AMD Fury X 2020 - Kana's FineWine Edition - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

AMD Fury X 2020 - Kana's FineWine Edition

 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 8 (permalink) Old 07-13-2020, 06:23 AM - Thread Starter
New to Overclock.net
 
Kana-Maru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,178
Rep: 201 (Unique: 130)
AMD Fury X 2020 - Kana's FineWine Edition

AMD Fury X 2020 - Kana's FineWine Edition
  • Added Counter Strike
  • Added Warframe Benchmarks
  • Added Power Usage – Stock & Undervolt Results

I wanted to share my Fury X results 5 years later with you guys with my 12 year old Intel platform, the Intel X58-1st Gen. Basically I’ve used this GPU since it first released in 2015 and have been enjoying it. The last time I benchmarked the Fury X was December 2016 and I benched 11 games 100% max graphical settings at 4K, before then I reviewed it in 2015 shortly after the Fury X release. The Fury X had respectable 4K performance during it’s time. Low level API’s such as Vulkan and DX12, when implemented properly, really showed the true potential of the Radeon Fury X and AMD’s GPU architecture. For instance, in Doom 2016 @ 4K with the highest graphical settings: “Ultra + Nightmare + TSSAA-8TX” graphical settings I went from 35fps using OpenGL (launch API) to 60fps using Vulkan (released much later in an update). During those times Doom was one of the most anticipated games of the year and was one of the hardest titles to run at 4K. Other games like Hitman (2016) and eventually Rise of the Tomb Raider showed us how developers who actually “try” to implement the API’s properly could utilize modern GPU technology, unfortunately, it was a technology that only AMD properly supported during this time. I wrote about this as well and you know how the story goes with Nvidia and AMD.

Now here we are in 2020 and I’m still enjoying the Fury X along with my X58 – 1st Gen platform. Although the 4GB vRAM limitation was a controversial decision the card has performed well many years after released. The Fury X went from being a solid 4K GPU to a solid 1440p GPU across the board. That isn’t to say that the card doesn’t perform well with 4K resolutions as I’ll show below, it just hitting that 4GB limit is much easier now and you’ll have to drop a few unnecessary settings that don’t increase the image quality to a noticeable level. Certain settings such as shadows and lighting etc. can easily be knocked down to the next settings and the Fury X shines.

I ran all of my benchmarks using an overclock X5660 @ 4Ghz and a stock Fury X (1050Mhz). I also provided my Power Usage results and undervolted\power savings results. I won’t post my entire article here since it would be far too much for one thread, I will just share some games with the community that I benchmarked to give everyone a good idea of my performance in 2020 along with a few YouTube videos showing the performance @ 4K with near max settings in 2020. Here are my basic PC specs:

CPU: Xeon X5660 @ 4Ghz
Motherboard: ASUS Sabertooth X58
RAM: 24GB RDIMM DDR3-1600Mhz [6x4GB] - ECC Buffered

GPU: AMD Radeon R9 Fury X Watercooled - Push
GPU Drivers: Radeon "Adrenalin" 20.4.2 [April 21st 2020]
GPU Speed: (Stock) – Core 1050Mhz

Resident Evil 2
Spoiler!


Resident Evil 3
Spoiler!


Ray Tracing - Crytek: Neon Noir
Spoiler!


Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus
Spoiler!


Hitman 2
Spoiler!


Counter Strike: Global Offensive
Spoiler!


Warframe
Spoiler!


Middle-earth: Shadow of War
Spoiler!


Fury X - The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild @ 1080p - Cemu


Fury X Power Usage – Stock & Undervolt Results
Spoiler!

I benchmarked several other games as well in my article, but these should be enough games to give you a general idea of the AMD Finewine. Being a liquid cooled GPU the Fury X is always silent and has always given me great temps. A lot of people were afraid that the liquid would evaporate over the years, but I still hear plenty of liquid splashing around whenever I removed it from my PC to replace or install hardware. A few of the reasons I chose the Fury X over the 980 Ti during these times were due to several reasons, the top three reason were: GPU architecture\performance, image quality, and HBM (water cooling was a great bonus). That’s not to say I didn’t even get my hands on a 980 Ti, awesome card, but you’ll pretty much need to overclock it or buy an expensive AIB GPU. It didn’t take long for me to go back to the AMD Fury X. The performance of the HBM has been truly something special I didn’t have the same performance hit’s on my Fury X that I’ve seen on the 980 Ti (noticeable screen tearing at 4K, micro-stuttering, lower image quality etc. )

The driver support has been great and AMD has supported the Fury Series with all of the bells and whistles from newer GPU tech\driver features such as: Radeon Image Sharpening, Radeon Chill, Radeon Enhanced Sync, Radeon Anti-Lag and so on. So overall the driver support over the years has been superb, especially when it comes to newly released titles over the years.

LONG LIVE FURY X!

So what do you guys think about the Fury X and my results using legacy tech?

Last edited by Kana-Maru; 07-13-2020 at 08:49 AM.
Kana-Maru is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 8 (permalink) Old 07-13-2020, 06:32 AM
Vandelay Industries
 
maltamonk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: US/UK
Posts: 1,780
Rep: 85 (Unique: 63)
I would be interested in comparing the old with the new results. Could you link the old ones?
maltamonk is online now  
post #3 of 8 (permalink) Old 07-13-2020, 06:47 AM - Thread Starter
New to Overclock.net
 
Kana-Maru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,178
Rep: 201 (Unique: 130)
Quote: Originally Posted by maltamonk View Post
I would be interested in comparing the old with the new results. Could you link the old ones?
No problem. Do you mean the old 2015 & 2016 benchmark charts\results? All of the benches I ran in 2020 came from later releases.

