The specifications of AMD's RX 480 Specifications have Leaked on Newegg listings, revealing that the new AMD GPU will have base/boost GPU clocks. This makes AMD's RX 480 GPUs much more similar to Nvidia GPUs in terms of clock speed variance during gameplay.
This listing on Newegg has now been taken offline, but thankfully the people over at PCPER has managed to grab a screenshot while the listing was still online.
The VisionTek RX 480 GPU is not listed as a factory overclocked model, so it is expected that this GPU features AMD's reference clock speeds, with the GPU having a 1120MHz base clock and a 1266MHz boost clock.
At this time, it is unknown how this new base/boost clock speed model will affect this GPUs performance and overclocking ability.
Which is a LOT better in my opinion. Having R7 vs R9, and then X version of the R9s created a bit of a mess. (much in the same way their CPU names are also confusing as all hell)
Though on the flip side, you're going to have bigger gaps between cards (Where previously you had 380, 380X, 390 and 390X, now you only have 2)
Does it matter? Just call a full Polaris an RX 460
Then look it up to see whether or not it's the full die? I fail to see why the model number has to indicate that.
The only thing the model number has to do is indicate relative performance within a graphics family. I don't see why the model number has to indicate whether or not it's a "full die".
It would be an absolute disaster to combine roman numerals with letters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanLoco
The only thing the model number has to do is indicate relative performance within a graphics family. I don't see why the model number has to indicate whether or not it's a "full die".
It would be an absolute disaster to combine roman numerals with letters.
because they always did?? and the CU/shader units count is basically the main indicator of performance.
So you think it would be fine If you buy a RX480 and get 2304 CU's and I buy a RX480 and get 2560 CUs ??
This makes absolutely no sense. You make no sense.
What? Why would you assume that there would be two different RX480's under the same name?
It would be more like the RX460 got 2304 CUs and the RX480 gets 2560 CUs. The R7/R9 nomenclature was largely useless anyway, since the following number (290, 280, 270, etc) was still sequential. There wasn't a R7 290 and an R9 290.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Ask a question
Ask a question
Overclock.net
27.8M posts
541.2K members
Since 2004
A forum community dedicated to overclocking enthusiasts and testing the limits of computing. Come join the discussion about computing, builds, collections, displays, models, styles, scales, specifications, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!