• 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.

Radeon RX 480 "Polaris" Launched at $199

RavenXXX2 said:
Puts things in perspective when Nvidia can do an 150 watt TitanX busting 1070 on 16nm and AMD give us 150 watt 970/390 performance at 150 watt. AMD are done. We're at 390 performance at £200+ for 8GB, we have had that performance at similar pricing for the past few years.
Click to expand...

Sounds really bad when you put it like that...

Could you please sugar-coat it a bit next time?

Still, the price is all-important. Sure the 480 might not offer even remotely half-decent perf compared to its rival, but if it's really, really dirt cheap, I guess it'll do...

Otherwise yeah, AMD have set sail for fail, yet again. And not just for enthusiasts, before anyone says "targetting mainstream".

The "mainstream" includes myself, and we've had the option of 390 perf at ~£240 for aaaaaaages now. So if the 480 offers 390 perf at... £205-£220, it sucks for "mainstream" people too.
 
Scougar said:
Have to agree with Seanspeed. The card isn't even released, yet people are making factual claims on performance of it vs other cards.
Click to expand...

I agree but its quite worrying when AMD on their own marketing slides show a last gen gimped 970 score better than your current flagship.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
Puts things in perspective when Nvidia can do an 150 watt TitanX busting 1070 on 16nm and AMD give us 150 watt 970/390 performance at 150 watt. AMD are done. We're at 390 performance at £200+ for 8GB, we have had that performance at similar pricing for the past few years.
Click to expand...

+1 its worrying.
 
I genuinely feel we need to see some bench results for games before we get too wrapped up with this and that. Affordable VR card is always a good thing in my book.
 
Gregster said:
I genuinely feel we need to see some bench results for games before we get too wrapped up with this and that. Affordable VR card is always a good thing in my book.
Click to expand...

I personally can't wait for reviews as at this moment things are all over the place.

AdoredTV seems to think the partner cards could have big OC's on them hence the $300 top end price which could be why the stock card looks to be slow so far. It's a wait and see from me but so far it's on the under whelming side at E3.
 
Unless people can fake firestrike scores, I think they are a better indicator of how the 480 will perform than the steam VR test. So far we have it between a 390X and 980 in firestrike but slower than a 970 in steam VR.
 
TheRealDeal said:
Problem being this card is aimed at VR so should really be doing better than what AMD are suggesting in this slide.
Click to expand...

Yup, its for VR.

AMD's Roy Taylor also confirmed that Polaris would target mainstream users, particularly those interested in creating a VR-ready system.

"The reason Polaris is a big deal, is because I believe we will be able to grow that TAM [total addressable market] significantly," said Taylor. "I don't think Nvidia is going to do anything to increase the TAM, because according to everything we've seen around Pascal, it's a high-end part. I don't know what the price is gonna be, but let's say it's as low as £500/$600 and as high as £800/$1000. That price range is not going to expand the TAM for VR. We're going on the record right now to say Polaris will expand the TAM. Full stop."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Anyway, aren't the console GFX chips somewhere around 7870 level? R7 270 or whatever that become?

"Console class gaming to the PC" sounds impressive, but it really isn't. It's perf we've had on the PC for yeeeeeeears.
 
FoxEye said:
Anyway, aren't the console GFX chips somewhere around 7870 level? R7 270 or whatever that become?

"Console class gaming to the PC" sounds impressive, but it really isn't. It's perf we've had on the PC for yeeeeeeears.
Click to expand...

The gpu's are weaker than my 7870, the PS4 has the same number of SP's but is clocked at 840mhz instead of 1ghz. while the xbox one is comparable to an underclocked 7850.

So for project scorpio to be rated at 6tflops instead of 1.5 of the XO is a large jump. But pretty much just mainstream performance now in terms of pc hardware.
 
FoxEye said:
Anyway, aren't the console GFX chips somewhere around 7870 level? R7 270 or whatever that become?

"Console class gaming to the PC" sounds impressive, but it really isn't. It's perf we've had on the PC for yeeeeeeears.
Click to expand...

I think what he meant with Console class gaming was cards designed to be dx12 compatible and close to the metal coding like with the ps4/xbone
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom