Radeon RX Vega revealed

[Jizz_Beard_thePirate]

shikamaru317 said:

Captain_Yuri said:

Neh, maybe. It's odd for AMD to release a "conservative" benchmark at a time where they really need to show people that Vega was worth the wait. What I am wondering is whether or not it is actually conservative or did AMD gimp Fury X to make Vega look better. Ik that sounds pretty conspiracy but it's really odd if they went for conservative.

I hope not. I mean it has been 2 years since Fury X released, so a 30% performance improvement like AMD's benchmark shows does seem logical.  It really doesn't make sense though that Vega 64 is getting the same FPS on AMD's benchamrk that the 2 year old Fury X is getting on Guru3D's charts. I can think of 2 possible explanations for the discrepancy, one is that the Guru3D benchmark was taken from a much less demanding section of the game, the other is that Guru3D hit the silicon lottery so to speak and had a really good Fury X sample, whereas AMD used poorer samples for their benchmark.

That's true. Hmm, something smells fishy.

Alright, I found another benchmark which maybe makes Guru3d's benchmark seem more ??? with the FuryX but makes it a bit more in line with AMD's findings.

Still, the one that is the same on both of these benches is that the 1080 is hovering around 150fps at 1080p.

Here's another one just in case which is more closer to AMD's findings while keeping the 1080 the same:

Yea not sure why Guru3d's Fury X was like crazy high loll.