5150Joker
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2005
- Messages
- 4,568
https://youtu.be/DuA3T9MzNic?t=507 Watch that.
Haha the same Richard Huddy that claims the 390x is brand new silicon and not "a few parts added to existing" shit they already had.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
https://youtu.be/DuA3T9MzNic?t=507 Watch that.
After FuryX's launch I don't believe much coming out of AMD. I get the feeling they are covering up quite a bit.
Let's look at the past. The Radeon 4870 was launched and it had the distinction of using the then brand spanking new GDDR5. Surprisingly this latest card only retailed for $300 and kept up with an the $450 GTX260, and even took on the over twice as expensive $650 GTX280!
I'm sure your opinion is much more authoritative than information from the people that created the technology.
Please explain why Titan / 980 TI's are having random stuttering issues in GTA V.
lolhttps://youtu.be/DuA3T9MzNic?t=507 Watch that.
All I can say is mild stutters beside, they play far better than AMD. I hope AMD launches something better in the future that not only has good hardware with sufficient VRAM but better drivers too.
But you never answered any of my questions.
Are you even educated enough to think properly or converse?
I'm sure your opinion is much more authoritative than information from the people that created the technology.
Please explain why Titan / 980 TI's are having random stuttering issues in GTA V.
Why would that be considered gimping anything? Sorry, I don't see this as some kind of nefarious plot.
You never asked any questions.
All you've done is say that the 4GB is the problem and never answered why Titan and 980 TI also randomly stutter even though they have 6/12GB of ram.
You asked me how to explain how AMD expects 4GB to work and I posted a link from AMD explaining it.
Now when are you going to answer my questions and explain why 980 TI / Titan also have issues as I showed from the issues on their forums.
Then why isn't there an air-cooled Fury X on the market? There are plenty of air-cooled 980 Ti's, so they obviously don't need water... but not a single air-cooled Fury X.
Excuses and more excuses is all AMD fan boys can do. Nothing more nothing less.
Atleast I wass honest and admitted there is slight stuttering but no way as bad as shown in the youtube video with the FuryX. That was jackshit of a performance with a huge slow down.
Keep deflecting and dreaming!
I get zero stuttering and will post a video of it tomorrow.
It's not "about even". Around 15-20% slower at 1440p when both are OC'd to max:
Everyone keeps talking abut this mythical OC tool too. Why didn't AMD provide it for launch reviews?
https://youtu.be/DuA3T9MzNic?t=507 Watch that.
Why? There is no point saying you aren't having issues when other people are. I don't think the issues the guy in the video was having are wide spread for Fury as its the only one that I've seen complain about it. There are lots of other people complaining about issues with Stuttering in GTA V since the last patch, using all types of hardware including Titan / 980 TIs (I posted the link multiple times).
Fury X doesn't NEED a water cooler any more than the 980 Ti Hybrid.
How can people keep repeating this nonsense over and over and over on this forum, I am convinced you are trolling.
When your GPU is expensive to produce but doesn't really match the competition for the same price, the easiest solution is to make it SFF and slap a cheap water-cooler on it for added value. They did it to soak up as many early adopter sales as possible. Tell me how AMD should cool a 6-inch 280W card on air...?
Also there's a logical fallacy in your post somewhere; just because there are no air cooled models on the market does not mean Fury X 'requires' water. Fury will be air-cooled and comes out in 3 weeks.
I'm not sure I can tolerate another 3 weeks of this forum's bullshit.
It was interesting when he said that system ram is used as part of the frame buffer for FuryX and maybe why the reviews for the card was all over the place because the review sites using systems with DDR4 showed FuryX doing a liitle better.
Who said they needed to build the card in the form factor they did?
And if you add a water cooler that jacks the price up to be identical/greater than the competition's top end offering, you're not really "adding value".
Again, Occam's Razor. The simplest answer is most likely the true answer.
In this case, they released a card that's water cooled by default. One that doesn't have a hell of a lot of room for overclocking. Ergo, they more or less NEEDED to water cool it, whether for form-factor constraints, thermal issues, etc.
Again, until AMD releases an air-cooled version, you need to come up with some way of disproving this. Because simply going "That's not right! Because that's not right!" isn't an argument anyone's going to listen to, let alone pay any form of credence.
But you and I KNOW they are releasing aircooled Furys in 3 weeks, ergo your argument is the least likely and will have to wait till the aircooled cards are released to know for sure.
But you and I KNOW they are releasing aircooled Furys in 3 weeks, ergo your argument is the least likely and will have to wait till the aircooled cards are released to know for sure.
It was interesting when he said that system ram is used as part of the frame buffer for FuryX and maybe why the reviews for the card was all over the place because the review sites using systems with DDR4 showed FuryX doing a liitle better.
Over the last few weeks there have been endless complaints about VRAM limitations citing benchmarks running 980's and 290X's at 4 GB solid and people say "See it's out of VRAM", now the card is running 3 GB usage and you say "It's out of VRAM because it's clearing space to thrash from system ram." It can't be BOTH!It's not interesting, it's an excuse. All GPU's do the same thing when they run out of VRAM. They pull the assets from RAM. It's kinda like the extra 0.5gb "feature" on a 970. Companies trying to downplay deficiencies in their products. AMD is guilty of it, as is NVIDIA.
Over the last few weeks there have been endless complaints about VRAM limitations citing benchmarks running 980's and 290X's at 4 GB solid and people say "See it's out of VRAM", now the card is running 3 GB usage and you say "It's out of VRAM because it's clearing space to thrash from system ram." It can't be BOTH!
You people just need to admit you have NO IDEA what you're talking about.
^ yup and y'all remember this, don't you?
Intel I740 series
I would love nothing more than someone vertically integrated like Intel to get back into the game. I'd pay a fee to have something fabbed in the USA.
Your memory might be foggy. The 260 and 4870 traded blows. The 260's price was dropped to $250 as a result. I paid that much and got a 260 216. One of the first ones as EVGA did not even switch the sticker on it. The 216 pushed it above the 4870, so AMD came out with the 4890. It certainly was a good thing though. Competitive card that lowered prices for all.
People still have LAN parties.
People still have LAN parties.
People still have LAN parties.
Because, until someone releases an air-cooled Fury X, the burden is on you to prove what you're saying.
Occam's Razor.
Hype kills.