The suprising thing is Fury X arrived just less than a week after the first batch of 980Ti in Malaysia O_O

i hope gpu water block will come out soon for Fury X

cant image it.. if running CF .. using stock system
radiator/tubing everywhere

I remember AMD demoed freesync over HDMI in computex. Not sure its 1.4 or 2.0.

Depends on the scaler and software, i do hope we can have a true 24p (24hz) experience in watching movies, and vrr when playing game consoles over HDMI via LCD TV in the future.

I've already delegated 4K movie watching to my recently purchased Shield Pro console (which has HDMI2.0 for 4K60 uncompromised), after finding out about the lack of HDMI2.0 on the Fury lineup. Need the device connected to my TV to be as inconspicuous as possible, not huge honking towers or bulky cubes.

" AMD powers a 5K monitor from a single Radeon R9 Fury X 5K !!" - Dragon age Inquisition 5K MEd setting 60+fps... link

Medium. You don't position a flagship GPU to run on Medium.

This post has been edited by stringfellow: Jun 22 2015, 11:49 PM

but you also need to take 5K into consideration.. i don't have that (5120x2880) do you... MR Stringfellow

Look, if you're buying flagship, you run it at the maximum setting. If this is what they got after trying to run it as such, and can only manage 60fps at Medium, then what's the point? You don't market your flagship running game on mediocre settings. It's like marketing a movie theatre as IMAX but running movie at standard definition.

I can run games on dual 4K monitors at Low, but I'm not gonna advertise that as a plus point, in fact I'd be embarrassed to proclaim that.

okay you have point.. but maybe.. just to show the amd flagship capability to run it flawless in 5K 60Fps but with just Medium setting.. as everyone know this gpu no issues on 4K gaming (which im planing to use it for when i receive gpu) xx

Or they set it to run at Medium to avoid hitting VRAM limits and stutter due to the limited 4GB VRAM, setting any higher than medium breaches that.

To each his own. I do not run my games on anything lower than High. Having UHD displays but running it on low or medium settings is a waste of that display capability to me.

ADDENDUM: Check the setting screenshot again, it's running at 5K30, NOT 5K60. The reviewer just mentions it "feels like running at 60+fps". Which is which? Also the fact that they mentioned The Witcher 3 at the start of the article and then run about correcting it to Dragon Age Inquisition, without correcting the first mention of the Witcher 3. Shows how suspect their method of reporting to me.

This post has been edited by stringfellow: Jun 23 2015, 12:52 AM

Why embarrassed, running medium at 5K with single card? I think you missing the point there. It's just to show what the single Fury X can do at 5K with Dragon Age game, not claiming any title.

Sure, it's not claiming any title, so from the way you word your sentences there, it's nothing special either. So what the big deal then?

I'd still say that they are purposely AVOIDING running any settings higher than Medium to hide the fact that they're running out of VRAM (and the ensuing consequences of VRAM starvation). At 1440p, Dragon Age Inquisition is already eating up 4GB of video memory.

yes i see your point on .. Vram limit(heck is on 5K) but AMD not claim any Title.. but it post on AMD Flagship able to run 5K (Medium) get 60Fps on DAI game..

hm i thought i was only one see that what amd was doing..

Check the setting screenshot again, it's running at 5K30, NOT 5K60. The reviewer just mentions it "feels like running at 60+fps". Which is which? Also the fact that they mentioned The Witcher 3 at the start of the article and then run about correcting it to Dragon Age Inquisition, without correcting the first mention of the Witcher 3. Shows how suspect their method of reporting to me.



This post has been edited by stringfellow: Jun 23 2015, 12:53 AM

he says " It was liquid smooth to my eyes, with the graphics being set to 'Medium' at 5K. It felt like 60FPS+, which was absolutely astounding to see in person... 5120x2880 on Dragon Age: Inquisition from a single video card. Yes, please AMD." so he seem to be happy with it.. well i am sure need to be amd fan to lov it haha x

Then technically it is NOT 60fps, it's merely running above 30fps to alleviate any instances of stuttering, that made that "felt like 60+fps" comment. I don't have to be an AMD fan to like what they're doing or hate Nvidia to show appreciation of what they did right. Same reason why you dont have to be an AMD user here to post what you felt they did wrong. Heck, if I'm AMD (or Nvidia), I'd rather listen to constructive criticism to improve myself rather than thinking I did great (Medium 4K? Seriously.) when it is actually nothing to shout about.

Which would you rather want: people praising you for something mediocre, or people critisizing you for something great? I'd take the latter.

For posterity sake, I just disabled SLI on my rig and ran a single card at 4K Medium on Dragon Age Inquisition. I get 60 fps (possibly higher since my monitor only goes up to 60Hz) as well recorded on Shadowplay FPS counter. I don't feel so special here either. Granted I'm running Titan X, but since the Fury X's competitor, the 980Ti is a Titan X killer, 60fps on 4K at Medium in DA:I, is normal. The point to take here, it is normal to get 30-60fps at 4K and above running DA:I on Medium on flagship cards. It's probably astonishing to AMD users here since neither of their previous flagship cards are able to do so before the arrival of Fury. But it has been that way with its competitor's card, so nothing really much to shout about really. *shrugs*

This post has been edited by stringfellow: Jun 23 2015, 01:19 AM

"The first thing that probably slapped you in the face is the close to 6GB VRAM usage at 4K while our VRAM test cards the R9-290s in Crossfire only have 4GB (mirrored) . This is probably due to a bug on the driver side, so it should be taken with a grain of salt."

Read more at HardwarePal: Dragon Age Inquisition Benchmark Mantle Vs DirectX http://www.hardwarepal.com/?p=7793

Take with a grain of salt. The reviewer doesn't mentioned stuttering (which is what would you get when the card out of VRAM) when testing at 4K with 290 or 970. The graph meaningless to me since the reviewer didn't go into details on it. For 290, they should have two graphs for DX11 & Mantle. Like they mentioned in the article, take with grain of salt.

It's not even a review. It's only one page with 3 screenshots. Everything shown there, 5K @30Hz & like you said, he/she basically said "It was liquid smooth to my eyes, with the graphics being set to 'Medium' at 5K. It felt like 60FPS+". Sorry, I don't see why you need to fuss about this though. And no one going to run 5K or 4K even, with single GPU. I also checked other reviews on Dragon Age Inquisition, they also doesn't mentioned stuttering when playing the games at 4K @High or Ultra with either 295X2 or 980 SLI.

I didnt say it was a review. It was a post with 3 screenshots. But which is which? At first say Witcher 3 then later show screenshots of DA:I? Setting screenshot says 5K at 30Hz, then mention "feels like 60+"? If the post is meant to generate a "feel-good" feeling for those justifying a Fury X purchase, maybe it works for those who are already invested or buying the Fury X already. Perhaps as justification of purchase since the person who first posted the link to that article has he himself invested in the Fury X from a local reseller, and posting this link made his purchase justifiable, maybe? The rest who are sitting on the fence, money in hand but still researching, I reckon, would prefer a more unbiased, trustworthy, and proof-readed/proof-provided article than 3 screenshots and a "feel like 60+fps" article. They're gonna be spending RM2800-2900 on this, so proof of such performance would help them make the right decision on whether to buy or not, not driven by fanboyism alone. I was in the market for this myself for a Fury SFF build, so I prefer and appreciate an unbiased article than a loosely cobbled-together one like this.

There are no reviews on DA:I with regards to frame-rating which would elaborate further on stuttering, other than a smattering of posts from users in forums. Does not mean that there aren't any. I looked up the usual suspects like TPU, MAximumPC and PcPER since they're the ones usually with graphs of frame-rating, nothing there either. Still it does not mean that there aren't any.

"AMD user here", yeah, nice trolling. If you can't discuss nicely here without inflaming people here, why bother posting here. According to anandtech review, 290X is only a couple FPS behind 980 in DA: Inquisition @4K @high & ultra settings. If 980 can run @60FPS with medium settings @4K, 290X will be able too. Well, your argument is faulty since you're testing @4K, not 5K.

RM 2,899. Darn. Wonder if it will get closer to US price?