Originally Posted by zealord
I am still not convinced that the RX480 is as fast as the GTX 980. I am going to be careful with praise. If the RX480 is slower than GTX 980 stock then it's in GTX 970 territory and I've just seen a 250€ GTX 970 + DOOM in europe. If the RX480 is slower than GTX 980, even at 200$, it won't be the absolute insane card everyone praises it to be.
There is a very fine line. If the card is on par with GTX 980 (on average, DX11 games etc.) and overclocks aswell then we have a very good card for 200$.
I don't know why, but I have a feeling when review come out it will be somewhere in the area between 970 and 390X/980.
I think it is dangerous to look at the GTX 1070 and GTX 1080 and then scream "yay RX480 for 199$. Take that nvidia you gonna go down. Sell all stocks. Nvidia is done"
Increased performance has diminishing return when it comes to price. If a card is 200$ then that doesn't mean a card at 400$ is twice as good and a card at 1000$ won't be 5 times as fast.
The question is, would a RX480 which performs like a 970/290, really be an "insane" card at 200$?
it's confirmed to have 2304x2x1266= 5.8 tflops. let's assume they haven't increased ipc. that means it will be 5.9/5.8= 1% slower than 390x, means same as 980. which isn't a bad deal.
but if and big if
, those 2.8x p/w claims are true than @150w it will perform same as 420w card of previous gcn. means it will be faster than 390x. there's also a hint of it's performance in dx12, they showed 1080@100% =~2x480@50%, does that mean with 100% utilization it will be 2x as powerful as 1080 or a single 480=~1080 ? lol a bomb if true
i think it will perform close to Fury/nano. both are faster than 980/390x. but we'll see soon. card already meets my expectations and it's good enough.