# [WCCF] AMD RX 480 Can Hit 1.5Ghz+, New Overclocking Tool With Voltage Control Coming



## XHellAngelX

Interesting!


----------



## TK421

WCCF, fake?

I don't think AMD is going to let users control voltage and blow up the chip at launch, at least not this early.


----------



## KingG14

I am blown away if true. If the card won't turn out as overclockingly promising as they stated then WCCF will be forever on my blacklist.


----------



## infranoia

I bet the AIBs will have no problem with breaking from that measly $199 pricepoint, if this pushes up there into Fury X / 980Ti territory. I guess the question is how well the stock board will do compared to an AIB, with all the additional power capacity they can add.

Hmm... I'm starting to believe we won't see Vega this year at all.

But then, "overclocker's dream..."


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *infranoia*
> 
> I bet the AIBs will have no problem with breaking from that measly $199 pricepoint, if this pushes up there into Fury X / 980Ti territory. I guess the question is how well the stock board will do compared to an AIB, with all the additional power capacity they can add.
> 
> Hmm... I'm starting to believe we won't see Vega this year at all.


No way this touches Fury X or 980 Ti, not at $199 or even $299.


----------



## Elohim

So the early rumours wäre true after all:
$200 for 390x Performance
$300 for nearly 980ti Performance on factory overclocked AIB cards

Looks good


----------



## FlyingSolo

Cant wait to get my card. Was getting one if it was 390x/980 performance. But if this is true even better.


----------



## Loladinas

Looks to me like people are just setting themselves up for disappointment.


----------



## Unkzilla

The leaked benchmarks have this around a 390x at stock clock at 1250mhz odd (cant remember the exact clock)

1500mhz is around a 15% overclock.

Fury X / TI is around 30% faster then a 390x

Assuming the 390x perf and 1500mhz is accurate it should fall short by 15%... but then you can overclock the FuryX/980ti anyway (FuryX overclock only squeezes 8-9% whereas the TI will squeeze 20%+)

Cliffs: nothing to get too excited about


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> WCCF, fake?
> 
> I don't think AMD is going to let users control voltage and blow up the chip at launch, at least not this early.


http://videocardz.com/61007/amd-wants-gamers-to-start-the-uprising
Quote:


> More overclocking control. "We brainstormed what kind of voltage control could be given to them to create a better experience.


----------



## infranoia

Yeah, on reflection there's too much WCCF in this thread. Color me skeptical. This will be a fine card for the AIBs and maybe we'll see some interesting LN2 scores, but let's not make this launch something it's not.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unkzilla*
> 
> The leaked benchmarks have this around a 390x at stock clock at 1250mhz odd (cant remember the exact clock)
> 
> 1500mhz is around a 15% overclock.
> 
> Fury X / TI is around 30% faster then a 390x
> 
> Assuming the 390x perf and 1500mhz is accurate it should fall short by 15%... but then you can overclock the FuryX/980ti anyway (FuryX overclock only squeezes 8-9% whereas the TI will squeeze 20%+)
> 
> Cliffs: nothing to get too excited about


http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-480-faster-than-nano-980/
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *infranoia*
> 
> Yeah, on reflection there's too much WCCF in this thread. Color me skeptical. This will be a fine card for the AIBs and maybe we'll see some interesting LN2 scores, but let's not make this launch something it's not.


It does sit quite perfectly with that Chiphell leak we've seen previously.

It sounds plausible the more I think about it.


----------



## Elohim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unkzilla*
> 
> The leaked benchmarks have this around a 390x at stock clock at 1250mhz odd (cant remember the exact clock)
> 
> 1500mhz is around a 15% overclock.
> 
> Fury X / TI is around 30% faster then a 390x
> 
> Assuming the 390x perf and 1500mhz is accurate it should fall short by 15%... but then you can overclock the FuryX/980ti anyway (FuryX overclock only squeezes 8-9% whereas the TI will squeeze 20%+)
> 
> Cliffs: nothing to get too excited about


According to https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_1080_G1_Gaming/24.html the difference is more around 20% overall depending on resolution, wich would be roughly the same as the overclock % (~250MHz/1266MHz)

the question remains how many cards will actually reach 1,5GHz+ though...


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Last night I was thinking about this myself, basically 14nm also allows the same clockspeed improvements as 16nm:



So I was thinking, compared to the Fury X they went from 1050 MHz to 1266MHz with the RX480 and gained a 20% increase in clockspeed.

Which leaves another 20% increase leftover for overclocking which brings us to 1520MHz

This means potentially, that the rumor about the $300 Polaris card as fast as a 980 Ti is just a non-reference custom board partner RX480 that has factory overclocks that put it basically at Fury X levels, and then after overclocked 980 Ti levels.

If this all pans out to be true, without a doubt I will be getting a RX480.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Last night I was thinking about this myself, basically 14nm also allows the same clockspeed improvements as 16nm:
> 
> 
> 
> So I was thinking, compared to the Fury X they went from 1050 MHz to 1266MHz with the RX480 and gained a 20% increase in clockspeed.
> 
> Which leaves another 20% increase leftover for overclocking which brings us to 1520MHz
> 
> This means potentially, that the rumor about the $300 Polaris card as fast as a 980 Ti is just a non-reference custom board partner RX480 that has factory overclocks that put it basically at Fury X levels, and then after overclocked 980 Ti levels.
> 
> If this all pans out to be true, without a doubt I will be getting a RX480.


By that chart it looks like 14LPP which amd is using is 10% more than the 16nm Finfet. So maybe 1600 Mhz?


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> By that chart it looks like 14LPP which amd is using is 10% more than the 16nm Finfet. So maybe 1600 Mhz?


I was originally going to note that there is probably another 10% leftover in there, because of that, which puts us exactly at 1646MHz (OC Titan X levels?)


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> I was originally going to note that there is probably another 10% leftover in there, because of that, which puts us exactly at 1646MHz (OC Titan X levels?)


So at 1625Mhz (Guessing this could be an achievable overclock) I could see this inbetween the 980 and 980 ti, and around the Fury. So thats some pretty good company for whatever it costs at sub $299.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Elohim*
> 
> According to https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_1080_G1_Gaming/24.html the difference is more around 20% overall depending on resolution, wich would be roughly the same as the overclock % (~250MHz/1266MHz)
> 
> the question remains how many cards will actually reach 1,5GHz+ though...


One. The one that i'll be ordering.









I got 380MHz oc on one of my 290s. Maybe i'll be lucky again.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> So at 1625Mhz (Guessing this could be an achievable overclock) I could see this inbetween the 980 and 980 ti, and around the Fury. So thats some pretty good company for whatever it costs at sub $299.


AMD has always scaled better with overclocks in relation to MHz increases. Where they see large gains with even small MHz increases. Meaning at 1500MHz it will easily already be at 980 Ti levels.


----------



## Unkzilla

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Elohim*
> 
> According to https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_1080_G1_Gaming/24.html the difference is more around 20% overall depending on resolution, wich would be roughly the same as the overclock % (~250MHz/1266MHz)
> 
> the question remains how many cards will actually reach 1,5GHz+ though...


Looks like I didn't give enough credit to the 390x







. Hopefully the new card is at that level of performance

If the aftermarket cards are hitting 1.5ghz+ regularly with an OC then that will be quite impressive ..


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unkzilla*
> 
> The leaked benchmarks have this around a 390x at stock clock at 1250mhz odd (cant remember the exact clock)
> 
> 1500mhz is around a 15% overclock.
> 
> Fury X / TI is around 30% faster then a 390x
> 
> Assuming the 390x perf and 1500mhz is accurate it should fall short by 15%... but then you can overclock the FuryX/980ti anyway (FuryX overclock only squeezes 8-9% whereas the TI will squeeze 20%+)
> 
> Cliffs: nothing to get too excited about


Leaked FS scores are faster than 980, much less 390X...


----------



## Elohim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unkzilla*
> 
> Looks like I didn't give enough credit to the 390x
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Hopefully the new card is at that level of performance
> 
> If the aftermarket cards are hitting 1.5ghz+ regularly with an OC then that will be quite impressive ..


yeah, let's hope so. I might upgrade my 7870xt eventhough i dont play nearly as much these days


----------



## truelife772

Cant wait to get this card. Btw, it will be arriving on 29 June. For my country, the 8GB is rather expensive, around USD295.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61007/amd-wants-gamers-to-start-the-uprising


Original article is from Forbes:
Quote:


> While Radeon Technologies Group was conceptualizing Polaris, they kept their ear to the ground and learned what their community wanted right now, but also what their community desired 2 years from now. Hook says this resulted in five key takeaways:
> 
> 1: _Prestige_. "They wanted the prestige of a $700 graphics card, but they didn't want to have to pay for it," Hook begins.
> 
> 2: _VR that just works._ "They wanted the ability to have a great VR experience today or two years from now without worrying about upgrading power supplies and digging into their PC. They wanted to buy a headset at some point and just have it work."
> 
> 3: _Respect their investment._ "They wanted us to pay respect to the dollars they were giving us and do things in the architecture or transistors or APIs or ASync Compute, that provided a measure of 'futureproofness.' They wanted to be reassured that even if they're only spending $200 they'd feel secure in their investment for a couple years."
> 
> 4: _More overclocking control._ "We brainstormed what kind of voltage control could be given to them to create a better experience.
> 
> 5: _Better drivers._ "We feel we've made a great first step there, and we're only going to be putting a heavier foot on the gas this year and next year to make those drivers better and better."


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Leaked FS scores are faster than 980, much less 390X...


The base 1080MHz score a 2.9k FS ultra.

If 1.5Ghz just add a close 40% score and u can get almost 4k FSU.

Now... Its not just 980 ti lvl, we are talking about titan x lvl


----------



## alawadhi3000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> The base 1080MHz score a 2.9k FS ultra.
> 
> If 1.5Ghz just add a close 40% score and u can get almost 4k FSU.
> 
> Now... Its not just 980 ti lvl, we are talking about titan x lvl


lol, overclocking the core by %40 won't get you %40 more performance, there are other variables like memory bandwidth, you'll be lucky if you get %20 nad thats assuming the stock clock is 1080MHz.


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alawadhi3000*
> 
> lol, overclocking the core by %40 won't get you %40 more performance, there are other variables like memory bandwidth, you'll be lucky if you get %20 nad thats assuming the stock clock is 1080MHz.


Base is 1080mhz, but AMD's run at their boost clocks until they throttle. With the 480, that boost is 1266mhz

Btw,
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *guttheslayer*
> 
> The base 1080MHz score a 2.9k FS ultra.
> 
> If 1.5Ghz just add a close 40% score and u can get almost 4k FSU.
> 
> Now... Its not just 980 ti lvl, we are talking about titan x lvl


Speaking of base/boost, the 480 @ it's 1266mhz boost scored ~3.4K in FS Ultra. Just under the Fury Nano


----------



## Jay1ty0

The itch to upgrade from my 280x to this beauty is strong, dammit!


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Jay1ty0*
> 
> The itch to upgrade from my 280x to this beauty is strong, dammit!


Good







Nice to see AMD with some good cards in the pipeline for once


----------



## TopicClocker

If this is true, this GPU is going to be the second coming of 8800 GT and maybe the 7950 too.


----------



## Gungnir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alawadhi3000*
> 
> lol, overclocking the core by %40 won't get you %40 more performance, there are other variables like memory bandwidth, you'll be lucky if you get %20 nad thats assuming the stock clock is 1080MHz.


Hey, this isn't Pascal; GCN scales really well with clocks. Not 100%, but 90-95% is pretty normal on past cards. Also, rumors have it the 480's stock clocks are tuned for efficiency over performance, unlike the Fury X and 290X were. As for memory bandwidth, the RX 480 has the exact same memory setup as the GTX 1070: 256bit, 8Ghz effective GDDR5, for 256GB/s bandwidth. If the 1070 can match or beat a Titan X with that amount of bandwidth, I see no reason it would be insufficient for a heavily OC'd 480.

Anyway, I'm not sure about 480s regularly breaking 1600Mhz, but I think 1500 is definitely possible, and I wouldn't be terribly surprised to see higher end non-reference cards at 1350-1400 stock.


----------



## Orthello

Ah this is awesome , I just love the direction , instead of overpricing a card clocked to an inch of its life where the AIB cards merely just reduce noise it sounds like AIB cards here will actually be something special.

Instead of locking down over voltage / locking down tri sli / locklng down driver performance increases for prev gen cards / locking down you wallet for a good amount of time.. locking down all the fun basically .. AMD goes the other way


----------



## flopper

I think I said no I know I said/wrote total ownage below the 1080 for AMD and this is why.
AMD just killed the 1070 and any other nvidia card below the 1080.

The way to bring in a wider customer group did just happen


----------



## Ultracarpet

Hmmmm... I wonder if/how much the single six pin would hold back the overclocking... hopefully the 8+6 pin aren't too much more $$$


----------



## JackCY

We can only hope that the new direction brings us more control over the hardware settings and voltage control for core and memory won't be an exclusive anymore. How well the RX 480 does and clocks remains to be seen.


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> AMD has always scaled better with overclocks in relation to MHz increases. Where they see large gains with even small MHz increases. Meaning at 1500MHz it will easily already be at 980 Ti levels.


Dx12 we already see the 390 at 980ti levels or beyond.
the value atm is that it offers a future with dx12 vs the 980ti which is dead in the water.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gungnir*
> 
> Hey, this isn't Pascal; GCN scales really well with clocks. Not 100%, but 90-95% is pretty normal on past cards. Also, rumors have it the 480's stock clocks are tuned for efficiency over performance, unlike the Fury X and 290X were. As for memory bandwidth, the RX 480 has the exact same memory setup as the GTX 1070: 256bit, 8Ghz effective GDDR5, for 256GB/s bandwidth. If the 1070 can match or beat a Titan X with that amount of bandwidth, I see no reason it would be insufficient for a heavily OC'd 480.
> 
> Anyway, I'm not sure about 480s regularly breaking 1600Mhz, but I think 1500 is definitely possible, and I wouldn't be terribly surprised to see higher end non-reference cards at 1350-1400 stock.


Yea the IPC for amd is awesome.
exciting for sure.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unkzilla*
> 
> The leaked benchmarks have this around a 390x at stock clock at 1250mhz odd (cant remember the exact clock)
> 
> 1500mhz is around a 15% overclock.
> 
> Fury X / TI is around 30% faster then a 390x
> 
> Assuming the 390x perf and 1500mhz is accurate it should fall short by 15%... but then you can overclock the FuryX/980ti anyway (FuryX overclock only squeezes 8-9% whereas the TI will squeeze 20%+)
> 
> Cliffs: nothing to get too excited about


^ pretty much this

its nice and all but if the stock is 1266 then I dont see how 1400 on air (+134) and 1500 (+234) on "beast mode 6+8 overvolted $300+ cards" is anything to go so insane over

980 also goes from 12XX to 1500 in its OC









the whole Fury X/980Ti level is just more of "set yourself up for dissapointment"









and noone ever even mentions how 980Ti gets up to *+25%* from its own OC, leaving *everything* except 1070 & 1080 in the dust


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> ^ pretty much this
> 
> its nice and all but if the stock is 1266 then I dont see how 1400 on air (+134) and 1500 (+234) on "beast mode 6+8 overvolted $300+ cards" is anything to go so insane over
> 
> 980 also goes from 12XX to 1500 in its OC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the whole Fury X/980Ti level is just more of "set yourself up for dissapointment"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and noone ever even mentions how 980Ti gets up to *+25%* from its own OC, leaving *everything* except 1070 & 1080 in the dust


This card isn't about being the BEST performer. Its about being the best ECONOMICAL performer. At $200 it simply can't be beat except maybe slightly by the 1070 at $379-$500. I don't know about you, but double the cost for an extra 10-15% doesn't seem worth it to me. And with the extra 1070 performance from OC being non existent, ANY overclock this can gain will directly start to catch up to the 1070.


----------



## paulerxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TopicClocker*
> 
> If this is true, this GPU is going to be the second coming of 8800 GT and maybe the 7950 too.


as a HD7870..I'm more proud of paying $200 for a video card that lasted me 4 years..Playing games at High Settings still.


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> ^ pretty much this
> 
> its nice and all but if the stock is 1266 then I dont see how 1400 on air (+134) and 1500 (+234) on "beast mode 6+8 overvolted $300+ cards" is anything to go so insane over
> 
> 980 also goes from 12XX to 1500 in its OC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the whole Fury X/980Ti level is just more of "set yourself up for dissapointment"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and noone ever even mentions how 980Ti gets up to *+25%* from its own OC, leaving *everything* except 1070 & 1080 in the dust


Maxwell lacks dx12 functions the 980ti is a dead card now along with a hardware latency hit with VR.
anyone buying and keeping a Nvidia card like that is going to have the same dissapointment with dx12 and VR and thats the future.
to defend the past like Kepler and we seen how AMD cards keep on giving better and better performance and the same will happen with Maxwell and dx12 a big loss of peformance along the way for the 980ti.

AMD just killed the 1070 and any Nvidia card below the 1080 and I called it....earlier.....Next on list, but lottery ticket.
The King is here and its name is RX 480 Radeon the Red Dragon

Join the revolution buy 480 July 1


----------



## Loladinas

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> This card isn't about being the BEST performer. Its about being the best ECONOMICAL performer. At $200 it simply can't be beat except maybe slightly by the 1070 at $379-$500. I don't know about you, but double the cost for an extra 10-15% doesn't seem worth it to me. And with the extra 1070 performance from OC being non existent, ANY overclock this can gain will directly start to catch up to the 1070.


The $199 won't be beating anything. It's the bone stock reference model. Over here, the AIB boards with extra power and better cooling, will probably cost something like 299€. Of course it still makes it an OK deal, since a 1070 with a decent cooling system is 499€. If you can even find them in stock, that is.


----------



## sinholueiro

Well, an OCed 980Ti leaves even the 1070 in the dust. The point is as RX480 seems to be a 980, the 980Ti is 18,3% more powerful at 1080p. No one sees a 20% OC in the RX480? At 1500Mhz, the RX480 should be start to catching the 980Ti (being the 1266Mhz the base clock). From memory bandwith, as someone said, the 1070 has the same memory setup but it catches the TitanX, so I see it possible even accounting a worse IMC from AMD. And the 8GHz GDDR5 is known to go way past over 9000, so a 20% OC in the memory is way easy to get and keep the memory up with the core.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Loladinas*
> 
> The $199 won't be beating anything. It's the bone stock reference model. Over here, the AIB boards with extra power and better cooling, will probably cost something like 299€. Of course it still makes it an OK deal, since a 1070 with a decent cooling system is 499€. If you can even find them in stock, that is.


Well yeah maybe 299€ with the seahawk version with 8GB. But the 4GB version with the Gaming G1 or whatever will probably be closer to 230-240


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Loladinas*
> 
> The $199 won't be beating anything. It's the bone stock reference model. Over here, the AIB boards with extra power and better cooling, will probably cost something like 299€. Of course it still makes it an OK deal, since a 1070 with a decent cooling system is 499€. If you can even find them in stock, that is.


I dont see it getting to 299€ even with AIB boards. AMD aib boards even custom ones usually are on par with MSRP pricing, thats how its been with the 300 series. A reference and an aib card usually are fairly close in price not 100€ extra this isn't nvidia lol.

The boost clock is known to be above 1200mhz so its totally believable and accurate that its going to OC at least 200mhz. As far as the 6pin? Thats only a spec, with a thicker gauge cable and a shorter run it will be able to provide more amps therefore more wattage. You can easily provide 200+w on a 6pin.

And i wish people would stop comparing the rx 480 to the 980ti/1070/1080. Its a midrange card aka a 1080p card. Same way the r9 390 is maxed out.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> This card isn't about being the BEST performer. Its about being the best ECONOMICAL performer. At $200 it simply can't be beat except maybe slightly by the 1070 at $379-$500. I don't know about you, but double the cost for an extra 10-15% doesn't seem worth it to me. And with the extra 1070 performance from OC being non existent, ANY overclock this can gain will directly start to catch up to the 1070.


except it wont even come close to 10-15% of (OCed) 1070, thats just more red dreaming .. stock 1070 is like 10%+ ahead of stock 980Ti, 1070 will crush 480









the value is very good of course, noone doubts that

but its not a 980Ti/1070 competitor, because it *cannot* match that level of performance

as for no OC on 1070 :


its funny how ppl say no OC on 1070, yet for some reason go insane over just +134/+234 Mhz OC on 480









like since when did +200-250Mhz become something to wet yourself over ?







its just ok

but then again Im 100% ok with all the red fanboys getting dissapointed

Quote:


> Well, an OCed 980Ti leaves even the 1070 in the dust


wrooooooooooong


----------



## Loladinas

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluej511*
> 
> I dont see it getting to 299€ even with AIB boards. AMD aib boards even custom ones usually are on par with MSRP pricing, thats how its been with the 300 series. A reference and an aib card usually are fairly close in price not 100€ extra this isn't nvidia lol.
> 
> The boost clock is known to be above 1200mhz so its totally believable and accurate that its going to OC at least 200mhz. As far as the 6pin? Thats only a spec, with a thicker gauge cable and a shorter run it will be able to provide more amps therefore more wattage. You can easily provide 200+w on a 6pin.
> 
> And i wish people would stop comparing the rx 480 to the 980ti/1070/1080. Its a midrange card aka a 1080p card. Same way the r9 390 is maxed out.


-shrug-
The Sapphire RX 480 was listed as 300something€. Remember, even MSRP for reference 8GB cards is supposedly $249, and that is without taxes. VAT in most places in EU is 19-21%. That alone brings it near $300. USD to EUR is barely 0.89 these days. And all you people are saying that AIBs/retailers won't bump the prices up another 20-30€? Yeah, right.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Loladinas*
> 
> -shrug-
> The Sapphire RX 480 was listed as 300something€. Remember, even MSRP for reference 8GB cards is supposedly $249, and that is without taxes. VAT in most places in EU is 19-21%. That alone brings it near $300. USD to EUR is barely 0.89 these days. And all you people are saying that AIBs/retailers won't bump the prices up another 20-30€? Yeah, right.


Where did you see it listed for that id love to get a link.

Unfortunately they dont go buy vat or eur/usd conversion. I should know as i live in France but my account is in the US so i have to convert either way costs more for me.

It works the same way as USD prices but in Eur (most of the times a few euros more), ie if it sells for 250$ sapphire card for example it will sell for 250€-280€ i dont see it reaching 300€ unless its a site that really jacks up its prices. It really really depends on the company thats why.

For example my LG i bought is 360€ here but 350$ or so in the US. So SLIGHTLY more expensive. Of course if you get rid of VAT its WAY cheaper haha.

The gtx 1080 msrp is like 620€ for Europe yet its 729€ in France and Germany but sells for 799€. We wont know till it comes out.


----------



## ChevChelios

the "beast mode" 1500 cards will easily be $300 in US which will naturally translate to _at least_ 350 EUR in good ol Europe


----------



## bossie2000

Ok let's just kill off all the predictions.Bottem line is for people in the 150- 300 dollar market and still got like 4-5 year old cards,this is going to be a heavenlly upgrade(470 included).Full stop!


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> except it wont even come close to 10-15% of (OCed) 1070, thats just more red dreaming .. stock 1070 is like 10%+ ahead of stock 980Ti, 1070 will crush 480
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the value is very good of course, noone doubts that
> 
> but its not a 980Ti/1070 competitor, because it *cannot* match that level of performance
> 
> as for no OC on 1070 :
> 
> 
> its funny how ppl say no OC on 1070, yet for some reason go insane over just +134/+234 Mhz OC on 480
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> like since when did +200-250Mhz become something to wet yourself over ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> its just ok
> 
> but then again Im 100% ok with all the red fanboys getting dissapointed
> wrooooooooooong


The 1070 has been reviewed, and while it overclocks, it gained 1 FPS from like 30 to 31 for a whopping 3% increase. This is clearly a bigger increase as you saw from the 1080 Mhz to 1266 Firestrike runs. Dude, go get educated somewhere. I'm sporting 2 rigs with GTX 980 Ti's. Do you think i take pleasure in seeing my cards go down to $200 USD?

No.


----------



## Newbie2009

I'll believe it when I see it. Not long now.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> I'm sporting 2 rigs with GTX 980 Ti's. Do you think i take pleasure in seeing my cards go down to $200 USD?
> 
> No.


I think you should be happy you have a beastly 980Ti rig and not give a frack about how much they cost now .. you buy a card to run what you need it to run, not to worry about how much its resale value will be years down the line


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> I think you should be happy you have a beastly 980Ti rig and not give a frack about how much they cost now .. you buy a card to run what you need it to run, not to worry about how much its resale value will be years down the line


Then why are you in an AMD thread when you are clearly going to buy a GTX 1070, or 1080?


----------



## Loladinas

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluej511*
> 
> I dont see it getting to 299€ even with AIB boards. AMD aib boards even custom ones usually are on par with MSRP pricing, thats how its been with the 300 series. A reference and an aib card usually are fairly close in price not 100€ extra this isn't nvidia lol.
> 
> The boost clock is known to be above 1200mhz so its totally believable and accurate that its going to OC at least 200mhz. As far as the 6pin? Thats only a spec, with a thicker gauge cable and a shorter run it will be able to provide more amps therefore more wattage. You can easily provide 200+w on a 6pin.
> 
> And i wish people would stop comparing the rx 480 to the 980ti/1070/1080. Its a midrange card aka a 1080p card. Same way the r9 390 is maxed out.


It was one of the first leaks regarding the price and it was all over the place. I'm sure you've seen it as well. It's from one of the warehouses where local retailers order stock from. On top of that there were several other listings at Czech retailers website which roughly translated to the same prices.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> Then why are you in an AMD thread when you are clearly going to buy a GTX 1070, or 1080?


so I can only post in threads about the card(s) I have personally bought ?

dumbest thing Ive read this morning


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> so I can only post in threads about the card(s) I have personally bought ?
> 
> dumbest thing Ive read this morning


You literally just told me that i should mind my own business with the cards i bought. So by the same logic you should do the same.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Loladinas*
> 
> It was one of the first leaks regarding the price and it was all over the place. I'm sure you've seen it as well. It's from one of the warehouses where local retailers order stock from. On top of that there were several other listings at Czech retailers website which roughly translated to the same prices.


Ill have to take a look and find it again. Usually most decent companies will keep the MSRP the same in eur as USD and yes if you convert it is more expensive but the euro is more powerful (slightly, was a lot more 3 yrs ago) and european pay is way different as well.

Steam games are 14.99$/14.99€. If AMD keeps with the theme should be 199$/199€ or 230€ but well have to see. Prices on sites are a bit iffy cuz they tend to hike it up a good amount. Here in France the 1070/1080 are no where near the MSRP they listed in € so who knows haha.

Even if its 300€ could probably sell my 390 with the waterblock and pick up an rx480 and watercool it. I might do it anyways if it looks REALLY good or just wait 6 months or so for Vega who knows.


----------



## Shiftstealth

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluej511*
> 
> Ill have to take a look and find it again. Usually most decent companies will keep the MSRP the same in eur as USD and yes if you convert it is more expensive but the euro is more powerful (slightly, was a lot more 3 yrs ago) and european pay is way different as well.
> 
> Steam games are 14.99$/14.99€. If AMD keeps with the theme should be 199$/199€ or 230€ but well have to see. Prices on sites are a bit iffy cuz they tend to hike it up a good amount. Here in France the 1070/1080 are no where near the MSRP they listed in € so who knows haha.
> 
> Even if its 300€ could probably sell my 390 with the waterblock and pick up an rx480 and watercool it. I might do it anyways if it looks REALLY good or just wait 6 months or so for Vega who knows.


I hope they are cheaper for you


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> I hope they are cheaper for you


I hope so, either way i get screwed i live in France with USD money in a US bank account so i gotta convert no matter what haha. 1.13/€ is much better then 1.40/€ when i moved 3 years ago. Quick math a 350€ card would come out to 490$ 3 yrs ago, today its 395$. A 100$ savings in my case so yea people who complain about euro and usd prices should just shush and try being in my shoes lol.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> I think you should be happy you have a beastly 980Ti rig and not give a frack about how much they cost now .. you buy a card to run what you need it to run, not to worry about how much its resale value will be years down the line


And this is the dumbest thing I read, as well.
...not to mention that 980Ti is not years old, it's just one year old.


----------



## AuraNova

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bossie2000*
> 
> Ok let's just kill off all the predictions.Bottem line is for people in the 150- 300 dollar market and still got like 4-5 year old cards,this is going to be a heavenlly upgrade(470 included).Full stop!


I can certainly drink to that. I'm working a 7870 right now that I wouldn't mind retiring to "backup" status.

I've noticed that the focus for some people seems to be lost here. The reason people are so excited is the performance you are getting for a $200-$250 card. I know this is obvious to some here. Quite simply, the price is what makes the RX 480 worthwhile.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AuraNova*
> 
> I've noticed that the focus for some people seems to be lost here. The reason people are so excited is the performance you are getting for a $200-$250 card. I know this is obvious to some here. Quite simply, the price is what makes the RX 480 worthwhile.


well if you read this the thread - half legitimately think they are getting essentially a 980Ti/1070 for $250 (or even $200)

the rest are reasonable though


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AuraNova*
> 
> I can certainly drink to that. I'm working a 7870 right now that I wouldn't mind retiring to "backup" status.
> 
> I've noticed that the focus for some people seems to be lost here. The reason people are so excited is the performance you are getting for a $200-$250 card. I know this is obvious to some here. Quite simply, the price is what makes the RX 480 worthwhile.


Ill drink to taht too, i went from a 5770 to 7850 to r9 390 haha. Huge leap, kinda regret not waiting but my r9 390 is at least 6months old now but oh well. Maybe build another rig with it


----------



## hawker-gb

Looks liket a new king is coming at 29th


----------



## AuraNova

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> well if you read this the thread - half legitimately think they are getting essentially a 980Ti/1070 for $250 (or even $200)
> 
> the rest are reasonable though


Yeah, I've pretty much not taken all the charts and leaks seriously. The proof will come in time, of course. Either way, if it is a beast of a card, then it will be a phenomenal deal. If not as much, I still think this card will be a top seller.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluej511*
> 
> Ill drink to taht too, i went from a 5770 to 7850 to r9 390 haha. Huge leap, kinda regret not waiting but my r9 390 is at least 6months old now but oh well. Maybe build another rig with it


I almost made a purchase on a R9 380X earlier this year, but decided to just rebuild when I heard about Zen's progress. I'm glad I have waited. The RX 480 is seeming to be a very good card so far. If Zen turns out to be all IT is hyped up to be, then I think I will have a nice build I can be happy with for a good 4 or 5 years. With "minor" upgrades here and there, of course.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AuraNova*
> 
> Yeah, I've pretty much not taken all the charts and leaks seriously. The proof will come in time, of course. Either way, if it is a beast of a card, then it will be a phenomenal deal. If not as much, I still think this card will be a top seller.
> I almost made a purchase on a R9 380X earlier this year, but decided to just rebuild when I heard about Zen's progress. I'm glad I have waited. The RX 480 is seeming to be a very good card so far. If Zen turns out to be all IT is hyped up to be, then I think I will have a nice build I can be happy with for a good 4 or 5 years. With "minor" upgrades here and there, of course.


My plan exactly, i think i might end up waiting vega/zen and build a new rig. I already have most of the components i need so id need a new mobo/ram/cpu. The waterblock would even fit if ek provides free am4 mounting kits. Then could have a spare rig with my i5/r9 390 setup and go back to air on that one and watercool zen/vega. Would be a pretty sweet rig.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Loladinas*
> 
> Looks to me like people are just setting themselves up for disappointment.


At $450 . . . true dat.

I see Chev started a new shift. lol


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> I see Chev started a new shift. lol


I love how you mention me in half the posts you make









so tsundere <3


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> I love how you mention me in half the posts you make
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so tsundere <3


We have about 2K guests. Dupe Convince 10% each day is a nice goal.


----------



## AuraNova

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluej511*
> 
> My plan exactly, i think i might end up waiting vega/zen and build a new rig. I already have most of the components i need so id need a new mobo/ram/cpu. The waterblock would even fit if ek provides free am4 mounting kits. Then could have a spare rig with my i5/r9 390 setup and go back to air on that one and watercool zen/vega. Would be a pretty sweet rig.


Oh yeah, that's right. AM4 is going to have a different mount.

I think either way, with the price of the RX 480, I could wait long after the initial release of Vega to snag one of those cards. By then, there might be a good sale or combo to capitalize on. Then use the 480 for an HTPC build or keep as a backup card or something.


----------



## Nestala




----------



## AuraNova

Not gonna lie, I had to do a double take.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nestala*


seems legit


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nestala*


NVidia still 5 generations behind. Sad!


----------



## stoker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nestala*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


HAHA thats better than mine



Though 1800 could be possible


----------



## spurdomantbh

vc also posted new numbers


----------



## Yttrium

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nestala*


quick! delete it before wccf makes an article about it!


----------



## stoker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> vc also posted new numbers


So at 1080p

11893 @1230

est 14749 @1400 &

est 16439 @1500


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yttrium*
> 
> quick! delete it before wccf makes an article about it!


You joke but I wouldn't put it past them. I stopped using them for anything more than satire several years ago.


----------



## rainzor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> vc also posted new numbers
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8834505 Performance
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8834447 Extreme
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8834341 Ultra


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rainzor*
> 
> [/SPOILER]
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8834505 Performance
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8834447 Extreme
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8834341 Ultra


About 8000 more points then my r9 390? Thats a bit hard to believe isnt it haha.


----------



## stoker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluej511*
> 
> About 8000 more points then my r9 390? Thats a bit hard to believe isnt it haha.


All x2 crossfire result links posted


----------



## alawadhi3000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gungnir*
> 
> Hey, this isn't Pascal; *GCN scales really well with clocks. Not 100%, but 90-95% is pretty normal on past cards.* Also, rumors have it the 480's stock clocks are tuned for efficiency over performance, unlike the Fury X and 290X were. As for memory bandwidth, the RX 480 has the exact same memory setup as the GTX 1070: 256bit, 8Ghz effective GDDR5, for 256GB/s bandwidth. If the 1070 can match or beat a Titan X with that amount of bandwidth, I see no reason it would be insufficient for a heavily OC'd 480.
> 
> Anyway, I'm not sure about 480s regularly breaking 1600Mhz, but I think 1500 is definitely possible, and I wouldn't be terribly surprised to see higher end non-reference cards at 1350-1400 stock.


Just three examples of high end GCN cards.

10% overclock on the core, only 5.1% real world gain
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/34.html

7% overclock on the core, only 4.5% real world gain
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/R9_Fury_Strix/34.html

10% overclock on the core, only 6.4% real world gain
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/R9_Fury_Tri-X_OC/33.html

90%-95%, lol.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stoker*
> 
> All x2 crossfire result links posted


Yea me stupid didnt check haha. I get a graphics score of about 13,000 non oc about 15,000 oced on my r9 390. If charts are right then rx 480 gets about 11,000.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alawadhi3000*
> 
> Just three examples of high end GCN cards.
> 
> 10% overclock on the core, only 5.1% real world gain
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/34.html
> 
> 7% overclock on the core, only 4.5% real world gain
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/R9_Fury_Strix/34.html
> 
> 10% overclock on the core, only 6.4% real world gain
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/R9_Fury_Tri-X_OC/33.html
> 
> 90%-95%, lol.


And they are from techpowerup and only from fury x.

I can cherry pick way better. For example a 7970 from 925 mhz stock clock to 1350









Also it is only a core overclock.


----------



## alawadhi3000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> And they are from techpowerup and only from fury x.
> 
> I can cherry pick way better. For example a 7970 from 925 mhz stock clock to 1350
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also it is only a core overclock.


Go back and read the previous posts.


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> And they are from techpowerup and only from fury x.
> 
> I can cherry pick way better. For example a 7970 from 925 mhz stock clock to 1350
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also it is only a core overclock.


And does it result in 40-45% perfomance gain? If so, source.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nestala*


Yeah that memory compression was superior to anything we have today. 8bit graphics FTW.

---

So RX 480 comes at around 1250MHz stock boost clock it seems so far. These speculations of insane OC potential are just funny, it all remains to be seen how far the cores can go and how far will we be allowed by AMD and provided tools to push the chips. I don't expect anything more than the usual 10-15% OC headroom but maybe we will be surprised pleasantly and it will do more % like 980Ti did.

I'm definitely looking into RX 480 8GB AIB version as long as the price is right. Otherwise the no brainer would be a cheap 1070.


----------



## prjindigo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *alawadhi3000*
> 
> lol, overclocking the core by %40 won't get you %40 more performance, there are other variables like memory bandwidth, you'll be lucky if you get %20 nad thats assuming the stock clock is 1080MHz.


We can pretty much assume that the RX480 will not OC past it's ram. That's not a selling point at all and it's a 480. There's more than 300mm^2 of diespace left in aperture for Polaris...


----------



## Noufel

No no no polaris can't get pass the 850mhz


----------



## prjindigo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> I think I said no I know I said/wrote total ownage below the 1080 for AMD and this is why.
> AMD just killed the 1070 and any other nvidia card below the 1080.
> 
> The way to bring in a wider customer group did just happen


I sniff a little hype in your post. But my god... this is the tech they're building Zen on. Dense and brutal.


----------



## Titanox

Runaway Hype train pulling into Overexpectation Station


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> Yeah that memory compression was superior to anything we have today. 8bit graphics FTW.
> 
> ---
> 
> So RX 480 comes at around 1250MHz stock boost clock it seems so far. These speculations of insane OC potential are just funny, it all remains to be seen how far the cores can go and how far will we be allowed by AMD and provided tools to push the chips. I don't expect anything more than the usual 10-15% OC headroom but maybe we will be surprised pleasantly and it will do more % like 980Ti did.
> 
> I'm definitely looking into RX 480 8GB AIB version as long as the price is right. Otherwise the no brainer would be a cheap 1070.


At 1250, it does not need much to reach 1500. 1600 might be too much. My 290 at 947 was able to do 1330.

when it was 8C outside.


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> No no no polaris can't get pass the 850mhz


yea, 850mhz, October launch. Sad stuff.


----------



## Defoler

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Elohim*
> 
> So the early rumours wäre true after all:
> $200 for 390x Performance
> $300 for nearly 980ti Performance on factory overclocked AIB cards
> 
> Looks good


I doubt that it will be that of a performer. Especially the 4gb version vs a 8gb card.
Also comparing overlock vs reference? Really? If you would overclock a 480 you would definitely a 980ti, in which case, it would give you way more than what the 480m will be able to do.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> And does it result in 40-45% perfomance gain? If so, source.


If you keep the same ratio between core clock and memory bandwidth the gpu will scale correctly.

But you will not going to learn the scale from a single game because of many factors. Especially on bf3 because fury x has a limitation on pixel fillrate. But o well what i know


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> At 1250, it does not need much to reach 1500. 1600 might be too much. My 290 at 947 was able to do 1330.
> 
> when it was 8C outside.


And my 280x chip was pushed from it's original design of about 970 or 850? to 1070 stock and wouldn't OC anywhere really after that.
It's always a hit or miss. Sure newer chip designs and not rebrands may not be pushed to the limit from start but that remains to be seen. Nvidia does push their chip quite to the limit with boost on Pascal leaving minimal OC headroom especially when it comes to AIB versions with reasonable coolers.

I think they have learned to use the headroom and lately clock the chips much closer to the limit than they used to, both AMD and Nvidia so the OC headroom left is smaller than what it used to be years ago. Same with Intel and AMD CPUs.


----------



## pengs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Loladinas*
> 
> -shrug-
> The Sapphire RX 480 was listed as 300something€. Remember, even MSRP for reference 8GB cards is supposedly $249, and that is without taxes. VAT in most places in EU is 19-21%. That alone brings it near $300. USD to EUR is barely 0.89 these days. And all you people are saying that AIBs/retailers won't bump the prices up another 20-30€? Yeah, right.


That's nothing new, your looking at odd ball retailers who most likely have limited quantities and are pushing pre-orders on non reference coolers. Also, the fact that cards are showing up a month early is a good sign - the higher the quantities the more likely retailers are to hang around MSRP.


----------



## stoker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> And my 280x chip was pushed from it's original design of about 970 or 850? to 1070 stock and wouldn't OC anywhere really after that.
> It's always a hit or miss. Sure newer chip designs and not rebrands may not be pushed to the limit from start but that remains to be seen. Nvidia does push their chip quite to the limit with boost on Pascal leaving minimal OC headroom especially when it comes to AIB versions with reasonable coolers.
> 
> I think they have learned to use the headroom and lately clock the chips much closer to the limit than they used to, both AMD and Nvidia so the OC headroom left is smaller than what it used to be years ago. Same with Intel and AMD CPUs.


Hopefully Polaris does have that extra headroom because of per/watt as my 7970 @950 stock pushes to 1200OC.

It can crank Normal
Firestrike
10515(1200)
Extreme
4752(1200)
Ultra
2419(1200)


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stoker*
> 
> Hopefully Polaris does have that extra headroom because of per/watt as my 7970 @950 stock pushes to 1200OC.
> It can crank Normal
> 
> Firestrike
> 
> 10515(1200)
> 
> Extreme
> 
> 4752(1200)
> 
> Ultra
> 
> 2419(1200)


At only 1200 you matched my 290.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> And my 280x chip was pushed from it's original design of about 970 or 850? to 1070 stock and wouldn't OC anywhere really after that.
> It's always a hit or miss. Sure newer chip designs and not rebrands may not be pushed to the limit from start but that remains to be seen. Nvidia does push their chip quite to the limit with boost on Pascal leaving minimal OC headroom especially when it comes to AIB versions with reasonable coolers.
> 
> I think they have learned to use the headroom and lately clock the chips much closer to the limit than they used to, both AMD and Nvidia so the OC headroom left is smaller than what it used to be years ago. Same with Intel and AMD CPUs.


I think amd is finally listening. They are following nvidia's lead to let users oc. Have fun!

I'm not quite sure, though, why some will even think that this will nip at the 1070's heels.


----------



## Cakewalk_S

Wonder if this would be a worthy upgrade from a GTX970... Sell my 970 for say $175, spend $50-75 and pick up a 480... maybe what? 10-20% better performance after OC?


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> At only 1200 you matched my 290.
> I think amd is finally listening. They are following nvidia's lead to let users oc. Have fun!
> 
> I'm not quite sure, though, why some will even think that this will nip at the 1070's heels.


Well you could always OC with AMD, even voltage control. This is just going to do it thru Crimson. And i wouldnt say theyre listening to Nvidia, 1070/1080 can't even OC worth a doodoo with the locked everything on their bios.


----------



## y2kcamaross

I really hope this is true - it'd be a great card to replace my gtx 950 in my 4k htpc setup, could possibly even play some games at 4k with lowered settings


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cakewalk_S*
> 
> Wonder if this would be a worthy upgrade from a GTX970... Sell my 970 for say $175, spend $50-75 and pick up a 480... maybe what? 10-20% better performance after OC?


Just my opinion. Raw power wise, not even a 1070 will be worth it. 1080 maybe. But, for $250 with 8GB . . . depends on your budget. I'm getting one to replace my 7950.


----------



## ryan92084

I find the possibility of the $230-250 reference doing 1400+ much more interesting than the $300 "beast mode" doing 1500. If true I wonder if its due to the cooler or the extra power pins (hoping for the former).


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> Just my opinion. Raw power wise, not even a 1070 will be worth it. 1080 maybe. But, for $250 with 8GB . . . depends on your budget. I'm getting one to replace my 7950.


I'm with you on that, I thought I'd have 7950s forever


----------



## Elohim

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Defoler*
> 
> I doubt that it will be that of a performer. Especially the 4gb version vs a 8gb card.
> Also comparing overlock vs reference? Really? If you would overclock a 480 you would definitely a 980ti, in which case, it would give you way more than what the 480m will be able to do.


Sure. I'm not comparing anything though







, i'm just saying that the rumours from earlier this year might be true. And the rumour was that there will be a $300 card with close to 980ti performance. So yeah, with 1500MHz AIB cards this seems not too unlikely at this point.


----------



## spurdomantbh

Pictures of 480
http://videocardz.com/61162/sapphire-and-powercolor-radeon-rx-480-pictured-as-well
Are AMD's reference coolers still horrible? How long do you guys think it will take for custom coolers to show up?


----------



## SwishaMane

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Loladinas*
> 
> Looks to me like people are just setting themselves up for disappointment.


Not even a single remote feeling of disappointment from my perspective...


----------



## stoker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> Pictures of 480
> http://videocardz.com/61162/sapphire-and-powercolor-radeon-rx-480-pictured-as-well
> Are AMD's reference coolers still horrible? How long do you guys think it will take for custom coolers to show up?


Hate to say but terrible packaging, more like photoshopped images. Hoping the benchmarks are atleast true


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> Pictures of 480
> http://videocardz.com/61162/sapphire-and-powercolor-radeon-rx-480-pictured-as-well
> Are AMD's reference coolers still horrible? How long do you guys think it will take for custom coolers to show up?


Seems like custom coolers will come out probably day one as well as hoping waterblocks from ekwb day 1 as well. The packaging doesnt look that bad but really were going to criticize packaging lol. Im not buying the card for the box haha.


----------



## iRUSH

The RX480 and what AMD might be able to do has me super excited. It's why I haven't tried to hunt down Polaris and have skipped out on a few "good" deals on the 980ti.

This paired with ZEN on a mATX or ideally mitx form factor would be a dream come true.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluej511*
> 
> Well you could always OC with AMD, even voltage control. This is just going to do it thru Crimson. And i wouldnt say theyre listening to Nvidia, 1070/1080 can't even OC worth a doodoo with the locked everything on their bios.


Yeah it seems that way, that the leaders of high end like Intel and Nvidia are locking OC ability to force more people to upgrade sooner to the next generation they release. I don't know how much the 10xx is limited on air but the extreme overclockers were quite disappointed with the limits enforced by NV which prevent 1080 to beat 980Ti in exreme OC. It's certainly not a good trend for OC when there is little competition on the market.

---

AIB versions, from what I read they should come with the reference versions. Shops are said to be stocking up but no AIB versions listed/leaked yet. Hopefully there won't be shortages like we see with 10x0.
1070 launched yet shops pretty much don't have stock and won't sell to you or only offer pre-orders.

All those reference blowers make me wanna remove the oversized blower and slap a 120mm fan on the heatsink instead and make the card super short


----------



## motoray

I have not upgraded since day1 launch of my 6970.... finally time. Hopefully someone makes a waterblock for one of the custom boards at launch.


----------



## Cakewalk_S

Wonder if the coolers will do well with CLU as the thermal paste...hmm...


----------



## sugalumps

Ok now I see why amd dissapoints it's not amds fault but the peoples, people thinking this is going to match a 980ti.............................


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> Ok now I see why amd dissapoints it's not amds fault but the peoples, people thinking this is going to match a 980ti.............................


Yep. People have too high expectations for a $199 mainstream product, at least here on an enthusiast forum. Polaris is made for $100-250 cards compared to current Pascal that goes for $350-700 MSRP.


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> Ok now I see why amd dissapoints it's not amds fault but the peoples, people thinking this is going to match a 980ti.............................


There's some sad truth to this lol.

I'll be happy if it can match a gtx 980 for $200


----------



## cainy1991

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> There's some sad truth to this lol.
> 
> I'll be happy if it can match a gtx 980 for $200


I would be happy with a DVI-D.... and 980 performance







lol

I'm praying a custom board with DVI comes out very soon after release, converters suck soo hard.


----------



## motoray

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> Ok now I see why amd dissapoints it's not amds fault but the peoples, people thinking this is going to match a 980ti.............................


I dont expect it to. If it gets ANYWHERE near it there is literally no better card for the money. But if it does.... im not going to complain.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> Yeah it seems that way, that the leaders of high end like Intel and Nvidia are locking OC ability to force more people to upgrade sooner to the next generation they release. I don't know how much the 10xx is limited on air but the extreme overclockers were quite disappointed with the limits enforced by NV which prevent 1080 to beat 980Ti in exreme OC. It's certainly not a good trend for OC when there is little competition on the market.
> 
> ---
> 
> AIB versions, from what I read they should come with the reference versions. Shops are said to be stocking up but no AIB versions listed/leaked yet. Hopefully there won't be shortages like we see with 10x0.
> 1070 launched yet shops pretty much don't have stock and won't sell to you or only offer pre-orders.
> 
> All those reference blowers make me wanna remove the oversized blower and slap a 120mm fan on the heatsink instead and make the card super short


Honestly its probably going to run fairly cool for 150w tdp even with that style cooler. The pcb does look super short, and with no dvi and a waterblock it could become a single slot beast. This would be awesome for itx and mitx cases would look amazing.


----------



## prjindigo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cainy1991*
> 
> I would be happy with a DVI-D.... and 980 performance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lol
> 
> I'm praying a custom board with DVI comes out very soon after release, converters suck soo hard.


HDMI/DP converters are simple, but I'm betting the chip isn't able to send DVI at all


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prjindigo*
> 
> HDMI/DP converters are simple, but I'm betting the chip isn't able to send DVI at all


Not that simple, dvi to hdmi is simpler.

It looks as though people have said the board has dvi pinouts ready to go so will be up to the manufacturer to implement it. Personally idc since you can always get an hdmi to dvi cable anyways.


----------



## Vesku

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> yea, 850mhz, October launch. Sad stuff.


Maybe he was passing us Vega info stealthily. 1*850*MHz October, WOAH.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vesku*
> 
> Maybe he was passing us Vega info stealthily. 1*850*MHz October, WOAH.


Unless he means 850mhz memory speed, hot damn 350 over the fury?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Then even bigger GCN4 gpus should oc below 1.5?


----------



## schmotty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> Then why are you in an AMD thread when you are clearly going to buy a GTX 1070, or 1080?


So nVidia will send his paycheck.

Every single one of his posts sounds like "green team" marketing crap. He even uses buzzwords when referencing NV products.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schmotty*
> 
> So nVidia will send his paycheck.
> 
> Every single one of his posts sounds like "green team" marketing crap. He even uses buzzwords when referencing NV products.


as opposed to all of you worshipping the ground AMD walks on 24/7 ?


----------



## FLCLimax

Meltdown imminent.


----------



## itsFreezy

Yeah, sure would be impressive but all i can see is people building up a massive mountain of disappointment to throw at themselves when this finally launches. Well, not my problem...


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Meltdown imminent.


the meltdown will come after 480 releases and is at around 980 level in OC vs OC









which will still be *great* value mind you, but since it wont be at Fury X/980Ti/1070 levels - some members from this very thread will get head BSODs out of disbelief


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> the meltdown will come after 480 releases and is at around 980 level in OC vs OC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> which will still be *great* value mind you, but since it wont be at Fury X/980Ti/1070 levels - some members from this very thread will get head BSODs out of disbelief


Ive been saying that since day one and i have an AMD card haha.

I could see it reaching Nano/Fury levels when oced, and when i say reach i mean slightly under or neck and neck. I dont see it, in gaming performance matching the 980ti/1070. In benchmarks its a possibility but thats about it.


----------



## FLCLimax

haha, meltdown commenced. they don't make viral marketers like they use to. find one post suggesting an OC 480 could match a 1070...the most optimistic prediction says it "could" achieve "near" Fury X performance. but hey, don't let me stop you from losing your mind and raging at straw men.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> haha, meltdown commenced. they don't make viral marketers like they use to. find one post suggesting an OC 480 could match a 1070...the most optimistic prediction says it "could" achieve "near" Fury X performance. but hey, don't let me stop you from losing your mind and raging at straw men.


suggest you invest in some glasses and reread this thread as well as some other earlier ones

although I doubt it'll help since your own internal AMD-biased filter will auto-remove anything you dont want to see


----------



## KarathKasun

If 480 can hit 1.5ghz on a good day, I wonder what we are gong to see out of the 460.

BTW, 480 will probably match Fury X/980 Ti stock speeds while overclocked. If it gets within 10% of their stock speeds Id be happy.


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> haha, meltdown commenced. they don't make viral marketers like they use to. find one post suggesting an OC 480 could match a 1070...the most optimistic prediction says it "could" achieve "near" Fury X performance. but hey, don't let me stop you from losing your mind and raging at straw men.
> 
> 
> 
> suggest you invest in some glasses and reread this thread as well as some other earlier ones
> 
> although I doubt it'll help since your own internal AMD-biased filter will auto-remove anything you dont want to see
Click to expand...

I feel like you're arguing with yourself in the mirror and just typing the words here for us to see. so no posts saying "RX480
OC will equal 980ti?", *you can't pull those up*?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ryan92084*
> 
> I find the possibility of the $230-250 reference doing 1400+ much more interesting than the $300 "beast mode" doing 1500. If true I wonder if its due to the cooler or the extra power pins (hoping for the former).


1400 would be a 10% OC over the claimed 1266 MHz clock speeds... nothing ground breaking and, quite frankly, should be expected of all cards


----------



## KarathKasun

Given current leaks, a core clock of 1520 should put it within spitting distance of stock 980 Ti and T-X. Thats assuming a 20% overclock gets 10-15% more performance.


----------



## FLCLimax

^ Careful


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Given current leaks, a core clock of 1520 should put it within spitting distance of stock 980 Ti and T-X. Thats assuming a 20% overclock gets 10-15% more performance.


Total ownage from AMD with the 400 series, Nvidia has nothing to counter with.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> Meltdown imminent.


Troll overload.

It's going to beat everything as long as 10% OC gives you +200% performance.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> Total ownage from AMD with the 400 series, Nvidia has nothing to counter with.


They really dont at their price points. At max OC a ~$200 card is going to be nipping at the heels of their ~$400 card.

If people would look at the articles, they said that 1400 should be doable without touching voltages. I expect reference cards to be able to hit the mid 1400's with some easy tweaking. 1500 with modified BIOS. AIB cards should be starting at 1400 stock and hitting low-mid 1500's.


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> Total ownage from AMD with the 400 series, Nvidia has nothing to counter with.
> 
> 
> 
> They really dont at their price points. At max OC a ~$200 card is going to nipping at the heels of their ~$400 card.
> 
> If people would look at the articles, they said that 1400 should be doable without touching voltages. I expect reference cards to be able to hit the mid 1400's with some easy tweaking. 1500 with modified BIOS. AIB cards should be starting at 1400 stock and hitting low-mid 1500's.
Click to expand...

watch out, you might offend someone.


----------



## lolfail9001

It's leak if it's positive towards AMD and FUD otherwise









Either way, we shall see, what i do know is that it should approach 290x performance in stock. How far will it overclock? Well, i doubt it will go beyond ~200 watts worth of TBP, because cooling that becomes borderline impossible, if 6950X is to believed. So, depends on voltage required to overclock beyond 10% mentioned by NordicHardware.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> watch out, you might offend someone.


Like I care.









Love all the "NV cards are ALWAYS better than anything AMD has" sentiment.

Like the GTX 960 vs R9 380/X? Yep the 960 is totally better. /sarcasm


----------



## schmotty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> as opposed to *all of you*(?) worshipping the ground AMD walks on 24/7 ?


Not sure what group you are putting me into, but there is no worship here.

I'm in this thread to discuss the topic, not try to convince people to buy or not buy anything in or not in the topic.

Now, If thinking a card that costs as much as my R9 285 did a year ago, but performs twice as well if not more, while using much less power and having 2x the VRAM, is a good deal means I'm worshiping something then I guess I need to revisit my definition of worship.


----------



## iRUSH

This sounds good especially at $199. However AMD has a history of high release prices and then they drop quite quickly. Absurd stuff like the 390x and the 9k series CPUs. Way too high for what is basically a tweaked re-skin.

To me this kills their brand perception.

IF this actually hit the market for $199 (reference) and performs like speculated, then it's the homerun AMD could definitely use.

Otherwise it'll be laughed at. NV can sadly pull this off. AMD can't IMO.


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *schmotty*
> 
> Not sure what group you are putting me into, but there is no worship here.
> 
> I'm in this thread to discuss the topic, not try to convince people to buy or not buy anything in or not in the topic.
> 
> Now, If thinking a card that costs as much as my R9 285 did a year ago, but performs twice as well if not more, while using much less power and having 2x the VRAM, is a good deal means I'm worshiping something then I guess I need to revisit my definition of worship.


According to him anyone who says anything remotely positive about AMD is a fanboy.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> It's leak if it's positive towards AMD and FUD otherwise
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Either way, we shall see, what i do know is that it should approach 290x performance in stock. How far will it overclock? Well, i doubt it will go beyond ~200 watts worth of TBP, because cooling that becomes borderline impossible, if 6950X is to believed. So, depends on voltage required to overclock beyond 10% mentioned by NordicHardware.


Well, its definitely beyond the 390 performance wise. And 390 is between 290 and 290X... I am pretty sure its closer to 390X than 290X.

Stock TBP is in the 120w range. It has LOTS of room to OC before hitting 200w.


----------



## ebduncan

i think most people here are starting to realise what the "rage" is about now.

nda release couldn't come sooner. the star of the show in my eyes is the RX470 though, it's so cheap, and truly brings a great experience for that price. Considering most people still game at 1080p.


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Well, its definitely beyond the 390 performance wise. And 390 is between 290 and 290X... I am pretty sure its closer to 390X than 290X.
> 
> Stock TBP is in the 120w range. It has LOTS of room to OC before hitting 200w.


Don't hurt anyone's feelings now. We know it's just going to _approach_ 290X performance like the good man says, *even though the 470 is almost even with the 290X* itself. Let's not upset anybody.

EDIT: Oh yea positive AMD rumors aren't true, the bad ones all are. That's why AMD can't get Polaris to clock above 850mhz and it is launching this fall. Silly me.


----------



## Dargonplay

One thing that people seem to ignore is that Polaris RX 480 is no doubt an incredible upgrade to anyone running reference 290Xs, my reference 290 in my 2ndary ITX RIG is even worse than the 1080 Fools Edition, I can't even maintain 947MHz constantly unless I ramp up the fan to 100%, which sounds as bad as the 1080, I can't even hit stock clocks so forget about overclocking.

Current custom 390s sport 1050MHz stock can overclock to 1100MHz easily, that alone is 15% extra performance over my reference 290 which puts things into perspective when you consider the fact that 15% is the same percentage difference between someone going from an Overclocked 980Ti to an Overclocked 1080, except this cost me 199$-219$ while it cost them near 900$, and this is assuming the RX 480 have the same performance of a custom 1100MHz 290, which is almost certainly not true and should be way above that.

If people with overclocked 980Tis/Titan X are willing to pay 900$ for 15% extra performance how come people with cards like the reference 290/290X shouldn't be expected to pay 199$ for 25% extra performance? That's not even counting the added ability of finally being able to overclock their cards and net even higher gains.

Plus P10 brings up a new command processor for the first time since GCN was designed, a new Geometry Processor and a Primitive discard accelerator.

Polaris 10 even if it's sporting the same RAW/Brute performance as a 1100MHz 290 it should in practice be way faster while gaming, especially on DX11 titles on which this new command processor should get rid of all API DX11 overhead, crushing my 290, and in Gameworks titles where Polaris should be faster than Maxwell when working on Tessellation.

This is yet to be proven by actual benchmarks and we will have everything confirmed in June 29th anyway, but saying a RX 480 isn't an upgrade for people with reference 290s/290X is foolish at best.


----------



## wolfej

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sinholueiro*
> 
> *Well, an OCed 980Ti leaves even the 1070 in the dust.* The point is as RX480 seems to be a 980, the 980Ti is 18,3% more powerful at 1080p. No one sees a 20% OC in the RX480? At 1500Mhz, the RX480 should be start to catching the 980Ti (being the 1266Mhz the base clock). From memory bandwith, as someone said, the 1070 has the same memory setup but it catches the TitanX, so I see it possible even accounting a worse IMC from AMD. And the 8GHz GDDR5 is known to go way past over 9000, so a 20% OC in the memory is way easy to get and keep the memory up with the core.


Ummmm, no it doesn't. Everything I've seen has them very close to each other.

There is no "leave... in the dust" in this comparison at all.


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wolfej*
> 
> Ummmm, no it doesn't. Everything I've seen has them very close to each other.
> 
> There is no "leave... in the dust" in this comparison at all.


Correct and most of the time the 1070 is slightly ahead. Not enough worth mentioning however.


----------



## Boomer1990

I am currently waiting for Zen to come out so I can pair it with the $230-250 8gb version should be a very nice upgrade for myself. However if Vega releases around the time Zen drops I might go for it instead. Since I only game at 1080p I am very happy to see the price point to max 1080p visuals dropping to a more reasonable level.


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> Correct and most of the time the 1070 is slightly ahead. Not enough worth mentioning however.


wait till the next few driver updates.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> One thing that people seem to ignore is that Polaris RX 480 is no doubt an incredible upgrade to anyone running reference 290Xs, my reference 290 in my 2ndary ITX RIG is even worse than the 1080 Fools Edition, I can't even maintain 947MHz constantly unless I ramp up the fan to 100%, which sounds as bad as the 1080, I can't even hit stock clocks so forget about overclocking.
> 
> Current custom 390s sport 1050MHz stock can overclock to 1100MHz easily, that alone is 15% extra performance over my reference 290 which puts things into perspective when you consider the fact that 15% is the same percentage difference between someone going from an Overclocked 980Ti to an Overclocked 1080, except this cost me 199$-219$ while it cost them near 900$, and this is assuming the RX 480 have the same performance of a custom 1100MHz 290, which is almost certainly not true and should be way above that.
> 
> If people with overclocked 980Tis/Titan X are willing to pay 900$ for 15% extra performance how come people with cards like the reference 290/290X shouldn't be expected to pay 199$ for 25% extra performance? That's not even counting the added ability of finally being able to overclock their cards and net even higher gains.
> 
> Plus P10 brings up a new command processor for the first time since GCN was designed, a new Geometry Processor and a Primitive discard accelerator.
> 
> Polaris 10 even if it's sporting the same RAW/Brute performance as a 1100MHz 290 it should in practice be way faster while gaming, especially on DX11 titles on which this new command processor should get rid of all API DX11 overhead, crushing my 290, and in Gameworks titles where Polaris should be faster than Maxwell when working on Tessellation.
> 
> This is yet to be proven by actual benchmarks and we will have everything confirmed in June 29th anyway, but saying a RX 480 isn't an upgrade for people with reference 290s/290X is foolish at best.


We still do not know. Also 290/290X are 512-Bit cards. I will be getting RX 480 for sure and putting it up against R9 290, R9 290X, HD 7970.


----------



## rudyae86

I just want this card to be out right now! Lol

Im cardless right now ever since I sold my 980 a month ago







.

29th cant come soon enough!


----------



## i7monkey

Quote:


> an overclocked RX 480 will actually perform within striking distance of AMD's current R9 Fury X flagship


If true, that's how it's done Nvidia! $200 card matches previous gen flaghship, not this $450/$700 garbage.


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rudyae86*
> 
> I just want this card to be out right now! Lol
> 
> Im cardless right now ever since I sold my 980 a month ago
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> 29th cant come soon enough!


Might not be much of an upgrade. Unless you wanted to switch to red and pocket some money. That I can understand ?


----------



## FlyingSolo

I just hope the custom AIB cards with 8GB are not £300 in the UK. If that's the case i can pickup a cheap 1070 for around £365. Hopefully the custom AIB cards with 8GB are around £240 to £280.


----------



## Rustynails

if every thing that has been said about this card is True,
this will be my next card.

this card makes me feel nostalgic ,
remember those days when the forum was full of people pushing low end cards to match high end cards.
today its people postal hight end cards at 1k$ .....


----------



## tweezlednutball

has anyone heard if there will be a version with gddr5x?


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tweezlednutball*
> 
> has anyone heard if there will be a version with gddr5x?


Nope haven't heard anything about GDDR5X for the 480. And i don't think it will happen with any AMD cards coming out. Vega will have HBM2.


----------



## Rabit

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> If 480 can hit 1.5ghz on a good day, I wonder what we are gong to see out of the 460.
> 
> BTW, 480 will probably match Fury X/980 Ti stock speeds while overclocked. If it gets within 10% of their stock speeds Id be happy.


If Rx 460x will appear with 6 pin will be interesting









R7 265 common OC 1200Mhz

R7 260x common OC 1250 and golden sample 1400 http://hwbot.org/submission/3081520_nicegab_3dmark___fire_strike_extreme_radeon_r7_260x_2528_marks

now add 40% to this


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> If true, that's how it's done Nvidia! $200 card matches previous gen flaghship, not this $450/$700 garbage.


It's going to be so glorious if true!


----------



## Titanox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> If true, that's how it's done Nvidia! $200 card matches previous gen flaghship, not this $450/$700 garbage.


Guys, seriously. I'm really hoping to buy a RX 480 but i really want to taper my expectations so i don't end up disappointed. Bulldozer really left some deep scars.
Nvidia have priced the 1070 at almost 650$ and 1080 at 1100$ in my country. So they can bugger off.

I hope all the reference 8gb cards have backplates.


----------



## Mad Pistol

You guys are all nuts. I hope I have to eat my words on release, but I highly doubt an overclocked RX 480 will match GTX 1070/980 Ti levels of performance. After reading through so much "stuff" on WCCFtech, what I am finding is lots of links to their own articles and sensationalist journalism. There is very little actual proof of any of these things being true.

What do I actually want?

I want a STOCK RX 480 to match a STOCK GTX 980. That's it. If it can do that, then the value proposition is most definitely there. If the card can overclock to GTX 980 Ti levels of performance in a buffed up version, then that's icing on the cake.

Seriously, take it down a few notches guys. I'm excited for the RX 480, but I'm not losing perspective on what it probably will be.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *i7monkey*
> 
> If true, that's how it's done Nvidia! $200 card matches previous gen flaghship, not this $450/$700 garbage.


So going back to the pre-2012 standard of pricing?









I might just buy a card or two just to support the pricing structure


----------



## Sleazybigfoot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unkzilla*
> 
> The leaked benchmarks have this around a 390x at stock clock at 1250mhz odd (cant remember the exact clock)
> 
> 1500mhz is around a 15% overclock.
> 
> Fury X / TI is around 30% faster then a 390x
> 
> Assuming the 390x perf and 1500mhz is accurate it should fall short by 15%... but then you can overclock the FuryX/980ti anyway (FuryX overclock only squeezes 8-9% whereas the TI will squeeze 20%+)
> 
> *Cliffs: nothing to get too excited about
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Kind of funny because I recall there being a similar discussion in the GTX 1080 thread where they we're comparing overclocking headroom to the previous generation cards and apparently the 1080 can OC to 2.1Ghz (not every card) and they are very pleased, yet it's only an about 15% OC as well.

Kind of ironic.

Any way, I _hope_ WCCF isn't making this stuff up. I'd really love to own an RX 480 that does 1.5Ghz


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Titanox*
> 
> Guys, seriously. I'm really hoping to buy a RX 480 but i really want to taper my expectations so i don't end up disappointed. Bulldozer really left some deep scars.
> Nvidia have priced the 1070 at almost 650$ and 1080 at 1100$ in my country. So they can bugger off.
> 
> I hope all the reference 8gb cards have backplates.


It's not $2500. It's $250. Just do not expect 1070 performance and you are set. It should at least be 980 level.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> You guys are all nuts. I hope I have to eat my words on release, but I highly doubt an overclocked RX 480 will match GTX 1070/980 Ti levels of performance. After reading through so much "stuff" on WCCFtech, what I am finding is lots of links to their own articles and sensationalist journalism. There is very little actual proof of any of these things being true.
> 
> What do I actually want?
> 
> I want a STOCK RX 480 to match a STOCK GTX 980. That's it. If it can do that, then the value proposition is most definitely there. If the card can overclock to GTX 980 Ti levels of performance in a buffed up version, then that's icing on the cake.
> 
> Seriously, take it down a few notches guys. I'm excited for the RX 480, but I'm not losing perspective on what it probably will be.


Everyone sets expectations of their own and they carry their own burden. Over expectations are but their own fault!
And I agree with you! RX 480 matching 980? for $250? Yes, please


----------



## schmotty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> Nope haven't heard anything about GDDR5X for the 480. And i don't think it will happen with any AMD cards coming out. *Vega will have HBM2.*


NVM


----------



## KeepWalkinG

1266+20% is 1519 overclock.


----------



## LeadbyFaith21

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rabit*
> 
> If Rx 460x will appear with 6 pin will be interesting
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> R7 265 common OC 1200Mhz
> 
> R7 260x common OC 1250 and golden sample 1400 http://hwbot.org/submission/3081520_nicegab_3dmark___fire_strike_extreme_radeon_r7_260x_2528_marks
> 
> now add 40% to this


Back when I was actually using mine, I was able to push it to almost 1500 on the core if I didn't change the memory. That card was a joy to overclock!


----------



## GamerusMaximus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> So going back to the pre-2012 standard of pricing?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I might just buy a card or two just to support the pricing structure


I wouldnt go that far. Prices really began to fall with the 5000 and 400 series. If anything, I'd say this is back to the 2010-2012 era pricing.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LeadbyFaith21*
> 
> Back when I was actually using mine, I was able to push it to almost 1500 on the core if I didn't change the memory. That card was a joy to overclock!


Reminds me of OCing a GT210 way back in the day, when I couldnt afford better. Maxing out the sliders on MSI afterburner for both the core and memory was sweet.


----------



## CasualCat

It would be nice if it is real.

I was considering 480 for my HTPC, but then looked up some of my old benchmarks for my HTPC GPUs compared to the leaked FireStrike benchmarks and it'd be a minor upgrade (based on the leaks) without a good OC (~5400 vs ~5700 graphics score in FireStrike Extreme). Granted it'd have the advantage of ditching SLI, but I was hoping for more. Kinda bummed when I saw that.

Hope it does overclock well or Vega really does come this year.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasualCat*
> 
> It would be nice if it is real.
> 
> I was considering 480 for my HTPC, but then looked up some of my old benchmarks for my HTPC GPUs compared to the leaked FireStrike benchmarks and it'd be a minor upgrade (based on the leaks) without a good OC (~5400 vs ~5700 graphics score in FireStrike Extreme). Granted it'd have the advantage of ditching SLI, but I was hoping for more. Kinda bummed when I saw that.
> 
> Hope it does overclock well or Vega really does come this year.


There is no comparing SLI/CF to a single card. If the single card performs about the same in a benchmark it is 50%-100% faster in games.


----------



## LeadbyFaith21

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GamerusMaximus*
> 
> Reminds me of OCing a GT210 way back in the day, when I couldnt afford better. Maxing out the sliders on MSI afterburner for both the core and memory was sweet.


My 260x was actually the first GPU I had, bought it off one of my friends for $30 and was probably the best $30 I've ever spent on my computer! If the 14nm process AMD is using clocks as well as the 16nm that Nvidia is using, I'm excited to see these cards pushed to the max, something that's been absent in every other AMD card I've tried to overclock since my 260x.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasualCat*
> 
> It would be nice if it is real.
> 
> I was considering 480 for my HTPC, but then looked up some of my old benchmarks for my HTPC GPUs compared to the leaked FireStrike benchmarks and it'd be a minor upgrade (based on the leaks) without a good OC (~5400 vs ~5700 graphics score in FireStrike Extreme). Granted it'd have the advantage of ditching SLI, but I was hoping for more. Kinda bummed when I saw that.
> 
> Hope it does overclock well or Vega really does come this year.


You need a 1070.


----------



## TK421

Quote:


> Respect their investment. "They wanted us to pay respect to the dollars they were giving us and do things in the architecture or transistors or APIs or ASync Compute, that provided a measure of 'futureproofness.' They wanted to be reassured that even if they're only spending $200 they'd feel secure in their investment for a couple years."


While nvidia gimps / sabotage / nerf / de-optimize anything that isn't current gen.


----------



## CasualCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> You need a 1070.


Eh maybe, but I suspect Vega's release would make me regret that purchase especially if it does come out this year. Plus I'm envious some of the longevity people have gotten on the AMD GCN cards, and it would be cool to have AMD in one machine and Nvidia in another.


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Respect their investment. "They wanted us to pay respect to the dollars they were giving us and do things in the architecture or transistors or APIs or ASync Compute, that provided a measure of 'futureproofness.' They wanted to be reassured that even if they're only spending $200 they'd feel secure in their investment for a couple years."
> 
> 
> 
> While nvidia gimps / sabotage / nerf / de-optimize anything that isn't current gen.
Click to expand...

you can't say that!


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> You need a 1070.


1070 is too expensive for a secondary PC/HTPC IMHO. Especially if there is a quieter, lower power option available.


----------



## BradleyW

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> you can't say that!


Oh yes he can.


----------



## GamerusMaximus

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LeadbyFaith21*
> 
> My 260x was actually the first GPU I had, bought it off one of my friends for $30 and was probably the best $30 I've ever spent on my computer! If the 14nm process AMD is using clocks as well as the 16nm that Nvidia is using, I'm excited to see these cards pushed to the max, something that's been absent in every other AMD card I've tried to overclock since my 260x.


$30 is an amazing price for a 260x. Unfortunatly, modern high end AMD cards just dont OC as well. They OC, sure, but little GPUS have so much spirit in them to hit stupid high numbers Same with nvidia, the tiny dies OC way better then the big ones most of the time. Or at least they used to, maxwell threw a wrench in that idea.

My first card I bought was a 2600XT back in the day. First card I owned was a voodoo banshee. Then a 9800 pro, the 2600xt, the GT 210 (the insane OCer), then dual 550tis and dual 770s. If the 480 is good, which it sounds like it is, I'll happily buy two of them for my rig rebuild.


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BradleyW*
> 
> Oh yes he can.


b-b-b-but "people" won't like it! It's already bad enough people are hoping for good things from AMD, a positive FACT would be unacceptable!


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasualCat*
> 
> Eh maybe, but I suspect Vega's release would make me regret that purchase especially if it does come out this year. Plus I'm envious some of the longevity people have gotten on the AMD GCN cards, and it would be cool to have AMD in one machine and Nvidia in another.


That's what i am waiting for too but this is too cheap. My aging 7950 needs a rest. btw, my oc'ed 290 gets 6300, so this should go higher.


----------



## LeadbyFaith21

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GamerusMaximus*
> 
> $30 is an amazing price for a 260x. Unfortunatly, modern high end AMD cards just dont OC as well. They OC, sure, but little GPUS have so much spirit in them to hit stupid high numbers Same with nvidia, the tiny dies OC way better then the big ones most of the time. Or at least they used to, maxwell threw a wrench in that idea.
> 
> My first card I bought was a 2600XT back in the day. First card I owned was a voodoo banshee. Then a 9800 pro, the 2600xt, the GT 210 (the insane OCer), then dual 550tis and dual 770s. If the 480 is good, which it sounds like it is, I'll happily buy two of them for my rig rebuild.


I would agree with you there, the smaller dies that I've seen seem to overclock like champs. I currently have a Sapphire Fury TrixX that I was able to "unlock" to the full Fiji XT, and I can push that to 1100 MHz, but if I go any farther it crashes. I'm really hoping the 490 will clock as well as the 480 and Nvidia's 1000 series, I may have to get one if that's the case!


----------



## Slomo4shO

Everyone raving about Bonaire OC capacities seems to have forgotten how bandwidth limited the card was and how little performance was actual yielded from the 20-40% OCs...


----------



## Puck

Hmmm....sounds a bit too good to be true, especially coming from WCCF.

If true, two of these WC'd @ 1.5ghz would be some insane performance for under $500. If they hit even 1.4ghz regularly I will probably get a pair of them...would be hard not to.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Puck*
> 
> If they hit even *1.4ghz* regularly I will probably get a pair of them...would be hard not to.


Why wouldn't you expect a 10% OC as a figure everyone should be able to reasonably hit?


----------



## Puck

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Why wouldn't you expect a 10% OC as a figure everyone should be able to reasonably hit?


Not saying its unexpected, just stating that it doesn't need to be able to hit the full 1.5ghz listed to still be an amazing value









.


----------



## sage101

Should we expect same OCing potential with the RX 470 and is it safe to say that the 470 is on par with the 970? I recently sold my 270X so I'm eyeing out a 470 or 970 and possibly a 480.


----------



## SSJVegeta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TK421*
> 
> While nvidia gimps / sabotage / nerf / de-optimize anything that isn't current gen.


Jhen Sun Huang intensifies!

Jhen Sun Huang has sends his Hairworks Ninja's to terminate you.


----------



## moey1974

Well like i said before any other place posted that the Rx 480 can hit 1500mhz on air, even before WCCF


----------



## incog

AMD is starting to get some nice attention, turning all those heads with these rumors.

Can't wait to see some nice reviews. I might buy such a card, would be a nice upgrade from my 7970. Finally, a cheap card which destroys my 7970.


----------



## Slomo4shO

The 32% OC to 2,5GHz on air claim for the GTX 1080 had greater hype and deeper ingrained belief of possibility than does the 18.5% OC of the RX 480 to 1.5 GHz

Goes to show the power of marketing


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> The 32% OC to 2,5GHz on air claim for the GTX 1080 had greater hype and deeper ingrained belief of possibility than does the 18.5% OC of the RX 480 to 1.5 GHz
> 
> Goes to show the power of marketing


shhhhhhhhhhhhh!


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> The 32% OC to 2,5GHz on air claim for the GTX 1080 had greater hype and deeper ingrained belief of possibility than does the 18.5% OC of the RX 480 to 1.5 GHz
> 
> Goes to show the power of marketing


Nvidia GPUs usually cost more -> People paying more money for GPUs -> More at stake -> More emotional investment

That's not to say it doesn't happen with AMD but usually the crazies are on the green side from what i've noticed at least.

(the only side i favor is the one that's beneficial to me in terms of cost/perf personally)


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> *the only side i favor is the one that's beneficial to me* in terms of cost/perf personally


It is the only side anyone should adhere to


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Source
> It is WCCF so take it with a pound of salt...


Somehow this doesnt affect with this release. Most of their stuff for rx 480 was correct.


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clukos*
> 
> Nvidia GPUs usually cost more -> People paying more money for GPUs -> More at stake -> More emotional investment
> 
> That's not to say it doesn't happen with AMD but usually the crazies are on the green side from what i've noticed at least.
> 
> _*(the only side i favor is the one that's beneficial to me in terms of cost/perf personally)*_


How selfish of you. Think about NVIDIA's image and bottom line. You should choose what's in their best interest and worry about yourself last.


----------



## moey1974

ALL 6+8 Pin cards will hit 1500mhz on air, In other words, you pay the $300 for the premium model, you will get 1500mhz. At least cards from a certain "specific" AIB H/W vendor guarantee's it.









PS I have some "exciting" news to share about Vega as well, Again, info
from my older brother, not mine..He only lets me say so much as of
NDA,etc as you all know.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> I feel like you're arguing with yourself in the mirror and just typing the words here for us to see. so no posts saying "RX480
> OC will equal 980ti?", *you can't pull those up*?


To be totally fair I did say this in another thread:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Depending on good the scaling is, 1500+ on 480 just might get it "near 980 Ti performance", which would be very awesome indeed.


Note however the use of weasel words such as "just might" and "near".


----------



## moey1974

Speaking of my reply above about $300 Rx 480's from a certain AIB partner guarantees 1500mhz. I can also share that Rx 480's @1500mhz trade blows perf wise with the 1070 in games. That's right, it literally goes neck and neck with a stock 1070 when the 480 is overclocked at 1500mhz. Also, i seen it myself...1500mhz is not the limit on OC.


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> Speaking of my reply above about $300 Rx 480's from a certain AIB partner guarantees 1500mhz. I can also share that Rx 480's @1500mhz trade blows perf wise with the 1070 in games. That's right, it literally goes neck and neck with a stock 1070 when the 480 is overclocked at 1500mhz. Also, i seen it myself...1500mhz is not the limit on OC.


What about memory, do you know how card reacts to mem overclock?


----------



## Lipos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> ALL 6+8 Pin cards will hit 1500mhz on air, In other words, you pay the $300 for the premium model, you will get 1500mhz. At least cards from a certain "specific" AIB H/W vendor guarantee's it.


Hopefully Sapphire if true.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> The 32% OC to 2,5GHz on air claim for the GTX 1080 had greater hype and deeper ingrained belief of possibility than does the 18.5% OC of the RX 480 to 1.5 GHz
> 
> Goes to show the power of marketing


I think some people are still gun shy because of AMD's statement regarding Fury's overclocking performance. "Overclockers dream!"


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> Speaking of my reply above about $300 Rx 480's from a certain AIB partner guarantees 1500mhz. I can also share that Rx 480's @1500mhz trade blows perf wise with the 1070 in games. That's right, it literally goes neck and neck with a stock 1070 when the 480 is overclocked at 1500mhz. Also, i seen it myself...1500mhz is not the limit on OC.


What about Vega?

Anything, even if it is just rumor. lol


----------



## Clukos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> Speaking of my reply above about $300 Rx 480's from a certain AIB partner guarantees 1500mhz. I can also share that Rx 480's @1500mhz trade blows perf wise with the 1070 in games. That's right, it literally goes neck and neck with a stock 1070 when the 480 is overclocked at 1500mhz. Also, i seen it myself...1500mhz is not the limit on OC.


That's not that hard to believe, the rated TFLOPS for the 1070 are 6.5 at stock clocks. A 480 at 1.5ghz is:

2304 x 1500 x 2 = 6.9 TFLOPS

Although that's definitely not everything, the 480 when OCed might pull some wins in some very AMD optimized games or poorly Nvidia optimized games (like Quantum Break for example). Don't expect it to win the vast majority of titles though, these cards are aimed at different segments.


----------



## LeadbyFaith21

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Everyone raving about Bonaire OC capacities seems to have forgotten how bandwidth limited the card was and how little performance was actual yielded from the 20-40% OCs...


That doesn't mean it wasn't fun to overclock, the memory on mine overclocked almost as good as the core did, so I could run both at a healthy OC and actually see some performance increase. The actual performance increase from one or the other was minimal, but both OC resulted in visible performance increase.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LeadbyFaith21*
> 
> That doesn't mean it wasn't fun to overclock


Sorry I must have missed the fun factor of big numbers, my adherence to the practical got the best of me


----------



## LeadbyFaith21

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Sorry I must have missed the fun factor of big numbers, my adherence to the practical got the best of me


No worries







I like the computer names by the way!


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> Speaking of my reply above about $300 Rx 480's from a certain AIB partner guarantees 1500mhz. I can also share that Rx 480's @1500mhz trade blows perf wise with the 1070 in games. That's right, it literally goes neck and neck with a stock 1070 when the 480 is overclocked at 1500mhz. Also, i seen it myself...1500mhz is not the limit on OC.


Hopefully that's MSI and Gigabyte. Cant wait for more info on Vega.


----------



## vloeibaarglas

AMD could have gone toaster style and marketed these chips as a R9-290 Cyclone Clone. Trying to push that power efficiency sub 110 watts.

Efficiency be damned if I can get $450 worth of performance at $300. But seriously adding a 8 pin PCIE power cable shouldn't add $50 to the cost. Hoping for some $259/269 RX480 with 6+8.


----------



## CasualCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> ALL 6+8 Pin cards will hit 1500mhz on air, In other words, you pay the $300 for the premium model, you will get 1500mhz. At least cards from a certain "specific" AIB H/W vendor guarantee's it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *PS I have some "exciting" news to share about Vega as well,* Again, info
> from my older brother, not mine..He only lets me say so much as of
> NDA,etc as you all know.


Share away!


----------



## azanimefan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unkzilla*
> 
> The leaked benchmarks have this around a 390x at stock clock at 1250mhz odd
> 1500mhz is around a 15% overclock.


I hate myself for replying in a WCCF thread, as these numbers i'm sure all all BS.

but i've news for you, your math is wrong.

1500/1250= 1.20 -1 = 0.20 = 20% increase

sidenote: I knew you were wrong because I did the math in my head like this
1500-1250 = 250
1250/250 = 5
100/5 = 20
20%

yeah, now I feel like an idiot for playing around with numbers like this. but it seemed like such simple math to get right, when i saw 15% I thought "that's wrong" before even doing the math, cause 15% off of 1500 is something like 1304 (i think it's a little more, like 1304.3 something)


----------



## WorldExclusive

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> Speaking of my reply above about $300 Rx 480's from a certain AIB partner guarantees 1500mhz. I can also share that Rx 480's @1500mhz trade blows perf wise with the 1070 in games. That's right, it literally goes neck and neck with a stock 1070 when the 480 is overclocked at 1500mhz. Also, i seen it myself...1500mhz is not the limit on OC.


BS meter at 95%


----------



## moey1974

A few more bits of news to share - It's not just one AIB partner that guarantees a 1500mhz stable OC for the $300 dollar Rx 480 models but two different AIB partners that also guarantee this 1500mhz clock. Like i mentioned below ...this 1500mhz OC is not the limit at all. Also when the Rx 480 is OC to 1500mhz, its quite cool on air, even higher its a lot cooler than what you'd think it would be. Also the Rx 480 @1500mhz is on par with the 1070 in games, the Rx 480 @1550mhz/1600mhz starts to pull away from the 1070, and yes those clocks are "very" doable" on air. One last tidbit i just got from my bro, the Rx 470 when OC rivals the 390X/980, rival means in the same ballpark give or take a few. I will have more info on the 470 later tonight, lots more info. And like i mentioned, a few bits of Vega news. A few key notes below:

Two "confirmed" AIB partners will sell the Rx 480 that guarantees 1500Mhz OC stable on air while cool. These are the $300 dollar models with 6+8 pin power. Might be more AIB partners that sell these guaranteed 1500mhz OC cards, waiting on bro to confirm more.

The Rx 480 when OC'd to 1500mhz trades blows with the stock 1070 in games, Dx12 games shows more favor to the Rx 480. The Rx 480 when OC'd to 1550mhz to 1600mhz starts to leave the stock 1070 behind. Yes 1600mhz is achievable on air.

The Rx 470 when OC'd is around the 390x/980. This means it don't beat them but near them in game perf. You'll see what i mean by this. I just want to make what i say as spot on as possible. How far the 470 OC i don't know, I am waiting on that comfirmation from bro, meaning what the average OC is for the 470 that you can count on getting.

PS: For anyone that don't know, I have a older brother in the industry, that works for one of the three big console makers. For the last few weeks he's been giving me tidbits to share. You can look up my post history at overclock.net forums and at Neogaf.com I go by the name Moey1974 at OC and Slapnuts at Neogaf. I had debunked lots of leakers and websites and shared lots of unheard of news before anyone for the last 3 to 4 weeks relating to AMD's Polaris lineup. I also posted about the 1500mhz Rx 480 3 days ago before anyone else did. So i just wanted to share that so that you may take what i say with a bit of confidence. To each is own, I just want to share some news on this exciting transformation of AMD GPU lineup of cards. All credit goes to my bro for every bit of info I've shared. I take no credit, i am just a happy messenger.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> A few more bits of news to share - It's not just one AIB partner that guarantees a 1500mhz stable OC for the $300 dollar Rx 480 models but two different AIB partners that also guarantee this 1500mhz clock. Like i mentioned below ...this 1500mhz OC is not the limit at all. Also when the Rx 480 is OC to 1500mhz, its quite cool on air, even higher its a lot cooler than what you'd think it would be. Also the Rx 480 @1500mhz is on par with the 1070 in games, the Rx 480 @1550mhz/1600mhz starts to pull away from the 1070, and yes those clocks are "very" doable" on air. One last tidbit i just got from my bro, the Rx 470 when OC rivals the 390X/980. I will have more info on the 470 later tonight, lots more info. And like i mentioned, a few bits of Vega news. A few key notes below:
> 
> Two "confirmed" AIB partners will sell the Rx 480 that guarantees 1500Mhz OC stable on air while cool. These are the $300 dollar models with 6+8 pin power. Might be more AIB partners that sell these guaranteed 1500mhz OC cards, waiting on bro to confirm more.
> 
> The Rx 480 when OC'd to 1500mhz trades blows with the stock 1070 in games, Dx12 games shows more favor to the Rx 480. The Rx 480 when OC'd to 1550mhz to 1600mhz starts to leave the stock 1070 behind. Yes 1600mhz is achievable on air.
> 
> The Rx 470 when OC'd is around the 390x/980.
> 
> PS: For anyone that don't know, I have a older brother in the industry, that works for one of the three big console makers. For the last few weeks he's been giving me tidbits to share. You can look up my post history at overclock.net forums and at Neogaf.com I go by the name Moey1974 at OC and Slapnuts at Neogaf. I had debunked lots of leakers and websites and shared lots of unheard of news before anyone for the last 3 to 4 weeks relating to AMD's Polaris lineup. I also posted about the 1500mhz Rx 480 3 days ago before anyone else did. So i just wanted to share that so that you may take what i say with a bit of confidence. To each is own, I just want to share some news on this exciting transformation of AMD GPU lineup of cards. All credit goes to my bro for every bit of info I've shared. I take no credit, i am just a happy messenger.


Be careful there, you go directly against ...Oj101









PS: Polaris is delayed, as it cannot be validated above 850Mhz


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> Be careful there, you go directly against ...Oj101


I am still waiting for october and polaris.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> A few more bits of news to share - It's not just one AIB partner that guarantees a 1500mhz stable OC for the $300 dollar Rx 480 models but two different AIB partners that also guarantee this 1500mhz clock. Like i mentioned below ...this 1500mhz OC is not the limit at all. Also when the Rx 480 is OC to 1500mhz, its quite cool on air, even higher its a lot cooler than what you'd think it would be. Also the Rx 480 @1500mhz is on par with the 1070 in games, the Rx 480 @1550mhz/1600mhz starts to pull away from the 1070, and yes those clocks are "very" doable" on air. One last tidbit i just got from my bro, the Rx 470 when OC rivals the 390X/980, rival means in the same ballpark give or take a few. I will have more info on the 470 later tonight, lots more info. And like i mentioned, a few bits of Vega news. A few key notes below:
> 
> Two "confirmed" AIB partners will sell the Rx 480 that guarantees 1500Mhz OC stable on air while cool. These are the $300 dollar models with 6+8 pin power. Might be more AIB partners that sell these guaranteed 1500mhz OC cards, waiting on bro to confirm more.
> 
> The Rx 480 when OC'd to 1500mhz trades blows with the stock 1070 in games, Dx12 games shows more favor to the Rx 480. The Rx 480 when OC'd to 1550mhz to 1600mhz starts to leave the stock 1070 behind. Yes 1600mhz is achievable on air.
> 
> The Rx 470 when OC'd is around the 390x/980.
> 
> PS: For anyone that don't know, I have a older brother in the industry, that works for one of the three big console makers. For the last few weeks he's been giving me tidbits to share. You can look up my post history at overclock.net forums and at Neogaf.com I go by the name Moey1974 at OC and Slapnuts at Neogaf. I had debunked lots of leakers and websites and shared lots of unheard of news before anyone for the last 3 to 4 weeks relating to AMD's Polaris lineup. I also posted about the 1500mhz Rx 480 3 days ago before anyone else did. So i just wanted to share that so that you may take what i say with a bit of confidence. To each is own, I just want to share some news on this exciting transformation of AMD GPU lineup of cards. All credit goes to my bro for every bit of info I've shared. I take no credit, i am just a happy messenger.


Honestly i dont know why people are doubting it. Even if you dont work in the industry an OC of 1400-1500 over 1266/1288 isnt that unheard of haha. Thats like us saying no way in hell the 1080 does 2100 from 1800 or wtv it is on AIR theres no f en way.

Its only a 112mhz-212mhz OC why would that be ridiculous.


----------



## bluej511

Btw i posted this in the other thread, anyone worrying about DVI the pinout is indeed there will be dependent on the AIB if they use it or not.


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> A few more bits of news to share - It's not just one AIB partner that guarantees a 1500mhz stable OC for the $300 dollar Rx 480 models but two different AIB partners that also guarantee this 1500mhz clock. Like i mentioned below ...this 1500mhz OC is not the limit at all. Also when the Rx 480 is OC to 1500mhz, its quite cool on air, even higher its a lot cooler than what you'd think it would be. Also the Rx 480 @1500mhz is on par with the 1070 in games, the Rx 480 @1550mhz/1600mhz starts to pull away from the 1070, and yes those clocks are "very" doable" on air. One last tidbit i just got from my bro, the Rx 470 when OC rivals the 390X/980, rival means in the same ballpark give or take a few. I will have more info on the 470 later tonight, lots more info. And like i mentioned, a few bits of Vega news. A few key notes below:
> 
> Two "confirmed" AIB partners will sell the Rx 480 that guarantees 1500Mhz OC stable on air while cool. These are the $300 dollar models with 6+8 pin power. Might be more AIB partners that sell these guaranteed 1500mhz OC cards, waiting on bro to confirm more.
> 
> The Rx 480 when OC'd to 1500mhz trades blows with the stock 1070 in games, Dx12 games shows more favor to the Rx 480. The Rx 480 when OC'd to 1550mhz to 1600mhz starts to leave the stock 1070 behind. Yes 1600mhz is achievable on air.
> 
> The Rx 470 when OC'd is around the 390x/980.
> 
> PS: For anyone that don't know, I have a older brother in the industry, that works for one of the three big console makers. For the last few weeks he's been giving me tidbits to share. You can look up my post history at overclock.net forums and at Neogaf.com I go by the name Moey1974 at OC and Slapnuts at Neogaf. I had debunked lots of leakers and websites and shared lots of unheard of news before anyone for the last 3 to 4 weeks relating to AMD's Polaris lineup. I also posted about the 1500mhz Rx 480 3 days ago before anyone else did. So i just wanted to share that so that you may take what i say with a bit of confidence. To each is own, I just want to share some news on this exciting transformation of AMD GPU lineup of cards. All credit goes to my bro for every bit of info I've shared. I take no credit, i am just a happy messenger.


How does the 480 fare with DX11? More importantly, how much improvement is there with physics/tessellation? I would love it if Gimpworks could lose some of it's potency


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> I am still waiting for october and polaris.


Me too, as are others


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> How does the 480 fare with DX11? More importantly, how much improvement is there with physics/tessellation? I would love it if Gimpworks could lose some of it's potency


I hope it does better but gimpworks is still gimpworks will always run like poopsies on AMD because of closed sourcing. Just means heavy tessellation titles will run much better. Im curious as well that would be worth the upgrade from my r9 390 alone.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> How does the 480 fare with DX11? More importantly, how much improvement is there with physics/tessellation? I would love it if Gimpworks could lose some of it's potency


This please.


----------



## moey1974

I edited my last reply, I wanted to make sure what i say is not misleading. The bold part below is what i added to my previous reply.

The Rx 470 when OC'd is around the 390x/980. *This means it don't beat them but near them in game perf. You'll see what i mean by this. I just want to make what i say as spot on as possible. How far the 470 OC i don't know, I am waiting on that confirmation from bro, meaning what the average OC is for the 470 that you can count on getting.*


----------



## Bidz

AMD employee confirmed on Reddit that reference card won't have DVI connector, but AIB can include DVI-D as it's on the board.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4ok8sd/to_everyone_worried_about_lack_of_dvi_the/


----------



## EightDee8D

so does that means 470 has less than 32cu ?


----------



## sage101

Nice to know since I'll be upgrading to a 470. What about the Vega info you promised us?


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> The 32% OC to 2,5GHz on air claim for the GTX 1080 had greater hype and deeper ingrained belief of possibility than does the 18.5% OC of the RX 480 to 1.5 GHz
> 
> Goes to show the power of marketing


Don't take their dream away, custom vbios here we go









The wait is getting too much lol


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> so does that means 470 has less than 32cu ?


The rx 460 has 16cu common sense would say the rx 470 prob has 26cu or so. Rough guess though haha.


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> so does that means 470 has less than 32cu ?


way less. 24 or 27. Quite a lot less. Seems like yelds are not that great, and this is why apple might "Steal" full p10 chip.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LeadbyFaith21*
> 
> I like the computer names by the way!


My next builds will be Shrimp and Tsar Bomba


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> My next builds will be Shrimp and Tsar Bomba


Jamaican tarantula


----------



## iLeakStuff

Question is:
How much do you gain with 1288 > 1500MHz?
GTX 1080 have like 12% more performance with +200MHz overclock. Not really amazing


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluej511*
> 
> The rx 460 has 16cu common sense would say the rx 470 prob has 26cu or so. Rough guess though haha.


Looking at previous GCN, it could be 32, 28 or 24.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> Looking at previous GCN, it could be 32, or 28 or 24.


Seems like 28 is more then likely. I cant see it being 32 being so close to the rx 480. Im still wondering if an rx 490 is coming or it theyre not even bothering at all and just going rx480 to vega.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluej511*
> 
> Seems like 28 is more then likely. I cant see it being 32 being so close to the rx 480. Im still wondering if an rx 490 is coming or it theyre not even bothering at all and just going rx480 to vega.


I think 7970 vs 7950 was 32 CU vs. 28 CU, so it's not unlikely but...you're probably right.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> The Rx 470 when OC'd is around the 390x/980.


This would mean that the RX 470 is pretty cut down. 1536 or 1792 SP...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Question is:
> GTX 1080 have like 12% more performance with +200MHz overclock. Not really amazing


~12% OC resulting in only 12% performance gains? Preposterous!


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluej511*
> 
> Btw i posted this in the other thread, anyone worrying about DVI the pinout is indeed there will be dependent on the AIB if they use it or not.


Thanks! +rep I was wondering about this since I still use my Qnix.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> I think 7970 vs 7950 was 32 CU vs. 28 CU, so it's not unlikely but...you're probably right.


Yea but this is more like going from a 270 to a 280 not 280 to 280x, again all speculation i could be totally wrong. I remember seeing the specs for all 3 cards somewhere but can't find it anymore.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eorzean*
> 
> Thanks! +rep I was wondering about this since I still use my Qnix.


Don't quote me on that but from what it looks like and what i read somewhere else it does seem to be a pinout for dvi. Its the same on the back and doesnt seem to be connected anywhere to anything so that would be my educated guess.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> The 32% OC to 2,5GHz on air claim for the GTX 1080 had greater hype and deeper ingrained belief of possibility than does the 18.5% OC of the RX 480 to 1.5 GHz
> 
> Goes to show the power of marketing


Has more to do with Hawaii/Fiji topping out at 10-15% while Kepler/Maxwell topped out at 20-30%. People expect Nvidia cards to overclock better because in recent times they have overclocked better.


----------



## Wille114

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nordic Hardware*
> NordicHardware during the day discussed the overclocking potential of the RX 480 with its own sources of AMD's partner manufacturers and there is talk of potential performance increases of around 10% by overclocking. Which matches quite well with a rate increase of more than 10% if one speaks of 1266-1400 GHz frequency boost for easier overclocking. In other words, no stunning performance gains by pressing Polaris 10 circuit, but nevertheless a noticeable difference.


https://translate.google.se/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nordichardware.se%2Fnyheter%2Fgrafikkort%2Famd-radeon-rx-480-ska-na-15-ghz-med-vanlig-luftkylning.html&edit-text=&act=url&act=url


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wille114*
> 
> https://translate.google.se/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nordichardware.se%2Fnyheter%2Fgrafikkort%2Famd-radeon-rx-480-ska-na-15-ghz-med-vanlig-luftkylning.html&edit-text=&act=url&act=url


Oooh, shots fired against 'some guy's brother who works in the industry'.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eorzean*
> 
> Thanks! +rep I was wondering about this since I still use my Qnix.


Heres a comparison of an r9 390 backboard, the pinout for DVI looks the same. Although this is dual dvi.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Oooh, shots fired against 'some guy's brother who works in the industry'.


Eh? It reinforces the claim...


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> A few more bits of news to share - It's not just one AIB partner that guarantees a 1500mhz stable OC for the $300 dollar Rx 480 models but two different AIB partners that also guarantee this 1500mhz clock. Like i mentioned below ...this 1500mhz OC is not the limit at all. Also when the Rx 480 is OC to 1500mhz, its quite cool on air, even higher its a lot cooler than what you'd think it would be. Also the Rx 480 @1500mhz is on par with the 1070 in games, the Rx 480 @1550mhz/1600mhz starts to pull away from the 1070, and yes those clocks are "very" doable" on air. One last tidbit i just got from my bro, the Rx 470 when OC rivals the 390X/980, rival means in the same ballpark give or take a few. I will have more info on the 470 later tonight, lots more info. And like i mentioned, a few bits of Vega news. A few key notes below:
> 
> Two "confirmed" AIB partners will sell the Rx 480 that guarantees 1500Mhz OC stable on air while cool. These are the $300 dollar models with 6+8 pin power. Might be more AIB partners that sell these guaranteed 1500mhz OC cards, waiting on bro to confirm more.
> 
> *The Rx 480 when OC'd to 1500mhz trades blows with the stock 1070 in games, Dx12 games shows more favor to the Rx 480. The Rx 480 when OC'd to 1550mhz to 1600mhz starts to leave the stock 1070 behind. Yes 1600mhz is achievable on air.*
> 
> The Rx 470 when OC'd is around the 390x/980. This means it don't beat them but near them in game perf. You'll see what i mean by this. I just want to make what i say as spot on as possible. How far the 470 OC i don't know, I am waiting on that comfirmation from bro, meaning what the average OC is for the 470 that you can count on getting.
> 
> PS: For anyone that don't know, I have a older brother in the industry, that works for one of the three big console makers. For the last few weeks he's been giving me tidbits to share. You can look up my post history at overclock.net forums and at Neogaf.com I go by the name Moey1974 at OC and Slapnuts at Neogaf. I had debunked lots of leakers and websites and shared lots of unheard of news before anyone for the last 3 to 4 weeks relating to AMD's Polaris lineup. I also posted about the 1500mhz Rx 480 3 days ago before anyone else did. So i just wanted to share that so that you may take what i say with a bit of confidence. To each is own, I just want to share some news on this exciting transformation of AMD GPU lineup of cards. All credit goes to my bro for every bit of info I've shared. I take no credit, i am just a happy messenger.


Quoted for posterity. And also because my BS meter is approaching 11.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Quoted for posterity. And also because my BS meter is approaching 11.


If the 980ti trades blows with the 1070 why couldnt the rx 480 trade blows with the 1070 if when OCed its performance approaches or beats 980ti territory?

Again this would be in a fair comparison in a game that runs well on both amd/nvidia and not a biased title.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Eh? It reinforces the claim...


"Potential increases around 10%", reinforces the claim that AIBs will "guarantee" 1500 MHz overclocks and that it'll match a 1070?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> "Potential increases around 10%", reinforces the claim that AIBs will "guarantee" 1500 MHz overclocks and that it'll match a 1070?


Sure, if you conveniently leave out the next sentence...
Quote:


> Which matches quite well with a rate increase of more than 10% if one speaks of 1266-1400 GHz frequency boost for easier overclocking


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluej511*
> 
> Heres a comparison of an r9 390 backboard, the pinout for DVI looks the same. Although this is dual dvi.


As far as I know, HDMI can be considered as superset which includes DVI, so it should be easy for OEM, AIB to include it.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluej511*
> 
> If the 980ti trades blows with the 1070 why couldnt the rx 480 trade blows with the 1070 if when OCed its performance approaches or beats 980ti territory?
> 
> Again this would be in a fair comparison in a game that runs well on both amd/nvidia and not a biased title.


Because we haven't established that 480 would indeed trade blows with the 980 Ti.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> As far as I know, HDMI can be considered as superset which includes DVI, so it should be easy for OEM to include it.


Yup, so depends on the aib we'll see if they add it. Even a single dvi-d above the third dp would do. DVI-A is totally unneccesary and dead at this point.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Because we haven't established that 480 would indeed trade blows with the 980 Ti.


True but i did say if, or maybe i should have written IF lol. IF indeed it does have the same performance as a 980ti it could be close to the 1070. Again its all speculation we dont know how well the OC will react to gaming. For example the fury didnt game much from an OC in gaming.


----------



## Oj010

Considering orders for the card are not yet open I dont see how someone's brother has access to one from a retailer.

Paper launch on 29 June, maybe a few review samples.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Considering orders for the card are not yet open I dont see how someone's brother has access to one from a retailer.
> 
> Paper launch on 29 June, maybe a few review samples.


He says he works in the industry so it wouldnt be from a retailer. And from what ive heard it seems like AMD actually handed out sample during their tech demo. So people like linus/jayztwocents/techpowerup and so on probably already have sample. Its why we already have rx 470/460 3dmark samples.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Paper launch on 29 June, maybe a few review samples.


Paper launch? Seems AMDs partners missed the memo... Retailers have been receiving shipments and stocking inventory in preparation for the 29th launch...


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Considering orders for the card are not yet open I dont see how someone's brother has access to one from a retailer.
> 
> Paper launch on 29 June, maybe a few review samples.


Didn't you have exclusive access to inside info about the 1080 that showed 1080 in 2-way SLI beat 980 Ti 4-way SLI's Firestrike LN2 record?

Same idea here.


----------



## Yorkston

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Considering orders for the card are not yet open I dont see how someone's brother has access to one from a retailer.
> 
> Paper launch on 29 June, maybe a few review samples.


Wasn't the 29th supposed to be a hard launch? I thought retailers in Europe were already receiving them.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Considering orders for the card are not yet open I dont see how someone's brother has access to one from a retailer.
> 
> Paper launch on 29 June, maybe a few review samples.


I'm not advocating for the guy but probably the same way your AMD, Gigabyte? sources are giving you info?


----------



## Lipos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Considering orders for the card are not yet open I dont see how someone's brother has access to one from a retailer.
> 
> Paper launch on 29 June, maybe a few review samples.


So Hard Launch in October?


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Considering orders for the card are not yet open I dont see how someone's brother has access to one from a retailer.
> 
> Paper launch on 29 June, maybe a few review samples.












"October"


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Didn't you have exclusive access to inside info about the 1080 that showed 1080 in 2-way SLI beat 980 Ti 4-way SLI's Firestrike LN2 record?
> 
> Same idea here.


I never said Firestrike. Also, wait and see. Results are being held back for some reason, EVGA's Instagram account has already shown north of 2,800 MHz on GTX 1080 and that isnt even the limit. I don't know why results aren't being made public.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> I'm not advocating for the guy but probably the same way your AMD, Gigabyte? sources are giving you info?


Except for when a vendor (AIB partner) says they aren't taking orders yet.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Wille114*
> 
> https://translate.google.se/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nordichardware.se%2Fnyheter%2Fgrafikkort%2Famd-radeon-rx-480-ska-na-15-ghz-med-vanlig-luftkylning.html&edit-text=&act=url&act=url


Thanks.
Thats what I thought.

One thing is impressive clocks, another is if it translates to impressive performance along with it


----------



## AmericanLoco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Quoted for posterity. And also because my BS meter is approaching 11.


Polaris 11?


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I never said Firestrike. Also, wait and see. Results are being held back for some reason, EVGA's Instagram account has already shown north of 2,800 MHz on GTX 1080 and that isnt even the limit. I don't know why results aren't being made public.


You're right, you only implied it was 3DMark in this post.

Still, looking through all the 3DMark entries, all top 3 records are still held by GM200.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> ...stuff..
> Except for when a vendor (AIB partner) says they aren't taking orders yet.


All vendors? Even first tier partners?

Well, I guess we'll soon see.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> You're right, you only implied it was 3DMark in this post.
> 
> Still, looking through all the 3DMark entries, all top 3 records are still held by GM200.


Nope, never implied. I didn't even use the word 3DMark, never mind Firestrike. Someone else said 3DMark.


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Nope, never implied. I didn't even use the word 3DMark, never mind Firestrike. Someone else said 3DMark.


I am almost positive you made that claim.


----------



## bluej511

Things are getting dicey. opcorn


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Nope, never implied. I didn't even use the word 3DMark, never mind Firestrike. Someone else said 3DMark.


You replied to a post that specifically mentioned 3DMark leaks. How exactly do you expect me to know you weren't talking about 3DMark?

I quote:
Quote:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Extremely disappointed that there are no new 3DMark benchies found, overclock or stock, or even GPU-Z screenshots
> 
> 
> 
> Theres an embargo. I can't say anything more than that 2-way SLI GTX 1080 has taken 4-way SLI GTX 980 TI records.
Click to expand...


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> I am almost positive you made that claim.


Nope. You're welcome to search.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> You replied to a post that specifically mentioned 3DMark leaks. How exactly do you expect me to know you weren't talking about 3DMark?
> 
> I quote:


Instead of making your own context by reading from halfway though a discussion, go further back for the original context.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1599305/vc-first-gtx-1080-benchmarks/480#post_25133342


----------



## magnek

Great, a deliberately ambiguous statement completely void of any detail that could be easily massaged to fit into any context, pure genius.









The fact of matter remains that someone very specifically mentioned 3DMark, and you followed up with more or less the same comment. So if anything, you created that context for yourself, not me.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Great, a deliberately ambiguous statement completely void of any detail that could be easily massaged to fit into any context, pure genius.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fact of matter remains that someone very specifically mentioned 3DMark, and you followed up with more or less the same comment. So if anything, you created that context for yourself, not me.


My popcorn is delicious lol.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Instead of making your own context by reading from halfway though a discussion, go further back for the original context.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1599305/vc-first-gtx-1080-benchmarks/480#post_25133342


Keep digging it's so funny


----------



## C2H5OH

Now when I think of it, there was some reporting, that AIB partners are frustrated at AMD (for the lack of competition). If we take some of it as true and taking Oj010 comment for the delay







, I'm starting to think that Polaris 10 may indeed be in limited supply for some AIB but not Sapphire, Powercolor, XFX...Apple, Dell, HP....etc..


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Great, a deliberately ambiguous statement completely void of any detail that could be easily massaged to fit into any context, pure genius.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fact of matter remains that someone very specifically mentioned 3DMark, and you followed up with more or less the same comment. So if anything, you created that context for yourself, not me.


He asked why he couldn't find any 3DMark results at all and I said there's an embargo in place (it was before the soft launch) and reiterated what I'd already said.

He also mentioned GPU-Z, by your logic I'm proven correct as GPU-Z shows higher frequencies for the 1080 than the 980 Ti can achieve. See? Works both ways. Except that it doesn't as my reply had nothing to do with GPU-Z. Or 3DMark.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Considering orders for the card are not yet open I dont see how someone's brother has access to one from a retailer.
> 
> Paper launch on 29 June, maybe a few review samples.


So global launch in octobre and max freq at 850mhz confirmed ?


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> So global launch in octobre and max freq at 850mhz confirmed ?


Would you like to show me where I said it would never exceed 850 MHz? That isn't just taking what I said out of context, that's putting words in my mouth.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I never said Firestrike. Also, wait and see. Results are being held back for some reason, EVGA's Instagram account has already shown north of 2,800 MHz on GTX 1080 and that isnt even the limit. I don't know why results aren't being made public.


Forget what benchmark it was... still waiting on some proof to the claim that *two 1080 on LN2 beat four 980 Tis on LN2*

We can all agree that you did, in fact, make that claim.


----------



## blue1512

Someone just put an order for 50 of RX480 for his mining farm


----------



## ZealotKi11er

If Polaris 10 / RX 480 is impressive I can't wait to see how good Vega will be.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Forget what benchmark it was... still waiting on some proof to the claim that *two 1080 on LN2 beat four 980 Tis on LN2*
> 
> We can all agree that you did, in fact, make that claim.


I absolutely did, and all in good time. As I explained a few posts ago, it's now common knowledge that even reference cards have crept close to 3 GHz yet we don't have any publicly available benchmark results remotely near to that speed and I don't know why they're not being shared.


----------



## DeathMade

Why is Ojo here talking about polaris again? 850MHz intensifies? No polaris chips till october?


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I absolutely did, and all in good time. As I explained a few posts ago, it's now common knowledge that even reference cards have crept close to 3 GHz yet we don't have any publicly available benchmark results remotely near to that speed and I don't know why they're not being shared.


They will be in....... octobre


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> He asked why he couldn't find any 3DMark results at all and I said there's an embargo in place (it was before the soft launch) *and reiterated what I'd already said.*


Which is _"2-way SLI GTX 1080 has taken 4-way SLI GTX 980 TI records."_

Again how do you expect someone to NOT take that to mean 3DMark results in context.
Quote:


> He also mentioned GPU-Z, by your logic I'm proven correct as GPU-Z shows higher frequencies for the 1080 than the 980 Ti can achieve. See? Works both ways. Except that it doesn't as my reply had nothing to do with GPU-Z. Or 3DMark.


Ok let's look at the quotes in question again:
Quote:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Extremely disappointed that there are no new 3DMark benchies found, overclock or stock, or even GPU-Z screenshots
> 
> 
> 
> Theres an embargo. I can't say anything more than that 2-way SLI GTX 1080 has taken 4-way SLI GTX 980 TI records.
Click to expand...

Not sure how you're proven correct since the record breaking context clearly wasn't in reference to clockspeed or frequency. Really the only thing you said in your _original post_ was "CPU-like frequencies", which is again ambiguous.

You should look this up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnum_effect. It's exactly the same concept.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I absolutely did, and all in good time. As I explained a few posts ago, it's now common knowledge that even reference cards have crept close to 3 GHz yet we don't have any publicly available benchmark results remotely near to that speed and I don't know why they're not being shared.


2 weeks post launch... as much as I appreciate your attempts at evading the task at hand, your reluctance and vagueness just further diminishes your credibility...


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Which is _"2-way SLI GTX 1080 has taken 4-way SLI GTX 980 TI records."_
> 
> Again how do you expect someone to NOT take that to mean 3DMark results in context.
> Ok let's look at the quotes in question again:
> Not sure how you're proven correct since the record breaking context clearly wasn't in reference to clockspeed or frequency. Really the only thing you said in your _original post_ was "CPU-like frequencies", which is again ambiguous.
> 
> You should look this up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnum_effect. It's exactly the same concept.


Or maybe you should learn to read and see where I first mentioned it, along with the complete lack of reference to any particular benchmark? Just a thought.

As for CPU-like frequencies, as ambiguous as it was it was a lot more than what anyone else had brought to the table which was basically pondering the price. I do, however, think that we can all agree that CPU-like frequencies in this day and age would be sonewhere in the 3 GHz range.


----------



## AmericanLoco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 2 weeks post launch... as much as I appreciate your attempts at evading the task at hand, your reluctance and vagueness just further diminishes your credibility...


Everytime he posts, Polaris 10 is delayed by 5 days and its clock speed decreases by 10 Mhz.

Reminds me of this from way back in the XtremeSystems days, pre-bulldozer launch:
Quote:


> JF-AMD posting: IPC increases!!!!!!! How many times did I tell you!!!
> 
> terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
> terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
> terrace215 post: IPC decreases, The more I post the more it decreases.
> .....}
> until (interrupt by Movieman)
> 
> Regards, Hans


----------



## DeathMade

And Vega is delayed by one month


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 2 weeks post launch... as much as I appreciate your attempts at evading the task at hand, your reluctance and vagueness just further diminishes your credibility...


Given that we know that near 3 GHz has been done yet the results available are all sub 2.2 GHz, it should be pretty easy to deduce that something about those results is preventing them from being made public. Custom BIOS? Unannounced card? Who knows


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Or maybe you should learn to read and see where I first mentioned it, along with the complete lack of reference to any particular benchmark? Just a thought.
> 
> As for CPU-like frequencies, as ambiguous as it was it was a lot more than what anyone else had brought to the table which was basically pondering the price. I do, however, think that we can all agree that CPU-like frequencies in this day and age would be sonewhere in the 3 GHz range.


That's rich.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Instead of making your own context by reading from halfway though a discussion, go further back for the original context.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1599305/vc-first-gtx-1080-benchmarks/480#post_25133342


Thread title: [VC] First GTX 1080 *benchmarks*










As far as CPU frequencies go, some mobile CPUs are clocked below 1.5GHz, so I guess you could say Maxwell reaches CPU-like frequencies as well.

I mean no offense, but saying stuff without giving concrete numbers doesn't make you a prophet.


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Given that we know that near 3 GHz has been done yet the results available are all sub 2.2 GHz, it should be pretty easy to deduce that something about those results is preventing them from being made public. Custom BIOS? Unannounced card? Who knows


maybe they dont exist








anyway, this is not gtx 1080 thread right?


----------



## slavovid

Guys i don't mean to derail the thread as this guy Oj010 is so funny to read right now. But along all the RX480 threads i have been folowing there was a post about how AMD cards age compared to their competitor across the years and i can't find it.

Could someone with more experience in finding those things or memmory of where it was assist please









I feel bad for not saving it the first time i read it and i thought i had









On the subject i still expect Polaris 10 to be at atleast 1050 mhz if they take so much time till octobre to fix their 850 mhz problem ...


----------



## Shatun-Bear

Ojo10 you have some front coming here talking BS again after you were exposed with your 'Polaris 10 in October' misinformation. Please spare us all further false claims.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> maybe they dont exist
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> anyway, this is not gtx 1080 thread right?


Now why would they not exist when EVGA has shown that they do, albeit without releasing the scores? Anyway, as you said it's not the GTX 1080 thread so let's get back on topic.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shatun-Bear*
> 
> Ojo10 you have some front coming here talking BS again after you were exposed with your 'Polaris 10 in October' misinformation. Please spare us all further false claims.


Until there's a hard launch (obviously with mass availability) you have no evidence to the contrary


----------



## slavovid

Yeah beacause AMD are going to target 95% of the gamers with the same paper launch as Nvidia did


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Given that we know that near 3 GHz has been done yet the results available are all sub 2.2 GHz, it should be pretty easy to deduce that something about those results is preventing them from being made public. Custom BIOS? Unannounced card? Who knows


Ok now you've crossed over into spreading FUD. Maybe you really should take a step back and brush up on some recent news:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> I would be lying if I said I didn't giggle a little bit at this:
> 
> http://forum.hwbot.org/showpost.php?p=447836&postcount=15
> http://forum.hwbot.org/showpost.php?p=447837&postcount=16


Actually do me a favor and read through this page of that thread: http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?p=447837#post447837

There hasn't been a lot of results because GP104 is extremely finnicky/hard to overclock on LN2 period.

Yes Kingpin got his to 2835 MHz but didn't run any benchmarks. Why? Maybe because the card is too unstable to complete any benchmarks in that state.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I do, however, think that we can all agree that CPU-like frequencies in this day and age would be sonewhere in the 3 GHz range.


I suppose those ultra low power server chips running at 2.0GHz , mobile products like the atom running at 1.6GHz or the i5 runing at 2.3GHz.or embedded i3s running at 1.9GHz don't qualify as CPUs

I already called you out on this vagueness weeks ago and and you are still backpedaling?


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Until there's a hard launch (obviously with mass availability) you have no evidence to the contrary


Would you say that Nvidia hard launched (with mass availability) their GTX 1080 and GTX 1070? What do you call mass availability?


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> Guys i don't mean to derail the thread as this guy Oj010 is so funny to read right now. But along all the RX480 threads i have been folowing there was a post about how AMD cards age compared to their competitor across the years and i can't find it.
> 
> Could someone with more experience in finding those things or memmory of where it was assist please
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I feel bad for not saving it the first time i read it and i thought i had
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the subject i still expect Polaris 10 to be at atleast 1050 mhz if they take so much time till octobre to fix their 850 mhz problem ...


Somewhere here?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1436497/official-amd-r9-290x-290-owners-club/42400#post_25076326

http://www.overclock.net/t/1592431/anand-ashes-of-the-singularity-revisited-a-beta-look-at-directx-12-asynchronous-shading/300#post_24935955

Not sure it helps, but...


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Until there's a hard launch (obviously with mass availability) you have no evidence to the contrary


hard launch of custom aib or reference design ? please be more specific.

because 29th is for reference iirc.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> I suppose those ultra low power server chips running at 2.0GHz , mobile products like the atom running at 1.6GHz or the i5 runing at 2.3GHz.or embedded i3s running at 1.9GHz don't qualify as CPUs
> 
> I already called you out on this vagueness weeks ago and and you are still backpedaling?


Celeron 2961Y runs at 1.1GHz with no turbo. So I guess you could say every single GM204 card in existence ran at CPU-like frequencies lol.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Until there's a hard launch (obviously with mass availability) you have no evidence to the contrary


https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Ok now you've crossed over into spreading FUD. Maybe you really should take a step back and brush up on some recent news:
> Actually do me a favor and read through this page of that thread: http://forum.hwbot.org/showthread.php?p=447837#post447837
> 
> There hasn't been a lot of results because GP104 is extremely finnicky/hard to overclock on LN2 period.
> 
> Yes Kingpin got his to 2835 MHz but didn't run any benchmarks. Why? Maybe because the card is too unstable to complete any benchmarks in that state.


So you're honestly suggesting that while he was able to show more than 2,800 MHz on LN2 the highest bench speed is still on air? Mkay. I'm yet to see any card that can suicide almost 650 MHz (that's 30 %) higher than it can bench.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> hard launch of custom aib or reference design ? please be more specific.
> 
> because 29th is for reference iirc.


Don't worry mate. There is no restrictions for AIBs this time. If not for the NDA they would have been selling already.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> So you're honestly suggesting that while he was able to show more than 2,800 MHz on LN2 the highest bench speed is still on air? Mkay. I'm yet to see any card that can suicide almost 650 MHz (that's 30 %) higher than it can bench.


You have GOT TO BE kidding me.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1599305/vc-first-gtx-1080-benchmarks/2220_30#post_25167766
Quote:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> So you would say running 400-500MHz overclock 24/7 is ok with GTX 1080?
> 
> 
> 
> On air I wouldn't expect more than 2.2-2.3 GHz.
Click to expand...











Right from your very own mouth.

And no, I'm saying derBauer seems to be suggesting getting over 2.5GHz on LN2 is tricky.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Celeron 2961Y runs at 1.1GHz with no turbo. So I guess you could say every single GM204 card in existence ran at CPU-like frequencies lol.


That chip is from 2013, the ones I listed were from 2015 or early 2016 just to avoid the rhetoric about dated products


----------



## Oj010

I guess Slomo4shO and magnek are running embedded CPUs if their first thought of CPU frequencies are the 1-2 GHz range they mentioned.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I guess Slomo4shO and magnek are running embedded CPUs if their first thought of CPU frequencies are the 1-2 GHz range they mentioned.


No it's to demonstrate how ambiguous statements are disingenuous and useless because they can easily be molded to fit into any context as one pleases.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> ......


My South African friend, as we are all friends here, no need to further dig into the topic. Soon it will all be revealed, and you will be...judged







accordingly.








I personalty remain neutrally skeptical (if there is such thing) of your sources but you never know...


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> You have GOT TO BE kidding me.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1599305/vc-first-gtx-1080-benchmarks/2220_30#post_25167766
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Right from your very own mouth.


I don't know if reading isn't your strong point but that's what I said then and guess what? I'm not saying anything different now.


----------



## DeathMade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Until there's a hard launch (obviously with mass availability) you have no evidence to the contrary


So Pascal is not launched by that logic amirite


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> No it's to demonstrate how ambiguous statements are disingenuous and useless because they can easily be molded to fit into any context as one pleases.


If anyone today considers 1.1 GHz to be a typical CPU like frequency I need to introduce them to the year 2000.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I don't know if reading isn't your strong point but that's what I said then and guess what? I'm not saying anything different now.


And where did I suggest the highest bench speed was still on air?


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathMade*
> 
> So Pascal is not launched by that logic amirite


Except you CAN buy Pascal right now. It isn't limited to review samples, it's available to the masses.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> And where did I suggest the highest bench speed was still on air?


You didn't. Check HWBOT for results, they're all below 2.2 GHz.


----------



## DeathMade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Except you CAN buy Pascal right now. It isn't limited to review samples, it's available to the masses.


Sure it is. Thats why no one can buy it, the cards are available for preorders in most countries and the prices are insanely inflated in EU


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I guess Slomo4shO and magnek are running embedded CPUs if their first thought of CPU frequencies are the 1-2 GHz range they mentioned.


Strawman much?

A CPU is a CPU, my laptops run a base frequencies of around 2.2GHz, my tablet runs at around 1.6GHz, my phone runs around 1.8GHz, my PS4 runs at 1.6GHz, my NAS has an embedded chip that runs below 2GHz... My desktop is overclocked to 4.6 GHz... From the products that I use that have CPUs in them, the 2GHz speeds seem the normal. The 4770K seems to be the outlier.

Claiming that 3GHz+ is the standard CPU speed is absurd based on general availability of CPU equipped products.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Except you CAN buy Pascal right now. It isn't limited to review samples, it's available to the masses.


Tell that to those who ordered weeks ago and still have no card in hand...


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Except you CAN buy Pascal right now. It isn't limited to review samples, it's available to the masses.


I'm sorry, but broad availability is not determined by the available review samples. Chanel inventory is probably the hardest to track. We'll see on their Q2 report but even that won
t be an indication, as they are not separated. As such, all talk about mass availability is non provable and pointless.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> You didn't. Check HWBOT for results, they're all below 2.2 GHz.


So why did you feel the need to be snide then?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I don't know if reading isn't your strong point but that's what I said then and guess what? I'm not saying anything different now.


Also
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> If anyone today considers 1.1 GHz to be a typical CPU like frequency I need to introduce them to the year 2000.


You're still missing the point.


----------



## DeathMade

Can I add a fuel to the fire?


----------



## rv8000

For everyone saying that GCN doesn't scale well, it took me awhile but I finally found it, personal scaling benchmarks in an Nvidia favored game...

http://www.overclock.net/t/1547314/official-amd-r9-radeon-fury-nano-x-pro-duo-fiji-owners-club/3170#post_24229629

~10% OC, 9.11% increase in avg fps, and 20% increase in minimum.

GCN scales infinitely better than maxwell and pascal, please stop saying otherwise...


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Strawman much?
> 
> A CPU is a CPU, my laptops run a base frequencies of around 2.2GHz, my tablet runs at around 1.6GHz, my phone runs around 1.8GHz, my PS4 runs at 1.6GHz, my NAS has an embedded chip that runs below 2GHz... My desktop is overclocked to 4.6 GHz... From the products that I use that have CPUs in them, the 2GHz speeds seem the normal. The 4770K seems to be the outlier.
> 
> Claiming that 3GHz+ is the standard CPU speed is absurd based on general availability of CPU equipped products.
> Tell that to those who ordered weeks ago and still have no card in hand...


So your tablet, PS4 and NAS are typical representations of CPUs? Interesting definition. For what it's worth, several posts later (although that thread progressed very rapidly, it may have been many posts later; it was probably a day or two later) I said it would be over 3 GHz.

Are you saying that because demand exceeds supply in certain regions the card has not been hard launched and is only available as a review sample?


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathMade*
> 
> Can I add a fuel to the fire?


lol ,


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathMade*
> 
> Can I add a fuel to the fire?


Sure you can. You're not actually adding anything though as there has been no hard launch and no public availability to prove otherwise. Good try though









(Although I think at this stage it's safe to say I debunked the "Vega launch is imminent" rumour)


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Availability? Hard dates are hard to come by. But I believe the 480 in 8GB dressing is landing this month while the 460, 470 and 480/4GB are slated for a few months out.


http://unlocked.newegg.com/article/hands-amd-rx-460-470-480-graphics-cards


----------



## mutantmagnet

Overall I've been lukewarm to the 1070 pricing even though it's hitting the performance levels I expected 4 months ago and I already own an Acer XB27HU.

If these $300 480s can hit these rumored overclocked performance numbers I'll buy one even if it means I can't leverage Gsync or ULMB for the time being. Paying 40% more money for 22% more performance after overclocking isn't all that appealing especially since the performance being reached isn't strong enough to leverage ULMB at 1440p.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> So your tablet, PS4 and NAS are typical representations of CPUs? Interesting definition. For what it's worth, several posts later (although that thread progressed very rapidly, it may have been many posts later; i*t was probably a day or two later) I said it would be over 3 GHz.*
> 
> Are you saying that because demand exceeds supply in certain regions the card has not been hard launched and is only available as a review sample?


Can you point me to that post? The best I could come up with is this: http://www.overclock.net/t/1599305/vc-first-gtx-1080-benchmarks/1470_30#post_25154437
Quote:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> I believe he is. I heard mention (it may have been him) that Pascal can(should) reach close to 3GHz on LN2.
> 
> 
> 
> Criminal from XS? How're you doing man? I hinted at a speed but I can't say more, maybe you're on the money, maybe not
Click to expand...

Which continues with the ambiguity theme.


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Question is:
> How much do you gain with 1288 > 1500MHz?
> GTX 1080 have like 12% more performance with +200MHz overclock. Not really amazing


hard to say but for certain Pascal has slower IPC than Maxwell.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> So your tablet, PS4 and NAS are typical representations of CPUs? Interesting definition. For what it's worth, several posts later (although that thread progressed very rapidly, it may have been many posts later; it was probably a day or two later) I said it would be over 3 GHz.


Convenient of you to leave out the phone and laptop.

Make a vague claim... then proceed to move the goal post wherever you like whenever you like


----------



## iRUSH

How much is this RX480? I've seen $200, $250 and $300. Big difference here for the same card essentially. Especially when we're talking $200 to start.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> How much is this RX480? I've seen $200, $250 and $300. Big difference here for the same card essentially. Especially when we're talking $200 to start.


The only thing we do know for certain currently: 4GB RX 480 reference model = $199


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> How much is this RX480? I've seen $200, $250 and $300. Big difference here for the same card essentially. Especially when we're talking $200 to start.


Reference 4GB version $199, Reference 8GB prob around $240, AIB custom above each of that


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> How much is this RX480? I've seen $200, $250 and $300. Big difference here for the same card essentially. Especially when we're talking $200 to start.


Agreed. My thoughts exactly. For a little extra you can just get a 1070, making the value of this card go down (assuming you need to spend $300 and OC to match or nearly match a stock 1070). At $200, it seems to good to be true, but at $300, it seems priced where it should be in comparison to Nvidia's more expensive and higher performance offerings... making it less of a big deal.

I wouldn't mind paying an extra $100-130 for 20% more performance (1070).

Edit: blah, fixed.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eorzean*
> 
> Agreed. My thoughts exactly. For a little extra you can just get a 1070, making the value of this card go down (assuming you need to spend $300 to match a stock 1070). At $200, it seems to good to be true, but at $300, it seems priced where it should be in comparison to Nvidia's more expensive and higher priced offerings... making it less of a big deal.


A little extra? A 1070 here costs around 499-550

Actually i was wrong. A 1070 costs around 524 for FE and up to 650 for a custom card.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eorzean*
> 
> Agreed. My thoughts exactly. For a little extra you can just get a 1070, making the value of this card go down (assuming you need to spend $300 to match a stock 1070). At $200, it seems to good to be true, but at $300, it seems priced where it should be in comparison to Nvidia's more expensive and higher priced offerings... making it less of a big deal.


GTX 1070 FE is $449, the $380 version is non existent yet

Of course...if you can find them at these prices at all


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> A little extra? A 1070 here costs around 499-550


Well, here ranges from person to person, obviously. Here, as in Canada, it'll be around 100-130 USD more if this card (8+6 pin 8GB AIB RX 480) is priced at $300 USD.

I'll take that for the performance gains.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eorzean*
> 
> Well, here ranges from person to person, obviously. Here, as in Canada, it'll be around 100-130 USD more if this card (8+6 pin 8GB AIB RX 480) is priced at $300 USD.
> 
> I'll take that for the performance gains.


But the 450 $ 1070 FE shouldnt be 100-150 usd more too?


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eorzean*
> 
> Well, here ranges from person to person, obviously. Here, as in Canada, it'll be around 100-130 USD more if this card (8+6 pin 8GB AIB RX 480) is priced at $300 USD.
> 
> I'll take that for the performance gains.


Consider, that a good custom GTX 1070, no matter what Nvidia says, will be above the suggested $380 price. Even might be above (let's just say it) Fanboys Edition $450...


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> This would mean that the RX 470 is pretty cut down. 1536 or 1792 SP...
> ~12% OC resulting in only 12% performance gains? Preposterous!


it can be a 2048SP with low clocks just a cut down 480 if there isnt any X model for each card or maybe skipping X model and it is 1792


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eorzean*
> 
> Agreed. My thoughts exactly. For a little extra you can just get a 1070, making the value of this card go down (assuming you need to spend $300 to match a stock 1070). *At $200, it seems to good to be true, but at $300, it seems priced where it should be in comparison to Nvidia's more expensive and higher priced offerings... making it less of a big deal*.


I'm glad you said that. Makes me feel less crazy. I've read through this whole thread and there's a lot to be excited about at $200. But there's too much variation in price for me to not scratch my head in confusion.

Then there's a super high-end 1500 mhz model for $300? That's strange at 50% more in price. I get that a reference 980 ti was at $600?? Then the Kingpin 980ti was $900+ but that is a very unique copper cooler and the name has clearly earned its price premium cause they sell. It's a rare low number availability card. It's not for me and I think that's an unreasonable asking price, but that's besides the point.


----------



## FlyingSolo

The cheapest 1070 i can find is the KFA2 GeForce GTX 1070 "Reference Blower" which is £364.99 in UK. And MSI GeForce GTX 1070 GAMING X £429.99 and some cards go over that. So hopefully i can get a 480 8GB MSI or Gigabyte for £250 to £280.


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> But the 450 $ 1070 FE shouldnt be 100-150 usd more too?


Eh? I really don't know what you mean by that. The Gigabyte G1 version of the 1070 is $430 USD in Canada right now. If this miracle 480 releases at $300 USD, I'll take the 1070 instead because after an OC of 1500Mhz, it'll still be slower.

If they priced the 1500+MHz capable RX 480 at $250 USD, I'd be more impressed. Of course I'll wait for benchmarks because even if the 1070 is 20%+ faster on paper OC vs OC, AMDs DX11/12 improvements can probably make up for the difference, at least over time with driver improvements.

All I'm saying is, if this was a $200 card, it'd be a bargain. But it most likely won't be and the supposed $300 makes it less impressive.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eorzean*
> 
> Eh? I really don't know what you mean by that. The Gigabyte G1 version of the 1070 is $430 USD in Canada right now. If this miracle 480 releases at $300 USD, I'll take the 1070 instead because after an OC, it'll be 15+% better, assuming this one actually clocks to 1500 MHz, otherwise it'll be even faster.
> 
> If they priced the 1500+MHz capable RX 480 at $250 USD, I'd be more impressed. Of course I'll wait for benchmarks because even if the 1070 is 20%+ faster on paper, AMDs DX11/12 improvements can probably make up for the difference, at least over time with driver improvements.
> 
> All I'm saying is, if this was a $200 card, it'd be a bargain. But it most likely won't be.


You told me that if the beast 480x cost 300 usd then it should be 100 more in canada right?

That doesnt apply to 1070 too?

The 1070 g1 is 569 cad atm. So it's still way more expensive.


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> You told me that if the beast 480x cost 300 usd then it should be 100 more in canada right?
> 
> That doesnt apply to 1070 too?
> 
> The 1070 g1 is 569 cad atm. So it's still way more expensive.


Nope, sorry. My wording was probably just a little confusing. I meant if it (RX 480) was $300, then the 1070 would only be $100-130 more in comparison. Making the value of the RX 480 drop, at least to me, and yada yada.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> http://unlocked.newegg.com/article/hands-amd-rx-460-470-480-graphics-cards


Good read on the article. Also, RX 480 availability is June 29th, at least here in the US. Dunno if that includes the 8GB models or the "beast mode" model that everyone keeps alluding to. We shall see.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> You told me that if the beast 480x cost 300 usd then it should be 100 more in canada right?
> 
> That doesnt apply to 1070 too?
> 
> The 1070 g1 is 569 cad atm. So it's still way more expensive.


Oh, hey neighbor! How's in Greece?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eorzean*
> 
> Nope, sorry. My wording was probably just a little confusing. I meant if it (RX 480) was $300, then the 1070 would only be $100-130 more in comparison. Making the value of the RX 480 drop, at least to me, and yada yada.


It is yet to be seen what the $300 version is.. As, of now the only official price is $199 for the 4GB version (probably reference cooler).


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> Oh, hey neighbor! How's in Greece?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is yet to be seen what the $300 version is.. As, of now the only official price is $199 for the 4GB version (probably reference cooler).


I would say fine but we had over 41C today.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> I would say fine but we had over 41C today.


[OT]
Well, you're further down South I can imagine. I'll visit some friends soon, so I'll experience it myself


----------



## tkenietz

If a reference card does 1400mhz for $230 and custom card does 1500mhz for $70 more, I would be more likely to go reference board. If custom design did 1600+ I would maybe consider it as I would assume at >14% higher clocks there could be a noticeable difference.


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> It is yet to be seen what the $300 version is.. As, of now the only official price is $199 for the 4GB version (probably reference cooler).


Which is exactly why I haven't made a decision yet... But assuming reference 8GB models will be near the $250 mark, $300 doesn't seem that far off after MSI or whoever throws an extra 6 pin on it and a cooler. But who knows, maybe we'll see 8GB AIBs with all the jazz and OC headroom for $250. Time will obviously tell but I'll remain skeptical.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> If a reference card does 1400mhz for $230 and custom card does 1500mhz for $70 more, I would be more likely to go reference board. If custom design did 1600+ I would maybe consider it as I would assume at >14% higher clocks there could be a noticeable difference.


Usually blower type coolers are more...noisy but we are yet to see what temperatures RX 480 holds for each clocks. You should wait for some reviews first.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Good read on the article. Also, RX 480 availability is June 29th, at least here in the US. Dunno if that includes the 8GB models or the "beast mode" model that everyone keeps alluding to. We shall see.


Thanks. I'll be waiting for them 8GB AIB cards that have 6 + 8 pin. Hopefully it comes out on the 29th. Just wandering when these cards will be up for pre-orders. Just don't want them all to be sold out before i can get one.


----------



## Marios145

850Mhz Polaris 11 beating 3GHz GP104 confirmed.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Marios145*
> 
> 850Mhz Polaris 11 beating 3GHz GP104 confirmed.


stop beating that poor dead horse









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Just kidding you can proceed


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> I would say fine but we had over 41C today.


You are on a peninsula/archipelago, get to a beach!


----------



## Ultracarpet

I kind of want to go reference because of the blowers (cf in smaller case), but i don't want to miss out on the fat OCs with just one 6pin incase i put them under water in the future







decisions decisions....


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> I kind of want to go reference because of the blowers (cf in smaller case), but i don't want to miss out on the fat OCs with just one 6pin incase i put them under water in the future
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> decisions decisions....


Just wait it out till mid July and you'll know exactly what to do ?.

What I learned over the years is if I'm unhappy with something I'll sell it and buy what I should have just waited for. In this case, just a few extra weeks.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You are on a peninsula/archipelago, get to a beach!


...or get to a bitc*, they do make you forget about the heat, sometimes. (I should probably stop drinking and get to bed, huh?)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> I kind of want to go reference because of the blowers (cf in smaller case), but i don't want to miss out on the fat OCs with just one 6pin incase i put them under water in the future
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> decisions decisions....


Yeah, that might be a limitation, although...we only know that the maximum TDP is 150W, don't now real power draw nor how OC scales, so...


----------



## FlyingSolo

I really like his videos


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> If anyone today considers 1.1 GHz to be a typical CPU like frequency I need to introduce them to the year 2000.


I would like to introduce you to the most numerous CPU on the planet, the smartphone SOC.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> I would like to introduce you to the most numerous CPU on the planet, the smartphone SOC.


My phone is clocked 2.5GHz.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> My phone is clocked 2.5GHz.


Most are 1.5-2.5ghz. 1080 lands right in the middle of that.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> My phone is clocked 2.5GHz.


Pshhhhhhttttt... my Galaxy Note 4, which is nearing 2 years old, is a quad core @ 2.7Ghz.

Alas, newer phones with less clockspeed are faster. Gotta love tech advancement.


----------



## helis4life

Its more than obvious that oj010 is just guessing, hoping something comes true so he doesnt look stupid. Claiming P10 cant pass validation beyond 850 was the start, but following it up with no P10
until october, and even now still standing by that claim in spite of everything weve seen from AMD and the leaks says everything anyone needs to know. My prediction is come 29th Jun when 480 is available his account will quietly abandoned. He has no sources and likes attention.

I would hope that the 460, 470 and 480 are available on 29th June also. LS did say cards covering the 100 to 300 range on shelves 29th. I wouldnt like to see that not be the case


----------



## sammkv

Exciting to see AMD back at it again with the new cards!!


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sammkv*
> 
> Exciting to see AMD back at it again with the new cards!!


DAM, AMD.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> DAM, *MAD* AMD.


FTFY


----------



## SSJVegeta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> I kind of want to go reference because of the blowers (cf in smaller case), but i don't want to miss out on the fat OCs with just one 6pin incase i put them under water in the future
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> decisions decisions....


Same dilemma here. Got a small Corsair Air 240 mATX case and want to crossfire RX 480's. Only reference makes sense in this case but we don't know how well they will OC. Hope they can also hit 1500MHz+.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AmericanLoco*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Quoted for posterity. And also because my BS meter is approaching 11.
> 
> 
> 
> Polaris 11?
Click to expand...


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Quote:


> Uploaded on Nov 11, 2011












Well played


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Given that we know that near 3 GHz has been done yet the results available are all sub 2.2 GHz, it should be pretty easy to deduce that something about those results is preventing them from being made public. Custom BIOS? Unannounced card? Who knows


Or maybe piss poor scaling and disappointing performance for the clock speeds?







I made up my mind about your credibility long ago with the ridiculous attempt to sabotage AMD's reputation with an obvious trolling lie about Polaris delays and low clock speeds. Just go away...


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> I really like his videos


I loved what he said about memory compression, pretty interesting.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eorzean*
> 
> Agreed. My thoughts exactly. For a little extra you can just get a 1070, making the value of this card go down (assuming you need to spend $300 and OC to match or nearly match a stock 1070). At $200, it seems to good to be true, but at $300, it seems priced where it should be in comparison to Nvidia's more expensive and higher priced offerings... making it less of a big deal.
> 
> I wouldn't mind paying an extra $100-130 for 20% more performance (1070).


Except it is confirmed that the 4GB 480 will be $199, or less than half of what the 1070 FE costs. The 4GB of memory will not affect performance meaningfully (unless talking 4K which nobody should be doing with either the 1070 or 480) so you can expect the same GPU performance from a $199 480 as a $299 AIB card with the only question being just how much more OCing headroom the AIB cards might have. At any rate, a $199 reference 480 will reach at least 1400MHz and should be uncomfortably close to the performance of a stock 1070 that costs more than twice as much...


----------



## Fancykiller65

So according to wccf's Khalid Moammer, https://disqus.com/by/KMoamm/

AMD, not happy with wccf's reports, has apparently contacted wccf, offering review samples in return for wccf stopping publishment of the leaks, which wccf has refused. Which is signaling to me at least two situations, One, Wccf isn't actually bombarding with rumors galore and perhaps actually is hitting the mark in regards to the Polaris cards, or two, wccf is overhyping the launch and AMD is trying to reign in expectations.

Of course, there is a third, wccf is completely tabloid and lying about AMD contacting, but eh I can't tell.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Anything from WCCF is worthy of massive amounts of skepticism. That said, my own personal opinion is that the 480 will be faster than a 980 and will hit 1500MHz OC, bringing performance close to the Fury X. And all for just $200! Even if it falls short of that performance, it will still be a fantastic value the likes of which we haven't seen in a looooooong time.


----------



## one-shot

By next week I imagine the RX 480 will be as fast as quad TXs and consume 26W at load, all for $100 at new price reduction.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> By next week I imagine the RX 480 will be as fast as quad TXs and consume 26W at load, all for $100 at new price reduction.


That's certainly the way it seems to be going. Last week it was between 390 and 390X, and this week it's matching a 1070. Won't be long until it's hitting 1600 and beating 1080 in DX12 games.

Edit: what happened to those PCtuning guys that were supposed to have 2 non-NDA 480s? They went radio silent in a hurry.


----------



## rdr09

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> A few more bits of news to share - It's not just one AIB partner that guarantees a 1500mhz stable OC for the $300 dollar Rx 480 models but two different AIB partners that also guarantee this 1500mhz clock. Like i mentioned below ...this 1500mhz OC is not the limit at all. Also when the Rx 480 is OC to 1500mhz, its quite cool on air, even higher its a lot cooler than what you'd think it would be. Also the Rx 480 @1500mhz is on par with the 1070 in games, the Rx 480 @1550mhz/1600mhz starts to pull away from the 1070, and yes those clocks are "very" doable" on air. One last tidbit i just got from my bro, the Rx 470 when OC rivals the 390X/980, rival means in the same ballpark give or take a few. I will have more info on the 470 later tonight, lots more info. And like i mentioned, a few bits of Vega news. A few key notes below:
> 
> Two "confirmed" AIB partners will sell the Rx 480 that guarantees 1500Mhz OC stable on air while cool. These are the $300 dollar models with 6+8 pin power. Might be more AIB partners that sell these guaranteed 1500mhz OC cards, waiting on bro to confirm more.
> 
> The Rx 480 when OC'd to 1500mhz trades blows with the stock 1070 in games, Dx12 games shows more favor to the Rx 480. The Rx 480 when OC'd to 1550mhz to 1600mhz starts to leave the stock 1070 behind. Yes 1600mhz is achievable on air.
> 
> The Rx 470 when OC'd is around the 390x/980. This means it don't beat them but near them in game perf. You'll see what i mean by this. I just want to make what i say as spot on as possible. How far the 470 OC i don't know, I am waiting on that comfirmation from bro, meaning what the average OC is for the 470 that you can count on getting.
> 
> PS: For anyone that don't know, I have a older brother in the industry, that works for one of the three big console makers. For the last few weeks he's been giving me tidbits to share. You can look up my post history at overclock.net forums and at Neogaf.com I go by the name Moey1974 at OC and Slapnuts at Neogaf. I had debunked lots of leakers and websites and shared lots of unheard of news before anyone for the last 3 to 4 weeks relating to AMD's Polaris lineup. I also posted about the 1500mhz Rx 480 3 days ago before anyone else did. So i just wanted to share that so that you may take what i say with a bit of confidence. To each is own, I just want to share some news on this exciting transformation of AMD GPU lineup of cards. All credit goes to my bro for every bit of info I've shared. I take no credit, i am just a happy messenger.






Ok cool. What about Vega?


----------



## dir_d

I don't think the $200 version with 1x6pin will reach 1500 mhz, 350 after market versions might. I'm not gonna give my hopes up, I'll try to be practical.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dir_d*
> 
> I don't think the $200 version with 1x6pin will reach 1500 mhz, *350 after market versions* might. I'm not gonna give my hopes up, I'll try to be practical.


Lets just continue to pull random numbers out of our behinds...


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> Just wait it out till mid July and you'll know exactly what to do ?.
> 
> What I learned over the years is if I'm unhappy with something I'll sell it and buy what I should have just waited for. In this case, just a few extra weeks.


But like... that also presents a problem... if the cards are truly that bomb, they will be selling out fast, which means I might have to wait a long time to get them, and/or the retailer's will start jacking the prices way up.... That last part honestly has me the most worried. I bet retailers are licking their chops; a card that punches above its weight means they can charge more for it.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> That's certainly the way it seems to be going. Last week it was between 390 and 390X, and this week it's matching a 1070. Won't be long until it's hitting 1600 and beating 1080 in DX12 games.
> 
> Edit: what happened to those PCtuning guys that were supposed to have 2 non-NDA 480s? They went radio silent in a hurry.


Beating 1080? Haha. It will take two. lol

2 of the $200.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> But like... that also presents a problem... if the cards are truly that bomb, they will be selling out fast, which means I might have to wait a long time to get them, and/or the retailer's will start jacking the prices way up.... That last part honestly has me the most worried. I bet retailers are licking their chops; a card that punches above its weight means they can charge more for it.


Yeah some retailers will do this for sure. I will order one once i see a custom 480 8GB online. These things now will sell like hot cakes whether it's true or not that it does 1.5Ghz. People will just buy them and sell it for a higher price.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> Yeah some retailers will do this for sure. I will order one once i see a custom 480 8GB online. These things now will sell like hot cakes whether it's true or not that it does 1.5Ghz. People will just buy them and sell it for a higher price.


Friendly reminder that crypto mining has rised again and the farms are hunting for this new efficient chip.


----------



## moey1974

Updated Info: I will have some more info to share Saturday for 460,470 and Vega10, I just gotta get my brother to look over and "ok" what i written out. In the mean time, I wanted to update on a few things i did learn today from my bro and his partners in Seattle and to clear things up on the 1500mhz guarantee Rx 480 cards i mentioned before. I just got home a little bit ago and its going on 2am so i just wanted to post this and gonna hit the sack. I can't always reply back to my threads here as most of the time i am at work so i can only pop in and post and quickly leave. Anyways, until i post new updates for the Rx 460, 470 and Vega 10 this weekend, this is a few minor updates concerning Rx 480, below.

Update info on the Rx 480

Earlier here today i posted some info on two different AIB vendors releasing $300 dollar 1500mhz Rx 480 Editions. There is some clarity i wanted to update on what exactly this means. Its quite simple, There will be some "superclocked" editions (< not the exact name) released with a bios option set at 1500mhz, its as simple as that. As for how many others vendors will release these Rx 480's that have the bios option switch to 1500mhz is unknown outside of the two companies that i am aware of. I cannot share which companies are releasing this but honestly I am told that all 6+8 pin Rx 480's are said to get this 1500mhz mark with software, Let me just quote what they said...this is a C/P from my email that was forwarded to me by my brother just a few hours ago.

_This particular $300 Rx 480 OC Edition will have toggle with two bios options - Standard bios of 1266mhz and Extreme bios of 1500mhz - All 6+8 pin models will be able to reach the 1500mhz mark - the only difference is some editions will have a overclock bios setting that will be set at the 1500mhz mark - while other cards will have to be done manually although today its easy to do manually by just a few clicks of a button with software - While running at 1570mhz - the OC edition runs at 72c with 99% gpu load with 65% fan - one impressive feat to say the least - This bodes well for AMD's new Polaris cards as it shows these cards are capable of even more than this impressive 1570mhz mark - In fact, in a closed box setup, we were able to "easily" obtain 1600mhz while running Battlefield 4 for over an hour with zero crashes or artifacts all while keeping below the 75c mark while using 99% gpu load - Even more impressive is the fact that the voltage usage leaves room for even a bit further tweaking to further our overclock past 1600mhz - One has to wonder what AMD has with the entire lineup of Vega right now - we can only imagine pure bliss in terms of performance at the top enthusiast level - AMD really does have something special on their hands. The Rx 480 while running 1500mhz is on par with the stock 1070 in-game, it even beats it on some games at this clock, anything more and the 480 begins to put some distance between the two cards. Keep in mind this is Dx12 games, this is where GCN 4 truly shows off.
_

Earlier my brother and I were talking and I mentioned to him about how i felt about what AMD is doing and my brother said i literally took the words out of his mouth in what i am about to say below...

...we both are very curious and intrigued at how AMD is targeting these new cards, Its as if they are not even trying to target Nvidia at all but rather setting a new lineup of cards and a completely new lineup of performance targets. In other words, AMD's cards are not really targeting Nvidia's nor any of AMD's previous cards but rather...setting a completely new standard of graphic cards with a whole new identity and vision that will be a new trend setter unlike any time before. I really feel this way and my brother agrees as he said we must be brothers as we had this exact same thoughts in mind. My brother and I are both in the Gaming/Hardware Industry, I work for a game company in Chicago but my brother has been in the industry longer than myself working in a big software/hardware company in Seattle. Anyways, I am very excited at what AMD is doing here. I think they are doing a remarkable job and they should be commended by both Nvidia and AMD fans alike. Forget all the petty fanboy trolling...we are all on the same team here, green or red, we are gamers and computer enthusiasts...we should be excited to see AMD step in new waters. I am, my bro and his colleagues are...so should you.

PS I'll have more info on the Rx 460, Rx 470 and Vega 10 (Rx 490) on saturday as my brother was out for the night so i could only get a few things answered. And yes Rx 490 is the smallest chip of Vega lineup confirmed., I'll explain more tomorrow, its something my brother told me but i gotta be careful with NDA,etc so i gotta check to see how much i can post when i get more time to talk with him, when i do, i'll post it for any interested for that info.

Play Hard!
MCL


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Or maybe piss poor scaling and disappointing performance for the clock speeds?


So at higher speeds you're suggesting performance decreases? Nobody withholds better results regardless of how good or bad scaling is past a certain point unless they're sandbagging, which clearly isn't the case.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I made up my mind about your credibility long ago with the ridiculous attempt to sabotage AMD's reputation with an obvious trolling lie about Polaris delays and low clock speeds.


I guess saying that Bulldozer would be a step backwards from Thuban instead of an INTEL destroyer as many "leaks" were showing until just before launch was just a ridiculous attempt to sabotage AMD?

I suppose saying that Fury X would top out at around 1,140 MHz after "leaks" all the way up until release day were showing 1,300 MHz or more and *even AMD themselves promised it would be an overclocker's dream* was just a ridiculous attempt to sabotage AMD?

I suppose that saying unlocked voltage would not come close to helping Fury X reach 1,300 MHz while "leaks" were saying it's the saviour Fury X needs was just a ridiculous attempt to sabotage AMD?

I suppose saying that the GTX Titan would perform around 30 % slower than all the "leaks" right up until release was a ridiculous attempt to sabotage... NVIDIA? *I must have been sabotaging NVIDIA.*

I suppose that saying the average air overclock for Skylake would be ~4.5-4.6 GHz on air instead of the 5 GHz "leaks" were showing was a ridiculous attempt to sabotage AM... No wait, *I must have been sabotaging INTEL.*

I suppose saying that INTEL would be blocking BCLK overclocking on Skylake non-K processors was just a ridiculous attempt to sabotage AMD, right? Nope, that's INTEL again. *Must've been sabotaging INTEL.*

I suppose that saying the i7-6950X would, on average, not manage 4.5 GHz by quite a margin despite all the hopes and dreams of it clocking as well as Haswell-E was a ridiculous attempt to sabotage A... Nope, *Must've been sabotaging INTEL again.*

Funny that it's ONLY "ridiculous," "fanboyism," "sabotage," etc when it's bad news about AMD, but if it's bad news about any other company or good news about AMD it's automatically legit and fair.

If not being one of those generating unobtainable hype about AMD's products as many often do leading up to release which then makes a decent AMD product seem disappointing makes me a ridiculous AMD sabotager then I guess that's what I am








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Just go away...


After you pal.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> That's certainly the way it seems to be going. Last week it was between 390 and 390X, and this week it's matching a 1070. Won't be long until it's hitting 1600 and beating 1080 in DX12 games.
> 
> Edit: what happened to those PCtuning guys that were supposed to have 2 non-NDA 480s? They went radio silent in a hurry.


I never thought the 480 would only be as fast as a 390. In my mind there's no way it's not faster than a 390X but even if it were, the price makes up for it. And it will almost certainly OC much better. But we'll find out soon enough.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> So at higher speeds you're suggesting performance decreases? Nobody withholds better results regardless of how good or bad scaling is past a certain point unless they're sandbagging, which clearly isn't the case.
> I guess saying that Bulldozer would be a step backwards from Thuban instead of an INTEL destroyer as many "leaks" were showing until just before launch was just a ridiculous attempt to sabotage AMD?
> 
> I suppose saying that Fury X would top out at around 1,140 MHz after "leaks" all the way up until release day were showing 1,300 MHz or more and *even AMD themselves promised it would be an overclocker's dream* was just a ridiculous attempt to sabotage AMD?
> 
> I suppose that saying unlocked voltage would not come close to helping Fury X reach 1,300 MHz while "leaks" were saying it's the saviour Fury X needs was just a ridiculous attempt to sabotage AMD?
> 
> I suppose saying that the GTX Titan would perform around 30 % slower than all the "leaks" right up until release was a ridiculous attempt to sabotage... NVIDIA? *I must have been sabotaging NVIDIA.*
> 
> I suppose that saying the average air overclock for Skylake would be ~4.5-4.6 GHz on air instead of the 5 GHz "leaks" were showing was a ridiculous attempt to sabotage AM... No wait, *I must have been sabotaging INTEL.*
> 
> I suppose saying that INTEL would be blocking BCLK overclocking on Skylake non-K processors was just a ridiculous attempt to sabotage AMD, right? Nope, that's INTEL again. *Must've been sabotaging INTEL.*
> 
> I suppose that saying the i7-6950X would, on average, not manage 4.5 GHz by quite a margin despite all the hopes and dreams of it clocking as well as Haswell-E was a ridiculous attempt to sabotage A... Nope, *Must've been sabotaging INTEL again.*
> 
> Funny that it's ONLY "ridiculous," "fanboyism," "sabotage," etc when it's bad news about AMD, but if it's bad news about any other company or good news about AMD it's automatically legit and fair.
> 
> If not being one of those generating unobtainable hype about AMD's products as many often do leading up to release which then makes a decent AMD product seem disappointing makes me a ridiculous AMD sabotager then I guess that's what I am
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> After you pal.


Yeah, yeah, yeah, so you claim based on your now defunct site that you can't prove even existed. None of your previous fairy tale predictions are even relevant to this discussion anyway. You said a month ago that P10 couldn't do more than 850MHz and was delayed til October. A couple weeks later AMD announces P10 launch on June 29 and almost every leak agrees on a 1266MHz stock clock speed. Your rumors are BS and nobody takes you seriously.


----------



## Kpjoslee

Um, AMD themselves only showed 480CF beating 1080 at AotS. Now it is about to trade blows with 1070...what.
I hope AMD launch doesn't backfire with this amount of overhype going on lol.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> Update info on the Rx 480
> 
> Earlier here today i posted some info on two different AIB vendors releasing $300 dollar 1500mhz Rx 480 Editions. There is some clarity i wanted to update on what exactly this means. Its quite simple, There will be some "superclocked" editions (< not the exact name) released with a bios option set at 1500mhz, its as simple as that. As for how many others vendors will release these Rx 480's that have the bios option switch to 1500mhz is unknown outside of the two companies that i am aware of. I cannot share which companies are releasing this but honestly I am told that all 6+8 pin Rx 480's are said to get this 1500mhz mark with software, Let me just quote what they said...this is a C/P from my email that was forwarded to me by my brother just a few hours ago.
> 
> _This particular $300 Rx 480 OC Edition will have toggle with two bios options - Standard bios of 1266mhz and Extreme bios of 1500mhz - All 6+8 pin models will be able to reach the 1500mhz mark - the only difference is some editions will have a overclock bios setting that will be set at the 1500mhz mark - while other cards will have to be done manually although today its easy to do manually by just a few clicks of a button with software - While running at 1570mhz - the OC edition runs at 72c with 99% gpu load with 65% fan - one impressive feat to say the least - This bodes well for AMD's new Polaris cards as it shows these cards are capable of even more than this impressive 1570mhz mark - In fact, in a closed box setup, we were able to "easily" obtain 1600mhz while running Battlefield 4 for over an hour with zero crashes or artifacts all while keeping below the 75c mark while using 99% gpu load - Even more impressive is the fact that the voltage usage leaves room for even a bit further tweaking to further our overclock past 1600mhz - One has to wonder what AMD has with the entire lineup of Vega right now - we can only imagine pure bliss in terms of performance at the top enthusiast level - AMD really does have something special on their hands. The Rx 480 while running 1500mhz is on par with the stock 1070 in-game, it even beats it on some games at this clock, anything more and the 480 begins to put some distance between the two cards. Keep in mind this is Dx12 games, this is where GCN 4 truly shows off.
> _


4870 2016.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Thanks moey1974 for the 480 info. Cant wait for Vega 490 info.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kpjoslee*
> 
> Um, AMD themselves only showed 480CF beating 1080 at AotS. Now it is about to trade blows with 1070...what.
> I hope AMD launch doesn't backfire with this amount of overhype going on lol.


OCing is an unknown at this point. The best guess we can make right now is stock performance around that of a 980 with the absolute possibility of good OC's getting it near 1070. But it may also be an "OCers dream" and end up still only just slightly ahead of the 980. Just have to wait and see.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

The worrying thing to me about Moey's info is that he keeps stressing DX12 performance. What about DX11?


----------



## Kpjoslee

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> OCing is an unknown at this point. The best guess we can make right now is stock performance around that of a 980 with the absolute possibility of good OC's getting it near 1070. But it may also be an "OCers dream" and end up still only just slightly ahead of the 980. Just have to wait and see.


I am remaining skeptical because AMD really focused on that $199 price point and being the best value card. If it really performs close to 1070 when overclocked, AMD would have found a way to hype it using that fact someway or other, but we only saw 480CF beating 1080 in AotS from AMD themselves. I think some people are expecting too much out of that little GPU.

I would have loved seeing AMD launch something like 490 performing right between 1070 n 1080 and priced at 299 instead and that would have been a game changer just like 4870...


----------



## hojnikb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Friendly reminder that crypto mining has rised again and the farms are hunting for this new efficient chip.


Really ? Which coins are profitable nowadays for GPU mining ?


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kpjoslee*
> 
> I am remaining skeptical because AMD really focused on that $199 price point and being the best value card. If it really performs close to 1070 when overclocked, AMD would have found a way to hype it using that fact someway or other, but we only saw 480CF beating 1080 in AotS from AMD themselves. I think some people are expecting too much out of that little GPU.
> 
> I would have to love seeing AMD launch something like 490 performing right between 1070 n 1080 and priced at 299 instead and that would have been a game changer just like 4870...


Given AMD's history, hyping up the 480 would probably have the opposite effect and dulled interest instead. AMD built up hype around Fury and it was a disappointment ("Overclocker's dream!"...said no one ever). AMD hyped up Bulldozer a lot and it was a complete flop. Honestly, their silence is somewhat encouraging.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> The worrying thing to me about Moey's info is that he keeps stressing DX12 performance. What about DX11?


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> Given AMD's history, hyping up the 480 would probably have the opposite effect and dulled interest instead. AMD built up hype around Fury and it was a disappointment ("Overclocker's dream!"...said no one ever). AMD hyped up Bulldozer a lot and it was a complete flop. Honestly, their silence is somewhat encouraging.


The only thing that amd provided was compare the two 480s to a single 1080. The hyping is done by others. lol

There is no way the $199 card will match the $380 card. Maybe after a year.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> 4870 2016.


A 4870 Mk II would be awesome beyond words. I've said more than a few times 2008-2011 was the best time to be a PC gamer, because both companies kept each other in check both in terms of performance AND price. Hopefully AMD can hit a home run with Polaris and Vega so the absolute suck that is the discrete GPU market can get less sucky.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> A 4870 Mk II would be awesome beyond words. I've said more than a few times 2008-2011 was the best time to be a PC gamer, because both companies kept each other in check both in terms of performance AND price. Hopefully AMD can hit a home run with Polaris and Vega so the absolute suck that is the discrete GPU market can get less sucky.


All I know is if I see Fury X performance in DX11 with this card after overclocked, I will definitely be buying one and I'm sure that there's about a million gamers out there who will also buy Fury X performance @ $300.


----------



## magnek

Yeah I think the internet would have a meltdown if that indeed was the case.

Though the pessimistic part of me thinks that's just a tad too much to ask for, because a card like that would instantly obsolete the Fury X (and practically AMD's entire existing lineup).


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Yeah I think the internet would have a meltdown if that indeed was the case.
> 
> Though the pessimistic part of me thinks that's just a tad too much to ask for, because a card like that would instantly obsolete the Fury X (and practically AMD's entire existing lineup).


I don't think it's too much to ask for when AMD owes their customers for the last card they claimed was an overclocker's dream. I think giving us a card that is actually an overclocker's dream would instantly satisfy their customers. AMD has been studying NVIDIA for quite some time now, they can take some of their strategies and use them for good. For instance, obsoleting the Fury X and previous lineup basically means drastic price cuts across the board throughout every single retailer for every single videocard on the planet. You want to gain market share? That's how you do it.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Yeah I think the internet would have a meltdown if that indeed was the case.
> 
> Though the pessimistic part of me thinks that's just a tad too much to ask for, because a card like that would instantly obsolete the Fury X (and practically AMD's entire existing lineup).


They have no choice, NVIDIA is already obsoleting them.
If AMD was alone in the market, then they could worry about their last gen, but they have a fierce competitor that would eat them alive if they even dared to try and keep the last gen line up relevant.


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> Updated Info: I will have some more info to share Saturday for 460,470 and Vega10, I just gotta get my brother to look over and "ok" what i written out. In the mean time, I wanted to update on a few things i did learn today from my bro and his partners in Seattle and to clear things up on the 1500mhz guarantee Rx 480 cards i mentioned before.
> 
> Earlier my brother and I were talking and I mentioned to him about how i felt about what AMD is doing and my brother said i literally took the words out of his mouth in what i am about to say below...
> 
> ...we both are very curious and intrigued at how AMD is targeting these new cards, Its as if they are not even trying to target Nvidia at all but rather setting a new lineup of cards and a completely new lineup of performance targets. In other words, AMD's cards are not really targeting Nvidia's nor any of AMD's previous cards but rather...setting a completely new standard of graphic cards with a whole new identity and vision that will be a new trend setter unlike any time before. I really feel this way and my brother agrees as he said we must be brothers as we had this exact same thoughts in mind. My brother and I are both in the Gaming/Hardware Industry, I work for a game company in Chicago but my brother has been in the industry longer than myself working in a big software/hardware company in Seattle. Anyways, I am very excited at what AMD is doing here. I think they are doing a remarkable job and they should be commended by both Nvidia and AMD fans alike. Forget all the petty fanboy trolling...we are all on the same team here, green or red, we are gamers and computer enthusiasts...we should be excited to see AMD step in new waters. I am, my bro and his colleagues are...so should you.
> 
> MCL


Thats been my impression that amd choose a new strategy and direction to create a new form of brand.
the old ways didnt work that good.
this allows for the customer to start thinking differently whats the value is for them and the OC tool is the big thing here to get the word out.









if accurate, amd are going to give us a party


----------



## nyxagamemnon

If the rX480 can come within striking distance of a 980TI OC'ed with 2304 cores, then I really wonder if we can get a 1.5ghz+ 4096 Vega and see how well that would perform.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Yeah, yeah, yeah, so you claim based on your now defunct site that you can't prove even existed. None of your previous fairy tale predictions are even relevant to this discussion anyway. You said a month ago that P10 couldn't do more than 850MHz and was delayed til October. A couple weeks later AMD announces P10 launch on June 29 and almost every leak agrees on a 1266MHz stock clock speed. Your rumors are BS and nobody takes you seriously.


Are you talking about the site that I have shown multiple times on The Internet Archive where you can see the site along with my name. I've also shown multiple other sites linking to it, but yeah, it never existed. You're very selective about the information you spread, trying to discredit me by disregarding many of my posts which have the evidence you say doesn't exist.

All of the above points I made, or "fairy tale predictions" as you call them, went 100 % against the leaks that were still coming out mere days before release and even promises from AMD - and all turned out to be true.

Do you really think the first revision of an architecture runs at the final clock speed? Or the second revision? Or the third revision? Not even INTEL can get that right, with early silicon operating at very low speeds - sometimes a good deal less than half of the final launch speed.

Make of it what you will but it's very clear that you're pushing an agenda


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hojnikb*
> 
> Really ? Which coins are profitable nowadays for GPU mining ?


At this moment in time, Ethereum. After costs, I'm banking about $ 50 per month per HD 7950. I'm considering replacing them with RX 480s towards the end of this year or early next. AT THE GIVEN DIFFICULTY AND PRICE, ROI generally happens within five months. You don't really need more than 30 % ROI to break even though, as you can always sell the hardware for around 70 % of the retail price 2-3 months down the line if need be.

For what it's worth, GPU mining has remained profitable for the majority of the last five years. When Litecoin became unprofitable, the public considered GPU mining in general to be unprofitable but there have almost always been altcoins that were profitable. I did Bitcoin, Litecoin, Feathercoin, Darkcoin, Dogecoin, Digicoin and several other pump-and-dumps. For a while now I've been on Ethereum and will remain there until it becomes unprofitable, at which point (if we go by historic trends) either an existing altcoin will gain momentum or a new altcoin will appear.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Are you talking about the site that I have shown multiple times on The Internet Archive where you can see the site along with my name. I've also shown multiple other sites linking to it, but yeah, it never existed. You're very selective about the information you spread, trying to discredit me by disregarding many of my posts which have the evidence you say doesn't exist.
> 
> All of the above points I made, or "fairy tale predictions" as you call them, went 100 % against the leaks that were still coming out mere days before release and even promises from AMD - and all turned out to be true.
> 
> Do you really think the first revision of an architecture runs at the final clock speed? Or the second revision? Or the third revision? Not even INTEL can get that right, with early silicon operating at very low speeds - sometimes a good deal less than half of the final launch speed.
> 
> *Make of it what you will but it's very clear that you're pushing an agenda*


Accusing Majin of pushing an agenda ....... plz stop man leave this thread and all the 480 threads your credibility is below level 0 .


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Accusing Majin of pushing an agenda ....... plz stop man leave this thread and all the 480 threads your credibility is below level 0 .


After you, you don't tell me what to do. Got it? His selective choices of what he posts make it clear -even today he said I can't prove FlyingSuicide.Net ever existed yet I've shown it on The Internet Archive as well as other sites linking to it MULTIPLE times in threads he's participated in.


----------



## Noufel

We all know that pascall has no gains in dx12 games, so a 1500-1600mhz 480 trading blows with a stock 1070 ( if the alleged polaris performance are true ) doesn't surprise me.
On the other hand if a 200-230$ gpu beats the 980 and 390X in dx 11 games while consuming less power and no heat problems that will be the biggest win for AMD since the 4870 era, and knowing how well GCN arch scall with oc'ing at 1500mhz it will be a mosnter of a card, even if i bought a 1080 i'll be getting one of those 480 to play with








Ps: imagine the number of people with low budget getting a 480 and enjoying fantastic perfs in 1080p monitors


----------



## hojnikb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> At this moment in time, Ethereum. After costs, I'm banking about $ 50 per month per HD 7950. I'm considering replacing them with RX 480s towards the end of this year or early next. AT THE GIVEN DIFFICULTY AND PRICE, ROI generally happens within five months. You don't really need more than 30 % ROI to break even though, as you can always sell the hardware for around 70 % of the retail price 2-3 months down the line if need be.
> 
> For what it's worth, GPU mining has remained profitable for the majority of the last five years. When Litecoin became unprofitable, the public considered GPU mining in general to be unprofitable but there have almost always been altcoins that were profitable. I did Bitcoin, Litecoin, Feathercoin, Darkcoin, Dogecoin, Digicoin and several other pump-and-dumps. For a while now I've been on Ethereum and will remain there until it becomes unprofitable, at which point (if we go by historic trends) either an existing altcoin will gain momentum or a new altcoin will appear.


Interesting. If 480 ends up decent at cryptocoining, i might consider picking two of them








Obviously i don't need two of them for gaming, but once one pays itself in mining, i'll would just sell it and have the other one pretty much for free (if obviously trend of profitability continues)


----------



## EightDee8D

The fact you said no pol10 till October, which is going to be debunk on 29th june. puts your credibility is below level 0. doesn't matter how much you said before was right. on this matter nobody is going to trust you.


----------



## DADDYDC650

Tempted to cancel my 1080 FTW for 2 480 8GB's.....


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> The fact you said no pol10 till October, which is going to be debunk on 29th june. puts your credibility is below level 0. doesn't matter how much you said before was right. on this matter nobody is going to trust you.


If he indeed has a source, then that source was being hunted by AMD for NDA breakers by giving false info.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DADDYDC650*
> 
> Tempted to cancel my 1080 FTW for 2 480 8GB's.....


I had 980ti sli and fury cfx multi gpu is broken for now, if i were you i'll buy this 1080 ( i bought one my self ) and enjoy the best gpu in the market ( not the best price of course







)
Ps: i'll buy a 480 just to play with this little montser


----------



## provost

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Make of it what you will but it's very clear that you're pushing an agenda


I don't know what you are arguing about? if you have any inside sources, why not just start your own blog and make money off this information, instead of trying to convince a few readers on an unaffiliated forum. May be you already do, and this is just a cross promo? oh hell, I don't know, I am just a dumb consumer trying to get some info by reading up on things....Lol
But, I do know there are more than few people on this forum without an agenda (like the poster who you replied to). Unfortunately, the ones without an agenda are almost always drowned out by those with an agenda. I guess such is the nature of any such platform on the internets... Lol


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> The fact you said no pol10 till October, which is going to be debunk on 29th june. puts your credibility is below level 0. doesn't matter how much you said before was right. on this matter nobody is going to trust you.


So you're basing it on something which hasn't happened yet, got it









I guess sites like Guru3D, TPU, WCCFTech, VideoCardz, etc must all be VERY much on your blacklist as they've all run articles that have already been debunked without a doubt


----------



## LocoDiceGR

Im in the corner waiting for those rumors to be true...


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> So you're basing it on something which hasn't happened yet, got it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess sites like Guru3D, TPU, WCCFTech, VideoCardz, etc must all be VERY much on your blacklist as they've all run articles that have already been debunked without a doubt


yes they are, mostly wccf. and Vc.

g3d/tpu are only good for reviews. not news.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> yes they are, mostly wccf. and Vc.
> 
> g3d/tpu are only good for reviews. not news.


That's fair enough, I can respect that.


----------



## Sleazybigfoot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> If anyone today considers 1.1 GHz to be a typical CPU like frequency I need to introduce them to the year 2000.


From what I read, you never stated "typical CPU like frequency", just "CPU like frequency".. If you had written the former *I* would be more inclined to think of 3Ghz, it'd still be quite ambiguous though.

Just pointing something out.


----------



## $ilent

As someone who has rarely dabbled with amd gpus can someone answer this:

Is it better to buy aftermarket amd 480 or the ones out end june for overclocking?

When will the aftermarket 480s be on sale?

Will the aftermarekt 480 be much more expensive than the £160 4GB 480?

thanks


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *provost*
> 
> I don't know what you are arguing about? if you have any inside sources, why not just start your own blog and make money off this information, instead of trying to convince a few readers on an unaffiliated forum. May be you already do, and this is just a cross promo? oh hell, I don't know, I am just a dumb consumer trying to get some info by reading up on things....Lol
> But, I do know there are more than few people on this forum without an agenda (like the poster who you replied to). Unfortunately, the ones without an agenda are almost always drowned out by those with an agenda. I guess such is the nature of any such platform on the internets... Lol


I ran a site, in its prime it had around 120,000 hits per month which was more than I could afford (hosting costs - unlimited hosting in South Africa wasn't a thing yet and with one major Internet pipeline giving almost monthly issues at one stage, international hosting wasn't an option) as a hobby.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sleazybigfoot*
> 
> From what I read, you never stated "typical CPU like frequency", just "CPU like frequency".. If you had written the former *I* would be more inclined to think of 3Ghz, it'd still be quite ambiguous though.
> 
> Just pointing something out.


I'm not going to dig through all the posts, it's a long weekend and I'm with the future in-laws and posting from my phone, but if you look through the GTX 1080 thread you'll see people guessing clock speeds and me saying higher or lower. I indicated north of 3 GHz there









Anyway, 13:00 and lunchtime.


----------



## Chrabaszcz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I never said Firestrike. Also, wait and see. Results are being held back for some reason, EVGA's Instagram account has already shown north of 2,800 MHz on GTX 1080 and that isnt even the limit. I don't know why results aren't being made public.
> Except for when a vendor (AIB partner) says they aren't taking orders yet.


Does nvidia play you for this bull****? I mean seriously...

Der b8uer said max what you can do is 2,5GHz with LN2.

after
"850 max on Polaris"
"delay to october"

You should stop posting. This is laughable...


----------



## zealord

you could've atleast had posted with your real account instead of making a new one mate


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *$ilent*
> 
> As someone who has rarely dabbled with amd gpus can someone answer this:
> 
> Is it better to buy aftermarket amd 480 or the ones out end june for overclocking?
> 
> When will the aftermarket 480s be on sale?
> 
> Will the aftermarekt 480 be much more expensive than the £160 4GB 480?
> 
> thanks


Yes get an AIB, the rest no one knows, usually AMD only has AIB cards so there is not much option later on to get a cheap crappy reference blower. But the blowers on these newer low power cards may be more desirable for some where as blowers on 290 series were not sufficient coolers.

I would still get an AIB, hopefully they make one with 1x8pin and dual fan.

There is nothing we can do to speed things up. Just gotta wait until AIBs make their cards and ship them to stores.


----------



## revanchrist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *$ilent*
> 
> As someone who has rarely dabbled with amd gpus can someone answer this:
> 
> Is it better to buy aftermarket amd 480 or the ones out end june for overclocking?
> 
> When will the aftermarket 480s be on sale?
> 
> Will the aftermarekt 480 be much more expensive than the £160 4GB 480?
> 
> thanks


AIBs coming out mid of July, two weeks of exclusivity reserved for 8GB reference. Price is anywhere between $250 to $300.


----------



## $ilent

So the best cards to buy are out mid july? whats the difference between the ones out end june and mid july?

Im only looking at the 4GB cards. Also is 4GB enough for 1440p?

My bro has a 1440p build and I have a 1080p build, both looking to put a 480 in.

thanks


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *$ilent*
> 
> So the best cards to buy are out mid july? whats the difference between the ones out end june and mid july?
> 
> Im only looking at the 4GB cards. Also is 4GB enough for 1440p?
> 
> My bro has a 1440p build and I have a 1080p build, both looking to put a 480 in.
> 
> thanks


I'd go for 8GB, because honestly while the majority of games might not use 8GB for now, we're definitely going to start seeing a lot of games push 5-6gigs.

As for the difference between the cards out end of June and the cards from mid July, that's basically the difference between reference and aftermarket coolers.
Aftermarket is quieter, cooler, and allows for higher overclocking.


----------



## Chrabaszcz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *$ilent*
> 
> So the best cards to buy are out mid july? whats the difference between the ones out end june and mid july?
> 
> Im only looking at the 4GB cards. Also is 4GB enough for 1440p?
> 
> My bro has a 1440p build and I have a 1080p build, both looking to put a 480 in.
> 
> thanks


Well im using r9 290x 4GB. With upscaling to 1440p, i need to turn textures to medium and turn off msaa because of memory. Otherwise a can run almost everything perfectly on 4Gigs. Imo i would buy 8GB anyway. More memory is always better + better future proof.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *$ilent*
> 
> So the best cards to buy are out mid july? whats the difference between the ones out end june and mid july?
> 
> Im only looking at the 4GB cards. Also is 4GB enough for 1440p?
> 
> My bro has a 1440p build and I have a 1080p build, both looking to put a 480 in.
> 
> thanks


The memory usage depends mostly on the game developers, and whether they have optimized their code or not. As far as i have read, 4GB is enough for 1440p and for resolutions above it's more likely that you will run out of GPU sauce first, than reach the memory limit. 8GB should be more of a marketing thing in lower end GPUs/


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> you could've atleast had posted with your real account instead of making a new one mate


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *$ilent*
> 
> So the best cards to buy are out mid july? whats the difference between the ones out end june and mid july?
> 
> Im only looking at the 4GB cards. Also is 4GB enough for 1440p?
> 
> My bro has a 1440p build and I have a 1080p build, both looking to put a 480 in.
> 
> thanks


yea 4gb is good for 1440p.
how else is those 970 owners gonna work with 3.5gb?
Games normally ask what card and how much ram its allocate for it.
8gb is basically atm a sales PR thing.


----------



## Chrabaszcz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Are you talking about the site that I have shown multiple times on The Internet Archive where you can see the site along with my name. I've also shown multiple other sites linking to it, but yeah, it never existed. You're very selective about the information you spread, trying to discredit me by disregarding many of my posts which have the evidence you say doesn't exist.
> 
> All of the above points I made, or "fairy tale predictions" as you call them, went 100 % against the leaks that were still coming out mere days before release and even promises from AMD - and all turned out to be true.
> 
> Do you really think the first revision of an architecture runs at the final clock speed? Or the second revision? Or the third revision? Not even INTEL can get that right, with early silicon operating at very low speeds - sometimes a good deal less than half of the final launch speed.
> 
> Make of it what you will but it's very clear that you're pushing an agenda


Well, if you would say something like this:

"Guys, first revision of Polaris GPU has probles reaching clocks over 800MHz, that's why we will see Polaris mid-year instead of march/april"

Noone would blame you. But you implicated that Polaris is not ready for launch, has problems and is delayed until october. And you still trying to defend yourself.

Now you are implicating about "3000MHz 1080".

You are spreading bias and bs. Noone can reach clocks higher than 2,3-2,5 Ghz on 1080 without using LN2...

What will be next?
Vega without HBM? New Titan with 5GHz clocks? Staph please.


----------



## DeathMade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Except you CAN buy Pascal right now. It isn't limited to review samples, it's available to the masses.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Chrabaszcz*
> 
> Well, if you would say something like this:
> 
> "Guys, first revision of Polaris GPU has probles reaching clocks over 800MHz, that's why we will see Polaris mid-year instead of march/april"
> 
> Noone would blame you. But you implicated that Polaris is not ready for launch, has problems and is delayed until october. And you still trying to defend yourself.
> 
> Now you are implicating about "3000MHz 1080".
> 
> You are spreading bias and bs. Noone can reach clocks higher than 2,3-2,5 Ghz on 1080 without using LN2...
> 
> What will be next?
> Vega without HBM? New Titan with 5GHz clocks? Staph please.


I've seen those posts.

850MHz, No cards till october, Pascal 2x SLI beating 4way 980ti SLI, Pascal reaching 2.4.

All those turned to be pretty much the exact opposite


----------



## Mad Pistol

This is definitely getting exciting. Based on rumors, this could be AMD going back to basics and releasing a low-cost, high value card for the masses. How do you beat nvidia? Undercut them hard and build mindshare.









Also, I just checked Newegg. Pascal is STILL completely sold out, so if AMD is releasing a massive amount of cards on launch day, then it will make fans super happy. They may even woo over people that are constantly hitting the refresh button on (INSERT AMBIGUOUS E-TAILER HERE)'s website for the new Pascal cards.

That's how you win mindshare.


----------



## HGooper

Latest leak from chiphell, RX480 comes along with manual, 110W full load on gaming, the leaker is still waiting for official driver so no bench yet.

https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1606404-2-1.html


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathMade*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Except you CAN buy Pascal right now. It isn't limited to review samples, it's available to the masses.
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Chrabaszcz*
> 
> Well, if you would say something like this:
> 
> "Guys, first revision of Polaris GPU has probles reaching clocks over 800MHz, that's why we will see Polaris mid-year instead of march/april"
> 
> Noone would blame you. But you implicated that Polaris is not ready for launch, has problems and is delayed until october. And you still trying to defend yourself.
> 
> Now you are implicating about "3000MHz 1080".
> 
> You are spreading bias and bs. Noone can reach clocks higher than 2,3-2,5 Ghz on 1080 without using LN2...
> 
> What will be next?
> Vega without HBM? New Titan with 5GHz clocks? Staph please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've seen those posts.
> 
> 850MHz, No cards till october, Pascal 2x SLI beating 4way 980ti SLI, Pascal reaching 2.4.
> 
> All those turned to be pretty much the exact opposite
Click to expand...

and even funnier is that AMD has from all credible accounts outdone NVIDIA with their refresh, AMD simply wants a hard launch instead of trickling out a few dozen cards at a time. Pascal won't have real supply until August. AMD could have "launched" their product like NVIDIA did even earlier, but the whole industry would have buried them for it instead of singing their praises like they do NVIDIA.


----------



## p4inkill3r

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *$ilent*
> 
> So the best cards to buy are out mid july? whats the difference between the ones out end june and mid july?
> 
> Im only looking at the 4GB cards. Also is 4GB enough for 1440p?
> 
> My bro has a 1440p build and I have a 1080p build, both looking to put a 480 in.
> 
> thanks


I'll be buying Sapphire Nitro versions, and 4GB is enough for 1440 but even at the price, the 8GB 480 is going to be a steal.
I'm going to buy 3 right off the bat at this rate.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HGooper*
> 
> 
> 
> Latest leak from chiphell, RX480 comes along with manual, 110W full load on gaming, the leaker is still waiting for official driver so no bench yet.
> 
> https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1606404-2-1.html


Am I misunderstanding google translate?
Quote:


> do not exceed 150W peak power consumption is estimated around core 1.4G Me, and so drive .


Is it saying 150W consumption around 1.4GHz core?


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *HGooper*
> 
> 
> 
> Latest leak from chiphell, RX480 comes along with manual, 110W full load on gaming, the leaker is still waiting for official driver so no bench yet.
> 
> https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1606404-2-1.html
> 
> 
> 
> Am I misunderstanding google translate?
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> do not exceed 150W peak power consumption is estimated around core 1.4G Me, and so drive .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is it saying 150W consumption around 1.4GHz core?
Click to expand...

well yea, leaks say the 6 pin version can get up to 1400, and 150w is the power limit for a 6 pin card.


----------



## HGooper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Am I misunderstanding google translate?
> Is it saying 150W consumption around 1.4GHz core?


Sorry I forgot to translate this quote. What he's saying is that if the card doesn't put much voltage and control the load within 150W range, it should be reach 1.4G no problem.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HGooper*
> 
> Sorry I forgot to translate this quote. What he's saying is that if the card doesn't put much voltage and control the load within 150W range, it should be reach 1.4G no problem.


Cool, thanks.


----------



## Mack42

Good looking card. Just hope no coil whine and leaf blower noise.


----------



## Mad Pistol

That cooler looks like a vapor chamber design. Low power consumption + vapor chamber = very quiet card.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> That cooler looks like a vapor chamber design. Low power consumption + vapor chamber = very quiet card.


...That's a 200$ card.

How do you put a vapor chamber in that price tag...
I think it's more likely that it's just a tiny heatsink since there's not much heat to dissipate requiring a large heatsink.


----------



## bluej511

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> well yea, leaks say the 6 pin version can get up to 1400, and 150w is the power limit for a 6 pin card.


Sorry but that power limit is for 18awg wiring. Most psus and cards can handle more then that thru the 6pin connector, i wouldnt be surprised if OCed and stable to be able to reach 200w on the card including the pcie x16 power going thru it (doesnt draw much from there to begin with).

Only difference between the 6pin and 8pin is the 8pin has 2 extra grounds, theoretically if the card/cables/psu can handle it you could actually reach 150w on the 6pin connector alone and another 75w if need be thru the pcie.

Example. You can OC an r9 390 with 200mv aux power and be way over the rated power lol. 300w on pcie i get around 325-330 with 100mv alone. Its prob pulling 300w from the connector and 25-50 from pcie. Another 100mv youre reaching 400w if not more. It can handle more then speced without issues.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> ...That's a 200$ card.
> 
> How do you put a vapor chamber in that price tag...
> I think it's more likely that it's just a tiny heatsink since there's not much heat to dissipate requiring a large heatsink.


6970,7970 and 290x had a vapor chamber. Vapor chamber is not that expensive.


----------



## headd

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> 6970,7970 and 290x had a vapor chamber. Vapor chamber is not that expensive.


Yeah.Its just NV marketing to add 100USD price tag because vapor chamber...


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *headd*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> 6970,7970 and 290x had a vapor chamber. Vapor chamber is not that expensive.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah.Its just NV marketing to add 100USD price tag because vapor chamber...
Click to expand...

Lmao, worth every penny!


----------



## sinholueiro

I have a 7770 VaporX that has a vapor chamber and a friend purchased it for 100€ or something like that. It's funny how Nvidia confuses the people


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> 6970,7970 and *290x had a vapor chamber*. Vapor chamber is not that expensive.


MOMMY PLZ NO!

On a more serious note, they were much more expensive.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> 6970,7970 and 290x had a vapor chamber. Vapor chamber is not that expensive.


They didn't cost $200 though.


----------



## GHADthc

So if 480 hard launches on June 29th..I really hope `Ojoke`an hero`s and stops posting utter crap on this forum, like I`m hoping for that even more than for the latest peformance rumours about 480 to be true...and if they are true, I`ll be getting one for sure, possibly two.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> They were much more expensive cards though.


Because they use bigger dies.

Even the ref pcb of the 480x kinda match the pcb of FE


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> ...That's a 200$ card.
> 
> How do you put a vapor chamber in that price tag...
> I think it's more likely that it's just a tiny heatsink since there's not much heat to dissipate requiring a large heatsink.


I get what you're saying, but I highly doubt the vapor chamber costs that much to manufacture compared to the actual card cost. It may infact be a standard HSF with nothing more than copper-aluminum contact, and if it is, then you are right; this is one very efficient card.

I, too, believe that Nvidia has completely blown the cost of vapor chambers out of proportion. They are more expensive than a standard heatpipe/fin design, but the other thing you have to consider is that a heatpipe design is also much better at spreading out heat to a larger area, whereas a vapor chamber is much better at dissipating heat in a smaller area. In this case, because the PCB is so small, a vapor chamber makes more sense (if one is being used).


----------



## rv8000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Because they use bigger dies.
> 
> Even the ref pcb of the 480x kinda match the pcb of FE


From a VRM standpoint, ref 480 has better power circuitry than 1070/1080, only slightly.


----------



## lolerk52

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4oovvm/amd_peru_claims_vega_10_to_launch_in_october/


----------



## jprovido

the HD4870 had a vapor chamber. tbh I don't it's that expensive.


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HGooper*
> 
> 
> 
> Latest leak from chiphell, RX480 comes along with manual, 110W full load on gaming, the leaker is still waiting for official driver so no bench yet.
> 
> https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1606404-2-1.html


e epic







now i know that i can buy ref version of card. + Rep for posting.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

New thread incoming i guess..


----------



## EightDee8D

that actually looks like a solid build card.

guess they should charge 50$ extra for "Rebellion edition" ?


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> that actually looks like a solid build card.
> 
> guess they should charge 50$ extra for "Rebellion edition" ?


Rebel against the Founding Fathers Edition!


----------



## lolerk52

AMD right now.


----------



## Noufel

Strong is the perf/price ratio in this gpu young pc enthusiast .


----------



## gerardfraser

First off I would like to thank moey1974 for sharing his information.I accept his post as being the truth to the best of his knowledge.Others will not.Does not matter it is the internet after all.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1603252/wccf-amd-rx-480-can-hit-1-5ghz-new-overclocking-tool-with-voltage-control-coming/390#post_25267966

Anyway-AMD is fighting an uphill battle against Intel and Nvidia with their products for years. Negative comments that build up over the years with respect to Intel and Nvidia fans against AMD is a battle that AMD has never been able to compete with.All I can say AMD do have good products.

AMD needs to do something different to make money and keep the business viable for the next 40 years.Where the hell do they start and how do they accomplish this goal to start to be profitable and get out of debt.

Maybe some nut at AMD suggested a couple years ago it's time to do something.So they mess around for a year or two with meetings and stuff and come up with
a group like Radeon Technologies Group to improve aspects of graphics technologies used in AMD's APU, discrete GPU, semi-custom, and GPU compute products and dole out responsibility and hire passionate people.

So what's the first thing this Radeon Technologies Group have to do to win back the confidence of the people and start a turn around to make the company to be profitable in the future.

This is the GPU thread on new AMD cards on rumors and unconfirmed articles.

So lets say these nuts come up with an idea to gain back some market share in the GPU market.Crazy I know.

First meeting boss says -*** are we going to do to turn this ship around and get back to profit.

First guy -Be our own biggest supporter.Baffle them with BS this will get us where we need to be.

Second guy-No problem man,lets just make the fastest GPU and charge loads of money for it.Profit all the way to the bank.

Boss-Cut the frigging crap.It time to change things up.we need market share and profitability. Here is what were are going to do.

Get off your behind *****es and make me a bleeping GPU that is fast,low power so I can sell the bleeping thing to everyone.

Team -Boss we got something for ya.
Boss-Puts down cigar and stops making it rain for the strippers.Well this better be bleeping good.
Team-Sure is boss how about the new RX480 4GB @199USD.With Premium features.
Boss-OK you got my attention.
Team-We can make a nice profit ,the card is fast and low power and cool ,we also left some room for overclocking .Will throw in some new tools to get the best out of the card.Improve drivers/liquid VR and BLAH BLAH BLAH.
Boss-Let me get this straight in my head.Your saying we can profit on premium card with premium features and make it desirable to just about everyone and the card kicks butt.F-ya drinks for everyone.
Team-Thanks boss
Boss-Grabs cigar and takes a puff,one thing though,this card is so frigging good,we need to create so buzz .Now we can not let the cat out of the bag.We can not tell everyone how good this card is.To much negativity out there against us at the moment.Bleep it do not tell anyone about the card except price and let the reviewers and internet tell our story of one of the best GPU'S ever. Now get the bleep out of my office ,I am going to make it rain.

I am just messing around but am buying some RX480 cards.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> ...That's a 200$ card.
> 
> How do you put a vapor chamber in that price tag...


The same way AIB partners have been offering it at sub $200 price points for years...






Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HGooper*
> 
> [/QUOTE]
> 
> For the size of the shell, that heatsink is tiny... it doesn't even extend out to the front of the card?


----------



## Nizzen

RX 480 is going to be faster than 1080 OC and pigs can fly


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Nizzen*
> 
> RX 480 is going to be faster than 1080 OC and pigs can fly


HOLY CRAP PIGS CAN FLY?!!?!?!?


----------



## Travieso

The thing that really pissed me off in the past 4-5 years is nVidia could get away with launching underwhelming products so many times.

While AMD needed to have excellent and valuable products like 290 series to sell well, nVidia could have dog**** cards like 550Ti or GTX760 as their best selling.

Hope these launches of Polaris and Vega will change the perception of many people.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Travieso*
> 
> The thing that really pissed me off in the past 4-5 years is nVidia could get away with launching underwhelming products so many times.
> 
> While AMD needed to have excellent and valuable products like 290 series to sell well, nVidia could have dog**** cards like 550Ti or GTX760 as their best selling.
> 
> Hope these launches of Polaris and Vega will change the perception of many people.


I still think AMD needs better brand recognition. They need to include their own logo on the consoles they power...

The Intel Inside campaign worked wonders for Intel.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> I still think AMD needs better brand recognition. They need to include their own logo on the consoles they power...


Given the strong strain of PC elitism, that's probably a bad idea. People would associate AMD with "peasantry".


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> I still think AMD needs better brand recognition. They need to include their own logo on the consoles they power...


That would be cool.

For me AMD was always premium. They changed industry many times with their own ideas. Intergrated ram controller, In older days they were introducing new standards first (sata, usb etc) forcing dx 11 and now dx12. HBM. I dont remember bringing so many things by nvidia.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> People would associate AMD with "peasantry".


Which is another misconceived fallacy that has gotten way too much traction...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Prior to the last generation, Consoles used to be bleeding edge at release...
> 
> 
> 
> The peasant depiction of console owners is also ironic since they typically pay more over the life of their system compared to PC gamers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is also the reason why PC games are usually badly optimized console ports... just follow the money
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I suppose having a false sense of superiority helps alleviate the stress from all of the abuse the PC gaming community endures from developers...


----------



## iRUSH

Anyone have a lot of experience wit Raptr and Game DVR?

I use Shadowplay everyday. Being able to record desktop, gameplay and webcam overlay at the push of a button is amazing!

If AMD's equivalent is its equal then a RX480 is for me ?


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> Anyone have a lot of experience wit Raptr and Game DVR?
> 
> I use Shadowplay everyday. Being able to record desktop, gameplay and webcam overlay at the push of a button is amazing!
> 
> If AMD's equivalent is its equal then a RX480 is for me ?


You can use Open Broadcast Software, it has an option to use AMD's VCE's, just like Shadowplay does with NVIDIA.

AMD is most likely working on their own Radeon branded Shadowplay like software, so something more integrated will come out later.


----------



## $ilent

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> yea 4gb is good for 1440p.
> how else is those 970 owners gonna work with 3.5gb?
> Games normally ask what card and how much ram its allocate for it.
> 8gb is basically atm a sales PR thing.


Forget my sig rig I don't have that anymore.

Basically my bro has a 6600k and 1440p monitor

I have a 2700k and 1080p monitor.

We will both prob go with a 480, my bro will buy the 480 out end June and then I'll get an aftermarket 480 in July and then we will prob swap cards for whichever overclocks best since he will need it more than me on his higher res monitor.


----------



## HalongPort

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> That would be cool.
> 
> [...] forcing dx 11 and now dx12. HBM. I dont remember bringing so many things by nvidia.


I'd rather have them forcing Vulkan instead of DX12.
Anyway, I guess there will be new leaks when the final bios is being distributed and I'm looking forward to get a new AMD card in two weeks.


----------



## Dargonplay

"Only someone who's already an extremist fanboy would conceive the thought of a competing brand as a cult."


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *$ilent*
> 
> So the best cards to buy are out mid july? whats the difference between the ones out end june and mid july?
> 
> Im only looking at the 4GB cards. Also is 4GB enough for 1440p?
> 
> My bro has a 1440p build and I have a 1080p build, both looking to put a 480 in.
> 
> thanks


Reference blower and PCB vs AIB cooler and PCB.
4GB is enough for 1200p but not 1440p not in all games and maxed out, no way. GTAV gave me like 3.5GB needed VRAM on my 3GB GPU with very high settings, dunno why coz it ran just fine (60-80fps average) on 3GB anyway. But other games do happily attack toward 3GB on 1200p and mind you I don't use MSAA I use SMAA. I guess games like Shadow of My dead GPU run VRAM like crazy.

Personally I'm looking for a decent RX 480 8GB with 8pin power and corresponding power limits available. They can put that 4GB version where the sunshine don't shine.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Which is another misconceived fallacy that has gotten way too much traction...


I agree, but it would happen. Personally, I don't even think Neo and Scorpio are necessary.


----------



## Kpjoslee

I wish I could get so emotional over hardware vendors lol. Either Nvidia fanboys who acts like 16 years old living off their rich parents bragging their shiny new FE they overpaid n looks down on whoever has AMD stuff on their rig, or AMD fanboys who believe AMD is champion of morals and thinks they are doing a world a favor by not buying anything from Intel or Nvidia....they all look ridiculous,

Why not just buy whichever is best available without any of this pissing contest.


----------



## mypickaxe

Why point out just a simple spelling error? His grammar is the main event.

"Of course people are *gonna* consider..."

"AMD fans are usually stuck in the performance/dollar thought process and *doesnt* understand at all..."

"...a lot of people will get the _fastest regardless price_ and _*doesnt* turn every stone_..."

"...trying all they can..."

"I know a lot of *oeople* that (who) *dont* want to get AMD cards..."

I'm surprised he uses periods, to be honest.


----------



## hokk

If you're in the UK at least there will be wide availability.

I've had at least 700 cards through this week.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> I'm surprised he uses periods, to be honest.





Spoiler: Policing grammar on the interwebs...


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kpjoslee*
> 
> I wish I could get so emotional over hardware vendors lol. Either Nvidia fanboys who acts like 16 years old living off their rich parents bragging their shiny new FE they overpaid n looks down on whoever has AMD stuff on their rig, or AMD fanboys who believe AMD is champion of morals and thinks they are doing a world a favor by not buying anything from Intel or Nvidia....they all look ridiculous,
> 
> Why not just buy whichever is best available without any of this pissing contest.


Fanboyism has been here for ages, it just part of us. Probably even starting from early ages of religion...I'm right and you're wrong, type of stuff. Defending (or justifying) our own ego, that we have made the right choice and the others didn't.
...discussing it sometimes fun









EDIT:
Crusaders were the first Fanboys....that took it to max


----------



## mypickaxe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Policing grammar on the interwebs...


Irony.


----------



## $ilent

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kylzer*
> 
> If you're in the UK at least there will be wide availability.
> 
> I've had at least 700 cards through this week.


Are you a vendor?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Irony.


You don't say...


----------



## mypickaxe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You don't say...


You're no better than he is, troll. My *entire* point is people are both pointing out the "hypocrisy and irony" and another has pointed out a single spelling error. I'm thinking, hey if you're going to go in, GO ALL IN.

You on the other hand are able to dish it out, but then you feel the need to keep dishing it out, as a TROLL does. You also have a serious obsession with those stupid emoticons. Get lost.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> You're no better than he is, troll. My *entire* point is people are both pointing out the "hypocrisy and irony" and another has pointed out a single spelling error. I'm thinking, hey if you're going to go in, GO ALL IN.
> 
> You on the other hand are able to dish it out, but then you feel the need to keep dishing it out, as a TROLL does. You also have a serious obsession with those stupid emoticons. Get lost.


Warning angry TX owner here









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



just kidding


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> ...That's a 200$ card.
> 
> How do you put a vapor chamber in that price tag...
> I think it's more likely that it's just a tiny heatsink since there's not much heat to dissipate requiring a large heatsink.


Don't get brainwashed by JHH propaganda, vapor chambers aren't that expensive, and in fact the cost could be more or less on par with traditional heatpipes.


----------



## Fyrwulf

If the 480 can overclock to near Fury X level performance, it will be superior to the 980Ti in the games I'm interested in playing. Since I'm planning a dual loop system anyway, it makes me wonder how these will overclock under water.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> You're no better than he is, troll. My *entire* point is people are both pointing out the "hypocrisy and irony" and another has pointed out a single spelling error. I'm thinking, hey if you're going to go in, GO ALL IN.
> 
> You on the other hand are able to dish it out, but then you feel the need to keep dishing it out, as a TROLL does. You also have a serious obsession with those stupid emoticons. Get lost.


Calm down. It's just a gpu. We don't normally check grammar around here. English is not a native tongue to some.lol


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Get lost.


Seems I hit a nerve. Need a tissue?










Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Lighten up, you shouldn't be taking anything said on an anonymous forum to heart.

Dropping the Grammar Nazi act while engaging in online discussion would also help



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Warning angry TX owner here


He does live in TX and probably does own something of his own at this stage of his life


----------



## lolerk52

So, that Chiphell guy was streaming Overwatch.

Two things:
1. He alt-tabbed and showed a Firestrike window with an RX 480 at 1607MHz: https://i.imgur.com/6jCfQQH.png
2. We could see his Youtube for a moment, and while I forgot to take a screencap of that, it looks like his videos got taken down by a 3rd party, rather than himself.

The 2nd part makes me think he's actually legit.

EDIT: He posted in chat saying
Quote:


> base on 1277 overlock on 1380


Since he's using an MSI aftermarket cooler (8+6 pin), the 1277MHz number isn't weird. He was apparently streaming at 1380.
1380MHz, 1440P at Epic settings, with 60-70FPS while streaming with OBS? That's quite good.


----------



## Eorzean

Really anxious to see some gaming benchmarks of this card @ 1500-1600mhz on 1440p. If I was on 1080p, it'd be a no brainer, but for the extra $200 CAD I may consider getting a 1070 instead. I'm on ITX and can't crossfire, but would for sure









Or hell, I might just switch back to 1080p temporarily and await Vega (with an RX 480).


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> So, that Chiphell guy was streaming Overwatch.
> 
> Two things:
> 1. He alt-tabbed and showed a Firestrike window with an RX 480 at 1607MHz: https://i.imgur.com/6jCfQQH.png
> 2. We could see his Youtube for a moment, and while I forgot to take a screencap of that, it looks like his videos got taken down by a 3rd party, rather than himself.
> 
> The 2nd part makes me think he's actually legit.
> 
> EDIT: He posted in chat saying
> Since he's using an MSI aftermarket cooler (8+6 pin), the 1277MHz number isn't weird. He was apparently streaming at 1380.
> 1380MHz, 1440P at Epic settings, with 60-70FPS while streaming with OBS? That's quite good.


Do we know if he's using a reference card?
If so, I will be pleasantly surprise - a 6pin providing such an overclock...


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> 1He alt-tabbed and showed a Firestrike window with an RX 480 at 1607MHz: https://i.imgur.com/6jCfQQH.png


Tomorrow's WCCF headline:

RX 480 his 1.6GHz on air with ease on custom boards


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> So, that Chiphell guy was streaming Overwatch.
> 
> Two things:
> 1. He alt-tabbed and showed a Firestrike window with an RX 480 at 1607MHz: https://i.imgur.com/6jCfQQH.png
> 2. We could see his Youtube for a moment, and while I forgot to take a screencap of that, it looks like his videos got taken down by a 3rd party, rather than himself.
> 
> The 2nd part makes me think he's actually legit.
> 
> EDIT: He posted in chat saying
> Since he's using an MSI aftermarket cooler (8+6 pin), the 1277MHz number isn't weird. He was apparently streaming at 1380.


Why wasn't he running OW at 1600mhz?


----------



## Shatun-Bear

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fyrwulf*
> 
> If the 480 can overclock to near Fury X level performance, it will be superior to the 980Ti in the games I'm interested in playing. Since I'm planning a dual loop system anyway, it makes me wonder how these will overclock under water.


Yes, I have the same thoughts. I mean we have to assume it gets to 'Fury X levels' in synthetic benchmarks, and we all know these favour Nvidia cards a little. Imagine the perfomance of a highly overclocked 480, under water, in a DX12 title, at 1440p. Could potentially blow away a stock 980 Ti.


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> Do we know if he's using a reference card?
> If so, I will be pleasantly surprise - a 6pin providing such an overclock...


He said 8+6 pin, so that isn't reference...


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eorzean*
> 
> He said 8+6 pin, so that isn't reference...


I asked before he edited.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> I asked before he edited.


After... you quoted the edit and the timestamps suggest a lapse of ~4 minutes between his edit and your post


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> After... you quoted the edit and the timestamps suggest a lapse of ~8 minutes between his edit and your post


That's strange. Oh, well...could be my eyes fooling me. nvm

Now I'm just curious, whether we will have custom boards available on 29th, and whether reviews will be performed on reference or partner boards...

EDIT:
Just out of curiosity, when you click on "Unread" pop-up window, does it update the whole page or does it just show new comments?


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> Do we know if he's using a reference card?
> If so, I will be pleasantly surprise - a 6pin providing such an overclock...


He has a board with 8+6 pin, so no.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

That image is suspect. Looking at that same display on my own PC, the number in parentheses should be the stock clocks. I set my 290 to 1040MHz, and this is what it looks like:


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> That's strange. Oh, well...could be my eyes fooling me. nvm
> 
> Now I'm just curious, whether we will have custom boards available on 29th, and whether reviews will be performed on reference or partner boards...


Probably refference first then aib next like what we are seeing for the 1080, the aviability should be refference in 29 june and mid july for aib cards.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> That image is suspect. Looking at that same display on my own PC, the number in parentheses should be the stock clocks. I set my 290 to 1040MHz, and this is what it looks like:


Perhaps a driver/firestrike database thing? It is an unreleased card.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Perhaps a driver/firestrike database thing? It is an unreleased card.


1607 MHz is the exact base clock a GTX 1080 (https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2839/geforce-gtx-1080). The whole thing is a trick. It's a 1080 with the name edited. That sucks.


----------



## Eorzean

The next time chiphell posts anything, tell him to take his phone camera and show us the RX 480 in his rig. Since he's already breaking the NDA, it shouldn't be a problem.

Assuming it's the same troll as before.


----------



## GoLDii3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Tomorrow's WCCF headline:
> 
> RX 480 his 1.6GHz on air with ease on custom boards


What are the chances that's the memory clock? 1600 x 5 = 8 Gbps GDDR5


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> 1607 MHz is the exact base clock a GTX 1080 (https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2839/geforce-gtx-1080). The whole thing is a trick. It's a 1080 with the name edited. That sucks.


1080 performs much better though.
It gets that kind of framerate in 4k, this is 1440p.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

I don't see the score there, and they might have turned off GPU boost.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> I don't see the score there, and they might have turned off GPU boost.


I'm talking about the Overwatch gameplay.

I watched the stream.


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> 1080 performs much better though.
> It gets that kind of framerate in 4k, this is 1440p.


At its stock clock it does, but this guy brought it down to 1350mhz or whatever it was, for some reason.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eorzean*
> 
> At its stock clock it does, but this guy brought it down to 1350mhz or whatever it was, for some reason.


It wasn't shown anywhere, he claimed that clock speed.
I highly doubt it's an underclocked 1080. Would GPU Boost even allow that?

The card was running at 70C.


----------



## NFL

Here's the stream in question. Settings @ 22:55


----------



## Eorzean

.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> It wasn't shown anywhere, he claimed that clock speed.
> I highly doubt it's an underclocked 1080. Would GPU Boost even allow that?
> 
> The card was running at 70C.


I dunno. With all the charade going on with this card, I'm skeptical. If he's already breaking the NDA, why can't he just show the card physically? Until then I won't believe just FireStrike menus.


----------



## HalongPort

When this is a big hoax, why would Sapphire tweet about it?


----------



## Pyrotagonist

The bios name of AMD GPUs has always included the word 'series' in the past as well. As far as we know, there's only one card per multiple of 10, but you'd think they'd keep their options open and call it '480 series' instead.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kylzer*
> 
> If you're in the UK at least there will be wide availability.
> 
> I've had at least 700 cards through this week.


Well that's good to know. Are they just reference cards.


----------



## prznar1

1.6GHz is impressive, but i would like to know how the card reacts to overclocking memory, and memory alone.


----------



## mypickaxe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Seems I hit a nerve. Need a tissue?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Lighten up, you shouldn't be taking anything said on an anonymous forum to heart.
> 
> Dropping the Grammar Nazi act while engaging in online discussion would also help
> 
> 
> He does live in TX and probably does own something of his own at this stage of his life


let me know when you have anything valuable to offer any discussion whatsoever. You are a pot calling the kettle black.

I don't waste a lot of time on idiot trolls who think they are "hitting a nerve." You're lucky I got until this point to block you.


----------



## tamas970

LoL, 54 pages... My gtx 970 does furmark-stable 1518MHz (970 reference base: 1050MHz), without any overvolting while consuming less than 190W in the process. What's new here?


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> 1.6GHz is impressive, but i would like to know how the card reacts to overclocking memory, and memory alone.


they are not constrained by their memory in most cases. I haven't really had much of a chance to play with any of the board partner cards, but the reference rx 480 cards performance is limited by the maximum core clock you can achieve.


----------



## HalongPort

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tamas970*
> 
> LoL, 54 pages... My gtx 970 does furmark-stable 1518MHz (970 reference base: 1050MHz), without any overvolting while consuming less than 190W in the process. What's new here?


That you don't know that the clock depends on the architecture and can't be compared this way....


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoLDii3*
> 
> What are the chances that's the memory clock? 1600 x 5 = 8 Gbps GDDR5


GDDR5 is quad pumped, so it'd be 1600x4 and not 1600x5. So that 1600 couldn't have been GDDR5.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tamas970*
> 
> LoL, 54 pages... My gtx 970 does furmark-stable 1518MHz (970 reference base: 1050MHz), without any overvolting while consuming less than 190W in the process. What's new here?


Absolutely nothing, so you can move along now.


----------



## Greenland

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I'm not going to dig through all the posts, it's a long weekend and I'm with the future in-laws and posting from my phone, but if you look through the GTX 1080 thread you'll see people guessing clock speeds and me saying higher or lower. I indicated north of 3 GHz there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, 13:00 and lunchtime.


Alright, so do you still stand by your "cannot validate past 850Mhz, delayed to October" comment?


----------



## cranfam

If you write on here like you have insider knowledge, and the information you provide is proven inaccurate, why are you shocked people will ridicule what you say?


----------



## tamas970

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HalongPort*
> 
> That you don't know that the clock depends on the architecture and can't be compared this way....


That is right, however, the Maxwell's result is a good 40+% boost, which translates quite well to performance. I'll keep watching the reviews and OC reports, and do all kind of tests on my 970 before I trade it for an AMD card.

Still not convinced that the 480 would be a significant step forward for me, but we shall see.


----------



## blue1512

Polaris 10 is a beast. But it seems you guys got overhyped and expected too much.

The ref card is priced at $199 and is already the best p/p in the recent time. Don't force the 1070 performance on that tiny board with a blower cooler.

Still as I said before the 1070 performance can be achieved by pushing the card to the uncomfortable zone. It's when the AIBs are needed and of course you have to reach deeper into your pocket (The p/p still better than Pascal though







)


----------



## Dargonplay

Just give me a 4GB Polaris RX 480 for 250$ with AIB Custom Boards with slightly above average binning and we're good to go full ITX, selling my Fury X now for 300$, anyone interested?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> Just give me a 4GB Polaris RX 480 for 250$ with AIB Custom Boards with slightly above average binning and we're good to go full ITX, selling my Fury X now for 300$, anyone interested?


As far as I know custom AMD cards dont OC any better than reference.


----------



## revanchrist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Polaris 10 is a beast. But it seems you guys got overhyped and expected too much.
> 
> The ref card is priced at $199 and is already the best p/p in the recent time. Don't force the 1070 performance on that tiny board with a blower cooler.
> 
> Still as I said before the 1070 performance can be achieved by pushing the card to the uncomfortable zone. It's when the AIBs are needed and of course you have to reach deeper into your pocket (The p/p still better than Pascal though
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Agree with you there. When people who purchase the reference card on 29th realize that they can't hit over 1.5 with the blower cooler and a single 6-pin, probably lots of "Fiji's overclocking 2.0" talks incoming.


----------



## revanchrist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> So, that Chiphell guy was streaming Overwatch.
> 
> Two things:
> 1. He alt-tabbed and showed a Firestrike window with an RX 480 at 1607MHz: https://i.imgur.com/6jCfQQH.png
> 2. We could see his Youtube for a moment, and while I forgot to take a screencap of that, it looks like his videos got taken down by a 3rd party, rather than himself.
> 
> The 2nd part makes me think he's actually legit.
> 
> EDIT: He posted in chat saying
> Since he's using an MSI aftermarket cooler (8+6 pin), the 1277MHz number isn't weird. He was apparently streaming at 1380.
> 1380MHz, 1440P at Epic settings, with 60-70FPS while streaming with OBS? That's quite good.


1266 is the official boost clock of reference version. But I've heard from China forums that XFX's reference comes with a minor OC at 1277. And the Korean journalist Daeguen Lee (the guy who leaks lots of stuff under DG.Lee alias) also confirm in his website that the reference 480 he has is 1277. And DG Lee also successfully overclock to 1400+.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revanchrist*
> 
> Agree with you there. When people who purchase the reference card on 29th realize that they can't hit over 1.5 with the blower cooler and a single 6-pin, probably lots of "Fiji's overclocking 2.0" talks incoming.


There is no reason reference card cant hit MAX OC. There has never been the case for AMD. Loud yes, possible yes.


----------



## The Mac

There was an article somwhere that claimed some of the AIBs are giving press samples that are overclocked from the retail versions.


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> So, that Chiphell guy was streaming Overwatch.
> 
> Two things:
> 1. He alt-tabbed and showed a Firestrike window with an RX 480 at 1607MHz: https://i.imgur.com/6jCfQQH.png
> 2. We could see his Youtube for a moment, and while I forgot to take a screencap of that, it looks like his videos got taken down by a 3rd party, rather than himself.
> 
> The 2nd part makes me think he's actually legit.
> 
> EDIT: He posted in chat saying
> Since he's using an MSI aftermarket cooler (8+6 pin), the 1277MHz number isn't weird. He was apparently streaming at 1380.
> 1380MHz, 1440P at Epic settings, with 60-70FPS while streaming with OBS? That's quite good.


122% resolution scaling as well


----------



## FlyingSolo

The clock counts ....... how if counts!


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tamas970*
> 
> My gtx 970 does furmark-stable 1518MHz (970 reference base: 1050MHz), without any overvolting while consuming less than 190W in the process.


Saying that the GTX 970 has a base clock of 1050 and you overclocked it by 45% is like saying your GTX 970 has 4GB of ram







.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Twitter Image


Someone translate this please? Google translate seems to think that the entire Twitter page is in English and I am too lazy to manually translate each line through the Google Translate website.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Saying that the GTX 970 has a base clock of 1050 and you overclocked it by 45% is like saying your GTX 970 has 4GB of ram
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> Someone translate this please? Google translate seems to think that the entire Twitter page is in English and I am too lazy to manually translate each line through the Google Translate website.


It say's The clock counts ....... how if counts!


----------



## FlyingSolo




----------



## NFL

Question for people that play Overwatch: how much of an FPS hit do you get from resolution scaling?


----------



## xx9e02

I'm 100% on the hype train, looking to get rid of this b stock 780 Ti


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xx9e02*
> 
> I'm 100% on the hype train, looking to get rid of this b stock 780 Ti


I'm on the hype train too. Next stop June 29th.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xx9e02*
> 
> I'm 100% on the hype train, looking to get rid of this b stock 780 Ti


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> I'm on the hype train too. Next stop June 29th.


Not long to go


----------



## AuraNova

Hey, somebody pick me up! I'd like to ride on the train too! I have a 7870 to retire.


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> Question for people that play Overwatch: how much of an FPS hit do you get from resolution scaling?


My 970 @ 1500/8000 i get 100-120fps average maxxed out with 100% scaling @ 1080p

150% scaling drops me down to 60s average

200% scaling drops me down to 30s average.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AuraNova*
> 
> Hey, somebody pick me up! I'd like to ride on the train too!


You sure? it seems a bit crowded...


Spoiler: Hype Train!









Spoiler: Next stop?


----------



## NFL




----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> The clock counts ....... how if counts!


I am sure something was lost in the translation


----------



## AuraNova

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You sure? it seems a bit crowded...
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Hype Train!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Next stop?


I look at it this way: Almost anything is better than what I have right now.







Either way, I still win.


----------



## NightAntilli

For me, if it has even R9 390 performance, I'll be getting one.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AuraNova*
> 
> I look at it this way: Almost anything is better than what I have right now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Either way, I still win.


You are definitely due for an upgrade


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You sure? it seems a bit crowded...
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Hype Train!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Next stop?


You forgot


Spoiler: Destination


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> The clock counts ....... how if counts!
> 
> 
> 
> I am sure something was lost in the translation
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure what they mean is "Frequency counts... a lot!"

Italian is fairly easy to read if you know romance languages.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> Italian is fairly easy to read if you know romance languages.


I can speak, write, and read English, Ebonics, and Gibberish. Although, now that I think about it, I am unsure if the latter two are actual languages


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> Italian is fairly easy to read if you know romance languages.
> 
> 
> 
> I can speak, write, and read English, Ebonics, and Gibberish. Although, now that I think about it, I am unsure if the latter two are actual languages
Click to expand...

Gibberish is certainly a dialect on this sub-forum.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> Gibberish is certainly a dialect on this sub-forum.


Hence why I have become quite fluent in it over the last few years


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> There is no reason reference card cant hit MAX OC. There has never been the case for AMD. Loud yes, possible yes.


What? What is this madness? My 290 reference can't, even with fans at 100% OC for crap, I can barely hit stock 947MHz on really high fan speed.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> What? What is this madness? I can barely hit stock *947MHz* on really high fan speed.


Let me be the first to call *BS* on your inability get the card past reference clock.... Try getting out of silent mode and using a custom fan profile


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> What? What is this madness? My 290 reference can't, even with fans at 100% OC for crap, I can barely hit stock 947MHz on really high fan speed.


I saw you on AdornedTV's channel. How do we convince him to come here?


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Let me be the first to call *BS* on your inability get the card past reference clock.... Try getting out of silent mode and using a custom fan profile


You're a bad troll. I have it on an ITX case that no matter the jets inside it, it wont go past stock, never, eve at 100%, except maybe on Winter, it's even worse than the GTX 1080 Fools Edition, considering that to do it I'd need to increase the power target it's GG already.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Robenger*
> 
> I saw you on AdornedTV's channel. How do we convince him to come here?


We could make a thread on OCN called "AdoredTV, we summon you Oh Red Lord!" with everyone who's on his channel posting their reasons why they believe AdoredTV should bless OCN with his presence.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> FTFY


Now I support you.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> I can *barely* speak, write, and read English, Ebonics, and Gibberish. Although, now that I think about it, I am unsure if the latter two are actual languages


FTFY


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> We could make a thread on OCN called "AdoredTV, we summon you Oh Red Lord!" with everyone who's on his channel posting their reasons why they believe AdoredTV should bless OCN with his presence.


I really need him to make my voicemail message.


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Robenger*
> 
> I really need him to make my voicemail message.


I've been told I sound like him, I could make it happen if you're interested on buying it from Fiverr, Cheers!


----------



## renx

Alright guys how's it going.


----------



## Mad Pistol

So about that RX 480 overclock....


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> So about that RX 480 overclock....


I heard it can do 1.7GHz on air, AIBs guarantee. At that level, it matches an OC 1070.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> So about that RX 480 overclock....


2.0 GHz 480 beating 1080 in DX12.


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> I heard it can do 1.7GHz on air, AIBs guarantee. At that level, it matches an OC 1070.


2.4Ghz on water. My cousin's best friend's uncle confirmed it live on his stream via Firestrike.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> What? What is this madness? My 290 reference can't, even with fans at 100% OC for crap, I can barely hit stock 947MHz on really high fan speed.


You are completely missing the point. You have a ITX case and you blame the GPU for not hitting stock clocks? How is that even possible. In a ITX case a Reference card will be the best card to have if you lack airflow. My 290 unlocked to 290X and did 1150MHz in BF4 with only 55% fan speed. Got it to 1200MHz with 75% fan speed. Yes is was loud as hell.


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> The guy makes some good reasoning, and I like listening to him. But the idea of "people needing him" to know about the future is weird. LOL
> I mean he's been both right and wrong (probably more right than wrong). It would be a very nice opinion to have here.
> Yeah, I'd post on that thread!


It's just for the lols, like a meme, it would be fun to do it and even more fun to have it around








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> You are completely missing the point. You have a ITX case and you blame the GPU for not hitting stock clocks? How is that even possible. In a ITX case a Reference card will be the best card to have if you lack airflow. My 290 unlocked to 290X and did 1150MHz in BF4 with only 55% fan speed. Got it to 1200MHz with 75% fan speed. Yes is was loud as hell.


You're saying your REFERENCE 290 can get to 1200MHz? You've lost all credibility you had, Screenshots or didn't happened.


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> It's just for the lols, like a meme, it would be fun to do it and even more fun to have it around


Sounds cool. I'm in !


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> It's just for the lols, like a meme, it would be fun to do it and even more fun to have it around
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're saying your REFERENCE 290 can get to 1200MHz? Screenshots or didn't happened.


My card is under water now. I can 1200MHz all day. Need +100mV.


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> My card is under water now. I can 1200MHz all day. Need +100mV.


So you're the one who's missing the point, Oh OK.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> My card is under water now. I can 1200MHz all day. Need +100mV.
> 
> 
> 
> So you're the one who's missing the point, Oh OK.
Click to expand...

Can be done on air with Windforce cooler.

Possible with reference cooler if you have -10C ambient temperature.


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Can be done on air with Windforce cooler.
> 
> Possible with reference cooler if you have -10C ambient temperature.


And that is exactly my point, reference 290s don't OC for crap, answering to this.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> As far as I know custom AMD cards dont OC any better than reference.


A water cooled R9 290 is not a reference 290 by any stretch.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Can be done on air with Windforce cooler.
> 
> Possible with reference cooler if you have -10C ambient temperature.


I did that OC with reference cooler before getting WB. It was like 67C with 100% fan speed.


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I did that OC with reference cooler before getting WB. It was like 67C with 100% fan speed.


I couldn't get temps below 85c with my XFX Double D 290X stock Fan: 100%, 1000MHz, and you're here telling me the reference 290 can do 67C OCed to 1200MHz? Get out of here please there's only so much BS I can take.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> And that is exactly my point, reference 290s don't OC for crap, answering to this.
> A water cooled R9 290 is not a reference 290 by any stretch.


The 290 is irrelevant to this conversation. The 480 will be just like the 1080 in that AIB cards with extra power and 12-fan coolers etc will not make any difference to OC's over reference because of how small and efficient Polaris 10 is. Basing opinions on Polaris OCing using how Hawaii OC's (a chip that uses almost three times the power) is just fundamentally flawed.


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> The 290 is irrelevant to this conversation. The 480 will be just like the 1080 in that AIB cards with extra power and 12-fan coolers etc will not make any difference to OC's over reference because of how small and efficient Polaris 10 is. Basing opinions on Polaris OCing using how Hawaii OC's (a chip that uses almost three times the power) is just fundamentally flawed.


I'm sure Polaris will OC incredibly with its Reference version, more so than Hawaii on Aftermarket Coolers, that's a given, the whole conversation came from this.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> As far as I know custom AMD cards dont OC any better than reference.


Which is "Fundamentally wrong", and him saying that he could get 1200MHz on his 290 with the reference cooler, with only 67c on 100% Fan Speed, which is fundamentally BS.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> I'm sure Polaris will OC incredibly with its Reference version, more so than Hawaii on Aftermarket Coolers, that's a given, the whole conversation came from this.
> Which is "Fundamentally wrong".


My impression was that he was talking about upcoming AMD cards, not Hawaii. Its OT anyway, but if referencing the 290X then yeah, there's no doubt that non-reference cards OC much better. The 290X blower was one of the worst reference coolers ever made...


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> The 290X blower was one of the worst reference coolers ever made...


Fundamentally wrong for Zealotkiller, he's got 67c - 100% Fan profile with an Overclock of 1200MHz on his reference 290.

290s got the best Reference Coolers in history


----------



## STEvil

You guys do realize not all cores are equal when it comes to ability to overclock or power use, right?

The cooler you keep a 290/X the less power it uses and not all come with the same volts, let alone the performance differences you can get per clock with the different bioses.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> Fundamentally wrong for Zealotkiller, he's got 67c - 100% Fan profile with an Overclock of 1200MHz on his reference 290.
> 
> 290s got the best Reference Coolers in history


In term of raw strength, that jet cooler is one of the most powerful blower ever introduced (it's loud, of course). And he said he could reach 1200 MHz, but to hold it for a long playing session is another story.


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> In term of raw strength, that jet cooler is one of the most powerful blower ever introduced (it's loud, of course). And he said he could reach 1200 MHz, but to hold it for a long playing session is another story.


He said 67c as well, again, not even my aftermarket double D would stay below 85c at stock, 90c for 50% power target without voltage increases.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> You're a bad troll. I have it on an ITX case that no matter the jets inside it, *it wont go past stock, never, eve at 100%*, except maybe on Winter, it's even worse than the GTX 1080 Fools Edition, considering that to do it I'd need to increase the power target it's GG already.


If you are getting the same effective cooling at 47% as you are at 100% fan speed then there is obviously another factor at play. Instead of analyzing the issue, I suppose we can pick a case with restrictive airflow for a blower GPU and then proceed to bash the GPU for not performing. Logically follow such train of though...









More of the same fallacies from you...


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> If you are getting the same effective cooling at 47% as you are at 100% fan speed then there is obviously another factor at play. Instead of analyzing the issue, I suppose we can pick a case with restrictive airflow for a blower GPU and then proceed to bash the GPU for not performing. Logically follow such train of though...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More of the same fallacies from you...


Reading comprehension is not your forte so I will simplify it.

100% Fan Speed: Stock Speed

Anything less than 100% fan speed: Never even reaching stock speed.

Now you can Fanboy AMD to the moon and the stars while riding Lisa Su's dreams and hopes, that won't suddenly turn the 290X reference cooler into anything other than the worst reference cooler ever.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> He said 67c as well, again, not even my aftermarket double D would stay below 85c at stock, 90c for 50% power target without voltage increases.


Mate, the ref fan of 290x at 100% is very powerful, it does have the cooling job done, albeit extremely loud. Meanwhile double D is not recognized as one of the beyond average on the market, if not near the bottom.

One more thing, whether a card can reach 1200MHz or not is depended on the chip and the power circuit, not much on the cooler. However, for a card to hold that high clock, it does need a good cooler


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Mate, the ref fan of 290x at 100% is very powerful, it does have the cooling job done, albeit extremely loud. Meanwhile double D is not recognized as one of the beyond average on the market, if not near the bottom.
> 
> One more thing, whether a card can reach 1200MHz or not is depended on the chip and the power circuit, not much on the cooler.


Where were all of these marvelous Reference 290Xs capable of hitting 1200MHz on Reference Coolers while running at 67c? Oh yes, in AMD's fanboys dreams, because I could never find one in reality, I'm amazed people think this is even possible, anyone with a reference 290xs knows better.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> Where were all of these marvelous Reference 290Xs capable of hitting 1200MHz on Reference Coolers while running at 67c? Oh yes, in AMD's fanboys dreams, because I could never find one in reality, I'm amazed people think this is even possible, anyone with a reference 290xs knows better.


Dude, hitting and holding are different. Like many of FE1080 can hit 2000+MHz, but none can hold. You get what I mean now?

And I bet you have never tried 290x ref with 100% fan. It is extremely load so no much ppl tried it, but it is capable. I dare say the ref cooler at 100% is better at cooling than your Double D at 100%


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Dude, hitting and holding are different. Like many of FE1080 can hit 2000+MHz, but none can hold. You get what I mean now?


If you hit 1200MHz with 67c you're certainly able to hold not only 1200MHz but probably 1300MHz, get what I mean now?

If Reference 290Xs were such miracle cards as you people think it is I'm sure AMD would have at least 50% marketshare right now, in the real world people can't even get to stock clocks without ramping up the fans.


----------



## gerardfraser

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> Reading comprehension is not your forte so I will simplify it.
> 
> 100% Fan Speed: Stock Speed
> 
> Anything less than 100% fan speed: Never even reaching stock speed.
> 
> Now you can Fanboy AMD to the moon and the stars while riding Lisa Su's dreams and hopes, that won't suddenly turn the 290X reference cooler into anything other than the worst reference cooler ever.


Well you do not like reference coolers on R9 290/x cards.I get it.I have owned a few of them.The reference card can run quite good and quiet on the R9 290/x cards.You may just have the worst R9 290 card ever made.LOL

Here is R9 290 cards in crossfire running at 1200 core/1600 memeroy with max voltage @ 1.4Mv.
One is a reference and one is a non-reference and to tell you the truth there is not much difference between coolers.BTW all my R9 290/x cards could hit 1200 core.

Now where is my RX 480 reference card.

https://postimage.org/
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1981892


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> If you hit 1200MHz with 67c you're certainly able to hold not only 1200MHz but probably 1300MHz, get what I mean now?
> 
> If Reference 290Xs were such miracle card as you people think it is I'm sure AMD would have at least 50% marketshare right now, in the real world people can't even get to stock clocks without ramping up the fans.


Dude, you have to fix your way of thought.

Many guys with custom loop run their cards at low temp, but they can't push them any further. The cards were at their silicon limit, which can only be changed at extreme condition aka subzero LN2.

Similar story here dude. And as I said the ref cooler at 100% is extremely loud, that's why the card failed.


----------



## Buris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gerardfraser*
> 
> Well you do not like reference coolers on R9 290/x cards.I get it.I have owned a few of them.The reference card can run quite good and quiet on the R9 290/x cards.You may just have the worst R9 290 card ever made.LOL
> 
> Here is R9 290 cards in crossfire running at 1200 core/1600 memeroy with max voltage @ 1.4Mv.
> One is a reference and one is a non-reference and to tell you the truth there is not much difference between coolers.BTW all my R9 290/x cards could hit 1200 core.
> 
> Now where is my RX 480 reference card.
> 
> https://postimage.org/
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/1981892


stock 290 runs at 47% fan speed, but it's already pretty loud at this point- after 60% fan speed on a 290, it gets way too loud.

During the summer I usually just add crazy fan profiles to do with this, which works fine enough, but it's partially the reason I'll most likely get the 480. Heat and power consumption are going to be massively improved upon.

The RX 480 is rumored to use about 110w under load and be around 60c on a stock cooler... That's pretty damn good. If that's true, then I'll be purchasing one for my roommate, and one for myself!


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> stock 290 runs at 47% fan speed, but it's already pretty loud at this point- after 60% fan speed on a 290, it gets way too loud.
> 
> During the summer I usually just add crazy fan profiles to do with this, which works fine enough, but it's partially the reason I'll most likely get the 480. Heat and power consumption are going to be massively improved upon.
> 
> The RX 480 is rumored to use about 110w under load and be around 60c on a stock cooler... That's pretty damn good. If that's true, then I'll be purchasing one for my roommate, and one for myself!


Did you ever ran a suicide run with 100% lol? I did once (with headphone of course). My flatmate thought I had been vacumning the whole afternoon


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> 100% Fan Speed: Stock Speed
> 
> Anything less than 100% fan speed: Never even reaching stock speed.


I know you are in Florida but that claim sounds ludicrous, even for the god awful reference cooler. Now I am genuinely curious as to which god awful ITX case you chose for your build...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> Now you can *Fanboy* AMD to the moon and the stars while riding Lisa Su's dreams and hopes, that won't suddenly turn the 290X reference cooler into anything other than the worst reference cooler ever.


I challenge you to find one post of mine that displays fanboyism for any company...


----------



## SpeedyVT

This is no longer a rumor Sapphire Italia has confirmed that the overclock potential is massive.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4or1he/sapphire_confirms_15ghz_rx_480_hyping_up_their/


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyVT*
> 
> This is no longer a rumor Sapphire Italia has confirmed that the overclock potential is massive.
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4or1he/sapphire_confirms_15ghz_rx_480_hyping_up_their/


Yeah posted that few pages back.


----------



## spyshagg

290X reference cooler:



Not a chance in hell to hit 1200mhz with this cooler.

With water (3x 360rads), it hits ~50ºc at benchable 1200mhz ~150mv


----------



## KarathKasun

I have a reference 290 that can get upper 1100 range with minimal voltage adjustment. 100% fan temps are ~70c. Ambient temps are 22c.


----------



## spyshagg

considering my picture, with stock volts @ 1030mhz = 72ºc with 85% fan, I would say my card cannot do what yours can


----------



## FallenFaux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spyshagg*
> 
> 290X reference cooler:
> 
> 
> 
> Not a chance in hell to hit 1200mhz with this cooler.
> 
> With water (3x 360rads), it hits ~50ºc at benchable 1200mhz ~150mv


That's a ton of voltage. Mine reached 1175Mhz with +45mv and only hit ~45c playing the Witcher 3 @ 4K. 420mm+140mm Rad in a loop with my 5930k.

That being said, my Sapphire card did fairly well on the stock cooler but my XFX card couldn't even hit stock clocks consistently.


----------



## Zahix

How did this turn into a 290x thread?


----------



## magna224

One of my 290x is fine at +86mv 1150/1475 in the low 70s the other can only OC core to 1100/1450 and runs in the low 80s even on stock clocks. It's depressing.

Edit: These are both Sapphire TriX. The first one worked so well it made me get a second which was the more dissapointing one.


----------



## spyshagg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FallenFaux*
> 
> That's a ton of voltage. Mine reached 1175Mhz with +45mv and only hit ~45c playing the Witcher 3 @ 4K. 420mm+140mm Rad in a loop with my 5930k.
> 
> That being said, my Sapphire card did fairly well on the stock cooler but my XFX card couldn't even hit stock clocks consistently.


-30mv and it locks up







And that voltage is stock btw

This 290x conversation is to establish a reference about what stock coolers can do


----------



## GHADthc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> It's just for the lols, like a meme, it would be fun to do it and even more fun to have it around
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're saying your REFERENCE 290 can get to 1200MHz? You've lost all credibility you had, Screenshots or didn't happened.


My reference Sapphire 290x can do just shy of 1200 on air, it can run at 1200 but it gets uncomfortably hot and starts to artifact, this was running stock fan at 100% and now using a Raijintek Morpheus with 2x SP120`s...I`m tempted to put a block on it and see how it fairs when pushed even further...a lot of those ref 299/x`s seem to be pretty temp sensitive, if you can keep em cool whilst pumping enough mV into them, they tend to hit well over 1100, and even 1200+.


----------



## mohiuddin

Please stop r9 290x oc nonsense. Please


----------



## Ha-Nocri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magna224*
> 
> One of my 290x is fine at +86mv 1150/1475 in the low 70s the other can only OC core to 1100/1450 and runs in the low 80s even on stock clocks. It's depressing.
> 
> Edit: These are both Sapphire TriX. The first one worked so well it made me get a second which was the more dissapointing one.


Did you try re-applying TIM on the bad card? But it just might be normal if that is the top card as it receives heat from the bottom one also.


----------



## Klocek001

6+8-pin to run 1.5GHz on a mid-range card ?
doesn't sound optimistic


----------



## magna224

It runs hot in any slot. I had considered it but I only bought it at the end of the last year to hold me over until the 490X. A single 290X just doesn't cut 1440p 144hz. I'm just going to give my 290s to my little brother who will run them stock anyways so I'm not going to bother. It doesn't pass 90c either way it's just dissapointing that it runs warm and doesn't OC at all compared to my other


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> 6+8-pin to run 1.5GHz on a mid-range card ?
> doesn't sound optimistic


It doesn't mean it needs it. We'll have to see how 480 overclocks and at what threshold does it need additional voltage. If venodrs have decided to make it premium and charge additional $50, they better at least add additional 8pin.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> It doesn't mean it needs it. We'll have to see how 480 overclocks and at what threshold does it need additional voltage. If venodrs have decided to make it premium and charge additional $50, they better at least add additional 8pin.


I'm just saying,RX480 8GB is already $50 over $200. Now we're learning that a version taht can oc well will have 6+8-pin and will probably cost another $50 premium. So we've got a $300 6-8-pin card that overclocked may come close to the likes of the cheapest $380 1070s, running a single 8-pin and auto fan with +80 degrees.


----------



## Ha-Nocri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> I'm just saying,RX480 8GB is already $50 over $200. Now we're learning that a version taht can oc well will have 6+8-pin and will probably cost another $50 premium. So we've got a $300 6-8-pin card that overclocked may come close to the likes of the cheapest $380 1070s, running a single 8-pin and auto fan with +80 degrees.


I don't think 1 6-pin will limit OC-ing as we know it can support much more than 75W. It will depend on the aftermarket coolers imo, but all cards that have good ones will also have a 8-pin, or 6+6(8) pin


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> I'm just saying,RX480 8GB is already $50 over $200. Now we're learning that a version taht can oc well will have 6+8-pin and will probably cost another $50 premium. So we've got a $300 6-8-pin card that overclocked may come close to the likes of the cheapest $380 1070s, running a single 8-pin and auto fan with +80 degrees.


nowone knows if 8 gigs version will cost same as 4 gigs or will be 50 bucks more expencive.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> nowone knows if 8 gigs version will cost same as 4 gigs or will be 50 bucks more expencive.


lol how do you think they're gonna sell 4GB ones if 8GB one will cost the same ?


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> I'm just saying,RX480 8GB is already $50 over $200. Now we're learning that a version taht can oc well will have 6+8-pin and will probably cost another $50 premium. So we've got a $300 6-8-pin card that overclocked may come close to the likes of the cheapest $380 1070s, running a single 8-pin and auto fan with +80 degrees.


If an 8GB RX480 with 8+6 pin can OC to near 1070 performance for $300, I don't see that as a bad thing at all.

Plus if the 1080 is any indication, the absolute cheapest 1070 with the junkiest of coolers will probably still cost $389, so the value aspect of RX480 is certainly still there.


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> lol how do you think they're gonna sell 4GB ones if 8GB one will cost the same ?


im not sayin this. im saying that all we know is entry price for rx 480. 8 gigs version can cost ~20$ more but i highly doubt if it will be charged additional 50$


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> If an 8GB RX480 with 8+6 pin can OC to near 1070 performance for $300, I don't see that as a bad thing at all.
> 
> Plus if the 1080 is any indication, the absolute cheapest 1070 with the junkiest of cooler will probably still cost $389, so the value aspect of RX480 is certainly still there.


yeah quite good indeed. but still nothing that revolutionary.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> im not sayin this. im saying that all we know is entry price for rx 480. 8 gigs version can cost ~20$ more but i highly doubt if it will be charged additional 50$


lol will you buy a 4GB for 1000PLN if 8GB will be 1100 ?


----------



## Klocek001

yeah quite good indeed. but still nothing that revolutionary.[/quote]


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> yeah quite good indeed. but still nothing that revolutionary.
> lol will you buy a 4GB for 1000PLN if 8GB will be 1100 ?


you dont even know what im talking about.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> I'm just saying,RX480 8GB is already $50 over $200. Now we're learning that a version taht can oc well will have 6+8-pin and will probably cost another $50 premium. So we've got a $300 6-8-pin card that overclocked may come close to the likes of the cheapest $380 1070s, running a single 8-pin and auto fan with +80 degrees.


The additional 8pin does not make 480 less efficient, it eases overclock and adds additional value. The corresponding premium variant of GTX 1070 will have 2x8pin, but will prob. cost way above $380 (maybe close to $500).
As magnek pointed, the value aspect is there.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> yeah quite good indeed. but still nothing that revolutionary.
> lol will you buy a 4GB for 1000PLN if 8GB will be 1100 ?


I don't know what you call revolution. The big "revolution" in 1070 and 1080 is the 16nm.


----------



## Ha-Nocri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> yeah quite good indeed. but still nothing that revolutionary.


Are you trying to justify buying 2x 1070 FE (?!) to yourself (if you did that), or what is the deal here?


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> yeah quite good indeed. but still nothing that revolutionary.


So what would be revolutionary? Matching 1080 performance for $200? I mean we can all dream but you gotta be realistic sometimes.


----------



## MaxprO

Hey guys,

Do you think it is worth to sell my 390x for around 280-300 EURO and get a RX 480 instead? I want to do it before the prices drop after the RX 480 is released.
I have a HX650 gold PSU and I should be able to crossfire a RX 480 down the line without upgrading my PSU.
I wonder if I should get the 6+8 pin version of the 480, these overclocks seems ridiculous and seems legit enough for me to sell my 390x. I got a backup 7850 I can use in the meantime. ^_^
I have a 6600k @4.6 GHZ that only consume around 60 watt of power on load.


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> If an 8GB RX480 with 8+6 pin can OC to near 1070 performance for $300, I don't see that as a bad thing at all.
> 
> Plus if the 1080 is any indication, the absolute cheapest 1070 with the junkiest of coolers will probably still cost $389, so the value aspect of RX480 is certainly still there.


price difference will be around 200euro between a 480/1070 here where I live.
Basically half the cost for the 480 vs the 1070.


----------



## prznar1

For all those that are saying "+50$ for 8 gb version"

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150732&cm_re=r9_380-_-14-150-732-_-Product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125793&cm_re=r9_380-_-14-125-793-_-Product

same brand
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121963&cm_re=r9_380-_-14-121-963-_-Product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121978&cm_re=r9_380-_-14-121-978-_-Product

20$, as it usually was with any other 2x mem version.

but for rx 480, we still dont know official pricing for 4gb and 8gb


----------



## Power Drill

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Klocek001*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *T1A1*
> 
> It doesn't mean it needs it. We'll have to see how 480 overclocks and at what threshold does it need additional voltage. If venodrs have decided to make it premium and charge additional $50, they better at least add additional 8pin.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just saying,RX480 8GB is already $50 over $200. Now we're learning that a version taht can oc well will have 6+8-pin and will probably cost another $50 premium. So we've got a $300 6-8-pin card that overclocked may come close to the likes of the cheapest $380 1070s, running a single 8-pin and auto fan with +80 degrees.
Click to expand...

So you are comparing card with custom PCB + custom cooler to a reference card which is still 80$ more(but in reality you still can not get 1070 anywhere at that price if at all) and consider that fair and a good deal?

How about we talk about this when the premium 1070 hit the stores, so we see where the REAL price land and so we don't have to compare vapoware with dreamland prices, ok?


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ha-Nocri*
> 
> Are you trying to justify buying 2x 1070 FE (?!) to yourself (if you did that), or what is the deal here?


He is gonna do that every single day in ocn. lol. You better get used to it.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaxprO*
> 
> Hey guys,
> 
> Do you think it is worth to sell my 390x for around 280-300 EURO and get a RX 480 instead? I want to do it before the prices drop after the RX 480 is released.
> I have a HX650 gold PSU and I should be able to crossfire a RX 480 down the line without upgrading my PSU.
> I wonder if I should get the 6+8 pin version of the 480, these overclocks seems ridiculous and seems legit enough for me to sell my 390x. I got a backup 7850 I can use in the meantime. ^_^
> I have a 6600k @4.6 GHZ that only consume around 60 watt of power on load.


R9 390x is a stretched 290x, you don't have much overclock headroom.

Meanwhile, RX 480 is an underclocked card sold at lower price, you have more headroom to play with. The more you invest into custom cards, the better clock you have. 390x to an 6+8pin 480 is definitely a good upgrade


----------



## Ha-Nocri

We still don't know tho. 480 might not be faster than 390 @stock clocks. But even in that case it might be worth selling 390X just for less power consumption/heat.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ha-Nocri*
> 
> We still don't know tho. 480 might not be faster than 390 @stock clocks. But even in that case it might be worth selling 390X just for less power consumption/heat.


Well according to the most recent leak on performance @ 1266MHz in Firestrike Ultra, it appears that this card would certainly be faster than a 390 @ stock clocks.



As of now you have noticed how far behind it is compared to the Fury X (not much), again, @ 1266MHz. Now, this would mean that at an increase to say 1520MHz (overclocked), you will most likely be at that Fury X score (a more realistic approach would be to apply 20% improvement to the score, and then subtract 5% because scaling is not linear with overclocking, but that still realistically puts you @ 4099 score, so even higher than the Fury X)


----------



## Ha-Nocri

^ if the leak is true


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ha-Nocri*
> 
> ^ if the leak is true


Leaks tend to be more and more accurate as we approach launch. This came out 4 days ago.


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Leaks tend to be more and more accurate as we approach launch. This came out 4 days ago.


So did the other leak that places it ahead of 390x only in Firestrike Ultra and behind otherwise.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> So did the other leak that places it ahead of 390x only in Firestrike Ultra and behind otherwise.


Which leaks are you talking about that are more recent than the one I posted, specifically?


----------



## Clocknut

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> So did the other leak that places it ahead of 390x only in Firestrike Ultra and behind otherwise.


it will definitely be at least equal or ahead of 290x/390x.

1266MHz x 2304 cores equals to Hawaii's 2816 @ 1035MHz. That is assuming there are no GCN architecture improvement....


----------



## guttheslayer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clocknut*
> 
> it will definitely be at least equal or ahead of 290x/390x.
> 
> 1266MHz x 2304 cores equals to Hawaii's 2816 @ 1035MHz. That is assuming there are no GCN architecture improvement....


If the improvement is 20% over GCN than it will be faster than Hawaii by 20%. 390X tend to have better clock so maybe 15%?

Either way get a pair and OC till 1.5GHz and u are looking at TX SLI performance.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Well according to the most recent leak on performance @ 1266MHz in Firestrike Ultra, it appears that this card would certainly be faster than a 390 @ stock clocks.
> 
> 
> 
> As of now you have noticed how far behind it is compared to the Fury X (not much), again, @ 1266MHz. Now, this would mean that at an increase to say 1520MHz (overclocked), you will most likely be at that Fury X score (a more realistic approach would be to apply 20% improvement to the score, and then subtract 5% because scaling is not linear with overclocking, but that still realistically puts you @ 4099 score, so even higher than the Fury X)


My 290 oc'ed to 1200 is a bit faster than the 390X but even my highest oc, which is 1300 will never match the 480 if real.


----------



## HackHeaven

I think the point was that this card is meant to be $200 not $300


----------



## FlyingSolo

The card is $199 for the reference 480 4GB card. No one really knows the price of the reference 480 8GB card. It could be around $250 that's my guess. Then for AIB cards add another $50 on both. But the reference card will do 1.4GHz and maybe a little bit more. Guess we will find out soon.


----------



## prznar1

I will quote myself again :>
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> For all those that are saying "+50$ for 8 gb version"
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150732&cm_re=r9_380-_-14-150-732-_-Product
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125793&cm_re=r9_380-_-14-125-793-_-Product
> 
> same brand
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121963&cm_re=r9_380-_-14-121-963-_-Product
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814121978&cm_re=r9_380-_-14-121-978-_-Product
> 
> 20$, as it usually was with any other 2x mem version.
> 
> but for rx 480, we still dont know official pricing for 4gb and 8gb


doubtfull that additional 4 gigs will be priced for 50$


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> I will quote myself again :>
> 
> doubtfull that additional 4 gigs will be priced for 50$


Was quoted as $29 over the 4GB.


----------



## FlyingSolo

I am saying around $50. It can be $10 and upwards. We don't know cause AMD has not told us the price of the 8GB. Hell for all we know the 8GB card might be AIB only. And be priced at $300


----------



## JackCY

The prices have been leaked from shops for both versions. Posted here million times.


----------



## doza

this is all about rx480? dat is like current naming ex. 380? so there is room fpr rx480x? or dat rX is the x model ?


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> The prices have been leaked from shops for both versions. Posted here million times.


They just might be a placeholder price. Have you seen them on new egg or amazon or on any other big compaines you buy your card from. Cause i have yet to see one.


----------



## GHADthc

Pretty sure the X in RX is just roman numeral for 10, you know, the number that follows after R9..I`m pretty certain there will be an RX 480X once yeilds improve and AMD can deal with supplying the demand from Apple and Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo.


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GHADthc*
> 
> Pretty sure the X in RX is just roman numeral for 10, you know, the number that follows after R9..I`m pretty certain there will be an RX 480X once yeilds improve and AMD can deal with supplying the demand from Apple and Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo.


Radeon RX CDLXXX


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> I will quote myself again :>
> 
> doubtfull that additional 4 gigs will be priced for 50$


wonder if they're selling those 2gb ones at all


----------



## 364901

I heard this was a popular place to post pictures of unreleased Radeon graphics cards.



Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4ot0cy/im_sure_youll_appreciate_this/


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CataclysmZA*
> 
> I heard this was a popular place to post pictures of unreleased Radeon graphics cards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4ot0cy/im_sure_youll_appreciate_this/


Very nice.


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CataclysmZA*
> 
> I heard this was a popular place to post pictures of unreleased Radeon graphics cards.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4ot0cy/im_sure_youll_appreciate_this/


nice find. however, are those bp one piece?


----------



## 364901

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> nice find. however, are those bp one piece?


Yup.


----------



## Newbie2009

Backplates and all. I didn't think they would have on such a cheap card......


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GHADthc*
> 
> Pretty sure the X in RX is just roman numeral for 10, you know, the number that follows after R9..I`m pretty certain there will be an RX 480X once yeilds improve and AMD can deal with supplying the demand from Apple and Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo.


Thought it stood for "prescription" for sure.

Come on gaming benchmarks! Please leak soon, for my sanity.


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CataclysmZA*
> 
> Yup.


sadface


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CataclysmZA*
> 
> I heard this was a popular place to post pictures of unreleased Radeon graphics cards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4ot0cy/im_sure_youll_appreciate_this/


Beautiful.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GHADthc*
> 
> Pretty sure the X in RX is just roman numeral for 10, you know, the number that follows after R9..I`m pretty certain there will be an RX 480X once yeilds improve and AMD can deal with supplying the demand from Apple and Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo.


The RX stands for radeon xperience. That's what Raja said in a video.


----------



## GoLDii3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyVT*
> 
> This is no longer a rumor Sapphire Italia has confirmed that the overclock potential is massive.
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4or1he/sapphire_confirms_15ghz_rx_480_hyping_up_their/


LOL that absolutely means nothing. I swear people and their hype.


----------



## GHADthc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> The RX stands for radeon xperience. That's what Raja said in a video.


Real? Thats a bit corny...


----------



## FlyingSolo

Nice reference card with backplate. They should just cancel the 29th and start selling now ☺


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GHADthc*
> 
> Real? Thats a bit corny...


Update. Actually i heard wrong. Found a video Watch at 6:13


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CataclysmZA*
> 
> I heard this was a popular place to post pictures of unreleased Radeon graphics cards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4ot0cy/im_sure_youll_appreciate_this/


Are you a time traveler this must be an october image


----------



## GoLDii3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Are you a time traveler this must be an october image




Fixed.


----------



## hokk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *$ilent*
> 
> Are you a vendor?


I handle database entries for import/exports.

just to add it doesn't say defined details

example SHIPMENT/IMPORT99-UK-VAT-EXCLU-SAPPHIRE-R9-400SERIES or similar.

Then it has a barcode which will tell you the exact product/item.


----------



## FlyingSolo

XFX Radeon RX 480 card factory overclocked at 1288MHz, 8GB AMD model starts at $249
Quote:


> The XFX Radeon RX 480 card comes factory overclocked at 1288MHz which is just a few steps ahead of the reference clock speeds of 1266 MHz, TechFrag has learned. It also features a backplate for aesthetics and extra heat dissipation unlike the other custom AIB Polaris 10 cards.


Quote:


> The AMD Radeon RX 480 4GB model costs $200 and the price for the 8GB variant has been revealed to be $249 only, WCCFTech reported. Custom cards like the XFX, Sapphire and Powercolor models will probably cost $299 upwards as they feature custom coolers and factory overclocked frequencies that will give the user more headroom for overclocking their Polaris 10 graphics card.


http://en.yibada.com/articles/132968/20160618/xfx-radeon-rx-480-card-factory-overclocked-1288mhz-8gb-amd.htm


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoLDii3*
> 
> 
> 
> Fixed.


Nice they get ready for the October release. Any info about the 850mhz stock clocks? I want a 750mhz one for the power efficiency


----------



## FLCLimax

WOW, the summer flew by so fast i didn't realize we're in October already.


----------



## Lipos

https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1606744-1-1.html


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Nice they get ready for the October release. Any info about the 850mhz stock clocks? I want a 750mhz one for the power efficiency


Don't worry october launch with assured max frequency of 850mhz that throttle at 50C with 100% fan speed








Best AMD gpu ever


----------



## prznar1

to many jokes for my hearth ;D


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Don't worry october launch with assured max frequency of 850mhz that throttle at 50C with 100% fan speed
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Best AMD gpu ever


Nice. Nvidia has GPU boost 3.0 AMD has Eco Boost.

"We throttle because WE care." -www.amd.io


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Nice. Nvidia has GPU boost 3.0 AMD has Eco Boost.
> 
> "*We throttle because WE care*." -www.amd.io


Man you must put a patent on this one


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CataclysmZA*
> 
> I heard this was a popular place to post pictures of unreleased Radeon graphics cards.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4ot0cy/im_sure_youll_appreciate_this/


----------



## Buris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> I know you are in Florida but that claim sounds ludicrous, even for the god awful reference cooler. Now I am genuinely curious as to which god awful ITX case you chose for your build...
> I challenge you to find one post of mine that displays fanboyism for any company...


FX 5000 series was the worst cooler design ever, everyone knows that


----------



## bossie2000

1328 clock on the XFX card.Interesting!


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bossie2000*
> 
> 1328 clock on the XFX card.Interesting!


Wow, that's a 64% OC out the box(up from 850)! Can't wait to play with these baby's this Halloween.


----------



## Buris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> FX 5000 series was the worst cooler design ever, everyone knows that


Found an old video for you guys


----------



## ZealotKi11er

So it using Samsung GDDR5. How does that compare to Hynix?


----------



## prjindigo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bluej511*
> 
> Not that simple, dvi to hdmi is simpler.
> 
> It looks as though people have said the board has dvi pinouts ready to go so will be up to the manufacturer to implement it. Personally idc since you can always get an hdmi to dvi cable anyways.


Those pin-outs may simply be SOP contact pad pattern for test equipment that already exists tho. No guarantee the cards will actually DVI out and if they can't DL-DVI they're worthless at 1440p anyway


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> FX 5000 series was the worst cooler design ever, everyone knows that


I called the Hawaii reference cooler god awful, not the worst cooler ever.

You might be thinking of this asinine comment:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> Now you can Fanboy AMD to the moon and the stars while riding Lisa Su's dreams and hopes, that won't suddenly turn the 290X reference cooler into anything other than the worst reference cooler ever.


----------



## ryan92084

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prjindigo*
> 
> Those pin-outs may simply be SOP contact pad pattern for test equipment that already exists tho. No guarantee the cards will actually DVI out and if they can't DL-DVI they're worthless at 1440p anyway


They aren't, DVI-D support confirmed
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AMD_Robert*
> Hi. OP is right. Our reference design does not have DVI, however AIB solutions can feature DVI-D ports.


https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4ok8sd/to_everyone_worried_about_lack_of_dvi_the/


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> So it using Samsung GDDR5. How does that compare to Hynix?


it seems the cutdown gp104 has 8ghz samsung memory and it can achieve 9.3GHz (oc)

the thig is why they push a fast frequency for a midrange card if they have proper bandwidth compression


----------



## Zahix

We need info on dvi support because alot of people are running those overclockable monitors that have a single dvi input, myself included. Active adapters cost 100+$

edit: nevermind I didn't see the post before me.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> it seems the cutdown gp104 has 8ghz samsung memory and it can achieve 9.3GHz (oc)
> 
> the thig is why they push a fast frequency for a midrange card if they have proper bandwidth compression


Because fast GDDR5 is very cheap by this point.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Because fast GDDR5 is very cheap by this point.


probably is bandwidth limited r9 380x was 1.4GHz and it had 256SP Less


----------



## Mad Pistol

I don't like giving into hype, but I need two 8GB variants of these cards in my rig... yesterday.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> probably is bandwidth limited r9 380x was 1.4GHz and it had 256SP Less


RX 480 has 40% more bandwidth than R9 380X.

And 380x had a 384bit memory controller that was never enabled because there was no difference between 256bit and 384bit.
So combine those two facts, and really, there's no reason for it to be bandwidth limited.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> I don't like giving into hype, but I need two 8GB variants of these cards in my rig... yesterday.


october is near


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> october is near


I don't like fanning the flames, but yes... October is near.


----------



## 364901

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Are you a time traveler this must be an october image


I am.

In the future timeline, NVIDIA stock drops and moves to hold. AMD moves to buy. Lisa Su and Raja were seen drinking margaritas and smoking cigars while a video was being filmed of them observing RX 480s taped together to fit into two PCI-E slots rolling off the factory floor. Jen-Hsun is hiding from reporters after taking a selfie of himself and his family, and his PC in the distance clearly had four Radeon RX 480s in it. The red glow was unmistakable.

In my timeline, Hector Ruiz also announced his intention to return to AMD with Dirk Meyer for the RTG leadership position. Armies of AMD fans covered in ARM armor blocked their entrance to the AMD headquarters. They fought their way through, but entered an empty building - SURPRISE! AMD moved their headquarters into the Apple Hyperloop offices.

Meanwhile, JayZ TwoCents appeared on Youtube with a new video, showing a build log of an iron throne built from RX 470s and RX 460s.

AMD stock is $9001. Their logo has changed to AyyMD. Valve brought back Glide somehow and made it work with all AMD GPUs. All is good.

Edit: Half-Life 3 was only available on pre-order in Guatemala.


----------



## looniam

stay away from the brown acid.


----------



## SpeedyVT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> I don't like fanning the flames, but yes... October is near.


Hype train takes a new form during October skies... to the mooooooooooooooooooooooooooooon!


----------



## CasualCat

Did I miss the Vega info promised for yesterday?


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasualCat*
> 
> Did I miss the Vega info promised for yesterday?


Exactly


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CataclysmZA*
> 
> I am.
> 
> In the future timeline, NVIDIA stock drops and moves to hold. AMD moves to buy. Lisa Su and Raja were seen drinking margaritas and smoking cigars while a video was being filmed of them observing RX 480s taped together to fit into two PCI-E slots rolling off the factory floor. Jen-Hsun is hiding from reporters after taking a selfie of himself and his family, and his PC in the distance clearly had four Radeon RX 480s in it. The red glow was unmistakable.
> 
> In my timeline, Hector Ruiz also announced his intention to return to AMD with Dirk Meyer for the RTG leadership position. Armies of AMD fans covered in ARM armor blocked their entrance to the AMD headquarters. They fought their way through, but entered an empty building - SURPRISE! AMD moved their headquarters into the Apple Hyperloop offices.
> 
> Meanwhile, JayZ TwoCents appeared on Youtube with a new video, showing a build log of an iron throne built from RX 470s and RX 460s.
> 
> AMD stock is $9001. Their logo has changed to AyyMD. Valve brought back Glide somehow and made it work with all AMD GPUs. All is good.
> 
> Edit: Half-Life 3 was only available on pre-order in Guatemala.


+Rep for "AyyMD"!


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CataclysmZA*
> 
> I am.
> 
> In the future timeline, NVIDIA stock drops and moves to hold. AMD moves to buy. Lisa Su and Raja were seen drinking margaritas and smoking cigars while a video was being filmed of them observing RX 480s taped together to fit into two PCI-E slots rolling off the factory floor. Jen-Hsun is hiding from reporters after taking a selfie of himself and his family, and his PC in the distance clearly had four Radeon RX 480s in it. The red glow was unmistakable.
> 
> In my timeline, Hector Ruiz also announced his intention to return to AMD with Dirk Meyer for the RTG leadership position. Armies of AMD fans covered in ARM armor blocked their entrance to the AMD headquarters. They fought their way through, but entered an empty building - SURPRISE! AMD moved their headquarters into the Apple Hyperloop offices.
> 
> Meanwhile, JayZ TwoCents appeared on Youtube with a new video, showing a build log of an iron throne built from RX 470s and RX 460s.
> 
> AMD stock is $9001. Their logo has changed to AyyMD. Valve brought back Glide somehow and made it work with all AMD GPUs. All is good.
> 
> Edit: Half-Life 3 was only available on pre-order in Guatemala.


Ayy Lmao ...


----------



## Noufel

never seen nvidia fanboys trolled this much








on topic : is NDA lift in 29 june or octobre ............ ok i must stop


----------



## FLCLimax

We'll know by Halloween.


----------



## GHADthc

So how big of a percentage of overclock is 850mhz to 1500+?....


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GHADthc*
> 
> So how big of a percentage of overclock is 850mhz to 1500+?....


76 Octobers %.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CataclysmZA*
> 
> I am.
> 
> In the future timeline, NVIDIA stock drops and moves to hold. AMD moves to buy. Lisa Su and Raja were seen drinking margaritas and smoking cigars while a video was being filmed of them observing RX 480s taped together to fit into two PCI-E slots rolling off the factory floor. Jen-Hsun is hiding from reporters after taking a selfie of himself and his family, and his PC in the distance clearly had four Radeon RX 480s in it. The red glow was unmistakable.
> 
> In my timeline, Hector Ruiz also announced his intention to return to AMD with Dirk Meyer for the RTG leadership position. Armies of AMD fans covered in ARM armor blocked their entrance to the AMD headquarters. They fought their way through, but entered an empty building - SURPRISE! AMD moved their headquarters into the Apple Hyperloop offices.
> 
> Meanwhile, JayZ TwoCents appeared on Youtube with a new video, showing a build log of an iron throne built from RX 470s and RX 460s.
> 
> AMD stock is $9001. Their logo has changed to AyyMD. Valve brought back Glide somehow and made it work with all AMD GPUs. All is good.
> 
> Edit: Half-Life 3 was only available on pre-order in Guatemala.


I agree, AyymD >>> Novideo


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> Nice reference card with backplate. They should just cancel the 29th and start selling now ☺


yeah, and do paper launch like nvidia XD


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *motoray*
> 
> I have not upgraded since day1 launch of my 6970.... finally time. Hopefully someone makes a waterblock for one of the custom boards at launch.


I still have a 6970 laying around somewhere. It was an amazing card for the time. Eyefinity
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> yeah, and do paper launch like nvidia XD


OMG, could you imagine??

Right now with the way things are brand image wise AMD has to have absolutely everything to be perfect in order for it to be considered as even remotely successful. Need to have a compelling product that sips power, has amazing performance, overclocks to another planet all while keeping the price at something that hasn't existed for quite some time now. On top of that, they need to have more than enough product and to not have any technical issues on launch day. Anything else and it will be seen as a complete failure by many people... Even more so by a couple who are simply looking for amd to throw them a bone so they don't have to pay as much on their next NVidia upgrade.

Did I miss anything?


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nakano2k1*
> 
> I still have a 6970 laying around somewhere. It was an amazing card for the time. Eyefinity
> OMG, could you imagine??
> 
> Right now with the way things are brand image wise AMD has to have absolutely everything to be perfect in order for it to be considered as even remotely successful. Need to have a compelling product that sips power has amazing performance, overclocks to another planet all while keeping the price at something that hasn't existed for quite some time now. On top of that, they need to have more than enough product and to not have any technical issues on launch day. Anything else and it will be seen as a complete failure by many people... Even more so by a couple who are simply looking for amd to throw them a bone so they don't have to pay as much on their next NVidia upgrade.
> 
> Did I miss anything?


Dunno, dont care







im just waiting for fullcover waterblock i think. I wanted to use my gpu core block but well, i think ill go this time with fullcover for the first time XD

but on a sencond thought, you are right. IF AMD would release those cards to soon, it would end up with greater disaster then paper lauch for nvidia. All that crazyness would turn against them.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> They just might be a placeholder price. Have you seen them on new egg or amazon or on any other big compaines you buy your card from. Cause i have yet to see one.


Yes. Biggest shop around here and prices look in line with what this shop's prices are for other things as well, typically overpriced.

Any dildo can sell on Amazon it's like freakin' eBay for new products hell even used ones. Not worth a thing to me are Amazon prices.


----------



## Sleazybigfoot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> Where were all of these marvelous Reference 290Xs capable of hitting 1200MHz on Reference Coolers while running at 67c? Oh yes, in AMD's fanboys dreams, because I could never find one in reality, I'm amazed people think this is even possible, anyone with a reference 290xs knows better.


If I recall correctly my r9 290's ref hit 1100 and ran at around 65-70 celcius with 100% speed. (It could be 1150 because I have had them run at that speed for 1 day)


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> Yes. Biggest shop around here and prices look in line with what this shop's prices are for other things as well, typically overpriced.
> 
> Any dildo can sell on Amazon it's like freakin' eBay for new products hell even used ones. Not worth a thing to me are Amazon prices.


Well that's all good then. Hope some shops don't start overpricing.

I was taking amazon and not amazon sellers.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> RX 480 has 40% more bandwidth than R9 380X.
> 
> And 380x had a 384bit memory controller that was never enabled because there was no difference between 256bit and 384bit.
> So combine those two facts, and really, there's no reason for it to be bandwidth limited.


it really didnt performed better than a R9 280x with more bandwidth

and the smaller bus width can be to reduce costs


----------



## Buris

Okay OCN, I understand it's not the performance you personally were hoping for, it doesn't compete with the 1080.

But for the majority of PC gamers, the 29th is their october. Believe.


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> Okay OCN, I understand it's not the performance you personally were hoping for, it doesn't compete with the 1080.
> 
> But for the majority of PC gamers, the 29th is their october. Believe.


You meam its slower than the 1080!? Awww maaaaaaaaaan my fake hype just died.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> Okay OCN, I understand it's not the performance you personally were hoping for, it doesn't compete with the 1080.
> 
> But for the majority of PC gamers, the 29th is their october. Believe.


I just want to point out that one of my sig rigs was always called Red October. It's just a coincidence that it's getting a 480.


----------



## magnek

What do the numbers in parentheses refer to btw? The amount of hours spent on building each rig?


----------



## FlyingSolo

Are you guy's gonna buy the reference or AIB cards on the 29th. I sure hope i can pick up a AIB 6 + 8 pin card on the 29th. Also if i can get a watercooled version of RX 480 like a Fury X i will be all over it.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> What do the numbers in parentheses refer to btw? The amount of hours spent on building each rig?


Think of their full title as their Christian name and their number as their nickname (and their network name). When I'm showing them off they're called by their full name and then in my head when I'm plotting upgrades and hand me downs I think of them by number. I'm one of those weirdos that remembers someone's phone number more easily than their name.


----------



## Mack42

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> Are you guy's gonna buy the reference or AIB cards on the 29th. I sure hope i can pick up a AIB 6 + 8 pin card on the 29th. Also if i can get a watercooled version of RX 480 like a Fury X i will be all over it.


Going to by whatever card looks best, and is most quiet. I still think the reference blower is gonna be loud as heck on these cards.


----------



## infranoia

Bah, I can wait with my overclocked 290x-- I'm not missing anything in any current games or VR 'experiences' at this point.

IMO the best time to upgrade for anyone is when Vega comes out, and whatever NV responds with. Then you have the full current-gen product stack. It may be that Vega / Titan / 1080Ti isn't the second coming; at that point I can pick up two AIB 480's if that's the sweet spot with DX12.


----------



## blue1512

Uhm, OK. Wake me up when September ends


----------



## ryan92084

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> Are you guy's gonna buy the reference or AIB cards on the 29th. I sure hope i can pick up a AIB 6 + 8 pin card on the 29th. Also if i can get a watercooled version of RX 480 like a Fury X i will be all over it.


I'll wait to see if the extra power pins matter or not for OC. As a water cooler the fancy fans don't matter to me.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *infranoia*
> 
> Bah, I can wait with my overclocked 290x-- I'm not missing anything in any current games or VR 'experiences' at this point.
> 
> IMO the best time to upgrade for anyone is when Vega comes out, and whatever NV responds with. Then you have the full current-gen product stack. It may be that Vega / Titan / 1080Ti isn't the second coming; at that point I can pick up two AIB 480's if that's the sweet spot with DX12.


Yeah i was going to upgrade when the big cards arrive. But since i had the 970 3.5GB card. I was planing to put that card in my arcade rig and keep that for a few years. Decided on selling that 970 and replace that with the 480 8GB card until Vega comes out.


----------



## Mad Pistol

I dunno, but personally, I would love to see a pair of RX 480's with the stock cooler in my rig. The reference cooler looks pretty sleek.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *infranoia*
> 
> Bah, I can wait with my overclocked 290x-- I'm not missing anything in any current games or VR 'experiences' at this point.


Same for me. I really wanted to upgrade this summer, but the 1080 is too expensive and the 480 doesn't look to be enough of an upgrade to go to the hassle of pulling the loop apart (and water blocking the 480). Maybe if 1600 MHz is feasible.


----------



## SSJVegeta

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> Are you guy's gonna buy the reference or AIB cards on the 29th. I sure hope i can pick up a AIB 6 + 8 pin card on the 29th. Also if i can get a watercooled version of RX 480 like a Fury X i will be all over it.


2x reference for crossfire.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Guys please just stop with CFX talk. Yes 2 x $200 seems like a good deal but CFX is dead and broken.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Same for me. I really wanted to upgrade this summer, but the 1080 is too expensive and the 480 doesn't look to be enough of an upgrade to go to the hassle of pulling the loop apart (and water blocking the 480). Maybe if 1600 MHz is feasible.


1070? Used 980 Ti?


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Guys please just stop with CFX talk. Yes 2 x $200 seems like a good deal but CFX is dead and broken.


the fact that AMD stopped calling it cf doesnt mean they dropped support for two video cards in one system.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> the fact that AMD stopped calling it cf doesnt mean they dropped support for two video cards in one system.


I've had good experiences with CF but like anything else mileage varies. Some people are very outspoken about their disappointment with it, which is fine.


----------



## STEvil

RX 480 will do 2.5ghz just to spite 1080. Read about it on WCCF in an hour.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Guys please just stop with CFX talk. Yes 2 x $200 seems like a good deal but CFX is dead and broken.


2-way crossfire is still viable. My 2-way SLI 660s faired pretty well as well as 2-way crossfire. If my quadfire 7950s and 290Xs have taught me anything, it would be to stay as far away from tri or quadfire/SLI as possible. Developer support beyond 2 cards is atrocious. Maybe DX12 might make me reconsider at a latter date


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> 1070? Used 980 Ti?


I don't want to buy into Maxwell at this point, but the 1070 is a possibility. Was really hoping for a better option around $550 or so - what the 1080 could have been.


----------



## newguyeverytime

So I have a 4k monitor, I think I'm just going to go for the 4GB model though (8GB may be useful, but I won't buy it if it is over 229). I also have bad airflow in my case, I think I'm just going to opt for the reference. I got a buyer on craigslist for the 290 at 200$.

I think with the reference, 1350-1400 should be possible. That should be an amazing upgrade from my dud 980mhz 290.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I don't want to buy into Maxwell at this point, but the 1070 is a possibility. Was really hoping for a better option around $550 or so - what the 1080 could have been.


I don't think there would be much difference between Pascal and Maxwell, as both failed to support Async from hardware. I actually would have bought an 1080 for its flagship performance if it had supported Dx12 properly


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *newguyeverytime*
> 
> So I have a 4k monitor, I think I'm just going to go for the 4GB model though (8GB may be useful, but I won't buy it if it is over 229). I also have bad airflow in my case, I think I'm just going to opt for the reference. I got a buyer on craigslist for the 290 at 200$.
> 
> I think with the reference, 1350-1400 should be possible. That should be an amazing upgrade from my dud 980mhz 290.


I think 8GB is nice to have for 4K. Up to $249 is fine. Anything more and it's a no. Resale value will also be better so you do not lose much.


----------



## newguyeverytime

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I think 8GB is nice to have for 4K. Up to $249 is fine. Anything more and it's a no. Resale value will also be better so you do not lose much.


50 bucks for 4GB of old GDDR5 is just silly in my opinion.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *newguyeverytime*
> 
> 50 bucks for 4GB of old GDDR5 is just silly in my opinion.


@ 4K, you need 8GB memory. If you don't believe me, look at some of the Fury X benchmarks on super high resolutions, especially in Tomb Raider. The Fury X gets eaten alive because it only has 4GB Vram.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> @ 4K, you need 8GB memory. If you don't believe me, look at some of the Fury X benchmarks on super high resolutions, especially in Tomb Raider. The Fury X gets eaten alive because it only has 4GB Vram.


Which means 4gb is fine for single cards. 8gb should only be a priority for mGPU setups, because you are not going to drive 4k60 with a single card at max settings which necessitate the 8gb of VRAM.

Now, Vega/new-Titan will need 8gb of VRAM. They will be at if not VERY close to 4k60 with only minor detail sacrifices.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nakano2k1*
> 
> I still have a 6970 laying around somewhere. It was an amazing card for the time. Eyefinity
> OMG, could you imagine??
> 
> *Right now with the way things are brand image wise AMD has to have absolutely everything to be perfect in order for it to be considered as even remotely successful. Need to have a compelling product that sips power, has amazing performance, overclocks to another planet all while keeping the price at something that hasn't existed for quite some time now. On top of that, they need to have more than enough product and to not have any technical issues on launch day. Anything else and it will be seen as a complete failure by many people... Even more so by a couple who are simply looking for amd to throw them a bone so they don't have to pay as much on their next NVidia upgrade.*
> 
> Did I miss anything?


I think this is the exact reasoning for why they decided to lead with mainstream products this time around. Let's face it, if they go head to head vs Nvidia they have to not only win, but win big time to get any credit at all from a PR perspective (and even then certain tech sites would still find something to complain about and claim Nvidia won anyway). By not even competing at the upper end and focusing on providing incredible performance at the $200 level (an important sector that is typically thrown scraps after the flagship stuff rakes all the headlines) AMD is hitting Nvidia where they are soft while also dramatically emphasizing how ridiculous their pricing is. I think it is actually a pretty brilliant way to shift the narrative to one that they can actually win and gain in the all important PR battle. Even PCPer and Ryan "Greenhype" Shrout won't be able to deny how much impact a $200 Fury X-equivalent card (when OC'd) will have on the market...


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I don't want to buy into Maxwell at this point, but the 1070 is a possibility. Was really hoping for a better option around $550 or so - what the 1080 could have been.


I know you don't think there is any chance in hell this will happen but what if an OC'd $200 RX 480 were somehow able to match a stock 980Ti, or close to it? Would you then consider that enough of an upgrade to make the move? I mean, at $200 you are essentially looking at a minimal investment if you sell the 290...


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Which means 4gb is fine for single cards. 8gb should only be a priority for mGPU setups, because you are not going to drive 4k60 with a single card at max settings which necessitate the 8gb of VRAM.
> 
> Now, Vega/new-Titan will need 8gb of VRAM. They will be at if not VERY close to 4k60 with only minor detail sacrifices.


I think you might be missing the point. The reason the Fury X gets eaten alive in the new Tomb Raider (when compared to a 980 Ti) is because the lack of available Vram means the GPU has to use system RAM for graphic resources, which leads to stuttering and inconsistent framerates. There are a few other games that also exhibit this same behavior, although at this moment, the names of those titles escapes me.

If a Fury X had 8GB Vram, it would be able to run Tomb Raider maxed out no problem. However, because it has less, it's a stuttery mess.

If you have a 4K monitor and plan on getting/keeping an RX 480 for any length of time, you will need to get the 8GB model. Otherwise, you may be setting yourself up for disappointment down the road.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> I think you might be missing the point. The reason the Fury X gets eaten alive in the new Tomb Raider (when compared to a 980 Ti) is because the lack of available Vram means the GPU has to use system RAM for graphic resources, which leads to stuttering and inconsistent framerates. There are a few other games that also exhibit this same behavior, although at this moment, the names of those titles escapes me.
> 
> If a Fury X had 8GB Vram, it would be able to run Tomb Raider maxed out no problem. However, because it has less, it's a stuttery mess.
> 
> If you have a 4K monitor and plan on getting/keeping an RX 480 for any length of time, you will need to get the 8GB model. Otherwise, you may be setting yourself up for disappointment down the road.


TR is a terrible example to use for claiming 4GB isn't enough as it is a buggy as hell game period. Almost every other anecdote I have heard from Fury X owners is that the card's VRAM capacity is enough for 4k across the board. Whether this is because of HBM or better memory compression or drivers I dunno but these claims are fairly widespread at this point.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> TR is a terrible example to use for claiming 4GB isn't enough as it is a buggy as hell game period. Almost every other anecdote I have heard from Fury X owners is that the card's VRAM capacity is enough for 4k across the board. Whether this is because of HBM or better memory compression or drivers I dunno but these claims are fairly widespread at this point.


I guess we shall see. I have a monitor with 3440x1440 res, and after running out of memory on my current GTX 780 3GB card, I just cannot justify getting a card with ONLY 4GB Vram, especially since I'm planning on getting dual 480's.


----------



## PhantomTaco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> TR is a terrible example to use for claiming 4GB isn't enough as it is a buggy as hell game period. Almost every other anecdote I have heard from Fury X owners is that the card's VRAM capacity is enough for 4k across the board. Whether this is because of HBM or better memory compression or drivers I dunno but these claims are fairly widespread at this point.


I'm not so sure, I was recently reading through a pcgamer review on doom with benchmarks and came across these 4k benchmarks:





Now the difference between Nightmare + Ultra and Ultra alone supposedly has to do with Shadow Quality and Virtual Texturing Page Size. Correct me if I'm wrong but at least the latter has to do with the amount of onboard VRAM? You can see that without Nightmare mode enabled, the Fury X appears to hold a lead, but the moment it is enabled the Fury X drops down to 390 levels of performance, which would seem to indicate (at least to me) that it has something to do with it running out of VRAM. Then again this is only a single game and a single benchmark, so it by no means is conclusive.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I know you don't think there is any chance in hell this will happen but what if an OC'd $200 RX 480 were somehow able to match a stock 980Ti, or close to it? Would you then consider that enough of an upgrade to make the move? I mean, at $200 you are essentially looking at a minimal investment if you sell the 290...


Depends how good a chance there is. If most cards can hit those speeds then it is probably worth the upgrade (though it'll probably be the $250+ cards that do so). I just hate buying performance we already have - if I'm going to buy something new, I kind of want it to be better than what is available now. Unfortunately, it sounds like the 1080 is the only such product we are going to see this year. Getting tired of waiting.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> Are you guy's gonna buy the reference or AIB cards on the 29th. I sure hope i can pick up a AIB 6 + 8 pin card on the 29th. Also if i can get a watercooled version of RX 480 like a Fury X i will be all over it.


I will have wait to see what the aib customs clock to and what kind of performance the higher clocks will translate into.

If custom boards don't impress me then I will likely stick to a reference board design, if reference cooler is capable I would choose that, if it's borderline, I would go with probably a sapphire reference board with whatever they're going to call their cooler, as long as it's not the one that got leaked. Lol

If someone makes one look just like the fury x, i would certainly consider it regardless of p/p. Imo super nice design... makes me wonder, how hard might it be to just mod the ref shroud, add heatsinks and attach an aio


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PhantomTaco*
> 
> I'm not so sure, I was recently reading through a pcgamer review on doom with benchmarks and came across these 4k benchmarks:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now the difference between Nightmare + Ultra and Ultra alone supposedly has to do with Shadow Quality and Virtual Texturing Page Size. Correct me if I'm wrong but at least the latter has to do with the amount of onboard VRAM? You can see that without Nightmare mode enabled, the Fury X appears to hold a lead, but the moment it is enabled the Fury X drops down to 390 levels of performance, which would seem to indicate (at least to me) that it has something to do with it running out of VRAM. Then again this is only a single game and a single benchmark, so it by no means is conclusive.


Don't think it's the vram, otherwise you'd see the 980 tank too as it also only has 4GB.

The other telling sign, is that min FPS didn't facetank into the single digits, which would be almost conclusive proof that the card was hitting its vram wall.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> If custom boards don't impress me then I will likely stick to a reference board design, if reference cooler is capable I would choose that, if it's borderline, I would go with probably a sapphire reference board with whatever they're going to call their cooler, as long as it's not the one that got leaked. Lol
> 
> If someone makes one look just like the fury x, i would certainly consider it regardless of p/p. Imo super nice design... makes me wonder, how hard might it be to just mod the ref shroud, add heatsinks and attach


So you don't like the reference blower design, but you like the fury X design?

They are both very simlar and based on the exact same styling I'm confused.

Maybe you are talking about the actual cooling? Like the AIO vs blower etc?

Anyway it sounds like you are talking about the look of the cards not the functionality of the cooling system.


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I don't want to buy into Maxwell at this point, but the 1070 is a possibility. Was really hoping for a better option around $550 or so - what the 1080 could have been.


Let AMD play their hand, if the RX 480 does what the hype is making it sound like it does, Nvidia will have to respond with price cuts on their offering. Which is great, because a 480 for my son at 1080P, and a hopefully lower Pascal point for me!


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Depends how good a chance there is. If most cards can hit those speeds then it is probably worth the upgrade (though it'll probably be the $250+ cards that do so). I just hate buying performance we already have - if I'm going to buy something new, I kind of want it to be better than what is available now. Unfortunately, it sounds like the 1080 is the only such product we are going to see this year. Getting tired of waiting.


Fair point, but we are talking about $200 here. That is a major factor, even if it isn't breaking current performance records. The fact you can buy three of these cards for less than a single 1080 is astonishing, assuming of course the OC performance gets it anywhere near a 980Ti. That may be nothing more than pie in the sky hopefulness but even if it just soundly beats an OC 980 it would still be an incredible value card.


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Fair point, but we are talking about $200 here. That is a major factor, even if it isn't breaking current performance records. The fact you can buy three of these cards for less than a single 1080 is astonishing, assuming of course the OC performance gets it anywhere near a 980Ti. That may be nothing more than pie in the sky hopefulness but even if it just soundly beats an OC 980 it would still be an incredible value card.


Being realistic, we could see 8GB models for $200 after rebates, and Crossfire will probably be viable once again, especially in DX12 and Vulkan. So ~$400 in GPU power like that could possibly be all anyone would need for 1440P and 1080P.

Either way, I want some of that pie.


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PostalTwinkie*
> 
> Being realistic, we could see 8GB models for $200 after rebates, and Crossfire will probably be viable once again, especially in DX12 and Vulkan. So ~$400 in GPU power like that could possibly be all anyone would need for 1440P and 1080P.
> 
> Either way, I want some of that pie.


Yea.. I'm in a rock and a hard place now. It's pretty much a guarantee to beat my 290x (hopefully) while using less power, and creating less heat and noise. Doubling the vram helps, too. But can't decide if it's worth it as I'm at 4k.. Want to sell my 290x now before the 29th hits and selling prices get even worse but I'm not sure if the 480x is really going to pull enough ahead of an oc'ed 290x at my res to justify even $100.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoloCamo*
> 
> Yea.. I'm in a rock and a hard place now. It's pretty much a guarantee to beat my 290x (hopefully) while using less power, and creating less heat and noise. Doubling the vram helps, too. But can't decide if it's worth it as I'm at 4k.. Want to sell my 290x now before the 29th hits and selling prices get even worse but I'm not sure if the 480x is really going to pull enough ahead of an oc'ed 290x at my res to justify even $100.


An 8GB 480 will resell at most likely $50+ more than the 290X down the track, it will become severely obsolete with it's higher power draw and temperatures.

So really you'll probably only lose $50? As long as you sell before 290X prices plummet.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Fair point, but we are talking about $200 here.


True, but I suspect the real cards worth buying are going to be $250 and up. Which is still a good price, but not sure a 4GB card is a good choice, especially if you want to get 2 of them. Plus the "beast" cards that supposedly overclock so well are likely to be even more than that.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoloCamo*
> 
> Yea.. I'm in a rock and a hard place now. It's pretty much a guarantee to beat my 290x (hopefully) while using less power, and creating less heat and noise. Doubling the vram helps, too. But can't decide if it's worth it as I'm at 4k.. Want to sell my 290x now before the 29th hits and selling prices get even worse but I'm not sure if the 480x is really going to pull enough ahead of an oc'ed 290x at my res to justify even $100.


The 480 will be significantly faster than a 290X, especially if we see that 1500-1600 MHz OC rumor come true. I would absolutely make the move if I were you considering how little it's likely to cost you.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> True, but I suspect the real cards worth buying are going to be 250 and up. Which is still a good price, but not sure a 4GB card is a good choice, especially if you want to get 2 of them. Plus the "beast" cards that supposedly overclock so well are likely to be even more than that.


All likely true. Would be much better if there were no 4GB cards at all (only 8GB reference for $200). Still getting at least one for sure to replace my 270X. Will be a massive upgrade for ~$100 or so...


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> All likely true. Would be much better if there were no 4GB cards at all (only 8GB reference for $200). Still getting at least one for sure to replace my 270X. Will be a massive upgrade for ~$100 or so...


If they make a ITX size version (which I'm sure they will), I'll at least get one for my HTPC. Maybe that'll scratch the itch until Vega.


----------



## newguyeverytime

The only rumor we have is 1500 mhz. Anybody claiming anything higher needs to calm down a bit. The rumor is it comes within spitting distance of a STOCK 1070 at 1500 mhz. If that is true it's already pretty awesome, let's not bloat our expectations here.


----------



## provost

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Depends how good a chance there is. If most cards can hit those speeds then it is probably worth the upgrade (though it'll probably be the $250+ cards that do so). I just hate buying performance we already have - if I'm going to buy something new, I kind of want it to be better than what is available now. Unfortunately, it sounds like the 1080 is the only such product we are going to see this year. Getting tired of waiting.


People could buy that performance at what $350 -$400 today? or they can wait and buy it for $200, instead of $550 (think that's what 1070 is priced at, but not sure as I haven't even looked at it) and $700 to play the same games. If Nvidia does respond with price cuts, what would the price cuts look like? Any price cuts on the 1070s and 1080s would be inconsequential given the already anemic availability....


----------



## ZealotKi11er

ToTR will use 8GB at 4K. I think even 1440p it does. Easy fix though. Just lower texture quality. Going from High to Ultra does not impact IQ nearly as much as the performance loss that you get.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> ToTR will use 8GB at 4K. I think even 1440p it does. Easy fix though. Just lower texture quality. Going from High to Ultra does not impact IQ nearly as much as the performance loss that you get.


It doesn't actually need that much. RoTR just takes as much VRAM as you have (or just about), even it it's unnecessary.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> it really didnt performed better than a R9 280x with more bandwidth
> 
> and the smaller bus width can be to reduce costs


And memory isn't the reason:
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph8460/67234.png

If it was, they would have enabled the 384bit bus that was already there in silicon. The cost would be absolutely minimal, and it would be from the PCB side things.


----------



## degenn

Not sure why anyone would get 4GB instead of 8GB (regardless of whether or not it's needed) if the price difference is really only $30. If $30 means that much to you then it may be time to reexamine your priorities!


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

It just irks me honestly that AMD is even releasing a 4GB 480. The $200 card should have 8GB and then there would be no room for the haters to hate. Especially for a measly $50 more. Sigh, always half measures with this company, especially when they really need to be taking it to Nvidia as hard as they can. The $200 car will still be an immense value but they could have really slammed the door in this segment with a unified release at the value price. How much is 4GB of GDDR5 anyway?


----------



## hokk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> It just irks me honestly that AMD is even releasing a 4GB 480. The $200 card should have 8GB and then there would be no room for the haters to hate. Especially for a measly $50 more. Sigh, always half measures with this company, especially when they really need to be taking it to Nvidia as hard as they can. The $200 car will still be an immense value but they could have really slammed the door in this segment with a unified release at the value price. How much is 4GB of GDDR5 anyway?


$15


----------



## Fancykiller65

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> It just irks me honestly that AMD is even releasing a 4GB 480. The $200 card should have 8GB and then there would be no room for the haters to hate. Especially for a measly $50 more. Sigh, always half measures with this company, especially when they really need to be taking it to Nvidia as hard as they can. The $200 car will still be an immense value but they could have really slammed the door in this segment with a unified release at the value price. How much is 4GB of GDDR5 anyway?


Some other person on OCN mentioned the need for AMD to appeal to OEMs, that like to go cheap as possible to save money.


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> It just irks me honestly that AMD is even releasing a 4GB 480. The $200 card should have 8GB and then there would be no room for the haters to hate. Especially for a measly $50 more. Sigh, always half measures with this company, especially when they really need to be taking it to Nvidia as hard as they can. The $200 car will still be an immense value but they could have really slammed the door in this segment with a unified release at the value price. How much is 4GB of GDDR5 anyway?


A lot of games at 1080p can't even use 4gb as is.. which I honestly think is the target market for a card like this. A low power, fairly cheap card with plenty of horsepower for 99% of games the majority plays. CS:GO, Dota2, Overwatch, BF4, GTAV, MMO's such as WoW, etc.

Trust me, I'm all for buying as much vram on a card as makes sense and I would never bother with the 4gb model myself. However, it gives them two flexible price points to work with and there are (scarily) still plenty of people that don't even play on 1080p and are happy with it or just play older games that wouldn't even touch 4gb at 4k that would gladly save $20-$50 bucks.

AMD still has to make some profit after all for this low of pricing as is...


----------



## KarathKasun

There are 4gb and 8gb models because of the price range. That $30 could get you a decent mouse or headset, and at 1080p those things are more useful.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Oh 4GB is fine, I'm just disappointed they left the door open for the haters to clamor over.

"See, the $200 card only has 4GB lol and prolly clocks like crap, you'll has to get the $300 one to get only 290 performance, and AMD sux!"

You know...


----------



## bossie2000

I want more of that red coolaid! End of this year i'm back with AMD. Zen running at 6 gig,am4,ddr4 4000 32 gig, Vega...... yeh baby!!


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> So you don't like the reference blower design, but you like the fury X design?
> 
> They are both very simlar and based on the exact same styling I'm confused.
> 
> Maybe you are talking about the actual cooling? Like the AIO vs blower etc?
> 
> Anyway it sounds like you are talking about the look of the cards not the functionality of the cooling system.


I specifically said I would choose the reference cooler if it is capable. I think it looks great. I said I didn't like the sapphire card that had leaked with the aluminum looking shroud


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> It just irks me honestly that AMD is even releasing a 4GB 480. The $200 card should have 8GB and then there would be no room for the haters to hate.


You have to remember that $50 to people on really low budgets that are saving for such cards (ie schoolkids etc) see that as a significant amount of money. Haters will hate anything and everything regardless.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Sigh, always half measures with this company, especially when they really need to be taking it to Nvidia as hard as they can.


They've provided both options so everyone is happy yet it's 'always half measures with this company'

They can't please people like you I guess.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> I specifically said I would choose the reference cooler if it is capable. I think it looks great. I said I didn't like the sapphire card that had leaked with the aluminum looking shroud


Ah ok, I have bad word absorption.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> There are 4gb and 8gb models because of the price range. That $30 could get you a *crap* mouse or headset, and at 1080p those things are more useful.


FTFY. But yes it is valid for people on a tight budget.

People are just nitpicking faults.

NO DVI - Haters

Different models 4GB/8GB to cater for different users - Haters

Sorry to burst people's bubbles but there's not really anything significant to hate on these cards so far.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Does any criticism qualify as hate? I agree the 4GB complaints are stupid, but I really think that not including that DVI slot in the reference model was a mistake. Not a deal-breaker, but a mistake. Not nothing.

Besides, we have not much idea how this card performs, except 6.3 in the Steam VR test, as well as the AotS results, both of which are about the same as a stock R9 290 (tested it with my own 290, which got a 6.2). I'm optimistic, but I'm worried this is going to be a disappointment. I really want this card to be great, but I'm worried it isn't. Fingers crossed that my worries are in vain.


----------



## KarathKasun

No, a crap mouse is $8.99. An OK mouse is ~$30.

Sadly, my CRAP logitech mouse works better for me than most gaming mice.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *newguyeverytime*
> 
> 50 bucks for 4GB of old GDDR5 is just silly in my opinion.


Just as silly as the $130 premium for the R9 390X over the R9 290X for a factory overclock and an extra 4GB of higher speed ram... But I suppose there is a need for fillers in each price segment









AMD wants to be aggressive with pricing. I would consider anything over $229 for the 8GB 480 to be overpriced just for the sake of tiering cards to specific price segments.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> No, a crap mouse is $8.99. An OK mouse is ~$30.
> 
> Sadly, my CRAP logitech mouse works better for me than most gaming mice.


You're right from your perspective I respect that. Where I'm from you can't even get a logitech 300S for $30.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> Does any criticism qualify as hate?


Nah not really, Majin bought up haters so I ran with it.

They are really tiny negatives though honestly with this card, none are deal breakers.

We need to see performance and pricing and the rest of the so called issues will wash away if they are good value.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Been using my Corsair M60 since it came out and it's perfect.

And for the record, I'm one of the more bullish members regarding the 480 but I just hate that they gave people the opportunity to criticize the 4GB when they could easily have just gone with 8 and be done with it. Now, if the 8GB card really is $250 all we're gonna hear from the usual suspects is that the 480 is really a $250-$300 card and isn't any great value (we've already been hearing that, in fact). The $200 card will be ignored.

Case in point:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Just as silly as the $130 premium for the R9 390X over the R9 290X for a factory overclock and an extra 4GB of higher speed ram... But I suppose there is a need for fillers in each price segment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMD wants to be aggressive with pricing. I would consider anything over $229 for the 8GB 480 to be overpriced just for the sake of tiering cards to specific price segments.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Been using my Corsair M60 since it came out and it's perfect.
> 
> And for the record, I'm one of the more bullish members regarding the 480 but I just hate that they gave people the opportunity to criticize the 4GB when they could easily have just gone with 8 and be done with it. Now, if the 8GB card really is $250 all we're gonna hear from the usual suspects is that the 480 is really a $250-$300 card and isn't any great value (we've already been hearing that, in fact). The $200 card will be ignored.


I have noticed you have an optimistic approach to the 480 series don't get me wrong. It would suck if they kinda 'milked' the 8GB versions for more than the ram upgrade is worth that's for sure.

let's hope the rumoured $200/$229 pricing is correct.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Been using my Corsair M60 since it came out and it's perfect.


Ditched Razor finally and moved up to a Corsair M65








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> And for the record, I'm one of the more bullish members regarding the 480 but I just hate that they gave people the opportunity to criticize the 4GB when they could easily have just gone with 8 and be done with it. Now, if the 8GB card really is $250 all we're gonna hear from the usual suspects is that the 480 is really a $250-$300 card and isn't any great value (we've already been hearing that, in fact). The $200 card will be ignored.


8GB of GDDR5 was ~$88 3 years ago. Which means that 4GB of GDDR5 was $44. We have had a about a 50% reduction in GDDR5 ram prices since then that means to add 4 extra GB today would cost roughly $22. Pricing the 8GB variant to be $30 more would equate to a 26.7% gross margin(Q2 2015 gross margins were 24.63% for comparison). Which is in line with what one should expect with an aggressively priced product.

Call me what you will but I will continue to call a spade a spade.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> let's hope the rumoured $200/$229 pricing is correct.


I have been saying that AMD needs to deliver fury like performance at or below $250 for over a month and have been adamant about the logic behind pricing the 8GB variety of the card at $229 since the RX 480 was announced.

My price predictions for the series:
RX 480 8GB $229
RX 480 4GB $199
RX 470 8GB $169
RX 470 4GB $139
RX 460 4GB $109
RX 460 2GB $79

Please don't confuse speculation as rumor.

Also, it will be silly to have a 4GB and 8GB version of the RX 370 if the 8GB version demanded a $50 premium.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Ditched Razor finally and moved up to a Corsair M65
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8GB of GDDR5 was ~$88 3 years ago. Which means that 4GB of GDDR5 was $44. We have had a about a 50% reduction in GDDR5 ram prices since then that means to add 4 extra GB today would cost roughly $22. Pricing the 8GB variant to be $30 more would equate to a 26.7% gross margin(Q2 2015 gross margins were 24.63% for comparison). Which is in line with what one should expect with an aggressively priced product.
> 
> Call me what you will but I will continue to call a spade a spade.
> I have been saying that AMD needs to deliver fury like performance at or below $250 for over a month and have been adamant about the logic behind pricing the 8GB variety of the card at $229 since the RX 480 was announced.
> 
> My price predictions for the series:
> RX *3*80 8GB $229
> RX *3*80 4GB $199
> RX *3*70 8GB $169
> RX *3*70 4GB $139
> RX *3*60 4GB $109
> RX *3*60 2GB $79
> 
> Please don't confuse speculation as rumor.
> 
> Also, it will be silly to have a 4GB and 8GB version of the RX 370 if the 8GB version demanded a $50 premium.


Euh are you predicting naming change aswell







?


----------



## Kuivamaa

RX 480 appeals to the 1080p masses as well, and 4GB makes perfect sense there. I suppose there are still people on 1GB 6950s or 560Tis that are really looking for an upgrade, 4GB will sound plenty to them.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kuivamaa*
> 
> RX 480 appeals to the 1080p masses as well, and 4GB makes perfect sense there. I suppose there are still people on 1GB 6950s or 560Tis that are really looking for an upgrade, 4GB will sound plenty to them.


I think 4GB is going to become less viable, partly because I think it's possible that Nvidia will start encouraging developers to use uncompressed textures to obsolesce the 970 and 980Ti.


----------



## DaaQ

Also they are targeting 480 as 1440p and 470 as 1080p (competitive gaming) iirc. Also has 470 8GB been confirmed or is this just speculation?


----------



## Clocknut

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> I think 4GB is going to become less viable, partly because I think it's possible that Nvidia will start encouraging developers to use uncompressed textures to obsolesce the 970 and 980Ti.


that 3.5GB 970 gonna get hit real hard if it is what you said lol


----------



## revanchrist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DaaQ*
> 
> Also they are targeting 480 as 1440p and 470 as 1080p (competitive gaming) iirc. Also has 470 8GB been confirmed or is this just speculation?


8GB 470 is purely speculation. As far as i know, there'll be no reference 470 and the first 470 AIBs will hit shelves starting August. No lead time for 460 so far.


----------



## slavovid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *variant*
> 
> I think 4GB is going to become less viable, partly because I think it's possible that Nvidia will start encouraging developers to use uncompressed textures to obsolesce the 970 and 980Ti.


That is an interesting thing that Nvidia might do. But they will have to wait until they have a proper low cost card for the masses or if they do it too early risk everyone with 970 to get an RX ... and that will be rly bad for them.


----------



## SpeedyVT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Clocknut*
> 
> that 3.5GB 970 gonna get hit real hard if it is what you said lol


Planned obsoletion.


----------



## FlyingSolo

RX 480 leak look real?





















http://imgur.com/a/N0sx7


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> RX 480 leak look real?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/N0sx7


5250-5560 in FSE and 2700 in FSU thats 390X level or so ? or not ?


----------



## FlyingSolo

If only we could have seen what clocks his running at.


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> If only we could have seen what clocks his running at.


Leaker said it was stock
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> 5250-5560 in FSE and 2700 in FSU thats 390X level or so ? or not ?


Don't think he re-ran Ultra on the updated drivers. He rain extreme though. 5492 graphics score before, to 5856 after. He was about to start overclocking when the thread was closed


----------



## elect

Quote:


> Moses Lawrence TheDizz • 14 hours ago
> 
> The 1500mhz+ OC is real, especially the 6+8 pin cards. Even 1600mhz is obtainable, on air, in closed box systems. Some AIB's will ship with a 1500mhz bios option, while all others won't but will be able to get the 1500mhz manually.
> 
> EDIT: I've seen one Rx 480 running at 1570mhz at around 73c and 70% fan. In-game at 1500mhz, it trades blows with stock 1070. Oh one last tidbit, I also know of single pin cards reaching 1500mhz but that's not confirmed from my brother or his sources but by someone else.


http://disq.us/p/19aynj5


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> Leaker said it was stock
> Don't think he re-ran Ultra on the updated drivers. He rain extreme though. 5492 graphics score before, to 5856 after. He was about to start overclocking when the thread was closed


Thanks. If only we could have seen the overclock.


----------



## variant

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> 5250-5560 in FSE and 2700 in FSU thats 390X level or so ? or not ?


Ultra was on old drivers and Extreme was on the latest drivers. Stock speeds as well.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Looks like before the 29th. We just might see some overclock leaks.


----------



## Buris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Which means 4gb is fine for single cards. 8gb should only be a priority for mGPU setups, because you are not going to drive 4k60 with a single card at max settings which necessitate the 8gb of VRAM.
> 
> Now, Vega/new-Titan will need 8gb of VRAM. They will be at if not VERY close to 4k60 with only minor detail sacrifices.


Dude, I don't know what year you're in.... but 8GB is not going to be enough for vega 10 or 1080 Ti. They're both going to have 16GB most likely. Anything less for these ultra-high-end cards is just a slap in the face. Especially when some games are using 6-8GB of RAM in 1080p now


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> Especially when some games are using 6-8GB of RAM in 1080p now


Allocated != necessary.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> RX 480 leak look real?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/N0sx7


On par with 390X


----------



## ChevChelios

5856 in FSE (latest drivers) on stock is about 980 level, give or take

980 stock is also 12XX Mhz and it also OCs to 1500+

looks like 480 is pretty much a cheaper 980 with better DX12 and hopefully equal DX11 as well

as was expected from the start


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> 5856 in FSE (latest drivers) on stock is about 980 level, give or take
> 
> 980 stock is also 12XX Mhz and it also OCs to 1500+
> 
> looks like 480 is pretty much a cheaper 980 with better DX12 and hopefully equal DX11 as well
> 
> as was expected from the start


But the oc scalling on the GCN arch differe fron the one in maxwell and pascal


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> But the oc scalling on the GCN arch differe fron the one in maxwell and pascal


OC scaling is not magic









going to 1500Mhz is a 18% clock increase compared to 1266, and it will translate into 15%+ performance increase (depending also how memory OCs)

1600Mhz is ~25% OC and around 22-23% perf increase, maybe 20-21% if memory cant keep up (OCing the memory may also decrease the core max OC)

first case puts it @ stock Fury (non-X) level, second - really close to stock Fury X

an OC between 1500 & 1600 (probably the most realistic/consistent max OC on 6+8 cards) will put it between stock Fury & stock Fury X

980 is about the same only with a worse DX12


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> OC scaling is not magic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> going to 1500Mhz is a 18% clock increase compared to 1266, and it will translate into 15%+ performance increase (depending also how memory OCs)
> 
> 1600Mhz is ~25% OC and around 22-23% perf increase, maybe 20-21% if memory cant keep up (OCing the memory may also decrease the core max OC)
> 
> first case puts it @ stock Fury (non-X) level, second - really close to stock Fury X
> 
> an OC between 1500 & 1600 (probably the most realistic/consistent max OC on 6+8 cards) will put it between stock Fury & stock Fury X
> 
> 980 is about the same only with a worse DX12


Fury(X) has been inching closer and closer to the 980 Ti with newer drivers, even overtaking it in some games.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> an OC between 1500 & 1600 (probably the most realistic/consistent max OC on 6+8 cards) will put it between stock Fury & stock Fury X
> 
> 980 is about the same only with a worse DX12


The Fury is better than a 980 when reviewed on multiple titles that favour either archs, except at 1600x900 of course









900p - 390X>Fury>980

1080p - 390X>980>Fury

1440p - 980>390X>Fury

4K - 980/390>390X>Fury

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1070/24.html

And OC scaling is not magic you are correct, but it can vary for different architectures.


----------



## mohiuddin

If it can just give Gtx 1070 a little itch with moderate overclocking, that would be awesome.....


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Fury(X) has been inching closer and closer to the 980 Ti with newer drivers, even overtaking it in some games.


keep in mind that stock/1075Mhz 980Ti and 1450-1500+ Mhz 980Ti are practically 2 different cards









as for the latest comparisons - here is one

http://www.babeltechreviews.com/geforce-368-39-brings-performance-gtx-1080/3/

https://i.imgur.com/M5c4Sjp.jpg

Fury X only beats 980Ti in Hitman and Ashes, unless Im mistaken


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> The Fury is better than a 980


considering that 980 = 390X and Fury > 390X, thats hardly a surprise









Quote:


> If it can just give Gtx 1070 a little itch with moderate overclocking, that would be awesome.....


if it scores 5850 @ 1266Mhz then thats just not possible, since stock 1070 scores ~8200+ in FSE

in Hitman/Ashes with OC it could reach stock 1070, but not in anything else


----------



## slavovid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ToTheSun!*
> 
> Allocated != necessary.


Then again if the developers of the game have set their game to "need" more than 4 or even more than 8 GB at those higher settings. Even if other games are better optimized the game still "NEEDS" to use them even if they could be Unnecessary









I know for my 1080p needs i won't need more than 4GB but i feel i have to get the 8GB due to game optimization and requirement being different across the board.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> keep in mind that stock/1075Mhz 980Ti and 1450-1500+ Mhz 980Ti are practically 2 different cards


Also keep in mind reviews of the 980ti are not running 1075mhz lol, they are running at 1200mhz+

They are not practically different cards, they gain about 15% in game fps when clocked to 1450mhz.

You like exaggerating how good nvidia cards are, yet you do the exact opposite when it comes to AMD? Am I surprised by now you do this? of course not lol








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> considering that 980 = 390X and Fury > 390X, thats hardly a surprise


You didn't say that though, you said it would land between a fury and fury X, then you went on to say it was the same as gtx 980.

Again trying to exaggerate Nvidia performance


----------



## prznar1

Nice. Very nice. Gtx 980 for 200 bucks. Me like.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Found a MSI RX480. Looks like a fail.

https://ca.msi.com/Motherboard/RX480_Neo2F.html#hero-overview


----------



## TokenBC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> You didn't say that though, you said it would land between a fury and fury X, then you went on to say it was the same as gtx 980.
> 
> Again trying to exaggerate Nvidia performance


He meant 980 when OC'd. What he's saying is that stock 980 is around stock 480 and OC'd 980 is probably around OC'd 480 (both are between Fury and FuryX). So overall the same.

Which seems a reasonable thing to say given what we know about the 480, though I personally have no idea how well the 980 OCs.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> OC scaling is not magic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> going to 1500Mhz is a 18% clock increase compared to 1266, and it will translate into 15%+ performance increase (depending also how memory OCs)
> 
> 1600Mhz is ~25% OC and around 22-23% perf increase, maybe 20-21% if memory cant keep up (OCing the memory may also decrease the core max OC)
> 
> first case puts it @ stock Fury (non-X) level, second - really close to stock Fury X
> 
> an OC between 1500 & 1600 (probably the most realistic/consistent max OC on 6+8 cards) will put it between stock Fury & stock Fury X
> 
> 980 is about the same only with a worse DX12


Nope








If you could put 1500+ oc on the 390X you'll be far away than a 980 at 1500


----------



## ChevChelios

Yeah thats what i meant

980 can reach 1500 and 1550+ under water IIRC


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Yeah thats what i meant
> 
> 980 can reach 1500 and 1550+ under water IIRC


Is a 980 at 1500 on par with a 390X on 1500 ?


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Yeah thats what i meant
> 
> 980 can reach 1500 and 1550+ under water IIRC


Which lands it around stock 980 Ti numbers from what I can find @ 1080p. So... yeah. RX 480 with a what appears to be a decent, but relatively achievable OC, will land at stock ~1200mhz boost 980 Ti performance. Which also happens to be the same ballpark as the GTX 1070 @ stock.

~$200 card biting the heels of a $400 card.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Is a 980 at 1500 on par with a 390X on 1500 ?


no way. the 390X is faster at 1500, but it's very hard to find a 1500mhz 390X


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Found a MSI RX480. Looks like a fail.
> 
> https://ca.msi.com/Motherboard/RX480_Neo2F.html#hero-overview


Lol that's funny


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> no way. the 390X is faster at 1500, but it's very hard to find a 1500mhz 390X


Say that to the guy that said oc scaling is nothing








On topic : imagine if the 480 = 390X at stock is true what could a 1500 oc achieve with GCN arch improuvement, i only hope that the hype train doesn't explode like in the " overclockers dream"


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Say that to the guy that said oc scaling is nothing


Hah, this is true for NV cards because its quite like just overclocking the shaders (think back to Fermi and earlier) when you OC a Pascal or Maxwell. The whole chip has 4-5 clock domains, and the "core clock" is only the ROPs and shaders.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Hah, this is true for NV cards because its quite like just overclocking the shaders (think back to Fermi and earlier) when you OC a Pascal or Maxwell. The whole chip has 4-5 clock domains, and the "core clock" is only the ROPs and shaders.


I was reffering to GCN


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> I was reffering to GCN


Yeah, GCN gets more from overclocking because the clocks of EVERYTHING go up. Probably also why the cards that are out now OC less.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> *Which lands it around stock 980 Ti numbers from what I can find @ 1080p*. So... yeah. RX 480 with a what appears to be a decent, but relatively achievable OC, will land at stock ~1200mhz boost 980 Ti performance. *Which also happens to be the same ballpark as the GTX 1070 @ stock.*
> 
> ~$200 card biting the heels of a $400 card.


Id like to see where you found that, stock 980Ti should still be ahead of OCed 980 (especially at 1440p)

and no, stock 1070 is ahead of stock 980Ti .. in pretty much everything - https://i.imgur.com/M5c4Sjp.jpg

OC 1070 trades blows with well OCed 980Ti .. if you call that "biting at the heels" ...







.. but its a solid 20-25% diff once both cards are OCed (also the 8GB 480 is not $200 .. the kinds of 480 cards that can do that OC while maintaning thermals and good noise will cost ~$280-300 and in reality from vendors likely $300+ and in Europe 300-350+ EUR)

we will see soon enough, but its clear to me that 1070 will outfperform 480 about the same way 980Ti outperforms 980 (except maybe in Ashes/Hitman







) .. whether its worth the price difference is another matter, for 1080p definitely not, but for 1440p 165Hz I personally decided even 1070 is not enough, and ordered 1080 (still waiting for it, damn the shortages







)


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Id like to see where you found that, stock 980Ti should still be ahead of OCed 980 (especially at 1440p)
> 
> and no, stock 1070 is ahead of stock 980Ti .. in pretty much everything - https://i.imgur.com/M5c4Sjp.jpg
> 
> OC 1070 trades blows with well OCed 980Ti .. if you call that "biting at the heels" ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .. but its a solid 20-25% diff once both cards are OCed (also the 8GB 480 is not $200 .. the kinds of 480 cards that can do that OC while maintaning thermals and good noise will cost ~$280-300 and in reality from vendors likely $300+ and in Europe 300-350+ EUR)
> 
> we will see soon enough, but its clear to me that 1070 will outfperform 480 about the same way 980Ti outperforms 980 (except maybe in Ashes/Hitman
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) .. whether its worth the price difference is another matter, for 1080p definitely not, but for 1440p 165Hz I personally decided even 1070 is not enough, and ordered 1080 (still waiting for it, damn the shortages
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


Using TPU benchmark results @ 1080. OC'd 980 (1500-1550mhz in game boosting) is about equal to a bone stock 980 Ti.

If GCN gaining more per clock than Maxwell is still true, the OC'd RX 480 @ 1500 will be even faster than the 980 @ 1500.


----------



## ChevChelios

ok fair enough

but keep in mind reference 980 is *1216*Mhz (not 1266)

GCN/Polaris superior







scaling







may or may not bridge that gap


----------



## Farih

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Yeah, GCN gets more from overclocking because the clocks of EVERYTHING go up. Probably also why the cards that are out now OC less.


They dont OC less, people just compare it wrong against an Nvidia card.

Example.
They look at GPUZ and see the base clock, they then start to overclock and look at max clock reported on the monitor tab.
Reference 980ti has 1075mhz base clock but boost to around 1279mhz max.. then you set 107% power target and it boost to around 1325mhz Thats all stock and nothing overclocked yet.
My own 980ti has a base clock of 1279mhz and boost to 1392mhz, with power to 107% it boost to 1402mhz, all stock.
No Nvidia cards dont have massive OC headroom, they have boost 2.0 (and now 3.0) that people cant seem to notice








They claim 25% OC's with ease but i am not seeing them if i consider boost clocks.

AMD cards arent magical overclocking cards either but its not as bad as people make it out to be.
A 290x is 1000mhz base clock, you can OC them to around 1200mhz, thats 20%
a stock 7970 is 1000mhz, you can OC them over 1200mhz, thats 20%
Lower end AMD cards overclock even more, i hve a 270x at 1370mhz









The only overclocking turds are Fury(x)

This wierd "Nvidia is OC king" and "AMD cards cant overclock" really needs to stop.
Both overclock basicly just as crap/good.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Yeah, GCN gets more from overclocking because the clocks of EVERYTHING go up. Probably also why the cards that are out now OC less.


What does this even mean......the clocks of everything go up?


----------



## hokk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> What does this even mean......the clocks of everything go up?


When you overclock your card it also overclocks your monitor,hdd,ram.cpu,psu,mouse ect

didn't you know?


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kylzer*
> 
> When you overclock you're card it also overclocks your monitor,hdd,ram.cpu,psu,mouse ect
> 
> didn't you know?


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> What does this even mean......the clocks of everything go up?


All GPU's are gaining higher clock speeds thanks to the magic of FinFET.
It's how Paxwell got to where it is


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> What does this even mean......the clocks of everything go up?


If you ever edit a Maxwell BIOS it has static frequencies for the cache, command dispatch engines, shader xbar and so forth. These do not change when you overclock in software. They are usually around the stock "boost" speed or base speed in my experience. Some are even lower than that. Ther "core" clock speed you change in MSI AB or any other software is only the speed of the ROPs and shader cores.

AFAIK, GNC has a single clock domain for those components of the chip. Everything runs at the "core" speed. Overclocking gets a better percentage return on GCN because of it.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> If you ever edit a Maxwell BIOS it has static frequencies for the cache, command dispatch engines, shader xbar and so forth. These do not change when you overclock in software. They are usually around the stock "boost" speed or base speed in my experience. Some are even lower than that.
> 
> AFAIK, GNC has a single clock domain for those components of the chip. Everything runs at the "core" speed. Overclocking gets a better percentage return on GCN because of it.


Interesting, thanks for answering my question.

Not that I don't believe you but it would be nice if someone would confirm this or you could with a link maybe?


----------



## prjindigo

Just to throw this out here but with a waterblock Po10 has been up to 2.0 already, like a month ago. No, I don't have a link.
I trust the guy... he might have meant 1.93 or something but he certainly wasn't rounding up 1.5.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> @ 4K, you need 8GB memory. If you don't believe me, look at some of the Fury X benchmarks on super high resolutions, especially in Tomb Raider. The Fury X gets eaten alive because it only has 4GB Vram.


GTX 980's run perfectly well with their 4GB in 4K. Been doing it for a whole year now and no games have issues with vram limitation so far.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> GTX 980's run perfectly well with their 4GB in 4K. Been doing it for a whole year now and no games have issues with vram limitation so far.


Depends on the game obviously.

Intel graphics could probably run Half Life 1 at 4K


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prjindigo*
> 
> Just to throw this out here but with a waterblock Po10 has been up to 2.0 already, like a month ago. No, I don't have a link.
> I trust the guy... he might have meant 1.93 or something but he certainly wasn't rounding up 1.5.


i herd 1 mnth ago pascal oc to 3ghz on airs


----------



## prznar1

Any info on how the boost will work, is it just on off boost or does it scale with load like in nvidia cards?


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> Interesting, thanks for answering my question.
> 
> Not that I don't believe you but it would be nice if someone would confirm this or you could with a link maybe?


http://www.overclock.net/t/1590562/attempted-maxwell-ii-bios-editor-guide/0_20

Ive done editing on a 750 Ti. Overclocking XBAR, L2C, and SYS gives tangible gains when combined with overclocking the "core". There is no way to change them from software.

For an example, a 20% "core" OC may only get 10% more performance. If you do the BIOS clocks as well, its a 15% gain.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Euh are you predicting naming change aswell
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ?


Thanks for catching that. Just one of the reasons why I shouldn't post at 2 AM


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Depends on the game obviously.
> 
> Intel graphics could probably run Half Life 1 at 4K


Well, I guess that's true. lol
I did mean modern games though. The Division, Overwatch,etc.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> And memory isn't the reason:
> http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph8460/67234.png
> 
> If it was, they would have enabled the 384bit bus that was already there in silicon. The cost would be absolutely minimal, and it would be from the PCB side things.


exactly that bench is showing the better pixel fill rate and yet it doesnt achieve the same level as a 384 bit without compression

and yet it would be more expensive than a 960 was so having higher costs for slighly more performance wouldnt be a good thing if they wanted to compete


----------



## Klocek001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> i herd 1 mnth ago pascal oc to 3ghz on airs


850mhz to 2ghz, it's official polaris can oc up to 230%


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

I still wonder about buying a $100+ waterblock for a $199 card.....


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> I still wonder about buying a $100+ waterblock for a $199 card.....


To potentially have a $199 card get the performance of a $600 one?


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> To potentially have a $199 card get the performance of a $600 one?


man stop that plz i just bought a 1080


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> man stop that plz i just bought a 1080


No way Polaris could ever compete with a 1080, you're fine..







The fact that you bought a 1080 means you don't mind paying to get the best, but if someone bought one thinking they are amazing value (which many reviews tried to sell) then i think they'll be a bit annoyed.









If by some miracle a heavily overclocked P10 gets within spitting distance of a 1080, then it will be one of the best GPU's to ever be released, i don't see that happening at all. Heck, if it get's near a 980Ti then it would be something very special considering it's price..


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> I still wonder about buying a $100+ waterblock for a $199 card.....


I bet that wc makers wont price fullcover so high, but it wont be cheap anyway.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> No way Polaris could ever compete with a 1080, you're fine..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that you bought a 1080 means you don't mind paying to get the best, but if someone bought one thinking they are amazing value (which many reviews tried to sell) then i think they'll be a bit annoyed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If by some miracle a heavily overclocked P10 gets within spitting distance of a 1080, then it will be one of the best GPU's to ever be released, i don't see that happening at all. Heck, if it get's near a 980Ti then it would be something very special considering it's price..


The best gpu in the market is the 1080 no one can argue against that but not in the price segment indeed, what makes me happy about a gpu like 480 if the rumors are true it will ( i hope ) bring prices back to what they were and stop that 600$+ for a midrange gpu


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> exactly that bench is showing the better pixel fill rate and yet it doesnt achieve the same level as a 384 bit without compression
> 
> and yet it would be more expensive than a 960 was so having higher costs for slighly more performance wouldnt be a good thing if they wanted to compete


And your point is?
The R9 285 is 176GB/s beating a 320GB/s R9 290 thanks to compression.

RX 480 will be 256GB/s, you can easily expect over Hawaii effective bandwidth.
It will not be the bottleneck on the RX 480, unless they made a REGRESSION in compression.
Oh and btw... GTX 1070 has 256GB/s bandwidth too


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> I still wonder about buying a $100+ waterblock for a $199 card.....


EK had a waterblock for the GTX 750 (non-Ti), and it cost ~$70 IIRC.

That's a $70 waterblock for a $120 card.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> The best gpu in the market is the 1080 no one can argue against that but not in the price segment indeed, what makes me happy about a gpu like 480 if the rumors are true it will ( i hope ) bring prices back to what they were and stop that 600$+ for a midrange gpu


Exactly.









No matter what it looks like it will be in the performance class (or thereabout) of the 980/390X, while only costing $199.. The more PC gamers we have with high performance cards means better looking games, and will mean more consumers jumping to PC, which means more support. The mainstream price segment is the most important one for all of us, enthusiasts and mainstream users alike. It's also the segment that has been fed absolute garbage for the last few years. Exciting to see a card like the 480 dropping, and hopefully the 1060 delivers too.


----------



## CasualCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> EK had a waterblock for the GTX 750 (non-Ti), and it cost ~$70 IIRC.
> 
> That's a $70 waterblock for a $120 card.










What? Wonder how many they sold, and I thought the 750/Ti were particularly cool cards too? I couldn't get blocks for my non-reference 660Tis and they could have actually used blocks...


----------



## NuclearPeace

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> EK had a waterblock for the GTX 750 (non-Ti), and it cost ~$70 IIRC.
> 
> That's a $70 waterblock for a $120 card.


What made it even dumber is that a lot of 750 Ti cards (if not all) lacked proper voltage control.


----------



## kingzero

It might look stupid to put a waterblock on a 750ti. But people who already have an existing custom watercooling loop will obviously not use a gpu on air.


----------



## CasualCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingzero*
> 
> It might look stupid to put a waterblock on a 750ti. But people who already have an existing custom watercooling loop will obviously not use a gpu on air.


Why would anyone with an existing loop even get a card like the 750Ti though?


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingzero*
> 
> It might look stupid to put a waterblock on a 750ti. But people who already have an existing custom watercooling loop will obviously not use a gpu on air.


Can't really think of anyone with an existing waterloop that buys a 750ti though. It's an oxymoron really considering you could practically run that card fanless fine.

Edit:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasualCat*
> 
> Why would anyone with an existing loop even get a card like the 750Ti though?


Exactly.


----------



## KarathKasun

HTPC on water.

Would rather spend $50 on a passive heat sink.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kingzero*
> 
> It might look stupid to put a waterblock on a 750ti. But people who already have an existing custom watercooling loop will obviously not use a gpu on air.


It looks like a glorified version of a universal block: https://www.ekwb.com/news/ek-introduces-nvidia-geforce-gtx-750-ti-water-block/

Quite frankly I doubt anybody with a proper loop would have a 750 Ti anyway. If they did have a 750 (Ti) and put a block on it, it would be purely for kicks/aesthetics and a lot of "because I can" than practical concerns. About the only legit reason for having a 750 (Ti) along with a loop would be if you were using it as a PhysX card.


----------



## CasualCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> HTPC on water.


At least for me, I'm less open to water on a HTPC because the PC is among other components just as if not more expensive than the PC. Rare though it is, if my loop fails on my main PC I lose the PC. If a loop fails on the HTPC, I run the risk of not only the PC but the receiver and all the other components near it. Just my personal preference though.


----------



## spurdomantbh

cool stuff http://videocardz.com/61225/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-2


----------



## Noufel

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> cool stuff http://videocardz.com/61225/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-2





Other pictures from october ?


----------



## FLCLimax

Instead of raving over the launch of the RX 480 we should be making a bigger deal out of the discovery of time travel.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Lol, Ojo! What a joke...


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Other pictures from october ?


can you not quote posts with pictures or can you spoiler them in your post?


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> can you not quote posts with pictures or can you spoiler them in your post?


done thnx for the advise


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*


Looks like an October release for sure.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Looks like an October release for sure.


Here's hoping they stabilised the 800MHz clocks.


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *criminal*
> 
> Looks like an October release for sure.


Maybe soft launch, looks like there will be supply problems.


----------



## FLCLimax

Hopefully out by Thanksgiving.


----------



## AmericanLoco

Guys, these cards aren't shipping yet! Those pictures are only of the very limited few review samples!


----------



## CasualCat

I've never seen an individual trolled/mocked so hard on OCN.


----------



## FallenFaux

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasualCat*
> 
> I've never seen an individual trolled/mocked so hard on OCN.


I've been here a long time and I don't think I have either... Not to say it isn't deserved.


----------



## FLCLimax

All aboard the humiliation conga line!


----------



## tamas970

OcUK supplies seem rdy for launch.


----------



## Pesmerrga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tamas970*
> 
> OcUK supplies seem rdy for launch.


He also said:


----------



## FLCLimax

So the best you can hope for is the "spitting distance" of Fury X like the rumors suggest? *suicides*


----------



## EightDee8D

meh, 390x performance for 230$ on 110w is already impressive. anything else is just a bonus. but fake hype went too much out of hand.


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> So the best you can hope for is the "spitting distance" of Fury X like the rumors suggest? *suicides*


Heavy overclock probably = Nano in benchmarks. But will probably better than it in actual games, as new tech generally is vs older tech.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasualCat*
> 
> I've never seen an individual trolled/mocked so hard on OCN.


It's one thing to make a claim then back down once it seems ridiculous. It's another to just keep on repeating that when it's proven to be beyond stupid.
He had many outs, but he took none of them, so he is getting the appropriate amount of mocking for refusing to back down


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pesmerrga*
> 
> He also said:


that's it, wrap it up, folks. 800MHz confirmed.


----------



## Pesmerrga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> that's it, wrap it up, folks. 800MHz confirmed.


I hope he's wrong..


----------



## FLCLimax

with a core speed like that it will be perfect for notebooks.


----------



## The-Beast

Man, this is going to be a tough decision. Do I get 2 to satiate my desire and utilize my current rig. Or do I opt for a single card for my planned ITX Zen.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

So 800 MHz stock clock, but you can OC it to 1900 on air and beat match a 1080.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> So 800 MHz stock clock, but you can OC it to 1900 on air and beat match a 1080.


Yes but you have to initiate the onboard LN2 distributor.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pesmerrga*
> 
> He also said:


I wonder if he's referring to stock 980 Ti or Titan X. Because we all know you can easily squeeze another 30% out of those cards, and given that a 980 Ti @ 1500/8000 = stock 1080, yeah not surprising it "can't rival" the GM200 cards.

But if it can come "near stock 980 Ti" performance, that would still be very good.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Yes but you have to initiate the onboard LN2 distributor.


Just keep this in mind:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> ^Dewars and liquid nitrogen sold separately


And yes, that IS why the card is so cheap, because you have to pay extra for dem LN2 overclocks to get 1080 performance.


----------



## lolerk52

Polaris includes Deep Clocking. The chip over time figures out the electrons quantum computation of the field modulator, and so the more you use it, the higher the clocks get. After 1 year, you should expect 1 Terahertz clock speed at 69W power usage.


----------



## AuraNova

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasualCat*
> 
> I've never seen an individual trolled/mocked so hard on OCN.


I'd have to agree. But I'd be darned if it wasn't entertaining. This whole thing is pretty much meme status here at OCN now.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Polaris includes Deep Clocking. The chip over time figures out the electrons quantum computation of the field modulator, and so the more you use it, the higher the clocks get. After 1 year, you should expect 1 Terahertz clock speed at 69W power usage.


Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooring

You know you can instantly unlock FURYOUS MODE by soldering an extra 8 pin connector to it right? But please don't LN2 with only 6+8, the card will persistently get the cold bug until you solder a second 8 pin to it.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Polaris includes Deep Clocking. The chip over time figures out the electrons quantum computation of the field modulator, and so the more you use it, the higher the clocks get. After 1 year, you should expect 1 Terahertz clock speed at 69W power usage.


For 420 teraflopz ? awesome man









crysis @ 1337 fps confirmed


----------



## GorillaSceptre

The AIB's are going to be the ones to watch for OC'ing, the reference only has a 6 pin. Hopefully we don't have to wait to long to see how close it can get to a 980Ti, if anywhere near it.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tamas970*
> 
> OcUK supplies seem rdy for launch.


Hmm seems only reference cards may be available on June 29...
Quote:


> No custom stuff, ref. only which in my view is fine as AMD nailed the cooler this time, it looks great, is quiet and performs.


Quote:


> We are Kings of VGA, that won't change when it comes to AMD!
> 
> So the moment I get a sniff of custom cards they shall be online. I know board partners have them but whether they want to launch is another thing, I have even held the Sapphire ones when I was in Asia couple weeks ago.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Hmm seems only reference cards may be available on June 29...


Polaris 10 delayed to Oktober confirmed.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Polaris 10 delayed to Oktober confirmed.


LOL i see the man coming back here " i wasn't reffering to refference 480 it was all about AIB OCTOBER LAUNCH "


----------



## ryan92084

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> The AIB's are going to be the ones to watch for OC'ing, the reference only has a 6 pin. Hopefully we don't have to wait to long to see how close it can get to a 980Ti, if anywhere near it.


That's what people thought about the 1080, I'll wait and see.


----------



## CasualCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> No custom stuff, ref. only which in my view is fine as AMD nailed the cooler this time, it looks great, is quiet and performs.


I've always wondered how they're (any mfg) changing blowers on GPUs. They're not exactly new, so how do they make them quiet, good, etc. Basically isn't it a mature tech? What are they doing differently from generation to generation? You'd think after the 5800 no one would make a loud blower anymore.


----------



## Kuivamaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I wonder if he's referring to stock 980 Ti or Titan X. Because we all know you can easily squeeze another 30% out of those cards, and given that a 980 Ti @ 1500/8000 = stock 1080, yeah not surprising it "can't rival" the GM200 cards.
> 
> But if it can come "near stock 980 Ti" performance, that would still be very good.


Seems pretty conclusive that he believes a 480 will not offer near 980Ti performance. And I trust he knows his stuff, at least when it comes to benchmarks. In games the story might be different but outside DX12 ,it seems polaris 10 will be a step under GM200. But let's see,only a few days left.


----------



## hjacob

I personally think if this card is between Nano or 980 performance...then is a hit for that Price... the reviews of " Nano CF or 980 Sli" vs the 1080 gtx... its very close...they trade blows if the game is CF/Sli enabled... so at the end of the day everybody wants more for less...in the 100-300 dollar segment of card buyers...

this review should give people some perspective ...no need to be a 980ti or Titan X level to beat a 1070 or 1080... above or equal to Nano and 980 is enough if its put in CF/Sli...in the AMD presentation thats what Radja put in a Slide... no need 700 dollar card for a great experience...they are pushing CF for it...since in DX 12 this card is going to do good...

the review... http://www.pcgamer.com/gtx-1080-review/ Nano CF or 980 Sli" vs the 1080 gtx, if you read the CF and Sli comparison part...then Rx 480 CF makes a lot of sense since nano CF and stock 980 sli hangs with the 1080 gtx in CF/Sli enabled games..only that you are going to do it with 450$ rather then 600 to 700...

so you this card should be a great buy... powerusers can wait for Vega or do CF rx 480 until then...


----------



## elina08

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I wonder if he's referring to stock 980 Ti or Titan X. Because we all know you can easily squeeze another 30% out of those cards, and given that a 980 Ti @ 1500/8000 = stock 1080, yeah not surprising it "can't rival" the GM200 cards.
> 
> But if it can come "near stock 980 Ti" performance, that would still be very good.
> Just keep this in mind:
> And yes, that IS why the card is so cheap, because you have to pay extra for dem LN2 overclocks to get 1080 performance.


From the guy who have a lot of RX480 in his warehouse
"Only a pair of RX480 for 980Ti performance"
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=29654755&postcount=4832


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasualCat*
> 
> I've always wondered how they're (any mfg) changing blowers on GPUs. They're not exactly new, so how do they make them quiet, good, etc. Basically isn't it a mature tech? What are they doing differently from generation to generation? You'd think after the 5800 no one would make a loud blower anymore.


Wikipedia so small grain of salt, but there's A LOT more than meets the eye, and I was surprised.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifugal_fan#Fan_blades


----------



## iRUSH

So stock performance at the 1266 mhz is roughly 970/390 performance up too 1500 mhz to get near 980 performance?

After sifting through the blah talk and over hype speculation, is what I said above seem like a realistic expectation?


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> So stock performance at the 1266 mhz is roughly 970/390 performance up too 1500 mhz to get near 980 performance?
> 
> After sifting through the blah talk and over hype speculation, is what I said above seem like a realistic expectation?


5856 puts it at around the 390X, which is the current FS Extreme score we have for it


----------



## criminal

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> So stock performance at the 1266 mhz is roughly 970/390 performance up too 1500 mhz to get near 980 performance?
> 
> After sifting through the blah talk and over hype speculation, is what I said above seem like a realistic expectation?


I think Fury (non x) is possibly what we will see.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> So stock performance at the 1266 mhz is roughly 970/390 performance up too 1500 mhz to get near 980 performance?
> 
> After sifting through the blah talk and over hype speculation, is what I said above seem like a realistic expectation?


We will see in october








But seriously a fury non X perf like said


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kuivamaa*
> 
> Seems pretty conclusive that he believes a 480 will not offer near 980Ti performance. And I trust he knows his stuff, at least when it comes to benchmarks. In games the story might be different but outside DX12 ,it seems polaris 10 will be a step under GM200. But let's see,only a few days left.


And this is a problem for a $200 card? I mean, what are you even talking about? It just needs to be faster than a 980 and its a win...


----------



## FLCLimax

Goal posts will be moved.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I wonder if he's referring to stock


Seems he is:



Now I am curiously what qualifies as "highly overclocked" for Gibbo


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Seems he is:
> 
> 
> 
> Now I am curiously what qualifies as "highly overclocked" for Gibbo


I mean he is going crazy over GTX980 Ti OC which is less then 25%.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Seems he is:
> 
> 
> 
> Now I am curiously what qualifies as "highly overclocked" for Gibbo


18% cant be highly clocked unless stock clocks are lower than 1266, or it can OC higher than 1.500MHz


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Someone summon Gibbo to this thread. We need answers.


----------



## Eorzean

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> cool stuff http://videocardz.com/61225/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-2





I think that last pic turned me on a little bit.


----------



## tkenietz

I think he is speculating like anyone else based off if his phrasing. "If RX-480 performs around 980"


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ryan92084*
> 
> That's what people thought about the 1080, I'll wait and see.


Always best to wait and see... but then what's the point of having rumors and unconfirmed threads?









This is also a completely different situation to the 1080, the RX480 only has one 6 pin.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> 18% cant be highly clocked unless stock clocks are lower than 1266


Well, he also insists that AMD mid-range parts can't compete with the GTX 980 Ti while in the same sentence expressing an opinion that Nvidia mid-range parts are surpassing the stock GTX 980 Ti









In addition, he claims Maxwell to be "incredible" even though it wasn't much of a generational jump in performance. The biggest thing Maxwell had going for it were the spectacular performance per watt improvements within the same node.

Kepler 780 Ti to Maxwell 980 Ti --> ~35-40% performance jump

Fermi 580 to Kepler 780 Ti --> ~80-90% performance jump


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Well, he also insists that AMD mid-range parts can't compete with the GTX 980 Ti while in the same sentence expressing an opinion that Nvidia mid-range parts are surpassing the stock GTX 980 Ti


because 480 and 1070 are different segments of mid-range ?

480X (aka "big Polaris 10") would be competing with 980Ti & 1070, but 480X would still be mid-range


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> uh, because 480 and 1070 are different segments of mid-range ?
> 
> 480X (aka "big Polaris 10") would be competing with 980Ti & 1070, but 490 would still be mid-range


Hard to say I expect 490 to beat 1.5 years old high end card by a lot.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> because 480 and 1070 are different segments of mid-range ?


By what measure? Price?


----------



## ChevChelios

i was talking about the 40/44CU Polaris 10, it would ~15-20% faster then 480 and would be competing directly and trading blows with 980Ti & 1070

Vega would obviously beat them, but Vega is not mid-range


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> By what measure? Price?


price and performance, obviously


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> i was talking about the 40/44CU Polaris 10


Where exactly does this chip exist? Yes, GP104 die is roughly 40% larger than Polaris 10. Then again Polaris 10 is on 14nm and if we equalize to 16nm then the deltas between the two die sizes should be closer to 30%. Historically, AMD dies tend to be smaller in size in relation to Nvidia's comparable dies.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> price and performance


Right now the only thing we do know is price and only for the 4GB model... How exactly are you comparing performance?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> I think he is speculating like anyone else based off if his phrasing. "If RX-480 performs around 980"


Yes he is speculating:
Quote:


> *Only powered one up to check for noise, being to busy to test.*
> 
> *My comment was basically common sense*, the entire internet and review sites are saying 390-390X and circa 980 levels, so I just had to step in when some people were trying to create false rumours by saying 980Ti / Titan X levels as people obviously do not realise how quick a 980Ti is.
> 
> Its a good 30-40% quicker than even an overclocked 980!!!! So in general performance I cannot see it, be good to be proven wrong as they'd sell like crazy but at same time I think people's expectations should not be so crazy or deluded. Of course in an AMD DX12 where AMD is typically stronger than NVIDIA then I suspect it could be possible in a game such as Ashes of Singularity DX12 where cards like 390X do very well, its fair to say an RX 480 will do superb.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Where exactly does this chip exist? Yes, GP104 die is roughly 40% larger than Polaris 10


it doesnt, I was saying that such a hypothetical mid-range Polaris chip would "challenge" an OCed 980Ti just like 1070 does

Quote:


> ght now the only thing we do know is price and only for the 4GB model... How exactly are you comparing performance?


most of the leaks indicate stock 390X/980 performance at 1266Mhz


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> it doesnt, I was saying that such a hypothetical mid-range Polaris chip would "challenge" an OCed 980Ti just like 1070 does
> most of the leaks indicate stock 390X/980 performance at 1266Mhz


And those leaks are good for jack squat. As I said with the 1080, we won't know the real truth about the 480's performance until people here on OCN start getting them in and testing. We saw how the reviewers raved about the 1080 but once people here started doing their own testing we found out really quick what the truth was regarding OCing...


----------



## slavovid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Wikipedia so small grain of salt, but there's A LOT more than meets the eye, and I was surprised.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifugal_fan#Fan_blades


So if i am reading this right given 1 fan only a centrifugal setup is the best possible option and potentialy the reference card can be both reliable quiet and yet effiecient ?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Well, he also insists that AMD mid-range parts can't compete with the GTX 980 Ti while in the same sentence expressing an opinion that Nvidia mid-range parts are surpassing the stock GTX 980 Ti
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In addition, he claims Maxwell to be "incredible" even though it wasn't much of a generational jump in performance. The biggest thing Maxwell had going for it were the spectacular performance per watt improvements within the same node.
> 
> Kepler 780 Ti to Maxwell 980 Ti --> ~35-40% performance jump
> 
> Fermi 580 to Kepler 780 Ti --> ~80-90% performance jump


Well Porbably it wont compete Overclock vs Overclock but the R9 285/380 didnt match a GTX 780 (Ti) at release but with lack of driver support for kepler Maxwell can follow similar steps (except when OCed because still there is a big gap), and then DIrectx 12+Async compute would put a Rx 480 ahead a 980Ti

but a 200usd card matching an old 600usd flagships sounds better than just power efficiency


----------



## slavovid

delete / double post


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> In addition, he claims Maxwell to be "incredible" even though it wasn't much of a generational jump in performance. The biggest thing Maxwell had going for it were the spectacular performance per watt improvements within the same node.
> 
> Kepler 780 Ti to Maxwell 980 Ti --> ~35-40% performance jump
> 
> Fermi 580 to Kepler 780 Ti --> ~80-90% performance jump


980 Ti isn't a full chip, you should be comparing 780 Ti to Titan X (that's a minor difference to be sure, but still).

Fermi 580 to Kepler 780 Ti was an architecture change and a die shrink, so not really comparable in a Kepler to Maxwell comparison.

Maxwell was pretty impressive for the same node.


----------



## tamas970

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pesmerrga*
> 
> He also said:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Indeed! I never fed false hopes that a 300$ card kicks 600+ units out of business. I am currently looking for 2 cards: a great HTPC-card, which is the 460, hopefully on a low profile PCB by late summer and a replacement of my workhorse gtx970. The "workhorse" card is not urgent, I might take a 1080 or a Vega at the end of this year/beginning of the next.


----------



## spurdomantbh

Confirmed price:
http://videocardz.com/61262/amd-radeon-rx-480-8gb-to-cost-229-usd
Quote:


> Suggested (retail) price is 229 USD (for 8GB model, 199 for 4GB). The price in Polish zloty will be determined closer to the launch, to avoid differences in exchange rates.


----------



## Ganf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> So if i am reading this right given 1 fan only a centrifugal setup is the best possible option and potentialy the reference card can be both reliable quiet and yet effiecient ?


Centrifugal fans, AKA Squirrel Cages.

They've been used for ages, and they move a hell of a lot of air in the 110/220 HVAC industry.



Also comes in the Big Daddy version.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> 980 Ti isn't a full chip, you should be comparing 780 Ti to Titan X (that's a minor difference to be sure, but still).
> 
> Fermi 580 to Kepler 780 Ti was an architecture change and a die shrink, so not really comparable in a Kepler to Maxwell comparison.
> 
> Maxwell was pretty impressive for the same node.


that a 1.5 years older GPU architecture matches a new architecture (with lack of proper DX12 support ) makes it impressive?


----------



## ChevChelios

Maxwell is very very impressive unless you're an avid AotS gamer


----------



## EightDee8D

or any Dx12 game* for that matter.

*unless it's a broken ported GW dx12 game


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Maxwell is very very impressive


Doesn't take much to impress fanboys and cultist.


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Maxwell is very very impressive unless you're an avid AotS gamer


Shrunk Pascal really isn't that impressive.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Robenger*
> 
> Shrunk Pascal really isn't that impressive.


...wait


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Doesn't take much to impress fanboys and cultist.


that was low even against him


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> ...wait


What?


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Robenger*
> 
> What?


Nothing, carry on.


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Nothing, carry on.


COME AT ME BRO


----------



## slavovid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ganf*
> 
> Centrifugal fans, AKA Squirrel Cages.
> 
> They've been used for ages, and they move a hell of a lot of air in the 110/220 HVAC industry.
> 
> 
> 
> Also comes in the Big Daddy version.


Customfit the 2 badboys from the second picture on top of an RX 480 ....


----------



## Kuivamaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> And this is a problem for a $200 card? I mean, what are you even talking about? It just needs to be faster than a 980 and its a win...


For a lower node, yes it is. 980 performance at probably half the consumption and almost half the die size, is certainly nothing impressive, underwhelming actually. Low cost and all is nice but AMD has been offering products of similar price/perf (R9 290) last year. Granted,the consumption was much higher but that was 2013 arch and a 2011 node. I expect more from 14nm FF ,especially when full polaris should rival 1070 in die size. But I feel there is a hidden ace somewhere. We will see.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Maxwell is very very impressive unless you're an avid AotS gamer


Well then you get impressd by 3 years old architecture no?

390x>980

So impressive it needed a new revision to get proper pre emption


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ganf*
> 
> Centrifugal fans, AKA Squirrel Cages.
> 
> They've been used for ages, and they move a hell of a lot of air in the 110/220 HVAC industry.
> 
> 
> 
> Also comes in the Big Daddy version.


I'm a hvacr journeyman. Mostly residential now, but when I first stated I worked for a company that only did commercial so I spent some time with the big boys

Everybody go check your ac filter! Lol


----------



## Ganf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> I'm a hvacr journeyman. Mostly residential now, but when I first stated I worked for a company that only did commercial so I spent some time with the big boys
> 
> Everybody go check your ac filter! Lol


Used to do a lot of work in pretty much anything but HVAC. Removed a lot of HVAC equipment though and I'd always save the squirrel cages instead of junking them. I had a fine collection going before I realized I had used all of them that I could possibly use and Craigslisted the rest. They went like hotcakes.

They're just too useful for handyman projects.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ganf*
> 
> Centrifugal fans, AKA Squirrel Cages.
> 
> They've been used for ages, and they move a hell of a lot of air in the 110/220 HVAC industry.
> 
> 
> 
> Also comes in the Big Daddy version.


He was responding to my post which had this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifugal_fan

So I guess those squirrel cage fans would probably fall into the "straight radial" category then. Both nVidia and AMD blowers used in the last 2 generations seem to have some sort of curvature on the fan blades, so would fall into either the forward or backward curved category depending on which way the fan spun.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Maxwell is very very impressive unless you're an avid AotS gamer


Maxwell IS impressive; it's Pascal that isn't.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> that a 1.5 years older GPU architecture matches a new architecture (with lack of proper DX12 support ) makes it impressive?


Not sure what you mean. Maxwell was an impressive improvement over Kepler considering it is the same node.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> *unless it's a broken ported GW dx12 game


So all of them then?


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Not sure what you mean. Maxwell was an impressive improvement over Kepler considering it is the same node.
> So all of them then?


R9 290X with 1/2 price and a 50 MHZ OC Core and imrpoved BIOS power profile matched the new architecture

and GOW was the only (known) "DX12" patched game which used DX11/10/9 assets and pipeline


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> R9 290X with 1/2 price and a 50 MHZ OC Core and imrpoved BIOS power profile matched the new architecture
> 
> why getting similar performance at release/with somethign you already could ge(cheaper)t makes it impressive


No one is comparing it to AMD except you - the issue was the improvement of Maxwell over Kepler.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> No one is comparing it to AMD except you - the issue was the improvement of Maxwell over Kepler.


not only AMD
http://www.overclock.net/t/1515264/gtx-980-vs-gtx-780-ti-benchmarked-1440p-performance

7% on TPU


----------



## Ganf

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> He was responding to my post which had this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifugal_fan
> 
> So I guess those squirrel cage fans would probably fall into the "straight radial" category then. Both nVidia and AMD blowers used in the last 2 generations seem to have some sort of curvature on the fan blades, so would fall into either the forward or backward curved category depending on which way the fan spun.
> Maxwell IS impressive; it's Pascal that isn't.


Forward or backward curved. I've never seen a radial, likely not very efficient or else used on some very strange, demonically powerful equipment I've never dealt with.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> not only AMD
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1515264/gtx-980-vs-gtx-780-ti-benchmarked-1440p-performance
> 
> 7% on TPU


Again, the conversation was Maxwell 980 Ti versus Kepler 780 Ti. Why are you bringing up AMD and the 980? It's irrelevant to the discussion. Are you just trying to make trouble?


----------



## EightDee8D

Who cares, even freakin 980 Ti versus Kepler 780 Ti is irrelevant to the discussion.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> not only AMD
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1515264/gtx-980-vs-gtx-780-ti-benchmarked-1440p-performance
> 
> 7% on TPU


Please. This doesn't make a sense.

Maxwell is impressive. Matching the previous flagship at the same nod almost at the half tdp.

GP104 is not that impressive..


----------



## hokk

WHY ARE YOU BRINGING UP AMD IN AN AMD THREAD

YOU JUST TRYING TO START TROUBLE AREN'T YOU?


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> R9 290X with 1/2 price and a 50 MHZ OC Core and imrpoved BIOS power profile matched the new architecture
> 
> and GOW was the only (known) "DX12" patched game which used DX11/10/9 assets and pipeline


If you feed enough power to run Rx 480 at "hot and loud" mode of 290x, the card can reach 1600+ MHz and you will have a 40% increase over 290x


----------



## FlyingSolo

Looks like no AIB cards in UK on the 29th. Damn was hoping to pick up a AIB card on the 29th. Don't know if i would pick up a reference card tho.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by humbug View Post
> I'm thinking the reference one is probably limited, stock at 1266Mhz is should still do 1400 - 1500Mhz but AIB's with better coolers and more power would clock better.
> 
> 2304 Shaders @ 1266Mhz rumoured Fury-Nano performance makes perfect sense to me, its 'at least' 390X performance but GCN 4 has a lot of enhancements over GCN 1.2
> 
> Performance wise i think the reference ones should clock to 980TI - Titan-X.
> 
> AIB ones, beyond that.


Gibbo
Quote:


> Do not create false hype, its going to be a great card but no matter what you do to it I am afraid it won't be rivalling a 980Ti or Titan X.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by humbug View Post
> So a bit of a damp squib then?
> 
> Thanks for the info, at least now we know
> 
> Crap! never mind, back to looking at used 980TI's.


Gibbo
Quote:


> Nope but I think anyone expecting it to rival 1070 / 980Ti / Titan X is smoking the crack pipe as we put it, of course a pair of them then its a different story.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> 
> 
> Looks like no AIB cards in UK on the 29th. Damn was hoping to pick up a AIB card on the 29th. Don't know if i would pick up a reference card tho.


Wonder how long the wait will be.


----------



## nagle3092

Well thats good news for me, hopefully plenty of reference cards to be had. Apparently 229 is the confirmed price for the 8gb version.


----------



## ChevChelios

Gibbo with that reality check









nice to see the stock cooler is good


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ganf*
> 
> Used to do a lot of work in pretty much anything but HVAC. Removed a lot of HVAC equipment though and I'd always save the squirrel cages instead of junking them. I had a fine collection going before I realized I had used all of them that I could possibly use and Craigslisted the rest. They went like hotcakes.
> 
> They're just too useful for handyman projects.


We always save them as well. For older units it's hard to find a replacement. If they ran without a filter for long enough the blades will gather build up and get off balance and warp/break. The ones in better shape I attach a power cord to and use as a fan to blow into attics when it's hot so I can work up there.
Idk what you did with the rest of the stuff but I hope you recycled! $$ now you have to show a license or proof of ownership


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Wonder how long the wait will be.


Probably in the middle of July somewhere or even later. But if they both overclock the same. Then i'll probably just get the reference 480 8GB card. Since it will be cheaper plus there will be water blocks for it and probably a AIO bracket comes out for it.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Gibbo with that reality check
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nice to see the stock cooler is good


Go back a few pages somebody posted something about how he hadn't checked the performance yet


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> Go back a few pages somebody posted something about how he hadn't checked the performance yet


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Wonder how long the wait will be.


October..









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Gibbo with that reality check
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nice to see the stock cooler is good


Reality check to what?

The rumors were custom 480's reaching 1500 +, based on theoretical's they should be around the 980Ti at those speeds. A reference board with a single 6 pin doesn't exactly let P10 reach it's full potential.

Obviously best to take all rumors with a large grain of salt.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Looks like there will be plenty of cards to go around


----------



## ryan92084

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> October..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reality check to what?
> 
> The rumors were custom 480's reaching 1500 +, based on theoretical's it should being around the 980Ti at those speeds. A reference board with a single 6 pin doesn't exactly let P10 reach it's full potential.
> 
> Obviously best to take all rumors with a large grain of salt.


*EDIT: the benchmark from HH was using a 980ti Asus Strix and not a stock 980ti please see* http://www.overclock.net/t/1603252/wccf-amd-rx-480-can-hit-1-5ghz-new-overclocking-tool-with-voltage-control-coming/1040#post_25276567

Taking the highest rumored scores for firestrike ultra and pulling a benchmark from a site with similar results for the included compared cards 980ti is a bit of a stretch. 1070 is more reasonable.




So assuming a 1266 stock MHz for the leak, this leak is legit( a stretch) and perfect OC scaling (a bigger stretch) you'd need 1513mhz (19.5% oc) to match a stock 1070 and 1678(32.5% oc ) to match the stock 980ti.

Obviously a ton a salt for inaccurate leaks, perfect oc scaling, and different systems required. Also a whole lot of meh for synthetic benchmarks. Additional note I didn't hunt 1070 reviews to find the best/worst but just found the first with comparable scores for the other cards.


----------



## revanchrist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ryan92084*
> 
> Taking the highest rumored scores for firestrike ultra and pulling a benchmark from a site with similar results for the included compared cards 980ti is a bit of a stretch. 1070 is more reasonable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So assuming a 1266 stock MHz for the leak, this leak is legit( a stretch) and perfect OC scaling (a bigger stretch) you'd need 1513mhz (19.5% oc) to match a stock 1070 and 1678(32.5% oc ) to match the stock 980ti.
> 
> Obviously a ton a salt for inaccurate leaks, perfect oc scaling, and different systems required. Also a whole lot of meh for synthetic benchmarks. Additional note I didn't hunt 1070 reviews to find the best/worst but just found the first with comparable scores for the other cards.


I don't know where's Khalid 34XX FSU score comes from, but supposedly there's only two guys that scored 34XX on FSU, that is the Korean DGLee with a 1400Mhz overclocked card and the Chiphell's Getwinder guy with a 1380Mhz overclocked card. Others with a reference card at stock managed only 27XX-28XX FSU score.


----------



## ryan92084

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revanchrist*
> 
> I don't know where's Khalid 34XX FSU score comes from, but supposedly there's only two guys that scored 34XX on FSU, that is the Korean DGLee with a 1400Mhz overclocked card and the Chiphell's Getwinder guy with a 1380Mhz overclocked card. Others with a reference card at stock managed only 27XX-28XX FSU score.


Yeah truckloads of salt required for even that best case scenario


----------



## GoLDii3

I've got my 40 inch 4K TV ready. Im ordering a HDMI 2.0 cable tomorrow. Come at me AMD.

Pulling the trigger on a Sapphire 1500 MHz+ card on D1.


----------



## infinite0180

Whats all this october talk? I thought is was coming out at the end of the month....?


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *infinite0180*
> 
> Whats all this october talk? I thought is was coming out at the end of the month....?


Welcome to the party


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revanchrist*
> 
> I don't know where's Khalid 34XX FSU score comes from, but supposedly there's only two guys that scored 34XX on FSU, that is the Korean DGLee with a 1400Mhz overclocked card and the Chiphell's Getwinder guy with a 1380Mhz overclocked card. Others with a reference card at stock managed only 27XX-28XX FSU score.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revanchrist*
> 
> I don't know where's Khalid 34XX FSU score comes from, but supposedly there's only two guys that scored 34XX on FSU, that is the Korean DGLee with a 1400Mhz overclocked card and the Chiphell's Getwinder guy with a 1380Mhz overclocked card. Others with a reference card at stock managed only 27XX-28XX FSU score.


The only 27XX score I know of was from the Chinese leak last night and that was run on an older driver, along with Extreme (54XX). He later ran Extreme on a newer driver (which we got a score for: 5856) but we never got an Ultra run on it


----------



## Utroz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *infinite0180*
> 
> Whats all this october talk? I thought is was coming out at the end of the month....?


A certain poster was very sure that we would not see the 480 till October, and even after proved wrong still kept saying it. So now everyone is trolling the heck out of him.. Pretty funny. Also he was saying something about 800-850Mhz clock speeds or some crap like that.. LOL.


----------



## infinite0180

^^Oh haha i kind of figured... Thanks


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *infinite0180*
> 
> Whats all this october talk? I thought is was coming out at the end of the month....?


In short: A fellow came into a 1080 thread before the launch, where some people had mentioned AMD. He said that he had information from a reliable informant stating that AMD was having difficulty stabilising clocks above 800MHz on Pol and that it was being pushed back to October. After this was proved to be false he defended himself with a defunct website wherein he had made some correct predictions.


----------



## Greenland

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *infinite0180*
> 
> Whats all this october talk? I thought is was coming out at the end of the month....?


Haven't you heard? Polaris cannot pass validation @850Mhz and is delayed 'till October /s


----------



## revanchrist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> The only 27XX score I know of was from the Chinese leak last night and that was run on an older driver, along with Extreme (54XX). He later ran Extreme on a newer driver (which we got a score for: 5856) but we never got an Ultra run on it


That was the only one you know. There's two other guys on Chiphell who have the card and they score within the same range. And they all faced the same problem that is the card is unable to overclock at all. So far all this reference card leakers said they can't OC the card at all and they score within the same range of FSE 53XX-54XX and FSU 27XX-28XX under drivers 16.200.0. Rumor is that there is a newer driver released yesterday and the score leaked yesterday ie 58XX FSE is under this new drivers. That Getwinder has a MSI non ref testing card while DGLee has an unknown card. Not sure how someone else can overclock a reference card now when everyone else can't OC it. Could be bios locked purposely by AMD or whatever.


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Greenland*
> 
> Haven't you heard? Polaris cannot pass validation @850Mhz and is delayed 'till October /s


Even the Xbox One is delayed for this reason. The Polaris chip is flawed at either one of the masking layers, it don't work above 911 MHz.


----------



## Mad Pistol

If anyone would like to know why I want the RX 480 to be successful...


https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=gtx+1070

I actually wanted a 1070, but because Nvidia isn't able to supply enough cards AND because people keep grabbing them up and reselling them for profit, I've simply lost interest. I want something better, but I think Nvidia has royally screwed up this time.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> The only 27XX score I know of was from the Chinese leak last night and that was run on an older driver, along with Extreme (54XX). He later ran Extreme on a newer driver (which we got a score for: 5856) but we never got an Ultra run on it


Well, these are still some good numbers to use for some more speculation.

5856 @ 1266MHz

6992 @ 1520MHz

7239 @ 1646MHz

Fury X in Fire Strike Extreme = 7197

Fury in Fire Strike Extreme = 6772


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> If anyone would like to know why I want the RX 480 to be successful...
> 
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=gtx+1070
> 
> I actually wanted a 1070, but because Nvidia isn't able to supply enough cards AND because people keep grabbing them up and reselling them for profit, I've simply lost interest. I want something better, but I think Nvidia has royally screwed up this time.


I think you are shedding your green skin.







We'll forge you new underpants - the red variety. More durable in the long term and cozy. +1 ease of mind is a bonus, too.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtcn77*
> 
> I think you are shedding your green skin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We'll forge you new underpants - the red variety. More durable in the long term and cozy. +1 ease of mind is a bonus, too.


Believe it or not, I actually had a dual HD 7870 setup before I got a GTX 780 (eventually 2), and before the 7870's, I had a 5870. I don't play favorites.

However, I don't understand how anyone can ignore Nvidia's shenanigans this generation. If I had to guess, Nvidia knows that their time is coming to an end, so they are marketing the crap out of themselves with this generation... which is nothing more than a shrunken, slightly tweaked version of Maxwell.

AMD has their hands in so many different markets at this point that all they need is ONE hit, and they will explode... and the RX 480 may be that hit. Lord knows they are playing their cards perfectly so far. The Internet is in a FRENZY over the RX 480!


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Believe it or not, I actually had a dual HD 7870 setup before I got a GTX 780 (eventually 2), and before the 7870's, I had a 5870. I don't play favorites.
> 
> However, I don't understand how anyone can ignore Nvidia's shenanigans this generation. If I had to guess, Nvidia knows that their time is coming to an end, so they are marketing the crap out of themselves with this generation... which is nothing more than *a shrunken, slightly tweaked version of Maxwell.*
> 
> AMD has their hands in so many different markets at this point that all they need is ONE hit, and they will explode... and the RX 480 may be that hit. Lord knows they are playing their cards perfectly so far. The Internet is in a FRENZY over the RX 480!


+1 This.

Personally I would buy a 1080 as I wanted the a significant jump, but I can't justified to spend AUD $1200 on a card that doesn't support Dx12 properly. I'd rather hunt for a good 6+8 Rx 480 and OC the hell out of it before jumping on a flagship which fully supports Dx12, no matter green or red


----------



## FlyingSolo

Gibbo
Quote:


> Hi there
> 
> Sorry to burst bubbles guys but I hold 980Ti in a very high regard. Maxwell was and is incredible.
> 
> Do some of you realise how powerful and truly fast 980Ti is? How overclockable they are?
> 
> 980Ti absolutely batters a 980, then it overclocks like an absolute banshee on top of that, they rape a 980 and even beat Titan X in games.
> 
> Even the 1070 struggles against an overclocked 980Ti, its a very good card. If some of you were genuinely expecting AMD's mid-range part to compete with NVIDIA's flagship at half the price then your deluded.
> 
> Maybe just maybe in some chosen games a highly overclocked RX-480 might get close to a bone stock reference 980Ti, but never beat it and once a 980Ti is overclocked its bye bye as they overclock like demons.
> 
> If RX-480 performs around 980 with twice the VRAM, less power usage at a much lower price I think AMD have a great card on their hands.


Quote:


> NDA, I am not going to post any results or release figures. So clouded is the best you will get.
> 
> But I was shocked some people seem to think this is a 980Ti or Titan X performing part, has no one looked at all the sites showing 390-390X performance and around 980 levels? They are all out there, I am just confused why all of a sudden some are touting it as a 980Ti performer.
> 
> Those thinking 980Ti levels need a reality check, the 980Ti is hugely powerful I'd be very surprised if an RX-480 could match a reference 980Ti, let alone an OC one as they overclock incredibly well.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Like Was known (VDZ conffirmed in a quote) that the RX 480 8GB is 230usd (MSRP)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> If you feed enough power to run Rx 480 at "hot and loud" mode of 290x, the card can reach 1600+ MHz and you will have a 40% increase over 290x


it should be quite heavily oced (this is supossed to be a 120-140w card)


----------



## ryan92084

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> Gibbo


this has been posted multiple times now. The standard rebuttal is


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ryan92084*
> 
> this has been posted multiple times now. The standard rebuttal is


O my bad.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Wonder how long the wait will be.


As multiple people have mentioned, October. It will be October, it _must_ be October. Just believe dammit!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> In short: A fellow came into a 1080 thread before the launch, where some people had mentioned AMD. He said that he had information from a reliable informant stating that AMD was having difficulty stabilising clocks above *800MHz* on Pol and that it was being pushed back to October. After this was proved to be false he defended himself with a defunct website wherein he had made some correct predictions.


It's actually 850MHz m'dear, so he was at least being 50MHz generous.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> So let's get straight into the juicy bits. A few days ago we reported in an exclusive story that the AMD Radeon RX 480 can hit clock speeds upwards of 1.5Ghz and that AMD is launching a brand new overclocking tool with a new host of features among which is voltage control. Well only yesterday we were tipped about a specific source in Asia who we had a close eye on for the past week. The source will remain unnamed to protect their identity but suffice to say this individual has had an RX 480 for close to week and has been leaking pieces of info about the card ever since.
> 
> So far everything that this particular individual has leaked we've managed to corroborate and confirm with our sources. So we know that his leaks are genuine. Interestingly, this person streamed live gameplay of Overwatch running on an RX 480 yesterday. *In the video, which has now been removed, it was revealed that the particular RX 480 sample that was being used had been overclocked to 1607Mhz*.


http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-480-overclocked-1600mhz-cooler-detailed/

Based on that a 1607MHz clock would in theory provide a 7099 Fire Strike Extreme Score.


----------



## NFL

It sounds like that first leak has been validated, which would be an interesting twist


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Believe it or not, I actually had a dual HD 7870 setup before I got a GTX 780 (eventually 2), and before the 7870's, I had a 5870. I don't play favorites.
> 
> However, I don't understand how anyone can ignore Nvidia's shenanigans this generation. *If I had to guess, Nvidia knows that their time is coming to an end, so they are marketing the crap out of themselves with this generation...* which is nothing more than a shrunken, slightly tweaked version of Maxwell.
> 
> AMD has their hands in so many different markets at this point that all they need is ONE hit, and they will explode... and the RX 480 may be that hit. Lord knows they are playing their cards perfectly so far. The Internet is in a FRENZY over the RX 480!


I agree that Pascal is basically Maxwell on 16nm FF, and the power savings and high clocks are a result of the 1.5x node shrink, and so much to do with nVidia's miraculous engineering.

However, I disagree with the bold part. nVidia knows they're basically Apple of the GPU market now, and people will buy whatever crap is fed to them, so they're just doing what every business would do and milking every last drop out of that (blind) brand recognition. Hell they could've priced the 1080 $100 more and it would still sell out within minutes.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ryan92084*
> 
> this has been posted multiple times now. The standard rebuttal is


I support what he said in principle though, the speculation really has gotten out of hand, and expectations have been raised so high that the only outcome is sore disappointment then resentment towards AMD for "not delivering 980 Ti performance @ $200", which quite frankly if you used some common sense is indeed a ridiculous statement.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> it should be quite heavily oced (this is supossed to be a 120-140w card)


That's why I specifically pointed out the 6+8 pin option. AMD gimped this card at 120-140w to fit the efficiency game and gave it a good price. But from my sources this GPU responses to increase voltage very well and can hit very high clock when the efficiency is tossed away, a.k.a the "hot and loud" region of Hawaii cards.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> It's actually 850MHz m'dear, so he was at least being 50MHz generous.


Aw, bless his heart.


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> That's why I specifically pointed out the 6+8 pin option. AMD gimped this card at 120-140w to fit the efficiency game and gave it a good price. But from my sources this GPU responses to increase voltage very well and can hit very high clock when the efficiency is tossed away, a.k.a the "hot and loud" region of Hawaii cards.


Thats the main reason this card is the king of cards the last decade


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Again, the conversation was Maxwell 980 Ti versus Kepler 780 Ti. Why are you bringing up AMD and the 980? It's irrelevant to the discussion. Are you just trying to make trouble?


It's an AMD thread..................


----------



## FLCLimax




----------



## TheLAWNOOB

I hope this RX 480 will convince a lot of AMD users to ditch their last gen GPUs.

It will be good for AMD.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kuivamaa*
> 
> For a lower node, yes it is. 980 performance at probably half the consumption and almost half the die size, is certainly nothing impressive, underwhelming actually. Low cost and all is nice but AMD has been offering products of similar price/perf (R9 290) last year. Granted,the consumption was much higher but that was 2013 arch and a 2011 node. I expect more from 14nm FF ,especially when full polaris should rival 1070 in die size. But I feel there is a hidden ace somewhere. We will see.


You don't get it. The 480 is not in the same upper end category that the 980 is/was but brings that performance down to the nearly budget level. It is intended to replace cards like the 380 and 370X at their price points. They are targeting this market intentionally, it is not a matter of Polaris being "unable" to compete with Pascal; it was never designed to do so in the first place...


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Kuivamaa*
> 
> For a lower node, yes it is. 980 performance at probably half the consumption and almost half the die size, is certainly nothing impressive, underwhelming actually. Low cost and all is nice but AMD has been offering products of similar price/perf (R9 290) last year. Granted,the consumption was much higher but that was 2013 arch and a 2011 node. I expect more from 14nm FF ,especially when full polaris should rival 1070 in die size. But I feel there is a hidden ace somewhere. We will see.
> 
> 
> 
> You don't get it. The 480 is not in the same upper end category that the 980 is/was but brings that performance down to the nearly budget level. It is intended to replace cards like the 380 and 370X at their price points. They are targeting this market intentionally, it is not a matter of Polaris being "unable" to compete with Pascal; it was never designed to do so in the first place...
Click to expand...

Furthermore, AMD under priced it this time around to make it a much more appealing option.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revanchrist*
> 
> I don't know where's Khalid 34XX FSU score comes from, but supposedly there's only two guys that scored 34XX on FSU, that is the Korean DGLee with a 1400Mhz overclocked card and the Chiphell's Getwinder guy with a 1380Mhz overclocked card. *Others with a reference card at stock managed only 27XX-28XX FSU score*.


Those were Total scores, not Graphics scores, AFAIK...


----------



## AuraNova

I've been looking in some of these threads and haven't said too much about all of this. Just observing.

I feel all of this is psychological in some way. It's people justifying the fact that AMD has no "high-end" card to compete with Nvidia's current releases. So they put the RX 480 on that upper echelon. I can't say much about the tech or overclocking of these cards, but I do realize people setting themselves up for something that may never be.

AMD knows what they are doing, and where they want to go right now. They may very well be the smarter of the two major GPU companies going further into Summer.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I agree that Pascal is basically Maxwell on 16nm FF, and the power savings and high clocks are a result of the 1.5x node shrink, and so much to do with nVidia's miraculous engineering.
> 
> However, I disagree with the bold part. nVidia knows they're basically Apple of the GPU market now, and people will buy whatever crap is fed to them, so they're just doing what every business would do and milking every last drop out of that (blind) brand recognition. Hell they could've priced the 1080 $100 more and it would still sell out within minutes.
> I support what he said in principle though, the speculation really has gotten out of hand, and expectations have been raised so high that the only outcome is sore disappointment then resentment towards AMD for "not delivering 980 Ti performance @ $200", which quite frankly if you used some common sense is indeed a ridiculous statement.


Even that early leak months ago only claimed P10 to be "on par with stock 980Ti at $300", not $200. I still think its possible we see special AIB cards that can do 1500-1600 MHz and at that speed get uncomfortably close to a stock 980Ti. OC to OC though, no chance, and I've said a million times that as long as the 480 soundly beats an OC 980 at $200 it will be a huge win for AMD. Anything more than that will just be gravy.


----------



## magnek

Apologize in advance for being petty, but I thought I'd get some of Oj010's choice quotes on record in case he decides to backpedal when the inevitable happens:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Polaris 10 just got pushed back to October.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Aaaaaand Polaris 10 pushed back to October.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> It is specifically for desktop Polaris 10. Not for Polaris 11, not for APUs, not for mobile parts, just desktop Polaris 10.


And the most ironic one of them all:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> If that's the case, my source at AMD doesn't have a freaking clue what's going on
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually I retract that, specifically because of the reason said to me I can say that there won't be any new GPUs until October.
Click to expand...

Safe to say that if Oj010 isn't making all of this stuff up, then AMD went on a mole hunt and his contact would probably lose his/her job soon, assuming they haven't been fired already.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Apologize in advance for being petty, but I thought I'd get some of Oj010's choice quotes on record in case he decides to backpedal when the inevitable happens:
> 
> And the most ironic one of them all:
> Safe to say that if Oj010 isn't making all of this stuff up, then AMD went on a mole hunt and his contact would probably lose his/her job soon, assuming they haven't been fired already.


Yeah but he had a defunct site where he allegedly predicted BD would be a fail! What a prophet!


----------



## Zoner

AMD RX 480 Release Day


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I think we can all agree at this point that Ojo's "inside info" was nothing if not an epic troll! I mean, we are all still talking about it two months later!

Troll Level = Expert

Congrats Ojo (though i did call him out on his BS at the time)!


----------



## Pesmerrga

Did this new article get posted already?

AMD RX 480 Overclocked To 1.6Ghz+, Cooler Tear Down & Production Line Photos Leaked

Read more: http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-480-overclocked-1600mhz-cooler-detailed/#ixzz4CBCCjj2O
http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-480-overclocked-1600mhz-cooler-detailed/?utm_source=wccftechtwitterfeed&utm_medium=wccftechtwitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Wccftechcom+%28WCCFtech.com%29


----------



## Greenland

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pesmerrga*
> 
> Did this new article get posted already?
> 
> AMD RX 480 Overclocked To 1.6Ghz+, Cooler Tear Down & Production Line Photos Leaked
> 
> Read more: http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-480-overclocked-1600mhz-cooler-detailed/#ixzz4CBCCjj2O
> http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-480-overclocked-1600mhz-cooler-detailed/?utm_source=wccftechtwitterfeed&utm_medium=wccftechtwitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Wccftechcom+%28WCCFtech.com%29


1607MHz is 1080's stock clock, strange....


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pesmerrga*
> 
> Did this new article get posted already?
> 
> AMD RX 480 Overclocked To 1.6Ghz+, Cooler Tear Down & Production Line Photos Leaked
> 
> Read more: http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-480-overclocked-1600mhz-cooler-detailed/#ixzz4CBCCjj2O
> http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-480-overclocked-1600mhz-cooler-detailed/?utm_source=wccftechtwitterfeed&utm_medium=wccftechtwitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Wccftechcom+%28WCCFtech.com%29


http://www.overclock.net/t/1603252/wccf-amd-rx-480-can-hit-1-5ghz-new-overclocking-tool-with-voltage-control-coming/990#post_25275591

I speculated the score using previous RX 480 Firestrike Extreme stock clock scores.


----------



## Pesmerrga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1603252/wccf-amd-rx-480-can-hit-1-5ghz-new-overclocking-tool-with-voltage-control-coming/990#post_25275591
> 
> I speculated the score using previous RX 480 Firestrike Extreme stock clock scores.


Sorry about that.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> Looks like there will be plenty of cards to go around
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Please refrain from posting the same images and quotes that have already been posted in the thread.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ryan92084*
> 
> Taking the highest rumored scores for firestrike ultra and pulling a benchmark from a site with similar results for the included compared cards 980ti is a bit of a stretch. 1070 is more reasonable.


You trust a benchmark that depicts a Titan X being 10% slower than a 980 Ti?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> Thats the main reason *this card is the king of cards the last decade*


That is a mighty fine title for product that hasn't even been released and with no verifiable performance figures.









AMD is using Stars as code names for their GPU products, but AMD also thinks it is a good idea to advertise the Radeon branding utilizing graphics of giant fireballs. I mean its not like there is a preexisting mindset that links AMD GPUs to excessive heat or anything...











#fireyourmarketingteam


----------



## Slomo4shO

Well, 8GB for $229 is now official


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Well, 8GB for $229 is now official


NAILED IT.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Please refrain from posting the same images and quotes that have already been posted in the thread.
> *You trust a benchmark that depicts a Titan X being 10% slower than a 980 Ti?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Wow good catch!



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!





For whoever tested those cards, not for you


----------



## KarathKasun

Well, AFAIK T-X had no OC editions where the 980 Ti did. So it is possible.


----------



## SamuraiGuns

I was _spec sheet hyped_ for Fury & Fury X when the leaks and performance estimates started to come around and the infamous "Overclocker's Dream" statement. I've learned to curb my enthusiasm when it comes to pre tech launches.

I think about it like this for $199 to $299 (AMD reference to AIB Supreme), the performance cannot be that overwhelming. The leaks these past few weeks have been mind boggling, first it was the performance was

First: R9 390 -> RX 480 -> R9 390X
Then: RX 480 = R9 390X + 10%
Later: RX 480 OC'd = GTX 980
Thereafter: RX 480 OC'd = GTX 980 Ti
Now: R9 490 OC'd ~ 1070

Doesn't any of this sound suspicious??? I'll happily bow out if any of it is true but I have to hold my reservations after Fury and Fury X


----------



## magnek

Well to be fair, RX 480 OC'd can indeed beat 1070 or even match a 1080*

*under LN2


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I think it will beat a 980 with both at max OC by at least 5-10%. Could be better, could be worse but should be in that ballpark. The question really is how well the OC scaling turns out? If 1500MHz is true we might see an even wider gap over the 980, at least in synthetics. Of course launch drivers are almost always bad with AMD.


----------



## gamervivek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> ok fair enough
> 
> but keep in mind reference 980 is *1216*Mhz (not 1266)
> 
> GCN/Polaris superior
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> scaling
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> may or may not bridge that gap


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Please refrain from posting the same images and quotes that have already been posted in the thread.
> You trust a benchmark that depicts a Titan X being 10% slower than a 980 Ti?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is a mighty fine title for product that hasn't even been released and with no verifiable performance figures.


Maybe they're following TechReport's graph scheme where they don't mention that they are using the factory overclocked models.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Seems like Oj010's not the only one being feed insider info








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> What has you more excited? The upcoming price hike from Nvidia for its midgrade chips or another poorly executed sequel from EA?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> As expected, under 10% performance deltas between new "top tier" midgrade chip and previous generation top tier chip.
> 
> Anyone expecting GTX 980 prices for this card is delusional.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> I also don't see the logic of pricing Polaris above $250 considering that it is a small chip designed to replace the much larger 380X die. Raising prices in this segment won't lead to market share gains that they are after. Should expect aggressive pricing if such plans hope to pan out...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Better be near Fury performance... R9 290X performance can already be had for around $250...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> FTFY
> 
> If it is replacing the 380X, it should come in at 380X price. 380X launched at $229


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> $50 for 4GB of ram would be absurd if it is GDDR5.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> My price predictions for the lineup in USD:
> 
> RX 480 8GB for 229
> RX 480 4GB for 199
> RX 470 8GB for 169
> RX 470 4GB for 139
> RX 460 4GB for 109
> RX 460 2GB for 79


----------



## SuperZan




----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Seems like Oj010's not the only one being feed insider info


If I were to pick one post, this would be THE one as proof your prophecy:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 8GB of GDDR5 was ~$88 3 years ago. Which means that 4GB of GDDR5 was $44. We have had a about a 50% reduction in GDDR5 ram prices since then that means to add 4 extra GB today would cost roughly $22. *Pricing the 8GB variant to be $30 more would equate to a 26.7% gross margin(Q2 2015 gross margins were 24.63% for comparison).* Which is in line with what one should expect with an aggressively priced product.
> 
> Call me what you will but I will continue to call a spade a spade.
> I have been saying that AMD needs to deliver fury like performance at or below $250 for over a month and have been adamant about the *logic behind pricing the 8GB variety of the card at $229 since the RX 480 was announced.*


I mean holy crap, not only did you NAIL the price right to the last dollar, you also laid out the reasoning for why such a price made sense, and AMD did indeed do the most sensible thing.

If that's not clairvoyance I don't know what is. (it's actually a double prophecy since AMD has a tendency to do the LEAST sensible thing, but no the did a complete 180 this time around)


----------



## GHADthc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Lol, Ojo! What a joke...


Hence me calling him Ojoke a few pages back, I think it should be his new handle.


----------



## Andr3az

Some card better have DVI-D. Other than that the card seems like a good upgrade from 280X.


----------



## Noufel

I think ojo is working for AMD he created all this hype, smart move amd very smart


----------



## Kuivamaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> You don't get it. The 480 is not in the same upper end category that the 980 is/was but brings that performance down to the nearly budget level. It is intended to replace cards like the 380 and 370X at their price points. They are targeting this market intentionally, it is not a matter of Polaris being "unable" to compete with Pascal; it was never designed to do so in the first place...


What I am saying is that judging by die size and node difference, it is doing a lousy job if it can only bring 980 perf down one level. I still think it will be a faster GPU than 980.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> (it's actually a double prophecy since AMD has a tendency to do the LEAST sensible thing, but no the did a complete 180 this time around)


They seem to be doing a 180 in all aspects these days.

1. Seems they actually have a decent stock of cards this time - Learned from fury release stock problems.

2. Drivers are stable and updated more often - learned from the past.

3. Have gone back to their roots of bang for buck - learned um.....stuff.

4. Didn't claim the Polaris is an overclocker's dream.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Andr3az*
> 
> Some card better have DVI-D. Other than that the card seems like a good upgrade from 280X.


http://techfrag.com/2016/06/20/xfx-radeon-rx-480-photos-specs-leaked-aib-cards-can-feature-dvi-d-ports/


----------



## Marios145

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GHADthc*
> 
> Hence me calling him Ojoke a few pages back, I think it should be his new handle.


HEY, he accurately predicted that Intel will release a bios to "fix" non-K overclock, WHO would even think of that.


----------



## BigTree

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Apologize in advance for being petty, but I thought I'd get some of Oj010's choice quotes on record in case he decides to backpedal when the inevitable happens:
> 
> And the most ironic one of them all:
> Safe to say that if Oj010 isn't making all of this stuff up, then AMD went on a mole hunt and his contact would probably lose his/her job soon, assuming they haven't been fired already.


...or AMD knew and gave (told to do so) the mole wrong info....


----------



## Rabit

This is Hype train


----------



## prznar1

This picture ia amazing


----------



## GHADthc

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rabit*
> 
> This is Hype train


Well that has made my evening...


----------



## ryan92084

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> ...
> You trust a benchmark that depicts a Titan X being 10% slower than a 980 Ti?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Wow good catch!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For whoever tested those cards, not for you


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Well, AFAIK T-X had no OC editions where the 980 Ti did. So it is possible.


My mistake I'll add in an edit. Like I said I just used the first bench I could find for firestrike ultra that included a 1070, tx, and 980ti (there aren't many). I missed that HH used a GeForce GTX 980 Ti (Asus STRIX) which does perform about 10% above the tx on that benchmark. I never followed the 980ti versus tx benches to really notice the discrepancy from memory

Here's one that is a little more helpful for the comparison.


Looks like the 19.5% oc (still assuming perfect scaling and the best case leak) would get the rx480 up to both the 980ti and 1070 level.


----------



## CasualCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> AMD is using Stars as code names for their GPU products, but AMD also thinks it is a good idea to advertise the Radeon branding utilizing graphics of giant fireballs. I mean its not like there is a preexisting mindset that links AMD GPUs to excessive heat or anything...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #fireyourmarketingteam


Actually I think that image looks cool and isn't a problem marketing wise imho.

edit: I take that back it is a problem in that it shows vega but they won't talk about vega.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Well, AFAIK T-X had no OC editions where the 980 Ti did. So it is possible.


The EVGA Superclocked and Hydrocopper


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> AMD is using Stars as code names for their GPU products, but AMD also thinks it is a good idea to advertise the Radeon branding utilizing graphics of giant fireballs. I mean its not like there is a preexisting mindset that links AMD GPUs to excessive heat or anything...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #fireyourmarketingteam


Isn't that a WCCFTech Photoshop job?
I don't believe that's official marketing material.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> I hope this RX 480 will convince a lot of AMD users to ditch their last gen GPUs.
> 
> It will be good for AMD.


No doubt about it. 28nm was definitely a sour point in the history of GPUs. A 7970 from over 4 years ago is still an upper midrange card.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Isn't that a WCCFTech Photoshop job?
> I don't believe that's official marketing material.


I think those were made by @tugasdocrl on reddit and are not official marketing slides
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4lmp2u/still_confused_with_the_next_gpus_numbering_4k/d3olhwt


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> No doubt about it. 28nm was definitely a sour point in the history of GPUs. A 7970 from over 4 years ago is still an upper midrange card.


The 7970 was an awesome card at launch and thats why its still relevant today. It was well underclocked and had huge head-room the likes we have not seen since really. For some reason it took AMD a while to get the most of out it too, so it just steadily improved as time went on with driver updates.

I had two of them , under chilled liquid hitting 1430mhz core in CFX. Moved from them to 780 tics - which were almost as much fun. Still set a WR with those 7970s (lightnings) at the time so really great memories. Great cards , stil have them somewhere


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

I "blame" the success of the 7970 on GCN being brand new and 28nm being the node of choice for all these years. That allowed it to age very well. It's wild to think of the 55nm 3870 (with 320 SPs) as being as many generations from the 7970 as the RX480s are now.


----------



## Serios

Quote:


> [WCCFTECH] Folks, new rumor just hit my desk. There's talk that AMD MIGHT move the embargo forward to June 24, THIS FRIDAY. Apparently we've "leaked way too much" and some people under embargo are complaining that they don't have much left to write about.


The leaks are cray at this moment.
Just a few minutes ago a guy in China was live "benching" the 480 although he did not show anything interesting.
At this point it is possible to at least see some benchmarks earlier, I suspect the hard launch date will remain 29.


----------



## ryan92084

You can catch some glimpses of the new overclocking tool in the video & pictures here https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4p42vm/chinese_streamer_has_rx_480_showing_on_stream/ not a whole lot else though


----------



## Ha-Nocri

Crimson has custom fan curve it seems. Nice. Now they need some kind of graphs so I can replace MSI AB completely.


----------



## doza

i have no time crossing 30+ pages of this, are there any new leaks or something important in lst 2-3 days? thx upfront!


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *doza*
> 
> i have no time crossing 30+ pages of this, are there any new leaks or something important in lst 2-3 days? thx upfront!


wait till October.


----------



## p4inkill3r

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> wait till October.


----------



## whicker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rabit*
> 
> This is Hype train


Noooooo!!! You forgot the cigar!!!!


----------



## spurdomantbh

More stuff:

http://videocardz.com/61293/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-3

most interesting:


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> More stuff:
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61293/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-3
> 
> most interesting:


Those VRMs sure do get hot.


----------



## Ha-Nocri

1340 MHz max OC.... that would suck, if true, on any 480 card


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> More stuff:
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61293/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-3
> 
> most interesting:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Unfortunately, we don't know on what clocks, what fan settings...actually, we don't even know for sure if it's RX 480.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ha-Nocri*
> 
> 1340 MHz max OC.... that would suck, if true, on any 480 card


1340MHz OC could be the reason why it can match 980 Ti because 1.6GHz OC in paper it can.


----------



## AmericanLoco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Those VRMs sure do get hot.


They don't get any hotter than the core, which is 70*C.

Anyone else notice they're still using "ATI Technologies" on the FCC compliance sticker?


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Those VRMs sure do get hot.


If you mean the MOBO VRMs then sure








I'm more worried about that hotspot on MOBO than the VRMs on the GPU. Sure reference cooler is gonna be subpar compared to AIB bigger coolers and custom boards with differently placed VRM. Still nothing out of the extraordinary, not amazing temps. neither bad ones, just normal. I've seen worse FLIR on GPUs irregardless of brand.


----------



## Newbie2009

So looking at some ot the leaks so far, the RX 480 does not have a backplate. Yet we have seen cards with backplates on the production line.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CataclysmZA*
> 
> I heard this was a popular place to post pictures of unreleased Radeon graphics cards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4ot0cy/im_sure_youll_appreciate_this/


These pics show a card with a back plate yet they look like stock cards. I assumed they were RX 480s and was surprised it had a backplate.

The pictures from computerbase.de show no such blackplate on the RX480.

http://www.computerbase.de/2016-06/radeon-rx-480-bilder/


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Crazy theory: Maybe Oj00's source was talking about Vega in October, and he mis-interpreted them and thought Polaris in October?

sauce:


----------



## tkenietz

My understanding is that xfx reference cards will come with a backplate


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Newbie2009*
> 
> So looking at some ot the leaks so far, the RX 480 does not have a backplate. Yet we have seen cards with backplates on the production line.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *CataclysmZA*
> 
> I heard this was a popular place to post pictures of unreleased Radeon graphics cards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4ot0cy/im_sure_youll_appreciate_this/
> 
> 
> 
> These pics show a card with a back plate yet they look like stock cards. I assumed they were RX 480s and was surprised it had a backplate.
> 
> The pictures from computerbase.de show no such blackplate on the RX480.
> 
> http://www.computerbase.de/2016-06/radeon-rx-480-bilder/
Click to expand...

\

That's XFX cards. XFX cards have backplates, but they removed the images showing their backplates because Sapphire complained to AMD.

So even though XFX reference cards won't be advertised as having backplates, at least the first batch will have them.


----------



## kaosstar

I don't know why some people are so in love with backplates. They just look nice and trap in heat.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> \
> 
> That's XFX cards. XFX cards have backplates, but they removed the images showing their backplates because Sapphire complained to AMD.
> 
> So even though XFX reference cards won't be advertised as having backplates, at least the first batch will have them.


that's believable, Sapphire hardly ever uses a backplate on anything. Should just accept that people like them and use them too


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kaosstar*
> 
> I don't know why some people are so in love with backplates. They just look nice and trap in heat.


It gives me a piece of mind when I man handle my cards during installation.

With a backplate, I can drag it across the carpet and not worry about a thing.

FYI, you should't buy any used GPUs from me. It's for your own good.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

That ojo guy is getting way to much credit. He posted nothing more than a weak troll with no evidence whatsoever.. The only reason it gained any traction was all the Nvidia loyals jumped on it immediately, including a bunch of shameful journalism by click-bait websites.

Misinterpreting the Vega launch was brought up at the time iirc, and he said that wasn't the case. All he did was insinuate that the 1080 could easily surpass 3GHz, and tried to spread nonsense about Polaris.

He doesn't deserve anywhere near the "attention" he's gotten.


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Crazy theory: Maybe Oj00's source was talking about Vega in October, and he mis-interpreted them and thought Polaris in October?
> 
> sauce:


That pic is so fake. AFAIK the current drivers shouldn't even recognize the chipset and just write it's device id instead of a full name. Oh and how convenient to just black out the specifications


----------



## CasualCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> It gives me a piece of mind when I man handle my cards during installation.
> 
> With a backplate, I can drag it across the carpet and not worry about a thing.
> 
> FYI, you should't buy any used GPUs from me. It's for your own good.


lol


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kaosstar*
> 
> I don't know why some people are so in love with backplates. They just look nice and trap in heat.


A proper backplate has contact with the PCB right behind the VRMs, usually with a thermal pad.


----------



## Pesmerrga

Nothing to see here..


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Crazy theory: Maybe Oj00's source was talking about Vega in October, and he mis-interpreted them and thought Polaris in October?
> 
> sauce:


That's what I initially thought as well. But then to spread pointless FUD and then double, triple and quadruple down on your insider information whilst claiming you are more "in tune" with the PC world than others. Oh no... Ojo got what was coming to him.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> \
> 
> That's XFX cards. XFX cards have backplates, but they removed the images showing their backplates because Sapphire complained to AMD.
> 
> So even though XFX reference cards won't be advertised as having backplates, at least the first batch will have them.


Another theory I read was the 8gb will get the backplate and the 4gb wont have one. Guess we will see soon enough.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

For $30 8GB is very worth it.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> For $30 8GB is very worth it.


Nooooooo 30$ is too much for 4gb of gddr5 5


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Nooooooo 30$ is too much for 4gb of gddr5 5


Trolling or Serious? Its 8Gbps.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Trolling or Serious? Its 8Gbps.


LOL i was on sarcastic mod


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> For $30 8GB is very worth it.


Don't get excited. We are going to get screwed by Canadian pricing.

I'm going for either the 4GB 480 or the 470s.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Don't get excited. We are going to get screwed by Canadian pricing.
> 
> I'm going for either the 4GB 480 or the 470s.


If a high percentage of 470s are unlockable i'll be all over a custom pcb. There hasn't been much talk about it, some leak showed 290 perf, wonder if it can oc past 480 stock.

Are they using Sk hynix or samsung memory? Guess anything is better than elpida


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Doesn't even need to be unlocked. 2048 cores at 1.2-1.3Ghz is still great. 110W TDP is something to lust for.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Don't get excited. We are going to get screwed by Canadian pricing.
> 
> I'm going for either the 4GB 480 or the 470s.


Why is that? It will be ~ 300-330 CAD.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Doesn't even need to be unlocked. 2048 cores at 1.2-1.3Ghz is still great. 110W TDP is something to lust for.


Yeah I mean 290 perf would be incredible for $150-175. But a (470 unlocked to) 480 at 470 price would obviously be even better lol

I'm leaning heavy towards 480 mainly because I will probably use the same card until the next huge jump at the same price point. I don't like incrimental upgrades, I want to be in awe. Also thinking about going from like a decade old 900p tn to 1440p ips, want to be in awe


----------



## whicker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Don't get excited. We are going to get screwed by Canadian pricing.
> 
> I'm going for either the 4GB 480 or the 470s.


I dont think it will be that bad for us Canadians. 300$ for ref, 330-350$ for AIB.


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Don't get excited. We are going to get screwed by Canadian pricing.
> 
> I'm going for either the 4GB 480 or the 470s.
> 
> 
> 
> Why is that? It will be ~ 300-330 CAD.
Click to expand...

8GB for 300-330 CAD before tax.

Only a good deal if you need the extra 4GB.

Meanwhile I keep picking up 290s for around $200.

If you are only using it for gaming and don't care about power consumption, 290s are still a better deal.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> 8GB for 300-330 CAD before tax.
> 
> Only a good deal if you need the extra 4GB.
> 
> Meanwhile I keep picking up 290s for around $200.
> 
> If you are only using it for gaming and don't care about power consumption, 290s are still a better deal.


Thats for sure. $200 for 290 vs $300+ for RX480. Thats 50% more expensive.


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Don't get excited. We are going to get screwed by Canadian pricing.
> 
> I'm going for either the 4GB 480 or the 470s.




I can't wait to see how much they bend us over price wise. The dollar has been rising in the past couple of weeks, so here's hoping.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Nooooooo 30$ is too much for 4gb of gddr5 5


Well it's still better than a 3.5GB 970 while paying for it like it has 16GB VRAM.


----------



## Catscratch

I hope it sells well so that it hurts Nvidia. I'm tempted to get one even thou I wanna wait for the whole lineup. Developers should suck it up and go full dx12.


----------



## mohiuddin

1340mhz???? It would be pathetic in oc like fury/fufyx


----------



## prznar1

Oc tool, ir shots. God, leave somethig for actual review


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> 1340mhz???? It would be pathetic in oc like fury/fufyx


Or a 1080? This is pretty much expected for a single six-pin. If there are going to be superb overclockers in the 480 range they'll be from AIB's with additional power and custom BIOS.


----------



## 364901

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Newbie2009*
> 
> So looking at some ot the leaks so far, the RX 480 does not have a backplate. Yet we have seen cards with backplates on the production line.
> These pics show a card with a back plate yet they look like stock cards. I assumed they were RX 480s and was surprised it had a backplate.
> 
> The pictures from computerbase.de show no such blackplate on the RX480.
> 
> http://www.computerbase.de/2016-06/radeon-rx-480-bilder/


As others have said, that's XFX. I chatted with local retailers gearing up for the launch and they didn't have any cards in the pipeline that shipped with a backplate. It's not a standard issue thing, and XFX might be the only one with a backplate at launch, making it the most desirable of the bunch.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TheLAWNOOB*
> 
> Crazy theory: Maybe Oj00's source was talking about Vega in October, and he mis-interpreted them and thought Polaris in October?
> 
> sauce:


Could also just be a name edit to make it seem as if this is legit. AFAIK, no RX 490 cards exist.


----------



## PontiacGTX

72c on thermal imaging ,it would be better to hold for non ref cooling and pcb


----------



## mohiuddin

What about this?
http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-480-overclocked-1600mhz-cooler-detailed/
Can be overclocked to 1607mhz (in thiso case)?!!!!


----------



## infranoia

And here I am sitting on this 1200 watt power supply, while GPUs are going in the opposite direction.

Seriously considering 4 480's at this point, if only my PCIe lane width wasn't so hosed for more than 2.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *infranoia*
> 
> And here I am sitting on this 1200 watt power supply, while GPUs are going in the opposite direction.
> 
> Seriously considering 4 480's at this point, if only my PCIe lane width wasn't so hosed for more than 2.


The high end HPC based GPUs might use more power but with 230-290w GPUs in CF would need a really good (air) cooling or wcing
get a mobo with PLX?


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> What about this?
> http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-480-overclocked-1600mhz-cooler-detailed/
> Can be overclocked to 1607mhz (in thiso case)?!!!!


it can be done yes.

199$- RX 480 4gb reference 1266mhz ref boost
229$-RX 480 8gb reference 1266mhz ref boost
300$ RX480 8gb AIB OC models

There will be many AIB cards which will advertise 1.5ghz+, not based on the reference card/cooler.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *infranoia*
> 
> And here I am sitting on this 1200 watt power supply.


My Maxrevo 1500W probability doesn't even maintain 80% efficiency at 100W load








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *infranoia*
> 
> Seriously considering 4 480's at this point, if only my PCIe lane width wasn't so hosed for more than 2.


Stay away from more than 2 GPUs. Support is completely lackluster for 3 and 4 way crossfire.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> The high end HPC based GPUs might use more power but with 230-290w GPUs in CF would need a really good (air) cooling or wcing
> get a mobo with PLX?


I thought AMD could run 4x for CF instead of Nvidia's 8x minimum req. Pretty sure I think you can do tri-CF at 8x/4x/4x. No idea how it would impact performance though. Maybe even 4x/4x/4x/4x but not sure.


----------



## Buris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> I thought AMD could run 4x for CF instead of Nvidia's 8x minimum req. Pretty sure I think you can do tri-CF at 8x/4x/4x. No idea how it would impact performance though. Maybe even 4x/4x/4x/4x but not sure.


I'm pretty sure cf only works PCI-E 2.0 16x and PCI-E 3.0 8x. There's no bridge so how could it use less?


----------



## DR4G00N

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> I'm pretty sure cf only works PCI-E 2.0 16x and PCI-E 3.0 8x. There's no bridge so how could it use less?


You can crossfire with two Gen 1.1 @ 1x using 1x to 16x adapters if you really wanted to, will the performance suck, yes, but you can do it.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DR4G00N*
> 
> You can crossfire with two Gen 1.1 @ 1x using 1x to 16x adapters if you really wanted to, will the performance suck, yes, but you can do it.


XDMA is designed for optimal performance with systems running PCI Express 2.0 x16 (16GB/s), PCI Express 3.0 x8 (16GB/s), or PCI Express 3.0 x16 (32GB/s).


----------



## Offender_Mullet

Have these been posted already?


----------



## prznar1

Seriously, leave something for release XD


----------



## MaxprO

Don´t you guys think that a 6+8pin is overabundant? A single 8pin for overclocking purposes should be enough. But I guess we will have to wait and see for benchmarks to find out.


----------



## Dargonplay

?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> Seriously, leave something for release XD


Do we really have anything? I want to see concrete numbers. Games being benchmarked, see driver version, temperatures, clock, Overclocks, power consumption, noise, how the new features like the reworked command processor, geometry processor and primitive discard accelerator works, what are the advantages compared to previous GCNs without these features, DX11 Overhead.

We might as well be Jon Snow.


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> ?
> Do we really have anything? I want to see concrete numbers. Games being benchmarked, see driver version, temperatures, clock, Overclocks, power consumption, noise, how the new features like the reworked command processor, geometry processor and primitive discard accelerator works, what are the advantages compared to previous GCNs without these features, DX11 Overhead.
> 
> We might as well be Jon Snow.


You know nothing Jon Snow.


----------



## looniam




----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> it can be done yes.
> 
> 199$- RX 480 4gb reference 1266mhz ref boost
> 229$-RX 480 8gb reference 1266mhz ref boost
> 300$ RX480 8gb AIB OC models
> 
> There will be many AIB cards which will advertise 1.5ghz+, not based on the reference card/cooler.












$300 seems a huge jump from $229 just for an AIB model that sounds stupid honestly.


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> $300 seems a huge jump from $229 just for an AIB model that sounds stupid honestly.


ya well look the price difference between the 1080 and the 1070....

besides 300$ is the upper limit, most will be priced below that.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> ya well look the price difference between the 1080 and the 1070....
> 
> besides 300$ is the upper limit, most will be priced below that.


What's the price difference between the 1070 and 1080 have to do with it?

They are different products completely..............

Also how do you know AIB's will have cards advertised at 1500mhz+?

You're dropping massive facts here and I'd like to know you're source.


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> What's the price difference between the 1070 and 1080 have to do with it?
> 
> They are different products completely..............
> 
> Also how do you know AIB's will have cards advertised at 1500mhz+?
> 
> You're dropping massive facts here and I'd like to know you're source.


source is me. I have a RX-480 and I know what it can do. I've seen some of the aib cards as well, and if they don't reach 1500, i'd be highly surprised. Like I said they will likely advertise it as factory oc clock.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> What's the price difference between the 1070 and 1080 have to do with it?
> 
> They are different products completely..............
> 
> Also how do you know AIB's will have cards advertised at 1500mhz+?
> 
> You're dropping massive facts here and I'd like to know you're source.


IIRC ebduncan is an AMD affiliated game dev, so his words carry more weight with me


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> source is me. I have a RX-480 and I know what it can do. I've seen some of the aib cards as well, and if they don't reach 1500, i'd be highly surprised. Like I said they will likely advertise it as factory oc clock.


Ah ok you have one well that makes a lot of sense.









Sorry it's just many other people speak on here like things are fact and you can tell it's just...........


----------



## Titanox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> $300 seems a huge jump from $229 just for an AIB model that sounds stupid honestly.


70$ markup for AIB coolers revised board.is excessive. It generally is 50, unless it's some special edition like an MSI lightning.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Titanox*
> 
> 70$ markup for AIB coolers revised board.is excessive. It generally is 50, unless it's some special edition like an MSI lightning.


yeah for a $229 card you'd expect maybe $269 at the highest.


----------



## magnek

I'd be _all over_ an RX 480 Lightning 8GB if it really was just $300. (but I highly doubt MSi would bother making a Lightning out of a mainstream card)


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> yeah for a $229 card you'd expect maybe $269 at the highest.


Unless of course they are offering much more performance at $300.

I mean if at $300 it offers nearly 20% performance improvement over the $200-230 cards I would say it is worth it. That's nearly a whole other card.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Unless of course they are offering much more performance at $300.
> 
> I mean if at $300 it offers nearly 20% performance improvement over the $200-230 cards I would say it is worth it. That's nearly a whole other card.


It would have to be a freakin beast that is clocking to 1700mhz on every card whilst the $229-$269 versions are only going to 1500mhz.

Even that is not 20%


----------



## Titanox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Unless of course they are offering much more performance at $300.
> 
> I mean if at $300 it offers nearly 20% performance improvement over the $200-230 cards I would say it is worth it. That's nearly a whole other card.


This scenario is based on adding a 6 pin to the existing 8 pin to allow for higher clocks compared with the single 8pin cards (which can be OCed too). Unless It shows a considerable performance difference, wouldn't such an extra cost just be for a fancy name


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Titanox*
> 
> This scenario is based on adding a 6 pin to the existing 8 pin to allow for higher clocks compared with the single 8pin cards (which can be OCed too). Unless It shows a considerable performance difference, wouldn't such an extra cost just be for a fancy name


And fancy cooler. The best value cards will probably be in the $250-ish region.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> It would have to be a freakin beast that is clocking to 1750mhz on every card whilst the $229-$269 versions are only going to 1500mhz.


I'm not sure about 1750MHz. I think upper 1600's will be the limit of these cards. But even then I speculated at 1600MHz it would have Fury X performance @ 1440p.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Titanox*
> 
> This scenario is based on adding a 6 pin to the existing 8 pin to allow for higher clocks compared with the single 8pin cards (which can be OCed too). Unless It shows a considerable performance difference, wouldn't such an extra cost just be for a fancy name


Well I think AMD might follow NVIDIA here offering some factory overclocked cards that are considerably higher than the reference, of course including the additional power, but if at stock factory overclocks they have say 1500MHz clock speeds, that puts it above a Fury @ 1440p.


----------



## Titanox

The 980 Ti G1 gaming was 40$ more. We all can see that was a reasonable increase for the performance offered.

Nvidia is hardly someone they should emulate. Their money grubbing tactics stopped being cute a while ago. Price it appropriately, don't lie about specs and no FE bull****. Follow that mantra and the RX 480 will end up in my cart.

PS : The 1070 is 650$ where i live. Talk about delusional pricing. Idiots.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Titanox*
> 
> The 980 Ti G1 gaming was 40$ more. We all can see that was a reasonable increase for the performance offered.


Well we're talking $70 more, on a far more basic PCB with less components.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Besides all the leaks/rumors, a single chip being able to cover such a wide price range should give us a clue regarding it's OC ability.









Their $199-$300 statements hopefully sent a strong hint to the AIB's. The most fascinating part is going to be how close it can get to the 1070.. If some customs can get anywhere near it while being $150 cheaper (Nvidia is also far more expensive than AMD in a lot of other countries besides the U.S, you could be looking at half the price in a lot of places), then this thing is going to dominate both the low and mid-range markets.

If all these rumors and clock speeds turn out to be real, then my Vega hype is going to go through the roof..


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> Besides all the leaks/rumors, a single chip being able to cover such a wide price range should give us a clue regarding it's OC ability.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their $199-$300 statements hopefully sent a strong hint to the AIB's. The most fascinating part is going to be how close it can get to the 1070.. If some customs can get anywhere near it while being $150 cheaper (Nvidia is also far more expensive than AMD in a lot of other countries besides the U.S, you could be looking at half the price in a lot of places), then this thing is going to dominate both the low and mid-range markets.
> 
> If all these rumors and clock speeds turn out to be real, then my Vega hype is going to go through the roof..


There's no doubt there will be $300 options:



Has to do something with overclocking capabilities. Since we know that this is the full lineup of cards (480, 470, 460):

AMD Provides Sneak Peek of Full Line of Radeon™ RX Series Graphics Processors:

"Today at Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) AMD (NASDAQ: AMD) CEO Lisa Su delivered a pre-launch showcase of the full line of forthcoming Radeon™ RX Series graphics cards set to transform PC gaming this summer by delivering enthusiast class performance and features for gamers at mainstream price points from $100-$300."

http://www.amd.com/en-us/press-releases/Pages/e3-sneak-peek-2016jun13.aspx


----------



## FLCLimax

Even if the 480 goes that high with OC and extra power, they should BRAND the "beast mode" cards as RX 490.


----------



## infranoia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> My Maxrevo 1500W probability doesn't even maintain 80% efficiency at 100W load


I'm at 91% at 200W on this Corsair. I'll take it.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Stay away from more than 2 GPUs. Support is completely lackluster for 3 and 4 way crossfire.


Drinking from Pascal's well, eh? The scaling on that fourth card is not great in DX11, granted-- but CF scaling is a far sight better than the competition. But I don't think we know enough about

1. These cards, or
2. DX12 MultiGPU

...to make that call. More info needed, especially with next-gen VR titles. If you can find anything at the $1000 pricepoint that would match 4 480s in raw speed, you're welcome to it (2 Vegas? One can hope...). Crossfire will soon be made obsolete by API, but I'm just not as afraid of it for all these aging DX11 titles as most of the grumps here on OCN.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> There's no doubt there will be $300 options:


I'm aware.









I meant i hope them saying $199 - $300 stops AIB's from pricing above $300.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GorillaSceptre*
> 
> I'm aware.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I meant i hope them saying $199 - $300 stops AIB's from pricing above $300.


I dont think we have too much to worry about with AIB partners. At $199 MSRP it gives AIB plenty of wiggle room. But IMO if they can give more performance for over $300 I would gladly take it. Not over $350 though.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> I dont think we have too much to worry about with AIB partners. At $199 MSRP it gives AIB plenty of wiggle room. But IMO if they can give more performance for over $300 I would gladly take it. Not over $350 though.


Newegg's listing for the RX 480 VisionTek is only running at 1120 MHz. That's a bit lower than the 1266, unless the 1266 MHz is a boost clock.


----------



## magnek

Well considering 1070 is _supposed to be_ $380 *coughcoughwinkwinknudgenudge*, yeah you don't want to go above $300 if the card can only OC to around Fury (non-X) levels of performance.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Well considering 1070 is _supposed to be_ $380 *coughcoughwinkwinknudgenudge*, yeah you don't want to go above $300 if the card can only OC to around Fury (non-X) levels of performance.


$379! The Nvidia fanpeople will attack you for that mishap.


----------



## Vesku

If we are listing our unrealistic desires regarding the 480 I'd rather it be "unlockable" to 2560 or 2816 SP than OCes to the moon if you pump 250+ Watts into it.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> There's no doubt there will be $300 options:
> 
> 
> 
> Has to do something with overclocking capabilities. Since we know that this is the full lineup of cards (480, 470, 460):
> 
> AMD Provides Sneak Peek of Full Line of Radeon™ RX Series Graphics Processors:
> 
> "Today at Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) AMD (NASDAQ: AMD) CEO Lisa Su delivered a pre-launch showcase of the full line of forthcoming Radeon™ RX Series graphics cards set to transform PC gaming this summer by delivering enthusiast class performance and features for gamers at mainstream price points from $100-$300."
> 
> http://www.amd.com/en-us/press-releases/Pages/e3-sneak-peek-2016jun13.aspx


Some believe that the $100-300 was used to indicate the market range (like it is used on the slide), not as a specific price range for these cards. Charging $299 for a MSRP $229 card is a pretty hefty percentage increase for custom cards, even if it isn't so much in actual dollars.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vesku*
> 
> If we are listing our unrealistic desires regarding the 480 I'd rather it be "unlockable" to 2560 or 2816 SP than OCes to the moon if you pump 250+ Watts into it.


It's been rumored for months the full die is 2560 SPs. Where you been, bro?


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> Newegg's listing for the RX 480 VisionTek is only running at 1120 MHz. That's a bit lower than the 1266, unless the 1266 MHz is a boost clock.


Yeah if you re-check the Newegg listing it states 1266MHz boost.



It also supports CUDA now too









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Well considering 1070 is _supposed to be_ $380 *coughcoughwinkwinknudgenudge*, yeah you don't want to go above $300 if the card can only OC to around Fury (non-X) levels of performance.


Well the thing here is, only using 14nm clockspeed improvements you only get to about mid 1600's with clockspeed improvements, and that's Fury X performance @ 1440p. But if there is a way to get it over that performance then I would gladly pay up to $350 for that. As of now we don't know what architectural improvements AMD has done. With 16nm NVIDIA has gone way over their predicted clockspeed improvements. I did the math months ago for clockspeed improvements with the 1080 and 1070 based on 16nm clockspeed improvements and NVIDIA was able to go way above that.

This potentially means that AMD could possibly have the same thing on their hands here, except they aren't exploiting it as much as NVIDIA is. In that, they have the same ability to vastly improve clockspeeds but they are taking a slightly different route than just implementing all of the clockspeed boosts directly to the card at launch like NVIDIA has done.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Some believe that the $100-300 was used to indicate the market range (like it is used on the slide), not as a specific price range for these cards. Charging $299 for a MSRP $229 card is a pretty hefty percentage increase for custom cards, even if it isn't so much in actual dollars.


While this is what they state in the slides, it is not what they state in the literature. Which was also posted below the slide that came directly from the AMD website. I'm sure if there was a misunderstanding with pricing segments AMD would have attempted to clear the air on that subject, no?


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Some believe that the $100-300 was used to indicate the market range (like it is used on the slide), not as a specific price range for these cards. Charging $299 for a MSRP $229 card is a pretty hefty percentage increase for custom cards, even if it isn't so much in actual dollars.


That's precisely why I think that $300 AIB cards are entirely dependent on how well 480 clocks and how it responds to additional voltage. There is a niche for highly custom 480 with amazing clocks and additional voltage capacity if the performance is there.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Yeah if you re-check the Newegg listing it states 1266MHz boost.


It looks like Newegg just took it down. I wasn't able to open the link at the time I found it in a search. It appears Newegg was in the process of removing the item.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> I dont think we have too much to worry about with AIB partners. At $199 MSRP it gives AIB plenty of wiggle room. But IMO if they can give more performance for over $300 I would gladly take it. Not over $350 though.


Please don't say that marketing teams are watching OCN









There is no justification for charging up to $350 (let alone $300) for something with exactly the same chip as a $200 card on it.

Maybe if they purposely gimped any chips under $300 so the $350 cards were 'worth it' then yeah, I'd never buy another AMD card.

Better VRM's/power delivery, better cooler, extra 4GB ram. There's no way that can blow out to above $300, if it does, it's price gouging for enthusiasts and a premium product.

If AIB's can't do solid power delivery and a good cooler for $50 more then something is wrong.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> While this is what they state in the slides, it is not what they state in the literature. Which was also posted below the slide that came directly from the AMD website. I'm sure if there was a misunderstanding with pricing segments AMD would have attempted to clear the air on that subject, no?


Seems strange to me that AMD would give a price that wasn't an MSRP - they don't control AIB pricing, so how do they know they'll end up at $300? Makes more sense that they just state it as a rounded-off price bracket where the cards will fall, especially when they use the phrase "at mainstream price points from $100-300" - but I guess we'll find out in July.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> Please don't say that marketing teams are watching OCN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no justification for charging up to $350 (let alone $300) for something with exactly the same chip as a $200 card on it.
> 
> Maybe if they purposely gimped any chips under $300 so the $350 cards were 'worth it' then yeah, I'd never buy another AMD card.
> 
> Better VRM's/power delivery, better cooler, extra 4GB ram. There's no way that can blow out to above $300, if it does, it's price gouging for enthusiasts and a premium product.
> 
> If AIB's can't do solid power delivery and a good cooler for $50 more then something is wrong.


$229 for 8 GB + $50 = close to $300, bro. $300 isn't that far off for AIBs.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> $229 for 8 GB + $50 = close to $300, bro. $300 isn't that far off for AIBs.


The person I quoted said they'd pay up to $350.......................


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> Please don't say that marketing teams are watching OCN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is no justification for charging up to $350 (let alone $300) for something with exactly the same chip as a $200 card on it.
> 
> Maybe if they purposely gimped any chips under $300 so the $350 cards were 'worth it' then yeah, I'd never buy another AMD card.
> 
> Better VRM's/power delivery, better cooler, extra 4GB ram. There's no way that can blow out to above $300, if it does, it's price gouging for enthusiasts and a premium product.
> 
> If AIB's can't do solid power delivery and a good cooler for $50 more then something is wrong.


What if they can directly compete with the 1070 for $350 though, doesn't that change your perception of the card even if it is the same chip as the $200 card?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Seems strange to me that AMD would give a price that wasn't an MSRP - they don't control AIB pricing, so how do they know they'll end up at $300? Makes more sense that they just state it as a rounded-off price bracket where the cards will fall - but I guess we'll find out in July.


Well if they aren't predicting AIB card's prices then what would the $300 price be for exactly? AMD has gone AIB only route with cards before in the past, it seems unlikely they wouldn't be discussing such things with the AIB partners now about the Polaris lineup.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> What if they can directly compete with the 1070 for $350 though, doesn't that change your perception of the card even if it is the same chip as the $200 card?


Then why can't a $270 version compete with a 1070 too.

I think some of us are thinking there will be magical OC results the more money we pour into the PCB.


----------



## toddincabo

Sooooo, I'm thinking of grabbing one of the AIB RX480 boards in hopes that down the road it will crossfire with a Zen APU.

Any thoughts on that?

Also, I would like to know if this 380x I'm using would be compatible with a Zen APU using 14nm. Is the process a factor or can it be achieved in software. That's how much I don"t know about all this.

I plan on using this 43" 1080p Lg tv for a few more years and hope my next purchase on that front will be Quantum Dot technology. So one of these plus a good APU should suffice by then. Surely they'll have CF working better, I hope.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> There is no justification for charging up to $350 *(let alone $300)* for something with exactly the same chip as a $200 card on it.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> $229 for 8 GB + $50 = close to $300, bro. $300 isn't that far off for AIBs.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> The person I quoted said they'd pay up to $350.......................


You were saying, bro?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Anything more then $269 for this card has no place in the market. You could spend a bit more and get GTX1070. Yes they are overpriced right now but price will settle down soon enough.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> Then why can't a $270 version compete with a 1070 too.
> 
> I think some of us are thinking there will be magical OC results the more money we pour into the PCB.


For all we know a $260-270 version will be the 1500-1600MHz versions, but I wouldn't expect it to compete with a 1070 directly at these speeds though and I wouldn't expect AMD to be able to challenge a nearly $400 product @ $270.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> For all we know a $260-270 version will be the 1500-1600MHz versions, but I wouldn't expect it to compete with a 1070 directly at these speeds though and I wouldn't expect AMD to be able to challenge a nearly $400 product @ $270.


$400+ when you factor in AIBs. Zealot fails to compare AIB 1070s to AIB 480s where both will be priced upwards from the MSRP. Unless, you wanted a $379 generic 1070 instead of an overclocked 480, then I supposed what he's saying isn't too far off.


----------



## JackCY

They can keep any overpriced AIBs that cost around $300. That is 150% price increase because the 4GB version won't be that far off in performance. No sane person is gonna pay $300 for AIB with 8GB when a $200 will run almost the same performance. Might as well save the trouble, save those extra $100 and get 1070 instead.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> That's precisely why I think that $300 AIB cards are entirely dependent on how well 480 clocks and how it responds to additional voltage. There is a niche for highly custom 480 with amazing clocks and additional voltage capacity if the performance is there.


I'd be tripping over people to grab an RX 480 Lightning 8GB @ $300 if it could OC to 1600.

Alas MSi doesn't make Lightning versions of pleb mainstream cards so that's just a dream.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> They can keep any overpriced AIBs that cost around $300. That is 150% price increase because the 4GB version won't be that far off in performance. No sane person is gonna pay $300 for AIB with 8GB when a $200 will run almost the same performance. Might as well save the trouble, save those extra $100 and get 1070 instead.


$199.99 + "save those extra $100" doesn't quite equal enough for a 1070.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> $400+ when you factor in AIBs. Zealot fails to compare AIB 1070s to AIB 480s where both will be priced upwards from the MSRP. Unless, you wanted a $379 generic 1070 instead of an overclocked 480, then I supposed what he's saying isn't too far off.


That's what I mean these 1070 cards are all going to be $400+, $380 1070's will look like this:



Even this "MSRP" 1080 is still $9 over MSRP.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> $199.99 + "save those extra $100" doesn't quite equal enough for a 1070.


Yeah, still another $100 short.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> You were saying, bro?


I have no idea what point you're trying to make....bro.............

Like I said, the person I quoted was saying they'd pay up to $350, which would be gouging no matter what PCB components they put on the card.

I'm not sure what you're missing here.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> I have no idea what point you're trying to make....bro.............
> 
> Like I said, the person I quoted was saying they'd pay up to $350, which would be gouging no matter what PCB components they put on the card.
> 
> I'm not sure what you're missing here.


You say even $300 was too much. He said $230 + $50 = $280 which is still right around $300 mark.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> If AIB's can't do solid power delivery and a good cooler for $50 more then something is wrong.


So literally for $50 more you are just about at the $300 mark. This is assuming you want the 8GB AIB partner versions.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> $400+ when you factor in AIBs. Zealot fails to compare AIB 1070s to AIB 480s where both will be priced upwards from the MSRP. Unless, you wanted a $379 generic 1070 instead of an overclocked 480, then I supposed what he's saying isn't too far off.


I know AIB are more for $380 but the Worse 1070 will still be faster then the best 480.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> You say even $300 was too much. He said $230 + $50 = $280 which is still right around $300 mark.
> 
> So literally for $50 more you are just about at the $300 mark. This is assuming you want the 8GB AIB partner versions.


$300 is a pretty extreme markup for a better cooler and 4GB vram.

I was saying that if it goes over $280 something is wrong. $280 and $300 are different numbers although you might think differently.

Maybe I should've said $270 then it would be a difference enough for people to recognize?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I know AIB are more for $380 but the Worse 1070 will still be faster then the best 480.


Nope, it is evident the more money we can throw at a 480 the more 1070 performance we will get.

Seriously though I agree with you.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> $300 is a pretty extreme markup for a better cooler and 4GB vram.
> 
> I was saying that if it goes over $280 something is wrong. $280 and $300 are different numbers although you might think differently.
> 
> Maybe I should've said $270 then it would be a difference enough for people to recognize?


I think you think differently if you think there's such a big difference between $280 and $300 that's only a 7% difference in price.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> I think you think differently if you think there's a difference between $280 and $300 that's a 7% difference in price.


But it's a cheap bang for buck card that is slowly creeping up and up in price in people's minds and they are fine with it.

I run an AMD card, and I'll be buying another AMD card, but this kind of thing is called gouging when it's Nvidia but suddenly we are allowing ourselves to pay huge % amounts extra for AIB 480's?

Are we forgetting this starts as a $200 card?

You've lost me.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> But it's a cheap bang for buck card that is slowly creeping up and up in price in people's minds and they are fine with it.
> 
> I run an AMD card, and I'll be buying another AMD card, but this kind of thing is called gouging when it's Nvidia but suddenly we are allowing ourselves to pay huge % amounts extra for AIB 480's?
> 
> Are we forgetting this starts as a $200 card?
> 
> You've lost me.


You are forgetting about the speculation that is taking place, responsible for these price increases. Which I don't understand why you are getting so bent out of shape over.

If the $300 card offers 20-25% improvement, for 30% higher price why is that such a problem? Offering a card with more performance for more money is quite good business practice for people who are not limited strictly to a $200-230 budget but are not willing to pay $400 or more for a 1070 (where's the in-between product stack here?). AMD has to compete with NVIDIA in some way. Because not long from now NVIDIA will have a 1060 and 1050, then what happens? They release after Polaris so NVIDIA knows the performance targets they have to hit to be faster and the prices that have to be set to be a better offering. So here offering 390X performance for $200 is great and all but the used market for 290X's has been going for $200 for quite some time now. AMD really needs to stick it to NVIDIA now while they have the chance.

All we are doing is predicting the possible performance increases from overclocking, and what the prices will be for AIB cards that surpass stock performance by a lot.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> But it's a cheap bang for buck card that is slowly creeping up and up in price in people's minds and they are fine with it.
> 
> I run an AMD card, and I'll be buying another AMD card, but this kind of thing is called gouging when it's Nvidia but suddenly we are allowing ourselves to pay huge % amounts extra for AIB 480's?
> 
> Are we forgetting this starts as a $200 card?
> 
> You've lost me.


With NV, you have no cheap reference versions and the AIB versions don't overclock well They're barely any better than the awful FEs so far.. There will still be $230 RX 480s, and probably cheap AIB versions that are a substantial upgrade. We should just wait and see.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> You are forgetting about the speculation that is taking place, responsible for these price increases. Which I don't understand why you are getting so bent out of shape over.
> 
> If the $300 card offers 20-25% improvement, for 30% higher price why is that such a problem? Offering a card with more performance for more money is quite good business practice for people who are not limited strictly to a $200-230 budget but are not willing to pay $400 or more for a 1070 (where's the in-between product stack here?). AMD has to compete with NVIDIA in some way. Because not long from now NVIDIA will have a 1060 and 1050, then what happens? It releases after Polaris so NVIDIA knows the performance targets they have to hit to be faster and the prices that have to be set to be a better offering. So here offering 390X performance for $200 is great and all but the used market for 290X's has been going for $200 for quite some time now. AMD really needs to stick it to NVIDIA now while they have the chance.
> 
> All we are doing is predicting the possible performance increases from overclocking, and what the prices will be for AIB cards that surpass stock performance by a lot.


Exactly. These threads are all speculation until something concrete arrives anyway, so why not indulge? There is a smorgasbord of tantalising what-if's and could-be's out there and postulating on them is simply human nature. It's not advocating for random prices, it's discussing what could happen given x or y.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> If the $300 card offers 20-25% improvement, for 30% higher price why is that such a problem?


I just don't understand why AMD would intentionally underclock/underpower their cards to the point where they can only charge less for it.

I'll speculate for the sake of it..........

$199-$229 reference - Might top out at 1400-1450mhz with a 6 pin?

$229-$299 - Better power delivery, extra 6 pin - maybe top out at 1450-1550

$300-$350 480? - Supreme components and cooler - Might top out at 1550-1650mhz?

I just can't see where such an expensive card is going to fit in or be worth it to anyone.

Even if you got a terrible reference card (we already know they run cool enough not to throttle) there is no way you're going to get 20% performance gain out of an uber card.

My numbers are a pretty generous assumption of the kind of gains we'd see I reckon. It would be more like a 10% gain for $100 more. This is on a $200-$229 GPU.

I just can't fathom it sorry, and also I apologize for being argumentative and possibly rude









I think it was the comment about being willing to pay up to $350 that struck a nerve with me for some reason (think I have a chip on my shoulder about companies gouging) and I'm sorry about that








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> With NV, you have no cheap reference versions and the AIB versions don't overclock well They're barely any better than the awful FEs so far.. There will still be $230 RX 480s, and probably cheap AIB versions that are a substantial upgrade. We should just wait and see.


Yeah. I think in some way I'm expecting AMD to have pushed the speeds for this architecture pretty fast straight out of the box as they did with fury, and like Nvidia has with Pascal.

I hope it's got massive headroom but not counting on it that's for sure.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Exactly. These threads are all speculation until something concrete arrives anyway, so why not indulge? There is a smorgasbord of tantalizing what-if's and could-be's out there and postulating on them is simply human nature. It's not advocating for random prices, it's discussing what could happen given x or y.


Basically what this thread was since its inception, until October guy arrived.









Guess some people just haven't been following since the start and forget what the title and subject is.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> I just don't understand why AMD would intentionally underclock/underpower their cards to the point where they can only charge less for it.
> 
> I'll speculate for the sake of it..........
> 
> $199-$229 reference - Might top out at 1400-1450mhz with a 6 pin?
> 
> $229-$299 - Better power delivery, extra 6 pin - maybe top out at 1450-1550
> 
> $300-$350 480? - Supreme components and cooler - Might top out at 1550-1650mhz?
> 
> I just can't see where such an expensive card is going to fit in or be worth it to anyone.
> 
> Even if you got a terrible reference card (we already know they run cool enough not to throttle) there is no way you're going to get 20% performance gain out of an uber card.
> 
> My numbers are a pretty generous assumption of the kind of gains we'd see I reckon. It would be more like a 10% gain for $100 more. This is on a $200-$229 GPU.
> 
> I just can't fathom it sorry, and also I apologize for being argumentative and possibly rude
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think it was the comment about being willing to pay up to $350 that struck a nerve with me for some reason (think I have a chip on my shoulder about companies gouging) and I'm sorry about that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah. I think in some way I'm expecting AMD to have pushed the speeds for this architecture pretty fast straight out of the box as they did with fury, and like Nvidia has with Pascal.
> 
> I hope it's got massive headroom but not counting on it that's for sure.


So I'm confused you do not believe your projected price points and clockspeeds would be worth it to anyone?

We really don't know what a 1650MHz 480 could do, but from earlier benchmarks @ 4K earlier on in this thread's life I projected Titan X performance at those speeds (@ 4K). That seems like a good buy for $300-350? You disagree with that?


----------



## SlackerITGuy

If this card (a heavily OC AIB SKU) can somewhat match Fury X level performance for around ~$250, then there's no way I won't be picking one up.

But if its just close to stock ~GTX 980 performance, then GTX 1070 here I come.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Basically what this thread was since its inception, until October guy arrived.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guess some people just haven't been following since the start and forget what the title and subject is.
> So I'm confused you do not believe your projected price points and clockspeeds would be worth it to anyone?
> 
> We really don't know what a 1650MHz 480 could do, but from earlier benchmarks @ 4K earlier on in this thread's life I projected Titan X performance at those speeds (@ 4K). That seems like a good buy for $300-350? You disagree with that?


Well I guess it would be ok but I left a large margin for error/silicon lottery.

According to my wild assumptions you might get 1550mhz on a good sample of a card for $269. Then on an uber card for $329 maybe only 1600mhz.

The uber card would then be considered terrible value.

Anyway we all have our own opinions on how these are going to OC and what we personally would pay for them. We'll have to agree to disagree


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I'm still of the opinion that extra power and non-reference boards won't matter all that much because the reference card will OC very well on its own. I'd be surprised if we didn't get 1500MHz speeds even out of the $199 cards simply because I think 14nm FF will be the key determining factor, not extra power. We are talking about an extremely efficient chip here (probably only 100W or so at stock boost speeds). Of course even if the reference cards are limited by power, getting non-reference AIB cards that can do 1500-1600 MHz for less than $300 would still be a steal (and likely really good performers considering how much better GCN scales with OC's compared to Nvidia's last few architectures). Imagine how a 1600MHz 390X would perform?


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> Well I guess it would be ok but I left a large margin for error/silicon lottery.
> 
> According to my wild assumptions you might get 1550mhz on a good sample of a card for $269. Then on an uber card for $329 maybe only 1600mhz.
> 
> The uber card would then be considered terrible value.
> 
> Anyway we all have our own opinions on how these are going to OC and what we personally would pay for them. We'll have to agree to disagree


Well originally based on the transition to 14nm, it offers 50% clockspeed improvements over 28nm. By going to 1266MHz with the 480 they already used 20% of their clockspeed improvement compared to previous gen. So there is another 30% leftover for clockspeed improvements here (yet AMD still settled on 1266MHz boost when clearly they could have gone higher). Now a while back I predicted the clockspeeds of the 1080 and 1070 based on the same arithmetic, that which is the clockspeed improvements from 28nm to 16nm. Yet when NVIDIA actually launched the 1080 and 1070 the clockspeeds ended up being even higher than what the facts say (on paper). Which means NVIDIA was able to go even higher than what 16nm can offer directly. Here I believe it is possible for the same scenario to occur with AMD, in that they might be sandbagging the clockspeeds (holding them back purposely). Whereas NVIDIA implemented all of their clockspeed improvements immediately. So there is always the possibility of over 1600MHz, it just about 1646MHz is the maximum on paper increase they can hit solely from 14nm.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Imagine how a 1600MHz 390X would perform?


Here's a 290X @ 1600MHz Fire Strike Extreme:



Here's a 980 Ti @ Stock Fire Strike Extreme:


----------



## Vesku

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I'm still of the opinion that extra power and non-reference boards won't matter all that much because the reference card will OC very well on its own. I'd be surprised if we didn't get 1500MHz speeds even out of the $199 cards simply because I think 14nm FF will be the key determining factor, not extra power. We are talking about an extremely efficient chip here (probably only 100W or so at stock boost speeds). Of course even if the reference cards are limited by power, getting non-reference AIB cards that can do 1500-1600 MHz for less than $300 would still be a steal (and likely really good performers considering how much better GCN scales with OC's compared to Nvidia's last few architectures). Imagine how a 1600MHz 390X would perform?


If GCN4 hasn't made any design regressions when it comes to clocking then through process change alone 1400 on reference should be the "guaranteed" OC. Only a very unlucky few might hit a wall in the 1300s.

Again, assuming AMD or GF have executed the 14FF transition with at least average competency.


----------



## Malinkadink

You guys are nuts if you're going to pay anything over $250 for this card. Its $229 for 8gb reference, so lets say $250 for an AIB card with non ref cooler, and if rumors are true you'll get a nice 1.5ghz clock out of it and be nipping on the heels of the Fury/Fury X.

Then theres the 1070 $379 MSRP for AIB cards, so i personally wouldn't pay more than $400 for it. Unfortunately with Nvidia's founders edition scam we wont be 1070s at $400 for some time. Now that i think about it, Nvidia's offering looks awful in terms of overall value especially the 1080.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *infranoia*
> 
> *Drinking from Pascal's well, eh?* The scaling on that fourth card is not great in DX11, granted-- but CF scaling is a far sight better than the competition. But I don't think we know enough about
> 
> 1. These cards, or
> 2. DX12 MultiGPU
> 
> ...to make that call. More info needed, especially with next-gen VR titles. If you can find anything at the $1000 pricepoint that would match 4 480s in raw speed, you're welcome to it (2 Vegas? One can hope...). Crossfire will soon be made obsolete by API, but I'm just not as afraid of it for all these aging DX11 titles as most of the grumps here on OCN.





Spoiler: Little boy!


----------



## infranoia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> *Little boy!*


LOL! I did indeed forget who I was talking to.


----------



## Gungnir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Well originally based on the transition to 14nm, it offers 50% clockspeed improvements over 28nm. By going to 1266MHz with the 480 they already used 20% of their clockspeed improvement compared to previous gen. So there is another 30% leftover for clockspeed improvements here (yet AMD still settled on 1266MHz boost when clearly they could have gone higher). Now a while back I predicted the clockspeeds of the 1080 and 1070 based on the same arithmetic, that which is the clockspeed improvements from 28nm to 16nm. Yet when NVIDIA actually launched the 1080 and 1070 the clockspeeds ended up being even higher than what the facts say (on paper). Which means NVIDIA was able to go even higher than what 16nm can offer directly. Here I believe it is possible for the same scenario to occur with AMD, in that they might be sandbagging the clockspeeds (holding them back purposely). Whereas NVIDIA implemented all of their clockspeed improvements immediately.


I think that's probably the case. Polaris' goals are high efficiency and low cost: low voltage means better efficiency and lower clocks means looser tolerances, better yields, lower cost. They made it clear that those goals are more important to them than pushing the chip to the limits to try to compete with the much bigger GP104. And that means there should be significant headroom for those of us with different priorities. Assuming of course that GCN4 doesn't significantly reduce max clocks, which is possible, though I feel unlikely.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gungnir*
> 
> I think that's probably the case. Polaris' goals are high efficiency and low cost: low voltage means better efficiency and lower clocks means looser tolerances, better yields, lower cost. They made it clear that those goals are more important to them than pushing the chip to the limits to try to compete with the much bigger GP104. And that means there should be significant headroom for those of us with different priorities. Assuming of course that GCN4 doesn't significantly reduce max clocks, which is possible, though I feel unlikely.


Well that's basically why I think these $300 cards are going to have totally different goals than the reference design, and why I also believe that these high clocked AIB cards will most likely exist.

They already have "Super Clocked" versions of the AIB Reference 480:


----------



## nagle3092

I hope its not just xfx cards that have the full length backplate.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Those discounting the fact that AIB cards will be very necessary might need to reconsider because most recent testing of the reference design card maxes out at 1340MHz:



All these big overclock rumors we are seeing are AIB cards.

Also, thermal imaging of stock cooler:

https://vid.me/xs9x


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Those discounting the fact that AIB cards will be very necessary might need to reconsider because most recent testing of the reference design card maxes out at 1340MHz:
> 
> 
> 
> All these big overclock rumors we are seeing are AIB cards.
> 
> Also, thermal imaging of stock cooler:
> 
> https://vid.me/xs9x


A single forum post is not enough data to conclude that overclocking is that bad on these.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> A single forum post is not enough data to conclude that overclocking is that bad on these.


Let's hope so.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Little boy!





Spoiler: Fat Man!


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Let's hope so.


Its gpu lottery man, it always has been. I had a 780ti classy that was THE WORST overclocker I have ever had (I couldnt even get 100mhz out of it). Theres always going to be duds that make it off the assembly line. Considering we havent seen even a hint of non reference cards I doubt there is that many people out there overclocking them.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Its gpu lottery man, it always has been. I had a 780ti classy that was THE WORST overclocker I have ever had. Considering we havent seen even a hint of non reference cards I dout there is that many people out there overclocking them.


Define "The Worst" I mean if the Classy hit 1150-1200 still around average overclock for big Kepler. We were expecting at least 1400-1450 average with the 480 reference. Seems a bit low even if it is because of the silicon lottery.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Those discounting the fact that AIB cards will be very necessary might need to reconsider because most recent testing of the reference design card maxes out at 1340MHz:
> 
> All these big overclock rumors we are seeing are AIB cards.
> 
> Also, thermal imaging of stock cooler:
> 
> https://vid.me/xs9x


Someone pointed out the he didn't raise the power limit for his card


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Someone pointed out the he didn't raise the power limit for his card


I see something about voltage in the thread but not power limit:

Page 2 Chiphell Translated

https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1607671-1-1.html


----------



## Mad Pistol

So I am officially off the RX 480 hype train.

People keep saying around 390X performance with lower power draw. That's fantastic... except there is one issue that I cannot get over; I need two RX 480's to reach the performance I want, and after my previous experiences with Crossfire and SLI, I do not want to go down that route again. I am not a hardcore overclocker or benchmarker. I like to play games, and I NEED something to power this 3440x1440 monitor that I bought about 6 months ago.

Seeing as an overclocked 980 Ti can match/beat and overclocked 1070, I have conceded that there is not a viable upgrade path to the performance I want without either severe compromises (multi-card) or a card that is out of my budget. Because of this, I just bought a 980 Ti CLASSIFIED for $449 from Newegg. Yes, I know it's the "Ref clock" version, but it has such a beefy design on it that it shouldn't have any issues overclocking like a demon... I hope. I also realize it's previous gen tech, but at that price, I can't really pass it up.

I love new tech so much, but I just feel underwhelmed right now. Even if the RX 480 overclocks to the moon and back, it won't reach 1070 or 980 Ti levels, which is where I need it to be... so I have to give it a pass.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> I see something about voltage in the thread but not power limit:
> 
> Page 2 Chiphell Translated
> 
> https://www.chiphell.com/thread-1607671-1-1.html


Something about existing drivers still buggy, and most importantly voltage locked to 1.13V.

Also CCC is locking memory OC to 2050 (8100 effective), and there was something about "I can adjust the sliders but the values reset to default", but not sure if he was referring to clocks or voltage (probably clocks since I don't imagine there's a voltage slider in any part of the drivers)


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Something about existing drivers still buggy, and most importantly voltage locked to 1.13V.
> 
> Also CCC is locking memory OC to 2050 (8100 effective), and there was something about "I can adjust the sliders but the values reset to default", but not sure if he was referring to clocks or voltage.


Well I guess that there is still hope for the reference design because of a driver holding everything back then. All of that could be tied to a driver and hopefully not a bios.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> So I am officially off the RX 480 hype train.
> 
> People keep saying around 390X performance with lower power draw. That's fantastic... except there is one issue that I cannot get over; I need two RX 480's to reach the performance I want, and after my previous experiences with Crossfire and SLI, I do not want to go down that route again. I am not a hardcore overclocker or benchmarker. I like to play games, and I NEED something to power this 3440x1440 monitor that I bought about 6 months ago.
> 
> Seeing as an overclocked 980 Ti can match/beat and overclocked 1070, I have conceded that there is not a viable upgrade path to the performance I want without either severe compromises (multi-card) or a card that is out of my budget. Because of this, I just bought a 980 Ti CLASSIFIED for $449 from Newegg. Yes, I know it's the "Ref clock" version, but it has such a beefy design on it that it shouldn't have any issues overclocking like a demon... I hope. I also realize it's previous gen tech, but at that price, I can't really pass it up.
> 
> I love new tech so much, but I just feel underwhelmed right now. Even if the RX 480 overclocks to the moon and back, it won't reach 1070 or 980 Ti levels, which is where I need it to be... so I have to give it a pass.


Saw a 980 Ti with a full waterblock for about the same price. I'm sure the owner stll has the stock cooler. sell the block and wait for the Ti.

OCN market.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> So I am officially off the RX 480 hype train.
> 
> People keep saying around 390X performance with lower power draw. That's fantastic... except there is one issue that I cannot get over; I need two RX 480's to reach the performance I want, and after my previous experiences with Crossfire and SLI, I do not want to go down that route again. I am not a hardcore overclocker or benchmarker. I like to play games, and I NEED something to power this 3440x1440 monitor that I bought about 6 months ago.
> 
> Seeing as an overclocked 980 Ti can match/beat and overclocked 1070, I have conceded that there is not a viable upgrade path to the performance I want without either severe compromises (multi-card) or a card that is out of my budget. Because of this, I just bought a 980 Ti CLASSIFIED for $449 from Newegg. Yes, I know it's the "Ref clock" version, but it has such a beefy design on it that it shouldn't have any issues overclocking like a demon... I hope. I also realize it's previous gen tech, but at that price, I can't really pass it up.
> 
> I love new tech so much, but I just feel underwhelmed right now. Even if the RX 480 overclocks to the moon and back, it won't reach 1070 or 980 Ti levels, which is where I need it to be... so I have to give it a pass.


Considering your goals, the RX 480 was never meant for you anyway. This is a mainstream card, not a flagship.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> So I am officially off the RX 480 hype train.
> 
> People keep saying around 390X performance with lower power draw. That's fantastic... except there is one issue that I cannot get over; I need two RX 480's to reach the performance I want, and after my previous experiences with Crossfire and SLI, I do not want to go down that route again. I am not a hardcore overclocker or benchmarker. I like to play games, and I NEED something to power this 3440x1440 monitor that I bought about 6 months ago.
> 
> Seeing as an overclocked 980 Ti can match/beat and overclocked 1070, I have conceded that there is not a viable upgrade path to the performance I want without either severe compromises (multi-card) or a card that is out of my budget. Because of this, I just bought a 980 Ti CLASSIFIED for $449 from Newegg. Yes, I know it's the "Ref clock" version, but it has such a beefy design on it that it shouldn't have any issues overclocking like a demon... I hope. I also realize it's previous gen tech, but at that price, I can't really pass it up.
> 
> I love new tech so much, but I just feel underwhelmed right now. Even if the RX 480 overclocks to the moon and back, it won't reach 1070 or 980 Ti levels, which is where I need it to be... so I have to give it a pass.


For that price, you might as well have gotten a 1070 Flounder's Flanders Founder's Edition from nVidia direct. Hell they even have them in stock right now: http://www.geforce.com/hardware/10series/geforce-gtx-1070

Tell you what: send that 980 Ti back as soon as it arrives, and just buy the 1070 FE.


----------



## nagle3092

Dropping hints?



@2:38


----------



## SSJVegeta

That moey1974 dude posted this today on videocardz:
Quote:


> posted this yesterday at the other site but for all you skeptics,
> you'll see that a nicely overclocked Rx 480 rivals a stock 1070. I keep
> saying it because my brother has a ref 480 and his business partners
> have a few AIB 6+8 pin Rx 480's and plenty more of the reference
> cards.
> 
> Long story short is this...
> 
> Why buy a 1070 when a
> single Rx 480 OC'd beats/rivals the stock 1070? A 1500+ OC is very
> doable on the double pin cards, the 6+8 pin cards i mean. Ref cards do
> quite well if the person knows what he's doing. This guy in the video seems a little lost lol kidding but seriously, his reference is even more capable than what he shared and its even hard to see what he's doing and getting in terms of results.
> 
> There are enough confirmed
> sources on my side to say with 100% confidence that the Rx 480 OC'd is
> indeed a contender with a stock 1070 in just about all new games or
> rather all Dx12 games. We are at a point now that real in-game
> benchmarks should start to come out this week that will show what i am
> saying is indeed true. So hold off on trying to buy a 1070, You really
> would be wasting money imho. Both single and double pin Rx 480's rock
> big time when overclocked. You can clearly see AMD designed these cards
> to overclock nicely because they're a lot more efficient when
> overclocked.


----------



## hokk

Lol Linus


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kylzer*
> 
> Lol Linus


At least it was good use of insanity wolf.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *kylzer*
> 
> Lol Linus


More like Lolnus


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> More like Lolnus


A nus tech tips?

Too far


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SSJVegeta*
> 
> That moey1974 dude posted this today on videocardz:


So, his source claims that rx480 gains 60% performance from at most 34% overclock?

With all due respect, where is the tiger?


----------



## SSJVegeta

Lolrus


----------



## Coffee Bean

Too bad I must be nVidia slave because I like to use 3DTV/Vision for gaming


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> For that price, you might as well have gotten a 1070 Flounder's Flanders Founder's Edition from nVidia direct. Hell they even have them in stock right now: http://www.geforce.com/hardware/10series/geforce-gtx-1070
> 
> Tell you what: send that 980 Ti back as soon as it arrives, and just buy the 1070 FE.


Thanks for the tip. I just ordered the 1070 FE... I didn't even think you could order that right now due to low stocks.

I will get in contact with Newegg and see if they cannot catch the order before it leaves. If not, I will decline the other package when it arrives.

Sorry guys... My original intent was to get a GTX 1070 anyway... so it looks like I will be getting one after all.

EDIT: I just noticed that Newegg doesn't offer a refund for the current card I just bought... all I'm going to say is if I am unable to return it to them, I will never buy anything from them again... count on it.

EDIT2: just chatted with Customer Support for Newegg, and the order for the 980 Ti has been cancelled. Now we wait for the 1070 FE. I love you AMD, but I just cannot do it.


----------



## magnek

Everybody needs a backup card, so just make sure to pick up an RX 480 when it launches.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Now we wait for the 1070 FE. I love you AMD, but I just cannot do it.


Buying a Funder's Edition 1070 is a sure way to break AMD's heart lol. Did you ever really love them though?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Everybody needs a backup card, so just make sure to pick up an RX 480 when it launches.


lols


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Coffee Bean*
> 
> Too bad I must be nVidia slave because I like to use 3DTV/Vision for gaming


I know the feeling ,thats about the only good reason I have to not get rid of my nv rig when Vega comes around. Even though good support is lacking when it works it's magic.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Well if the 1.5+ AIB cards moey1974 is taking about are $300. I wonder how much these will cost in the UK. I just hope it's not £300 cause then you can get a cheap 1070 for around £365


----------



## amlett

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I'd be tripping over people to grab an RX 480 Lightning 8GB @ $300 if it could OC to 1600.
> 
> Alas MSi doesn't make Lightning versions of pleb mainstream cards so that's just a dream.


I supose they'll release a HAWK version.


----------



## daviejams

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> Well if the 1.5+ AIB cards moey1974 is taking about are $300. I wonder how much these will cost in the UK. I just hope it's not £300 cause then you can get a cheap 1070 for around £365


None of these £365 1070s are in stock anywhere as far as I can see. Cheapest is £395


----------



## FlyingSolo

Well if the 1.5+ AIB cards moey1974 is taking about are $300. I wonder how much these will cost in the UK. I just hope it's not £300 cause then you can get a cheap 1070 for around £365
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *daviejams*
> 
> None of these £365 1070s are in stock anywhere as far as I can see. Cheapest is £395


Yeah they are not in stock. I'll wait it out and see what the cost of AIB 480 8GB are.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *daviejams*
> 
> None of these £365 1070s are in stock anywhere as far as I can see. Cheapest is £395


Yeah they are not in stock. I'll wait it out and see what the cost of AIB 480 8GB are.


----------



## artemis2307

New pics



Oh my god void stamp on the screw
and here I am so hyped up for it


----------



## stoker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> New pics
> 
> 
> 
> Oh my god void stamp on the screw
> and here I am so hyped up for it


Possibly Sapphire


----------



## artemis2307

if my sample got void stamp on the screw I'm gonna die


----------



## Titanox

Here's some Info

Slides


----------



## Titanox

Chinese Forum

http://bbs.ngacn.cc/read.php?tid=9491647


----------



## NFL

58FPS in DOOM @ 1080p, which is 380-ish, but the 3DMark score puts it at 980/390X levels?

Yeah, something's not right


----------



## Ha-Nocri

nvm


----------



## Kuivamaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> 58FPS in DOOM @ 1080p, which is 380-ish, but the 3DMark score puts it at 980/390X levels?
> 
> Yeah, something's not right


Without actual drivers it is entirely possible to have poor soon performance. Hawaii-Granada got 40% boost or thereabouts from drivers alone.


----------



## elina08

RX480 = R9 390X @ 1080/1440p slower @ 4K

http://bbs.ngacn.cc/read.php?tid=9491647


----------



## sammkv

I want one of these aftermarket 480 and get it up to 1700


----------



## flopper

NH got cards so a week to go for reviews.
without the fan shroud the card is basically Nano size.


----------



## rainzor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kuivamaa*
> 
> Without actual drivers it is entirely possible to have poor soon performance. *Hawaii-Granada got 40% boost or thereabouts from drivers alone*.


If you said Tahiti, as a completely new uarch, ok i believe that, but Hawaii? No, not even close.


----------



## Newbie2009

In synthetics it looks almost identical to a single 290x.

So a 290x with less power consumption, 8GB and probably with tax €249 here in yoyo land.


----------



## revanchrist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sammkv*
> 
> I want one of these aftermarket 480 and get it up to 1700


Better stop hyping it. I've seen people across all kind of forums and websites getting their expectation pumped sky high. 29th will be a disaster for AMD if it fails to overclock to the moon. People will point fingers to AMD, no they themselves.


----------



## NFL

Did anyone else notice that they used the box art of 4/10 year old games for their FPS slide?


----------



## daviejams

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revanchrist*
> 
> Better stop hyping it. I've seen people across all kind of forums and websites getting their expectation pumped sky high. 29th will be a disaster for AMD if it fails to overclock to the moon. People will point fingers to AMD, no they themselves.


Nonsense

If it's 390x/980 levels for $229 , it will be a success regardless of how well it overclocks


----------



## artemis2307

oh god, now we can't even watercool the ****


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> $199.99 + "save those extra $100" doesn't quite equal enough for a 1070.


It does if you consider an expensive AIB card for $279, so instead of paying $300 for AIB just save extra 100 and get 1070.


----------



## ryan92084

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> Did anyone else notice that they used the box art of 4/10 year old games for their FPS slide?


I chuckled. I'd say that proves them fake but with marketing blunders like this being so common who knows.


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ryan92084*
> 
> I chuckled. I'd say that proves them fake but with marketing blunders like this being so common who knows.


Between the bizarre FPS, the old box art, and the recycled 3DMark scores (it's the same score VC leaked), I think it's fake


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Oh man, I have a feeling Moey is gonna get Ojo'd if his "leaks" don't pan out...


----------



## FLCLimax

lmao.


----------



## revanchrist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *daviejams*
> 
> Nonsense
> 
> If it's 390x/980 levels for $229 , it will be a success regardless of how well it overclocks


Feel free to continue hyping it then. Be my guest.


----------



## ryan92084

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Oh man, I have a feeling Moey is gonna get Ojo'd if his "leaks" don't pan out...


henceforth they would be known as mOjoey


----------



## xzamples

how does an overclocked rx 480 8gb version compare to 1070?

is the rx 480 8gb competing with the 1070 or just 1060? since we know it's not with the 1080


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Oh man, I have a feeling Moey is gonna get Ojo'd if his "leaks" don't pan out...


Lol. I just hope the 480 performance is around 390X/980. I need to get a card now no matter what. Since i sold off my 970.


----------



## Ha-Nocri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xzamples*
> 
> how does an overclocked rx 480 8gb version compare to 1070?
> 
> is the rx 480 8gb competing with the 1070 or just 1060? since we know it's not with the 1080


Competing with 1060. Everything else are hopeful wishes.


----------



## stoker

Man I hoping RX480 pans out, missed out on a 2nd hand Fury for cheap


----------



## sugalumps

Oh god if it only just matches a 980 after 100 page thread hyping it to match and surpass a 980ti


----------



## ryan92084

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xzamples*
> 
> how does an overclocked rx 480 8gb version compare to 1070?
> 
> is the rx 480 8gb competing with the 1070 or just 1060? since we know it's not with the 1080


That depends on which firestrike ultra "leaks" you prefer to trust more. On the optimistic side the 1070 is 19.5% ahead so you'd need an OC around 1550mhz to battle with it. On the other end the 1070 is 44% ahead so it'd need closer to 1900mhz.


----------



## Ha-Nocri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> Oh god if it only just matches a 980 after 100 page thread hyping it to match and surpass a 980ti


I hope it matches 980.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Anyone see preorders yet for legit sites?

Really wanting to get my cards at launch, and not months from now or with extreme gouging.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> It does if you consider an expensive AIB card for $279, so instead of paying $300 for AIB just save extra 100 and get 1070.


Would you mind link me a listing of 1070 at $379


----------



## JackCY

I think your best bet is to have a friend or work in one of the shops that already has stock. Get it before release or on day of release. No idea how large stock the shops will have and how fast it will go to zero stock, it's pretty normal for any GPU release that the initial stock no matter how big goes to zero and you have to wait for another wave of resupply.

Which is not bad per se, because you get to see more reviews, potential issues get discovered, better AIB cards arrive and you can better choose the GPU you want instead of getting the reference design on day 0.


----------



## CasualCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Oh man, I have a feeling Moey is gonna get Ojo'd if his "leaks" don't pan out...


Still waiting for the Vega info he promised


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *CasualCat*
> 
> Still waiting for the Vega info he promised


Maybe he meant by next weekend


----------



## Pesmerrga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> NH got cards so a week to go for reviews.
> without the fan shroud the card is basically Nano size.


Hmm.. what do you guys think of taking off the stock cooler and throwing one of these on?



I have an RVZ02B in which I cut out the area for the optical/3.5 HDD area and put in a TD03Slim with an AP fan. So instead of being able to fit a full size GPU, I really only have space for a 970 ITX or Nano. I have the Asus 970 in there now and have been reluctant to get a Nano with the new gen coming out.


----------



## JackCY

I bet a just fan swap would do. These Arctic coolers cost way too much extra and are not thin by any means. I've just been looking at them for fun.
AIBs should release some short RX480s with better coolers IMHO.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> I think your best bet is to have a friend or work in one of the shops that already has stock. Get it before release or on day of release. No idea how large stock the shops will have and how fast it will go to zero stock, it's pretty normal for any GPU release that the initial stock no matter how big goes to zero and you have to wait for another wave of resupply.
> 
> Which is not bad per se, because you get to see more reviews, potential issues get discovered, better AIB cards arrive and you can better choose the GPU you want instead of getting the reference design on day 0.


I have a preference for reference. Plus if it has voltage control what more could you ask for?


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> I bet a just fan swap would do. These Arctic coolers cost way too much extra and are not thin by any means. I've just been looking at them for fun.
> AIBs should release some short RX480s with better coolers IMHO.


but not at launch. AMD confirmed that. Sadly we will have to wait for custom rx 480.


----------



## Pesmerrga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> but not at launch. AMD confirmed that. Sadly we will have to wait for custom rx 480.


Yeah, I'm worried it will go Reference at launch, AIB OC Beast Mode models 2 or 3 weeks after launch, then niche mini ITX ones a few weeks or longer after that. Maybe to get as many Nano's out the door as they can. I definitely don't want to invest in a 4 gb Nano that has thermal or power throttling for $400 when I can get a RX 480 for $200/$229 and a $50 arctic cooler. I'll just give it a shot and let everyone know how it goes.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> I bet a just fan swap would do. These Arctic coolers cost way too much extra and are not thin by any means. I've just been looking at them for fun.
> AIBs should release some short RX480s with better coolers IMHO.
> 
> 
> 
> but not at launch. AMD confirmed that. Sadly we will have to wait for custom rx 480.
Click to expand...

I'm hoping for cheap full cover blocks available soon.


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> I'm hoping for cheap full cover blocks available soon.


im going with core block, since i already have one :> but still not sure if i should go for 480 or just 470. Tbh i think i dont need that much of raw power.


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pesmerrga*
> 
> Yeah, I'm worried it will go Reference at launch, AIB OC Beast Mode models 2 or 3 weeks after launch, then niche mini ITX ones a few weeks or longer after that. Maybe to get as many Nano's out the door as they can. I definitely don't want to invest in a 4 gb Nano that has thermal or power throttling for $400 when I can get a RX 480 for $200/$229 and a $50 arctic cooler. I'll just give it a shot and let everyone know how it goes.


i would just save that 50 bucks and see how will custom pcb cards overclock. Maybe it will be worth to wait.


----------



## Pesmerrga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> i would just save that 50 bucks and see how will custom pcb cards overclock. Maybe it will be worth to wait.


Lol.. too late.. got an open box one on Fleabay for $20 shipped.


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pesmerrga*
> 
> Lol.. too late.. got an open box one on Fleabay for $20 shipped.


Well, then you are our doctor now XD and rx480 will be your patient


----------



## GHADthc

I`ll attempt to put a Raijintek Morpheus on one for the luls...not sure its gonna fit too well, will let you guys know.


----------



## CasualCat

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Maybe he meant by next weekend


So Saturday in October?


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> Oh god if it only just matches a 980 after 100 page thread hyping it to match and surpass a 980ti


Matching a 980 (or a little more so) is all AMD was ever aiming at for a $200 video card. Anybody hyping 980Ti performance for this thing is just being hopeful (and its not completely impossible, just extremely unlikely). But thanks for previewing just how the Nvidia fanboys are going to respond when the card does come out. "Hahahaha, another AMD fail! Its ONLY a little faster than an OC 980 after all that hype, what a joke!"

I think beating a max OC 980 with a $199 card is pretty dam epic myself and anything beyond that would just be frosting on the cake...


----------



## ChevChelios

well a max OC 980 is a ~1550+Mhz 980 .. and I doubt the $199-229 480 versions will be able to OC enough to match that, much less beat it

the AIB 480s likely can, but they will also cost more then $250 (and thats before non-US price increases)


----------



## ryan92084

2906 gpu score in ultra from today using public drivers. Little better than the worst leaks but not much.
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8900159


----------



## Rabit

Ok heat sink inside RX 480 looks a bit to small for my taste

Close up


Source: http://videocardz.com/61340/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-4

I probably go for RX 470 remove plastic cover, unplug stock fan, and mount 120mm on heat sink


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rabit*
> 
> Ok heat sink inside RX 480 looks a bit to small for my taste
> 
> Close up
> 
> 
> Source: http://videocardz.com/61340/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-4
> 
> I probably go for RX 470 remove plastic cover, unplug stock fan, and mount 120mm on heat sink


it's a small card. I don't think it will run as hot or loud as the R9 290X reference cards


----------



## SamuraiGuns

Ummm, I thought everyone said Polaris was being made at GloFo???


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

All this talk of changing the cooler I find a little surprising considering it's an *up to* 150W card with a single 6 pin connector.

The card is said to run in the low 60C region and that's the reference version, fairly sure the small heatsink is plenty.


----------



## Pesmerrga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> All this talk of changing the cooler I find a little surprising considering it's an *up to* 150W card with a single 6 pin connector.
> 
> The card is said to run in the low 60C region and that's the reference version, fairly sure the small heatsink is plenty.


I only want to do it due to the form factor..


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rabit*
> 
> Ok heat sink inside RX 480 looks a bit to small for my taste
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Close up
> 
> 
> 
> Source: http://videocardz.com/61340/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-4
> 
> I probably go for RX 470 remove plastic cover, unplug stock fan, and mount 120mm on heat sink


I really want to mount an EK-Thermosphere on there and have it poke through the shroud, leaving the fan and VRM sink on there. It would look almost stock!


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SamuraiGuns*
> 
> Ummm, I thought everyone said Polaris was being made at GloFo???


Well, does not GloFo have Taiwan foundries as well?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> All this talk of changing the cooler I find a little surprising considering it's an *up to* 150W card with a single 6 pin connector.
> 
> The card is said to run in the low 60C region and that's the reference version, fairly sure the small heatsink is plenty.


Didn't we see it hitting 70 degrees on IR shot?


----------



## AmericanLoco

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SamuraiGuns*
> 
> Ummm, I thought everyone said Polaris was being made at GloFo???


Chips can be packaged in locations other than where they were fabricated. For example, AMD CPUs for the longest time said "Diffused In Germany/Made in Malaysia". The raw dies would be shipped to a packaging facility, which would mount them to the PCB and attach the IHS.

GloFo's only 14nm fab is in New York, so these dies must be being shipped overseas to be packaged.


----------



## NuclearPeace

The heat sink assembly on that 480 is disappointingly small but they have to save money somewhere.


----------



## Newbie2009

I wonder if these cards are binned. I hope not.


----------



## SamuraiGuns

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AmericanLoco*
> 
> Chips can be packaged in locations other than where they were fabricated. For example, AMD CPUs for the longest time said "Diffused In Germany/Made in Malaysia". The raw dies would be shipped to a packaging facility, which would mount them to the PCB and attach the IHS.
> 
> GloFo's only 14nm fab is in New York, so these dies must be being shipped overseas to be packaged.


The AMD CPUs still say this (even the new excavator cores), that is why I assumed the GPUs would follow. Hilariously enough I never looked at a GPU package close enough to realize the naming conventions are different.

Now It makes me wonder why they do it because there is enough space to add both around the edges


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xzamples*
> 
> how does an overclocked rx 480 8gb version compare to 1070?
> 
> is the rx 480 8gb competing with the 1070 or just 1060? since we know it's not with the 1080


I would expect nothing better than the 1060. We will know for sure in a week from today, the 29th.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SamuraiGuns*
> 
> Ummm, I thought everyone said Polaris was being made at GloFo???


GF is using Samsung 14nm FF node, so the cards could probably be produced at either foundries depending on which would give better price and/or lead times. Or maybe the initial batches are produced at both to get a big boost of initial stock.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Matching a 980 (or a little more so) is all AMD was ever aiming at for a $200 video card. Anybody hyping 980Ti performance for this thing is just being hopeful (and its not completely impossible, just extremely unlikely). But thanks for previewing just how the Nvidia fanboys are going to respond when the card does come out. "Hahahaha, another AMD fail! Its ONLY a little faster than an OC 980 after all that hype, what a joke!"
> 
> I think beating a max OC 980 with a $199 card is pretty dam epic myself and anything beyond that would just be frosting on the cake...


That may be what AMD was aiming for, but the hype train is at full speed and now it is expected to be able to rival the 1070. That is what people are going to remember and expect. Just like the 1080 is an "overclocking failure" because it doesn't clock to 2.3 like people hyped. We saw the same thing with Fury - expectations went too high and suddenly it was a failure for not beating Titan X.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> All this talk of changing the cooler I find a little surprising considering it's an *up to* 150W card with a single 6 pin connector.
> 
> The card is said to run in the low 60C region and that's the reference version, fairly sure the small heatsink is plenty.


And the 1080 FE was shown to run 67C at 2100, but we saw how that turned out. 150W through that die is roughly the same as the 180W the 1080 is putting through its correspondingly larger die, so thermal density may be a problem once you start overclocking.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Just like the 1080 is an "overclocking failure" because it doesn't clock to 2.3 like people hyped.


I consider the 1080 and overclocking failure because its real stock speeds are 1850ish, and cards barely reach 2050 stable. While 200MHz is nice and what a lot of cards through generations have been getting, it is barely more than 10% in reality, on top of which Nvidia made wildly false claims and impressions that 2.1Ghz would be a really easy to achieve standard on any old card and with really low temperatures, which proved completely false. So when Nvidia claimed one thing and supposedly showed a demo of it, people expected the better cards out there to be able to get at least an extra 100MHz over what was "easily achievable on any random card". So that is why it is considered an overclocking failure. The 1080 didn't live up to Nvidia's actual promise, it didn't live up to hype, it didn't live up to standard expectations, and it didn't live up to past GPU average OC history.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> I thought AMD could run 4x for CF instead of Nvidia's 8x minimum req. Pretty sure I think you can do tri-CF at 8x/4x/4x. No idea how it would impact performance though. Maybe even 4x/4x/4x/4x but not sure.


the minimum setting for CF using XDMA with good performance is 2.0 x8


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> Didn't we see it hitting 70 degrees on IR shot?


Not sure I must've missed the flir pic.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> And the 1080 FE was shown to run 67C at 2100, but we saw how that turned out. 150W through that die is roughly the same as the 180W the 1080 is putting through its correspondingly larger die, so thermal density may be a problem once you start overclocking.


Good points.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> The 1080 didn't live up to Nvidia's actual promise, it didn't live up to hype, it didn't live up to standard expectations, and it didn't live up to past GPU average OC history.


Valid.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> I have a preference for reference. Plus if it has voltage control what more could you ask for?


Better cooler and VRM.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> but not at launch. AMD confirmed that. Sadly we will have to wait for custom rx 480.


Normal.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pesmerrga*
> 
> Yeah, I'm worried it will go Reference at launch, AIB OC Beast Mode models 2 or 3 weeks after launch, then niche mini ITX ones a few weeks or longer after that. Maybe to get as many Nano's out the door as they can. I definitely don't want to invest in a 4 gb Nano that has thermal or power throttling for $400 when I can get a RX 480 for $200/$229 and a $50 arctic cooler. I'll just give it a shot and let everyone know how it goes.


Or wait 2 weeks and get the card with warranty etc.

People are just too impatient, I'm sure custom cards will be released, it would be really stupid if they didn't. Wait, see reviews, see what card you like the most, wait for prices to settle down as I'm sure the sellers will be greedy at the start as always. Then get your card when prices stabilize and most models are available.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> I have a preference for reference. Plus if it has voltage control what more could you ask for?
> 
> 
> 
> Better cooler and VRM.
Click to expand...

6+1 should be fine for the power consumption, right?


----------



## lolerk52

Kyle Bennett's "excellent" understanding of silicon lithography


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> 
> 
> Kyle Bennett's "excellent" understanding of silicon lithography


lol
Both 14nm and 16nm are essentially 20nm + finfet, 14nm has MAYBE 10% advantage in density, but it would vary depending on design. Even intel's 14nm has ~20% density advantage over tsmc's 16nm. If glofo/samsung had a denser process than intel they'd be bragging about it non-stop


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Kyle Bennett's "excellent" understanding of silicon lithography


I assume Kyle is beyond repair and needs to be replaced by a new and why not a 480 card?









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> lol
> Both 14nm and 16nm are essentially 20nm + finfet, 14nm has MAYBE 10% advantage in density, but it would vary depending on design. Even intel's 14nm has ~20% density advantage over tsmc's 16nm. If glofo/samsung had a denser process than intel they'd be bragging about it non-stop


Yea, thats the consensus.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Keep this in mind.

Usually when a company isn't happy with their product, they will hype the crap out of it.

If they are happy about it, they will remain tight lipped about it and let the product sell itself through review sites.

This is part of the reason I think the RX 480 is going to be a runaway success... AMD has not hyped it up. However, the INTERNET has hyped it up, so we shall see if that tactic by them worked.


----------



## aznguyen316




----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Keep this in mind.
> 
> Usually when a company isn't happy with their product, they will hype the crap out of it.
> 
> If they are happy about it, they will remain tight lipped about it and let the product sell itself through review sites.
> 
> This is part of the reason I think the RX 480 is going to be a runaway success... AMD has not hyped it up. However, the INTERNET has hyped it up, so we shall see if that tactic by them worked.


You sure they haven't hyped it up? Seems from their slides to be pretty hype-worthy (2x > 1x 1080, 2.5x perf:watt or whatever it was, etc.).

And when did retired staff get the rep option?


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> I consider the 1080 and overclocking failure because its real stock speeds are 1850ish, and cards barely reach 2050 stable. While 200MHz is nice and what a lot of cards through generations have been getting, it is barely more than 10% in reality, on top of which Nvidia made wildly false claims and impressions that 2.1Ghz would be a really easy to achieve standard on any old card and with really low temperatures, which proved completely false. So when Nvidia claimed one thing and supposedly showed a demo of it, people expected the better cards out there to be able to get at least an extra 100MHz over what was "easily achievable on any random card". So that is why it is considered an overclocking failure. The 1080 didn't live up to Nvidia's actual promise, it didn't live up to hype, it didn't live up to standard expectations, and it didn't live up to past GPU average OC history.


This is basically the nVidia's version of the "overclocker's dream".


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> This is basically the nVidia's version of the "overclocker's dream".


lol

Hopefully the RX480 is the 970 equivalent where you can get like 1600-1650 on water EZPZ.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> lol
> 
> Hopefully the RX480 is the 970 equivalent where you can get like 1600-1650 on water EZPZ.


RX480 > SLI 1080s


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> lol
> 
> Hopefully the RX480 is the 970 equivalent where you can get like 1600-1650 on water EZPZ.


Like I said, if you want to unlock FURYOUS MODE you gotta solder an extra 8 pin to it.

or admit defeat and cough up the dough for an AIB card


----------



## KyadCK

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> The high end HPC based GPUs might use more power but with 230-290w GPUs in CF would need a really good (air) cooling or wcing
> get a mobo with PLX?
> 
> 
> 
> I thought AMD could run 4x for CF instead of Nvidia's 8x minimum req. Pretty sure I think you can do tri-CF at 8x/4x/4x. No idea how it would impact performance though. Maybe even 4x/4x/4x/4x but not sure.
Click to expand...

It can, yes.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> I thought AMD could run 4x for CF instead of Nvidia's 8x minimum req. Pretty sure I think you can do tri-CF at 8x/4x/4x. No idea how it would impact performance though. Maybe even 4x/4x/4x/4x but not sure.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm pretty sure cf only works PCI-E 2.0 16x and PCI-E 3.0 8x. There's no bridge so how could it use less?
Click to expand...

AMD does not have any lane requirements for Crossfire, only recommendations. 3.0 x4 is plenty, that's 4GB/s. Each 4k/60 is "just" 2GB/s, and in QuadFire (worst case), you'll be transferring 3/4ths of that (1.5GB/s).


----------



## Gungnir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> You sure they haven't hyped it up? Seems from their slides to be pretty hype-worthy (2x > 1x 1080, 2.5x perf:watt or whatever it was, etc.).


I'm not sure I'd consider those hype. Two cards beating one faster card in a multi-GPU friendly game is pretty much expected. Claiming improved p/w on a new node is rather different than "an overclocker's dream" or "2.1Ghz on air" or any of the other hyped releases of the last few years, IMHO. All of the real Polaris hype is from rumors, not AMD.


----------



## Noufel

The hype is strong in this card .


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *aznguyen316*


What nobody understands is Linus isn't talking about overclocking TO 1.5 GHz, he's talking about overclocking BY 1.5 GHz, so if stock is 1200 MHz, that means 2700 MHz on air. This goes along with the news story about Jen-Hsun Huang being placed on suicide watch.


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> The hype is strong in this card .


Those that lack faith use woodscrews.
Those that cant remember use 3.5gb cards.

Reference while we wait for that to be presented and excellent value and performance as expected we who are deep in the force of knowing awaits the reveal of the master card free of limitations and strong with the force as its such in our family of the 400 series.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> What nobody understands is Linus isn't talking about overclocking TO 1.5 GHz, he's talking about overclocking BY 1.5 GHz, so if stock is 1200 MHz, that means 2700 MHz on air. This goes along with the news story about Jen-Hsun Huang being placed on suicide watch.


Polaris includes Deep Clocking. The chip over time figures out the electrons quantum computation of the field modulator, and so the more you use it, the higher the clocks get.


----------



## ChevChelios

Pascal is a mere Super Saiyan

but Polaris is the Legendary Super Saiyan


----------



## FLCLimax

His clock speed is over 9000!!!


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> His clock speed is over 9000!!!


WHAT? 9000?!?! THERE'S NO WAY THAT CAN BE RIGHT!


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> Those that lack faith use woodscrews.
> Those that cant remember use 3.5gb cards.
> 
> Reference while we wait for that to be presented and excellent value and performance as expected we who are deep in the force of knowing awaits the reveal of the master card free of limitations and strong with the force as its such in our family of the 400 series.


Pioneerisloud knows all about those wood screws. Then theres us 970 owners with our gimped cards...

Yep, looking forward to going back to AMD.


----------



## tkenietz

So I wonder if on the 29th aibs will show their cooler designs as well?

I think another reason AMD doesn't sell as well is look at the history of sub $300 AMD AIB cards. They usually come with cheap/dinky looking coolers. Look at the gtx 950 cards, the coolers look more beastly than a lot of previous AMD AIB cards and a lot of them come with back plates. I hope the AIBS go above and beyond this time, but at the same time I hope they don't go the led route. Don't know much about zotac, but man their coolers are sexy


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> That may be what AMD was aiming for, but the hype train is at full speed and now it is expected to be able to rival the 1070. That is what people are going to remember and expect. Just like the 1080 is an "overclocking failure" because it doesn't clock to 2.3 like people hyped. We saw the same thing with Fury - expectations went too high and suddenly it was a failure for not beating Titan X.
> And the 1080 FE was shown to run 67C at 2100, but we saw how that turned out. 150W through that die is roughly the same as the 180W the 1080 is putting through its correspondingly larger die, so thermal density may be a problem once you start overclocking.


The difference is that nvidia set those expectations itself with the whole 2100mhz at 67C demo. AMD hasnt officially said anything about OCing Polaris.


----------



## Ha-Nocri

Oveclockers dream


----------



## magnek

GTX 1080: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080/30.html
Quote:


> Maximum overclock of our sample is +453 MHz to the GPU's base clock, which increases *max Boost from 1898 MHz to 2114 MHz (11% overclock)*, and 1450 MHz on the memory (16% overclock).


Fury X: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/34.html
Quote:


> *Maximum overclock of our sample is 1150 MHz GPU clock (10% overclock).* GPU overclocking potential is quite slim. AMD hinted at much higher overclocking potential in their briefings, so I'm a bit disappointed.


It really isn't much of a stretch to call the 1080 an "overclocker's dream".


----------



## TheLAWNOOB

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> GTX 1080: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080/30.html
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Maximum overclock of our sample is +453 MHz to the GPU's base clock, which increases *max Boost from 1898 MHz to 2114 MHz (11% overclock)*, and 1450 MHz on the memory (16% overclock).
> 
> 
> 
> Fury X: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/34.html
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> *Maximum overclock of our sample is 1150 MHz GPU clock (10% overclock).* GPU overclocking potential is quite slim. AMD hinted at much higher overclocking potential in their briefings, so I'm a bit disappointed.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It really isn't much of a stretch to call the 1080 an "overclocker's dream".
Click to expand...

Lowering the bar, 1 step at a time.


----------



## caswow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> That may be what AMD was aiming for, but the hype train is at full speed and now it is expected to be able to rival the 1070. That is what people are going to remember and expect. Just like the 1080 is an "overclocking failure" because it doesn't clock to 2.3 like people hyped. We saw the same thing with Fury - expectations went too high and suddenly it was a failure for not beating Titan X.
> And the 1080 FE was shown to run 67C at 2100, but we saw how that turned out. 150W through that die is roughly the same as the 180W the 1080 is putting through its correspondingly larger die, so thermal density may be a problem once you start overclocking.


there is a difference between nvidias ceo claiming crazy overclockablity while showing 2,[email protected] and amd never stating rx480 beeing a competitor to a 1070. if you believe the fud people place in forums then its your own fault.

you should be a responsible and mature adult who should be able to differentiate between fiction and reality. there can be viral marketeers spouting how amd rx480 will be as fast as a 1070 so people can claim amd and their "fanboys" said x and y so you guys can play the bla
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> GTX 1080: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080/30.html
> Fury X: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/34.html
> It really isn't much of a stretch to call the 1080 an "overclocker's dream".


now lets see what real users get out of their cards...not a golden sample provided by nvidia









and where are the 2100+ @ 60celsius nvidia mr.ceo was showing us?

one person said once an overclockers dream and got totally ripped out of context and people lose their mind. nvidia lying constantly out of their southern area and nobody bats an eye


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Would you mind link me a listing of 1070 at $379


You dont have the right person for what you quoted:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1603252/wccf-amd-rx-480-can-hit-1-5ghz-new-overclocking-tool-with-voltage-control-coming/1220#post_25279751


----------



## Ha-Nocri

Some 1080's barely go over 2000MHz, some go to 2100, but average is about 2050 it seems.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Pascal is a mere Super Saiyan
> 
> but Polaris is the Legendary Super Saiyan


Another analogy completely butchered...


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Another analogy completely butchered...


Srsly. I have that guy blocked so I don't see his nonsense. Nice post.


----------



## looniam

unless it's changed, BL never worked for me since it just puts their post in a spoiler, so i end up looking at it anyways.

guess i am masochistic that way.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> 6+1 should be fine for the power consumption, right?


6+1 means nothing. On the other hand 6*12V*20A + 1*12V*20A does. You see 6+1 doesn't define the capacity only layout, number of phases but not power of the phases. You could have 1+1 as long as the phases have the needed power capacity.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Another analogy completely butchered...


what are you babbling about now ?


----------



## Pesmerrga




----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> unless it's changed, BL never worked for me since it just puts their post in a spoiler, so i end up looking at it anyways.
> 
> *guess i am masochistic*that way.


You sure are. You still look at all my posts!!!


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pesmerrga*


Raja's in Shanghai? Goddamit I knew I should've postponed my trip by 2 weeks, dude's a god to me, and I'm usually not religious.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Its an interesting Tweet for sure. Could just be a massive troll but it could also be significant. October Vega release confirmed?


----------



## tkenietz

What is in Shanghai?


----------



## MrKoala

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> What is in Shanghai?


Raja


----------



## Kpjoslee

Now I am interested.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> What is in Shanghai?


Raja in his Vega, keep up










Spoiler: Vega


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Raja in his Vega, keep up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Vega


Is the car really what he was referring to (epic troll)? Still could be relevant considering...


----------



## tkenietz

Maybe he's saying Vega is shanghai'd


----------



## Mad Pistol

Maybe Vega has been renamed to Shanghai?


----------



## hokk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Maybe Vega has been renamed to Shanghai?


Wasn't that a cpu?


----------



## comagnum

I'm looking to upgrade my 280x, possibly to a cf setup. Would it be more beneficial for me to get the 480 at launch and a second one in the future, or grab 2 470's? I know the data on either is spotty at best at this point, but what would benefit me more in the long run?


----------



## ErOR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> I'm looking to upgrade my 280x, possibly to a cf setup. Would it be more beneficial for me to get the 480 at launch and a second one in the future, or grab 2 470's? I know the data on either is spotty at best at this point, but what would benefit me more in the long run?


In the same boat, I'm waiting for Vega to upgrade.

Nvidia is not a option ...


----------



## comagnum

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ErOR*
> 
> In the same boat, I'm waiting for Vega to upgrade.
> 
> Nvidia is not a option ...


I don't have the patience to wait for vega, lol


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> I'm looking to upgrade my 280x, possibly to a cf setup. Would it be more beneficial for me to get the 480 at launch and a second one in the future, or grab 2 470's? I know the data on either is spotty at best at this point, but what would benefit me more in the long run?


I haven't had significant Crossfire issues with my cards, nor did I have them with the 7970's that preceded them. I think that two 480's is a perfectly logical choice. I plan on picking up a pair to replace the 780 Ti in my secondary rig which will allow me to gift that to a mate.


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I haven't had significant Crossfire issues with my cards, nor did I have them with the 7970's that preceded them. I think that two 480's is a perfectly logical choice. I plan on picking up a pair to replace the 780 Ti in my secondary rig which will allow me to gift that to a mate.


I am not ashamed to say if the benchmarks put it somewhere around a 390x/fury i will be nabbing 4 of these if they are obtainable. I would love to bench 4xpolaris against 2x1080gtx. Will i game with them? Probably will if i can.

Edit: assuming 4 way CF still works that is. lol


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> I am not ashamed to say if the benchmarks put it somewhere around a 390x/fury i will be nabbing 4 of these if they are obtainable. I would love to bench 4xpolaris against 2x1080gtx. Will i game with them? Probably will if i can.
> 
> Edit: assuming 4 way CF still works that is. lol


Best part is that'll only cost you about $100 more than a single 1080!


----------



## lolerk52

Does anyone have any idea how much die area DP units take?

I'm looking at perf/mm^2 on Polaris vs Pascal, and DP performance is sort of a wildcard I can't figure out.
Assuming Polaris follows Fiji, it's 1/16, while Pascal is 1/32.


----------



## comagnum

It baffles me how there are absolutely no concrete benchmarks for this card yet. I don't understand what AMD having the NDA expire the day the cards are released would accomplish for them.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> It baffles me how there are absolutely no concrete benchmarks for this card yet. I don't understand what AMD having the NDA expire the day the cards are released would accomplish for them.


It's nothing new. NDA lifting before cards release would be a change of policy.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I haven't had significant Crossfire issues with my cards, nor did I have them with the 7970's that preceded them. I think that two 480's is a perfectly logical choice. I plan on picking up a pair to replace the 780 Ti in my secondary rig which will allow me to gift that to a mate.


Just make sure you don't pick up _GTX_ 480s by mistake


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> It baffles me how there are absolutely no concrete benchmarks for this card yet. I don't understand what AMD having the NDA expire the day the cards are released would accomplish for them.


I think we will get a surprise before the 29th. What's the point in sending the cards to all the reviewers, they don't need nearly 10 days to benchmark a card. Unless of course AMD is going to release benchmarks before actual launch.


----------



## comagnum

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> I think we will get a surprise before the 29th. What's the point in sending the cards to all the reviewers, they don't need nearly 10 days to benchmark a card. Unless of course AMD is going to release benchmarks before actual launch.


There have been people with cards in their hands for quite some time now. I know they've all signed an NDA, but it's hard to believe all of them are following the rules, lol.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> It's nothing new. NDA lifting before cards release would be a change of policy.


There's been confirmed reviews and leaks of cards and other hardware before. I don't see why this release would be any different.


----------



## mohiuddin

http://www.legitreviews.com/first-look-at-the-amd-radeon-rx-480-8gb-video-card_183213


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> There have been people with cards in their hands for quite some time now. I know they've all signed an NDA, but it's hard to believe all of them are following the rules, lol.


Surely there have been numerous leaks so far because of this, however I still believe that AMD might gives us pre-launch numbers similar to what NVIDIA did with their launch for Pascal; basically having a concrete date where they can be purchased but also a date before where reviewers can release benchmarks.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Just make sure you don't pick up GTX 480s by mistake


I still have a 470! I keep it in a SFF case because I like to live dangerously.


----------



## Associated

https://www.instagram.com/p/BG-ioBzSbDn/


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Does anyone have any idea how much die area DP units take?
> 
> I'm looking at perf/mm^2 on Polaris vs Pascal, and DP performance is sort of a wildcard I can't figure out.
> Assuming Polaris follows Fiji, it's 1/16, while Pascal is 1/32.


AMD doesn't use separate DP units for DP computation. Their GCN architecture is built in a way that let's them use 2 stream processors to achieve DP processing without the use of special hardware. That's how their firepro cards manage to get 1/2 DP rate. AMD started disabling DP capabilities with Hawaii, but the hardware for a 1/2 DP rate is still there(afaik, maybe they changed it with GCN4).


----------



## C2H5OH

Cold shower for the October launch or Raja trolling?









https://twitter.com/GFXChipTweeter/status/745887920809218049

EDIT:
Milestone reached - always sounds good, though.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *C2H5OH*
> 
> Cold shower for the October launch or Raja trolling?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/GFXChipTweeter/status/745887920809218049
> 
> EDIT:
> Milestone reached - always sounds good, though.


Long way to go before you see it ........ ouch


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Long way to go before you see it ........ ouch


But is there a Vega 11?








I kid, I kid...just speculating


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *C2H5OH*
> 
> But is there a Vega 11?










where is our local "october's launch" specialist


----------



## KeepWalkinG

Why RX 480 is 50% more expensive in Europe?


----------



## Newbie2009

I wonder if these cards are binned
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> Why RX 480 is 50% more expensive in Europe?


Is it? Shows me?


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *C2H5OH*
> 
> Cold shower for the October launch or Raja trolling?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://twitter.com/GFXChipTweeter/status/745887920809218049
> 
> EDIT:
> Milestone reached - always sounds good, though.


oh god that hurts. Why are you doing this AMD.

How do GPU manufacturers manage to make PS4K NEO and Nintendo NX look so good with simply failing to deliver a proper product within a desired timeframe


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> Why RX 480 is 50% more expensive in Europe?


sweden early, 273 euro 8gb reference.
which I guess is within expected here.

40 euro more than the calculated price without cards out so I expect that price will be within the stated msrp even here. (we pay more due to tax etc..)


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> How about these then?
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


You're lucky I'm already eating.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> Why RX 480 is 50% more expensive in Europe?


Because import duties, VAT and greedy sellers that have to pay high rents if they don't own their shop locations.
Usually the prices seem to settle down after the initial shortages and hype are resolved.

It can also be that they set different MSRP for different regions which is unfortunately nothing unheard of. How is AMD going about it, we shall see. But you could have seen the insane 10x0 nGreedia MSRPs divided by region.

The expected price in EU should be about 290 USD / 255 EUR (retail price in a shop, cca 20% tax etc. incl.) for a 229 USD card...








A more realistic greedy shop/government price would be about 275 EUR.


----------



## KeepWalkinG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Newbie2009*
> 
> I wonder if these cards are binned
> Is it? Shows me?


This is the one of the bggest shipper in my country - Gigabyte nVidia RX-480D5-8GD-B, 8GB GDDR5, 256 bit, DP*3, HDMI*1

350$.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> Why RX 480 is 50% more expensive in Europe?


USD prices exclude VAT, as VAT is not applicable or is different in some states.
EU prices have VAT included for most part, as are in BG - So, you should start comparing with $199x1.2 (VAT in BG) = $238,8 (for 4GB version)


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> This is the one of the bggest shipper in my country - Gigabyte nVidia RX-480D5-8GD-B, 8GB GDDR5, 256 bit, DP*3, HDMI*1
> 
> 350$.


Bizarre.


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KeepWalkinG*
> 
> This is the one of the bggest shipper in my country - Gigabyte nVidia RX-480D5-8GD-B, 8GB GDDR5, 256 bit, DP*3, HDMI*1
> 
> 350$.


Vali doesn't have the card, but is on pre-order and they are playing it safe (in case price changes). Also, have in mind, that the shipping fee, from Taiwan or wherever, is in this case payed by you (prob around $40-50), as it will be a single order (on their side too).


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Newbie2009*
> 
> Bizarre.


Not bizare look at how much they sell the 1080 FE 934$***
Their prices are super inflated
http://www.vali.bg/?action=products&manufacturer=&group1=9&group2=104&group3=190&group4=467&article=27405


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> It baffles me how there are absolutely no concrete benchmarks for this card yet. I don't understand what AMD having the NDA expire the day the cards are released would accomplish for them.


maybe they arent as confident in its performance as Nvidia was in 1080/1070 (for which NDA was set to lift before release day)


----------



## C2H5OH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> maybe they arent as confident in its performance as Nvidia was in 1080/1070 (for which NDA lifted way before release day)


Or it may be nothing of the above! You have NDA, that lifts on certain date - leaks usually show disrespect to (non leaking) reviewer and journalists, as this is directly linked to their click-revenue.
And since when, keeping your schedule means that you're not confident in your product?


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> maybe they arent as confident in its performance as Nvidia was in 1080/1070 (for which NDA lifted way before release day)


Sure did and reviewers were sent modified cards lol I guess you gotta keep the buzz going somehow.

I'm more looking forward to AIB cards, good general availability and prices settling down.
Leaks often originate from China or other Asian territories, popular western reviewers won't risk breaking NDA to get a few clicks once and then not get any review samples from then on. Which is kinda sad because they really should be getting retail cards to review and not rely on these cherry picked sample cards they get sent for free.


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> The expected price in EU should be about 290 USD / 255 EUR (retail price in a shop, cca 20% tax etc. incl.) for a 229 USD card...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A more realistic greedy shop/government price would be about 275 EUR.


255euro seems to be happening maybe not at launch but in a few weeks if lot of cards are in store.
No extra Nvidia 100$ tax added so that helps the 480 win the customers trust
No special bios sent to reviewers either helps with trust for the 480 and customers buying

Its a lot of good things coming with the 480


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Just make sure you don't pick up _GTX_ 480s by mistake


Ive been there at one point, been a while for me but it was fun:

I melted an atx 24 modular cable then, but doubt that will happen with these radeons


----------



## Yttrium

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Its an interesting Tweet for sure. Could just be a massive troll but it could also be significant. October Vega release confirmed?


I am very carefully optimistic, VERY carefully.


----------



## C2H5OH

Teasers, teasers, hype train and more teasers...




EDIT:
2:14min.
Quote:


> ...and that may or may not have been Overwatch at 4K at Max settings


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *C2H5OH*
> 
> Teasers, teasers, hype train and more teasers...
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## JackCY

LOL how they freakin detach from the seats. Best sandbox ever.


----------



## flopper

some people buy a 1080 to play overwatch at 1080p

http://us.battle.net/forums/en/overwatch/topic/20745534413
Quote:


> Well yet another topic about this. But I really need to know if it's a problem on my end.
> So I got a i5 4690 non k @3,5 Ghz and a GTX 1080. I'm playing on a 144Hz Monitor @1080p and Ultra settings. And in my understanding I should be able to hit constant 144 fps. Problem is I'm only hitting about 120-130 or sometimes even less.
> Is my rig seriously not powerful enough or is it still a problem with the game?
> Btw: Frames got a little better since the patch. But still no constant 144


whats interesting is that a 480 does 100fps+ in the same game








obviously some people buy cards without understanding cpu ipc limits and mhz
I guess the 480 customer target is spot on


----------



## ChevChelios

if you dont need anything more demanding then OW then a 480 is fine


----------



## sugalumps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> some people buy a 1080 to play overwatch at 1080p
> 
> http://us.battle.net/forums/en/overwatch/topic/20745534413
> 
> whats interesting is that a 480 does 100fps+ in the same game
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> obviously some people buy cards without understanding cpu ipc limits and mhz
> I guess the 480 customer target is spot on


Lol the propaganda from you, my 980ti does 120fps at 1440p nevermind 1080p. A 1080 would easy do a constant 144 at 1080p, that is a user error or a poor cpu if if I ever saw one.


----------



## EightDee8D

Bet you have better cpu than that guy. that's why.


----------



## lolerk52

http://videocardz.com/61371/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-5

32 ROPS?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61371/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-5
> 
> 32 ROPS?


In line with Tahiti and Pitcairn. Polaris 10 is mid-grade after all.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> sweden early, 273 euro 8gb reference.
> which I guess is within expected here.
> 
> 40 euro more than the calculated price without cards out so I expect that price will be within the stated msrp even here. (we pay more due to tax etc..)


Most people tend to forget that Europe has crazy high taxes, and that those taxes are listed already in the price. In the US we pay taxes on top of the price shown. Going by current exchange rate plus the average taxes I tend to see listed in Europe it comes out to 254 Euro, and that is without factoring in the shipping cost to get them to Europe which is farther. So really not that much markup, especially if your VAT is higher than the 23% I calculated.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> In line with Tahiti and Pitcairn. Polaris 10 is mid-grade after all.


Right, but wouldn't that bottleneck a part that is supposedly at Hawaii levels of performance at minimum?


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Right, but wouldn't that bottleneck a part that is supposedly at Hawaii levels of performance at minimum?


ROPs can change each generation and become more powerful and/or efficient, though AMD didnt mention that they specifically improved their ROPs this time around. Actually, AMD made men tion of improvements to almost every single area of the GPU except ROPs: http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Polaris5.png lol. So yes, it probably will be a bit of a bottleneck. ROPs tend to come into play more the higher resolution you go though, so Im sure it will be plenty fine at 1080p and possibly even 1440p too. And dont forget that DX12 also brings improvements to ROP efficiency from itself too.


----------



## mohiuddin

https://mobile.twitter.com/hardwarecanucks/status/745732168643674112
Hardware Canucks tweet


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> https://mobile.twitter.com/hardwarecanucks/status/745732168643674112
> Hardware Canucks tweet


Sounds like they're very happy with it so far.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> What else is needed for a perfect GPU


it starts with _V_ and ends with _ega_


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> it starts with _V_ and ends with _ega_


Please, it will come out, be amazing and yet you will still be trolling the forums talking about how it's not impressive.


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Right, but wouldn't that bottleneck a part that is supposedly at Hawaii levels of performance at minimum?


Not necessarily. They may not improve their rasterizer this generation, but they are improving their geometry processor. We don't really know details of these improvements, but there's a good chance that ROP efficiency will increase by a large amount and things like primitive discard accelerator should lower the overall ROP load. Performance might balance out to Hawaii levels in games.


----------



## sugarhell

http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showpost.php?p=266518&postcount=2022

It seems that the primitive discard accelerator is working alright.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Only 32-ROPs? I hope thats not right.


----------



## prznar1

Any news about rx 470?


----------



## BigTree

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> Any news about rx 470?


http://www.tomshardware.de/amds-radeon-rx-470-r9-390-gtx-970,news-256069.html


----------



## zealord

I've completely lost overview. Too many RX480 threads


----------



## BigTree

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> I've completely lost overview. Too many RX480 threads


Oh common admit it...its fun.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> I've completely lost overview. Too many RX480 threads


Yeah, it's kind of crazy that pretty much all of the threads have stayed up this long. I'll post something in one or be following a convo and then can't remember which thread it was in


----------



## devilhead

https://youtu.be/aFzp2nKbAuM


----------



## slavovid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> I've completely lost overview. Too many RX480 threads


I've been following them for a month or more now and they are never that many 4-6 max easy to follow tbh.


----------



## lolfail9001

32 RoPs?

Are AMD on their "async compute" trip still?

Either way, i hope that's just false.


----------



## EightDee8D

News at 11, 32rop means 480 will be a turd. there stop with the hype guys.


----------



## The Mac

interesting analysis:

http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-480-gaming-benchmarks-leaked/


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> News at 11, 32rop means 480 will be a turd. there stop with the hype guys.


But the early versions of gpu-z most of the time report wrong values. Like the 970 and the 32 ROPs. Or the 4gb vRam of 970


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *devilhead*
> 
> https://youtu.be/aFzp2nKbAuM


FOUNDERSSS EDITIONAAA








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Or the 4gb vRam of 970


SAVAGE
A
V
A
G
E


----------



## The Mac

that guy talks like Davy Jones from pirates of the caribbean...


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BigTree*
> 
> http://www.tomshardware.de/amds-radeon-rx-470-r9-390-gtx-970,news-256069.html


Thx for posting. This would mean that 2048 shaders 32 clusters spec might be true. Im sold.


----------



## Buris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> News at 11, 32rop means 480 will be a turd. there stop with the hype guys.


with so many benches out that put it at 980 levels, this means that AMD has significantly improved IPC on their chips. AMD can already do this with only 32 ROPs, can you imagine a 64 ROP Vega monster?


----------



## L36

Number of ROPs indicates nothing. Even if this GPU has 32 ROPs, if AMD redesigned the cache subsystem and beefed up the ROPs themselves, it could be sufficient for performance P10 targets.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> with so many benches out that put it at 980 levels, this means that AMD has significantly improved IPC on their chips. AMD can already do this with only 32 ROPs, can you imagine a 64 ROP Vega monster?


Just hope it can OC like the 980 (or even the 970).


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> can you imagine a 64 ROP Vega monster?


why not a 128 ROP vega monster?


----------



## JackCY

Also how accurate is GPUz at this time really...
Gotta wait for official specs and reviews.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Only 32-ROPs? I hope thats not right.


Yeah, and 0 MHz base clock. Since when GPUz is correct on non support card. Even 380 has 64 Rops already, why some one tried to refer Tahiti number is beyond me.


----------



## mohiuddin

Someone in YouTube comment ran with same settings at approximately same day time (claimed), gtx970. Oc'ed to 1547mhz. Got this >>
http://i.imgur.com/kvWOXsn.jpg
Compare with leaked WITCHER3 game play.
68fps on rx480
71fps on gtx970 @1547mhz


----------



## Buris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> why not a 128 ROP vega monster?


Because it isn't necesarily needed to crush the 1080, which is all AMD has to do in their eyes.

I'm guessing if vega is going to be near 400mm die sizewith HBM, stock full vega is going to be roughly 20-25% faster than the 1080 on average. The 1080 Ti will be announced the next day.









480 is going to be about 30% slower than the 1080 and 15% slower than the 1070, (AIB partners will make custom chips with massive OC headroom *prays for 1700mhz* that puts it up against the 1070, reference maxes around 1500, so almost 980 Ti levels)

I can see Vega 11 being the massive 128 ROP vega which will compete against 1080 Ti or Titan 3, maybe even GP100 if a consumer variant comes out


----------



## Shatun-Bear

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Someone in YouTube comment ran with same settings at approximately same day time (claimed), gtx970. Oc'ed to 1547mhz. Got this >>
> http://i.imgur.com/kvWOXsn.jpg
> Compare with leaked WITCHER3 game play.
> 68fps on rx480
> 71fps on gtx970 @1547mhz


Looks like we got a little beast on our hands as its around the same as a 970 _overclocked to the hilt_ in a game where AMD cards don't perform well even with gimpworks off.


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Someone in YouTube comment ran with same settings at approximately same day time (claimed), gtx970. Oc'ed to 1547mhz. Got this >>
> http://i.imgur.com/kvWOXsn.jpg
> Compare with leaked WITCHER3 game play.
> 68fps on rx480
> 71fps on gtx970 @1547mhz


Why is W3 only using a little over 1.1GB of memory?? That's weird....


----------



## Buris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Someone in YouTube comment ran with same settings at approximately same day time (claimed), gtx970. Oc'ed to 1547mhz. Got this >>
> http://i.imgur.com/kvWOXsn.jpg
> Compare with leaked WITCHER3 game play.
> 68fps on rx480
> 71fps on gtx970 @1547mhz


same settings would be hard to do (who actually only has 8GB of RAM and a 6400k, the kid doing these tests is gimping the 480)

Even if that were true, for such a heavy nvidia title this would put a stock 480 above the 980 in most games, with a rumored OC clock of 1400-1500 without changing voltages.... that puts it near 980 Ti levels


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> *480 is going to be about 30% slower than the 1080 and 15% slower than the 1070*, (AIB partners will make custom chips with massive OC headroom *prays for 1*700mhz* that puts it up against the 1070, reference maxes around 1500, so almost 980 Ti levels*)


yep, this is one hype train thats going to derail hard on the 29-th









btw fyi - https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1070/24.html

980 is 60% slower than 1080 @ 1080p
and 70% slower than 1080 @ 1440p


----------



## JackCY

2GHz+ on LN2 didn't you hear?
Just like 1080 on LN2 above 3GHz.
Only nubs are getting barely 2.1GHz on a 1080.


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> yep, this is one hype train thats going to derail hard on the 29-th


Such the little passive aggressive instigator, aren't you?









I guess we'll see if everything stays on track or goes horribly wrong in less than a week.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nakano2k1*
> 
> Such the little passive aggressive instigator, aren't you?


best prepare him now, lest he gets a shock on the 29-th


----------



## Buris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> yep, this is one hype train thats going to derail hard on the 29-th


How is it a hype train, I'm basing my information on fact.

Things we know about the RX 480

100-110W usage at full load (tested)
70c hottest during thermal tests on blower cooler (video proof)--> some report 60c under full load
1500Mhz OC reported by various reviewers and independent sources
14nm, should be able to clock into the 1600's when adjusted for voltage if we see 1080/1070's hitting 2000mhz.
Samsung chips and AMD architecture scale very well compared to TSMC/nvidia.

These are my predictions and I'm basing them off of well-known information at this point. Yes, stock 480 will probably be playing tug-of-war with the 980, but it's pretty much common knowledge that it has an easy 15% OC headroom. And that's only with the reference design.


----------



## ChevChelios

Gibbo said to forget about 480 competing with 980Ti or 1070


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Gibbo said to forget about 480 competing with 980Ti or 1070


I'll wait for something a trifle more conclusive.


----------



## JackCY

I thought the direct competitor was GTX 480








You are confusing me


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Gibbo said to forget about 480 competing with 980Ti or 1070


And if you read the rest of the comments he says that it's possible for an oced 480 to reach a stock 980ti on some games. BUt no hope to match a high overclocked 980ti !


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> for an oced 480 to reach a stock 980ti on some games


980 can already do that









so pretty much 480 = 980


----------



## Buris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> And if you read the rest of the comments he says that it's possible for an oced 480 to reach a stock 980ti on some games. BUt no hope to match a high overclocked 980ti !


Exactly, a custom 480 OC could possibly even match a FE 1070 @stock. Obviously the 1070 and the 980 Ti have great OC headroom as well, but these are cards that cost over twice as much. It's still extremely impressive.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> 980 can already do that
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so pretty much 480 = 980


For 200-250 bucks









And still this is not a proof. Even Gibbo doesn't know the exactly performance of a 480x. I will wait for proper reviews









More like a reality check that we shouldn't hype a 200 buck gpu for such a performance. But well that happened before with the 4870


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> How is it a hype train, I'm basing my information on fact.
> 
> Things we know about the RX 480
> 
> 100-110W usage at full load (tested)
> 70c hottest during thermal tests on blower cooler (video proof)--> some report 60c under full load
> 1500Mhz OC reported by various reviewers and independent sources
> 14nm, should be able to clock into the 1600's when adjusted for voltage if we see 1080/1070's hitting 2000mhz.
> Samsung chips and AMD architecture scale very well compared to TSMC/nvidia.
> 
> These are my predictions and I'm basing them off of well-known information at this point. Yes, stock 480 will probably be playing tug-of-war with the 980, but it's pretty much common knowledge that it has an easy 15% OC headroom. And that's only with the reference design.


Stop making logical deductions! Chev is only trying to illuminate us to the truth. AMD is a comically inept company. The engineers run around with their trousers on their heads. The trousers are on fire. Benny Hill theme music is piped over the PA. The development HQ is located at the bottom of the sea and has no contact with the outside world. They think they're making a product to compete against Kepler. Meanwhile at corporate, Raja and Lisa are upstairs smoking cigars and drinking 100-year-old brandy whilst laughing at the peasants foolish enough to buy their worthless $200 bait-and-switch.


----------



## ChevChelios

^ Im making ppl salty without even addressing them directly now










Quote:


> *For 200-250 bucks*
> 
> More like a reality check that *we shouldn't hype a 200 buck gpu for such a performance*


all true


----------



## SuperZan

I'm glad you're enjoying your status as resident punchline.

Cue meme-joke about salt or whatever because you haven't got a single salient point to make in any thread or on any topic.


----------



## Buris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> For 200-250 bucks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And still this is not a proof. Even Gibbo doesn't know the exactly performance of a 480x. I will wait for proper reviews
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More like a reality check that we shouldn't hype a 200 buck gpu for such a performance. But well that happened before with the 4870


Exactly. 980 performance with good OC headroom is a pretty moderate prediction. And that's still extremely good, a 200-230$ card beating a card that even after price reductions from AMD sit at around 400$, with the possibility to OC to 980 Ti levels of performance? A card that costs 550$ after price reductions? It's damn amazing.


----------



## rv8000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I'm glad you're enjoying your status as resident punchline.
> 
> Cue meme-joke about salt or whatever because you haven't got a single salient point to make in any thread or on any topic.


Extremely OT, but you are without a doubt becoming my favorite poster on these forums









Definitely gonna pick up an AIB card just for fun, this 1080 is boring me to death


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> Exactly. 980 performance with good OC headroom is a pretty moderate prediction. And that's still extremely good, a 200-230$ card beating a card that even after price reductions from AMD sit at around 400$, with the possibility to OC to 980 Ti levels of performance? A card that costs 550$ after price reductions? It's damn amazing.


Yeah, when Raja threw out 'competes with $500 GPU's' it was fairly obvious what he was referring to.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rv8000*
> 
> Extremely OT, but you are without a doubt becoming my favorite poster on these forums
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Definitely gonna pick up an AIB card just for fun, this 1080 is boring me to death












At least that 1080 can game like a beast . I'm looking forward to messing about with some AIB 480's, I do hope the OC potential is real. I've also still got my hopes up for Big Pascal and Vega. I'd love a compelling reason to buy one of each.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> Exactly. 980 performance with good OC headroom is a pretty moderate prediction. And that's still extremely good, a 200-230$ card beating a card that even after price reductions from AMD sit at around 400$, with the possibility to OC to 980 Ti levels of performance? A card that costs 550$ after price reductions? It's damn amazing.


so long as we forget hype nonsense like "reach 1070" (fyi stock 1070 > stock 980Ti .. they are *not* equal) or "1700 MHz OC" its all gonna be fine


----------



## GoLDii3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> so long as we forget hype nonsense like "reach 1070" (fyi stock 1070 > stock 980Ti .. they are *not* equal) or "1700 MHz OC" its all gonna be fine


Why do you care?


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoLDii3*
> 
> Why do you care?


why do you care why i care ?


----------



## GoLDii3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> why do you care why i care ?


You don't reply a question with another question.

That said,i care because i want to know why could anyone possibly get troubled by people's speculation to reach the point that he has to say "as we forget hype nonsense like reach 1070 its all gonna be fine".


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> so long as we forget hype nonsense like "reach 1070" (fyi stock 1070 > stock 980Ti .. they are *not* equal) or "1700 MHz OC" its all gonna be fine


Yeah it's going to be fine for *you*. So you can sleep without having nightmares about the possibility that a AMD 200 bucks oced gpu can match your precious Funders Edition


----------



## nakano2k1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> why do you care why i care ?


You know, sometimes I think he's Roy Taylor posing as a NVidia shill.

He drives everyone crazy with his less than useful comments, and aggravates people all under the guise of being a legitimate PC enthusiast. This, in turn, makes everyone dislike a company that is already somewhat going downhill in the ethics and likability department.

Well done!


----------



## Titanox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> so long as we forget hype nonsense like "reach 1070" (fyi stock 1070 > stock 980Ti .. they are *not* equal) or "1700 MHz OC" its all gonna be fine


You seem awfully invested in a product you're never going to buy. And your post history definitely makes us circumspect of your intentions.


----------



## zealord

guys you are really hard on ChevyChellios.

Lets be open minded and look at it from a different point of view. He has to endure himself 24 hours a day. He is the one who got the short end of the stick (no pun intended).


----------



## EightDee8D

As i said before, someone is jelly.


----------



## Greenland

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> guys you are really hard on ChevyChellios.
> 
> Lets be open minded and look at it from a different point of view. He has to endure himself 24 hours a day. He is the one who got the short end of the stick (no pun intended).


Oh god hahaha...


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I'm glad you're enjoying your status as resident punchline.
> 
> Cue meme-joke about salt or whatever because you haven't got a single salient *saline* point to make in any thread or on any topic.


Gotta keep with the salty theme.


----------



## spyshagg

High school stuff. All will seem embarrassing to him in a few years. But, forever available on the web.

Thank god all my younger shenanigans had no web to be permanently imprinted to. I would die lol


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spyshagg*
> 
> High school stuff. All will seem embarrassing to him in a few years. But, forever available on the web.
> 
> Thank god all my younger shenanigans had no web to be permanently imprinted to. I would die lol


the good old days when we were young. I remember to be the second coolest kid in my class. I will never forget the fun my brother and I had when we were homeschooled.


----------



## EniGma1987

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Buris*
> 
> with so many benches out that put it at 980 levels, this means that AMD has significantly improved IPC on their chips. AMD can already do this with only 32 ROPs, can you imagine a 64 ROP Vega monster?


Im still hoping big chips from both camps move up to 128 ROPs and more geometry processors so we can finally crush through 4K like we do 1440p right now. Probably have to wait for Volta and whatever next gen RTG has for that though. They need to milk the node as long as they can


----------



## Kpjoslee

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EniGma1987*
> 
> Im still hoping big chips from both camps move up to 128 ROPs and more geometry processors so we can finally crush through 4K like we do 1440p right now. Probably have to wait for Volta and whatever next gen RTG has for that though. They need to milk the node as long as they can


Hopefully 10nm is not as big huddle as 20nm this time. 4 years of 28nm definitely stagnated GPU progression.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Gotta keep with the salty theme.


I was going for that soft pun! I was in queue to vote all day so my NaCl may have got a big soggy with the humidity.


----------



## magnek

Damn those soft buns, always trip me up.

So are you an innie or outie?


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> And if you read the rest of the comments he says that it's possible for an oced 480 to reach a stock 980ti on some games. BUt no hope to match a high overclocked 980ti !


I thought that it read DX12 games to be more specific. I sure of it although there's been so much random info here and there perhaps I saw something different.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> I thought that it read DX12 games to be more specific. I sure of it although there's been so much random info here and there perhaps I saw something different.


Probably it is dx12 games. I dont remember exactly. But still we don't know the stock performance, the max overclock, the max overclock scaling. Also we need to re-evaluate the overclock performance with the beefy AIB cards.

There seems to be a lot of overclock potential. The stock card probably is around 90-100 watt average gaming power consumption and that leaves a lot of space to scale.


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Damn those soft buns, always trip me up.
> 
> So are you an innie or outie?


the brits are staying 100%. democratic votes are only an illusion cast by the politicians to trick people into believing they have a choice. Decisions have been made long before the public even knows what they are even voting for/against.

Same with Hillary. We all know she is going to be president.

*tinfoil hat off*


----------



## magnek

tbh I actually want to see Trump elected so I can sit back and


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> tbh I actually want to see Trump elected so I can sit back and


I'd be funny yeah. This is still my favorite Trump video.














it's from Mass Effect


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> Same with Hillary. We all know she is going to be president.
> 
> *tinfoil hat off*


No need for the tinfoil hat, Hillary should be in prison and it's disgusting that she can even run for president D:


----------



## caenlen

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Unkzilla*
> 
> The leaked benchmarks have this around a 390x at stock clock at 1250mhz odd (cant remember the exact clock)
> 
> 1500mhz is around a 15% overclock.
> 
> Fury X / TI is around 30% faster then a 390x
> 
> Assuming the 390x perf and 1500mhz is accurate it should fall short by 15%... but then you can overclock the FuryX/980ti anyway (FuryX overclock only squeezes 8-9% whereas the TI will squeeze 20%+)
> 
> Cliffs: nothing to get too excited about


not to mention most 980 ti's overclocked to 1500 core, i know both of mine did. and thats close to 1080 performance stock. (23k graphics firestrike score for a single 980 ti at 1545 core, ala my main card), and only 27k firestrike graphicsc score for 1080 stock. meh. paid $575 for that 980 ti no tax free ship on jet website, amd is overrated this round and so is the 1080


----------



## KarathKasun

Well, this is an interesting turn. Not that I dont agree.

Presidential election 2016...


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Damn those soft buns, always trip me up.
> 
> So are you an innie or outie?


Outie all the way but I love meeting new anions.

(in non-chemistry related joke terms, innie).


----------



## looniam

some of you people are pretty damn sick!

i love this place


----------



## sugarhell

Sometimes on 4chan..


----------



## mav451

Ahahah well done Japan.


----------



## cranfam

Let's drop the politics talk (as entertaining as it is).

In regards to the 480, I do expect it to overclock well. It is in the price range I am interested in. I still game at 1080p, I might move up to 1440p in a year or two, but I have no reason to at this time.

I do not expect it to compete with the 1080. Hell, I'll be extremely excited if it is within striking distance of the 1070. Here's what's important to me, the 480 is in my price range. I do not have to explain the purchase to my spouse!

Sure, I could afford a 1080, but I wouldn't get any more joy out of it. If this card performs as I expect it to, AMD will have hit a home run in my opinion. Don't let the trolls distract us from what this card is.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nakano2k1*
> 
> This, in turn, makes everyone dislike a company that is already somewhat going downhill in the ethics and likability department.


Im sure you guys hated Nvidia long before I even registered on OC.net









I mean its so easy to do with all the circlejerking round here


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Outie all the way but I love meeting new anions.
> 
> (in non-chemistry related joke terms, innie).


Can I interest you in a va*cation* then?









oh wait you said anion, uhhh... [insert something witty about anions here]
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> some of you people are pretty damn sick!
> 
> i love this place


I still have nightmares about this emoji. You're a monster! *cries*


----------



## SuperZan

I love that emoticon though.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Im sure you guys hated Nvidia long before I even registered on OC.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean its so easy to do with all the circlejerking round here


My friend, you are without a doubt one of the most unreasonably fanboyish people on OCN. Most of 'us guys' have bought from both camps before and will continue to do so. However, we can also articulate our reasons for disliking elements of Nvidia's business practices. As a bog-standard troll the best you've got is 'hurr durr AMD late / bulldozer / overclocker's dream". I will continue to feed you because you are funny to me but you need to work on your material.


----------



## Buris

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Im sure you guys hated Nvidia long before I even registered on OC.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean its so easy to do with all the circlejerking round here


I've had an even amount of Nvidia and AMD/ATI products. Lately I've been buying AMD due to Nvidia's business practices starting around 2010

Obviously If I had unlimited funds I would get Nvidia almost every time, as they are usually (excluding 900v300 series) a frame or 2 faster for an extra 100+$

I still build and reccomend friends and family Nvidia if it's legitimately in their best interest-- poor cousin got a 750 Ti, Someone who used a CUDA-enabled video editing suite got a 780, etc.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Im sure you guys hated Nvidia long before I even registered on OC.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I mean its so easy to do with all the circlejerking round here


I hate nVidia so much I bought a 980 Ti instead of a Fury X.


----------



## sugarhell

Most of the times i don't care about business practices. Because both are companies and they want to make profit no matter what. Intel business practices are way worst but their cpus are the best and most of us are will continue to buy intel cpus. I just buy what is the best of me, especially for my work i use 90% nvidia gpus.

But when i want to bench a bit, i just love amd overclocking <3


----------



## SuperZan

FANBOY! Get out! This is official Nvidia h80rz klub.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Most of the times i don't care about business practices. Because both are companies and they want to make profit no matter what. Intel business practices are way worst but their cpus are the best and most of us are will continue to buy intel cpus. I just buy what is the best of me, especially for my work i use 90% nvidia gpus.
> 
> But when i want to bench a bit, i just love amd overclocking <3
> 
> That's how I see it, though I have strong opinions on the subject. I'll still do what's best for me because at the end of the day I'm more concerned with my decisions than the moral compass of a corporation. That said I'm critical of Intel and Nvidia at what we could call a philosophical level for lack of a better word.


----------



## iRUSH

I want one of these RX480's so bad! But I love Shadowplay and use it daily.

I've spent some time over the last few days looking for something comparable that I can use with an AMD card.

Their play.tv solution looked promising but it doesn't work for all games and doesn't allow desktop recording.

I've tried a few others too but they're not the easiest to use. An Elgato HD60 isn't going to cut it since I play at 144hz

Seriously how hard is it for AMD to have a Shadowplay copy? I'm convinced this is why many YouTubes enjoy Nvidia more. Their recording software is insanely easy to use.

You can say "real YouTubers don't use Shadowplay and they use big boy software" all you want. But recording PC gameplay with commentary and webcam is much easier using Shadowplay.

Sorry for the rant guys. My issue is a minor one in the grand scheme of the GPU buyers market I'm sure.

I figured I'd post this here since I'm really excited for the RX480 and ultimately hoping someone can show me a solution that I'm looking for.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> I want one of these RX480's so bad! But I love Shadowplay and use it daily.
> 
> I've spent some time over the last few days looking for something comparable that I can use with an AMD card.
> 
> Their play.tv solution looked promising but it doesn't work for all games and doesn't allow desktop recording.
> 
> I've tried a few others too but they're not the easiest to use. An Elgato HD60 isn't going to cut it since I play at 144hz
> 
> Seriously how hard is it for AMD to have a Shadowplay copy? I'm convinced this is why many YouTubes enjoy Nvidia more. Their recording software is insanely easy to use.
> 
> You can say "real YouTubers don't use Shadowplay and they use big boy software" all you want. But recording PC gameplay with commentary and webcam is much easier using Shadowplay.
> 
> Sorry for the rant guys. My issue is a minor one in the grand scheme of the GPU buyers market I'm sure.
> 
> I figured I'd post this here since I'm really excited for the RX480 and ultimately hoping someone can show me a solution that I'm looking for.


I just use obs and i find it way easier to use it for my needs.


----------



## SuperZan

OBS is great and once you've got it tuned just right it's quite easy to use. Shadowplay is of course very simple to get started with but I find that with OBS you can do much more to improve the quality of recording/streaming and in some respects its customisation options are as simple as Shadowplay if not more so.

This: https://obsproject.com/forum/threads/technical-explanation-of-obs-settings.642/ is quite helpful and a quick once-over should enable you to tune OBS quickly for your needs. After that it's essentially fire and forget.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I hate nVidia so much I bought a 980 Ti instead of a Fury X.


i hate them more than you, so much that i bought a 980ti sli and it's worse with AMD i have the deepest hate for them i've even bought a Fury cfx to only moke them









Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



i'm a gpu masochist i think


----------



## sugalumps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Most of the times i don't care about business practices. Because both are companies and they want to make profit no matter what. Intel business practices are way worst but their cpus are the best and most of us are will continue to buy intel cpus. I just buy what is the best of me, especially for my work i use 90% nvidia gpus.
> 
> But when i want to bench a bit, *i just love amd overclocking* <3


So true the fury x is an oc beast.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> i hate them more than you, so much that i bought a 980ti sli and it's worse with AMD i have the deepest hate for them i've even bought a Fury cfx to only moke them
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> i'm a gpu masochist i think


Nah it's just like what SuperZan said:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> That's how I see it, though I have strong opinions on the subject. *I'll still do what's best for me because at the end of the day I'm more concerned with my decisions than the moral compass of a corporation. That said I'm critical of Intel and Nvidia at what we could call a philosophical level for lack of a better word.*


The 980 Ti purchase was actually a struggle, and I had to get people to convince me to NOT buy a Fury X.

From this point onward though I'll try to buy second hand if I can, so at least I'm directly supporting either company (plus there are some great deals on used hardware).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> So true the fury x is an oc beast.


Seriously?


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> So true the fury x is an oc beast.


That's why i never got a fury x.

For dice 7970 was the most fun card for me. Even on water it was so fun to play with so many tweaks


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> So true the fury x is an oc beast.


Tahiti / Hawaii were good fun, and OC'ing Vishera CPU's is a hobby unto itself. Some of the best HWBOT comps are AMD CPU-related, you see a much wider range of competitors instead of the usual 5960x-Yolo Swaggins-p2w.


----------



## NFL

Welp, sold my 380. Now I wait for launch day (or thereabouts)


----------



## comagnum

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> Welp, sold my 380. Now I wait for launch day (or thereabouts)


Seeing as I have a similar card (oc'd 280x) which card(s) are you aiming for? Reference 480 or aib? 470? Just trying to figure out which path I should take.


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> Seeing as I have a similar card (oc'd 280x) which card(s) are you aiming for? Reference 480 or aib? 470? Just trying to figure out which path I should take.


480, but undecided on reference or AIB


----------



## Offender_Mullet

Has that poster who's supposed "brother works for the industry" been active here lately?


----------



## The Mac

Moey, no one has seen him in a while...

moey1974 to be exact, he hasnt even been online since he made that original post.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Mac*
> 
> Moey, no one has seen him in a while...


the fear of being OjO'ed maybe ?


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I hate AMD so much I bought four different 7970's but then decided that I'd go back to hating Nvidia when I bought my two Titans. I'm just a total hater all around, only like Matrox...


----------



## stoker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Mac*
> 
> Moey, no one has seen him in a while...


AMD had him locked up, due to too many leaks.

He'll be released on the 29th


----------



## magnek

I'm afraid where he's going, nobody ever comes back (in one piece anyway).


----------



## Offender_Mullet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Mac*
> 
> Moey, no one has seen him in a while...
> 
> moey1974 to be exact, he hasnt even been online since he made that original post.


Ah, that's his name. +rep Looks like his last post was about 6 days ago:


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *moey1974*
> 
> Updated Info: I will have some more info to share Saturday for 460,470 and Vega10, I just gotta get my brother to look over and "ok" what i written out. In the mean time, I wanted to update on a few things i did learn today from my bro and his partners in Seattle and to clear things up on the 1500mhz guarantee Rx 480 cards i mentioned before. I just got home a little bit ago and its going on 2am so i just wanted to post this and gonna hit the sack. I can't always reply back to my threads here as most of the time i am at work so i can only pop in and post and quickly leave. Anyways, until i post new updates for the Rx 460, 470 and Vega 10 this weekend, this is a few minor updates concerning Rx 480, below.
> 
> Update info on the Rx 480
> 
> Earlier here today i posted some info on two different AIB vendors releasing $300 dollar 1500mhz Rx 480 Editions. There is some clarity i wanted to update on what exactly this means. Its quite simple, There will be some "superclocked" editions (< not the exact name) released with a bios option set at 1500mhz, its as simple as that. As for how many others vendors will release these Rx 480's that have the bios option switch to 1500mhz is unknown outside of the two companies that i am aware of. I cannot share which companies are releasing this but honestly I am told that all 6+8 pin Rx 480's are said to get this 1500mhz mark with software, Let me just quote what they said...this is a C/P from my email that was forwarded to me by my brother just a few hours ago.
> 
> _This particular $300 Rx 480 OC Edition will have toggle with two bios options - Standard bios of 1266mhz and Extreme bios of 1500mhz - All 6+8 pin models will be able to reach the 1500mhz mark - the only difference is some editions will have a overclock bios setting that will be set at the 1500mhz mark - while other cards will have to be done manually although today its easy to do manually by just a few clicks of a button with software - While running at 1570mhz - the OC edition runs at 72c with 99% gpu load with 65% fan - one impressive feat to say the least - This bodes well for AMD's new Polaris cards as it shows these cards are capable of even more than this impressive 1570mhz mark - In fact, in a closed box setup, we were able to "easily" obtain 1600mhz while running Battlefield 4 for over an hour with zero crashes or artifacts all while keeping below the 75c mark while using 99% gpu load - Even more impressive is the fact that the voltage usage leaves room for even a bit further tweaking to further our overclock past 1600mhz - One has to wonder what AMD has with the entire lineup of Vega right now - we can only imagine pure bliss in terms of performance at the top enthusiast level - AMD really does have something special on their hands. The Rx 480 while running 1500mhz is on par with the stock 1070 in-game, it even beats it on some games at this clock, anything more and the 480 begins to put some distance between the two cards. Keep in mind this is Dx12 games, this is where GCN 4 truly shows off.
> _
> 
> Earlier my brother and I were talking and I mentioned to him about how i felt about what AMD is doing and my brother said i literally took the words out of his mouth in what i am about to say below...
> 
> ...we both are very curious and intrigued at how AMD is targeting these new cards, Its as if they are not even trying to target Nvidia at all but rather setting a new lineup of cards and a completely new lineup of performance targets. In other words, AMD's cards are not really targeting Nvidia's nor any of AMD's previous cards but rather...setting a completely new standard of graphic cards with a whole new identity and vision that will be a new trend setter unlike any time before. I really feel this way and my brother agrees as he said we must be brothers as we had this exact same thoughts in mind. My brother and I are both in the Gaming/Hardware Industry, I work for a game company in Chicago but my brother has been in the industry longer than myself working in a big software/hardware company in Seattle. Anyways, I am very excited at what AMD is doing here. I think they are doing a remarkable job and they should be commended by both Nvidia and AMD fans alike. Forget all the petty fanboy trolling...we are all on the same team here, green or red, we are gamers and computer enthusiasts...we should be excited to see AMD step in new waters. I am, my bro and his colleagues are...so should you.
> 
> PS I'll have more info on the Rx 460, Rx 470 and Vega 10 (Rx 490) on saturday as my brother was out for the night so i could only get a few things answered. And yes Rx 490 is the smallest chip of Vega lineup confirmed., I'll explain more tomorrow, its something my brother told me but i gotta be careful with NDA,etc so i gotta check to see how much i can post when i get more time to talk with him, when i do, i'll post it for any interested for that info.
> 
> Play Hard!
> MCL






Hmm.......well, his posts seem more 'solid' than most other random rumors i've seen. I've been without a gpu for almost a month now and losing my mind, so I'll believe anything that sounds even remotely legit.









If the 1080's stock wasn't a joke I would've picked one up already. However, Pascal seems more of a 'tick' than 'tock' (to use Intel terms) anyway. That being said, even though AMD's new lineup isn't high-end, it still intrigues me. Then again, there aren't many DX12 coming out that I'm interested in, so does the new AMD arch really matter? *gets a headache*







I'll just wait


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Here's the full scoop on the RX 480:

*- At stock clocks it will beat a stock GTX 980 and 390X by 5% or so, maybe more.

- It will OC by at least 25-30%, reaching speed in excess of 1500MHz reference. The AIB cards may get into the 1600's.

- Performance at max OC will be significantly higher than the 980 at the same OC (and obviously far beyond the 390X which can't OC anywhere near as high).

- Some max OC 480's (those possible 1600MHz ones) will come very close to matching stock 980Ti's and 1070's. They will definitely be faster than the stock Fury X.

- Temps will be pushed at max OC on reference but P10 will not be any hotter a chip than GP104. In fact, due to lower OC potential, it will be a good bit cooler at max OC.

- DX12 performance from the 480 will be far more impressive than anything Nvidia has to offer, at least when factoring in chip size and price. DX11 will bring impressive gains for AMD but no better than Nvidia.

- Drivers will steadily improve over the first year of release and we will see 480's increase 10-20% in performance over that time, becoming very close indeed to 980Ti and 1070 performance all around by this time next year.

- Even the most expensive AIB cards will not be $300. Most will be between $250-$275.

- The RX 480 will do exceptionally well in synthetics, outperforming its gaming performance by a bit. For some reason it does really well in 3dmark and Unigine benches.

- Availability on launch day will be good, with most people looking for a reference card able to get them without difficulty (in the US at least). AIB's will be out within a couple of weeks and their availability will similarly be great (unlike a certain recent green release).

- NDA on reviews will drop before the 29th.*

That is all the info I have to share with you guys right now. My neighbor's son's brother-in-law works at one of the regular watering holes of several of the AMD engineers and was given an impromptu demonstration of the card late one night, after a ferocious beer pong battle. Oh, and Vega will indeed be out before the end of the year, but not quite by October...


----------



## magnek

Ignore Eric, he posted a bunch of BS.

Source: Some guy in my neighborhood who works at nVidia


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Ignore Eric, he posted a bunch of BS.
> 
> Source: Some guy in my neighborhood who works at nVidia


I kid of course but how much you wanna bet most of that ends up being on the money?


----------



## Offender_Mullet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I kid of course but how much you wanna bet most of that ends up being on the money?


Quote:


> My neighbor's son's brother-in-law works at one of the regular watering holes of several of the AMD engineers and was given an impromptu demonstration of the card late one night, after a ferocious beer pong battle.


lollllll Very creative.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I kid of course but how much you wanna bet most of that ends up being on the money?


I bet one ferocious battle of beer pong.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I kid of course but how much you wanna bet most of that ends up being on the money?


I will say plausible.


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I kid of course but how much you wanna bet most of that ends up being on the money?


90%, it's freakishly plausible


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I kid of course but how much you wanna bet most of that ends up being on the money?


Are you actually moeys brother? -.-


----------



## mohiuddin

Real mature guys.. Real mature...


----------



## artemis2307

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caenlen*
> 
> not to mention most 980 ti's overclocked to 1500 core, i know both of mine did. and thats close to 1080 performance stock. (23k graphics firestrike score for a single 980 ti at 1545 core, ala my main card), and only 27k firestrike graphicsc score for 1080 stock. meh. paid $575 for that 980 ti no tax free ship on jet website, amd is overrated this round and so is the 1080


wow a maxed out OCed 600$ card is stronger than a 230$ card
WOW


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> wow a maxed out OCed 600$ card is stronger than a 230$ card
> WOW


I am super curious though as to 4 rx 480s vs 2 1080gtx. Mainly benchmark wise but maybe something new will be on CF side as well. so close to launch and NDA... I have a feeling i will be working when the NDA lifts always happens and it sucks. I wish they did Friday NDA lifts/launches like the movie industry.


----------



## Orthello

For a card i won't be in the market for i don't think its ever been such a pain waiting this long to see how it performs. It's almost like i have no gpu and i'm waiting for it to come out so i can finally game on lol ...

Anyway 29th is not too far away now and looking forward to all the reviews - i'll skip hardocp - the venom there is just so obvious, Raja mentioning vega now is apparently a big negative story even with internal fighting at amd lol .. Its a pity as i used to like reading that site.

Hopefully someone will do a CFX review shortly after NDA is up so we can see scaling. I mean two of these cards will not be too much more - could equal the street price of the 1070 in most cases - if they stick to RRPs also. 480 CFX in almost any game with 60+ scaling will be quite a bit faster than a 1070 i would think. Heck i'm interested to see how many games it will catch a single 1080 in even.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> I want one of these RX480's so bad! But I love Shadowplay and use it daily.
> 
> I've spent some time over the last few days looking for something comparable that I can use with an AMD card.
> 
> Their play.tv solution looked promising but it doesn't work for all games and doesn't allow desktop recording.
> 
> I've tried a few others too but they're not the easiest to use. An Elgato HD60 isn't going to cut it since I play at 144hz
> 
> Seriously how hard is it for AMD to have a Shadowplay copy? I'm convinced this is why many YouTubes enjoy Nvidia more. Their recording software is insanely easy to use.
> 
> You can say "real YouTubers don't use Shadowplay and they use big boy software" all you want. But recording PC gameplay with commentary and webcam is much easier using Shadowplay.
> 
> Sorry for the rant guys. My issue is a minor one in the grand scheme of the GPU buyers market I'm sure.
> 
> I figured I'd post this here since I'm really excited for the RX480 and ultimately hoping someone can show me a solution that I'm looking for.


I just use my phone to record.


----------



## comagnum

This is probably a silly question, but it can't hurt to ask.

Do you guys think that this heatsink from my old 5770 would fit the 480? The screw holes look very similar in dimensions to the tear down shots of the 480, and the die size looks very similar as well;





Thoughts?


----------



## artemis2307

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> This is probably a silly question, but it can't hurt to ask.
> 
> Do you guys think that this heatsink from my old 5770 would fit the 480? The screw holes look very similar in dimensions to the tear down shots of the 480, and the die size looks very similar as well;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thoughts?


it'll probably fit, modern AMD cards all use 54x54 holes


----------



## comagnum

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> it'll probably fit, modern AMD cards all use 54x54 holes


Do you think it would perform better than the stock reference blower? Only thing I would be worried about is the dimm's not getting direct cooling.


----------



## artemis2307

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> Do you think it would perform better than the stock reference blower? Only thing I would be worried about is the dimm's not getting direct cooling.


only way to know is to test it out, both doesn't have heatpipe so can't say for sure
I wouldn't be too worried abt rhe VRAMs though, my 290 VRAM runs fine at 1400


----------



## slavovid

Guys it might be a bit unrelated but do you think for a guy that is not planning to overclock anytime soon since he is playing on 1080p (1050 even) Would the reference blower be best option due to it being just 1 fan making it quiet enough and reliable enough or should that guy (me) wait for AIB cards and see tests and such.

I might overclock it in a year or 2 if and when i change my monitor to something better. Or change the rest of my system before that. [email protected] Also haven't overclocked those yet due to no need with my current GPU (GTX650 that's been running at 1201Mhz poor one but still an OC)

You could say i don't have a GPU and am eager to get one so i can play on anything else than "LOW" everywhere


----------



## Ha-Nocri

I would wait for AIB cards if your case air-flow is decent. Most will shut their fans @idle and be quieter when under load.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> Guys it might be a bit unrelated but do you think for a guy that is not planning to overclock anytime soon since he is playing on 1080p (1050 even) Would the reference blower be best option due to it being just 1 fan making it quiet enough and reliable enough or should that guy (me) wait for AIB cards and see tests and such.
> 
> I might overclock it in a year or 2 if and when i change my monitor to something better. Or change the rest of my system before that. [email protected] Also haven't overclocked those yet due to no need with my current GPU (GTX650 that's been running at 1201Mhz poor one but still an OC)
> 
> You could say i don't have a GPU and am eager to get one so i can play on anything else than "LOW" everywhere


If you've got a SFF case with lower airflow then you'll want the blower cooler anyway and if you're not planning to overclock the additional cooling potential of AIB models will (pending reviews) likely be unnecessary. Likewise, you wouldn't have any pressing need for an additional 6 or 8 pin if you're not overclocking. I'm not one to advise against waiting for reviews but in your case I'm fairly certain the reference blower card will suit you just fine, particularly if you run a mATX / ITX build.


----------



## slavovid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ha-Nocri*
> 
> I would wait for AIB cards if your case air-flow is decent. Most will shut their fans @idle and be quieter when under load.


My case is some sort of a cheap server high tower or whatnot that i found back in the days in my country (5-6y ago) with a filter in front and a 120mm fan to suck in from that front where the HDD bay is then 1 at the back to exhaust and a Thermalright Inferno FX-14 on the CPU running at 55 C under load with yet a 3-rd 120mm fan on there. I lately replaced them
Then it has 1 SSD and 7 more HDD drives that fill up all the bays.

I don't think turned off fans of AIB card under load will rly work with my setup. Wouldn't it require a lot of airflow to work on passive cooling?
I was thinking that the reference (the one that we could see in one of those leeks) seems quite good and it will be pushing air out rather than the AIB cards that are actually just rotating the air inside the case ?

As SuperZan is suggesting maybe the reference is just about what i need and even thou 20-30$ extra on the AIB cards to not be that much more seems kind a pointless.
My thought is the reference blower style might be better for me. That's what i can't decide on.

On a much more related note. I do hope AMD lifts NDA today








If they are lifting it then it better be today as on monday the 27-th it will be kind a pointless to do so.


----------



## Ha-Nocri

you could put another fan after the HDD cage and your airflow would be just fine. Cards turn off fans @idle, not under load.


----------



## mohiuddin

http://videocardz.com/61396/new-amd-rx-480-crossfire-benchmarks-hit-the-web-exclusive-first-look-at-new-overclocking-tool
87c?


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

http://videocardz.com/61396/new-amd-rx-480-crossfire-benchmarks-hit-the-web-exclusive-first-look-at-new-overclocking-tool

WhyCry
14 minutes ago
I heard from reviewers the average OC is around 1330-1350 MHz. The highest clock I'm aware of is 1379 MHz. Of course all reference cards.


----------



## prznar1

Then im giving +100 on custom pcb and only golden chips will pass 1.5 GHz.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61396/new-amd-rx-480-crossfire-benchmarks-hit-the-web-exclusive-first-look-at-new-overclocking-tool
> 
> WhyCry
> 14 minutes ago
> I heard from reviewers the average OC is around 1330-1350 MHz. The highest clock I'm aware of is 1379 MHz. Of course all reference cards.


Seems realistic, no company would leave much headroom if possible anymore otherwise you have to charge less for your product.

The glory days of manual OC's are dead.


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> Seems realistic, no company would leave much headroom if possible anymore otherwise you have to charge less for your product.
> 
> The glory days of manual OC's are dead.


Or it's limited by the reference 6-pin power connector?


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61396/new-amd-rx-480-crossfire-benchmarks-hit-the-web-exclusive-first-look-at-new-overclocking-tool
> 87c?


Crossfire reference cards with fan speeds at 49% and 44%.

Now as for whycry's comment about oc maxing out around 1380mhz, if that's high for reference, that makes the rumoured customs make more sense if they're indeed able to reach 1500+

Only 5 more days to find out


----------



## EightDee8D

It's getting meh everyday lol. but for 240$ even 390 performance with 120w is good enough deal. maybe more performance with upcoming drivers ? ( hint 7970 )


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Not the best news but still rumors. Just like 1080, I will trust numbers achieved here by regular owners over reviews anyway. Might just be 980 performance across the board but still mighty impressive for a budget card at $200. I spent about as much for my 270X a couple years ago and this thing will be nearly twice as fast at max OC.


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> Crossfire reference cards with fan speeds at 49% and 44%.
> 
> Now as for whycry's comment about oc maxing out around 1380mhz, if that's high for reference, that makes the rumoured customs make more sense if they're indeed able to reach 1500+
> 
> Only 5 more days to find out


no custom cards at launch.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> no custom cards at launch.


Yeah I'm saying 5 days to find out if 1380 is a high oc. Also to find out why if so. Is it running out of power? Thermal limit? Is that with stock voltage? Is voltage locked on reference? Is there a bug still being worked out? Or is it just a bonified "overclockers dream"? Ect

100mhz oc, if true, that's a bit disappointing. I was even quite reserved in my expectations but that would be a real let down.

On the other side, as fun as overclocking is, it's not the end all be all and the real metric is fps, so I'm still excited as I was only expecting a 980 + some oc icing on the cake


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> no custom cards at launch.


rumour sets middle of July for custom cards


----------



## sinholueiro

How many chances are that the custom cards will use binned chips? Because I think that is very unlikely.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Availability on launch day will be good, with most people looking for a reference card able to get them without difficulty (in the US at least). AIB's will be out within a couple of weeks and their availability will similarly be great (unlike a certain recent green release).


this will be the hardest goal for AMD ,this would be the only reason why the card might be over msrp,low stock availability


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sinholueiro*
> 
> How many chances are that the custom cards will use binned chips? Because I think that is very unlikely.


Doesn't need though. This card need more power, that's all. As far as I know GCN is still quite powerhungry sadly


----------



## zealord

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61396/new-amd-rx-480-crossfire-benchmarks-hit-the-web-exclusive-first-look-at-new-overclocking-tool
> 
> WhyCry
> 14 minutes ago
> I heard from reviewers the average OC is around 1330-1350 MHz. The highest clock I'm aware of is 1379 MHz. Of course all reference cards.


hoped it was more if true









A 1500mhz RX480 would've been sweet


----------



## nagle3092

If you dont mind getting robbed B&H has them for preorder.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1261505-REG/index.html


----------



## ChevChelios

even if the card had no OC at all whatsoever, it would still be good at that price


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> If you dont mind getting robbed B&H has them for preorder.
> 
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1261505-REG/index.html


Nice found, it is XFX Force? So the custom will come a week later, right?
Quote:


> XFX Force RADEON RX 480 PCIE 8GB GDDR5 HDMI 3XDP
> Expected availability: July 08 2016


----------



## FLCLimax

NDA at this point makes no sense. The card has zero competition at its price and NVIDIA couldn't really respond to it anyway. No time, no supply of chips and they'd obviously rather sell what they got now for the $400 to $700 instead of hack 'em down to sell around $200.


----------



## mav451

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *zealord*
> 
> hoped it was more if true
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A 1500mhz RX480 would've been sweet


Looks like that 1340Mhz leak was fairly accurate then.
As for that 1700Mhz prediction made by a certain poster, I have to wonder where that came from hahah.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Nice found, it is XFX Force? So the custom will come a week later, right?


Same model thats on newegg so no, they are just overcharging.


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Same model thats on newegg so no, they are just overcharging.


MSRP for the XFX was 249.99 at one of the major distributors. Sapphire's reference was listed at $230 as selling price, not msrp but it falls in line with the msrp obviously.


----------



## Ultracarpet

Super low oc results on reference... hmm.. I have a feeling the single six pin is holding the chip back and this is how AMD is going to make the more expensive aib versions worth it...


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SoloCamo*
> 
> MSRP for the XFX was 249.99 at one of the major distributors. Sapphire's reference was listed at $230 as selling price, not msrp but it falls in line with the msrp obviously.


No we are talking about the B&H link I posted. They are charging $285.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> Super low oc results on reference... hmm.. I have a feeling the single six pin is holding the chip back and this is how AMD is going to make the more expensive aib versions worth it...


Yeah cheap cooler/heatsink, probably cheap components and weak VRM.

But at the same time they can hit good efficiency with the clocks they have, and really reduce cost for the manufacture process of the cards.

Leave the extravagant stuff for AIB's so people will possibly spend up to $300 on an AIB 480 instead of forking out the extra for a 1070.

Bet the AIB cards will chew a lot more juice if they do get to 1500mhz+ once manually OC'd.


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> Super low oc results on reference... hmm.. I have a feeling the single six pin is holding the chip back and this is how AMD is going to make the more expensive aib versions worth it...


pretty underhanded.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> Yeah cheap cooler/heatsink, probably cheap components and weak VRM.
> 
> But at the same time they can hit good efficiency with the clocks they have, and really reduce cost for the manufacture process of the cards.
> 
> Leave the extravagant stuff for AIB's so people will possibly spend up to $300 on an AIB 480 instead of forking out the extra for a 1070.
> 
> Bet the AIB cards will chew a lot more juice if they do get to 1500mhz+ once manually OC'd.


Didn't the PCB shots we got show 6 phase VRM's and Nichicon caps?
That's not exactly weak or cheap for 150W max power draw, that's downright over engineered.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Powercolor will be releasing a Devil RX 480
http://www.benchmark.pl/aktualnosci/powercolor-zapowiedz-karty-graficznej-radeon-rx-480-devil.html
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Didn't the PCB shots we got show 6 phase VRM's and Nichicon caps?
> That's not exactly weak or cheap for 150W max power draw, that's downright over engineered.


and Poorly cooled if it can oc higher than 1400


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Didn't the PCB shots we got show 6 phase VRM's and Nichicon caps?
> That's not exactly weak or cheap for 150W max power draw, that's downright over engineered.


Not sure haven't looked at closely, I could be wrong but I was imagining them trying to cut costs on the PCB.

At the same time they have to make sure the cards don't die early or they will be losing money in returns.

There are cheap/expensive ways to make a power delivery system too, the number of phases doesn't say everything.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> Not sure haven't looked at closely, I could be wrong but i was imagining them trying to cut costs on the PCB.


http://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2016/06/AMD-Radeon-RX-480-PCB-Polaris-10-2.jpg

You can see the cost savings here


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> http://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2016/06/AMD-Radeon-RX-480-PCB-Polaris-10-2.jpg
> 
> You can see the cost savings here


Yeah exactly, and I think they will use that same reference shroud on many cards that are upcoming.


----------



## FLCLimax

that HSF is awful.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> Not sure haven't looked at closely, I could be wrong but I was imagining them trying to cut costs on the PCB.
> 
> At the same time they have to make sure the cards don't die early or they will be losing money in returns.
> 
> There are cheap/expensive ways to make a power delivery system too, the number of phases doesn't say everything.


Nichicon are basically the highest quality caps you can get.

I can't confirm myself if the caps used on the PCB are from them, as these things are far from my area of understanding, I just remember reading that's what the power system is using.


----------



## BigTree

> Rise up. PC Gaming for the masses. #BetterRed pic.twitter.com/AZKYHymlLy
> 
> - AMD Radeon Graphics (@AMDRadeon)


June 24, 2016

I like the Russian stickers at the beginning.


----------



## The Mac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Nichicon are basically the highest quality caps you can get.
> 
> I can't confirm myself if the caps used on the PCB are from them, as these things are far from my area of understanding, I just remember reading that's what the power system is using.


power system is deff over engineered, AMD always does that.

It isnt being held back by the 6pin.

150 watts is spec. You can draw way more than 75watts over 6pin on a decent power supply.

Cooling with be the bottleneck, not power delivery.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

http://videocardz.com/61396/new-amd-rx-480-crossfire-benchmarks-hit-the-web-exclusive-first-look-at-new-overclocking-tool

Do not get too optimistic about the performance. Only thing that might push RX480 above GTX980/390X is 1.6GHz OC. If it overclocks under 1.5GHz it will lose.

Here is my 290 + 290X CFX @ 1275/1625MHz

In general 290X will score ~ 7% more point clock per clock then 290.

Extreme - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6693268
Ultra - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6693295

These a bit old but still relevant.


----------



## f1LL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61396/new-amd-rx-480-crossfire-benchmarks-hit-the-web-exclusive-first-look-at-new-overclocking-tool
> 
> Do not get too optimistic about the performance. Only thing that might push RX480 above GTX980/390X is 1.6GHz OC. If it overclocks under 1.5GHz it will lose.
> 
> Here is my 290 + 290X CFX @ 1275/1625MHz
> 
> In general 290X will score ~ 7% more point clock per clock then 290.
> 
> Extreme - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6693268
> Ultra - http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6693295
> 
> These a bit old but still relevant.


Hm...the option to define all power states individually is nice thing


----------



## Dudewitbow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *f1LL*
> 
> Hm...the option to define all power states individually is nice thing


it really is, I hate it when some application holds me at 2d clocks (I'm looking at you Battle.net launcher) even having the application minimized locks my gpu clocks at 2d. would like to undervolt/underclock my 2d application controls.


----------



## motoray

Anyone making full cover blocks for non ref cards anymore?? Would suck to throw a block on a ref card that might not have power needed for possible high clocks. Unless the chip cant go much further than ref is capable of....... so we wait to see.


----------



## Dudewitbow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *motoray*
> 
> Anyone making full cover blocks for non ref cards anymore?? Would suck to throw a block on a ref card that might not have power needed for possible high clocks. Unless the chip cant go much further than ref is capable of....... so we wait to see.


no one does it because its cost prohibitive. Custom watercooling is already a niche industry in a niche industry that is custom pcs. WC companies either make reference cooled water blocks, universal ones, or waterblocks based on flagship popular gpus.


----------



## motoray

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dudewitbow*
> 
> no one does it because its cost prohibitive. Custom watercooling is already a niche industry in a niche industry that is custom pcs. WC companies either make reference cooled water blocks, universal ones, or waterblocks based on flagship popular gpus.


Eh i can always just make my own if the clocking gap is that large from ref. But probably wont be.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

For this card it's probably easy to just install a AIO and leave the plate and stock fan for vRAM and VRM cooling.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> even if the card had no OC at all whatsoever, it would still be good at that price










gotta reinforce good behavior.


----------



## rv8000

That new tuning software looks fantastic, I wonder if AB or Trixx will support an option for these in the future.

And what's with being extremely biopolar in this thread; one second a leaked clock speed is 1500, then its 1370, then its 1400, all of it with no proof, yet everyone has such extreme reactions


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *motoray*
> 
> Anyone making full cover blocks for non ref cards anymore?? Would suck to throw a block on a ref card that might not have power needed for possible high clocks. Unless the chip cant go much further than ref is capable of....... so we wait to see.


EK is the only one who makes non-ref blocks.


----------



## Ha-Nocri

If max OC is really ~1380 for reference cards, what was Linus showing in one of his videos? 1500 MHz on air


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ha-Nocri*
> 
> If max OC is really ~1380 for reference cards, what was Linus showing in one of his videos? 1500 MHz on air


People keep thinking that the 1.5ghz on stock cooler thing was a sneak peak of the rx 480 but im pretty certain that meme is old and in relation to the gtx 980 or 970.......


----------



## nagle3092

I must say, potato salad is either one of my 90 year old guy take a quarter of a lightning storm you should do it again instead of "voilà" which really annoyed me.


----------



## Cakewalk_S

OH yes....

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&N=8000&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=PPSSHSDDJAMLWK&cm_mmc=SNC-Twitter-_-PM-Promo-_-AMD-RX480-auto-notify-_-NA&hootPostID=0bc2f8a755bea0c166edf404926213d2


----------



## p4inkill3r

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> I must say, potato salad is either one of my 90 year old guy take a quarter of a lightning storm you should do it again instead of "voilà" which really annoyed me.


nagle3092.exe has stopped working.


----------



## toddincabo

Saw this .....Nvidea shill campaign.... posted on another site today. Ten years old but just as relevant today...cough... Chev... cough..:

https://consumerist.com/2006/02/06/nvidias-perez-they-act-as-our-voice/


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *p4inkill3r*
> 
> nagle3092.exe has stopped working.


I just wanted to see the response from "normal people" when I posted something from subreddit simulator (a subreddit composed of nothing but bots).


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> I just wanted to see the response from "normal people" when I posted something from subreddit simulator (a subreddit composed of nothing but bots).


Every account on reddit is a bot except you.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Every account on reddit is a bot except you.


Its pretty clear that sub is, really off the wall sentences like above.

Sooooo.........where the heck is all the 480 news?


----------



## Dudewitbow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Its pretty clear that sub is, really off the wall sentences like above.
> 
> Sooooo.........where the heck is all the 480 news?


NDA isn't lifted until the 29th at 9AM EST.


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> This: https://obsproject.com/forum/threads/technical-explanation-of-obs-settings.642/ is quite helpful and a quick once-over should enable you to tune OBS quickly for your needs. After that it's essentially fire and forget.


I've been messing about with OBS today. It seems to be a pretty decent solution and perhaps even slightly better quality that Shadowplay. It's definitely much more CPU hungry lol. I'm on a 6600K and the build I plan on using with probably be on a FX 8 core and of course the RX 480.

I sure hope the FX doesn't puke on itself with OBS. I would like to keep FPS minimum at 100 on this 1080p 144hz screen.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> I must say, potato salad is either one of my 90 year old guy take a quarter of a lightning storm you should do it again instead of "voilà" which really annoyed me.


Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> I just wanted to see the response from "normal people" when I posted something from subreddit simulator (a subreddit composed of nothing but bots).


Sadly it would appear even the bots make more sense than (some) humans.


----------



## GoLDii3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> I must say, potato salad is either one of my 90 year old guy take a quarter of a lightning storm you should do it again instead of "voilà" which really annoyed me.


wat


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> I've been messing about with OBS today. It seems to be a pretty decent solution and perhaps even slightly better quality that Shadowplay. It's definitely much more CPU hungry lol. I'm on a 6600K and the build I plan on using with probably be on a FX 8 core and of course the RX 480.
> 
> I sure hope the FX doesn't puke on itself with OBS. I would like to keep FPS minimum at 100 on this 1080p 144hz screen.


True, it will eat some more CPU. I've been able to run it comfortably on an 8370 several different cards; I was even able to stabilise a 4K stream (as that's what I play on) after some tweaks. That of course was not the best quality but I was impressed nonetheless. FX does relatively well with streaming and is quite good with transcoding.


----------



## FLaguy954

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cakewalk_S*
> 
> OH yes....
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&N=8000&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=PPSSHSDDJAMLWK&cm_mmc=SNC-Twitter-_-PM-Promo-_-AMD-RX480-auto-notify-_-NA&hootPostID=0bc2f8a755bea0c166edf404926213d2


I setup an auto notification for the XFX version since it's the only one I can see that has a backplate.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLaguy954*
> 
> I setup an auto notification for the XFX version since it's the only one I can see that has a backplate.


Check double check when you click to buy, supposedly XFX is releasing a 'Black version' with a backplate and a 'Core version' without.


----------



## The Mac

supposedly sapphire does as well


----------



## FLaguy954

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Check double check when you click to buy, _supposedly_ XFX is releasing a 'Black version' with a backplate and a 'Core version' without.


Thanks for the heads-up.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Check double check when you click to buy, _supposedly_ XFX is releasing a 'Black version' with a backplate and a 'Core version' without.


What SuperZan didn't tell you, is that the "Black" version comes with a _permanent_ backplate -- it's soldered to the PCB so you'll never get it off.

The "Black Core" version however does feature a removable backplate.

j/k


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoLDii3*
> 
> wat


0.35 seconds before I noped out of here with the drive will break nicely and almost never high ropes from a sidewalk you should only swerve or lock brakes in a news article she fell to her little follower.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Mac*
> 
> supposedly sapphire does as well


But all the stock photos of them say otherwise so far.


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> Super low oc results on reference... hmm.. I have a feeling the single six pin is holding the chip back and this is how AMD is going to make the more expensive aib versions worth it...


Wishful Thinking.









Not enough power does not limit max OC when running "easy" workloads, not enough power would cause de-clocking under load but we can still see what the max OC is with lighter benchmarks and games.

The same wishful thinking was applied to the 1080 and we now know extra power doesn't help max OC much if at all.


----------



## The Mac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> 0.35 seconds before I noped out of here with the drive will break nicely and almost never high ropes from a sidewalk you should only swerve or lock brakes in a news article she fell to her little follower.
> But all the stock photos of them say otherwise so far.


true, but thats the rumor.

maybe a specific model like the xfx "black"

who knows.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Mac*
> 
> true, but thats the rumor.
> 
> maybe a specific model like the xfx "black"
> 
> who knows.


https://www.techpowerup.com/223594/sapphire-reference-radeon-rx-480-taken-apart-pictured-some-more

Gigabyte doesnt have one, not sure about the other vendors.

So far it only looks like XFX.


----------



## The Mac

i read it somewhere that xfx and sapphire were the only two with backplates.

cant remember where now, but it seemed legit at the time.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Mac*
> 
> i read it somewhere that xfx and sapphire were the only two with backplates.
> 
> cant remember where now, but it seemed legit at the time.


I heard about it too but so far no proof other than for the XFX cards.


----------



## Dudewitbow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Mac*
> 
> i read it somewhere that xfx and sapphire were the only two with backplates.
> 
> cant remember where now, but it seemed legit at the time.


for XFX, I asked an XFX PR on r/pcmr and he couldn't answer my question for future products directly, but could indirectly answer the question, which he posted the Newegg listing showing the XFX backplate, so its probably confirmed that XFX cards will have a backplate(just check).

For sapphire the one pictured mid page here is the one in question, there have been no confirmations yet showing that the sapphire ones will have a backplate.


----------



## Gungnir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> I've been messing about with OBS today. It seems to be a pretty decent solution and perhaps even slightly better quality that Shadowplay. It's definitely much more CPU hungry lol. I'm on a 6600K and the build I plan on using with probably be on a FX 8 core and of course the RX 480.
> 
> I sure hope the FX doesn't puke on itself with OBS. I would like to keep FPS minimum at 100 on this 1080p 144hz screen.


OBS can use AMD's VCE to do encoding on the GPU, just like Shadowplay. When using that, there's pretty much no CPU impact, though you lose the improved quality x264 provides.


----------



## nagle3092

Disregard, turned out that its fake. Someone just replaced 390 with 480.


----------



## The Mac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dudewitbow*
> 
> for XFX, I asked an XFX PR on r/pcmr and he couldn't answer my question for future products directly, but could indirectly answer the question, which he posted the Newegg listing showing the XFX backplate, so its probably confirmed that XFX cards will have a backplate(just check).
> 
> For sapphire the one pictured mid page here is the one in question, there have been no confirmations yet showing that the sapphire ones will have a backplate.


yeah, that was where i saw it thanks...










Quote:


> Sapphire's solution, while less aesthetically pleasing, does not affect the width of the card. Which improves cooling in tight crossfire configurations where the cards are installed right next to each other.


----------



## Ha-Nocri

Since when is 390X faster than 980 in GTA 5? And also faster in The Division with GimpWorks on? lol ... new drivers?

Also, 1120MHz is odd, but I was expecting 480 will be somewhere between 390 and 390X, probably closer to 390


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ha-Nocri*
> 
> Since when is 390X faster than 980 in GTA 5? And also faster in The Division with GimpWorks on? lol ... new drivers?
> 
> Also, 1120MHz is odd, but I was expecting 480 will be somewhere between 390 and 390X, probably closer to 390


Chart was a fake, someone just shopped a 480 over the 390 score


----------



## Pesmerrga

Raja Koduri is going to be on PCPER next Wednesday! 5 more days until October

https://twitter.com/ryanshrout/status/746462940740608000


----------



## EightDee8D

October


----------



## SuperZan

I can't express how happy it would make me if Raja popped into the interview with a couple of 480's and yelled "Happy Halloween mofos!"


----------



## Ultracarpet

Thus, June 29th was forever remembered, and cherrished, as "October Day". A day to give thanks to those few who sacrificed their e-pride in 2016, and bless friends and family with the simple prayer: "May you one day validate beyond 850mhz".

Also, pizza is mandatory for the celebration.... and chocolate.


----------



## AuraNova

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> Thus, June 29th was forever remembered, and cherrished, as "October Day". A day to give thanks to those few who sacrificed their e-pride in 2016, and bless friends and family with the simple prayer: "May you one day validate beyond 850mhz".
> 
> Also, pizza is mandatory for the celebration.... and chocolate.


I only wonder if anyone would remember this "holiday" come next year. I wouldn't put if past this forum to make a thread on that, assuming everyone involved is still here on June 29, 2017.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> Thus, June 29th was forever remembered, and cherrished, as "October Day". A day to give thanks to those few who sacrificed their e-pride in 2016, and bless friends and family with the simple prayer: "May you one day validate beyond 850mhz".
> 
> Also, pizza is mandatory for the celebration.... and chocolate.


EL OH EL


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pesmerrga*
> 
> Raja Koduri is going to be on PCPER next Wednesday! 5 more days until October
> 
> https://twitter.com/ryanshrout/status/746462940740608000












It will be great to see him in a more relaxed environment, where he can be more comfortable than on a big stage. Lego Star Wars: TFA comes out on the 28th, and if the 480 impresses, I will snag one for my son to go with the new game. A $200 1080P crushing card would be pretty sweet.


----------



## Noufel

TT in their fb page
Quote:


> Playing Overwatch on the new AMD Radeon RX 480 is amazing, considering it's $199 and handles 1440p like a boss!


----------



## SlackerITGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pesmerrga*
> 
> Raja Koduri is going to be on PCPER next Wednesday! 5 more days until October
> 
> https://twitter.com/ryanshrout/status/746462940740608000


Look for Ryan to get some Vega info out of him


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> best prepare him now, lest he gets a shock on the 29-th


Speaking from personal experience? How are those 2.5GHz on air 1080s you were raving about last month?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cakewalk_S*
> 
> OH yes....
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&N=8000&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=PPSSHSDDJAMLWK&cm_mmc=SNC-Twitter-_-PM-Promo-_-AMD-RX480-auto-notify-_-NA&hootPostID=0bc2f8a755bea0c166edf404926213d2
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


This better not be a reference only launch...


----------



## magnek

By all indications this looks to be a reference only launch, with AIB cards to come 2-4 weeks later.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> By all indications this looks to be a reference only launch, with AIB cards to come 2-4 weeks later.


Without a single AIB card leak I think you're right.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Without a single AIB card leak I think you're right.


Pretty sure Gibbo said they had no AIB cards, just reference for launch.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Without a single AIB card leak I think you're right.


That cheese grater card is suddenly looking very attractive isn't it.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> That cheese grater card is suddenly looking very attractive isn't it.


Nope, sounds like a disappointing launch


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

I'm assuming at least 70% of you in this thread are joining the Radeon Rebellion, because VR is not just for the 1%:


----------



## Offender_Mullet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> I'm assuming at least 70% of you in this thread are joining the Radeon Rebellion, because VR is not just for the 1%:


No millenial hipsters wearing Che Guevara shirts? Disappointing.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> That cheese grater card is suddenly looking very attractive isn't it.


Nope, I'd rather have reference than one of those.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> I'm assuming at least 70% of you in this thread are joining the Radeon Rebellion, because VR is not just for the 1%:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Not even slightly interested in VR. Long live monitors mice and keyboards!


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> Not even slightly interested in VR. Long live monitors mice and keyboards!


But, #BetterRed.


----------



## SuperZan

It's not the agitprop ad campaign or the silly metrics or even the potential for the aforementioned Che Guevara'd hipsters that has my inner curmudgeon at the fore. It's the VR!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> Not even slightly interested in VR. Long live monitors mice and keyboards!


Agreed! I refuse to wear those goggles and trounce around my house like a muppet!

I do want a 480 or two though..


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Its so hilarious to me what a massive beating Ojo is taking around here! The October thing is everywhere in every 480 and 1080 thread! Is this how stuff goes viral, just on a bigger scale?


----------



## SuperZan

Pretty much!


----------



## HackHeaven

I run OBS when i stream its good... alot better then raptor (what is now called AMD gaming evolved) at least when i tried it it sucked

Also what does a backplate really do spread heat better?


----------



## Circlemage8

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Agreed! I refuse to wear those goggles and trounce around my house like a muppet!


Trust me. You don't look near as good as a muppet. I have proof (this is me).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqwclgmh8RI


----------



## paulerxx

No matter how these overclock...a 980/390x for $200 cannot be beat for people who still own HD7870/750Tis etc.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Circlemage8*
> 
> Trust me. You don't look near as good as a muppet. I have proof (this is me).
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqwclgmh8RI










Seems to be good exercise at least! I like around 1:35 when you started putting a little flair on it.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HackHeaven*
> 
> I run OBS when i stream its good... alot better then raptor (what is now called AMD gaming evolved) at least when i tried it it sucked
> 
> Also what does a backplate really do spread heat better?


If there is thermal pads between the plate and the card then yeah. It provides more surface area to dissipate heat. The xfx plates look like they are purely for aesthetics though. There doesnt seem to be any pads on those.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Unfortunately people get sucked in to the statist propaganda that promises to take care of them from cradle-to-grave without realizing that at the same time they are surrendering all of their liberties to them. I for one am proud of you guys in Great Britain for daring to defend your sovereignty. Even if you guys are going to get killed in the media for it.


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Unfortunately people get sucked in to the statist propaganda that promises to take care of them from cradle-to-grave without realizing that at the same time they are surrendering all of their liberties to them. I for one am proud of you guys in Great Britain for daring to defend your sovereignty. Even if you guys are going to get killed in the media for it.


How dare you defend freedom! Stand in line comrade for the New World Order.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Robenger*
> 
> How dare you defend freedom! Stand in line comrade for the New World Order.


I've been working on Skynet and/or Cylons in my spare time just in case the plebs don't want to queue up.


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paulerxx*
> 
> No matter how these overclock...a 980/390x for $200 cannot be beat for people who still own HD7870/750Tis etc.


Not sure how you reason actually, there is no card cheaper than the 480 even now where I live in the performance delta.
Your argument make absolutly no sense whatsoever.

AMD played this game before,
no finished drivers before reviewers can do their tests and even today one of them said it be on monday they get the drivers for benching their 480.
I ask myself, what drivers have been out as far?
did amd make sure they were all crippled performance?
Holding back overclocking?
Holding back any bios for the card?

Its what I would do.
AMD did a similiar thing with a previous serie and how much they played that game now, we find out in a few days.


----------



## stoker

New drivers unlock extra 32ROPS


----------



## kalelovil

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> NDA at this point makes no sense. The card has zero competition at its price and NVIDIA couldn't really respond to it anyway. No time, no supply of chips and they'd obviously rather sell what they got now for the $400 to $700 instead of hack 'em down to sell around $200.


The hardware certainly seems ready. Perhaps reviewers are/were waiting for a final driver from AMD before doing their benchmarks. It wouldn't be the first time an AMD hardware launch has been held up by drivers.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HackHeaven*
> 
> I run OBS when i stream its good... alot better then raptor (what is now called AMD gaming evolved) at least when i tried it it sucked
> 
> Also what does a backplate really do spread heat better?


It traps heat better so the card cooks more and shortens life span.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Speaking from personal experience?


so far it looks like 1700Mhz / 1070 competitor that one user was hyped for got revised to ~1350









card is still great, but if he would have listened to me - he would not have set himself up for dissapointment









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> Not sure how you reason actually, there is no card cheaper than the 480 even now where I live in the performance delta.
> Your argument make absolutly no sense whatsoever.
> 
> AMD played this game before,
> no finished drivers before reviewers can do their tests and even today one of them said it be on monday they get the drivers for benching their 480.
> I ask myself, what drivers have been out as far?
> did amd make sure they were all crippled performance?
> Holding back overclocking?
> Holding back any bios for the card?
> 
> Its what I would do.
> AMD did a similiar thing with a previous serie and how much they played that game now, we find out in a few days.


your tune changes all the time, m8

what happened to "480 replaces everything under 1080", "1070 at half the price" ? etc.


----------



## renx

...a world without rules and controls, without borders or boundaries, a world where anything is possible.
Where we go from there, is a choice I leave to you.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

the fact that someone took a videocardz article from may and actually twist it so much but made even videocardz blush is enough i think lol

http://videocardz.com/59903/possible-polaris-10-and-polaris-11-specifications-emerge

here we see the famous and so reliable videocardz claiming the card will be clocked at 1350

today we learned the card will have a 1350 of oc clock..








people never EVER learn around here


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> ...a world without rules and controls, without borders or boundaries, a world where anything is possible.
> Where we go from there, is a choice I leave to you.


Looks good and on track replacing every card out there below the 1080.
Thats the real power behind the AMD Rebellion as its a rebellion so I rebel.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Looks good and on track replacing every card out there below the 1080.


its so great to buy a card ~40% slower then 1070 to replace a 1070


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *paulerxx*
> 
> No matter how these overclock...a 980/390x for $200 cannot be beat for people who still own HD7870/750Tis etc.


i've seen a GTX 780 for $200. The 980? Maybe in about six months but, by that time, it would have fallen off nvidia's radar for driver optimization.

i want to see a 390X at $200, though.


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> ...a world without rules and controls, without borders or boundaries, a world where anything is possible.
> Where we go from there, is a choice I leave to you.


I get what AMD is trying to do with this better red communist type theme marketing, but I just hope the new cards won't be as big of a flop as the soviet union was


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> its so great to buy a card ~40% slower then 1070 to replace a 1070


Sit tight and watch. Shock and awe is coming.

Just kidding. I have no clue. But shock and awe may come.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> Sit tight and watch. Shock and awe is coming.


he'll be MIA like ojo


----------



## ChevChelios

Im sure I will be "shock & awed" by reference 480 OCing by ~6%+ to 1350









j/k (still a good card for the price), but its so easy to mock the insanely oberblown expectations and the "red revolution"/radeon rebellion









hmm, _radeon rebellion_ .. dem Code Geass vibes

Nvidia = Brittania

Huang = Emperor Charles zi Britannia

Raja = Lelouch

Lisa Su = C.C/Kallen


----------



## Noufel

so to sum it up :
480 oc = ref 1400mhz aib 1600+
performance stock = 980/390X, oc'ed to 1400 better than 980/390X oc'ed and 1600+ oc = stock 1070 ( that's a little umprobable but who knows







)


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Im sure I will be "shock & awed" by reference 480 OCing by ~6%+ to 1350
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> j/k (still a good card for the price), but its so easy to mock the insanely oberblown expectations and the "red revolution"


it was much more easy to troll " october launch " don't worry


----------



## prznar1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> so to sum it up :
> 480 oc = ref 1400mhz aib 1600+
> performance stock = 980/390X, oc'ed to 1400 better than 980/390X oc'ed and 1600+ oc = stock 1070 ( that's a little umprobable but who knows
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


I would say aib 1400+ and golden chips close to 1.5 GHz. Underpromise overdeliver. Never hype something to infinity levels.


----------



## renx

To tell the truth, even after heavy overclock it shouldn't come close to the 1070.
If it ever does, then Nvidia has a huge problem.
I'd say even if it comes closer than a 30% after overclocking, the RX480 will be the worst pain in the arse Nvidia has ever had.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> To tell the truth, even after heavy overclock it shouldn't come close to the 1070.
> If it ever does, then Nvidia has a huge problem.
> I'd say even if it comes closer than a 30% after overclocking, the RX480 will be the worst pain in the arse Nvidia has ever had.


That's the least of their concern. Supply is at the top.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> To tell the truth, even after heavy overclock it shouldn't come close to the 1070.
> If it ever does, then Nvidia has a huge problem.
> I'd say even if it comes closer than a 30% after overclocking, the RX480 will be the worst pain in the arse Nvidia has ever had.


*Some math-*

let's say 1070 is running at 2100mhz ( max avg oc ) - 2100x2x1920= 8 tflops

IF 480 oc to let's say 1650mhz (max avg oc) - 1650x2x2304= 7.6 tflops

IF polaris has same perf/tflops (p/t) as hawaii, that means it will have same p/t as pascal ( 290 and 1080 has almost same p/t from tpu chart at 2k, 78% more performance for 80% more tflops)

so that puts rx480 delivering 7.6/8= *95% of 1070oc performance* . damn that's pretty good.









so there's a possibility of rx480 delivering almost same performance as 1070oc. but as always it's just that "a possibility". i don't want to get disappointed so *i'll say it again expect 390x lvl performance + 15% oc YMMV*.

i'm sure someone doesn't like this but whatever.







*it's just a speculation so take it easy*


----------



## ChevChelios

if stock 480 = stock 390X/980

then OC 480 is going to be *40-45%+* faster then its own stock to match stock 1070 or mild OC 1070

that makes perfect sense


----------



## Xuper

not possible , AMD said it's $200 and not high end card.so it's not going to fight again GTX 1070.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> To tell the truth, even after heavy overclock it shouldn't come close to the 1070.
> If it ever does, then Nvidia has a huge problem.
> I'd say even if it comes closer than a 30% after overclocking, *the RX480 will be the worst pain in the arse Nvidia has ever had.*


You sure it's not the HD 4870/4850?


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> if stock 480 = stock 390X/980
> 
> then OC 480 is going to be *40-45%+* faster then its own stock to match stock 1070 or mild OC 1070
> 
> that makes perfect sense


That's why i said IF , IF and IF. atleast let amd to perform good in speculation man geee.

And 1070 is only 37% faster than 390x, and 95% of that doesn't mean 40-45% faster than own stock. it's around 30% which is not impossible.

but whatever, speculation is speculation.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> That's why i said IF , IF and IF. atleast let amd to perform good in speculation man geee.
> 
> And 1070 is only 37% faster than 390x, and 95% of that doesn't mean 40-45% faster than own stock. it's around 30% which is not impossible.
> 
> but whatever, speculation is speculation.


Come the end of the month . . .

Stock 480 > Stock 1070

'Cause the latter will still be in a paper launch.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> 'Cause the latter will still be in a paper launch.


I was able to buy and receive FE 1070 (if I wanted to) starting from 10-12 June


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> I was able to buy and receive FE 1070 (if I wanted to) starting from 10-12 June


Join the 1070 club to make the roster at number 11.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> Join the 1070 club to make the roster at number 11.


Im aiming for the 1080, thx









I just posted that to show that there was no paper launch as far as reference cards are concerned


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Im aiming for the 1080, thx
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just posted that to show that there was no paper launch as far as reference cards are concerned


Hurry! You might be the first owner to make it to the top 10 . . .

http://www.overclock.net/t/1406832/single-gpu-fire-strike-top-30


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Im aiming for the 1080, thx
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just posted that to show that there was no paper launch as far as reference cards are concerned


when does the NDA lift for the 1080


----------



## TopicClocker

The hype is real! I can't wait to see the performance of the RX 480 in reviews!


----------



## JackCY

Triple RX480 8GB, similar price to 1080? What about performance?








I know multiGPU setups will still take time to be properly done with low level APIs but would be interesting to see such comparisons for the fun of it.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> when does the NDA lift for the 1080


you guys do really well to dance around the issue

that your "paper launch 1080" thing is simply not true


----------



## ku4eto

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> ill
> you guys do really well to dance around the issue
> 
> that your "paper launch 1080" thing is simply not true


This means that the Fury line wasn't paper launch either.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TopicClocker*
> 
> The hype is real! I can't wait to see the performance of the RX 480 in reviews!


Especially from kyle.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> when does the NDA lift for the 1080


lol


----------



## GoLDii3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> you guys do really well to dance around the issue
> 
> that your "paper launch 1080" thing is simply not true


Announced on May 7,NDA retired the 17th and sold the 27th. Completely paper launch. Deal with it.


----------



## blue1512

Pulling out the reviews without the cards on shelves happens to be the definition of paper launch


----------



## Mad Pistol

I know there are reports of high inventories of the RX 480, and I really hope this is true. I do wish Nvidia had waited another couple of weeks to backstock inventories so more people got the product on launch day.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> that your "paper launch 1080" thing is simply not true


Oh wow look at the abundant stock of 1080's Newegg has. BRB gotta go pledge allegiance to Nvidia a few more times. If I shill hard enough maybe someone will finally love me.


----------



## slavovid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> *Some math-*
> 
> let's say 1070 is running at 2100mhz ( max avg oc ) - 2100x2x1920= 8 tflops
> 
> IF 480 oc to let's say 1650mhz (max avg oc) - 1650x2x2304= 7.6 tflops
> 
> IF polaris has same perf/tflops (p/t) as hawaii, that means it will have same p/t as pascal ( 290 and 1080 has almost same p/t from tpu chart at 2k, 78% more performance for 80% more tflops)
> 
> so that puts rx480 delivering 7.6/8= *95% of 1070oc performance* . damn that's pretty good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> so there's a possibility of rx480 delivering almost same performance as 1070oc. but as always it's just that "a possibility". i don't want to get disappointed so *i'll say it again expect 390x lvl performance + 15% oc YMMV*.
> 
> i'm sure someone doesn't like this but whatever.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *it's just a speculation so take it easy*


Lets say both GTX 1070 and RX480 are running at their standard boost clock speeds that is 1683 MHz on 1920 CC so 1683x2x1920 = 6.46 tflop
the RX 480 running on 1266 MHz with 2304 CU so 1266x2x2304 = 5.83 ]

Setting aside the GCN changes then RX 480+ is 11% behind GTX 1070 ....

This guy however is starting to talk nonsence:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> its so great to buy a card ~40% slower then 1070 to replace a 1070


a 229$ cards with 10% less performance than a 379$ MSRP card that is hardly found at that price surely makes the 65.5% more expencive card and only 10% better performing a BAD decision.
Not only that but from what we know that comparison will be even worse for DX12 applications.

.... and then comes Vulkan API ... oh boy


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> you guys do really well to dance around the issue
> 
> that your "paper launch 1080" thing is simply not true


did u receive you 1080 ?








mine arrive mid to end july


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Pulling out the reviews without the cards on shelves happens to be the definition of paper launch


I cant even respond to such an insanely twisted logic









date of 27-th was set from the day of announcement and the cards were out on 27-th

not everyone drags their NDA till launch date


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> I cant even respond to such an insanely twisted logic


You can't because that's a fact not twisted logic.









enjoy the horror lol


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> a 229$ cards with 10% less performance than a 379$ MSRP card


10% = 40%

confirmed


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> a 229$ cards with 10% less performance than a 379$ MSRP card that is hardly found at that price surely makes the 65.5% more expencive card and only 10% better performing a BAD decision.
> Not only that but from what we know that comparison will be even worse for DX12 applications.


I wouldn't put too many eggs in that TFLOPS basket.

According to Wikipedia, R9 390X has roughly 5.9 TFLOPS single precision. GTX 980 has 4.6 TFLOPS. By all accounts, the GTX 980 is about 5-10% faster in real-world performance. That's not even considering the fact that GTX 980 overclocked much higher than they 390x, too.

Don't use TFLOPS as a metric for measuring performance. Lets wait for reviews to release so we can get some actual performance numbers.


----------



## spyshagg

Someone is feeling nervous and a bit reddish around here lol

Passive aggressive smile ->


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> 10% = 40%
> 
> confirmed


i know that you wont but

do you have ANY REAL PROOF to show that 40% difference?


----------



## Mad Pistol

c
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spyshagg*
> 
> Someone is feeling nervous and a bit reddish around here lol
> 
> Passive aggressive smile ->


Not at all, I just don't think the RX 480 is going to even come close to a GTX 1070, even after a monster overclock from the RX 480. However, traditionally, AMD has had higher TFLOPS numbers from their cards compared to Nvidia, but that doesn't play out in real-world performance. I'm just trying to temper some expectations of the RX 480 = GTX 1070... probably not going to happen.

Will the RX 480 be a better value than the GTX 1070? It really should be. We will see what kind of value it provides in a few days.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> 10% = 40%
> 
> confirmed


10% less performance at 40% price difference. But, why base all these on speculations. Card will be launched soon. Members will either rejoice or get disappointed as you predicted.

So how many members/guests have you duped convinced into buying the 1070 today?

kid kid


----------



## slavovid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> its so great to buy a card ~40% slower then 1070 to replace a 1070


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> I wouldn't put too many eggs in that TFLOPS basket.
> 
> According to Wikipedia, R9 390X has roughly 5.9 TFLOPS single precision. GTX 980 has 4.6 TFLOPS. By all accounts, the GTX 980 is about 5-10% faster in real-world performance. That's not even considering the fact that GTX 980 overclocked much higher than they 390x, too.
> 
> Don't use TFLOPS as a metric for measuring performance. Lets wait for reviews to release so we can get some actual performance numbers.


That is true for the 390X yes but we have enough leaks to asume that GCN4 has lowered that gap.
even if it hasn't eliminated all of it the RX480 based on all the leaks is far from 40% slower than 1070 ... even if it is 20% slower/weaker it still is 65% cheaper and that is a huge difference that would still render the 1070 a poor option imo.

However we should wait 4 more days before we can know for sure but untill then this guy and his 40% difference needs to lower his nonsence as he is starting to be realy anoying.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> I wouldn't put too many eggs in that TFLOPS basket.
> 
> According to Wikipedia, R9 390X has roughly 5.9 TFLOPS single precision. GTX 980 has 4.6 TFLOPS. By all accounts, the GTX 980 is about 5-10% faster in real-world performance. That's not even considering the fact that GTX 980 overclocked much higher than they 390x, too.
> 
> Don't use TFLOPS as a metric for measuring performance. Lets wait for reviews to release so we can get some actual performance numbers.


Well, actually, while I do agree TFLOPS comparisons are a bad way to do these things, that TFLOPS number is using base clock.
With boost lock, it's 5 TFLOPS, and Maxwell cards pretty much always hit a lot higher than their rated boost clock, so it's probably even higher than that.

Though don't even start looking at GM200 and Fiji, it's a really bad comparison considering how incredibly bottlenecked Fiji was in so many areas.

Edi:
Using the numbers here, with a custom cooler, the 980 should EASILY hit an extra 100MHz above the advertised boost clock. We're looking at 5.4 TFLOPS on the 980.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Well, actually, while I do agree TFLOPS comparison are a bad way to do these things, that TFLOPS number is using base clock.
> With boost lock, it's 5TFLOPS, and Maxwell cards pretty much always hit a lot higher than their rated boost clock.
> 
> Though don't even start looking at GM200 and Fiji, it's a really bad comparison considering how incredibly bottlenecked Fiji was in so many areas.


This is true. You are correct. However, Nvidia says the GTX 1070 has 6.5 TFLOPS of performance. and this is for the base clock of 1500mhz. My GTX 1070 stabilizes at around 1800mhz boost, stock, so real world, The GTX 1070 gets about 7.8 TFLOPS of performance at stock.

Here's a link to Anandtech's 2016 GPU bench that shows a GTX 980 vs 1070, both at stock.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1716?vs=1731

Bear in mind, the 1070 also overclocks around 10% higher, and because of the recent leaks saying that the RX 480 will ONLY hit around 1350mhz on ref cooler, that means that both cards will overclock very similarly.

That graph does prove one thing, though. If the RX 480 does match the 980, then it will be one hell of a value. But will it be able to match the GTX 1070 with a 40%+ overclock? That's very unlikely.


----------



## huzzug

Wonder why no one posted these screen caps:


What are you guys thoughts ?


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> This is true. You are correct. However, Nvidia says the GTX 1070 has 6.5 TFLOPS of performance. and this is for the base clock of 1500mhz. My GTX 1070 stabilizes at around 1800mhz boost, stock, so real world, The GTX 1070 gets about 7.8 TFLOPS of performance at stock.
> 
> Here's a link to Anandtech's 2016 GPU bench that shows a GTX 980 vs 1070, both at stock.
> 
> http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1716?vs=1731
> 
> Bear in mind, the 1070 also overclocks around 10% higher, and because of the recent leaks saying that the RX 480 will ONLY hit around 1350mhz on ref cooler, that means that both cards will overclock very similarly.
> 
> That graph does prove one thing, though. If the RX 480 does match the 980, then it will be one hell of a value. But will it be able to match the GTX 1070 with a 40%+ overclock? That's very unlikely.


I think your math is wrong somewhere?
1920 CUDA cores * 2 * 1800MHz = 6,912,000

That's 6.9 TFLOPS, not 7.8.
7.8 TFLOPS would be about 2.05GHz.

Assuming AMD caught up in TFLOPS to real world performance, an RX 480 at 1500MHz would match a GTX 1070 at 1800MHz.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> I think your math is wrong somewhere?
> 1920 CUDA cores * 2 * 1800MHz = 6,912,000
> 
> That's 6.9 TFLOPS, not 7.8.
> 7.8 TFLOPS would be about 2.05GHz.


Hmmmmmm...

1800mhz*6.5= 11700

11700/1500= 7.8

Proof: 1500/6.5= 230.8
Proof: 1800/7.8=230.8

Gotta love proportional fractions. My math lines up.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Hmmmmmm...
> 
> 1800mhz*6.5= 11700
> 
> 11700/1500= 7.8
> 
> Proof: 1500/6.5= 230.8
> Proof: 1800/7.8=230.8
> 
> My math lines up.


ehh,

just use this

# of cores x 2 x frequency. what nvidia states is irrelevant.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Hmmmmmm...
> 
> 1800mhz*6.5= 11700
> 
> 11700/1500= 7.8
> 
> Proof: 1500/6.5= 230.8
> Proof: 1800/7.8=230.8
> 
> Gotta love proportional fractions. My math lines up.


https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2840/geforce-gtx-1070

It's 5.78 TFLOPS at base clock, 6.5 TFLOPS at boost clock.
1920 * 2 * 1506 = 5,783,040
1920 * 2 * 1683 = 6,462,720


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2840/geforce-gtx-1070
> 
> It's 5.78 TFLOPS at base clock, 6.5 TFLOPS at boost clock.
> 1920 * 2 * 1506 = 5,783,040
> 1920 * 2 * 1683 = 6,462,720


Good enough for me. I stand corrected. More of the reason why we shouldn't be comparing TFLOPS as a reliable performance metric.









Still if we are doing comparisions, check the GTX 980 vs 1070 Anandtech bench I posted.

EDIT: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1716?vs=1731


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Good enough for me. I stand corrected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still if we are doing comparisions, check the GTX 980 vs 1070 Anandtech bench I posted.
> 
> EDIT: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1716?vs=1731


Looks like 1070 is 31% faster in a GPU bound scenario like Crysis 3.
You're saying your 1070 is hitting 1800MHz boost, so...

6.9 TFLOPS / 1.31 = ~5.3 TFLOPS
GTX 980 is hitting 5.3 TFLOPS usually without overclocking, which is about 1300MHz.

390x being at 5.9TFLOPS, doesn't look like the effective gaming performance vs TFLOPS is THAT different, though definitely NVIDIA is better at that. We'll see what architectural improvements Polaris brings.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GoLDii3*
> 
> Announced on May 7,NDA retired the 17th and sold the 27th. Completely paper launch. Deal with it.


Sold on 27th June? I guess that seems about right








It was a typical hype marketing presentation launch with endless wait and unreal prices.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Looks like 1070 is 31% faster in a GPU bound scenario like Crysis 3.
> You're saying your 1070 is hitting 1800MHz boost, so...
> 
> 6.9 TFLOPS / 1.31 = ~5.3 TFLOPS
> GTX 980 is hitting 5.3 TFLOPS usually without overclocking, which is about 1300MHz.


And yet the 1070 is significantly faster than the 980. More of a reason why TFLOPS should not be used as a metric for performance.

Anyway, I cannot wait to see how the RX 480 performs. If it hits GTX 980 levels of performance for $200-230, it will be a huge win.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> And yet the 1070 is significantly faster than the 980. More of a reason why TFLOPS should not be used as a metric for performance.
> 
> Anyway, I cannot wait to see how the RX 480 performs. If it hits GTX 980 levels of performance for $200-230, it will be a huge win.


Actually, the performance lines up with TFLOPS pretty well from my calculations on the NVIDIA side.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> Sold on 27th June? I guess that seems about right
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was a typical hype marketing presentation launch with endless wait and unreal prices.


NVIDIA is its own Ojo


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Actually, the performance lines up with TFLOPS pretty well from my calculations on the NVIDIA side.


Oh I see what you're saying. The 5.3 TFLOPS was for the 980, not the 1070.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Oh I see what you're saying. The 5.3 TFLOPS was for the 980, not the 1070.


Yup, sorry if I'm not making myself clear.
When I do math, things start getting scattered.


----------



## JackCY

Let's agree that the 1070 is the best power/performance/price card at the moment and it may enjoy it's reign in that category for more 4 days when they can't even stock shops with it so almost no one can buy it.









My bet is TSMC can't make enough decent chips yet as has been seen before.


----------



## slavovid

The way i see it Nvidias 980 vs 1070 performance lines up with their Tflops is expected based on the little changes that were done to the architecture.

Thus resulting in expected performance with higher clock speeds.

Leaks for the RX suggest that even with less Tflops than the 390x it beats it due to architecture changes. But that is still a speculation and we will have to wait for NDA and drivers.


----------



## TopicClocker

Never compare teraflops across different architectures.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TopicClocker*
> 
> Never compare teraflops across different architectures.


Even similar architectures you cant compare. RX 480 needs all the benefits of GCN 4 to match 390X 512-Bit memory and 64-ROPs. A simple Teraflop count will not make RX 480 comparable to R9 390X.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Even similar architectures you cant compare. RX 480 needs all the benefits of GCN 4 to match 390X 512-Bit memory and 64-ROPs. A simple Teraflop count will not make RX 480 comparable to R9 390X.


32 ROPS isn't a sure thing at this point, considering the same thing happened with the GTX 970. GPU-Z was simply wrong with a pre-release card.

As for the memory bandwidth, 390x was using slower memory, and it didn't have the compression tech introduced in Tonga and improved in Polaris.
Memory bandwidth will NOT be an issue, unless AMD regressed in their memory compression tech from Tonga.


----------



## ku4eto

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *huzzug*
> 
> Wonder why no one posted these screen caps:
> 
> 
> What are you guys thoughts ?


This is what i have been waiting for a while. No more Sapphire Trixx, which messes up all of the Profile Overclocks. AMD is going to butcher nVidia in terms of drivers (and hardware).


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> 32 ROPS isn't a sure thing at this point, considering the same thing happened with the GTX 970. GPU-Z was simply wrong with a pre-release card.
> 
> As for the memory bandwidth, 390x was using slower memory, and it didn't have the compression tech introduced in Tonga and improved in Polaris.
> Memory bandwidth will NOT be an issue, unless AMD regressed in their memory compression tech from Tonga.


I will be getting it either way. I hope memory compression is good though. If anything this card is like GTX780 Ti vs GTX980.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> Lets say both GTX 1070 and RX480 are running at their standard boost clock speeds that is 1683 MHz on 1920 CC so 1683x2x1920 = 6.46 tflop
> the RX 480 running on 1266 MHz with 2304 CU so 1266x2x2304 = 5.83 ]
> 
> Setting aside the GCN changes then RX 480+ is 11% behind GTX 1070 ....
> 
> This guy however is starting to talk nonsence:
> a 229$ cards with 10% less performance than a 379$ MSRP card that is hardly found at that price surely makes the 65.5% more expencive card and only 10% better performing a BAD decision.
> Not only that but from what we know that comparison will be even worse for DX12 applications.
> 
> .... and then comes Vulkan API ... oh boy


Can't compare Tflops across architectures.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Seems PowerColor is running a giveaway for what may presumably be a custom RX 480


Spoiler: A New Devil Is Born


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Seems PowerColor is running a giveaway for what may presumably be a custom RX 480
> 
> 
> Spoiler: A New Devil Is Born


**hopes for dual gpu devil 13 replacement**

Not like i'd buy one, but it certainly would be an awesome card at $450 or so.


----------



## supergamer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I will be getting it either way. I hope memory compression is good though. If anything this card is like GTX780 Ti vs GTX980.


*HD 6970* (2.7TFlop 176Gb/s 40nm) vs *HD 7870* (2.56TFlop 153.6Gb/s 28nm)
Still 10% Faster at launch


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ku4eto*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *huzzug*
> 
> Wonder why no one posted these screen caps:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are you guys thoughts ?
> 
> 
> 
> This is what i have been waiting for a while. No more Sapphire Trixx, which messes up all of the Profile Overclocks. AMD is going to butcher nVidia in terms of drivers (and hardware).
Click to expand...

glad you're optimistic. unfortunately i am disappointed that it looks AMD is going for tweaking the boost like nvidia instead of manual overclocking . .the old fashion way.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *supergamer*
> 
> *HD 6970* (2.7TFlop 176Gb/s 40nm) vs *HD 7870* (2.56TFlop 153.6Gb/s 28nm)
> Still 10% Faster at launch


Yes but the architectures where vastly different.


----------



## Yttrium

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Its an interesting Tweet for sure. Could just be a massive troll but it could also be significant. October Vega release confirmed?


I am very carefully optimistic, VERYcarefully.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *huzzug*
> 
> Wonder why no one posted these screen caps:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What are you guys thoughts ?
> 
> 
> 
> glad you're optimistic. unfortunately i am disappointed that it looks AMD is going for tweaking the boost like nvidia instead of manual overclocking . .the old fashion way.
Click to expand...

Source? Also, I dont quite know how Nvidia's manual overclocking helps performance. Either way it is a step forward for both companies in terms of overclocking.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yttrium*
> 
> Source? Also, I dont quite know how Nvidia's manual overclocking helps performance. Either way it is a step forward for both companies in terms of overclocking.


source is the owners using PX. and i think you misunderstood - imo, nvidia through it's "curve based tweaking" is taking control away for OCers.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> The nice thing about AMD's cards before now, is if you overclocked the card by 200mhz, you got a 200mhz boost in performance. Period.


*^THAT!*


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yttrium*
> 
> I am very carefully optimistic, VERYcarefully.
> Source? Also, I dont quite know how Nvidia's manual overclocking helps performance. Either way it is a step forward for both companies in terms of overclocking.


Nvidia's overclocking, especially in the Pascal generation, is more of a suggested offset. This means that it will boost both the Core and Boost clocks by whatever you set the offset to. However, if the card exceeds it's power or temperature limits, it will throttle back to keep the card working within spec. You have to massage the maximum performance out of any Nvidia card made for the Kepler, Maxwell, or Pascal generation.

The nice thing about AMD's cards before now, is if you overclocked the card by 200mhz, you got a 200mhz boost in performance. Period.


----------



## Yttrium

Thanks you guys. Also, check AMD's twitter, they upload daily cringe PR.

https://twitter.com/AMDRadeon/status/746411638840926208

#MakeGoodGreatAgain


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Yes but the architectures where vastly different.


Yet comparing GCN 1.1 to GCN 4.0 is reasonable?


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yttrium*
> 
> https://twitter.com/AMDRadeon/status/746411638840926208


*cringe fiesta* WutFace


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> I cant even respond to such an insanely twisted logic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> date of 27-th was set from the day of announcement and the cards were out on 27-th
> 
> not everyone drags their NDA till launch date


So if NDA lifts for a card a month before it even begins shipping to stores, it's not a paper launch right?


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Yet comparing GCN 1.1 to GCN 4.0 is reasonable?


Well if you want to get technical its only a small 2.9 difference.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Well if you want to get technical its only a small 2.9 difference.


With that logic, the difference between Hawaii and Fiji was only a minuscule 0.1


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> So if NDA lifts for a card a month before it even begins shipping to stores, it's not a paper launch right?


If they lift Navi NDA right now can AMD get credit for being a gen ahead of Nvidia?


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Yet comparing GCN 1.1 to GCN 4.0 is reasonable?


It's more like GCN 2.0 or 1.1 or GCN 1.3.

You can compare SB to Haswell but not Core 2 Quad to Core i7.

GCN 1.1 to 1.2 was not that big of a change as you can see Fury vs 390X.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Yttrium*
> 
> Thanks you guys. Also, check AMD's twitter, they upload daily cringe PR.
> 
> https://twitter.com/AMDRadeon/status/746411638840926208
> 
> #MakeGoodGreatAgain


If they keep this up, I'll be thinking better dead than red.









PS: GCN 1.1 isn't official name. AMD would probably call it second generation GCN if they were to name it.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> If they lift Navi NDA right now can AMD get credit for being a gen ahead of Nvidia?


That's just sheer genius.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> If they keep this up, I'll be thinking better dead than red.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS: GCN 1.1 isn't official name. AMD would probably call it second generation GCN if they were to name it.


Nah better red than dead.


----------



## infranoia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> That's just sheer genius.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nah better red than dead.


Awesome. I still fire that game up whenever I'm really mad at concrete.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> So if NDA lifts for a card a month before it even begins shipping to stores, it's not a paper launch right?


you are taking it to the extremes, because you have no argument

launch is when the date is officially set, in 1080 case it was 27-th .. not before

and releasing NDA a little earlier (~1-1.5 weeks) is just something that *should* be done (if possible) .. noone is talking month/months

Im pretty sure you know all of this too, but are being stubborn for bias reasons

if AMD has legitimate reasons for NDA on 29-th, such as working on drivers _to the very last day_ then fine .. but outside of that dont try to pretend that releasing NDA before launch date is not a good thing

if all the drivers are ready and card can be benchmarked and reviewed, then by all means we should be reading and discussing official 480 reviews right now and not waiting for 29-th


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> you are taking it to the extremes, because you have no argument
> 
> launch is when the date is officially set, in 1080 case it was 27-th .. not before
> 
> and releasing NDA a little earlier (~1-1.5 weeks) is just something that *should* be done (if possible) .. noone is talking month/months
> 
> Im pretty sure you know all of this too, but are being stubborn for bias reasons
> 
> if AMD has legitimate reasons for NDA on 29-th, such as working on drivers _to the very last day_ then fine .. but outside of that dont try to pretend that releasing NDA before launch date is not a good thing
> 
> if all the drivers are ready and card can be benchmarked and reviewed, then by all means we should be reading and discussing official 480 reviews right now and not waiting for 29-th


You know the difference between paper launch and hard launch?


----------



## ChevChelios

not sure why I bothered to type that out though, its all going to fall on deaf ears or get twisted

I have way too much free time


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> You know the difference between paper launch and hard launch?


And here I thought the answer to this question was self evident...


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> not sure why I bothered to type that out though, its all going to fall on deaf ears or get twisted
> 
> I have way too much free time


Yeah go learn something valuable instead of bad trolling


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Yeah go learn something valuable instead of bad trolling


Quote:


> its all going to fall on deaf ears or get twisted


^ case in point


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> ^ case in point


Yeah because it's bad. I can't read that crap because it seems that you know nothing about marketing and in general for the markets based on your answers.

I know it's easy to be a hype victim that's why i am not mad at you







You will learn someday


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> ^ case in point


Nonsensical rhetoric is seldom taken into consideration... Why should your continued stream of absurdities be taken seriously by anyone?


----------



## Gungnir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> You know the difference between paper launch and hard launch?


Don't you know? When AMD lifts NDA before launch, it's a nasty paper launch, because AMD can't do anything right. When NV lifts NDA before launch, they're graciously allowing the public to gaze in awe at the 'irresponsible' performance that they, too, can achieve - in a few weeks/months.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> you are taking it to the extremes, because you have no argument
> 
> launch is when the date is officially set, in 1080 case it was 27-th .. not before
> 
> and releasing NDA a little earlier (~1-1.5 weeks) is just something that *should* be done (if possible) .. noone is talking month/months
> 
> Im pretty sure you know all of this too, but are being stubborn for bias reasons
> 
> if AMD has legitimate reasons for NDA on 29-th, such as working on drivers _to the very last day_ then fine .. but outside of that dont try to pretend that releasing NDA before launch date is not a good thing
> 
> if all the drivers are ready and card can be benchmarked and reviewed, then by all means we should be reading and discussing official 480 reviews right now and not waiting for 29-th


I am taking it to the extremes to illustrate just how bad and arbitrary your argument is.

If we take the "NDA doesn't have to lift until launch day" argument at face value, then where do we draw the line between a hard launch and a paper launch? 10 days? 2 weeks? A month? 3 months?

Also if you think I'm biased, surely you must agree that Kyle is biased too.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gungnir*
> 
> Don't you know? When AMD lifts NDA before launch, it's a nasty paper launch, because AMD can't do anything right. When NV lifts NDA before launch, they're graciously allowing the public to gaze in awe at the 'irresponsible' performance that they, too, can achieve - in a few weeks/months.


Yeah , exactly this ! With this logic, that means 7970 paper launch was actually a hard launch or Nvidia Launch








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I am taking it to the extremes to illustrate just how bad and arbitrary your argument is.
> 
> If we take the "NDA doesn't have to lift until launch day" argument at face value, then where do we draw the line between a hard launch and a paper launch? 10 days? 2 weeks? A month? 3 months?
> 
> Also if you think I'm biased, surely you must agree that Kyle is biased too.


The fact that 1080 is still on paper launch means a lot


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Also if you think I'm biased


Than so is Google...


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *huzzug*
> 
> Wonder why no one posted these screen caps:
> 
> 
> What are you guys thoughts ?


Because it's been all over the net for ages now. Same old same old but nice to see that they are adding OC GUI clickables into the official control panel that comes with drivers. It's certainly a step in the right direction, I'm sick of needing OC tools and other crap that doesn't work half the time like ASUS Tweak, MSI Afterburner, Trixx, Precision, all this 3rd party garbage.

It's a definite plus for me if proper OC options are available and one doesn't need to user 3rd party tools to either enable them like on old nGreedia cards or use 3rd party tools to be able to OC at all.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Yet comparing GCN 1.1 to GCN 4.0 is reasonable?


Maybe if you dont count tessellation and bandwidth, but compute wise the CU might remain similar (unless it has been re designed)


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Nvidia's overclocking, especially in the Pascal generation, is more of a suggested offset. This means that it will boost both the Core and Boost clocks by whatever you set the offset to. However, if the card exceeds it's power or temperature limits, it will throttle back to keep the card working within spec. You have to massage the maximum performance out of any Nvidia card made for the Kepler, Maxwell, or Pascal generation.
> 
> The nice thing about AMD's cards before now, is if you overclocked the card by 200mhz, you got a 200mhz boost in performance. Period.


I don't like turbo features for instance. It is much easier to sustain cooling performance at stated values. Ironically, Nvidia overclock monitoring is based on actual values while the parameters themselves are manually off limits, whereas AMD's turbo is determined in the abstract eventhough the overclocking thresholds can be manually determined. I think disabling P1 does the trick for Nvidia as well however we are at version v3.0 now, so it might have changed.


----------



## EightDee8D

Watt is this


----------



## Gungnir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Watt is this


Watt a name.


----------



## infranoia

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gungnir*
> 
> Watt a name.


Taken


----------



## mohiuddin

http://videocardz.com/61422/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-6
Hype is crushed again?


----------



## sugalumps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61422/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-6
> Hype is crushed again?


Quote:


> Like I said 2 days ago, most review samples are having trouble reaching anything beyond 1350 MHz. The highest reported clock is 1379 MHz. The member of the PCGamesHardware team confirmed that their sample did not reach 1400 MHz.


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61422/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-6
> Hype is crushed again?


How? These are just the blower cards, the real overclocking as we know will come from the 8+6 pin connector cards with aftermarket coolers.


----------



## Lipos

https://www.chiphell.com/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=1609345&page=1#pid33756385


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Robenger*
> 
> How? These are just the blower cards, the real overclocking as we know will come from the 8+6 pin connector cards with aftermarket coolers.


Stock card with fan 100% should tell you how much OC you can get.


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Stock card with fan 100% should tell you how much OC you can get.


In theory, but not all cards are created equal.


----------



## spyshagg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Stock card with fan 100% should tell you how much OC you can get.


Not with that wee piece of aluminium the 480 ref has for a cooler. The same does not apply to the 290x ref copper cooler as well.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Stock card with fan 100% should tell you how much OC you can get.


There are laptop GPUs with bigger heatsinks than the one in the reference cooler...








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Hype is crushed again?


78° C at 58% fan speed at stock speed while only pulling 112W... that reference cooler sucks








Quote:


> there is no thermal throttling present on RX 480, GPU clock is stable and power draw is around 112W.


----------



## slavovid

I beleive they have set the fan speed to low in order to rise the temperature so they can see if the card will throtle down from it's boost clock. It's nice to know that even at those temps it doesn't.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> There are laptop GPUs with bigger heatsinks than the one in the reference cooler...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 78° C at 58% fan speed at stock speed while only pulling 112W... that reference cooler sucks


You are probably right but you can still get lower temps with 100% fan. I am still getting reference.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> There are laptop GPUs with bigger heatsinks than the one in the reference cooler...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 78° C at 58% fan speed at stock speed while only pulling 112W... that reference cooler sucks


They likely tuned it for the best noise/thermal performance ratio so it would be a positive highlight in reviews.


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> There are laptop GPUs with bigger heatsinks than the one in the reference cooler...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 78° C at 58% fan speed at stock speed while only pulling 112W... that reference cooler sucks


Not caring so much of temperature.. But the max oc looks rather underwhelming.


----------



## renx

We should probably wait before pronouncing the final verdict.
We're moving from unerwhelming to mindblowing, back to underwhelming, back to mindblowing, solely based on rumors.

.


----------



## toddincabo

Adios Chev The only person I've blocked in 4 years. Enough is enough!


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> They likely tuned it for the best noise/thermal performance ratio so it would be a positive highlight in reviews.


It is amazing how often some details are completely ignored by everyone here. I mentioned the issue with the reference cooler over a week ago when the first images became available:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> For the size of the shell, that heatsink is tiny... it doesn't even extend out to the front of the card?


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I am still getting reference.


I wouldn't. I even went as far as calling this launch a failure if AMD launches the product with only reference models available on day 1.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> I would consider the Polaris launch a failure if they delay custom designs and limit the market to reference design.


----------



## dagget3450

Given the few gcn launches i would tend to lean toward very small oc headroom. I think the 1500+ claim is hype at its best. I hope i am wrong but it seems too good to be true.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> It is amazing how often some details are completely ignored by everyone here. I mentioned the issue with the reference cooler over a week ago when the first images became available:
> 
> I wouldn't. I even went as far as calling this launch a failure if AMD launches the product with only reference models available on day 1.


You can not expect the same big cooler found 290X (275W TDP) on a card with half the TDP. It cost money.


----------



## slavovid

I am too worried about this reference design model. I am not planning to overclock it since at 1050p i won't even fully utilize an RX 480 but with time and a monitor change i might want to and the reference model seems a bit lacking in this regard.

I do want to have this card in my possesion before the end of august so mid jully for AIB models sounds ok-ish.

1500 is probably only for 6+8 pin card versions thou. I was hoping that the Ref could do 1400 on average rather than 1350 as suggested by the later leaks.

They are still unconfirmed thou.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> You can not expect the same big cooler found 290X (275W TDP) on a card with half the TDP. It cost money.


They could've used copper instead of aluminum at the very least.

But yeah for its price, I believe certain compromises had to be made.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> They could've used copper instead of aluminum at the very least.
> 
> But yeah for its price, I believe certain compromises had to be made.


IIRC it has copper too.


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> You can not expect the same big cooler found 290X (275W TDP) on a card with half the TDP. It cost money.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> I am too worried about this reference design model. I am not planning to overclock it since at 1050p i won't even fully utilize an RX 480 but with time and a monitor change i might want to and the reference model seems a bit lacking in this regard.
> 
> I do want to have this card in my possesion before the end of august so mid jully for AIB models sounds ok-ish.
> 
> 1500 is probably only for 6+8 pin card versions thou. I was hoping that the Ref could do 1400 on average rather than 1350 as suggested by the later leaks.
> 
> They are still unconfirmed thou.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> They could've used copper instead of aluminum at the very least.
> 
> But yeah for its price, I believe certain compromises had to be made.


Now i am wondering just how different the AMD ref 390x/390 cooler is from the 480 in terms of mounting and the like. I have 4 390x ref coolers just sitting here collecting dust....

I am going to go look at the pics again! hehe. It would be really nice if i could slap a 390x ref cooler on the ref 480.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

I really don't think the reference cooler will be that big of a deal. Cards with higher TDPs have had worse coolers and turned out fine.


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> I am too worried about this reference design model. I am not planning to overclock it since at 1050p i won't even fully utilize an RX 480 but with time and a monitor change i might want to and the reference model seems a bit lacking in this regard.
> 
> I do want to have this card in my possesion before the end of august so mid jully for AIB models sounds ok-ish.
> 
> 1500 is probably only for 6+8 pin card versions thou. I was hoping that the Ref could do 1400 on average rather than 1350 as suggested by the later leaks.
> 
> They are still unconfirmed thou.


If history is accurate,
new design tweaks, a driver increase of 10% over a few months are a normal increase.
card/fan/shroud are silent
price are great
soon-TM we know a lot more


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> You can not expect the same big cooler found 290X (275W TDP) on a card with half the TDP. It cost money.


How is it that vendors like MSI, ASUS, and Sapphire are able to offer the same cooler designs on cards priced from the low $100s to high $800s? You, Sir, are just full of misconceptions...


Spoiler: Guess what card this is









Spoiler: cost fallacy







Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> Cards with higher TDPs have had worse coolers and turned out fine.


That is an interesting way of rationalizing bad design


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> IIRC it has copper too.


Copper base plate, aluminum fins.

Also they likely could've increased the fin density, but I suspect that would've (greatly) increased noise as well. Like I said, the current HSF design is likely a compromise between noise, heat, and cost.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Also they likely could've


They could've allowed AIB partners to release their own custom designs day 1...


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> How is it that vendors like MSI, ASUS, and Sapphire are able to offer the same cooler designs on cards priced from the low $100s to high $800s? You, Sir, are just full of misconceptions...
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Guess what card this is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: cost fallacy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is an interesting way of rationalizing bad design


The top card is HD 5850 aka $300. Other card like 370 and 380 got those coolers because they where refreshes. RX 480 will get those too but the PCB is different from older cards.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> They could've allowed AIB partners to release their own custom designs day 1...


I agree but, has there ever been a launch from either side where AIB designs were available on day 1? Closest I can think of is GTX 970, but that's only because it was a "virtual launch" with no reference model available.


----------



## prznar1

r9 3xx. So yes.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> The top card is HD 5850 aka $300.


Wrong... it is a reference R9 270X, it also launched for $199 back in 2013









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I agree but, has there ever been a launch from either side where AIB designs were available on day 1? Closest I can think of is GTX 970, but that's only because it was a "virtual launch" with no reference model available.


Recall Pitcairn? The chip Polaris is replacing? It launched with AIB designs... How about Fiji R9 Fury? It is the choice of AMD/Nvidia whether to limit the launch inventory with just reference design. Nvidia now has the obvious early adoption tax attached to their reference design. Not sure why AMD continues to push their bad reference designs.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Wrong... it is a reference R9 270X, it also launched for $199 back in 2013
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Recall Pitcairn? The chip Polaris is replacing? It launched with AIB designs... How about Fiji R9 Fury? It is the choice of AMD/Nvidia whether to limit the launch inventory with just reference design. Nvidia now has the obvious early adoption tax attached to their reference design. Not sure why AMD continues to push their bad reference designs.


Again a re-brand. Same card 7870 was $350 at launch.


----------



## iRUSH

I just left Microcenter to grab a CPU and my buddy was there. He said they have a crap load of RX 480's in the back ready to go boys!

I tried to buy one but he said when he scanned it earlier the register rejected it lol.

I tried ?


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> I just left Microcenter to grab a CPU and my buddy was there. He said they have a crap load of RX 480's in the back ready to go boys!
> 
> I tried to buy one but he said when he scanned it earlier the register rejected it lol.
> 
> I tried ?


You should've just walked out with the merchandise, and when you get stopped by security, just tell them the register rejected it


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> You should've just walked out with the merchandise, and when you get stopped by security, just tell them the register rejected it


Haha!! Hey at least he seemed confident that there are plenty to go around ?


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *prznar1*
> 
> r9 3xx. So yes.


True but many of those cards were rebrands with higher clocks / more VRAM. A brand-new arch usually leads with reference.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Again a re-brand. Same card 7870 was $350 at launch.


I am having a hard time following your logic. You seem to continue to change the argument so clarify your argument for me if you would please. Wasn't your argument based around the cost of the cooler? How the same cooler on products of lower price point would be economically unviable? Is your argument now that the cost of the cooler is only relevant if the product is new?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> True but many of those cards were rebrands with higher clocks / more VRAM. A brand-new arch usually leads with reference.


High end models usually lead with reference. Mid-range and low end cards have historically had AIB designs at launch.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Copper base plate, aluminum fins.
> 
> Also they likely could've increased the fin density, but I suspect that would've (greatly) increased noise as well. Like I said, the current HSF design is likely a compromise between noise, heat, and cost.


Which will be fine for 90% of the people who buy this card. I dont imagine alot of mainstream gpu users push their cards that much.


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> Haha!! Hey at least he seemed confident that there are plenty to go around ?


Microcenter should have around 100 in stock at each store.

People are going to be highly disappointed if they think the reference card will hit 1.5Ghz. Average clocks of the RX 480 will be right around 1350~ core clock.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> Microcenter should have around 100 in stock at each store.
> 
> People are going to be highly disappointed if they think the reference card will hit 1.5Ghz. Average clocks of the RX 480 will be right around 1350~ core clock.


Are you our new insider link for the week?


----------



## revanchrist

According to the few guys and ladies who have the card over Chiphell, when it's overclocked to 1360-1380ish, the card consumes between 170-190W, much more higher than the power consumption of stock. Now I don't know if this is true, but if it is then this might be the reason why stock 480's a poor overclocker. 8-pin AIBs and 8+6 pin so called beast mode card makes more and more sense now.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revanchrist*
> 
> According to the few guys and ladies who have the card over Chiphell, when it's overclocked to 1360-1380ish, the card consumes between *170-190W*, much more higher than the power consumption of stock. Now I don't know if this is true, but if it is then this might be the reason why stock 480's a poor overclocker. 8-pin AIBs and 8+6 pin so called beast mode card makes more and more sense now.


what the .. ,

that's like 40% more w for 10% frequency ? seems like bs, even thermi wasn't that bad lol.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revanchrist*
> 
> According to the few guys and ladies who have the card over Chiphell, when it's overclocked to 1360-1380ish, the card consumes between 170-190W,


112W at reference and ~180W at ~1370GHz? Anyone else see any issue with a 60% increase in power for a 8% overclock?

edit:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> what the .. ,
> 
> that's like 40% more w for 10% frequency ? seems like bs, even thermi wasn't that bad lol.


Seems I am not the only one


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 112W at reference and ~180W at ~1370GHz? Anyone else see any issue with a 60% increase in power for a 8% overclock?


Nah, totally normal for suky Ayymd.

/s


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *revanchrist*
> 
> According to the few guys and ladies who have the card over Chiphell, when it's overclocked to 1360-1380ish, the card consumes between 170-190W, much more higher than the power consumption of stock. Now I don't know if this is true, but if it is then this might be the reason why stock 480's a poor overclocker. 8-pin AIBs and 8+6 pin so called beast mode card makes more and more sense now.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> what the .. ,
> 
> that's like 40% more w for 10% frequency ? seems like bs, even thermi wasn't that bad lol.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 112W at reference and ~180W at ~1370GHz? Anyone else see any issue with a 60% increase in power for a 8% overclock?
> 
> edit:
> Seems I am not the only one


The engineers at AMD are so ahead of our time that they managed to bend the modern laws of physics. They should all be given a Nobel prize for their efforts.


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Are you our new insider link for the week?


I hope you all like 4000 RPM fan speeds if you considering overclocking :]


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Ayymd.


AyyMD!


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> I am having a hard time following your logic. You seem to continue to change the argument so clarify your argument for me if you would please. Wasn't your argument based around the cost of the cooler? How the same cooler on products of lower price point would be economically unviable? Is your argument now that the cost of the cooler is only relevant if the product is new?
> High end models usually lead with reference. Mid-range and low end cards have historically had AIB designs at launch.


Price Price Price. Its that low because of Rebrand. RX 480 is fresh. Also R9 270X uses more power. Hence bigger cooler and pcb. End of story.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> AyyMD!


Well my NoVideo GimpForced GTX 980 Ti with NoSync is certainly experiencing bouts of directileX dysfunction 12 times a day lol


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Well my NoVideo GimpForced GTX 980 Ti with NoSync is certainly experiencing bouts of directileX dysfunction 12 times a day lol


What it needs is a helping hand from the Furries.


----------



## magnek

I think the heat resulting from the crossfire that is the helping hands of Furries would cause a catastrophic power throttling leading to premature driver ejection


----------



## ZealotKi11er

I am really hopping this card makes it too the top of Steam GPU chart. There is no reason for it not to.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I think the heat resulting from the crossfire that is the helping hands of Furries would cause a catastrophic power throttling leading to premature driver ejection


"Go away you freaks! You are drawing the power of the building!" - Founder's Edition your 980 Ti.


----------



## JackCY

I just can't wait for 29th when half the people start complaining about how slow and what not the RX 480 is, that it doesn't OC well and that their 1600MHz 1070 like performance dream has been broken.

Oh it won't make the top of Steam charts, nGreedia will make sure with their hype marketing.


----------



## sage101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I am really hopping this card makes it too the top of Steam GPU chart. There is no reason for it not to.


Nah that spot is reserved for the best selling gpu of all time *GTX 1080*


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I am really hopping this card makes it too the top of Steam GPU chart. There is no reason for it not to.


The only thing I'm worried about is the number of people who already have that level of performance. The RX 480 might be coming just a little too late. But I hope so too!


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> The only thing I'm worried about is the number of people who already have that level of performance. The RX 480 might be coming just a little too late. But I hope so too!


Not really. Look how well the stupid GTX960 sold lol. People had that level of performance ages ago. It's price.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I am really hopping this card makes it too the top of Steam GPU chart. There is no reason for it not to.


Maybe in top 5 if nvidia is generous. their marketing team won't let this happen.


----------



## tkenietz

1380mhz would be a 9% oc
If 6pin is an issue, that means that for that 9% oc, you would be using well over 33% more wattage. Doubtful but I guess anythings possible.

Thermals would likely be the issue, but I'm wondering why every leak that shows the fan profile, it's set low. 58% is actually the highest fan speed I've seen.

I'm getting suspicious. Either this card is terribly inefficient / crazy hot when tweaked at all, this card is already running near max, or AMD is gimping them till official release drivers.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> "Go away you freaks! You are drawing the power of the building!" - Founder's Edition your 980 Ti.


I've watched that video 5 times and it's still just as funny as the first time























And incidentally, I put my portable A/C on the 18A kitchen circuit for a reason LOL


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> The only thing I'm worried about is the number of people who already have that level of performance. The RX 480 might be coming just a little too late. But I hope so too!


The number of people with 980 level performance is a lot less than you must think. They are the vast minority.


----------



## JackCY

980/390x performance... yes desirable but not for the prices these cards sold for. But now we should be able to get that performance for half the price as RX 480. Just like you are getting 980Ti performance for half the price as 1070, hopefully lol ya know those hikes and shortages and unreal MSRP.

Most people outside OCN/Enthusiast/... really do buy mostly in the range of 100-200 USD when looking for a GPU to play some games. The prices for which enthusiast cards sell are kind of the price of a whole PC for these mainstream folks.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I've watched that video 5 times and it's still just as funny as the first time
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And incidentally, I put my portable A/C on the 18A kitchen circuit for a reason LOL


If the 1080 FE came with that moustache and that attitude I'd already have one! 

And yes, for reasons totally unrelated to the massive power draw of the Furries I'm very glad my home is relatively new and I've got a radial rather than ring circuit..


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> 1380mhz would be a 9% oc
> If 6pin is an issue, that means that for that 9% oc, you would be using well over 33% more wattage. Doubtful but I guess anythings possible.
> 
> Thermals would likely be the issue, but I'm wondering why every leak that shows the fan profile, it's set low. 58% is actually the highest fan speed I've seen.
> 
> I'm getting suspicious. Either this card is terribly inefficient / crazy hot when tweaked at all, this card is already running near max, or AMD is gimping them till official release drivers.


This is part of the reason I went ahead and bought a 1070. It's not that the RX 480 is going to be a bad card, but I think people are going to be disappointed when it "only" hits GTX 970-980 performance and doesn't overclock much. Because I had a 780 before, the RX 480 would have been a 20-30% upgrade, which is barely enough to notice. Instead, the GTX 1070 is roughly twice the speed of my old GTX 780 and does far better at my monitor's 3440x1440 resolution.

Considering that I paid $550 for my GTX 780 over 2 years ago, I was completely fine with the $450 of the GTX 1070.

Again, I think the RX 480 is going to be a great card, but I think too many people are expecting it to perform above its weight class. Frankly, I just don't see that happening.


----------



## fatmario

Looks like reference model only be overclockable to 1400 mhz

http://wccftech.com/radeon-rx-480-wattman-overclocking/


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> *Price Price Price.* Its that low because of Rebrand. RX 480 is fresh.


Do the the reference coolers somehow become exponentially cheaper because they are offered with older GPUs?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Also R9 270X uses more power. Hence bigger cooler and pcb.


180 TDP vs 150 TDP. Yes, the cards are clearly miles apart...










Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> End of story.


Sure, if you are done spreading misinformation...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> "Go away you freaks! You are drawing the power of the building!"


"Take a radeon pill to feel better"


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> This is part of the reason I went ahead and bought a 1070. It's not that the RX 480 is going to be a bad card, but I think people are going to be disappointed when it "only" hits GTX 970-980 performance and doesn't overclock much. Because I had a 780 before, the RX 480 would have been a 20-30% upgrade, which is barely enough to notice. Instead, the GTX 1070 is roughly twice the speed of my old GTX 780 and does far better at my monitor's 3440x1440 resolution.
> 
> Considering that I paid $550 for my GTX 780 over 2 years ago, I was completely fine with the $450 of the GTX 1070.
> 
> Again, I think the RX 480 is going to be a great card, but I think too many people are expecting it to perform above its weight class. Frankly, I just don't see that happening.


Some people just cant spend $450 for a GTX1070 lol. Yes GTX 1070 seems like a good deal but it really is not compare to $330 GTX970. Aslo most of us want to play with this new architecture and buy the real high end cards early next year.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Some people just cant spend $450 for a GTX1070 lol. Yes GTX 1070 seems like a good deal but it really is not compare to $330 GTX970. Aslo most of us want to play with this new architecture and buy the real high end cards early next year.


I 100% agree with you. The GTX 970 was an amazing deal, and I think Nvidia is stupid for not repeating it and starting this "Founder's Edition" crap. Trust me when I say I wanted an RX 480 back when it was rumored to have a 1600mhz core @ max overclock. Now that that rumor has been toppled, I have to go with something that can actually provide the performance that I want on my system.

Enter the GTX 1070. No one forced me to buy it, but at the moment, it's what I can afford. More than likely, I will be keeping the 1070 for several years.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> I 100% agree with you. The GTX 970 was an amazing deal, and I think Nvidia is stupid for not repeating it and starting this "Founder's Edition" crap. Trust me when I say I wanted an RX 480 back when it was rumored to have a 1600mhz core @ max overclock. Now that that rumor has been toppled, I have to go with something that can actually provide the performance that I want on my system.
> 
> Enter the GTX 1070. No one forced me to buy it, but at the moment, it's what I can afford. More than likely, I will be keeping the 1070 for several years.


GTX1070 is the only card I could buy too right now If I had to buy a card. I am getting 480 for fun and then maybe selling it back to a friend. For me even GTX1080 does not do the 4K 60 i want. I have ~ 800 USD lined up for the card that does it first.


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> GTX1070 is the only card I could buy too right now If I had to buy a card. I am getting 480 for fun and then maybe selling it back to a friend. For me even GTX1080 does not do the 4K 60 i want. I have ~ 800 USD lined up for the card that does it first.


Get ready for Vega/1080Ti then. That's pretty much what i'm waiting for as well.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> Get ready for Vega/1080Ti then. That's pretty much what i'm waiting for as well.


If I still had my good 'ole Dell U2414 (1920x1200 monitor, I would still be waiting as well. There were very few instances that that card could not max out games at that res.

"Buy an Ultrawide monitor, they said. It'll be better, they said..."


----------



## looniam

some more . . ."stuff"



http://videocardz.com/61434/amd-radeon-rx-480-3dmark-analysis


----------



## f1LL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> some more . . ."stuff"
> 
> 
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61434/amd-radeon-rx-480-3dmark-analysis


Is the author of that chart trying to say that the single highest clocking RX480 out of 330 achieved 1379Mhz max??


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> some more . . ."stuff"
> 
> 
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61434/amd-radeon-rx-480-3dmark-analysis


That's actually some *AMAZING* scaling if you sit down and calculate the %ages:

1379 / 1266 = 8.9% core OC
2200 / 2000 = 10% memory OC

3028 / 2645 = 14.5% increase in FSU score

That's (beyond







) 1:1 scaling if I ever saw great scaling.

SO, assuming all those numbers are real and the scaling is consistent, if there's an RX 480 that can indeed overclock to ~1500, it could very well match a bone stock 980 Ti.



Spoiler: Stuff



Also with leaks like these, who needs official reviews?


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> That's actually some *AMAZING* scaling if you sit down and calculate the %ages:
> 
> 1379 / 1266 = 8.9% core OC
> 2200 / 2000 = 10% memory OC
> 
> 3028 / 2645 = 14.5% increase in FSU score
> 
> That's (beyond
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) 1:1 scaling if I ever saw great scaling.
> 
> SO, assuming all those numbers are real and the scaling is consistent, if there's an RX 480 that can indeed overclock to ~1500, it could very well match a bone stock 980 Ti.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Stuff
> 
> 
> 
> Also with leaks like these, who needs official reviews?


Ye, but it's just synthetic bench. doesn't really mean anything.

or maybe stock clock isn't 1266mhz and maybe it's throttling ?


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> That's actually some *AMAZING* scaling if you sit down and calculate the %ages:
> 
> 1379 / 1266 = 8.9% core OC
> 2200 / 2000 = 10% memory OC
> 
> 3028 / 2645 = 14.5% increase in FSU score
> 
> That's (beyond
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) 1:1 scaling if I ever saw great scaling.
> 
> SO, assuming all those numbers are real and the scaling is consistent, if there's an RX 480 that can indeed overclock to ~1500, it could very well match a bone stock 980 Ti.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Stuff
> 
> 
> 
> Also with leaks like these, who needs official reviews?


Time to break out this smiley again,


----------



## magnek




----------



## Greenland

So still no official driver?


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Greenland*
> 
> So still no official driver?


Yeah it's bugging me were this close to a launch and nothing. This makes me think this is going to be more disappointing than anything. Like someone else said i don't see why they are keeping it locked up this long since it supposedly won't have any competition in that range yet.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> Yeah it's bugging me were this close to a launch and nothing. This makes me think this is going to be more disappointing than anything. Like someone else said i don't see why they are keeping it locked up this long since it supposedly won't have any competition in that range yet.


It has a direct competitor and it's th 1070


----------



## tajoh111

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> That's actually some *AMAZING* scaling if you sit down and calculate the %ages:
> 
> 1379 / 1266 = 8.9% core OC
> 2200 / 2000 = 10% memory OC
> 
> 3028 / 2645 = 14.5% increase in FSU score
> 
> That's (beyond
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ) 1:1 scaling if I ever saw great scaling.
> 
> SO, assuming all those numbers are real and the scaling is consistent, if there's an RX 480 that can indeed overclock to ~1500, it could very well match a bone stock 980 Ti.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Stuff
> 
> 
> 
> Also with leaks like these, who needs official reviews?


No.

1500 wouldn't do it. It's better to use the median score than the lowest score. 3028/2680 = 13%.

So using the rest of your math, that is still good scoring/scaling. The problem is the next part. AMD assuming linear scaling continued, another 120mhz on the clock which would bring it close to 1500, but would also bring up the score another 320+/- 10 points. because this is linear scaling. Not approximately 1000 points, that would be a 33% increase. A 10 percent increase in frequency is not going to increase a score by 33%.

So a 1500mhz/2400memory would only bring the score up 3353 points about. To get to 4000 points, you would need 1730-1750mhz clocks and 2800 mhz memory speed which is the speed you would need to get to a gtx 980 ti stock because this is about what a gtx 980 ti scores stock.

Basically to match a gtx 980 ti, it needs close to a 50% increase because that how much the score needs to increase by.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> It has a direct competitor and it's th 1070


I want which you are smoking, mate


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tajoh111*
> 
> No.
> 
> 1500 wouldn't do it. It's better to use the median score than the lowest score. 3028/2680 = 13%.
> 
> So using the rest of your math, that is still good scoring/scaling. The problem is the next part. AMD assuming linear scaling continued, another 120mhz on the clock which would bring it close to 1500, but would also bring up the score another 320+/- 10 points. because this is linear scaling. Not approximately 1000 points, that would be a 33% increase. A 10 percent increase in frequency is not going to increase a score by 33%.
> 
> So a 1500mhz/2400memory would only bring the score up 3353 points about. To get to 4000 points, you would need 1730-1750mhz clocks and 2800 mhz memory speed which is the speed you would need to get to a gtx 980 ti stock because this is about what a gtx 980 scores stock.


Damn I knew I should've added something at the end. I was only being half serious -- basically poking fun at the numbers and how the scaling seems to be complete bonkers.

But yes your math is correct.

Btw here's two chars with FSE and FSU scores for easy comparisons:


----------



## NFL

Max reported scores at 1266mhz (stock)

Ultra: 2995

Extreme: 6158

Performance: 13266


----------



## ZealotKi11er

I hope it does better then 13xx MHz.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I hope it does better then 13xx MHz.


than*

I like pizza more than cherry pie.

I ate then I went home.


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> than*
> 
> I like pizza more than cherry pie.
> 
> I ate then I went home.


What an absolute madman!


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> than*
> 
> I like pizza more than cherry pie.
> 
> I ate then I went home.


Then-than and there-their-they're are both important but the true bane of my existence is 'could of' instead of could've.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> than*
> 
> I like pizza more than cherry pie.
> 
> I ate then I went home.


And do they sound the same? Not my problem English so butchered.


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I hope it does better then 13xx MHz.


Don't expect reference to do better than that. AIB however will get a little further. Posted this a few pages back already.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> Don't expect reference to do better than that. AIB however will get a little further. Posted this a few pages back already.


13XX is not even a OC lol. I understand if its temp limited. I just hope its not architecture limited.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> And do they sound the same? Not my problem English so butchered.


It's a cobbled-together jargon that became a language proper. The thing is that it has no regulatory body so if you were able to convince everybody who speaks English to use one or the other it would become the colloquial standard and then eventually just the standard. Hence why I'm one of the only people that still writes words like betwixt and forsooth.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> And do they sound the same? Not my problem English so butchered.


If you think of send and sand, it might help. The difference between then and than is more noticeable then.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> If you think of send and sand, it might help. The difference between then and than is more noticeable then.


A lot of people don't really think about it when writing a post on a forum. Yes, I get what you mean, but you also need to realize that 99.5% of people that read what ZealotKi11er wrote knew exactly what he meant and didn't even notice that he made a mistake.

Now if we were talking about a doctorate-level paper on the Fabric of the Universe in relation to Cute Kittens , I might take the difference between "then" and "than" a little more seriously.

Carry on... weren't we talking about a video card or something?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> A lot of people don't really think about it when writing a post on a forum. Yes, I get what you mean, but you also need to realize that 99.5% of people that read what ZealotKi11er wrote knew exactly what he meant and didn't even notice that he made a mistake.
> 
> Now if we were talking about a doctorate-level paper on the Fabric of the Universe in relation to Cute Kittens , I might take the difference between "then" and "than" a little more seriously.


The Grammar Nazi is at it again? Trying to "educate" people on OCN? He started spamming me in PMs last time I ignored his advice and even went as far as suggesting that I lacked capacity for higher level thinking because I refused to conform.









Needless to say, he is one of the more deserving individuals on my ignore list.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> you are taking it to the extremes, because you have no argument
> 
> launch is when the date is officially set, in 1080 case it was 27-th .. not before
> 
> and releasing NDA a little earlier (~1-1.5 weeks) is just something that *should* be done (if possible) .. noone is talking month/months
> 
> Im pretty sure you know all of this too, but are being stubborn for bias reasons
> 
> if AMD has legitimate reasons for NDA on 29-th, such as working on drivers _to the very last day_ then fine .. but outside of that dont try to pretend that releasing NDA before launch date is not a good thing
> 
> if all the drivers are ready and card can be benchmarked and reviewed, then by all means we should be reading and discussing official 480 reviews right now and not waiting for 29-th


Just stop for the love of God. Nobody is forced to buy a card ON RELEASE DAY. If you want to peruse reviews before making your purchase AMD is not stopping you. Just buy it later...


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61422/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-6
> Hype is crushed again?


Its funny to see crap rumor sites like VC post stories like this acting like the previous stories they've posted (claiming 1500MHz that had been completely confirmed) never existed! Luckily for them these reports are typed out so they don't have to worry about keeping a straight face!


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Its funny to see crap rumor sites like VC post stories like this acting like the previous stories they've posted (claiming 1500MHz that had been completely confirmed) never existed! Luckily for them these reports are typed out so they don't have to worry about keeping a straight face!


The funny thing is the Overclocking tool. Why spend time making it for 100MHz OC?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Its funny to see crap rumor sites like VC post stories like this acting like the previous stories they've posted (claiming 1500MHz that had been completely confirmed) never existed! Luckily for them these reports are typed out so they don't have to worry about keeping a straight face!


Contradicting articles on the same click bait site? Impossible!


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> I am having a hard time following your logic. You seem to continue to change the argument so clarify your argument for me if you would please. Wasn't your argument based around the cost of the cooler? How the same cooler on products of lower price point would be economically unviable? Is your argument now that the cost of the cooler is only relevant if the product is new?
> High end models usually lead with reference. Mid-range and low end cards have historically had AIB designs at launch.


What are you even on about? The non-reference cards will be out just two weeks later. What is the big freaking deal?


----------



## Lipos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> The funny thing is the Overclocking tool. Why spend time making it for 100MHz OC?


Customs.


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> A lot of people don't really think about it when writing a post on a forum. Yes, I get what you mean, but you also need to realize that 99.5% of people that read what ZealotKi11er wrote knew exactly what he meant and didn't even notice that he made a mistake.
> 
> Now if we were talking about a doctorate-level paper on the Fabric of the Universe in relation to Cute Kittens , I might take the difference between "then" and "than" a little more seriously.
> 
> Carry on... weren't we talking about a video card or something?


You must have retired before this came out.

http://www.overclock.net/t/235282/overclock-net-professionalism-initiative

We can help each other in more ways than computer hardware news. Illiteracy is a real issue, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Lipos*
> 
> Customs.


Never been the case for AMD cards. Custom cards do not OC that much more than Reference card.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tajoh111*
> 
> No.
> 
> 1500 wouldn't do it. It's better to use the median score than the lowest score. 3028/2680 = 13%.
> 
> So using the rest of your math, that is still good scoring/scaling. The problem is the next part. AMD assuming linear scaling continued, another 120mhz on the clock which would bring it close to 1500, but would also bring up the score another 320+/- 10 points. because this is linear scaling. Not approximately 1000 points, that would be a 33% increase. A 10 percent increase in frequency is not going to increase a score by 33%.
> 
> So a 1500mhz/2400memory would only bring the score up 3353 points about. To get to 4000 points, you would need 1730-1750mhz clocks and 2800 mhz memory speed which is the speed you would need to get to a gtx 980 ti stock because this is about what a gtx 980 ti scores stock.
> 
> Basically to match a gtx 980 ti, it needs close to a 50% increase because that how much the score needs to increase by.


2800mhz vram? (Would that be a gddr5 record?) That would be 358GBps, why would it need 22GBps more bandwidth than the 980 ti to match the 980ti? especially when a 1070 does it with 256GBps

Other than that, I'm with you


----------



## one-shot

I can't wait for an AIB RX 480. I want two of whatever clocks the highest and runs the coolest.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Ye, but it's just synthetic bench. doesn't really mean anything.
> 
> or maybe stock clock isn't 1266mhz and maybe it's throttling ?


It means plenty to those who enjoy doing synthetic benches. There are tons of them (I used to be a bencher when my cards were still relevant)...


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> You must have retired before this came out.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/235282/overclock-net-professionalism-initiative
> 
> We can help each other in more ways than computer hardware news. Illiteracy is a real issue, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.


Here's my first tip for you; stop with the passive-aggressive insults.

I am well aware of the "professionalism initiative", but I am also well aware of the "Don't be a dick" initiative here on the forums, because that's what drives people away from here and to other forums. I know you think you're doing some sort of public service by correcting people on their slight lapse in judgement on written language, but the fact of the matter is that mixing up "then" and "than" is not a reason to create a post solely devoted to calling out that person on their mistake.

Please be mindful of others when you attempt to correct them. Send them a PM if it really bugs you, but this whole "Public shaming" of people that mess up word usage is getting on my nerves.

Now, as I said before... weren't we talking about a video card or something?


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> than*
> 
> I like pizza more than cherry pie.
> 
> I ate then I went home.


For all intensive purposes, I could care less about being grammatically correct on a forum. I mean shirley their are better things to do then wasting time correcting people's grammar on the interwebs? But I digest.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> For all intensive purposes, I could care less about being grammatically correct on a forum. I mean surely their are better things you can do then to waste your time correcting people's grammar on the interwebs? But I digest.


I cee wat u did thar


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Here's my first tip for you; stop with the passive-aggressive insults.
> 
> I am well aware of the "professionalism initiative", but I am also well aware of the "Don't be a dick" initiative here on the forums, because that's what drives people away from here and to other forums. I know you think you're doing some sort of public service by correcting people on their slight lapse in judgement on written language, but the fact of the matter is that mixing up "then" and "than" is not a reason to create a post solely devoted to calling out that person on their mistake.
> 
> Please be mindful of others when you attempt to correct them. Send them a PM if it really bugs you, *but this whole "Public shaming" of people that mess up word usage is getting on my nerves.*
> 
> Now, as I said before... weren't we talking about a video card or something?


Really? "Public shaming"? That's ridiculous man. The point is that society is getting lazier and lazier every day as it relates to the written word. Text and internet lingo is becoming commonplace and THAT really gets on MY nerves. I don't think there was any public shaming going on, just a good-natured correction of a common error...


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Really? "Public shaming"? That's ridiculous man. The point is that society is getting lazier and lazier every day as it relates to the written word. Text and internet lingo is becoming commonplace and THAT really gets on MY nerves. I don't think there was any public shaming going on, just a good-natured correction of a common error...


As I said, sending a PM is a far more direct way to communicate the error with the person.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> As I said, sending a PM is a far more direct way to communicate the error with the person.


Then nobody else can learn from it.

*Notice that I used "then" instead of "than".


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> I cee wat u did thar


I see yew sea we aussie Lucy


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> I see yew sea we aussie Lucy


Your lack of commas vexes me greatly...


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Your lack of commas vexes me greatly...


I like to step back and think about the fact that we're hairless apes flying around through the skies in metal tubes with wings. The absurdity of it all tends to make me feel better.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Your lack of commas vexes me greatly...


Whenever I'm vexed I flex to feel better.









Run on sentences 4evar btw.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Slow news day, lol.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> What are you even on about? The non-reference cards will be out just two weeks later. What is the big freaking deal?


Launch day reviews will paint the picture moving forward... Much like Hawaii, Polaris will be vexed by image induced by the reference design which will require months to correct.

There are cards under $100 that come with a better heatsink and fan...


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I like to step back and think about the fact that we're hairless apes flying around through the skies in metal tubes with wings. The absurdity of it all tends to make me feel better.


When you consider the fact that we find a device that can produce an artificial image on a screen interesting, it really puts things into perspective.


----------



## dmasteR

Has anyone else noticed, according to all the leaks, price/performance is really nothing special? It's roughly the same as a GTX 1070...

There's a GTX 1070 on Newegg that's being sold for $400 (Gigabyte Windforce). A 1070 is 40% faster than a GTX 980, the RX 480 is about the same speed as the GTX 980.

It's only marginally better price/performance.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> Has anyone else noticed, according to all the leaks, price/performance is really nothing special? It's roughly the same as a GTX 1070...


First, the leaks mean nothing. Final performance is an unknown still. Second, for someone who can only afford $200 (i.e., the market AMD is targeting), the 1070 is irrelevant.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Launch day reviews will paint the picture moving forward... Much like Hawaii, Polaris will be vexed by image induced by the reference design which will require months to correct.
> 
> There are cards under $100 that come with a better heatsink and fan...


If the reference model indeed can't OC much over 1350, I guarantee reviewers will make a big fuss out of it, justified or not.

So yeah I gotta concur here.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> Has anyone else noticed, according to all the leaks, price/performance is really nothing special? It's roughly the same as a GTX 1070...
> 
> There's a GTX 1070 on Newegg that's being sold for $400 (Gigabyte Windforce). A 1070 is 40% faster than a GTX 980, the RX 480 is about the same speed as the GTX 980.
> 
> It's only marginally better price/performance.


That's the reason I went ahead and bought a GTX 1070. All evidence is now pointing to the RX 480 being around GTX 970-980 speeds. This is great; a $200 card that can give us that sort of performance is a tremendous value. The problem is that people wanted the RX 480 to compete with the GTX 980 Ti, and now that it is all but confirmed that it won't, people are starting to realize that, while the RX 480 is an excellent value, it's not going to redefine the market.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> If the reference model indeed can't OC much over 1350, I guarantee reviewers will make a big fuss out of it, justified or not.
> 
> So yeah I gotta concur here.


Self-sabotage is the AMD way


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> If the reference model indeed can't OC much over 1350, I guarantee reviewers will make a big fuss out of it, justified or not.
> 
> So yeah I gotta concur here.


Eh, the thing could clock to 1600MHz and those reviewers would still find something to whine about. "At the end of the day, the RX 480 fails to match Nvidia's latest release which makes it a complete disappointment." -PCPer


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Eh, the thing could clock to 1600MHz and those reviewers would still find something to whine about. "At the end of the day, the RX 480 fails to match Nvidia's latest release which makes it a complete disappointment." -PCPer


[H] was available for comment:


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Eh, the thing could clock to 1600MHz and those reviewers would still find something to whine about. "At the end of the day, the RX 480 fails to match Nvidia's latest release which makes it a complete disappointment." -PCPer


But the difference is, _they_ would be the ones that end up looking like green goblins if they did that, so at least they'd be more hesitant to make those asinine comments.

Whereas if they made fun of a card that only had a 7% OC headroom, well I think most wouldn't bat an eyelash at that.

FWIW I still think Bile Kennett is a lot worse than Ryan Shrout. I mean Raja trusts Ryan enough to invite him to events and have 1 on 1's with him, so that's a start.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I still don't believe these 7% OC rumors anymore than I did the 1600MHz ones. The truth will be somewhere in the middle of these.


----------



## SuperZan

That is the most likely outcome, I agree.


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I still don't believe these 7% OC rumors anymore than I did the 1600MHz ones. The truth will be somewhere in the middle of these.


Reference will average 1350~ Core Clock. In fact, 4 days from now I'll say I told you so


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Really? "Public shaming"? That's ridiculous man. The point is that society is getting lazier and lazier every day as it relates to the written word. Text and internet lingo is becoming commonplace and THAT really gets on MY nerves. I don't think there was any public shaming going on, just a good-natured correction of a common error...


This is the Internet. Where else should we use internet lingo? Seriously tho(<), this is pretty informal. Obviously literacy isn't an issue here, if it were, he wouldn't have known you corrected him. I would even dare to say the majority here are fairly educated.

If it were a repeated grammatical error I can see pointing it out, but a single time I would assume to be a mistake or perhaps, esl.
But I too digest, sometimes better than others but I get it done 'irregardless' =P

Actually, I make the mistake quite frequently, while focused on my train of thought, of typing gb instead of GB or Gb. I would think people would jump all over that as the difference is quite substantial and this is a tech forum.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I still don't believe these 7% OC rumors anymore than I did the 1600MHz ones. The truth will be somewhere in the middle of these.


Forget the exact figures for a second. The point being, if the card OCs less than 10%, it WILL be noted and negatively.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I mean, we already know just how useless the reviewers are when it comes to overclocking anyway. As I have said 1 million times before, I will trust the avg OC numbers we get from members here on OCN Who actually buy the cards much more than I will any of the reviewer's numbers. I said the same thing about the 1080s overclocking as well.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I still don't believe these 7% OC rumors anymore than I did the 1600MHz ones. *The truth will be somewhere in the middle of these.*


I do believe that would be around 1.5GHz. Ironic isn't it?








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I mean, we already know just how useless the reviewers are when it comes to overclocking anyway.


You are preaching to the choir. The issue is that reviewers are going to have major impact on the success of this card.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

I expect that the average clock speed will be 1120 as it throttles down to base clocks due to the ****ty reference cooler, with no OC headroom at all. It'll run at 98C, with the fan constantly at 100% - this will produces 60dB and that's on top of the horrible coil whine. It'll be the first product since 1970 that gets below an 8 from TPU.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

One thing I did forget about with the whole "then or than" argument is that often times people are using talk to text or autocorrect and that can easily screw up a post. So, yeah, no big deal.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You are preaching to the chorus. The issue is that reviewers are going to have major impact on the success of this card.


Pretty much.

The crux of what I'm saying is, if AMD has a waterproof (or rather, flameproof) product on their hands, even if the reviewers turned it upside down and flipped it inside out to look for faults, they'd be the ones that end up looking like unreasonable idiots. So point being you don't want to give the reviewers ANY excuse, no matter how small or ridiculous, to crap on your product.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> So point being you don't want to give the reviewers ANY excuse, no matter how *small* or ridiculous, to crap on your product.


This is a pretty SMALL excuse











At the very least, they could have designed the reference PCB better so that the GPU was mounted closer to the back panel so the overall length of the card could have been reduced instead of having so much empty space behind the card.


----------



## ku4eto

Yar ar all forgettin sumthing! This card is for the masses, whichare really not good with anything PC related. The total % of people who overclock in that segment is lower than the combined markets of 400$+ cards. They get the card to do stuff right out of the box, not to fiddle with it. They would most probably find a friend who understands a bit more, just to instaall the card.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ku4eto*
> 
> Yar ar all forgettin sumthing! This card is for the masses, whichare really not good with anything PC related. The total % of people who overclock in that segment is lower than the combined markets of 400$+ cards. They get the card to do stuff right out of the box, not to fiddle with it. They would most probably find a friend who understands a bit more, just to instaall the card.


They would also be most inclined to blindly follow a reviewers recommendation...


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> They would also be most inclined to blindly follow a reviewers recommendation...


Or not even read a review...


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ku4eto*
> 
> Yar ar all forgettin sumthing! This card is for the masses, whichare really not good with anything PC related. The total % of people who overclock in that segment is lower than the combined markets of 400$+ cards. They get the card to do stuff right out of the box, not to fiddle with it. They would most probably find a friend who understands a bit more, just to instaall the card.


And this is exactly what I mean "justified or not complaints" by reviewers. Is a <10% OC a big deal (or even an issue) for a card of this price in its intended segment? No of course not. But if a reviewer says stuff like "well that's a bit disappointing, it looks like AMD didn't leave much OC headroom for those inclined to tweak with their GPUs", that will leave a negative impression to whomever reads it.


----------



## Ultracarpet

A priest, a rabbi, and an atheist walk into the worlds only computer store on October Day (June 29th). One by one, the three men approach a seemingly knowledgeable salesperson and ask for a graphics card recommendation. The priest says he wants a monster card for all the new dx12 games coming out, the rabbi says he only plays indie games, and the atheist says he only wants to play one game- Ashes of the Singularity (weird I know)....

They all walk out with $250 GTX 960s.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> And this is exactly what I mean "justified or not complaints" by reviewers. Is a <10% OC a big deal (or even an issue) for a card of this price in its intended segment? No of course not. But if a reviewer says stuff like "well that's a bit disappointing, it looks like AMD didn't leave much OC headroom for those inclined to tweak with their GPUs", that will leave a negative impression to whomever reads it.


If the reviewers do in fact harp on the lack of OC headroom of the 480 then to me that will do nothing but prove their bias. I don't recall any of them complaining about the lack of headroom with the 1080, only just talking about how amazing the clock speeds are.

Then again, 2 GHz for a video card is pretty amazing...


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> A priest, a rabbi, and an atheist walk into the worlds only computer store on October Day (June 29th). One by one, the three men approach a seemingly knowledgeable salesperson and ask for a graphics card recommendation. The priest says he wants a monster card for all the new dx12 games coming out, the rabbi says he only plays indie games, and the atheist says he only wants to play one game- Ashes of the Singularity (weird I know)....
> 
> They all walk out with $250 GTX 960s *$449 1070 FE's*


FTFY

Remember Maxwell sucks at DX12 and is waiting for that magical async driver which is "coming soon™", so the only logical choice is to buy a Pascal card.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> FTFY
> 
> Remember Maxwell sucks at DX12 and is waiting for that magical async driver which is "coming soon™", so the only logical choice is to buy a Pascal card.


NO! DX12 and Win10 are the devil and will eat yo babies! Win7 for life!!!1!


----------



## magnek

Well if the customer wants DX12, you give them what they want or else you lose the sale (and your job potentially).









And yes Win10 =







while Win7 =


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I luv my win10!


----------



## SuperZan

WTH is Win? OSX is called El Capitan right now. The next one is Sierra, not Win.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> WTH is Win? OSX is called El Capitan right now. The next one is Sierra, not Win.


Mac Master Race


----------



## SuperZan

I actually have a hollowed-out Emac shell that my cat sleeps in.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Mac Master Race


MMR

Come to think of it, that's quite fitting actually.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I love to hate on Apple just like everybody else but the fact is if I had millions of dollars in the bank I would for sure buy one of those 5K iMac's! The thing just oozes cool even if it is limited...


----------



## Gungnir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Mac Master Race
> 
> *iMac pic*


Heh, that was my first computer: an original bondi blue iMac, with a 233Mhz PowerPC G3 and an ATI Rage Pro if memory serves. It was pretty great, too; played Star Wars Racer like a charm. It's still working fine, too, just a _little_ bit slow by today's standards.


----------



## SpeedyVT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> If the reviewers do in fact harp on the lack of OC headroom of the 480 then to me that will do nothing but prove their bias. I don't recall any of them complaining about the lack of headroom with the 1080, only just talking about how amazing the clock speeds are.
> 
> Then again, 2 GHz for a video card is pretty amazing...


There was discussion about not getting very high on stock cooler, but serious the thing has no heat pipes! Where did they expect it to go? Always get after market if you intend to OC.


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpeedyVT*
> 
> Always get after market if you intend to OC.


words on a tablet.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gungnir*
> 
> Heh, that was my first computer: an original bondi blue iMac, with a 233Mhz PowerPC G3 and an ATI Rage Pro if memory serves. It was pretty great, too; played Star Wars Racer like a charm. It's still working fine, too, just a _little_ bit slow by today's standards.


Was that the one where you were a pod racer? If so maaaan that game was awesome.

When I was young, early elementary school, the schools here all had macs. Idr exactly but I would guess either Mac ii or Mac se. That's the last time I've ever used one. I've considered a used mbp several times to use for mobile recording, but this dell Studio with a Penryn (lol) just keeps on keeping on


----------



## blue1512

Reference card testing so far: 1680 MHz can be set, but throttle back to ~1300 MHz right after going on heavy duty. The ref cooler is quiet but very weak









This will be the case when spending money on a good custom card is actually worth it.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Reference card testing so far: 1680 MHz can be set, but throttle back to ~1300 MHz right after going on heavy duty. The ref cooler is quiet but very weak
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This will be the case when spending money on a good custom card is actually worth it.


Wait, you got the card ? if so can you monitor wattage during when it throttles down to 13xx ?







and please check if there are any tessellation improvements


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Wait, you got the card ? if so can you monitor wattage during when it throttles down to 13xx ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and please check if there are any tessellation improvements


Not really, and I didn't have much time with it. There are some key points of the ref as follows

- AMD puts a strict power/temp limit on the BIOS. The 4GB version seems to be hold back more than the 8GB one.

- There is an "hidden" additional boost clock, something like nVidia cards which boost over the set boost clock. 1680 MHz was this boost clock, recorded as the peak when I tried Dota 2 Vulkan @ 1440p ( 300+fps)

- The ref cooler is perfect for the $200 performance, but it can't bring the card to 980ti level. The 6 pin power doesn't help as well.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Not really, and I didn't have much time with it. There are some key points of the ref as follows
> 
> - AMD puts a strict power/temp limit on the BIOS. The 4GB version seems to be hold back more than the 8GB one.
> 
> - There is an "hidden" additional boost clock, something like nVidia cards which boost over the set boost clock. 1680 MHz was this boost clock, recorded as the peak when I tried Dota 2 Vulkan @ 1440p ( 300+fps)
> 
> - The ref cooler is perfect for the $200 performance, but it can't bring the card to 980ti level. The 6 pin power doesn't help as well.


thanks, btw i was talking about gpuz it can show you watt usage.

so 300$ cards will actually be much faster ? hmmmm


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> thanks, btw i was talking about gpuz it can show you watt usage.
> 
> so 300$ cards will actually be much faster ? hmmmm


The wattage was bugged out on GPUz, but from the kill-a-watt it was around 150W stable (+50% power limit). As I said the power limit AMD put on this card is quite strict.

I'm not sure about the price. But a 480 at $300 should have a beefy cooler, 8+6 power feed and a beast BIOS. If it's the case I'm sure that it can hold the boost clock of 1680MHz.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> The wattage was bugged out on GPUz, but from the kill-a-watt it was around 150W stable (+50% power limit). As I said the power limit AMD put on this card is quite strict.
> 
> I'm not sure about the price. But a 480 at $300 should have a beefy cooler, 8+6 power feed and a beast BIOS. If it's the case I'm sure that it can hold the boost clock of 1680MHz.


Hmm, so it's already using 150w and performance is slower than 1070 which also consumes 150w, kinda disappointing tbh. because for 1680mhz it will probably use around 185-190w. and still loose to 1080( 1070 too). only hope is somehow launch day drivers will improve performance. someone was saying review drivers will be delivered just 2 days before launch. don't know if it's true.

If they can't improve perf/mm^2 how they gonna fight big pascal because it seems they ( amd) haven't improve ipc much.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Hmm, so it's already using 150w and performance is slower than 1070 which also consumes 150w, kinda disappointing tbh. because for 1680mhz it will probably use around 185-190w. and still loose to 1080( 1070 too). only hope is somehow launch day drivers will improve performance. someone was saying review drivers will be delivered just 2 days before launch. don't know if it's true.
> 
> If they can't improve perf/mm^2 how they gonna fight big pascal because it seems they ( amd) haven't improve ipc much.


Kind of agree with you there. AMD's power efficiency is till lagging behind nVidia. If there are no major change with Vega the AIO cooler of Fury X might appear again with big Vega.

But for now what 480 can bring on the table is enough tbh.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> GTX1070 is the only card I could buy too right now If I had to buy a card. I am getting 480 for fun and then maybe selling it back to a friend. For me even GTX1080 does not do the 4K 60 i want. I have ~ 800 USD lined up for the card that does it first.


The cheapest but not the smoothest option would be dual 1070s. Which is still over 800USD in US.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> The wattage was bugged out on GPUz, but from the kill-a-watt it was around 150W stable (+50% power limit). As I said the power limit AMD put on this card is quite strict.
> 
> I'm not sure about the price. But a 480 at $300 should have a beefy cooler, 8+6 power feed and a beast BIOS. If it's the case I'm sure that it can hold the boost clock of 1680MHz.


Was the 150 watts mesured when the 480 was oc'ed or it was at stock ? Thnx in advance


----------



## sammkv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugalumps*
> 
> Oh god if it only just matches a 980 after 100 page thread hyping it to match and surpass a 980ti


Building up this hyppppeee train!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> The wattage was bugged out on GPUz, but from the kill-a-watt it was around 150W stable (+50% power limit). As I said the power limit AMD put on this card is quite strict.
> 
> I'm not sure about the price. But a 480 at $300 should have a beefy cooler, 8+6 power feed and a beast BIOS. If it's the case I'm sure that it can hold the boost clock of 1680MHz.


yes please 1700mhz thats what im talking about!


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Was the 150 watts mesured when the 480 was oc'ed or it was at stock ? Thnx in advance


It was about 147W MAX, not average. Where as the 1.5x bigger 1070 has 150Wish typical/average gaming on TPU.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Hmm, so it's already using 150w and performance is slower than 1070 which also consumes 150w, kinda disappointing tbh. because for 1680mhz it will probably use around 185-190w. and still loose to 1080( 1070 too). only hope is somehow launch day drivers will improve performance. someone was saying review drivers will be delivered just 2 days before launch. don't know if it's true.
> 
> If they can't improve perf/mm^2 how they gonna fight big pascal because it seems they ( amd) haven't improve ipc much.


I don't think they need to get to NVs perf/mm2 to still be effective. If the pricing is right for the performance then i don't think a lot of people will worry to much about 20-30 watts difference. I certainly could care less. Are we going to worry about 10 watt differences at 10nm ? i hope not.

Theres also such a wide range of performance factors to consider. Eg dx11 performance / dx12 performance / vulcan performance (to come) . I would say if you compare this cards dx12 performance its performance per watt will be a whole lot stronger than looking at its dx11 performance.

We really only know firestrike perf at present and that shows a GTX980 above a 390x .. but a 390x is faster in ROTR than a 980 (4k) and a few other games so i think we have to wait and see what happens in a wide variety of games as synthetics won't tell the full story.


----------



## ChevChelios

http://wccftech.com/radeon-rx-480-wattman-overclocking/
Quote:


> Update: A video from a Thai retailer has leaked out who was showcasing the performance and features of the Radeon RX 480 graphics card. The video provides us a good look at the performance in 3DMark with the press drivers along with the Radeon WattMan tool. *The stability of the card has some issues as it crashed in 3D mark even at default clocks due to which the benchmark had to be run again*. The retailer was using a Crossfire setup of the Radeon RX 480 and the whole video of the demonstration can be seen below:


Quote:


> Update: Aside from the benchmarks, you can also find the power consumption of the card at overclocked speed in the picture below. *At 1328 MHz, the card runs at 88C (Degrees) and has a power consumption close to 147W* when being fully utilized under gaming or benchmarking load. Other performance tests have showed that usual gaming power consumption will be around 115-120W.




ouch


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> I don't think they need to get to NVs perf/mm2 to still be effective. If the pricing is right for the performance then i don't think a lot of people will worry to much about 20-30 watts difference. I certainly could care less. Are we going to worry about 10 watt differences at 10nm ? i hope not.
> 
> Theres also such a wide range of performance factors to consider. Eg dx11 performance / dx12 performance / vulcan performance (to come) . I would say if you compare this cards dx12 performance its performance per watt will be a whole lot stronger than looking at its dx11 performance.
> 
> We really only know firestrike perf at present and that shows a GTX980 above a 390x .. but a 390x is faster in ROTR than a 980 and a few other games so i think we have to wait and see what happens in a wide variety of games as synthetics won't tell the full story.


Oh don't get me wrong, card is great for it's price. but from technical standpoint it's not that great since it's after 4-5 years they are making huge changes in architecture. i don't care about p/w but still it shows what they lag or achieve.


----------



## Origondoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/radeon-rx-480-wattman-overclocking/
> 
> 
> 
> ouch


OMG that denglish from Raff


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/radeon-rx-480-wattman-overclocking/
> 
> 
> 
> ouch


That guy didn't talk about the new boost clock? What a fail


----------



## ChevChelios

so now all new cards will have dynamic boost clocks or what ?


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> That guy didn't talk about the new boost clock? What a fail


Well just a week ago they were talking about furyx performance and 1.5-6 ghz oc. So as always its bs.


----------



## Ha-Nocri

So, we'll have to wait another 2 weeks at least for AIB "beast mode" cards :/


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> so now all new cards will have dynamic boost clocks or what ?


He has the card so he knows. We will know after 5 days. LoL


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/radeon-rx-480-wattman-overclocking/
> 
> 
> 
> ouch


Wow impressive results for the 480 crossfire very good for a refference design.
Thnx chev for the post + rep


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Wow impressive results for the 480 crossfire very good for a refference design.
> Thnx chev for the post + rep


its nice to stay positive


----------



## Cakewalk_S

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> http://wccftech.com/radeon-rx-480-wattman-overclocking/
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Update: A video from a Thai retailer has leaked out who was showcasing the performance and features of the Radeon RX 480 graphics card. The video provides us a good look at the performance in 3DMark with the press drivers along with the Radeon WattMan tool. *The stability of the card has some issues as it crashed in 3D mark even at default clocks due to which the benchmark had to be run again*. The retailer was using a Crossfire setup of the Radeon RX 480 and the whole video of the demonstration can be seen below:
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Update: Aside from the benchmarks, you can also find the power consumption of the card at overclocked speed in the picture below. *At 1328 MHz, the card runs at 88C (Degrees) and has a power consumption close to 147W* when being fully utilized under gaming or benchmarking load. Other performance tests have showed that usual gaming power consumption will be around 115-120W.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> ouch
Click to expand...

probably just early drivers is the issue here.. And I'd imagine we'll see higher overclocks coming from the card from review sites. I just hope it wasn't binned from AMD... I would also imagine, like the 1080, they might be hitting a TDP wall. It may be limited to 150w or so and that's whats preventing the card from OC'ing higher. I'd imagine with bios that allow upto 160-175w we'll see some crazy high overclocks...


----------



## mohiuddin

@blue1512, could you please run some games and give us a general idea if it isn't any problem for you..


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ha-Nocri*
> 
> So, we'll have to wait another 2 weeks at least for AIB "beast mode" cards :/


At least the custom cards are worth to invest to.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> its nice to stay positive


I don't understand your negative tone. The shiny cooler $100 of FE 1080 also hits 83C, mate, and throttles hard. At least 480 doesnt throttle, it just can't hold that tasty 1680 MHz boost


----------



## ChevChelios

so thats 6377 on a 1380Mhz 480, that would be ~5850-5900 on a stock 1266Mhz 480


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> At least the custom cards are worth to invest to.
> I don't understand your negative tone. The shiny cooler $100 of FE 1080 also hits 83C, mate, and throttles hard. At least 480 doesnt throttle, it just *can't hold that tasty 1680 MHz* boost


So it doesn't crash but just down clocks itself ? so maybe silicon is able to achieve more frequency but limited by available power unlike fury ?


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> 
> 
> so thats 6377 on a 1380Mhz 480, that would be ~5850-5900 on a stock 1266Mhz 480


Basically 390x lvl performance for 120w which is what i've said many times and what i expected based on 1% less tflops. it's the oc p/w that shocks me because it doesn't seem normal.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> At least the custom cards are worth to invest to.
> I don't understand your negative tone. The shiny cooler $100 of FE 1080 also hits 83C, mate, and throttles hard. At least 480 doesnt throttle, it just can't hold that tasty 1680 MHz boost


So, you think it is the mediocre cooler not the 6-PIN holding back the card from boosting? Could be driver too. Is the driver even out yet?

Ignore Chev, he still have to sell so many 1070s today. lol


----------



## ChevChelios

that 4000 rpm 81% stock fan doe


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cakewalk_S*
> 
> probably just early drivers is the issue here.. And I'd imagine we'll see higher overclocks coming from the card from review sites. I just hope it wasn't binned from AMD... I would also imagine, like the 1080, they might be hitting a TDP wall. It may be limited to 150w or so and that's whats preventing the card from OC'ing higher. I'd imagine with bios that allow upto 160-175w we'll see some crazy high overclocks...


I've also been thinking that the best of the chips might be binned for the beast models , it would make sense if so. We also know TDP climbs with Heat , if the fan is locked at 58% then its not helping the power draw that's for sure. It will be interesting to see what happens when the fan is set to 100 % . Although the AIB cards will be totally superior in all metrics i would suspect.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> So, you think it is the mediocre cooler not the 6-PIN holding back the card from boosting? Could be driver too. Is the driver even out yet?
> 
> Ignore Chev, he still have to sell so many 1070s today. lol


For me the cooler is the problem as the card heat up pretty quick. But it really needs more power to consistently hit higher lock as 150W is the limit of the 6 pin already.

Note that it's only when you overclock and the fan is realy quiet this time (yet weak). Leave it at stock you have the perfect performance for $200


----------



## ChevChelios

I heard you can draw more then 150W from 6-pin anyway, true ?

also has anyone tried max OC of the reference while setting fan to 100% ?

in the above pic a 81% fan is keeping the 1380Mhz 480 at 74C


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> I heard you can draw more then 150W from 6-pin anyway, true ?
> 
> also has anyone tried max OC of the reference while setting fan to 100% ?
> 
> in the above pic a 81% fan is keeping the 1380Mhz 480 at 74C


The power limit is locked in the BIOS, mate.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> The power limit is locked in the BIOS, mate.


ah alright


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> The power limit is locked in the BIOS, mate.


At least the AIB 480s will provide more than a Decibel reduction which will be a nice change of late.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> For me the cooler is the problem as the card heat up pretty quick. But it really needs more power to consistently hit higher lock as 150W is the limit of the 6 pin already.
> 
> Note that it's only when you overclock and the fan is realy quiet this time (yet weak). Leave it at stock you have the perfect performance for $200


It is already at the 390X level. +rep.

I'm going for the 6/8 PIN if there will be any.


----------



## NFL

I wouldn't mind a single 8-pin


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> I wouldn't mind a single 8-pin


A 6-pin connector is good for between 200 to 300 watts. The 6-pin connector has 4 current carrying wires in it, the 8-pin has 6.

The 75 W "rating" for the 6-pin connector is completely artificial if you have a good PSU.


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> A 6-pin connector is good for between 200 to 300 watts. The 6-pin connector has 4 current carrying wires in it, the 8-pin has 6.
> 
> The 75 W "rating" for the 6-pin connector is completely artificial if you have a good PSU.


That means tdp is bios locked for reference rx480?


----------



## JackCY

For those that missed this.






Anyone can translate some interesting parts?


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> A 6-pin connector is good for between 200 to 300 watts. The 6-pin connector has 4 current carrying wires in it, the 8-pin has 6.
> 
> The 75 W "rating" for the 6-pin connector is completely artificial if you have a good PSU.
> 
> 
> 
> That means tdp is bios locked for reference rx480?
Click to expand...

I haven't seen anything to indicate that. All we know is that the card can't exceed 150 W at stock speeds. Remember, PCIe cards have to be designed with the idea that someone is going to stick one in a 5 year old eMachines desktop that may only have 75 W to spare on the connector. With that same crappy eMachines desktop, if AMD used an 8-pin connector that person wouldn't be able to use the card. It's really not a conspiracy.


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> I heard you can draw more then 150W from 6-pin anyway, true ?
> 
> also has anyone tried max OC of the reference while setting fan to 100% ?
> 
> in the above pic a 81% fan is keeping the 1380Mhz 480 at 74C


It is crucially so. You'll blow up the pci-e output if the powerline cannot be sustained directly from the psu.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> If they can't improve *perf/mm^2* how they gonna fight big pascal because it seems they ( amd) haven't improve ipc much.


Not sure what you are talking about. Do you realize that Polaris is 2/3 the size GP104? AMD usually has better perf/mm² what it has been behind in is perf/watt...


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Not sure what you are talking about. Do you realize that Polaris is 2/3 the size GP104? AMD usually has better perf/mm² what it has been behind in is perf/watt...


Nope, they've been behind on perf/mm^2.
And unless Polaris 10 surprises us and is actually 980 Ti performance, Pascal will keep that crown.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Nope, they've *been behind* on perf/mm^2.


Yes, since Fiji... Why? Because the die is huge due to HBM integration...

Generation earlier:
GTX 780 Ti = 561 mm²
R9 290X = 438 mm²

Hawaii was 3.9/5 the size of GK100 meaning that GK100 was 28% larger than Hawaii
Performance delta between the two= < 10%


----------



## comagnum

I don't understand why a lot of you are so critical of this cards performance. If it doesn't perform to your hypothetical lofty expectations, then this card isn't for you. I'm coming from a 280x and this card, if it performs near 390/x levels, I'll be more than happy. I've never seen so many whiney people in my life. The card is aimed at mainstream/entry level 1080p gamers, which is the vast majority of the pc gaming world. It was never intended to blow the doors off of the competition. At the $200 price point, this card can't be beat. End of discussion.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Nope, they've been behind on perf/mm^2.
> And unless Polaris 10 surprises us and is actually 980 Ti performance, Pascal will keep that crown.


What?

Hawaii is smaller still offers the same performance as 780ti.
Fury x is smaller still offers the same performance as 980ti.
Even the 7970 that is quite bigger than 680 is better on perf/mm^2


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Not sure what you are talking about. Do you realize that Polaris is 2/3 the size GP104? AMD usually has better perf/mm² what it has been behind in is perf/watt...





Spoiler: Ohhh


----------



## HackHeaven

Reading these posts is making this card worse and worse lol


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Fury x is smaller still offers the same performance as 980ti.


Fury X is quite similar in size to the 980 Ti

GM200 = 601 mm²
Fiji = 596 mm²

The difference in size between the two is less than 1%. The 980 Ti does perform better than Fury X so the performance/mm² crown does belong to GM200 in this case.


----------



## EightDee8D

Its a great card and delivers what i expected, just not that great from technical standpoint. still waiting for actual reviews.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Ohhh


Oh, the irony...









#learn2math


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Fury X is quite similar in size to the 980 Ti
> 
> GM200 = 601 mm²
> Fiji = 596 mm²
> 
> The difference in size between the two is less than 1%. The 980 Ti does perform better than Fury X so the performance/mm² crown does belong to GM200 in this case.


If amd had the nvidia driver team believed me that the fury x would perform a lot better. And at 4k fury x match the 980ti or it is a bit faster. (always stock to stock







)

980ti is the better card. And we will see in 6 months if the same applies


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> What?
> 
> Hawaii is smaller still offers the same performance as 780ti.
> Fury x is smaller still offers the same performance as 980ti.
> Even the 7970 that is quite bigger than 680 is better on perf/mm^2


Fury X is smaller by a SMIDGE, but it offers less performance than 980 Ti. Not same.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Yes, since Fiji... Why? Because the die is huge due to HBM integration...
> 
> Generation earlier:
> GTX 780 Ti = 561 mm²
> R9 290X = 438 mm²
> 
> Hawaii was 3.9/5 the size of GK100 meaning that GK100 was 28% larger than Hawaii
> Performance delta between the two= < 10%


390x is smaller than a 980.
While I understand that Hawaii isn't from the same generation as Maxwell, it's still AMD's best perf/mm^2 chip lol. (aside from RX 480 obviously)


----------



## 12Cores

I just watched a crossfire run with a 9590 and the cards hit around 24k graphics score which is about 4k more than my overclocked 7970's, I will get two of these. I think will be able to do much better than that with 2 universal waterblocks, cannot wait.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HackHeaven*
> 
> Reading these posts is making this card worse and worse lol


it's about 4X as fast as the HD 5850 for $200. If you want something faster, then the 1070. But, your cpu will bottleneck it fo sho.


----------



## sugalumps

So 390x levels? Most of the mid market already have 290x/970s/390/390xs right? I think most of the mid tier market will be waiting on something a bit bigger like amds answer to the 1070 at a better price, this is great for people coming from the lower market though at an excellent price.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Oh, the irony...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> #learn2math


If it delivers 390x performance, compare that to gp104. yeah the irony









remember it's 10 - 12% dense than 16nm.


----------



## hjacob

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Reference card testing so far: 1680 MHz can be set, but throttle back to ~1300 MHz right after going on heavy duty. The ref cooler is quiet but very weak .


how are you doing with clocks in the 1500-1600 range? does it throttle back...lets say with 1550? etc...

what drivers are you using? there are some reports that on monday they are sending reviewers new drivers...


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> 390x is smaller than a 980.
> While *I understand that Hawaii isn't from the same generation as Maxwell*, it's still AMD's best perf/mm^2 chip lol. (aside from RX 480 obviously)


Newer generations having better performance per mm²? Imagine that....

But let's analyze your claim:

GM204 is 398 mm²

Hawaii is 10% larger than GM204.
The R9 390X is currently slightly faster(~5-7%) than the GTX 980.

106/110 = Hawaii has .96 the performance per mm² as GM204...

Doesn't seem to be much of an improvement even though Maxwell is competing with a chip that is a year older...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> *If* it delivers 390x performance, compare that to gp104. yeah the irony


Your assertions are all based on assumptions.









Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> remember it's 10 - 12% dense than 16nm.


You really are liberal with your numbers...


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Newer generations having better performance per mm²? Imagine that....
> 
> But let's analyze your claim:
> 
> GM204 is 398 mm²
> 
> Hawaii is 10% larger than GM204.
> The R9 390X is currently slightly faster(~5-7%) than the GTX 980.
> 
> 106/110 = Hawaii has .96 the performance per mm² as GM204...
> 
> Doesn't seem to be much of an improvement even though Maxwell is competing with a chip that is a year older...


Also the fact that 290X has 512-Bit vs 256-Bit.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Robenger*
> 
> How? These are just the blower cards, the real overclocking as we know will come from the 8+6 pin connector cards with aftermarket coolers.


Probably the reference cards have a target like r9 290x had, just to get lower noise level
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Stock card with fan 100% should tell you how much OC you can get.


not if the power required is lower than required look at the r9 nano or r9 270

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> I am too worried about this reference design model. I am not planning to overclock it since at 1050p i won't even fully utilize an RX 480 but with time and a monitor change i might want to and the reference model seems a bit lacking in this regard.


you can use VSR and then it will be GPU bound
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> I really don't think the reference cooler will be that big of a deal. Cards with higher TDPs have had worse coolers and turned out fine.


The HD 7870 and 7850 with a slighly more expensive price tag had a way better cooling and it could be oced with relative low temps for a ref cooler
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> They could've allowed AIB partners to release their own custom designs day 1...


and Maybe it could have caused that the true overclocking ability of GCN4 would be revealed(if AMD plans to compete with the 1070 with an OCed GPU)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> What are you even on about? The non-reference cards will be out just two weeks later. What is the big freaking deal?


Thermal limit from reference cooling, really cheap ref cooling


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Fury X is smaller by a SMIDGE, but it offers less performance than 980 Ti. Not same.
> 390x is smaller than a 980.
> While I understand that Hawaii isn't from the same generation as Maxwell, it's still AMD's best perf/mm^2 chip lol. (aside from RX 480 obviously)


R9 390 ties with 980*Ti* in Hitman, so it can be said Dx12 will tip the scales somewhat in AMD's favour. 8GB is the new standard.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Newer generations having better performance per mm²? Imagine that....
> 
> But let's analyze your claim:
> 
> GM204 is 398 mm²
> 
> Hawaii is 10% larger than GM204.
> The R9 390X is currently slightly faster(~5-7%) than the GTX 980.
> 
> 106/110 = Hawaii has .96 the performance per mm² as GM204...
> 
> Doesn't seem to be much of an improvement even though Maxwell is competing with a chip that is a year older...


When both overclocked, the 980 has a very significant performance lead on the 390x.
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/07/06/msi_radeon_r9_390x_gaming_8g_overclocking_review/3#.V2_hzGh96Hs
390x is already at its limits, 980 came with very conservative clocks.

Anyway, back to Polaris, unless stock RX 480 is between Fury X to 980 Ti performance or so, AMD is way behind NVIDIA in perf/mm^2.
GP104 is 35% larger than Polaris 10. 1080 is 42% faster than Fury X, and about 31% faster than 980 Ti. So somewhere in the middle would match the die size difference.
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080/images/perfrel_1920_1080.png


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Not sure what you are talking about. Do you realize that Polaris is 2/3 the size GP104? AMD usually has better perf/mm² what it has been behind in is perf/watt...


P10 - 232 mm2
GP104 - 314 mm2
= *35% diff*

(assuming 480 = 980) the performance difference to 1080 is *60-65%*+


----------



## doza

has this been posted, if so than sry for duble post!

https://imgur.com/a/3iTkS#8CdoVOw


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> P10 - 232 mm2
> GP104 - 314 mm2
> = *35% diff*
> 
> (assuming 480 = 980) the performance difference to 1080 is *60-65%*+


Pretty much.
It's why I've been saying for ages that Polaris 10 should be 980 Ti performance.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> I wouldn't mind a single 8-pin
> 
> 
> 
> A 6-pin connector is good for between 200 to 300 watts. *The 6-pin connector has 4 current carrying wires in it, the 8-pin has 6.*
> 
> The 75 W "rating" for the 6-pin connector is completely artificial if you have a good PSU.
Click to expand...

they BOTH have 3 lines of 12volts. old 6 pin could have 2 on cheap PSUs; that is why there is 1 sensor on 6 pin but 2 sensors on 8 pin.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> For me the cooler is the problem as the card heat up pretty quick. But it really needs more power to consistently hit higher lock as 150W is the limit of the 6 pin already.
> 
> Note that it's only when you overclock and the fan is realy quiet this time (yet weak). Leave it at stock you have the perfect performance for $200


then miners wil be all over those cards


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> then miners wil be all over those cards


Seems they already are...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Seems they already are...


it was expected since it has 120w or so power consumption and performance better than a 380x with a 200usd price


----------



## ChevChelios

miners in 2016 LUL

so if miners buy 480s up it will be another fiasco for AMD ? or not ?


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> P10 - 232 mm2
> GP104 - 314 mm2
> = *35% diff*
> 
> (assuming 480 = 980) the performance difference to 1080 is *60-65%*+


24%, including the 14/16 nm density factor.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> miners in 2016 LUL
> 
> so if miners buy 480s up it will be another fiasco for AMD ? or not ?


Initial launch not but later it will be .


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> miners in 2016 LUL
> 
> so if miners buy 480s up it will be another fiasco for AMD ? or not ?


a card sold is a card sold, regardless of the purpose. Selling cards doesn't hurt AMD unless they are selling at a loss.

gpu mining is profitable depending on what coin you mine, the current go to is ethereum which is about as profitable as litecoin was when it was first introduced.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> it was expected since it has 120w or so power consumption and performance better than a 380x with a 200usd price




Suggests 24 Mh/s for Ethereum mining on the RX 480. For comparison, the R9 390 yeild around 31Mh/s


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> a card sold is a card sold, regardless of the purpose. Selling cards doesn't hurt AMD unless they are selling at a loss.


you'd think that but Ive read many times around here that miner craze for 290 hurt AMD a lot later


----------



## Ha-Nocri

I don't understand why miners buying these cards would hurt AMD...

It would hurt us consumers as prices would go up most probably.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> I wouldn't mind a single 8-pin
> 
> 
> 
> A 6-pin connector is good for between 200 to 300 watts. *The 6-pin connector has 4 current carrying wires in it, the 8-pin has 6.*
> 
> The 75 W "rating" for the 6-pin connector is completely artificial if you have a good PSU.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *they BOTH have 3 lines of 12volts. old 6 pin could have 2 on cheap PSUs;* that is why there is 1 sensor on 6 pin but 2 sensors on 8 pin.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
Click to expand...

Pin 2 is not defined on the 6-pin, pin 5 is a sense line. Often 2 is tied to +12v and 5 is grounded (and not supposed to carry current), but they are not part of the 6-pin connector. "Cheap PSUs" are actually the compliant ones here.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ha-Nocri*
> 
> I don't understand why miners buying these cards would hurt AMD...
> 
> It would hurt us consumers are prices would go up most probably.


I believe the theory is that it drives up initial prices and keeps cards out of the hands of actual gamers, which hurts mindshare. Then the market is flooded with secondhand cards later, which hurts long term sales. At least that's what was said about the 290s.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> you'd think that but Ive read many times around here that miner craze for 290 hurt AMD a lot later


That is because GPU mining for profitability is short lived and cyclical. A few months down the line and the market becomes flooded with used mining GPUs which will eat away at new card sales...


----------



## Ha-Nocri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> That is because GPU mining for profitability is short lived and cyclical. A few months down the line and the market becomes flooded with used mining GPUs which will eat away at new card sales...


Still don't see how it's bad for AMD


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ha-Nocri*
> 
> Still don't see how it's bad for AMD


Cards that have been used 24/7 at full potential. Probably at the breaking point.
Not only does it hurt mindshare keeping the cards out of the hands of gamers, it also makes AMD cards seem unreliable because second hand buyers will buy cards near the end of their life due to being used far beyond what they were intended for.

All of this hurts AMD's already lackluster image.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ha-Nocri*
> 
> Still don't see how it's bad for AMD


Initial inventory goes to miners instead of gamers. Gamers buy alternative products during the mining craze due to price gouging and strained supply channels. When miners liquidate inventory down the line, they create a surplus of cheap used GPUs that eat away at retail sales. The quarterly and yearly revenues are negatively impacted as a result.


----------



## Ha-Nocri

I still think that's way overblown.


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Cards that have been used 24/7 at full potential. Probably at the breaking point.
> Not only does it hurt mindshare keeping the cards out of the hands of gamers, it also makes AMD cards seem unreliable because second hand buyers will buy cards near the end of their life due to being used far beyond what they were intended for.
> 
> All of this hurts AMD's already lackluster image.


Used cards have less coil whine, if any. Through normal operation you don't count mean time to failure hours of vrm chips, the heat cycle count is more prevalent in reliability, afaik.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ha-Nocri*
> 
> I still think that's way overblown.


If you still can't comprehend the impact of a surge of used products hitting the market, I'll just refer you to the 9.5% market share drop for AMD from Q2 to Q3 2014 ...


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> a card sold is a card sold, regardless of the purpose. Selling cards doesn't hurt AMD unless they are selling at a loss.
> 
> gpu mining is profitable depending on what coin you mine, the current go to is ethereum which is about as profitable as litecoin was when it was first introduced.


It hurts AMD in two ways. The gamers who can't get their hands on cards swap over to NVIDIA (not by choice) and regaining a lost customer is really difficult - many will then stick to NVIDIA for life. Secondly, RMA rates on cards used for mining is 2-3x higher within the first two years (warranty). I've personally seen this with a sample size of several thousand units.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 
> 
> Suggests 24 Mh/s for Ethereum mining on the RX 480. For comparison, the R9 390 yeild around 31Mh/s


That seems... Poor. I get 21.5 MH/s on my HD 7950s, something is definitely not right there.


----------



## JackCY

Just get an ASIC for the price of the GPU for gorram sake, it will give you more virtual money for your stolen electricity.


----------



## sugarhell

http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showpost.php?p=267069&postcount=2183
Quote:


> From our OC early tests: the PCB and the new tools are very good, and the Polaris 10 overclocks very well even at stock voltage. The problem is the reference cooler (it's very good just at stock frequencies or a little bit over). With a 3rd party cooler (Sapphire Nitro?) Polaris 10 will be a best buy, IMHO.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> Just get an ASIC for the price of the GPU for gorram sake, it will give you more virtual money for your stolen electricity.



Ethereum doesn't work with ASICs
I would never buy an ASIC even if it did. With a GPU I only need to turn about 30 % ROI to break even as I can sell the hardware should SHTT. With an ASIC, it's worthless after a SHTT scenario.
I pay around $ 0.13/kwh (converted), I don't know how that's "stolen."


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showpost.php?p=267069&postcount=2183


Powercolor PCS+, Powercolor Devil or Burst


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> It hurts AMD in two ways. The gamers who can't get their hands on cards swap over to NVIDIA (not by choice) and regaining a lost customer is really difficult - many will then stick to NVIDIA for life. Secondly, RMA rates on cards used for mining is 2-3x higher within the first two years (warranty). I've personally seen this with a sample size of several thousand units.
> That seems... Poor. I get 21.5 MH/s on my HD 7950s, something is definitely not right there.


Welcome back. A lot of us missed you.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> Welcome back. A lot of us missed you.


October is coming !


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> It hurts AMD in two ways. The gamers who can't get their hands on cards swap over to NVIDIA (not by choice) and regaining a lost customer is really difficult - many will then stick to NVIDIA for life. Secondly, RMA rates on cards used for mining is 2-3x higher within the first two years (warranty). I've personally seen this with a sample size of several thousand units.
> That seems... Poor. I get 21.5 MH/s on my HD 7950s, something is definitely not right there.


it's not a problem if they have sufficient stock at launch. Failure rates I can see, but overall most electrics only have a 1 year warranty now unless it's an extended warranty.

On the mining part, Ethereum is sensitive to memory speeds so it makes perfect sense. It's bitcoin hash rate is much higher and matches that of a 390/390x at stock.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> Welcome back. A lot of us missed you.


(Polaris Sabotage)became a popular topic on reddit...
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4ph1d5/kyle_bennett_is_mad_amd_gpu_stack_is_about_to/

kinda

now Polaris Sabotage comes in form of miner that use Nvidia GPUs for gaming


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> Welcome back. A lot of us missed you.


Thanks I guess? I started a new job three weeks ago and haven't had as much time for forums as normal.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> *it's not a problem if they have sufficient stock at launch.* Failure rates I can see, but overall most electrics only have a 1 year warranty now unless it's an extended warranty.
> 
> On the mining part, Ethereum is sensitive to memory speeds so it makes perfect sense. It's bitcoin hash rate is much higher and matches that of a 390/390x at stock.


You underestimate the hardcore miners. There are guys who order R9 390s by the 100.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> I wouldn't mind a single 8-pin
> 
> 
> 
> A 6-pin connector is good for between 200 to 300 watts. *The 6-pin connector has 4 current carrying wires in it, the 8-pin has 6.*
> 
> The 75 W "rating" for the 6-pin connector is completely artificial if you have a good PSU.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *they BOTH have 3 lines of 12volts. old 6 pin could have 2 on cheap PSUs;* that is why there is 1 sensor on 6 pin but 2 sensors on 8 pin.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pin 2 is not defined on the 6-pin, pin 5 is a sense line. Often 2 is tied to +12v and 5 is grounded (and not supposed to carry current), *but they are not part of the 6-pin connector.* "Cheap PSUs" are actually the compliant ones here.
Click to expand...

source for your image?


http://wenku.baidu.com/view/21e1d2573c1ec5da50e270e8.html


----------



## airfathaaaaa

at least we know why the card cant even hit a higher clock

1322mhz->147 watts


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> 
> 
> at least we know why the card cant even hit a higher clock
> 
> 1322mhz->147 watts


some site claimed they reached not more than 1380MHz and gpuz might reporting wrong power draw, how much is the VDDC at stock?

it seems is trying to keep low noise levels and the temp target is around 90c (like r9 290(x))


----------



## TopicClocker

Some really solid performance coming from this card, lovely stuff!


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> 
> 
> at least we know why the card cant even hit a higher clock
> 
> 1322mhz->147 watts


At least post the whole album.

http://imgur.com/a/3iTkS

http://i.imgur.com/wTuI1L1.jpg

It seems that gpu-z is not working 100% correctly atm with 480


----------



## TopicClocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> (Polaris Sabotage)became a popular topic on reddit...
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4ph1d5/kyle_bennett_is_mad_amd_gpu_stack_is_about_to/
> 
> kinda
> 
> now Polaris Sabotage comes in form of miner that use Nvidia GPUs for gaming


What the... What's up with Kyle? That behavior is pretty bizarre.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

i didnt wanted to post the whole album to make the point......

that pic alone is the proof that this 1500+ might only be on the beast mode card we have yet to see...


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> i didnt wanted to post the whole album to make the point......
> 
> that pic alone is the proof that this 1500+ might only be on the beast mode card we have yet to see...


Check this. The guy is playing with the fanspeed it seems. Or gpu-z is not working correctly


----------



## toddincabo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> If you still can't comprehend the impact of a surge of used products hitting the market, I'll just refer you to the 9.5% market share drop for AMD from Q2 to Q3 2014 ...


You nailed it "comprehend". Comprehension is lacking in these peoples minds that can't understand that it is overall bad for AMD.

Gamers are the target market for this card in hopes that they will have a good experience and buy future products. Miners are in and out. AMD needs to build up a larger, loyal consumer base.

If a miner buys 100 cards, he is only 1 person spreading the word about said card. If 100 people buy the cards and like it, then they will tell others and will also be a potential future customer.

If they have a good experience then they can also recommend a Dell or Lenovo AIO or whatever to friends and family in the future. Miners aren't going to do that.

Get a grip man!


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TopicClocker*
> 
> What the... What's up with Kyle? That behavior is pretty bizarre.


He wasnt invited to the AMD event on macau so he went full Anti AMD and even made an article about this(instead of a professional article it was more like a rant)


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> He wasnt invited to the AMD event on macau so he went full Anti AMD and even made an article about this(instead of a professional article it was more like a rant)


he didn't go anti amd lol

https://hardforum.com/threads/how-much-does-kyle-hate-amd.1903198/

anyway...


----------



## Titanox

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> he didn't go anti amd lol
> 
> https://hardforum.com/threads/how-much-does-kyle-hate-amd.1903198/
> 
> anyway...


If your website has to post an article stating whether someones on your payroll hates a certain company, it sort of disproves the point the article tries to make.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> he didn't go anti amd lol
> 
> https://hardforum.com/threads/how-much-does-kyle-hate-amd.1903198/
> 
> anyway...


he did. but that someone tries to excuse his behaviour doesnt really hide the truth

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/05/27/from_ati_to_amd_back_journey_in_futility/

https://hardforum.com/threads/from-ati-to-amd-back-to-ati-a-journey-in-futility-h.1900681/


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> it's not a problem if they have sufficient stock at launch. Failure rates I can see, but overall most electrics only have a 1 year warranty now unless it's an extended warranty.
> 
> On the mining part, Ethereum is sensitive to memory speeds so it makes perfect sense. It's bitcoin hash rate is much higher and matches that of a 390/390x at stock.


Think about this, if miners go nuts for this card and buy them by the truck load, prices inflate to levels unreasonable for the intended purpose, and gamers buy nvidia. Mining takes a dump, and aside from all of the used cards on the market, amd has now gained 0 marketshare. That would be 2 of the last 3 generations went that way, next year people will say, "oh, no. I want a gpu for gaming so I'm going to get a nvidia, I don't mine stuff"

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> 
> 
> at least we know why the card cant even hit a higher clock
> 
> 1322mhz->147 watts


You can pull more than 150w from pcie+6pin. You should go back a few pages and read. Card boosts to 1600+ but atm isn't stable under heavy load. Some people are having issues under heavy load at base clock which points to driver issues.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Reference card testing so far: 1680 MHz can be set, but throttle back to ~1300 MHz right after going on heavy duty. The ref cooler is quiet but very weak
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This will be the case when spending money on a good custom card is actually worth it.


----------



## cranfam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> I don't understand why a lot of you are so critical of this cards performance. If it doesn't perform to your hypothetical lofty expectations, then this card isn't for you. I'm coming from a 280x and this card, if it performs near 390/x levels, I'll be more than happy. I've never seen so many whiney people in my life. The card is aimed at mainstream/entry level 1080p gamers, which is the vast majority of the pc gaming world. It was never intended to blow the doors off of the competition. At the $200 price point, this card can't be beat. End of discussion.


I agree. I look at this last week as the crescendo. Now everyone's falling back into realistic expectations for a $200 card. Unfortunately, the excitement can cause us to look at the reality of a situation as a disappointment.


----------



## Kuivamaa

I hope there will be 180W+ TDP AIB SKUs, clocked at 1.4 or higher with proper bios and coolers.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> It hurts AMD in two ways. The gamers who can't get their hands on cards swap over to NVIDIA (not by choice) and regaining a lost customer is really difficult - many will then stick to NVIDIA for life. Secondly, RMA rates on cards used for mining is 2-3x higher within the first two years (warranty). I've personally seen this with a sample size of several thousand units.
> That seems... Poor. I get 21.5 MH/s on my HD 7950s, something is definitely not right there.


Only get 20MH/s with 7970. The problem here is actual memory bandwidth. I do not think compression help mining at all. 290X get 32MH/s because of monstrous 512-Bit.


----------



## tkenietz

So if blue1512 is credible, (no offense to you, blue1512) and the card is capable* of boosting to 1600+, then it's not out of the realm of possibility that a custom could get close to...I'm not gonna say it


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> The problem here is actual memory bandwidth.


Memory bandwidth does seem proportional to hash rate:

24MH/s */* 30MH/s = 256GB/s */* 320GB/s


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Only get 20MH/s with 7970. The problem here is actual memory bandwidth. I do not think compression help mining at all. 290X get 32MH/s because of monstrous 512-Bit.


What clock speed and driver? I'm running at around 1,150-1,200 MHz and using 14.11.2 Beta (yes I know it's bloody ancient, but it's the best I've found).


----------



## slavovid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I believe the theory is that it drives up initial prices and keeps cards out of the hands of actual gamers, which hurts mindshare. Then the market is flooded with secondhand cards later, which hurts long term sales. At least that's what was said about the 290s.


There is a difference this time around AMD has planned for massive production of this card with even a 2-nd contract to produce at Samsung that everyone was questioning a few months ago and now we know the reasons behind it. So even if Miners want to buy a lot of theese cards there will be enough production of it.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Memory bandwidth does seem proportional to hash rate:
> 
> 24MH/s */* 30MH/s = 256GB/s */* 320GB/s


Not so sure about that hey, 1,250 MHz to 1,550 MHz on the memory does absolutely zero for my hashrate.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> So even if Miners want to buy a lot of theese cards there will be enough production of it.


The effect will be the same when all the miners flood the used market at once with their cards.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

If AMD is smart (or maybe it's retailers who do this, not sure), they'll limit purchases to two at a time. I remember that happening for the 980 Ti and such.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> If AMD is smart (or maybe it's retailers who do this, not sure), they'll limit purchases to two at a time. I remember that happening for the 980 Ti and such.


They should.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> If AMD is smart (or maybe it's retailers who do this, not sure), they'll limit purchases to two at a time. I remember that happening for the 980 Ti and such.


or reduce performance with drivers to avoid miners


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> I wouldn't mind a single 8-pin
> 
> 
> 
> A 6-pin connector is good for between 200 to 300 watts. *The 6-pin connector has 4 current carrying wires in it, the 8-pin has 6.*
> 
> The 75 W "rating" for the 6-pin connector is completely artificial if you have a good PSU.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *they BOTH have 3 lines of 12volts. old 6 pin could have 2 on cheap PSUs;* that is why there is 1 sensor on 6 pin but 2 sensors on 8 pin.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pin 2 is not defined on the 6-pin, pin 5 is a sense line. Often 2 is tied to +12v and 5 is grounded (and not supposed to carry current), *but they are not part of the 6-pin connector.* "Cheap PSUs" are actually the compliant ones here.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> source for your image?
> 
> 
> http://wenku.baidu.com/view/21e1d2573c1ec5da50e270e8.html
Click to expand...

Even if pin 2 is +12v, there's no corresponding ground path. And if there were, the connector would be identical to the 8-pin connector which supplies 150W, so it would be irrelevant anyway.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> I wouldn't mind a single 8-pin
> 
> 
> 
> A 6-pin connector is good for between 200 to 300 watts. *The 6-pin connector has 4 current carrying wires in it, the 8-pin has 6.*
> 
> The 75 W "rating" for the 6-pin connector is completely artificial if you have a good PSU.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *they BOTH have 3 lines of 12volts. old 6 pin could have 2 on cheap PSUs;* that is why there is 1 sensor on 6 pin but 2 sensors on 8 pin.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pin 2 is not defined on the 6-pin, pin 5 is a sense line. Often 2 is tied to +12v and 5 is grounded (and not supposed to carry current), *but they are not part of the 6-pin connector.* "Cheap PSUs" are actually the compliant ones here.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> source for your image?
> 
> 
> http://wenku.baidu.com/view/21e1d2573c1ec5da50e270e8.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if pin 2 is +12v, *there's no corresponding ground path*. And if there were, the connector would be identical to the 8-pin connector which supplies 150W, so it would be irrelevant anyway.
Click to expand...



read the specs bro.


----------



## spyshagg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Only get 20MH/s with 7970. The problem here is actual memory bandwidth. I do not think compression help mining at all. 290X get 32MH/s because of monstrous 512-Bit.


Both my 290x only do 28.4mh\s stock and 30.4 1060\1250

Tried them with different mboards and os. Still the same hash rate.


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> What clock speed and driver? I'm running at around 1,150-1,200 MHz and using 14.11.2 Beta (yes I know it's bloody ancient, but it's the best I've found).


better question would be what miner are you using?

I've seen best results with the claymore verison.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> I wouldn't mind a single 8-pin
> 
> 
> 
> A 6-pin connector is good for between 200 to 300 watts. *The 6-pin connector has 4 current carrying wires in it, the 8-pin has 6.*
> 
> The 75 W "rating" for the 6-pin connector is completely artificial if you have a good PSU.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *they BOTH have 3 lines of 12volts. old 6 pin could have 2 on cheap PSUs;* that is why there is 1 sensor on 6 pin but 2 sensors on 8 pin.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pin 2 is not defined on the 6-pin, pin 5 is a sense line. Often 2 is tied to +12v and 5 is grounded (and not supposed to carry current), *but they are not part of the 6-pin connector.* "Cheap PSUs" are actually the compliant ones here.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> source for your image?
> 
> 
> http://wenku.baidu.com/view/21e1d2573c1ec5da50e270e8.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if pin 2 is +12v, *there's no corresponding ground path*. And if there were, the connector would be identical to the 8-pin connector which supplies 150W, so it would be irrelevant anyway.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> read the specs bro.
Click to expand...

Well, it's not supposed to be a ground path. So, what do the two extra grounds do on the 8-pin connector, that allow the 3 +12v lines to provide more current?


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> better question would be what miner are you using?
> 
> I've seen best results with the claymore verison.


Ethminer 0.9.41


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> I wouldn't mind a single 8-pin
> 
> 
> 
> A 6-pin connector is good for between 200 to 300 watts. *The 6-pin connector has 4 current carrying wires in it, the 8-pin has 6.*
> 
> The 75 W "rating" for the 6-pin connector is completely artificial if you have a good PSU.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *they BOTH have 3 lines of 12volts. old 6 pin could have 2 on cheap PSUs;* that is why there is 1 sensor on 6 pin but 2 sensors on 8 pin.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pin 2 is not defined on the 6-pin, pin 5 is a sense line. Often 2 is tied to +12v and 5 is grounded (and not supposed to carry current), *but they are not part of the 6-pin connector.* "Cheap PSUs" are actually the compliant ones here.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> source for your image?
> 
> 
> http://wenku.baidu.com/view/21e1d2573c1ec5da50e270e8.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if pin 2 is +12v, *there's no corresponding ground path*. And if there were, the connector would be identical to the 8-pin connector which supplies 150W, so it would be irrelevant anyway.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> read the specs bro.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, it's not supposed to be a ground path. So, what do the two extra grounds do on the 8-pin connector, that allow the 3 +12v lines to provide more current?
Click to expand...

look i am in the same boat as you; after years of reading people quote "knowledge" and web site articles i was more than surprise to finally read the specs (PCI-SIG has a membership requirement) and see 3 12v wires spec'd for both connections; whereas 6 pin has two grounds one ground/sensor and 8 pin 3 grounds and two ground/sensors.

now whether or not 2 wire/6 pin pci-e connections (those cheap PSUs we both mentioned) had a blind eye turn towards them because two 18awg wire can safely deliver 75 watts would be a guess. though @Phaedrus2129 has been a product manager for a few PSU rebrands (eVGA and coolermaster) and may answer that.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> I wouldn't mind a single 8-pin
> 
> 
> 
> A 6-pin connector is good for between 200 to 300 watts. *The 6-pin connector has 4 current carrying wires in it, the 8-pin has 6.*
> 
> The 75 W "rating" for the 6-pin connector is completely artificial if you have a good PSU.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *they BOTH have 3 lines of 12volts. old 6 pin could have 2 on cheap PSUs;* that is why there is 1 sensor on 6 pin but 2 sensors on 8 pin.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pin 2 is not defined on the 6-pin, pin 5 is a sense line. Often 2 is tied to +12v and 5 is grounded (and not supposed to carry current), *but they are not part of the 6-pin connector.* "Cheap PSUs" are actually the compliant ones here.
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> source for your image?
> 
> 
> http://wenku.baidu.com/view/21e1d2573c1ec5da50e270e8.html
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even if pin 2 is +12v, *there's no corresponding ground path*. And if there were, the connector would be identical to the 8-pin connector which supplies 150W, so it would be irrelevant anyway.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> read the specs bro.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, it's not supposed to be a ground path. So, what do the two extra grounds do on the 8-pin connector, that allow the 3 +12v lines to provide more current?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> look i am in the same boat as you; after years of reading people quote "knowledge" and web site articles i was more than surprise to finally read the specs (PCI-SIG has a membership requirement) and see 3 12v wires spec'd for both connections; whereas 6 pin has two grounds one ground/sensor and 8 pin 3 grounds and two ground/sensors.
> 
> now whether or not 2 wire/6 pin pci-e connections (those cheap PSUs we both mentioned) had a blind eye turn towards them because two 18awg wire can safely deliver 75 watts would be a guess. though @Phaedrus2129 has been a product manager for a few PSU rebrands (eVGA and coolermaster) and may answer that.
Click to expand...

I haven't been able to find the actual spec sheet (the link you provided does not load for me) but everything I've read says that pin 2 is "not defined" but often +12v since the 8-pin requires it.

At any rate, we should be able to agree that the 75 watt limit is entirely artificial. The spec page for a mini-fit jr is 9 amps per pin, for 324 W on a 3-pair connection. Even if pin 2 were to be omitted, the "six pin" would still be rated for up to 216 W if wire gauge and trace size on either side were appropriate. I feel that the 75W limit was a result of some guy at PCI-SIG saying "surely GPUs won't need more than 150 W total."


----------



## JackCY

The 6/8pin PCIe power limits are a convention. Sure the 6pin connector and wires can pull much more practically. You just gotta mod the hardware because most is designed to fit within that power envelope and not to go over it. Means strong VRM, custom VBIOS, ... when it comes to GPU.


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Ethminer 0.9.41


drop that

use this instead if you have AMD cards

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1433925.0


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Ethminer 0.9.41
> 
> 
> 
> drop that
> 
> use this instead if you have AMD cards
> 
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1433925.0
Click to expand...

I never had good luck with Claymore, I've been using Genoil with a lot of success.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> drop that
> 
> use this instead if you have AMD cards
> 
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1433925.0


I need to try again, I was getting 0 MH with it cor some reason so swapped back to Ethminer.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> look i am in the same boat as you; after years of reading people quote "knowledge" and web site articles i was more than surprise to finally read the specs (PCI-SIG has a membership requirement) and see 3 12v wires spec'd for both connections; whereas 6 pin has two grounds one ground/sensor and 8 pin 3 grounds and two ground/sensors.
> 
> now whether or not 2 wire/6 pin pci-e connections (those cheap PSUs we both mentioned) had a blind eye turn towards them because two 18awg wire can safely deliver 75 watts would be a guess. though @Phaedrus2129 has been a product manager for a few PSU rebrands (eVGA and coolermaster) and may answer that.


There is a problem with the 18awg more than 75w argument.

That is only in open air at 25c. Once the wires are bundled/sleeved and in a warm operating environment the rating is MUCH less.

The ATX wiring standard derates everything as if it is operating in a 60c environment with zero airflow while being bundled. This gets you exactly 75w rating on 2x 18awg (number of grounds present).


----------



## spyshagg

There are talks at bitcointalk the 480 manages 28mh\s









Prepare for another 290x type mining assault


----------



## slavovid

Thinking about those miners if they want the RX480 they will want the Reference models right. Because the higher clocked AIB models with chance of even further OC will draw much more power that in the end will result is less gain / time mined. Correct ?


----------



## Asmodian

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spyshagg*
> 
> There are talks at bitcointalk the 480 manages 28mh\s
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prepare for another 290x type mining assault


One hopes that if there is another mining craze AMD will be better able to plan for it.

The major problem with mining was not lack of supply when potential customers wanted to buy them or even the large used market after the craze, it was that AMD's supply chain didn't expect the drop in mining when it happened so AMD was stuck with a lot of product that they could not sell. Remember all those "inventory write downs"?

Long term, fewer customers with their first GPU being AMD was bad too, but the short term financial pain was getting stuck with too much inventory.


----------



## Vowels

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> Thinking about those miners if they want the RX480 they will want the Reference models right. Because the higher clocked AIB models with chance of even further OC will draw much more power that in the end will result is less gain / time mined. Correct ?


Doubt it. If a card is a good miner, it's a good miner. It might take 2 or 3 more weeks to get ROI but if it's anything like the first mining craze, all models of a card are in demand by miners.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> Thinking about those miners if they want the RX480 they will want the Reference models right. Because the higher clocked AIB models with chance of even further OC will draw much more power that in the end will result is less gain / time mined. Correct ?


even if it consumes around 200w at 30MH/s they will buy them all
(RX 480)
and if the 470 isnt much slower at 150usd and 5MH/s less it would be even better


----------



## slavovid

The thing is if it consumes 110W and does a set amount of Mining / h then doubling the power consumption for 15% OC seems like a bad idea for wouldn't it make less profit / hour
Double the power consumption of a 6+8 pin AIB version getting +20% seems not so great.

Wouldn't it be better to get more reference cards / rigs rather than less cards but AIB versions not only they will cost extra 10-15% to buy but also will consume a lot more power for just 10-20% better mining ?


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> I haven't been able to find the actual spec sheet (the link you provided does not load for me) but everything I've read says that pin 2 is "not defined" but often +12v since the 8-pin requires it.
> 
> At any rate, we should be able to agree that the 75 watt limit is entirely artificial. The spec page for a mini-fit jr is 9 amps per pin, for 324 W on a 3-pair connection. Even if pin 2 were to be omitted, the "six pin" would still be rated for up to 216 W if wire gauge and trace size on either side were appropriate. I feel that the 75W limit was a result of some guy at PCI-SIG saying "surely GPUs won't need more than 150 W total."


sorry you can't get that site to load - it is java bug ridden so no surprise. it took me some time to find it as it seems those (actual) specs are hidden for national security or the like.









however yeah, we are in agreement. hope i didn't come off as an ass, i saw a few details you mentioned that i had hoped to . . . "help you" with. not saying you but i've seen some pretty wild theories about PEG power supply.

cheers and thanks for keeping the discussion civil; too rare around here anymore.

E:
side note 6K posts!


----------



## TopicClocker

So is Ethereum the new go to Cryptocurrency? How much could a 290X, RX 480 or GTX 970 earn in a day?

Sorry if this is a nooby question, I've been out of the Cryptocurrency game for quite some time and will spent quite some time researching it.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> The thing is if it consumes 110W and does a set amount of Mining / h then doubling the power consumption for 15% OC seems like a bad idea for wouldn't it make less profit / hour
> Double the power consumption of a 6+8 pin AIB version getting +20% seems not so great.
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to get more reference cards / rigs rather than less cards but AIB versions not only they will cost extra 10-15% to buy but also will consume a lot more power for just 10-20% better mining ?


undervolt and OC anyway if the performance is good. the increased power consumption wont be an issue. even for 250w card


----------



## Vowels

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> The thing is if it consumes 110W and does a set amount of Mining / h then doubling the power consumption for 15% OC seems like a bad idea for wouldn't it make less profit / hour
> Double the power consumption of a 6+8 pin AIB version getting +20% seems not so great.
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to get more reference cards / rigs rather than less cards but AIB versions not only they will cost extra 10-15% to buy but also will consume a lot more power for just 10-20% better mining ?


Miners will just buy the AIB cards and run them at reference settings if power consumption really gets out of hand with minor OCs. Also, if the 480s mine well, there will be no "wouldn't it be better to get more reference cards" because all the reference cards have already been bought by other miners.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> I haven't been able to find the actual spec sheet (the link you provided does not load for me) but everything I've read says that pin 2 is "not defined" but often +12v since the 8-pin requires it.
> 
> At any rate, we should be able to agree that the 75 watt limit is entirely artificial. The spec page for a mini-fit jr is 9 amps per pin, for 324 W on a 3-pair connection. Even if pin 2 were to be omitted, the "six pin" would still be rated for up to 216 W if wire gauge and trace size on either side were appropriate. I feel that the 75W limit was a result of some guy at PCI-SIG saying "surely GPUs won't need more than 150 W total."
> 
> 
> 
> sorry you can't get that site to load - it is java bug ridden so no surprise. it took me some time to find it as it seems those (actual) specs are hidden for national security or the like.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> however yeah, we are in agreement. hope i didn't come off as an ass, i saw a few details you mentioned that i had hoped to . . . "help you" with. not saying you but i've seen some pretty wild theories about PEG power supply.
> 
> cheers and thanks for keeping the discussion civil; too rare around here anymore.
Click to expand...

Agreed, I'm very big on skepticism and making sure the facts are known. I hate when people go into a discussion with bad information and then further distort the truth. I was always led to believe that pin 2 was not connected (based on lots of sources) but if the PCIe spec says it should be +12V then that is the final word. I'll have to look into the derating some more, but the fact is more than 75/150 watts flow through those connectors all the time without ill effects. The 295x2 is a great example, those only have two 8-pins for something like 500 W of power. I don't think the single 6-pin will be what limits overclockability on this card. I'm guessing thermals and then maybe the VRMs (though a 6+1 phase does seem in line with the needs of the card)


----------



## spyshagg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TopicClocker*
> 
> So is Ethereum the new go to Cryptocurrency? How much could a 290X, RX 480 or GTX 970 earn in a day?
> 
> Sorry if this is a nooby question, I've been out of the Cryptocurrency game for quite some time and will spent quite some time researching it.


0.22 eth per day at 30mh/s. About 3usd as of right now.

Edited


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spyshagg*
> 
> 0.44 eth per day at 30mh/s.


and if the difficulty increases less earning.more people doing this=more diff


----------



## TopicClocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spyshagg*
> 
> 0.44 eth per day at 30mh/s. About 6usd as of right now.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> and if the difficulty increases less earning.more people doing this=more diff


Oh okay cool, thanks! I think I might throw a GTX 970 and a R9 280 at it.

The RX 480 sounds to be pretty good at mining, it's probably going to be the go-to card for it since it has a fantastic price-point.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spyshagg*
> 
> 0.44 eth per day at 30mh/s. About 6usd as of right now.


Not even close. 0.347 Eth with 290 + 290X OCed 1200/1375 which is no possible in air sustained. Thats ~ 64 MH/s. Thats 5 USD a with current price. That is assuming free electricity, 24/7 operation and degradation of parts. Mining is never worth it in small scale. Only time you make some money is trading at the right time.


----------



## spyshagg

Sorry, I meant 0.44 per 60mh\s. (my hashrate with 2x290x @1060/1250)


----------



## iLeakStuff

Well that is disappointing to hear

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Well that is disappointing to hear
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/


No it's not. We know it for so long that this card will deliver 390-390x-980 performance.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Well that is disappointing to hear
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/


Why? 480 is probably ~5-7% upgrade over 390, so it's barely even a sidegrade unless you care about power draw.

It's exactly analogous to "upgrading" to 1070 from a 980 Ti.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Well that is disappointing to hear
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/


Not really. We knew that the RX 480 was going to have similar performance to the R9 390(X), so this pretty much confirms it.

The draw of the RX 480 is 8GB @ far lower power consumption and a killer price. For those of you that wanted something more... I'm sorry.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spyshagg*
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, I meant 0.44 per 60mh\s. (my hashrate with 2x290x @1060/1250)


Yeah but has been dropping each day. RX 480 will make ~ 2 USD a day with free electricity. Tell that to people here if it's worth it. Just to ROI for it would take 3.5 Months with current difficulty. It's stupid for people to buy cards for mining. People that do it really have other problems. It's basically too late to many anything now with Etherium unless you are a trader and do not need to mine to begin with.


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Well that is disappointing to hear
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/


It does not mean that the gpu performance is equal to a 390. It could be 20% faster and I wouldn't upgrade in that case.
And if it was 20% faster, it would match or improve a 390X as well.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Well Reference 480 vs Nitro 390 is a hard call. One had better cooler and quite operation.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Not really. We knew that the RX 480 was going to have similar performance to the R9 390(X), so this pretty much confirms it.
> 
> The draw of the RX 480 is 8GB @ far lower power consumption and a killer price. For those of you that wanted something more... I'm sorry.


It was more the disappointment that it was suppose to be a little faster than 390X and overclock to 1.5Ghz.
Right now it seems to perform close to 390, which cost $250 at the moment which 8GB 490 is suppose to cost.
And PCGH said their sample could not go over 1.4GHz.

Seems like the hype for this card seems to have gone overboard if the above is true


----------



## Kpjoslee

No doubt it is going to be a great card at that price, but there is a reason AMD set the price at $199-$229. Only the people who expected too much would be disappointed with 480 lol.


----------



## looniam

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/












that poor sod.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/


Yea, that will be a huge upgrade.


----------



## magnek

I had this... thing until May 2011. Then I upgraded to a GTS 350M (roughly 85% of a GT 240). Yeah you laugh now but that thing was still pretty good for 720p gaming.









Then I went from GTS 350M to 780M SLI (~GTX 780), and boy was that a true upgrade.


----------



## slavovid

But AMD should be ready for high demand.

They what to sell what 1million + cards right they have the TSMC and they got even a Samsung Contract to make them with.
In addition the RX480 is not rly a high end and crrently a lot of players are using slightly lower or equivalent and they won't be rushing in to make the transition from 970 or even 960 GTX to an RX480.
Maybe later but not on 29-th at least.

By the time ppl start wanting those cards desperately considering the fact that we already hear of good supply like everywhere it sounds even miners are predicted by AMD.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> But AMD should be ready for high demand.
> 
> They what to sell what 1million + cards right they have the TSMC and they got even a Samsung Contract to make them with.
> In addition the RX480 is not rly a high end and crrently a lot of players are using slightly lower or equivalent and they won't be rushing in to make the transition from 970 or even 960 GTX to an RX480.
> Maybe later but not on 29-th at least.
> 
> By the time ppl start wanting those cards desperately considering the fact that we already hear of good supply like everywhere it sounds even miners are predicted by AMD.


I don't think AMD uses TSMC.


----------



## Pnanasnoic

AMD might have a monster on its hands, its very good performance matched with its great price will be just the thing for those of us that haven't upgraded in few years. I'm coming from a gtx670 and before that a 4850. Like everyone else I'm really looking forward to some wide ranging benchmarks.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> I don't think AMD uses TSMC.


They use GloFo


----------



## slavovid

Oh ... not TSMC but GLOBALFOUNDRIES ... i am new to this don't judge me







and i am bad with names.

+ on the subject i just need to replace my 650 GTX ... so regardless if the performance of the RX480 is equal to 390 /390x / 980 or even better it still best possible cards for the money range that i can spare









So given the high supply i will eventually get one preferably the 1 model i like best.







and preferably before august -30 .... (Legion comes)

I read a discussion about AMD not being able to hold their end of the agreement with GloFo and then they made a contract with samsung for even more production lines. So people were wondering what is going on. And for a while now i think i know the answer it is to produce MASSIVE amounts of the Polaris 10/11 cards.

Edit: I just noticed something in another thread. Miners won't rly want the 8GB versions of this card as they don't have any benefit from the extra 4GB over the RX480-4GB version. Is that also correct and making it safe to asume they won't be looking for the 8GB versions as not to waste money on them?


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> Oh ... not TSMC but GLOBALFOUNDRIES ... i am new to this don't judge me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and i am bad with names.
> 
> + on the subject i just need to replace my 650 GTX ... so regardless if the performance of the RX480 is equal to 390 /390x / 980 or even better it still best possible cards for the money range that i can spare
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So given the high supply i will eventually get one preferably the 1 model i like best.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and preferably before august -30 .... (Legion comes)
> 
> I read a discussion about AMD not being able to hold their end of the agreement with GloFo and then they made a contract with samsung for even more production lines. So people were wondering what is going on. And for a while now i think i know the answer it is to produce MASSIVE amounts of the Polaris 10/11 cards.
> 
> Edit i just noticed something in another thread. Miners won't rly want the 8GB versions of this card as they don't have any benefit from the extra 4GB over the RX480-4GB version. Is that also correct and making it safe to asume they won't be looking for the 8GB versions as not to waste money on them?


AFAIK 14nm finfet lpp and lpe are a joint effort from Samsung and glofo.
And the thing with glofo was a take or pay arrangement for the wafers


----------



## iRUSH

I will be at Microcenter this Wednesday to snag one of these. Each store is shooting for 100 cards to start.

I'll start with a reference 4gb version and cover the worse case scenario. Provided it's not a mad house getting one.

My 10 am client had to cancel so it's my destiny to be at MC when they open instead lol


----------



## slavovid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> AFAIK 14nm finfet lpp and lpe are a joint effort from Samsung and glofo.
> And the thing with glofo was a take or pay arrangement for the wafers


As far as i know AMD has a contract to make a set amount of product per year and they were not managing to fill up what was expected from them so they suffered. In addition GloFo has licensed the 14nm from Samsung but then AMD goes and makes another contract with Samsung for even more production lines. So it's part of their plan to produce a lot of those polaris dies otherwise they won't need higher production line.

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/samaung-to-fab-14nm-gpus-for-amd.html

""Because Samsung Electronics and GF have same IP for 14-nano processing, chips that are designed by AMD will all be produced at both factories." said a person who is familiar with this industry. "If products are produced from both factories, AMD won't have to worry about a problem regarding lack of supplies.""


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> As far as i know AMD has a contract to make a set amount of product per year and they were not managing to fill up what was expected from them so they suffered. In addition GloFo has licensed the 14nm from Samsung but then AMD goes and makes another contract with Samsung for even more production lines. So it's part of their plan to produce a lot of those polaris dies otherwise they won't need higher production line.
> 
> http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/samaung-to-fab-14nm-gpus-for-amd.html
> 
> ""Because Samsung Electronics and GF have same IP for 14-nano processing, chips that are designed by AMD will all be produced at both factories." said a person who is familiar with this industry. "If products are produced from both factories, AMD won't have to worry about a problem regarding lack of supplies.""


That's pretty much exactly what I said. Lol

Take or pay means you use it or dont, you pay either way (usually a reduced rate but not much).

That was for 28nm tho


----------



## sage101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Well that is disappointing to hear
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/


It seems like you're just searching the entire internet looking for any bad news on AMD. I don't think AMD intended any1 with a R9 290/290X/390/390X to upgrade to the 480, most likely they were targeting the 7950/7970/380/380X/280/280X crowd.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sage101*
> 
> It seems like you're just searching the entire internet looking for any bad news on AMD. I don't think AMD intended any1 with a R9 290/290X/390/390X to upgrade to the 480, most likely they were targeting the 7950/7970/380/380X/280/280X crowd.


Exactly, aka the vast majority of the market which exists in that sub-$300 stratum.


----------



## magnek

It's pretty clear this card is marketed towards those still on 1st gen 28nm GPUs.

That said, people who care about power consumption would also find this a useful upgrade. And as multiple have mentioned, they'd be picking one up just to play with it.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Exactly, aka the vast majority of the market which exists in that sub-$300 stratum.


But no if the 480 cant match the 1070 or overclock to 1800 then it's a failure.

This forum has narrow perspective about the gpu market. The low mid range market actually has bad offers atm.


----------



## magnek

I don't think it matters the offers are bad atm because:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> A priest, a rabbi, and an atheist walk into the worlds only computer store on October Day (June 29th). One by one, the three men approach a seemingly knowledgeable salesperson and ask for a graphics card recommendation. The priest says he wants a monster card for all the new dx12 games coming out, the rabbi says he only plays indie games, and the atheist says he only wants to play one game- Ashes of the Singularity (weird I know)....
> 
> They all walk out with $250 GTX 960s *$449 1070 FE's*
> 
> 
> 
> FTFY
> 
> Remember Maxwell sucks at DX12 and is waiting for that magical async driver which is "coming soon™", so the only logical choice is to buy a Pascal card.
Click to expand...


----------



## ZealotKi11er

This is just like R9 285 lol.


----------



## SpeedyVT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Kind of agree with you there. AMD's power efficiency is till lagging behind nVidia. If there are no major change with Vega the AIO cooler of Fury X might appear again with big Vega.
> 
> But for now what 480 can bring on the table is enough tbh.


I don't think AMD's power this time is lagging, it's obvious some components are actually consuming more. Remember AMD has more cores than their counter part and each core is portion of consumption. We don't even know the performance of the card in games with the newest upcoming driver to know it's fps to watt ratio.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> This is just like R9 285 lol.


If it's = 290, sadly, yes it is. I would likely hold out to see the 1060 if that were the case

300% improvement over 7850 or bust!


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> If it's = 290, sadly, yes it is. I would likely hold out to see the 1060 if that were the case
> 
> 300% improvement over 7850 or bust!


R9 285 is faster then 280 but slower then 280X. If RX 480 falls in the same place its the same thing. People are hyping this way too much. Only difference this time is 16nm.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> R9 285 is faster then 280 but slower then 280X. If RX 480 falls in the same place its the same thing. People are hyping this way too much. Only difference this time is 16nm.


It all depends on why one hypes it I think. I'm hyping it as a much-needed shakeup in the budget / OEM category. How nice would it be if games were optimised around 390 performance as a minimum? Not only would our bare-minimum IQ improve, but optimisation itself could get to be simpler at its core with a tighter range between minimum and recommended performance requirements. The bargain- basement has been flooded for a decade now and it's about time somebody decided to work on the foundation instead of re-painting the front door every week.


----------



## TopicClocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> It all depends on why one hypes it I think. I'm hyping it as a much-needed shakeup in the budget / OEM category. How nice would it be if games were optimised around 390 performance as a minimum? Not only would our bare-minimum IQ improve, but optimisation itself could get to be simpler at its core with a tighter range between minimum and recommended performance requirements. *The bargain- basement has been flooded for a decade now and it's about time somebody decided to work on the foundation instead of re-painting the front door every week.*


Too true!


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> R9 285 is faster then 280 but slower then 280X. If RX 480 falls in the same place its the same thing. People are hyping this way too much. Only difference this time is 16nm.


I thought the RX 480 is also a great intro VR card? That's 390/970 territory by minimum default isn't it?


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> I thought the RX 480 is also a great intro VR card? That's 390/970 territory by minimum default isn't it?


Well, yeah, if it's 290/x performance at 8Gb VRAM with faster clocks then ipso facto it's 390/x performance.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Well that is disappointing to hear
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/


That's because it's a side grade, duh. Of course the 480 is better but performance wise they are similar, just 480 costs much less and eats much less power.
Want an enthusiast card, shell out enthusiast money for 1070 or wait for AMDs offerings.

480 is bringing enthusiast performance as we have known so far down into mainstream. Can't be said about overpriced 1070 one bit.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> R9 285 is faster then 280 but slower then 280X. If RX 480 falls in the same place its the same thing. People are hyping this way too much. Only difference this time is 16nm.


isn't 14nm from Glofo ?


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> ...
> So given the high supply i will eventually get one preferably the 1 model i like best.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and preferably before august -30 .... (Legion comes)
> ...


probably be able to max out legion with a 470 at 1080p, maybe even 1440p. My 7850 maxes out wod at 900p @ 65ish fps at 860mhz. If 480 gets to 980 levels it will be 3x more powerful

Could probably come close to maxing legion at 1080p with the rx460, leaked scores put it about 15% faster than a 7850


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> That's because it's a side grade, duh. Of course the 480 is better but performance wise they are similar, just 480 costs much less and eats much less power.
> Want an enthusiast card, shell out enthusiast money for 1070 or wait for AMDs offerings.
> 
> 480 is bringing enthusiast performance as we have known so far down into mainstream. Can't be said about overpriced 1070 one bit.


R9 285 did the same thing.


----------



## NYU87

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> That's because it's a side grade, duh. Of course the 480 is better but performance wise they are similar, just 480 costs much less and eats much less power.
> Want an enthusiast card, shell out enthusiast money for 1070 or wait for AMDs offerings.
> 
> 480 is bringing enthusiast performance as we have known so far down into mainstream. Can't be said about overpriced 1070 one bit.


What? 1070 brings better than Titan X performance for ~$399. Some people really are delusional.


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> That's because it's a side grade, duh. Of course the 480 is better but performance wise they are similar, just 480 costs much less and eats much less power.
> Want an enthusiast card, shell out enthusiast money for 1070 or wait for AMDs offerings.
> 
> 480 is bringing enthusiast performance as we have known so far down into mainstream. Can't be said about overpriced 1070 one bit.


We're already seeing 1070 AIB at 399.99. That's really not that overpriced....

RX 480 will most likely beat it price/performance, but the GTX 1070 really isn't that overpriced.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> R9 285 did the same thing.


285 launched at $250 and at the time r9 280s were selling for $200, a year before you could get 7950 for $175.

They perform within what, 1-3% of eachother?

Edit: yeah 1070 isnt overpriced from a p/p standpoint whatsoever. Even at $400 it's solid. I think maybe they mean overpriced because 970 price made people forget 670 and 770 price


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> overpriced 1070


nice joke bro


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> 285 launched at $250 and at the time r9 280s were selling for $200, a year before you could get 7950 for $175.
> 
> They perform within what, 1-3% of eachother?


R9 290 have been costing $200 for 2 years now.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> That's because it's a side grade, duh. Of course the 480 is better but performance wise they are similar, just 480 costs much less and eats much less power.
> Want an enthusiast card, shell out enthusiast money for 1070 or wait for AMDs offerings.
> 
> 480 is bringing enthusiast performance as we have known so far down into mainstream. Can't be said about overpriced 1070 one bit.


So because the 480 offers better value (but less performance), the 1070 is suddenly overpriced?

No... the Titan X was overpriced for the performance you got. Keep in mind, the 1070 is actually faster than a Titan X for less than half the cost.

The RX 480 is a sweet spot where performance meets value. No one will argue with you on that front.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> So because the 480 offers better value (but less performance), the 1070 is suddenly overpriced?
> 
> No... the Titan X was overpriced for the performance you got. Keep in mind, the 1070 is actually faster than a Titan X for less than half the cost.
> 
> The RX 480 is a sweet spot where performance meets value. No one will argue with you on that front.


Trades bows and loses once both are OCed.


----------



## Gungnir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> No... the Titan X was overpriced for the performance you got. Keep in mind, the 1070 is actually faster than a Titan X for less than half the cost.


A much more reasonable comparison for the 1070 is that it's around or slightly above a 980 Ti for ~2/3 the cost and a fair bit less power. Bringing any Titan into a discussion of price/performance is ridiculous; they've always been stupidly overpriced, the Titan X even more so since it lost its FP64 performance, which was pretty much the only thing the first two Titans had going for them.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gungnir*
> 
> A much more reasonable comparison for the 1070 is that it's around or slightly above a 980 Ti for ~2/3 the cost and a fair bit less power. Bringing any Titan into a discussion of price/performance is ridiculous; they've always been stupidly overpriced, the Titan X even more so since it lost its FP64 performance, which was pretty much the only thing the first two Titans had going for them.


I actually thought about using the 980 Ti, but if I had said the 980 Ti was overpriced, I have a feeling I would have had about 200 death threats in my PM box by morning.

I think the Titan X was overpriced compared to the 980 Ti as well, simply because AIB cards for the 980 Ti were usually faster than the Titan X anyway.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> R9 290 have been costing $200 for 2 years now.


Sure. But a 390 is an oc'd 290 and performs on the level of a 290x, 390x an oc'd 290x. Therefor, if a 480 at stock is between a 390 and 390x, it's faster than a stock 290x, much less a stock 290. when comparing apples to apples, the 480 is a performance upgrade. *all assuming it is actually between a 390 and 390x*

It's time for GoT season finale, bbl


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> Sure. But a 390 is an oc'd 290 and performs on the level of a 290x, 390x an oc'd 290x. Therefor, if a 480 at stock is between a 390 and 390x, it's faster than a stock 290x, much less a stock 290. when comparing apples to apples, the 480 is a performance upgrade. *all assuming it is actually between a 390 and 390x*
> 
> It's time for GoT season finale, bbl


Yeah but 290 to 390X performance difference is not that big. It's like 10-15% difference.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> Sure. But a 390 is an oc'd 290 and performs on the level of a 290x, 390x an oc'd 290x. Therefor, if a 480 at stock is between a 390 and 390x, it's faster than a stock 290x, much less a stock 290. when comparing apples to apples, the 480 is a performance upgrade. *all assuming it is actually between a 390 and 390x*
> 
> It's time for GoT season finale, bbl


And you can overclock 480 for more delta. Even on the stock cooler, an OCd 480 can edge out an OCd 390x comfortably.

Furthermore, with the potential of 1700 MHz boost clock on the GPU, if your balls are big enough you can flash to an custom BIOS with unlocked power target to test the limit of the ref board. Water is recommended btw.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> I actually thought about using the 980 Ti, but if I had said the 980 Ti was overpriced, I have a feeling I would have had about 200 death threats in my PM box by morning.
> 
> I think the Titan X was overpriced compared to the 980 Ti as well, simply because AIB cards for the 980 Ti were usually faster than the Titan X anyway.


I love how people assume no one overclocked the TX .. lol.

The TX has always outperformed the 980 ti max OC vs max OC especially at 4k and still does . A lot of people waterblocked them and ran them at the same clocks the 980ti is capable of (best AIB samples in the 1500s) and had the extra ram and cuda cores to go with it. As for a 1070 been faster than a Titan X , not in max OC vs max OC . In firestrike ultra there are no 1070 SLI rigs above the 9000 mark , i score 9525 with my gaming clocks and the 980ti is very near also - above the 1070.

There is only 1 card faster than the TX and that the 1080 .. by the time there will be anything worth upgrading too i would have had two years+ out of this TX .

For people buying now the 1070 obsoletes the 980 ti and TX for sure - cheaper and nearly as fast in OC vs OC, but no reason for owners of either to feel like the are missing something . They've had that performance for years now.


----------



## cranfam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> It was more the disappointment that it was suppose to be a little faster than 390X and overclock to 1.5Ghz.
> Right now it seems to perform close to 390, which cost $250 at the moment which 8GB 490 is suppose to cost.
> And PCGH said their sample could not go over 1.4GHz.
> 
> Seems like the hype for this card seems to have gone overboard if the above is true


I think your word choice is poor. Nothing official stated that the card was "suppose (sic) to...overclock to 1.5Ghz." Rumor mills put out that information. Being disappointed by rumors not being true (which we don't know what's true or false at this point), isn't wise. Now, if AMD had shown the RX 480 running at 1.5 at 65C, then I think disappointment is warranted.


----------



## ChevChelios

Titan X is overpriced no matter how you cut it with the existence of 980Ti, much less 1070 .. those extra 7-8% over 980Ti dont justify a $1000 unless you are made of money

but then again Titan X is supposed to be overpriced more or less, hence the round $1000 tag

especially when you need to buy a $100+ waterblock to OC it well (with 980Ti an aircooled AIB can be enough for 1500+)


----------



## awdrifter

AMD is doing this because they can't afford to design multiple dies like Nvidia. The cost of designing 14nm FinFET dies is supposed to be 3x more than 28nm.


----------



## dagget3450

Why is it so quiet 3 days from launch? What do we have that is the most credible leak so far? This is nuts for it to be so quiet. I guess the NDA is jun 29th at this rate?


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Titan X is overpriced no matter how you cut it with the existence of 980Ti, much less 1070 .. those extra 7-8% over 980Ti dont justify a $1000 unless you are made of money
> 
> but then again Titan X is supposed to be overpriced more or less, hence the round $1000 tag
> 
> especially when you need to buy a $100+ waterblock to OC it well (with 980Ti an aircooled AIB can be enough for 1500+)


TX overpriced yes no argument there. Nvidia is good at creaming every $$.

Still with some of the 980 ti users ugrading to 1080s , i would argue vs just buying 1 TX with waterblock back in April 2015 i'm not much worse off. I still have more vram than both and peformance is close to 1080 level max oc vs max oc. That 7-8 % helps keep the card closer to 1080 level than the 980 ti is so less need to upgrade than if i had a 980ti.

I can comfortably wait for 1080 ti or vega , so overall i'm not losing out really. The SMP feature is most likely the best thing about pascal so far, its a pity its going to take some time before it gets good support however.


----------



## helis4life

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *awdrifter*
> 
> AMD is doing this because they can't afford to design multiple dies like Nvidia. The cost of designing 14nm FinFET dies is supposed to be 3x more than 28nm.


Perhaps it is, but by all acounts Vega is a totally new architecture. If that is true AMD were designing Vega along side Polaris. And with regard to Nvidia doing that, do you mean designing P100 along with GP104?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dagget3450*
> 
> Why is it so quiet 3 days from launch? What do we have that is the most credible leak so far? This is nuts for it to be so quiet. I guess the NDA is jun 29th at this rate?


The hype train derailed a few days ago. The realisation that the RX480 is exactly what AMD claimed it to be is dawning on most people perhaps


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *helis4life*
> 
> Perhaps it is, but by all acounts Vega is a totally new architecture. If that is true AMD were designing Vega along side Polaris. And with regard to Nvidia doing that, do you mean designing P100 along with GP104?
> The hype train derailed a few days ago. The realisation that the RX480 is exactly what AMD claimed it to be is dawning on most people perhaps


Theres just nothing more to leak apart from actual game performance which is solidly under the NDA. WCCFtech and videocardz have really released pretty much every other detail.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> And you can overclock 480 for more delta. Even on the stock cooler, an OCd 480 can edge out an OCd 390x comfortably.
> 
> Furthermore, with the potential of 1700 MHz boost clock on the GPU, if your balls are big enough you can flash to an custom BIOS with unlocked power target to test the limit of the ref board. Water is recommended btw.


is it using 32 or 64 rops? does it gain more performance with OCing memory and stock core clock?


----------



## TopicClocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NYU87*
> 
> What? 1070 brings better than Titan X performance for ~$399. Some people really are delusional.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> We're already seeing 1070 AIB at 399.99. That's really not that overpriced....
> 
> RX 480 will most likely beat it price/performance, but the GTX 1070 really isn't that overpriced.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> nice joke bro


The GTX 1070 has been selling above it's MSRP in the UK for a couple of weeks now, the majority of cards are pretty much selling at founders edition prices.

I would say it can be considered overpriced since it seems that we are being gouged, however if it was selling for it's MSRP I wouldn't agree.

The GTX 970 didn't have this problem at all, many cards were available for the MSRP price point.

EuroGamer - Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 review
Quote:


> Nvidia has confirmed a £399/$450 price for the Founder's Edition, *while partner cards will hopefully come in at the target £330/$380.* Unless you really, really want a blower cooler (where the FE excels), we'd suggest waiting for the cheaper cards.


----------



## awdrifter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *helis4life*
> 
> Perhaps it is, but by all acounts Vega is a totally new architecture. If that is true AMD were designing Vega along side Polaris. And with regard to Nvidia doing that, do you mean designing P100 along with GP104?
> The hype train derailed a few days ago. The realisation that the RX480 is exactly what AMD claimed it to be is dawning on most people perhaps


Polaris and Vega are the same architecture, what I mean is AMD is only doing a mid-range die without a big die this generation. Probably due to they can only afford to design one die, so they chose the mid-range because of lower risk (smaller dies should be easier to make) and more volume. Hopefully once they get some experience this generation, the Vega generation will have a big die again on 7nm (Samsung said 10nm is going to be a short gen, and GF uses Samsung tech, so AMD might skip it like they did with 20nm).


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *awdrifter*
> 
> AMD is doing this because they can't afford to design multiple dies like Nvidia. The cost of designing 14nm FinFET dies is supposed to be 3x more than 28nm.


huh? AMD has 4 different dies for Polaris and Vega.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *awdrifter*
> 
> Polaris and Vega are the same architecture, what I mean is AMD is only doing a mid-range die without a big die this generation. Probably due to they can only afford to design one die, so they chose the mid-range because of lower risk (smaller dies should be easier to make) and more volume. Hopefully once they get some experience this generation, the Vega generation will have a big die again on 7nm (Samsung said 10nm is going to be a short gen, and GF uses Samsung tech, so AMD might skip it like they did with 20nm).


They will have big die parts.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *awdrifter*
> 
> Polaris and Vega are the same architecture, what I mean is AMD is only doing a mid-range die without a big die this generation. Probably due to they can only afford to design one die, so they chose the mid-range because of lower risk (smaller dies should be easier to make) and more volume. Hopefully once they get some experience this generation, the Vega generation will have a big die again on 7nm (Samsung said 10nm is going to be a short gen, and GF uses Samsung tech, so AMD might skip it like they did with 20nm).


It is more cost effective to design a large die and then cut it down for smaller versions of said chip. Which is exactly what AMD did with Vega and Polaris. Both Polaris and Vega are going to be GCN 4.0 on 14nm FinFET. The reason Vega is planned for 2017 is due to HBM2. Mass production of Hynix HBM2 memory doesn't start until Q3 2016...


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *awdrifter*
> 
> Polaris and Vega are the same architecture, what I mean is AMD is only doing a mid-range die without a big die this generation. Probably due to they can only afford to design one die, so they chose the mid-range because of lower risk (smaller dies should be easier to make) and more volume. Hopefully once they get some experience this generation, the Vega generation will have a big die again on 7nm (Samsung said 10nm is going to be a short gen, and GF uses Samsung tech, so AMD might skip it like they did with 20nm).


I have not heard that before so i'm not if thats correct. AMD have not said they are not making Vega on 14nm. I expect they would. They are just following NVs route of mid range die out first then larger die next.

The big celebration they have just had could be its taping out - if that's right then its definitely taped out on 14nm vs 7nm due to the tech available now. However they will want to respin in a few times to tune it hence delay.


----------



## NFL

Supposedly RX 480 benchmarks run at 1080p Ultra settings. Yellow is at stock, red is after 1350/2200mhz overclock


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Yeah but 290 to 390X performance difference is not that big. It's like 10-15% difference.


17% @ 1440p

So if 480 split the difference between the 390 and 390x, it would be 12.5% over stock 290.

Now, with all that out of the way, If the difference between a 390x and 390 is 8%, and the 480 landed in the middle, or, 4% over the 390 'reference', for $230, which is $50 less than custom 390s which are on average 3% faster than a 'reference' 390.
What you end up with, assuming you buy your card and never touch the settings, is 1% faster for $50 less.

That's far from the bargain that this card is hyped to be.

Not hating, but this card would need to oc pretty well to be impressive at all if current leaks are accurate


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> I actually thought about using the 980 Ti, but if I had said the 980 Ti was overpriced, I have a feeling I would have had about 200 death threats in my PM box by morning.
> 
> I think the Titan X was overpriced compared to the 980 Ti as well, simply because AIB cards for the 980 Ti were usually faster than the Titan X anyway.


Death threats? lol a bit dramatic don't you think?

Anyway i'll say it: 980 Ti was overpriced as well, but since most people focused on comparing it to the _egregiously_ overpriced Titan X, it seemed like good value.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> 
> 
> Supposedly RX 480 benchmarks run at 1080p Ultra settings. Yellow is at stock, red is after 1350/2200mhz overclock


If true that seems to be scaling well.


----------



## maynard14

https://imgur.com/a/3iTkS#8CdoVOw

guys look at the benchmark and info, although in chinese


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maynard14*
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/3iTkS#8CdoVOw
> 
> guys look at the benchmark and info, although in chinese


5609 FSE graphics score puts it ~6% behind stock 980:



So as expected, stock is ~980 performance.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> 
> 
> Supposedly RX 480 benchmarks run at 1080p Ultra settings. Yellow is at stock, red is after 1350/2200mhz overclock


8.5-14% scaling on a 6.5% core overclock and a 10% memory overclock?


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maynard14*
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/3iTkS#8CdoVOw
> 
> guys look at the benchmark and info, although in chinese


Would corroborate what blue1512 said was possible. Tho he said it down clocks to the 1300s under load


----------



## hokk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *awdrifter*
> 
> Polaris and Vega are the same architecture, *what I mean is AMD is only doing a mid-range die without a big die this generation.* Probably due to they can only afford to design one die, so they chose the mid-range because of lower risk (smaller dies should be easier to make) and more volume. Hopefully once they get some experience this generation, the Vega generation will have a big die again on 7nm (Samsung said 10nm is going to be a short gen, and GF uses Samsung tech, so AMD might skip it like they did with 20nm).


no.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> So as expected, stock is ~980 performance.


AMDs new mid-range 14nm chip can barely compete with a 2 year old 28nm mid-range chip? This is definitely going to be a failed product launch. AMD can toot all they want about pricing but there is no excuse in launching such a poor performance product at such a price when you are competing against a 2 year old chip. I expected performance to be near or surpassing Fury. Another Major Disappointment indeed.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maynard14*
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/3iTkS#8CdoVOw
> 
> guys look at the benchmark and info, although in chinese


Installed drivers from CD, yeah those are sure to be the latest release.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> AMDs new mid-range 14nm chip can barely compete with a 2 year old 28nm mid-range chip? This is definitely going to be a failed product launch. AMD can toot all they want about pricing but there is no excuse in launching *such a poor performance product at such a price*. I expected performance to be near or surpassing Fury. Another Major Disappointment indeed.


Nice troll , just without any correct facts. The 980 was THE top performing chip released at the time. So it was priced as a Top tier chip - not mid range pricing like this card. It was mid range in the maxwell lineup but the price strategy was completely different.

You need to read about the market AMD are going for with this card , its great performance for that market and its priced accordingly. Since when was a 230mm die going to be the high performance gpu ?? lol.

I'm sure it has not clocked like they wanted it too .. or they are scared of clocking it into the 1600s due to being behind on perf/watt , the AIB cards will tell us that in time to come. Either way its priced right - absolutely right for the ref card and from all reports gives more performance per $$ than the 1070.

Performance will pass Fury on the AIB cards , just wait and see. Again its about the target market with the ref card and 1080p monitors, not a lot of point in adding more $$ for a better cooler etc with custom pcb etc for 1080p.

Also looking forward to seeing a 200$ card get close in dx12 games to a $380 (cough $400+) card in dx12.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> AMDs new mid-range 14nm chip can barely compete with a 2 year old 28nm mid-range chip? This is definitely going to be a failed product launch. AMD can toot all they want about pricing but there is no excuse in launching such a poor performance product at such a price when you are competing against a 2 year old chip. I expected performance to be near or surpassing Fury. Another Major Disappointment indeed.




Did you miss all the leaks pouring out of sites last week? It's been known for a while now 480 would have around 980 performance at stock.


----------



## nagle3092

This comment...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> AMDs new mid-range 14nm chip can barely compete with a 2 year old 28nm mid-range chip? This is definitely going to be a failed product launch. AMD can toot all they want about pricing but there is no excuse in launching such a poor performance product at such a price when you are competing against a 2 year old chip. I expected performance to be near or surpassing Fury. Another Major Disappointment indeed.


With this quote in your sig....
Quote:


> You are young, my son, and, as the years go by, time will change and even reverse many of your present opinions. Refrain therefore awhile from setting yourself up as a judge of the highest matters


Maybe time to take your own advice?


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> AMDs new mid-range 14nm chip can barely compete with a 2 year old 28nm mid-range chip? This is definitely going to be a failed product launch. AMD can toot all they want about pricing but there is no excuse in launching such a poor performance product at such a price when you are competing against a 2 year old chip. I expected performance to be near or surpassing Fury. Another Major Disappointment indeed.


I think someone missed the memo on 14/16nm wafer costs. You still get a good deal.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> I expected performance to be near or surpassing Fury. Another Major Disappointment indeed.


Who's fault is that?


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> AMDs new mid-range 14nm chip can barely compete with a 2 year old 28nm mid-range chip? This is definitely going to be a failed product launch. AMD can toot all they want about pricing but there is no excuse in launching such a poor performance product at such a price when you are competing against a 2 year old chip. I expected performance to be near or surpassing Fury. Another Major Disappointment indeed.


I honestly can't tell if you're trolling or...
Is 980 performance not near fury? 13% at 1440p, 5% at 1080p... are you disappointed that you aren't getting more for $200 or are you disappointed that this isn't a higher end card despite the word 'mainstream' being repeated countless times?

I would at least wait till launch before you light the torch and grab the pitchfork


----------



## blue1512

I just realized that the VRM is located quite far away from the fan and run extremely hot. Maybe this is what hold the card back at this moment









AMD really had to cut many thing to fit the price range.


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> Who's fault is that?


Still waiting on those real life results.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> 
> 
> Did you miss all the leaks pouring out of sites last week? It's been known for a while now 480 would have around 980 performance at stock.


I have been saying it for weeks now. A product launched at the performance of a R9 390X/GTX 980 is a failure in my eyes, especially at a $229 price point. I have been touting the same horn ever since AMDs declaration to conquer the mainstream markets a couple months back. R9 390s have been available for $250 or less for months now. Repackaging that performance into a smaller die to save costs and then delivering it at the same price isn't exactly groundbreaking.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> This comment...
> With this quote in your sig....
> Maybe time to take your own advice?


Your views of life are rather limited if you believe that an expectation of a future product is worthy of being one of the highest matters in life


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> I just realized that the VRM is located quite far away from the fan and run extremely hot. Maybe this is what hold the card back at this moment
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMD really had to cut many thing to fit the price range.


The are covered by the metal plate on the shroud, should be fine.



Otherside


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Robenger*
> 
> Still waiting on those real life results.


AMD quoted 390/390X performance and all leaks point to that?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> are you disappointed that you aren't getting more for $200 or are you disappointed that this isn't a higher end card despite the word 'mainstream' being repeated countless times?


Truth be told, more disappointed in the lack of competition in this market.

Also, since when did the word "mainstream" become synonymous with sup-par performance from 3 years ago?


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> The are covered by the metal plate on the shroud, should be fine.
> 
> 
> 
> Otherside


Still quite far compared to the 290x, which has the VRM right under the fan. And as I said the fan on RX 480 is quite weak for some reason.


----------



## NYU87

And some posters were saying its going to be as fast as 980ti/1070... Speedvt?


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Truth be told, more disappointed in the lack of competition in this market.
> 
> Also, since when did the word "mainstream" become synonymous with sup-par performance from 3 years ago?


I assume you're talking about the 290/x? I don't see how they were sub-par. And have you not paid any attention to the mainstream segment? The 960 < 770 and the 380x is 30% slower than the 290.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> The are covered by the metal plate on the shroud, *should be fine*.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Otherside


AMD could have easily shaved off 2" off the length of the card if they had designed the PCB better. If they were dead set on using such a small heat sink, would have been better to move the VRM to the right of the GPU and have the GPU sit further to left on the PCB similar to the R9 Nano.


Spoiler: RX 480









Spoiler: R9 Nano






Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> I assume you're talking about the 290/x? I don't see how they were sub-par. And have you not paid any attention to the mainstream segment? The 960 < 770 and the 380x is 30% slower than the 290.


Hawaii was fine 3 years ago... Tahiti was 4.5 years ago... It appears that quite a few individuals here really have lowered their expectations...


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> AMDs new mid-range 14nm chip can barely compete with a 2 year old 28nm mid-range chip? This is definitely going to be a failed product launch. AMD can toot all they want about pricing but there is no excuse in launching such a poor performance product at such a price when you are competing against a 2 year old chip. I expected performance to be near or surpassing Fury. Another Major Disappointment indeed.










The 980 was Nvidia's flagship video card in fall 2014 and cost $550+. The 480 is a $200 budget card that will beat it at max OC only 20 months later.

Troll attempt = Fail


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> AMD could have easily shaved off 2" off the length of the card if they had designed the PCB better. If they were dead set on using such a small heat sink, would have been better to move the VRM to the right of the GPU and have the GPU sit further to left on the PCB similar to the R9 Nano.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: RX 480
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: R9 Nano
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hawaii was fine 3 years ago... Tahiti was 4.5 years ago... It appears that quite a few individuals here really have lowered their expectations...


But with the power connecter hang off the back.. lol silly when length is one of your selling points

Edit: didn't see reply to me. why reference tahiti?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> The 980 was Nvidia's flagship video card in fall 2014 and cost $550+. The 480 is a $200 budget card that will beat it at max OC *only 21.5 months later.*


FTFY

The card the RX 480 is replacing was released 32 months ago and variations of said card have been readily available at or below $300 for over a year now... But for the sake of this argument, we should ignore those facts


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> But with the power connecter hang off the back.. lol silly when length is one of your selling points
> 
> Edit: didn't see reply to me. why reference tahiti?


to be fair in most small format cases, you more limited by height than you are length. Considering most have been designed for larger gpus than the nano.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> AMD could have easily shaved off 2" off the length of the card if they had designed the PCB better. If they were dead set on using such a small heat sink, would have been better to move the VRM to the right of the GPU and have the GPU sit further to left on the PCB similar to the R9 Nano.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: RX 480
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: R9 Nano
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hawaii was fine 3 years ago... Tahiti was 4.5 years ago... It appears that quite a few individuals here really have lowered their expectations...


Let the miners use the reference. Used to be meant for watercooling like tahiti and hawaii, but these 480s are so cheap that watercooling them do not make sense. AIBs will work for the rest.

Don't expect much for a $250 card. My first 290 cost $400 at launch.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> FTFY
> 
> The card the RX 480 is replacing was released 32 months ago and variations of said card have been readily available at or below $300 for over a year now...


And? This card is $200 and is faster, with better clocks and while consuming half the power. Remind me again what powerhouse Nvidia currently has at $200???

Sorry, you lose.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> Edit: didn't see reply to me. why reference tahiti?


You brought up the R9 380X which is just a rebranded HD 7970.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> And? This card is $200 and is faster hike consuming half the power. Remind me again what powerhouse Nvidia currently has at $200???
> 
> Sorry, you lose.


Are you seriously advocating for the higher pricing brought upon by lack of competition? The only loss here is consumer surplus.


----------



## lolerk52

I'm not disappointed in price/perf, I'm disappointed in AMD's engineers.

So you're telling me NVIDIA just shrunk Maxwell, while AMD did a heavy rework of their uArch, and they still can't catch up in perf/mm^2? Or even come close? And on a denser node no less?

Then there's the matter of extracting the raw performance out of the card. It's 5.8TFLOPS, the 390x is 5.9TFLOPS. Where is that uArch work if all we're getting is 390x perf?

Where is that Primitive Discard Accelerator? Instruction pre-fetch? Improved shader efficiency?

You're telling me all of that couldn't even bring more than 2% perf improvement?


----------



## LAKEINTEL

Maybe you should blame nvidia for making this card look like a miracle worker in power/dollar.

seriously though, the 200 dollar price mark is more important than beating the fury. Exactly what precedent is AMD running afoul other than the fact that they were a steal more than a year ago too?

edit: ignore this post.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> Let the miners use the reference. Used to be meant for watercooling like tahiti and hawaii, but these 480s are so cheap that watercooling them do not make sense. AIBs will work for the rest.


The reference design wouldn't even benefit from watercooling if it is power limited...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> Don't expect much for a $250 card. My first 290 cost $400 at launch.


My first 290X cost $320 a month after launch


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> I'm not disappointed in price/perf, I'm disappointed in AMD's engineers.
> 
> So you're telling me NVIDIA just shrunk Maxwell, while AMD did a heavy rework of their uArch, and they still can't catch up in perf/mm^2? Or even come close? And on a denser node no less?
> 
> Then there's the matter of extracting the raw performance out of the card. It's 5.8TFLOPS, the 390x is 5.9TFLOPS. Where is that uArch work if all we're getting is 390x perf?
> 
> Where is that Primitive Discard Accelerator? Instruction pre-fetch? Improved shader efficiency?
> 
> You're telling me all of that couldn't even bring more than 2% perf improvement?


Where are the official performance numbers that you seem to be basing your assumptions on? WCCF leaks? The point is that AMD was never targeting Nvidia flagship performance with this $200 card. They will release a proper 390X successor later...


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LAKEINTEL*
> 
> Maybe you should blame nvidia for making this card look like a miracle worker in power/dollar.
> 
> seriously though, the 200 dollar price mark is more important than beating the fury. Exactly what precedent is AMD running afoul other than the fact that they were a steal more than a year ago too?


Maybe some got influenced by the hype train so much expecting 980 Ti performance from a $200 card.lol

We don't even know if the proper drivers are out. Knowing AMD . . . it could be a few weeks after launch.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> I'm not disappointed in price/perf, I'm disappointed in AMD's engineers.
> 
> So you're telling me NVIDIA just shrunk Maxwell, while AMD did a heavy rework of their uArch, and they still can't catch up in perf/mm^2? Or even come close? And on a denser node no less?
> 
> *Then there's the matter of extracting the raw performance out of the card. It's 5.8TFLOPS, the 390x is 5.9TFLOPS. Where is that uArch work if all we're getting is 390x perf?*
> 
> Where is that Primitive Discard Accelerator? Instruction pre-fetch? Improved shader efficiency?
> 
> You're telling me all of that couldn't even bring more than 2% perf improvement?


You're looking at it the wrong way. At little more than half the die size of Hawaii (232mm² vs 438mm²), with 18% less shaders and only 20% higher clockspeed, it manages to match 390X in performance. I think that's not a bad achievement at all.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> I'm not disappointed in price/perf, I'm disappointed in AMD's engineers.
> 
> So you're telling me NVIDIA just shrunk Maxwell, while AMD did a heavy rework of their uArch, and they still can't catch up in perf/mm^2? Or even come close? And on a denser node no less?
> 
> Then there's the matter of extracting the raw performance out of the card. It's 5.8TFLOPS, the 390x is 5.9TFLOPS. Where is that uArch work if all we're getting is 390x perf?
> 
> Where is that Primitive Discard Accelerator? Instruction pre-fetch? Improved shader efficiency?
> 
> You're telling me all of that couldn't even bring more than 2% perf improvement?


Nvidia launches a new mid-grade chip = ~10% higher performance than preceding top tier offering.

AMD launches a new mid-grade chip = ~15-20 lower performance than preceding top tier offering

Keep in mind that this is the first time in history of GPU product launches that a new mid-grade chip didn't meet or exceed the performance of a previous generation top tier offering.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> You're looking at it the wrong way. At little more than half the die size of Hawaii (232mm² vs 438mm²), with 18% less shaders and only 20% higher clockspeed, it manages to match 390X in performance. I think that's not a bad achievement at all.


See above.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Where are the official performance numbers that you seem to be basing your assumptions on? WCCF leaks? The point is that AMD was never targeting Nvidia flagship performance with this $200 card. They will release a proper 390X successor later...


If it was WCCFTech then I would be happy because R9 Nano perf means a good 15% in uArch improvements.

I'm basing it on us assuming 390X perf. If it IS 390x perf, Polaris is an engineering dud saved as a product by a low price point.


----------



## Tisser12

So how long after launch do you think we'll have to wait for aib cards? Will the pricing be around the same?? This will be the first card I've paid attention to/witnessed launch so I have no idea about the time frame/cost diffferences that happen. I've been dreaming of a new video card ever since I built my PC and as soon as I heard about the rx480 I was sold. But I'm a bigger fan (no pun intended) of dual fan coolers and not so much of reference designs.

Also, I don't know a whole lot, but you guys had said there's no reason to water cool this card, but you could build a decently cheap loop that would work just fine. Just IMO. I had thought about it if the aib cards took too long or cost too much.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> Maybe some got influenced by the hype train so much expecting 980 Ti performance from a $200 card.lol
> 
> We don't even know if the proper drivers are out. Knowing AMD . . . it could be a few weeks after launch.


We still don't KNOW anything in regards to finalized performance numbers and yet the trolls are already starting to climb out of the woodwork. AMD would have to sell a $200 480 that beats The 1080 by 50% in order for the fanboys to ever give them any credit. And even then they would probably say that the cooler was a cheap piece of trash.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> I'm not disappointed in price/perf, I'm disappointed in AMD's engineers.
> 
> So you're telling me NVIDIA just shrunk Maxwell, while AMD did a heavy rework of their uArch, and they still can't catch up in perf/mm^2? Or even come close? And on a denser node no less?
> 
> Then there's the matter of extracting the raw performance out of the card. It's 5.8TFLOPS, the 390x is 5.9TFLOPS. Where is that uArch work if all we're getting is 390x perf?
> 
> Where is that Primitive Discard Accelerator? Instruction pre-fetch? Improved shader efficiency?
> 
> You're telling me all of that couldn't even bring more than 2% perf improvement?


I think if you look at uArch performance increases vs 390x and what that could achieve i would put that in the realm of what will be added in drivers to come. Comparing day 1 drivers vs mature drivers remember. Also given the uArch performance may be substantial it may take some time for it to fully perform.

I can almost gaurantee things will improve for this card performance wise, where as i'm not so sure about the 390x.


----------



## Poisoner

200 bucks for a card that will beat my gtx 780 into the ground? I'll take two and water cool them both.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> And even then they would probably say that the cooler was a cheap piece of trash.


The cooler *IS* a cheap piece of trash









Does that make me a fanboy?


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> You're looking at it the wrong way. At little more than half the die size of Hawaii (232mm² vs 438mm²), with 18% less shaders and only 20% higher clockspeed, it manages to match 390X in performance. I think that's not a bad achievement at all.


So... Zero uArch inprovements? Both cards have near identical raw shader performance, but two generations (one being touted as a near complete rework) are separating them. And yet they have identical performance? Where is the uArch work?


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> *Nvidia launches a new mid-grade chip = ~10% higher performance than preceding top tier offering.*
> Keep in mind that this is the first time in history of GPU product launches that a new mid-grade chip didn't meet or exceed the performance of a previous generation top tier offering.
> See above.


Since when is a $700 1080 a mid-grade card (or even a $450 1070 for that matter)? And since when do you compare performance of a $200 budget card with that of a flagship? This card is not a replacement for the 390X. It's launching for half the price of the 390X for God sake!

Are you finished? I could do this all night...


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Nvidia launches a new mid-grade chip = ~10% higher performance than preceding top tier offering.
> 
> AMD launches a new mid-grade chip = ~15-20 lower performance than preceding top tier offering
> 
> Keep in mind that this is the first time in history of GPU product launches that a new mid-grade chip didn't meet or exceed the performance of a previous generation top tier offering.
> See above.


Huh that's actually a good point.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> So... Zero uArch inprovements? Both cards have near identical raw shader performance, but two generations (one being touted as a near complete rework) are separating them. And yet they have identical performance? Where is the uArch work?


Well the 390X also has 50% higher memory bandwidth (384 GB/s vs 480's 256 GB/s), so I guess we can say the memory compression is worth at least that much.


----------



## Orthello

I don't get why when AMD attempts a small die gpu to capture the low - mid GPU market people say its a fail as its not like nvidia with their 50% larger die beating the last gen by 10% (1080 only).

If AMD had a 1080 sized die then yes , they should get a bollocking and rightly so for not getting similar gains vs last gen like nvidia.

AMD didn't turn up to the big GPU fight with this GPU. I doubt any reviews will state they did either (apart from Hardocp ...)

Vega is the gpu that will compete with the 1070/1080 and beyond , i would like it to be here right now but we just have to wait. Its not like NV released anything to get excited about if you own 980ti or TX .. so yeah there is no upgrade paths really for the top end of either camp yet.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Huh that's actually a good point.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well the 390X also has 50% higher memory bandwidth (384 GB/s vs 480's 256 GB/s), so I guess we can say the memory compression is worth at least that much.


No it isn't a good point. The 480 at $200 is not a mid grade product. Hell, I paid more for my 560Ti back in 2011 and it didn't even match a 470, much less the 480...


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Huh that's actually a good point.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well the 390X also has 50% higher memory bandwidth (384 GB/s vs 480's 256 GB/s), so I guess we can say the memory compression is worth at least that much.


That's straight from Tonga.
The R9 285 with 176GB/s bandwidth had more effective bandwidth than Hawaii.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> We still don't KNOW anything in regards to finalized performance numbers and yet the trolls are already starting to climb out of the woodwork. AMD would have to sell a $200 480 that beats The 1080 by 50% in order for the fanboys to ever give them any credit. And even then they would probably say that the cooler was a cheap piece of trash.


If it was R9 Nano or Fury Air performance, I would be happy. That's a decent uArch improvement.


----------



## Gungnir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Nvidia launches a new mid-grade chip = ~10% higher performance than preceding top tier offering.
> 
> AMD launches a new mid-grade chip = ~15-20 lower performance than preceding top tier offering
> 
> Keep in mind that this is the first time in history of GPU product launches that a new mid-grade chip didn't meet or exceed the performance of a previous generation top tier offering.
> See above.


This is why "mid-grade" is a terrible term for Gx104 chips. P10 and GP104 are in very different size categories, so your comparison doesn't make any sense. A bigger Polaris at ~310-320mm^2 would give a 980 Ti a run for its money, too, but since P10 is very similar in size to Pitcairn rather than GK104/Tahiti/whatever, it's not going to get that kind of performance.

NV's competition to Polaris 10 is GP106, which we haven't seen in any way, shape, or form yet. AMD's competition to GP104 is Vega 10, which again, we haven't seen yet. Comparing GP104 to Polaris 10 is like comparing Pitcairn to GK104.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> So... Zero uArch inprovements? Both cards have near identical raw shader performance, but two generations (one being touted as a near complete rework) are separating them. And yet they have identical performance? Where is the uArch work?


980ti cores - 2816

1080 cores - 2560

Now think about how high the clock speed has to be on the 1080 to make a significant increase in performance.

Nothing spectacular there either.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gungnir*
> 
> This is why "mid-grade" is a terrible term for Gx104 chips. P10 and GP104 are in very different size categories, so your comparison doesn't make any sense. A bigger Polaris at ~310-320mm^2 would give a 980 Ti a run for its money, too, but since P10 is very similar in size to Pitcairn rather than GK104/Tahiti/whatever, it's not going to get that kind of performance.
> 
> NV's competition to Polaris 10 is GP106, which we haven't seen in any way, shape, or form yet. AMD's competition to GP104 is Vega 10, which again, we haven't seen yet. Comparing GP104 to Polaris 10 is like comparing Pitcairn to GK104.


If you look at perf/mm^2, it should have been in Fury X territory in comparison to Pascal. So saying "small die" doesn't save it from an engineering stand point.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> 980ti cores - 2816
> 
> 1080 cores - 2560
> 
> Now think about how high the clock speed has to be on the 1080 to make a significant increase in performance.


Exactly. Nvidia HAD to get 1800+MHz out of GP104 just to beat the 980Ti. There is no architectural performance increase with Pascal vs Maxwell; it's all node shrink and clock speed advantage.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Since when is a $700 1080 a mid-grade card (or even a $450 1070 for that matter)? And since when do you compare performance of a $200 budget card with that of a flagship? This card is not a replacement for the 390X. It's launching for half the price of the 390X for God sake!
> 
> Are you finished? I could do this all night...


You could sell a turd for a low price, doesn't mean it's not a turd.

I'm looking at it strictly from the engineering standpoint. If it's 390x performance, zero uArch improvements in shader efficiency have been made.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> No it isn't a good point. The 480 at $200 is not a mid grade product. Hell, I paid more for my 560Ti back in 2011 and it didn't even match a 470, much less the 480...


Exactly, people are just using garbage for the sake of their argument up to this point.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Nvidia launches a new mid-grade chip = ~10% higher performance than preceding top tier offering.
> 
> AMD launches a new mid-grade chip = ~15-20 lower performance than preceding top tier offering


You might need to look at the tiger picture for a while.


----------



## SoloCamo

This thread is ridiculous and proves why AMD has such a hard time regaining market share. Even when they have a clear winner on their hands (even if the card only matched a 390, not 390x/980) at a great price they still get called out for not doing enough. Nvidia has ZERO cards that can touch this, zero.

It's ridiculous how when a 1080 is *not that much faster at max OC* vs a 980ti or Titan-X (at a ridiclous price) and is a card mean't for people on vanilla 980's/780ti'sto upgrade it's hailed as god tier. Yet AMD does something similar for the lower end of the price point and after far better value per dollar, it's labeled as a failure.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> So... Zero uArch inprovements? Both cards have near identical raw shader performance, but two generations (one being touted as a near complete rework) are separating them. And yet they have identical performance? Where is the uArch work?


Actually thinking deeper, I'm not sure if these comparisons could capture the full IPC improvements.

980 had 29% less shaders than 780 Ti (2048 vs 2880) but its boost clock was also 31% faster (1216 vs 928). After drivers matured it ended up being ~10% faster than 780 Ti. So you'd think it was only a 10% IPC improvement, but apparently it's supposed to be 35%:



(officially, 1 SMM with 128 shaders is supposed to have 90% the performance of 1 SMX with 192 shaders, assuming equal clockspeeds)


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> You could sell a turd for a low price, doesn't mean it's not a turd.
> 
> I'm looking at it strictly from the engineering standpoint. If it's 390x performance, zero uArch improvements in shader efficiency have been made.


Even though it's a much smaller chip with less shaders and half the memory bandwidth? And ignoring price point and market position completely? OK then...


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> No it isn't a good point. The 480 at $200 is not a mid grade product. Hell, *I paid more for my 560Ti* back in 2011 and it didn't even match a 470, much less the 480...


You also overpaid for your Titans... did that somehow make the 780 Ti a mid-grade product?


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Since when is a $700 1080 a mid-grade card (or even a $450 1070 for that matter)? And since when do you compare performance of a $200 budget card with that of a flagship? This card is not a replacement for the 390X. It's launching for half the price of the 390X for God sake!
> 
> Are you finished? I could do this all night...


Exactly, this is not to replace Grenada or even Hawaii. I think it is meant to replace the 380 (X) but mainly an affordable card for the masses who still are using 1080P.

If the masses want a faster card, then the 1070 at $380 will be their alternative. When it becomes more readily available and affordable.

You see, miners recognize the price advantage and i don't see any farms of 1070 or 1080 around for mining. It could be the supply issue affecting those cards, though.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Exactly. Nvidia HAD to get 1800+MHz out of GP104 just to beat the 980Ti. There is no architectural performance increase with Pascal vs Maxwell; it's all node shrink and clock speed advantage.


And that is exactly my point.

NVIDIA has already shown their engineering grunt with Maxwell, meanwhile AMD was stuck with a chip designed to compete with Kepler. Now NVIDIA are staying put in uArch this gen, while AMD has a chance to catch up... And they achieve basically nothing on the uArch front.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> And that is exactly my point.
> 
> NVIDIA has already shown their engineering grunt with Maxwell, meanwhile AMD was stuck with a chip designed to compete with Kepler. Now NVIDIA are staying put in uArch this gen, while AMD has a chance to catch up... And they achieve basically nothing on the uArch front.


Refer to the tiger.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> You could sell a turd for a low price, doesn't mean it's not a turd.
> 
> I'm looking at it strictly from the engineering standpoint. If it's 390x performance, zero uArch improvements in shader efficiency have been made.


It doesn't consume as much power as 390x for the same performance, mate.

If AMD had threw the power efficiency away and fed the card with 390x's power consumption, it would have had 1070 performance. Yeah, it is inferior to Pascal, that is why it is cheap


----------



## Dudewitbow

If anyone is bashing AMD for releasing midrange polaris as its first die into something new, I want to know your opinions when the first Maxwell die was a 750ti.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> And that is exactly my point.
> 
> NVIDIA has already shown their engineering grunt with Maxwell, meanwhile AMD was stuck with a chip designed to compete with Kepler. Now NVIDIA are staying put in uArch this gen, while AMD has a chance to catch up... And they achieve basically nothing on the uArch front.


In shader efficiency perhaps not, but they seem to have done quite a bit with power consumption. Still, I get what you're saying.


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> And that is exactly my point.
> 
> NVIDIA has already shown their engineering grunt with Maxwell, meanwhile AMD was stuck with a chip designed to compete with Kepler. Now NVIDIA are staying put in uArch this gen, while AMD has a chance to catch up... And they achieve basically nothing on the uArch front.


Soo..... since when has it been set in stone that rx-480 is their flagship for this arch? Naming scheme alone says otherwise.

Edit:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dudewitbow*
> 
> If anyone is bashing AMD for releasing midrange polaris as its first die into something new, I want to know your opinions when the first Maxwell die was a 750ti.


Go search this very site, the card was 'amazing' and a 'miracle of Nvidia engineering'. Seriously. I even bought one for my spare pc. Yet here comes AMD with a card that follows suit and look at the reaction differences.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> If you look at perf/mm^2, it should have been in Fury X territory in comparison to Pascal. So saying "small die" doesn't save it from an engineering stand point.


The chip actually could - yet. It won't get there on the reference card though. The AIB cards will push higher clocks. That's higher clocks in the same perf / mm2 ratio you mention - same GPU, just not power limited with better cooling. So unlike Pascal where the AIBs apart from reducing noise have been absolute fails at improving clocks - it will actually help the RX480.

There's quite a few leaks that indicate 1500mhz + level of performance in the OC department, couple that with a driver update or two and bingo you are near Fury X performance.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> And that is exactly my point.
> 
> NVIDIA has already shown their engineering grunt with Maxwell, meanwhile AMD was stuck with a chip designed to compete with Kepler. Now NVIDIA are staying put in uArch this gen, while AMD has a chance to catch up... And they achieve basically nothing on the uArch front.


See this post:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Actually thinking deeper, I'm not sure if these comparisons could capture the full IPC improvements.
> 
> 980 had 29% less shaders than 780 Ti (2048 vs 2880) but its boost clock was also 31% faster (1216 vs 928). After drivers matured it ended up being ~10% faster than 780 Ti. So you'd think it was only a 10% IPC improvement, but apparently it's supposed to be 35%:
> 
> 
> 
> (officially, 1 SMM with 128 shaders is supposed to have 90% the performance of 1 SMX with 192 shaders, assuming equal clockspeeds)


If we take this at face value, it means P10 already has about 25% "silent" IPC improvement from Hawaii. Catch my drift?


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> And that is exactly my point.
> 
> NVIDIA has already shown their engineering grunt with Maxwell, meanwhile AMD was stuck with a chip designed to compete with Kepler. Now NVIDIA are staying put in uArch this gen, while AMD has a chance to catch up... And they achieve basically nothing on the uArch front.


You just don't get it. They have yet to release the cards that are going to compete with Nvidia's upper range. This card was never meant to be compared to those flagship cards. You can argue with their decision to release cards from the bottom up this generation if you want to but you can't argue with the fact that the 480 is a bombshell of a card at the $200 price point that has literally no competition at this time. And that's just a fact.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Even though it's a much smaller chip with less shaders and half the memory bandwidth? And ignoring price point and market position completely? OK then...


It's a smaller chip because we got a 2x density increase from node. That's not AMD's engineering. And it's less shaders but higher clockspeed, having effectively the same raw performance if not looking at uArch improvements.

As for memory bandwidth, that's an improvement made with Tonga, not a Polaris advancement.


----------



## Serios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> That's pretty much exactly what I said. Lol
> 
> Take or pay means you use it or dont, you pay either way (usually a reduced rate but not much).
> 
> That was for 28nm tho


The terms of the "Take or pay" agreement have been renegotiated a couple of times since it was a major problem for AMD.
AMD hasn't been in a disadvantage for years regarding the wafer contracts they have with GloFo.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> It doesn't consume as much power as 390x for the same performance, mate.
> 
> If AMD had threw the power efficiency away and fed the card with 390x's power consumption, it would have had 1070 performance. Yeah, it is inferior to Pascal, that is why it is cheap


They could have shrunk Hawaii and had a similar chip in perf/mm^2 and perf/watt to the 1070.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> And that is exactly my point.
> 
> NVIDIA has already shown their engineering grunt with Maxwell, meanwhile AMD was stuck with a chip designed to compete with Kepler. Now NVIDIA are staying put in uArch this gen, while AMD has a chance to catch up... And they achieve basically nothing on the uArch front.


It is a marketing strategy to target a different segment. Can't just based it on engineering strategy.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dudewitbow*
> 
> If anyone is bashing AMD for releasing midrange polaris as its first die into something new, I want to know your opinions when the first Maxwell die was a 750ti.


Exactly. By these guys reckoning maxwell should have been declared an immediate fail as soon as the 750 TI released because it didn't beat a 780 TI in performance. I literally can't roll my eyes any harder right now.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> It's a smaller chip because we got a 2x density increase from node. That's not AMD's engineering. And it's less shaders but higher clockspeed, having effectively the same raw performance if not looking at uArch improvements.
> 
> As for memory bandwidth, that's an improvement made with Tonga, not a Polaris advancement.


The primative discard acclerator is mean't to be really stellar. Some programmers have tested this and its far ahead of anything yet released, how much it will help i don't know.

If you divide pascals clocks by maxwells clocks and then look at the performance gain for pascall vs the clock speed increase its not pretty either , in fact its most likely a regression. So if AMDs engineers are poor then its likewise for Nvidia.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> You just don't get it. They have yet to release the cards that are going to compete with Nvidia's upper range. This card was never meant to be compared to those flagship cards. You can argue with their decision to release cards from the bottom up this generation if you want to but you can't argue with the fact that the 480 is a bombshell of a card at the $200 price point that has literally no competition at this time. And that's just a fact.


YOU don't get it.

I'M NOT SAYING THE RX 480 IS NOT A GREAT DEAL. It's pretty damn awesome. I'm saying the chip itself makes me react like that tiger meme.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> The primative discard acclerator is mean't to be really stellar. Some programmers have tested this and its far ahead of anything yet released, how much it will help i don't know.
> 
> If you divide pascals clocks by maxwells clocks and then look at the performance gain for pascall vs the clock speed increase its not pretty either , in fact its most likely a regression. So if AMDs engineers are poor then its likewise for Nvidia.


In the end it's the performance that matters, and they got 70% greater efficiency while pushing clocks to 2GHz. Minor shader efficiency regressions or not, that's impressive.


----------



## Tisser12

Such a plethora of great information in this thread.







It's a shame forums are still a proving ground to flex your internet muscles. If anyone could actually answer some questions and quit arguing for a second I'd like to know how long after release AIB cards take to start showing up?


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tisser12*
> 
> Such a plethora of great information in this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a shame forums are still a proving ground to flex your internet muscles. If anyone could actually answer some questions and quit arguing for a second I'd like to know how long after release AIB cards take to start showing up?


I think powercolor is releasing theirs around the middle of July. That's probably when you'll see them. Somewhere around the 10th give or take.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tisser12*
> 
> Such a plethora of great information in this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a shame forums are still a proving ground to flex your internet muscles. If anyone could actually answer some questions and quit arguing for a second I'd like to know how long after release AIB cards take to start showing up?


Two weeks, best estimate.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> The primative discard acclerator is mean't to be really stellar. Some programmers have tested this and its far ahead of anything yet released, how much it will help i don't know.
> 
> If you divide pascals clocks by maxwells clocks and then look at the performance gain for pascall vs the clock speed increase its not pretty either , in fact its most likely a regression. So if AMDs engineers are poor then its likewise for Nvidia.


NVIDIA was already a gen ahead of AMD in efficiency with Maxwell. AMD had a chance to catch up against Pascal and they didn't take it. What happens when Volta releases?


----------



## comagnum

Speaking of the plethora of abundant information, have there been any CONFIRMED performance leaks?


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> YOU don't get it.
> 
> I'M NOT SAYING THE RX 480 IS NOT A GREAT DEAL. It's pretty damn awesome. I'm saying the chip itself makes me react like that tiger meme.


Did you see my post above? Might be a bit too early to accurately judge IPC improvements.


----------



## Dudewitbow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> Speaking of the plethora of abundant information, have there been any CONFIRMED performance leaks?


the closest you can get to confirmation are the chinese ones with pictures of the actual gpu running actual stuff. NDA is still under effect for 2 and a half more days


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> In the end it's the performance that matters, and they got 70% greater efficiency while pushing clocks to 2GHz. Minor shader efficiency regressions or not, that's impressive.


Yes the performance per watt is impressive. But i don't really care to much for Performance per watt, because 90% of the time my card idles and i game the other 10%. I care about overall performance and to a lesser extent price.

So its impressive from an engineering point of view yes, does it make me want to run out and buy it - no.

Will AMD match Nvidias performance per watt this gen, i doubt it seriously . Will i care , no - not at all just as long as pricing is right and the vega card performs where i want it too.

The next generation we are going to get down to 10watt differences at 7nm or so and i seriously could care less even before then about power efficiency.

The only decent thing i see worth upgrading to in pascall is smp and the gains from that are no-where to be seen and won't be for a while.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> In shader efficiency perhaps not, but they seem to have done quite a bit with power consumption. Still, I get what you're saying.


If it's 390x perf at 100W, they just caught up to NVIDIA in perf/watt while falling flat on their faces in perf/mm^2. Either way you slice it, Polaris didn't catch up to NVIDIA on the technology side, despite NVIDIA effectively doing nothing on their uArch.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Did you see my post above? Might be a bit too early to accurately judge IPC improvements.


I don't get it tbh.
Could you perhaps rephrase what you mean?


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tisser12*
> 
> Such a plethora of great information in this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a shame forums are still a proving ground to flex your internet muscles. If anyone could actually answer some questions and quit arguing for a second I'd like to know how long after release AIB cards take to start showing up?


First rumor was they'll be along side reference models, now mid july. so, nobody really knows. Am waiting for them too, especially reviews with proper drivers. I'm aiming at Sapphire.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> If it's 390x perf at 100W, they just caught up to NVIDIA in perf/watt while falling flat on their faces in perf/mm^2. Either way you slice it, Polaris didn't catch up to NVIDIA on the technology side, despite NVIDIA effectively doing nothing on their uArch.


Perf/mm^2 isn't linear. Hawaii was a huge improvement over Tahiti in that department. Tahiti's 2048 shaders lost to GK104's 1536 shaders while Hawaii's 2816 shaders basically matched GK110 2880, with Tahiti (352) being considerably larger than GK104 (294), but Hawaii (438) being much smaller than GK110 (561).

How would shrinking Hawaii with no arch improvements put them in a better position? They'd have the same card, but with worse power consumption.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> NVIDIA was already a gen ahead of AMD in efficiency with Maxwell. AMD had a chance to catch up against Pascal and they didn't take it. What happens when Volta releases?


AMD didn't actually release a new generation, they just overclocked the old one and updated their drivers and it still beat maxwell in a lot of games.

So yes they were behind in efficiency , if they catch up is still to be seen. I think the RX480s default clock will be impressive performance per watt , overclocking it however will undo this a bit. People buying the AIB 480s will care less i think about 20-30 watts extra used in the OC.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> I don't get it tbh.
> Could you perhaps rephrase what you mean?


nVidia claimed Maxwell had 35% IPC (shader efficiency to be accurate) improvement over Kepler

980 has 29% less shaders but 31% higher clockspeed than 780 Ti (so a wash basically in raw TFLOPS), yet only ends up being 10% faster even after drivers have matured.

So either nVidia's quoted 35% figure is way off, or IPC/shader efficiency isn't that easy to extract from shader count and clockspeed alone.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> They could have shrunk Hawaii and had a similar chip in perf/mm^2 and perf/watt to the 1070.


Do you know that Polaris 10 has less SP than Hawaii??
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> Perf/mm^2 isn't linear. Hawaii was a huge improvement over Tahiti in that department. Tahiti's 2048 shaders lost to GK104's 1536 shaders while Hawaii's 2816 shaders basically matched GK110 2880, with Tahiti being considerably larger than GK104, but Hawaii being much smaller than GK110.
> 
> How would shrinking Hawaii with no arch improvements put them in a better position? They'd have the same card, but with worse power consumption.


Tahiti lost to GK104 due to the poor drivers. At this moment Tahiti can trade low with the 2304 GK110 in GTX780.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> Perf/mm^2 isn't linear. Hawaii was a huge improvement over Tahiti in that department. Tahiti's 2048 shaders lost to GK104's 1536 shaders while Hawaii's 2816 shaders basically matched GK110 2880, with Tahiti (352) being considerably larger than GK104 (294), but Hawaii (438) being much smaller than GK110 (561).
> 
> How would shrinking Hawaii with no arch improvements put them in a better position? They'd have the same card, but with worse power consumption.


Shrinking Hawaii would mean 44CU's at near the same die size as Polaris, while also benefitting from clock speed improvements from the node. Perf/watt would improve by 1.7x from the node alone, as AMD stated in their Polaris reveal.


----------



## Tisser12

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> First rumor was they'll be along side reference models, now mid july. so, nobody really knows. Am waiting for them too, especially reviews with proper drivers. I'm aiming at Sapphire.


Thanks to all the answers. I'm looking at another sapphire card also. My HD6950 takes a beating and keeps on ticking and I've heard a lot of others say they'll always go sapphire if they can. I'm the same way.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> YOU don't get it.
> 
> I'M NOT SAYING THE RX 480 IS NOT A GREAT DEAL. It's pretty damn awesome. I'm saying the chip itself makes me react like that tiger meme.


Why are you expecting so much out of a $200 budget card though? If it was faster than a fury ex do you think they would've only charged $200 for it? The 480,s intended place in the market has EVERYTHING to do with the chip we got. And it is by far the most impressive $200 card I've ever seen. So what's the problem again?


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> nVidia claimed Maxwell had 35% IPC (shader efficiency to be accurate) improvement over Kepler
> 
> 980 has 29% less shaders but 31% higher clockspeed than 780 Ti (so a wash basically in raw TFLOPS), yet only ends up being 10% faster even after drivers have matured.
> 
> So either nVidia's quoted 35% figure is way off, or IPC/shader efficiency isn't that easy to extract from shader count and clockspeed alone.


NVIDIA scales worse with clocks since they decoupled a few things like cache from the core clock. If you BIOS overclock it, you can adjust those other figures too.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Why are you expecting so much out of a $200 budget card though? If it was faster than a fury ex do you think they would've only charged $200 for it? The 480,s intended place in the market has EVERYTHING to do with the chip we got. And it is by far the most impressive $200 card I've ever seen. So what's the problem again?


I'm not expecting anything from the 200$ card. I'm expecting something from the 232mm^2 chip with identical TFLOPS to 390x.


----------



## Kpjoslee

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Why are you expecting so much out of a $200 budget card though? If it was faster than a fury ex do you think they would've only charged $200 for it? The 480,s intended place in the market has EVERYTHING to do with the chip we got. *And it is by far the most impressive $200 card I've ever seen*. So what's the problem again?


No, This was.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> I'm not expecting anything from the 200$ catd. I'm expecting something from the 232mm^2 chip with identical TFLOPS to 390x.


And you are likely looking at a chip that beats the 390X at max OC even though it was designed from the ground up to replace Pitcairn, not Grenada/Hawaii. I just don't get your point, do you have one?


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kpjoslee*
> 
> No, This was.


I dunno about that, I got into PC building in the fermi/Cayman days...


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> I'm not expecting anything from the 200$ card. I'm expecting something from the 232mm^2 chip with identical TFLOPS to 390x.


The 438 mm² 390X with 350W power consumption?


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> If it's 390x perf at 100W, they just caught up to NVIDIA in perf/watt while falling flat on their faces in perf/mm^2. Either way you slice it, Polaris didn't catch up to NVIDIA on the technology side, despite NVIDIA effectively doing nothing on their uArch.


I think you need to wait and see the AIB cards , i said it before , NV clocked the 1080/1070s to within 10-13% of their total overclock ability - they had to as big maxwell was faster clock for clock already. A Custom AIB cards get you nothing in mhz apart from saving your ears with Pascall so far. That's never been the case in prior generations IMHO.

The AIBs with the 480 however will make a difference for sure. So we have not see the final perf/mm2 from this GPU yet. We have had one report of the card throttling after 1680mhz clock initially , now if i can reach near that with better power / cooling then it has a long way to go yet.

Once the AIB overclocked 480s are out it will loose some of its perf/watt shine but thats not going to matter much if the price is right and the performance picks up.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> NVIDIA scales worse with clocks since they decoupled a few things like cache from the core clock. If you BIOS overclock it, you can adjust those other figures too.


That's been the case since Kepler. And how much do you expect L1 cache/crossbar to affect performance anyway?

Even if we assume a generous 10%, that's still 15% off from the official figure. Like I said, my main point was simply shader count and clockspeed doesn't tell the full story about shader efficiency, if the Kepler to Maxwell example is indicative of anything.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> And you are likely looking at a chip that beats the 390X at max OC even though it was designed from the ground up to replace Pitcairn, not Grenada/Hawaii. I just don't get your point, do you have one?


My point is AMD has done nothing to shader efficiency if all they managed is 390x performance.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> The 438 mm² 390X with 350W power consumption?


On 28nm? Yes.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> That's been the case since Kepler. And how much do you expect L1 cache/crossbar to affect performance anyway?
> 
> Even if we assume a generous 10%, that's still 15% off from the official figure. Like I said, my main point was simply shader count and clockspeed doesn't tell the full story about shader efficiency, if the Kepler to Maxwell example is indicative of anything.


I see what you mean.


----------



## mohiuddin

If what blue1512 found, is true, like if it can get 1700mhz oc even at 200w I think it will be tremendous. Smaller chip at lower clock beating bigger chips with higher clocks(gtx1070)


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> My point is AMD has done nothing to shader efficiency if all they managed is 390x performance.


Well all we have to go on so far is 3dmark leaks. I wouldn't call that conclusive evidence of no improvement.

Games can tell a different story.


----------



## awdrifter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> I have not heard that before so i'm not if thats correct. AMD have not said they are not making Vega on 14nm. I expect they would. They are just following NVs route of mid range die out first then larger die next.
> 
> The big celebration they have just had could be its taping out - if that's right then its definitely taped out on 14nm vs 7nm due to the tech available now. However they will want to respin in a few times to tune it hence delay.


AMD had not said that, but Samsung is saying they'll have 7nm out by end of 2017, assuming they can hit their goal, it'll coincide with AMD's planned launch of Vega. GF is using Samsung tech, so it makes sense that the 4xx generation won't have a big die, they are probably saving money this gen and waiting for the next gen on 7nm.

http://vrworld.com/2016/05/09/samsung-manufacture-ultra-violet-7nm-chips-2017/


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> If what blue1512 found, is true, like if it can get 1700mhz oc even at 200w I think it will be tremendous smaller at lower clock beating bigger chip with higher clocks(gtx1070)


What did blue find?


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> What did blue find?


1680mhz clocks for a split second before power limiters kicked in , i think it was dota 2 he was playing.


----------



## Serios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> I have been saying it for weeks now. A product launched at the performance of a R9 390X/GTX 980 is a failure in my eyes, especially at a $229 price point. I have been touting the same horn ever since AMDs declaration to conquer the mainstream markets a couple months back. R9 390s have been available for $250 or less for months now. Repackaging that performance into a smaller die to save costs and then delivering it at the same price isn't exactly groundbreaking.


250$ is still not the typical price for a 390.
Basically you are comparing the best offers and prices you can find for a 390 with 480's MSRP.
The thing is if we apply logic the 480 starts at 200-230$ which means that in time this price should decrease and after a few months you should find the 480 whit offers below 200$.
At the end of it's life cycle you will most likely be able to buy a 480 for 170-180$ maybe even less.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> 1680mhz clocks for a split second before power limiters kicked in , i think it was dota 2 he was playing.


Source? That's incredibly interesting if true.


----------



## stoker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> 1680mhz clocks for a split second before power limiters kicked in , i think it was dota 2 he was playing.


yeah some hidden bios clock he said


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> It is a marketing strategy to target a different segment. Can't just based it on engineering strategy.


It is a marketing ploy to disguise their incapacity to compete directly...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> What did blue find?


Some unsubstantiated claims without any screenshots as proof


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> What did blue find?


Quote:


> Reference card testing so far: 1680 MHz can be set, but throttle back to ~1300 MHz right after going on heavy duty. The ref cooler is quiet but very weak mad.gif
> 
> This will be the case when spending money on a good custom card is actually worth it.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You brought up the R9 380X which is just a rebranded HD 7970.
> Are you seriously advocating for the higher pricing brought upon by lack of competition? The only loss here is consumer surplus.


380x is tonga
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> to be fair in most small format cases, you more limited by height than you are length. Considering most have been designed for larger gpus than the nano.


If they're made to fit larger gpus they they should be able to fit the connector on the side since almost every other gpu has it on the side. This discussion opens a can of worms so i'll just leave it alone lol


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> It is a marketing ploy to disguise their incapacity to compete directly...
> Some unsubstantiated claims without any screenshots as proof


It was his own first hand experience. But it proves nothing since it down clocked under load. I don't expect anything like 1700MHz but it's irrelevant when you consider the card's market position and price, which is what you don't seem to grasp...


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*


From what I've heard, the RX 480 crashes the moment an overclock is applied, even before going into any sort of load.

It's from a source I can't confirm, but it did seem in line with that chinese overclocking livestream. Before actually testing anything it crashed and returned to default settings.

We'll have to wait and see, but I hope what blue said is true.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> It was his own first hand experience. But it proves nothing since it down clocked under load. I don't expect anything like 1700MHz but it's irrelevant when you consider the card's market position and price, which is what you don't seem to grasp...


Is blue a known figure or something? Is there any reason to believe his claims?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serios*
> 
> 250$ is still not the typical price for a 390.
> Basically you are comparing the best offers and prices you can find for a 390 with 480's MSRP.
> The thing is if we apply logic the 480 starts at 200-230$ which means that *in time this price should decrease* and after a few months you should find the 480 whit offers below 200$.
> At the end of it's life cycle you will most likely be able to buy a 480 for 170-180$ maybe even less.


You acknowledge that prices decrease over time but are still arguing that $229 is a reasonable price for performance equivalent to a product launched 3 years ago?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> 380x is tonga


You are right, I was thinking 280X. The Antigua XT die was larger than Tahiti XT and and it barely matched the performance of, 4 years its senior, Tahiti.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> It is a marketing ploy to disguise their incapacity to compete directly...


Nobody is claiming they can match Nvidia's top end cards, they weren't able to last gen what makes you think they can now?

Everybody knows that AMD were way behind with their architecture, especially when maxwell was released.

They seem to have made just as good jumps in performance/efficiency on the node shrink as Nvidia though unless I'm missing something (plus we don't actually know the peak mhz these chips can hit yet)

At it's heart it's still a GCN card yet people are expecting a few architectural changes are going to magically make Polaris beat Pascal.


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You acknowledge that prices decrease over time but are still arguing that $229 is a reasonable price for performance equivalent to a product launched 3 years ago?
> You are right, I was thinking 280X. The Antigua XT die was larger than Tahiti XT and and it barely matched the performance of, 4 years its senior, Tahiti.


R9 390 can be found even at lower price point than 250$.. But u know why? Coz of RX480.


----------



## HackHeaven

Most of the 390X cards are still going for $339~$439 i think on newegg lol
390 is around $259


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HackHeaven*
> 
> Most of the 390X cards are still going for $339~$439 i think on newegg lol
> 390 is around $259


Brand new, yes. The impending 480 has done a number on the second-hand market though.


----------



## stoker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Is blue a known figure or something? Is there any reason to believe his claims?


See this post

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Not really, and I didn't have much time with it. There are some key points of the ref as follows
> 
> - AMD puts a strict power/temp limit on the BIOS. The 4GB version seems to be hold back more than the 8GB one.
> 
> - There is an "hidden" additional boost clock, something like nVidia cards which boost over the set boost clock. 1680 MHz was this boost clock, recorded as the peak when I tried Dota 2 Vulkan @ 1440p ( 300+fps)
> 
> - The ref cooler is perfect for the $200 performance, but it can't bring the card to 980ti level. The 6 pin power doesn't help as well.


----------



## HackHeaven

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Brand new, yes. The impending 480 has done a number on the second-hand market though.


Who buys used pc parts


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> It was his own first hand experience. But it proves nothing since it down clocked under load. I don't expect anything like 1700MHz but it's irrelevant when you consider the *card's market position and price*, which is what you don't seem to grasp...


The irony is that you don't even comprehend my argument or are deliberately planting red herring and straw man distractors..


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HackHeaven*
> 
> Who buys used pc parts


My brain, it hurts.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HackHeaven*
> 
> Who buys used pc parts


Crazy nuts!


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *stoker*
> 
> See this post


Again, any reason to believe him?


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HackHeaven*
> 
> Who buys used pc parts


My first 4930K would like to have a few words with you.


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> Nobody is claiming they can match Nvidia's top end cards, they weren't able to last gen what makes you think they can now?
> 
> Everybody knows that AMD were way behind with their architecture, especially when maxwell was released.
> 
> They seem to have made just as good jumps in performance/efficiency on the node shrink as Nvidia though unless I'm missing something (plus we don't actually know the peak mhz these chips can hit yet)
> 
> At it's heart it's still a GCN card yet people are expecting a few architectural changes are going to magically make Polaris beat Pascal.


390 beats the 980ti in dx12.
so how is amd gcn behind the bad design of Nvidia really?
Next up is vega to take the crown of entusiast end.
everything points to one thing amd has the superior design.


----------



## Randomdude

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> You could sell a turd for a low price, doesn't mean it's not a turd.
> 
> I'm looking at it strictly from the engineering standpoint. If it's 390x performance, zero uArch improvements in shader efficiency have been made.


Core improvements for AMD similar to nVidia from an engineering standpoint in my opinion. Let's compare:

390x vs rx480 - 2,8k cores vs 2,3k cores, 20% clock speed difference, same performance. 2.8/(2.3x1.2)=1.015

1070 vs Titan X - 1.9k cores vs 3k cores, 50% clock speed (chevchelios and ileakstuff keep referencing 2100 clocks so that's what I use and compare to 1400 Titan as is ref standard), same performance. 3/(2x1.5)=1.067

On a phone so I can't go in depth.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> 390 beats the 980ti in dx12.
> so how is amd gcn behind the bad design of Nvidia really?
> Next up is vega to take the crown of entusiast end.
> everything points to one thing amd has the superior design.


Sauce?


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> R9 390 can be found even at lower price point than 250$.. But u know why? Coz of RX480.


Imagine that! Polaris anticipation has been influencing prices since October 2015...











Or R9 290X pricing since Q4 2014


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> 390 beats the 980ti in dx12.
> so how is amd gcn behind the bad design of Nvidia really?
> Next up is vega to take the crown of entusiast end.
> everything points to one thing amd has the superior design.


Well true it could be more the software holding GCN back, that will be discovered when more games use DX12 I suppose.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Sauce?


It might in Hitman. It sounds and is ridiculous, but yeah, that one game.

Of course an aftermarket 980 Ti would crush any aftermarket 390.

Assuming a 390 ~ 290X.


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Imagine that! Polaris anticipation has been influencing prices since October 2015...


Ojo confirmed


----------



## Serios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *awdrifter*
> 
> AMD had not said that, but Samsung is saying they'll have 7nm out by end of 2017, assuming they can hit their goal, it'll coincide with AMD's planned launch of Vega. GF is using Samsung tech, so it makes sense that the 4xx generation won't have a big die, they are probably saving money this gen and waiting for the next gen on 7nm.
> 
> http://vrworld.com/2016/05/09/samsung-manufacture-ultra-violet-7nm-chips-2017/


There is absolutely no way 7nm will be ready for big dies in 2017, more like the end of 2018.
Also if Vega is not launched by the end of 2016 like a lot of us are hopping we should see it at least in Q1 2017 so I would expect it by the end of february.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Randomdude*
> 
> Core improvements for AMD similar to nVidia from an engineering standpoint in my opinion. Let's compare:
> 
> 390x vs rx480 - 2,8k cores vs 2,3k cores, 20% clock speed difference, same performance. 2.8/(2.3x1.2)=1.015
> 
> 1070 vs Titan X - 1.9k cores vs 3k cores, 50% clock speed (chevchelios and ileakstuff keep referencing 2100 clocks so that's what I use and compare to 1400 Titan as is ref standard), same performance. 3/(2x1.5)=1.067
> 
> On a phone so I can't go in depth.


The thing is 2100mhz is basically all the AIB cards are going up to?

May as well be comparing peak speeds for the architecture?

So maybe a more accurate comparison would be 1500mhz compared with 2100mhz? Correct me if I'm wrong of course.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> This is just like R9 285 lol.


20% cheaper but same performance that already exists

And they made all these revolution posters because of that?


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Imagine that! Polaris anticipation has been influencing prices since October 2015...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or R9 290X pricing since Q4 2014


Here in my area the 2ND hand price went from 300plus$ equivalent to 250$ equivalent just after rx480 being announced...still people are reluctant to buy even at that price


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> The thing is 2100mhz is basically all the AIB cards are going up to?
> 
> May as well be comparing peak speeds for the architecture?
> 
> So maybe a more accurate comparison would be 1500mhz compared with 2100mhz? Correct me if I'm wrong of course.


No, you're correct. And a 1500 MHz Titan X is veeeery close to a 2100MHz 1080. If the 1080 wasn't capable of 2GHz it wouldn't even beat a 1500MHz Titan X at all. But it costs $300 less and is in fact faster so it's still a better buy obviously...


----------



## Serios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You acknowledge that prices decrease over time but are still arguing that $229 is a reasonable price for performance equivalent to a product launched 3 years ago?


I don't follow.
The 8gb 480 at it's starting price point should be cheaper than the cheapest 390s and that will only decrease in time.
So what is AMD doing wrong?

Also the 390 is discontinued and it's price has been irrelevant since AMD announced the 200$ 480.
What was the price of the 390 in september 2015 when we didn't know much about Polaris?


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> 20% cheaper but same performance that already exists
> 
> And they made all these revolution posters because of that?


Uses a heck of a lot less power though so significant progress has been made, they were never aiming for high performance on these cards and they were aware that the same performance was already available.

An evolved/uber clocked 480 will probably be a fair bit faster than the 390X, the reference 290X's don't put up very good numbers in reviews for example.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> No, you're correct. And a 1500 MHz Titan X is veeeery close to a 2100MHz 1080. If the 1080 wasn't capable of 2GHz it wouldn't even beat a 1500MHz Titan X at all. But it costs $300 less and is in fact faster so it's still a better buy obviously...


Yep of course, should probably compare it to a 980ti anyway as the Titan is a card that always has a 'special' price.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serios*
> 
> So what is AMD doing wrong?


Launching another Tonga. Management can't seem to be able to learn from their past mistakes...


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Management can't seem to be able to learn from their past mistakes...


lol

Once DX11 is phased out they'll be fine, they can't really do much till then except give decent price performance on what they can produce.

That's why they aimed for mainstream buyers and are looking to gain a bit of marketshare


----------



## Serios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Launching another Tonga. Management can't seem to be able to learn from their past mistakes...


Well in 2 days all will be revealed.
The 480 does improve performance vs a Togna in a similar way Nvidia's 1080 improved performance vs the 980 only they didn't increase the price.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> 20% cheaper but same performance that already exists
> 
> And they made all these revolution posters because of that?


Um yes, because you can have $550 card (980) performance for $200 now?

What you guys keep ignoring is that the 480 is just the first card of this generation and is the budget card at that. Nvidia has no competition at the high end but AMD also has no competition at the low end. These segments are just not comparable by logical and unbiased people (and we can clearly see in this thread which posters are absolutely biased and illogical by their arguments). At least this discussion has exposed those posters for what they truly are...


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> 20% cheaper but same performance that already exists
> 
> And they made all these revolution posters because of that?


I have a 7950 to replace and it is not going to be Grenada, It will be a 480.

Anyway, aren't you suppose to be defending the "non supply issue revolution" of the 1070/80? Go! Convince the gullible.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Nvidia launches a new mid-grade chip = ~10% higher performance than preceding top tier offering.
> 
> AMD launches a new mid-grade chip = ~15-20 lower performance than preceding top tier offering
> 
> Keep in mind that this is the first time in history of GPU product launches that a new mid-grade chip didn't meet or exceed the performance of a previous generation top tier offering.
> See above.


So I guess everyone should wait for the 1060 since it must be faster than last gen top tier, by your logic.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> It's a smaller chip because we got a 2x density increase from node. That's not AMD's engineering. And it's less shaders but higher clockspeed, having effectively the same raw performance if not looking at uArch improvements.
> 
> As for memory bandwidth, that's an improvement made with Tonga, not a Polaris advancement.


Didnt AMD specifically say they improved compression in Polaris? But, you haven't seen it yet so it's obviously not true.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serios*
> 
> The terms of the "Take or pay" agreement have been renegotiated a couple of times since it was a major problem for AMD.
> AMD hasn't been in a disadvantage for years regarding the wafer contracts they have with GloFo.


He said he read about a problem and I told him what it meant and that it was not a current issue
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> NVIDIA was already a gen ahead of AMD in efficiency with Maxwell. AMD had a chance to catch up against Pascal and they didn't take it. What happens when Volta releases?


Did you steal the tardis and go to the future to see AMD's unreleased and yet to be announced products for this generation?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You acknowledge that prices decrease over time but are still arguing that $229 is a reasonable price for performance equivalent to a product launched 3 years ago?
> You are right, I was thinking 280X. The Antigua XT die was larger than Tahiti XT and and it barely matched the performance of, 4 years its senior, Tahiti.


Yeah it's a joke. A joke that the 380x is the best offering in the sub $230 price range right now, both camps considered. Nvidia can't top what's comparable to 4 year old Tahiti for under $230, that's also a pretty good joke.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serios*
> 
> Well in 2 days all will be revealed.
> The 480 does improve performance vs a Togna in a similar way Nvidia's 1080 improved performance vs the 980 only they didn't increase the price.


They actually lowered the price of significantly faster performance, something Nvidia hasn't done in a long time(well there was the 970 to be fair). Two years ago I paid the same price as a 480 for a 270X that has half the performance.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Um yes, because you can have $550 card (980) performance for $200 now?
> 
> What you guys keep ignoring is that the 480 is just the first card of this generation and is the budget card at that. Nvidia has no competition at the high end but AMD also has no competition at the low end. These segments are just not comparable by logical and unbiased people (and we can clearly see in this thread which posters are absolutely biased and illogical by their arguments). At least this discussion has exposed those posters for what they truly are...


Exactly. The company hurting for market-share is obviously best served addressing the largest portion of the market. They're also inadvertently doing us all a favour as gamers by improving the baseline performance level of bargain PC's and (hopefully) OEM's 'gaming' machines. I just don't understand how the card as described and intended could possibly be construed as a negative. They're giving the gaming public a 390x/980 that can run in their POS low-airflow case without causing a pressure-cooker explosion. We've got a guy in our gaming community, constantly skint because he smokes tonnes of weed, that hasn't bothered to buy a PC in years. He plays games on a crap notebook with Warm Potato graphics and just dies non-stop with his low frames. I was finally able to convince him to buy a PC with a 6600k and an RX 480. 390x/980 performance under $300 finally sold him.

This is the TAM AMD wants to grow. I know he's not the only one.


----------



## slavovid

And not to mention the fact that AMd is pushing new tech as Mantle/Vulkan for some time now that is the sole reason for DX12 to exist. Now they are offering a great mid range product at a great price that is on par with 980 and will probably outperform it in all DX12 related content.

People are ungrateful only because the company that is doing all that is named AMD not Nvidia.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Exactly. The company hurting for market-share is obviously best served addressing the largest portion of the market. They're also inadvertently doing us all a favour as gamers by improving the baseline performance level of bargain PC's and (hopefully) OEM's 'gaming' machines. I just don't understand how the card as described and intended could possibly be construed as a negative. They're giving the gaming public a 390x/980 that can run in their POS low-airflow case without causing a pressure-cooker explosion. We've got a guy in our gaming community, constantly skint because he smokes tonnes of weed, that hasn't bothered to buy a PC in years. He plays games on a crap notebook with Warm Potato graphics and just dies non-stop with his low frames. I was _finally_ able to convince him to buy a PC with a 6600k and an RX 480. 390x/980 performance under $300 finally sold him.
> 
> This is the TAM AMD wants to grow. I know he's not the only one.


Unfortunately logic and common sense is no match for blind fanboyism. If you have $700 to buy a video card the 1080 is the best of the best, no question, but that don't mean a thing to somebody who has to scrape pennies to come up with $200. And at that price you simply can't beat a 480 that will transform your $300 budget build into a high end machine overnight.


----------



## blue1512

I didn't realize you guys are talking about "TECH REVOLUTION".

Let's bring in nVidia and their "Async incapable" Pascal


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Um yes, because you can have $550 card (980) performance for $200 now?
> 
> What you guys keep ignoring is that the 480 is just the first card of this generation and is the budget card at that. Nvidia has no competition at the high end but AMD also has no competition at the low end. These segments are just not comparable by logical and unbiased people (and we can clearly see in this thread which posters are absolutely biased and illogical by their arguments). At least this discussion has exposed those posters for what they truly are...


If this card is bad because 290/390 has been around for years and doesn't cost much more, why does anyone even own a 980. Lol


----------



## Serios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> I didn't realize you guys are talking about "TECH REVOLUTION".
> 
> Let's bring in nVidia and their "Async incapable" Pascal


Yeah Maxwell and Pascal are all extraordinary when it comes to DX11 but the future belongs to DX12.
And when it comes to DX12 I don't see how AMD's architecture is inferior.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Didn't you know, DX11 is never going away! Nobody is ever going to make DX12 games, it's all AMD propaganda!


----------



## slavovid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Serios*
> 
> Yeah Maxwell and Pascal are all extraordinary when it comes to DX11 but the future belongs to DX12.
> And when it comes to DX12 I don't see how AMD's architecture is inferior.


That's only because you are not looking at things through nvidia tinted glasses


----------



## Serios

Yeah there was a time when DX12 was going to destroy Mantle and take over the gaming world but that was before August 2015.


----------



## Kuivamaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> So because the 480 offers better value (but less performance), the 1070 is suddenly overpriced?
> 
> No... the Titan X was overpriced for the performance you got. Keep in mind, the 1070 is actually faster than a Titan X for less than half the cost.
> 
> The RX 480 is a sweet spot where performance meets value. No one will argue with you on that front.


I cannot help but think the 1070 as the grandchild of GTX560 and 1080 the same for 560Ti. In that sense they both feel horribly overpriced.


----------



## slavovid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Didn't you know, DX11 is never going away! Nobody is ever going to make DX12 games, it's all AMD propaganda!


Actually i do believe that might be partially correct. With Microsoft limiting DX12 to W10 only things are not looking bright for DX12 but Vulkan is another thing and should overtake future gaming headlines.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> Actually i do believe that might be partially correct. With Microsoft limiting DX12 to W10 only things are not looking bright for DX12 but Vulkan is another thing and should overtake future gaming headlines.


Everybody will be on Win10 eventually. This forum and it's love affair with Win7 is not indicative of the average PC owner who probably doesn't know or care about gaming api's.


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> You brought up the R9 380X which is just a rebranded HD 7970.
> Are you seriously advocating for the higher pricing brought upon by lack of competition? The only loss here is consumer surplus.


Ew the 380X was a rebranded 7970 ?!
It was the 280X


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Um yes, because you can have $550 card (980) performance for $200 now?
> 
> What you guys keep ignoring is that the 480 is just the first card of this generation and is the budget card at that. Nvidia has no competition at the high end but AMD also has no competition at the low end. These segments are just not comparable by logical and unbiased people (and we can clearly see in this thread which posters are absolutely biased and illogical by their arguments). At least this discussion has exposed those posters for what they truly are...


That argument, half the price vs GTX 980, well it doesnt sound very logical considering you can already have the same performance today for the same price difference.
R9 390 and GTX 980 have almost the same difference.

What AMD seems to improve is $200 vs $250. Although 8GB 480 will cost exactly the same as 390..
And power efficiency have improved.

All the best to AMD for improving efficiency by a lot, but in terms of performance gains, it all seems to fall apart.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> That argument, half the price vs GTX 980, well it doesnt sound very logical considering you can already have the same performance today for the same price difference.
> R9 390 and GTX 980 have almost the same difference.


390 is not quite as good as the 980, and it's a rebrand with it's architecture pushed very close to the limit.

We still don't know how far Polaris will clock to with more voltage and custom designs.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> That argument, half the price vs GTX 980, well it doesnt sound very logical considering you can already have the same performance today for the same price difference.
> R9 390 and GTX 980 have almost the same difference.
> 
> What AMD seems to improve is $200 vs $250. Although 8GB 480 will cost exactly the same as 390..
> And power efficiency have improved.
> 
> All the best to AMD for improving efficiency by a lot, but in terms of performance gains, it all seems to fall apart.


Did you say the same thing with the 1080? It struggles to beat an older 980 Ti . . .

http://www.overclock.net/t/1443196/fire-strike-extreme-top-30


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> That argument, half the price vs GTX 980, well it doesnt sound very logical considering you can already have the same performance today for the same price difference.
> R9 390 and GTX 980 have almost the same difference.
> 
> What AMD seems to improve is $200 vs $250. Although 8GB 480 will cost exactly the same as 390..
> And power efficiency have improved.
> 
> All the best to AMD for improving efficiency by a lot, but in terms of performance gains, it all seems to fall apart.


There's a good 15% between 980 and 390: https://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080/images/perfrel_1920_1080.png

980 is also a better overclocker, so the gap grows in in actual use.
Hopefully those rumors of power limit on the 480 are true and AIB's can actually overclock much higher.


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> Did you say the same thing with the 1080? It struggles to beat an older 980 Ti . . .
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1443196/fire-strike-extreme-top-30


What? GTX 1080 is 40% faster stock vs stock and 20% faster overclocked vs overclocked.

GTX 1080 is overpriced. There is no way around that and I have already said that several times. It should have cost $500.
GTX 1070 seems to hit the sweetspot so atleast we have that one.


----------



## Randomdude

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> The thing is 2100mhz is basically all the AIB cards are going up to?
> 
> May as well be comparing peak speeds for the architecture?
> 
> So maybe a more accurate comparison would be 1500mhz compared with 2100mhz? Correct me if I'm wrong of course.


Thank you for the correctio! Later tonight when I'm home I will come back to this, with a few more included variables and try to be as technically correct as I can, very curious about the numbers. Cheers.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> What? GTX 1080 is 40% faster stock vs stock and 20% faster overclocked vs overclocked.
> 
> GTX 1080 is overpriced. There is no way around that and I have already said that several times. It should have cost $500.
> GTX 1070 seems to hit the sweetspot so atleast we have that one.


20%? lol. The 980 Ti can oc higher. at some point, the 1080 can only do so much and get left behind.

The 1070 is indeed the sweet spot if it is $380. But . . .

And it is in short supply. lol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> There's a good 15% between 980 and 390: https://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1080/images/perfrel_1920_1080.png
> 
> 980 is also a better overclocker, so the gap grows in in actual use.
> Hopefully those rumors of power limit on the 480 are true and AIB's can actually overclock much higher.


The gap between the 390 and 980 drops as the rez go higher. As the months go by . . . the gap will even get wider in favor of the 390. And you know why.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> What? GTX 1080 is 40% faster stock vs stock and 20% faster overclocked vs overclocked.


Try 30% and 10%


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> The gap between the 390 and 980 drops as the rez go higher. As the months go by . . . the gap will even get wider in favor of the 390. And you know why.


That's true, but the 390 and 980 both don't fit for the very high resolutions where they nearly match up.
Maybe the driver thing though


----------



## flopper

Nvidia cant beat amd fury line.
Imagine a die shrink and 2ghz and your still failing at it?

the 480 aimed at low end users that can start to use the dx12 for gaming at a pricepoint never before seen.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> Nvidia cant beat amd fury line.
> Imagine a die shrink and 2ghz and your still failing at it?
> 
> the 480 aimed at low end users that can start to use the dx12 for gaming at a pricepoint never before seen.


For the nVidia supporters, Dx12 is a unneeded step and Dx11 is always the best. Pretty much everytime I mention Dx12 there are always guys like that.

And when Dx12/Vulkan take over and nVidia releases an Async capable card to compete, those guys will just mine the salt from their own whine and get rich


----------



## Olivon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> Nvidia cant beat amd fury line.


Nvidia raped the Fury Line. Certainly the most unsuccessful and meaningless serie in all AMD/ATI history.
This serie was a just a showcase and that's all, pityful sales, 4GB of HBM for nothing, a total waste.


----------



## Power Drill

I'm betting 2017 is full of DX12 releases so why the hate towards it?


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Power Drill*
> 
> I'm betting 2017 is full of DX12 releases so why the hate towards it?


People said DX12 was not relevant for many years, now the same people a few months later tell others not to buy second hand 980ti's because DX12 is better on Pascal.

It's confusing.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Olivon*
> 
> Nvidia raped the Fury Line. Certainly the most unsuccessful and meaningless serie in all AMD/ATI history.
> This serie was a just a showcase and that's all, pityful sales, 4GB of HBM for nothing, a total waste.


Yet owners of the Fury X will be happily gaming for years as drivers improve and DX12 becomes the norm.


----------



## Ha-Nocri

Fury-X is on par with 980ti @stock clocks and better performer in DX12. For the same price you get water-cooled card. Also, Fury (non X) is a completely sexy card. Not sure why some consider it failure.


----------



## lolerk52

I have to question Fury X's longevity having 4GB of VRAM. I'd rather it had GDDR5 tbh.


----------



## Newbie2009

So the 480 is out this week, right?


----------



## ChevChelios

Furies are a joke, Fury X literally beats stock 980Ti in only 2 games - Hitman and AotS, in the rest its on par or a bit worse .. and OC vs OC the 980Ti buries it

they're even more of a joke *now* when they're NOT getting the price cuts the 980Ti is after Pascal is out .. I mean Im looking right now @ local shops and seeing new Fury X for _690_EUR .. new 980Tis for ~480+ EUR .. I bought my G1 1080 for 697 EUR .. that Fury X has the worst p/p ever, excluding maybe the $1000 Titans









Quote:


> Yet owners of the Fury X will be happily gaming *for years* as drivers improve and DX12 becomes the norm.


if they are willing to turn down the settings to High/Medium from max in future more demanding games (especially after Neo and Scorpio roll out and up the requirements shoot up for everything), then sure


----------



## junkman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> Furies are a joke, Fury X literally beats stock 980Ti in only 2 games - Hitman and AotS, in the rest its on par or a bit worse .. and OC vs OC the 980Ti buries it
> 
> they're even more of a joke *now* when they're NOT getting the price cuts the 980Ti is after Pascal is out .. I mean Im looking right now @ local shops and seeing new Fury X for _690_EUR .. new 980Tis for ~480+ EUR .. I bought my G1 1080 for 697 EUR .. that Fury X has the worst p/p ever, excluding maybe the $1000 Titans
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if they are willing to turn down the settings to High/Medium from max in future more demanding games (especially after Neo and Scorpio roll out and up the requirements shoot up for everything), then sure


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> I have to question Fury X's longevity having 4GB of VRAM. I'd rather it had GDDR5 tbh.


On the contrary, my Fury X performed amazingly well at 4K resolutions. It trades blows with the 980 ti depending on the game, but often wins at 4K. I am not so sure I understand why people bash HBM. It is an amazing memory architecture. The Fury/Nano series actually gets better in performance with higher resolutions... with a 4GB limit.

The only real problem with it is manufacturing the actual die is much more expensive due to additional, non-traditional steps with an interposer. It's why the Nano was so much more expensive than hoped for, initially.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *junkman*
> 
> On the contrary, my Fury X performed amazingly well at 4K resolutions. It trades blows with the 980 ti depending on the game, but often wins at 4K. I am not so sure I understand why people bash HBM. It is an amazing memory architecture. The Fury/Nano series actually gets better in performance with higher resolutions... with a 4GB limit.
> 
> The only real problem with it is manufacturing the actual die is much more expensive due to additional, non-traditional steps with an interposer. It's why the Nano was so much more expensive than hoped for, initially.


Performance scaling with resolution is a GCN thing, not HBM. Hawaii behaves like that too.


----------



## Ha-Nocri

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> I have to question Fury X's longevity having 4GB of VRAM. I'd rather it had GDDR5 tbh.


You would usually only need more than 4GB for 4k textures, which you don't need @1440p, and Flurry isn't a 4k card. And I think Sapphire Fury Nitro is a beast.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ha-Nocri*
> 
> You would usually only need more than 4GB for 4k textures, which you don't need @1440p, and Flurry isn't a 4k card. And I think Sapphire Fury Nitro is a beast.


For now.
Years down the line, 1080p will need 6GB easily.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> For now.
> Years down the line, 1080p will need 6GB easily.


Years down the line you turn down your graphics options instead of trying to play a game at MAX on an old GPU.


----------



## junkman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Performance scaling with resolution is a GCN thing, not HBM. Hawaii behaves like that too.


You're wrong, man. Explain why the Fury line is not bottlenecked at all by 4GB?This is not to mention the performance enabled due to the efficiency improvements of HBM with TDP constraints and 3500+ shaders. Yes GCN scales well, but it is very clearly not bottlenecked by 4GB of HBM.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *junkman*
> 
> You're wrong, man. Explain why the Fury line is not bottlenecked at all by 4GB?This is not to mention the performance enabled due to the efficiency improvements of HBM with TDP constraints and 3500+ shaders. Yes GCN scales well, but it is very clearly not bottlenecked by 4GB of HBM.


It is. Minimum FPS are pretty bad in instances where the 980 Ti does better.

It just does not have enough memory for the time it launched. If it launched about a year earlier, we would not be debating if 4gb was enough or not.


----------



## junkman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> It is. Minimum FPS are pretty bad in instances where the 980 Ti does better.
> 
> It just does not have enough memory for the time it launched. If it launched about a year earlier, we would not be debating if 4gb was enough or not.


I'm sorry. You're wrong.









Even in BF4 it is consistently 4-5 frames slower in min and avg FPS.



On the contrary, again - having owned a Fury X it was actually one of the smoothest 4K experiences I have had.

Edit: Wrong image.


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *flopper*
> 
> Nvidia cant beat amd fury line.
> Imagine a die shrink and 2ghz and your still failing at it?
> 
> the 480 aimed at low end users that can start to use the dx12 for gaming at a pricepoint never before seen.


I hope you're kidding. Cherry picking one benchmark to prove your point is just low.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> People said DX12 was not relevant for many years, now the same people a few months later tell others not to buy second hand 980ti's because DX12 is better on Pascal.
> 
> It's confusing.
> *Yet owners of the Fury X will be happily gaming for years as drivers improve and DX12 becomes the norm*.


It's unfortunate Fury / Fury X owners still suffer from desktop artifact. We're already seeing the Fury X 4GB VRAM becoming a issue in games like Mirrors Edge.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *junkman*
> 
> I'm sorry. You're wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even in BF4 it is consistently 4-5 frames slower in min and avg FPS.
> 
> 
> 
> On the contrary, again - having owned a Fury X it was actually one of the smoothest 4K experiences I have had.
> 
> Edit: Wrong image.


Comparing a 980Ti Stock vs a Fury X stock.


----------



## EightDee8D

Heh, fake hypers showing up already.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *junkman*
> 
> I'm sorry. You're wrong.
> 
> Even in BF4 it is consistently 4-5 frames slower in min and avg FPS.
> 
> On the contrary, again - having owned a Fury X it was actually one of the smoothest 4K experiences I have had.
> 
> Edit: Wrong image.


So what about ME: SoM...


Fury X performance starts declining MUCH faster when settings/resolution are cranked up. Its about even with a GTX 980 here, because it is memory limited.


----------



## ChevChelios

those are the smoothest 40+ fps Ive ever seen


----------



## junkman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Heh, fake hypers showing up already.


I think it will be a great card. There's no need to hype, it should meet the expectations set during countless interviews and conferences.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> So what about ME: SoM...
> 
> 
> Fury X performance starts declining MUCH faster when settings/resolution are cranked up. Its about even with a GTX 980 here, because it is memory limited.


What about SoM? Well, it seems at 4K it actually has less FPS variation than the GTX 980 ti.





I'm sorry. You're wrong again. I don't know why you picked 2560x1440 SoM to support your claim.

This is a false and unfounded belief - and when you crossfire them, you actually get better scaling than with SLI - and with only 4GB mirrored VRAM usage? Who would have known.

Now that we've substantiated some facts let's get back on track with this thread.


----------



## Arturo.Zise

So should I sell my 970 and grab a new 480, or is it more of a side grade? Will be switching to a 32" 1440p monitor soon.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arturo.Zise*
> 
> So should I sell my 970 and grab a new 480, or is it more of a side grade? Will be switching to a 32" 1440p monitor soon.


As far as I can tell, sidegrade. Wait for reviews then make a decision.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arturo.Zise*
> 
> So should I sell my 970 and grab a new 480, or is it more of a side grade? Will be switching to a 32" 1440p monitor soon.


probably a 15%+ upgrade to 970

definitely sell 970

for 1440p I would go with 1070, but 480 is an ok cheaper option


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arturo.Zise*
> 
> So should I sell my 970 and grab a new 480, or is it more of a side grade? Will be switching to a 32" 1440p monitor soon.


For that resolution i'll get a 1070 , i think that the 480 will be the 1080p gpu but for 2k and up i'll take 1070 and 1080 if the price isn't a probleme ofcourse


----------



## StabiloBoSS2000

@ junkman

There are lot of unhappy AMD users who are 'locked' with AMDs wishful thinking - "AMD the world leader in graphics" with faked Benchmark methods & "Overclockes Dream" PR propaganda from the hole AMD Director Board @ E3 2015 AMD Event!

Get a 2016 Reality check for free - GeForce GTX 980 Ti Round-up: 12 HighEnd Graphics Cards Review / Friday 24 June 2016

http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/6671/8/geforce-gtx-980-ti-round-up-12-graphics-cards-review-3dmark-fire-strike--extreme


----------



## sugarhell

Ok what happened to this thread from yesterday. Now it's a cringe fiesta.

People here can't understand what a 200 bucks card offers to the market. But whatever let's talk about perf/mm^2 without a single benchmark or power consumption results. You know reference Polaris 10 is set up for power efficiency instead of perf/mm^2


----------



## junkman

[/quote]
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arturo.Zise*
> 
> So should I sell my 970 and grab a new 480, or is it more of a side grade? Will be switching to a 32" 1440p monitor soon.


I think it would be a worthwhile upgrade, but do your due diligence and wait for reviews. There should be plenty of them on the shelves, so you needn't hurry to grab one before looking at some benchmarks.


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> R9 285 did the same thing.


Maybe, I had 280x from second hand before 285 came out so 285 didn't bring anything from my POV, just an update to the 7970 chip. I think price wise the 280x brought the previous expensive 7970 performance down to mainstream. Same chip kept being revised and rereleased for 3 generations







Damn TSMC nor GF could get on a lower node.


----------



## junkman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Ok what happened to this thread from yesterday. Now it's a cringe fiesta.
> 
> People here can't understand what a 200 bucks card offers to the market. But whatever let's talk about perf/mm^2 without a single benchmark or power consumption results. You know reference Polaris 10 is set up for power efficiency instead of perf/mm^2


Actually, I'm inclined to agree. There is a lot of unsubstantiated and unwarranted product belittlement in this thread. The card has uarch improvements, could perform well for the 1080p audience at face value, and is ~200 to boot. I'm pleased with it so far.

I'm also inclined to agree with a previous post stating that the GTX 750 ti was touted as such a wonderful card when released in a similar fashion. This could very well be another gtx 750 ti, albeit, more performance and a slightly increased price.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Ok what happened to this thread from yesterday. Now it's a cringe fiesta.
> 
> People here can't understand what a 200 bucks card offers to the market. But whatever let's talk about perf/mm^2 without a single benchmark or power consumption results. You know reference Polaris 10 is set up for power efficiency instead of perf/mm^2


But if it's 390x perf at 100W power draw, then it's identical perf/watt to the 1080 

And are we not allowed to compare technology just because of pricing?


----------



## deskiller

just as long as its better then a nvidia 780. then I will be happy


----------



## julizs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> For that resolution i'll get a 1070 , i think that the 480 will be the 1080p gpu but for 2k and up i'll take 1070 and 1080 if the price isn't a probleme ofcourse


So you're saying Gtx 980/ 390X level performance is not sufficient for 2k? Come on now.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *junkman*
> 
> On the contrary, again - having owned a Fury X it was actually one of the smoothest 4K experiences I have had.


Not to mention no cards are doing 60 fps at those settings, so tuning settings down a bit as most would do, will result in an even lower vram amount being used.

Fury is fine for a while that's for sure.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> But if it's 390x perf at 100W power draw, then it's identical perf/watt to the 1080
> 
> And are we not allowed to compare technology just because of pricing?


Comparison b/w products of different price brackets is just weird, mate.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *julizs*
> 
> So you're saying Gtx 980/ 390X level performance is not sufficient for 2k? Come on now.


980/390X get under 60 avg fps at max settings in a lot of new games @ 1440p

its up to you to decide if thats sufficient or not


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Comparison b/w products of different price brackets is just weird, mate.


Why?

I'm comparing their technology, which for the same generation is constant from top to bottom. Vega will have mostly the same technology as Polaris 10, and GP106 will have mostly the same technology as GP104.
Perf/watt and perf/mm^2 comparisons are completely valid, as these are dictated mostly by the technology.

https://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_980_Ti/images/perfrel_3840.gif

0.173 - Titan X
0.195 - 980
0.184 - 960

I divided the % by die size, and this is what I got. Fairly consistent perf/mm^2.

And then we look at Polaris vs Pascal:
0.318 - 1080
0.271 - RX 480 (assuming 390X performance)


----------



## julizs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> 980/390X get under 60 avg fps at max settings in a lot of new games @ 1440p
> 
> its up to you to decide if thats sufficient or not


Only in a few bad optimized titles, and if you need max antialiasing. If you really think they are only 1080p capable then you might as well classify the Gtx 960 and R9 380 as 720p cards...


----------



## ChevChelios

no, not just in a few and even w/o heavy AA

they are 1440p capable but not to the same level as 1070, 980ti and 1080


----------



## gamervivek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> i didnt wanted to post the whole album to make the point......
> 
> that pic alone is the proof that this 1500+ might only be on the beast mode card we have yet to see...


That XFX card is clocked out of box at 1330Mhz on a reference cooler so it's damn likely that 1.4Ghz shouldn't be a problem for most cards unless limited by something(TDP, voltage or cooling).

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *deskiller*
> 
> just as long as its better then a nvidia 780. then I will be happy


It'd be easily 10% faster than the 280X.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> The are covered by the metal plate on the shroud, should be fine.
> 
> 
> 
> Otherside


This looks like it will lend itself to the AIO watercooler mod.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Why?
> 
> I'm comparing their technology, which for the same generation is constant from top to bottom. Vega will have mostly the same technology as Polaris 10, and GP106 will have mostly the same technology as GP104.
> Perf/watt and perf/mm^2 comparisons are completely valid, as these are dictated mostly by the technology.
> 
> https://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_980_Ti/images/perfrel_3840.gif
> 
> 0.173 - Titan X
> 0.195 - 980
> 0.184 - 960
> 
> I divided the % by die size, and this is what I got. Fairly consistent perf/mm^2.
> 
> And then we look at Polaris vs Pascal:
> 0.318 - 1080
> 0.271 - RX 480 (assuming 390X performance)


The most ****** comparison








You need to take into account the clock and power consumption, mate.


----------



## gamervivek

Vega is graphics IP 9(Polaris is 8 like Tonga/Fury but of course with hardware changes) as seen from the linkedin profile of one of the AMD engineers.

Besides, when looking at perf/mm2 you should normalize for the clock speed otherwise it doesn't make much sense like comparing performance at same clockspeeds but with different number of shaders. AMD have been ahead on perf/mm2 and transistor density but the clockspeed gap is simply too much.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> The most ****** comparison
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to take into account the clock and power consumption, mate.


If we raise clockspeed until power consumption matches 1070, I highly doubt it will have 1070 performance








You tend to lose efficiency when overclocking, and 390x perf at 100W is about 1080 perf/watt.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gamervivek*
> 
> Vega is graphics IP 9(Polaris is 8 like Tonga/Fury but of course with hardware changes) as seen from the linkedin profile of one of the AMD engineers.
> 
> Besides, when looking at perf/mm2 you should normalize for the clock speed otherwise it doesn't make much sense like comparing performance at same clockspeeds but with different number of shaders. AMD have been ahead on perf/mm2 and transistor density but the clockspeed gap is simply too much.


Well, yeah, AMD makes denser dies so they clock lower.
The question is who has the best balance between density and clock speed, and when looking at perf/mm^2 you can easily see that.


----------



## NFL

RX 480 running Quantum Break. According to the uploader, game running @ 1080p max settings with No AA


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RX 480 running Quantum Break. According to the uploader, game running @ 1080p max settings with No AA


It already contains 4xssaa equivalent in its maximum settings.


----------



## AliNT77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtcn77*
> 
> It already contains 4x*MSAA* equivalent in its maximum settings.


Fixed that for ya


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Ok what happened to this thread from yesterday. Now it's a cringe fiesta.
> 
> People here can't understand what a 200 bucks card offers to the market. But whatever let's talk about perf/mm^2 without a single benchmark or power consumption results. You know reference Polaris 10 is set up for power efficiency instead of perf/mm^2


Yeah, I have a feeling this card is gonna be the new 6600GT. Amazing priceerformance and sells like mad.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> If we raise clockspeed until power consumption matches 1070, I highly doubt it will have 1070 performance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You tend to lose efficiency when overclocking, and 390x perf at 100W is about 1080 perf/watt.
> Well, yeah, AMD makes denser dies so they clock lower.
> The question is who has the best balance between density and clock speed, and when looking at perf/mm^2 you can easily see that.


Your arguments are kinda moot because amd use 14nm LPE that's why it's cant clock that high. LPE is a mobile focus node meanwhile 16+ on TSMC is a performance one. Still extremely wide and parallel architectures like GCN use more die space for the extra capabilities. Also wait for the reviews, now it's just a pure speculation


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> People here can't understand what a *200 bucks card offers to the market.*


Did you applaud when the HD 7870 was rebranded and launched as the R9 270X for $200?

Would you feel the same way if the R9 290X was rebranded again and priced at $200?

But now that it is a new chip that also offers some power reduction, the move is revolutionary?


----------



## sugalumps

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Did you applaud when the HD 7870 was rebranded and launched as the R9 270X for $200?
> 
> Would you feel the same way if the R9 290X was rebranded again and priced at $200?
> 
> But now that it is a new chip that also offers power reduction, the move is revolutionary?


It basically is a cheaper 390x which was a cheaper 290x with more vram, amd have been slightly polishing and releasing the same card a bit cheaper each time for like the last 5 years and people in here are acting like it is the saviour of the pc market. They are also blaming us for being a bit disappointed with the latest rumours when they were the ones hyping it to match a gtx 980ti after oc.

I guess this is nvidias fault for being so dang greedy and over pricing their cards, any old re re released mid tier chip from amd at a cheap price is going to impress.


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Did you applaud when the HD 7870 was rebranded and launched as the R9 270X for $200?
> 
> Would you feel the same way if the R9 290X was rebranded again and priced at $200?
> 
> But now that it is a new chip that also offers power reduction, the move is revolutionary?


They aren't the same. Aren't we presupposing a little too much that they are?


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Would you feel the same way if the R9 290X was rebranded again and priced at $200?
> 
> But now that it is a new chip that also offers power reduction, the move is revolutionary?


it's a 380x replacement, it's actually an upgrade For *same price* where performance was stuck for last 2-3 years. for 290/390+ guys you will have your 490 in 6-8 months.

compare launch to launch and 2 year old to 2 year old price. don't mix. in a lot places 390/x still cost more than 300$ just like 290/x was costing more than 400$









there's a reason why amd got 6% market back with just rebrands. because they bring lower prices to many markets.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Did you applaud when the HD 7870 was rebranded and launched as the R9 270X for $200?
> 
> Would you feel the same way if the R9 290X was rebranded again and priced at $200?
> 
> But now that it is a new chip that also offers some power reduction, the move is revolutionary?


Maybe you need to start applying your own signature









It's a low mid range card and you guys expect magic and fire. If you get hyped from speculations or some specific users that makes you what?

The card is fine because it offers what is suppose to offers. Amd needs marketshare not a flagship war like the previous years thats why they focus on a low cost high volume product .

Also they dont have competition on this market segment. TSMC having so many customers it will be tough for nvidia to produce high volume parts like gp106.


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Your arguments are kinda moot because amd use 14nm LPE that's why it's cant clock that high. LPE is a mobile focus node meanwhile 16+ on TSMC is a performance one. Still extremely wide and parallel architectures like GCN use more die space for the extra capabilities. Also wait for the reviews, now it's just a pure speculation


technically the 14LPE node is a higher performance node than TSMC 16nm. 14nm lpe base voltage is 0.800 volts, while the TSMC 16nm base voltage is 0.700 volts. Granted there are other factors, but in general 14nm LPE should be capable of higher speeds, since it supports higher voltage.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> technically the 14LPE node is a higher performance node than TSMC 16nm. 14nm lpe base voltage is 0.800 volts, while the TSMC 16nm base voltage is 0.700 volts. Granted there are other factors, but in general 14nm LPE should be capable of higher speeds, since it supports higher voltage.


I actually can set quite high voltage on 480. It just refuses to maintain high boost clock.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> technically the 14LPE node is a higher performance node than TSMC 16nm. 14nm lpe base voltage is 0.800 volts, while the TSMC 16nm base voltage is 0.700 volts. Granted there are other factors, but in general 14nm LPE should be capable of higher speeds, since it supports higher voltage.


Irrelevant that it supports higher voltage. LPE is for mobile soc that focus on power efficiency and lower clocks. LPP will offer a bit more balance but still it's a node for mobile soc. Meanwhile, TSMC 16nm FF+ is a more performance focus node.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Well, yeah, AMD makes denser dies so they clock lower.
> The question is who has the best balance between density and clock speed, and when looking at perf/mm^2 you can easily see that.


pretty much

right now P10 (232 mm2) loses to Pascal (314 mm2) in raw perf / mm2, we'll see if something changes with a hypothetical 480X or Vega


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> pretty much
> 
> right now P10 (232 mm2) loses to Pascal (314 mm2) in raw perf / mm2, we'll see if something changes with a hypothetical 480X or Vega


At this point it's pretty much confirmed 480x doesn't exist.


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Irrelevant that it supports higher voltage. LPE is for mobile soc that focus on power efficiency and lower clocks. LPP will offer a bit more balance but still it's a node for mobile soc. Meanwhile, TSMC 16nm FF+ is a more performance focus node.


I'm an sorry, but this statement is incorrect. I am not going to argue with you about it.

performance is a measure of voltage in pc's, at the expense of power consumption. This is why the TSMC apple chips were more power efficient than their Samsung parts. Tsmc chips operated at a slightly lower base voltage, compared to the samsung/glofo node.

it's not a low power node, they call it a low power node, because it's more efficient than previous planar soi designs.


----------



## maltamonk

Can someone explain to me why perf/mm2 really matters for these cards? Imo only perf/watt and perf/$ matter here.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> At this point it's pretty much confirmed 480x doesn't exist.


Ppl said the same with full Tonga. It will eventually come out when the node is mature


----------



## andydabeast

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *julizs*
> 
> So you're saying Gtx 980/ 390X level performance is not sufficient for 2k? Come on now.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> 980/390X get under 60 avg fps at max settings in a lot of new games @ 1440p
> 
> its up to you to decide if thats sufficient or not


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> no, not just in a few and even w/o heavy AA
> 
> they are 1440p capable but not to the same level as 1070, 980ti and 1080


I currently use a MSI gaming 290x at a mild OC at 1440p 70hz and I don't play a hugely wide variety of games but I can usually have settings to high-ultra with low to medium AA. With the RX480 projecting to perform slightly better than that 290x I think it will be great for 1440p high-max settings. If your monitor is not gigantic it is hard to tell between 4x and 8x AA anyway.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> I'm an sorry, but this statement is incorrect. I am not going to argue with you about it.
> 
> performance is a measure of voltage in pc's, at the expense of power consumption. This is why the TSMC apple chips were more power efficient than their Samsung parts. Tsmc chips operated at a slightly lower base voltage, compared to the samsung/glofo node.
> 
> it's not a low power node, they call it a low power node, because it's more efficient than previous planar soi designs.


It's irrelevant when you compare the volts between 2 different nodes. It's like comparing the volts of a SOI node to finfet.

There isn't any argument here. Doesnt change the fact that gpus are high performance parts and amd is using a mobile soc low power node.


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> It's irrelevant when you compare the volts between 2 different nodes. It's like comparing the volts of a SOI node to finfet.
> 
> There isn't any argument here. Doesnt change the fact that gpus are high performance parts and amd is using a mobile soc low power node.


I will correct you one last time.

It's not a low power node. AMD is releasing Zen on this node, a high performance cpu, they are releasing high performance gpus on this node. Why would they gimp themselves? it makes absolutely zero sense, much like your statements.

Performance is a measure of voltage. I will repeat that statement. TSMC 16nm- base voltage 0.70 volts, Samsung 14nm- base voltage 0.800 volts, Intel 14nm- base voltage 0.75 volts. The reason they call it "low power plus" or a low power node is because of Finfet. With finfet designs you don't need as much voltage to get high performance. This allows you to reduce the total voltage, improving efficiency and keeping high clocks.

Base voltage of the 28nm node is between 0.6 and 1.1 volts, 0.6 is the ultra low power stuff, and 1.1 is the super high performance stuff.

ok so if 28nm high performance took 1.1 volts, and the finfet 14nm takes 0.800 volts you can clearly see why they call it a low power node. Again it doesn't mean they cannot reach high clocks because finfets don't need no where near as much voltage to achieve higher clocks.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> I will correct you one last time.
> 
> It's not a low power node. AMD is releasing Zen on this node, a high performance cpu, they are releasing high performance gpus on this node. Why would they gimp themselves? it makes absolutely zero sense, much like your statements.
> 
> Performance is a measure of voltage. I will repeat that statement. TSMC 16nm- base voltage 0.70 volts, Samsung 14nm- base voltage 0.800 volts, Intel 14nm- base voltage 0.75 volts. The reason they call it "low power plus" or a low power node is because of Finfet. With finfet designs you don't need as much voltage to get high performance. This allows you to reduce the total voltage, improving efficiency and keeping high clocks.
> 
> Base voltage of the 28nm node is between 0.6 and 1.1 volts, 0.6 is the ultra low power stuff, and 1.1 is the super high performance stuff.
> 
> ok so if 28nm high performance took 1.1 volts, and the finfet 14nm takes 0.800 volts you can clearly see why they call it a low power node. Again it doesn't mean they cannot reach high clocks because finfets don't need no where near as much voltage to achieve higher clocks.


Oh if only @The Stilt was here... And do you expect zen to match the clocks of intel ?

I will stop it here because you have zero idea about nodes


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *maltamonk*
> 
> Can someone explain to me why perf/mm2 really matters for these cards? Imo only perf/watt and perf/$ matter here.


It's not important for us, but it is important to AMD.
The smaller the chip is, the cheaper it is to produce, and the faster you can produce large volumes.


----------



## ebduncan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Oh if only stilt was here... And do you expect zen to match the clocks of intel ?
> 
> I will stop it here because you have zero idea about nodes


lol









you're a waste of time to try and educate. I didn't say AMD will match the clocks of intel, there are other factors other than voltage.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ebduncan*
> 
> lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you're a waste of time to try and educate. I didn't say AMD will match the clocks of intel, there are other factors other than voltage.


Yeah i am a waste of time because you cant buy me like some companies do around here


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> It's a low mid range card and you guys expect magic and fire. If you get hyped from speculations or some specific users that makes you what?


Yea, my track record speaks volumes about how often I succumb to hype








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> The card is fine because it offers what is suppose to offers. Amd needs marketshare not a flagship war like the previous years thats why they focus on a low cost high volume product .


What you fail to realize is that AMD would have dropped the price of the R9 390X in response to Pascal. It has nothing to compete in the $300+ price range. We should be expecting a price drop in the Fury and Fury X soon enough.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Also they dont have competition on this market segment. TSMC having so many customers it will be tough for nvidia to produce high volume parts like gp106.


I agree with this point. The lack of competition for this market segment is precisely the reason for such a lackluster product...


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> I'm not disappointed in price/perf, I'm disappointed in AMD's engineers.
> 
> So you're telling me NVIDIA just shrunk Maxwell, while AMD did a heavy rework of their uArch, and they still can't catch up in perf/mm^2? Or even come close? And on a denser node no less?
> 
> Then there's the matter of extracting the raw performance out of the card. It's 5.8TFLOPS, the 390x is 5.9TFLOPS. Where is that uArch work if all we're getting is 390x perf?
> 
> Where is that Primitive Discard Accelerator? Instruction pre-fetch? Improved shader efficiency?
> 
> You're telling me all of that couldn't even bring more than 2% perf improvement?


Once Again where is the RX 480 GPU equivalent of Nvidia to make such assumptions? Now if you want to make an assumption why not use current proof like AotS RX 480 CF beating 700usd+ Paxwell midrange card?

RX 480 is a 380 replacement. not a 390x Replacement, why do you complain of getting around a 500usd card (Midrange Maxwell) performance for 200usd, with improved overclock, improved architecture, 8GB VRAM, VR-Ready and low power consumption?

2%?
R9 380 1792SP, 3.47TFLOPs,
RX 480 2304SP, 5.8TFLOPs (41.3% difference)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> If it was WCCFTech then I would be happy because R9 Nano perf means a good 15% in uArch improvements.
> 
> I'm basing it on us assuming 390X perf. If it IS 390x perf, Polaris is an engineering dud saved as a product by a low price point.


Again this isnt a R9 390x replacement, this card performs like the OCed High end card from 3 years ago for 350usd less, while uses 58% less energy
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Since when is a $700 1080 a mid-grade card (or even a $450 1070 for that matter)? And since when do you compare performance of a $200 budget card with that of a flagship? This card is not a replacement for the 390X. It's launching for half the price of the 390X for God sake!
> 
> Are you finished? I could do this all night...


For same reason 680,770,980,970 were overpriced midrange GPUs of course the performance is higher but the midrange gpus matched the latest high end GPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> Perf/mm^2 isn't linear. Hawaii was a huge improvement over Tahiti in that department. Tahiti's 2048 shaders lost to GK104's 1536 shaders .


matter of drivers not the cards you can see now how a 7870 can match midrange 680


----------



## f1LL

Saying the RX480 is a 390X replacement is like saying the 1070 is a 980Ti replacement, since those have same level of performance too.


----------



## SoloCamo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> They don't promote sensational, they say VR ready. RX480 is hardly +10% over 7970 lol.


I must be on a different planet.. You've got quotes like the above and we've also got clear shills/trolls joining just to post and take away as much thunder from AMD as possible. Let alone longer term members that clearly can't comprehend the point of this card.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Once Again where is the RX 480 GPU equivalent of Nvidia to make such assumptions? Now if you want to make an assumption why not use current proof like AotS RX 480 CF beating 700usd+ Paxwell midrange card?
> 
> RX 480 is a 380 replacement. not a 390x Replacement, why do you complain of getting around a 500usd card (Midrange Maxwell) performance for 200usd, with improved overclock, improved architecture, 8GB VRAM, VR-Ready and low power consumption?
> 
> 2%?
> R9 380 1792SP, 3.47TFLOPs,
> RX 480 2304SP, 5.8TFLOPs (41.3% difference)
> Again this isnt a R9 390x replacement, this card performs like the OCed High end card from 3 years ago for 350usd less, while uses 58% less energy


Do you even understand what I'm trying to say?
R9 390X has 5.9 TFLOPS, RX 480 has 5.8 TFLOPS. They both have the same RAW shader performance.
From comparing previous gen GCN to Maxwell, we know AMD is worse at extracting performance out of the hardware. If 5.8 TFLOPS RX 480 performs the same as an R9 390X with 5.9 TFLOPS, that means they made little to no improvement on that front.

http://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2016/01/AMD-Polaris-Architecture-1-900x506.jpg

What the hell is all that under 4th Gen GCN doing? Being pretty?

For the billionth time, *I'm not complaining about the price/perf*, I'm asking what the hell have AMD's engineers been doing? Partying with Raja too much?


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Do you even understand what I'm trying to say?
> R9 390X has 5.9 TFLOPS, RX 480 has 5.8 TFLOPS. They both have the same RAW shader performance.
> From comparing previous gen GCN to Maxwell, we know AMD is worse at extracting performance out of the hardware. If 5.8 TFLOPS RX 480 performs the same as an R9 390X with 5.9 TFLOPS, that means they made little to no improvement on that front.
> 
> http://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2016/01/AMD-Polaris-Architecture-1-900x506.jpg
> 
> What the hell is all that under 4th Gen GCN doing? Being pretty?
> 
> For the billionth time, I'm not complaining about the price/perf, I'm asking what the hell have AMD's engineers been doing? Partying with Raja too much?


I think all those features have improved p/w , and maybe reduced memory bandwidth/rop requirements. shader efficiency maybe improve with future drivers or just in specific cases like vulkan or dx12.

we will see in 2 days.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> I think all those features have improved p/w , and maybe reduced memory bandwidth/rop requirements. shader efficiency maybe improve with future drivers or just in specific cases like vulkan or dx12.
> 
> we will see in 2 days.


All of these are a possibility.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Do you even understand what I'm trying to say?
> R9 390X has 5.9 TFLOPS, RX 480 has 5.8 TFLOPS. They both have the same RAW shader performance.
> From comparing previous gen GCN to Maxwell, we know AMD is worse at extracting performance out of the hardware. If 5.8 TFLOPS RX 480 performs the same as an R9 390X with 5.9 TFLOPS, that means they made little to no improvement on that front.
> 
> http://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2016/01/AMD-Polaris-Architecture-1-900x506.jpg
> 
> What the hell is all that under 4th Gen GCN doing? Being pretty?
> 
> For the billionth time, I'm not complaining about the price/perf, I'm asking what the hell have AMD's engineers been doing? Partying with Raja too much?


What if you compare it with the actual card is replacing? because 290x replaced 7970 (550usd), frrom 3.7TFLOPs to 5.6TFLOPs, R9 285(200) replaced 7870/7950(350/450usd), from 2.5/2.9TFLOPs to 3.47TFLOPs


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> What if you compare it with the actual card is replacing? because 290x replaced 7970 (550usd), frrom 3.7TFLOPs to 5.6TFLOPs, R9 285(200) replaced 7870(350usd), from 2.5TFLOPs to 3.47TFLOPs


Then you're looking at it from a price point standpoint, which I explained is not what I'm complaining about.

I'm wondering why AMD is failing at extracting more performance out of the same raw shader performance, when we know there's more headroom to be had there by looking at NVIDIA's offerings.
I'm not asking for MOAR TFLOPS, I'm asking for making better use of those TFLOPS.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> I'm wondering why AMD is failing at extracting more performance out of the same raw shader performance, when we know there's more headroom to be had there by looking at NVIDIA's offerings.
> I'm not asking for MOAR TFLOPS, I'm asking for making better use of those TFLOPS.


Still using same core(CU) as GCN1/GCN2* (or at least it might be)

*SIMD vector and scalar,cache may vary



Maybe the hardware scheduler might improve use of SIMD vector units/scalar


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Then you're looking at it from a price point standpoint, which I explained is not what I'm complaining about.
> 
> I'm wondering why AMD is failing at extracting more performance out of the same raw shader performance, when we know there's more headroom to be had there by looking at NVIDIA's offerings.


TFlops is a theoretical peak shader performance. And it's used mostly from the PR of each company.

And AMD doesn't need more shader performance. They need to improve their geometry output ,rasterization, pixel fillrate and ROPs performance. And with TFlops you cant compare all these things.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Then you're looking at it from a price point standpoint, which I explained is not what I'm complaining about.
> 
> I'm not asking for MOAR TFLOPS, I'm asking for making better use of those TFLOPS.
> I'm wondering why AMD is failing at extracting more performance out of the same raw shader performance, when we know there's more headroom to be had there by looking at NVIDIA's offerings.


yep, that thing is kinda scary. if they can't improve perf/tflops.

usually it's 3 ways you can achieve high performance.
1. moar cores
2. moar jigga hertz
3. more per core performance or ipc or perf/tlops whatever you want to call it.

The problem here is 1. takes die space so you will need big die for big gpu, 2. takes more power unless you improve p/w. 3 one is what Amd seems to be lacking. hell they even gone backwards with it on fiji.

maybe this is why they are talking about multiple die idea. because they have hit a wall and cannot improve perf/tflop.







that would be good idea but still.


----------



## iLeakStuff

R9 will be extremely MEH at $250 when 390 cost that and offer the same performance.

Atleast Nvidia offered the fastest card with 1090 although it was expensive
GTX 1070 a tiny bit faster than 980Ti but vastly cheaper.

I find it extremely lolw-orthy AMDs revolution marketing.
AMD fanboys excuse is a more efficient architecture than 390, and even thst is absolutely hilarious considering they were bashing GTX 980 because then it didnt matter.
But now since its AMD it is suddenly important lol


----------



## Oj010

480 in the house.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> R9 will be extremely MEH at $250 when 390 cost that and offer the same performance.
> 
> Atleast Nvidia offered the fastest card with 1090 although it was expensive
> GTX 1070 a tiny bit faster than 980Ti but vastly cheaper.
> 
> I find it extremely lolw-orthy AMDs revolution marketing.
> AMD fanboys excuse is a more efficient architecture than 390, and even thst is absolutely hilarious considering they were bashing GTX 980 because then it didnt matter.
> But now since its AMD it is suddenly important lol


1070 and 480 both do same thing, but at different segments.

green team praises it, and those same guys are saying 480 is lolw-orthy. amd was getting trashed for p/w and now when they fixed it it's not important ?

Hypocrisy is real here lol, but expected from fake hyper.


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> 480 in the house.


no


----------



## JackCY

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> R9 will be extremely MEH at $250 when 390 cost that and offer the same performance.
> 
> Atleast Nvidia offered the fastest card with 1090 although it was expensive
> GTX 1070 a tiny bit faster than 980Ti but vastly cheaper.
> 
> I find it extremely lolw-orthy AMDs revolution marketing.
> AMD fanboys excuse is a more efficient architecture than 390, and even thst is absolutely hilarious considering they were bashing GTX 980 because then it didnt matter.
> But now since its AMD it is suddenly important lol


R9?
1090?
1070 yes is cheaper than 980Ti at launch and better investment overall.

There are people who do not care about power consumption or price or both as well as those who do.

You like the 1080 and it's prices, go buy it.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *f1LL*
> 
> Saying the RX480 is a 390X replacement is like saying the 1070 is a 980Ti replacement, since those have same level of performance too.


Right, this card is a replacement for Tonga and it might match the 390X.

As the thread starter said in the op . . . to take WCCF with a pound of salt that it comes within striking distance of the FuryX..


----------



## Oj010

It's a surprisingly heavy card. I would have liked a backplate, but oh well.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> 
> 
> It's a surprisingly heavy card.


Damn, October is here already ?


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Damn, October is here already ?


http://www.overclock.net/t/1604140/i-was-wrong-polaris-10-october-launch


----------



## lolerk52

Woah woah woah! That means a new Hellsing Ultimate Abridged episode is out! Sweet! Thanks Ojo!


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> R9 will be extremely MEH at $250 when 390 cost that and offer the same performance.
> 
> Atleast Nvidia offered the fastest card with 1090 although it was expensive
> GTX 1070 a tiny bit faster than 980Ti but vastly cheaper.
> 
> I find it extremely lolw-orthy AMDs revolution marketing.
> AMD fanboys excuse is a more efficient architecture than 390, and even thst is absolutely hilarious considering they were bashing GTX 980 because then it didnt matter.
> But now since its AMD it is suddenly important lol


I have a feeling you don't think before you write things.

You completely contradicted yourself, the 1070 to the 980ti is almost the exact same comparison as the rx480 to a 390x... you sing praises for one and call the other "MEH".

As for your last paragraph i don't know if you are slow, or you are trolling. Most people on this forum don't care about power consumption if the card performs well. HOWEVER, (I really need you to focus here), the mainstream market has made it abundantly clear that power consumption is an important selling point. The people here saying that power consumption doesn't matter that much have not changed their tune, THEY JUST UNDERSTAND THE CARD IS NOT FOR THEM, IT IS FOR THE MAINSTREAM MUCH LIKE THE 970.

Can we be done with this now?


----------



## FLCLimax

Goal posts will be moved.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> Goal posts will be moved.


Too late ...


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> 
> 
> It's a surprisingly heavy card. I would have liked a backplate, but oh well.


Pics and benches would be nice, and an overclock with stock volts


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> I have a feeling you don't think.


FTFY


----------



## rdr09

Don't care what you think of Ojo . . . he/she has the card and we don't' lol

BTW, Ojo my friend. I'll be flying to Thailand tonight but will be back in Africa in about three weeks. If you don't mind . . . I'll pm you.


----------



## maltamonk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> R9 will be extremely MEH at $250 when 390 cost that and offer the same performance.
> 
> Atleast Nvidia offered the fastest card with 1090 although it was expensive
> GTX 1070 a tiny bit faster than 980Ti but vastly cheaper.
> 
> I find it extremely lolw-orthy AMDs revolution marketing.
> AMD fanboys excuse is a more efficient architecture than 390, and even thst is absolutely hilarious considering they were bashing GTX 980 because then it didnt matter.
> But now since its AMD it is suddenly important lol


http://slickdeals.net/f/8837775-msi-geforce-gtx-980ti-gaming-6g-golden-edition-369-99-ar?src=SiteSearchV2_SearchBarV2Algo1
Kinda ironic no?


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

I have a question. Going from a R9 290 to a RX 480, what (if any) will be impacted by going from 512 to 256 bit memory bus?


----------



## JackCY

Your bragging rights.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> I have a question. Going from a R9 290 to a RX 480, what (if any) will be impacted by going from 512 to 256 bit memory bus?


depends on the game and also the resolution


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> I have a question. Going from a R9 290 to a RX 480, what (if any) will be impacted by going from 512 to 256 bit memory bus?


Nothing. RX 480 is using faster memory, and has two generations of memory compression under its belt compared to Hawaii which had none.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *JackCY*
> 
> Your bragging rights.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> I have a question. Going from a R9 290 to a RX 480, what (if any) will be impacted by going from 512 to 256 bit memory bus?
> 
> 
> 
> depends on the game and also the resolution
Click to expand...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> I have a question. Going from a R9 290 to a RX 480, what (if any) will be impacted by going from 512 to 256 bit memory bus?
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing. RX 480 is using faster memory, and has two generations of memory compression under its belt compared to Hawaii which had none.
Click to expand...

Thanks everyone! I'm just trying to see what's a sidegrade and what's an upgrade.


----------



## Noufel

Are you under NDA ojo ?


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> AMD could have easily shaved off 2" off the length of the card if they had designed the PCB better. If they were dead set on using such a small heat sink, would have been better to move the VRM to the right of the GPU and have the GPU sit further to left on the PCB similar to the R9 Nano.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: RX 480
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: R9 Nano


Please explain how they could have shortend the pcb. Are you forgetting about the memory on the 480?

Your comparing HBM layout to GDDR5 layout.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Please explain how they could have shortend the pcb. Are you forgetting about the memory on the 480?
> 
> Your comparing HBM layout to GDDR5 layout.


RX 460 says hi:
http://images.anandtech.com/doci/10413/RX470Lisa.jpg


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> RX 460 says hi:
> http://images.anandtech.com/doci/10413/RX470Lisa.jpg


Smaller die less memory chips. With gddr5 you need specific traces to the memory chips and specific space.

The 480x is almost as small as possible.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Smaller die less memory chips. With gddr5 you need specific traces to the memory chips and specific space.
> 
> The 480x is almost as small as possible.


Also less vrms, and no external power.


----------



## lolerk52

So, question, is Firestrike something that would be particularly heavy on ROPs? More than the average AAA game would?


----------



## TopicClocker

The amount of Hype Uncertainty and Doubt in this thread is incredible, there's so much arguing taking place in here.

It's probably best to just wait for benchmarks to come out and also reviews.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> So, question, is Firestrike something that would be particularly heavy on ROPs? More than the average AAA game would?


Fire Strike
Quote:


> When rendering illuminated particles, hull and domain shaders are enabled. Incident
> radiance volume texture sampling is done in the domain shader. Tessellation factors are set
> to produce fixed size triangles in screen pixels. Tessellation is used to avoid sampling
> incident radiance textures in the pixel shader.
> 
> Particles can cast shadows on opaque surface and on other particles. For generating particle
> shadows, particle transmittance is first rendered to a 3D texture. The transmittance texture
> is rendered from the shadow casting light like a shadow map. After particles have been
> rendered to the texture, an accumulated transmittance 3D texture is generated by
> accumulating values of each depth slice in the transmittance texture. The accumulated
> transmittance texture can then be sampled when rendering illumination or incident radiance
> that is used to illuminate particles.


----------



## spyshagg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1604140/i-was-wrong-polaris-10-october-launch
> 
> Cards are here already, I'm holding one in the pic above.


Try to ascertain where is the reference model bottleneck regarding OC (temps or hard wattage limit) and if there are bridges to short. No need to break NDA, just this inf.

After this you are good in my books









cheers


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spyshagg*
> 
> Try to ascertain where is the reference model bottleneck regarding OC (temps or hard wattage limit) and if there are bridges to short. No need to break NDA, just this inf.
> 
> After this you are good in my books
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cheers


Me too want some info regarding that


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> 180 in the house.


FTFY


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Please explain how they could have shortend the pcb. Are you forgetting about the memory on the 480?
> 
> Your comparing HBM layout to GDDR5 layout.


Have you noticed how multi-GPU PCBs manage to squeeze the memory much more asymmetrically? I didn't suggest shortening the PCB, I said moving the CPU closer to the front and utilizing the empty space in the cooler which would make the overall length of the card.


Spoiler: Rough illustration


----------



## sugarhell

This is not waste space. This is the vrm space...


----------



## toddincabo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Why are you expecting so much out of a $200 budget card though? If it was faster than a fury ex do you think they would've only charged $200 for it? The 480,s intended place in the market has EVERYTHING to do with the chip we got. And it is by far the most impressive $200 card I've ever seen. So what's the problem again?


The problem is that if lolerk52 doesn't at least give it his best try to demean any and all aspects of a new AMD GPU he wont receive those sweet NVidea bucks from the leather man.

Seemingly paid by the post count if all the different angles he is coming at this card is any indication. You guys are just feeding his wallet by even engaging him by letting him come back at you with more drivel.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Please explain how they could have shortend the pcb. Are you forgetting about the memory on the 480?
> 
> Your comparing HBM layout to GDDR5 layout.
> 
> 
> 
> Have you noticed how multi-GPU PCBs manage to squeeze the memory much more asymmetrically? I didn't suggest shortening the PCB, I said moving the CPU closer to the front and utilizing the empty space in the cooler which would make the overall length of the card.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Rough illustration
Click to expand...

Lots of multi-GPU cards also have the RAM on both sides, which helps with packaging.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> This is not waste space. This is the vrm space...


Again, a better design would have it on the other side of the GPU... The cooler comes in at around 10 inches long and the heat sink it houses is barely 3.5" long...


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Again, a better design would have it on the other side of the GPU... The cooler comes in at around 10 inches long and the heat sink it houses is barely 3.5" long...


Yes I am sure your armchair engineering is better than what they can develope at AMD. If you do nothing but complain about the product why do you stay in these threads?


----------



## MikeDuffy

Nothing


----------



## sage101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Yes I am sure your armchair engineering is better than what they can develope at AMD. If you do nothing but complain about the product *why do you stay in these threads?*


Maybe because he's the OP of this thread.


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

OP does have special license to troll his or her own thread.


----------



## bucdan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1604140/i-was-wrong-polaris-10-october-launch
> 
> Cards are here already, I'm holding one in the pic above.


Can you measure the card from the DP and HDMI connector to the end of the cooler? mm or inches, doesn't matter to me. Thanks!


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> R9 will be extremely MEH at $250 when 390 cost that and offer the same performance.
> 
> Atleast Nvidia offered the fastest card with 1090 although it was expensive
> GTX 1070 a tiny bit faster than 980Ti but vastly cheaper.
> 
> I find it extremely lolw-orthy AMDs revolution marketing.
> AMD fanboys excuse is a more efficient architecture than 390, and even thst is absolutely hilarious considering they were bashing GTX 980 because then it didnt matter.
> But now since its AMD it is suddenly important lol


How many nVidia fans cared about efficiency when 5870 was beating the pants off of every single Fermi card nVidia had? Then Kepler released and OMG perf/watt was liek the mostest importantest thing evar! Theme continued with Maxwell and AMD was made fun of for releasing space heater after space heater. And now when AMD finally takes steps to address efficiency their efforts are belittled.


----------



## Tobiman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Do you even understand what I'm trying to say?
> R9 390X has 5.9 TFLOPS, RX 480 has 5.8 TFLOPS. They both have the same RAW shader performance.
> From comparing previous gen GCN to Maxwell, we know AMD is worse at extracting performance out of the hardware. If 5.8 TFLOPS RX 480 performs the same as an R9 390X with 5.9 TFLOPS, that means they made little to no improvement on that front.
> 
> http://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2016/01/AMD-Polaris-Architecture-1-900x506.jpg
> 
> What the hell is all that under 4th Gen GCN doing? Being pretty?
> 
> For the billionth time, *I'm not complaining about the price/perf*, I'm asking what the hell have AMD's engineers been doing? Partying with Raja too much?


You seem to be jumping the gun my friend. AMD's steam cores usually take less space compared to Nvidias so maybe they aren't targetting higher shader performance per core yet?


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> R9 will be extremely MEH at $250 when 390 cost that and offer the same performance.
> 
> Atleast Nvidia offered the fastest card with 1090 although it was expensive
> GTX 1070 a tiny bit faster than 980Ti but vastly cheaper.
> 
> I find it extremely lolw-orthy AMDs revolution marketing.
> AMD fanboys excuse is a more efficient architecture than 390, and even thst is absolutely hilarious considering they were bashing GTX 980 because then it didnt matter.
> But now since its AMD it is suddenly important lol
> 
> 
> 
> How many nVidia fans cared about efficiency when 5870 was beating the pants off of every single Fermi card nVidia had? Then Kepler released and OMG perf/watt was liek the mostest importantest thing evar! Theme continued with Maxwell and AMD was made fun of for releasing space heater after space heater. And now when AMD finally takes steps to address efficiency their efforts are belittled.
Click to expand...

TBH whoever has the most marketshare and/or fastest card tends to troll the hardest. I know we trolled the hell out of Intel fanboys back when the Athlon 64 was spanking all the Pentium 4's. It was bad...

A 3800+ along with a 7900 GT was a mean combo back then.


----------



## comagnum

Sigh, you've missed the point of this release, like so many others here. It's an attempt for amd to mainstream gaming to the average consumer. Good performance, good price, low power consumption. Everything else as far a speculation is concerned was fabricated by the internet. Amd never claimed it was a power house.


----------



## SuperZan

Let's see if I can sum up the complaints.

GTX 980 successor: FaASTESt CARD evaR!/!1!!1

R9 380 successor: IT'S JUST OFFERING THE SAME PFEROFMANCE THAT ALREADY EXISTS

Both of these cards do what a new card should do in terms of performance, which is to say that they move forward the standard for their bracket as defined by AMD/Nvidia product positioning. The fact that the RX 480 is doing so at the same price as its predecessor is a nice feather in the cap, I think. *Of course* the RX 480 is a side-grade if you're on a 390x/980 or better. We typically don't expect the bottom of the stack to reach the previous gen's flagships, do we? Who was looking at the GTX 960 and going YA TITAN PERF OR BUST. If the *380* successor was the same performance as the 380 itself, then I'd understand the complaints. It's not though. It's moving the stack forward as it should. Why is that a bad thing?


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> Sigh, you've missed the point of this release, like so many others here. It's an attempt for amd to mainstream gaming to the average consumer. Good performance, good price, low power consumption. Everything else as far a speculation is concerned was fabricated by the internet. Amd never claimed it was a power house.


https://twitter.com/AMDRadeon/status/745979045419094016

They actually did when they made claims of being the equivalent of the 4850 / 4870.


----------



## Oj010

No promises but I will try to have some benchmarks ready for the second the NDA lifts - maaaaaaybe sooner? Hehe. I'll measure the card tomorrow, it's fairly late and I'm in bed.


----------



## ChevChelios

1080Ti will be a supercomputer


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Let's see if I can sum up the complaints.
> 
> GTX 980 successor: FaASTESt CARD evaR!/!1!!1
> 
> R9 380 successor: IT'S JUST OFFERING THE SAME PFEROFMANCE THAT ALREADY EXISTS
> 
> Both of these cards do what a new card should do in terms of performance, which is to say that they move forward the standard for their bracket as defined by AMD/Nvidia product positioning. The fact that the RX 480 is doing so at the same price as its predecessor is a nice feather in the cap, I think. *Of course* the RX 480 is a side-grade if you're on a 390x/980 or better. We typically don't expect the bottom of the stack to reach the previous gen's flagships, do we? Who was looking at the GTX 960 and going YA TITAN PERF OR BUST. If the *380* successor was the same performance as the 380 itself, then I'd understand the complaints. It's not though. It's moving the stack forward as it should. Why is that a bad thing?


Yeah but AMD rebranded 290/X into 390/X so they should have been the 380/X with the Fury and Fury X as the 390/X. I think that's the reason people bring up comparing it to the 390/X.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> No promises but I will try to have some benchmarks ready for the second the NDA lifts - maaaaaaybe sooner? Hehe. I'll measure the card tomorrow, it's fairly late and I'm in bed.


Winter came on the same day as October


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Yeah but AMD rebranded 290/X into 390/X so they should have been the 380/X with the Fury and Fury X as the 390/X. I think that's the reason people bring up comparing it to the 390/X.


I don't see the comparison as unfair in and of itself. We compare the 1080 to the 980 Ti for the same reason we should compare the 480 to the 390. But, rebrand or no, the 290/390/x remained competitive for its spot in the product stack so regardless of how people want to perceive it those cards exist. They fill a spot in the stack. They will be replaced in turn, likely by a Vega part, with the ultimate Vega part being used for another special-snowflake card.

I see what you're saying, I just don't think it's the most logical way to evaluate AMD's approach.


----------



## iLeakStuff

AMD should have concentrated on the competitors for the GTX 1080/1070 cards instead. Atleast then they could offer something interesting and fast rather than a dull low midrange card.

Even AMD subreddit is extremely disappointed and you find a lot of fanboys there. Many people here on this forum seems to afraid or too stuck up you know what to say anything negative regarding the RX480.
The card would have been a "revolution" if it was faster than 390X by a good amount.
As always with new nodes you find midrange cards matching high end cards of previous nodes. There is nothing amazing about if 480X match a R9 390.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4q43w3/stop_justifying_amd_as_much_as_we_all_like_the/


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> AMD should have concentrated on the competitors for the GTX 1080/1070 cards instead. Atleast them they could offer something interesting and fast rather than a dull low midrange card.
> 
> Even AMD subreddit is extremely disappointed and you find a lot of fanboys there. Many people here are too afraid and too stuck up you know what to say anything megative regarding the RX480.
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4q43w3/stop_justifying_amd_as_much_as_we_all_like_the/


No, they should have not. I hope you never run a business as your business logic is lacking. Why try to create a product to compete when you may or may not come out on top for a select few, when you can create a product to please the masses while having no competition?


----------



## looniam

sure, fight the more uphill battle w/less resources; makes perfect sense _when you want to lose._


----------



## iRUSH

This thread went nuts lol. I don't see much to be unsatisfied about. AMD is targeting the majority with this GPU.

It's still the best new card for under $230 easily. It's checking off all of the right things in order to be successful.

Power efficiency

Price to performance

Availability (yet to be seen)

And for the enthusiast having 3 different options for the same GPU is pretty fun.

I was certain I was going to get the 1070. But Pascal was a wake-up call for me.

Up until the 970, I had a $299 maximum GPU limit. It's just something I did. But over the years things have gotten out of hand and I sort of slid into the trap so to speak.

This RX 480 even at 290 performance is what makes me not only excited to be a value PC gamer again, but the amount of people that will build their first rig now because of this GPU has me even more excited.

I'm convinced that this is exactly what the PC builder's market needed.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> sure fight the more uphill battle w/less resources makes perfect sense when you want to lose.


Ah, the classic uphill cavalry charge against scaled fortifications and spear walls. Always your best bet.


----------



## Boomer1990

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> AMD should have concentrated on the competitors for the GTX 1080/1070 cards instead. Atleast then they could offer something interesting and fast rather than a dull low midrange card.
> 
> Even AMD subreddit is extremely disappointed and you find a lot of fanboys there. Many people here on this forum are too afraid and too stuck up you know what to say anything megative regarding the RX480.
> The card would have been a "revolution" if it was faster than 390X by a good amount.
> As always with new nodes you find midrange cards matching high end cards of previous nodes. There is nothing amazing about if 480X match a R9 390.
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4q43w3/stop_justifying_amd_as_much_as_we_all_like_the/


Or they could focus on the mainstream market like they are with the improvements to DX11, so people like me who does not buy used computer parts and does not have a lot of spare cash can have a nice upgrade.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xxdarkreap3rxx*
> 
> Yeah but AMD rebranded 290/X into 390/X so they should have been the 380/X with the Fury and Fury X as the 390/X. I think that's the reason people bring up comparing it to the 390/X.


Nvidia did it first using midrange GPUs as high end for 100% higher price, now If AMD rebrand a high end GPU with 2x vram and better BIOS, cooling and higher frequency for 100usd less is bad

Also Fury X isnt a mainstream or high end card given the exclusive technology it has which certainly requires higher costs than using 2008 memory into 1000usd GPUs


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Robenger*
> 
> No, they should have not. I hope you never run a business as your business logic is lacking. Why try to create a product to compete when you may or may not come out on top for a select few, when you can create a product to please the masses while having no competition?


Yes my "business logic" (lol) are lacking. Its just the exact same as Nvidia have been using for years now. Who is sucessful of AMD and Nvidia you say?









By all means, let AMD release a card with the same performance as millions and millions already own. Im sure they will buy RX 480 just because its "new".
Go read the AMD subreddit. Many are pissed because they sold their 290/390/290X/390X and this is what they found out later after all the hype: "matching 1070 with overclock, maybe even 1080", or "980Ti performance for $200"









https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> How many nVidia fans cared about efficiency when 5870 was beating the pants off of every single Fermi card nVidia had? Then Kepler released and OMG perf/watt was liek the mostest importantest thing evar! Theme continued with Maxwell and AMD was made fun of for releasing space heater after space heater. And now when AMD finally takes steps to address efficiency their efforts are belittled.


HD 5, 6, and 7 series before Kepler were all besting nvidia in efficiency. Really AMD only released 3 chips that were less efficient than nvidia at the time of release. When you consider the investment/efficiency, AMD isn't doing to shabby


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Yes my "business logic" (lol) are lacking. Its just the exact same as Nvidia have been using for years now. Who is sucessful of AMD and Nvidia you say?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By all means, let AMD release a card with the same performance as millions and millions already own. Im sure they will buy RX 480 just because its "new".
> Go read the AMD subreddit. Many are pissed because they sold their 290/390/290X/390X and this is what they found out later after all the *hype: "matching 1070 with overclock, maybe even 1080", or "980Ti performance for $200"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/


Show me a single post where amd said that, you and your fake hype.

btw , card is x80, not x90 so obviously it's for 280/380 crowd. as the price suggests.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Yes my "business logic" (lol) are lacking. Its just the exact same as Nvidia have been using for years now. Who is sucessful of AMD and Nvidia you say?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By all means, let AMD release a card with the same performance as millions and millions already own. Im sure they will buy RX 480 just because its "new".
> Go read the AMD subreddit. Many are pissed because they sold their 290/390/290X/390X and this is what they found out later after all the hype: "matching 1070 with overclock, maybe even 1080", or "980Ti performance for $200"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/


I dont see many people complaining at all.


----------



## NicksTricks007

@Oj010 you dirty dog, lol. It wasn't enough that you apologized for your misinformation. You had to go and get two 480s just to prove your point









We shall await your findings shortly!


----------



## Robenger

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Yes my "business logic" (lol) are lacking. Its just the exact same as Nvidia have been using for years now. Who is sucessful of AMD and Nvidia you say?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By all means, let AMD release a card with the same performance as millions and millions already own. Im sure they will buy RX 480 just because its "new".
> Go read the AMD subreddit. Many are pissed because they sold their 290/390/290X/390X and this is what they found out later after all the hype: "matching 1070 with overclock, maybe even 1080", or "980Ti performance for $200"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/


If they're mad then they only have themselves to blame as there still is no official benchmarks from any reputable source.
Secondly. Nvidia did the same thing last gen with the 970. It offered the best price to performance ratio for most people. This is also AMD's plan as well.


----------



## slavovid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Yes my "business logic" (lol) are lacking. Its just the exact same as Nvidia have been using for years now. Who is sucessful of AMD and Nvidia you say?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By all means, let AMD release a card with the same performance as millions and millions already own. Im sure they will buy RX 480 just because its "new".
> Go read the AMD subreddit. Many are pissed because they sold their 290/390/290X/390X and this is what they found out later after all the hype: "matching 1070 with overclock, maybe even 1080", or "980Ti performance for $200"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/


If many ppl have sold their old cards they have probably done so for more than 200$ or close to that at least. Now if they get a RX480 8GB they will get newer node, less heat generated, less power draw and better performance. Maybe not much better but all those things add up + it's performance would probably increase by 5-10% in the course of an year.

Now about marketing i am one of those guys with 200-300$ price limit and for me if either AMD or Nvidia releases a high end GPU it will be something i read up once and revew how it goes in hopes later they can release a product in my price range that performs at least at half the rate of it. What is great now is that AMD has actually started with that product rather with the top end one. From production point of vew, from marketshare point of view even from hardware maturity point of view. Then why not do it?
Not only that it is half of the top end product - 1080 and that was shown in the Ashes Crossfire comparison. it.
Nvidia however had the lead and had to keep it,


----------



## Fancykiller65

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Yes my "business logic" (lol) are lacking. Its just the exact same as Nvidia have been using for years now. Who is sucessful of AMD and Nvidia you say?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> By all means, let AMD release a card with the same performance as millions and millions already own. Im sure they will buy RX 480 just because its "new".
> Go read the AMD subreddit. Many are pissed because they sold their 290/390/290X/390X and this is what they found out later after all the hype: "matching 1070 with overclock, maybe even 1080", or "980Ti performance for $200"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4pzklb/sapphire_ed_i_would_not_upgrade_from_390_to_480/


Thats what happens when people stake out on rumors, sometimes you lose, or you get lucky and sell a card before its selling prices drop. On one hand, competing with GTX 1070 and 80 is entirely a good decision, on the other, there is something to be said for AMD trying to preempt Nvidia at a market segment. Considering AMD's low market share, Nvidia's marketing and name brand dominance, one could see a situation AMD competing with Nvidia's 1070/80 directly and failing to gain market share or sales. In that case, AMD may have decided to attempt this push at the mainstream to gain share, and not go directly into a contest its already losing.

If it works, hopefully it does, great, if not, well, hopefully Vega will do better.


----------



## NicksTricks007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> I dont see many people complaining at all.


Only ones are those that had unrealistic expectations.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> *AMD should have concentrated on the competitors for the GTX 1080/1070 cards instead. Atleast then they could offer something interesting and fast rather than a dull low midrange card.*
> 
> Even AMD subreddit is extremely disappointed and you find a lot of fanboys there. Many people here on this forum seems to afraid or too stuck up you know what to say anything negative regarding the RX480.
> The card would have been a "revolution" if it was faster than 390X by a good amount.
> As always with new nodes you find midrange cards matching high end cards of previous nodes. There is nothing amazing about if 480X match a R9 390.
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4q43w3/stop_justifying_amd_as_much_as_we_all_like_the/


Would you buy an AMD card that had 1080 performance but was 10% less expensive? 15%? 25%? 50%?

I think AMD did the right thing by not trying to get into a pissing match with nVidia at the high end, because everything else equal, unless the AMD card was literally half the price, people would still buy nVidia because their brand recognition is unhealthily strong at the high end.


----------



## KarathKasun

Like all the people that say "I want AMD to compete so NV will suck less", but will never buy an AMD product. No matter if its better for their price point or application.


----------



## magnek

More like "I want AMD to compete so NV will be cheaper"

Yeah screw those people. I hope one day x04 cards cost $1000 (we're not that far away) and a Titan costs $3000 so they reap what they sow.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Like all the people that say "I want AMD to compete so NV will suck less", but will never buy an AMD product. No matter if its better for their price point or application.


This.

for 200-230$ we haven't got any huge improvements( from nvidia 760-960 )or new products from amd ( mostly rebrands). this is the best launch in this price segment after years. but people are still unhappy. i guess if nvidia launched 1060 now it will be the second coming of Jesus or something ?


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Let's not forget that OC vs OC, the 1080 is barely faster than the Titan X, given that the Titan X has sufficient cooling. A good aftermarket 980 Ti only loses by 10% against an aftermarket 1080.

It's just like the jump from the 780 Ti; the real gap was about 5% when comparing the chips at their highest clock speeds. The 780 Ti was just so low clocked from the factory that it looked more impressive for the 980 than it was.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> Originally Posted by iLeakStuff View Post
> 
> Yes my "business logic" (lol) are lacking. Its just the exact same as Nvidia have been using for years now. Who is sucessful of AMD and Nvidia you say? rolleyes.gif
> 
> By all means, let AMD release a card with the same performance as millions and millions already own. Im sure they will buy RX 480 just because its "new".
> Go read the AMD subreddit. Many are pissed because they sold their 290/390/290X/390X and this is what they found out later after all the hype: "matching 1070 with overclock, maybe even 1080", or "980Ti performance for $200" rolleyes.gif


Meanwhile over at the NV forums i'm sure people are pissed because they sold their 980ti for the 1070 or 1080 lol.


----------



## Fancykiller65

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> Meanwhile over at the NV forums i'm sure people are pissed because they sold their 980ti for the 1070 or 1080 lol.


Do you have any evidence for that? On that note, have any reviewers anyone has read, warned about upgrades from the 980ti to 1070/80 might not be that big of an upgrade?

I ask cause I think Nvidia managed to get away with that under the radar. Or am I missing those reviews?


----------



## NicksTricks007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> Like all the people that say "I want AMD to compete so NV will suck less", but will never buy an AMD product. No matter if its better for their price point or application.


I'll never understand that. Why rip on a product that you obviously have no intention of purchasing. Hell, why even click on any RX 480 discussion link.

I sometimes think nVidia might be paying them to go in all the online tech forums and bash on AMD.

But whatever, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. Hopefully there are people smart enough to sift through and disregard the trash to make an informed decision.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> A good aftermarket 980 Ti only loses by 10% against an aftermarket 1080.


source ?

everything Ive seen puts it @ 15-20%

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/nvidia_geforcegtx_1070_overclocking/

a 1455Mhz 980Ti there, but a 1500+ would only make it a few % faster
Quote:


> for 1080 OC:
> The best possible core clock speed/memory speed I was able to wring from this GPU was a solid 2050MHz to 2063MHz under load at the maximum reported temperatures. If I could keep the core temperature another 10 °C cooler, the card will run at 2126MHz all day long.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fancykiller65*
> 
> Do you have any evidence for that? On that note, have any reviewers anyone has read, warned about upgrades from the 980ti to 1070/80 might not be that big of an upgrade?
> 
> I ask cause I think Nvidia managed to get away with that under the radar. Or am I missing those reviews?


Most of the reviews follow the NV guidebook, quote fantastic overclocking , do not compare to any AIB 980tis at all etc even in overclock reviews (hardOCP etc) . Quote big upgrade from maxwell .

Really you might be lucky if you can run one extra detail setting with the 1080 and you would have to tone detail down with the 1070. Max OC vs Max OC 980ti/TX etc.

Massive upgrade still


----------



## Fancykiller65

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NicksTricks007*
> 
> I sometimes think nVidia might be paying them to go in all the online tech forums and bash on AMD.


I wouldn't be surprised. Hell, AMD should probably do it too. Perception is everything, and if majority something someone sees at first glance is negative, they won't bother with going deeper. Not that they should always, at the end of the day you only have so much time to shift through everything before moving on.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> source ?
> 
> everything Ive seen puts it @ 15-20%
> 
> http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/nvidia_geforcegtx_1070_overclocking/
> 
> a 1455Mhz 980Ti there, but a 1500+ would only make it a few % faster


I agree a 980ti would still be 15-20% slower than a 1080 ti max oc vs max oc whilst been on par or better than a max OC 1070. Certainly in firestrike ultra results i browsed through the other day there were no 1070 SLI setups close to TX or 980ti SLI setups. Difference of at least 500 points there.

I estimated with my TX at 1530 mhz gaming clocks that i'm behind by 5-12 % in 4k to a 2100mhz 1080. That's a very small difference , almost negligible for any real world benefit.

Like any sane person i'll wait for a decent upgrade for my $$.


----------



## Pyrotagonist

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> source ?
> 
> everything Ive seen puts it @ 15-20%
> 
> http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/nvidia_geforcegtx_1070_overclocking/
> 
> a 1455Mhz 980Ti there, but a 1500+ would only make it a few % faster


I guess it's closer to 15%. It's about 10% compared to the Gigabyte 1080. On average, maybe 13% loss.

It's from the TPU overclocking results. 980 Ti Matrix vs aftermarket 1080s. Most sites that test overclocking use the ridiculously gimped stock 980 Ti.

Assuming the TX at the same clocks is about 9-10% faster then it's 7% slower than the best aftermarket 1080. That's slightly better than 980 vs 780 Ti.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pyrotagonist*
> 
> I guess it's closer to 15%.
> 
> It's from the TPU overclocking results. 980 Ti Matrix vs aftermarket 1080s.
> 
> Assuming the TX at the same clocks is about 9-10% faster then it's 7% slower than the best aftermarket 1080. That's slightly better than 980 vs 780 Ti.


Its almost interesting to think that if NV had left the Maxwell OC headroom in the Pascall cards, the 1070 would have lost to 980ti in the reviews , especially AIB models (but they were barred from reviews so maybe not). The 1080 would have come close to loosing to the TX at stock also.

