8.3
Check Prices $649.00
5.6
Check Prices $999.99
Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB GeForce GTX 690
Cyberpunk 2077 8% 5%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 16% 4%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 19% 7%
Watch Dogs Legion 12% 1%
FIFA 21 54% 47%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 19% 7%
Godfall 49% 70%
Grand Theft Auto VI 29% 47%
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands 31% 50%
Genshin Impact 8% 5%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the AMD Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB are very slightly better than the Nvidia GeForce GTX 690.

The R9 FURY has a 135 MHz higher core clock speed and the same number of Texture Mapping Units as the GeForce GTX 690. This results in the R9 FURY providing 34.6 GTexel/s better texturing performance. This still holds weight but shader performance is generally more relevant, particularly since both of these GPUs support at least DirectX 10.

The R9 FURY has a 135 MHz higher core clock speed than the GeForce GTX 690 and the same number of Render Output Units. This results in the R9 FURY providing 8.6 GPixel/s better pixeling performance. However, both GPUs support DirectX 9 or above, and pixeling performance is only really relevant when comparing older cards.

The R9 FURY was released over three years more recently than the GeForce GTX 690, and so the R9 FURY is likely to have far better driver support, meaning it will be much more optimized and ultimately superior to the GeForce GTX 690 when running the latest games.

Both GPUs exhibit very powerful performance, so it probably isn't worth upgrading from one to the other, as both are capable of running even the most demanding games at the highest settings.

The Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB and the GeForce GTX 690 have the same amount of video memory, but are likely to provide slightly different experiences when displaying game textures at high resolutions.

The R9 FURY has 128 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the GeForce GTX 690, which means that the memory performance of the R9 FURY is massively better than the GeForce GTX 690.

The Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB has 4096 Shader Processing Units and the GeForce GTX 690 has 3072. However, the actual shader performance of the R9 FURY is 3656 and the actual shader performance of the GeForce GTX 690 is 3130. The R9 FURY having 526 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the R9 FURY delivers a massively smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the GeForce GTX 690.

The Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB requires 275 Watts to run and the GeForce GTX 690 requires 300 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 600 Watts for the R9 FURY and a PSU with at least 650 Watts for the GeForce GTX 690. The GeForce GTX 690 requires 25 Watts more than the R9 FURY to run. The difference is not significant enough for the GeForce GTX 690 to have a noticeably larger impact on your yearly electricity bills than the R9 FURY.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed1050 MHzvs915 MHz
Boost Clock-vs1019 MHz
ArchitectureGCN 1.2 Fiji XTKepler GK104-355-A2
OC Potential Poor vs Fair
Driver Support Great vs Good
Release Date24 Jun 2015vs03 May 2012
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

Resolution Performance

1366x768
10
green tick vs green tick
10
1600x900
10
green tick vs green tick
10
1920x1080
10
green tick vs green tick
10
2560x1440
8.4
green tick vs
7.8
3840x2160
6.5
green tick vs
5.7

GPU Memory

Memory4096 MBvs4096 MB
Memory Speed500 MHzvs1500 MHz
Memory Bus4096 Bitvs512 Bit
Memory TypeHBM-1vsGDDR5
Memory Bandwidth512GB/secvs384GB/sec
L2 Cache 2048 KB green tick vs 1024 KB
Delta Color Compression yes vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units4096vs3072
Actual Shader Performance100%vs100%
Technology28nmvs28nm
Texture Mapping Units256vs256
Texture Rate268.8 GTexel/svs234.2 GTexel/s
Render Output Units64vs64
Pixel Rate67.2 GPixel/svs58.6 GPixel/s
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)4096x2160vs4096x2160
VGA Connections0vs0
DVI Connections0vs3
HDMI Connections1vs0
DisplayPort Connections4vs1
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power275 Wattsvs300 Watts
Recommended PSU600 Watts & 42 Ampsvs650 Watts & 38 Amps

GPU Features

DirectX12.0vs12.0
Shader Model5.0vs5.0
Open GL4.5vs4.5
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUnono
SLI/Crossfireyesvsyes
Dedicatedyesvsyes
Comparison

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended ProcessorIntel Core i7-4790K 4-Core 4.0GHzvsIntel Core i7-3770K 4-Core 3.5GHz
Recommended RAM16 GBvs8 GB
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution2560x1600vs2560x1440

Gaming Performance Value

Rise of the Tomb Raidervs
Performance Value

GPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewOverview
Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB is an Enthusiast Graphics Card based on the Third Revision of the Graphics Core Next (GCN) Architecture.

Architecture
The Fiji is a Second Generation GCN GPU. It offers support for HBM-1 Memory, DirectX 12.0, Open GL 4.5 and the acclaimed Delta Compression Algorithm which may decrease bandwidth consumption by up to 30%, in most games.
Fiji XT is the Full Variant of the GPU with 64 Compute Units activated, offering 4096 Shader Processing Units, 256 TMUs and 64 ROPs.

GPU
The Central Unit is clocked at 1000MHz.

Memory: Speed
The GPU is equipped with stacked HBM-1 Memory and accesses the Frame Buffer through a 4096-bit memory interface.

Memory: Frame Buffer
The GPU can fill up a Memory Pool of up to 4GB. Under most circumstances, this only proves useful in certain 3D Games whose Settings Require Large Amounts of Memory.
However, and because the GPU itself is aimed for 4K Gaming, 4GB might be a bottlenecked and Performance could be better, were the Frame Buffer larger.

Power Consumption
With a rated board TDP of 275W, it requires at least a 600W PSU with two available 8-pin connectors.

Performance
Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB competes with GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB and both are available for $649.
Benchmarks However Indicate that GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB is still faster than Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB, even at 4K, whereas as the resolution goes down, the performance gap between the latter and GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB increases and at 1600x900, Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB is only as fast as the weaker GeForce GTX 980.
Considering Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB offers practically no overclock potential (operating memory clock can't even be increased), consumes slightly more energy than GeForce GTX 980 Ti 6GB, costs the same price and performs worse, Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB ends up being one of AMD's worst releases of the last years and given the hype built, probably the most disappointing.

System Suggestions
Radeon R9 FURY X 4GB is best suited for resolutions up to and including 2560x1600. We recommend a Very Strong Processor and 16GB of RAM for Optimal Performance.
GeForce GTX 690 is a dual-GPU graphics card solution of two GeForce GTX 680 (not SLI) and part of the 600 Series released by NVIDIA in 2012.
As usual and a hindrance of dual-GPU graphics cards, the clock frequencies had to be reduced. However, NVIDIA managed to almost double-cross this problem by developing Turbo Boost technology that sets the GPU's core clock from 915 to 1019MHz. The other specs, such as the number of cores, memory speed, and memory bandwidth per GPU are the same on both cards.
The Performance is mind-blowing and indicated for gamers that use demanding technologies, such as Tesselation, paired with extreme resolutions and on games already Very Demanding from the start, such as Metro 2033 and The Witcher 2. GeForce GTX 690 is less expensive and energy consuming than GTX 680 put in Dual SLI.
Recommended CPU
Possible GPU Upgrades
-
-
GPU Variants
-
-