Radeon RX 480 "Polaris" Launched at $199

five8five · 19 Jun 2016 at 10:55

Geck0 said:
That isn't a sale and it obviously confirms that supply is constrained. WTF were you disputing again?

I think OCUK would disagree with you. What are you disputing, people haven't bought a card they've paid for?
You need to get over it.

TheRealDeal · 19 Jun 2016 at 10:56

Rroff said:
I get where you are coming from but its stretching a point when you are talking about a couple of weeks versus say a couple of months and is really stretching it thin when you (in general) are talking in the context of a desperate paper launch like some are.

The launch has been fine in my eyes. Sure stock ain't great but I can't recall to many times when stock was great after a node shrink. Plus demand is usually at its highest at launch.

Geck0 · 19 Jun 2016 at 10:56

Kaapstad said:
So you are telling me AMD made a mistake fitting the Fiji chips with HBM, I think you may be onto something here.

Absolutely it was but it was a test bed also, and it helped the card keep up at higher resolutions where conventional memory will have held it back.

It was a double edged sword but vega will have the architecture to support and saturate HBM2.

AMD did the time, Nvidia haven't yet.

flopper · 19 Jun 2016 at 10:57

200euro difference between the 1070 and a 480 and OC the 480 you now have the best card for 1440p and lower resolutions.
If your at 4k, wait for Vega as it will blow away the 1080 in october.

The king the 480 the card of decade is soon here.

Kaapstad · 19 Jun 2016 at 10:58

Mauller said:
Pot calling the kettle black, you crack me up Kaap, keep it up.

I think that the fact AMD do not manufacture HBM1 based cards is a solid fact.

There are no HBM1 cards from either vendor is another solid fact.

This is a whole lot better than DMs guesswork.

Kaapstad · 19 Jun 2016 at 10:59

flopper said:
200euro difference between the 1070 and a 480 and OC the 480 you now have the best card for 1440p and lower resolutions.
If your at 4k, wait for Vega as it will blow away the 1080 in october.

The king the 480 the card of decade is soon here.

First good post today.

Geck0 · 19 Jun 2016 at 10:59

five8five said:
I think OCUK would disagree with you. What are you disputing, people haven't bought a card they've paid for?
You need to get over it.

Jesus, give me all your money you clown, I'll promise you the world. I'll just not deliver it yet and you'll be ok with that.

Mauller · 19 Jun 2016 at 11:01

Kaapstad said:
I think that the fact AMD do not manufacture HBM1 based cards is a solid fact.
There are no HBM1 cards from either vendor is another solid fact.
This is a whole lot better than DMs guesswork.

you know what i am talking about, all your claims around poor 1080p performance and the workings of HBM, so keep up with the smilies.

TheRealDeal · 19 Jun 2016 at 11:01

Kaapstad said:
I think that the fact AMD do not manufacture HBM1 based cards is a solid fact.

There are no HBM1 cards from either vendor is another solid fact.

This is a whole lot better than DMs guesswork.

Kaap HBM is the way forward end of story. Everything has its shelf life and GDDR5 is coming to the end of its at the top end. HBM and technology's like it will be taking over.

You could go pray at the shrine like Flopper and see if you are worthy of receiving such tech in the future if that's what worries you.

Seanspeed · 19 Jun 2016 at 11:02

drunkenmaster said:
Buying an AMD card doesn't make you not biased, it provides you with a platform to say you're not biased and think you're serious.

Pascal is hot with a very small area and a lot of heat... really.... literally only a few months ago you were saying Fiji ran hotter than Hawaii because you both didn't understand the concept of power output compared to die area and you actually attempted to refute the concept and deny basic physics by insisting that when pointed out that Fury X had a significantly lower w/mm^2 output than Hawaii I was wrong and didn't know what I was talking about.

It's hilarious that back then you were arguing against an incredibly basic physics principal but now you're using it to defend a 1080.

One, HBM would drop actual power usage coming from the memory controller by 30-35W at that bandwidth level and two the HBM dies are separate so it wouldn't result in extra heat build up but in fact lead to a cooler running 1080 core, lead to lower power usage and higher sustained clockspeeds in the same power usage.

AMD didn't drop HBM, they used it on a product that is still sold, their next product uses HBM2. In the same way Nvidia is using gddr5 on a 1070 AMD is using GDDR5 on lower end cards also. There was never any intention to have HBM in every segment instantly due to cost and there was never any intention for Nvidia to use GDDR5x in every card due to cost. AMD have specifically stated the intention to use HBM2 and so have Nvidia, neither have dropped the technology but both will use the latest version of it.

But when Nvidia launches a GDDR5x card using 12Gbps chips, I'll be sure to spout the ridiculous idea that Nvidia has dropped using GDDR5x 10Gbps chips because they are a failed technology and no good.... because that is the incredibly ridiculous argument you're making as a claim that neither AMD or Nvidia will use HBM1 any more.

Drunkenmaster is right here. On all counts.

Which I dont think I've ever said before!

C'mon Kaap, this isn't a winnable argument man. I dont think anybody can prove with absolute certainty that your theories(or the theories you've heard) are completely untrue, but there's enough evidence suggesting they most likely are. Meaning that believing them over the more rational explanation is..........irrational.

five8five · 19 Jun 2016 at 11:03

Seanspeed said:
This was typically how it had been referred to before, where the term was used in a negative connotation.

Apparently now just having reviews out means something is 'launched', even if it has a later specific release date.....not how I'd use the term, but it's not up to me to define something which has no strict definition in the first place.

It doesn't really matter, either way. I'm not sure what arguing about it achieves in the end. There is no overarching point to be made if there's an concensus agreement. The way 'paper launch' is being defined here is not a disparaging term by any means.

That's what I don't understand, does it mean that the 480 is a paper launch because AMD have announced a future release date but also prior to that benchmarks and specs. I'm sure their will be some reviews prior to the end of the NDA but if there's stock to buy that would make it a hard launch.

Kaapstad · 19 Jun 2016 at 11:03

TheRealDeal said:
Kaap HBM is the way forward end of story. Everything has its shelf life and GDDR5 is coming to the end of its at the top end. HBM and technology's like it will be taking over.

You could go pray at the shrine like Flopper and see if you are worthy of receiving such tech in the future if that's what worries you.

Indeed HBM or similar is the way forward but HBM1 is history.

h4rm0ny · 19 Jun 2016 at 11:04

five8five said:
I thought a paper launch was when a product wasn't available to buy on the scheduled release day due to being delayed for whatever reason, delivery issue, manufacturing problem etc.

No. A paper launch can be deliberate as well. All that matters is the availability to buy following after the full disclosure of details about the product. If a company is answering all the questions about the product, reviewers have samples and have published reviews, etc., that's a launch. If you can also buy the product, it's a hard launch. If you can't, it's a paper launch. The things you list could force a company to do a paper launch, but a company can also choose to do one for marketing reasons, et al.

TheRealDeal · 19 Jun 2016 at 11:05

five8five said:
That's what I don't understand, does it mean that the 480 is a paper launch because AMD have announced a future release date but also prior to that benchmarks and specs. I'm sure their will be some reviews prior to the end of the NDA but if there's stock to buy that would make it a hard launch.

That's what google says. Have amd done this? This thread would be almost dead if we had reviews which we haven't. What AMD have done is smoke and mirrors. We still don't know much hence this threading pounding on at rapid amounts of posts.

"A paper launch is the situation in which a product is compared or tested against other products of the same kind, despite the fact that it is not available to the public at the time. Generally, the term is applied to the computer and gaming industry, but is not limited to that."

Jono8 · 19 Jun 2016 at 11:05

TheRealDeal said:
A paper launch is the situation in which a product is compared or tested against other products of the same kind, despite the fact that it is not available to the public at the time. Generally, the term is applied to the computer and gaming industry, but is not limited to that.[1]

Technically they have yes.

Not that any of this matters.

Kaapstad · 19 Jun 2016 at 11:06

Seanspeed said:
Drunkenmaster is right here. On all counts.

Which I dont think I've ever said before!

C'mon Kaap, this isn't a winnable argument man. I dont think anybody can prove with absolute certainty that your theories(or the theories you've heard) are completely untrue, but there's enough evidence suggesting they most likely are. Meaning that believing them over the more rational explanation is..........irrational.

I don't have a problem with HBM2 or higher but HBM1 left a lot to be desired.

five8five · 19 Jun 2016 at 11:07

drunkenmaster said:
Lastly, every salesman everywhere always claims everything is the best selling product.... it's like salesman spiel 101.

He didn't during the Fury launch though. He kept ominously quiet..........

five8five · 19 Jun 2016 at 11:08

h4rm0ny said:
I would like to think that whilst there are things that Gibbo obviously wouldn't say or phrase things as, he's pretty upfront and honest and wouldn't actively mislead people. He might conceivably remain silent on some things - nobody is going to say "Don't buy this card!" or "Nvidia are hoarding their limited supply for their FE and starving their partners of chips". But when he does say something, I would like to think it can basically be trusted.

Hear, hear.

harmattan · 19 Jun 2016 at 11:09

TheRealDeal said:
Top link of Google on the definition of a paper launch. Not from me.

I think we're arguing semantics between two valid definitions. The technical definition is where the cards are reviewed, but not available to buy (at all); the colloquial (and perjorative) definition is where reviews are out, the company claims there will be availability, and then there is none or only a few samples. Both are valid definitions, but it's the latter one where people (rightfully) get upset.

Rroff · 19 Jun 2016 at 11:09

h4rm0ny said:
No. A paper launch can be deliberate as well. All that matters is the availability to buy following after the full disclosure of details about the product. If a company is answering all the questions about the product, reviewers have samples and have published reviews, etc., that's a launch. If you can also buy the product, it's a hard launch. If you can't, it's a paper launch. The things you list could force a company to do a paper launch, but a company can also choose to do one for marketing reasons, et al.

I'd agree with that definition though if there is a say 1 minute delay after reviews are released before cards can be bought is that a paper launch?

Its fairly reasonable for there to be a short delay (which for most people could be a few days) between full disclosure of metrics relevant to comparing to other products to supply hitting retail can't really use paper launch in a negative connotation in respect to the Pascal launch as some are. In general use paper launch is only tagged on when the delay is in the context of a couple of months or so.