Vayra86QFT

The fact is AMD can make a 3072 or even a 4096+ chip now (Or months ago). But AMD sees no point in doing this unless all games fully take advantage of their arch with DX12, Crossfire, and perfected drivers from AMD. Just look at how the Fury X was 5% weaker than the 980 Ti at launch, and now it is nearly 20% stronger!


Most people just read the OG reviews and fail to read recent reviews when they hunt for a GPU upgrade. Don't worry Vega 10 will be 30 -50% stronger than the Fury X, and it will be out in a few months. But they don't want to release a new Fury, 490, or 495x2 until they all curb-stomp the competition.

Captain_TomThe fact is AMD can make a 3072 or even a 4096+ chip now (Or months ago). But AMD sees no point in doing this unless all games fully take advantage of their arch with DX12, Crossfire, and perfected drivers from AMD. Just look at how the Fury X was 5% weaker than the 980 Ti at launch, and now it is nearly 20% stronger!


Most people just read the OG reviews and fail to read recent reviews when they hunt for a GPU upgrade. Don't worry Vega 10 will be 30 -50% stronger than the Fury X, and it will be out in a few months. But they don't want to release a new Fury, 490, or 495x2 until they all curb-stomp the competition.

That's very generous of AMD, letting Nvidia have no competition in the high end for what's it been like... 7 months already?

People forget there are gamers like me who don't upgrade for ages.

Actually, most buyers of mid/low end GPUs keep them for years.
"DX12/Vulkan is irrelevant, since GPUs will be obsolete" is not serious even if that wouldn't be the case, as if I play Doom it matters to me, here and now.

FluffmeisterThat's very generous of AMD, letting Nvidia have no competition in the high end for what's it been like... 7 months already?

Haha nothing generous about it. If you would look at GPU history, you would see that AMD has always been most successful when they focus on the mid-high end, and ignore Ultra Enthusiast. For some reason people ignored the gems that were the 7970 and 290X, and AMD gets that now. It's sad but true.

Captain_TomHaha nothing generous about it. If you would look at GPU history, you would see that AMD has always been most successful when they focus on the mid-high end, and ignore Ultra Enthusiast. For some reason people ignored the gems that were the 7970 and 290X, and AMD gets that now. It's sad but true.

People ignored the 7970 and the 290X?

Have you been living in a cave or something?

It's seems like some others here you opt for playing the "victim card".

Captain_TomAs usual the Fury is falling in between a 1070 and 1080... For $140 less than a 1070. LOL 28nm > 16nm?

Depends on your definition of "usual", I guess. According to this: www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Zotac/GeForce_GTX_1080_Amp_Extreme/29.html
not even Fury X finishes between the 1070 and 1080. Usually.

FluffmeisterPeople ignored the 7970 and the 290X?

Have you been living in a cave or something?

It's seems like some others here you opt for playing the "victim card".

There sales went down compared to the 4000, 5000, and 6000 series. Are you saying they didn't?

medi01People forget there are gamers like me who don't upgrade for ages.

Actually, most buyers of mid/low end GPUs keep them for years.
"DX12/Vulkan is irrelevant, since GPUs will be obsolete" is not serious even if that wouldn't be the case, as if I play Doom it matters to me, here and now.

Let's try to use our brains here a bit, ok?

The "DX12/Vulkan is irrelevant, since GPUs will be obsolete" statement is true, because that's the situation with most titles available now. It does not mean "do no buy a 480 no matter what". IF you happen to play Doom and only Doom, than yes, the 480 is probably the card to get. If you play Doom and something else, things change. And guess what, most of the games don't play just Doom.

Other reasons to buy the 480 could be "it's cheaper than 1060"; which is the case for MSRP, but usually you can't get the 480 at MSRP. If you can, however, even if the 1060 is technically faster in many titles, that rarely (if at all) translates into an ability to play the same game at higher resolutions. Or another reason people buy the 480 is the "I want to support AMD open source drivers for Linux effort".

You can see why I'm ditching the 980Ti when Vega comes out.

