Published in Graphics

First alleged Radeon Fury X 3DMark results show up

by on10 June 2015


Trading blows with Titan X

As we draw closer to the official unveil of AMD's Radeon 300 series lineup and the Radeon Fury flagship lineup, it does not come as a surprise that we now have some of the first unconfirmed 3DMark results where alleged Radeon Fury X graphics card is trading blows with the Geforce Titan X.

According to a set of results compiled by Videocardz.com and taken from 3DMark FireStrike Ultra and FireStrike Extreme benchmarks, the Fiji XT-based AMD Radeon Fury X, is trading blows with Nvidia GM200 Maxwell-based Geforce GTX Titan X. According to the posted results and the combined table, the Radeon Fury X is actually faster than the GTX Titan X in FireStrike Ultra at 4K/UHD 3840x2160 resolution but slight slower in FireStrike Extreme at 2560x1440 resolution.

While this is just a synthetic benchmark and does not show the real world and gaming performance it is a good starting point and gives us a general idea regarding the performance of the Radeon Fury X.

Appearently, AMD Radeon Fury X also does good in Crossfire mode as two AMD Fury X graphics cards are pretty close to GTX Titan X in SLI. The Radeon Fury X also beats the reference clocked GTX 980 Ti while it looses from an overclocked GTX 980 Ti working at 1220MHZ for the GPU and 1900MHz for the memory. The Radeon Fury X is clocked at 1050MHz for the GPU and 500MHz (1000MHz effective) for 4GB of High Bandwidth Memory.

Judging from these early results, High Bandwidth Memory and 4096-bit memory interface on the Radeon Fury X certainly does wonders and we can't wait to see some of the first results from actual games.

The Fiji XT based Radeon Fury X graphics card should debut at AMD's dedicated event on June 16th while first details are expected on June 18th with first reviews scheduled for June 24th. According to our sources, it should be available as of June 24th but you should expect limited availability. 

AMD RadeonFuryXvc 1

AMD RadeonFuryXvc 2

 

Rate this item
(10 votes)

Read more about: