AMD Polaris architecture – GCN 4.0

[Geck0]

I feel if we are all going to be honest, that was probably the worst decision ever to use a pair of 480s running AoTS and showing it marginally faster than a 1080. If the card was fast enough, why not put it against a 980 in Aots in a card V card situation. That would have made whole lot more sense to me, or even run it against a 390.

I don't buy the "we don't want to take site traffic away from reviewers" either. I am going to put my head on the chopping block and say it is about 10% slower than a 390 at 1440P.

Problem is that at every previous launch nVidia was telegraphed pretty good specs and launched a counter that blunted AMD. This time around they are being a lot tighter on leaks which could mean that they suck or that they are holding something else back

I guess time will tell.

 

[triss]

Look at this - GTX 1080 $1999 to $1249 in Australia

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=...firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&ei=cFlRV_jIFc7N8geMx6PQDA

Ridiculous, well done AMD and FU nVidia

Both AMD and Nvidia cards are high priced in Australia and New Zealand. NZ is often worse as some shipments go through aussie first get taxed then onto NZ for another tax. While its not nice this isnt something we can blame either Nvidia or AMD for.
BTW they are current $1399 NZ for a 1080. Which is same price as a fury X ... or $2699 for a fury duo

 

[Geck0]

http://www.kotaku.com.au/2016/05/he...es-in-australia-for-nvidias-geforce-gtx-1080/

$1179 = £592

Not sure what your point is?

My point is that there are no $1179 cards. There are no cards under the range I posted which are retail ads. Apart from that the price of these cards is just bulls**t compared to what you get.

Seriously, do you consider this a fair price?

 

[Gregster]

This thread already had a conversation about both Nvidia and AMD using smoke and mirrors and being as bad as each other.

I'm sure AMD they have their reasons for doing what they did, the same way as Nvidia did when showing the 1080 using AOTS and a 1080p monitor to show off a 4K GPU.

The fact everybody wants to talk about it is a clear indication, in part at least, AMD got what they wanted out of it - Planted a seed that has led to mass discussion.

The trouble is, I am seeing people who I do consider to favour AMD also questioning the results and reasoning for that test. We also have reviewers and users with a 1080, so we have the full picture so to speak with regards to the 1080. The 1070 releases next week as well and remove the gouging, it will be around the £315 price range and for a card faster than a Titan X, that is pretty incredible value.

The 480 does have a place in the market though but not for the likes of most of us here, if I am indeed correct and it is slower than a 390.

 

[james.miller]

the GTX1070 is massively more expensive than a GTX970

That's a bit.....over-stated. heh.

Don't try on purpose to understate the performance of the RX480 and overstate the performance of the GTX1070 to make it look better.

some here on purpose are trying to pump up the performance of the GTX1070 and downgrade the performance of the RX480 to make the former look better.

Like you did when you overstated the cost difference between the 970 and 1070 to make the 480 look better. Like that, you mean? Sorry, just trying to understand your position on this one

 

[Jono8]

My point is that there are no $1179 cards. There are no cards under the range I posted which are retail ads. Apart from that the price of these cards is just bulls**t compared to what you get.

Seriously, do you consider this a fair price?

No its rubbish but Nvidia know people will buy them (and they are) because there is nothing to compete in that top segment.

 

[Gregster]

My point is that there are no $1179 cards. There are no cards under the range I posted which are retail ads. Apart from that the price of these cards is just bulls**t compared to what you get.

Seriously, do you consider this a fair price?

I went from the link you posted and read that. And I seriously don't like the price of the 1080 regardless of what country you live in. £450 ($895) would have been fair in my opinion.

 

[Geck0]

Both AMD and Nvidia cards are high priced in Australia and New Zealand. NZ is often worse as some shipments go through aussie first get taxed then onto NZ for another tax. While its not nice this isnt something we can blame either Nvidia or AMD for.

Incorrect, GST or VAT is charged in the country of sale - you are being scammed. The VAT/ GST on freight is applicable however and I assume that's your issue.

 

[Ferrari100]

The trouble is, I am seeing people who I do consider to favour AMD also questioning the results and reasoning for that test. We also have reviewers and users with a 1080, so we have the full picture so to speak with regards to the 1080. The 1070 releases next week as well and remove the gouging, it will be around the £315 price range and for a card faster than a Titan X, that is pretty incredible value.

The 480 does have a place in the market though but not for the likes of most of us here, if I am indeed correct and it is slower than a 390.

...and that's your opinion and that's great. I just don't understand why you want to repeat the same topic of discussion regarding the AOTS test when it has been covered already and agreed both side use smoke and mirrors?

If it's slower than a 390 and it doesn't sell then OK, maybe there will be some people who still want to buy it, maybe not. As we know, you are an enthusiast anyway, so if you have decided the likely performance is less than a 390 then OK. Who cares right? You are not gonna buy it anyway.


The key metric for me, when the 480 arrives, will be price performance and personally I am happy to wait and see how the 480 does in this area.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

That's a bit.....over-stated. heh.






Like you did when you overstated the cost difference between the 970 and 1070 to make the 480 look better. Like that, you mean? Sorry, just trying to understand your position on this one

No,because people like you are overstating the GTX1070 improvements. Stop trying to pump the GTX1070 in this thread.

People like you are using false concern and making up false performance targets to make the RX480 look worse.

The GTX1070 is 50% faster than a GTX970 and this is the UK. The GTX1070 is going to be around £320 and the GTX970 launched at £250.

50% improvement at nearly 30% price increase in the UK. Hexus puts their aggregate GTX1070 score at just under a Titan X and TPU puts the Titan X as 50% faster - so read this:

https://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080/images/perfrel_2560_1440.png

Even the US pricing would give you a 50% increase at least a 15% price increase.

Yet,people like you who come into a Polaris thread,pumping the GTX1070,on purpose ignore,the fact,that unfortunately for you the RX480 is launching at $199 for the 4GB version.

This is $30 cheaper than a R9 380X - even at R9 390 level performance it is close to 40% faster and at R9 390X level it is close to 50% faster.

Yet,$199 is the price point of the R9 380 4GB and GTX960. That means it even looks more favourable. See how I compared it to the faster AMD GPUs too??

 

[Geck0]

So, Pricing is fairly to moderately BS depending on your take and location. I'm tired and not inclined to argue the issue. already done 12hrs today.

nVidia will not pass on the die shrink savings where AMD will. Different reasons and market segments granted but not really disputable that 1080 is overpriced.

 

[Gregster]

...and that's your opinion and that's great. I just don't understand why you want to repeat the same topic of discussion regarding the AOTS test when it has been covered already and agreed both side use smoke and mirrors?

If it's slower than a 390 and it doesn't sell then OK, maybe there will be some people who still want to buy it, maybe not. As we know, you are an enthusiast anyway, so if you have decided the likely performance is less than a 390 then OK. Who cares right? You are not gonna buy it anyway.


The key metric for me, when the 480 arrives, will be price performance and personally I am happy to wait and see how the 480 does in this area.

You are missing my point. Even if it is slower than a 390, at the £165 price, it will still fly off the shelves. Most gamers are still 1080P and running 670s/7950s (generally older and slower hardware) and sticking to my point, most of the guys here are the higher end of the spectrum with regards to hardware, so there might not be much to see for us.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

So, Pricing is fairly to moderately BS depending on your take and location. I'm tired and not inclined to argue the issue. already done 12hrs today.

nVidia will not pass on the die shrink savings where AMD will. Different reasons and market segments granted but not really disputable that 1080 is overpriced.

Exactly - even the GTX1070 pumpers here will never even buy a £150 to £200 Nvidia or AMD GPU,so continue to just post in this thread to pump the GTX1070 for some reason,since they want to buy a GTX1070.

