• 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.

Radeon RX480 Review Thread, Launching Now!

D

Durante

Member
I like PCGH for power measurements since they measure actual GPU power draw (not just extrapolate from overall system numbers):
480_wattrhug3.png


From that data, it looks like AMD reached NV's 28nm efficiency at 14nm :/

(I posted this in the wrong thread before)
 
O

opticalmace

Member
//DEVIL// said:
if you never paid a 350$ for a card dear, it means PC gaming isn't your #1 gaming system. maybe consoles are. because i don't remember cheap video cards since long time.


i thought the gtx 1080 is 250$ more expensive than than 350$ 1070



well you right. right now cheapest is 400$
http://www.newegg.com/GIGABYTE/BrandStore/ID-1314
and its out of stock. but I would imagine the price will go down very soon ?
Click to expand...
Re: the bolded. Why would you think that? They're selling almost all they make. There's no pressure for the 1070 prices to go down.

OT: looks like a great value card. I'm more interested in the 470 for my SO's computer, but the 480 is a no-brainer over the 390 and 970.
 
B

brotkasten

Member
Lupercal said:
How can the Max Power draw be 270+ W for the 480 RX when it's an 8 pin limited to 150W ?

In the Digital Foundry review.
Click to expand...

The card draws 150-160W, which puts more stress on the PEG port on the mainboard and the 6-pin connector. PCGH says that it can easily be solved with a second connector on the card, but that kinda goes against the whole power efficiency thing.

Durante said:
I like PCGH for power measurements since they measure actual GPU power draw (not just extrapolate from overall system numbers):
480_wattrhug3.png


From that data, it looks like AMD reached NV's 28nm efficiency at 14nm :/

(I posted this in the wrong thread before)
Click to expand...

Yep. It's a shame, too. It would've been a great HTPC card for me, if they could've kept it around 120W instead.
 
O

Outdoor Miner

Member
btgorman said:
Wish these sites were giving results to compare 480 and the 1070. I think people want to know what they can get with an extra $150 from the other team.

From my point of view, the extra $150 is totally worth it when considering the Radeon 480 is approximately a GTX 970.
Click to expand...

Anand has the 1070 in its preview roundup.
 
D

derFeef

Member
It's basically a R9 390, my card, which also does not overclock really well. Heh.
I am okay with this but still a little disappointed. Better overclocking or less power draw / heat would make it a bit more attractive.
 
A

amstradcpc

Member
Almost same consumption as a 1070 and what? 70% less performance?.

Without taking account price (Nvidia could kill that advantage tomorrow if wanted as has so much performance/wattage headroom for the GTX 1060), and only from a tech point of view, this is a R600 caliber disaster. Globalfoundries the culprit?. I hope AMD goes TSMC for Vega to see if effectively the bad efficiency is for the foundry.

No wonder Neo is targeting 911 Mhz, the only way approaching effectively the 100 watts area.
 
S

slash000

Zeboyd Games
Most of these reviews are drawing this conclusion:

Slightly better than GTX 970 most of the time. In DX12 or AMD-favored edge cases, trades blows roughly with stock/reference GTX 980 especially at 1440p.

That sum it up about right?
 
//DEVIL//

//DEVIL//

Member
JaggedSac said:
Well, what's another $100 when you've already saved up the rest? Just keep saving that monies.
Click to expand...

I laughed. but yeah i see your logic :)

hooijdonk17 said:
How about you fuck off and stop telling me what is or isn't my #1 gaming system my dear? PC IS my #1 gaming system, I just go for good p/p midrange cards. Like 80% of the market.
Click to expand...

wow man. no need to blow up. so pc is your # 1 gaming machine. i was just thinking its been a while since i seen not so expensive cards. chill man lol . sorry if you thought i am insulting you or anything. i am really not
 
A

amstradcpc

Member
slash000 said:
Most of these reviews are drawing this conclusion:

Slightly better than GTX 970 most of the time. In DX12 or AMD-favored edge cases, trades blows roughly with stock/reference GTX 980 especially at 1440p.

That sum it up about right?
Click to expand...

Problem is that performs similar to a GTX 970 consuming also similar to a GTX 970, built in 28nm...
 
N

NormalFish

Banned
//DEVIL// said:
if you never paid a 350$ for a card dear, it means PC gaming isn't your #1 gaming system. maybe consoles are. because i don't remember cheap video cards since long time.
Click to expand...
Oh please. This level of condescension is gross. I've never spent 350$ for a video card, nor have I ever spent that much on a console. I can't afford it. If you really think that means "PC gaming isn't [my] #1 gaming system" you're horribly confused.
//DEVIL// said:
Again, i apologized for the guy. i didn't mean it in an insulting way at all.
Click to expand...
lmao ok
 
W

wachie

Member
slash000 said:
Most of these reviews are drawing this conclusion:

Slightly better than GTX 970 most of the time. In DX12 or AMD-favored edge cases, trades blows roughly with stock/reference GTX 980 especially at 1440p.

That sum it up about right?
Click to expand...
It's faster at 1080p too

GuKUibQ.jpg


Moving on to DX12 and we see AMD’s new architecture really coming into its own against the NVIDIA cards. It absolutely demolishes the GTX 970 across the board (even in NVIDIA-friendly games like Tomb Raider) and even manages to run circles around that once-expensive GTX 980. These tests show Maxwell’s performance in current DX12 applications is nothing short of embarrassing and proves this architecture simply wasn’t designed with these types of workloads in mind. How this translates to Pascal or upcoming DX12-based games is unknown at this point (remember, our sample size is quite small here) but something drastic needs to be done if NVIDIA’s mid-tier competitors are to have any hope against Polaris.
Click to expand...
 
//DEVIL//

//DEVIL//

Member
opticalmace said:
Re: the bolded. Why would you think that? They're selling almost all they make. There's no pressure for the 1070 prices to go down.

OT: looks like a great value card. I'm more interested in the 470 for my SO's computer, but the 480 is a no-brainer over the 390 and 970.
Click to expand...

Oh i am sorry. not sure why but i thought the official price for the 1070 is 350$ not 380$. my bad. i was just saying it will go to that price.

NormalFish said:
Oh please. This level of condescension is gross. I've never spent 350$ for a video card, nor have I ever spent that much on a console. I can't afford it. If you really think that means "PC gaming isn't [my] #1 gaming system" you're horribly confused.
Click to expand...


Again, i apologized for the guy. i didn't mean it in an insulting way at all.
 
Boss Mog

Boss Mog

Member
Glad I went with the GTX 1070. I had high hopes for the RX 480 when people were saying it was on par with a GTX 980 and was gonna be super overclockable but judging from the reviews the card can't even beat the GTX 970 in most games. And paying $240 for a card that can't beat a card that cost a little over $300 2 years ago is not a good deal to me at all.

If you want a card in that price range I would wait for the GTX 1060 or even maybe pick up a used GTX 970 on eBay; you can probably find some for under 200 bucks.
 
B

byropoint

Member
Looks good performance/price wise, I reckon an aftermarket cooler will make it even more appealing. Disappointed at that power draw though, if nvidia releases a 1060 to compete with this it's not gonna be good for amd :/
 
G

Glass Shark

Banned
I'm really happy with my GTX 1070, but this looks like a solid contender from AMD. And a video card that you can actually buy on launch day? Shocking.
 
M

Marlenus

Member
Thinking about it I am pretty disappointed In the power figures. The 7850 was in the 100-120 watt region and both NV and Apple got 40% clock speed increases when moving to 14/16nm. Based on that the 480 at 1.2GHz should also be in the 100-120 watt range, and if it was chances are it would have a bit of OC headroom and the cooler would not be as loud.

I really hope these first batches are just poorly binned chips and the AIBs have something better to play with as otherwise glofo has really screwed AMD.
 
J

Jimrpg

Member
brotkasten said:
It's just a preview. The full review should come out later.
Click to expand...

Yeah alot later... just like the 1080/1070 review that hasn't come out yet.

RX480 and the RX470 are going to be winners... its going to be weird if there's only 10-15% difference between the two as there's $50 (~33%) difference in the cost. It would make sense to buy the 470 if they are both going to be good 1080p performers and average 1440p performers.

I mean the Nvidia competition is a GTX 960 right now for $199 and these things are going to be 40-50% faster.

You would think Jen Tsun would be releasing their 1060 like right now.
 
Coulomb_Barrier

Coulomb_Barrier

Member
I've been lead down the garden path with this card.

Apparently Pascal is 70% more efficient than this. lol AMD. What on earth has Raja been doing?

Reference is hot, worst OC headroom on a reference card in recent memory, highest noise output in recent memory.

Granted, AIB cards should be much, much better than this.
 
X

Xclash

can't grow facial hair
//DEVIL// said:
if you never paid a 350$ for a card dear, it means PC gaming isn't your #1 gaming system. maybe consoles are. because i don't remember cheap video cards since long time.
Click to expand...

Do you not remember the 8800gt, 4850, gtx460, 5770, gtx 960? All these cards were less than $350 USD at launch and this is off the top of my head.
 
M

mnz

Unconfirmed Member
//DEVIL// said:
if you never paid a 350$ for a card dear, it means PC gaming isn't your #1 gaming system. maybe consoles are. because i don't remember cheap video cards since long time.
Click to expand...
I'm buying mid-tier cards since the 90s, why did nobody ever tell me I'm not a true PC gamer??
 
A

Aztechnology

Member
Boss★Moogle;208668000 said:
Glad I went with the GTX 1070. I had high hopes for the RX 480 when people were saying it was on par with a GTX 980 and was gonna be super overclockable but judging from the reviews the card can't even beat the GTX 970 in most games. And paying $240 for a card that can't beat a card that cost a little over $300 2 years ago is not a good deal to me at all.

If you want a card in that price range I would wait for the GTX 1060 or even maybe pick up a used GTX 970 on eBay; you can probably find some for under 200 bucks.
Click to expand...

But it is outperforming a 980 in DX12 games and it will probably do significantly more so with the custom AIB's. Well we can hope. I'm glad you're happy with your 1070, but that does not make the accomplishment here any less valid and this 480 is a much more futureproof card than the 970/980.

Repost of my earlier statement

Aztechnology said:
Yes but when it comes to future proofing a bit the 480 is a better bet. Will be supported longer (970/980 will slowly stopped receiving quality attention from Nvidia on Drivers) in addition lower Vram and not as high performance in most DX12 games. Remember also this is essentially the card that will see lots of optimization techniques for console too, so add that to the mix with custom AIB's coming later. Not worth buying a 970 or 980 IMO. For the price range this is the card to go with. Just wait for custom coolers.
Click to expand...
 
metareferential

metareferential

Member
Aztechnology said:
But it is, more than outperforming a 980 in DX12 games and it will probably do significantly more so with the custom AIB's. Well we can hope. I'm glad you're happy with your 1070, but that does not make the accomplishment here any less valid and this 480 is a much more futureproof card than the 970/980.

Repost of my earlier statement
Click to expand...

If nothing else, this bodes well for Neo/Scorpio.

But still, if one wants an immediate, tangibile and temporary upgrade, a used 970 might be better. And anyway, if you're looking at a 970 for a big upgrade, it's time to rebuild your pc xD
 
F

F1Fan

Banned
Holy shit, this card is even worst than I expected. Perf/Watt is embarrassing. Can hardly match a 2 year old 28nm GTX 970.

I don't even understand who this card is aimed that. AMD have just gone and launched a card into the most crowded segment on the market. This referenced card with a pathetic cooler is going up against custom GTX 970, 390, 390x & even the GTX 980, yet bring no performance improvements. Almost no performance progress since the 290...And I was being called a troll in the original thread lol.

AMD are well & truly finished.
 
S

seb_n

Member
//DEVIL// said:
if you never paid a 350$ for a card dear, it means PC gaming isn't your #1 gaming system. maybe consoles are. because i don't remember cheap video cards since long time.
Click to expand...

lol, this is a really shitty attitude to have, you do realise that there are very few people in the grand scheme of the market who actually buy the $500+ graphics cards?

PC is my "#1 gaming system" (whatever that means) and i havent spent that kinda money on a card for a long long time. Most people dont really care about having all their settings on "uber max ultra sex" detail, as the other poster said, i tend to go for mid range price/performance cards. The majority of "gamres" are still running 1080p and even a lower end card like the GTX950/R9 270 will be able to perform admirably at 1080 with a few of the settings turned down.

Bottom line:- Stop being so condescending
 
H

hooijdonk17

Member
Coulomb_Barrier said:
I've been lead down the garden path with this card.

Apparently Pascal is 70% more efficient than this. lol AMD. What on earth has Raja been doing?

Reference is hot, worst OC headroom on a reference card in recent memory, highest noise output in recent memory.

Granted, AIB cards should be much, much better than this.
Click to expand...

We don't know how well that efficiency will scale down, it didn't scale down at all with the 900 series. We will only know when 1060 launches, and even if that has an efficiency lead it won't match the price/perf.
 
S

Sir Abacus

Member
hooijdonk17 said:
The launch 4GB cards actually come on 8GB boards with 4GB VRAM BIOS'es.. It could be possible for a BIOS hack to unlock the remaining 4GB later down the line.
Click to expand...

You do realize those chips on the board are just 8Gb vs 4Gb, right? Just because there's 8 of them on both boards doesn't mean it's 8GB guaranteed.
 
H

hooijdonk17

Member
F1Fan said:
Holy shit, this card is even worst than I expected. Perf/Watt is embarrassing. Can hardly match a 2 year old 28nm GTX 970.

I don't even understand who this card is aimed that. AMD have just gone and launched a card into the most crowded segment on the market. This referenced card with a pathetic cooler is going up against custom GTX 970, 390, 390x & even the GTX 980, yet bring no performance improvements. Almost no performance progress since the 290...And I was being called a troll in the original thread lol.

AMD are well & truly finished.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, the $200 market is overcrowded with GTX 970 and (fuck me I can't even say it) GTX 980? Where, in Cloud Cuckoo Land?

The $200 market is starving with the shitty GTX 960. This card is for EVERYONE who wants a good card at $200.

The Hyperbole is strong with this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Radeon 6700 XT review roundup
Review Hardware 2
93
6K
iQuasarLV replied
The Steam Deck | Review Mega Thread
News Analysis Review 2
80
10K
EekTheKat replied
Google Stadia review thread
Review 2 3
138
16K
Shmunter replied
AMD Radeon RX500 series benchmarks
2 3 4
180
36K
DonMigs85 replied
AMD Radeon RX 470 Review Thread
2 3
105
27K
dr_rus replied
Top Bottom