4K gaming on a single graphic card is impressive, 8K, even more so, but neither have anything on a 12K surround gaming setup. Skeptics would be laughing at this point now, well allow me to add some more merriment to their humor, I am talking about a 12K setup at 60 frames per second constant. I am sure you must think I have lost my marbles by now, but that is exactly what AMD has achieved with their new Fury X GPU. LegitReviews have tried the GPU in a 12K @60fps configuration successfully in the recently released Dirt Rally game.
Originally posted by JayFiveAlive The industry needs AMD otherwise nvidia is going to go nuts with their pricing. AMD needs to make quieter cards. The last card I had literally sounded like a jet engine taking off and would hit around 90c temp which was apparently "normal" for that card. No thank you. I hope their new cards do very well.. but yeah this is not 12k resolution lol.
AMD cards mostly aren't made by AMD itself. Mostly they're made by AMD's board partners. And many of AMD's board partners are exactly the same companies as Nvidia's board partners.
If someone botches a cooler, that can make a card obnoxiously loud. But usually, that cooler was designed by neither AMD nor Nvidia.
Originally posted by Classicstar Originally posted by Nitth Originally posted by Mikeha 4K gaming on a single graphic card is impressive, 8K, even more so, but neither have anything on a 12K surround gaming setup. Skeptics would be laughing at this point now, well allow me to add some more merriment to their humor, I am talking about a 12K setup at 60 frames per second constant. I am sure you must think I have lost my marbles by now, but that is exactly what AMD has achieved with their new Fury X GPU. LegitReviews have tried the GPU in a 12K @60fps configuration successfully in the recently released Dirt Rally game.Read more: http://wccftech.com/amd-fury-x-tested-12k-60fps/#ixzz3dZCeuRja
And i don't even care. Never going to buy another AMD card ever again.
In fact, i would pay more for a card with "less potential" that runs "Good" on all games than an amd card that has peak performance and stability on only a handful of titles.
You have absolutely no clue what your talking about you just copy what all other Nvidia fanboys say sadly.
Ive owned ati cards for nearly all my life, i can assure you im spreaking from experience.
Infact, i used to run them way before they sorted out their Texture and lighting tech which used to crash games constantlly in the early 2000's.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
I am a fanboy of neither company. I buy whatever of the two brands currently happens to have the better card when I'm looking to upgrade. In most recent history AMD has had the better cards in regards to price and performance but with the 980 it seemed like it ran cooler and used less power when comparing to AMD's R9 series so I went with Nvidia.
Also to the OP - 3 monitors at 4K does not equal 12K resolution.
Originally posted by Mikeha 4K gaming on a single graphic card is impressive, 8K, even more so, but neither have anything on a 12K surround gaming setup. Skeptics would be laughing at this point now, well allow me to add some more merriment to their humor, I am talking about a 12K setup at 60 frames per second constant. I am sure you must think I have lost my marbles by now, but that is exactly what AMD has achieved with their new Fury X GPU. LegitReviews have tried the GPU in a 12K @60fps configuration successfully in the recently released Dirt Rally game.Read more: http://wccftech.com/amd-fury-x-tested-12k-60fps/#ixzz3dZCeuRja
And i don't even care. Never going to buy another AMD card ever again.
In fact, i would pay more for a card with "less potential" that runs "Good" on all games than an amd card that has peak performance and stability on only a handful of titles.
This. All but one build I've ever done has been NVidia. I fell for AMD's cheap performance once and will never buy a single thing from them again. I don't care if they come out with a $2.00 card that holoprojects games with 1:1 hyper-realism and gives happy endings, I won't buy it.
In War - Victory. In Peace - Vigilance. In Death - Sacrifice.
I had a NVidia GeForce 440mx... It sucked so in the last 12 years I have never suggested someone buy NVidia. I believe that sums up all your AMD hate comments. Its rather dumb in my opinion since right now AMD is the dominant player in the Gaming side considering they part all 3 consoles. The thing I find funny is when AMD helps a developer, the game typically runs better on a NVidia card, like with Dirt. On the other hand if you build a game for a Unknown Graphics card without giving a shit about optimization, it always seem AMD cards perform better.
