SneakyStephan
Banned
even a 460 is almost an order of magnitude faster than intel integrated graphics
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AMD announced Radeon RX460 and RX470 (June 29)
- Thread starter dr_rus
- Start date
even a 460 is almost an order of magnitude faster than intel integrated graphics
Andalus0880
Member
Haven't read 6 + 8, but I hope it's all true. 😈
https://mobile.twitter.com/GFXChipTweeter/status/745889570919682048
Wow I didn't know the Polaris and Vega designs were done in Shanghai.
Also if you like more Polaris nutty rumors, speculation that the last batch of benchmark leaks were held back up to 10% by old drivers. Salt!
Wow I didn't know the Polaris and Vega designs were done in Shanghai.
Also if you like more Polaris nutty rumors, speculation that the last batch of benchmark leaks were held back up to 10% by old drivers. Salt!
Andalus0880
Member
Polaris is launching on 6/29 so that's no surprise. However, there were rumors that AMD was moving Vega launch up from Q1 2017 to November 2016.
https://twitter.com/gfxchiptweeter/status/745887920809218049
AMD is not resting on their laurels this time around. They're hungry for market share and putting their best foot forward.
10% increase from newer driver plus this tease http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=933LBq34y8I&sns=em makes for interesting times ahead. I'll echo an earlier post, c'mon NDA!
roadrunn3r
Member
Is there an official source for that? Cause all I've read is speculation about the Primitive Discard Accelerator.
MarmaladeChainsaw
Neo Member
Supposedly some footage of overwatch running on a 480 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5amDuBHloqk
roadrunn3r
Member
Yea it's in 4K but "it may or may not be maxed out" so we really can't tell anything from that.
Anyway here's a 4K graph at Ultra:
EDIT: nevermind, thought you were talking about this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=933LBq34y8I&feature=youtu.be
Discotheque
Banned
low 100fps avg on Ultra. is that good for this game?
Hmm Vega 10, that's to go against 1070 and 1080.
Vega 11 further next year
Very low. R9 390 did 143fps
Not a decision at all. GTX1070 for anything above 1920x1080
Transistor
Banned
Alright GAF. I'm having a real tough decision between the 8gb 480 and a 1070. I do most of my gaming at 2560x1080 but I do have a 4K TV I can hook up to. Halp
SneakyStephan
Banned
edit: nvm I thought the reflections setting went to ultra, the point was that the highest setting has a HUGE performance impact in overwatch
It actually is on the highest setting here
It actually is on the highest setting here
Andalus0880
Member
Unfortunately nothing official. Just rumors. But Primitive Discard Accelerator is AMDs solution of getting around the exorbitant amount of unnecessary tesselation GameWorks introduces to cripple performance, at least that's my take on it.
I think the more telling story is the additional headroom left untapped that Raja Koduri pointed out when he demoed AoS benchmarks at Computex. He said additional driver improvements and developer fine tuning will increase performance. So the 10% performance improvement from newer drivers isn't entirely out of the question.
baddvision
Member
opticalmace
Member
Supposedly someone caught a glimpse of 480 8GB prices on newegg (from reddit):
Irobot82
Member
Videos of several tests allegedly ran on an RX 480 including The Witcher 3, GTA V, CS GO.
Also alleged GPU-Z shot on new 0.8.9 update
Videocardz article about it.
Also alleged GPU-Z shot on new 0.8.9 update
Videocardz article about it.
amstradcpc
Member
In Witcher 3 video it performs like a RX285, not even 60 fps stable at 1080p and without max settings... A big meh.Videos of several tests allegedly ran on an RX 480 including The Witcher 3, GTA V, CS GO.
Also alleged GPU-Z shot on new 0.8.9 update
Videocardz article about it.
https://youtu.be/BN7bEnMs9bc
And he seems legit:
https://www.instagram.com/p/BG-TWLWwDHp/?taken-by=goodgamingpc&hl=en
Last_colossi
Member
Hmm... A bit lower then expected, but keep in mind that he is using a i5 6400 and I know from experience that The Witcher 3 is heavily CPU dependent, I'd wait until someone with an i7 4790K/6700K does some benchmarks.
Those settings are a mix of mostly high and ultra, even with everything on high an R9 285 doesn't get anywhere near the 50-70 FPS in the video.
LordOfChaos
Member
TBC? I want TBC. Is that new?
Soren01
Member
Or up to date drivers.
Also I think one of the latest updates reduced performance.
Last_colossi
Member
Exactly, I think we all know how much that can affect performance, especially on AMD hardware: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvWaE-3Aseg
amstradcpc
Member
1080p High quality:Those settings are a mix of mostly high and ultra, even with everything on high an R9 285 doesn't get anywhere near the 50-70 FPS in the video.
http://cdn.overclock.net/6/67/350x700px-LL-670f9c8a_1080.jpeg
ohyouagain
Member
An Intel Pro Graphics 580 is about as good as a GTX 560.
Last_colossi
Member
1080p High quality:
I can confirm that this graph is accurate as that is exactly the performance I get on my 960 paired with my 6700K.
SneakyStephan
Banned
I just tried that same cs go map on the same settings on a gtx 970 and i5 4690k, I seem to be getting about 20 fps more than him on average, though my minimum fps is better and my maximum fps is much higher (go over 300 fps)
My gpu useage never goes above 55-60 percent though , it's clearly cpu bottlenecked at this resolution
The higher fps I'm getting is probably due to the lower cpu overhead on nvidia.
Reinstalling gta5 atm to try the gta5 benchmark at the same settings.
I'm 99 percent sure I never got those half second freezes from that video when I ran the benchmark before
My gpu useage never goes above 55-60 percent though , it's clearly cpu bottlenecked at this resolution
The higher fps I'm getting is probably due to the lower cpu overhead on nvidia.
Reinstalling gta5 atm to try the gta5 benchmark at the same settings.
I'm 99 percent sure I never got those half second freezes from that video when I ran the benchmark before
Witcher is quite heavy on CPU so the 5960X with 4.6GHz OC might effect it a bit though. The one with the 480 is running on a 6400 (stock I think?)
One has 8 cores + HT wit over 1GHz clock speed advantage and one has 4 cores.
Broadbandito
Member
CSGO is very CPU oriented though isn't it?
saltinekracka
Member
SneakyStephan
Banned
I sincerely doubt that
576 shading units, 72 TMUs and 9 ROPs.
clockspeed of 300 mhz, boost up to 1ghz, rated at 0.3TF
it uses your ddr4 ram as vram which hopelessly memory bandwidth bottlenecks it
A gtx 560 has about 60 percent of the performance of a 2TF GCN card (2 TF gcn would be somewhere in between hd7850 and 7870 performance)
This thing comes nowhere near that
amstradcpc
Member
Not big bottleneck.In the video gpu usage is 100℅ almost all the time.The same user has a video of W3 with a 1070 performing an average of 40fps at 4K.
Or there are magic drivers left or this arch jump in perf/flop is nowhere to be seen.
It's from Techspot. Judging from this and the other Gamegpu graph performance seems to vary greatly depending on the area tested.
That looks about the same.
amstradcpc
Member
???
Isn't he talking about the Iris P580?
The one that, as far as I remember, was rated a little higher than .3TF (like somewhere in the realm of 1TF?) Where is that coming from?
I'm not saying it's all that much better, but integrated graphics have come a long way. I'd probably put the Iris Pro at like maybe within 50-60% of the 560.
Glass Shark
Banned
.
SneakyStephan
Banned
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2788/iris-pro-graphics-580
Doing more googling and that iris pro 580 only shows up in skylake xeons (which aren't even out yet), and confirms that they're nowhere near gtx 560 performance
Anyhow this is super off topic and igpu talk is boring they're not suited for games
Like our more broke brothers and sisters in this thread, I'm very curious how a 470 4GB holds up against a used 970
Beerman462
Member
After pouring over all the leaked benchmarks and extrapolating what I think the 480 will be capable of I'm thinking about waiting even longer to get a new card. I feel like the 480 will be a right between the 390 and 390X stock and only what I think will be the highest overclocks 1500+ will get it to 980 levels. Which would be great, but I don't like the idea of relying on overclocks to put me in the performance window I want. I might have to stretch my budget to get a 1070 or wait for the $300 cards.(490? 1060ti?)
The 470 though sounds like a possibly great HTPC card. I just put a 750ti in for $120 4 months ago. Oh well. A 460 or maybe an NVidia equivilent next year could be good. Has to be a short slot card.
The 470 though sounds like a possibly great HTPC card. I just put a 750ti in for $120 4 months ago. Oh well. A 460 or maybe an NVidia equivilent next year could be good. Has to be a short slot card.
From what I read, nope.
hardocp seems to think mid-july
SneakyStephan
Banned
Ran the gtaV benchmark on my pc (gtx 970) with the same settings and I get anywhere from 10-40 percent more performance it varies from scene to scene.
About the ROPs. GPU-Z deosn't read that info from the card, but has a database that collects that information. And a lot of times when a card launches, it is incorrect.
See the 480: https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2848/radeon-rx-480
And the 470: https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2861/radeon-rx-470
And the 460: https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2849/radeon-rx-460
First of all, they still have the old names, Ellesmere and Baffin. We can see the 480 is Ellesmere XT and the 470 is Ellesmere Pro, which means the 470 is most likely a cut-down 480.
But if we see the number of ROPs on the card, the 480 has 32 and the 470 has 48. Which considering the 470 is cut-down, is most likely wrong.
if we consider the ratio of Shading Units is the same as ROPs, 1536/2304 equals 2/3, which will give 72/48 or 32/21.3, and I hope it's the first one.
See the 480: https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2848/radeon-rx-480
And the 470: https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2861/radeon-rx-470
And the 460: https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2849/radeon-rx-460
First of all, they still have the old names, Ellesmere and Baffin. We can see the 480 is Ellesmere XT and the 470 is Ellesmere Pro, which means the 470 is most likely a cut-down 480.
But if we see the number of ROPs on the card, the 480 has 32 and the 470 has 48. Which considering the 470 is cut-down, is most likely wrong.
if we consider the ratio of Shading Units is the same as ROPs, 1536/2304 equals 2/3, which will give 72/48 or 32/21.3, and I hope it's the first one.
Obviously the 480 is still using beta drivers but this isn't exactly promising