Radeon R9 FURY X vs Titan X Pascal

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Titan X Pascal and Radeon R9 FURY X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Titan X Pascal
2016
12 GB GDDR5X, 250 Watt
33.76
+36%

Titan X Pascal outperforms R9 FURY X by a substantial 36% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking155217
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.876.83
Power efficiency9.336.24
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameGP102Fiji
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date2 August 2016 (8 years ago)24 June 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 $649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Titan X Pascal has 1% better value for money than R9 FURY X.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores35844096
Compute unitsno data64
Core clock speed1417 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1531 MHz1050 MHz
Number of transistors11,800 million8,900 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt275 Watt
Texture fill rate342.9268.8
Floating-point processing power10.97 TFLOPS8.602 TFLOPS
ROPs9664
TMUs224256

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm191 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin2x 8-pin
Bridgeless CrossFire-+

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5XHigh Bandwidth Memory (HBM)
High bandwidth memory (HBM)no data+
Maximum RAM amount12 GB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit4096 Bit
Memory clock speed1251 MHz1050 MHz
Memory bandwidth480.4 GB/s512 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
Eyefinity-+
Number of Eyefinity displaysno data6
HDMI++
DisplayPort support-+
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration-+
CrossFire-+
FRTC-+
FreeSync-+
HD3D-+
LiquidVR-+
PowerTune-+
TressFX-+
TrueAudio-+
UVD-+
VCE-+
DDMA audiono data+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.46.3
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan++
Mantle-+
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Titan X Pascal 33.76
+36%
R9 FURY X 24.83

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Titan X Pascal 13026
+36%
R9 FURY X 9580

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Titan X Pascal 27349
+63.7%
R9 FURY X 16710

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD127
+41.1%
90−95
−41.1%
1440p71
+42%
50−55
−42%
4K57
+42.5%
40−45
−42.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080p9.447.21
1440p16.8912.98
4K21.0416.23

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 79
+43.6%
55−60
−43.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 104
+38.7%
75−80
−38.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 95
+46.2%
65−70
−46.2%
Battlefield 5 174
+45%
120−130
−45%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 108
+44%
75−80
−44%
Cyberpunk 2077 78
+41.8%
55−60
−41.8%
Far Cry 5 121
+42.4%
85−90
−42.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 138
+38%
100−105
−38%
Forza Horizon 4 240
+41.2%
170−180
−41.2%
Hitman 3 104
+38.7%
75−80
−38.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 296
+41%
210−220
−41%
Metro Exodus 143
+43%
100−105
−43%
Red Dead Redemption 2 125
+38.9%
90−95
−38.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 161
+46.4%
110−120
−46.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 226
+41.3%
160−170
−41.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 121
+42.4%
85−90
−42.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 85
+41.7%
60−65
−41.7%
Battlefield 5 165
+37.5%
120−130
−37.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 98
+40%
70−75
−40%
Cyberpunk 2077 69
+38%
50−55
−38%
Far Cry 5 92
+41.5%
65−70
−41.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 108
+44%
75−80
−44%
Forza Horizon 4 225
+40.6%
160−170
−40.6%
Hitman 3 104
+38.7%
75−80
−38.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 275
+37.5%
200−210
−37.5%
Metro Exodus 143
+43%
100−105
−43%
Red Dead Redemption 2 102
+36%
75−80
−36%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 194
+38.6%
140−150
−38.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 96
+37.1%
70−75
−37.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 216
+44%
150−160
−44%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 67
+48.9%
45−50
−48.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 63
+40%
45−50
−40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75
+36.4%
55−60
−36.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 59
+47.5%
40−45
−47.5%
Far Cry 5 67
+48.9%
45−50
−48.9%
Forza Horizon 4 112
+40%
80−85
−40%
Hitman 3 93
+43.1%
65−70
−43.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150
+36.4%
110−120
−36.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 167
+39.2%
120−130
−39.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95
+46.2%
65−70
−46.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 64
+42.2%
45−50
−42.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 118
+38.8%
85−90
−38.8%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+42.2%
45−50
−42.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+45.7%
35−40
−45.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+50%
24−27
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 51
+45.7%
35−40
−45.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 58
+45%
40−45
−45%
Cyberpunk 2077 38
+40.7%
27−30
−40.7%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+44.4%
27−30
−44.4%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+37.9%
140−150
−37.9%
Hitman 3 66
+46.7%
45−50
−46.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 118
+38.8%
85−90
−38.8%
Metro Exodus 101
+44.3%
70−75
−44.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 122
+43.5%
85−90
−43.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+53.3%
30−33
−53.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 212
+41.3%
150−160
−41.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 92
+41.5%
65−70
−41.5%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 63
+40%
45−50
−40%
Far Cry New Dawn 48
+37.1%
35−40
−37.1%
Hitman 3 39
+44.4%
27−30
−44.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 129
+43.3%
90−95
−43.3%
Metro Exodus 67
+48.9%
45−50
−48.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 68
+36%
50−55
−36%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 38
+40.7%
27−30
−40.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 32
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 34
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+50%
12−14
−50%
Far Cry 5 33
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Forza Horizon 4 73
+46%
50−55
−46%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 70
+40%
50−55
−40%
Watch Dogs: Legion 26
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 47
+56.7%
30−33
−56.7%

This is how Titan X Pascal and R9 FURY X compete in popular games:

  • Titan X Pascal is 41% faster in 1080p
  • Titan X Pascal is 42% faster in 1440p
  • Titan X Pascal is 43% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.76 24.83
Recency 2 August 2016 24 June 2015
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 275 Watt

Titan X Pascal has a 36% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 10% lower power consumption.

The Titan X Pascal is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 FURY X in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA Titan X Pascal
Titan X Pascal
AMD Radeon R9 FURY X
Radeon R9 FURY X

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.6 2994 votes

Rate Titan X Pascal on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 83 votes

Rate Radeon R9 FURY X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.