Subject: Graphics Cards | September 5, 2018 - 05:50 PM | Jeremy Hellstrom
Tagged: amd, GCN, R9 290X, r9 390x, R9 Fury X, RX VEGA 64
[H]ard|OCP have been examining the generational performance differences between GPUs, starting with NVIDIA and moving onto AMD. In this review they compare Hawaii GCN 1.1, Fiji GCN 1.3 and Vega10 GCN 1.5 on a wide variety of games. AMD is a more interesting case as they have made more frequent changes to their architecture, while at the same time tending towards mid-range performance as opposed to aiming for the high end of performance and pricing. This has led to interesting results, with certain GCN versions offering more compelling upgrade paths than others. Take a close look to see how AMD's GPUs have changed over the past five years.
"Wonder how much performance you are truly getting from GPU to GPU upgrade in games? We take GPUs from AMD and compare performance gained from 2013 to 2018. This is our AMD GPU Generational Performance Part 1 article focusing on the Radeon R9 290X, Radeon R9 390X, Radeon R9 Fury X, and Radeon RX Vega 64 in 14 games."
Here are some more Graphics Card articles from around the web:
- The New 3GB GeForce GTX 1050: Good Product or Misleading Product? @ TechSpot
- Razer Core X @ Kitguru
- Blackmagic external GPU review: A very Apple graphics solution @ Ars Technica
Subject: Graphics Cards | July 13, 2016 - 09:20 PM | Scott Michaud
Tagged: vulkan, R9 Fury X, nvidia, Mantle, gtx 1070, fury x, doom, amd
We haven't yet benchmarked DOOM on Vulkan Update (immediately after posting): Ryan has just informed me that, apparently, we did benchmark Vulkan on our YouTube page (embed below). I knew we were working on it, I just didn't realize we published content yet. Original post continues below.
As far as I know, we're trying to get our testing software for frame time analysis running on the new API, but other sites have posted framerate-based results. The results show that AMD's cards benefit greatly from the new, Mantle-derived interface (versus the OpenGL one). On the other hand, while NVIDIA never really sees a decrease, more than 1% at least, it doesn't really get much of a boost, either.
Image Credit: ComputerBase.de
I tweeted out to ID's lead renderer programmer, Tiago Sousa, to ask whether they take advantage of NVIDIA-specific extensions on the OpenGL path (like command submission queues). I haven't got a response yet, so it's difficult to tell whether this speaks more toward NVIDIA's OpenGL performance, or AMD's Vulkan performance. In the end, it doesn't really matter, though. AMD's Fury X (which can be found for as low as $399 with a mail-in rebate) is beating the GTX 1070 (which is in stock for the low $400s) by a fair margin. The Fury X also beats its own OpenGL performance by up to 66% (at 1080p) with the new API.
The API should also make it easier for games to pace their frames, too, which should allow smoother animation at these higher rates. That said, we don't know for sure because we can't test that from just seeing FPS numbers. The gains are impressive from AMD, though.
Subject: Graphics Cards | January 11, 2016 - 08:32 AM | Sebastian Peak
Tagged: radeon, r9 nano, R9 Fury X, price cut, press release, amd
AMD has announced a price cut for the Radeon R9 Nano, which will now have a suggested price of $499, a $150 drop from the original $649 MSRP.
VideoCardz had the story this morning, quoting the official press release from AMD:
"This past September, the AMD Radeon™ R9 Nano graphics card launched to rave reviews, claiming the title of the world’s fastest and most power efficient Mini ITX gaming card, powered by the world’s most advanced and innovative GPU with on-chip High-Bandwidth Memory (HBM) for incredible 4K gaming performance. There was nothing like it ever seen before, and today, it remains in a class of its own, delivering smooth, true-to-life, premium 4K and VR gaming in a small form factor PC.
At a peak power of 175W and in a 6-inch form factor, it drives levels of performance that are on par with larger, more power-hungry GPUs from competitors, and blows away Mini ITX competitors with up to 30 percent better performance than the GTX 970 Mini ITX.
As of today, 11 January, this small card will have an even bigger impact on gamers around the world as AMD announces a change in the AMD Radeon™ R9 Nano graphics card’s SEP from $649 to $499. At the new price, the AMD Radeon™ R9 Nano graphics card will be more accessible than ever before, delivering incredible performance and leading technologies, with unbelievable efficiency in an astoundingly small form factor that puts it in a class all of its own."
The R9 Nano (reviewed here) had been the most interesting GPU released in 2015 to the team at PC Perspective. It was a compelling product for its tiny size, great performance, and high power efficiency, but the dialogue here probably mirrored that of a lot of potential buyers; for the price of a Fury X, did it make sense to buy the Nano? It was all going to depend on need, but very few enclosures on the market do not support a full-length GPU, as we discovered when testing out small R9 Nano builds.
Now that the price will move down $150 it becomes an easier choice: $499 will buy you a full R9 Fury X core for $150 less. The performance of a Fury X is only a few percentage points higher than the slighly lower-clocked Nano, so you're now getting most of the way there for much less. We have seen some R9 Fury X cards selling for $599, but even at $100 more would you buy the Fury X over a Nano? If nothing else the lower price makes the conversation a lot more interesting.
Subject: Graphics Cards | November 18, 2015 - 01:22 PM | Sebastian Peak
Tagged: Sapphire TriXX, R9 Fury X, overclocking, hbm, amd
The new version (5.2.1) of Sapphire's TriXX overclocking utility has been released, and it finally unlocks voltage and HBM overclocking for AMD's R9 Fury X.
(Image credit: Sapphire)
Previously the voltage of the R9 Fury X core was not adjustable, leaving what would seem to be quite a bit of untapped headroom for the cards which shipped with a powerful liquid-cooling solution rated for 500 watts of thermal dissipation. This should allow for much better results than what Ryan was able to achieve when he attempted overclocking for our review of the R9 Fury X in June (without the benefit of voltage adjustments):
"My net result: a clock speed of 1155 MHz rather than 1050 MHz, an increase of 10%. That's a decent overclock for a first attempt with a brand new card and new architecture, but from the way that AMD had built up the "500 watt cooler" and the "375 watts available power" from the dual 8-pin power connectors, I was honestly expecting quite a bit more. Hopefully we'll see some community adjustments, like voltage modifications, that we can mess around with later..."
(Image credit: Sapphire)
- You can download the new TriXX v5.2.1 software from the product page at Sapphire here.
Will TriXX v5.2.1 unleash the full potential of the Fury X? We will have to wait for some overclocked benchmark numbers, but having the ability can only be a good thing for enthusiasts.