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

[Headfoot]

Scores being exactly 390x speeds makes me wonder if they actually benched a 390x and faked it

 

[Mikeduffy]

There is a definite concentrated effort by Nvidia to compare this card against the 1070 while completely ignoring performance/$. It's completely clear by the constant barrage on the ocnet forums.

Performance/$ the 480 wins easily. Performance/Watt the 480 is competitive - this is huge against GP104 as GP106 will most likely be much lower in perf/watt. Performance/mm^2 is a pointless metric that only the most clueless seem to be making.

Seeing as though driver overhead is a thing of the past with dx12 - I can't see how Nvidia will be competitive in the mainstream market. P10 has effectively shut them out - where are the 1060 leaks that were expected to drop before the 29th?

 

[RussianSensation]

Because this is about trying to get as many folks as possible to BELIEVE their lies BEFORE 480 is released, so that as many as possible will BUY NVIDIA cards BEFORE 480 launches.

Team Green is entering the twilight zone when you completely lose track of reality to justify your brand loyalty/purchases.

Nvidia's gift to mainstream PC gaming
June 2013 $249 GTX760
January 2015 $200 GTX960 replacement
11-14% more performance

AMD's gift to mainstream PC gaming
January 2015 $200 GTX960
June 2016 $200-229 RX 480
60-70% more performance

ONCE 480 releases, the truth of 480's performance/stock/OC-ability/etc will be known, and this fud and its associated lies evident to all.

I cannot take anyone's post on this forum seriously who recommended GTX750/750Ti over R9 270/270X and GTX950/960 over R9 280X/380X/R9 290, but then turns around and pushes GTX1070 over the RX 480. Back then a $250-280 R9 290 was as fast as $400 GTX960 SLI.

Now the same people are trying to push a $400-450 GTX1070? D:

Couple this with (this rumor) :

https://semiaccurate.com/2016/06/24/serious-manufacturing-problem-hits-nvidia-consumer-gpus/

It's clear NV rushed this launch.
http://www.techpowerup.com/223669/geforce-gtx-pascal-faces-high-dvi-pixel-clock-booting-problems

The only worse paper launch I can recall off the top of my head is the 7800GTX 512MB.

If 480/470/460 cards perform and OC well and stock is plentiful, and the rumored supply issues play out, AMD will gain significant market share, and thus nVidia's income stream and market share will suffer.

That's why the NV marketing/PR campaign came out to start discrediting $149-199 4GB cards for 1080p. For the entirety of 2013-2015 they defended 2GB cards and even 3GB 780/780Ti wasn't brought up against R9 290/290X, nor 970's 3.5GB or 980's 4GB against R9 390's 8GB. If we follow their logic, it was perfectly fine to spend $500-550 on a 980 4GB for the last 2 years but now when a card is about to bring a similar level of performance for <$250, 4GB isn't enough? They should send $300 "forgiveness" cheques to all the GTX980 owners to whom they recommended wasting $550 USD/EURO on a gimped 4GB high-end card during the last 1.5 years.

Whatever it takes to get people to upgrade into a 1070 or wait out until 1060 shows up. The irony is that because NV rushed the launch of 1070, as soon as RX 480 shows up in retail channels, it'll be winning sales by default since NV has no stock.

 

[Thala]

Can easily go from 6.3 -> 7.2 by changing clocks

That's because the Valve VR benchmark score is not linear in the framerates. As such it gives you a wrong impression of distance.

 

[maddie]

Because this is about trying to get as many folks as possible to BELIEVE their lies BEFORE 480 is released, so that as many as possible will BUY NVIDIA cards BEFORE 480 launches.

ONCE 480 releases, the truth of 480's performance/stock/OC-ability/etc will be known, and this fud and its associated lies evident to all.

Couple this with (this rumor) :

https://semiaccurate.com/2016/06/24/serious-manufacturing-problem-hits-nvidia-consumer-gpus/

And this makes it imperative (from nVidia's perpective) to get folks to purchase as many nVidia cards as possible BEFORE the 480 Release, and BEFORE these rumored supply issues--IF TRUE--become visible and known to the GPU buying masses. Taken together, this would also explain why nVidia pulled forward (by ~1.5 to 2 MONTHS) the 1070/1080 "launch" and the (pure cash grab) of the Founders Edition pricing as well.

