mboost-dp1
Så er der reviews af Radeon R9 Fury X
- Forside
- ⟨
- Forum
- ⟨
- Tagwall
http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/gpu_displays/am...
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-r9...
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/06/24/amd_rade...
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2015/06/...
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/84170-amd-r...
http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/06/24/amd-radeon-...
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canu...
http://techreport.com/review/28513/amd-radeon-r9-f...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2015/06...
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Ra...
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-...
http://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-...
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2939712/amd-radeon-...
http://www.digitalstorm.com/unlocked/amd-fury-x-pe...
http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-v...
http://www.digitaltrends.com/video-card-reviews/am...
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Radeon-Grafikkar...
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/content/reviews/grap...
http://www.pcgamer.com/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-tested...
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-radeon-r9...
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/06/24/amd_rade...
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2015/06/...
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/84170-amd-r...
http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/06/24/amd-radeon-...
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canu...
http://techreport.com/review/28513/amd-radeon-r9-f...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2015/06...
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/AMD-Ra...
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-...
http://hothardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-...
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2939712/amd-radeon-...
http://www.digitalstorm.com/unlocked/amd-fury-x-pe...
http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-v...
http://www.digitaltrends.com/video-card-reviews/am...
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Radeon-Grafikkar...
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/content/reviews/grap...
http://www.pcgamer.com/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-tested...
terracide (2) skrev:-Crappy OC. (~10% Core , NO oc on HBM)
Enig - men de fleste reviewere er også enige om at der nok skal lukkes op for noget VMOD og adgangen til HBM-OC i driverne/BIOSen. Intet er afgjort endnu.
terracide (2) skrev:-4GB limitation
Ikke i alle spil.
terracide (2) skrev:-Beaten by GTX 980 Ti (at any resolution)
Ganske enkelt ikke korrekt.
terracide (2) skrev:-Worse perf/watt with less performance
For AMD en kæmpe forbedring ift. sidste generation og tæt (nok) på Maxwell.
terracide (2) skrev:-Limited supply (30K units), sold out fast
Limited Supply er meget normalt for en ny generation og løser sig selvfølgelig. "Sold out in 5-10 min" er jo nice nok - det er jo ikke et mainstream-produkt.
terracide (2) skrev:-Too little, too late
Overhovedet ikke - de fleste reviews er da også enige om at AMD faktisk er kommet stærkt igen, men skal lige have tid til finpudsning af drivere mv.
Reality bites eh:
Site
Publication Average
Legit Reviews -4.1%
TheTechReport -7.9%
Hardware Heaven -13.5%
Hardware Canucks -4.4%
techPowerUp -3.6%
Guru3D -2.3%
IGN -4.5%
Forbes -9.3%
Overclock3d -9.1%
Tom's Hardware +1.7%
HardOCP -9.0%
Den eneste der har AMD som vinder..er et sit der mixer drivers og genbruger gammel data...
Det her er morsomt...denying reality is like religion! ^^
Site
Publication Average
Legit Reviews -4.1%
TheTechReport -7.9%
Hardware Heaven -13.5%
Hardware Canucks -4.4%
techPowerUp -3.6%
Guru3D -2.3%
IGN -4.5%
Forbes -9.3%
Overclock3d -9.1%
Tom's Hardware +1.7%
HardOCP -9.0%
Den eneste der har AMD som vinder..er et sit der mixer drivers og genbruger gammel data...
Det her er morsomt...denying reality is like religion! ^^
Man skulle næsten tror Kyle postede i denne tråd også ^^
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041691092&...
It really does not matter what I have to say. I know your kind. You are that guy that is not going to be swayed from his opinion no matter what I say. So I see no need in addressing your opinion. If you do not like our review format or how we share our opinions, I fully accept that. My response to you directly is, "If you do not like it, don't read it." That little red X in corner of your browser will solve all your issues with our writing.
So basically....I read your opinion and don't really give a fuck what you think. So piss off.
I hope this is a bit more clear than the, "Your thoughts are noted," I posted previously.
http://hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1041691092&...
It really does not matter what I have to say. I know your kind. You are that guy that is not going to be swayed from his opinion no matter what I say. So I see no need in addressing your opinion. If you do not like our review format or how we share our opinions, I fully accept that. My response to you directly is, "If you do not like it, don't read it." That little red X in corner of your browser will solve all your issues with our writing.
So basically....I read your opinion and don't really give a fuck what you think. So piss off.
I hope this is a bit more clear than the, "Your thoughts are noted," I posted previously.
Jeg kunne godt tænke mig at se dette kort køre et spil som er optimeret til at benytte Mantle.
- AMD Defence Force, we hate nVidia, or do we? Join today.
- AMD Defence Force, we hate nVidia, or do we? Join today.
Clauzii (4) skrev:Overhovedet ikke - de fleste reviews er da også enige om at AMD faktisk er kommet stærkt igen, men skal lige have tid til finpudsning af drivere mv.
Korrekt - de fleste er enige om, at det ikke slår et GTX 980 Ti, i det samlede billede, men det var der vel heller ikke ret mange der forventede.
Når/hvis der bliver åbnet op for OC og driverne bliver bedre, så bliver det et tæt ræs mellem de to.
CBM (10) skrev:Jeg kunne godt tænke mig at se dette kort køre et spil som er optimeret til at benytte Mantle.
- AMD Defence Force, we hate nVidia, or do we? Join today.
Mantle er død...AMD kort yder bedre under D3D end Mantle i BF4...Mantle var igen AMD's typiske bæ med "MASSER AF PR....fubar excecution"
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2894036/mantle-is-a...
Vi er flere der forudsagde dette.
Mantle var ikke fader til DX12...DX12 var i pipelinen FØR AMD besluttede sig for at prøve at smykke sig i lånte fjer...og Microsoft gad ikke AMD's PR.
Så AMD tog dør nummer 2...OpenGL...
XorpiZ (11) skrev:Korrekt - de fleste er enige om, at det ikke slår et GTX 980 Ti, i det samlede billede, men det var der vel heller ikke ret mange der forventede.
Når/hvis der bliver åbnet op for OC og driverne bliver bedre, så bliver det et tæt ræs mellem de to.
Der bliver IKKE lukket op for OC af HBM...men i skulle måske søge lidt på hvordan VRM's ser ud på Fury, før i benytter det kedelige AMD-fan-gril-trick:
"Bare vent til X!!!!"
Det var det samme bæ med:
- Bare vent til DirectX 10
- Bare vent til DirectX 11
- Bare vent til tessellation
- Bare vent til Bullet Physics
- Bare vent til HavokFX
- Bare vent til nye drivere
- Bare vent til DirectX 12
- Bare vent til man kan OC
Hvad er det næste?
- Bare vent til Windows 10? *GG*
Ja, det er jo nærmest uhørt at AMDs drivere bliver bedre..
*shrug* *snickers* *GG*
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1656013...
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10582...
*shrug* *snickers* *GG*
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1656013...
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10582...
#15
Ja, det er nærmest ubrugeligt lige nu;
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9...
*GG* *S*
Ja, det er nærmest ubrugeligt lige nu;
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_r9...
*GG* *S*
Du vælger den eneste revuew der skiller sig (cherry-picking)...og bruger en skrladespand af mixed drivers, gammel data og ingame benches...tak fordi du bevise rmin pointe ^^
Prøv denne:
http://hardocp.com/article/2015/06/24/amd_radeon_r...
Prøv denne:
http://hardocp.com/article/2015/06/24/amd_radeon_r...
terracide (17) skrev:Du vælger den eneste revuew der skiller sig (cherry-picking)...og bruger en skrladespand af mixed drivers, gammel data og ingame benches...tak fordi du bevise rmin pointe ^^
Prøv denne:
http://hardocp.com/article/2015/06/24/amd_radeon_r...
Tidligere (#6) whinede du over, at det var Toms Hardware, der brugte mixed drivers og gammel data.
Du er en forvirret knægt, Henny.
Computerbase.de er også enige i, at 4k gaming er ganske realistisk på Fury:
http://www.computerbase.de/2015-06/amd-radeon-r9-f...
Det samme er HardOCP i dit link.
Man skulle tro du troede det var R9 290X der var tale om.
.oO( mon terra har glemt hjernen? ) *GG* *snickers* *shrugs*
terracide (17) skrev:en skrladespand af mixed drivers
Det er de, måske nok, nødt til:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nvidia/comments/381ef5/35...
Clauzii (19) skrev:Det er de, måske nok, nødt til:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nvidia/comments/381ef5/35...
Så fakta har ramt nu?
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/06/24/amd_rade...
**Update 6/26/2015 On Overclocking**
Preliminary Overclocking
We've had some time now to do some preliminary overclocking with the AMD Radeon R9 Fury X. We have found that you can control the speed of the fan on the radiator with MSI Afterburner. Turning it up to 100% fan speed keeps the GPU much cooler when attempting to overclock, and isn't that loud.
For example, during our overclocking attempts the GPU was at 37c at full-load removing temperature as a factor holding back overclocking. We also found out that you will not be able to overclock HBM, it is at 500MHz and will stay at 500MHz. You will only be able to overclock the GPU. Currently, there is no way to unlock voltage modification of the GPU.
In our testing we found that the GPU hard locked in gaming at 1150MHz 100% fan speed 37c. Moving down to 1140MHz we were able to play The Witcher 3 without crashing so far. This is with the fan at 100% and 37c degree GPU. So far, 1140MHz seems to be stable, but we have not tested other games nor tested the overclock for a prolonged amount of time.
More testing needs to be done, but our preliminary testing seems to indicate 1130-1140MHz may be the overclock. This is about a 70-80MHz overclock over stock speed of 1050MHz. That is a rather small increase in overclock and doesn't really amount to any gameplay experience or noteworthy performance improvements.
We have at least learned that temperature is not the factor holding the overclock back, at 37c there was a lot of headroom with the liquid cooling system. There are other factors holding the overclock back, one of which may be voltage.
Men din itd er ikke for dyrbare til at sprede FUD...
Det er ikke for sjov at AMD PR er ude og prøve at negligere de 4 GB.
Fury X failed hard...de eenste der ikke har indset det endnu...eer dem som er spild af tid...wake up and smell the roses.
Q3 marketshare bliveer interresnat ;)
Det er ikke for sjov at AMD PR er ude og prøve at negligere de 4 GB.
Fury X failed hard...de eenste der ikke har indset det endnu...eer dem som er spild af tid...wake up and smell the roses.
Q3 marketshare bliveer interresnat ;)
terracide (9) skrev:
De er altså ikke så sjove når man kan tysk :/
Also, en lille "fejl" - han siger at han har været AMD Fanboi siden Athlon 64 dagene, jaja bevares, men dengang lavede AMD jo ikke grafikkort? Man burde vel sige at han har været Fanboi siden Rage* ;)
* Lidt spøjst de genbruger navne btw, forgængeren for Radeon 7000 var Rage Fury
terracide (38) skrev:Jeg kan forklare det for dig, men jeg kan ikke forstå det for dig...
Hvad fanden mener du med at jeg skal "importere sproget, ikke humoren" o_O
Pointen er, at jeg ikke kan læse underteksterne, uden at være irriteret over at det ikke er det de siger. Den er sjov for præpubetære folk, og andre der ikke kan tysk.
PHP-Ekspert Thoroughbreed (39) skrev:Hvad fanden mener du med at jeg skal "importere sproget, ikke humoren" o_O
Pointen er, at jeg ikke kan læse underteksterne, uden at være irriteret over at det ikke er det de siger. Den er sjov for præpubetære folk, og andre der ikke kan tysk.
Nårh lille pusser da...ny ble? :)
#33
Jeg ved ikke ligefrem om det er "Reality Bites". Jeg synes (efter at have læst stort set alle reviews) det ligner noget driver-snask, som mange også siger.
Jeg er overhovedet ikke blind for at 4GB ikke er alverden, men heller ikke blind for at det er temmeligt GODE 4GB, siden der er situationer hvor Fury's 4GB er NOK til at ligge sig side om side (endda lidt foran i nogle spil) med TitanX/980Ti.
Frametimes kan løses, tror jeg - det blev de jo sidst den var 'gal' ;)
Personligt er jeg hooked på et Nano. Det ser ud til at blive det der sælger som hotcakes: Full Fiji chip ved lidt lavere clock i et 15,6 cm. kort, nice :)
Det har i øvrigt vist sig at man godt kan OC HBM-RAM ;) :
http://wccftech.com/unlock-memory-overclocking-amd...
Jeg ved ikke ligefrem om det er "Reality Bites". Jeg synes (efter at have læst stort set alle reviews) det ligner noget driver-snask, som mange også siger.
Jeg er overhovedet ikke blind for at 4GB ikke er alverden, men heller ikke blind for at det er temmeligt GODE 4GB, siden der er situationer hvor Fury's 4GB er NOK til at ligge sig side om side (endda lidt foran i nogle spil) med TitanX/980Ti.
Frametimes kan løses, tror jeg - det blev de jo sidst den var 'gal' ;)
Personligt er jeg hooked på et Nano. Det ser ud til at blive det der sælger som hotcakes: Full Fiji chip ved lidt lavere clock i et 15,6 cm. kort, nice :)
Det har i øvrigt vist sig at man godt kan OC HBM-RAM ;) :
http://wccftech.com/unlock-memory-overclocking-amd...
#42:
Du kan ikke løse freametimes pga. en for lilel framebuffer.
Ikke uden magi...og den slag er for idioter.
Besides...så er det ikke 4GB VRAM...deet er 3,5 GB VRAM og 512 MB chace in windows, med lavere hastighed...så problemet er faktisk større.
Hvis du ikke aner hvad jeg snakker om nu..så skal du nok liiiiiiiiiige læse op før du poster igen.
Selv om uvidenhed og dig nu altid har været gode venner...
Du kan ikke løse freametimes pga. en for lilel framebuffer.
Ikke uden magi...og den slag er for idioter.
Besides...så er det ikke 4GB VRAM...deet er 3,5 GB VRAM og 512 MB chace in windows, med lavere hastighed...så problemet er faktisk større.
Hvis du ikke aner hvad jeg snakker om nu..så skal du nok liiiiiiiiiige læse op før du poster igen.
Selv om uvidenhed og dig nu altid har været gode venner...
Og det lader ikke til AMD har styr på deres strategi ^^
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/06/us-adv-m...
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/07/06/us-adv-m...
#44
Tilfældigt uploaded billede - link til kilde??
Prøver igen, kan man OC HBM - Ja eller Nej??
FOH DP på Fury X:
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph9390/75495...
Tilfældigt uploaded billede - link til kilde??
Prøver igen, kan man OC HBM - Ja eller Nej??
FOH DP på Fury X:
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph9390/75495...
GF 980Ti:
http://i.imgur.com/vrlKM6W.png
--
That link points to a test I ran on a GTX 980 Ti *without* putting it in headless mode with Aero disabled. You can see the slowdown in the last memory blocks. I confirmed that this also happens with the GTX Titan X as well. Again, note that it's the last 512MB of RAM being affected.
This is what happens when a bona fide issue meets a crude benchmark and limited understanding. People start looking to find demons everywhere, even when the problems don't exist. Just because the GTX 970 had a problem doesn't mean that every GPU does.
Further compounding the issue is this: Programs like GPU-Z and Process Explorer don't report how much VRAM is actually in use. They report how much VRAM the card has *requested*. DX11 doesn't offer the kind of monitoring control you need to know how much VRAM the GPU is actually using and there's no way to monitor it directly.
If the GPU has more RAM it may request to use more RAM, but that doesn't mean it's actually *doing* so. This is why you don't see performance gains from many titles, even when they show more VRAM as in-use. There's not a 1:1 mapping and the GPU can change the amount of memory its requesting to use from moment to moment, which is why many games will change the RAM allocation depending on what's going on, on-screen.
/ Jhruska på AT
http://i.imgur.com/vrlKM6W.png
--
That link points to a test I ran on a GTX 980 Ti *without* putting it in headless mode with Aero disabled. You can see the slowdown in the last memory blocks. I confirmed that this also happens with the GTX Titan X as well. Again, note that it's the last 512MB of RAM being affected.
This is what happens when a bona fide issue meets a crude benchmark and limited understanding. People start looking to find demons everywhere, even when the problems don't exist. Just because the GTX 970 had a problem doesn't mean that every GPU does.
Further compounding the issue is this: Programs like GPU-Z and Process Explorer don't report how much VRAM is actually in use. They report how much VRAM the card has *requested*. DX11 doesn't offer the kind of monitoring control you need to know how much VRAM the GPU is actually using and there's no way to monitor it directly.
If the GPU has more RAM it may request to use more RAM, but that doesn't mean it's actually *doing* so. This is why you don't see performance gains from many titles, even when they show more VRAM as in-use. There's not a 1:1 mapping and the GPU can change the amount of memory its requesting to use from moment to moment, which is why many games will change the RAM allocation depending on what's going on, on-screen.
/ Jhruska på AT
More bottlenecking due to 4GB:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/07/10/asus_str...
"Dying Light is a VRAM memory hog, this has been proven multiple times. Both video cards have 4GB of VRAM but one seems to bottleneck more than the other with it in this game.
Both video cards are able to play with the maximum settings in Dying Light. As you can see we had the same gameplay experience between the two video cards. However, you will note one appears faster, the GeForce GTX 980. However, this is a bit misleading, and that is because of VRAM capacity.
At maximum settings the ASUS STRIX R9 Fury is being bottlenecked by the VRAM capacity. The GeForce GTX 980 however, isn't being held back so much.
When we lowered settings in this game to "Best Quality" lowering shadow map size to "Very High" and reducing the view distance to half we saw a large power increase out of the ASUS STRIX R9 Fury. How much you ask? 50 watts! That's right, by reducing settings the video card increased its total wattage by 50W. That means the video card was working harder and accelerating the game faster.
Our theory is that the video card is running out of VRAM at maximum settings in this game and thus capping or bottlenecking performance. It is keeping the video card from fully showing its performance potential since the VRAM capacity is too small. The GeForce GTX 980 however doesn't seem to have this issue, its wattage doesn't change and it seems to be showing its full potential.
What does this all really mean? It is an example where VRAM capacity of 4GB is already not enough in a game at 1440p. A sign of times to come? Of course we cannot predict, but it is here now in Dying Light.
It also means as we lower settings in the game the ASUS STRIX R9 Fury can show its full potential to us and delivers faster performance compared to the GeForce GTX 980, unlike it does at maximum settings. Look at the apples-to-apples below."
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/07/10/asus_str...
"Dying Light is a VRAM memory hog, this has been proven multiple times. Both video cards have 4GB of VRAM but one seems to bottleneck more than the other with it in this game.
Both video cards are able to play with the maximum settings in Dying Light. As you can see we had the same gameplay experience between the two video cards. However, you will note one appears faster, the GeForce GTX 980. However, this is a bit misleading, and that is because of VRAM capacity.
At maximum settings the ASUS STRIX R9 Fury is being bottlenecked by the VRAM capacity. The GeForce GTX 980 however, isn't being held back so much.
When we lowered settings in this game to "Best Quality" lowering shadow map size to "Very High" and reducing the view distance to half we saw a large power increase out of the ASUS STRIX R9 Fury. How much you ask? 50 watts! That's right, by reducing settings the video card increased its total wattage by 50W. That means the video card was working harder and accelerating the game faster.
Our theory is that the video card is running out of VRAM at maximum settings in this game and thus capping or bottlenecking performance. It is keeping the video card from fully showing its performance potential since the VRAM capacity is too small. The GeForce GTX 980 however doesn't seem to have this issue, its wattage doesn't change and it seems to be showing its full potential.
What does this all really mean? It is an example where VRAM capacity of 4GB is already not enough in a game at 1440p. A sign of times to come? Of course we cannot predict, but it is here now in Dying Light.
It also means as we lower settings in the game the ASUS STRIX R9 Fury can show its full potential to us and delivers faster performance compared to the GeForce GTX 980, unlike it does at maximum settings. Look at the apples-to-apples below."
Opret dig som bruger i dag
Det er gratis, og du binder dig ikke til noget.
Når du er oprettet som bruger, får du adgang til en lang række af sidens andre muligheder, såsom at udforme siden efter eget ønske og deltage i diskussionerne.