AMD Radeon RX 480 Review: Performance for the masses
- Thread starter Steve
- Start date
Azshadi
Posts: 55 +53
It's like saying "you should've bought the 290x because it aged better" and ignoring the fact that that specific chip had constant support throughout 2 cycles and it's not because they wanted to it's because they had to since the "current gen" one was a rebrand of the same chip. How can you think about the future with a mainstream card that maxes out 1080p ? Don't mean to burst your bubble but the term "future-proof" is non-existent. In a year another mainstream piece of hardware will come out that will mop the floor with the current gen also both AMD and nVidia will pump the updates in their current gen. No business would support a product that is EOL more than it's current products it would make no sense business wise. The EOL ones do not generate profit.
NightAntilli
Posts: 929 +1,195
R9 290x vs RX480
Year: October 2013 vs June 2016
Cores: 2816 vs 2304
Render Output Units: 64 vs 32
Bus Width: 512 bit vs 256 bit
Fab Process: 28nm vs 14nm
Memory: 4GB vs 8GB
Core Speed: 800MHz vs 1266 MHz
Memory Speed: 5000 MHz vs 8000 MHz
Power (TDP): 300 watts vs 150 watts
Launch price: $549 vs $239
Performance: Similar
This is bad... How?
Year: October 2013 vs June 2016
Cores: 2816 vs 2304
Render Output Units: 64 vs 32
Bus Width: 512 bit vs 256 bit
Fab Process: 28nm vs 14nm
Memory: 4GB vs 8GB
Core Speed: 800MHz vs 1266 MHz
Memory Speed: 5000 MHz vs 8000 MHz
Power (TDP): 300 watts vs 150 watts
Launch price: $549 vs $239
Performance: Similar
This is bad... How?
After those drivers are out, I can count how long it takes from Nvidia to fill their promises. That Async driver proves that updating software seems to be harder than updating hardware. At least for Nvidia.
The people that bought 980ti are still solid in gaming experience. I bought r9 380x 8 months ago and I paid 260$ (in my country) but now there's rx480 for 240 bucks you see we all are screwedBy the way Nvidia's new-gen cards are not bad in DX12 titles either, they use their raw strength to make up for their lack of hardware async it seems. That's what I mean, who gives a fck if a card without hardware schedules can perform on par with the one that has it on-board?
I don't feel screwed as I paid much less for R9 380 than RX 480 costs. Also 20 bucks on 8 months is bit less than 300 bucks on 2 months.
It's not hard to make software cripple even if card is just rebrand. Didn't see that happen.
Probably because GTX 1080 is faster.
Boilerhog146
Posts: 642 +223
Are you guys sure you want that async driver ?I remember a certain piece of PhysX hardware that I have one of.Nvidia got a driver for that....DRY...sips tea...they seem to have taken that driver level and running with it..and where is the hardware now ...tear drips in tea....
AMD is not done giving just yet, wait for it..
some Nvidia fanboys may own more Radeons than you do .I may be one of them, just for Fanboism sake..
I may buy a pair of the new 480's anyway, when the AIB's ,the ASUS strix ,in particular ,shows up..power consumption I never gave a damn about,performance per watt , pfffffttt...cool, quiet,OC to be jesus, and play all at max...the first 3 keep the radeons out of my rig's..I guess someone will let me know when I'm hard up and needing async compute,cause I don't feel I'm missing out just yet...
the long lasting card comment is mute here,my good friend another BM. runs Radeons because he mines coins as well.he has RMA'd more cards in the last few years than I ever have in 20 + years..is that the end result of async compute...?
AMD is not done giving just yet, wait for it..
some Nvidia fanboys may own more Radeons than you do .I may be one of them, just for Fanboism sake..
I may buy a pair of the new 480's anyway, when the AIB's ,the ASUS strix ,in particular ,shows up..power consumption I never gave a damn about,performance per watt , pfffffttt...cool, quiet,OC to be jesus, and play all at max...the first 3 keep the radeons out of my rig's..I guess someone will let me know when I'm hard up and needing async compute,cause I don't feel I'm missing out just yet...
the long lasting card comment is mute here,my good friend another BM. runs Radeons because he mines coins as well.he has RMA'd more cards in the last few years than I ever have in 20 + years..is that the end result of async compute...?
Last edited:
Just leaving this here....
Why are you just leaving this here? Are you just trying to show us how random and pointless your posts can really get?
If comparing every new GPU to the 290X and it's release day MSRP is the new measuring stick then damn, the GTX 1070 is even more impressive than we thought, even with rubbish availability. How long did the 290X sell for $550 again?
Azshadi
Posts: 55 +53
Year: October 2013 vs June 2016
~3 Years to achieve this? Today's mainstream = 3 years ago's high end?
Considering the RX 480 is aimed at 970.
GTX 780 ti vs GTX 970 ??
The performance jump isn't that high from a node shrink compared to the competition. That's just my two cents.
~3 Years to achieve this? Today's mainstream = 3 years ago's high end?
Considering the RX 480 is aimed at 970.
GTX 780 ti vs GTX 970 ??
The performance jump isn't that high from a node shrink compared to the competition. That's just my two cents.
That's how adults communicate.
mcborge
Posts: 599 +487
Just in case anyone is thinking of getting one of these, it seems some people have reported that the rx480 is drawing too much power over pcie slot... as much as 86 watts.
http://www.custompcreview.com/news/amd-rx480-exhibiting-excessive-power-draw-pcie/30612/
http://www.custompcreview.com/news/amd-rx480-exhibiting-excessive-power-draw-pcie/30612/
"1) The RX 480 meets the bar for PCIe compliance testing with PCI-SIG. //edit: and interop with PCI Express. This is not just our internal testing. I think that should be made very clear. Obviously there are a few GPUs exhibiting anomalous behavior, and we've been in touch with these reviewers for a few days to better understand their test configurations to see how this could be possible.
2) Update #2 made by the OP is confused. There is a difference between ASIC power, which is what ONLY THE GPU CONSUMES (110W), and total graphics power (TGP), which is what the entire graphics card uses (150W). There has been no change in the spec, so I would ask that incorrect information stop being disseminated as "fact."
We will have more on this topic soon as we investigate, but it's worth reminding people that only a very small number of hundreds of RX 480 reviews worldwide encountered this issue. Clearly that makes it aberrant, rather than the rule, and we're working to get that number down to zero."
amstech
Posts: 2,661 +1,824
For the picky enthusiast it doesn't perform well enough to be considered a solid 1440p/1600p card unless you crank down some settings. But for a low resolution like 1080p it looks great.
As usual the temps, power consumption and drivers all need work, but any AMD fan expects those drawbacks to save money.
As usual the temps, power consumption and drivers all need work, but any AMD fan expects those drawbacks to save money.
OcelotRex
Posts: 558 +302
I'll admit I chuckled at that one. At the moment though the performance for $200 (4GB) or $240 (8GB) is pretty compelling. Once the 1060 comes out though I would expect that if performance is in line with the
Freesync is (supposed to be) cheaper, more readily available, and work for both sides.
G-Sync is Green only. While I own Nvidia currently (and am likely to pick up the 1060 or 1070 over this) the benefit of adaptive sync monitors outweighs petty tribalism.
amstech
Posts: 2,661 +1,824
Its not tribalism its quality control.
Nvidia has alot of R&D into Gsync and it was being rolled out as AMD was still in its infancy trying to catchup with FreeSync.
While its common for Nvidia to be a few steps ahead, this was them making sure if people bought Gsync cards and monitors, they are getting the quality they expect.
FreeSync didn't perform as well in tests either, last I saw them compared.
sauerkraut17
Posts: 25 +10
FALSE; maybe you're too young to remember but.....
Do you know how many people got Radeon 5870's instead of Geforce 480's for this exact reason?
That was a long freaking time ago, way before Maxwell was probably even on NV's road-map.
Last edited:
NightAntilli
Posts: 929 +1,195
You're just salty because I call you out on your nonsense. The card is superior to the GTX 970 in every way. Cheaper price, faster & more memory, better performance, particularly under DX12, similar power use, has ACEs. It is a superior GTX 970 for $200. Maybe $30 - $50 more if you want more than double the memory of the GTX 970.
If this was nVidia you would be praising it to heaven. Since it's AMD, you have to downplay it. This post says it all;
OcelotRex
Posts: 558 +302
I'd argue the leap Freesync makes without requiring an expensive, marked up proprietary controller in the monitor outweighs the slight better performance or perceived improvement of quality that comes with G-Sync. For the Mainstream consumer the free-to-use and higher adopted option makes more sense even if there's a small trade off in quality.
NightAntilli
Posts: 929 +1,195
For the ones interested, PCB details;
I remember that time. GTX480 was very much late and quite soon replaced by GTX500-series. From those days CPU coolers have developed so much that power consumption is much less major issue. As GTX 480 also was top end card, there was much less talk about power consumption. Because of those, there was not much talk about this issue. At least compared to current situation.
So pretty much nobody cared.
NightAntilli
Posts: 929 +1,195
Working only on 3D games (not 2D) and full screen mode (not windowed) is "quality Nvidia customers expect"?
"(y)"
According to current Steam stats, that's most popular game on Steam right now:
702,797 877,709 Dota 2
493,384 540,933 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
61,333 63,290 Team Fortress 2
57,120 61,751 ARK: Survival Evolved
55,996 58,907 Garry's Mod
53,413 57,989 Grand Theft Auto V
52,662 62,604 Football Manager 2016
52,377 59,750 Sid Meier's Civilization V
43,634 53,654 Rocket League
35,880 36,525 Unturned
Performance per dollar, one dollar gives
RX 480 ($240): 0.294 FPS
GTX970 ($240): 0.238 FPS
GTX 1070 ($400): 0.194 FPS
85/100 my ***
cliffordcooley
Posts: 13,141 +6,441
You can rate the products what ever you like on your own site.85/100 my ***
What's your point? Criticism not allowed?
amstech
Posts: 2,661 +1,824
You sound like a newbie.
This cycle of AMD releasing a bargain product for cheaper has happened several times.
This is how an inferior product/company competes.
Your making your conclusions off launch day pricing and comparing a new shiny mid range card to an older, more expensive aged card. Derp Da Derp, what do you expect?
In your biased mind I am sure that sounds just fine but that's a comical conclusion at best.
In reality AMD are doing this to compete with Nvidia. The 970 was or still is the most popular card on Steam, you know that right? Not a card to pick on.
AMD's sh!tty cards run hot and suck power, and AMD's software still stinks something fierce. The most I'd pay for this 480 is $180, and thats pushing it. They've fixed the minimum frames and frame latency issues for the most part but its still a buggy driver suite.
You get what you pay for, and thats why the most popular/used card on steam is a GTX. I predict the 1070 being the new card most users go with considering its amazing 2K performance and price.
Similar threads