TheGuruStudYou can see why I'm ditching the 980Ti when Vega comes out.

I'll have it, also... can I borrow your crystal ball.

FluffmeisterI'll have it, also... can I borrow your crystal ball.

Nvidia will gain nothing and I can only go up with Vega (I also suspect Async has been beefed up in Vega). Who knows how long this next cycle will last. My card is now 1.5 yrs old and there won't be anything to upgrade to from either camp for months. Plus, it's new monitor time. Nvidia deserves less than 0 cents and I want adaptive sync.

Dumping this shitty haswell, too lol

TheGuruStudNvidia will gain nothing and I can only go up with Vega (I also suspect Async has been beefed up in Vega). Who knows how long this next cycle will last. My card is now 1.5 yrs old and there won't be anything to upgrade to from either camp for months. Plus, it's new monitor time. Nvidia deserves less than 0 cents and I want adaptive sync.

Fair enough, you go girl... fight the power!

I still want your GTX 980 Ti.

FluffmeisterFair enough, you go girl... fight the power!

I still want your GTX 980 Ti.

You'll have to wine and dine me 8> *kisses*

Captain_TomThe fact is AMD can make a 3072 or even a 4096+ chip now (Or months ago). But AMD sees no point in doing this unless all games fully take advantage of their arch with DX12, Crossfire, and perfected drivers from AMD. Just look at how the Fury X was 5% weaker than the 980 Ti at launch, and now it is nearly 20% stronger!


Most people just read the OG reviews and fail to read recent reviews when they hunt for a GPU upgrade. Don't worry Vega 10 will be 30 -50% stronger than the Fury X, and it will be out in a few months. But they don't want to release a new Fury, 490, or 495x2 until they all curb-stomp the competition.

That is highly unlikely and no more than an (uneducated) guess of yours. The thing is, AMD has been rebranding old stuff for too long, Fury X didn't fly too well at release, and RX480 did not fill the entire void. There is no sane business practice in that, they just didn't have anything and focused on other efforts to gain traction, and I think the Ryzen reveal is a decent example of that, along with their latest driver update.

AMD is now filling a different kind of void, on the CPU side which is fár more important for them financially, and on the GPU software end they now also have a nice, rounded set of tools. All of this will benefit a next high end GPU. They are also finally turning around the negative PR that's surrounded them for so long.

Vayra86That is highly unlikely and no more than an (uneducated) guess of yours. The thing is, AMD has been rebranding old stuff for too long, Fury X didn't fly too well at release, and RX480 did not fill the entire void. There is no sane business practice in that, they just didn't have anything and focused on other efforts to gain traction, and I think the Ryzen reveal is a decent example of that, along with their latest driver update.

AMD is now filling a different kind of void, on the CPU side which is fár more important for them financially, and on the GPU software end they now also have a nice, rounded set of tools. All of this will benefit a next high end GPU. They are also finally turning around the negative PR that's surrounded them for so long.

You do understand that the points you mentioned have added to my argument.... Right?

AMD is waiting to release cards when they will be fully taken advantage of. Software and PR are a big part of that. Nothing uneducated about my guess, and on the contrary it is common sense what is going on.

Captain_TomYou do understand that the points you mentioned have added to my argument.... Right?

AMD is waiting to release cards when they will be fully taken advantage of. Software and PR are a big part of that. Nothing uneducated about my guess, and on the contrary it is common sense what is going on.

No, I disagree that they had some top-end GPU just waiting to be released. Nothing points to that. They used resources to get other things done and Vega has been on the map for years.

Captain_TomYou do understand that the points you mentioned have added to my argument.... Right?

AMD is waiting to release cards when they will be fully taken advantage of. Software and PR are a big part of that. Nothing uneducated about my guess, and on the contrary it is common sense what is going on.

HBM is holding them back about as much as decent clocking, but not stupid power consumption on finfet LP. HBM only went into volume production very recently (if it indeed has, haven't seen any updates).

They could've shit out a card, I'm sure, but the gains and power consumption wouldn't have been worth the money (lost) and the flop it would be.

