AMD RX 480 Review Thread - Page 130 - Overclock.net

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1291 of 3674 Old 06-30-2016, 12:08 AM
 
Waitng4realGPU's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loladinas View Post

Man, Europe has weird prices.

Cheapest GTX970 - 238,85€ for EVGA GeForce GTX 970 SuperClocked ACX 2.0
Cheapest RX480 4GB - 219€ for Sapphire Radeon RX 480
Cheapest RX480 8GB - 269€ HIS Radeon RX 480

50€ for 4GB of RAM this card can hardly utilize....

EDIT: are there any news on when might custom cards show up or is it just Soon ™ ?

It's no wonder all the european members on here hate AMD so much. Where I am it's quite a bit cheaper than a gtx 970.
Waitng4realGPU is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1292 of 3674 Old 06-30-2016, 12:11 AM
 
Waitng4realGPU's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyrotagonist View Post

They are way too forward thinking. By the time the 7970 beats the 970 consistently, both of those chips will be obsolete.

Do you mean the 480?

Because it's priced fine is on par in DX11, and when it beats the 970 consistently that will be a bonus to owners, and it means they will not need a new card well into the DX12 era.
Waitng4realGPU is offline  
post #1293 of 3674 Old 06-30-2016, 12:12 AM
NFL
4.0 GHz
 
NFL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 2,103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 57

Quote:
“Like I always say, there's no "I" in team. There's a "me" though, if you jumble it up.”
NFL is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1294 of 3674 Old 06-30-2016, 12:13 AM
 
Pyrotagonist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 568
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waitng4realGPU View Post

Do you mean the 480?

Because it's priced fine is on par in DX11, and when it beats the 970 consistently that will be a bonus to owners, and it means they will not need a new card well into the DX12 era.
No, I mean the 7970. Its design will eventually allow it to, but all the R&D that went into creating that incredible chip will be little more than a curiosity by the time it's truly unleashed. I'm making a point about how GCN is too forward thinking, while Kepler and especially Maxwell were built for their own times. Yes, the GTX 680 has little use for modern games but it doesn't matter because it was so impressively and definitively replaced by GM204, which has once again been replaced by GK104 almost as impressively. GK104 chips are just a little too costly; the 1070 isn't the 970.
Pyrotagonist is offline  
post #1295 of 3674 Old 06-30-2016, 12:14 AM
 
Loladinas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 827
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFL View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Are there any more, you know, "relevant" benchmarks?

Loladinas is offline  
post #1296 of 3674 Old 06-30-2016, 12:18 AM
NFL
4.0 GHz
 
NFL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 2,103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loladinas View Post

Are there any more, you know, "relevant" benchmarks?

I'm just posting for the 1487mhz overclock it's running at

Quote:
“Like I always say, there's no "I" in team. There's a "me" though, if you jumble it up.”
NFL is online now  
post #1297 of 3674 Old 06-30-2016, 12:18 AM
Left OCN
 
neurotix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,889
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mookster View Post

I'm not particularly moved by the fact that you've been benchmarking AMD cards since 2011.

And, no, those are not what I'd call criteria for an educated guess. In fact, that "It's AMD" attitude is exactly what resulted in my "antagonistic" response.

Did you know whether it would be produced on GloFlo's, TSMC's, or Samsungs node? No. Did you know the differences between those nodes before the release? No. Do you now? No, no one does. Did you know the die size before release? No. Did you know anything substantial about this release? No, you didn't.

You really summed it up for me. You based your opinion on Fury X's launch and "it's AMD". It doesn't matter if you're right or wrong, those are just bad reasons to hold a strong opinion either way. You have nothing to be sitting here bragging about. All this "I called it" talk is weak, and your "high rank" at HWBOT doesn't change that. Die size, fab process, and provider are just as relevant to the performance of the final product as AMD's ability to design the chip. Architecture performance has been so close between NV and AMD, outside of driver enhancements and proprietary garbage, that those few factors matter more than almost anything else these days.

So, no. I wouldn't say my attitude is any more "antagonistic" than your opinion. Your statements warrant a strong response so I gave you one.

Your judgment about whether or not my opinion is educated is irrelevant, and so is the specifics of how I arrived at my conclusion, because I was still right. Just because my assumptions don't make sense to you, or aren't "in-depth" enough to you, doesn't discredit them or my way of thinking. My conclusion was still mostly accurate.

And actually, contrary to your assumptions, I actually did know that it would be produced on a combined GloFlo/Samsung 14nm node. I also knew the die size would be roughly 232mm2, this has been known for some time, surely it was less than 250mm2, and it's obviously a midrange chip with a smaller die. This has been common knowledge for months. Do I know the differences? Does it matter? I was still correct. More importantly, I've stated in other posts that I believe that the weak performance of the card are due to it having less ROPs and TMUs- which I also expected. The Fury X only had 64 ROPs while the 980ti had 96, and on release I knew this was a reason for it's poor performance at 1080p. So, I figured that the RX 480/Polaris would likely have 32 ROPs and probably underperform compared to the 390/290.

"It being AMD" is actually a valid reason to be suspicious, I thought everyone knew about Bulldozer at this point rolleyes.gif We also get tons of delays for the 14nm node, the Fury and Fury X were turds, the company itself is failing and so on. Personally, I don't know how you can even hold this against me when I've stated I've used nothing but AMD graphics cards since 2008. I'm certainly an AMD supporter, and not an Nvidia troll or something. I'm not blind to the facts though and the companies' history, so obviously I have caution and am diffident in my expectations.

I don't know how these are "bad reasons", I'm sorry I'm not an electrical engineer at a fabrication facility, christ some people think you can't have an opinion or make statements unless you have a degree in this stuff.

The point about HWBOT is simple- where's your results? Where's your cred? If you know so much, then do something and prove you're actually good at this- building computers- instead of being full of hot air. I've seen your rigs, they're seriously outdated and they look like crap thumb.gif So good luck on this front.

With that sir, have a good day. You will remain in my blocklist and receive no further responses. smile.gif

neurotix is offline  
post #1298 of 3674 Old 06-30-2016, 12:20 AM
 
Waitng4realGPU's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 986
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyrotagonist View Post

No, I mean the 7970. Its design will eventually allow it to, but all the R&D that went into creating that incredible chip will be little more than a curiosity by the time it's truly unleashed. I'm making a point about how GCN is too forward thinking, while Kepler and especially Maxwell were built for their own times. Yes, the GTX 680 has little use for modern games but it doesn't matter because it was so impressively and definitively replaced by GM204, which has once again been replaced by GK104 almost as impressively. GK104 chips are just a little too costly; the 1070 isn't the 970.

Ah I get you, 7970 beating a 970 that's a far stretch it's already come so far.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFL View Post

I'm just posting for the 1487mhz overclock it's running at

Wow. Must've got a nice chip, pity it's in a reference shroud with a 6 pin lol.
Waitng4realGPU is offline  
post #1299 of 3674 Old 06-30-2016, 12:22 AM
 
Loladinas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 827
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFL View Post

I'm just posting for the 1487mhz overclock it's running at
Considering where it was posted and the "can't get any more power from 6pin" I wouldn't put too much stock in it.

Loladinas is offline  
post #1300 of 3674 Old 06-30-2016, 12:22 AM
 
lolfail9001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 674
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFL View Post

I'm just posting for the 1487mhz overclock it's running at
GPU-Z, where?
lolfail9001 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off