Funny how they don't go to the Pascal thread and discuss it there.

They are on purpose trying to make the RX480 look worse ,by saying it needs to be Fury/Fury X level at $199/£165 otherwise it is a fail compared to the GTX1070.

Even at UNDER R9 390X level performance at £200 it has better price/performance than a GTX1070,since it is replacing the older cards at the SAME PRICE POINT.

But when shown that the GTX1070 with its mighty performance increase is coming at a decent dollar and pound increase in price over the GTX970 they are ignore it and continue to try and thrash this one.

The GTX1070 is NOT replacing the GTX970 at the SAME PRICE POINT.

 

[fs123]

Its not the same settings, the bench thread on here uses maximum settings, the 51fps result i posted was at crazy which is the closest comparison.

62.5fps is the AMD posted fps, Robert says this was at 1.83 scaling, at 1080 extreme settings, well below the crazy+ used on here, works out to 34fps for single card, which is around the same fps figure for a 980, except the 980 was running much higher settings

According to Robert Hallock they used 1080P crazy but with 8xAA so not an easy comparison with any of the results on the AoTS site. The problem with the crazy setting is that it's still not the maximum possible setting. It sets AA to 4x and shadows and other stuff to high but manually you can set those to ultra.

If we just look at the 1440P single card benchmark on the AoTS site it gets 40fps which puts it around 390X/980 level I think.

The Doom demo appears to be running at around 70fps average @ 1440P VSR. That indicates closer to Nano performance though.

 

[Ferrari100]

You are missing my point. Even if it is slower than a 390, at the £165 price, it will still fly off the shelves. Most gamers are still 1080P and running 670s/7950s (generally older and slower hardware) and sticking to my point, most of the guys here are the higher end of the spectrum with regards to hardware, so there might not be much to see for us.

I was not questioning your point, I was questioning why you repeatedly want to bring up AMD's AOTS test when that ground has been covered already and no greater good can come from revisiting it yet again at least until AMD give more information. It doesn't make sense, especially as it is more apparent that these GPU's are not right for you. That's all.

 

[Gregster]

So, Pricing is fairly to moderately BS depending on your take and location. I'm tired and not inclined to argue the issue. already done 12hrs today.

nVidia will not pass on the die shrink savings where AMD will. Different reasons and market segments granted but not really disputable that 1080 is overpriced.

Yer, AMD do care for their customers and really go the extra mile to look after them.

 

[Gregster]

I was not questioning your point, I was questioning why you repeatedly want to bring up AMD's AOTS test when that ground has been covered already and no greater good can come from revisiting it yet again at least until AMD give more information. It doesn't make sense, especially as it is more apparent that these GPU's are not right for you. That's all.

Forums tend to go round and round. You will see that the longer you are here Sorry if it is annoying you and that wasn't my intention.

And sure it isn't right for me but my Mrs wants a desktop again, so maybe it is right for my good lady and I did tell you I wanted one for review purposes (or told someone that anyways).

 

[DiscoDave]

Why do people think a direct currency conversion is a fair measure of comparison?

 

[AlamoX]

So, Pricing is fairly to moderately BS depending on your take and location. I'm tired and not inclined to argue the issue. already done 12hrs today.

nVidia will not pass on the die shrink savings where AMD will. Different reasons and market segments granted but not really disputable that 1080 is overpriced.

not nvidia's fault if AUD is worth close to nothing, or the geographical position, or the tax on businesses, or the size of the market, or the average salary, if the australian gov want their citizens to have cheaper imports, or higher spending power, they can help towards that.

 

[Final8y]

I was not questioning your point, I was questioning why you repeatedly want to bring up AMD's AOTS test when that ground has been covered already and no greater good can come from revisiting it yet again at least until AMD give more information. It doesn't make sense, especially as it is more apparent that these GPU's are not right for you. That's all.

And that's one of the reasons why D.P. and Gregster is on my ignore.