AMD Radeon Fury X 3DMark performance

[BonSie]

Source

Result link

 

Just gimme it ffs.

Would be very intersting if they are trough

 

 

We are less than a week before official announcement, and probably even further from actual reviews to show up. Well, I’m not sure how ’bout you, but I’m tired of waiting. 

Those who follow our site, know that I do my best to post the most accurate synthetic results as soon as possible. It requires three things, a good source with credible information (thanks Lisa!), enough data with small variance and few energy drinks — not exactly in this order.

• Percentage is calculated as an average from both 3DMark presets.
• We do not know if the Fury X sample(s) were water-cooled.
• I did my best to include only results with i7-5960X CPU.
• My chart is awesome.

 

 

 

[TorqueS]

If it's true then it's kinda disappointing. It beats the 980 Ti at stock, but when you OC the 980 Ti it seems like it blows the Fiji out of the water..

Still we don't know how well Fiji OCs, or if it OCs at all.

[The Benjamins]

Not that surprising to me that it beat the 980ti

 

 

If it's true then it's kinda disappointing. It beats the 980 Ti at stock, but when you OC the 980 Ti it seems like it blows the Fiji out of the water..

Still we don't know how well Fiji OCs, or if it OCs at all.

 

 

how is it disappointing a card that is not OC is getting beat by a card that is?

[ADZ_123_!"£]

There hasn't been any thing official about this gpu yet some people have already got there hands on it, really...

[Sauron]

Why can't we wait for the game benchmarks?

 

If it's true then it's kinda disappointing. It beats the 980 Ti at stock, but when you OC the 980 Ti it seems like it blows the Fiji out of the water..

Still we don't know how well Fiji OCs, or if it OCs at all.

 

well, that's hardly a fair comparison since we don't know how an overclocked fury x performs (besides we don't even know if this is accurate or what)

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Assuming that the AIO can bring better cooling, an OC-ed Fury X looks to bring some good scores  :huh:

[Arcanekitten]

If it's true then it's kinda disappointing. It beats the 980 Ti at stock, but when you OC the 980 Ti it seems like it blows the Fiji out of the water..

Still we don't know how well Fiji OCs, or if it OCs at all.

what if the fury x is overclocked

[Johannes_Lazor]

Looks like the 390x will just be a 290x on steroids.. They better give it a low price.

[TorqueS]

Not that surprising to me that it beat the 980ti

 

 

 

 

how is it disappointing a card that is not OC is getting beat by a card that is?

 

Why can't we wait for the game benchmarks?

 

 

well, that's hardly a fair comparison since we don't know how an overclocked fury x performs (besides we don't even know if this is accurate or what)

 

 

what if the fury x is overclocked

 

It's not disappointing at all. The 980 Ti just has great value.

 

The Fury X is meant to go against the Titan X, a $1000 GPU. It is supposedly priced under $900, and other variants are meant to be around $700-800. If that's true, then it's a very good deal

Exactly...

We don't even now how well the Fury X overclocks, but I have a feeling it's not good at that(that's just me), thus the apparent disappointment. Jeez learn the words, I said "kinda".

The results seem solid for its place.

 

I do not intend to start a flame war so nor would I want to take part in one.

[The Benjamins]

also note that the 390x has a 10% increase in performance over the 290x with a 5% faster clock. putting it right in the middle of the 970 and 980

[Megahurt]

Extreme and ultra are 1440p and 4k right? So fury would beat titanX at 4k. Also interesting is the 390 beating the 970, I was expecting them to be about equal.

[zMeul]

 

 

 

color me disappointed: all that bragging from AMD, and in the end HBM didn't do that much for it

[TorqueS]

Oh neither do I, but overclock-ability should be a plus, not a standard to judge from which you a judge a GPU's value. At least IMO

Of course not, but with that AIO cooler, I'm expecting results, yet I have a feeling we won't get them.

 Still, GG AMD, you made a card that's on par with  the absolute flagship which is an achievement.

 

 

color me disappointed: all that bragging from AMD, and in the end HBM didn't do that much for it

Take a moment, look at the graph, and look at the results of the previous flagship(290X)

The performance is considerably better, and the TDP is what, 10w higher?

 

So how did this not do much for it?

[BuckGup]

Keeping AMD for the peasants and cheap. Usual AMD

[Ashaira]

I would like to remind everyone that gpu boost 2 exists so those "stock" settings you see for nvidia are anything but real.

[That Norwegian Guy]

So,the same as a 980 Ti.

 

Incoming backpedal and $600 price point.

[The Benjamins]

Exactly...

We don't even now how well the Fury X overclocks, but I have a feeling it's not good at that(that's just me), thus the apparent disappointment. Jeez learn the words, I said "kinda".

The results seem solid for its place.

 

I do not intend to start a flame war so nor would I want to take part in one.

 

I just don't get how someone can be disappointed in something thats not tested. I get were you are coming from though, I don't think it will be a bad overclocker.

 

color me disappointed: all that bragging from AMD, and in the end HBM didn't do that much for it

its as fast as a titanX/980ti and is a 56% improvement over a 290X, how is that disappointing? were you expecting a bigger improvement?

[marldorthegreat]

So,the same as a 980 Ti.

 

Incoming backpedal and $600 price point.

This is a synthetic test, not a real world test. gamming benchmarks will need to come for me to make my opinion. 

[marldorthegreat]

 

 

I just don't get how someone can be disappointed in something thats not tested. I get were you are coming from though, I don't think it will be a bad overclocker.

 

its as fast as a titanX/980ti and is a 56% improvement over a 290X, how is that disappointing? were you expecting a bigger improvement?

 

Yeah, if people are going into the cards launch thinking like that AMD will never be able to sell it. Its a so far, great card. With a low-ish tdp relative to the 290x, and has a VERY new technology!!!

[duriel]

color me disappointed: all that bragging from AMD, and in the end HBM didn't do that much for it

 

what? within 1% distance between nvidia's highest end card while taking a huge risk on hbm, and you're managing to be disappointed?

 

oooookay

 

 

Keeping AMD for the peasants and cheap. Usual AMD

 

>Has a GTX 760

 

top kek

[ACatWithThumbs]

 

Of course not, but with that AIO cooler, I'm expecting results, yet I have a feeling we won't get them.

 Still, GG AMD, you made a card that's on par with  the absolute flagship which is an achievement.

 

 

Take a moment, look at the graph, and look at the results of the previous flagship(290X)

The performance is considerably better, and the TDP is what, 10w higher?

 

So how did this not do much for it?

 

It's still bad compared to the Nvidia counter part.

They need 1200 more cores, 200GB/s more bandwidth, and watercooling to even compete that is not good at all.

This is disappointing for something that is on paper worlds ahead of Nvidia but isn't any better in real world performance.

Like do you realize how much bandwidth HBM has?

That is one of the biggest jumps in at least 7 years and the result is a joke.

[The Benjamins]

Yeah, if people are going into the cards launch thinking like that AMD will never be able to sell it. Its a so far, great card. With a low-ish tdp relative to the 290x, and has a VERY new technology!!!

 

yeah, assuming these are true scores, the card should perform well. when you look at what they did with how little money they have it is impressive. can't wait for the 16th

[Bouzoo]

It's still bad compared to the Nvidia counter part.

They need 1200 more cores, 200GB/s more bandwidth, and watercooling to even compete that is not good at all.

This is disappointing for something that is on paper worlds ahead of Nvidia but isn't any better in real world performance.

 

GDDR5 has been out for quite some time and it's really coming to it's max but this is the first generation for HBM, so I'm not sure what people were expecting.

[duriel]

It's still bad compared to the Nvidia counter part.

They need 1200 more cores, 200GB/s more bandwidth, and watercooling to even compete that is not good at all.

This is disappointing for something that is on paper worlds ahead of Nvidia but isn't any better in real world performance.

 

 

what are you even saying

 

are you actually comparing hbm to gddr5 and saying amd had to move to hbm to beat nvidia?

 

lol.

[syoumans54]

The lack of VRAM made this card DOA for me to begin with... Now I'm just deciding between the 980ti or Titan X for my next build... If CaseLabs ever builds and ships my case to me...