Originally Posted by JackCY
Not so much to me when R9 290s sold cheaper than RX 480 2 years ago on 2nd hand market. For a new card it just barely improves the performance/price ratio :/
You can't directly compare the price of a used item to a new one.
8GB gives better than 290 performance for ~60% of the cost, ~50% of the power draw, double the VRAM, all while adding other features. If you compare the 4GB card then it is directly 50% of the cost and performance would still be ahead.
In Time Spy when comparing factory clocks my 480 is 14% faster than my 290...for approximately half the cost and power draw that sounds OK to me. Yes, Hawaii cards can catch up and potentially surpass with a large overclock but they have a much larger voltage range to work with as well as being a true enthusiast class card. Try adding .013V to a Hawaii based card and see how much of an overclock can be had...spoiler alert...it probably wouldn't be much unless it is a VERY good card. I'm working with 10.5% overclock with the miniscule voltage increase and 50% power boost...most cards are in the same ballpark and we don't even have a proper OC tool yet, all this is had by AMDs overclocking implementation.
Prices are inflated currently and availability is crap...but it was the same way when the 290 came out. I know because I bought a NewEgg 'combo deal' of (2) XFX Reference cards for $900 when availability was scarce; That's a 12.5% markup and I bought two. I sold the 2nd card for $450 as it was the lesser performer.
Here's another way to look at it. The RX 480 outperforms the 290. The 290 was nipping at the heels of the Titan. Meaning the RX 480 is essentially as fast as a Titan; speaking in terms of stock speeds.
3 years, 4 months, and 10 days for an 'entry level' GPU to be in the same performance league as an overpriced, 'elitist' piece of hardware is good progress by any metric.
Originally Posted by prznar1
r9 290 release price was 400$ and with mining crazie they were even more expensive.