• 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

D.P. said:
Typically AMD cards draw more than their stated TDP.
Click to expand...

No they don't.

290X 300 Watt, uses <275
290 300 Watt, uses <250

And Polaris 11 is a 75 Watt card, we already know its only pulling about ~40 Watts.
 
Last edited:
I certainly wouldn't expect the RX480 to actually pull 150w, but I suppose we can only compare advertised TDP's at this point.
 
If AMD gumph has any truth to it Polaris 10 is a 98 Watt card. 2.8 ~ by 275 Watts

All we know is it has 75 Watts from the PCIe and a 75 Watt 6 Pin. = up to 150 Watts power input.

Too much for PCIe only, not enough for PCIe and 2x 6 pin or 1x 8 pin, thats all we know.

I also think its unrealistic to assume P10 would use over 3 time as much power as P11
 
Last edited:
Yeah about 100w would be my guess too, I doubt that we will find out for certain until the reviews hit the web.
 
I'm also going with the ~100W mark. Wonder if we'll see a new Polaris equivalent of the 7750 - some gaming power with VERY low power consumption, perfect for HTPCs.
 
I think they knew exactly what they were doing when they said "51% utilisation" despite the fact that anyone with any sense would spot it straight away, as a marketing ploy they knew the majority of people dont go on forums to argue about such things

And even if 480 is only 98w as humbug says, thats still 196w of cards to beat a card that averages 166w in gaming usage (again using the same figures as humbug's 290/290X usage)
 
Last edited:
psidetracked said:
That's a bit of a worry though isn't it? Reviews held off until the day of release. If this was a movie we'd assume it was going to be rubbish
Click to expand...

A bit. However, unlike movies there are legitimate reasons for hiding the reviews. Movies aren't exclusive - if you go to see The Big Short one weekend, you might go to see Room the following. But if you buy a 480 one week, that's probably it. You're not going to buy a 1060 the day after. GPUs compete in a way that movies only do to a much lesser extent. A good review for one movie, doesn't have a direct negative impact on another movie. Whereas GPUs are a zero sum game.

Furthermore, GPU companies can respond to each other's reviews strategically by altering their prices. The X-men movies can't (or don't) sell their seats at a lower price because they score lower on entertainment benchmarks than the Marvel movies.

So it's imperative for AMD to keep their details secret from Nvidia for as long as possible. Nvidia have deep pockets. Once they see the reviews and price point for, e.g. the 480, they can decide how much they're willing to reduce their per-unit profit by with their own products and announce those. If they do it afterwards then it looks much worse for them to slash their prices to compete with what AMD just released. It's a clear admission to the public that a rival card is better than there's at a given price point.

So whilst I ordinarily agree with you, I think we can look to other explanations in the GPU market.
 
h4rm0ny said:
A bit. However, unlike movies there are legitimate reasons for hiding the reviews. Movies aren't exclusive - if you go to see The Big Short one weekend, you might go to see Room the following. But if you buy a 480 one week, that's probably it. You're not going to buy a 1060 the day after. GPUs compete in a way that movies only do to a much lesser extent. A good review for one movie, doesn't have a direct negative impact on another movie. Whereas GPUs are a zero sum game.

Furthermore, GPU companies can respond to each other's reviews strategically by altering their prices. The X-men movies can't (or don't) sell their seats at a lower price because they score lower on entertainment benchmarks than the Marvel movies.

So it's imperative for AMD to keep their details secret from Nvidia for as long as possible. Nvidia have deep pockets. Once they see the reviews and price point for, e.g. the 480, they can decide how much they're willing to reduce their per-unit profit by with their own products and announce those. If they do it afterwards then it looks much worse for them to slash their prices to compete with what AMD just released. It's a clear admission to the public that a rival card is better than there's at a given price point.

So whilst I ordinarily agree with you, I think we can look to other explanations in the GPU market.
Click to expand...


Great explanation :)
 
AlamoX said:
doubt that some snow can have that much impact, it's most likely irrelevent, just conspiracy & co thought it would be a good point to argue about.
Click to expand...

And yet for the past couple of weeks we've had conspiracy theories flying around about how the AMD side had less detail showing in its benchmark. But now it turns out its Nvidia's fault I bet its importance suddenly vanishes, like you say. :/
 
end of june cant come soon enough now. see what the 480 can actually do in the wild and also hopefully see stock of the 1080's.
 
D.P. said:
If there was a driver bug just because something isn't rendered doesn't mean there wasn't a computional cost, and that cost may be higher that if it was done correctly.
Click to expand...

If...just...may... if...

But in all probability, the 480 just got even better relative to the 1080.
 
Linus did it!

01aPVMT.gif
 
So come in thread hit last page to look at any new news to see its Nvidia talk again straight away in first couple posts at top of the page. Thought id go back couple of pages to end up seeing same person talking about Nvidia again in top of the pages. Why dont we just name the thread Nvidia hijack thread.

Was hoping to see if anyone found any news of any other amd cards 490 maybe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom