Sapphire Fury Nitro OC Edition £289.25 @ Ballicom
85°Expired

Sapphire Fury Nitro OC Edition £289.25 @ Ballicom

14
Found 27th Jul 2016
Sapphire SKU: 11247-03-40G

GPU Clock: 1050 MHz
HBM Clock: 500MHz (effective 1000MHz)
Memory bus: 4096 bit
Memory size: 4096MB

14 Comments

Good price.

Original Poster

Yep.

Interesting thing I noted in Bit Tech RX 480 review is how in Valley @ 1440P Fury X gave 50% higher performance. When I asked on forum what resolution of Valley is used for the power consumption section of review they said 1440P, the Fury X system drew 50% more power from wall and gave 50% more performance.

When I asked on TPU how they calculate perf.per watt chart I was told they only take the single typical gaming power usage result and apply to all results shown on perf.per watt chart. This IMO is inaccurate, but I do understand due to time constraints reviewer uses this method.

Then I noted in extremetech review Nano having better perf.per watt in Metro.


http://i.imgur.com/UGRDMGa.jpg


I'm not convinced at the moment RX 480 is that big a leap of perf.per watt.
Edited by: "gupsterg" 27th Jul 2016

gupsterg

Yep.Interesting thing I noted in Bit Tech RX 480 review is how in Valley … Yep.Interesting thing I noted in Bit Tech RX 480 review is how in Valley @ 1440P Fury X gave 50% higher performance. When I asked on forum what resolution of Valley is used for the power consumption section of review they said 1440P, the Fury X system drew 50% more power from wall and gave 50% more performance.When I asked on TPU how they calculate perf.per watt chart I was told they only take the single typical gaming power usage result and apply to all results shown on perf.per watt chart. This IMO is inaccurate, but I do understand due to time constraints reviewer uses this method.Then I noted in extremetech review Nano having better perf.per watt in Metro.I'm not convinced at the moment RX 480 is that big a leap of perf.per watt.


It's not

This card is just going to get better and better, guy in the office just got one and says it runs like a dream, slight coil whine when pushing hard but nothing out of the ordinary.

Original Poster

oos now, so deal expired .
Edited by: "gupsterg" 27th Jul 2016

biggiep

This card is just going to get better and better, guy in the office just … This card is just going to get better and better, guy in the office just got one and says it runs like a dream, slight coil whine when pushing hard but nothing out of the ordinary.



I don't see how the card is going to "get better". It's last generation's card, with 4GB of VRAM.

HBM or not, this is not even the Fury X. If you are paying 289.25 for last gen AMD and expecting it to 'get better' you are going to have a bad time.

Nate1492

I don't see how the card is going to "get better". It's last generation's … I don't see how the card is going to "get better". It's last generation's card, with 4GB of VRAM.HBM or not, this is not even the Fury X. If you are paying 289.25 for last gen AMD and expecting it to 'get better' you are going to have a bad time.



GCN drivers do tend to improve over time. Though saying that the 4GB VRAM isn't going to do it any favours, and for that reason, I'm out.

Original Poster

Nate1492

HBM or not, this is not even the Fury X.



A Fury is very close to Fury X on performance. I've had both, when the Fury is unlocked to 3840SP it benches clock for clock as a Fury X. 3dmark.com/com…309

rev6

Though saying that the 4GB VRAM isn't going to do it any favours, and for … Though saying that the 4GB VRAM isn't going to do it any favours, and for that reason, I'm out.



At the moment not convinced the 4GB is an issue.

i) This is viewing say the launch reviews of Fiji cards on Bit tech and results with updated driver in 8GB RX 480 review. The Fiji cards with 4GB start closing the gap with say a 6GB 980 Ti as resolution is increased, other cards like the 390X it still out performs with 4GB of HBM.

ii) A lot of owners on OCN running these cards at 1440P or 4K do not highlight any issue with RAM size.

The future maybe or maybe not ...

*** edit ***

An interesting article.

i) interesting to read monitoring apps show requested RAM and not actual usage.
ii) so on tested GPUs 4K is a balancing act of settings if you want ~30FPS or +, so GPU horsepower is more of a limit than RAM.
iii) out of 15 titles only 4 could be forced to request more than 4GB.
iv) out of the 3 games profile 2 were gamesworks (ie can hit AMD cards), GTA V results were most interesting.

To me it seems as long as game/driver is optimised perhaps not an issue now and maybe in the future.

Edited by: "gupsterg" 28th Jul 2016

Nate1492

I don't see how the card is going to "get better". It's last generation's … I don't see how the card is going to "get better". It's last generation's card, with 4GB of VRAM.HBM or not, this is not even the Fury X. If you are paying 289.25 for last gen AMD and expecting it to 'get better' you are going to have a bad time.



I simply don't agree, more and more titles are moving to Direct X 12 and this favours AMD, so when games make the transition and are built purely for DX12 this card will still be performing well. If you look at when this came out it was more on par with a 980 but in DX12 it gets closer to a 980ti and only seems to get better with driver improvements.

The HBM memory does help because it can swap out textures so quickly, it will become a problem eventually, but I think this would be a good card for the next 18 months at 1080p @144hz or 2k at 60.

As ever we pays our money we makes our choices.

biggiep

I simply don't agree, more and more titles are moving to Direct X 12 and … I simply don't agree, more and more titles are moving to Direct X 12 and this favours AMD, so when games make the transition and are built purely for DX12 this card will still be performing well. If you look at when this came out it was more on par with a 980 but in DX12 it gets closer to a 980ti and only seems to get better with driver improvements.The HBM memory does help because it can swap out textures so quickly, it will become a problem eventually, but I think this would be a good card for the next 18 months at 1080p @144hz or 2k at 60. As ever we pays our money we makes our choices.



The memory isn't swapped in/out, it is loaded in.

The idea of swapping in memory is the problem with 4GB or less. That's the entire point, if you need to swap in new textures to memory, you are running too low on VRAM.

GTA V suffers, and you say "If the game is optimized" is just not right, as these games are already out and these are AAA titles. If these titles aren't 'optimized' what hope do you have of other titles being optimized better?

If you want to lock yourself in at 4GB of VRAM, and have 289.25 to spend, I wouldn't recommend this card, pick up a 1060 6GB, save 50 quid. Or spend 50 quid more and pick up the 1070.

Unless you are on an absolute tight rope of a budget that dictates exactly £290 for a gfx card, pass this for one of the options in the next gen. 480, 1060, or 1070 all fit around this value place.

4GB of VRAM is absolutely a limiting factor, and it would be disingenuous to state otherwise.

Nate1492

HBM or not, this is not even the Fury X.

rev6

Though saying that the 4GB VRAM isn't going to do it any favours, and … Though saying that the 4GB VRAM isn't going to do it any favours, and for that reason, I'm out.



4GB might not be a serious problem today no, but even low/mid range 1060 has 6GB now. How long will it be.
Edited by: "rev6" 28th Jul 2016

Original Poster

I can see the error of my ways .

Fall out 4@1440P, GTX 1060 due to early drivers which aren't using the extra VRAM will make up the ~24% min FPS difference vs Fury X and aver. FPS ~24% in later releases. Again also at 4K, ~47% min FPS and ~35% aver. FPS.

Division again an early driver release issue, 1440P - ~45% min FPS and aver. ~32%, 4K - ~91% min FPS and ~44% aver. FPS.

Witcher 3, again driver improvement on the way to gain ground . Finally let's not forget OC'd GTX 1060 vs stock Fury X.

On the basis of these results clearly the GTX 1060 or RX 480 with driver improvements will utilise extra VRAM = FPS gain in future releases as well .

PS And who wants to compare the Fury X gaining ground to the 980 Ti in those results as well .

Edited by: "gupsterg" 28th Jul 2016

Original Poster

FYI for anyone interested and some more older discussion.

Edited by: "gupsterg" 31st Jul 2016

Original Poster

Interesting info from Techspot's Deus EX: Mankind Divided review.

Bang for your buck, the best value option for playing Mankind Divided … Bang for your buck, the best value option for playing Mankind Divided goes to the Radeon RX 480. Although I didn't show the results, I did try the RX 480 flashed to the 4GB BIOS and performance was identical to the 8GB model, even when using the Ultra quality preset.


Edited by: "gupsterg" 28th Aug 2016
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text