Radeon RX 480 "Polaris" Launched at $199

Mr Latte · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:42

harney said:
looking at that cooler i would expect it to be pushing it on air more so if its upto 150w

I think the GTX670 was 170W and this is not much different really by the looks of things.

humbug · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:42

@ Mauller
This... http://store.steampowered.com/app/323910

AllBodies · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:42

Yeah those slides from AMD with the VR test and info in the disclaimer slide are just plain pathetic if true.

It also says the RX 470 got 121 FPS in Overwatch, and that would put it behind both the R9 290 and GTX 970

Source: http://www.techspot.com/review/1180-overwatch-benchmarks/page2.html

A ~£160 card (RX 470) which delivers around 970 performance is still mildly disappointing on 14nm as a new launch.

ICDP · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:42

Mr Latte said:
If you want to try and convince everyone its only going to offer GTX970 performance go right ahead. I doubt you will have many agreeing with you (yet again).

When was a GTX970 a $500 card, is RX480 at $199 not supposed to offer performance of recent/current $500 cards.

I'm not trying to convince anyone it is equal to 390 performance, I'm stating that some rumours suggest it and if they are true it not good. Even though I suspect it will be faster given the specs.

brawl3r · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:43

Barrybear said:
Not having DVI is a bit of a dealbreaker as I wont be able to use 120hz on my on monitor without spending a large amount on an active adapter.

Hoping AIBs have a version with DVI

Dude, you don't need a active adaptor, a passive would work.
DP carries 8.5 gbps and DVI-D has to be duel link carry's 10 both do 120hz at 1080p.

Barrybear · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:45

brawl3r said:
Dude, you don't need a active adaptor, a passive would work.
DP carries 8.5 gbps and DVI-D has to be duel link carry's 10 both do 120hz at 1080p.

Strange as my friend is using a passive DP adapter on his 980ti and cant get more than 60hz, he has tried multiple adapters with no success.

humbug · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:45

AllBodies said:
Yeah those slides from AMD with the VR test and info in the disclaimer slide are just plain pathetic if true.

It also says the RX 480 got 121 FPS in Overwatch, and that would put it behind both the R9 290 and GTX 970

Source: http://www.techspot.com/review/1180-overwatch-benchmarks/page2.html

But this can't be right, because a ~£230 card which delivers around 970 performance for barely less power would be madness on 14nm as a new launch.

This thing is really starting to look like a complete let down. a step backwards in performance.

Rroff · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:46

brawl3r said:
Dude, you don't need a active adaptor, a passive would work.
DP carries 8.5 gbps and DVI-D has to be duel link carry's 10 both do 120hz at 1080p.

Despite the on paper numbers passive DP to DVI does not allow for higher resolution/refresh rate monitors.

meldarthx · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:47

humbug said:
Yeah I read Mauller's post....

Its not good is it?

with how old the drivers they used.......*coughs AMD is trolling us coughs* aka lowballing what it can do

drunkenmaster · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:47

AllBodies said:
Yeah those slides from AMD with the VR test and info in the disclaimer slide are just plain pathetic if true.

It also says the RX 480 got 121 FPS in Overwatch, and that would put it behind both the R9 290 and GTX 970

Source: http://www.techspot.com/review/1180-overwatch-benchmarks/page2.html

But this can't be right, because a ~£230 card which delivers around 970 performance for barely less power would be madness on 14nm as a new launch.

Overwatch result was the RX470... the RX480 is NOT a £230 card and using RX470 results to say a made up price for a different card sucks is nothing short of ridiculous.

The 270x results are also higher from that link and use a 4Ghz Skylake where the AMD test results used a 3Ghz Haswell. The techspot 270x result was around 10% higher, the RX 470 might have been more CPU limited at that clock speed and higher level of performance.

Mauller · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:48

humbug said:
@ Mauller
This... http://store.steampowered.com/app/323910

Yeah, it wants a 4.7GB download when i go to use it.

meldarthx · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:48

humbug said:
This thing is really starting to look like a complete let down. a step backwards in performance.

where? only benches I've seen were for 470 which were at 121 in overwatch.....

five8five · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:48

Mr Latte said:
I am not just referring to the article headlines but specifics made during the presentation. Although any reason to assume why a budget component of the 1060 will beat the RX480?

But use "beating a 1060" in the headline?

As the 1070 is at 980Ti + performance that leaves a big gap below. I expect the 1060 will be 980 or slightly above or between the 970 & 980 performance wise. It seems there's a 1050 which I expect will be the 960 replacement.

What do you think the performance of the 1060 will be?

AllBodies · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:48

humbug said:
This thing is really starting to look like a complete let down. a step backwards in performance.

The only explanation I can think of is there's some context to that presentation we're missing.

Was it something to do with VR backpacks? So they were showing an RX 480 running at 900 MHz low-power mode or something?

There is no way in hell a ~230mm2 14nm card will only deliver GTX 970 performance. It would have to be using Intel graphics tech to be that rubbish.

humbug · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:48

Mauller said:
Yeah, it wants a 4.7GB download when i go to use it.

Strange, download it, see what happens.

Boomstick777 · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:49

Mauller said:
1070 on right, 1080 on left.

Ha, the 1070 that costs 2X doesn't even have the copper that the X480 has, what will the doom mongers say about that? Running out if things to criticize now surely?

Looking forward to seeing what these cards can do. gg AMD.

eddyr · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:51

humbug said:
This thing is really starting to look like a complete let down. a step backwards in performance.

Perhaps, but lets wait before drawing conclusions.

Take into consideration they may be old drivers? Is the 6.3 base clock or boost? - various reasons to avoid using boost clocks and tallies with the 5.8GFlops being under boost conditions.

Mauller · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:51

humbug said:
Strange, download it, see what happens.

2GB download, 4.7GB when unpacked and installed by the looks.

BluD · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:52

Boomstick777 said:
Ha, the 1070 that costs 2X doesn't even have the copper that the X480 has.

according to that picture the 1070 does have a copper heatsync doesnt it?

Feoilban · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:52

humbug said:
This thing is really starting to look like a complete let down. a step backwards in performance.

What thing ?