So i just got one of those for my AMD system, i hope i did not make a bad choice in AMD cards when this Fury is so close to being released.
I needed a dual GPU solution because i was a moron and did not get a motherboard that accomodated x-fire cards.While spendy, this basically costs the same as 2 R9's.
It is very long for a card, but for some reason the case looked to be made specifically for this card, which is odd since the computer is now going on 2 years.
Waiting on a new power supply before i actually get to see its performance, anyone else use one of these ?
So i just got one of those for my AMD system, i hope i did not make a bad choice in AMD cards when this Fury is so close to being released.
I needed a dual GPU solution because i was a moron and did not get a motherboard that accomodated x-fire cards.While spendy, this basically costs the same as 2 R9's.
It is very long for a card, but for some reason the case looked to be made specifically for this card, which is odd since the computer is now going on 2 years.
Waiting on a new power supply before i actually get to see its performance, anyone else use one of these ?
I'd cancel that order if you can. For that price, you might as well get either a GTX 980 Ti or a Fury X. Never go dual GPU if you're not getting top end cards.
Originally posted by Quizzical Originally posted by Voiidiinhttp://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150710&cm_re=XFX_R9_295_X2-_-14-150-710-_-ProductSo i just got one of those for my AMD system, i hope i did not make a bad choice in AMD cards when this Fury is so close to being released.I needed a dual GPU solution because i was a moron and did not get a motherboard that accomodated x-fire cards.While spendy, this basically costs the same as 2 R9's.It is very long for a card, but for some reason the case looked to be made specifically for this card, which is odd since the computer is now going on 2 years.Waiting on a new power supply before i actually get to see its performance, anyone else use one of these ?
I'd cancel that order if you can. For that price, you might as well get either a GTX 980 Ti or a Fury X. Never go dual GPU if you're not getting top end cards.
I must agree not going for dual gpu many games work bad with double GPU it's still faster the TITAN X and is one of best cooled card plus very silient but DOUBLE GPU is problem for games. I would go for Fury X(never go go for Nvidia there greedy company ruined whole PC market)it's cheap compare to Nvidia super silient and cool plus super fast TOP NOTCH.
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
Some guy already tested fury x, specifically in shadow of mordor because his titan x/980 Ti eats up 6GB on 4k all maxed, and it works, it uses about 3.6GB and has almost the same average fps like the 980 Ti (he just used titan to see if it was gonna go over 6GB and then switched back to 980 Ti to continue comparing).
So it's fps by fps the same as 980 Ti stock, and a gigabyte g1 980 is of course better default overclocked, he had some trouble overcloking the fury x for more than 100Mhz over stock, so he couldn't compare them clock for clock.
Unigine haven is a bigger difference a few more fps in favour of 980 Ti because the fury X drops more in min fps for some reason.
The card never goes over 60 degrees celsius, he hasn't tested if it goes over 60 in furmark yet, but it's tdp and voltage locked, and he only tried to overclock in msi afterburner, he forgot to try in amd catalyst it seems, and msi needs a new version to support more overclocking.
So that's a wrap on the whole 4GB isn't enough nonsense, witcher 3 needs 2 GB video ram on 4k , mordor needs 6 GB video ram on 4k, and Fury X manages to run 4k with 4GB without bottlenecking at 48 fps average HBM is truly marvelous, cant wait for version 2 next year.
Oh and also the 100Mhz overclock puts average fps in shadow of mordor @ 53 fps which makes it 1/2 fps better then Titan X
If it can overclock properly to 1300Mhz range this thing is gonna beat every single nvidia card in existance including evga and inno3D liquid cooled versions.
Previous post was too long lol, system load with 4770k stock is 367w with 100 mhz overclock, which means it stayed on 275w with the overclock the whole time
I can just imagine how much headroom u have from 60c to ~85c, im hoping atleast another 150-200Mhz.
Comments
and where is the proof?
they have no grafs or any video to prove it.
its just a picture showing 3 monitors.
and also 4gb vram even if its HBM cannot run 12k just see how 4k requires more then 4gb vram and thats just how it is.
no proofs just another fake thing not even confirmed. plus that game Requires nothing to be played and handles 2 gpus bad.
i bet even Titan x can drive 12k easily
AMD cards mostly aren't made by AMD itself. Mostly they're made by AMD's board partners. And many of AMD's board partners are exactly the same companies as Nvidia's board partners.
If someone botches a cooler, that can make a card obnoxiously loud. But usually, that cooler was designed by neither AMD nor Nvidia.
And i don't even care. Never going to buy another AMD card ever again.
In fact, i would pay more for a card with "less potential" that runs "Good" on all games than an amd card that has peak performance and stability on only a handful of titles.
You have absolutely no clue what your talking about you just copy what all other Nvidia fanboys say sadly.
Ive owned ati cards for nearly all my life, i can assure you im spreaking from experience.
Infact, i used to run them way before they sorted out their Texture and lighting tech which used to crash games constantlly in the early 2000's.
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
I am a fanboy of neither company. I buy whatever of the two brands currently happens to have the better card when I'm looking to upgrade. In most recent history AMD has had the better cards in regards to price and performance but with the 980 it seemed like it ran cooler and used less power when comparing to AMD's R9 series so I went with Nvidia.
Also to the OP - 3 monitors at 4K does not equal 12K resolution.
Steam: Neph
In War - Victory.
In Peace - Vigilance.
In Death - Sacrifice.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150710&cm_re=XFX_R9_295_X2-_-14-150-710-_-Product
So i just got one of those for my AMD system, i hope i did not make a bad choice in AMD cards when this Fury is so close to being released.
I needed a dual GPU solution because i was a moron and did not get a motherboard that accomodated x-fire cards.While spendy, this basically costs the same as 2 R9's.
It is very long for a card, but for some reason the case looked to be made specifically for this card, which is odd since the computer is now going on 2 years.
Waiting on a new power supply before i actually get to see its performance, anyone else use one of these ?
Lolipops !
I'd cancel that order if you can. For that price, you might as well get either a GTX 980 Ti or a Fury X. Never go dual GPU if you're not getting top end cards.
I must agree not going for dual gpu many games work bad with double GPU it's still faster the TITAN X and is one of best cooled card plus very silient but DOUBLE GPU is problem for games. I would go for Fury X(never go go for Nvidia there greedy company ruined whole PC market)it's cheap compare to Nvidia super silient and cool plus super fast TOP NOTCH.
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
Some guy already tested fury x, specifically in shadow of mordor because his titan x/980 Ti eats up 6GB on 4k all maxed, and it works,
it uses about 3.6GB and has almost the same average fps like the 980 Ti (he just used titan to see if it was gonna go over 6GB and then switched back to 980 Ti to continue comparing).
So it's fps by fps the same as 980 Ti stock, and a gigabyte g1 980 is of course better default overclocked, he had some trouble overcloking the fury x for more than 100Mhz over stock, so he couldn't compare them clock for clock.
Unigine haven is a bigger difference a few more fps in favour of 980 Ti because the fury X drops more in min fps for some reason.
The card never goes over 60 degrees celsius, he hasn't tested if it goes over 60 in furmark yet, but it's tdp and voltage locked, and he only tried to overclock in msi afterburner, he forgot to try in amd catalyst it seems, and msi needs a new version to support more overclocking.
So that's a wrap on the whole 4GB isn't enough nonsense, witcher 3 needs 2 GB video ram on 4k , mordor needs 6 GB video ram on 4k, and Fury X manages to run 4k with 4GB without bottlenecking at 48 fps average
HBM is truly marvelous, cant wait for version 2 next year.
Oh and also the 100Mhz overclock puts average fps in shadow of mordor @ 53 fps which makes it 1/2 fps better then Titan X
If it can overclock properly to 1300Mhz range this thing is gonna beat every single nvidia card in existance including evga and inno3D liquid cooled versions.
Previous post was too long lol, system load with 4770k stock is 367w with 100 mhz overclock, which means it stayed on 275w with the overclock the whole time
I can just imagine how much headroom u have from 60c to ~85c, im hoping atleast another 150-200Mhz.