Some more well optimized DX12 (à la DX:MD)/Vulkan games and Nvidia will be crying about profit margin loss.

I just bought an 8GB Gigabyte Radeon RX-480 Gaming G-1 for the secondary system. I'm getting another for crossfire early in January.
Two of them should be good to go,.....
I tried it out in my favorite games and I'm impressed. It's faster than my 8-GB Sapphire R9-390X Toxic card is.

I don't know if I'm gonna have DX-12 though. Win-10 sucks. (and yeah, I've tried it out for a long time)

HokumI think the performance of the Fury X should be comment on also, only just behind the 1070 and 1080 at 1080p and only behind the 1080 at higher resolutions.
Not bad for the last gen card.

Indeed, hope more such patches come about :) .

nguyenlol 20% faster minimum and 7% slower in avg in 1080p, if anything this is still a win for Nvidia in my book. Remind me of AMD obnoxious xfire performance a few years back where scaling is more than 100% in avg fps but massive micro shuttering that only AMD fanatics can tolerate, this looks to be the same.

This kind of altitude made me registered an account here just to comment. Obvious when the case is reserved, aka when Nvidia is faster 7% on average, you would have gone all out and bash AMD on being suck at Dx12.

Vayra86No, I disagree that they had some top-end GPU just waiting to be released. Nothing points to that. They used resources to get other things done and Vega has been on the map for years.

I should probably clarify my earlier statements: 14nm was (and still seems to be a little) behind 16nm.

So by no means am I saying some 4096-SP/HBM card would have been ready months ago; but I am saying that AMD could have without a doubt released something stronger by now.

Some 3072-3584-SP chip with 8-12GB of GDDR5X would have been fairly easy to make by now. But it wouldn't beat the 1080 all that easily, and AMD's perception isn't quite where they want it to be to fully capitalize on a performance (or price/perf) enthusiast win. And again, the 480 has captured marketshare better than the Fury X ever did.

ffleader1This kind of altitude made me registered an account here just to comment. Obvious when the case is reserved, aka when Nvidia is faster 7% on average, you would have gone all out and bash AMD on being suck at Dx12.

Such a high flying comment.

Welcome to TPU. Stick around a while and check it out.

Developer: DX12 gives Better performance for everyone!

nv/ati fans: Yay!!

Developer: ATi benefits more from DX12

nv fans: bull shit this is fake unfair cheating DX12 irrelevant etc. etc. Bunch of cry babies.

Captain_TomAnd again, the 480 has captured marketshare better than the Fury X ever did.

FuryX had quite a limited run to be fair. Very few if any still exist in UK retailer stocks. Has been that way for months and months. (I was looking to grab one cheap). HBM was an experiment on that front.

One thing people are quite hypocritical or ignorant of is the hardware inside 'comparable' cards. 480 should easily beat 1060, so it's no doubt it's getting better. Likewise, Fiji had 4096 shader cores and decent ACE units. That's why it also required water cooling from start.
In terms of hardware power AMD are still not using their hardware well at all. They should be a lot better than Nvidia.

cryohellincImpressive work from AMD! Nvidia really needs to stop slacking and start optimising their drivers/Gpu's for next gen (or current gen, however id say next gen as currently there are like 1-2 games built from scratch on Dx12/ Vulcan) API's. Otherwise if AMD has much better performance for cheaper price on new API's they might easily win a big chunk of the market back from Nvidia. I mean honestly, Dx12 should give INSANE performance gains, however what we see in all of those "Dx12 updates" for various titles is actually NEGATIVE (wtf) scaling. Shame!

However all in all this is good news, competition always drives development and makes them Work for their money. Can't wait to see Nvidia's reaction after release of Vega.

the game was faster on radeon hardware even in DX11. and honestly i don't think there is any problem with nvidia hardware. DX12 is mostly solving AMD problem in extracting more performance out of their card. RX480 for example is rated at 5.1tflops while GTX1060 was rated at 3.85tflops. but in majority of games RX480 performance did not reflect the raw performance between the two.