If 480/470/460 cards perform and OC well and stock is plentiful, and the rumored (nVidia) supply issues play out, AMD will gain significant market share, and thus nVidia's income stream and market share will suffer.

That's the funny thing about all this manic posting.

Except for a small percentage of potential buyers, the Nvidia new gen cards are in a totally different price bracket and will not be seen as potential purchases by most prospective buyers. Spreading FUD to discourage purchasers away from RX models will not drive them to Pascal, at least not now, as there are no competitors there. Plus we will have reference and AIB tests within a month, so the truth will be revealed.

I'm swept away with laughter every time I read some of these frantic posts.

 

[RussianSensation]

That's the funny thing about all this manic posting.

Except for a small percentage of potential buyers, the Nvidia new gen cards are in a totally different price bracket and will not be seen as potential purchases by most prospective buyers. Spreading FUD to discourage purchasers away from RX models will not drive them to Pascal, at least not now, as there are no competitors there. Plus we will have reference and AIB tests within a month, so the truth will be revealed.

I'm swept away with laughter every time I read some of these frantic posts.

The greater the number of RX 470/480/970/390/1060 PC gamers, the higher the level of GPU performance becomes for the lowest common denominator, and the more advanced next gen games are likely to be. Developers would then use those GPUs as the common baseline, not 265/370/380/950/960. This is especially key with PS4K and Xbox Scorpio and the large amount of 970 videocards in the marketplace.

That means it's in the best interests of high-end PC enthusiasts that the lowest and mainstream GPU market segments get the much needed 50-100% boost in performance. Furthermore, the more market share and $ AMD earns, the more likely they will have more resources to create faster high-end flagship cards that actually give NV competition. This will encourage NV to lower prices and/or release even faster videocards. In an ideal world, we'd actually want 50/50% market share between both firms across each market segment.

 

[Eymar]

Seeing as though driver overhead is a thing of the past with dx12 - I can't see how Nvidia will be competitive in the mainstream market. P10 has effectively shut them out - where are the 1060 leaks that were expected to drop before the 29th?

Yeah only 1060 info would dissuade me from purchasing a RX 480 (if it indeed is at R9 390 perf. levels) since it's cost conscious purchase I can wait for 1060 if it's rumors\release time look good.

Until 1060 info and if I had to buy a card right now once RX 480 is released these are most people options at $200-$250:
1. New R9 390/X (while supplies last) - RX 480 is clear winner here if performance is similar
2. New GTX 970 (while supplies last) - Currently reaching $250 (or lower with rebates\games) so viable alternative. Freesync, +4.5GB makes RX 480 the card I buy though.
3. Used above or maybe 980 - Good option, but limited supply

 

[Head1985]

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/t...leaked-and-tested.223351/page-22#post-3479063

Appears to run Batman Arkham Knight same speed as a 980.

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/t...leaked-and-tested.223351/page-22#post-3479050

Good but we need more games tested.HEAVEN will be nice for tessellation performance.

 

[SSBrain]

That's because the Valve VR benchmark score is not linear in the framerates. As such it gives you a wrong impression of distance.

The SteamVR Performance Test score is based primarily on the videocard's capability of keeping the framerate above 90 fps. The 3D engine used by the benchmark will also try changing the rendering quality (including the internal rendering target resolution) adaptively to reach the 90 fps target or use excess graphics power.

If there are no frames above 90 fps and/or if quality is constantly below the minimum adaptive level, the score will be 0.

The rationale for this is that the framerate in VR games is synced with the headset's refresh rate (90 Hz), and when games run in 45 fps mode (+ reprojection to 90 fps) or worse it can quickly become a very uncomfortable experience.

 

[Thala]

Until 1060 info and if I had to buy a card right now once RX 480 is released these are most people options at $200-$250:
1. New R9 390 (while supplies last) - RX 480 is clear winner here if performance is similar
2. New GTX 970 (while supplies last) - Currently reaching $250 (or lower with rebates\games) so viable alternative. Freesync, +4.5GB makes RX 480 the card I buy though.

Indeed. And this is with the pessimistic assumption about RX480 only at 390/970 level of performance instead of the hoped-for (and even likely) 390x level of performance.

