Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
I facepalm AMD(due to first day reviews, it changes quit a bit in last few days) it's been beaten ev
Classicstar
Member UncommonPosts: 2,697
It even in some games 980 came close to Fury X.
AMD will not survive this.
Sorry i even thought AMD now would comeback with big bang and be KING again oh man was i wrong. I dunno what AMD is doing but this is as i see it now last nail in the coffin.
I won't upgrade only thing they improved is TEMPATURE which is extremely good but noise watt and performance mediocre at best very sad indeed.
I will never buy Nvidia because of greedy manipulative company but now i won't upgrade because of AMD FAILED HARD saying fastest card in world while it way behind 980 ti and Titan X.
Also i refuse to pay 750 euros for card thats not even faster then 980 ti.
Sorry AMD unless DX12 do wonders(no game in DX12)or next year HBM 2.0?(don't think you survive this disaster)im done with upgrading. Stick with my 290x 2x forever:P
Sorry guys you can burn me down now as you all do so well(it was never personal but some always think is so im done with hardware section)
This all based on REVIEW GURU3D so burn them is they showed a bad made review?
Hope to build full AMD system RYZEN/VEGA/AM4!!!
MB:Asus V De Luxe z77
CPU:Intell Icore7 3770k
GPU: AMD Fury X(waiting for BIG VEGA 10 or 11 HBM2?(bit unclear now))
MEMORY:Corsair PLAT.DDR3 1866MHZ 16GB
PSU:Corsair AX1200i
OS:Windows 10 64bit
Comments
No reason to burn you down as you call it.
Just remember next time not to buy into the initial hype.
each user has to believe in AMD once, and buy at least one of their cards.
after that, that user is usualy healed of the AMD idea.
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
ah, now they are the underdog again?
sorry, but after hearing years of "AMD TOTALY KICKS NVIDIA'S ASSSSSS!" from random fanbois, this underdog thing is kinda.... not valid anymore
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
This only (obviously) applies to super-ultra-rich people who do SLI 980Ti or such. Which is like...1% of the gaming market?
AMD for me is mainstream performance per price. And last time they kicked NVidia *** with a R9 290 much cheaper than a similar performing 970. For people rocking two or more high-end cards, I doubt AMD has had a proper offering of late. Maybe when the R9 295x2 was on sale for half price during Christmas or smthg...
They even bumped the price didn't they? i thought it's price was gonna be 550$, now i heard it's actually 650$?
Fanboys are fanboys... that doesn't make for 'facts.
Fact is AMD has ALWAYS been the underdog, has ALWAYS has less market share and has ALWAYS had less money.
Facts, not fanboys statements are what we base discussion off of here, at least for the most part.
Here's a quote for you
"JPR’s data isn’t the only point in favor of Nvidia. Steam’s hardware survey has long shown Nvidia to be dominant, and the latest trends only reinforce that position. As of February 2015 only 28.6 percent of Steam gamers have an AMD video card, compared to 51.8 percent for Nvidia, and the red team’s share has decreased from just over 32 percent two years ago.
Read more: http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/is-the-eternal-pc-graphics-war-coming-to-an-end/#ixzz3dzP0my91
Follow us: @digitaltrends on Twitter | digitaltrendsftw on Facebook"
So data has 'long shown Nvidia to be dominant' Seems like AMD would therefore be 'The underdog'.
One is at 550 and the other 650.
Anyways. I dont think AMD has been beaten at all. Their 390X even with it being a respin has performance at the 980 GTX fir 100 dollars less. That seems like a win to me. And their Fury cards are going to be priced lower than Nvidias flagship cards with similar if not better performance. Seems like another win there.
At this point though many people are settled into the idea that nvidia is the best at any price and that AMDs are nothing but trouble. AMD may never get rid of that perception. I have owned 1 AMD / Radeon card in my time and it worked great until it crapped out and XFX wouldnt replace it even with the lifetime warranty. With the prices AMD has now my next card is most likely going to be from AMD.
DX12 should bring more equality to the table and less " exclusive " features that seem to crop up.
I really freaking hope so.
Dx12, the thing we're all pining our futures on. or 'Can we please get a multi-core ready DX up in this?'
Rocky and Bullwinkle anyone?
AMD imo, their good at some things, and just great at others, basically they make good hardware at a great price, for the most part, recently decided to upgrade my PC, as i have been running a phenom I 2.6ghz quad core, for years, it works, but it could be a lot better, now, as much as i would have loved to have bought an Intel CPU, fact is, they are just way too expensive, so, my new build includes a AMD FX 9590, 8 core, running at 4.7 ghz, you can even overclock it, not that i intend to, but at £178.00 it is so much cheaper than intels equivalent CPU, that its a no brainer, on the other hand, my GPU, is my existing nvidia 660 gtx, the Msi twin frozr version, when i eventually upgrade that, next year probably, it will be for another Nvidia card, they have never let me down, and the one time i did use an AMD gpu, it did, i just could not get it to work, thats not to say amd cards are bad, just that sometimes, you need to really work at getting them to work, and with Nvidia, you don't, or at least, so far i havent.