I guess they engineered it so it was not the case - stock clocks slightly faster than last gen 1070 vs 980ti etc , but it does mean OC vs OC is very important to take into account when buying.


----------



## comagnum

What are the chances the NDA gets lifted before the cards are a available for sale? I'm going to get one regardless, but jumping in basically blind makes me nervous.. I always do thorough research on things before I buy, and with the 480, there isn't really solid enough info.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Ah, the classic uphill cavalry charge against scaled fortifications and spear walls. Always your best bet.


remember what jon snow did?

he knows something!


----------



## Iscaria

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> What are the chances the NDA gets lifted before the cards are a available for sale? I'm going to get one regardless, but jumping in basically blind makes me nervous.. I always do thorough research on things before I buy, and with the 480, there isn't really solid enough info.


Chances are slim to nil at this point. There was a rumor that NDA might lift June 24th, but that has proven false. Fortunately there is enough information in leaks to at least make an educated guess as to the card's performance. Honestly, the only real dilemma for someone who has read every leak like me is whether to get a reference model or wait for the AIB's. Reference is appealing to me, but with an AIB I could always run stock speeds in the summer and overclock in the winter.









If I recall correctly, the NDA lifts June 29th at 9AM EST. Your best bet would be to read all the reviews that get dropped at that time and then try to make a decision before they sell out.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> What are the chances the NDA gets lifted before the cards are a available for sale? I'm going to get one regardless, but jumping in basically blind makes me nervous.. I always do thorough research on things before I buy, and with the 480, there isn't really solid enough info.


Eh, we're only about 39 hours away, doesn't matter so much now. Personally I'm going to be waiting a few weeks to see what aib customs can offer before I make a decision.


----------



## Gungnir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> What are the chances the NDA gets lifted before the cards are a available for sale? I'm going to get one regardless, but jumping in basically blind makes me nervous.. I always do thorough research on things before I buy, and with the 480, there isn't really solid enough info.


Launch is in two days, and there doesn't seem to be a revised NDA lift date, so I doubt it. You could always hold off a day or two if you're nervous, but all the tech sites should have their reviews up around midnight on the 29th, same time as the cards go up for sale.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> remember what jon snow did?
> 
> he knows something!


You know nothing of John snow, only bran knows the truth!


----------



## comagnum

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> Eh, we're only about 39 hours away, doesn't matter so much now. Personally I'm going to be waiting a few weeks to see what aib customs can offer before I make a decision.


I've been mulling the idea of waiting myself, especially to see if the rumors of the 470 being able to be unlocked are true. However, the anticipation is killing me and I don't have a hot running system anyways, so the reference would be fine for the time being, until vega surfaces.


----------



## Iscaria

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gungnir*
> 
> Launch is in two days, and there doesn't seem to be a revised NDA lift date, so I doubt it. You could always hold off a day or two if you're nervous, but all the tech sites should have their reviews up around midnight on the 29th, same time as the cards go up for sale.


The lift is at 9AM EST on the 29th.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> What are the chances the NDA gets lifted before the cards are a available for sale? I'm going to get one regardless, but jumping in basically blind makes me nervous.. I always do thorough research on things before I buy, and with the 480, there isn't really solid enough info.


The AIB cards have real potential, unless you are not going to overclock i would wait the couple of weeks.

I would think 10%+ performance gains from the AIB cards vs ref as there seems to be cooling / power limitations in the ref design when trying to overclock.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> remember what jon snow did?
> 
> he knows something!
> 
> 
> 
> You know nothing of John snow, only bran knows the truth!
Click to expand...

i just finished watching it so now i know too.


----------



## comagnum

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> The AIB cards have real potential, unless you are not going to overclock i would wait the couple of weeks.
> 
> I would think 10%+ performance gains from the AIB cards vs ref as there seems to be cooling / power limitations in the ref design when trying to overclock.


That's probably the better bet.. I don't buy gfx cards new very often, my 280x now, 4850 and 4870x2 before that were my only recent new purchases. I'm just overly eager to finally upgrade.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> That's probably the better bet.. I don't buy gfx cards new very often, my 280x now, 4850 and 4870x2 before that were my only recent new purchases. I'm just overly eager to finally upgrade.


If you are fine with 980 performance, ref card is perfect for you. Remember, nVidia needs to put a fancy $100 cooler to their Pascal just to make them look good in bench before throttling. (I said this because many guys here want to refer to their MSRP). Meanwhile, the cooler on ref 480 is cheap junk and the card still operates well at their factory spec.


----------



## Kand

http://imgur.com/a/3iTkS

Crossposting this.

I'm surprised this image set hasn't been posted yet.



TLR RX 480 doesn't beat a GTX 970.


----------



## Lipos

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kand*
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/3iTkS
> 
> Crossposting this.
> 
> I'm surprised this image set hasn't been posted yet.
> 
> 
> 
> TLR RX 480 doesn't beat a GTX 970.


http://www.overclock.net/t/1603252/wccf-amd-rx-480-can-hit-1-5ghz-new-overclocking-tool-with-voltage-control-coming/1970#post_25292734










Actually the 480 is slightly faster than a 980 @1080p in Arkham Knight
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/rumor-rx480-aib-card-leaked-and-tested.223351/page-22#post-3479050


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kand*
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/3iTkS
> 
> Crossposting this.
> 
> I'm surprised this image set hasn't been posted yet.
> 
> 
> 
> TLR RX 480 doesn't beat a GTX 970.


2 things

1 what makes this Chinese leak more credible than the others?

2 do you know what TL;DR means? Lol


----------



## Lipos

Crossfire, 24327 Graphics Score


http://www.3dmark.com/fs/8993588?_ga=1.125669122.962508730.1464474514&locale=en_GB


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kand*
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/3iTkS
> 
> Crossposting this.
> 
> I'm surprised this image set hasn't been posted yet.
> 
> TLR RX 480 doesn't beat a GTX 970.


I'm surprised that you failed to read the graphic score. I admit that it's a bit small compared to the overall score but well


----------



## Slaughterem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kand*
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/3iTkS
> 
> Crossposting this.
> 
> I'm surprised this image set hasn't been posted yet.
> 
> 
> 
> TLR RX 480 doesn't beat a GTX 970.


Glad you posted that now for sure I will know how this card will perform when gaming. OOoo did he use the drivers that reviewers were given a day or so ago?


----------



## Fancykiller65

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slaughterem*
> 
> Glad you posted that now for sure I will know how this card will perform when gaming. OOoo did he use the drivers that reviewers were given a day or so ago?


It does not seem so according to the Crimson driver date.


----------



## Slaughterem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fancykiller65*
> 
> It does not seem so according to the Crimson driver date.


Thanks it sort of was a rhetorical question.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kand*
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/3iTkS
> 
> Crossposting this.
> 
> I'm surprised this image set hasn't been posted yet.
> 
> 
> 
> TLR RX 480 doesn't beat a GTX 970.


pssst don't confuse overall score with graphics score, which is 20% higher at 12516


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> 2 things
> 
> 1 what makes this Chinese leak more credible than the others?
> 
> 2 do you know what TL;DR means? Lol


I can confirm that the Chinese number is legit. The problem with that "TL;DR" guy is that he failed to aware of the 12467 graphics score, which of course ahead of 970.

A new driver mostly gives some optimization here and there and raises the temp limit to make the card look good, AMD did this before though


----------



## comagnum

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> If you are fine with 980 performance, ref card is perfect for you. Remember, nVidia needs to put a fancy $100 cooler to their Pascal just to make them look good in bench before throttling. (I said this because many guys here want to refer to their MSRP). Meanwhile, the cooler on ref 480 is cheap junk and the card still operates well at their factory spec.


Well, coming from a 280x, I would be perfectly happy with 390/980 performance. Seeing as you have first hand experience with the card do you believe this would fit? It's off of my asus 5770;


----------



## Kand

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> I'm surprised that you failed to read the graphic score. I admit that it's a bit small compared to the overall score but well


http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3717059

A non reference GTX 970 would clock in at about 12-13k Graphics score.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kand*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3717059
> 
> A non reference GTX 970 would clock in at about 12-13k Graphics score.


A non reference GTX 970 overclocked to stock 980 performance, what a shocker


----------



## sugarhell

But but amd cant overclock,"Overclockers Dream", hot,noise,power consumption,drivers,1700 lolwut oc on ref cooler

Apply more amd memes if you can


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kand*
> 
> http://www.3dmark.com/fs/3717059
> 
> A non reference GTX 970 would clock in at about 12-13k Graphics score.


Yeah, I admit that the ref 480 would be the same as a good custom 970, which is the range of a ref 980.

Should we wait for custom 480 to continue your argument? There will be a nice surprise when 480 got cooled properly and have enough juice to play with


----------



## Kand

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Yeah, I admit that the ref 480 would be the same as a good custom 970, which is the range of a ref 980.
> 
> Should we wait for custom 480 to continue your argument? There will be a nice surprise when 480 got cooled properly and have enough juice to play with


That does seem to be the thing with AMD.

Forever Waiting.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Yeah, I admit that the ref 480 would be the same as a good custom 970, which is the range of a ref 980.
> 
> Should we wait for custom 480 to continue your argument? There will be a nice surprise when 480 got cooled properly and have enough juice to play with


Not really. A custom 970 overclocked to the hilt will match and maybe exceed a stock 980 by a few %. By overclocked to the hilt I mean 1550 core 8000 memory.

Not one single custom 970 reaches stock 980 performance out the box without manual overclocking, so it's a stupid comparison to begin with.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kand*
> 
> That does seem to be the thing with AMD.
> 
> Forever Waiting.


Just like those waiting for that magical bios so they can do 2.5GHz on air on the 1080


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kand*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Yeah, I admit that the ref 480 would be the same as a good custom 970, which is the range of a ref 980.
> 
> Should we wait for custom 480 to continue your argument? There will be a nice surprise when 480 got cooled properly and have enough juice to play with
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That does seem to be the thing with AMD.
> 
> Forever Waiting.
Click to expand...

who is waiting for what exactly? If the RX480 is around 980/Nano perf(it is) like the pre launch rumors suggest what are people waiting for?


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Just like those waiting for that magical bios so they can do 2.5GHz on air on the 1080


Async drivers. Oh well we will wait a lot for that


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> Well, coming from a 280x, I would be perfectly happy with 390/980 performance. Seeing as you have first hand experience with the card do you believe this would fit? It's off of my asus 5770;


I'm not sure but just check if your card has the x bracket at the back. If yes then it would fit. But you have to careful with the VRM, it can be extremely hot.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> I can confirm that the Chinese number is legit. The problem with that "TL;DR" guy is that he failed to aware of the 12467 graphics score, which of course ahead of 970.
> 
> A new driver mostly gives some optimization here and there and raises the temp limit to make the card look good, AMD did this before though


Ah, my mistake for assuming he did a proper comparison. I cba to remember Firestike scores for everything. Lol

You're my boy blue! (Had to say it)


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Async drivers. Oh well we will wait a lot for that


Well it's coming soon­™


----------



## Slaughterem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kand*
> 
> That does seem to be the thing with AMD.
> 
> Forever Waiting.


Yea your right always waiting , thank god you have NVidia to order your 1070 and 1080 cards, hmmm how long will you have to wait from this rushed paper launch?


----------



## FLCLimax

cat got your tongue Kand?


----------



## Kand

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Well it's coming soon­™


Waiting forever for relevant games that would fully support Async shaders too
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> cat got your tongue Kand?


Nah. I was responding to the other thread. I don't have all my attention here like you. :b


----------



## delboy67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Async drivers. Oh well we will wait a lot for that


The fermi dx12 driver?


----------



## cranfam

I really don't understand the bashing of a $200 video card that you don't plan on buying. This is an upgrade for those of us on a 380/380X. Or, it is an upgrade for someone with a 290/290X/390/390X and is looking for a decrease in power consumption.

Why is this so hard for people to understand?


----------



## rv8000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cranfam*
> 
> I really don't understand the bashing of a $200 video card that you don't plan on buying. This is an upgrade for those of us on a 380/380X. Or, it is an upgrade for someone with a 290/290X/390/390X and is looking for a decrease in power consumption.
> 
> Why is this so hard for people to understand?


Most of them are here to argue above all else. That's what the internet is for isn't it?









Picking up an AIB card for sure. I wish I had realized I'm hardly going to play games anymore, my 1080 is great, but it was definitely a spur of the moment buy. And what do you know, now I need money for my car







.

Though if blue is speaking the truth about AMD going Nvidia boost style, I'm a little wary of it; the new pstate settings in crimson look pretty neat though.


----------



## Slaughterem

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kand*
> 
> Waiting forever for relevant games that would fully support Async shaders too
> Nah. I was responding to the other thread. I don't have all my attention here like you. :b


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cranfam*
> 
> I really don't understand the bashing of a $200 video card that you don't plan on buying. This is an upgrade for those of us on a 380/380X. Or, it is an upgrade for someone with a 290/290X/390/390X and is looking for a decrease in power consumption.
> 
> Why is this so hard for people to understand?


Exactly. Amd is releasing a card that will bring last years $400 to $500 level cards to a price point of $200 to $300. And is also now offering cards that will give the $100 to $200 segment a big boost in performance.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Too busy clogging up this thread.
> 
> It amazes me the length some would go to just to bash a card they would never even consider buying.


Guys like him are the reason for $699 Fudder Edition, which can't even fully support Async in 2016.


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Interesting conversation......

The uncalled for comments aside, not sure how anyone could be upset with a $200 card that crushes 1080P. Assuming the 480 does just that.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Looks like $240 is the launch price for the reference 8GB:


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Looks like $240 is the launch price for the reference 8GB:


That's called price gouging.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> That's called price gouging.


I think rumors said $230 originally, so not too bad compared to NVIDIA.


----------



## Greenland

@Dargonplay

Not really, MSRP for FuryX was $649 and MSI, ASUS and Gigabyte were selling it for $659 and above. All Fury X are the same btw.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Looks like $240 is the launch price for the reference 8GB:


That XFX better come with a backplate if it's $10 extra.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> That XFX better come with a backplate if it's $10 extra.


These were all XFX:



I think they also increased their clocks to 1328MHz:


----------



## rexolaboy

My first post on OCN... Wait for official and non profit reviews. No reason to compare gpus if you don't own them yourself ie. "My R9 Fury is faster than the RX 480." or "rx 480 = 970". Just wait peeps.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> These were all XFX:
> 
> 
> 
> I think they also increased their clocks to 1328MHz:


Reports are there is a black edition at 1280 with backplate then a black edition oc at 1328 with backplate.

It at least explaims the two skus.

http://videocardz.com/61475/amd-radeon-rx-480-rumors-part-7


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> These were all XFX:
> 
> 
> 
> I think they also increased their clocks to 1328MHz:


Ya I've seen those, but there was a rumor saying Sapphire got super jelly when XFX showed off their backplates, and so XFX took them off. So XFX charging $10 more hopefully means a backplate is included.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Reports are there is a black edition at 1280 with backplate then a black edition oc at 1328 with backplate.


Wonder if either of those is the $250 one.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Ya I've seen those, but there was a rumor saying Sapphire got super jelly when XFX showed off their backplates, and so XFX took them off. So XFX charging $10 more hopefully means a backplate is included.


It would make sense if they are charging more.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Wonder if either of those is the $250 one.
> It would make sense if they are charging more.


Looks like it.


----------



## Halo_003

Now if we can get some of the waterblock companies to put out some nice options for these 480's that would be great. Personally I'd be all over an Aquacomputer block.


----------



## Gungnir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rexolaboy*
> 
> My first post on OCN... Wait for official and non profit reviews. No reason to compare gpus if you don't own them yourself ie. "My R9 Fury is faster than the RX 480." or "rx 480 = 970". Just wait peeps.


My stance is that we don't really know much about a new video card until they've been released for at least a couple weeks. Review sites are all well and good, but they can only do so much. A large community of enthusiasts tweaking and testing gives a lot more info (a wider array of benchmarks, average and maximum OCs, etc.).
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Ya I've seen those, but there was a rumor saying Sapphire got super jelly when XFX showed off their backplates, and so XFX took them off. So XFX charging $10 more hopefully means a backplate is included.


That XFX 480 unboxing from a couple days ago had a backplate, so it seems like at least some cards will have it.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Looks like it.


What the a $270 reference 480?









Well it's probably the factory overclocked to 1328 one with a backplate. Still a bit much considering it's still just reference.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rexolaboy*
> 
> My first post on OCN... Wait for official and non profit reviews. No reason to compare gpus if you don't own them yourself ie. "My R9 Fury is faster than the RX 480." or "rx 480 = 970". Just wait peeps.


Welcome to OCN!









You picked one hell of a time to join us. Based on the way this conversation is going, it's as if the RX 480 is going tear the universe apart come Wednesday.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> What the a $270 reference 480?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well it's probably the factory overclocked to 1328 one with a backplate. Still a bit much considering it's still just reference.


Yeah, unless they were binned I wouldnt buy it. Just get the cheaper one and if you really want flash it with the other bios.


----------



## Offender_Mullet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rexolaboy*
> 
> My first post on OCN... Wait for official and non profit reviews. No reason to compare gpus if you don't own them yourself ie. "My R9 Fury is faster than the RX 480." or "rx 480 = 970". Just wait peeps.


Thank you......


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!






.....and welcome to OCN.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Looks like it.


The $270 one is probably the OC model then. I think I'll just wait for the next Devil card to come out see how much that is:


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> What the a $270 reference 480?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well it's probably the factory overclocked to 1328 one with a backplate. Still a bit much considering it's still just reference.


Yeah, that's too much for a reference. Maybe there really will be $350 non-reference cards.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Yeah, that's too much for a reference. Maybe there really will be $350 non-reference cards.


@ $350, you should probably spend an extra $50ish and get a GTX 1070.


----------



## blue1512

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> The $270 one is probably the OC model then. I think I'll just wait for the next Devil card to come out see how much that is:
> 
> 
> Yeah, that's too much for a reference. Maybe there really will be $350 non-reference cards.


Who want to reach 980ti should wait for this big ass cooler.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Welcome to OCN!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You picked one hell of a time to join us. Based on the way this conversation is going, it's as if the RX 480 is going tear the universe apart come Wednesday.


Well RX 480 is certainly going to cause the fanboys to rip each other a new one








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> The $270 one is probably the OC model then. I think I'll just wait for the next Devil card to come out see how much that is:
> 
> 
> Yeah, that's too much for a reference. Maybe there really will be $350 non-reference cards.


This sadly:
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> @ $350, you should probably spend an extra $50ish and get a GTX 1070.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> @ $350, you should probably spend an extra $50ish and get a GTX 1070.


I'm going to go with AMD this round of GPUs as an experiment to see which side is right or wrong when green vs red arguments come up. If the Devil Card is dual GPU like previous models, it will be great because I can jump right into Crossfire and get more data.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *blue1512*
> 
> Who want to overclock should wait for this big ass cooler.


Luckily that one turned out to be a fake, so we are in the clear from cheese graters.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> This sadly:


I still think the non-reference models will make it at least to Fury X performance, but we will see how everything plays out in a couple of weeks (AMD already knows that the 1070 exists @ $400 so if they are releasing a card in the $350 range it would have to directly compete or the product would not make sense). It could also mean NVIDIA price cuts the 1070 and 1080 to make them more appealing. But I will have to see what the non-reference reviews report first.


----------



## MikeDuffy

Polaris10, the current leader in performance/$, is launching shortly with good supply. The Nvidia faithful have said that GP106 will be leaked to the public in order to steal AMD's thunder.

My question is: why is Nvidia so quiet about GP106? Why have they seemingly abandoned the mainstream market?

My opinion is: 1280 Cuda Cores with 6GB and 192bit bus can't compete against Polaris10 especially in dx12 and Nvidia's silence is proof. They need to undercut Polaris 10 to compete.

I'm specifically asking the trolls - @ChevChelios?
@iLeakStuff?
Where is GP106? Why Nvidia hiding it? ?


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeDuffy*
> 
> Polaris10, the current leader in performance/$, is launching shortly with good supply. The Nvidia faithful have said that GP106 will be leaked to the public in order to steal AMD's thunder.
> 
> My question is: why is Nvidia so quiet about GP106? Why have they seemingly abandoned the mainstream market?
> 
> My opinion is: 1280 Cuda Cores with 6GB and 192bit bus can't compete against Polaris10 especially in dx12 and Nvidia's silence is proof. They need to undercut Polaris 10 to compete.
> 
> I'm specifically asking the trolls - @ChevChelios?
> @iLeakStuff?
> Where is GP106? Why Nvidia hiding it? ?


I think the biggest reason Nvidia isn't saying anything about any new cards, yet, is because they want to get GTX 1070's and 1080's into the hands of everyone that want them before announcing a new product. That way, they keep the focus on their 1070/1080 as the highest performing cards currently on the market (at stock at least).

It is very possible that Nvidia may make an announcement on Wednesday in an attempt to steal some of AMD's thunder. It's also possible that Nvidia knows something that we don't, such as perhaps the RX 480 won't deliver on the hype, so they're keeping their mouth shut and letting the world make their decision.

Or... you are right and Nvidia knows their proposed 1060 won't compete. I guess we will just have to wait and see.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeDuffy*
> 
> Polaris10, the current leader in performance/$, is launching shortly with good supply. The Nvidia faithful have said that GP106 will be leaked to the public in order to steal AMD's thunder.
> 
> My question is: why is Nvidia so quiet about GP106? Why have they seemingly abandoned the mainstream market?
> 
> My opinion is: 1280 Cuda Cores with 6GB and 192bit bus can't compete against Polaris10 especially in dx12 and Nvidia's silence is proof. They need to undercut Polaris 10 to compete.
> 
> I'm specifically asking the trolls - @ChevChelios?
> @iLeakStuff?
> Where is GP106? Why Nvidia hiding it? ?


Considering the 1070 is effectively the same size as the 480 (75% enabled cores * 314 mm = 235 mm)*, I'd say there's a pretty good chance GP106 will compete just fine.

*yes, it's not quite that straight forward, but you get the idea


----------



## Travieso

I don't think both companies don't have really insider information of each other. Maybe they know a bit more than us but not much.

I remember when AMD engineers said in interview that the first Titan was only meant for computing purpose. Apparently it wasn't.

Or nVidia had priced the GTX780 ridiculously high at $650 before they lowered the price for about $200 because they got undercut severely by 290 series.

Another case is nVidia had to refund their customers who bought GTX280 at launch price since they cut price of the card too quick to make it competitive with HD4870. There's no way they would have done so if they knew AMD was gonna launch new products that very competitive with theirs in both price and performance-wise.

So if there's problem or change in strategy in AMD or nVidia, i think it depends on the company itself more than the competitor.


----------



## HGooper

I think this card will overclock great on water, the guy from Baidu ATI bar mentioned that he can reach 1.6ghz on air with unlocked voltage.


----------



## magnek

Here goes the hype train again...


----------



## sammkv

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HGooper*
> 
> I think this card will overclock great on water, the guy from Baidu ATI bar mentioned that he can reach 1.6ghz on air with unlocked voltage.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HGooper*
> 
> I think this card will overclock great on water, the guy from Baidu ATI bar mentioned that he can reach 1.6ghz on air with unlocked voltage.


The hype train is not halting!!


----------



## MikeDuffy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> Considering the 1070 is effectively the same size as the 480 (75% enabled cores * 314 mm = 235 mm)*, I'd say there's a pretty good chance GP106 will compete just fine.
> 
> *yes, it's not quite that straight forward, but you get the idea


You can't make calculations like that - the 1070 is not 30% cut of the 1080. 30% of the Cuda Cores were cut, but that's it's - same memory bus, ROPs, TMU, Multi-media Engine,etc.

1070 effective die size is *not* 70% of the 1080. The effective die size of the 1070 could be 90% that of the 1080, pure speculation on my part though, but it most certainly isn't 70%.

Also comparing to Polaris10 in performance/mm^2 isnt so easy because the 480 has ACEs and hardware scheduling.

Anyhow, about the 1060 performance - Nvidia won't be able to compete at the same price. Hopefully they undercut Polaris10 and we can all enjoy mainstream cards at a bargain.

Nvidia is quiet about the 1060 because it can't compete card against card.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Can't wait to see these 1600mhz cards pwn the 1080 for 1/3 the price!!!!









/S


----------



## one-shot

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeDuffy*
> 
> You can't make calculations like that - the 1070 is not 30% cut of the 1080. *30% of the Cuda Cores were cut, but that's it's* - same memory bus, ROPs, TMU, Multi-media Engine,etc.
> 
> 1070 effective die size is *not* 70% of the 1080. The effective die size of the 1070 could be 90% that of the 1080, pure speculation on my part though, but it most certainly isn't 70%.
> 
> Also comparing to Polaris10 in performance/mm^2 isnt so easy because the 480 has ACEs and hardware scheduling.
> 
> Anyhow, about the 1060 performance - Nvidia won't be able to compete at the same price. Hopefully they undercut Polaris10 and we can all enjoy mainstream cards at a bargain.
> 
> Nvidia is quiet about the 1060 because it can't compete card against card.


GTX 1080 Cuda Cores = 2560

GTX 1070 Cuda Cores = 1920

1920 / 2560 = .75

A 20 second trip to Newegg can find the Cuda Core counts of both GPUs. You just made up some numbers to bolster your claim. Man, you are lazy.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> GTX 1080 Cuda Cores = 2560
> 
> GTX 1070 Cuda Cores = 1920
> 
> 1920 / 2560 = .75
> 
> A 20 second trip to Newegg can find the Cuda Core counts of both GPUs. You just made up some numbers to bolster your claim. Man, you are lazy.


I think you missed the point of what he was saying. CUDA cores aren't the only consideration when comparing die sizes between the 1070 and 1080...


----------



## HGooper

I need to clarify one thing though, he didn't specifically claim that he did 1.6ghz on air, what he said is that so far the highest achievable clock on air is 1.6ghz, but who did it nobody knows since he didn't say he did it. Sorry for that.

He did a preview yesterday though, I just make simple summary here.

+No more frame pacing/stuttering on single card(not crossfire setup), especially on Blizzard games, he said the smoothness on RX480 is better than 970, probably the best experience among all AMD cards so far.

+Don't judge the performance on all the leaks, it's because all those leaks most likely run on old driver, which's not supported the RX480. The only RX480 supported driver so far is 16.6.210038, the so called nda driver, it has exclusive setting for RX480, without it RX480 is trash lol.

+Some of the Wattman features are still locked, and will be unlocked in near future, you can forget about AB.









+Very good PCB and materials on RX480, just compare to 1070 and you can see the different. A bit overkill.

-The reference cooler is ok if you're not intended to overclock, but still not a good reference cooler, or else wait for AIB.

Performance wise he can't say much due to nda, but he did imply that it's slightly below 980.


----------



## mohiuddin

^ is he on that Rx480 driver? When comparing with gtx980?


----------



## comagnum

When he says slightly below 980, does he mean synthetics or real world performance? Also, is there no overclocking headroom on the reference models? Or is it just limited? 1300/1350mhz would be a decent enough boost to lift it above "980" levels, correct?


----------



## boot318

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Can't wait to see these 1600mhz cards pwn the 1080 for 1/3 the price!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> /S


Hard to get to 1600 when you can't get to 1400. I kinda wanna see what a custom card is going to do. I think power consumption shoots to the moon when you try to OC (typical GCN).


----------



## MikeDuffy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *one-shot*
> 
> GTX 1080 Cuda Cores = 2560
> 
> GTX 1070 Cuda Cores = 1920
> 
> 1920 / 2560 = .75
> 
> A 20 second trip to Newegg can find the Cuda Core counts of both GPUs. You just made up some numbers to bolster your claim. Man, you are lazy.


Fine - the 1070 is a 1080 with 25% of the Cuda Cores and TMUs cut - actually bolsters my claim, thanks!

*This does not mean* that the effective die size of the 1070 is 75% that of the 1080 because only a portion of the chip was cut.

Polaris 10 wins in performance/$ and wins in performance/mm^2 ( stupid Nvidia fanboy metric btw ). It may may come very close in performance/watt; could possibly take this too, but it's pretty difficult for a mainstream part to accomplish this.

Point is the 1060 is in hiding and it's pretty clear why Nvidia isn't talking about it.


----------



## HGooper

When he's implying the performance close to 980, I would assume default vs default. Pretty sure RX480 is definitely faster than 970, I think he was forced to come out to clarify because recent leaks indicated that RX480 is slower than 970.

Edit : I think just wait for official reviews drop is the best thing to do now, different result from different source lol.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Some retailers are already selling these cards apparently so it won't be long now before we start finding out exactly how it does. I can't wait until the members here on OCN start getting their cards and posting up benchmarks!


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Polish magazine CDA was released today with card review, some info:
> 
> RX480 1266MHz 8000Mhz 8gb ref
> 970 Zotac Amp Omega
> Tested on I5 6600K
> 
> "Radeon is slighty slower than custom oc'd 970 but beats stock 970"
> 
> "Reference model we had in test was pretty bad in terms of oc, it overclocked by 5%"
> 
> R480 - Zotac 970
> 
> Metro:Last Light Redux:
> 
> 1920 45 49
> 2560 26 28
> 3840 10 12
> 
> Witcher 3 high:
> 
> 1920 50 52
> 2560 37 39
> 3840 22 23
> 
> World of Tanks high:
> 
> 1920 95 107
> 2560 78 91
> 3840 39 43


Got from a member in guru3d who found it in a polish forum.. Lol


----------



## STEvil

ncix had one listed sunday night but couldnt get it to show so I could get into checkout. Might work in about 12 hours though...


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mohiuddin*
> 
> Got from a member in guru3d who found it in a polish forum.. Lol


Well if you can't trust a random Polish magazine that breaks NDA with a prerelease review then I don't know who you can trust!


----------



## Fancykiller65

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Well if you can't trust a random Polish magazine that breaks NDA with a prerelease review then I don't know who you can trust!


I just checked subreddit AMD and the version of the 970 the Polish site is using is stated by one user to be comparable to the stock GTX 980. Here is a article I found about that 970 card. http://www.extremetech.com/computing/190652-overclocking-nvidias-gtx-970-gtx-980-performance-for-a-fraction-the-price


----------



## Greenland

LOL: "5% overclocking causes severe artifices in 3DMark, while 7% overclock causes system to freeze"


----------



## Fancykiller65

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Greenland*
> 
> LOL: "5% overclocking causes severe artifices in 3DMark, while 7% overclock causes system to freeze"


I hope the AIB cards are much better off, otherwise it becomes strange that AMD would release an overclocking tool with a card maxed out already.


----------



## renx

This NDA got me sick.
I've seen Linus and other NDAers latest videos and I was like "you know, dude. you know and you're acting like you don't!".
I tell you what, that is betrayal to the gaming community!


----------



## SuperZan

Et tu, Linus? 

I'll be glad to see real reviews soon though. We can finally end the speculation and get to some real numbers.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fancykiller65*
> 
> I hope the AIB cards are much better off, otherwise it becomes strange that AMD would release an overclocking tool with a card maxed out already.


Overclocker's dream!


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MikeDuffy*
> 
> Polaris 10 wins in performance/mm^2 .


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tajoh111*
> 
> The engineering part is interesting and has relevance towards the future of the architecture and possible pricing schemes.
> 
> Normalized, considering the transistor density improvement, rx480 if made on 28nm, would 510mm2(2.2x increase in transistor density) while the gtx 1080(1.87), would have been 587mm2.
> 
> That's only 15% more transistors but the gtx 1080 appears to be 65% faster from the leaks. Even without normalizing, Nvidia architecture is 35% more die space but giving them 65% more performance. That's a good trade off.
> 
> What is crazy is with Hawaii, AMD, particularly after several driver revisions, had similar performance to gk110, for 25% smaller die area. That's a huge turn around.
> 
> Considering AMD was supposedly making bigger changes, they should have really caught up more but it seems like their entire focus was on power consumption but the performance is not that exciting considering the hype some insiders were saying.
> 
> What the performance per mm/transistor means is Nvidia can scale up and down to make cards more powerful than AMD and also scale down cards that are cheaper and potentially faster than AMD cards. It's basically GCN 1.3 vs Maxwell again if Nvidia decides to be aggressive against AMD. Engineering superiority allows you to make faster cards and also to make cards cheaper at a particular level of performance. Add in the marketing advantage and Nvidia has all the tools to make this generation theirs again. GP206 has a decent chance at catching polaris while being smaller.
> 
> What this shows to me, is Raja, didn't really bring huge engineering changes to AMD. I guess he couldn't considering the time, but more marketing based on, on what area's to segment and target. If he did, I would have expected, rx480 to be a 190mm2 die. That being a 2.2x increase in transistor density would have allowed AMD to provide the performance of rx480 at less than half the die size of hawaii when you add in the performance benefits of finfet. The rx480 is too big of a die for the performance it provides and a smaller die would have given AMD some margins to work with.
> 
> People rag on the 1080 for being a mediocre GPU/improvement, but it's still 20(both overclocked)-35(not overclocked), better than the gtx 980 ti, while using 10% less transistors.
> 
> We need AMD to have the performance per mm2 crown because it allows them to price their cards affordably while still making money. Smaller die = higher margins. If the performance per mm2 crown is in Nvidia's corner, it basically allows them to get into price wars with AMD where they still make money while AMD starts bleeding it.


----------



## flopper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Et tu, Linus?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll be glad to see real reviews soon though. We can finally end the speculation and get to some real numbers.


still have Vega for that....
all wont be answered tomorow but some answers we be told.
do you believe?


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Chev's entire reason for being on this board is hoping with every breath and keystroke that AMD will fail at everything they do. As Alfred said, "Some people just want to watch the world burn."

Godspeed Chev! Perhaps P10 will be slower than a 5770 and all your wildest dreams will come true! Keep the faith...


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> Keep the faith...


nope

look where that got the High Sparrow


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Well the wild fire was GREEN! It's a sign!


----------



## Ultracarpet

God I hope the OCing issues that keep popping up are just a software issue. I wonder if most of the leaks have been from people attempting to use the wattman software, or if they have just been using things like afterburner. It is odd, though; that leak after leak was indicating really good OCing capabilty, and then as soon as the wattman driver sort of popped up the leaks became crap for OCing........


----------



## ChevChelios

Huang as a member of Illuminati confirmed


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> God I hope the OCing issues that keep popping up are just a software issue. I wonder if most of the leaks have been from people attempting to use the wattman software, or if they have just been using things like afterburner. It is odd, though; that leak after leak was indicating really good OCing capabilty, and then as soon as the wattman driver sort of popped up the leaks became crap for OCing........


WattMan is clearly sick, so needs to be checked out by Dr. Watson right away.


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> WattMan is clearly sick, so needs to be checked out by Dr. Watson right away.


I wish there was a Dr. Watson for life....


----------



## iLeakStuff

On par with GTX 970 but sometimes slower

YIKES

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4q80xw/polish_magazine_reviews_rx480/


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> On par with GTX 970 but sometimes slower
> 
> YIKES
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4q80xw/polish_magazine_reviews_rx480/


if that is remotely true its on par with the 980 ref since the amp omega is on 980 levels..


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> On par with GTX 970 but sometimes slower
> 
> YIKES
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4q80xw/polish_magazine_reviews_rx480/


stop trying to put 480 down









its a good little workhorse


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> if that is remotely true its on par with the 980 ref since the amp9
> omega is on 980 levels..


No its slower than GTX 980


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> stop trying to put 480 down
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> its a good little workhorse


Who are you?


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> Who are you?





Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Im Batman


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> No its slower than GTX 980


i dont know about that
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/7143/zotac-geforce-gtx-970-amp-extreme-core-edition-video-card-review/index7.html


----------



## magnek

lol less than 29 hours to go before NDA lifts and yet we have to continue with this circlejerk garbage









un-freaking-believable
















I'm out.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> On par with GTX 970 but sometimes slower
> 
> YIKES
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4q80xw/polish_magazine_reviews_rx480/


It also includes a picture of a GTX 1060? It's a troll post lol.

Set up to derail the 480 just before launch.


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> lol less than 29 hours to go before NDA lifts and yet we have to continue with this circlejerk garbage
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> un-freaking-believable
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm out.


nuuuuuuuuuuuuu don't leave


----------



## mohiuddin

See th
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iLeakStuff*
> 
> On par with GTX 970 but sometimes slower
> 
> YIKES
> 
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4q80xw/polish_magazine_reviews_rx480/


see that r9 380x (oc) fps... Lol


----------



## iLeakStuff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> It also includes a picture of a GTX 1060? It's a troll post lol.
> 
> Set up to derail the 480 just before launch.


Yes. Its clearly a conspiracy


----------



## airfathaaaaa

nope its slower than a 980 according to certain ppl..even guru3d the shilliest of the shilliest shows that
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/zotac_geforce_gtx_970_amp_extreme_core_review,19.html

i guess now we are going to find another reason to shill


----------



## magnek

Argh



Analyze the weird 3DMark results instead of hurling insults around. Let me start: the FSE score of is pretty much half of what it's supposed to be.

Well you gents have fun, it's late so I'm truly out.


----------



## slavovid

Why would that magazine pick the most OC-ed 970 on the market and compare it to a stock reference card with NDA and possibly even fail driver.

Why do people do this kind of stupid things are they getting payed by certain someone to do them?

Even an average person like me would know not to do this and instead use base reference cards to compare performance in a similar price range. Hell why compare to an OC 970 when you can pick the equivalent in performance 980.

Unless there is some other plan behind this.


----------



## Oj010

For those wondering, the reference card is exactly 245 mm long, or 9.65 inches.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Argh
> 
> 
> 
> Analyze the weird 3DMark results instead of hurling insults around. Let me start: the FSE score of is pretty much half of what it's supposed to be.
> 
> Well you gents have fun, it's late so I'm truly out.


Even then its an AIB 970 compared to a vanilla 480. Lets wait and see AIB 480 against AIB 970 and lets hope they use the official nda drivers atleast.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

when did you ever saw someone using refrence nvidia cards against amd?


----------



## Origondoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> Even then its an AIB 970 compared to a vanilla 480. Lets wait and see AIB 480 against AIB 970 and lets hope they use the official nda drivers atleast.


nanana
You have to pick the 'worst' from AMD and compare it to the 'best' from NVidia. This is the only way you can have the most significant comparison









Let see what RX 480 will deliver.
My GTX 970 @ 1475 MHz has 5568 GPs in FSE, which is more or less the parity (5708) to what I've seen from the leaked stock RX 480.

What we need to wait for is just the overclocking possiblities, mainly from AIBs


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> when did you ever saw someone using refrence nvidia cards against amd?


pretty much every single review from a half decent site Ive ever read









they may have custom cards specifically marked, but they also have a stock ref


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bucdan*
> 
> Can you measure the card from the DP and HDMI connector to the end of the cooler? mm or inches, doesn't matter to me. Thanks!


245 mm, or 9.65 inches.


----------



## spurdomantbh

The last 30 pages of this thread gave me cancer


----------



## Pesmerrga

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> For those wondering, the reference card is exactly 245 mm long, or 9.65 inches.


What is the length of just the pcb?


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pesmerrga*
> 
> What is the length of just the pcb?


7" vs 6" on the nano, should be some nice itx cards available from AIBs hopefully.


----------



## xxdarkreap3rxx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> I don't see the comparison as unfair in and of itself. We compare the 1080 to the 980 Ti for the same reason we should compare the 480 to the 390. But, rebrand or no, the 290/390/x remained competitive for its spot in the product stack so regardless of how people want to perceive it those cards exist. They fill a spot in the stack. They will be replaced in turn, likely by a Vega part, with the ultimate Vega part being used for another special-snowflake card.
> 
> I see what you're saying, I just don't think it's the most logical way to evaluate AMD's approach.


OK. Makes sense comparing the 1080 to the 980 and the 480 to the 380/X, both of which obliterate the previous gen's cards.


----------



## rv8000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Argh
> 
> 
> 
> Analyze the weird 3DMark results instead of hurling insults around. Let me start: the FSE score of is pretty much half of what it's supposed to be.
> 
> Well you gents have fun, it's late so I'm truly out.


Uh, that doesnt look fake to you. Certainly does to me. Fse, cloud gate, and ice storm listed for the 970 and 380, yet the 480 has three different bars for fse??? Lol...


----------



## Serios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rv8000*
> 
> Uh, that doesnt look fake to you. Certainly does to me. Fse, cloud gate, and ice storm listed for the 970 and 380, yet the 480 has three different bars for fse??? Lol...


Yeah also why would they test the 480 against two OC cards?
Most decent reviewers already have most vanilla cards for both manufacturers so it could be they got the 480 from a retailer(maybe they have connections) and tested it against GPUs they personally have.
Also maybe they used the CD driver which is from May if I remember correctly.


----------



## sage101

I know that the 480 is the polaris flagship card but what about the 470? Any news on the launch date, potential performance and lifted NDA?


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sage101*
> 
> I know that the 480 is the polaris flagship card but what about the 470? Any news on the launch date, potential performance and lifted NDA?


Think it's in 2 weeks? Don't hold me to that.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

If people do not remember back in the day. HD 4850 vs 9800 GTX seems a bit similar to RX 480 vs GTX980


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Pesmerrga*
> 
> What is the length of just the pcb?


180 mm, or 7.09"


----------



## Drum

Stalked OCN for years (since vanilla Haswell came out, to learn some overclocking) and finally figured I'd make an account







. I thought it would be spotted pretty quick, but does anybody notice how the R9 380X beats the 1070 by a good 9% in Metro "Srednie Detale" (Average detail), effectively ties it in World of tanks, but gets destroyed elsewhere (as it should), including in "3DMark Ice storm (lol)."

Coupled with the terrible 3D Mark typos, that makes the whole "review" very poor imo. I'm not saying they're outright lying, but if a 380X, under any OC, (with fewer shaders and a much lower clock rate than the 480), can beat an _overclocked 970_, something about the entire benchmark seems fishy/invalid to me.


----------



## Halo_003

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> 180 mm, or 7.09"


Thanks!!!









Could be a really nice card for ITX.


----------



## Gungnir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rv8000*
> 
> Uh, that doesnt look fake to you. Certainly does to me. Fse, cloud gate, and ice storm listed for the 970 and 380, yet the 480 has three different bars for fse??? Lol...


RX 480 confirmed to score nearly 10,000 stock in FSE









Seriously though, a print magazine, before NDA, with such egregious mistakes? The grain of salt is strong with this one.


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Drum*
> 
> Stalked OCN for years (since vanilla Haswell came out, to learn some overclocking) and finally figured I'd make an account
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . I thought it would be spotted pretty quick, but does anybody notice how the R9 380X beats the 1070 by a good 9% in Metro "Srednie Detale" (Average detail), effectively ties it in World of tanks, but gets destroyed elsewhere (as it should), including in "3DMark Ice storm (lol)."
> 
> Coupled with the terrible 3D Mark typos, that makes the whole "review" very poor imo. I'm not saying they're outright lying, but if a 380X, under any OC, (with fewer shaders and a much lower clock rate than the 480), can beat an _overclocked 970_, something about the entire benchmark seems fishy/invalid to me.


I love it when these results creep up over time.


----------



## mohiuddin

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gungnir*
> 
> RX 480 confirmed to score nearly 10,000 stock in FSE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seriously though, a print magazine, before NDA, with such egregious mistakes? The grain of salt is strong with this one.


Nope with early driver 12.5k


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

https://www.ekwb.com/configurator/step1_complist?gpu_gpus=2029

Says a full cover block is coming soon! I hope it's cheap!


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> https://www.ekwb.com/configurator/step1_complist?gpu_gpus=2029
> 
> Says a full cover block is coming soon! I hope it's cheap!


Why would you get a block for such a card?


----------



## adventfred

thats quite an overclock if true


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> https://www.ekwb.com/configurator/step1_complist?gpu_gpus=2029
> 
> Says a full cover block is coming soon! I hope it's cheap!
> 
> 
> 
> Why would you get a block for such a card?
Click to expand...

To make it shorter, quieter and cooler?

Why not?


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> https://www.ekwb.com/configurator/step1_complist?gpu_gpus=2029
> 
> Says a full cover block is coming soon! I hope it's cheap!


Coming Soon™

















Even EK can't resist taking a stab at AMD


----------



## caswow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Coming Soon™
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even EK can't resist taking a stab at AMD


what stab? why would they? card is not released and they are certainly under nda what do you want to hear?


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Why would you get a block for such a card?


1700mhz on the core ?


----------



## Dyson Poindexter

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Noufel*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Why would you get a block for such a card?
> 
> 
> 
> 1700mhz on the core ?
Click to expand...

More gigglehurts on the core!


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dyson Poindexter*
> 
> More gigglehurts on the core!


The hype must go on man


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *caswow*
> 
> what stab? why would they? card is not released and they are certainly under nda what do you want to hear?


Why did they put ™ after coming soon?


----------



## Oj010

Oh AMD


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Oh AMD


Can you elaborate?


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Why did they put ™ after coming soon?


I always thought usage of "soon (c)" is a stab at Blizzards (or Valves ?) infamous soon (c)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Oh AMD


?


----------



## PostalTwinkie

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> I always thought usage of "soon (c)" is a stab at Blizzards (or Valves ?) infamous soon (c)
> ?


Also Riot Games "Soon™".


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Oh AMD


Zenpai what's wrong?


----------



## Oj010

They're making me spend money. I wasn't planning to spend money now.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> They're making me spend money. I wasn't planning to spend money now.


Is that positive or negative chief


----------



## cranfam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> They're making me spend money. I wasn't planning to spend money now.


So that's a happy sad face?


----------



## Noufel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> Is that positive or negative chief


He wasn't suposed to spend money but now that mister ojo saw the 480 in motion he can't only buy a cfx


----------



## ChevChelios

on a second 480 for CF ?


----------



## lolerk52

Ojo discovered that Polaris includes Deep Clocking™. The chip over time figures out the electrons quantum computation of the field modulator, and so the more you use it, the higher the clocks get.

He's now buying a second one so he can mine all the Ethereum ever, combined.


----------



## Newbie2009

Doubt I will be a buyer, but for AMD sake, I hope this card is a big win for them.


----------



## Oj010

I won't say the performance is mind blowing. I won't say I can't do better on the second hand market (although that might well be true). But I also won't say it isn't fresh and fun and something, SOMETHING, has me wanting AMD cards to play with again.


----------



## Dargonplay

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I won't say the performance is mind blowing. I won't say I can't do better on the second hand market (although that might well be true). But I also won't say it isn't fresh and fun and something, SOMETHING, has me wanting AMD cards to launch until October.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I won't say the performance is mind blowing. I won't say I can't do better on the second hand market (although that might well be true). But I also won't say it isn't fresh and fun and something, SOMETHING, has me wanting AMD cards to play with again.


Pop the champagne boys!


----------



## bucdan

What time does NDA lift? 12AM EST tonight? Or??


----------



## NicksTricks007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I won't say the performance is mind blowing. I won't say I can't do better on the second hand market (although that might well be true). But I also won't say it isn't fresh and fun and something, SOMETHING, has me wanting AMD cards to play with again.










could you please elaborate? Or should i wait for your full review tomorrow


----------



## NicksTricks007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bucdan*
> 
> What time does NDA lift? 12AM EST tonight? Or??


9AM EDT tomorrow


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NicksTricks007*
> 
> 9AM EDT tomorrow


have a look at the polaris owner thread for more info


----------



## DeathMade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I won't say the performance is mind blowing. I won't say I can't do better on the second hand market (although that might well be true). But I also won't say it isn't fresh and fun and something, SOMETHING, has me wanting AMD cards to play with again.


Dayum. So 480 went from "850Mhz" and "No cards till october" to "SOMETHING, has me wanting AMD cards to play with again."

So I guess 480 is 10/10.

LETS PARTY!


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I won't say the performance is mind blowing. I won't say I can't do better on the second hand market (although that might well be true). But I also won't say it isn't fresh and fun and something, SOMETHING, has me wanting AMD cards to play with again.


Can you leak some overclock numbers on Morse Code?

Or it's still not October for the NDA?









I am sorry but now it's a good meme around here !


----------



## Oj010

The drivers that come with the card are garbage (at least I think that's the problem) and I don't have the press drivers yet. I also lack the time to actually do much if I did have them, so... Regardless though, it's a nice change.


----------



## DeathMade

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> The drivers that come with the card are garbage (at least I think that's the problem) and I don't have the press drivers yet. I also lack the time to actually do much if I did have them, so... Regardless though, it's a nice change.


What issues did you have with the drivers? Did they have poor OC? Did they constantly crash even with slightliest OC?


----------



## ToTheSun!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DeathMade*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> I won't say the performance is mind blowing. I won't say I can't do better on the second hand market (although that might well be true). But I also won't say it isn't fresh and fun and something, SOMETHING, has me wanting AMD cards to play with again.
> 
> 
> 
> Dayum. So 480 went from "850Mhz" and "No cards till october" to "SOMETHING, has me wanting AMD cards to play with again."
> 
> So I guess 480 is 10/10.
> 
> LETS PARTY!
Click to expand...

Raja is WAY ahead of you.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Amd to host an AMA session and give away 14 RX 480s 8GB models tomorrow 06/29 starting at 11:00 AM EST over at Reddit PC Master Race


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Amd to host an AMA session and give away 14 RX 480s 8GB models tomorrow 06/29 starting at 11:00 AM EST over at Reddit PC Master Race


How does one enter? Never use Reddit before.


----------



## SuperZan

Almost there!

<3 Oj0, I'm sure I'm not alone in saying that I hope you'll give us a review when the NDA drops!


----------



## slavovid

I want an actual review with better than those popular drivers from the DVD in the box.


----------



## Gungnir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> How does one enter? Never use Reddit before.


Leave a top-level comment on the AMA, once it goes up tomorrow morning. It can be a question, or just anything.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> How does one enter? Never use Reddit before.


As simple as replying to the ask me anything thread...
Quote:


> The giveaway
> 
> Quite simply, you'll be entering to win an 8GB RX 480. The limitation on this, obviously, is one per person. There's also geographical limitations, y*ou can only win if you're in the US, Canada, Europe, Australia, or New Zealand* - but this is also an AMA, so nobody's going to be excluded from having fun.
> *
> How does one enter?*
> 
> You leave a top-level comment. That's it. *Just make sure your comment is "leftmost" and not a reply to another comment, and you'll be in.* This comment can be an AMA question, it can be a quick thank-you or comment, or it can just be a link to some weird meme. It's up to you.


----------



## tkenietz

So to clarify, you wait till tomorrow at 11am to comment? Just set up a reddit account..


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> So to clarify, you wait till tomorrow at 11am to comment?


Yes. In the correct thread obviously


----------



## EightDee8D

I think we are putting too much faith on drivers, i still think it will be 390x like power. +/-5%.
oc is another thing.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> I think we are putting too much faith on drivers, i still think it will be 390x like power. +/-5%.
> oc is another thing.


As of now it's 390x -5% so, that's a risky guess! Lol

If what blue1512 says is true about there being a boost clock feature beyond 1266mhz with the proper drivers, I could see it doing slightly better than that. If aib customs could make the 1600+ boost a permanent oc, that could be a pretty large jump as that would be like a 30% oc


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Overclocking is what will make this card from good to great.


----------



## rv8000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Overclocking is what will make this card from good to great.


Maybe for the sake of OCN members. Regardless of any of this, in terms of power, performance, and price this card will be a fantastic budget mid-range card for people who do not tinker.

I will be a little sad on the inside if some of the better AIB cards can't hit 1500


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> As of now it's 390x -5% so, that's a risky guess! Lol
> 
> If what blue1512 says is true about there being a boost clock feature beyond 1266mhz with the proper drivers, I could see it doing slightly better than that. If aib customs could make the 1600+ boost a permanent oc, that could be a pretty large jump as that would be like a 30% oc


What GPU has ever had a 30% OC? If a card can potentially have a 30% OC, AMD would have clocked the reference higher from the get-go.


----------



## The Mac

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dudewitbow*
> 
> for XFX, I asked an XFX PR on r/pcmr and he couldn't answer my question for future products directly, but could indirectly answer the question, which he posted the Newegg listing showing the XFX backplate, so its probably confirmed that XFX cards will have a backplate(just check).
> 
> For sapphire the one pictured mid page here is the one in question, there have been no confirmations yet showing that the sapphire ones will have a backplate.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> What GPU has ever had a 30% OC? If a card can potentially have a 30% OC, AMD would have clocked the reference higher from the get-go.


not if they were trying to stay within the power budget.

1500 is going to be over 200 watts. SIgnificantly over.


----------



## rv8000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> What GPU has ever had a 30% OC? If a card can potentially have a 30% OC, AMD would have clocked the reference higher from the get-go.


980ti, 980, 970 are all around the 30% mark if you consider the reference boost clock in comparison to an average clock of about 1450mhz on the core.


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rv8000*
> 
> 980ti, 980, 970 are all around the 30% mark if you consider the reference boost clock in comparison to an average clock of about 1450mhz on the core.


Factor in GPU Boost 2.0, and it's no where near 30%.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> What GPU has ever had a 30% OC? If a card can potentially have a 30% OC, AMD would have clocked the reference higher from the get-go.


7970/7950, some gk210 cards.


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> 7970/7950, some gk210 cards.


I'll agree with 7970's. Forgot some of them got into the 1200 range, wasn't even close to the average though.


----------



## rv8000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> Factor in GPU Boost 2.0, and it's no where near 30%.


Go knock on nvidias door and tell them then need to fix the listed specs for all their reference cards, stop nit picking.

And since you don't seem to think before you post, there's also the 7970 and 290 who could both achieve 30% core oc's. I'm sure there are more cards as well, but I'm not going to do all the work for you.


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> What GPU has ever had a 30% OC? If a card can potentially have a 30% OC, AMD would have clocked the reference higher from the get-go.


HD7850 had a range of up to 56%(1340MHz).


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rv8000*
> 
> Go knock on nvidias door and tell them then need to fix the listed specs for all their reference cards, stop nit picking.
> 
> And since you don't seem to think before you post, there's also the 7970 and 290 who could both achieve 30% core oc's. I'm sure there are more cards as well, but I'm not going to do all the work for you.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> I'll agree with 7970's. Forgot some of them got into the 1200 range, wasn't even close to the average though.


Already mentioned. Again the 7970 doing 30% isn't the norm. I own one.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtcn77*
> 
> HD7850 had a range of up to 56%(1340MHz).


Was that the average clock?

I've never owned one, let alone look at the 7850.

EDIT: http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/radeon_hd_7850/ Ya, going up to 1340 isn't even close to the average. That's like saying 980Ti go up to 1625.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> EDIT: http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/radeon_hd_7850/ Ya, going up to 1340 isn't even close to the average.


That 1107 MHz average overclock is still a 28.7% OC on average.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mtcn77*
> 
> HD7850 had a range of up to 56%(1340MHz).


Remember this from last week:



The 4870/50 didn't fair nearly as well as the 7850... then again it could just be a statement regarding their focus on small die and mainstream market price emphasis.


----------



## dmasteR

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTYyNDQwMzAxMg==.html

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTYyNDQwOTcwNA==.html

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTYyNDQxMjQ3Mg==.html

Have these leaks been mentioned yet?


----------



## rv8000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> Already mentioned. Again the 7970 doing 30% isn't the norm. I own one.
> Was that the average clock?
> 
> I've never owned one, let alone look at the 7850.
> 
> EDIT: http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/radeon_hd_7850/ Ya, going up to 1340 isn't even close to the average. That's like saying 980Ti go up to 1625.


All 3 of my 7970's did 1230 when benched on air with volts. Again you're nit picking, and only want to be right. Plenty of cards have had 30% oc capabilities.

/end conversation


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTYyNDQwMzAxMg==.html
> 
> http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTYyNDQwOTcwNA==.html
> 
> http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTYyNDQxMjQ3Mg==.html
> 
> Have these leaks been mentioned yet?


why is the CPU usage so high on 970? It's like 2-3x higher


----------



## doza

https://countingdownto.com/countdown/rx-480-nda-29-june-2016-countdown-clock-0


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rv8000*
> 
> All 3 of my 7970's did 1230 when benched on air with volts. Again you're nit picking, and only want to be right. Plenty of cards have had 30% oc capabilities.
> 
> /end conversation


You must not be able to read my posts, let alone yours. You're literally cherry picking your statements.

http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/radeon_hd_7970/

Again, 1300 wasn't the norm. I could care less if i'm right or wrong, as I've already said I was incorrect in a previous post.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> why is the CPU usage so high on 970? It's like 2-3x higher


Noticed this as well. Not really quite sure why, could it be because of the new Polaris Scheduler?


----------



## AliNT77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> What GPU has ever had a 30% OC? If a card can potentially have a 30% OC, AMD would have clocked the reference higher from the get-go.


Nearly any HD 7950 can do more than 30%
i had one in the past and i had a 52% OC on it and it was 247 Stable for gaming (1230-1750) stock was 800-1250


----------



## rv8000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> You must not be able to read my posts, let alone yours. You're literally cherry picking your statements.
> 
> http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/radeon_hd_7970/
> 
> Again, 1300 wasn't the norm. I could care less if i'm right or wrong, as I've already said I was incorrect in a previous post.
> Noticed this as well. Not really quite sure why, could it be because of the new Polaris Scheduler?


Your link proves my point, I'm not cherry picking anything

Air - 1195 average - (1195*100)/925 = 29.2%
Water - 1281 average - (1281*100)/925 = 38.5%


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AliNT77*
> 
> Nearly any HD 7950 can do more than 30%
> i had one in the past and i had a 52% OC on it and it was 247 Stable for gaming (1230-1750) stock was 800-1250


Yep. You are indeed correct, already been mentioned above.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rv8000*
> 
> Your link proves my point, I'm not cherry picking anything
> 
> Air - 1195 average - (1195*100)/925 = 29.2%
> Water - 1281 average - (1281*100)/925 = 38.5%


Whoops. My apologies, some reason the reference clocks for the original slipped my mind. Kept thinking about the Ghz edition.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> You must not be able to read my posts, *let alone yours.*
> 
> http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/radeon_hd_7970/


Oh the irony...

Consider this... both hwbot links you referred to showed *average* overclocks of 28.7% and 29.2%








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rv8000*
> 
> All 3 of my 7970's did 1230 when benched on air with volts. Again you're nit picking, and only want to be right. *Plenty of cards have had 30% oc capabilities.
> *
> /end conversation


See if you can comprehend what he wrote this time around...


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> Already mentioned. Again the 7970 doing 30% isn't the norm. I own one.
> Was that the average clock?
> 
> I've never owned one, let alone look at the 7850.
> 
> EDIT: http://hwbot.org/hardware/videocard/radeon_hd_7850/ Ya, going up to 1340 isn't even close to the average. That's like saying 980Ti go up to 1625.


Well, that is an air-cooled result. No way it is out of the ordinary.
However this, is a volt-modded result; no way this *56%* OC is feasible out of the box.


----------



## schmotty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> What GPU has ever had a 30% OC? If a card can potentially have a 30% OC, AMD would have clocked the reference higher from the get-go.


My 460GTX hit 911Mhz. If you go by the reference clock of 675Mhz that's almost 35%. But it was a AIB OC to 725Mhz so that's only 25.6%. I folded with it so, yes it was stable.


----------



## Noufel

So this thread is now about personal history with overclocking gpus







good idea to pass the time before nda is lifted


----------



## spurdomantbh

NEW DETAILS!

http://videocardz.com/61557/rajas-super-secret-cigar-stash


----------



## Slomo4shO

My 4 R9 290s all clocked to 1150MHz and also unlocked to be R9 290X. 10% shader unlock and 21.5% frequency overclock. Does that qualify as a 30% overclock?


----------



## AuraNova

This NDA lift can't come quick enough. Then again, when it does, we'll have a whole new chapter to this story (Read: more RX 480 threads). Complete with 100% more arguing and memes.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> My 4 R9 290s all clocked to 1150MHz and also unlocked to be R9 290X. 10% shader unlock and 21.5% frequency overclock. Does that qualify as a 30% overclock?


Eh close enough.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AuraNova*
> 
> This NDA lift can't come quick enough. Then again, when it does, we'll have a whole new chapter to this story (Read: more RX 480 threads). Complete with 100% more arguing and memes.


Plus 200% more







and 500% more









Great way to pass time though


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dmasteR*
> 
> http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTYyNDQwMzAxMg==.html
> 
> http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTYyNDQwOTcwNA==.html
> 
> http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTYyNDQxMjQ3Mg==.html
> 
> Have these leaks been mentioned yet?


Anyone notice the different sizes for the Aftetburner Text. Usually that change is due to different resolution is it not?


----------



## ChevChelios

those 30%+ OC days are long over

forget about it on the 480


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> those 30%+ OC days are long over
> 
> forget about it on the 1080


FTFY


----------



## looniam




----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> FTFY


whatever you say









this is the 480 thread tho, not 1080


----------



## airfathaaaaa

something good from videocardz since it was born
http://videocardz.com/61557/rajas-super-secret-cigar-stash


----------



## spurdomantbh

Looks like the primitive discard accelerator gives quite a performance boost


----------



## ChevChelios

reading that HDR slide just reminds me that there hasnt even been an _announced_ HDR monitor yet (as far as I know) .. how long until HDR is a standard feature in gaming monitors + most games support it

i fear 2018 or even 2019+


----------



## slavovid

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> Looks like the primitive discard accelerator gives quite a performance boost


Especially effective for Gimpworks related stuff ?


----------



## Oj010

Either the boxed drivers are terribad or AMD overhyped the card a tad but I cannot match a GTX 980. GTX 970 and a bit is about it. That being said, it's a good deal cheaper than the GTX 970 and still a brilliant (unmatched) price/performance ratio in the midrange.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Either the boxed drivers are terribad or AMD overhyped the card a tad but I cannot match a GTX 980. GTX 970 and a bit is about it. That being said, it's a good deal cheaper than the GTX 970 and still a brilliant (unmatched) price/performance ratio in the midrange.


They are really old, use these.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1603915/coming-soon-unofficial-polaris-owners-thread/0_20#post_25296095


----------



## Dudewitbow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> reading that HDR slide just reminds me that there hasnt even been an _announced_ HDR monitor yet (as far as I know) .. how long until HDR is a standard feature in gaming monitors + most games support it
> 
> i fear 2018 or even 2019+


Games will probably support it first, Microsoft themselves area already pushing for HDR with GoW4 and Forza Horizon 3, as HDR is a featureset for the Xbox One S(which also implies scorpio, and likely neo as well) . Gaming panels just need to catch up at that point. Wouldn't be surprised to see at least one in January for CES


----------



## Malinkadink

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> reading that HDR slide just reminds me that there hasnt even been an _announced_ HDR monitor yet (as far as I know) .. how long until HDR is a standard feature in gaming monitors + most games support it
> 
> i fear 2018 or even 2019+


Who knows... monitors are far behind TVs it seems. There are already 4k HDR TVs on the market, also OLED, and monitors are just stuck in LCD limbo.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> They are really old, use these.
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1603915/coming-soon-unofficial-polaris-owners-thread/0_20#post_25296095


Thanks, it's 12:34 AM so I'll try tomorrow.


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> reading that HDR slide just reminds me that there hasnt even been an _announced_ HDR monitor yet (as far as I know) .. how long until HDR is a standard feature in gaming monitors + most games support it
> 
> i fear 2018 or even 2019+


There are HDR monitors out there. They just cost several thousand dollars. But it should become a standard with displayport 1.4 if I'm not mistaken. Probably several HDR gaming monitors should come out in 2017, my guess.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> Looks like the primitive discard accelerator gives quite a performance boost
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!


Here are all of the slides:



Spoiler: Slides!


----------



## MaxRockatansky

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUiaJXLoKnE


----------



## Zahix

how many hours for NDA?


----------



## umeng2002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Zahix*
> 
> how many hours for NDA?


The slides say June 29 9AM EDT


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaxRockatansky*
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUiaJXLoKnE


going to spam on on every amd thread i guess?


----------



## umeng2002

So Polaris doesn't have any multi-viewport technology like nVidia.

They simply split the viewport up and render the edges in lower resolution...

I thought this was a VR-centric card.


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ChevChelios*
> 
> reading that HDR slide just reminds me that there hasnt even been an _announced_ HDR monitor yet (as far as I know) .. how long until HDR is a standard feature in gaming monitors + most games support it
> 
> i fear 2018 or even 2019+


I think it's going to be longer then that for monitors. Since Most 4K TV's don't have that yet. HDR 10 1,000 nits depending on the content. Dolby Vision content is currently typically mastered to around 4,000 nits. But that's for movies tho.


----------



## umeng2002

rec. 2020 color space on anything other than 12+ bits isn't going to be good.

HDR should be about color bit depth. Increased color space will better allow you to see the higher ranges the colors can be - closer to human vision.

In fact, HDR is more about brightness, not color space.

It will be hard to properly market HDR without seeing a good HDR display.

The leaked slides do a poor job, imho.

wider color gaumut =/= HDR

Bit depth and brightness levels = HDR


----------



## MaxRockatansky

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *airfathaaaaa*
> 
> going to spam on on every amd thread i guess?


nope, this video is from rbuass.


----------



## Lipos

false
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *umeng2002*
> 
> So Polaris doesn't have any multi-viewport technology like nVidia.
> 
> They simply split the viewport up and render the edges in lower resolution...
> 
> I thought this was a VR-centric card.


There are more slides, just wait for the reviews.


----------



## umeng2002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FlyingSolo*
> 
> I think it's going to be longer then that for monitors. Since Most 4K TV's don't have that yet. HDR 10 1,000 nits depending on the content. Dolby Vision content is currently typically mastered to around 4,000 nits. But that's for movies tho.


HDR requires monitor panels to be of better physical quality - better technology... and not just spamming Hz and resolution.

So they'll be more expensive at first... I just hope OLED isn't totally dead.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *umeng2002*
> 
> So Polaris doesn't have any multi-viewport technology like nVidia.
> 
> They simply split the viewport up and render the edges in lower resolution...
> 
> I thought this was a VR-centric card.


Not in hardware it seems. I wouldn't lose sleep over this though , the market for VR games at present is pitifull and in a growth stage due the hmds still been in very low numbers out there. So if you hold your breath waiting for a SMP patch for a VR game i think you'll not be here to talk about it for very long.

Its a great feature - the best feature of pascall actually , i just would not buy the nv cards solely for it. Would be like buying amd cards solely for Async reasons , actually async is actually better as its currently used in atleast some games.

In 12 months or two years time it might be an issue, but not now.


----------



## umeng2002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> Not in hardware it seems. I wouldn't lose sleep over this though , the market for VR games at present is pitifull and in a growth stage due the hmds still been in very low numbers out there. So if you hold your breath waiting for a SMP patch for a VR game i think you'll not be here to talk about it for very long.
> 
> Its a great feature - the best feature of pascall actually , i just would not buy the nv cards solely for it. Would be like buying amd cards solely for Async reasons , actually async is actually better as its currently used in atleast some games.
> 
> In 12 months or two years time it might be an issue, but not now.


For surround displays, it also helps a lot.

I wonder if it would matter for 1 21:9 ultra-wide.

That will be my next monitor format.

But yeah, I forgot it's another nVidia API thing that needs to be patched it...


----------



## Diogenes5

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dudewitbow*
> 
> Games will probably support it first, Microsoft themselves area already pushing for HDR with GoW4 and Forza Horizon 3, as HDR is a featureset for the Xbox One S(which also implies scorpio, and likely neo as well) . Gaming panels just need to catch up at that point. Wouldn't be surprised to see at least one in January for CES


HDR is just marketing. TV panel makers wasted a few years forcing 4k down people's throats (not noticeable to 95% of people) and now they want to force a standard that really doesn't do much. The increased color gamut of HDR is nice. The jacked up brightness to create a better contrast ratio on LCD tech is not.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Malinkadink*
> 
> Who knows... monitors are far behind TVs it seems. There are already 4k HDR TVs on the market, also OLED, and monitors are just stuck in LCD limbo.


Dell has an OLED coming at 120 hz for 5k. Expensive but there are plenty of corporate people who will buy one. Monitors actually have more tech since there are actually true 144hz and 120hz panels out there for PC's while on TV's it's almost all fake 120 hz except for the high-end models.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *umeng2002*
> 
> rec. 2020 color space on anything other than 12+ bits isn't going to be good.
> 
> HDR should be about color bit depth. Increased color space will better allow you to see the higher ranges the colors can be - closer to human vision.
> 
> In fact, HDR is more about brightness, not color space.
> 
> It will be hard to properly market HDR without seeing a good HDR display.
> 
> The leaked slides do a poor job, imho.
> 
> wider color gaumut =/= HDR
> 
> Bit depth and brightness levels = HDR


100% true. The brightness thing is a joke. I don't want 1000+ nits of brightness. It will burn out my eyes especially since you have to sit really close to notice the difference between a 4k and 1080p set anyways.

Increased gamut is nice, but a lot of bandwidth is being taken up for 4k resolution when people would notice more of a difference with higher hertz and better color accuracy at 1080p to begin with. All the new tv tech coming out next year is basically just selling the features of Quantum Dot technology which is an evolution of LCD. From the first quantum dot panels available though, there does seem to be a color accuracy problem with the tech that is inconsistent and requires an expensive color calibrator per monitor to adjust for (can't just download an IPA profile). I don't know if this is true for the tv's.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Diogenes5*
> 
> TV's it's almost all fake 120 hz except for the high-end models.


Comparing high end TVs to high end monitors, TVs are currently ahead...


----------



## nagle3092

Scumbags already started.


----------



## NicksTricks007

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Scumbags already started.


I can't facepalm hard enough


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *umeng2002*
> 
> HDR requires monitor panels to be of better physical quality - better technology... and not just spamming Hz and resolution.
> 
> So they'll be more expensive at first... I just hope OLED isn't totally dead.


Yeah. Really would like a 40" OLED monitor.


----------



## rv8000

Hmm looking at some of the slides and recent member benchmarks and screens, I feel a little disappointed from a design standpoint. It's seems a lot of the uarch changes were very small, the real new addition (hardware schedulers) seem to be focused on async/dx12







.

Assuming a 1266mhz 390x could score ~14450 (scaled this up based on 50mhz increases) in FS, the per shader IPC increase from hawaii to polaris looks like 6% (using the bench results from the polaris members thread); to be fair the RX 480 has numerous other cutdown specs and it's not the most accurate/proper way to calculate an IPC increase


----------



## NicksTricks007

Look who picked up on the supposed 1060 leak already lol:

http://www.techspot.com/news/65379-nvidia-gtx-1060-spied-leaked-photo-reportedly-come.html


----------



## Gungnir

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rv8000*
> 
> Hmm looking at some of the slides and recent member benchmarks and screens, I feel a little disappointed from a design standpoint. It's seems a lot of the uarch changes were very small, the real new addition (hardware schedulers) seem to be focused on async/dx12
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Assuming a 1266mhz 390x could score ~14450 (scaled this up based on 50mhz increases) in FS, the per shader IPC increase from hawaii to polaris looks like 6% (using the bench results from the polaris members thread); to be fair the RX 480 has numerous other cutdown specs and it's not the most accurate/proper way to calculate an IPC increase


Have there been any benchmark leaks with the NDA drivers? All the leaks I've seen are on old drivers, which probably don't support the new features and enhancements properly.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NicksTricks007*
> 
> Look who picked up on the supposed 1060 leak already lol:
> 
> http://www.techspot.com/news/65379-nvidia-gtx-1060-spied-leaked-photo-reportedly-come.html


3Gb is pointless.


----------



## SuperZan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gungnir*
> 
> Have there been any benchmark leaks with the NDA drivers? All the leaks I've seen are on old drivers, which probably don't support the new features and enhancements properly.


Precisely. We're less than a day away, I counsel patience.


----------



## dmasteR

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NicksTricks007*
> 
> Look who picked up on the supposed 1060 leak already lol:
> 
> http://www.techspot.com/news/65379-nvidia-gtx-1060-spied-leaked-photo-reportedly-come.html


3GB in 2016 is pretty pointless. NVIDIA would really need to price it below the RX480 for it to gain much traction as the RX 480 will be solid for people looking for a upgrade.


----------



## dagget3450

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SuperZan*
> 
> Precisely. We're less than a day away, I counsel patience.


What are you part of the Jedi Council? I NEED INFO NOW!

"We don't need to verify the leaks"
"These are not the benchmarks i am looking for"
"You can go about your business"
"Move along"


----------



## Agiel

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Shiftstealth*
> 
> The 1070 has been reviewed, and while it overclocks, it gained 1 FPS from like 30 to 31 for a whopping 3% increase. This is clearly a bigger increase as you saw from the 1080 Mhz to 1266 Firestrike runs. Dude, go get educated somewhere. I'm sporting 2 rigs with GTX 980 Ti's. Do you think i take pleasure in seeing my cards go down to $200 USD?
> 
> No.


no one say it will compete with 1070, or 1080, its the price point what matter, u can buy 2 RX 480 4GB for around 500 bucks, and still has 200 bucks for saving for more components, keep in mind a 1080 cost over 700 bucks ... just making some little maths


----------



## nagle3092

Xfx in stock at amazon

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B01H3P9CKI?me=ATVPDKIKX0DER&ref=olp_product_details

And MSI

http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B01GX5Z4EM/ref=dp_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=all&tag=nisa-20&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER

Sapphire

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B01GTYIEG2?me=ATVPDKIKX0DER&ref=olp_product_details


----------



## sugarhell

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=29710504&postcount=8972
Quote:


> All I will say is I benched a 390X Strix OC in Ashes Singularity DX12, I then benched the RX 480 at stock, 1fps difference.
> 
> So yes in DX12 it is powerful and will improve.
> 
> Wait for the reviews tomorrow with game benchmarks.


I know that OCN will get triggered with Ashes of singularity


----------



## Dudewitbow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=29710504&postcount=8972
> I know that OCN will get triggered with Ashes of singularity


albeit people always tend to question its validity, its a test between amd to amd card, so the results comparison wise are much more tangible on performance gain relative to last generation.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NicksTricks007*
> 
> Look who picked up on the supposed 1060 leak already lol:
> 
> http://www.techspot.com/news/65379-nvidia-gtx-1060-spied-leaked-photo-reportedly-come.html


So pretty much no word about 1060 at all until the day before 480 launch, and then suddenly it should be ready to launch "early july"? Early July is in a few days. This card is seriously ready to launch in less than 2 weeks? Doubtful. I bet nvidia mocked up a shroud and is trying to pass it off and get people to wait.

IF, and that's a capitol IF, the 1060 launches that soon, it would be a paper launch that made the 1080 seem like a hard launch.


----------



## The Mac

check it for wood screws!!!!

tweaktown also posed the same thing earlier today.

http://www.tweaktown.com/news/52811/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-rumors-begin-eve-radeon-rx-480/index.html


----------



## rv8000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Gungnir*
> 
> Have there been any benchmark leaks with the NDA drivers? All the leaks I've seen are on old drivers, which probably don't support the new features and enhancements properly.


I'm not sure we'll see much of a performance gain from newer drivers in a dx11 and or older environments. The major uarch change was the addition of the hardware schedulers, which from the slides seem to focus on both async and VR based tasks (the slide does list it can apply to a multitude of scenarios though). New drivers may give a further bump to dx12/vr performance, but I'm going to say we can expect little in terms of anything other than the 6% rough IPC increase, could go up a percent or two, but definitely not a double digit IPC increase.

There may be some chance scenarios in which heavy tessellation was bogging older GCN cards down with the new improvements there.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Scumbags already started.


Joke's on them. The whole selling point of RX 480 is price, and for $499 it makes even the 1070 Fanboy Edition look like a good deal.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> 3Gb is pointless.


3GB 1080p cards should be banned in 2016.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=29710504&postcount=8972
> I know that OCN will get triggered with Ashes of singularity


Well you can't get ashes without *FLAMES*.







<---see?


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> So pretty much no word about 1060 at all until the day before 480 launch, and then suddenly it should be ready to launch "early july"? Early July is in a few days. This card is seriously ready to launch in less than 2 weeks? Doubtful. I bet nvidia mocked up a shroud and is trying to pass it off and get people to wait.
> 
> IF, and that's a capitol IF, the 1060 launches that soon, it would be a paper launch that made the 1080 seem like a hard launch.


If it is a 3GB card, then it is worse than the 970. $150 Max for a new 3GB card. Can't buy a used 970 'cause pretty soon it will be off nVidia driver radar.

Besides, it will run into stock issue for sure. Well, maybe.


----------



## Bryst

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nagle3092*
> 
> Scumbags already started.


When did you see this? Because I see it at 249.99 right now.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> If it is a 3GB card, then it is worse than the 970. $150 Max for a new 3GB card. Can't buy a used 970 'cause pretty soon it will be off nVidia driver radar.
> 
> Besides, it will run into stock issue for sure. Well, maybe.


If you looks a GTX960 it was slower then GTX770. Same thing with this. I do not thing Nvidia can compete with RX 480 this time.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bryst*
> 
> When did you see this? Because I see it at 249.99 right now.


A couple hours ago, it was from a third party seller Antonline, they might have changed it since amazon went live with their prices.

Nope still shows 499 for me (from Antonline anyways). Amazons listed as another seller for 249.

https://www.amazon.com/MSI-Radeon-RX-480-8G/dp/B01GX5Z4EM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1467163827&sr=8-1&keywords=msi+rx+480


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> If you looks a GTX960 it was slower then GTX770. Same thing with this. I do not thing Nvidia can compete with RX 480 this time.


they wont compete because people will buy without even checking benchmarks/actual performance, due to their marketing and exclusive "tech"

960<380
760<280
670<7950

each time the Nvidia offering sold more units, even if it wasnt faster


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> If you looks a GTX960 it was slower then GTX770. Same thing with this. I do not thing Nvidia can compete with RX 480 this time.


Some would argue 3GB is plenty still for 1080P,, but why would you buy a car with just three wheels when you can get a similar one with all four? These are targeted for owners of Tahiti and lower range cards.


----------



## The Mac

https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B01GX5Z4EM/ref=dp_olp_new_mbc?ie=UTF8&condition=new

side by side...

lol


----------



## SlackerITGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=29710504&postcount=8972
> I know that OCN will get triggered with Ashes of singularity


Well, if recent rumors are true, Ashes of the Singularity might not be the only game/benchmark that uses Async Compute heavily.

Battlefield 1 might join that list.

EDIT:

Btw, have these slides been posted already?

http://videocardz.com/61557/rajas-super-secret-cigar-stash


----------



## FLaguy954

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SlackerITGuy*
> 
> Well, if recent rumors are true, Ashes of the Singularity might not be the only game/benchmark that uses Async Compute heavily.
> 
> Battlefield 1 might join that list.
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> Btw, have these slides been posted already?
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61557/rajas-super-secret-cigar-stash


You beat me to it. There are a ton of improvements to GCN. I'm liking what I see so far.


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PontiacGTX*
> 
> they wont compete because people will buy without even checking benchmarks/actual performance, due to their marketing and exclusive "tech"
> 
> 960<380
> 760<280
> 670<7950
> 
> each time the Nvidia offering sold more units, even if it wasnt faster


Any suggestions on how to fix the perception?


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> Any suggestions on how to fix the perception?


Remove shills from online tech forums, and educate consumers by being objective and showing proof why those cards are better than nvidia. until then kiss goodbye to huge sales.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

R9 285 came out before GTX970/980/960. People where not interested on that level of performance for $250. GTX960 came out much latter and suddenly people wanted that level of performance for the same money. It's hard to understand the market.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Remove shills from online tech forums,


Good luck with that on OCN, they are rampant here lol


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Shills are not a problem. The problem is people need to make their own mind and don't listen to your friends.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> R9 285 came out before GTX970/980/960. People where not interested on that level of performance for $250. GTX960 came out much latter and suddenly people wanted that level of performance for the same money. It's hard to understand the market.


$50 cheaper and 2/3 the power draw may have had something to do with it.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> The problem is people need to make their own mind and don't listen to your friends.


Good luck with that.

Look at iphones, look at how certain clothing brands become/stay popular.

Many people are followers, they do things to fit in. This is not going away.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> $50 cheaper and 2/3 the power draw may have had something to do with it.


Not really. 285 was ~ $200 too. It was also faster on average.

*Also RX480 confirmed bad overclocker form Paul Hardware. He is live streaming and said why are they charging $279 at some places. Kyle said maybe overclocked version. His respond was "How much overclocking can there be" Forget 1500MHz guys.*


----------



## comagnum

Are online retailers going to have them for sale at 9am? Or are they going to be available at midnight?


----------



## cranfam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> $50 cheaper and 2/3 the power draw may have had something to do with it.


2/3 power draw? I must have missed those measurements. Most of the videos I have seen put the 960 and 285/380 neck and neck in regards to power draw. $50 cheaper? They're really about the same price, maybe 10 or 20 dollar difference.


----------



## nagle3092

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *comagnum*
> 
> Are online retailers going to have them for sale at 9am? Or are they going to be available at midnight?


They were live earlier on Amazon. Newegg start at 9am est tomorrow.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Not really. 285 was ~ $200 too. It was also faster on average.
> 
> *Also RX480 confirmed bad overclocker form Paul Hardware. He is live streaming and said why are they charging $279 at some places. Kyle said maybe overclocked version. His respond was "How much overclocking can there be" Forget 1500MHz guys.*


Well at least they didn't say overclocker's dream this time. Or maybe that's coz they were dreaming about saying it or something I don't know.


----------



## Forceman

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Not really. 285 was ~ $200 too. It was also faster on average.


It was $200 when the 960 launched? I can't remember that far back.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cranfam*
> 
> 2/3 power draw? I must have missed those measurements. Most of the videos I have seen put the 960 and 285/380 neck and neck in regards to power draw. $50 cheaper? They're really about the same price, maybe 10 or 20 dollar difference.


The launch price was $50 apart, that's what I was quoting. Not sure what actual prices were. Guru3d measured them at 127W for the 960 versus 188W for the 285. I didn't do the math, but that's around 2/3.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> Well at least they didn't say overclocker's dream this time. Or maybe that's coz they were dreaming about saying it or something I don't know.


It sucks really. If I can't OC a card that means it's never going to be special.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Forceman*
> 
> It was $200 when the 960 launched? I can't remember that far back.
> The launch price was $50 apart, that's what I was quoting. Not sure what actual prices were. Guru3d measured them at 127W for the 960 versus 188W for the 285. I didn't do the math, but that's around 2/3.


Yeah it was $200 when GTX960 launched.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> It sucks really. If I can't OC a card that means it's never going to be special.


Yep if the AIB cards don't clock high or come out with 1350-1400mhz boost clocks I'll be a little disappointed, although I may be expecting too much.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> *Also RX480 confirmed bad overclocker form Paul Hardware. He is live streaming and said why are they charging $279 at some places. Kyle said maybe overclocked version. His respond was "How much overclocking can there be" Forget 1500MHz guys.*


What i got from your depiction of the events:

How much overclocking can there be on a reference factory overclocked model to warrant a $50 premium?

Reference factory overclock models typically mo more than 50-75 MHz. We know that XFX has a factory overclocked model with a reference clock of 1328 (?) or something


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> Yep if the AIB cards don't clock high or come out with 1350-1400mhz boost clocks I'll be a little disappointed, although I may be expecting too much.


The non AIB 480 RX cards reportedly have about as much head room its sounds as the 1070 and 1080s do , so it will be interesting to the see the difference in spin from some sites around this. I'm sure some will tout the ref 480 as a bad overclocker - i wonder if they called pascal the same ?


----------



## sammkv

Oh man, RIP 1700mhz aftermarket dreams


----------



## SlackerITGuy

Let's not over analyze what Paul said guys lol.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> What i got from your depiction of the events:
> 
> How much overclocking can there be on a reference factory overclocked model to warrant a $50 premium?
> 
> Reference factory overclock models typically mo more than 50-75 MHz


I'm not so sure about that. We know already from a couple of reports its not only thermally getting up there will small overclocks with that rather non special default cooler it has (reportedly) we also have seen a couple of reports of it getting close to 150 watts when oc and thats is Max TPU.

So we have more than one limiter at play here on the ref cards.

Really will have to wait and see. I can guarantee you they will be more effective than pascal AIBs however for improving overclocking which have been totally unaffective so far.


----------



## KarathKasun

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> I'm not so sure about that. We know already from a couple of reports its not only thermally getting up there will small overclocks with that rather non special default cooler it has (reportedly) we also have seen a couple of reports of it getting close to 150 watts when oc and thats is Max TPU.
> 
> So we have more than one limiter at play here on the ref cards.
> 
> Really will have to wait and see. I can guarantee you they will be more effective than pascal AIBs however for improving overclocking which have been totally unaffective so far.


You can draw more than 150w BY FAR with a single 6pin. You just need to change the BIOS power limits or bypass the current sensing circuit on the board. (making it report 10-20w at most, no matter the power draw)

Before advanced power management this was a trivial task. Just up the volts and clocks. 225w is easily doable on a 150w speced board, given you can cool it.


----------



## tkenietz

People at computer stores should educate themselves, that would help right away.

A story:

I helped a friend plan out a build, he bought all the parts I told him to except for the gpu. I told him to get an r9 270, iirc they were like $130ish at the time. He got a 750 ti for $150. I asked why, he said, the guy he knew at the store said nvidia was better and he should get the 750 ti instead. His thinking: well this guy sells pc components so he probably knows what he's talking about.

One strategy that I think would pay off is to have more of a presence. Go to frys, micro centers, best buys, ect., talk with employees, hold events, that sort of thing. Educate the masses on why they should buy and sell your product over another


----------



## Dudewitbow

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> People at computer stores should educate themselves, that would help right away.
> 
> A story:
> 
> I helped a friend plan out a build, he bought all the parts I told him to except for the gpu. I told him to get an r9 270, iirc they were like $130ish at the time. He got a 750 ti for $150. I asked why, he said, the guy he knew at the store said nvidia was better and he should get the 750 ti instead. His thinking: well this guy sells pc components so he probably knows what he's talking about.
> 
> One strategy that I think would pay off is to have more of a presence. Go to frys, micro centers, best buys, ect., talk with employees, hold events, that sort of thing. Educate the masses on why they should buy and sell your product over another


Intel does that with the retail edge program


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KarathKasun*
> 
> You can draw more than 150w BY FAR with a single 6pin. You just need to change the BIOS power limits or bypass the current sensing circuit on the board. (making it report 10-20w at most, no matter the power draw)
> 
> Before advanced power management this was a trivial task. Just up the volts and clocks. 225w is easily doable on a 150w speced board, given you can cool it.


Yeah i figured that could be done, but stock bios is locked to 150watts or less from what i've seen even with power limit increased.

It will be interesting to see , in say a 2d game or light 3d , eg where mhz can climb and not draw a lot of TDP if the ref boards can do more than 1400mhz, that will tell us something.

I was able to run my chilled TXs at 1690mhz in ori and the blind forrest lol .. but yeah anything heavy in 3d back to 1633 mhz max.


----------



## Vowels

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MaxRockatansky*
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUiaJXLoKnE


I really hope this review is fake otherwise those power consumption numbers at 3:49 mean the performance per watt is TERRIBLE for the RX 480.


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vowels*
> 
> I really hope this review is fake otherwise those power consumption numbers at 3:49 mean the performance per watt is TERRIBLE for the RX 480.


Calm down, it's furmark. Actual gaming power consumption is more like 110 watts.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> Calm down, it's furmark. Actual gaming power consumption is more like 110 watts.


Lol .. that power virus. Was going to ask for the TL;DV version . Now i don't need too.

Curious though, what mhz was maintained at that ?


----------



## TopicClocker

Damn, why is the launch of this GPU so secretive?


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Orthello*
> 
> Lol .. that power virus. Was going to ask for the TL;DV version . Now i don't need too.
> 
> Curious though, what mhz was maintained at that ?


Looking at temps and what i remember from TPU thread, definitely above stock.


----------



## looniam

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> *People at computer stores should educate themselves, that would help right away.
> *
> A story:
> 
> I helped a friend plan out a build, he bought all the parts I told him to except for the gpu. I told him to get an r9 270, iirc they were like $130ish at the time. He got a 750 ti for $150. I asked why, he said, the guy he knew at the store said nvidia was better and he should get the 750 ti instead. His thinking: well this guy sells pc components so he probably knows what he's talking about.
> 
> One strategy that I think would pay off is to have more of a presence. Go to frys, micro centers, best buys, ect., talk with employees, hold events, that sort of thing. Educate the masses on why they should buy and sell your product over another


*THAT*

i can't count how many times i've walked into a store for a cable or whatnot, start talking about hardware only to have the store employee whip out some cpu/gpu boss or passmark benchmarks. i start showing them some reviews only to hear them call it a shill site. (this is for BOTH sides or the red/green fence).

i now go into stores, say nothing as i get whatever i need and leave.

EDIT:

getting raj to drink some firewater might help:


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

I still can't work out why they would've gone to all the trouble of building a new overclocking suite for the 480 if it indeed can't overclock at all? It doesn't make any sense, but then again this is AMD we are talking about!


----------



## Forceman

Maybe it needs all the help it can get.


----------



## SimBy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *looniam*
> 
> *THAT*
> 
> i can't count how many times i've walked into a store for a cable or whatnot, start talking about hardware only to have the store employee whip out some cpu/gpu boss or passmark benchmarks. i start showing them some reviews only to hear them call it a shill site. (this is for BOTH sides or the red/green fence).
> 
> i now go into stores, say nothing as i get whatever i need and leave.
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> getting raj to drink some firewater might help:


Is getting him drunk to spill the beans on Vega too much to ask?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I still can't work out why they would've gone to all the trouble of building a new overclocking suite for the 480 if it indeed can't overclock at all? It doesn't make any sense, but then again this is AMD we are talking about!


I hope WattMan is not only for RX480.


----------



## HGooper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> I still can't work out why they would've gone to all the trouble of building a new overclocking suite for the 480 if it indeed can't overclock at all? It doesn't make any sense, but then again this is AMD we are talking about!


Comparing with Fury where they told the whole world that Fury is overclocker dream but ended up overclocking like crap, I will take Wattman anytime anywhere.


----------



## Majin SSJ Eric

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *HGooper*
> 
> Comparing with Fury where they told the whole world that Fury is overclocker dream but ended up overclocking like crap, I will take Wattman anytime anywhere.


It's definitely cool but if the card can only OC 50mhz I don't really see the point? Just have to wait and see.


----------



## Orthello

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> It's definitely cool but if the card can only OC 50mhz I don't really see the point? Just have to wait and see.


In games that boost might go higher .. i suspect thats poor silicon sample in heavy benching. We have heard of 1380 mhz samples , and that was firestrike too , so those samples i would suspect can game in the 1400s ref boards.

Anyway you cut it that default bios is going to pull power back to 150 watts or less and limit the OC.

However its early days on that , bios updates etc.


----------



## AliNT77

Why The nda hasn't been lifted yet????


----------



## lolerk52

http://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2016/06/Radeon-RX-480-Presentation-VideoCardz_com-5.jpg

My deep clocking meme is true!


----------



## GHADthc

So.....where the official reviews at?....I hate being a future sailor...


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AliNT77*
> 
> Why The nda hasn't been lifted yet????


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GHADthc*
> 
> So.....where the official reviews at?....I hate being a future sailor...


9 AM eastern


----------



## umeng2002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GHADthc*
> 
> So.....where the official reviews at?....I hate being a future sailor...


It's the internet.

"Tomorrow" means the next day at 6 to 9 am Eastern Standard Time.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Majin SSJ Eric*
> 
> It's definitely cool but if the card can only OC 50mhz I don't really see the point? Just have to wait and see.


That is what I said too. It seems they are done selling 79xx cards. Booth Nvidia and AMD are using software to get the performence level with no OC left. Good overclocking cards don't need volts. This card needs to get 1500MHz just to match 290X OC potential. Almost seem like this card was designed to come around gtx980 era. AMD have always been to depended on process shrink.


----------



## Slomo4shO

AMD RX 480 "Overclocks Very Well" Even At Low Voltages


----------



## magnek

So the RX 480 will be an amazing overclocker that has trouble overclocking more than 5%, and although can't even reach 980 performance at stock, will be able to overclock to near 980 Ti level on an 8+6 AIB card. The reference blower is a cheap piece of trash but very good at stock.

Did I cover all bases?


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> So the RX 480 will be an amazing overclocker that has trouble overclocking more than 5%, and although can't even reach 980 performance at stock, will be able to overclock to near 980 Ti level on an 8+6 AIB card. The reference blower is a cheap piece of trash but very good at stock.
> 
> Did I cover all bases?


I think you forgot to mention that because the cooler is good at stock it also allows it to be a great overclocker, just not beyond 5%, which allows it to be within 5% of a 980ti except at stock which it is 5% more than a 970. On top of that, the backplate that comes with every card, except the cards that don't come with one, seem to trap heat in while also providing extra cooling capability. Dead miners are buying the rx 480 in droves which will undoubtedly create a strain on the seemingly endless supply of cards that retailers are photographing. Finally, Wattman will finally give users the ability to overclock their RX 480 cards to the extremes of nearly 5% as long as the user doesn't mind artifacting and crashing, all whilst running cool and efficient with a great price to boot.


----------



## STEvil

If all the watts align volts will be released and the amperes shall flow.


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> So the RX 480 will be an amazing overclocker that has trouble overclocking more than 5%, and although can't even reach 980 performance at stock, will be able to overclock to near 980 Ti level on an 8+6 AIB card. The reference blower is a cheap piece of trash but very good at stock.
> 
> Did I cover all bases?


You forgot to mention how mind blowingly revolutionary it is.


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> I think you forgot to mention that because the cooler is good at stock it also allows it to be a great overclocker, just not beyond 5%, which allows it to be within 5% of a 980ti except at stock which it is 5% more than a 970. On top of that, the backplate that comes with every card, except the cards that don't come with one, seem to trap heat in while also providing extra cooling capability. Dead miners are buying the rx 480 in droves which will undoubtedly create a strain on the seemingly endless supply of cards that retailers are photographing. Finally, Wattman will finally give users the ability to overclock their RX 480 cards to the extremes of nearly 5% as long as the user doesn't mind artifacting and crashing, all whilst running cool and efficient with a great price to boot.


----------



## hollowtek

i love how newegg is already "out of stock" hours before release.


----------



## airfathaaaaa

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hollowtek*
> 
> i love how newegg is already "out of stock" hours before release.


who didnt expected? many people called it since the day amd said its gonna get to be 199 miners just bought them all i suspect


----------



## comagnum

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *hollowtek*
> 
> i love how newegg is already "out of stock" hours before release.


They haven't even been put up for sale yet. They won't post them until 9am est. Relax.


----------



## cez4r

From Gibbo, OcUK:
Quote:


> All I will say is I benched a 390X Strix OC in Ashes Singularity DX12, I then benched the RX 480 at stock, 1fps difference.
> 
> So yes in DX12 it is powerful and will improve.


https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=29710504&postcount=8972


----------



## renx

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cez4r*
> 
> From Gibbo, OcUK:
> https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=29710504&postcount=8972


I hope he's not implying that it sucks in DX11.
Other than that, DX12 performance sounds awesome. That's a 390X Strix OC.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *renx*
> 
> I hope he's not implying that it sucks in DX11.
> Other than that, DX12 performance sounds awesome. That's a 390X Strix OC.












Sounds good.


----------



## Newbie2009

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> So the RX 480 will be an amazing overclocker that has trouble overclocking more than 5%, and although can't even reach 980 performance at stock, will be able to overclock to near 980 Ti level on an 8+6 AIB card. The reference blower is a cheap piece of trash but very good at stock.
> 
> Did I cover all bases?


Yes but no


----------



## spurdomantbh

http://videocardz.com/61587/amd-radeon-rx-490-listed-on-amd-website

Mistake or RX 490 incoming?


----------



## Anik50

Probably the 1st review of RX 480

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CJBaZ9V2Eo


----------



## GHADthc

https://www.pccasegear.com/category/193_1837/graphics-cards/radeon-rx-480 All in stock here as of the moment, and even for a reasonable amount of dollerydoo's too...I'm finding it hard to resist, since I could possibly attach a Raijintek Morpheus to one, or block the reference too.....I'm just waiting till 11pm UTC+10 for reviews to see how they overclock.


----------



## hollowtek

Tl:dw version of that review...

Trades blows with 970 oc in pretty much everything for Dx12.
Slightly better than 970 oc for Dx12.
1.5-1.9% overclocking headroom before crashing.


----------



## spurdomantbh

looks like better coolers aren't that far away


----------



## FlyingSolo

I really hope that AIB cards do better then the reference cards. Cause now the 480 wins some and lose some against a 390/970.


----------



## iRUSH

Are drivers even officially out for this thing yet?


----------



## lolerk52

That review's results are beyond disappointing. 2% OC headroom, 150W power usage, less than 390 performance in most cases.
What the actual hell AMD?


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> 
> 
> That review's results are beyond disappointing. 2% OC headroom, 150W power usage, less than 390 performance in most cases.
> What the actual hell AMD?


Yeap, only price is good. but if it cannot even beat 390 in overall tpu chart 2k, than it's a fail from technical point because it has more tflops.


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> 
> 
> That review's results are beyond disappointing. 2% OC headroom, 150W power usage, less than 390 performance in most cases.
> What the actual hell AMD?


Lol that meme.

Am disappoint. Wasn't expecting the 390 to outclass it anywhere... even the 290x beat it in a few benches. And that OC headroom is cringe worthy.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Yeap, only price is good. but if it cannot even beat 390 in overall tpu chart 2k, than it's a fail from technical point because it has more tflops.


And it still lags behind Maxwell(!!!) in perf/watt!

A 14nm FinFET card lags behind a 28nm planar card in perf/watt released 2 years ago!


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> And it still lags behind *Maxwell(!!!) in perf/watt!*
> 
> A 14nm FinFET card lags behind a 28nm planar card in perf/watt released 2 years ago!


For that we need better reviews. but seems like it matches at least.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> For that we need better reviews. but seems like it matches at least.


Even matching it is BAD.

It needs to dominate it, obliterate it. This is 28nm vs 14nm FinFET, there's no excuse.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Even matching it is BAD.
> 
> It needs to dominate it, obliterate it. This is 28nm vs 14nm FinFET, there's no excuse.


Agree, but you need to also consider that they were already way behind maxwell.


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Yeap, only price is good. but if it cannot even beat 390 in overall tpu chart 2k, than it's a fail from technical point because it has more tflops.


tflops aren't everything, it only tells you about the compute capability, but yeah overall performance is slightly disappointing. Expected a bit more out of it.


----------



## umeng2002

You can thank Global Foundries


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Agree, but you need to also consider that they were already way behind maxwell.


Yes, and Paxwell is basically a shrunk Maxwell, giving AMD time to catch up.

And they failed.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Everyone needs to calm down a little.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shredded*


Wait for official reviews before trolling.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> Yes, and Paxwell is basically a shrunk Maxwell, giving AMD time to catch up.
> 
> And they failed.


I think they need to ditch GCN, just keep good parts of it and make new clean sheet design. until then their only hope is vr+ consoles.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> I think they need to ditch GCN, just keep good parts of it and make new clean sheet design. until then their only hope is vr+ consoles.


Are you saying that on the back of a couple of reviews that may or may not be using a proper card driver?

Or just generally speaking? GCN really isn't a bad architecture great for some things, not so good for others, just like nvidia's.


----------



## umeng2002

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> I think they need to ditch GCN, just keep good parts of it and make new clean sheet design. until then their only hope is vr+ consoles.


The DX12 titles tested in that video were excellent.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> Are you saying that on the back of a couple of reviews that may or may not be using a proper card driver?


Don't put too much faith on that. it's pretty obvious at this point that this card is 390x -5%, which i expected. ( i expected both +/- 5 and its -5).


----------



## spurdomantbh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> I think they need to ditch GCN, just keep good parts of it and make new clean sheet design. until then their only hope is vr+ consoles.


GCN is literally the most advanced computing architecture out there. Everything except GCN is the problem for AMD.


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Don't put too much faith on that. it's pretty obvious at this point that this card is 390x -5%, which i expected. ( i expected both +/- 5 and its -5).


More like 390 -5%.


----------



## Origondoo

do not know if this teaser was already posted


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolerk52*
> 
> More like 390 -5%.


Eh, it was ahead in new games , behind in some. and have a good lead in gw. so 390x - 5%. ( overall ). still wait for more reviews. but it's clear that it won't beat 390x overall.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Don't put too much faith on that. it's pretty obvious at this point that this card is 390x -5%, which i expected. ( i expected both +/- 5 and its -5).


I said may or may not? So no faith in it.

What I do know is it's before NDA so may as well wait till official reviews before talking about tearing down architectures and such lol


----------



## jologskyblues

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> I think they need to ditch GCN, just keep good parts of it and make new clean sheet design. until then their only hope is vr+ consoles.


Having GCN in both consoles and graphics cards is the only competitive advantage AMD has right now. Game developers are now optimizing for that architecture by default. Any major changes will break the continuity and require further optimization work. Just look at Tonga and Fiji.

Nvidia has to brute-force their performance just to counter this.


----------



## EightDee8D

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> I said may or may not? So no faith in it.
> 
> What I do know is it's before NDA so may as well wait till official reviews before talking about tearing down architectures and such lol


Make no mistake i'm not saying gcn is bad or anything, it's actually better than everything. but from p/w and dx11 point of view i think they have hit a wall. that's why muti die approach. from that perspective they need to ditch gcn, start new only incorporate goods from gcn.

this card is good for the price, but from tech it's meh.

Edit : seems like it's locked to 110w.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> Make no mistake i'm not saying gcn is bad or anything, it's actually better than everything. but from p/w and dx11 point of view i think they have hit a wall. that's why muti die approach. from that perspective they need to ditch gcn, start new only incorporate goods from gcn.
> 
> this card is good for the price, but from tech it's meh.
> 
> Edit : seems like it's locked to 110w.


GCN is is a great architecture moving forward.

If the cards are locked at 110W at this point, performance is phenomenal.


----------



## TokenBC

very disappointing from a technical standpoint...

that review seems kind of fishy, though. especially the OC headroom bit.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *EightDee8D*
> 
> seems like it's locked to 110w.


Probably all that worthless heat sink is rated for









I have seen larger reference heatsinks on CPUs....


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Probably all that worthless heat sink is rated for
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have seen larger reference heatsinks on CPUs....


lol yeah the heatsink doesn't look great in the 480.

That saying the low power of the reference card could actually be a blessing for AIBs to really push a lot more power out of their versions with OC and better cooling.


----------



## spurdomantbh

http://videocardz.com/61611/amd-launches-radeon-rx-480

More new slides


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*
> 
> lol yeah the heatsink doesn't look great in the 480.
> 
> That saying the low power of the reference card could actually be a blessing for AIBs to really push a lot more power out of their versions with OC and better cooling.


Inb4 linear voltage scaling spoils that too.


----------



## LocoDiceGR

Guru3D Review IS UP, and its good!


----------



## lolerk52

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LocoDiceGR*
> 
> Guru3D Review IS UP, and its good!


It's the only review where it looks decent.
The rest peg it at below 390/970 perf at 160W, with next to zero overclock headroom.


----------



## TopicClocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LocoDiceGR*
> 
> Guru3D Review IS UP, and its good!


It overclocked to 1375MHz, not bad.

I wouldn't be surprised to see that there's more to give, maybe somewhere around 1400-1450MHz.

With it's stock performance it slightly edges out the GTX 970, but when it's overclocked to 1375MHz it surpasses a max overclocked GTX 970 and a stock/reference GTX 980.


----------



## iRUSH

I have the XFX 4gb 480 in hand. I'll have worse case scenario results over the next 24 hours


----------



## TopicClocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> I have the XFX 4gb 480 in hand. I'll have worse case scenario results over the next 24 hours


Hey! Do you want to have a bench off against my GTX 970? If so, what games and benchmarks do you have?


----------



## spurdomantbh

http://videocardz.com/61658/asus-radeon-rx-480-rog-strix-coming-soon


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TopicClocker*
> 
> Hey! Do you want to have a bench off against my GTX 970? If so, what games and benchmarks do you have?


Sure! In the name of science lol!

This build is nothing special. FX 8320e hopefully at 4.5, 16 GB at 1600, a SSD and this RX 480.

I have most FPS games, Tomb Raider, Hitman, Doom...ect. ?


----------



## TopicClocker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> Sure! In the name of science lol!
> 
> This build is nothing special. FX 8320e hopefully at 4.5, 16 GB at 1600, a SSD and this RX 480.
> 
> I have most FPS games, Tomb Raider, Hitman, Doom...ect. ?


Awesome!


----------



## FLCLimax

even if the AIB boards are better that means all these reference 480's are a purposely gimped scam to make AIB look better. The 6 pin, the cooler, the BIOS. why make an OC tool for a card that doesn't OC, lol.


----------



## Oj010

Here are my results http://hwbot.org/search/submissions/permalink?username=Oj0&gpuId=2723 All were very rushed (install and run) and done at stock.


----------



## Bauxno

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *spurdomantbh*
> 
> http://videocardz.com/61658/asus-radeon-rx-480-rog-strix-coming-soon


I think 1 1/2 of those fans are going to blow air to the cpu with how.small the pcb is on the 480


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> even if the AIB boards are better that means all these reference 480's are a purposely gimped scam to make AIB look better. The 6 pin, the cooler, the BIOS. why make an OC tool for a card that doesn't OC, lol.


Correct it would be quite silly to have an "OC tool" and not be able to OC.

Reference is cheap and AIB can make their card appealing to the consumer.

That's how it's supposed to be. Unlike Pascal. There's so much wrong with that launch it's not funny.


----------



## rv8000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bauxno*
> 
> I think 1 1/2 of those fans are going to blow air to the cpu with how.small the pcb is on the 480


No, they'll remove air from the heatsink that extends the length of the shroud; this is exactly how fiji pro worked with AIB coolers. My Fury Tri-X was on average 6-8c cooler than my 1080 SC at half the fan speed.

At the very least AIB cards are going to make a MASSIVE improvement on temps for the 480, I'd expect to see low to mid 60s for load temps.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Here are my results http://hwbot.org/search/submissions/permalink?username=Oj0&gpuId=2723 All were very rushed (install and run) and done at stock.


You used the driver for it?


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> Correct it would be quite silly to have an "OC tool" and not be able to OC.
> 
> Reference is cheap and AIB can make their card appealing to the consumer.
> 
> That's how it's supposed to be. Unlike Pascal. There's so much wrong with that launch it's not funny.


class action lawsuit.


----------



## FLCLimax

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Here are my results http://hwbot.org/search/submissions/permalink?username=Oj0&gpuId=2723 All were very rushed (install and run) and done at stock.
> 
> 
> 
> You used the driver for it?
Click to expand...

no, he didn't have time.


----------



## Oj010

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rdr09*
> 
> You used the driver for it?


Nope, couldn't get my hands on it in time. Maybe tomorrow.


----------



## rdr09

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *FLCLimax*
> 
> no, he didn't have time.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Oj010*
> 
> Nope, couldn't get my hands on it in time. Maybe tomorrow.


Thanks. +rep.

Interesting results especially on 3DMark11 Graphics. My 290 only gets 14500 at stock but can easily get 19000 oc'ed.


----------



## PontiacGTX

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iRUSH*
> 
> Any suggestions on how to fix the perception?


They can try to call RTG instead AMD to change perception they have bought a card from AMD, which usually they dont like for any reason, also use same marketing tactics as Nvidia with whichever weak points Nvidia has, highlight AMD strengths, make parnetship with more game devs that make AAA which people always buy each year or each time a game is released like CoD,BF, Far Cry,Tom clancys,etc and also take advantage of the parnetship to improve performance based on their architecture for DX11 and DX12 path,release more exclusive feature each time a card is released from reviews sites instead hidding the benefits of the card to whitepapers and slides from conferences with the media/reviews site´s rep.also do the same Nvidia does with giving away samples of their products to reviewer/streamers/eSport leagues which have a wide spectrum of readers,include their GPUs into mobiles segment where they have nothing to some compete with,get more GPUs/CPUs into pre built PCs and those which are built with custom parts. Have more reps active into tech forums to be in contact with their customers, release an Own forum for their Card for CS and Troubleshoot


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gamervivek*
> 
> That XFX card is clocked out of box at 1330Mhz on a reference cooler so it's damn likely that 1.4Ghz shouldn't be a problem for most cards unless limited by something(TDP, voltage or cooling).
> It'd be easily 10% faster than the 280X.


Isn't the stock voltage gradient 100mv too many? The gpu can manage 1330MHz at 1.025v for starters...


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Any website have benchmark WoW, SC2 and other CPU Overhead games?


----------



## Eorzean

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Any website have benchmark WoW, SC2 and other CPU Overhead games?


Here's WoW:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480/21.html


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Eorzean*
> 
> Here's WoW:
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480/21.html


Probably better just SC2 as WoW benchmarks are hard to do.


----------



## Halo_003

So has anyone compiled what the actual overclocks on the card are yet? I know G3D did like 1375MHz, has anyone actually done 1.5GHz+?


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jologskyblues*
> 
> Nvidia has to brute-force their performance just to counter this.


I see this posted quite a bit and gotta ask, what does this even mean? Nvidia had to make their gpu stronger to compete? Well duh... why doesn't AMD "brute force" their way to better performance as well.. lol


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Halo_003*
> 
> So has anyone compiled what the actual overclocks on the card are yet? I know G3D did like 1375MHz, has anyone actually done 1.5GHz+?


I do not think it's possible with stock cooler.


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> I see this posted quite a bit and gotta ask, what does this even mean? Nvidia had to make their gpu stronger to compete? Well duh... why doesn't AMD "brute force" their way to better performance as well.. lol


They did that with fiji, didn't sell that well.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> They did that with fiji, didn't sell that well.


Fiji was like a rushed products, forced HBM, not balanced configuration.


----------



## tkenietz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> They did that with fiji, didn't sell that well.


They may have tried, but clearly it didn't happen. Should have forced it harder?

What I'm saying is, that argument to me sounds like "well nvidia has to make better cards in order to beat amd", isn't that the point?


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> They may have tried, but clearly it didn't happen. Should have forced it harder?
> 
> What I'm saying is, that argument to me sounds like "well nvidia has to make better cards in order to beat amd", isn't that the point?


Yea i have no idea how someone can refer to NVidia as brute forcing anything since fermi.... Pascal is miles ahead in perf/watt than anything AMD has.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ultracarpet*
> 
> They did that with fiji, didn't sell that well.


Fiji was launched after the GTX 980 Ti, perfomed lower, and was priced high...


----------



## Ultracarpet

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Slomo4shO*
> 
> Fiji was launched after the GTX 980 Ti, perfomed lower, and was priced high...


It was in reference to "brute forcing" performance. Which they absolutely did with the fury x.


----------



## tajoh111

I have a feeling the new 1.6ghz rumors are by exclusive AMD partners like xfx and sapphire.

Margins on AIB cards are higher and their future depends on polaris cards selling.

These rumors are likely not true and are just a stall tactic to get people to wait for their cards. Adding a better power delivery system is not going to double or triple the amount that a person can overclock.


----------



## rv8000

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Halo_003*
> 
> So has anyone compiled what the actual overclocks on the card are yet? I know G3D did like 1375MHz, has anyone actually done 1.5GHz+?


Highest clock was done on a reference board with a modded cooler (I think they used some cpu cooler) which was 1425mhz; brought it up to Nano performance. There is a link in one of the other 480 threads, too many posts to go through to find it now.

AIB's will likely clock marginally higher. In a worse case scenario I'd guess 1450-1475 which should put it in range of stock Fiji pro.


----------



## boot318

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> I do not think it's possible with stock cooler.


I don't think anything is possible with GCN but high power usage and low clocks.


----------



## ChevChelios

Quote:


> Highest clock was done on a reference board with a modded cooler (I think they used some cpu cooler) which was 1425mhz; brought it up to Nano performance. There is a link in one of the other 480 threads, too many posts to go through to find it now.


^ also worth noting only one of their four 480s was able to go to 1400/1425 with that custom cooler .. rest were still stuck @ 1350-ish

the silicon lottery might be strong in this one


----------



## magnek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tajoh111*
> 
> I have a feeling the new 1.6ghz rumors are by exclusive AMD partners like xfx and sapphire.
> 
> Margins on AIB cards are higher and their future depends on polaris cards selling.
> 
> These rumors are likely not true and are just a stall tactic to get people to wait for their cards. Adding a better power delivery system is not going to double or triple the amount that a person can overclock.


Kyle was quoted as saying "1480-1600 MHz" on AIB cards is possible, but "subject to silicon lottery".

In any case, at 1600 it'll end up right between 980 and 980 Ti, assuming the kind of scaling we've seen so far. Question is how much are these AIB cards gonna cost, and how much of a golden sample do we need.


----------



## Dargonplay

Anyone here feeling like selling a 1070 G1, SC, MSI, ZOTAC or EVGA for 429$ or less?

I will thank you forever


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dargonplay*
> 
> Anyone here feeling like selling a 1070 G1, SC, MSI, ZOTAC or EVGA for 429$ or less?
> 
> I will thank you forever


That should be it's price now lol. Give it a month and hopefully it'll settle.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

It would have been such a easy choice to get a GTX1070 if it was selling and selling for $380 MSRP.


----------



## Slomo4shO

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *magnek*
> 
> In any case, at 1600 it'll end up right *below an overclocked 980*, assuming the kind of scaling we've seen so far.


FTFY


----------



## magnek

Spoiler: Okay


----------



## hollowtek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> They may have tried, but clearly it didn't happen. Should have forced it harder?


( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)


----------



## Rabit

RX 480 @ 1425 = non-ref GTX 970 @ 1628

http://hwbot.org/submission/3251198_lucky_n00b_3dmark___fire_strike_radeon_rx_480_12668_marks

http://hwbot.org/submission/2765998_nyd117_3dmark___fire_strike_geforce_gtx_970_12751_marks

Now lets wait for non-ref PCB RX 480


----------



## slavovid

Now the question is will the AIB model come with factory OC leaving us less room for our personal OC.
If the cards come with 6+8 pins and instead of 1266 they come with 1350 that will leave us very little room to add more if even possible

Those that only reached 1330-1350 were limited by the power and the one that reached 1400 was i guess a winner but with more power even the 1330-1350 should reach 1400 where the one that reaches 1400 could possibly even hit 1500

Myself on other hand don't rly need to OC this card for 1050p but i god damn want an AIB card with better and quieter cooling. And ofc the OC will be needed and used after i get a better monitor


----------



## jologskyblues

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tkenietz*
> 
> I see this posted quite a bit and gotta ask, what does this even mean? Nvidia had to make their gpu stronger to compete? Well duh... why doesn't AMD "brute force" their way to better performance as well.. lol


Read the rest of my post. You know, about the GCN in the consoles and stuff.

By brute-forcing performance, I quite literally meant performance. Not architecture or SKU. Seems like Nvidia achieved this by scaling up the raw performance that is allowed by their perf/watt headroom advantage.

Just look at how GM200 and GP104 trades punches with equivalent GCN models in DX12 even if they "don't do async compute"


----------



## Xuper

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Rabit*
> 
> RX 480 @ 1425 = non-ref GTX 970 @ 1628
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/3251198_lucky_n00b_3dmark___fire_strike_radeon_rx_480_12668_marks
> 
> http://hwbot.org/submission/2765998_nyd117_3dmark___fire_strike_geforce_gtx_970_12751_marks
> 
> Now lets wait for non-ref PCB RX 480


wow! at 1425 Mhz , it beats 1628 Mhz! That's hard!

Graphic Score : 14646 (RX 480 ) vs 14467 ( GTX 970 )


----------



## mtcn77

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *slavovid*
> 
> Now the question is will the AIB model come with factory OC leaving us less room for our personal OC.
> If the cards come with 6+8 pins and instead of 1266 they come with 1350 that will leave us very little room to add more if even possible
> 
> Those that only reached 1330-1350 were limited by the power and the one that reached 1400 was i guess a winner but with more power even the 1330-1350 should reach 1400 where the one that reaches 1400 could possibly even hit 1500
> 
> Myself on other hand don't rly need to OC this card for 1050p but i god damn want an AIB card with better and quieter cooling. And ofc the OC will be needed and used after i get a better monitor


The power is not the issue when you can reach higher than average results by _undervolting_, imo. People you need to account for temperature & overshooting the overclock apex.
The cooler is rather potent next to 1070FE, btw. 5200>4000 rpm and lower noise at auto settings.


----------



## NFL

480 @ 1487mhz, cooled with H100 (supposedly)


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> 480 @ 1487mhz, cooled with H100 (supposedly)


Making it through Valley is usually a pretty good indicator of stability. But he didn't overclock the memory, so I would like to see that being done also to get a greater grasp of overall max OC on a stock reference PCB.

Looking forward to the completion of this:






Should yield similar results.


----------



## lolfail9001

By the way, the guy who slapped aftermarket air cooler and got 1425Mhz clock got a freaking 187 power draw on GPU alone.

That's literally a GPU power draw of R9 Nano. And both are reporting without memory included, as i come to conclude from AMD Robert words.


----------



## NFL

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> By the way, the guy who slapped aftermarket air cooler and got 1425Mhz clock got a freaking 187 power draw on GPU alone.
> 
> That's literally a GPU power draw of R9 Nano. And both are reporting without memory included, as i come to conclude from AMD Robert words.


Efficiency definitely not something to write home about.

Fortunately for me though, I don't actually give a crap about power efficiency.


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> Efficiency definitely not something to write home about.
> 
> Fortunately for me though, I don't actually give a crap about power efficiency.


Agreed, I just want to see what these AIB cards can do, this card looks pretty sick:


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *NFL*
> 
> Efficiency definitely not something to write home about.
> 
> Fortunately for me though, I don't actually give a crap about power efficiency.


Well, sadly it is for me to an extent (i am on power limit, basically) and it's kinda sad to see GF fail so hard and AMD pulling all the rabbits in the hat to cover that up. It does not even paint well for Zen, considering GF are producing it as well.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BiG StroOnZ*
> 
> Agreed, I just want to see what these AIB cards can do, this card looks pretty sick


Well, as fellows with 960 Strix review pointed out, it will probably draw 200 watts from the slot alone


----------



## BiG StroOnZ

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> Well, as fellows with 960 Strix review pointed out, it will probably draw 200 watts from the slot alone


Probably not they redesigned everything with the Strix for these 16nm and 14nm cards


----------



## artemis2307

pascal = maxwell on speed
polaris = ???


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *artemis2307*
> 
> pascal = maxwell on speed
> polaris = ???


Tonga 2.0


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> Tonga > Shrunk


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Waitng4realGPU*


You are correct, AMD should have shrunk Hawaii instead. It was more power efficient after all.


----------



## artemis2307

right, Hawaii is the most amazing GPU they've ever made, easily go 1200/1600mhz, ~25% performance increase for 25% clock increase


----------



## PlugSeven

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lolfail9001*
> 
> You are correct, AMD should have shrunk Hawaii instead. It was more power efficient after all.


Some truth in that, a shrink would probably have been a good way to test out the new node and Glofo/Samsung fabrication.


----------



## GorillaSceptre

Polaris was made for the low power/mobile market. High clocks loose the efficiency it was designed for, like in the 480.

The 460/470 will hit that 2.7x perf/Watt figure.


----------



## umeng2002

A few of the people who've slapped on custom coolers are getting over 1400 MHz on these reference boards.

A decent PCB version with good power delivery and cooling might work wonders for this chip.


----------



## Waitng4realGPU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *umeng2002*
> 
> A few of the people who've slapped on custom coolers are getting over 1400 MHz on these reference boards.
> 
> A decent PCB version with good power delivery and cooling might work wonders for this chip.


Exactly, which is why I'm choosing to believe that Kyle was not lying when he said AIBs are seeing anywhere between 1480-1600mhz on the chips.

What reason would he have to lie........

Plus these numbers would fall into line with pre release rumours of them matching fury X once overclocked to the max.


----------



## sugarhell

I got the 480 4gb yesterday. After some tests i will send it back because the reference cooler is bad

I found a lot of reasons why this card can't overclock.

Cooler. Even on stock is throttling heavily. I dont know why not all reviews said about this problem. They dont even check their stats?
Vrm temps. Its over 70 all the time. A big limit on the overclock just there
1 6 -pin

I will wait for a proper AIB version. First time that i got a bad reference from AMD. The pcb is fine but the cooler and the 1-6pin really limits what this card can do.

On the positives, the card can undervolt really well like i can save 0.1V and still maintain the stock clocks while saving 20-30 watt.

Well i have to go to work now . If i have time tonight before i send this card back i will upload some tests


----------



## FlyingSolo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *umeng2002*
> 
> A few of the people who've slapped on custom coolers are getting over 1400 MHz on these reference boards.
> 
> A decent PCB version with good power delivery and cooling might work wonders for this chip.


Yeah. I will wait for AIB cards to see what they can do before buying one.


----------



## iRUSH

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> I got the 480 4gb yesterday. After some tests i will send it back because the reference cooler is bad
> 
> I found a lot of reasons why this card can't overclock.
> 
> Cooler. Even on stock is throttling heavily. I dont know why not all reviews said about this problem. They dont even check their stats?
> Vrm temps. Its over 70 all the time. A big limit on the overclock just there
> 1 6 -pin
> 
> I will wait for a proper AIB version. First time that i got a bad reference from AMD. The pcb is fine but the cooler and the 1-6pin really limits what this card can do.
> 
> On the positives, the card can undervolt really well like i can save 0.1V and still maintain the stock clocks while saving 20-30 watt.
> 
> Well i have to go to work now . If i have time tonight before i send this card back i will upload some tests


I purchased mine at MC with a two year warranty. I'll take my reference one back in exchange for a beastly one in a few months?

I love having a local PC parts solution!


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> I got the 480 4gb yesterday. After some tests i will send it back because the reference cooler is bad
> 
> I found a lot of reasons why this card can't overclock.
> 
> Cooler. Even on stock is throttling heavily. I dont know why not all reviews said about this problem. They dont even check their stats?
> Vrm temps. Its over 70 all the time. A big limit on the overclock just there
> 1 6 -pin
> 
> I will wait for a proper AIB version. First time that i got a bad reference from AMD. The pcb is fine but the cooler and the 1-6pin really limits what this card can do.
> 
> On the positives, the card can undervolt really well like i can save 0.1V and still maintain the stock clocks while saving 20-30 watt.
> 
> Well i have to go to work now . If i have time tonight before i send this card back i will upload some tests


Have you checked if you have a 8GB card. I think you can flash the BIOS and get 8GB 8Gbps card. 4GB 7 GBps is a artificial sku.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Have you checked if you have a 8GB card. I think you can flash the BIOS and get 8GB 8Gbps card. 4GB 7 GBps is a artificial sku.


It is not a 8GB card. And this is misleading.

Actually AMD only sent the 8GB version of 480. But they also sent a bios that limits the card to 4gb and 7Gbps.

AIB can opt in for 8Gbps 4gb if they want. But no my card is only 4gb

tldr 4gb version can have either 7 or 8 Gbps. It's up to AIBs. The minimum spec is 7


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sugarhell*
> 
> It is not a 8GB card. And this is misleading.
> 
> Actually AMD only sent the 8GB version of 480. But they also sent a bios that limits the card to 4gb and 7Gbps.
> 
> AIB can opt in for 8Gbps 4gb if they want. But no my card is only 4gb
> 
> tldr 4gb version can have either 7 or 8 Gbps. It's up to AIBs. The minimum spec is 7


Does it have dual BIOS? Have you tried to flash it. I know that you can flash 8GB to 4GB. I was told by some people that there is no 4GB card. Its the same 8GB card for all SKUs. You probably can't open the card to check physically?


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> Does it have dual BIOS? Have you tried to flash it. I know that you can flash 8GB to 4GB. I was told by some people that there is no 4GB card. Its the same 8GB card for all SKUs. You probably can't open the card to check physically?


I already check it. There is only 4gb on board


----------



## The Mac

did you remove the cooler and look at the actual chips?

the rumor was they couldn't source the right chips so they all have 8GB and the 4GB version is BIOS limited.

Seems a bit unbelievable to me, but thats the rumor.


----------



## sugarhell

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Mac*
> 
> did you remove the cooler and look at the actual chips?
> 
> the rumor was they couldn't source the right chips so they all have 8GB and the 4GB version is BIOS limited.
> 
> Seems a bit unbelievable to me, but thats the rumor.


Yes only 4gb there.


----------



## The Mac

gotcha. i had a feeling that rumor was BS.


----------



## lolfail9001

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Mac*
> 
> gotcha. i had a feeling that rumor was BS.


It's based on AMD noting they had review samples with 4gb/8gb bios. So, basically, rumor mill processed a fact into bs.


----------



## mcg75

http://www.overclock.net/t/1604421/various-amd-rx-480-review-thread


----------

