• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

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

Page 177 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
RoarTiger said:
I doubt that since they had to anticipate AIB OC versions of the card to fill the $300 segment. Initial binning had to be done to find those chips, but I am suprised by the wide variance in the reference chips. Been a long time since we had a new process and this type of thing has happened before. Good news is that in a couple months it will be a non issue.
Click to expand...

I don't mean less critical as in that they didn't bin at all. I mean less critical as in the lowered their standards for what would be allowed to pass and be used for the reference model.

It is certainly possible that all the dies intended for AIB cards are binned higher.
 
RussianSensation said:
RX 480 seems to be a mainstream R9 380/380X replacement based on all the reviews. Pretty clear AMD supporters set this card up to fail by not understanding where it was in the next generation AMD line-up: Mainstream/Performance Low End.

A good replacement for the low-end GTX950/960/R9 270/270X/R9 380 tier but in itself is a potentially massive warning flag for Vega 10 and 11 given the massive gap in perf/watt go NV's highly efficient GTX1070/1080 cards.
Click to expand...

Set up to fail? Newegg has nearly sold out (and several other vendors) through there entire stock of them -- and I know the supply is excellent.

The card is the king of value -- nothing can touch its performance for $200. And it is ridiculous that people are comparing it to high end offerings.... That is what Vega is designed to compete with, not Polaris. BTW, AMD desktop users have rarely given a crap about power consumption -- why would this suddenly be important now? Polaris is a decent reduction for power consumption, but not the huge drop that some cranky enthusiasts were asking for.
 
The overall feel of the reviews I've read is "It's what AMD said it would be...just barely". That's a far cry from the positively enthusiastic reviews that nvidia garnered with it's 1070/1080 release. Somehow nvidia wowed us this generation while AMD just squeaked by with their offering.

Still, if you were going to recommend a sub-$300 card right now, what would it be? It would have to be a rx 480 right? Seems like nothing in that price range touches it really. AMD is suffering badly from the high expectations of their fans it seems.
 
krumme said:
If there is plenty supply its a huge win. It doesnt look there is plenty wafers for nv. Actually it looks opposite.
Click to expand...

By pure guesswork? 🙂

krumme said:
I am not so sure its only to blame gf. Nv have dedicated a lot of die area to efficiency. Amd havnt. And it just shows..
Click to expand...

And how did you come to that fictional conclusion? What we do know is Polaris is an outsourced design to a "cost effective" area in the world. its very heavily synthetized and its using the inferior 14LPP. In short, poor IC design, poor uarch and poor node.
 
Dribble said:
The GloFo wafer deal strikes again. You know if they had been able to use TSMC how much better this chip would have been. They are already up against it, but are forced to compete with one arm tied behind their backs.

*waits for RS to tell me how wrong I am to suggest that again with another wall of text*
Click to expand...

Who knows, but using GloFo probably saved them a pile of cash if that take or pay agreement is still in effect.
 
RX 480 Reviews:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CJBaZ9V2Eo

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480/13.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480/22.html

http://www.techspot.com/review/1198-amd-radeon-rx-480/page2.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/1198-amd-radeon-rx-480/page7.html

http://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/2016/06/amd-rx-480-polaris-review/

http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/zardon/amd-radeon-rx-480-8gb-review/20/
http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/zardon/amd-radeon-rx-480-8gb-review/31/

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2016/06/29/amd-radeon-rx-480-8gb-review/7
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2016/06/29/amd-radeon-rx-480-8gb-review/13

http://www.eteknix.com/amd-radeon-rx-480-graphics-card-review/7/
http://www.eteknix.com/amd-radeon-rx-480-graphics-card-review/12/

http://techreport.com/review/30328/amd-radeon-rx-480-graphics-card-reviewed/7
http://techreport.com/review/30328/amd-radeon-rx-480-graphics-card-reviewed/12

So on average across a spread of 20-25 games or so, and reviews by several different sites, the 14nm RX480 roughly = 28nm GTX 970 in both performance and power consumption and has a +50db +2000rpm blower fan that "hums under load" and is "rather loud", "has an annoying pitch" and is "grindy and obtrusive"? UK pricing seems to be at parity with GTX 970 too, so "perf-per-$ king" isn't there either, at least not in all regions.

TPU : "Quoting from the AMD reviewer's guide "A lot of work has gone into reducing noise levels for the Radeon™ RX 480. Sorry, but no, gaming noise levels are bad. The reference card is noisier than every single card released in recent times, and it runs at well above 80°C too. We confirmed the temperature and noise levels with other reviewers, so it's not only our sample."

TechReport : "We're not fans of blower-style coolers for the most part, and the RX 480's isn't doing anything to change our minds. While the card runs at or below our 40-dBA-ish noise floor at idle, its load noise level climbs to 51 dBA—just short of the triple-fan cooler on our Gigabyte Windforce GTX 980. Despite all the sound and fury, the RX 480's load temperatures reached 83° C under load, too."

Note to self : Stop reading brain-rotting pre-release hype predictions and add Videocardz and WCCFTech troll sites to hosts file...
 
Well, it is dissapointing- i kept my expectations in check, but still.

-Perf/w was one of the most talked up aspect for Polaris and it fails in this metric the most. According to the TPU review its not even more efficient than some of the 28nm Maxwell models.
-It's a little slower than I thought and perfomance usually falls apart at higher than 1080p resolutions (ROP bound?).
-it doesn't oveclock at all (less than 10%) and I don't think the AIB models have some magic bullet in that regard.
-the reference cooler is mediocre at best.
-the "IPC" of the architecture doesn't seem to be improved.
+the price and price/perfomance are great.

I was really looking forward to replace my R9 380 with RX 480, but now I'm having second thoughts. Especially as I'm running a 1440p monitor- maybe a used and custom cooled Hawaii card will be a better option.
 
Last edited:
It's still the GPU to get for 250$ and below at least until gp106 drops out and is competitive enough.
But from a technical perspective the perf/W is poor relatively to Nvidia. It's sad to see such a big gap between GP104 and polaris 10 perf/W.
This might be crucial for losing out many potential OEM and mid-range notebook sales when competing with Nvidia's counterparts.

People should understand to not trust stupid hype by click-bait videos/articles and like the ones that were presented by AdoredTV or Wccftech.
Let's see how well AIB cards to with respect to overclocking.
 
Riek said:
it really isn't.. expecting better efficiency than 28nm gpu in the same performance ballpark is the least one can expect.

In this case average performance is lower than 980 AND consuming more power than a 980.

It just means polaris doesn't scale at all. They already need more power then chips being 50% faster!
What does that tell you in relation to AMD competitivity?

Nvidia can easily compete with a much smaller chip, that is faster and consumes less energy in doing all that.
I wouldn't say nothing has changed, because we don't know how Vega will do but my guess is that AMD didn't decrease the efficiency difference between nvidia. hence i think it became worse.
Click to expand...
What is this nonsense about watt. Who cares if its 120 or 150w in a desktop.
People buy for performance per cost.
Efficiency cost.
Comparing it to a 400 usd cards just shows it.
You can buy this card or a 960.
The problem is not desktop. Its mobile.
 
SlitheryDee said:
Still, if you were going to recommend a sub-$300 card right now, what would it be? It would have to be a rx 480 right? Seems like nothing in that price range touches it really. AMD is suffering badly from the high expectations of their fans it seems.
Click to expand...
Yeah, especially as more games are becoming DX12/Vulkan where recommending a 970 to a friend (who won't upgrade in years) seems a bit cruel. I'd just warn him it uses a bit more power :\
 
BSim500 said:
So on average across a spread of 20-25 games or so, and reviews by several different sites, the 14nm RX480 roughly = 28nm GTX 970 in both performance and power consumption and has a +50db +2000rpm blower fan that "hums under load" and is "rather loud", "has an annoying pitch" and is "grindy and obtrusive"?
Click to expand...

The worst part is that the 480 would have looked so much better with a slightly better cooler.

No (excessive) noise, no throttling and performance between a 390 and 390X (and thus decisively faster than the 970).

Hopefully AIB version will come out soon.
 
The more I read the more I seem to want to go with a custom 1070. At the same time I don't want to spend $400+ unless I go ahead and spend more for a 1440p monitor and say what the heck why not.

Or at least I can wait some more until custom aib 480 versions are out but I need to give this card to my brother as his PC is being crippled right now without a GPU.
 
Well the performance is decent.Its just does not live upto the MASSIVE hype that everyone expected of this card which btw AMD never promised.
Its still a disappointing card.Same performance for same price as that of 970.Nothing groundbreaking.Should have been $179 for 4gb and $199 for 8gb to truly have been the ultimate $200 card.
 
DownTheSky said:
Scrap everything. RX 480 is 400$ in my country. FOUR hundred.
Click to expand...

😀

Here in Canada, $334 + tax => $290 USD.

For those outside the U.S., this entire generation's pricing is shaping up to be pretty garbage. At this point, might as well hunt for a used GTX980Ti or wait another 3-4 months to get one of those. Those who bought R9 290 $200 and R9 290X for $255 in the US are probably sad panda as there is nothing besides a 980Ti/$400 GTX1070 to upgrade to.

mohit9206 said:
Well the performance is decent.Its just does not live upto the MASSIVE hype that everyone expected of this card which btw AMD never promised.
Its still a disappointing card.Same performance for same price as that of 970.Nothing groundbreaking.Should have been $179 for 4gb and $199 for 8gb to truly have been the ultimate $200 card.
Click to expand...

Yup and looks like the MSRP is $239, not $229. In 6 months when it has rebates, it'll be a good deal for $180.

Granted, GTX1070 still has a worse price/performance ratio. $399 vs. $239 is 67% more expensive for about 50-53% higher performance.

Just shows how overpriced this entire generation is compared to after-market R9 290/290X that sold during 2014-2015 periods. Alternatively, it shows how unfairly the market has punished those awesome cards.

At least Fury X is starting to come down in price, not at $440.
 
Last edited:
BSim500 said:
RX 480 Reviews:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CJBaZ9V2Eo

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480/13.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480/22.html

http://www.techspot.com/review/1198-amd-radeon-rx-480/page2.html
http://www.techspot.com/review/1198-amd-radeon-rx-480/page7.html

http://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/2016/06/amd-rx-480-polaris-review/

http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/zardon/amd-radeon-rx-480-8gb-review/20/
http://www.kitguru.net/components/graphic-cards/zardon/amd-radeon-rx-480-8gb-review/31/

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2016/06/29/amd-radeon-rx-480-8gb-review/7
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2016/06/29/amd-radeon-rx-480-8gb-review/13

http://www.eteknix.com/amd-radeon-rx-480-graphics-card-review/7/
http://www.eteknix.com/amd-radeon-rx-480-graphics-card-review/12/

http://techreport.com/review/30328/amd-radeon-rx-480-graphics-card-reviewed/7
http://techreport.com/review/30328/amd-radeon-rx-480-graphics-card-reviewed/12

So on average across a spread of 20-25 games or so, and reviews by several different sites, the 14nm RX480 roughly = 28nm GTX 970 in both performance and power consumption and has a +50db +2000rpm blower fan that "hums under load" and is "rather loud", "has an annoying pitch" and is "grindy and obtrusive"? UK pricing seems to be at parity with GTX 970 too, so "perf-per-$ king" isn't there either, at least not in all regions.

TPU : "Quoting from the AMD reviewer's guide "A lot of work has gone into reducing noise levels for the Radeon™ RX 480. Sorry, but no, gaming noise levels are bad. The reference card is noisier than every single card released in recent times, and it runs at well above 80°C too. We confirmed the temperature and noise levels with other reviewers, so it's not only our sample."

TechReport : "We're not fans of blower-style coolers for the most part, and the RX 480's isn't doing anything to change our minds. While the card runs at or below our 40-dBA-ish noise floor at idle, its load noise level climbs to 51 dBA—just short of the triple-fan cooler on our Gigabyte Windforce GTX 980. Despite all the sound and fury, the RX 480's load temperatures reached 83° C under load, too."

Note to self : Stop reading brain-rotting pre-release hype predictions and add Videocardz and WCCFTech troll sites to hosts file...
Click to expand...
At least Videocardz was only giving out validated 3dmark results and quoting some good sources as far as rx480 articles concern. The really stupid hype was created by Wccftech and fanboyism. Though Videocardz might not have been perfect in past they certainly didn't hype rx480 to the extent that wccftech,adoredTV and fanboyism did.
 
RussianSensation said:
Not sure what's that supposed to man because out of all the people on this forum, I never stated with any confidence that GloFo's 14nm was superior to TSMC's 16nm. Looks like you missed the message with your comment by a country mile. In fact, I actually cautioned against making direct comparisons with claims such as GloFo was superior based on iPhone 6S ASIC comparisons. NV working closely with TSMC to optimize Pascal was not a direct correlation with TSMC making the Apple A9.

So no, I have no idea what you are talking about. I think you have me confused with someone else.



Every AMD launch on AT is the same. The hype train that started months ago before GP104 showed up was hyping up Fury X performance, which later shifted to 980Ti at $299. When AMD publicly stated they wanted to bring minimum VR spec (GTX970/R9 290) to lower pricing segments with Polaris 10, I knew it was a red flag that the chip is low end but the hype train got even more out of control over time. In my mind RX 480 at 110-130W would only be trading blows with R9 390/390X. My issue on this one is that it's taking them a 163-167W chip to do so, far worse than I predicted. I had no problem with RX 480 ~ R9 390 but not at nearly 170W power usage. That's a fail to me when considering AMD is using both a newer GCN architecture and a 14nm node shrink at the same time.
Click to expand...
The card is 100% at 390x performance levels at tpu at 1080. 100%.
A 200 to 230 usd card is a 1080 card. What else is there to big and little vega / 1070 1080?
Performance is higher than predicted. Eff is bad. Guess thats part of the cost. But for aib cards and desktop it means excactly nothing.
I have never seen people go so crazy for like what 30w? Mobile is woth keeping an eye on and it doesnt look good. But hey if gf can make this cheap its fine.
Gfx have been crazy expensive the last years and imo cost needs to be controlled.
 
Not going to be able to charge any kind of premium for this card.....going to have to make it up in volume.

Oh well at least the price is right. Should spark a bit of price war with the 970 and blow out sales on left over 390 stock.
 
Ok, just arrived. Is this a joke?

Is the card is actually slower than a Radeon R9 390 (non-X)?

perfrel_2560_1440.png


Can't match a Radeon R9 390X even at 1080p, and barely faster than the slowest Hawaii (Radeon R9 290) at 4K.
 
so power efficiency is a thing again now?

also the idle power consumption is a driver bug where the card doesnt go in idle state

amd made an official statement to this for reviewers

i am very hyped for sapphires msis and other solutions because from all reviews i see when overclocked

only the memory

and a little little bit on the core it does wonders for performance between 10-30%
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top