Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [VC] First RX 480 benchmarks hit the web
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[VC] First RX 480 benchmarks hit the web - Page 17

post #161 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by blue1512 View Post

Dude, where did you pull those words from rolleyes.gif

The NDA driver which will be released tomorrow, enables the "nVidia style" boost feature on 480, and it's the only driver that fully support the card. One of my cards can boost to 1680 MHz, but can not hold it for long rolleyes.gif

Any driver without that feature is NOT the driver for 480.

When i saw boost i just thought the 1266 or official boost .. sorry my bad. I guess it matters what difference that will make to performance and i'm looking forward to the reviews to find out.
post #162 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by umeng2002 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by FLCLimax View Post

not reality, just their partners at ubisoft, bethesda, epic games, blizzard, take two, etc. Save this post, 2018 will see the features that AMD cards do now become a priority right in time for NVIDIA's similarly capable GPU's to begin rolling out. happened the same way with DX11.

nVidia 2016: Async Compute isn't a big deal

nVidia 2018: Async Compute is the best thing since sliced bread

rolleyes.gif

seriously, look how much DX11 was a joke, useless, pipe dream,never gonna be used, etc. back when HD5870 came out. Then Nvidia GPU's roll out that support DX11 and real tessellation Overly tessellated benchmarks and games rendering tessellated invisible geometry spring up like weeds.
post #163 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by umeng2002 View Post

Because the 970 was a $330 card back in September 2014.

It's almost July 2016.

970 is a 28nm part.

480 is a 14nm part.

If the 480 performs somewhere between a 980 and 980 Ti, it might be worth it to go from a 970 to a 480.

But like I said, if the 970 and 480 perform about the same, and the 480 sells well; then devs will target that performance level for a good while longer...

It just means my 970 will last that much longer.

TBH, even if its 28nm vs 14nm, the 970 is a 150-160w power card, the 480 is said to be a 150w card, so overall the difference between them isn't going to be a major one, since nvidia are a much better performance/watt than AMD, so I never expected a low watt card from them to really gives big performance.
Just for comparison, the 1070 is a 160w card which performs at the 980 ti level.
Nvidia have been a step up over AMD in that regard for several years now.

Also don't forget that for awhile now the only performance mark we had was a CFX of 480s vs the 1080 on AOTS at 1080p. And since that game is seriously favouring AMD, it means that almost on every other game (especially DX11), 480s CFX will perform only close or less than a single 1080, which means 970 performance only.
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #164 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLCLimax View Post

seriously, look how much DX11 was a joke, useless, pipe dream,never gonna be used, etc. back when HD5870 came out. Then Nvidia GPu's roll out that support DX11 and real tessellation Overly tessellated benchmarks and games rendering tessellated invisible geometry spring up like weeds.

Don't forget the crysis 2 water .. or concrete block million polygon tessellation. The most detail you've never seen rendered in your life !
post #165 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLCLimax View Post

not reality, just their partners at ubisoft, bethesda, epic games, blizzard, take two, etc. Save this post, 2018 will see the features that AMD cards do now become a priority right in time for NVIDIA's similarly capable GPU's to begin rolling out. happened the same way with DX11.
I dont disagree, which is why I think getting Pascal for the 2016-2018 period which balances very good raw power (excellent perf/mm2 .. its 65% faster than 980 on a 314mm2 die) with a temporary stop-gap for async (pre-emption) is very viable .. it will crush DX11 and "early" DX12 games and do "ok" in some async heavier games (brute force helps there too)

and in 2018 after Win7/8 and DX11 should be finally history and we are swimming in new fully DX12 engines - Volta is all ready thumb.gif

pacing is important, theres no point rushing in too early redface.gif
The Green Beast
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3770K @ 4500 Mhz ASRock Z77 Pro3 Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming Crucial Ballistix 2x8GB DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SSD Crucial M550 500GB SSD Samsung 850 Evo 1TB HDD Seagate 7200rpm 3TB Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO; Xilence X5 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit Acer Predator XB271HU 27" IPS Gsync 1440p 165Hz CM Storm QuickFire XT Cherry Red 800W modular 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Black Logitech G900 Chaos Spectrum SteelSeries QcK+ 4mm SK Gaming Realtek On-board 
  hide details  
Reply
The Green Beast
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3770K @ 4500 Mhz ASRock Z77 Pro3 Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming Crucial Ballistix 2x8GB DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SSD Crucial M550 500GB SSD Samsung 850 Evo 1TB HDD Seagate 7200rpm 3TB Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO; Xilence X5 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit Acer Predator XB271HU 27" IPS Gsync 1440p 165Hz CM Storm QuickFire XT Cherry Red 800W modular 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Black Logitech G900 Chaos Spectrum SteelSeries QcK+ 4mm SK Gaming Realtek On-board 
  hide details  
Reply
post #166 of 712
The 970 is typical average gaming power consumption around 150-160 watt. The custom ones are a bit higher.

The polaris 10 is max 150 watt TDP.
Workstation
(4 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsMonitor
Xeon E5-2690 Supermicro 2011 Nvidia GP100/ Vega FE Dell ultrasharp 4k 
  hide details  
Reply
Workstation
(4 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsMonitor
Xeon E5-2690 Supermicro 2011 Nvidia GP100/ Vega FE Dell ultrasharp 4k 
  hide details  
Reply
post #167 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler View Post

TBH, even if its 28nm vs 14nm, the 970 is a 150-160w power card, the 480 is said to be a 150w card, so overall the difference between them isn't going to be a major one, since nvidia are a much better performance/watt than AMD, so I never expected a low watt card from them to really gives big performance.
Just for comparison, the 1070 is a 160w card which performs at the 980 ti level.
Nvidia have been a step up over AMD in that regard for several years now.

Also don't forget that for awhile now the only performance mark we had was a CFX of 480s vs the 1080 on AOTS at 1080p. And since that game is seriously favouring AMD, it means that almost on every other game (especially DX11), 480s CFX will perform only close or less than a single 1080, which means 970 performance only.

Who said 480 is a 150W card, from the leaks with a buggy GPUz??rolleyes.gif
It pulls 150W measured with kill-a-watt when the power limit is set to +50%. You do the math yourself.
The only problem I got so far is the scorching VRM and the junk heatsink.
post #168 of 712
I would hope the GCN 4.0 update means better DX11 & tessellation performance.

It's looking like AMD is doing just well in DX12, so far.

Come to think of it, Crysis 2 HD/ nVidia texture pack might be a good test for the 480 to guage tessellation?
AMD Box
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-8320E @ 4.6 GHz +0.356250v offset Asus Sabertooth 990FX Rev1 eVGA GTX 970 SC ACX2.0 Patriot Viper Xtreme 2x4 GB 1600LL @ 1866 9-11-... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung 840 EVO WD Black 1 TB 32MB cache FALS WD Blue 1 TB 7200rpm EZEX Corsair H80i 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 x64 HP LP2475w Logitech Illuminated Corsair TX750  
CaseMouseAudio
You don't want to know Logitech G9x Creative Sound Blaster Z 
  hide details  
Reply
AMD Box
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-8320E @ 4.6 GHz +0.356250v offset Asus Sabertooth 990FX Rev1 eVGA GTX 970 SC ACX2.0 Patriot Viper Xtreme 2x4 GB 1600LL @ 1866 9-11-... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung 840 EVO WD Black 1 TB 32MB cache FALS WD Blue 1 TB 7200rpm EZEX Corsair H80i 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 x64 HP LP2475w Logitech Illuminated Corsair TX750  
CaseMouseAudio
You don't want to know Logitech G9x Creative Sound Blaster Z 
  hide details  
Reply
post #169 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLCLimax View Post

seriously, look how much DX11 was a joke, useless, pipe dream,never gonna be used, etc. back when HD5870 came out. Then Nvidia GPU's roll out that support DX11 and real tessellation Overly tessellated benchmarks and games rendering tessellated invisible geometry spring up like weeds.

When the 5xxx series came out, AMD made a huge deal out of tessellation. They were the first to support it, their marketing was huge about tessellation.
Developers made games with that in mind which were supposed to favour AMD (which was also the reason why I bought 5870s back then).

The problem was that the moment nvidia brought out the 4xx series, AMD suddenly declared how tessellation is bad, wrong, should be used minimally. Imagine that...
And those claims about invisible geometry and stuff, those were also on games which were developed with AMD tessellation in mind, and not nvidia (and they sprang up every release since 2009 until lately, because AMD's sell point now is only DX12 and they gave up on DX11 completely).
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Main system
(16 items)
 
Editing PC
(8 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsGraphicsRAM
E5-1680v2 AMD FirePro D700 AMD FirePro D700 64GB 1866mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorCase
1TB PCIE SSD OSX 10.10.x Dell U2713H Mac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #170 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by umeng2002 View Post

GTA V isn't a good benchmark

Because it shows how slow AMD's DX11 driver performance is?

Please explain why it's a bad benchmark.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [VC] First RX 480 benchmarks hit the web