Radeon RX 480 "Polaris" Launched at $199

[tavtavtav]

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.

 

[meldarthx]

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.

it does say low power mode which some have estimated was about 900 mhz......as I said I think AMD is lowballing and trolling people on its performance to keep people guessing.....this really does remind me of 5000 series launch and what they did with eyefinity.....

 

[humbug]

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.

I agree, the maths don't add up, Shaders and Mhz its like a slightly overclocked 390X (and that's without any improvements from the new process and architectural enhancements)

Those Guru3D 3DMark leaks would seem to confirm that and yet the game leaks now along with that AMD VR slide suggest the thing is actually a significant regression in performance.

What worries me is one word from AMD history "Bulldozer"

 

[Mr Latte]

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.

Yes but your comparing rumours to given facts
Matching $500 card performance for $200 is what they stated. If it does not meet that then they lied.

How many people here would at this moment buy a GTX970 with 4GB for similar price this is going to come in at with 8GB. Or spend £299 on a GTX980 now when the RX480 AIB models should manage to outperform it.

To me its clear Nvidia have pushed for the enthusiast. AMD seen a performance gap in the market at a price they could be very competitive and that is exactly what the current price comparisons seem to be highlighting.

 

[RedGoose]

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.

Yeah, it would be bad, but to be fair, that Overwatch bench was listed as the 470, not the 480.

 

[Aretak]

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

That's the 1080 cooler, which also has a vapour chamber. The 1070 uses a cheaper version with no vapour chamber and apparently no copper base.

/edit/ Actually, from what he said, I'm looking at them the wrong way around. Never mind!

 

[karik666]

What i dont get is all these leaked 480 benchmarks using firestike etc,why dont they benchmark a few games at 1080p and 1440p.

 

[AllBodies]

Yeah, it would be bad, but to be fair, that Overwatch bench was listed as the 470, not the 480.

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.

Oh wow, my bad.

I read that through many times and read it as RX 480 each time. Have corrected my post.

I think the 470 being around 970 performance is still a tad disappointing, unless it has VERY impressive power consumption.

Also the RX 480 will absolutely be around £230.

Gibbo said in an earlier post you need to divide the $ price by a bank conversion rate (not the market one), and he gave us a figure of 1.41 as something he could get, and then add 35-40% for all other costs + profit margin.

So basically it'll be within a few digits of the $ price. Best case just using Gibbo's figures would be $229 / 1.41 x 1.35 = £219.26

 

[SiDeards73]

I will crack up if AMD have intentionally leaked the odd bit of contradictory info and then released a badboy of a card...

Then common sense kicks in and i realise that is just never going to happen

 

[Mauller]

I agree, the maths don't add up, Shaders and Mhz its like a slightly overclocked 390X (and that's without any improvements from the new process and architectural enhancements)

Those Guru3D 3DMark leaks would seem to confirm that and yet the game leaks now along with that AMD VR slide suggest the thing is actually a significant regression in performance.

What worries me is one word from AMD history "Bulldozer"

do you mean the apparent leaks that are supposedly from official Sapphire spiel?
the onese debunked as fakes here? https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=29664207&postcount=6263

 

[meldarthx]

Oh wow, my bad.

I read that through many times and read it as RX 480 each time. Have corrected my post.

I think the 470 being around 970 performance is still a tad disappointing, unless it has VERY impressive power consumption.

Also the RX 480 will absolutely be around £230.

Gibbo said in an earlier post you need to divide the $ price by a bank conversion rate (not the market one), and he gave us a figure of 1.41 as something he could get, and then add 35-40% for all other costs + profit margin.

So basically it'll be within a few digits of the $ price. Best case just using Gibbo's figures would be $229 / 1.41 x 1.35 = £219.26

why its less than 100w and will be about 150 pounds or less......and with some of the new drivers it looks like 470 will be baseline VR ready.......with 470 being as fast as 970......means 480 has to be faster....aka at least 980 + that's just in DX11; but will be faster in DX 12.....

 

[five8five]

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.

AMD will have rating for all their own cards and all Nvidia cards and yet they're happy to publish that number. Is it because it meets their criteria for the card?

Gaming performance is the unknown. It's possible it performs better in games than the VR rating suggests. We need benchmarks!

 

[drunkenmaster]

What thing ?

Apparently before this generation every single card on a smaller process was faster than every card from the previous process, this time AMD screwed up and their 232mm^2 core isn't smashing the 600mm^2 Fury to pieces, so Humbug is crying about that.

 

[tavtavtav]

Do all these hand waved 'costs' simply increase proportionally with the price of each individual gpu

 

[humbug]

Yeah, it would be bad, but to be fair, that Overwatch bench was listed as the 470, not the 480.

@ AllBodies, I don't have the link, was that a 480 or a 470, can you double check?

Edit.. NVM, i see your correction.

 

[brawl3r]

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.

OK, I stand corrected by Rroff, as I thought it would be fine, turns out I am wrong.

 

[ICDP]

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.

The 1070 heatsink is the one with the copper (on the right) so it's non vapour chamber tech just like the one on the 480. The heatsink from the 1080 is vapour champer.

 

[DPB]

So basically it'll be within a few digits of the $ price. Best case just using Gibbo's figures would be $229 / 1.41 x 1.35 = £219.26

That still seems very high to me, the 380X was released for $230 in November and was about £190 here.

 

[drunkenmaster]

Oh wow, my bad.

I read that through many times and read it as RX 480 each time. Have corrected my post.

I think the 470 being around 970 performance is still a tad disappointing, unless it has VERY impressive power consumption.

Also the RX 480 will absolutely be around £230.

Gibbo said in an earlier post you need to divide the $ price by a bank conversion rate (not the market one), and he gave us a figure of 1.41 as something he could get, and then add 35-40% for all other costs + profit margin.

So basically it'll be within a few digits of the $ price. Best case just using Gibbo's figures would be $229 / 1.41 x 1.35 = £219.26

A 1080 in dollars converted to pounds, add vat, that price +9% was the final price they sold at. £619 is less than £699, 1:1 conversion does not happen.

Gibbo's price isn't $229, that is the price retailers SELL at not buy at, your price is based on him adding a huge amount to a retail price Gibbo doesn't pay.

The RX480 with the exact same conversion rate from dollars to pounds with vat and OCUK tax added is £205.

 

[Feoilban]

Apparently before this generation every single card on a smaller process was faster than every card from the previous process, this time AMD screwed up and their 232mm^2 core isn't smashing the 600mm^2 Fury to pieces, so Humbug is crying about that.

Yeah I was confused. Apparently the 470 is now a complete let down scoring 121 fps in overwatch.