4gb fury x 4k gaming, what games have issues?

[tential]

I can't wait anymore 4k monitor time.
So what issues does the fury x have with 4k gaming?

I'm guessing heavy mods are out of the question on skyrim and that I need an 8gb vram card? What are my limitations?

 

[Arachnotronic]

I really wouldn't go with the Fury X if I were you. Fury X is fine for 4K gaming now, but that 4GB of VRAM is a serious longer-term liability.

I'd pick up a 1080 and, if you need AMD to take full advantage of your display setup (IIRC you have a FreeSync display), resell it when the time comes in favor of a Vega card. 1080 will hold its value a lot better than a Fury X, IMO, which is why I did not recommend buying a Fury X then swapping it for a Vega later.

 

[Bacon1]

I really wouldn't go with the Fury X if I were you. Fury X is fine for 4K gaming now, but that 4GB of VRAM is a serious longer-term liability.

I'd pick up a 1080 and, if you need AMD to take full advantage of your display setup (IIRC you have a FreeSync display), resell it when the time comes in favor of a Vega card. 1080 will hold its value a lot better than a Fury X, IMO, which is why I did not recommend buying a Fury X then swapping it for a Vega later.

Fury is ~300 vs ~600 for a 1080.

He won't be running "Ultra" settings on either, but will be turning down a few settings and the 4GB won't be limiting in most games.

@tential what games are you trying to play @ 4k?

 

[tential]

I don't even know anymore bacon. I just want to know what games have issues so I can get an idea of what I can't play to see if it's anything that I can just say "hey, that's a game I'd like to play I'll shelf it for 2018.."
I dunno this really sucks I didn't expect Vega to be this far away that I'd have to seriously consider fury x at the current $320 sale its on.

Gta 5 with mods. I really want that..
Skyrim remastered with mods
Dmc
Batman Arkham origins
Xcom 2
Final fantasy games after 10
Infinite
Assassin creed unity
Metal gear solid 5
Inquisition
Anno 2070
Doom


I get some games I'll have to hold off on. I just want to play some 4k games now.

I don't think I'll see a flagship amd gpu that I actually am impressed enough by to buy. So I guess I'll just enjoy the bargain close out deals instead.

 

[Arachnotronic]

For $320, Fury X is a solid stop-gap. Just go for it.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Do you have the Fury X now and are planning to buy a monitor, or will you be buying both the monitor and card? TBH, not sure any card is there yet for really good results at 4k.

 

[tential]

Some users have been using the 290 to play games at 4k.if they can chime in and let me know what games they've been playing maybe I can find a couple to last me til Vega. That's my only other option.

 

[Head1985]

Furyx is pretty decent for 4k.Its faster/or at same level as GTX1070 in most games, but 4GB will be limit in some games like skyrim with mods.

 

[Shmee]

Fury(X) is still a pretty good card, especially now if the price is pretty low.

 

[SlickR12345]

If you waited so far, I don't see what is the big issue waiting 2 more months and seeing what Vega offers to the table. If you really must get a GPU now than Fury X is a good stopgap, but don't expect to run most games at 4k. And 1440p with max settings is better looking than 4k with medium settings. Resolution is NOT a replacement for high quality textures and great ambient effects.

 

[bearxor]

I just picked up a FuryX to replace my CF 390 setup. I'll go with one more powerful card right now vs a CF setup that only works less than half the time.

It's a pure stop-gap for me. I will purchase whatever the high-end Vega card turns out to be early next year.

I only picked it up for $260 used off eBay. Really wanted to hit $250 but couldn't quite get there. As far as resale value goes I'm pretty confident I can offload it for $200 when Vega hits.

I wouldn't recommend buying one as a long-term plan. I suspect you about this time next year Fury/FuryX owners are going to be really complaining about 4GB of VRAM. but I think it's fine for the next six months or so.

 

[tential]

If you waited so far, I don't see what is the big issue waiting 2 more months and seeing what Vega offers to the table. If you really must get a GPU now than Fury X is a good stopgap, but don't expect to run most games at 4k. And 1440p with max settings is better looking than 4k with medium settings. Resolution is NOT a replacement for high quality textures and great ambient effects.

This is what I'm afraid of. Why do some people think it's 2 months or so? Amd said 1h 2017 instead of q1 2017.

 

[kraatus77]

They said 1h because i think their main focus is zen, if zen gets delayed even more then vega will slip into q2 or maybe q3, and they don't want people to say vega is being delayed so they have given a ballpark figure of 1h. although it still didn't stop people from saying that.

it all depends on zen imo. because that's their main brake or make product. vega ? not so much. because even if it's better it will bring down pascal's price and people will just buy that and AMD will get nothing. happening since ever no matter how much someone denies it.

 

[UaVaj]

stop losing sleep over a non issue.

given the current games. a single furyx over 4k. you will never ever saturate 4gb in a "real" gaming scenario. even furyx x2 you will be fine.

otoh. if all you care about is benchmarking to see how high u can jack up vram. even a 12gb titan x pascal might not be enough.

 

[Majcric]

Depending on the settings you're using @ 4k this could range from a little to a lot. I'd say the fps issue will come first and the Vram issue will come second but again this will depend what settings you want to use.

 

[crisium]

The only recent 4K gaming I have tried on my Fury air is Battlefield 1 and it is fine with VRAM, though it needs reduced settings of course to get 60fps.

I suspect that for 2016-2017 era games you will find you will have to use the High Texture setting rather than Ultra Texture for many of them. At 1440p this is already the case in a few games, so it has to be more for 4K. The "good news" is that you won't be able to max most of these games out in the other settings, so what's 1 more setting? The bad news is a comparable 8GB card, if it exists (1070 or 390X the closest?) may be able to have the same settings + Ultra textures.

Depends if your OCD about texture detail, I suppose.

 

[Gikaseixas]

At those prices, go for it. It's a compelling alternative

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

It depends a lot on the game, and how the game was made. 4k GTA San Andreas? Sure. 4k GTA5? Not so much. That 4GB of memory is going to get crushed under the weight of a few scenarios, such as a modded Skyrim (I'm already breaking that @1440p). If you're fine with turning down stuff, fine. If you want the max everything for current and +1 year of games, not gonna happen. Right now games and hardware are flittering back and forth with eachother @4k, even at the Titan GTX level (SLI notwithstanding).

Feel free to go nuts with the FuryX, or wait until black friday/monday for something to go on sale. Either way expect some restrictions to your future of 4k gaming.

 

[Mr Evil]

I have a plain Fury, so I can offer my comparable experience. Here's how it copes with the two newest games I have played:

• Shadow Warrior 2: To get it to stay around 60fps, I could go no higher than the "high" preset (the second highest setting).
• Obduction: I could turn everything to the highest "epic" settings, except to prevent hitches, I had to turn texture detail down one to "high" (presumably due to running out of VRAM, even though Process Explorer reports it only uses 3.6GB on "epic").

On most games I have to turn anti-aliasing down or off. Fortunately that makes very little visible difference at 4k. FreeSync makes a big difference, making games feel smooth even when below 60fps. And despite what other people say, I find that games look significantly better running high@4k than ultra@1440.

It's a good card overall, but I would hesitate to buy one (or any card with <8GB) for 4k today, especially with Vega so close.

 

[tential]

stop losing sleep over a non issue.

given the current games. a single furyx over 4k. you will never ever saturate 4gb in a "real" gaming scenario. even furyx x2 you will be fine.

otoh. if all you care about is benchmarking to see how high u can jack up vram. even a 12gb titan x pascal might not be enough.

Err I don't see how it's bad for me to do my due diligence and know which current games I'll run into issues with using ultra textures.

I understand with fury x I won't play new games moving forward(God this is a recurring theme....) but I do want to know my limitations. It doesn't seem like there are hard limitations. I was expecting maybe mirrors edge 2 or something to be brought up.

I saw cod, I don't care about battlefield or cod anymore. Overwatch is the only shooter I'm playing and I've tested 4k settings using the resolution slider which shows to me I really do need to upgrade my gpu even for casual gamers like overwatch.

 

[Dave2150]

I have a plain Fury, so I can offer my comparable experience. Here's how it copes with the two newest games I have played:

• Shadow Warrior 2: To get it to stay around 60fps, I could go no higher than the "high" preset (the second highest setting).
• Obduction: I could turn everything to the highest "epic" settings, except to prevent hitches, I had to turn texture detail down one to "high" (presumably due to running out of VRAM, even though Process Explorer reports it only uses 3.6GB on "epic").

On most games I have to turn anti-aliasing down or off. Fortunately that makes very little visible difference at 4k. FreeSync makes a big difference, making games feel smooth even when below 60fps. And despite what other people say, I find that games look significantly better running high@4k than ultra@1440.