So, for CPU's i'll probably be sticking with AMD for the foreseeable future, but for GPU's its Nvidia. Unless of course i win the lottery, which is pretty much what it would take for me to be able to afford an Intel CPU.
...I am wondering what do you think Intel equivalent of FX 9590 is.
Whats all this talk about underdog?
Isn't AMD the bigboy?
They make gpu's and cpu's and supply Xbone and Ps4. Seems to me that Nvidia is probably the smaller company and AMD is the underdog when it comes straight out to performance.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
Oh, they're evil like Apple is evil for not making their apps run on Android, or how Microsoft is evil for not making sure their programs run on Linux.
You expect NVidia to spend money on tech then open-source it so their competitor can make money? On what planet does that work?
I have been paying attention to G-sync, I'm saving up for my Acer XB27HU 1440P IPS g-sync monitor and I'm stoked. I don't care if NVidia shuts AMD out because AMD sucks. I broke away from NVidia once and bought the hype about how AMD is better for cheaper and it was the worst build I've ever made.
Bottom line is if you buy NVidia, you won't have to worry about everything you're talking about.
I've got one and I love it. Very happy with the purchase.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
techpowerup sums it up the best:
The good
~ Great performance at 4K
~ Low gaming noise
~ Compact form factor
~ Low temperatures
~ Power efficient gaming
~ HBM memory, tons of bandwidth
~ Multi-monitor power consumption greatly improved
~ Backplate included
~ ZeroCore power
~ Dual-BIOS
~ Support for AMD FreeSync
~ Supports AMD Virtual Super Resolution and Framerate Target Control
The bad
~ Slower than expected in sub-4K resolutions
~ Pump emits permanent high-pitched whine
~ Some coil noise
~ Could be much quieter in idle
~ 4 GB of VRAM
~ Lack of HDMI 2.0
~ No memory overclocking
~ Radiator takes up extra space
~ No DVI / analog VGA outputs
The card performs way better at 4k than at 1440p or 1080p, lol, it's the anti-aliasing which is killing it, and half the benchmarking websites used 14.2/15.4 drivers. Still focusing on driver tweaking for 4k performance is not a productive thing.
Fury X average performance compared 980 Ti is exactly the same @4k and then it just drops at 1440p to about 6% and then an abysmal 14% difference @1080p, ...
Significantly more expensive.
Decent post. I just wonder why the lack of memory overclocking is a bad thing? I mean ... its pretty much faster than any GDDR5 memory on the market.
Also I wouldn't buy into the initial reviews. I know of 3 hardware sites that do decent unopinionated reviews so I'd wait for those to make a judgement.
But to the OP, yeah, if you've got 2x 290X I don't think you need to upgrade anytime soon. I have a single one and it's a beast in all the games I play.
More likely you are comparing wrong models...
An i5 4690K will outperform an FX 9590 for about the same price and use less power.
Just the ones on Passmark, and at Novatech, the nearest Intel equivalent, is about £70 more than the Amd one i ended up buying. And Price/Performance were the deciding criteria, which, is something that Amd actually do pretty well at, Intel's CPU's have always been a bit pricey, and you get what you can afford.
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-4690K-vs-AMD-FX-9590/2432vs1812 $6.00 difference and better performance...
I expect once more drivers come along that some of those negative will be taken care of especially lower res performance.
This is also the first I have heard of any high pitched whine. Could have been a bad pump. I dont see how noise is a negative though since its noise level stays pretty much the same from idle to under load. It is much quieter than other cards in that regard.
Radiator taking up extra space? Really? The card itself is much smaller than other cards and the radiator somehow is a negative?
HDMI 2.0.. Not needed at all but would have been nice to have. No DVI or analog is certainly not a negative.
The 4GB VRam isnt a negative either. It is the first release of something new and much different than what is out there now.
I am wondering if they will with later released enable overclocking or if it can be with a driver release. It is new memory and such after all. They may be taking a cautious approach.
Water Cooling as standard should be listed as a " Good " also. That is an extra 100 bucks right there saved.
IMO once more efficient drivers and Win 10 come along it will out perform the 980 Ti.
The pump noise is probably due to the pump not being set up properly rpm to temperature wise, it should not be present on retail cards, these are preview samples.
4GB is def not a problem, as the card shines best in 4k, it uses a lot less vram in 4k then any other card probably thx to some awesome driver optimization utilizing the huge bandwidth advantage.
I hope the horrible 1080p and bad 1440p are a product of this 4k optimization and will be fixed in next driver. For instance it gets about 0.75 less fps than a 980 Ti while using 3.9GB of vram compared to 980 Ti using 5.5-5.9 GB of vram.
However on another website in supposedly the same test it gets 20% less fps, and i think that's cause they cranked up AA on 4k which is pointless and just clogged the card. (+they used 14.12 and 15.2 amd drivers instead of 15.5 which were released specifically for fury, talk about intentional crippling)
Without AA and high anisotropic Fury X doesn't stop when it hits 4GB vram, unlike 970