Conclusion

Having a quick look at the results shows, the advantages towards the GTX TitanX are overall moderate. At FullHD the TitanX is on average 11% quicker than the FuryX and at 1440p and 2160p (UHD) the difference is 10% and 6.6%, respectively. Averaging the three resolution values results in a 9.3% advantage towards the GTX TitanX, which is basically not visible. It's also interesting to observe that at FullHD the gap between the TitanX and the FuryX is quite a bigger than at UHD. Apparently the AMD card is becoming stronger the higher the resolution and detail levels are, which is the case due to the extremely well performing HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) memory.

It's also interesting to compare the power consumption of these two cards. In this case the TitanX burns less power in idle as well as under load. In idle the system with TitanX pulls 6 Watt less from the wall than the FuryX (72W vs. 78W). Comparing the load values, then there is a rather drastic difference, since the system with TitanX pulls 304W compared to 405W looking at the figures with FuryX. Bottom line the TitanX is more energy efficient.

For now we've had a quick look at the performance, which means it's about time to consider the price. These days the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TitanX sells for 1022 Euro and the AMD Radeon R9 FuryX costs 619 Euro. In other words this means, that the TitanX is about 65% more expensive, while at the same time performing on average 9.3% better. It appears we're coming to the usual conclusion when directly comparing NVIDIA and AMD cards, which address similar customers. NVIDIA is more expensive and offers better energy efficiency, whereas AMD offers a very compelling price point but less convincing energy efficiency.