Official RX580,RX570,RX560 and RX550 series review thread

MooMoo444 · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:01

What a damp squib.

Jono8 · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:04

D.P. said:
Sad times for AMD when this is what they are producing:
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/RX_580_Nitro_Plus/31.html

Nvidia at around twice the performance per watt, that is more than occurs with a full node drop, more than occurs in a whole new architecture generation.Sure, as a consumer you may not care but it is a useful indication of the relative normalized performance level between AMD and NVidia. Now even if Vega magically can offer twice the performance per watt, which would be unheard of for the same node process, that puts it at about the same performance and power as Pascal, released 1 year later.

The most shocking thing in that link is that it is only about ~10% faster than a 390 across all resolutions and not a huge amount more power efficient either (about 30% more). When you take into account that you could have got a 290x for the same price as this (or less) over 2 years ago it is pretty damning on the progress they have made.

PapaLazaru · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:08

The BF1 stats are appalling.

390 = 94.4
580 = 100.2

Glad I kept my 390.

JediFragger · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:08

Jono8 said:
When you take into account that you could have got a 290x for the same price as this (or less) over 2 years ago it is pretty damning on the progress they have made.

That one fact has highlighted how AMD have fallen in the gpu stakes

awaybreaktoday · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:11

They made a mistake releasing the 580s, they should have fully focused on vega.... Does the lack of info regarding VEGA = lack of performance in VEGA?

LoadsaMoney · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:12

COME ON VEGA!

HeX · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:14

The only thing wrong with 580 is the pricing. It should be closer to £200 than £300! Had these come out as a direct replacement giving slightly more performance than a 480 for the same price it would have been fine.

Toss3 · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:15

So how did AMD manage to make Polaris, a 14nm part, perform worse than even the Fury, a 28nm part (perf/watt)?

JediFragger · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:16

awaybreaktoday said:
Does the lack of info regarding VEGA = lack of performance in VEGA?

That is my thought too, they're keeping it VERY locked down for a reason...

JediFragger · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:16

Toss3 said:
So how did AMD manage to make Polaris, a 14nm part, perform worse than even the Fury, a 28nm part (perf/watt)?

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:18

Jono8 said:
for the same price as this (or less) over 2 years ago

In June 2015 the pound was 25% stronger than today,so wouldn't that add like £50 to a £200 card today??

Davedree · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:19

Toss3 said:
So how did AMD manage to make Polaris, a 14nm part, perform worse than even the Fury, a 28nm part (perf/watt)?

to be fair Rx 480 was aied at gm204 (970) this time rx580 is aimed at gm204 980.
Amd are still a couple of years behind with Polaris, maybe vega will turn it all around.

Ayahuasca · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:19

The vega bus is coming

JediFragger · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:20

Ayahuasca said:
The vega bus is coming

It's on fire and has no driver

orbitalwalsh · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:21

JediFragger said:
It's on fire and has no driver

think its passengers hopped on the Ti bus as it came first and not on fire , but running slightly warm

humbug · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:23

MooMoo444 said:
What a damp squib.

That sums it up nicely.

Doom112 · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:25

Toss3 said:
So how did AMD manage to make Polaris, a 14nm part, perform worse than even the Fury, a 28nm part (perf/watt)?

Heart breaking for any GPU tech fan.

humbug · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:29

Toss3 said:
So how did AMD manage to make Polaris, a 14nm part, perform worse than even the Fury, a 28nm part (perf/watt)?

Doom112 said:
Heart breaking for any GPU tech fan.

Using a smaller GPU than the last gen and trying to match it with higher clocks, when you overclock your CPU or GPU your power consumption goes up exponentially, that's what's happening here, at 1100Mhz the power consumption on these chips is probably pretty good, at 1266 its not, at 1340 its just plain bad.

Ayahuasca · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:31

humbug said:
at 1100Mhz the power consumption on these chips is probably pretty good

The performance, however, would be poor and still nowhere near anything nVidia are offering atm.

Phixsator · 18 Apr 2017 at 15:32

JediFragger said:
That one fact has highlighted how AMD have fallen in the gpu stakes

Wow so much doom and gloom in here.. The only thing wrong with the RX580 is the price and that is certainly not all on AMD. There is price gouging going on. Some of the rx 580s here in Denmark are only 20 quid cheaper than the 1070. That does not match the advertised MSRP.

And for those of you screaming from the rooftops that its so sad that it just about overtakes a r9 290x or just about matches a 390x well there is a clear difference in what kind of products these are. The R9 290x was a top end GPUs when it launched compared to the RX 400 and now 500 series which are mid end GPUs. So for you to be able to get a mid tier GPU that can match a last gen top end for less money on release day is not that bad a thing. Heck if you are to believe Gamers Nexus's benchmarks it even overtakes the fury and 980ti stock on a rare occassion.