• 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

spikerules said:
Hey look man dont take out your frustrations on me! Maybe you should take a walk calm yourself down? Blame AMD not me;)

You don't know me BTW. I bought a Nano when they were overpriced and everyone was against the card on here. Also I was going to buy an RX 480. Look at some of my past posts here. I've supported the card as a low power alternative to the 380. I was just expecting a little more from both AMD AND ocuk. Firstly I would have liked the RX 480 to be around 390x and 980 speeds, but even after finding out it was more 970 I was still going to buy one and make another AMD water build like I did with the Nano. Then ocuk went and raised the prices on the card after only 2 hours on sale like money grabbing so and so's. At that point I decided against buying one for now.

However I'm realistic with how the card is performing and I don't try and make excuses. It's embarrassing to see so many people on here defending the card. It has its faults let's all just be honest about that fact!
Click to expand...

Actually seeing how you attacked me several times - and then bitch when someone calls you on it.......pot meet kettle.

The performance of Polaris is all over; at times it beats 980 without a sweat and other times it can't beat 970.......then with makeshift cooler the ref 480 shown to hit 1450 without any issues.........and you see a nice jump in performance.....

It was also shown if you undervolt it; performance actually went up at boost speeds by 5% along with boost memory to 9000 which added another 6%......that's 10%+ performance that's been left on the table. AMD tends to overvolt their chips......

Thus showing drivers are an issue and the ref cooler is holding back the chip....along with confirmed power bug in 16.2.2 drivers which a lot of reviewers used over the new drivers that were sent out 3 days ago.....there are some wonky issues......it seems Polaris can pass 980; but that won't happen until aftermarket cards hit with better power delivery and cooling.....

I did say I was disappointed; as 5.8 TFLOP card should be same as their last card; which was 390X at least.......it looks like they need more time to get to grips with how polaris is put together - along with it looking to be the pipe cleaner on Glofo process; there really could be teething problems there which looks like they are being ironed out before both Vegas hit.

Instead of making fun of people - I've been digging around trying to find out why this chip seems to be a bit schizophrenic in its performance. It looks to be a combo of drivers; and ref cooler - holding this chip back......
 
Mtom said:
The slide shows 150W for the 480...considering the slot+6pin cable has a maximum of 150W power the exaggeration is out of the window, and no one would build a card which would pull the exact amount of power the terminals allow. Also there was a leak before stating it would pull around 120W...which is quite believable with the 6pin terminal.
If it would pull 150W in real life it would have a 8pin connector.

If it pulls 120W and 390(x) performance then it is spot on Pascal perf/W.
1070 is Titan X performance which is about 30% faster than a 390x https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080/26.html
120*1.3=156

One more thing, on the Computex slide they showed 2.8x perf/W comparing to 28nm. This could be true or not. If it would be true a 390x performance card would need ~100W. So taking account some exaggageration, the ~120W couldbe real.
Click to expand...
I didn't reply at the time, because we were both using theoretical numbers on which to draw our guesses.

But that's OK. No need to apologise. ;) So, it's almost Maxwell power/performance after all - slightly higher power draw than the 970, with similar performance. And a similar price, with recent 970 drops. Like everyone else, I thought we'd get something a little better after two years!

Now I've got my fingers crossed for the 1060 to have discernibly worse Windows performance than the 480, and if y'all like competition in the market, y'alls fingers will be doing the same.
 
OnionSpark said:
I didn't reply at the time, because we were both using theoretical numbers on which to draw our guesses.

But that's OK. No need to apologise. ;) So, it's almost Maxwell power/performance after all - slightly higher power draw than the 970, with similar performance. And a similar price, with recent 970 drops. Like everyone else, I thought we'd get something a little better after two years!

Now I've got my fingers crossed for the 1060 to have discernibly worse Windows performance than the 480, and if y'all like competition in the market, y'alls fingers will be doing the same.
Click to expand...

Personally i'm hoping the 1060 comes in at similar price to the 480 but with 20%+ more performance . We need vendors being pushed to give us more performance
 
mahius said:
The initial RX480 4GB prices weren't that bad but now they have sold out and the prices are going up. Question is: when do custom cards come out? And when do the 470 and 460 come out?

Hopefully there will be sales of the 480 in a few months time bringing it to better prices, or at least comparable to the 380. Also has anyone noticed that the 380 and 960 haven't had price drops since this release?
Click to expand...

Our 8Gb prices are unchanged! :)
 
Everything I have tried at 1080 runs really well. For the price it is a great card I have no complaints about the performance but if above 1080 maybe waiting for the 490 or whatever might be a good idea.
 
I'm looking to upgrade from an Powercolor Radeon R9 270X.

2 Things.

Firstly, is it a viable upgrade that will give a nice performance boost
Secondly, will I need to wait for DVI-DL (120hz monitor) and if so, how long.

If anyone could answer these couple of question, i owuld appreciate it .

thanks.
 
Firstly, is it a viable upgrade that will give a nice performance boost

Yes


Secondly, will I need to wait for DVI-DL (120hz monitor) and if so, how long.

if you have no display port on your monitor, then yes. And maybe 2 weeks? no one knows for sure
 
new boy said:
Firstly, is it a viable upgrade that will give a nice performance boost

Yes


Secondly, will I need to wait for DVI-DL (120hz monitor) and if so, how long.

if you have no display port on your monitor, then yes. And maybe 2 weeks? no one knows for sure
Click to expand...

Thank you.

Hopefully not too long then and who knows, perhaps with more competition a slightly lower card.
 
whyscotty said:
It's not a bad card to be honest, handles everything at 1080.


What did people expect for the price. :)
Click to expand...

I think this is the issue

People obviously thought this card was going to break the market in relation to overpriced GPUs

Mid to top end performance for knockdown prices

Not sure where this thought process came from but that is what has happened
 
OnionSpark said:
Now I've got my fingers crossed for the 1060 to have discernibly worse Windows performance than the 480, and if y'all like competition in the market, y'alls fingers will be doing the same.
Click to expand...

You want the 1060 to be a failure, and you think that's good for consumers?

Right on.

And some people say that everybody who is critical of the 480 is an nVidia shill. LOL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom