• 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

Associate
Joined
21 Feb 2014
Posts
11
No way in hell will it be 970 performance. Just..no

A 390 is around the same as a 970, slightly faster. So going from 5.1 to 5.8 TF from the 390 to the 480, they have regressed in actual performance when they are supposed to be easier to reach nearer to peak TF with the new arch? Nope, not happening. Should be faster than the 390x.

These people leaking the benches don't have proper drivers, that's the only explanation I can think of.
 
Caporegime
Joined
20 May 2007
Posts
39,733
Location
Surrey
No way in hell will it be 970 performance. Just..no

A 390 is around the same as a 970, slightly faster. So going from 5.1 to 5.8 TF from the 390 to the 480, they have regressed in actual performance when they are supposed to be easier to reach nearer to peak TF with the new arch? Nope, not happening. Should be faster than the 390x.

These people leaking the benches don't have proper drivers, that's the only explanation I can think of.

It all depends. Remember the 390x has a 512 bit bus compared with just a 256 bit bus (although that would probably only affect high res performance). It also has double the rops, and more TMU's if that Rx480 gpuz screenshot is true.

So apart from the 200mhz clock bump it is quite down on 390x specs wise.

It all depends on how much they have improved the single core performance or whether too much has gone into power efficiency.

All that being said, I still think it will be around 390x performance.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
20 Jun 2016
Posts
1,308
I am struggling to believe that they'd put out a £200+ plus 970 speed card.

I mean it's not impossible, but still.

How many times.....

The price should be £190 and performance will be probbly be 390x.

Retailers will try and milk the initial release by charging more £££ for the card. 20-30-40 quid over the recommended retail price.

Simply don't buy but wait for the retail price.
 
Associate
Joined
9 Apr 2016
Posts
14
One day you read this tread performance is going to better than 1070, the next day its worse than 970 lol
Well I certainly wouldnt go by the guy posting gameplay videos without giving actual proof it was a RX 480.

Sure, he showed a separate video of the plastic being taken off of a RX 480, but that doesnt prove thats the GPU he was benchmarking.

He ignored repeated requests to show the cpu/mem speeds in the OSD.
Didnt even have GPUz on the desktop as proof either.
Basically, he gave no real proof, for all we know that WAS a 970.
 

TNA

TNA

Caporegime
Joined
13 Mar 2008
Posts
27,699
Location
Greater London
I seriously hope it isn't 970 performance lol

Indeed. That would be a bit sad, even if it is £200 to be honest. Hopefully no less than 390X and overclocks better than 390X.

Was not happy to find out it is 32 ROP's only. If it turns out to perform like 970, then I think I will just keep my 290 until Vega.

Here's hoping that it can reach at least a Fury level of performance once overclocked.
 
Associate
Joined
30 Nov 2015
Posts
166
How many times.....

The price should be £190 and performance will be probbly be 390x.

Retailers will try and milk the initial release by charging more £££ for the card. 20-30-40 quid over the recommended retail price.

Simply don't buy but wait for the retail price.

That doesn't disagree at all with what I said :confused:
A 390x is faster than a 970.

Nobody can be too certain about the performance and price yet though.
 
Associate
Joined
24 May 2011
Posts
1,541
Well I certainly wouldnt go by the guy posting gameplay videos without giving actual proof it was a RX 480.

Sure, he showed a separate video of the plastic being taken off of a RX 480, but that doesnt prove thats the GPU he was benchmarking.

He ignored repeated requests to show the cpu/mem speeds in the OSD.
Didnt even have GPUz on the desktop as proof either.
Basically, he gave no real proof, for all we know that WAS a 970.

Yes because it would make complete sense that he would have a 480 but then think to himself, f this I'll bench a 970...
 
Back
Top Bottom