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 20

post #191 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by umeng2002 View Post

I'll wait to see frame-times.

Even with improved drivers, the 390 and 390x still have frame pacing issues compared to nVidia.

Ok we need that award back we have a new winner.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Sapphire-Nitro-Radeon-R9-390-8GB-Review/Battlefield-4

Surely you could come up with something better than that to hate on?
post #192 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebduncan View Post

glad the world can finally see the turd the RX-480 is.

performance per dollar is fine. The bigger problem comes from the RX-480 150 watt TDP, while the GTX 1070 has a tdp of 150 watts. AMD is still behind on performance per watt. Ya, they made big improvements, but it wasn't enough.

RX480 is max TDP at 150watts on ref .. if you do the math PCIE mobo connector provides up to 75watts, + PCIE 6 pin 75watts .. thats the minimum configuration above 75watts it could be configured for .

I just don't get some peoples excitement over performance per watt - i guess faced with a lack of real tangible benefits it comes up again and again, you save a few $$ per year on your power bill if that. Seriously it never used to matter when video cards consumed more power than now and it will matter even less in the next node of gpus . Its also relative to your gaming hours and the games you play also , if you vsync you will save further power also. GPUs use a fraction of their max TPU when idling.

I used to run an extremely power intensive rig for gaming , for about 5 hrs per week under serious load, did it impact my power bill , not really. Unless you are gaming serous hours its negligible.

Will people break into riots when there are 10watt differences at 7nm ? some will have nothing better to think about i guess .
post #193 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoLDii3 View Post

LOL at you. TDP is not the same as effective power consumption. rolleyes.gif
Uh oh all critical about TDP and has a FX 8320 at 5 GHz and a R9 290 lol

Lol at you for not understanding or being able to read why I wrote it rolleyes.gif

Also the FX 8320 was one of the worst CPU AMD every put out. It was not, underperforming and had to run at 5ghz in order to give performance similar to CPUs running at 3.4-3.6. Or the every so hot 290/290x with its very limited OC performance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orthello View Post

I'm trying to work out who actually cares about power consumption at this level . The 480 will outperform the 970 with less wattage so who cares what gen the cards are from as there is still improvement there. Will it be as efficient as Pascal no - does that matter really - no. For interests sake TPU stated that vega would improve the performance per watt compared to polaris , so AMD is still moving in the right direction.

Its an NV advantage if you can call it that. I'd rather have async support eg proper dx12 supported than bleeding edge power consumption.

I only explained my reasoning after reading the specs AMD put out on the card. I did not say that people care much about TDP, but I was referring to the possible performance of the card as an understanding of its specs.
If you can't get that, you are just posting to argue what is irrelevant to argue on. So good job man.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waitng4realGPU View Post

I thought the average gaming power draw was around 110W for the 480?

Plus the 970 Zotac in this thread probably uses more like 170W+

edit - Maybe that was the 110W TDP of the 470 I'm confusing myself with..............

The 970 with OC might pull out 170w or even 200w if pushed. The 480s might push 180w.
My system with 980 tis is barely pushing 500w total on most games.
It is irrelevant though.

I was only referring to the specs, not what you will run on average. Because some games will push a card hard and it might be running at 150w, and some games will not, and then it might take only 70w.

I was just stating that if AMD claims the 480 is a 150 TDP card, it means that with their lower performance/watt, the card shouldn't be a great performer as people claimed it will be, or hoped it will be.
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 #194 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waitng4realGPU View Post

Ok we need that award back we have a new winner.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Sapphire-Nitro-Radeon-R9-390-8GB-Review/Battlefield-4

Surely you could come up with something better than that to hate on?

Watch a few of the new Digital Foundry videos.
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 8-9-8-24 1T 
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 8-9-8-24 1T 
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 #195 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler View Post

I was just stating that if AMD claims the 480 is a 150 TDP card, it means that with their lower performance/watt, the card shouldn't be a great performer as people claimed it will be, or hoped it will be.

Well anyway people are just finding things to hate on honestly. The performance they are getting compared to the power draw of their last cards is a huge gap.

They can run these cards on small power supplies, It's all that matters in the end.
post #196 of 712
for FCAT - dunno about 390X, but 1070/1080 beat Fury/Fury X in all games (DX11 or 12) there

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/fcat_geforce_gtx_1080_framepacing_review,16.html
Quote:
Comparing apples to oranges, when you look at the charts NVIDIA still has a better overall solution as their latency differentials for each even and odd frame are a hint better. But the difference with AMD is very close, albeit we did see more glitches (as small as they are really) on the Fury. Overall we can say that the GeForce GTX 1080 performed exemplarily in the ten FCAT tests we ran it through. Three out of ten tests were DirectX 12 enabled as well. The end-score is a whopping 10 out 10, all games passed our examination easily without any noticeable stutters or anomalies, and that is pretty terrific if you ask me.
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 #197 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orthello View Post

RX480 is max TDP at 150watts on ref .. if you do the math PCIE mobo connector provides up to 75watts, + PCIE 6 pin 75watts .. thats the minimum configuration above 75watts it could be configured for .

I just don't get some peoples excitement over performance per watt - i guess faced with a lack of real tangible benefits it comes up again and again, you save a few $$ per year on your power bill if that. Seriously it never used to matter when video cards consumed more power than now and it will matter even less in the next node of gpus . Its also relative to your gaming hours and the games you play also , if you vsync you will save further power also. GPUs use a fraction of their max TPU when idling.

I used to run an extremely power intensive rig for gaming , for about 5 hrs per week under serious load, did it impact my power bill , not really. Unless you are gaming serous hours its negligible.

Will people break into riots when there are 10watt differences at 7nm ? some will have nothing better to think about i guess .

You still don't get it.

This is not caring about performance pet watt is in "omg the card is taking 150w out of wall!!".

It is about the fact that if AMD have worse performance per watt, than a 150 TDP card from AMD, will not perform as good as a 150 TDP card from nvidia on the same level.
For example the 480 is 150 TDP, and it performs a whole lot less than the 1070 which is also a 150 TDP (not out of the wall or performance average in games, but specs, plain specs).
This means that if AMD are a step behind nvidia, a 150 TDP card from AMD will perform somewhere around the 150 TDP from nvidia from previous gen.

That was the point. It is not caring if the card is running 5 hours or how much it cost to run it. It is about position of performance when speculating the actual card performance.
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 #198 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebduncan View Post

?
It means that the 1060 will beat the RX-480, and basically Nvidia will win this generation of cards as well.
No it won't. It just means it will maybe consume less than the RX 480. Anyways i don't like talking about things i don't even know unlike someone else over here,leave the crystal ball at home will ya? rolleyes.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler View Post

Lol at you for not understanding or being able to read why I wrote it rolleyes.gif
LOL at you thinking that it is my duty to understand the particular way you meant it. You wrote that,it came off as that. TDP is not the same as effective power consumption.

So no, the RX 480 is not a 150W card.
Edited by GoLDii3 - 6/28/16 at 5:44am
post #199 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoLDii3 View Post

No it won't. It just means it will maybe consume less than the RX 480. Anyways i don't like talking about things i don't even know unlike someone else over here,leave the crystal ball at home will ya? rolleyes.gif
You don't need any crystal ball. Just put some bad news for the red camp and you will have plenty of believers redface.gif

Shady reviews for 480, 20 page. Meanwhile, Pascal has an issue with DVI for 1440p and >80Hz and not even a thread opened rolleyes.gif
Edited by blue1512 - 6/28/16 at 5:45am
post #200 of 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Defoler View Post

I partially agree.
Yet, some people are still playing games from 2015, 2014, or 2009. Not everyone are paying 60$ for a game and 30$ for a season pass, and prefer to wait a year or two for full release is out.
So 2015 games are just as relevant as 2016 games.

If you want to make stuff up, just test DX12. All 3 usable games. That will give us a clear picture of the full potential of the card for every game on steam, right?

New graphics cards should run old games at 100s of frames per second though so it's a bit pointless really

A dx12 game , the new doom (as it uses openGL) , an UE4 game and a ubisoft game would be best
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