CPU
GPU
Radeon R9 Fury X
Popular choices:
Radeon R9 390X
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R9 Fury X is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.1% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Radeon R9 390X offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Radeon R9 Fury X | Radeon R9 390X |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (277mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R9 390X offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R9 390X holds the technical lead. Priced at $70 (vs $80), it costs 13% less, resulting in a 13% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R9 Fury X | Radeon R9 390X |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+13%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($80) | ✅More affordable ($70) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R9 Fury X and Radeon R9 390X
Radeon R9 Fury X
The Radeon R9 Fury X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 24 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1050 MHz. It has 4096 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 275W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 9,382 points. Launch price was $649.
Radeon R9 390X
The Radeon R9 390X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 18 2015. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1050 MHz. It has 2816 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 275W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 9,278 points. Launch price was $429.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 Fury X scores 9,382 and the Radeon R9 390X reaches 9,278 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 Fury X is built on GCN 3.0 while the Radeon R9 390X uses GCN 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 4,096 (Radeon R9 Fury X) vs 2,816 (Radeon R9 390X). Raw compute: 8.602 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 Fury X) vs 5.914 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 390X). Boost clocks: 1050 MHz vs 1050 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon R9 Fury X | Radeon R9 390X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 9,382+1% | 9,278 |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 4096+45% | 2816 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 8.602 TFLOPS+45% | 5.914 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1050 MHz | 1050 MHz |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 256+45% | 176 |
| L1 Cache | 1 MB+45% | 0.69 MB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R9 Fury X | Radeon R9 390X |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon R9 Fury X comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 390X has 8 GB. The Radeon R9 390X offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 512 GB/s (Radeon R9 Fury X) vs 384 GB/s (Radeon R9 390X) — a 33.3% advantage for the Radeon R9 Fury X. Bus width: 4096-bit vs 512-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Radeon R9 Fury X) vs 1 MB (Radeon R9 390X) — the Radeon R9 Fury X has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R9 Fury X | Radeon R9 390X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | HBM | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 512 GB/s+33% | 384 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 4096-bit+700% | 512-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.0 (Radeon R9 Fury X) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon R9 390X). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon R9 Fury X | Radeon R9 390X |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12 (12_0) |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 Fury X) vs VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 390X). Decoder: UVD 6.0 vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Radeon R9 Fury X) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Radeon R9 390X).
| Feature | Radeon R9 Fury X | Radeon R9 390X |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 3.0 | VCE 2.0 |
| Decoder | UVD 6.0 | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 Fury X draws 275W versus the Radeon R9 390X's 275W — a 0% difference. The Radeon R9 390X is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 600W (Radeon R9 Fury X) vs 750W (Radeon R9 390X). Power connectors: 2x 8-pin vs 6-pin + 8-pin. Card length: 195mm vs 277mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 60°C vs 80.
| Feature | Radeon R9 Fury X | Radeon R9 390X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 275W | 275W |
| Recommended PSU | 600W-20% | 750W |
| Power Connector | 2x 8-pin | 6-pin + 8-pin |
| Length | 195mm | 277mm |
| Height | 115mm | 129mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 60°C-25% | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 34.1+1% | 33.7 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 Fury X launched at $649 MSRP and currently averages $80, while the Radeon R9 390X launched at $429 and now averages $70. The Radeon R9 390X costs 12.5% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 117.3 (Radeon R9 Fury X) vs 132.5 (Radeon R9 390X) — the Radeon R9 390X offers 13% better value.
| Feature | Radeon R9 Fury X | Radeon R9 390X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $649 | $429-34% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $80 | $70-13% |
| Performance per Dollar | 117.3 | 132.5+13% |
| Codename | Fiji | Grenada |
| Release | June 24 2015 | June 18 2015 |
| Ranking | #282 | #287 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R9 Fury X and Radeon R9 390X