 

[Face2Face]

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/t...leaked-and-tested.223351/page-22#post-3479050

Looks like the RX 480 does very well in this game. I hope it's a prelude of what's to come. Turns out he used the drivers that came in the box, so impressive show of performance for the price. I can't wait to get my hands on one :thumbsup:

 

[Mikeduffy]

Yeah only 1060 info would dissuade me from purchasing a RX 480 (if it indeed is at R9 390 perf. levels) since it's cost conscious purchase I can wait for 1060 if it's rumors\release time look good.

Until 1060 info and if I had to buy a card right now once RX 480 is released these are most people options at $200-$250:
1. New R9 390/X (while supplies last) - RX 480 is clear winner here if performance is similar
2. New GTX 970 (while supplies last) - Currently reaching $250 (or lower with rebates\games) so viable alternative. Freesync, +4.5GB makes RX 480 the card I buy though.
3. Used above or maybe 980 - Good option, but limited supply

Correct - I can't believe there is no news about the 1060 and I'm starting to think Nvidia won't be competitive in this market seeing as though they haven't released a compelling mainstream part in a long time.

Btw - don't think they can get the wafers for a mainstream part either. Maybe they should go to Samsung.

 

[Thala]

The SteamVR Performance Test score is based primarily on the videocard's capability of keeping the framerate above 90 fps. The 3D engine used by the benchmark will also try changing the rendering quality adaptively to reach the 90 fps target or use excess graphics power.

If there are no frames above 90 fps and/or if quality is constantly below the minimum adaptive level, the score will be 0

Right, this very definition makes it highly non-proportional with average framerate. In addition, adding any performance above a certain level or likewise reducing performance below a certain level makes no difference to the score.

 

[agfkfhahddhdn]

In an ideal world, we'd actually want 50/50% market share between both firms across each market segment.

It's absolutely baffling and shameful that this even needs to be explained. I don't understand where the rabid Nvidia fanboyism developed or why it exists, but holy hell it is nothing but a massively negative force on the entire GPU market.

 

[SSBrain]

Right, this very definition makes it highly non-proportional with average framerate. In addition, adding any performance above a certain level or likewise reducing performance below a certain level makes no difference to the score.

Nevertheless, I found it relatively consistent in roughly gauging the videocard's suitability for VR. An increase of ~0.8 in score through overclocking with the R9 390 I used for a brief period would indeed result in an overall better VR experience.

I find a bit concerning that while the RX480 is apparently at 390X level in 3dmark and Batman Arkham Knight as far as we know, it seems to be just on par (or perhaps even slightly below) with the 390 in the SteamVR test. I realize it's not meant to be a 390/390X replacement, but the technical specifications and results suggested it would be.

I currently need a videocard at least as good as the 390 for VR but it would not be a smart decision to purchase a 390/390X at this time. I cannot wait until Vega either... hopefully the final benchmarks will tell a better story.

 

[Bacon1]

It's absolutely baffling and shameful that this even needs to be explained. I don't understand where the rabid Nvidia fanboyism developed or why it exists, but holy hell it is nothing but a massively negative force on the entire GPU market.

Yep, many people don't care about actual gaming but want to "win".

I've bought more Nvidia cards than AMD ones, but I'm firmly buying AMD until Nvidia supports open standards like Adaptive-Sync and stops lying to their customers about hardware / software specs (3.5GB, Async Compute support in Maxwell, etc).

 

[Bacon1]

Nevertheless, I found it relatively consistent in roughly gauging the videocard's suitability for VR. An increase of ~0.8 in score through overclocking with the R9 390 I used for a brief period would indeed result in an overall better VR experience.

I find a bit concerning that while the RX480 is apparently at 390X level in 3dmark and Batman Arkham Knight as far as we know, it seems to be just on par (or perhaps even slightly below) with the 390 in the SteamVR test. I realize it's not meant to be a 390/390X replacement, but the technical specifications and results suggested it would be.

I currently need a videocard at least as good as the 390 for VR but it would not be a smart decision to purchase a 390/390X at this time. I cannot wait until Vega either... hopefully the final benchmarks will tell a better story.

What I was trying to show above was the VR test is very, very easy to widly skew the results on. Hell when I've run it I've ran it multiple times back to back (without changing anything or reboots) and had .4-.5 differences in score.

 

[thilanliyan]

It's absolutely baffling and shameful that this even needs to be explained. I don't understand where the rabid Nvidia fanboyism developed or why it exists, but holy hell it is nothing but a massively negative force on the entire GPU market.

Pfffft...that's loser talk!!
We only like winners like NV here at AT!! I enjoy paying whatever NV wants to shove down my throat!! The more expensive the better! I feel so premium after doing so. Amiright folks?!!

 

[Thala]

I find a bit concerning that while the RX480 is apparently at 390X level in 3dmark and Batman Arkham Knight as far as we know, it seems to be just on par (or perhaps even slightly below) with the 390 in the SteamVR test. I realize it's not meant to be a 390/390X replacement, but the technical specifications and results suggested it would be

Well, if you would ask me, what type of games are possibly ROP limited to a higher degree, i would answer games with above average resolution with simple shaders while running at above average framerate - in short games with low shader performance requirement per pixel. I think this fits nicely to the SteamVR benchmark.
And honestly, if i were AMD, i would not have doubled the ROPs just because RX480 is closer to 390 instead of 390X in one benchmark, which could be regarded as worst case. You never tailor the architecture to extremes if you are a clever architect.

 

[SSBrain]

What I was trying to show above was the VR test is very, very easy to widly skew the results on. Hell when I've run it I've ran it multiple times back to back (without changing anything or reboots) and had .4-.5 differences in score.

I haven't experienced such a large variability myself. Since the benchmark aggressively changes rendering quality depending on system load, it could be that CPU spikes caused by something else (e.g. the operating system's power management setting and background programs) affect the score more than with pure GPU benchmarks. As the score is non-linear, as previously mentioned, this would affect slower systems more than faster ones.

On a related note, after installing my HTC Vive I found that the Windows power management got changed to "High Performance".

 

[Yakk]

Pfffft...that's loser talk!!
We only like winners like NV here at AT!! I enjoy paying whatever NV wants to shove down my throat!! The more expensive the better! I feel so premium after doing so. Amiright folks?!!

Yeeeeeeeah! Aren't the 1080 & 1070 selling over msrp? Yeeeeeeeah! PTFP!

(Pay To Feel Premium)!

Edit: Too much football, got that out of my system...

 

[A_Skywalker]

I want to buy 480 as soon as its out but I wonder if my monitor - samsung s23a700d

http://www.samsung.com/africa_en/consumer/it/monitor/led-monitor/LS23A700DS/XA

If this monitor will be able to be used with rx 480?
Also I have only cable like this - http://www.cvpoxford.co.uk/img/dvi.jpg

but since this monitor also has hdmi port I will just need to buy one cable, right? Nothing more.

 

[3DVagabond]

I don't think that's the argument here.

If two cards are equal in price and performance, of course you would want and believe the lower power one was a better choice.

The problem is when they differ in price and performance. That is when regional differences in power come into the calculation of which is the superior card.

Also front end versus recurring cost. Buying versus renting. Paying with cash versus credit plus interest.

For some people it's any factor they can cling to in order to justify their premeditated conclusion.

With everything included currently paying 24,7 €c/kWh .
So if I can drop this 390 for a decent price I'm getting in on that 480 action. Mostly because buying new GPU's is fun though.

For others, it's just the justification they need to buy a new card. They want it for emotional reasons, but feel better attaching some logic to the decision.

Just using you as an example, showb1z. :thumbsup:

 

[Bacon1]

I want to buy 480 as soon as its out but I wonder if my monitor - samsung s23a700d

http://www.samsung.com/africa_en/consumer/it/monitor/led-monitor/LS23A700DS/XA

If this monitor will be able to be used with rx 480?
Also I have only cable like this - http://www.cvpoxford.co.uk/img/dvi.jpg

but since this monitor also has hdmi port I will just need to buy one cable, right? Nothing more.

Since you have DVI cable only you might want to wait for the custom AIB versions that include DVI-D without having to use a converter. Not sure if the 3d would work over the HDMI cable or if it requires DVI that you are using.

 

[A_Skywalker]

Since you have DVI cable only you might want to wait for the custom AIB versions that include DVI-D without having to use a converter. Not sure if the 3d would work over the HDMI cable or if it requires DVI that you are using.

3d?
I dont want to use 3d by the way, so will I be okay with just buying one new hdmi cable?