The AMD Radeon R9 Fury Review, Feat. Sapphire & ASUS
by Ryan Smith on July 10, 2015 9:00 AM ESTThe Test
On a brief note, since last month’s R9 Fury X review, AMD has reunified their driver base. Catalyst 15.7, released on Wednesday, extends the latest branch of AMD’s drivers to the 200 series and earlier, bringing with it all of the optimizations and features that for the past few weeks have been limited to the R9 Fury series and the 300 series.
As a result we’ve gone back and updated our results for all of the AMD cards featured in this review. Compared to the R9 Fury series launch driver, the performance and behavior of the R9 Fury series has not changed, nor were we expecting it to. Meanwhile AMD’s existing 200/8000/7000 series GCN cards have seen a smattering of performance improvements that are reflected in our results.
| CPU: | Intel Core i7-4960X @ 4.2GHz |
| Motherboard: | ASRock Fatal1ty X79 Professional |
| Power Supply: | Corsair AX1200i |
| Hard Disk: | Samsung SSD 840 EVO (750GB) |
| Memory: | G.Skill RipjawZ DDR3-1866 4 x 8GB (9-10-9-26) |
| Case: | NZXT Phantom 630 Windowed Edition |
| Monitor: | Asus PQ321 |
| Video Cards: | AMD Radeon R9 Fury X AMD Radeon R9 290X AMD Radeon R9 285 AMD Radeon HD 7970 ASUS STRIX R9 Fury Sapphire Tri-X R9 Fury OC NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 |
| Video Drivers: | NVIDIA Release 352.90 Beta AMD Catalyst Cat 15.7 |
| OS: | Windows 8.1 Pro |
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
288 Comments
View All Comments
Oxford Guy - Saturday, July 11, 2015 - link
2% cost difference is likely to be erased by sale pricing at various times.darkfalz - Saturday, July 11, 2015 - link
My 980 is about 15% from stock, and it's a poor overclocker despite running cool. These cards struggle to hit 10%. I also can't go back 6 months ago and buy a R9 Fury. And Nvidia's next release is likely around the corner. I think they're approximately equal value - which is good for AMD fans, but it's been a long wait for them to have a card comparable to what NVIDIA enthusiasts have been enjoying for a year!Flunk - Friday, July 10, 2015 - link
It's nice to see AMD win a segment. I'm not sure that the Fury X matters that much in the grand scheme of things, seeing that it's the same price as the better performing Geforce 980 TI.The Fury seems to overclock to almost match the Fury X, making it a good enthusiast buy.
cmikeh2 - Friday, July 10, 2015 - link
If you're willing to over clock though, you can get a good 15+ percent out of the 980 and pretty much bring it even with an OCed Fury for a little less money.looncraz - Friday, July 10, 2015 - link
But as soon as voltage control is unlocked the fury will probably eek out at least another 100MHz or more, which will put it healthily out of reach of the 980. And, once a few more driver issues (such as GTA V performance) the performance of the Fury will improve even more.HBM has a different performance profile, and AMD is still accommodating that. And, of course, if you turn the nVidia image quality up to AMD levels, nVidia loses a few extra percent of performance.
The GTX 980 vs R9 Fury question is easy to answer (until a 980 price drop). The Fury X vs 980 Ti question is slightly more difficult (but the answer tends to go the other way, the AIO cooler being the Fury X's main draw).
D. Lister - Saturday, July 11, 2015 - link
"if you turn the nVidia image quality up to AMD levels, nVidia loses a few extra percent of performance."Surely we have some proof to go along with that allegation... ?
silverblue - Saturday, July 11, 2015 - link
I've heard the same thing, although I believe it was concerning the lack of anisotropic filtering on the NVIDIA side. However, anisotropic filtering is very cheap nowadays as far as I'm aware, so it's not really going to shake things up much whether it's on OR off, though image quality does improve noticeably.D. Lister - Saturday, July 11, 2015 - link
Err...http://international.download.nvidia.com/webassets...
You mean to say that it doesn't work like it is supposed to?
silverblue - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
I'm not sure what you're getting at. In any case, I was trying to debunk the myth that turning off AF makes a real difference to performance.FlushedBubblyJock - Wednesday, July 15, 2015 - link
no, there's no proof, the proof of course is inside the raging gourd of the amd fanboy, never be unlocked by merely sane mortal beings.