[Rumor (Various)] AMD R7/9 3xx / Fiji / Fury

Page 107 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
R

RaulF

Senior member
Jan 18, 2008
844
1
81
exar333 said:
Got about half the pages to load. Looks to be be between the 980 and 980Ti, sometimes falling short of the 980, while other times exceeding the Ti, but mostly between.

Not sure on the drivers though, it definitely seems to be inconsistent. Will wait for a more legit review...
Click to expand...

:\

That's not good.
 
G

gbeirn

Senior member
Sep 27, 2005
451
14
81
http://imgur.com/4QOd6gK
http://imgur.com/592s8kr
http://imgur.com/mikRsbV
http://imgur.com/YU0bFnX
http://imgur.com/svSRJPU
http://imgur.com/V9xXF1I

Some screen shots from my phone, sorry you'll have to cut and paste I can't format img tags on my phone
 
Last edited:
P

Pariah

Elite Member
Apr 16, 2000
7,357
20
81
RaulF said:
:\

That's not good.
Click to expand...

Especially the 90Mhz "overclock." What the hell is that? I don't care how pessimistic you are about this card, you have to believe even the worst samples will overclock more that that. Why even bench a 90Mhz OC with no RAM OC?
 
Last edited:
R

RaulF

Senior member
Jan 18, 2008
844
1
81
Pariah said:
Especially the 90Mhz "overclock." What the hell is that? I don't care how pessimistic you are about this card, you have to believe even the worst samples will overclock more that that. Why even bench a 90Mhz OC with no RAM OC?
Click to expand...

Some mentioned about that being that it's a new design with the whole HBM and current tools might not work as well on it (not just the memory but the whole architecture).
 
exar333

exar333

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2004
8,518
8
91
RaulF said:
:\

That's not good.
Click to expand...

Either the testing was suspect, or the drivers are still being worked on. Just glancing at the 4K showed some cases where minimums were amazing and others not so good. Will wait for a more thorough review to draw better conclusions. Not sure...

Been a while since we got a truly new tech in a gpu, so drivers will be important and likely will mature over time.
 
T

tkrushing

Junior Member
Jan 10, 2008
14
0
0
Honestly I feel like we have known this all along. Fury X will be either slightly better or worse than 980ti with or without overclocking at 1080 and 1440p. This is what everything has pointed towards over the past month. No one was expecting crazy numbers like 20-30% more than 980ti. Still a good card from AMD because it competes with what I think is Nvidias most realistic high end offering. Now the only thing left to be seen is why we had to see an AIO offering come stock with Fury X. We will see if this is the "overclockers dream" they touted. Honestly I don't care at this point you either go with AMD because you want their freesync and other technology offerings or you go with Nvidia for the gsync, physx, and gameworks offerings. Everyone here will have their own preference. I think everyone is excited about the head to head we will have next release from both companies. Good times to be had.
 
looncraz

looncraz

Senior member
Sep 12, 2011
722
1,651
136
gbeirn said:
http://imgur.com/4QOd6gK
http://imgur.com/592s8kr
http://imgur.com/mikRsbV
http://imgur.com/YU0bFnX
http://imgur.com/svSRJPU
http://imgur.com/V9xXF1I

Some screen shots from my phone, sorry you'll have to cut and paste I can't format img tags on my phone
Click to expand...


Thank you for posting these :biggrin:

Now, to investigate them :twisted:

1.
The Witcher 3 Benchmarks seem accurate enough. The Fury X is 15% faster than the 980 Ti stock, and 71% faster than the closest-configured 290X numbers I could find at 4k. Given the time, driver improvements and hardware changes I think this is possibly in the realm of possibilities. The 980Ti numbers are also pretty close to what seems to be expected.

2.
The GTA V numbers seem possibly right for the Fury, but WAY off for the 980 Ti. Unless the 980 Ti suddenly became 45% faster since AnandTech's review, where it only managed 27.8 FPS on the same settings and resolution, that is. If a driver release managed that, then there is no reason not to expect the same from the Fury in time.

