Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > Video Cards

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41 (permalink)  
Old June 29, 2016, 02:10 PM
Prolab's Avatar
Allstar
F@H
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Brampton
Posts: 500

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lysrin View Post
OK Squeetard, I must be missing something here. The HWC review gave it a Conclusion titled "New High Water Mark" and a Damn Good Value award. The other reviews I have seen (small sample, but still) are saying things like the RX480 puts AMD in a good position for the mainstream market (AnandTech) and best budget graphics card (Ars Technica). Even Tom's Hardware review conclusion seems generally favourable saying that they appreciate that AMD has achieved "the combination of smaller, faster, cooler and quieter, all for less money".

So what is missing in your mind that makes it a failed generation product? What were you expecting at this price point? Yeah it's going to be more expensive in Canada but that isn't AMD's fault.

EDIT: I think looking at more benchmarks it would be a nice boost for people trying to run 1440p who currently have a GTX 960 or similar. However, once again you would have to recommend continue to wait until we see what the 1060 can do. The 1070 certainly has a large margin of performance over the RX480 and there is enough room in that margin for the 1060 to beat it. Unfortunately NVIDIA doesn't have to be a tonne faster with the 1060, just a little faster at a similar price and the RX480 could become a hard choice again.

Maybe expecting it to be a 1070 competitor?

Or maybe he's talking about AMD in general, where there isn't a viable product to compete with Intel/Nvidia in the high end market?

Personally, i think this a great product for the mid-tier market. With good performance, lower TDP and a good price point - this shouldnt have a problem selling well.

Now, if AMD can come out with a similar CPU performance to compete with Intel and higher end GPU segment, is another thing .
__________________
Gaming Rig:
-Caselab STH10, Swiffy MCP35x2, (2) Aphacool UT60 480 rad, HWL GTX 360, Heatkiller IV, i7 5930k @ 4.5 Ghz, 16GB Ripjaws, Asus X99 Deluxe ii, (2) XFX R9 290 w/ XPSC WB, 240 GB Intel 530, 500 GB 850 EVO, (6) 3 TB Tosh HD, EVGA G2 1300 PSU, Win 10 Pro

HTPC Rig:
-G3258 @ 4.0 Ghz, Asrock Z97 Pro 4, Asus 290, 128 GB Crucial M4, (2) 2 TB WD Green, (1) 2 TB Sammy F4, (2) 5 TB Tosh HD, Enthoo Primo, XSPC 480, 240 HWL GTS, Corsair HX620, Win 10 Pro
Reply With Quote
  #42 (permalink)  
Old June 29, 2016, 02:57 PM
MARSTG's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,680

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fudd Rucker View Post
Lack of games supporting xfire has been my biggest gripe so far.
With DX12 that gripe now shifts entirely to the developer : let's see them at work now! Coding and optimizing for every architecture. And as Pascal still doesn't have Async Compute support it means that every new game on DX12 implementing that will put NV products at a disadvantage. AS for the price here in Canada I personally hold AMD the only guilty party for the price gouging : you said you will feliver the product at 199USD well then do that all over the world translated into the local currency. What's so difficult about that? You see retailers price gouging? You don't give them stock! And the drivers : you already had the product for 6 months. You know what games the review site use : is it that difficult to optimize some drivers for 10 games?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old June 29, 2016, 03:55 PM
Coach's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Morden MB
Posts: 1,069

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Knight View Post
Performance per watt is only relevant when you have a product that competes directly with one another. The RX 480 doesn't compete directly with the 1070 and the 1080. Besides those are high-end parts and the RX 480 is a mid-end part and as such it competes with previous generation high-end parts not Pascal (but rather Maxwell). See the following:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480/25.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480/26.html
So if the 1060 comes out and performs the same or better than 480 and uses substantially less power, then you will entertain the idea that Polaris is not competitive with perf/watt? I am not sure I follow your logic because what Fragman said makes total sense to me. So far Pascal on 16nm FF+ is more efficient per watt than Polaris on 14nm LPP. I mean you even linked to evidence that Pascal is WAY more efficient. Your links even show Maxwell being more efficient.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Knight View Post
Nvidia is not dominating. With the RX480 demand and price/performance for the ~$100-300 market segment Nvidia has nothing to compete against the RX480 and that's a sizeable market share (~85% according to AMD)
That is some spin. Nvidia is blowing AMD away. Not that I think it is good but you cannot reasonably argue otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Knight View Post
Launch day drivers are never perfect. It will take time to optimize and mature the drivers which may take months as it is currently in a BETA stage. For example look at the R9 290/290X drivers and maturity that the drivers eventually reached.
If that's true then Nvidia's drivers will mature too because Pascal is fresh so the point is moot IMHO.
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old June 29, 2016, 05:06 PM
Dark Knight's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 461
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach View Post
So if the 1060 comes out and performs the same or better than 480 and uses substantially less power, then you will entertain the idea that Polaris is not competitive with perf/watt? I am not sure I follow your logic because what Fragman said makes total sense to me. So far Pascal on 16nm FF+ is more efficient per watt than Polaris on 14nm LPP. I mean you even linked to evidence that Pascal is WAY more efficient. Your links even show Maxwell being more efficient.
The GTX 1060 hasn't come out and currently Nvidia doesn't have a counterpart to go against the RX480. The GTX 980 and 970 have similar performance to the RX480 and the RX480 when overclocked can match the 980 or even beat it. The GTX 970 performance is the stock RX480 with one or the other being close or slightly better than each other. Performance per watt here is not being discussed because the RX480 was never designed to counter the 1070 or the 1080 and Performance per watt is equivalent to GTX 970/980. The way I see it (and owning video cards from both Nvidia and AMD camps) is that AMD introduced a product into a specific segmented price range without real competition from which they are able to capitalize on. Also if you look at the links I provided you can see the price/performance offered by the RX480 and compare it to the GTX 1070/1080 if you wish to discuss Pascal as a counter. We can revisit this when the GTX 1060 launches but it's a moment right now just like the HD 4870 launch whereby the GTX 280 performance could be offered for a fraction of the cost.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach View Post
That is some spin. Nvidia is blowing AMD away. Not that I think it is good but you cannot reasonably argue otherwise.
It's not spin at all. The majority of enthusiasts can only afford graphics cards up to several hundred dollars (especially at our Canadian dollar levels). Those who can afford more than that are in the even lower percentile. AMD is selling the RX480 very well currently with little competition and taking advantage of this window because the GTX 1060 hasn't materialized yet and therefore anyone who doesn't have a GTX 970/980 or previous generation Kepler or other architectures would be looking to upgrade. Newegg.ca has pricing for the RX480 at $309 as a starting price up to about $324. The GTX 1070 founders edition is double if not almost triple in price and the non founders edition is still almost double in price. For the price of a 1070 you can get two RX480's that offer great performance with excellent scaling.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach View Post
If that's true then Nvidia's drivers will mature too because Pascal is fresh so the point is moot IMHO.
Pascal already has had some time to mature since May. It is almost July and that gives Nvidia about a two month lead on drivers which can be significant. However that point is offset that even though Pascal is high demand there is yield and supply issues. Also AMD is currently using BETA 16.6.2 drivers which in my opinion do not reflect driver performance from say 3-6 months from now or even later.
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old June 29, 2016, 05:48 PM
Coach's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Morden MB
Posts: 1,069

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Knight View Post
The GTX 1060 hasn't come out and currently Nvidia doesn't have a counterpart to go against the RX480. The GTX 980 and 970 have similar performance to the RX480 and the RX480 when overclocked can match the 980 or even beat it. The GTX 970 performance is the stock RX480 with one or the other being close or slightly better than each other. Performance per watt here is not being discussed because the RX480 was never designed to counter the 1070 or the 1080 and Performance per watt is equivalent to GTX 970/980. The way I see it (and owning video cards from both Nvidia and AMD camps) is that AMD introduced a product into a specific segmented price range without real competition from which they are able to capitalize on. Also if you look at the links I provided you can see the price/performance offered by the RX480 and compare it to the GTX 1070/1080 if you wish to discuss Pascal as a counter. We can revisit this when the GTX 1060 launches but it's a moment right now just like the HD 4870 launch whereby the GTX 280 performance could be offered for a fraction of the cost.
Performance/Watt can be compared across architecture and node process. Looking at the link you provided that is exactly what the info there is showing. 480 does not have to be the tier equivalent to be compared to any range of cards including GP104 Pascal. It can be discussed and IMO should be discussed because it is an interesting metric for any architecture on any process.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Knight View Post
It's not spin at all. The majority of enthusiasts can only afford graphics cards up to several hundred dollars (especially at our Canadian dollar levels). Those who can afford more than that are in the even lower percentile. AMD is selling the RX480 very well currently with little competition and taking advantage of this window because the GTX 1060 hasn't materialized yet and therefore anyone who doesn't have a GTX 970/980 or previous generation Kepler or other architectures would be looking to upgrade. Newegg.ca has pricing for the RX480 at $309 as a starting price up to about $324. The GTX 1070 founders edition is double if not almost triple in price and the non founders edition is still almost double in price. For the price of a 1070 you can get two RX480's that offer great performance with excellent scaling.
It is spin because what matters is market share. Although 480 looks to help AMD get some back the fact of the matter is that at the moment Nvidia owns most of the discrete graphics market. GTX 1060 coming to market later than 480 does not immediately shift the overwhelming dominance of Nvidia in the overall market.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Knight View Post
Pascal already has had some time to mature since May. It is almost July and that gives Nvidia about a two month lead on drivers which can be significant. However that point is offset that even though Pascal is high demand there is yield and supply issues. Also AMD is currently using BETA 16.6.2 drivers which in my opinion do not reflect driver performance from say 3-6 months from now or even later.
I hope SKYMTL revisits Pascal vs Polaris a year from now or more. I really liked what he did here GTX 780 Ti vs R9 290X; The Rematch It went to show that over time the delta between the 290x and 780ti cards stayed almost the same from the time they were launched (immature drivers) and then two years later (mature drivers). A card has to have it where it counts to start with and then yes drivers can slightly improve things.

Last edited by Coach; June 29, 2016 at 07:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #46 (permalink)  
Old June 29, 2016, 06:12 PM
Groove's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ottawa(ish)
Posts: 383

My System Specs

Default

At $199 price bracket I guess this card made sense. But at $325+ up here instead of the ~$250 where it should be priced at I found it is a lot less appealing.
Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old June 29, 2016, 07:05 PM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 13,603
Default

One thing I want to mention is that the power consumption numbers are VERY worrying. Not because what they mean for Polaris 10 relative to the competition (trust me, GP106 isn't a 150W part) but rather what it means for upwards scaling of the architecture. Imagine if AMD is targeting the 250W limit for Vega, much like NVIDIA could be doing with their "full" Pascal core. NVIDIA has more overhead to accomplish that scaling while AMD doesn't right now.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #48 (permalink)  
Old June 29, 2016, 07:15 PM
Coach's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Morden MB
Posts: 1,069

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
One thing I want to mention is that the power consumption numbers are VERY worrying. Not because what they mean for Polaris 10 relative to the competition (trust me, GP106 isn't a 150W part)...
Just wanna be clear that what you mean is the GP106 is <150watts

Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
...but rather what it means for upwards scaling of the architecture. Imagine if AMD is targeting the 250W limit for Vega, much like NVIDIA could be doing with their "full" Pascal core. NVIDIA has more overhead to accomplish that scaling while AMD doesn't right now.
Won't Vega be a different architecture? You mean Vega is just a bigger Polaris.
Reply With Quote
  #49 (permalink)  
Old June 30, 2016, 04:35 AM
ern88's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 722

My System Specs

Default

Check this out. This dude removed the stock blower and installed, what looks like a CPU cooler on the GPU. He OC'd the 480 to 1.425 ghz and the card benched at nearly what a Nano runs at.

Teaser: Overclocking AMD Radeon RX480 ke 1.4Ghz+ dengan Cooler 3rd Party – Page 2 – Jagat OC
Reply With Quote
  #50 (permalink)  
Old June 30, 2016, 05:35 AM
Ravenor's Avatar
MVP
F@H
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Oakville, Ontario
Posts: 299

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ern88 View Post
Check this out. This dude removed the stock blower and installed, what looks like a CPU cooler on the GPU. He OC'd the 480 to 1.425 ghz and the card benched at nearly what a Nano runs at.

Teaser: Overclocking AMD Radeon RX480 ke 1.4Ghz+ dengan Cooler 3rd Party – Page 2 – Jagat OC
Not that i would say eveyone should do that but wow, that is impressive to get that kinda of speed out of the 480 with better cooling. I wonder what Water cooling will be able to do?
__________________
Roy: [singing] We don't need no education.
Moss: Yes you do; you've just used a double negative
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The R9 Nano Performance Review Comment Thread SKYMTL Video Cards 39 September 20, 2015 06:12 AM
NVIDIA GTX 970 SLI Performance Review (Comment Thread) SKYMTL Video Cards 12 November 18, 2014 05:31 PM
AMD Radeon R9 295X2 Performance Review Comment Thread SKYMTL Video Cards 46 May 1, 2014 02:15 PM
Far Cry 2 Hardware Performance Review Comment Thread FiXT Gaming 21 November 30, 2008 09:09 PM