AMD Radeon R9 Fury X Launches Today, Initial Results A Bit Of A Let Down

[Marc Driftmeyer]

Your lack of professionalism is showing. An unfinished driver that hasn't be unified, optimized and tested matches performance by Nvidia whose cards have 12 months of maturity. Grow up already.

[blackiwid]

"The Fury X 4K gaming performance also left a lot to be desired"

lol english sites are even more nvidia biased than the german ones, unbelivable, all benchmarks show that this card is king on 4k, even the titan x is not as fast. maybe you desired it to be cheaper and 500% faster but that was never realistik in the first place.

4k it wins, no hdmi 2.0 is not that good yes, but maybe we will se soon adapters from dp 1.2 to hdmi 2.0 is the same featureset so why not?

[CrystalGamma]

I'm a little disappointed, Michael. You write that "the initial results [are] a bit of a let down", yet don't post a link showing the numbers to show for it.
For all I see, Fury X is competitive in performance with Titan X, while being a lot cooler, albeit working somewhat less efficiently (1: all high-end cards eat a lot of electricity, 2: this GPU has a new kind of memory which has possibly not yet optimized been in the drivers and maybe firmware yet).

As for me, I think (Fury) Nano will be right for me, this card is just too expensive ... by then maybe the driver situation will have settled down.

[boffo]

I'm a little disappointed, Michael. You write that "the initial results [are] a bit of a let down", yet don't post a link showing the numbers to show for it.
For all I see, Fury X is competitive in performance with Titan X, while being a lot cooler, albeit working somewhat less efficiently (1: all high-end cards eat a lot of electricity, 2: this GPU has a new kind of memory which has possibly not yet optimized been in the drivers and maybe firmware yet).

As for me, I think (Fury) Nano will be right for me, this card is just too expensive ... by then maybe the driver situation will have settled down.

Nano Nano Nano
Come on it's 2015, those big cases are so 2000.

[dungeon]

Nano Nano Nano
Come on it's 2015, those big cases are so 2000.

To bad it must fit into PCI-Express slot, because it can be even smaller that that

A wanna Pico Pico Pico but APU

[xeekei]

One thing is sure though. The 980 Ti is a direct result of Nvidia getting info about the Fury X. The Fury X looks like a killer card meant for a market where the 980 Ti does not exist.

[boffo]

To bad it must fit into PCI-Express slot, because it can be even smaller that that

A wanna Pico Pico Pico but APU

An APU with HBM ram, would be porn.

[chithanh]

I don't think it is necessary to post links to Fury X reviews, all the usual sites have them. And in most cases the conclusion is not favourable.

I'm looking forward to the Nano launch, this is the card that could become a real winner. Hopefully AMD will have worked with their partners to ensure that by then DP to HDMI 2.0 adapters are widely available.

[dungeon]

I don't think it is necessary to post links to Fury X reviews, all the usual sites have them. And in most cases the conclusion is not favourable.

People sees a HBM winner in it, that is what matters - not a bit of a difference in benchmarks, conclusions are not even needed for people to recognise what is video memory of future

So, we already have a winner here No one wants Titan X which is too much expensive and 980Ti - both are too large and too hot

[andresdju]

Any web has made opencl benchmarks?
I agree that a HBM APU would be very interesting as they are more bandwidth starved with DDR4 than GPUs with GDDR5. Also HBM is perfect for HSA in APUs as a high bandwidth, zero-copy shared memory.