Radeon RX 480 "Polaris" Launched at $199

[Alexrose1uk]

I showed a lot more bias before having shares. I feel AMD have come a long way since a few years ago.

Agreed. Drivers have only improved (see the dx11 draw calls improvements) and the r9 290 I just let go felt worlds more solid than my 7950 did which was already a well engineered card.

Made my old 9800 Pro and X1900XT seem tiny!

 

[Lokken86]

All i'm looking for is a card that is significantly faster than my 970, by significantly i mean 20-25%% minimum overclocked vs overclocked. it would have to cost the same or less than my 970 did at that.

Must be 6 or 8GB.

Whoever delivers that for the lowest amount gets my money.

I will admit i would like that to be AMD simply because i also want an adaptive sync screen and i can get more of that for my money with Free-Sync.

But if AMD cannot meet my expectations i will buy Nvidia, again.

I don't think the 480 will manage that unless it is a good overclocker. You can get dammed near 980 performance from that 970.

 

[Seanspeed]

I showed a lot more bias before having shares. I feel AMD have come a long way since a few years ago.

I got lucky, I was in the right place at the right time with plenty of spare cash.

I guess I owe Nvidia some thanks tbf. Lol, yeah, no.
Mostly I thank AMD engineers for making great products despite having a much lower budget than the competition.

So you think AMD would have made as much effort as they have with their drivers if not for Nvidia beating them resoundingly in this area for quite a few years?

Anyways, yea. Your post just reaffirms my point that you're not just biased, you're financially invested in promoting AMD. It doesn't invalidate anything you say, but it makes it very unlikely that you'd be honestly critical, or 'fair' towards judgements towards the competition.

 

[Ferrari100]

So you think AMD would have made as much effort as they have with their drivers if not for Nvidia beating them resoundingly in this area for quite a few years?

Anyways, yea. Your post just reaffirms my point that you're not just biased, you're financially invested in promoting AMD. It doesn't invalidate anything you say, but it makes it very unlikely that you'd be honestly critical, or 'fair' towards judgements towards the competition.

Lol
Whatever you say.

Every time you bump this thread to the top of of the pile I smile.
Thank for helping people to see how great a deal the RX480 is at $200.

 

[fs123]

So you think AMD would have made as much effort as they have with their drivers if not for Nvidia beating them resoundingly in this area for quite a few years?

Anyways, yea. Your post just reaffirms my point that you're not just biased, you're financially invested in promoting AMD. It doesn't invalidate anything you say, but it makes it very unlikely that you'd be honestly critical, or 'fair' towards judgements towards the competition.

Yet you seem to be Nvidia baised. What interest do you have in promoting Nvidia may I ask?

 

[Seanspeed]

Lol
Whatever you say.

Every time you bump this thread to the top of of the pile I smile.
Thank for helping people to see how great a deal the RX480 is at $200.

Thanks for proving my point.

Yet you seem to be Nvidia baised. What interest do you have in promoting Nvidia may I ask?

I'm pro Nvidia and pro AMD. I like to see both doing well. I simply dislike tribalism.

 

[mahius]

All i'm looking for is a card that is significantly faster than my 970, by significantly i mean 20-25%% minimum overclocked vs overclocked. it would have to cost the same or less than my 970 did at that.

Must be 6 or 8GB.

Whoever delivers that for the lowest amount gets my money.

I will admit i would like that to be AMD simply because i also want an adaptive sync screen and i can get more of that for my money with Free-Sync.

But if AMD cannot meet my expectations i will buy Nvidia, again.

You'll be waiting quite a while mate, unless some of these RX485/RX490 rumours are true and it performs they way some here have speculated (I saw a speculation graph where it was roughly on par with a 980ti). The 1070 is way above the 970 price and it'll be a while before competition and future card releases drive down prices of that card. Perhaps there is no RX 490 anytime soon and the release of Vega may provide you with the GPU you want... who knows?

I guess you can kinda be happy that a 970 is good for 1080p60 for now. If newer games give trouble then I'm considering grabbing a 2nd 970 for SLI, for a little bit more FPS. The RX 480 will not be an upgrade for sure, maybe a sidegrade or equivalent to upgrading to 980 level from a 970. Perhaps not quite worth it.

 

[Ferrari100]

Nope. It is not our job to act as volunteer marketers.

Wow, just wow.

 

[h4rm0ny]

Well then logic dictates that whoever wants a 50/50 split should at the very least show more positively to the business with less share in order to do their bit to balance share.
Yes?

No it doesn't. Your statement above implies that one must voice support based on market share, rather than technological merit. One can want competition without thinking that makes it okay to praise something not worth praising. In the hierarchy of bad behaviour, dishonesty ranks as worse than standing by and not being a warrior in the war of corporation market share, imo.

Plus some people are just critical generally - that doesn't mean they're biased. One doesn't need to show "positivity" to not be biased. You can be enthusiastic, you can be negative. Neither are biased inherently, only when you favour one company more than the other with the positivity / negativity.

So for example, D.P. will be endlessly negative about AMD. Call them out for bias and you'd be correct. You are endlessly positive about AMD. Again, there's an obvious bias that you could be called out for. Positivity is not more or less biased than the negativity, it's just a different approach.

I myself have a bias towards AMD, but it's purely on the purchasing side. I will prefer to buy from them where they meet my needs because I want the company to come back from where it was and establish itself as a strong force in the market. I both believe this would be a good thing for all of us and I have also been very impressed with what the company seems to have been doing. It's a company that is something like 70% engineers. I want to support it. But I wont extend my bias into partisanship online. At least I hope not. I do tend to say more positive things about AMD but that's mainly because I have been following the news on their products more closely and know more about it.

TL;DR: I don't think you should be attacking Seanspeed for bias. In fact, it's generally bad form to do so unless you have some special evidence. Like D.P.'s debacle over TDP from general familiarity with their posting, I'm happy enough to stand by an accusation of bias there and I'm pretty sure most of the rest of the forum knows it too. But generally such accusations don't do much other than incite the flames. They should be avoided. Bring facts and fight only with facts. Not being super-positive about something doesn't prove some terrible bias. It may just be that they don't buy into the whole Us and Them mentality.

Which is a good thing.

 

[D.P.]

Well then logic dictates that whoever wants a 50/50 split should at the very least show more positively to the business with less share in order to do their bit to balance share.
Yes?

So you want people to post biased and factually incorrect posts, and buy cards based on the IHV instead of performance and features?

That explains lot, thanks.

 

[Seanspeed]

Wow, just wow.

I'm truly disturbed that you could feel otherwise.

 

[Ferrari100]

No it doesn't. Some people are just critical generally - that doesn't mean they're biased. One doesn't need to show "positivity" to not be biased. You can be enthusiastic, you can be negative. Neither are biased inherently, only when you favour one or the other.

So for example, D.P. will be endlessly negative about AMD. Call them out for bias and you'd be correct. You are endlessly positive about AMD. Again, there's an obvious bias. One is not more or less biased than the other, it's just a different approach.

I myself have a bias towards AMD, but it's purely on the purchasing side. I will prefer to buy from them where they meet my needs because I want the company to come back from where it was and establish itself as a strong force in the market. I both believe this would be a good thing for all of us and I have also been very impressed with what the company seems to have been doing. It's a company that is something like 70% engineers. I want to support it. But I wont extend my bias into partisanship online. At least I hope not. I do tend to say more positive things about AMD but that's mainly because I have been following the news on their products more closely and know more about it.

TL;DR: I don't think you should be attacking Seanspeed for bias. In fact, it's generally bad form to do so unless you have some special evidence. Like D.P.'s debacle over TDP and general familiarity with their posting. I'm happy enough to stand by an accusation of bias there and I'm pretty sure most of the rest of the forum knows it too. But generally such accusations don't do much other than incite the flames. They should be avoided. Bring facts and fight only with facts. Not being super-positive about something doesn't prove some terrible bias. It may just be that they don't buy into the whole Us and Them mentality.