It's a good card overall, but I would hesitate to buy one (or any card with <8GB) for 4k today, especially with Vega so close.

It's worth noting that Vega will probably be more expensive than a 1080, if the rumoured 16GB HBM2 is correct. We're probably talking $1000+, which I guess is why AMD are in no hurry to release it - they know people will buy 1080ti's/TitanX's over it due to NVIDIA loyalty/AMD 'poor people' image.

 

[Keysplayr]

I don't get the replies in this thread at all. A 4GB Fury X will NEVER saturate in a "real gaming scenario" ???
What does that even mean? As opposed to a fake gaming scenario?
4GB FuryX will be fine at 4K but a 3GB 1060 is the worst buy you can ever make even in some games at 1080p as I've seen spoken in other threads?

FuryX 4GB will be fine for most games at 1080 and even 1440 for the most part, but 4K is pushing it. I'd go for a 1070 for 4K. Not much more money than the FuryX with more horsepower and twice the memory.

 

[Keysplayr]

Fury is ~300 vs ~600 for a 1080.

He won't be running "Ultra" settings on either, but will be turning down a few settings and the 4GB won't be limiting in most games.

@tential what games are you trying to play @ 4k?

^ bold
So suggest a 1070 8GB then. Not a 4GB FuryX for 4K. 1080 not being recommended is understandable, but you not mentioning 1070 as an option and only compare FuryX prices to 1080 prices is steering. There is also 980Ti 6GB option, but no mention? Heck, wouldn't even the 6GB 1060 be a better option at 4K over FuryX 4GB? What about 8GB AMD cards? 390X? Are those 8GB?

I suppose settings could be turned down if need be if memory runs out on the FuryX. If the price is undeniably irresistible, the I can see it.

 

[tential]

It's worth noting that Vega will probably be more expensive than a 1080, if the rumoured 16GB HBM2 is correct. We're probably talking $1000+, which I guess is why AMD are in no hurry to release it - they know people will buy 1080ti's/TitanX's over it due to NVIDIA loyalty/AMD 'poor people' image.

I didn't think about that. I'm really pessimistic about Vega now. Its super late, looks to be expensive. We'll see when it comes out but doesn't look good.

I don't get the replies in this thread at all. A 4GB Fury X will NEVER saturate in a "real gaming scenario" ???
What does that even mean? As opposed to a fake gaming scenario?
4GB FuryX will be fine at 4K but a 3GB 1060 is the worst buy you can ever make even in some games at 1080p as I've seen spoken in other threads?

FuryX 4GB will be fine for most games at 1080 and even 1440 for the most part, but 4K is pushing it. I'd go for a 1070 for 4K. Not much more money than the FuryX with more horsepower and twice the memory.

Well that's what I'm worried about. I see the 1060/480 where 4gb of vram or less is terrible. But yet fury x still seems to do well in games according to benches and users.

^ bold
So suggest a 1070 8GB then. Not a 4GB FuryX for 4K. 1080 not being recommended is understandable, but you not mentioning 1070 as an option and only compare FuryX prices to 1080 prices is steering. There is also 980Ti 6GB option, but no mention?

1070 doesn't support freesync and gsync just takes me so far out of the price range that I could get crossfire fury x and a freesync panel and still be under the pure panel cost of gsync.

It is a little disingenuous to not mention the 1070. That's my major gripe.

If I could get the 1070 and a 4k 30+ inch gsync monitor for a decent price then I would be much more inclined to go Nvidia. Right now u don't see many 30+inch 4k panels. I saw some 24 inch panels or so for 600 but that's tiny for 4k.

 

[Keysplayr]

Yeah, I have a 28" 4K and even that seems too small. To be perfectly honest, Tential, you really aren't missing out of not having 4K. If you place your eyeballs right up against the screen, you'd be able to tell. Other than that, it's your call. If you feel the pull of gimmickery calling you, then go for it. If you feel the move to 4K is truly worth the expense (I don't) then go for it. Really, for the money you need to spend not only for a monitor but also for a card that can run it comfortably in gaming, I can't justify the costs for the minimal improvement in the experience (if any).
All it got me was tiny ass text that I now need glasses to read or adjust font sizes. And to tell you the truth, I noticed no major, or even minor improvements in IQ over my 1080p. You'll see some people swear to God, Allah, Cthulu, whoever that they notice a major improvement over 1080, but they are likely trying to justify their expense to move there. My 2 cents. Good Luck in whichever way you choose.