-
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
- Thread starter Kaapstad
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,582
Sorry but you do realise you are making yourself sounding like a troll (I'm assuming you ain't one)?Typical AMD .. yet another rebadge release trying to keep up with Nvidia saying 'but if you buy 2 and go crossfire it beats the 1080 by 3fps in this game for $100 less!...' -with added power consumption, more heat, more noise!! AMD's driver/crossfire support has been atrocious the last few years to say the least. This presentation made me even happier about my 1080 purchase
What AMD's doing is essentially delivering a card that match or beat the 390/970 and with lower power consumption at sub £200 mark...what's not to like? It clearly shows it is the consumer that are getting more performance for the same money simply with move gen, unlike what Nvidia's pulling charging a higher price making people pay extra for the performance that comes from moving gen. The 1080 cost less than the 980Ti to make, and they are charging higher price than the 980Ti just because it is "faster" (a new gen card on 16nm vs and old gen card on 28nm is hardly surprising!).
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 5,849
Typical AMD .. yet another rebadge release trying to keep up with Nvidia saying 'but if you buy 2 and go crossfire it beats the 1080 by 3fps in this game for $100 less!...' -with added power consumption, more heat, more noise!! AMD's driver/crossfire support has been atrocious the last few years to say the least. This presentation made me even happier about my 1080 purchase
Hahah this post is all kinds of fail, and this is why people like this pay over the odds for stuff like 1080, i bet he even bought the FE edition as well....
Im tempted to buy 2 of these 8GB variants to tide me over til Vega, can finally replace my 290 and move onto a new tech, yeah xfire support is pony most of the time, but in the games i play one of these should be decent enough, and if i can get 2 working im laughing.
The Division
Diablo 3
WoW (CPU Bound?)
Elder Scrolls Online
Tempted to also go for a 4K monitor now instead of a 1440p as i feel 2 of these together should be half decent for now with a 4k Freesync panel til Vega arrives.
Soldato
Valve recommends a render resolution of 1512x1600 per eye @ 90 Hz. With some culling/optimisations etc it still works about 378million pixels per second which is some 3x 1080p @ 60 Hz.
Soldato
Valve recommends a render resolution of 1512x1600 per eye @ 90 Hz. With some culling/optimisations etc it still works about 378million pixels per second which is some 3x 1080p @ 60 Hz.
But we all know we need at least 4K per eye to loose that screendoor. I await Gen2. And my wallet will be ravaged for 2x 1180Ti's or whatever will run it lol.
Soldato
Associate
- Joined
- 29 May 2014
- Posts
- 402
any news for the 490/490X ?
Associate
- Joined
- 11 Jun 2013
- Posts
- 167
? Why is it fail? Its so right. Theyve rebranded there fury card and dropped the price so they can say 2 of these can match 1 of those! When 90% of the time crossfail... fails meanwhile your running twice as many cards, twice as much electric, twice as much heat, a lot more noise... just incase the next new game supports crossfail and scales anywhere near 90% .. smart ppl spend the extra £100 and stop kidding themselves. And yup i got the FE edition which comfortably ran bf4 all night ultra 200% resolution at 2050 80c
Same here but gen 2 is probably at least 3 years away so we will have all upgraded gfx cards by then.
? Why is it fail? Its so right. Theyve rebranded there fury card and dropped the price so they can say 2 of these can match 1 of those! When 90% of the time crossfail... fails meanwhile your running twice as many cards, twice as much electric, twice as much heat, a lot more noise... just incase the next new game supports crossfail and scales anywhere near 90% .. smart ppl spend the extra £100 and stop kidding themselves. And yup i got the FE edition which comfortably ran bf4 all night ultra 200% resolution at 2050 80c
1080 800euro
2x480 400euro or less.
difference?
400euro.......or so.
so how is that in any way a good view for the 1080?
You like pay overpriced prices for mid range gpu like the 1080?
The real smart people understands math and price and performance and value.
The only problem i see with this card is that it is targeted at the very card that sold the most cards ever ( 970 ) so the people who wanted that performance already have it with the 970 or the 290 or the 390.
The VR market is so small its not even worth mentioning, This card does however appeal to anyone on a 280 or 960 or lower or someone willing to tackle xfire.
Only time will tell if this is a good move or not. For me personally its not appealing.
The VR market is so small its not even worth mentioning, This card does however appeal to anyone on a 280 or 960 or lower or someone willing to tackle xfire.
Only time will tell if this is a good move or not. For me personally its not appealing.
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Nov 2013
- Posts
- 654
Has to be one of the best price / performance card!
I don't understand why AMD haven't prioritised the enthusiast card first.
What we're left with is nVidia charging whatever they want for their cards and laughing all the way to the bank because there is 0 competition. Oh, and also take the **** out of their customer base with the FE cards.
"Oh it has better thermals" - Yet there are thermal throttling issues on the default fan profile. Are you serious?
I want to stick with AMD, I really cannot be bothered paying an extra £150 on a monitor just to support some proprietary sync technology, or wait 6 months for AMD to play catch up.
What we're left with is nVidia charging whatever they want for their cards and laughing all the way to the bank because there is 0 competition. Oh, and also take the **** out of their customer base with the FE cards.
"Oh it has better thermals" - Yet there are thermal throttling issues on the default fan profile. Are you serious?
I want to stick with AMD, I really cannot be bothered paying an extra £150 on a monitor just to support some proprietary sync technology, or wait 6 months for AMD to play catch up.
Valve recommends a render resolution of 1512x1600 per eye @ 90 Hz. With some culling/optimisations etc it still works about 378million pixels per second which is some 3x 1080p @ 60 Hz.
Why such a bigger res than the screen is showing?
Will agree with you should be aiming for over 60 fps, ideaaly 75 fps and a max of 90 fps.
I still stand that if you have a card which can run 1440p at 90 fps then you are good to go.
Don;t forget both Nvidia and AMD are concentrating on VR and making card which run VR 1.7 faster than desktop displays so in theory you don't even need a new gen card capable of 1440p 90 fps to run he VR at max res and framerate.
Soldato
Because the mainstream cards sell 100 if not 1000 fold more and make much more money. Simple.
1080 800euro
2x480 400euro or less.
difference?
400euro.......or so.
so how is that in any way a good view for the 1080?
You like pay overpriced prices for mid range gpu like the 1080?
The real smart people understands math and price and performance and value.
The GeForce GTX 1080 Gaming ACX 3.0, 8192 MB GDDR5X is 664 euros
Associate
The state as it is now yes not good..
But i thought these new api's dx12 / Vulkan are going to change the way multi gpu's run ....
also the fact of having 2 cards for VR 1 for each eye ect ....
Enthusiast cards account for 3% of all sales. The bracket they have just launched this card into sells 11 million per year. If you were AMD would you rather sell 11 million at $199 or 330,000 at $500?