which gpu has better gaming performance?
- Thread starter GTFOOH
- Start date
Solution
ComputerSecurityGuy
Admirable
- Mar 30, 2015
- 2,031
- 0
- 6,460
I would take the Fury for a Windows 10 system as Fury and GTX 980 Ti are about matched at DirectX12 performance.
loki1944
Distinguished
- Oct 31, 2013
- 1,662
- 3
- 20,765
Fury is much faster than a 980 except in something like TW3 which heavily favors Nvidia cards; looking at Guru3D reviews in 7 games the Strix 980 loses 85% of the time to the Fury STRIX and only breaks even in TW3. http://s1068.photobucket.com/user/loki1944/media/AMD%20VS%20NVIDA_zpszmsk5jfx.png.html
- Oct 30, 2004
- 32,255
- 14
- 99,960
Without giving some basic data, the question is kinsa like like asking "what is the best tool" ?
a) it kinda depends on what ya wanna do with it ... bang in a nail, tighten a bolt or put in a screw each will get a different answer.
b) it much depends on how big the project is ... it it's putting in a screw, I'd have a different answer than if it was put in 1,000 screws
Tho the release of the 980 Ti kinda kills the 980 from a bag for the buck standpoint., the 980 is still an easy choice over the Fury. So I will assume that the question is 1440p and gaming only
The relative ranking of the cards at 1440p is 98 to 91 for the reference 980 so if you are an "out of the box" GFC card user then the Fury is the obvious choice. But since you are looking at overclocking cards.....
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/Sapphire/R9_Fury_Tri-X_OC/images/perfrel_2560.gif
However the Fury has almost no overclcoking headroom with the Sapphire getting you just 7.7 % (101.5 / 94.2) over reference.
That would raise the 98% score of the Fur X to 105.5 (98 x 1.077)
However if we take the 91% score of the 980 and apply the 22.7% (160.5 / 130.8) overclocking potential of the 980, we get 91 x 1.227 or 111.7.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_980_Gaming/28.html
Based upon TPUs data anyway, that's about 6% faster than the Fury
a) it kinda depends on what ya wanna do with it ... bang in a nail, tighten a bolt or put in a screw each will get a different answer.
b) it much depends on how big the project is ... it it's putting in a screw, I'd have a different answer than if it was put in 1,000 screws
Tho the release of the 980 Ti kinda kills the 980 from a bag for the buck standpoint., the 980 is still an easy choice over the Fury. So I will assume that the question is 1440p and gaming only
The relative ranking of the cards at 1440p is 98 to 91 for the reference 980 so if you are an "out of the box" GFC card user then the Fury is the obvious choice. But since you are looking at overclocking cards.....
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/Sapphire/R9_Fury_Tri-X_OC/images/perfrel_2560.gif
However the Fury has almost no overclcoking headroom with the Sapphire getting you just 7.7 % (101.5 / 94.2) over reference.
That would raise the 98% score of the Fur X to 105.5 (98 x 1.077)
However if we take the 91% score of the 980 and apply the 22.7% (160.5 / 130.8) overclocking potential of the 980, we get 91 x 1.227 or 111.7.
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_980_Gaming/28.html
Based upon TPUs data anyway, that's about 6% faster than the Fury
loki1944
Distinguished
- Oct 31, 2013
- 1,662
- 3
- 20,765
I disagree, the Fury beat the 980 85% here based on Guru3D reviews http://s1068.photobucket.com/user/loki1944/media/AMD%20VS%20NVIDA_zpszmsk5jfx.png.html.
80% of the time @1440p in the Andantech review: http://www.anandtech.com/show/9421/the-amd-radeon-r9-fury-review-feat-sapphire-asus/14
100% of the time @1440p in the eurogamer review: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-amd-radeon-r9-fury-review
Only time the 980 gets an edge is at lower resolutions like 1080p.
- Oct 30, 2004
- 32,255
- 14
- 99,960
See rest of post above ... as i said, if you are buying reference cards and using them outta the box, the Fury is the way to go/ However, that's not generally the mindset of those paying a price premium Sapphire's and HOFs. These folks are, way more often than not, gonna overclock the begeezes outta them.
The Fury, like the FuryX and all the 3xx cards has single digit overclocking headroom. This is because all AMD has done is apply a significant overclock before putting the card in the box.
With both cards overclocked "balwz to the wall", the out of the box performance is more than eclipsed by the 23% overclocking headroom compared to the Fury's 7%
The only time the Fury makes any sense, if you can call it that, is at 2160p and, at this time, no single GPU makes sense at 2160p.... it's hard to make a case for any 2 cards at 2160p.
The Fury, like the FuryX and all the 3xx cards has single digit overclocking headroom. This is because all AMD has done is apply a significant overclock before putting the card in the box.
With both cards overclocked "balwz to the wall", the out of the box performance is more than eclipsed by the 23% overclocking headroom compared to the Fury's 7%
The only time the Fury makes any sense, if you can call it that, is at 2160p and, at this time, no single GPU makes sense at 2160p.... it's hard to make a case for any 2 cards at 2160p.
ak47jar3d
Champion
- Mar 3, 2014
- 7,112
- 61
- 54,590
It's true until you start overclocking. The gtx 980 can reach north of 1400mhz in pretty much every version of gpu while the fury can barely reach 1150mhz. Once overclocked, the gtx 980 would win in all resolutions.
https://youtu.be/-BTpXQkFJMY
Th3-Hunter333
Reputable
- Dec 15, 2014
- 508
- 0
- 5,060
Not even all that mate, ive seen quite a large number of 970's/980's break 1500 mhz on the core with ease.
I.E. Im running my 970 fully stable on 1500 core at stock voltage
Reaper_7799
Distinguished
- May 27, 2015
- 1,574
- 5
- 20,165
Everyone loves to compare fury and fury x stock to reference cards stock because the perfomance is pretty even to a 980 or 980 ti but then they always conveniently leave out overclocking as if it doesn't matter. In the case you don't overclock...it's kind of a waste if you don't but then the cards are pretty even but who doesn't love more performance, especially at this level.
loki1944
Distinguished
- Oct 31, 2013
- 1,662
- 3
- 20,765
Strix 980 vs Strix Fury; Fury wins @1440p in guru3d reviews. Overclocking results are not guarranteed. You could end up with poor ASIC quality. Also I did not talk about reference cards at all; I showed STRIX vs STRIX results. At 1440p even the Strix 390X trades blows with the Strix 980.
Shadow of Mordor 1440p: STRIX 980 79FPS / STRIX 390X 82FPS / STRIX R9 Fury 92FPS
Thief 1440p: STRIX 980 54FPS / STRIX 390X 55FPS / STRIX R9 Fury 67FPS
Tomb Raider 1440p: STRIX 980 102FPS / STRIX 390X 95FPS / STRIX R9 Fury 120FPS
Bioshock Infinite 1440p: STRIX 980 87FPS / STRIX 390X 81FPS / STRIX R9 Fury 99FPS
Hitman Absolution 1440p: STRIX 980 65FPS / STRIX 390X 72FPS /STRIX R9 Fury 79 FPS
2160p STRIX 980 vs STRIX R9 Fury:
SoM: STRIX 980 42FPS / STRIX R9 Fury 50FPS
Thief: STRIX 980 30FPS / STRIX R9 Fury 37FPS
Tomb Raider: STRIX 980 47FPS / STRIX R9 Fury 58FPS
Bioshock Infinite: STRIX 980 44FPS / STRIX R9 Fury 50FPS
Hitman Absolution: STRIX 980 33FPS / STRIX R9 Fury 41FPS
- Oct 30, 2004
- 32,255
- 14
- 99,960
The number are the numbers..... it's not like they aren't consistent, there is very little variance among the reviews. Guaranteed, no.... but find just one where the 9xx series doesn't overclock 2-3 times better than a Fury / R9 series.
I have never .... ever ... gotten less than a 22% OC on 5xx, 6xx, 7xx or 9xx non reference card. 9 outta 10 break 25%. Ofc these were all non reference cards, well cooled and the one with the most robust PCB package.
Here's the Strix Fury and Strix 980 cards overclocked.... not exactly the strongest contenders available in the current series and not as if TPU goes "Bawlz to the wall". While in the 6xx series Asus was the king of the hill, they surrendered that title when they started going cheap on the PCBs. MSI and Gigabyte lead the pack here. MSI and Sapphire on the AMD cards. But back to *your numbers*
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GTX_980_STRIX_OC/28.html
That is 19% over reference, not bad for the Asus design
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/R9_Fury_Strix/34.html
The Strix gives the same OC as the reference design....(94.2 fps)
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/R9_Fury_Tri-X_OC/33.html
So what we are left with is the Asus 980 has 3 times the overclocking headroom of the Asus Fury.
Arstechnica summed it up perfectly and they were just comparing out of the box performance
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/07/the-r9-fury-is-amds-best-card-in-years-but-just-who-is-it-for/
No argument, AMD puts a very aggressive clock on the cards before they are boxed and if you don't OC, there's a strong argument to go that way. But for anyone who uses Afterburner or it's equivalent, it's a real hard sell.
I have never .... ever ... gotten less than a 22% OC on 5xx, 6xx, 7xx or 9xx non reference card. 9 outta 10 break 25%. Ofc these were all non reference cards, well cooled and the one with the most robust PCB package.
Here's the Strix Fury and Strix 980 cards overclocked.... not exactly the strongest contenders available in the current series and not as if TPU goes "Bawlz to the wall". While in the 6xx series Asus was the king of the hill, they surrendered that title when they started going cheap on the PCBs. MSI and Gigabyte lead the pack here. MSI and Sapphire on the AMD cards. But back to *your numbers*
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GTX_980_STRIX_OC/28.html
That is 19% over reference, not bad for the Asus design
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/R9_Fury_Strix/34.html
The Strix gives the same OC as the reference design....(94.2 fps)
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/R9_Fury_Tri-X_OC/33.html
So what we are left with is the Asus 980 has 3 times the overclocking headroom of the Asus Fury.
Arstechnica summed it up perfectly and they were just comparing out of the box performance
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/07/the-r9-fury-is-amds-best-card-in-years-but-just-who-is-it-for/
No argument, AMD puts a very aggressive clock on the cards before they are boxed and if you don't OC, there's a strong argument to go that way. But for anyone who uses Afterburner or it's equivalent, it's a real hard sell.
Reaper_7799
Distinguished
- May 27, 2015
- 1,574
- 5
- 20,165
Here they are both overclocked...they trade blows. Not 85% win for fury and certainly not by 15-20 fps every game up there. http://www.pcworld.com/article/2951297/components-graphics/fight-custom-radeon-fury-gtx-980-graphics-cards-brawl-for-pc-gaming-supremacy.html
loki1944
Distinguished
- Oct 31, 2013
- 1,662
- 3
- 20,765
Reaper_7799 :
Here they are both overclocked...they trade blows. Not 85% win for fury and certainly not by 15-20 fps every game up there. http://www.pcworld.com/article/2951297/components-graphics/fight-custom-radeon-fury-gtx-980-graphics-cards-brawl-for-pc-gaming-supremacy.html
Again, not guaranteed. 85% STRIX R9 Fury vs STRIX 980 is guaranteed. You get a 65% ASIC quality card and you're going to be in for disappointment thinking you can overclock a bunch. I've got a 65.9% ASIC quality STRIX 980Ti which will only go +105Mhz Core and +160Mhz Memory without over-volting.
Reaper_7799
Distinguished
- May 27, 2015
- 1,574
- 5
- 20,165
Yeah okay whatever....I'd say 80-90% or more can get that oc and you know it. See this is how you can defend it right. It's not guaranteed...not everyone overclocks...yada yada....meanwhile for the ones that do and there are a lot of them...the results are much different.
- Oct 30, 2004
- 32,255
- 14
- 99,960
And performance above 3.9 Ghz is not guaranteed on a 4690k.... but how many can't do 4.5 Ghz with adequate cooling.....
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1oB9-mKn2Bt56_f1vqKHC91Eb_Pa9jJzBreq47hMUI8A/htmlembed?usp=sharing&widget=false
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1oB9-mKn2Bt56_f1vqKHC91Eb_Pa9jJzBreq47hMUI8A/htmlembed?usp=sharing&widget=false
loki1944
Distinguished
- Oct 31, 2013
- 1,662
- 3
- 20,765
I'm willing to bet hands down the games where the Fury beat the 980 that I showed would be the same story with both cards overclocked. Oh wait, I don't have to bet, Guru3D did it for me:
Hitman Absolution: @1440p: STRIX 980 O/C 74FPS / STRIX R9 Fury O/C 88FPS
Bioshock Infinite @1440p: STRIX 980 O/C 98FPS / STRIX R9 FURY O/C 105 FPS
Tomb Raider @1440p: STRIX 980 O/C 115FPS / STRIX R9 FURY O/C 129FPS
If we only consider these O/C results and results you showed then the STRIX R9 Fury still wins 75% of the time, even with both cards O/C.
loki1944
Distinguished
- Oct 31, 2013
- 1,662
- 3
- 20,765
That's a pretty minuscule representation of everyone who bought 4690K I'm sure, since that's less than 200 people unless I'm missing something, though overclocking to 4.5Ghz on a 4690K isn't impressive anyway since just turning on turbo through maximum performance gets you 4.4Ghz without overclocking anything. Even 4.8Ghz is a relatively small overclock of 400Mhz past stock turbo. I mean, even my i7 960 did 640Mhz past turbo (3.46Ghz turbo, 4.1Ghz O/C) on an H50 and my 5930K does 800Mhz (3.7Ghz turbo / 4.5Ghz O/C )past turbo on six cores. That still doesn't mean I'm guaranteed good overclocking ability; I've got a 4770K that won't go past 3.89Ghz.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question PC won't turn on after unplugging it, what could be wrong?
- Started by donnieberry
- Replies: 12
-
Question Cant boot into windows, black screen with static
- Started by Christer souza
- Replies: 6
-
Question My pc shut it self down and i smelled burnt plastic.- Started by KNOWALOTBUTSTILNOTALL
- Replies: 16
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram