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.
Isn't Kyle a well known AMD hater? Apparently he didn't get invited to some AMD event and he's been kicking off ever since.
A lot of people are also assuming their is a bigger gpu because of comparing shaders and assuming they can fit more into that die size, if AMD have changed the shader cores or the size of front end vs back end, I wouldn't bank on there being a bigger core either. There could well be a bigger core with more shaders that still uses less than 150W, but I think people are setting themselves up for a disappointment presuming the RX 480 is 90W and there is a 20-30% faster bigger version coming this month.
.
Some things to point out, the guy who is somewhat insisting it's a 90ish W gpu has decided that from the last event the performance + efficiency listed on the bar graph meant 2x 480 had more performance and better POWER efficiency than the 1080. Power wasn't mentioned anywhere on that graph but the 98/51% efficiency (for whatever reason) was.
It's possible a single RX 480 uses 90W, or 120W or 150W, but I wouldn't use a graph that doesn't mention power at all to be referring to power efficiency. That youtube guy who came up with it decides efficiency means power and thus the 2x 480s must use less power than the 1080 while accounting for the increased performance.
He also decided that largely because this was only 90W, there must be a bigger faster core that is faster. Again there could be, there might not be, it doesn't make that presumption that efficiency meant AMD were saying it used less power/fps than the 1080 is most likely wrong.
A lot of people are also assuming their is a bigger gpu because of comparing shaders and assuming they can fit more into that die size, if AMD have changed the shader cores or the size of front end vs back end, I wouldn't bank on there being a bigger core either. There could well be a bigger core with more shaders that still uses less than 150W, but I think people are setting themselves up for a disappointment presuming the RX 480 is 90W and there is a 20-30% faster bigger version coming this month.
On a more positive note, I'll again say, if that leak is accurate in terms of performance and temps, it's perfectly possible that performance was thermally limited. A 20C delta from idle to load that it potentially shows is actually a very low delta, an indication that fan noise wouldn't likely be very high to maintain 90C and that significantly better cooling is more than possible. If it's cooler and quite, then it's quite possible that with lower temps it could perform much higher, ie at 90C and that performance level it's throttled throughout.
My guess is there is not a bigger GPU than the RX480 waiting to launch.
Normally if there are more than one GPU from the same chip they tend to get announced at the same time - 1070/80, 290X/P, 970/80, 7970/50 etc.
TI's don't tho. And we are missing the X's from both the 470 and 480 lines that are traditional with AMD.
The gaps there, it's just when they will fill it.
TI's don't tho. And we are missing the X's from both the 470 and 480 lines that are traditional with AMD.
The gaps there, it's just when they will fill it.
My guess is there is not a bigger GPU than the RX480 waiting to launch.
Normally if there are more than one GPU from the same chip they tend to get announced at the same time - 1070/80, 290X/P, 970/80, 7970/50 etc.
Even @70C I suspect that temps were effecting performance as the card is probably only designed to run at around 65C flat out.
How many SKU's do you know of that only have one chip made out of them?
i suppose your of the mind that the 8Gb version will cost £90 more than the 4GB, to explain the RX 480 @ $200 and the missing $300 GPU.
Agreed there is nothing to stop AMD launching a cut down version of the RX 480 but I think it is wishful thinking by some people to think there is a bigger version out there.
The RX 480 is going to be a fantastic card for it's target market and AMD are going to sell shedloads. Having said that people have got to get away from the AMD vs NVidia thing and accept sometimes there is no direct competitor to a rival card.
If people want the RX 480 to compete with the 1070 the answer is simple, go CF RX 480 for the same money and a lot more performance. Plus you don't have to buy a special (rip off) SLI bridge to get them to run in CF.
Agreed there is nothing to stop AMD launching a cut down version of the RX 480 but I think it is wishful thinking by some people to think there is a bigger version out there.
The RX 480 is going to be a fantastic card for it's target market and AMD are going to sell shedloads. Having said that people have got to get away from the AMD vs NVidia thing and accept sometimes there is no direct competitor to a rival card.
If people want the RX 480 to compete with the 1070 the answer is simple, go CF RX 480 for the same money and a lot more performance. Plus you don't have to buy a special (rip off) SLI bridge to get them to run in CF.
CrossFire doesn't work. and its more expensive than a 1070.
How do you explain the $300 price bracket?
Isn't there a bridge in the box??