Currently having very bad experience with Sapphire R9 3xx series.

The screen just flickers away, often crash and unable to do anything. NOTE : That's on the same system that's able to run GTX 980 Ti and R9 295X2.

I got fed up, did a fresh installation on different SSD, change mobo, RAM, processor, PSU, SATA cables whatever you can think off. Still the same thing.

Windows is 8.1 of course, driver is 15.6 as on the site. Nope, didn't work. 15.5, 15.4, 14.12 also doesn't work.

Now I'm just waiting for PowerColor units to come in and see if it's the brand issue or the Radeon chip itself.

And so far I have problem with R9 390X and R9 390 Nitro from Sapphire. Fury? Well, I haven't plug it in.

I can view BIOS / POST.
I can view Windows load.
The most I can reach is DESKTOP.
In some cases, the DESKTOP then after a while - CRASH.

It was miraculous that I managed to get some benchies done but even during that session I couldn't get it to go 4K no matter what.

Now I'm trying to get to benchies again, some can't do. Ridiculous so far.

It just doesn't make sense, a rig that can run GTX 980 Ti and R9 295X2 and never had any problem.

Changed PSU, even now my last ditch effort - raise the wattage to 850W but to no avail.

OK now I go try Fury X.

No, this is not from AMD. It's retail units of Sapphire's R9 390X and R9 390 Nitro.

As for the Fury X, I am installing the drivers now and keeping my fingers crossed.

I went from Gigabyte Z97X-Gaming 3 and ASRock Z97 Extreme 4.
I went from Core i5 to Core i3 (because the i5 on Gigabyte board is with AIO cooler, troublesome to remove just to troubleshoot)
I went from FSP Aurum S 700W to Cooler Master V700 to Cooler Master V850

Arrghhhhh..................

Really really really hoping the Fury X would be working fine.

Wahhh I love the Fury X!!! Compact and silent, ok well slight noise from the pump.

The unit runs cooling and it's very unlike the 295X2.

Using 15.15 now for the Fury X.

Once done I'll go back to the R9 390X / R9 390 Nitro again. I did install from the CD provided but to no avail.

Will see how it goes. Benching Fury X now. Preliminary deduction - performance similar to the GTX 980. Should be around R9 390X performance as seen on the many articles.

You know, Dual-BIOS shouldn't be giving hiccups like that. Anyway I tested both, not a first time Sapphire card user.

Oh and please, forget about Fury beating Titan X.

Price is around RM 3k. Performance varies from anywhere from trailing a GTX 980 to outperforming a GTX 980 Ti.

4GB RAM and HBM factor.

970 SLI would be faster than any single card 980.

I'm referring to both the 980 and 980 Ti.

The 980 Ti has speed improvements but it's not suprising that it's behind 970 SLI.

Very few article has such comparison, check out this one http://www.pcgamer.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti-review/

The 970 SLI may lose out when games go beyond the 4GB RAM limitation.

I have the 980 and 980 Ti with me, the Ti does shine when game settings take up a lot of VRAM.

I mentioned that yesterday and someone decided to report me.

But anyway it's like what others say, you can't be discussing one camp without discussing the other.

I think green camp also will be discussing red camp HBM and whatever else.

You don't need AA when on 4K la.

Anyway I've already tested the Fury X. It's a nice piece of device but the performance is variance is huge when compared to GTX 980 / GTX 980 Ti.

er, sure if you want photo of 4K AA and no AA.

Remember the good old days where CRT monitors got bigger but resolution didn't? That's when AA helps remove jaggies.

Consoles back then didn't need AA because those CRT TV units are interlaced.

AA went on and on and on but until now.

The logic behind no AA required on 4K is that the pixel density is huge that you won't be seeing jaggies.

I haven't read the OCN thing you mentioned but what level of AA are you referring to btw?

8xAA used to be great but as time went on I ended up gaming with usually only 2xAA or 4xAA.

And 4K with AA is really a killer.


ehhh it was due to resolution vs actual screen size that lead to jaggies that lead to introduction of AA.

RM 12k just for the graphic system.

That's the thing I like about the Fury X - the card is cooling so you can put them so close to one another and there won't be any heat issue.

It's short and takes up only 2 PCI-E slots so it fits perfectly.

Try running any other cards red or green camp with this setup, they'll be hot like silly.

What's this thing about?

Should be better than what I attempted.

https://www.facebook.com/goldfries.fanpage/...20373184655863/

Having a terribly difficult time to install the Fury X into my ThermalTake Core V1.

How much? I've been looking around, no price details.

I got it assembled finally and my goodness it's just too much a hassle.

I had to mount the fan outside. I would've mounted the radiator outside but it's designed to be L shaped same direction as the tube connection.

Only option is to have fan placed outside.

The mounting screws provided on the unit (holding the fan to radiator) is not long enough and I had to use the ones from Cooler Master's AIO unit to get it mounted.

Guys - I know who the person is. I ask WHAT is it about, as in the tessellation part and all.

Was referring to the Fury X stock setup. 2 PCI-E slots.

I've since updated with a more recent post on my endeavor to install the Fury X on Mini ITX casing - it was a nightmare.

Card small, correct BUT the cooling system takes up a lot of space

empire23 you saw my post? Small setup, wait for NANO.

Numbers posted since last week, not here though.

http://www.goldfries.com/hardware-reviews/...ic-card-review/