It Could Be A While Before Seeing The AMD R9 Fury X Readily Available

[blackout23]

Fury X would have to be 599 USD to really compete with NVIDIA.
Since it costs just as much as a 980 Ti you might as well just buy a 980 Ti and get slightly better performance, lower power consumption, higher OC potential, no need for compact water cooling which I see as a downside. If they need a water cooler now just to get all the heat away from the card all the air cooled models which will come later will probably have slightly worse performance. All of this isn't even taking into account that NVIDIA drivers on Linux simply are better than the ones form AMD.

[nadro]

The latest Catalyst 15.5 version is really good for gaming

[mao_dze_dun]

The Fury X is a real flop. 980 ti is by far the better option, and this is coming from an AMD fanboy. Unless the air-cooled Fury brings veeery close performance for about 100 dollars less, I don't think it would be worth it. I'm currently considering buying a second 290x instead since I do my gaming in Windows, anyway.

[Marc Driftmeyer]

The Fury X is a real flop. 980 ti is by far the better option, and this is coming from an AMD fanboy. Unless the air-cooled Fury brings veeery close performance for about 100 dollars less, I don't think it would be worth it. I'm currently considering buying a second 290x instead since I do my gaming in Windows, anyway.

Thanks for perpetuating the world of knee jerk commentary. Fury X is designed from the ground up for DX12/Vulkan and you're going to be pissed when the DX12 benchmarks arrive.

[Marc Driftmeyer]

Or they just didn't have much availability to start with.... And NewEgg seems to be keeping most of their units just for their CPU/GPU/motherboard bundles.

wrong. The yields from the fabs have all been high.

[dungeon]

The Fury X is a real flop. 980 ti is by far the better option, and this is coming from an AMD fanboy. Unless the air-cooled Fury brings veeery close performance for about 100 dollars less, I don't think it would be worth it. I'm currently considering buying a second 290x instead since I do my gaming in Windows, anyway.

That ending (to buy something cheaper) is so true and so typical... because i do think 99% of nVidia or AMD fanboys commenting around a net, neither buy 980Ti nor Fury X

It is like watching boxing match, with couple nockouts on both sides but without winner... then people go home to do gaming on Playstation

[bridgman]

I think the problem is GCN 1.1/1.2 is somewhat outdated,while it was successful, years have passed.. Where is GCN2.0?

Years ? The first GCN 3 chip (Tonga) shipped ~10 months ago, followed by Carrizo and Fiji.

[dungeon]

Years ? The first GCN 3 chip (Tonga) shipped ~10 months ago, followed by Fiji and Carrizo.

Tell them Bridgman that Anandtech invented that naming And also that if Fury is old architecture introduced last year, than 980Ti is also based on even much older architecture because that was introduced before Tonga

I can't help fanboys, because their brains are seems... elsewhere

[smitty3268]

I'm very interested in the Fury Nano, I hope it doesn't end up disappointing.

[blackiwid]

That ending (to buy something cheaper) is so true and so typical... because i do think 99% of nVidia or AMD fanboys commenting around a net, neither buy 980Ti nor Fury X

It is like watching boxing match, with couple nockouts on both sides but without winner... then people go home to do gaming on Playstation

You are absolutly right, and I admit I am one of it, how much of such expensive cards get sold in their live cycle 200.000 Worldwide? more less? even if amd would make 100 dollar interest? on each card, thats 20mio dollar nothing...

and besides its a close enough card some say its a bit better some say its a bit weaker the rest will the prices fix.

If I had that money for a graphics card I would maybe like such card, not loud because of the waku small I dont have a tower...

The real money is maybe in the nano? or whats its name, sounds very interestingly.