Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [WCCF] AMD RX 480 Can Hit 1.5Ghz+, New Overclocking Tool With Voltage Control Coming
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[WCCF] AMD RX 480 Can Hit 1.5Ghz+, New Overclocking Tool With Voltage Control Coming - Page 220  

post #2191 of 2870
Quote:
Originally Posted by lolerk52 View Post

YOU don't get it.

I'M NOT SAYING THE RX 480 IS NOT A GREAT DEAL. It's pretty damn awesome. I'm saying the chip itself makes me react like that tiger meme.

Why are you expecting so much out of a $200 budget card though? If it was faster than a fury ex do you think they would've only charged $200 for it? The 480,s intended place in the market has EVERYTHING to do with the chip we got. And it is by far the most impressive $200 card I've ever seen. So what's the problem again?
post #2192 of 2870
Quote:
Originally Posted by magnek View Post

nVidia claimed Maxwell had 35% IPC (shader efficiency to be accurate) improvement over Kepler

980 has 29% less shaders but 31% higher clockspeed than 780 Ti (so a wash basically in raw TFLOPS), yet only ends up being 10% faster even after drivers have matured.

So either nVidia's quoted 35% figure is way off, or IPC/shader efficiency isn't that easy to extract from shader count and clockspeed alone.
NVIDIA scales worse with clocks since they decoupled a few things like cache from the core clock. If you BIOS overclock it, you can adjust those other figures too.
post #2193 of 2870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

Why are you expecting so much out of a $200 budget card though? If it was faster than a fury ex do you think they would've only charged $200 for it? The 480,s intended place in the market has EVERYTHING to do with the chip we got. And it is by far the most impressive $200 card I've ever seen. So what's the problem again?
I'm not expecting anything from the 200$ card. I'm expecting something from the 232mm^2 chip with identical TFLOPS to 390x.
post #2194 of 2870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

Why are you expecting so much out of a $200 budget card though? If it was faster than a fury ex do you think they would've only charged $200 for it? The 480,s intended place in the market has EVERYTHING to do with the chip we got. And it is by far the most impressive $200 card I've ever seen. So what's the problem again?

No, This was.

My home PC
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Threadripper 1950x Gigabyte Aorus X399 Gaming 7  MSI Geforce GTX 1080ti Gaming X G.Skill DDR4 3600 CL16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung Evo 840 500GB Samsung 960 Pro 500GB Noctua NH-U14S TR4 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2711 Samsung 55" 4k Corsair K70  EVGA SuperNova G2 1300W 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide Air 540 Logitech G502 Denon AVR-X3300W 
  hide details  
My home PC
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Threadripper 1950x Gigabyte Aorus X399 Gaming 7  MSI Geforce GTX 1080ti Gaming X G.Skill DDR4 3600 CL16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung Evo 840 500GB Samsung 960 Pro 500GB Noctua NH-U14S TR4 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2711 Samsung 55" 4k Corsair K70  EVGA SuperNova G2 1300W 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide Air 540 Logitech G502 Denon AVR-X3300W 
  hide details  
post #2195 of 2870
Quote:
Originally Posted by lolerk52 View Post

I'm not expecting anything from the 200$ catd. I'm expecting something from the 232mm^2 chip with identical TFLOPS to 390x.

And you are likely looking at a chip that beats the 390X at max OC even though it was designed from the ground up to replace Pitcairn, not Grenada/Hawaii. I just don't get your point, do you have one?
post #2196 of 2870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kpjoslee View Post

No, This was.


I dunno about that, I got into PC building in the fermi/Cayman days...
post #2197 of 2870
Quote:
Originally Posted by lolerk52 View Post

I'm not expecting anything from the 200$ card. I'm expecting something from the 232mm^2 chip with identical TFLOPS to 390x.

The 438 mm² 390X with 350W power consumption?
post #2198 of 2870
Quote:
Originally Posted by lolerk52 View Post

If it's 390x perf at 100W, they just caught up to NVIDIA in perf/watt while falling flat on their faces in perf/mm^2. Either way you slice it, Polaris didn't catch up to NVIDIA on the technology side, despite NVIDIA effectively doing nothing on their uArch.

I think you need to wait and see the AIB cards , i said it before , NV clocked the 1080/1070s to within 10-13% of their total overclock ability - they had to as big maxwell was faster clock for clock already. A Custom AIB cards get you nothing in mhz apart from saving your ears with Pascall so far. That's never been the case in prior generations IMHO.

The AIBs with the 480 however will make a difference for sure. So we have not see the final perf/mm2 from this GPU yet. We have had one report of the card throttling after 1680mhz clock initially , now if i can reach near that with better power / cooling then it has a long way to go yet.

Once the AIB overclocked 480s are out it will loose some of its perf/watt shine but thats not going to matter much if the price is right and the performance picks up.
post #2199 of 2870
Quote:
Originally Posted by lolerk52 View Post

NVIDIA scales worse with clocks since they decoupled a few things like cache from the core clock. If you BIOS overclock it, you can adjust those other figures too.

That's been the case since Kepler. And how much do you expect L1 cache/crossbar to affect performance anyway?

Even if we assume a generous 10%, that's still 15% off from the official figure. Like I said, my main point was simply shader count and clockspeed doesn't tell the full story about shader efficiency, if the Kepler to Maxwell example is indicative of anything.
Edited by magnek - 6/26/16 at 10:56pm
post #2200 of 2870
Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

And you are likely looking at a chip that beats the 390X at max OC even though it was designed from the ground up to replace Pitcairn, not Grenada/Hawaii. I just don't get your point, do you have one?
My point is AMD has done nothing to shader efficiency if all they managed is 390x performance.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [WCCF] AMD RX 480 Can Hit 1.5Ghz+, New Overclocking Tool With Voltage Control Coming