I also added the Power Usage charts with both normal and undervolted results.

Last edited by Kana-Maru; 07-13-2020 at 07:06 AM.
Kana-Maru is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 8 (permalink) Old 07-13-2020, 07:07 AM
Vandelay Industries
 
maltamonk's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: US/UK
Posts: 1,780
Rep: 85 (Unique: 63)
Quote: Originally Posted by Kana-Maru View Post
No problem. Do you mean the old 2015 & 2016 benchmark charts\results? All of the benches I ran in 2020 came from later releases.

I also added the Power Usage charts with both normal and undervolted results.
Yes plz and ty.
maltamonk is online now  
post #5 of 8 (permalink) Old 07-13-2020, 07:16 AM - Thread Starter
New to Overclock.net
 
Kana-Maru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,178
Rep: 201 (Unique: 130)
Quote: Originally Posted by maltamonk View Post
Yes plz and ty.
No problem.

2015 - (Initial) Fury X Review:
https://overclock-then-game.com/inde...-fury-x-review

2016\2017 - Crimson ReLive 16.12.1 - Several Games Benchmarked @ 4K
https://overclock-then-game.com/inde...benchmarked-4k

There are plenty of comparisons between the old and the new results throughout the articles. That should give you more insight from 2015-2020

Last edited by Kana-Maru; 07-13-2020 at 09:02 AM.
Kana-Maru is offline  
post #6 of 8 (permalink) Old 07-13-2020, 07:39 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
Jedi Mind Trick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,600
Rep: 95 (Unique: 73)
Quote: Originally Posted by Kana-Maru View Post

LONG LIVE FURY X!

So what do you guys think about the Fury X and my results using legacy tech?
Agreed! Nice little review!

Makes me want to do one with my 980ti (unfortunately I don't have my X58 stuff with me ATM). That card is hard to upgrade from ($300 or less is a side-grade at best; anything more is too much for a secondary rig).

Wish I had the willpower to stick with something as long as you have with the X58+Fury!
Jedi Mind Trick is offline  
post #7 of 8 (permalink) Old 07-13-2020, 08:09 AM
Expert pin bender
 
dagget3450's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 2,115
Rep: 166 (Unique: 96)
I would love to see some in depth benching of AMD and CPU overhead in 2020. I still have my Furyx cards and a wide range of cpus to play on. I just don't have much time for now, but i am really curious to see how its changed from older drivers to the newest ones. The Radeon Pro Settings Version
2020.0706.1229.22473 drivers seem to be working really well with my Vega frontiers even in CF its working in almost every game/bench i tested(only a handful). I would love to see single threaded games and overhead and maybe even some dx12 usage scenarios. If i recall the Fury series cards were the worst with cpu overhead and dx11.

GPU i currently own: R9 390/290x/290/390x/FuryX/Vega FE/RX Vega 64/ - CPUs: 5960x/R7 1700/X5650x2/E5 2863/e5 2670/R5 3600/FX 9590
Radeon Vega Frontier Edition Owner
dagget3450 is offline  
post #8 of 8 (permalink) Old 07-13-2020, 08:33 AM - Thread Starter
New to Overclock.net
 
Kana-Maru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,178
Rep: 201 (Unique: 130)
Quote: Originally Posted by Jedi Mind Trick View Post
Agreed! Nice little review!

Makes me want to do one with my 980ti (unfortunately I don't have my X58 stuff with me ATM). That card is hard to upgrade from ($300 or less is a side-grade at best; anything more is too much for a secondary rig).

Wish I had the willpower to stick with something as long as you have with the X58+Fury!
It really isn't that bad with the correct setup. PCIe 2.0 32 full lanes has definitely kept this platform alive as well as the Westmere\Xeon\32nm CPUs. For the types of games I play. I'll also add Counter Strike and Warframe results. For esports the card is still a beast IMHO

Quote: Originally Posted by dagget3450 View Post
I would love to see some in depth benching of AMD and CPU overhead in 2020. I still have my Furyx cards and a wide range of cpus to play on. I just don't have much time for now, but i am really curious to see how its changed from older drivers to the newest ones. The Radeon Pro Settings Version
2020.0706.1229.22473 drivers seem to be working really well with my Vega frontiers even in CF its working in almost every game/bench i tested(only a handful). I would love to see single threaded games and overhead and maybe even some dx12 usage scenarios.
As far as gaming goes it's still going pretty strong in my opinion. It took a very long time to benchmark and write up the articles so I didn't go into major details with the CPU threads and things of that nature. I'll check and see if I can find anything. My main focus was on the overall power usage and actual gameplay performance across several titles. AMD is obviously focusing on the latest and greatest GPUs as well, but from my experience the overhead issues are a none issue with Vulkan and some DX12 titles when implemented properly.

I can honestly say that GTA5 is a poorly threaded game from my experience.

Last edited by Kana-Maru; 07-13-2020 at 08:51 AM.
Kana-Maru is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off