R9 Fury worth buying over RX480?

[Masada02]

Having owned 3 Fury's and 2 RX 480's and 2 (technically like 8, but not at the same time) Fury X's, I'm going to have to go with the RX 480.

 

Let me explain my reasoning: yes, the Fury is technically the more powerful GPU and in many games it will easily outperform the RX 480. Having said that, the RX 480 has a huge advantage over the Fury in its tessellation performance. In games that use heavy amounts of tessellation, the RX 480 will walk all over the Fury. I really hate to say it, but the Fury line is pretty much useless now. I'd buy a RX 480 over a Fury all day long just to have that better tessellation so that the few games that make use of it won't run like ass like they used to on AMD cards. Fallout 4 is a great example of this. I had a single RX 480 getting better performance in Fallout 4 than a Fury 3-way Crossfire. Now that's saying something.

[PRTI]

This thread was fun reading

[xAcid9]

9 hours ago, Masada02 said:

Having owned 3 Fury's and 2 RX 480's and 2 (technically like 8, but not at the same time) Fury X's, I'm going to have to go with the RX 480.

 

Let me explain my reasoning: yes, the Fury is technically the more powerful GPU and in many games it will easily outperform the RX 480. Having said that, the RX 480 has a huge advantage over the Fury in its tessellation performance. In games that use heavy amounts of tessellation, the RX 480 will walk all over the Fury. I really hate to say it, but the Fury line is pretty much useless now. I'd buy a RX 480 over a Fury all day long just to have that better tessellation so that the few games that make use of it won't run like ass like they used to on AMD cards. Fallout 4 is a great example of this. I had a single RX 480 getting better performance in Fallout 4 than a Fury 3-way Crossfire. Now that's saying something.

Any other game that RX-480 walk over the Fury? IIRC tessellation in Fallout 4 is pretty minimal, what crippling the Fury in Fallout 4 is the unoptimized game engine imo. 3x Fury with Fallout 4 that have poor CFX support is not a good combo imo.

[Morgan MLGman]

11 hours ago, DisconnectedYT said:

I would say get the RX480 only because its newer and maybe more reliable but i dont have any exprience with the R9

R9 Fury is a much faster card. It's better than a 390, 390X, RX 480, GTX 1060 and GTX 980. I'd get it immediately if I were OP, provided it's not like 100-200$ more expensive.

True, it's got 4GB of VRAM. It's HBM though, not regular GDDR5, Fury X does not encounter any stutters or FPS drops when playing at 4K compared to 6Gigs of GDDR5 in 980Ti.

[Morgan MLGman]

11 hours ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

if you can have the fury for similar price then you,re very lucky cause here in canada the Fury is like...300$ more

 

 

What the fuck is that 3300CAD card?

[Masada02]

Any other game that RX-480 walk over the Fury? IIRC tessellation in Fallout 4 is pretty minimal, what crippling the Fury in Fallout 4 is the unoptimized game engine imo. 3x Fury with Fallout 4 that have poor CFX support is not a good combo imo.

With Fallout 4 there's probably a combination of things that made it run bad with my Fury's. CFX support being the first, although I could get marginal gains by forcing AFR it definitely wasn't using all 3 cards to their fullest potential. And with Godrays turn on to their "Nvidia" settings the amount of tessellation is pretty high, especially when you are around all those dead trees or in some of the cities. In the open areas without heavy tessellation, the Fury's would get better framerates, but they would tank in other areas. The 480 was just a much more stable experience, and I was really caught off guard by it. 

 

GTA is another decent example, but mainly just because the 8GB 480 wasn't stuttering like the 4GB Fury's when they ran out of memory space... Also, in the countryside with ultra grass settings my dual 480's were doing better than the tri Fury's. Only in that situation though. 

[ivan134]

31 minutes ago, xAcid9 said:

Any other game that RX-480 walk over the Fury? IIRC tessellation in Fallout 4 is pretty minimal, what crippling the Fury in Fallout 4 is the unoptimized game engine imo. 3x Fury with Fallout 4 that have poor CFX support is not a good combo imo.

ROTTR

 

The improvements in GCN 4 are too good to pass up. I'm jumping on Vega as soon as it comes out and ditching my 390.

[xAcid9]

38 minutes ago, Masada02 said:

With Fallout 4 there's probably a combination of things that made it run bad with my Fury's. CFX support being the first, although I could get marginal gains by forcing AFR it definitely wasn't using all 3 cards to their fullest potential. And with Godrays turn on to their "Nvidia" settings the amount of tessellation is pretty high, especially when you are around all those dead trees or in some of the cities. In the open areas without heavy tessellation, the Fury's would get better framerates, but they would tank in other areas. The 480 was just a much more stable experience, and I was really caught off guard by it. 

 

GTA is another decent example, but mainly just because the 8GB 480 wasn't stuttering like the 4GB Fury's when they ran out of memory space... Also, in the countryside with ultra grass settings my dual 480's were doing better than the tri Fury's. Only in that situation though. 

20 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

ROTTR

-snip-

 

The improvements in GCN 4 are too good to pass up. I'm jumping on Vega as soon as it comes out and ditching my 390.

Yes, basically CPU bottleneck games. Polaris 10 enhanced geometry engine is great imo, another example is Just Cause 3 but that makes it on par with the Fury while on GPU bottleneck game the Fury is much better.

 

For $50 extra the Fury is better than 480 imo but that 4GB VRAM is rather concerning.

 

Ditching 390 so soon?  If Vega perform like 1080 and cost like 1070, i probably jump as well.

[ivan134]

41 minutes ago, xAcid9 said:

Yes, basically CPU bottleneck games. Polaris 10 enhanced geometry engine is great imo, another example is Just Cause 3 but that makes it on par with the Fury while on GPU bottleneck game the Fury is much better.

 

For $50 extra the Fury is better than 480 imo but that 4GB VRAM is rather concerning.

 

Ditching 390 so soon?  If Vega perform like 1080 and cost like 1070, i probably jump as well.

I'm expecting the cheapest Vega card to perform like a Fury, which is all I need.

[xAcid9]

15 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

I'm expecting the cheapest Vega card to perform like a Fury, which is all I need.

Not huge enough gain for an upgrade.  

I hope Vega is well balance and have similar if not better overhead efficiency like the 480 and not simply MOARR CORES MOAR POWAHH like the Fiji cards. 

On other hand i hope Fiji cards will still relevant in few more years when software finally catch up to fully utilize it's hardware.

[ivan134]

22 hours ago, xAcid9 said:

Not huge enough gain for an upgrade.  

I hope Vega is well balance and have similar if not better overhead efficiency like the 480 and not simply MOARR CORES MOAR POWAHH like the Fiji cards. 

On other hand i hope Fiji cards will still relevant in few more years when software finally catch up to fully utilize it's hardware.

Well, it will perform much better in games that typically give AMD cards problems. Also my card is loud as fuck which forces me to use the default fan curve.

[grayperview]

On 18/08/2016 at 2:33 PM, ivan134 said:

ROTTR

 

The improvements in GCN 4 are too good to pass up. I'm jumping on Vega as soon as it comes out and ditching my 390.

Interesting, i get much higher fps on my fury around 80-85fps using DX12....Gameworks disabled of course.

[ivan134]

1 hour ago, super_skank said:

Interesting, i get much higher fps on my fury around 80-85fps using DX12....Gameworks disabled of course.

You probably also have tessellation tweaks in your drivers while this benchmark is done without those tweaks. While GCN 3 brought tessellation improvements, GCN 4 is much better at it. I'm pretty sure this is what's happening.

[grayperview]

1 hour ago, ivan134 said:

You probably also have tessellation tweaks in your drivers while this benchmark is done without those tweaks. While GCN 3 brought tessellation improvements, GCN 4 is much better at it. I'm pretty sure this is what's happening.

Maybe, i just leave them on AMD managed....