The fast and the Fury(ous): 4K

Subject: Graphics Cards | September 28, 2015 - 04:45 PM |
Tagged: R9 Fury, asus strix r9 fury, r9 390x, GTX 980, crossfire, sli, 4k

Bring your wallets to this review from [H]ard|OCP which pits multiple AMD and NVIDIA GPUs against each other at 4K resolutions and no matter the outcome it won't be cheap!  They used the Catalyst 15.8 Beta and the GeForce 355.82 WHQL which were the latest drivers available at the time of writing as well as trying out Windows 10 Pro x64.  There were some interesting results, for instance you want an AMD card when driving in the rain playing Project Cars as the GTX 980's immediately slowed down in inclement weather.  With Witcher 3, AMD again provided frames faster but unfortunately the old spectre of stuttering appeared, which those of you familiar with our Frame Rating tests will understand the source of.  Dying Light proved to be a game that liked VRAM with the 390X taking top spot though sadly neither AMD card could handle Crossfire in Far Cry 4.  There is a lot of interesting information in the review and AMD's cards certainly show their mettle but the overall winner is not perfectly clear, [H] chose Fury the R9 Fury with a caveat about Crossfire support.

View Full Size

"We gear up for multi-GPU gaming with AMD Radeon R9 Fury CrossFire, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 SLI, and AMD Radeon R9 390X CrossFire and share our head-to-head results at 4K resolution and find out which solution offers the best gameplay experience. How well does Fiji game when utilized in a CrossFire configuration?"

Here are some more Graphics Card articles from around the web:

Graphics Cards

Source: [H]ard|OCP

Video News

September 28, 2015 | 05:25 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Any reviewer that still uses Project Cars as a measuring tool is just too dam lazy. It doesn't take a genius to look at the install folder and notice all the Nvidia files.

September 28, 2015 | 05:26 PM - Posted by Ghouldude (not verified)

I absolutely love Crossfire and SLI tests. Niche markets be damned!

September 28, 2015 | 08:22 PM - Posted by StephanS

I wonder what will [H]ard|OCP do with Dx12 titles...

Because if a 290x beats a GTX 980 at 1080p (like we seen in all dx12 benchmark to date), they are going to have to get more creative in their testing.

September 28, 2015 | 11:02 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Love how hardocp says there was stutter in GTAV on AMD but then goes on to say it doesnt show up in any of their graphs and the NVIDIA cards feel smooth.... Wait a minute here. The AMD cards were on avg over 60FPS and the Nvidia cards were on avg below 60 fps. That stutter he felt was going from above 60fps to below. When you are below 60 fps on avg im sure you cant tell you head from a hole in the ground. A smooth 53 fps LOL..

No wonder they didnt get a FuryX media sample.

September 29, 2015 | 02:04 AM - Posted by renz (not verified)

You can have high frame rates and the game still stutter like hell. There is once techreport recomending much slower 660Ti over the much faster 7950 because the former while having much lower frame rates it feel much smoother than 7950 in actual gameplay.

Personally i once have nvidia driver problem where every time vsync being use the game will madly stutter even when the frame rates is at 60 FPS constant.

September 29, 2015 | 12:47 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

The first real 4K GPU is GP100. I wouldnt waste time with 4K until that and Rec.2020 color monitors are available.

September 29, 2015 | 03:32 AM - Posted by JohnGR

I am thinking if there is any reason to click on a [H]ard|OCP link. Probably it makes more sense to try to find a Fury review in or

September 29, 2015 | 04:02 PM - Posted by Mageoftheyear (not verified)

I loved this deep-dive! I consider myself to be a big AMD fan but to me that means I hold them MORE accountable not less accountable for their actions because of my love for their respect for customers and their ceaseless long term innovation.

As I was reading the piece I began to get a little giddy over the implications at the architectural level so I decided to post this to /r/AMD eagerly anticipating the discussion. (

Wow, talk about the pot calling the tea kettle black. "HARDOCP is biased to Nvidia, obviously the 980 wins."
This is what I posted in response to the only poster who thought the piece wasn't biased:


Well I'm glad at least one person didn't think this was biased. I'm also surprised (and pretty disappointed) at the reactions to this piece and the inability of members here to read between the lines of the results and what they say about the architectural approach AMD has used.

The fact that most everyone here is complaining about GameWorks games being used in the benchmarks... I want to scream: don't you freaking get it!? Stuttering aside, the Fury and 390X managed to brute force their way into a very competitive position against a card (980) who's architecture heavily favours DX11 serial processing AND achieve a higher average framerate! That's amazing! That's a glowing endorsement of an architecture that has been fighting a war on two fronts (designed for parallel workloads but highly competent at serial too). It's like your favourite team is using a mouse to fight a cat and the cat is just barely winning and being outwitted half the time - would you shout "Stupid test! Put that mouse up against something its own size!" ??? No! You'd shout "Holy crap! That mouse is holding its own against a cat!" I'm not a boffin but this was just plain obvious to me and why I was so excited to share this piece.

I feel like a fool for amusing this sub would remain unbiased enough to judge this content for what it is and not where it comes from. And disappointed, really disappointed because I thought others would see the same thing I saw here and we could have an in-depth discussion about it and I'd hopefully I'd learn something from that exchange.

Instead we get a whole heap bitching and a straight up FPS comparison without any thought as to what the conditions say about the architecture. Ugh, I need to quit the internet for a while.


So does anyone on the PCper team have any insights on the piece and not the politics? I was so looking forward to a detailed discussion happening from this but so far everything has been so superficial and petty. Jeremy? Allyn? Ryan? Like I said I'm not very technically minded or bright with this stuff but I'm kind of bummed out that I didn't get a chance to learn anything from anyone besides the author.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.