![]() This replaces the GDDR5 found on older cards and uses a far wider interface. The most noticeable new component, though, is High Bandwidth Memory. Underpinning it all is the Fiji core, which uses the familiar Graphics Core Next architecture with turbo-charged components and more hardware in virtually every department.įor instance, each shader engine now has 16 stream processors rather than the 11 included in older cards. The Radeon R9 Fury isn’t a flagship in the same way as the Fury X, but it shares much of the same hardware. Crucially, though, the Fury is significantly cheaper than AMD’s current flagship model. There isn’t much that differentiates the Fury and the Fury X when it comes to the underlying hardware. The most recent to emerge is the Radeon R9 Fury, which sits between the flagship Fury X and the tiny Fury Nano. they excuse with the "everyone knows how 1080Ti and TitanX(P)/XP compare against GTX 1080" but they don't have the balls to compare it directly to avoid conflicts with AMD, its even funny some times.AMD promised a handful of cards with the Fury name at the top of its latest graphics range. the scenario is not the same with Vega, it seems more and more that every review made lately it's handled carefully by Kyle to avoid conflicts with vs AMD, we all know kyle have stated several times to be playing nice with AMD, but at this point every review just seems to be more "delicate" content and more of apologist due the failure AMD represent right know in the High-end Segment. They did even a 4K exclusive review to show how better it was than the GTX Titan and the same movement was made with the Fury X, it was tested against the 980Ti and Titan X, price weren't a concern either, just performance is what matters against competitor high-end. you know because it was Da titan killer, there prices weren't any concern right?. it's a point where it's almost cynical and hypocritical, when the 290X launched it was even TESTED AGAINST the much more expensive GTX Titan. They compare to last Gen flagship but they don't do the same to current competitor flagship. Yeah and they left out the 1080Ti which actually cost the same and in lot of cases even cheaper than Vega64. The Radeon R9 290X is clearly the card for Ultra HD 4K. At 4K resolutions, you need every bit of performance you can get to achieve playable performance at high in-game settings on a single video card. It wasn't just a little bit faster either, it was anywhere from 10-23% faster. We found that the Radeon R9 290X was faster in every game compared to the GeForce GTX TITAN at 3840x2160. Whatever magic AMD is doing at 4K, it is working. The situation changes when the Radeon R9 290X is pushed up to Ultra HD 4K display resolutions. The performance differences were so insignificant that those did not translate to any noticeable gameplay differences at all. Performance in terms of frames per second was either right under, or right at TITAN FPS performance. That means that every game played the same between both video cards, the same performance, same in-game settings, and same smoothness. The R9 290X is performance comparable to the GeForce GTX TITAN at 2560x1600 (1600p) and lower (1080p.) In every game we played we were able to match the same gameplay experience as the GeForce GTX TITAN.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |