Overclock.net banner

[VideoCardz] AMD Radeon R9 480 3DMark11 benchmarks

47K views 506 replies 141 participants last post by  WanWhiteWolf 
#1 ·
#5 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclonic View Post
2 cards not even beating 1 gtx 1080
frown.gif
Think im ready to bend over to Nvidia/Intel
sad-smiley-002.gif
Wait, is the 480 the equivalent of the 1070 for comparisons? However shouldnt two 1070's in SLI should outshine a single 1080 so I see your point. God I hope this is not fortelling what's about to drop, otherwise Nvidia will act like a....oh nevermind we all know.

In the military there was a term called B.o.h.i.c.a.

My Spidey Sense tells me it may be relevant soon, once again.
 
#6 ·
6% slower than FURY X.Probably faster in games...
1080 is there 20% faster than TITANX and it is 25-30% in real life games.

And that is 2304SP version.We dont know if there will be 2560SP version.
Not bad for 480/480x card.

Its great if true.

It will be within 10% of 1070...
 
#9 ·
Is it me, or is that absolute trash scaling for CF?
 
#10 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by headd View Post

6% slower than FURY X.Probably faster in games...
1080 is there 20% faster than TITANX and it is 25-30% in real life games.

And that is 2304SP version.We dont know if there will be 2560SP version.
Not bad for 480/480x card.

Its great if true.

It will be within 10% of 1070...
I think you missed where that was with Crossfire...
 
#12 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by headd View Post

Fury X 19315
Polaris10 2304SP 18060

FURYX is 6% faster
In real life gaming FURYX=Stock 980TI.1070 will be at 980TI performance so Polaris 10 will be pretty close to GTX1070
I guess I'm confused why you put "that's great if true", because nothing but price about this is great, in any way whatsoever.

Basically no one cares about power draw, so these cards are relatively worthless.

The only way these cards are going to be good is if these are underclocked and/or these things can overclock like monsters.
 
#13 ·
Still a lot of unknowns here, even if we assume this chart isn't total bs. For instance, what kind of OCing headroom is there? I could see a card like this easily beating the 980Ti score with OCs which would be pretty good performance for a $300 X80 sku. It would also mean AMD still has to have something coming to fill the X90/X90X tier that's even better...
 
#14 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfej View Post

I guess I'm confused why you put "that's great if true", because nothing but price about this is great, in any way whatsoever.

Basically no one cares about power draw, so these cards are relatively worthless.

The only way these cards are going to be good is if these are underclocked and/or these things can overclock like monsters.
because it is 480X?
380x cost 229USD you know..
 
#15 ·
Exactly. A sub-$300 card with that performance would do well. And there would still be a 490/490X in the pipeline.
 
#17 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by headd View Post

because it is 480X?
380x cost 229USD you know..
I don't really care what the name of the card is or where it's supposed to be in the market, what I care about is the fact that they couldn't even come out with a card that could beat their last generation flagship card. That's great that it's only 300 bucks, but this card sucks.

How long ago did FuryX come out, and how long until Vega?

These are the reasons that this card sucks. This big of a gap between releases and they made the choice/ran into issues that caused them to release a subpar card to compete with Nvidia.

I'm genuinely annoyed with this as I have 2 290x's in my rig at home, and I wanted the decision between a 1080 Classified and a Polaris GPU to be difficult, but these cards are a joke and have made this decision very easy.

That is assuming this graph is an accurate representation of the card's performance. Given AMD's recent history with overclock headroom I'm going to doubt these cards will be huge overclockers.
 
#18 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfej View Post

I guess I'm confused why you put "that's great if true", because nothing but price about this is great, in any way whatsoever.

Basically no one cares about power draw, so these cards are relatively worthless.


The only way these cards are going to be good is if these are underclocked and/or these things can overclock like monsters.
It's funny now that AMD is focusing on power efficiency I see things like, "no one cares about power draw," but when last couple generations power draw has been a defining factor in not recommending AMD GPUs (and CPUs) specially the 290X and so forth.

Now, I agree myself - I personally couldn't care less if a GPU was pulling 600W by itself so long as I have an amazing performing GPU but I'm not everyone and I definitely wouldn't go as far to say something like 'no one cares about power draw,' and that the cards are worthless.
 
#19 ·
Not bad for a mid-range $300 card? If it will be priced at $250 then that's even better, that price will also give AMD a chance to dominate the mainstream market and re-balance the market share quite a bit between the two competitors ( if these scores are true and the price is right).
 
#20 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butthurt Beluga View Post

It's funny now that AMD is focusing on power efficiency I see things like, "no one cares about power draw," but when last couple generations power draw has been a defining factor in not recommending AMD GPUs (and CPUs) specially the 290X and so forth.

Now, I agree myself - I personally couldn't care less if a GPU was pulling 600W by itself so long as I have an amazing performing GPU but I'm not everyone and I definitely wouldn't go as far to say something like 'no one cares about power draw,' and that the cards are worthless.
That's why I said "basically no one" as I'm sure there are a few people out there, but the vast majority don't care about power draw. Given there is obviously a point in which people care, like a single card requiring a kilowatt PSU or something, but people want "reasonable" power draw and the recent cards have been reasonable. A little on the heavy side, but reasonable.

Also, as I said I have 2 290x's in my rig so it's not like I've only ever owned Nvidia hardware hating on AMD. I'm pissed at them because I want them to compete, but either they're too incompetent to compete or don't want to.
 
#21 ·
Assuming these results are representative, at $300 dollars, raw price/performance isn't much better than what I'm already running. Still, it will have a niche as it will be faster, cheaper, and less power hungry than the current Hawaii line up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfej View Post

Basically no one cares about power draw, so these cards are relatively worthless.
I care about power draw, as that determines what sort of PSU I need as well as how much air conditioning I need to keep my PC room livable during the summer.

That said, it's rarely the deciding factor.
 
#22 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post

Assuming these results are representative, at $300 dollars, raw price/performance isn't much better than what I'm already running. Still, it will have a niche as it will be faster, cheaper, and less power hungry than the current Hawaii line up.
I care about power draw, as that determines what sort of PSU I need as well as how much air conditioning I need to keep my PC room livable during the summer.

That said, it's rarely the deciding factor.
I would say that's fair. This irritates me, and when I'm irritated with something I tend to gravitate towards hyperbole. What you said lines up pretty well with my thoughts.
 
#26 ·
between 980 and regular Fury, a bit meh unless it improves more

if this is within 10-15% of 1070 then might be ok, but Nvidia actually stated 1070 is Titan X level, not 980Ti (and stock Titan X is faster then stock 980Ti by 7-8%) which somehow often gets forgotten .. seeing as how 1080 performance delivered and beat 980Ti by how much was shown/said (and then some), Im expecting 1070 to deliver exactly like they said aka Titan X level (and potentially higher due to Pascal/later drivers) .. and Titan X would already be ~25% faster then this

so basically the 1070 will probably be with more actual non-negligible performance gap and P10 (if its $250-300) - with better price/performance value relative to 1070
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top