AMD Polaris Thread: Radeon RX 480, RX 470 & RX 460 launching June 29th

[tviceman]

There's some talk/rumor from some EU tech press, AMD is officially launching at E3 PC Gaming Show (June 14th), review samples sent out to the press, NDA for reviews likely 19th.

That is awesome news. I have no problems with paper launches. Get the products into reviews hands asap and let the information be fully circulated by the time the card is released.

 

[monstercameron]

Since this is the Radeon RX480 thread, were any RX480s given out, loaned etc to reviewers who flew over to Taipei? Is this info under NDA?

I don't want to start a flame war but Nvidia had a stack of GTX 1080s to hand out to reviewers at release and I understand that AMD is probably in a tighter financial bind but I did not see any mention of handing out RX 480s. I wonder if they will be sent to the persons that attended later in June after the GTX 1070 is released?

there is a slight contradiction here, just note that amd just invited several individuals to china, fed and accommodated them. how is seeding a few review samples or not constrained by their financials?

 

[guskline]

there is a slight contradiction here, just note that amd just invited several individuals to china, fed and accommodated them. how is seeding a few review samples or not constrained by their financials?

Sorry, I was unaware that it was just a few. If so were they given RX 480s to review?

 

[Silverforce11]

Anyone who is ridiculing AMD for bringing great perf/$ is an idiot. Anyone that wants to argue WHY AMD is bringing great perf/$ is not an idiot but is equally attacked the same as the ones you suggest are attacking AMD for low pricing.

The why is linked. They need marketshare gains. That's their goal, read their investor briefing slides.

AMD made a bold claim to their investors, that they will return to the dominant dGPU marketshare player, over the next several quarters. You simply don't say stuff like that to investors without a credible plan of attack.

How do you steal back marketshare?

By offering an amazing product at a price that's hard to resist. ie. Lots of NV users may have inertia and avoid using AMD because of several reasons. But if it's such a good deal, that sense of personal greed will override those factors and they will not be able to resist.

On a related note:

Anyone who questions the profitability of selling a small chip, low TDP, GDDR5 product at $199 has no clue. Look at the GTX 960, did anyone question whether NVIDIA made profit at that price?

Basic maths with available figures: 232mm2, on a 14nm FF wafer that costs $3000, with yield claims of 0.2 defects/cm2, each cut-down Polaris 10 would likely cost them $25-30. Simple low TDP PCB, 4GB GDDR5, a low thermal blower and total BOM should be <$100.

Certainly not the margins of selling GP104 for $699. There's published material out there, only 15% of GPU sales are above $350. Of this 15% segment, the vast majority (AIB claims ~85%) are $350 to $450. Meaning GPUs above $450 make up a very small volume of the overall GPU market. Thus, these mainstream GPU make up for lower margins with more volume.

I mean it's not a shocker and it's quite silly to have to say such obvious things but sometimes people on this forum have strange ideas that GPUs can't be sold for $199 as it's not profitable.

 

[guskline]

There's some talk/rumor from some EU tech press, AMD is officially launching at E3 PC Gaming Show (June 14th), review samples sent out to the press, NDA for reviews likely 19th.

Thank you Silverforce11. That answers my question.

 

[monstercameron]

Sorry, I was unaware that it was just a few. If so were they given RX 480s to review?

its a safe bet they all have 480s waiting for the nda to expire.

 

[Silverforce11]

That is awesome news. I have no problems with paper launches. Get the products into reviews hands asap and let the information be fully circulated by the time the card is released.

When they do hit retail, it better be a hard launch with major volume, because I know some mining enthusiasts who are getting ready for massive mining setups. For mining perf/w is the major factor in profitability.

It could be a major cluster-you-know-what if volume is low.

ie. if retailers jack up the prices due to miners, AMD can kiss goodbye the entire point of Polaris, perf per dollar.

 

[techne]

Smart mainstream buyers either buys a $199 480 4GB, and upgrades again in 2018, or he/she can spend a bit more for the 8GB version.

A delightful dilemma.

I'd like to know how much the 4GB / 8GB alternative would affect video encoding in general. I want the 8GB version, but I'm not sure it will be easy to find in the local market.

 

[monstercameron]

A delightful dilemma.

I'd like to know how much the 4GB / 8GB alternative would affect video encoding in general. I want the 8GB version, but I'm not sure it will be easy to find in the local market.

gfx cards dont really affect video encoding. Unless you mean something like gamestream?

 

[techne]

gfx cards dont really affect video encoding. Unless you mean something like gamestream?

I'm only a casual player. On the other hand, I'm interested in HVEC GPU encoding. I mean, I'm really interested.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Both VR and PC gaming market would increase just as fast. Polaris 10 is just another evolutionary part in that chain. It is by no means special in that regard.

