Skip to main content

Twin AMD Fury X cards deliver against SLI Titans on triple monitors

AMD Radeon Fury X
Bill Roberson/Digital Trends
The launch of the AMD Fury X cards has been rather tumultuous. There were rumours of selective sample send outs, issues with pre-release cooler pump whine and the fact that while powerful, the cards didn’t look likely to take Nvidia’s performance crown. However, while all that may be true at traditionally HD resolutions, if you scale it all up to three 4K displays and CrossFire two of the Fury X cards together, there’s a whole different story.

Although each card is ‘limited’ in total RAM to just 4GB (compared with Titan X 12GB GDDR5), in many of the games tested by Tweaktown, the Fury X cards came out on top. While Tomb Raider and Metro Last Light proved to be more compatible with Nvidia hardware, AMD’s new water cooled GPUs were able to take home the gold in Battlefield 4, Shadow of Mordor and Bioshock Infinite.

Recommended Videos

In each instance, the games were running at mostly-high settings, with the resolution set to a ridiculous 11,520 x 2,160. The fact that any of these cards was delivering playable frame rates at such a resolution is impressive, but it’s even more so when you factor in the architecture differences between AMD and Nvidia hardware.

Please enable Javascript to view this content

It is worth pointing out that while the average frame rates of the Fury X CrossFire cards were often higher than that of the SLI Titan X and 980 Ti cards, more often than not the minimum frame rate for both those latter cards was higher than AMD’s solution. Of course a more general playable frame rate is preferred, but it’s worth noting that neither company seems to have a catch-all solution for playing at resolutions that are still many years away for mainstream gamers.

What this does at least do, is give us hope that with future generations, driver updates and cooperation with developers, AMD can remain competitive in the desktop GPU game. Because if it can’t, Nvidia has much less incentive to develop industry leading products.

Jon Martindale
Jon Martindale is a freelance evergreen writer and occasional section coordinator, covering how to guides, best-of lists, and…
AMD says the $300 Ryzen 5 7600X beats Intel’s best by up to 17%
A group shot of Ryzen 7000 CPUs.

AMD is making some bold claims about its upcoming Ryzen 7000 processors -- not the least of which is that the $300 Ryzen 5 7600X is as much as 17% faster than Intel's flagship Core i9-12900K.

Team Red is wasting no time, it seems. The Ryzen 7000 launch just concluded, and AMD shared specs, projected performance, and platform details for its upcoming Zen 4 CPUs. We're getting four new processors on September 27, from the $300 Ryzen 5 7600X to the $700 Ryzen 9 7950X.

Read more
Acer’s TV-sized Predator gaming monitor is OLED, 4K, and living room-ready
acer predator cg48 gaming display half tv monitor ces 2022

At CES 2022, Acer announced an expansion to its gaming monitor lineup, with one model featuring a screen big enough to serve as a TV replacement.

The company unveiled three new additions to its Predator series of gaming monitors, the Predator CG48, the Predator X32, and the X32 FP. The X32 received a CES Innovation Award in the “Computer Peripherals & Accessories” category, while the FP variant is claimed to be the “fastest 4K monitor currently available," though it may have already been surpassed by another gaming monitor announced at CES.
Predator CG48

Read more
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X vs. Intel Core i9-9900K
AMD Ryzen 9 3900x pins.

The period between late 2018 and early 2019 was an inflection point in the ongoing battle between AMD and Intel. In late 2018, Intel continued its dominance in the gaming space by releasing the i9-9900K, which was the first CPU outside of Intel's Extreme range to sport the i9 marker. AMD followed up shortly after with the Ryzen 9 3900X. Although AMD had been competitive in productivity apps in its two previous Ryzen generations, the 3900X proved that team red still has the power to go up against Intel.

The 3900X marks a return for AMD, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's better than the 9900K. Let's dig into the details to find the better CPU.
By the numbers

Read more