Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [VideoCardz] AMD Radeon RX 480 to cost 199 USD
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[VideoCardz] AMD Radeon RX 480 to cost 199 USD - Page 116  

post #1151 of 1250
Firestrike doesn't matter, a 1070 is only 10% behind a 1080 in firestrike.

Yet it's 20% behind in games.
post #1152 of 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kand View Post

That's interesting, but you do have to consider that where the power footprint that the 980 TI's at, it's sucking up a whole lot more OC'd than the 1080 at stock.

That's about 100w difference at the socket. I know what you're going to say, but the 480 should be cheaper to run than say an overclocked 390x. While true, I still can't see anyone who has a 970 or 390/390x sidegrading for lower power consumption. It's very rare for someone on a 770 to go for a 960 or 380x.

The only place the 1080 fails at is the price gouging by both the markets and AIBs. Anyways, we've got actual benchmark results to preview and compare with what's currently available on the market. I for one would love to confirm what the guy with the 12k GPU score on the 970 is running his card at.



Another 970 getting 13k graphics score. http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6547911
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6463179

Again, recent GTX 980 firestrike results for comparison would be nice.

Uhm, so what is the point of your post now? REF 480 is weaker than a max clocked CUSTOM 970, which is ahead of REF 980 already. Oh well, I'm fine with that performance at $200. thumb.gif
post #1153 of 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slaughterem View Post

Why bother with firestrike? It is part of the Nvidia play book to denigrate the 480, along with the people who now use performance /mm2 as a metric. As far as I know in a few days we will have game benches which depending on the review site will provide us with a clearer picture.

To be fair, performance per unit area is an interesting statistic to use when comparing die use efficiency from an engineering standpoint. Like you're implying though, it certainly doesn't mean much to consumers. Performance per unit power, performance per unit currency, or performance without any other dimensions are more generally useful.

I've got a Radeon 390 now, but I'm interested in the 480 launch. I'm not bashing anything.
post #1154 of 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kand View Post

That's interesting, but you do have to consider that where the power footprint that the 980 TI's at, it's sucking up a whole lot more OC'd than the 1080 at stock.

That's about 100w difference at the socket. I know what you're going to say, but the 480 should be cheaper to run than say an overclocked 390x. While true, I still can't see anyone who has a 970 or 390/390x sidegrading for lower power consumption. It's very rare for someone on a 770 to go for a 960 or 380x.

So, it's strange to sidegrade for lower power consumption at the mid-range, but normal at the high end? Because I wouldn't be terribly surprised to see a stock 480 consuming ~80+W less than a heavily OC'd 970, and ~150+W less than a stock 390X.

And anyway, the RX 480 isn't meant for 390X owners; the name alone says that much. The successors for the big chips are Vega.
SPEAR
(22 items)
 
Laptop #3
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500k @ 4.2ghz ASRock Z68 Extreme3 Gen3 Gigabyte WF3 Radeon R9 270X x2 G.Skill Ripjaws X 4x4gb @ 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
OCZ Agility 3 120gb (Linux) OCZ Agility 3 120gb (Windows) WD Caviar Black 2tb Hitachi 500gb 
Optical DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Sony Optiarc LightScribe LaCie external BluRay writer Antec Kühler H2O 920 + Corsair SP120 P/P Arch Linux + radeonsi + E20 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro (Insider release) ASUS VS238H-V @ 70hz Corsair K90 Corsair TX750 V2 
CaseMouseAudioAudio
None CM Storm Recon Altec Lansing ATP3 Creative Aurvana Live! 
OtherOther
Masscool Shin-Etsu G751 ASUS PCE-N10 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 4980HQ @ 2.8/4.0GHz Intel Iris Pro 5200 AMD Radeon R9 M370X 2x8GB DDR3 @ 1600MHz 
Hard DriveOSMonitor
1TB PCIe SSD OS X 10.11.2 El Capitan 15" @ 2880x1800 
  hide details  
SPEAR
(22 items)
 
Laptop #3
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500k @ 4.2ghz ASRock Z68 Extreme3 Gen3 Gigabyte WF3 Radeon R9 270X x2 G.Skill Ripjaws X 4x4gb @ 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
OCZ Agility 3 120gb (Linux) OCZ Agility 3 120gb (Windows) WD Caviar Black 2tb Hitachi 500gb 
Optical DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Sony Optiarc LightScribe LaCie external BluRay writer Antec Kühler H2O 920 + Corsair SP120 P/P Arch Linux + radeonsi + E20 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro (Insider release) ASUS VS238H-V @ 70hz Corsair K90 Corsair TX750 V2 
CaseMouseAudioAudio
None CM Storm Recon Altec Lansing ATP3 Creative Aurvana Live! 
OtherOther
Masscool Shin-Etsu G751 ASUS PCE-N10 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 4980HQ @ 2.8/4.0GHz Intel Iris Pro 5200 AMD Radeon R9 M370X 2x8GB DDR3 @ 1600MHz 
Hard DriveOSMonitor
1TB PCIe SSD OS X 10.11.2 El Capitan 15" @ 2880x1800 
  hide details  
post #1155 of 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kand View Post

That's interesting, but you do have to consider that where the power footprint that the 980 TI's at, it's sucking up a whole lot more OC'd than the 1080 at stock.

That's about 100w difference at the socket. I know what you're going to say, but the 480 should be cheaper to run than say an overclocked 390x. While true, I still can't see anyone who has a 970 or 390/390x sidegrading for lower power consumption. It's very rare for someone on a 770 to go for a 960 or 380x.

The only place the 1080 fails at is the price gouging by both the markets and AIBs. Anyways, we've got actual benchmark results to preview and compare with what's currently available on the market. I for one would love to confirm what the guy with the 12k GPU score on the 970 is running his card at.



Another 970 getting 13k graphics score. http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6547911
http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6463179

Again, recent GTX 980 firestrike results for comparison would be nice.

I don't get the power savings comment. In one breath you say the 980 Ti matches 1080 at a power cost of 100W which is a negative, but in another breath you say that the power savings don't really matter for the 480. I mean what?

Btw just so you know, to get a 970 to score 13K+ graphics score in FireStrike, my 970 was constantly riding the 200W wall throughout the entire run. Not exactly very efficient when you push it to the limits.
post #1156 of 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by magnek View Post

I don't get the power savings comment. In one breath you say the 980 Ti matches 1080 at a power cost of 100W which is a negative, but in another breath you say that the power savings don't really matter for the 480. I mean what?

Btw just so you know, to get a 970 to score 13K+ graphics score in FireStrike, my 970 was constantly riding the 200W wall throughout the entire run. Not exactly very efficient when you push it to the limits.

I guess he confused the overall and the graphics score and then process to defend his post rolleyes.gif

I don't want to talk much about the performance as the reviews are very close. However, 13500+ FS is achievable with RX 480 ref with just some sliders. If the custom cards do the homework to maintain high boost clock, more impressive scores will definitely come.

Something like this for example




At first I was a bit confused by the big ass cooler, but now it definitely makes sense. After all Sapphire is the best when it comes to AMD.
Edited by blue1512 - 6/27/16 at 7:48pm
post #1157 of 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by magnek View Post

I don't get the power savings comment. In one breath you say the 980 Ti matches 1080 at a power cost of 100W which is a negative, but in another breath you say that the power savings don't really matter for the 480. I mean what?

Btw just so you know, to get a 970 to score 13K+ graphics score in FireStrike, my 970 was constantly riding the 200W wall throughout the entire run. Not exactly very efficient when you push it to the limits.

I really don't get his points either, the one about the power especially is bad.

I remember that my 2 Asus GTX 970 Strix only had one 8 pin power connector and they both clocked at 1400 / 1930 without any artifacts on that single 8 pin power connector on my 850W eVGA G2 single rail power supply.
Core i7-4790k
(16 items)
 
   
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Intel Xeon X5670 Intel Xeon X5670 Apple Mac Pro 5,1 GeForce GTX 770 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
48Gb RDIMM ECC DDR3 1333 2 Apricorn Velocity Duo X2 + 2x Crucial M550 512Gb 1x Apple Superdrive / 1x Pioneer BR-208D OS X 10.10.4 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2xApple LED Cinema 27" Apple BT Keyboard 980w Apple Apple Mac Pro 
MouseMouse Pad
Apple Magic Mouse BT Apple Magic TrackPad 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon E5-1680 v2 Apple Mac Pro 6,1 2x AMD FirePro D700 6Gb GDDR5 32Gb DDR3 1866 ECC Registered Quad Channel OWC 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Apple 512 Gb SSD Asus USB 3.0 BD-RW Mac OS X 10.10.2 Apple 27" Thunderbolt LED Display 
KeyboardMouseMouse PadAudio
Apple Bluetooth Keyboard Apple Magic Mouse Corsair MM200 Wide Bose Companion 20 Multimedia 
Other
Wacom Intuos Pen & Touch Medium Tablet 
  hide details  
Core i7-4790k
(16 items)
 
   
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
Intel Xeon X5670 Intel Xeon X5670 Apple Mac Pro 5,1 GeForce GTX 770 
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
48Gb RDIMM ECC DDR3 1333 2 Apricorn Velocity Duo X2 + 2x Crucial M550 512Gb 1x Apple Superdrive / 1x Pioneer BR-208D OS X 10.10.4 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
2xApple LED Cinema 27" Apple BT Keyboard 980w Apple Apple Mac Pro 
MouseMouse Pad
Apple Magic Mouse BT Apple Magic TrackPad 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon E5-1680 v2 Apple Mac Pro 6,1 2x AMD FirePro D700 6Gb GDDR5 32Gb DDR3 1866 ECC Registered Quad Channel OWC 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Apple 512 Gb SSD Asus USB 3.0 BD-RW Mac OS X 10.10.2 Apple 27" Thunderbolt LED Display 
KeyboardMouseMouse PadAudio
Apple Bluetooth Keyboard Apple Magic Mouse Corsair MM200 Wide Bose Companion 20 Multimedia 
Other
Wacom Intuos Pen & Touch Medium Tablet 
  hide details  
post #1158 of 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by EightDee8D View Post

At least 6 months away. most likely Q2 2017. i feel like 1080ti will launch way before vega.

No way that happens. Nvidia will release a Titan well before they do a 1080Ti to make sure the early adopters get at least some advantage for paying through the nose. In that time AMD should easily be able to get Vega out (though I think they may beat Nvidia to the punch outright with Vega)...
post #1159 of 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by EightDee8D View Post

At least 6 months away. most likely Q2 2017. i feel like 1080ti will launch way before vega.

If the 1070/1080 launch is anything to go by, 1080ti or titan will 'launch'

But you'll go into a store looking for a card and.....................

post #1160 of 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waitng4realGPU View Post

If the 1070/1080 launch is anything to go by, 1080ti or titan will 'launch'

But you'll go into a store looking for a card and.....................


Hopefully by then nV will have sorted out whatever the issue with GP104 stocks is. If GP102 does launch mid-2017, HBM2 will have been in production for quite a while, so memory at least shouldn't be an issue like it might be for the 1080.
SPEAR
(22 items)
 
Laptop #3
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500k @ 4.2ghz ASRock Z68 Extreme3 Gen3 Gigabyte WF3 Radeon R9 270X x2 G.Skill Ripjaws X 4x4gb @ 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
OCZ Agility 3 120gb (Linux) OCZ Agility 3 120gb (Windows) WD Caviar Black 2tb Hitachi 500gb 
Optical DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Sony Optiarc LightScribe LaCie external BluRay writer Antec Kühler H2O 920 + Corsair SP120 P/P Arch Linux + radeonsi + E20 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro (Insider release) ASUS VS238H-V @ 70hz Corsair K90 Corsair TX750 V2 
CaseMouseAudioAudio
None CM Storm Recon Altec Lansing ATP3 Creative Aurvana Live! 
OtherOther
Masscool Shin-Etsu G751 ASUS PCE-N10 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 4980HQ @ 2.8/4.0GHz Intel Iris Pro 5200 AMD Radeon R9 M370X 2x8GB DDR3 @ 1600MHz 
Hard DriveOSMonitor
1TB PCIe SSD OS X 10.11.2 El Capitan 15" @ 2880x1800 
  hide details  
SPEAR
(22 items)
 
Laptop #3
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 2500k @ 4.2ghz ASRock Z68 Extreme3 Gen3 Gigabyte WF3 Radeon R9 270X x2 G.Skill Ripjaws X 4x4gb @ 1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
OCZ Agility 3 120gb (Linux) OCZ Agility 3 120gb (Windows) WD Caviar Black 2tb Hitachi 500gb 
Optical DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Sony Optiarc LightScribe LaCie external BluRay writer Antec Kühler H2O 920 + Corsair SP120 P/P Arch Linux + radeonsi + E20 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro (Insider release) ASUS VS238H-V @ 70hz Corsair K90 Corsair TX750 V2 
CaseMouseAudioAudio
None CM Storm Recon Altec Lansing ATP3 Creative Aurvana Live! 
OtherOther
Masscool Shin-Etsu G751 ASUS PCE-N10 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 4980HQ @ 2.8/4.0GHz Intel Iris Pro 5200 AMD Radeon R9 M370X 2x8GB DDR3 @ 1600MHz 
Hard DriveOSMonitor
1TB PCIe SSD OS X 10.11.2 El Capitan 15" @ 2880x1800 
  hide details  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [VideoCardz] AMD Radeon RX 480 to cost 199 USD