-
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.
AMD RX 480 Fails PCI-E Specification
- Thread starter tripkebab
- Start date
Because it goes against their god Nvidia
Remember when Nvidia does it; its a feature.....if AMD does it...we need hysteria; mass panic; dog and cats living together......real biblical stuff; wrath of god
biggest Reason - they are worried just how good Polaris can be - specially aftermarket cards......I can almost predict when the 1060 comes out - it will not be tested against any aftermarket cards. *if they are out as we can see Polaris can hit Fury + speeds with OC*
Just wished AMD would start over engineering their ref cards
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
Higher power draw than a GTX 1070
Much less performance
Launched h2 16
Provides GTX 970 or below performance in many games
Costs as much as GTX 970 which has been available for 2+ years
Card is hot, noisey, doesn't OC well
Sure it's not a terrible card, it's just much worse than people were expecting.
It seems in the face of a good card at an excellent price-performance ratio that brings the previous high-end down to an affordable price, the sole remaining point of attack is for people to re-iterate "didn't meet expectations". Doesn't matter that it's much better than what it replaces, doesn't matter that it shifts the entire price-performance standard to a whole new level, there's a concerted effort by some faction to post "didn't meet expectations" everywhere they can. Seriously - did a memo go out? Have marching orders on how to control the narrative been issued? It's selling great, all the reviews are positive and praising it. It's what AMD claimed it would be (a great mid-range card). This post-fact attempt to damn it for "expectations" is pathetic. You know what? Maybe some of the people with these "expectations" should have reality-checked themselves long ago.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2014
- Posts
- 1,686
- Location
- Southampton
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2014
- Posts
- 1,686
- Location
- Southampton
Because it goes against their god Nvidia
Remember when Nvidia does it; its a feature.....if AMD does it...we need hysteria; mass panic; dog and cats living together......real biblical stuff; wrath of god
biggest Reason - they are worried just how good Polaris can be - specially aftermarket cards......I can almost predict when the 1060 comes out - it will not be tested against any aftermarket cards. *if they are out as we can see Polaris can hit Fury + speeds with OC*
Just wished AMD would start over engineering their ref cards
it feels like you are trying to hype things up again. Remember how last one went ....
The biggest point is that most of us would love to see AMD come up with decent cards because frankly Nvidia needs competition and needs to be kept in check.
This card, while not entirely terrible is nowhere near what it should have been to achieve these goals. So yes AMD deserves a serious spanking, hopefully they'll listen and do better next time. Otherwise prices will only go up and how many of us really want that to happen?
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2014
- Posts
- 1,686
- Location
- Southampton
It's not their fault to be honest, those guys really want AMD to shine and who can blame them.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
Except it's the same price as a GTX 970 that beats it in a lot of scenarios...
It also draws more power than a GTX 1070. How can you think this is a good product when the Polaris was launched much later than the others?
as others have pointed out - its doing exactly what its supposed to be doing; bring higher performance that this price point as ever seen.
Is it as good as it could be? No as its thermally and looks to be power limited.
There was confirmation by a few reviewers than new drivers were sent to them a couple days before NDA was lifted as there was a power bug in 16.2.2 drivers for Polairs. How that effected things the benches we don't know as a lot of reviewers didn't say which drivers they used.
We've seen people remove the ref cooler stick on something else and it OCed to 1400+ without issues putting it performance near Fury + speeds.
I do believe strongly we've not seen Polaris stretch its legs - I understand why AMD's attacked where they have attacked and its smart.
I also believe this launch could have been so much better......480 is a homerun; but it could have been a grand slam......
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
In multiple DX12 games it absolute thrashes a 970. The card is NOT noisey, the majority of reviews called it silent or quiet and not irritating. IF you whack up the fan to 100% and the fan limit to max then the noise gets bad, but you have exactly no reason to do this. It's a reference model for what should be a sub £200 card(without brexit), making it considerably cooler requires a more expensive heatsink or higher fan speed, neither are needed for a card that is targeting OEM desktops. AIB cards are coming shortly for enthusiasts which will add £20-30 cost for exactly this, a bigger heatsink with better fans for silent running and great overclocking.
It also does not cost what a 970 does, a 1080 or 970 bought a month ago will cost less than they do if bought today. The dollar value of the 970 is more expensive than a RX480, by a noticeable margin, while being a much slower card in DX12.
What do you want to buy today, a card that provides decent DX11 performance, poor DX12 performance or reasonable DX11 performance and brilliant DX12 performance.... considering that 80%+ of the major performance requiring best looking games going forwards will be DX12?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
You mean how literally 95% of Nvidia guys were talking about how the AIB 1080s would be a million times better, not throttle and overclock far better and how almost everyone was pre-ordering AIB cards and most didn't want the FE edition.... ah right. AMD guys should love reference and not want better coolers but it's absolutely fine for Nvidia users to all prefer AIB cards with better cooling and overclocking.
1) GTX 970 is an EOL card, the low price is only due to that, its unfair to compare an EOL card with a new card. Its the only 2016 card in the ~£200 market
2) Im dissapointed with the power draw of the RX 480, that being said its not a bad card. Its a mid range card that performs on par with last years enthusiast cards that cost i think $399 on launch (for the GX 970)
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,583
The problem is with comparing the 480 8GB, not the 480 4GB to the 970 4GB (3.5GB+500MB).
The RX480 4GB is £180, and would probably have been around £160 is not due to the current greatly weaken pound.
The card replace the 960/380 at same/similar launch price, and offer a respective 70%/60% increase in performance...yet people can somehow turn this like a huge negative PR.
Something is seriously wrong with the RX480 is getting far more sticks than the 1080 that's offering around similar level of performance increase comparing to the 980 (70%) but at around 40-50% higher launch price!
We've had 390s and 970s selling for less. They are faster to boot.
The 4GB is EOL. What was that said earlier about not comparing EOL cards...
** Quoting them is equally not exceptable **
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 18,249
- Location
- RG8 9
This is without doubt the lamest thread on these forums currently.
And that includes the many Brexit threads.
And that includes the many Brexit threads.
Sorry if it's already been posted (this thread is a mess) but noticed this on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4qmlep/rx_480_powergate_problem_has_a_solution/
TL;DR version, 75w is not the maximum limit as per PCIe 3 specifications, it's the startup value when the PC starts up. The actual maximum value is decided by both the motherboard and the PCIe device. But it can be fixed via a software update to limit the amount the 480 is draining from the board. In other words this whole issue is overblown for no reason.
TL;DR version, 75w is not the maximum limit as per PCIe 3 specifications, it's the startup value when the PC starts up. The actual maximum value is decided by both the motherboard and the PCIe device. But it can be fixed via a software update to limit the amount the 480 is draining from the board. In other words this whole issue is overblown for no reason.
In the Guru3D review, the 480 8GB beat the 970 in 13 out of 14 games where it was compared and often by large margins. It beat the 980 in some cases! The difference between the 8GB and 4GB models is a few frames per second in most cases so you can pretty much treat them the same in terms of performance. The 970 was $329 on release. The 480 $199 for the 4GB model (same amount of VRAM as the 970). It also has modern features such as the latest versions of DP, HDMI, high-dynamic range output, newer encoding, better DX12 support (by far)... The list goes on. And the 4GB which still beats the 970 is substantially cheaper than it.
Additionally, if you cannot understand that when a cheaper and better competitor appears, previous EOL products fall to its price because otherwise they will never sell, then you're an idiot. Though in this case I'm attributing it to massive bias.
The 1070 costs circa £400. The only reason you suddenly shift to comparing to cards in a different price bracket is because you need to in order to compare two 14nm processes. But the 480 is the only 14nm process card in the mid-range. I.e. that's a real and material plus as a mid-range card. You're essentially damning it for losing out (marginally) in a feature against a card over a £150 more expensive.
As to your other post, DM has torn it up better than I could do. All I see from your posts is bias.
Last edited: