Radeon RX 480 "Polaris" Launched at $199

[Ferrari100]

Nv funding(please don't add Async) this public showing gets Nv access to promoting it as a Nv title without actualy branding it-same as they've done with nearly every Frostbite release.

I can't believe Nvidia got Dice to add Hyper settings to their new Mirror's Edge game. I mean - when will it end?
Super duper amazing Ultradaddio setting?

Ultra setting should stay at the top as graphics cards in the lowest GPU segment end fall off the spectrum.
It did make me chuckle and **shake head** tbh.

 

[Ferrari100]

Another own goal by amd? Considering all the past dice/mantle/vulkan debate, would have thought amd would have had this as a show piece of their tech.

...who says they won't??

It's just Nvidia are just jumping on board for a free ride.

 

[humbug]

All Fury-X's are gone
One Fury remains.

No ETA on any, they are EOL.

Is the 390X level performance $200 RX 480 the only and top level card for the next 6+ months?

Or is there something waiting in the wind to replace those Fury's?

 

[Ferrari100]

all fury-x's are gone
one fury remains.

no eta on any, they are eol.

is the 390x level performance $200 rx 480 the only and top level card for the next 6+ months?

or is there something waiting in the wind to replace those fury's?

still one type of fury:
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/xfx-...ess-graphics-card-r9-fury-4tf9-gx-234-xf.html


I'm wondering they will will finally sell out these 5450's they are cramping the rest of the line-ups style (how old are they now)?
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asus...ress-low-profile-graphics-card-gx-271-as.html

 

[Relentless81]

Or is there something waiting in the wind to replace those Fury's?

Personally I think there is a unannounced 490 replacing the Fury/Nano and Vega will replace the FuryX

Nothing to go on other than the same rumors everyone else has read and what AdoredTV has said but thats my feels on it and I hope I'm right

 

[SimBy]

Another own goal by amd? Considering all the past dice/mantle/vulkan debate, would have thought amd would have had this as a show piece of their tech.

Don't worry B1 is AMD title Wasn't it obvious enough at B1 reveal? And if I had to bet I would say RX480 or whatever comes above it from AMD will be bundled with it.

 

[Mtom]

...who says they won't??

It's just Nvidia are just jumping on board for a free ride.

Especially as it seems the small Vega will arrive at the BF release.

 

[SimBy]

I can't believe Nvidia got Dice to add Hyper settings to their new Mirror's Edge game. I mean - when will it end?
Super duper amazing Ultradaddio setting?

Ultra setting should stay at the top as graphics cards in the lowest GPU segment end fall off the spectrum.
It did make me chuckle and **shake head** tbh.

Well from what I'm reading Pascal drivers are so broken you can't even play Mirror's Edge

Spoiler

Spoiler

 

[D.P.]

Well Nvidia don't have any comparable cards for them to show it against. There was no other card they could pick. If AMD had shown it against a 980 everyone would just attack them for comparing against the previous generation. The comments practically write themselves... 'afraid to compare with the current tech...', 'AMD's new generation is less powerful than Nvidia's last...' and so forth.

When Nvidia actually release a 480 competitor, then proper comparisons can begin.

They could have simply done what nvidia did when they announced the 1080 and there was no completion - compare it to the existing cards in the lineup to show improvements.


But the whole AotS bench was a complete farce. Not only did AMD have no idea what they are talking about wrt 51% utilisation and had backtrack and correct themselves, but the whole driver fiasco is very suspicious.

Turns out the driver AMD used was a pre-release review driver not for public circulation. The driver was only allowed to be used by reviewers under NDA. AMD illegally used a driver that happened to have a bug. They could have, indeed should have, used the release driver which had the bug fixed. The issue is Oxide then make innaprriate statements about the driver buf affecting performance leading to all sorts of tin-foil conspiracy garbage about Nvida cheating. Oxide could have simply used the actual release driver and verified that with the bug fixed there was no performance change, but then AMD wouldn't have got their publicity stunt.

 

[humbug]

Still one type of Fury:
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/xfx-...ess-graphics-card-r9-fury-4tf9-gx-234-xf.html


I'm wondering they will will finally sell out these 5450's they are cramping the rest of the line-ups style (how old are they now)?
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asus...ress-low-profile-graphics-card-gx-271-as.html

Din't i say they had one Fury left?

Its just whats left in stock, clearly they ain't making them anymore.

Personally I think there is a unannounced 490 replacing the Fury/Nano and Vega will replace the FuryX

Nothing to go on other than the same rumors everyone else has read and what AdoredTV has said but thats my feels on it and I hope I'm right

^

 

[Ferrari100]

Din't i say they had one Fury left?

Its just whats left in stock, clearly they ain't making them anymore.



^

ooooopppsssy

 

[Freddie1980]

I'm wondering they will will finally sell out these 5450's they are cramping the rest of the line-ups style (how old are they now)?
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asus...ress-low-profile-graphics-card-gx-271-as.html

The HD5450 serves a purpose though. Back in 2009/2010 before 40nm budget GPU's weren't able to play Blu-Ray or 1080p content without CPU support when the 5450 came along it was the first entry card that could do HD streaming over the GPU alone.

Once 4k content becomes more accessible and available we might see the HD5450 get replaced with GNC architecture based entry level GPU for £40 that can stream 4k content. Right now there is no need to replace it.

 

[humbug]

The HD5450 serves a purpose though. Back in 2009/2010 before 40nm budget GPU's weren't able to play Blu-Ray or 1080p content without CPU support when the 5450 came along it was the first entry card that could do HD streaming over the GPU alone.

Once 4k content becomes more accessible and available we might see the HD5450 get replaced with GNC architecture based entry level GPU for £40 that can stream 4k content. Right now there is no need to replace it.

Does it play Crysis?


Sorry, couldn't resist.

 

[hyperseven]

I can't believe Nvidia got Dice to add Hyper settings to their new Mirror's Edge game. I mean - when will it end?
Super duper amazing Ultradaddio setting?

Ultra setting should stay at the top as graphics cards in the lowest GPU segment end fall off the spectrum.
It did make me chuckle and **shake head** tbh.

And what are the presets named in that AMD funded tech demo Ashes of the singularity again......

 

[Lokken86]

We should have a new crysis 1 bench thread. See if anything can actually play it now.

 

[Orangey]

4K blu rays are being sold now. They are £20, pretty accessible, enough to start selling new GPUs for.

 

[David Bisset]

...

Turns out the driver AMD used was a pre-release review driver not for public circulation. The driver was only allowed to be used by reviewers under NDA. AMD illegally used a driver that happened to have a bug. They could have, indeed should have, used the release driver which had the bug fixed. The issue is Oxide then make innaprriate statements about the driver buf affecting performance leading to all sorts of tin-foil conspiracy garbage about Nvida cheating. Oxide could have simply used the actual release driver and verified that with the bug fixed there was no performance change, but then AMD wouldn't have got their publicity stunt.

An NDA that had expired and the very driver that NVIDIA wanted reviewers to use. Oh my, how shocking to then use it as a comparison base. As opposed to the drivers released shortly before the demo - cause setting thing s up at the last minute is a good idea. Also what law do you think was broken?

 

[Ferrari100]

An NDA that had expired and the very driver that NVIDIA wanted reviewers to use. Oh my, how shocking to then use it as a comparison base. As opposed to the drivers released shortly before the demo - cause setting thing s up at the last minute is a good idea. Also what law do you think was broken?

No laws are broken except for by the person who handed the driver to AMD, if it was still under NDA.

Nvidia would happily use similar tactics if they had the chance to expose AMD for releasing 'press only' drivers to make their own products look better to unsuspecting consumers.

 

[drunkenmaster]

Turns out the driver AMD used was a pre-release review driver not for public circulation. The driver was only allowed to be used by reviewers under NDA. AMD illegally used a driver that happened to have a bug. They could have, indeed should have, used the release driver which had the bug fixed. The issue is Oxide then make innaprriate statements about the driver buf affecting performance leading to all sorts of tin-foil conspiracy garbage about Nvida cheating. Oxide could have simply used the actual release driver and verified that with the bug fixed there was no performance change, but then AMD wouldn't have got their publicity stunt.

It's a publicity stunt because AMD made no mention of the differences in the rendering? The only reason AMD talked about the differences was because Nvidia people decided to have a pop at AMD over their lower settings which were infact Nvidia rendering bugs.

Again I'll point out this rendering issue has been seen for months, I've previously pointed it out and others spoke about it on ocuk months ago when AMD were also accused of using lower settings when comparing Fury with 980ti. So this is a 'known' bug, that either has been a bug the whole time or maybe was reintroduced to bump performance purely for the drivers handed to reviewers, but AMD are in the wrong here.

 

[Ferrari100]

It's a publicity stunt because AMD made no mention of the differences in the rendering? The only reason AMD talked about the differences was because Nvidia people decided to have a pop at AMD over their lower settings which were infact Nvidia rendering bugs.

Again I'll point out this rendering issue has been seen for months, I've previously pointed it out and others spoke about it on ocuk months ago when AMD were also accused of using lower settings when comparing Fury with 980ti. So this is a 'known' bug, that either has been a bug the whole time or maybe was reintroduced to bump performance purely for the drivers handed to reviewers, but AMD are in the wrong here.

Then why did an Nvidia employee state it was 'press only' and the reason for the discrepancy? I'm not sure why, if what you say is correct, that comment would have been made.