AMD R9 Fury X 4GB Graphics Card Crossfire Review

/ 3 years ago

Next Page »



Here at eTeknix, we strive to give the consumer the best possible advice in every aspect of technology. Today is no different, we are extremely excited to bring you the CrossFireX review of the recently released AMD Radeon R9 Fury X. As we all know, the R9 Fury X is AMD’s latest attempt to take the crown from NVIDIA in the top end consumer GPU market. In some ways, AMD has succeeded, thanks to the introduction of a new GPU architecture and the innovative High Bandwidth Memory (HBM). With the use of HBM, it has been proven that the quantity of VRAM isn’t the issue, it is the quality of the connection and bandwidth allowance for the VRAM to do its work; although more VRAM certainly couldn’t hurt.

On the test bench today, we have the XFX version of the AMD R9 Fury X 4GB featuring HBM. As we previously saw in the standalone review, the card had more than enough power to supply 30FPS at 4K; however, 30FPS isn’t enough. Adding another card into the mix should produce very high chances of witnessing 60FPS at 4K.

The two cards in the testing bench together you can get a feel of the size of them compared to the Gigabyte G1 Gaming X99 motherboard. The attention to detail that has gone into every card is simply amazing; there isn’t a piece of cable sleeve or cable tie out of place. All of the screws are perfectly inserted and the metal is buffed up to a gorgeous shine.


A single card is a testament to AMD’s attention to detail. It’s a shame the heat shrink didn’t go all of the way to the fan cowling; leaving about 1″ of coloured cables visible.


Out of the rig, the two cards in all their glory. If the comparison to the motherboard wasn’t enough, how about next to the 120mm radiators? Due to there being no metal heat sink inside the card, it weighs next to nothing compared to the radiators.



Up close to the cards, you can see that there isn’t a dimple on the cover plate out of place and there is no frayed cable sleeving protruding from the end of the cards.



We inserted both graphics cards onto our Core i7 5820K and X99-based test system, ensuring adequate spacing for optimum cooling and that both have access to sufficient PCI-e bandwidth for CrossFire operation. These cards are the best possible option for configuring a crossfire set-up, both are the reference design, same sub-vendor, exactly the same clock speeds and the same TDP. All of this means that we can achieve the best possible scaling with little to no variations due to the mismatch of graphics cards.

Topics: , , , , ,

Next Page »


By supporting eTeknix, you help us grow. And continue to bring you the latest news, reviews, and competitions. Follow us on Facebook and Twitter to keep up with the latest technology. Share your favourite articles, chat with the team and more. Also check out eTeknix YouTube, where you'll find our latest video reviews, event coverage and features in 4K!
eTeknix FacebookeTeknix TwittereTeknix Instagram

Check out our Latest Video


28 Responses to “AMD R9 Fury X 4GB Graphics Card Crossfire Review”
  1. Adrian says:

    are you comparing Cross Fire against single card ?

  2. RejZoR says:

    Throw in Radeon R9-295X2 and be amazed.. 😉 That old clunker can still pack some punch…

    • Mike Hedges says:

      its a bad ass card, when crossfire will work nicely. I’m personally looking for something that comes pre-water cooled, i hope the fury x has better overclock soon!

      • RejZoR says:

        Allegedly some people managed to overclock the HBM memory from 500MHz to 600MHz and it provided a huge boost. Allegedly because it’s not enough info to confirm it. As for GPU, I’m sure once we get proper tools for precise overvolting, it’ll be possible. Currently everyone overclocked it using CCC and that is quite limited in control. We’ll see…

        • Mike Hedges says:

          yea i seen the small amount of overclocking that could be done, im hoping for a lot more soon, i really dont want a 980ti, but if amd doesnt get the ball rolling i might have to switch over(i have no gpu in my desktop right now lol)

          • RejZoR says:

            I was waiting for vanilla R9 Fury to be released with the Fury X and they wanted me to wait another month. FU AMD and so I bought GTX 980. I don’t get it why they have to release flagship cards so wide apart. I gave AMD more than half a year extra time for their flagshipt os how up, but now it was enough. Besides, I haven’t had NVIDIA for years so why not give it a try I said to myself…

          • Mike Hedges says:

            the 970 does some work, ive put it in a few computers ive built for my friends, i personally had a crossfire 290x setup that i loved for 480 bucks, but i sold them for 400 recently, and now idk if i want a 980ti or a fury x, hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, i guess well see when i buy something lol. i do have 4k so i kinda need one of those cards.

          • trsskater63 says:

            I would go with the 980 TI because you can do more with it.

    • Liviu Cristian says:

      Yup, the 292×2 is still the best card to buy right now. You can get it as low as for ~£500, for that money has NO competition and as per performance no single GPU can touch it.

  3. Some Body says:

    Why is Witcher 3 so rarely used in these benchmarks?

    • Mike Hedges says:

      its most likely not used because the drivers aren’t fully there yet

      • Liviu Cristian says:

        most likely because you have no idea what you are talking about, but still have the need to talk.

        • Mike Hedges says:

          i have no idea? lmao dude, “does not work with crossfire or sli” oh what does that mean in terms everyone can understand? That there aren’t drivers for it yet. As for the hairworks you can always just turn it off and it works fine. is the grocery store by you all out of salt because you bought it all?

    • Liviu Cristian says:

      That is because there are issues still with the game:
      1. Does not work with SLi or Crossfire because of the Supersampling issue (with other words- cannot use the second card while AA is on)

      2. Because “Hairworks” feature that was contracted with Nvidia and was coded to run like shit on AMD, but there is a workaround by force enabling x16 tessellation through AMD catalyst game profile.

      Witcher 3 is mainly used for benchmarks that test single GPU setups.

  4. Naeem ur Rehman says:

    Put 2 x 980ti vs 2 x Fury X this review kinda looked borning as 2nd card is crossfire is doing nothing really at 1080p

  5. Daniel 'Bounty' Prosický says:

    When somebody who should sell bakery do HW fairytales..

    980ti completely ruin Fury and if you start with SLI/CF it double truth… who cares about noise or heat when manny of us will use Pro WC block…

    • Adrian says:

      Its strange, when everybody talks about AMD cards all Nvidia FANS jumps on the noise and heat issue, when its nvidia cards…. who cares ?
      980ti do not complete ruin fury. They are on the same performance level, and Fiji with less memory.
      At least be honest you Nvidia FANs, thanks to AMD you pay 1100 for a titan X and 650 for the 980ti, without AMD you pay 2000 for a Titan and 980ti wouldn’t exist….. So balance is good for all of us !!!

      • Daniel 'Bounty' Prosický says:

        Strange that untill now ive been using ATI/AMD for almost 20 years so who talks about NV fans.. + even now iam running on their cards. still this card doesnt belong to HE and its a failure in compete with NV and market results are already showing the numbers…

        • Tuna says:

          why is it that nvidia trolls have always used amd extensively? Vega is going to destroy anything that nvidia has. Nvidia cards are optimized for DirectX11 as soon as Vega is released and DX12 becomes common. It will be bye bye nvidia and all the dumb shits that spent a fortune on GTX1080s will be crying into their coolant.

  6. Sugaris says:

    Why no SLI 980ti’s results to compair?

  7. Adrian says:

    My conclusion on this and referencing this test is:
    AMD will price FuryX2 between titan X and 980ti and for the price FuryX2 beats all cards and all SLI !

    • Robert Jenkins says:

      i wish it wer etrue but AMD messed up and tried to add fire pro drivers into the mix and only used Nano’s… should have just used two fury x’s and kept it at about 900 bucks. once u add in that firepro thats price jack.

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!

  • Be Social with eTeknix

  • Poll

    AMD or NVIDIA?

    View Results