Which is a good thing.

.Let's not forget it was a reply from him to you that brought my bias into this thread.

....Just saying.

Not that I care, I have never hidden my adoration for what AMD do. I have no reason to hide that. I am proud of it.

 

[Ferrari100]

I'm truly disturbed that you could feel otherwise.

It's got nothing to do with what you said, it was a response to the many posts I could find that prove you do the opposite you stated..

Lol

 

[Seanspeed]

TL;DR: I don't think you should be attacking Seanspeed for bias.

He'd be entirely justified in doing so if I was actually biased.

 

[Rroff]

No it doesn't. Some people are just critical generally - that doesn't mean they're biased. One doesn't need to show "positivity" to not be biased. You can be enthusiastic, you can be negative. Neither are biased inherently, only when you favour one or the other.

So for example, D.P. will be endlessly negative about AMD. Call them out for bias and you'd be correct. You are endlessly positive about AMD. Again, there's an obvious bias. One is not more or less biased than the other, it's just a different approach.

I myself have a bias towards AMD, but it's purely on the purchasing side. I will prefer to buy from them where they meet my needs because I want the company to come back from where it was and establish itself as a strong force in the market. I both believe this would be a good thing for all of us and I have also been very impressed with what the company seems to have been doing. It's a company that is something like 70% engineers. I want to support it. But I wont extend my bias into partisanship online. At least I hope not. I do tend to say more positive things about AMD but that's mainly because I have been following the news on their products more closely and know more about it.

TL;DR: I don't think you should be attacking Seanspeed for bias. In fact, it's generally bad form to do so unless you have some special evidence. Like D.P.'s debacle over TDP and general familiarity with their posting. I'm happy enough to stand by an accusation of bias there and I'm pretty sure most of the rest of the forum knows it too. But generally such accusations don't do much other than incite the flames. They should be avoided. Bring facts and fight only with facts. Not being super-positive about something doesn't prove some terrible bias. It may just be that they don't buy into the whole Us and Them mentality.

Which is a good thing.

Personally I have no problem with people being bias or championing a brand of their choice - infact I'd rather see a bit of passion/lively debate, though its a little sad when it goes to the extreme of empty headed cheerleading. What I find repulsive is when people spread information they plainly know enough about the subject that they know is incorrect but still propagate it because it either looks bad on the competition for whoever they support or mis-leads people towards false positive thinking about the brand they support.

 

[h4rm0ny]

So you want people to post biased and factually incorrect posts, and buy cards based on the IHV instead of performance and features?

That explains lot, thanks.

See, Ferrari? Now you've got me agreeing with and supporting D.P.

 

[Ferrari100]

So you want people to post biased and factually incorrect posts, and buy cards based on the IHV instead of performance and features?

That explains lot, thanks.

No, I believe you should push people to do better for themselves, in life generally.
Negativity is no good for anyone.
Do you want to be surrounded by negativity or positivity?

 

[Ferrari100]

See, Ferrari? Now you've got me agreeing with and supporting D.P.

Think deeper about what I said and you might see a more thoughtful reasoning in that negativity is not good. Positivity pushes people forwards.

 

[Seanspeed]

It's got nothing to do with what you said, it was a response to the many posts I could find that prove you do the opposite you stated..

Lol

I'm sure you'd view things I'd said in a very one-sided manner. Being financially and emotionally invested in a brand, and admitting that you feel it somehow a 'duty' to prop up a brand would certainly explain how you'd have a very hard time telling the difference between somebody who is critical at times(as I am with anything when it deserves it) and somebody who has an agenda to push.

 

[Rroff]

No, I believe you should push people to do better for themselves, in life generally.
Negativity is no good for anyone.
Do you want to be surrounded by negativity or positivity?

I'd rather have genuine negativity than faked positivity personally.