[GPU Review] Sapphire AMD r9 Fury X on the rise!

[Mikiberry]

Hmm. Something is fishy here. A card that is water-cooled but unable to pull off high overclocks like the Titan X and GTX 980 Ti (400MHz headroom)? Nvr mind, shall wait for the review sites' reviews then.

But anyway, thx roy Just hope that it doesn't end up towards a sad conclusion that the FuryX is better than GTX 980Ti at stock but performs worse than the GTX 980Ti at the cards' max overclocks. That would be sad coz of the way AMD managed to hype up this card.

I suspect they locked the TDP hard on this card for lower temps.
60 degrees on bench is very very, impossible to be only at 12xx for clocks.

 

[royfrosty]

Hmm. Something is fishy here. A card that is water-cooled but unable to pull off high overclocks like the Titan X and GTX 980 Ti (400MHz headroom)? Nvr mind, shall wait for the review sites' reviews then.

But anyway, thx roy Just hope that it doesn't end up towards a sad conclusion that the FuryX is better than GTX 980Ti at stock but performs worse than the GTX 980Ti at the cards' max overclocks. That would be sad coz of the way AMD managed to hype out this card.

Not too sure about that.

Im not limited by temps nor power.

But 1 thing for sure, i cant get that amount of increment on my r9 290 with that increase for base clock.

Meaning to say i OC 290 at additional say 100mhz on Fury X, i get more performance for than a 100mhz clocked from a 290. So i'm not really sure how the clocks work either.

 

[royfrosty]

I suspect they locked the TDP hard on this card for lower temps.
60 degrees on bench is very very, impossible to be only at 12xx for clocks.

This is possible. On my KillaWatt meter im drawing only 367W off the wall for system load.

 

[Gattberserk]

Not too sure about that.

Im not limited by temps nor power.

But 1 thing for sure, i cant get that amount of increment on my r9 290 with that increase for base clock.

Meaning to say i OC 290 at additional say 100mhz on Fury X, i get more performance for than a 100mhz clocked from a 290. So i'm not really sure how the clocks work either.

4096 vs 2816 cores, of cos its not the same.

 

[Mikiberry]

This is possible. On my KillaWatt meter im drawing only 367W off the wall for system load.

Anyway wait for OCN peeps who are more suicidal with their cards to put to the test.
Initial benchmarks damn good for 1440p, SFF gonna be fun with this.

Great hoot, slowly savour and enjor hor!

 

[Zerreth]

What is the thickness of the radiator + fan ?

 

[enenyi]

I suspect they locked the TDP hard on this card for lower temps.
60 degrees on bench is very very, impossible to be only at 12xx for clocks.

Ouch. That would be painful for us consumers. I was initially angry at Nvidia for rolling out drivers that limited the max voltage (hence max overclocking headroom) of the Kepler cards. Now AMD wants to play the same trick on us...

 

[trento]

Hmm. Something is fishy here. A card that is water-cooled but unable to pull off high overclocks like the Titan X and GTX 980 Ti (400MHz headroom)? Nvr mind, shall wait for the review sites' reviews then.

But anyway, thx roy Just hope that it doesn't end up towards a sad conclusion that the FuryX is better than GTX 980Ti at stock but performs worse than the GTX 980Ti at the cards' max overclocks. That would be sad coz of the way AMD managed to hype up this card.

this may not be an accurate assessment. but i have 2 old amd cards. 270x and 280. The 280 can overclock way above stock. the 270x can barely overclock and system crashes. it leads me to think amd has maxed it out perhaps. nothing to do with the the cooling and temps.

anyone here overclocks their 290x?

 

[Mikiberry]

Ouch. That would be painful for us consumers. I was initially angry at Nvidia for rolling out drivers that limited the max voltage (hence max overclocking headroom) of the Kepler cards. Now AMD wants to play the same trick on us...

Nothing wrong with locking TDP - 200 mhz more is not significant in terms of fps. I think this is more of a fail safe for people who has no idea what they are doing. LN2 bios etc is very dangerous - put into furmark test unmonitor can kaput just like that lol.
HBM1 - efficiency is an added advantage to provide more fps liao - even cannot clock higher than 12xx but benchmarks numbers already better than Ti at stock.
AMD > Nvidia in transistors counts and cores leh. clocking it higher is not so simple one.

Anyway my TX is only game stable at 1410 going higher means going custom bios, which I highly dont recommend. Hot vram card you zhua harder sure uplorry faster.

P.S. Just personal opinion

 

[ondooy]

cpu is running at what freq ? stock ?

 

[royfrosty]

cpu is running at what freq ? stock ?

Stock i7-4770k

 

[royfrosty]

K guys i go sleep le. Im tired and tomorrow got to work. Hope you enjoyed this far. I hope i help you guys a bit.

The rest of the answers will be answered tomorrow instead.

 

[xxxxxD]

Stock i7-4770k

Hello

Could you run some 3dmark? Both FireStrike Normal and FireStrike Extreme?

 

[royfrosty]

What is the thickness of the radiator + fan ?

6.4cm 10fury xxxx

 

[enenyi]

Nothing wrong with locking TDP - 200 mhz more is not significant in terms of fps. I think this is more of a fail safe for people who has no idea what they are doing. LN2 bios etc is very dangerous - put into furmark test unmonitor can kaput just like that lol.
HBM1 - efficiency is an added advantage to provide more fps liao - even cannot clock higher than 12xx but benchmarks numbers already better than Ti at stock.
AMD > Nvidia in transistors counts and cores leh. clocking it higher is not so simple one.

Anyway my TX is only game stable at 1410 going higher means going custom bios, which I highly dont recommend. Hot vram card you zhua harder sure uplorry faster.

P.S. Just personal opinion

Oh haha. I wasnt even looking at 200MHz. If TX can OC 400MHz using stock cooler, and EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid can also hit the 1500MHz mark, i was expecting FuryX to also hit the 1500 or 1600MHz mark, which would mean, as kingtiger2014 boasts, FuryX wiping out TX and GTX 980 Ti completely. But the potential of FuryX doesnt seem as promising now.

Well, i can only wait for other review sites. If FuryX cannot match GTX 980TI at max overclock speeds, then i bo bian need to fork out more money for GTX 980 TI just to meet single-card near-60fps 4k gaming.

 

[Mikiberry]

Oh haha. I wasnt even looking at 200MHz. If TX can OC 400MHz using stock cooler, and EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid can also hit the 1500MHz mark, i was expecting FuryX to also hit the 1500 or 1600MHz mark, which would mean, as kingtiger2014 boasts, FuryX wiping out TX and GTX 980 Ti completely. But the potential of FuryX doesnt seem as promising now.

Well, i can only wait for other review sites. If FuryX cannot match GTX 980TI at max overclock speeds, then i bo bian need to fork out more money for GTX 980 TI just to meet single-card near-60fps 4k gaming.

980 Ti Hybrid can OC 1500 that high meh? Just showing OC or game stable?
I tried without increasing any voltage headroom and using default bios cant pushing higher than 1410. Higher cfm crash after 1-2 hours of gaming.
Edit: those people that claim they clock Ti or TX about 1450 cfm is custom bios or overvolt with kboost liao. almost all the cards cannot stable at that power limit lol.

Take it this way why saying Fury X can clock to 1500 or 1600 is wrong. 8 core 5690x is so much harder to clock than a 4 core 4790k. The same applies for GPU I think.
Most of the rendering is done across more cores instead of focusing on core efficiency (Green camp style) so in the end, net net both yield similar FPS.
The HBM1 is like the tripping point that makes the overall GPU efficiency better, faster and smaller.

 

[royfrosty]

Guys lets not speculate anything yet for the moment. Let me see what i can do tomorrow. It could be my afterburner is not updated to the latest. Hence the voltages were all locked.

Let me update to the latest and rerun the test again tomorrow night. Alright guys? I still believe it can oc further.

Cause according to amd, 100mhz should not be an issue without overvolting. So lets try overvolt tomorrow.

 

[enenyi]

980 Ti Hybrid can OC 1500 that high meh? Just showing OC or game stable?
I tried without increasing any voltage headroom and using default bios cant pushing higher than 1410. Higher cfm crash after 1-2 hours of gaming.
Edit: those people that claim they clock Ti or TX about 1450 cfm is custom bios or overvolt with kboost liao. almost all the cards cannot stable at that power limit lol.

Take it this way why saying Fury X can clock to 1500 or 1600 is wrong. 8 core 5690x is so much harder to clock than a 4 core 4790k. The same applies for GPU I think.
Most of the rendering is done across more cores instead of focusing on core efficiency (Green camp style) so in the end, net net both yield similar FPS.
The HBM1 is like the tripping point that makes the overall GPU efficiency better, faster and smaller.

Okay my bad. 1484MHz game stable. Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtRqmzRMar8

I remember someone clocked it past 1500MHz before but i forgot which review site. So take it as 1500MHz is non-existent.

 

[Mikiberry]

Okay my bad. 1484MHz game stable. Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtRqmzRMar8

I remember someone clocked it past 1500MHz before but i forgot which review site. So take it as 1500MHz is non-existent.

Basket that Hybrid is considered golden liao lol.

 

[maylyn]

Oh haha. I wasnt even looking at 200MHz. If TX can OC 400MHz using stock cooler, and EVGA GTX 980 Ti Hybrid can also hit the 1500MHz mark, i was expecting FuryX to also hit the 1500 or 1600MHz mark, which would mean, as kingtiger2014 boasts, FuryX wiping out TX and GTX 980 Ti completely. But the potential of FuryX doesnt seem as promising now.

Well, i can only wait for other review sites. If FuryX cannot match GTX 980TI at max overclock speeds, then i bo bian need to fork out more money for GTX 980 TI just to meet single-card near-60fps 4k gaming.

Single 980Ti can't give 60fps with max settings everything turn on lah .... 2 Titan X on default clocks can't reach it either for some games ... so have to lower some settings or off some to have a good 60fps gaming experience.

4k isn't a push over, people are forgetting it, just because 4k is getting nastily cheap these days.

4k = 4x of 1920x1080

+ i'm laughing my toes off when some tech websites blatantly or rather shameless can mention 2x 4k = 8k or 3x 4k = 12k.

8k is 4x of 4k

Wrong call .... please goggle and read more for those wannabe newbies reviewers lol