User Panel
Posted: 5/31/2016 8:37:26 PM EDT
PC World
Mere hours ahead of AMD’s big Computex livestream promising “Polaris GPU updates,” at least some of the company's big news has trickled out prematurely.
While Nvidia kicked off the new graphics card generation with the overwhelming firepower of the enthusiast-only $600 GeForce GTX 1080 and $380 GTX 1070, AMD’s attacking the mainstream instead. The first Radeon graphics cards based on its forthcoming Polaris graphics processors will start at just $200, the company told the Wall Street Journal, and be available by the end of June—potentially June 29, a non-disclosure date leaked by attendees of AMD’s recent Polaris Tech Day in Macau. AMD says its new Polaris-based graphics cards will deliver performance equivalent to $500 graphics cards from today’s generation. That’s roughly in line with the Radeon R9 390X, GeForce GTX 980, or air-cooled Radeon Fury. Assuming that proves accurate, the massive performance leap stems from the adoption of 14nm FinFET technology in Polaris, a leap forward by two full technological generations for graphics processors. Both AMD and Nvidia (which uses 16nm FinFET tech in its new Pascal GPUs) were previously stuck on the 28nm node since late 2011, after 20nm technology proved to be a bust for graphics cards. View Quote |
|
Sweet I may yet build a new gamer pc Been waiting on something like this
|
|
Quoted:
Sweet I may yet build a new gamer pc Been waiting on something like this View Quote I've been waiting to upgrade my older R7 360 and at this price point it's a no brainer. I really want to try VR, the new 4xx cards will all be VR ready, so now the damn Vive just needs to drop in price. |
|
Here is the link to sign up for their livecast.
Sign up to be notified about the Live stream for AMD@Computex on 5/31 |
|
Quoted:
Here is the link to sign up for their livecast. Sign up to be notified about the Live stream for AMD@Computex on 5/31 View Quote Here's a Link to their live stream. Starts at 10PM EST. |
|
|
They will own the market
About time someone does something like this. |
|
5 T.F. AT 150w? Ouch. If NV lowers the prices of the 1070 in response it won't be good.
|
|
Quoted:
Good, the will bring down nvidias prices. Txl View Quote Maybe. Doesn't really mean much if it can't compare to the 1070 never mind the 1080. And considering what you could get 970's for over the past ~year, high end graphics have already been available to the masses for quite some time for this past generation. |
|
|
That is only if a game has a Crossfire profile. A GTX 980ti will be a better buy as their price drops won't be much more than a single 480 probably. I'm gonna guess you will be able to get a 980ti for $250 and it will stomp dual 480's once overclocked.
|
|
Quoted:
5 T.F. AT 150w? Ouch. If NV lowers the prices of the 1070 in response it won't be good. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
5 T.F. AT 150w? Ouch. If NV lowers the prices of the 1070 in response it won't be good. 150w is the max board power. Actual power usage is likely ~110-125w. Within ~15-20% of the GTX1070 for less than half the price... Quoted:
Doesn't really mean much if it can't compare to the 1070 never mind the 1080. And considering what you could get 970's for over the past ~year, high end graphics have already been available to the masses for quite some time for this past generation. It doesn't need to compare to the GTX1080/1070, it is in a completely different price bracket. Nvidia would have to disable half of their GP104 ASIC to compete and likely would still have issues with price/power/performance. GTX970 was >$300, the amount of people that spend more than $300 on a GPU is <15% of the entire GPU market. Quoted:
That is only if a game has a Crossfire profile. A GTX 980ti will be a better buy as their price drops won't be much more than a single 480 probably. I'm gonna guess you will be able to get a 980ti for $250 and it will stomp dual 480's once overclocked. CF profile doesn't matter anymore with DX12... GTX980Ti is EOL, you might see some clearance pricing between $400-$500 but they won't last long. |
|
View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe. Doesn't really mean much if it can't compare to the 1070 never mind the 1080. And considering what you could get 970's for over the past ~year, high end graphics have already been available to the masses for quite some time for this past generation. https://i.redditmedia.com/emiBWi0MkPg3kxQiHhWDnzPzQP6rGsLI3CG94qHmaaA.jpg?w=932&s=8873107b91341d381ec6872015c65769 Yeah, that's totally objective. Who needs real world benchmarks when you have that. Quoted:
Quoted:
Doesn't really mean much if it can't compare to the 1070 never mind the 1080. And considering what you could get 970's for over the past ~year, high end graphics have already been available to the masses for quite some time for this past generation. It doesn't need to compare to the GTX1080/1070, it is in a completely different price bracket. Nvidia would have to disable half of their GP104 ASIC to compete and likely would still have issues with price/power/performance. GTX970 was >$300, the amount of people that spend more than $300 on a GPU is <15% of the entire GPU market. Did you actually read my post? To have a significant effect on 1070/1080 prices, it would have to be competitive in performance. That is what I'm referring to. No that they are in the same market segment. I saw deals for GTX 970's in the ~$280 range. Which is close to how much I spent on an 8800GT back in the Core 2 duo days. And I don't really care if the market is full of pc "peasants". Last I checked the point of "pc master race" was to blow away consoles not just provide a comparable or somewhat better experience. Going by that logic, AMD should have been killing intel in the CPU arena since most of their offering tended to be ~50-75% of the cost of intel's offerings. |
|
|
|
Quoted:
Did you actually read my post? To have a significant effect on 1070/1080 prices, it would have to be competitive in performance. That is what I'm referring to. No that they are in the same market segment. I saw deals for GTX 970's in the ~$280 range. Which is close to how much I spent on an 8800GT back in the Core 2 duo days. And I don't really care if the market is full of pc "peasants". Last I checked the point of "pc master race" was to blow away consoles not just provide a comparable or somewhat better experience. Going by that logic, AMD should have been killing intel in the CPU arena since most of their offering tended to be ~50-75% of the cost of intel's offerings. View Quote Eh... Looks like ti will be within 15-20% of the GTX1070 at half the price, not taking into account that this may not even be the full Polaris 10 ASIC. Sorry... what consoles offer a highend PC driven VR experience right now? Did you not watch the presentation, their goal was to deliver a highend VR experience to the masses and that is exactly what they are doing. They will be releasing the highend cards next quarter, which is shortly after GP104 starts showing up in any actual volume. |
|
View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes If AMD is charging ~$199 for a RX 480, what exactly are their pricepoints supposed to be on their higher end cards? Seems like they are almost forgoing all profit in order to gain marketshare against nvidia. Quoted:
Eh... Looks like ti will be within 15-20% of the GTX1070 at half the price, not taking into account that this may not even be the full Polaris 10 ASIC. Sorry... what consoles offer a highend PC driven VR experience right now? Did you not watch the presentation, their goal was to deliver a highend VR experience to the masses and that is exactly what they are doing. They will be releasing the highend cards next quarter, which is shortly after GP104 starts showing up in any actual volume. But with what tradeoff? Power consumption? Thermals? No, I didn't watch the presentation. I usually just read summary articles. |
|
Not sure what to think. On one hand I can have one good card at a higher price or two okay cards for less of a price and have to deal with crossfire. Not sure how many people are out there thinking on this, but I don't like multi gpu setups, as well as others.
At this time, I won't consider buying an AMD card, unless they release a single gpu card that competes with a 1070 at a competitive price point. |
|
View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe. Doesn't really mean much if it can't compare to the 1070 never mind the 1080. And considering what you could get 970's for over the past ~year, high end graphics have already been available to the masses for quite some time for this past generation. https://i.redditmedia.com/emiBWi0MkPg3kxQiHhWDnzPzQP6rGsLI3CG94qHmaaA.jpg?w=932&s=8873107b91341d381ec6872015c65769 Lol. A marketing graphic from the manufacturer showing better performance than the competition. I'm sold! Remember, nVidia showed the 1080 running at 67 degrees in their announcement. They also said that the 1080 would beat dual 980s. Reviewers have shown that it is true in specific circumstances. |
|
|
The thing is the definition of what is high-end graphics is redefined every time there is major advancement in architecture.
These $200 might be able to keep up at 1920x1080 but what happens when pushed to 4k, multi-screen, or VR? |
|
Quoted:
If AMD is charging ~$199 for a RX 480, what exactly are their pricepoints supposed to be on their higher end cards? Seems like they are almost forgoing all profit in order to gain marketshare against nvidia. But with what tradeoff? Power consumption? Thermals? No, I didn't watch the presentation. I usually just read summary articles. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
If AMD is charging ~$199 for a RX 480, what exactly are their pricepoints supposed to be on their higher end cards? Seems like they are almost forgoing all profit in order to gain marketshare against nvidia. Quoted:
Eh... Looks like ti will be within 15-20% of the GTX1070 at half the price, not taking into account that this may not even be the full Polaris 10 ASIC. Sorry... what consoles offer a highend PC driven VR experience right now? Did you not watch the presentation, their goal was to deliver a highend VR experience to the masses and that is exactly what they are doing. They will be releasing the highend cards next quarter, which is shortly after GP104 starts showing up in any actual volume. But with what tradeoff? Power consumption? Thermals? No, I didn't watch the presentation. I usually just read summary articles. Mid-range cards are always the biggest sellers. |
|
A little off topic, but where should I go to get rid of some R9 270's and R9 280X's? I've got a stack of them from a mining rig and I don't want to throw them away.
|
|
|
|
Quoted:
If AMD is charging ~$199 for a RX 480, what exactly are their pricepoints supposed to be on their higher end cards? Seems like they are almost forgoing all profit in order to gain marketshare against nvidia. View Quote Gaining market share over profit per unit is their goal. What we assume will be their update to the Fury cards is called "Vega." |
|
Quoted:
If AMD is charging ~$199 for a RX 480, what exactly are their pricepoints supposed to be on their higher end cards? Seems like they are almost forgoing all profit in order to gain marketshare against nvidia. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
If AMD is charging ~$199 for a RX 480, what exactly are their pricepoints supposed to be on their higher end cards? Seems like they are almost forgoing all profit in order to gain marketshare against nvidia. +$350, you know, the usual pricepoints for the performance, highend and enthusiast markets. Or... they simply aren't adding a "green tax" to their products like Nvidia does. FreeSync hits the market a year after G-Sync, doesn't have any proprietary tech in it, has way more products with more partners with a much wider range of displays than GSync, performs at a similar level (if not slightly better) and you can now buy a decent 1080p panel with FreeSync for less than the cost of the G-Sync module (not to mention the corresponding markup for G-Sync displays). AMD is offering performance a slot under the GTX1070, at about half the price by competing with a die size that is ~100mm2 smaller and will be produced in a much higher volume. Quoted:
But with what tradeoff? Power consumption? Thermals? No, I didn't watch the presentation. I usually just read summary articles. Tradeoff compared to what? Nvidia's magical TDP numbers for Pascal are just slightly less misleading than they were for Maxwell. GP104 has a significant issue with power and thermals, it is pushed to the limit of what the thermal solution and the power delivery system can handle on the FE boards. Most of the custom cards are quickly finding the limits of the silicon, as the frequency band for FinFet is much more narrow than previous processes. It will be interesting how the next 3-6months play out... but the rushed launch from Nvidia, pushing GP104 to the limit, and the lack of DX12 improvements from Nvidia seem to indicate that they left the door open for AMD. |
|
Fuck, fuck, fuckity fuckshits on a fuckstick. Knew I should have waited a few months before buying a R9 390X.
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted: Which one? The half disabled GP104 ASIC or the 128bit GP106? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Once the 1060 drops the 480 is toast. Which one? The half disabled GP104 ASIC or the 128bit GP106? |
|
Quoted: If you decide to sell it, better do it damn soon. Otherwise, it's still a good card that will perform well. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Fuck, fuck, fuckity fuckshits on a fuckstick. Knew I should have waited a few months before buying a R9 390X. If you decide to sell it, better do it damn soon. Otherwise, it's still a good card that will perform well. Can't, it's a pain in the ass to sell a OC'ed card. Especially one that's seen about a month's worth of hardcore work. |
|
I hope this will do well to replace my 170$ R9 290 that i bought in january
|
|
Quoted:
I don't think they would have the need for a 950 variant this time, just a 1060 and 1060ti. Price the 1060 at $200-$250 to compete with the 480 and it should be the equivalent of a 980. Price the 1060ti at $300-$350 and it should perform the same as a 980ti. That would give them a good price/performance spread in the lower end. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Once the 1060 drops the 480 is toast. Which one? The half disabled GP104 ASIC or the 128bit GP106? So you suggest they give up on ~50% of the discrete GPU market? That's funny, because they are definitely working as fast as they can on GP106 because of Polaris and shipping manifests show another ASIC in the works, either GP107 or GP108. |
|
|
You guys think that this will be a good upgrade over my hd 7870
|
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
You guys think that this will be a good upgrade over my hd 7870 You may notice a slight difference I was going to build a new computer for the new BF1, but with the new RX GPU and my old trust FX 8350 BE CPU I think ill manage. |
|
Quoted:
You guys think that this will be a good upgrade over my hd 7870 View Quote It will be a minimum of ~70% faster than a 270x, just going by the rough specifications of the RX 480, and likely will end up around 90-100% faster. If their efficiency numbers are true, they are expecting ~270x performance with Polaris 11 at <60w. There is also the $300 SKU above RX480 that could possibly catch GTX1070, which would easily be >2x faster than a 270x. |
|
So it sounds like if this comes to pass at the rumored $200 price point, I may be upgrading. I've always been an nvidia guy, but a new card and the mid-range price point sounds pretty good. Almost too good to be true?
I'd be upgrading from a GTX550ti, so it should be quite a jump. |
|
|
|
View Quote Maybe I misunderstood, but that seems quite a bit lower than originally anticipated? It'd still be a huge upgrade for me, though. |
|
Quoted:
Maybe I misunderstood, but that seems quite a bit lower than originally anticipated? It'd still be a huge upgrade for me, though. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Maybe I misunderstood, but that seems quite a bit lower than originally anticipated? It'd still be a huge upgrade for me, though. Looks about right to me. In previous articles that I saw, it takes 2-480s in crossfire to come in just a bit lower than 1 gtx 1080. |
|
Off the bottom of the chart... which is why it isn't on there. Quoted:
Maybe I misunderstood, but that seems quite a bit lower than originally anticipated? It'd still be a huge upgrade for me, though. Sample cards that are floating around out there do not have finalized bios/drivers or clocks. One of the runs I saw had a FireStrike Ultra score of ~3500, which is likely where it should be. Quoted:
Looks about right to me. In previous articles that I saw, it takes 2-480s in crossfire to come in just a bit lower than 1 gtx 1080. The only reference that has been made to RX 480 CF vs GTX1080 is that the two RX480's are faster (~10-12%) while being more efficient (used less power than the GTX1080). |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.