Can you honestly tell me that nvidia didn't have prior knowledge of the expected rx480 launch price, and say that they planned all along to have gtx 1070 cost $379(when it reaches this price who knows)?

The only reason the gtx1070 doesn't cost $499 is because nvidia's little birds told them what rx480 was going to cost and they adjusted gtx1070 accordingly to not look like rapists.

Gtx1080 is a flagship card and can command that flagship price of $599(we'll see when this happens), but I for one am highly skeptical that nvidia planned for their step-down enthusiast card to cost less than $449-499.

So even the most nvidia loyal consumer can thank amd for this pricing(when it ever happens.)

 

[tviceman]

The why is linked. They need marketshare gains. That's their goal, read their investor briefing slides.

In a nutshell, yes. But as you and I have argued over the past day or so over the specifics of their strategy, simply saying "market share" doesn't explain everything. You have opinions / speculations (Apple, cut down dies, yields, etc.) and I disagree with you and/or have my own speculations.

We both agree on this: RX 480 is a great deal at $199 vs. current pricing of others cards. I sold my entire rig about 6 weeks ago because I'm moving and my PC was going to be packed away for a few months if I didn't sell it. I'm planning a new build after I get into my new home (December / January) around the Dan A4-SFX case. I'm not buying a high end GPU until 2nd gen Vive or Oculus headsets hit the market. All that being the case, if prices in December stay where they are right now ($379 custom 1070's, $199 RX 480's) and GP106 can't keep up with RX 480 (comparing OC to OC) for a similar price, I won't even hesitate to entirely blow off the notion of getting a used video card and fork over an easy $200 for an RX 480.

 

[tviceman]

Can you honestly tell me that nvidia didn't have prior knowledge of the expected rx480 launch price, and say that they planned all along to have gtx 1070 cost $379(when it reaches this price who knows)?

The only reason the gtx1070 doesn't cost $499 is because nvidia's little birds told them what rx480 was going to cost and they adjusted gtx1070 accordingly to not look like rapists.

Gtx1080 is a flagship card and can command that flagship price of $599(we'll see when this happens), but I for one am highly skeptical that nvidia planned for their step-down enthusiast card to cost less than $449-499.

So even the most nvidia loyal consumer can thank amd for this pricing(when it ever happens.)

On the contrary, I think Nvidia had knowledge of RX 480's performance (hence the reason the 1070 is so cutdown from the 1080 but still comfortably ahead of RX 480), but they did NOT know the price. I believe AMD wasn't 100% settled on the price until after the 1080 and 1070 were revealed. If Nvidia knew the price, I'm not entirely sure if the 1070 would have been intro'd lower or if the 1070 founders edition done away with, but I do think AMD caught them by surprise on price and Nvidia is going to try to counter with GP106 before eventually cracking and lowering the 1070 and 1080 prices (at least unofficially).

EDIT: Don't forget, GTX 980 intro MSRP was $550 and 970 cost $330 - a $220 price gap. GTX 1080 and 1070's non-founders $599 and $379 price is the same gap. Had Nvidia known of AMD's pricing ahead of time, I think we might have seen a slightly cheaper 1080 and 1070 OR a more powerful 1070, leaving room for a potentially more powerful third GP104 sku that what may end up appearing.

 

[Silverforce11]

Well yes, all the tech press were caught off-guard by the aggressively low pricing from AMD. I wasn't even expecting that good a deal myself.

But IHVs tend to know the performance metrics of competitor hardware well in advanced. They can skew each other wrong info via drivers or non-final Bioses, but they are all capable of simulating the silicon once they have it in hand.

 

[JDG1980]

On the contrary, I think Nvidia had knowledge of RX 480's performance (hence the reason the 1070 is so cutdown from the 1080 but still comfortably ahead of RX 480), but they did NOT know the price. I believe AMD wasn't 100% settled on the price until after the 1080 and 1070 were revealed.

One thing you're overlooking is that even the performance of these cards isn't necessarily settled until very shortly before release. The silicon is fixed well in advance, but clock rates are discretionary depending on whether the vendor is going for raw performance or top perf/watt.

We saw this with Hawaii: reference R9 290 (non-X) was extremely loud and hot because the clock rates had to be juiced at the last minute to compete with the price-cut GTX 780. I don't expect AMD to do anything that extreme this time (R9 290 got a lot of bad press because of the terrible reference design, even though AIB cards were excellent), but I do think they will configure shipping clock rates on the top Polaris 10 SKU so that it comes as close to GTX 1070 as possible without blowing the power budget through the roof.

 

[tviceman]

One thing you're overlooking is that even the performance of these cards isn't necessarily settled until very shortly before release. The silicon is fixed well in advance, but clock rates are discretionary depending on whether the vendor is going for raw performance or top perf/watt.

What you're talking about is a 3-5% variance in final performance because the higher the clocks the less top binned SKU's can be produced. 3-5% is inconsequential when comparing P10 to GP104.

I do think they will configure shipping clock rates on the top Polaris 10 SKU so that it comes as close to GTX 1070 as possible without blowing the power budget through the roof.

No amount of configuring shipping clocks of P10 is going to bring it anywhere remotely close to 1070 performance. It's going to have somewhere around 390x performance, and that by itself is a solid 25% slower than GTX 1070.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Is it possible amd is waiting for gddr5x availability to drop a $299 full p10?

It would be a good reason for the lack of news regarding the suspected full chip.



Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

 

[Magee_MC]

Gtx1080 is a flagship card and can command that flagship price of $599(we'll see when this happens), but I for one am highly skeptical that nvidia planned for their step-down enthusiast card to cost less than $449-499.

Is it really a flagship card? It's the fastest card at the moment, but everybody knows that a 1080Ti and a new Titan are coming. When I think of a flagship card, I think of the fastest card of a generation. Since we know that won't be the 1080, I can't really consider it NV's flagship, just the fastest that they've released so far.

 

[tviceman]

Is it possible amd is waiting for gddr5x availability to drop a $299 full p10?

It would be a good reason for the lack of news regarding the suspected full chip.

This is actually the only good reason as to why RX 480 MAY be cut down. But still, why not release RX 485 at $279-299 along side RX 480? Surely Nvidia has not been guaranteed or allocated all G5X memory. It makes no sense to hold back a 230mm2 chip out of the gate. AMD can still hit the $199 price point while bringing a higher performance, more competitive part at the same time. It makes sense to hold back if and only if the cost of G5X is currently prohibitive to a $300 graphics card price point.

 

[Magee_MC]

Is it possible amd is waiting for gddr5x availability to drop a $299 full p10?

It would be a good reason for the lack of news regarding the suspected full chip.



Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

That would make sense, especially with a $300 price tag.

 

[Stormflux]

Would a GDDR5X Full P10 be worth it for both AMD or consumers? Bullet point aside, is this class of cards limited in any way by current GDDR5 offerings? $300 with GDDR5X would also cut into AMD's margins no?

Fantasy hay maker from AMD would be amazing... 8GB GDDR5X RX 485 (Full P10) for $299. Performance knocking on a 1070, which will eventually be $379 with old donky GDDR5, but for now is $450. But I'm not going to get my hopes up. As AMD will do as AMD does.

Realistically though, I'd be content with a full P10 that performs ~10% above the RX480.

I so hope their full launch is really at the E3 PC Gaming Show on the 14th and, review NDAs lift on the 19th as Silverforce mentioned. The media build up times for these cards are too damned high!

 

[Vaporizer]

When they do hit retail, it better be a hard launch with major volume, because I know some mining enthusiasts who are getting ready for massive mining setups. For mining perf/w is the major factor in profitability.

It could be a major cluster-you-know-what if volume is low.

ie. if retailers jack up the prices due to miners, AMD can kiss goodbye the entire point of Polaris, perf per dollar.

I assume that all the miners will shoot for the cheap 4GB version whereas the gamers will go for 8 GB versions.

 

[beginner99]

Is it possible amd is waiting for gddr5x availability to drop a $299 full p10?

It would be a good reason for the lack of news regarding the suspected full chip.

I don't think so. This is mainstream segment and it would require the chip to have a gddr5x capable controller which means additional development cost for just 1 more SKU? I don't believe that. They could just be binning to have enough "good dies" that can also clock higher. We don't even know if the RX 480 isn't a full die, maybe it is.

Either small Vega is GDDR5x or AMD actually ignores it completely. For small vega it would make sense because it of cost and it should offer enough bandwidth.

 

[IllogicalGlory]

Most leaks (which turned out to be correct about 2304 shaders) said that Polaris 10 has 40 CUs on the silicon, and the nomenclature (480 rather than 485 or 480X) suggests that it's not the full chip.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

I don't think so. This is mainstream segment and it would require the chip to have a gddr5x capable controller which means additional development cost for just 1 more SKU? I don't believe that. They could just be binning to have enough "good dies" that can also clock higher. We don't even know if the RX 480 isn't a full die, maybe it is.

Either small Vega is GDDR5x or AMD actually ignores it completely. For small vega it would make sense because it of cost and it should offer enough bandwidth.

I thought I read that a Gddr5x controller is backwards compatible to gddr5 memory? Do we know Polaris 10 does not support gddr5x natively?

I'm still waiting for benchmarks on P10 before jumping to any conclusions. I keep seeing people selling rx 480 way short of the 1070, but I don't think the difference will be as huge as people are making it sound.

Especially come nvidia refresh time next year.