Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > Video Cards

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61 (permalink)  
Old June 30, 2016, 06:24 PM
Lysrin's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 1,625

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Squeetard View Post
So that's just like, their opinion man :)
None of that says anything positive to me. Maybe if you actually don't even own a gpu this would be a good choice to start? Considering only price.
Massive die shrink (2x!) and nothing to show for it. That's all I see when I read all the reviews. And performance per watt is abysmal. The 1070 consumes only 5 watts more at load (1%) and is almost twice as fast, severe WTF here?
So now AMD has to shoot themselves in the foot again on pricing just to move some of these.

Keep in mind I have been running 7970's in xfire for almost 3 years now, longer than any other gpu I've ever owned, pleased with them.
Fair enough
Reply With Quote
  #62 (permalink)  
Old July 1, 2016, 07:24 AM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 13,605
Default

Something that hasn't been brought up is that NVIDIA was instrumental in the actual development of TSMC's 16nm FinFET+. They pumped a good amount of money into it. The same can't be said about AMD and the GF / Samsung joint process which is obviously being developed for future Samsung SoC's rather than high performance GPUs.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #63 (permalink)  
Old July 1, 2016, 07:26 AM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 13,605
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach View Post
Just wanna be clear that what you mean is the GP106 is <150watts

Won't Vega be a different architecture? You mean Vega is just a bigger Polaris.
There's no way the GTX 1060 will be a 150W part. I'm guessing there will be SKUs between 100W and 125W.

Vega isn't a different architecture, no. GCN will continue, maybe with a few minor revisions but I can't see there being many.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #64 (permalink)  
Old July 1, 2016, 09:44 AM
Top Prospect
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 95
Default

The Rx 480 launch is a disaster. reports of PCI-E slots dying

https://community.amd.com/thread/202410

The way I see it this launch is worse than R9 290X / R9 290 launch. PCI-E power overdraw, loud and crappy ref cooler with clock throttling. AMD also seems to have pumped too much voltage to qualify a lot more dies to run at 1266 Mhz.

https://www.computerbase.de/2016-06/...x-480-test/12/

computerbase showed perf increase by undervolting as it reduced clock throttling due to reduced power draw. AMD should have launched this card at 1150 Mhz and reduced voltages atleast in ref design. I also think the 4GB card should have been the primary focus at a price point of USD 199. The 4GB custom cards could have come in at USD 209-USD 229. The 8GB cards should have come later with only custom designs and 1400+ Mhz clocks with better PCB and power delivery and custom coolers at USD 249 - USD 279. The best binned dies should have been reserved for the 8 GB cards to further distinguish them from 4 GB cards.

imo GF 14LPP is a catastrophe. I think GF have the worst possible implementation of Samsung 14LPP. There is a good chance that a second revision of these chips will be released next year when and if GF sorts out the process issues. There are already hints to a second revision in AMD naming scheme for 400 series cards.

AMD Radeon RX 400 series naming scheme explained | VideoCardz.com

As for Nvidia they are going to be laughing all the way to the bank. I think there is a good chance that AMD market share slips even further once Nvidia gets supply situation sorted out. As for AMD I have written them off for good. Nothing good can come from that wretched GF and WSA which AMD are shackled with. As for Vega and Zen I expect both to be major disappointments as they are rumoured to be built at GF 14LPP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
There's no way the GTX 1060 will be a 150W part. I'm guessing there will be SKUs between 100W and 125W.

Vega isn't a different architecture, no. GCN will continue, maybe with a few minor revisions but I can't see there being many.
I think GTX 1060 will atleast match if not beat GTX 980. It will do so at 100-110w real world power draw, which is roughly 2/3rd the power draw of Rx 480. The key here is can Rx 480 match or beat GTX 1060 in DX12 games which will be the main API over the lifetime of these cards. Games like Ashes, Hitman, Gears of War Ultimate Edition, Quantum Break, Rise of the Tomb Raider and Total War Warhammer are running much faster on Rx 480 compared to GTX 980. This is where Rx 480 and GTX 1060 will face off. Upcoming games like Deus Ex Mankind Divided, BF1, Watchdogs 2, Star Citizen are all DX12 based. PS4 Neo and MS Project Scorpio are using Polaris/Vega GPUs and DX12 will be the dominant API of choice atleast on the most graphically advanced game engines and games.

Last edited by Fragman; July 1, 2016 at 10:13 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #65 (permalink)  
Old July 1, 2016, 06:26 PM
MARSTG's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,688

My System Specs

Default

It seems that the 8GB version of the card is roughly 3-4% faster than the 4GB at 1080p and 1440p for 20% more the price! Talking about being duped again by the marketing. Not to mention that basically all the 4GB versions, right now, are in fact 8GB cards but with a bios capping them at 4 and lowering the memory speed to 7Gbps.
AMD Radeon RX 480 4GB versus Radeon RX 480 8GB - Page 5 of 5 - Legit Reviews3DMarkĀ*& Final Thoughts
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #66 (permalink)  
Old July 1, 2016, 07:59 PM
Coach's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Morden MB
Posts: 1,078

My System Specs

Default

I hope a fresh crop of Radeon and AMD fanboi's are spawning. We need them to buy those brands just so that the rest of the market has something called competition... :(
Reply With Quote
  #67 (permalink)  
Old July 1, 2016, 08:02 PM
JD's Avatar
JD JD is offline
Moderator
F@H
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 7,919

My System Specs

Default

Some leaked slides show the GTX1060 as being 1.15x faster, 1.25x faster in VR and 1.45x more efficient. If true, and assuming it's priced within reason, I don't think the RX480 has much chance.

As Fragman noted though, it'll be more interesting to see if the architecture alone is enough to keep it ahead of the pack since the consoles are GCN-based and will continue to be. Most notably with games that are part of the XBOX Play Anywhere program.
Reply With Quote
  #68 (permalink)  
Old July 2, 2016, 10:03 AM
MARSTG's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,688

My System Specs

Default

A more interesting fact to consider is that all main consoles now are using AMD GPUs so any porting to pc will be considerably easier and developers will have to do extra work for nVidia optimization. And considering how the blame was always passed from vendor to developer, the developer will bear the grunt of the optimization for nVidia hardware now.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #69 (permalink)  
Old July 2, 2016, 10:29 AM
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,018

My System Specs

Default

PS4/Xbox One have been out for ~3 years now and we've yet to see this supposed advantage that AMD has take fruition in any meaningful way. Anything DX12/Vulkan related that benefits AMD will do the same for Nvidia.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #70 (permalink)  
Old July 2, 2016, 10:33 AM
sswilson's Avatar
Moderator
F@H
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 16,895

My System Specs

Default

My understanding is that Nvidia actively provides free resources to devs in order to promote the best outcome(s) when running something on Nvidia hardware. AMD probably doesn't have the budget to be able to do that.
__________________
Gigabyte Z97N-WIFI / i7 4770K / 2X 8G Gskill 1866 Sniper / XFX XTR 750 / EVGA GTX 970 SSC ACX 2.0+
AZZA Titan 240 / Custom WC / Intel 730 Series 480GB SSD / Seagate Barracuda 1TB / Dell UltraSharp U2412M

Asrock AM1H-ITX / AM1 Athlon 5350 / 1X4G Gskill PC3-14900 / Intel 6235 Wi-Fi / 90W Targus Power Brick / Uncased 256GB Sandisk Z400S SSD / Mini-Box M350 / 24" Westinghouse L2410NM
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