3.
Far Cry 4 results are very strange, especially with the inclusion of the 290X... and its performing 27% faster than it should. :\ I mean, it's beating out the 980 Ti - which IS performing as it should (well, the bottom one). The 980 Ti gaining 42% more performance from a ~20% overclock is quite fascinating... :hmm:

4.
WatchDogs seems to be right on the money for all known cards (or within a few percent anyway...) and the 40% performance increase over the 290X is quite believable.

5.
Batman's results seem to be pretty accurate, though the Fury X is only showing 29% scaling over the 290X, which may indicate a driver issue or simply a scaling issue, that remains to be seen. The 980 Ti numbers are only 1fps off from a review I found and the overclocked scaling is appropriate.

6.
The Crysis 3 results, across the board, are WAY too high to be running on "Very high" or even "high" presets at 4k, but are slightly too low to be at low. I'm guessing Medium settings. The relative positioning is also wrong, unless the 290X suddenly became much faster than the 980 in this game, when it usually trails the 980 about 20%...

So, there's my $3.50. ():)
 
S

Silverforce11

Lifer
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
[H] has GTA V 4K ~26 fps for Titan X.

1430748911U8nIsW8LSm_5_1.gif


On par with other sites.
 
S

Silverforce11

Lifer
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
Would be interesting to see if any sites do Fury X CF and use fcat, see of HBM helps frame times with its extra bandwidth & lower latency than GDDR5.
 
LTC8K6

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,520
1,576
126
Silverforce11 said:
Would be interesting to see if any sites do Fury X CF and use fcat, see of HBM helps frame times with its extra bandwidth & lower latency than GDDR5.
Click to expand...

Was the 450gb/s number on the Sapphire Fury box real?

If so, that's not a whole lot more BW.
 
Stuka87

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
6,240
2,559
136
Silverforce11 said:
Would be interesting to see if any sites do Fury X CF and use fcat, see of HBM helps frame times with its extra bandwidth & lower latency than GDDR5.
Click to expand...


That Swedish site should. All the American sites stopped after Maxwell launched, since it's frame times are worse than Keplers.

Really interested to see how well CF does, and if the 4GB of vram is enough.
 
A

amenx

Diamond Member
Dec 17, 2004
4,710
3,002
136
Pariah said:
Especially the 90Mhz "overclock." What the hell is that? I don't care how pessimistic you are about this card, you have to believe even the worst samples will overclock more that that. Why even bench a 90Mhz OC with no RAM OC?
Click to expand...
The first hint that it would be a poor overclocker were AMDs own official benchmarks vs 980ti/TX. Fury/X results were so close, virtually matching their Nv counterparts. That suggests to me that Fiji initially was underperforming and that they had to raise their clocks to match 980ti leaving little room for OC'ing. Basically same plan for bulldozer.
 
S

Silverforce11

Lifer
Feb 19, 2009
10,457
10
76
~100mhz OC without vcore on GCN is very decent.

Same on the R290X (and pretty much every other GCN), almost all of them require vcore to get above 1.1ghz.

As said, if there's no software to tweak vcore, its going to look crap in reviews with OC performance <10%.
 
S

soccerballtux

Lifer
Dec 30, 2004
12,553
2
76
Elfear said:
It's not too big of a difference actually. With added voltage Ryan got a 25% overclock on Anandtech's 980Ti (1202Mhz --> 1477Mhz). If the guy with the Fury was close to stable at 1240Mhz, a little voltage should get him there which would be an 18% overclock. Still a win for the 980Ti but not anything an end-user would notice.
Click to expand...

man, I never, ever got anywhere near what most reviewers got on my GTX670 Windforce. I was so frustrated. 200mhz higher than me it was lame!
 
O

Orivaa

Junior Member
Jun 18, 2015
20
0
0
Uwah, pretty bad reviews so far. Eh, I'm still looking forward to the actual results with voltage unlocked and some proper drivers.
 
H

Headfoot

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2008
4,444
641
126
Stuka87 said:
That Swedish site should. All the American sites stopped after Maxwell launched, since it's frame times are worse than Keplers.

Really interested to see how well CF does, and if the 4GB of vram is enough.
Click to expand...

Tom's did. They actually did a really quite good job on this one.
 
F

Fox5

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
5,957
7
81
Reviews are all over the place, it almost makes me wonder if reviewers are using pre-launch drivers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom