• 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

SimBy said:
Why would a guy with dual Titan Xs dwell in a thread about mainstream 230mm2 GPU?
Click to expand...

Sold em, Was gonna go Dual 1080's but not much better than OC TX'S. I was ready to go AMD if the 480 was half decent. I'm well aware its a big drop in performance, although would have been nice to run team red. If it's no better than a 390x i'm out.
 
eddyr said:
Well if that's your criteria, tell it to Nv, 28nm to 16 nm finfet they improved perf/£ by ... well they haven't (980 or 980ti vs 1080 pricing as of 21/06/16). AMD looks to be around 20% if it matches a 390x. Note: The 390X which has also already undergone price adjustment downwards as the market re-equilibrates to the NV release.

1080 is ~166% the performance of the 980 but costs ~180% the price. 1070 is 155-165% perf of the 970 and .... ~180% the price.

(rough back of the cerebral envelope maths - aka slightly more accurate than CEO maths)
Prices:
1080 £540
1070 £360
980ti £400
980 £299
970 £200

390x £275
480 £210

Nv Perf:
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080/26.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1070/24.html



No they should have broken the chain and reassessed their opinion based on reasonable assumptions.

Also see above on perf/£, and on your optimistic 970/980 scaling.
Click to expand...


You should link to the correct graphs:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1070/26.html
At 4K the reference 1070 will have improved price-performance over the 970 by 24% (118/95).


Things aren't as good at 1080P, this highlights the improvements nvidia has done to delta compression and so on to increase effective bandwidth.
 
Last edited:
I am still trying to work out people are acting like this should have been a high-end card, when it is CLEARLY not. It is mid-range at best.

The vega products are the high-end. Step into reality, not what you want these to be.
 
AthlonXP1800 said:
Saw UK competitor has 2 RX 480 cards up for pre-order now. Both XFX RX 480 CORE and XFX RX 480 BLACK cost nearly £300 each.

Train wreck I guess.
Click to expand...

Yea and i am sure that will be the launch price. You are having a laugh if you believe that will be the price here. I think Gibbo and OCUK are smart enough to know that those prices will lead to far less sales. This will be priced way closer to £200. How close i don't know but as it stands it does not have the performance to be priced much higher. Gibbo even said he will be following AMD's guidlines on pricing. Amd want to sell a shed load of these and that's the reason for the low $ price. They won't be growing no TAM for VR at £280-£300 on the stock cooled models.
 
I have a 390 but may hold off to get a Vega if the reviews aren't too great of an increase.

It will have to outstrip the 390 by a bit for me to pull the Trigger
 
Scougar said:
I am still trying to work out people are acting like this should have been a high-end card, when it is CLEARLY not. It is mid-range at best.

The vega products are the high-end. Step into reality, not what you want these to be.
Click to expand...

Yes but the 1070 and 1080 are 'mid-range' for 16nm. High-end is 400mm2 and beyond.

Also if you account for the effective size of the 1070 (since 25% of the shaders are disabled, and 14nm is a bit denser than 16nm), Polaris 10 and the 1070 are of similar size (1070 still being a bit bigger).

So if P10 is massively behind a 1070, that doesn't bode well.
 
TheRealDeal said:
Yea and i am sure that will be the launch price. You are having a laugh if you believe that will be the price here. I think Gibbo and OCUK are smart enough to know that those prices will lead to far less sales. This will be priced way closer to £200. How close i don't know but as it stands it does not have the performance to be priced much higher. Gibbo even said he will be following AMD's guidlines on pricing. Amd want to sell a shed load of these and that's the reason for the low $ price. They won't be growing no TAM for VR at £280-£300 on the stock cooled models.
Click to expand...

if 290/390 performance IMO £200 is waaaaaaaaay overpriced.

Facts -

If it performs the same as a 390x it's nothing more then a 290x. Would you pay £200 for a 290x? no me neither.
 
I appreciate that, but I cannot figure out for the life of me where any of these options are.

Pulseammo said:
Under all of your posts at the bottom right where the "Quote", "Edit", "Multi" buttons are there is one called "Trust", click it and fill in your details, it's like a reputation system for trades so that people can leave feedback.
Click to expand...
Ah sweet, thanks
 
Relentless81 said:
I dont understand how people are struggling with this, maybe they just look to slate off a technology company because they find it amusing somehow, the mind boggles

Its very basic stuff, the company announce a date and on that date it will be released with no information before from said company
Click to expand...
Not quite true in this case. AMD have released some specifications, the 1080 SLI benchmark and the VR benchmark. Naturally this information sparked a great deal of discussion.
 
why do people keep thinking that 390x/980 - nano performance is bad when it is moving down to the mainstream segment? baffles me.
 
faceman123 said:
if 290/390 performance IMO £200 is waaaaaaaaay overpriced.

Facts -

If it performs the same as a 390x it's nothing more then a 290x. Would you pay £200 for a 290x? no me neither.
Click to expand...

That's not facts at all. In performance it may be a 390x but the gpu is nothing like a 390x. We don't know to much about new features but we do know it's going to use less than half the power of the 390x. We don't know how far it will overclock. Basically the only thing this looks to have in common Gpu wise to the 390x is performance.

Mauller said:
why do people keep thinking that 390x/980 - nano performance is bad when it is moving down to the mainstream segment? baffles me.
Click to expand...

+1

Nvidia gave us more performance yet upped the prices to do so effectively taking the 70 up a tier to where the 80 used to sit. Amd look to be giving us similar performance and pricing it in the mainstream bracket instead of the high end bracket. people are just expecting to much.
 
Last edited:
Scougar said:
I am still trying to work out people are acting like this should have been a high-end card, when it is CLEARLY not. It is mid-range at best.

The vega products are the high-end. Step into reality, not what you want these to be.
Click to expand...

I wonder if some of these people were saying "nvidia are doomed" when they released the 750Ti as the first Maxwell.
 
AllBodies said:
Yes but the 1070 and 1080 are 'mid-range' for 16nm. High-end is 400mm2 and beyond.

Also if you account for the effective size of the 1070 (since 25% of the shaders are disabled, and 14nm is a bit denser than 16nm), Polaris 10 and the 1070 are of similar size (1070 still being a bit bigger).

So if P10 is massively behind a 1070, that doesn't bode well.
Click to expand...

You are calling 400 to 700 GBP cards mid range? Give me some of what you are taking man!! lol. :D ;)
 
Last edited:
Seanspeed said:
I appreciate that, but I cannot figure out for the life of me where any of these options are.


Ah sweet, thanks
Click to expand...

Also note as in setter's quote of the rules once you set it up it takes 24 hours before you will be able to see the MM section, it appears down the bottom of the forum, just below the distributed computing ones. Anyway, that's enough off topic chat from me, hope you get it sorted :).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom