• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Radeon RX 480 "Polaris" Launched at $199

humbug said:
"1.5Ghz+ on air" monster card :D

Click to expand...

Well I guess it is battle of who's leaks are fake/correct

Videocardz has the RX480 (at stock 1266mhz) at 2856 graphics score on Firestrike Ultra. If that is true a 134mhz core bump isn't going to give it over a 1000 more points (4135 like in that Chinese graph)...

http://videocardz.com/61154/amd-radeon-rx-480-crossfire-3dmark-performance

I'll be honest I am simply none the wiser as to how this will actually perform even after all these benchmarks :p
 
Last edited:
.Trooper. said:
Sooo are the rumours of the 480 overclocked being around 1070 performance far fetched? Is it just a random rumour that's being hyped?
Click to expand...

Close to is not unrealistic.

The apparent leaks (on new Polaris Drivers) have it scores over 3,400 in 3DMark11 ultra @ 1266Mhz
Which is about the same as a Fury-Nano, the 1070 FE scores about 4,200.

1266Mhz + 11% = 1405Mhz | 3,400 + 11% = 3,780
1266Mhz + 18% = 1495Mhz | 3,400 + 18% = 4,010

The rumours are it overclocks to 1500Mhz+
 
Last edited:
Jono8 said:
Well I guess it is battle of who's leaks are fake/correct

Videocardz has the RX480 (at stock 1266mhz) at 2856 graphics score on Firestrike Ultra. If that is true a 134mhz core bump isn't going to give it over a 1000 more points (4135 like in that Chinese graph)...

http://videocardz.com/61154/amd-radeon-rx-480-crossfire-3dmark-performance

I'll be honest I am simply none the wiser as to how this will actually perform even after all these benchmarks :p
Click to expand...


I think Videocardz is showing either with different bios or old drivers - as their's is the only one that doesn't align up with the rest of the leaks....

Remember Wizzard did say 480 was about 20-30% slower than 1070 - if he's seen and tested on older drivers.....that also holds up with the other leaks
 
Jono8 said:
They show the same driver version...16.200.0.0
Click to expand...

again doesn't line up - as I said possibly different bios - and don't discount what Wiz said - if normal 480 is 25% slower than 1070 - it literally lines up perfectly with the leaks - with OC 480 possibly matching a stock 1070....
 
For $200 it would take a lot of deflation for people to be disappointed ^^^^ worst case its as fat that 390 and overclocks 10%, for $200 thats still one hell of a card.

Do we have to go back though the pages to pull up the later 3DMark submissions?
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
Close to is not unrealistic.

The apparent leaks (on new Polaris Drivers) have it scores over 3,400 in 3DMark11 ultra @ 1266Mhz
Which is about the same as a Fury-Nano, the 1070 FE scores about 4,200.

1266Mhz + 11% = 1405Mhz | 3,400 + 11% = 3,780
1266Mhz + 18% = 1495Mhz | 3,400 + 18% = 4,010

The rumours are it overclocks to 1500Mhz+
Click to expand...
1% clockspeed increase does not necessarily translate to 1% performance improvement.
 
If it's true that it OCs so well to be comparable to a stock 1070 I'd be baffled as to why they haven't shown that off yet.

That would surely be a HUGE shakeup in the GPU market if a £200something AMD card compete with a £400+ 1070
 
r7slayer said:
In the context I was onabout was comparing getting faster clockspeeds. Surely youknew what context I was talking about when replying to orangey or u just wanted to make arugment about it?
Click to expand...
I wasn't saying you were wrong. I agree completely. I just thought it was funny somebody went on to compare them like-for-like anyways.
 
humbug said:
For $200 it would take a lot of deflation for people to be disappointed ^^^^ worst case its as fat that 390 and overclocks 10%, for $200 thats still one hell of a card.

Do we have to go back though the pages to pull up the later 3DMark submissions?
Click to expand...

Thing is... who is going to buy this card exactly? I will because it will be an upgrade from the 380 4gb I have, but anyone with a 390 is likely to only get a side grade.
 
Edit... Prime example ^^^^

Seanspeed said:
1% clockspeed increase does not necessarily translate to 1% performance improvement.
Click to expand...

It does in 3DMark. but 3DMark is not a game, Guru3D said it did better in games than 3DMark suggests.

All this is just speculation but predictably you have one side who want to down-play as a fail and the other as much better than that.

There is no middle ground here, the middle ground is still an excellent card, for $200, thats the problem, the only way you can make that look bad is if you say its slower than a 390.
 
Scougar said:
Thing is... who is going to buy this card exactly? I will because it will be an upgrade from the 380 4gb I have, but anyone with a 390 is likely to only get a side grade.
Click to expand...

Could make the same argument with any card that has an older "cousin" with equal performance, yet they still sell.
 
Scougar said:
Thing is... who is going to buy this card exactly? I will because it will be an upgrade from the 380 4gb I have, but anyone with a 390 is likely to only get a side grade.
Click to expand...

Depends if it overclocks.

It should perform better as well in directx 12 games plus drivers ill mature, latest tech, less power etc.

It could easily be the same decision 980ti owners have had to make, is it worth swapping for maybe 20% better performance????
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom