Where were you when AMD won the GPU wars? RX 480 for $200 is

another test showed 3,500

OC it and get 980ti performance

>~1000 mhz 3200
>~1.266 mhz 3500
>~1400 mhz 3700

i wanna see the hbm/next gen memory cards rather than gddr

>>55041579

Vega probably won't hit store shelves until 2017

how fast is the 8gb verision

>>55041601
Even faster than this, who knows. Should be another $20 or something though.

>>55041601
>>55041623
the extra VRAM is only going to matter where 4gbs of VRAM isn't enough, like the new Mirror's Edge on Hyper

>>55041623
the amount of memory by itself doesn't make the card faster

how good is it for stuff outside of gaming compared to nvidia cards? my friends say nvidia is always better in compatibility for shit like maya rendering and fluid sims. is there any weight to this?

>>55041643
Uhh actually it does

>>55041657
"My car can hold up to 80 litres of fuel it's sooo fast
"

>>55041646
AMD cards are better at compute, Nvidia only does well because they locked everyone to CUDA

>>55041437
>Fury X
>higher than 980Ti, just lower than Titan X

Since when? I have the card and it's a slow piece of shit compared to the 980 I had before

>>55041680
That's not even a remotely correct analogy

>>55041699
it is. you're comparing capacity to performance.

>>55041698
Do you use the new crimson drivers? That's why.

>>55041712
Yea, I do.

I played Warhammer TW with the 980 (OC) and then the Fury X and the X is slower.

>>55041643
It makes it operate better, because the 8gb vram usually has better timings and games that used 4gb can operate with more headroom.

>>55041706
Capacity? Do you think we're talking about hard drives?

This is RAM moron.

Going from 4GB to 8GB affects performance on the GPU just like going from 4GB to 8GB affects performance on a computer.

>>55041680
don't take the bait man

File: 1458865531831.jpg (66KB, 575x523px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 575x523px

>>55041728
You dunce.

>>55041761
I think he got you

>>55041761
Thanks for proving me right.

>>55041724
thats funny because amd is way better in warhammer. Unless its an extremely oced card you are lying.

File: Screenshot from 2016-06-12 18-04-58.png (47KB, 606x374px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 606x374px

>>55041761
He is right you know... More memory IS good for performance. Picture related.

File: 1456668634882.gif (338KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 480x270px

how long will it take for non references to come out?

>>55041795
Detrimental for witcher 3. So you're wrong.

>>55041795
There are noticeable improvements usually when they use a different ram brand altogether.

For example the 290 8gb used Samsung, while 4gb was Hynix.

>>55041728
You are borderline autistic the way you think you know what your talking about is hilarious. More ram on pc doesnt make jack shit faster unless you are using it or its different memory. If you have 4gb in a pc and you use 3 gb it will make 0 difference as opposed to using 3 gb with 8 gb avaible. Unless they offer gddr5x a faster type of memory 8 gb doesnt change performance.

>>55041870
If more RAM on PC means jack shit why don't you try using half of what you have right now you dumb speccy cunt?

>>55041870
So 8gb ddrx5 is faster than 4gb ddr5x?

>>55041896
You are retarded.

>>55041896
that makes no sense. what are you even saying? were you born inanimate?

For the newfags

AMD cards always score higher on benchmarks(check the overclockers.net club forums for both cards), the 390 gets the same FPS as a 980 on Valley, too bad that doesn't translated into actual performance on games.

File: 1447064513418.png (41KB, 802x799px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 802x799px

>>55041437
>nvidia on top
DELETE THIS

>>55041924
>benchmarks don't translate to actual performance

except that's exactly why they exist you mouth breathing mongoloid.

>>55041924
390 is faster than 980 now.

>>55041962
Embarrassing yourself, son.

>>55041966
>that's what amd shills really believe

>>55041989
Meant to say 390x

>>55041437
>150W and 230 bucks for 980

Noice

>>55041924
You really are a newfag. Your information about AMD doing good on benchmark is incorrect. Valley benchmark utilizes strong tessellation. It was made to showcase absurd amounts of tessellation. Nvidia cards always beat AMD on that benchmark.

>http://www.overclock.net/t/1360884/official-top-30-unigine-valley-benchmark-1-0
Here's some user benchmarks.

>1080 > 980ti > Titan X > 780 ti > Titan > 980 > 780 > 290X > etc

3Dmarks11 benchmarks are really close to real world performance these days, so its pretty close to how real world performance of 480 would be, ON AVERAGE. The image on OP post corresponds perfectly with how DX11 games performs in benchmarks these days, ON AVERAGE.

Completely fake chart I knew AMDPOORFAGS were desperate but not this much!

>>55041437
That's pretty nice, but it's still nowhere near the performance level I'm looking for, sadly.

I'm disappointed in AMD for not releasing a 14nm GPU in the high-end/enthusiast sector as well. I was ready to give 'em the money if they put out something decent.

What a blatant fake!!!

>>55042136
>if
they will, in September the 490 will be released

Will the next gen fury x be out within the next 3 months or should I just bite the bullet and get a 1080 when they release a hybrid cooling model?

>>55042237
I think theres another event at oct or something where they'll show off Vega

>>55041694
>Nvidia only does well because they locked everyone to CUDA


lol

No, CUDA gained dominance because for a long long time it was the only solution.

Nvidia took advantage of this by getting research institutes and universities invested + had parallel computing education courses since nothing like GPGPU existed.

Until GCN (2012), AMD's GPUs used VLIW based cores and AMD's compilers were dog shit so it didn't even matter if you wanted to use OpenCL for GPGPU because performance was terrible.

One key piece people keep forgetting about OpenCL is that its just a standard. Just because its "portable" doesn't mean it wont require individual optimizations on each architecture giving developers little incentive to move code bases.

>>55042020
It's $200

AMD: innovators in last-gen performance

>>55041870
Wow you really are dumb.

>>55042275
if you think having access to multiple architectures is little incentive then you have a bleak understanding of how the world of technology works. the cost of having someone tweak the code is better than the losses you accrue for shunting yourself out of a market.

>>55041437
Nice, but Nvidia will most likely match that with the 1060.

>>55041870
>More ram on pc doesnt make jack shit faster

Please leave.

>>55042300
That's the MRSP, decent aftermarket versions won't sell for that.

>>55042329
math it at 100 more dollars sure.

>>55042329
Just like the 960 right? Because that was such a great performance/dollar card. Idiot.

>>55041989
Sooner or later he will be right. Nvidia keeps gimping old cards while AMD slowly improves drivers.

>>55042349
Source?

>>55042353
It was, not to brainwashed AMD fanatics obviously.

For people who actualy wanted a card with drivers that worked it was good value, the 970 even better

>>55042361
The source is common sense, and the fact that you should never trust marketing prices, and marketing performance claims

>>55042381
So no source...

>>55042349
This isn't an nvidia card. They will sell for msrp.

>>55042349
Uhh AMD cards actually sell for the MSRP

>>55042363
in no way was the 960 a good deal. it cost more than a 390 while having 3/4 of the performance. driver issues disappeared even before crimson during patch updates of the last quarter prior to polaris being declared.

>>55042330
He stated an obvious truism. RAM that is not being used does nothing.

File: Roadmap-640x360.jpg (44KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 640x360px

>>55042182
That's 100% rumor, AMD have said absolutely nothing about it and according to their roadmap Vega with HBM2 is coming in 2017 and there's nothing between Polaris and Vega. I'm not going to base any purchasing decision on pure, unsubstantiated rumor.

>>55042440
Vega is coming Q4 2016, you cross-eyed faggot.

>>55042435
And a computer that is off doesn't do anything either. What a dumb thing to say.

File: 1465105885329-0-b.jpg (73KB, 640x359px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 640x359px

>>55042360
This. Can confirm. Crimson drivers are pretty great.

>>55041476
>50% increase in clock
>15% increase in score

We aren't talking about Nvidia, buddy

>>55042440
Don't present actual evidence to fanboys, they are allergic to it

File: 51746_01_amds-official-2016-2018-gpu-roadmap-released-vega-hbm2-2017_full.png (3MB, 1300x721px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1300x721px

>>55042450
Must be nice living in your own fantasy land

>>55042440
But there's actually larger Polaris chips in store before Vega.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/3977446-advanced-micro-devices-amd-44th-annual-jpmorgan-global-technology-media-telecom-conference

>Polaris will ramp over a series of quarters, as we nail that performance and mainstream portion of the market...". They also said, "...and the things we want to achieve in the near-term for this product launch to go to mainstream first, and then proliferate product upwards and downwards, up into enthusiast and down into value..."

File: 1465651805951-b.jpg (22KB, 320x259px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 320x259px

>>55042023
More like this.
1080 > RX490? > 1070 > 980ti > RX480 > 390x > 980 > 390 > 970

>>55042440
There will be a $300 Polaris card.

>>55042518
>, and then proliferate product upwards and downwards, up into enthusiast and down into value..."

So how do you know they aren't referring to early 2017?

>>55042571
Except aftermarket 980ti's beat the 1070

>>55042300
After taxes and shit and being in Europe, it will be 250 euros

>>55042581
Then Polaris would release too close to Vega which would make little sense, maybe the lowend/budget Polaris chips will release in 2017, but he explicitly stated mainstream first, enthusiast second, poorfag last.

>>55042450
October they announced they are moving faster with it.

>>55042581
Based on the fact Lisa su said Polaris will cover the price points from $100 to $300.

>>55042608
Mainstream is poolaris, then enthusiast is vega

Vega might even be the 490/490x

>>55042571
No idea where 490 will land as we have no information on that. We could do some theoretical math by shader/watt performance, but thats too much reaching. 480 isn't even released and to make a 490 prediction on an unreleased product is just too far.

>>55042518
Here's the entire interview since seeking has a paywall, it's pretty big.

https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/4m39s2/amd_met_with_jpmorgan_techs_analysts_asserts/

Also he confirmed Zen is 40% IPC increase over Excavator, not Bulldozer.

>>55042613
That was just a rumour, not something that came from AMD or has been confirmed by AMD in any way

>>55042622
He clearly said otherwise
>Polaris will ramp
>Polaris
>and the things we want to achieve in the near-term for this product launch to go to mainstream first, and then proliferate product upwards and downwards, up into enthusiast

>>55042518
They also said that they do not intend for Polaris to compete with Pascal and they repeatedly and consistently only mentioned Polaris 10 and Polaris 11.

If you also read the fucking interview you posted, it's abundantly clear that they are referring to Vega as the higher-end card.
>So if you see our new GPU roadmap that we rolled out in March, we have this Polaris family. And then that is followed-on by another family in 2017, which is actually a very tight cadence in terms of how you would normally launch products into the market.
So there's a new family of GPUs in 2017, we know this is Vega.
>So if you imagine, Polaris will ramp over a series of quarters, as we nail that performance and mainstream portion of the market, then you follow it on, and buy a new family in terms of the ultra-enthusiast portion of the market.
So, Polaris ramps over a few quarters and nails the PERFORMANCE and MAINSTREAM portions of the market, these are Polaris 10 and Polaris 11. Then you buy a NEW family for the ultra-enthusiast section, this is what we know to be called Vega. There's no indication of any sort of high-end Polaris.

>>55042647
Yeah and? That doesn't confirm anything in the slightest, I will wait for official announcements of AMD

>>55042671
>and nails the PERFORMANCE and MAINSTREAM portions of the market
Mainstream last year, what they offer is low end for this generations standards

File: 1465620500007-b.jpg (60KB, 360x269px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 360x269px

>>55042625
There were some mystery benchmarks landing a team red chip in striking distance of the 1080. If it's for around $300 the 1070 will be dead in the water.

>>55042688
Sounds legit

>http://videocardz.com/61007/amd-wants-gamers-to-start-the-uprising

>amd
>not positioning themselves as a budget brand

Pick one

File: Screenshot from 2016-06-12 18-13-39.png (161KB, 1500x780px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1500x780px

>>55042671
>>55042675
Clearly you are wrong, this is a response to the guy asking about competition to the 1080, and he clearly meant Polaris here, not Vega which was explicitly mention as a new generation earlier.

So let's say Polaris is only P10 and P11, when is Vega supposed to release then? Early 2017? Isn't that a new for a new generation?

>>55042715
Jesus christ that looks cringey as fuck
AMD actually adnitting theyre the poorfag company though, priceless

>>55042756
Around the start of 2017, but it won't be a GP100 contender, it will be around 420mm2 and very close to a GP102 and far faster than a 1080.
As for price, somewhere around $600-700?

>>55042756
The Fiji cards were also released much later than the 300 series.

File: 1463909434051.jpg (229KB, 647x1326px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 647x1326px

>>55042596

A 1500mhz 980ti would give most AIB 1080's a run for their money.

>>55042715
WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS AMD
STOP THIS POORFAG SHIT AND GIVE ME MY FURY 2 ALREADY

>>55042879
Try not wasting your money on overpriced shit.

>>55042491
>2016 MARCH

That's an old slide. They already pulled Vega closer.

>>55042893
If AMD just lets Nvidia have the high end market then we're all going to be wasting our money on overpriced shit

>>55042879
>doesn't understand the basics of market positioning, size and economics of sale

Selling 2 million $200 cards or selling 100k $600 cards, which is better?

>>55042913
not if you are retarded

>>55042913
You mean you're going to be wasting your money on overpriced shit.

The vast majority of people are not stupid enough to buy expensive graphics cards.

>>55042756
October

>>55042976
Stop lying.

File: ethrig.jpg (531KB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

531KB, 3264x1836px

It's going to cost way more then $200 on release, guarantee it.

These stupid fuckers in my picture, are willing to buy 200 to 300 cards off the bat to mine their shitcoins like Ethereum. I thought this crypto-currency autist bullshit died in 2014 but no it's making a come back...

File: 1465500884948.png (86KB, 500x517px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 500x517px

>mfw GTX 1060 will blow this piece of shit back to the streets of India

>>55042440
even on the slide it says end of 2016 for vega you retard or do your eyes not work

Whenever I go to best buy they only have low tier cards like 750 or something.
Where the heck do you even buy these fast ones?

>>55043089
>it's "it's another GP104 bin with a disable memory channel because yields are awful episode" for $300, Jack

Haha.

>>55043089
nvidia aren't going to sell the 1060 with 8gbs of VRAM though

Say I plan on getting another 1080 or 1440p monitor.

I'd be going rx480 most likely. 4gb or 8gb version?

>>55042461
What a retarded analogy

>>55043095
And Vega will be utterly btfo by the 1070/1080/1080ti

>>55043089
>overwatch + animu shitposter
>nvidia shill
pottery

>>55041728
the only time memory makes a card perform better is if you clock the memory faster. more memory on a card just means it can render more, it has no other affect on performance. please stop posting now, you're too stupid to share my air.

>>55043100
Go to pcpartpicker.com they have a lot of sites that supply many different high end pieces. You can also check if any of those companies have a store in your city.

>>55043221
>being this big of an idiot
Just stop you're embarrassing yourself

>>55041795

The fps boost isn't due to the memory actually increasing the speeds of the card

>>55043095
Are you stupid?
>>55042491

>>55042717
Read the paragraph literally above your second highlight. You highlight literally says "buy a new family in terms of the ultra-enthusiast portion of the market". How the fuck is that not 100% clear when they directly and clearly say A NEW FAMILY?

>>55042897
Show me an official statement or roadmap from AMD that indicates their supposed change in plans. There's nothing but random rumor and no news at all from AMD.

Personally I'll probably wait like ~1 month or how long it takes for custom 1080s to be properly available and then I'll make the decision on what to buy. Going by AMD's statements and roadmaps that's going to be 1 or 2 1080s.

>>55041437
I was watch faggots get BTFO, et tu?

>>55043055
Don't ASICs or whatever absolutely destroy GPU based mining?

>>55042250
theyre only showing it off in october?
will it even be released this year?
i dont think i can waitfag that long

>>55043286
>2 1080s
overkill much?
what are you trying to do? start fission?

>>55043425
Close, but what I want is to get 60FPS at 4K

>>55043483
144hz 1440p > 60hz 4k desu
playin vidya in 4k makes all the menus fuckin tiny

>>55043326

They did.

>>55043483
You a rich boy huh?

File: 1461108470347.png (150KB, 1020x716px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1020x716px

>>55042636
http://videocardz.com/59808/amd-vega-gpu-allegedly-pushed-forward-to-october
RIP rumor. Vega is confirmed 2016.

>>55043537
does this mean theyre just going to be announced in oct or actually released?

>>55043500
I've seen both first hand and disagree, the sharpness of 4K is too good to give up.

Also 4K games don't have tiny UI, the UI generally scales with resolution and is just as large as usual. The only game that I played where it was tiny was Vermintide. Some games also have options that allow you to set the size as you please, small UI was never a problem for me.

>>55043514
Not even close, I have a job and don't spend money on much else, it adds up after a while and I don't mind spending on my main hobby.

>>55043537
>http://videocardz.com/59808/amd-vega-gpu-allegedly-pushed-forward-to-october
>it's just a rumour
>points me to an article about a rumour
We already settled it was just a rumour

>>55043612
Likely announce. The specs point to it being a 1080 ti competitor.

>>55043639
Employees at amd confirmed release is being accelerated on twitter zen is being slightly delayed.

>>55043676
No they didn't

>>55043676
>Zen being delayed
Zen being delayed is the norm

>>55042450
>>55042613
"October they announced"

No one announced any thing. This came from a blog post.

>>55043878
Naturally AMD fanboys jumped all over it straight away

>>55042363
>Current year
>Le no driver meme
For the past few years they always get drivers out for new games on or before release.

>>55041437
>>55041476
>980 ti performance with a mild overclock
NVIDIA BTFO

WAIT FOR VOLTA

amd will be btfo

File: 53215123513251.jpg (116KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1000x1000px

>ALL THIS WAITFAGGING FROM AMD SHILLS

Miserable wretches. Doubt already casted over the poo in the loo and now you faggots spaculate whether the vega or volta will be any good.

They all will be shit. If, and that's a huge fucking if, the 480 is going to turn out good, than nvidia will crush it with a superior 1060. Just look at the 1070/1080 benchmarks -- AMD is btfo so hard their only hope is the mid-range and the mid-range. AMD shills will buy the 480 in a few weeks, but wait another month and they'll be in tears, seeing how good the 1060 performs.

AMD is officialy finished. They were able to make great cards in the past, 4xxx, 5xxx, 6xxx series, though hot and power thirsty as fuck, but now it appears they have run out of options; nvidia is too strong, their cards too optimized, the gayworks way too widespread for AMD to compete.

It's over.

>>55041803
sauce?

>>55044309
In the last generation the 380/380X were a good deal faster than the 960, that will most likely continue as nvidia doesn't seem to care about the low end market

Also, you're retarded

>>55041803
Would also like source on this

>>55044098
>waitfaging for nvidia
wew lad

Someone convince me not to buy the 1080

>>55044309
dumb frogposter

File: 1465557326331.jpg (80KB, 365x365px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 365x365px

AMD BABY

>>55044309
HD5k were neither very hot nor power thirsty, you must be thinking of their competition, the dreaded Fermi PCI-E powered MOSFET bombs.

>>55044499
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=gtx+1080
>$900-800
just dont

File: hqdefault (1).jpg (14KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 480x360px

>>55044540

Fermi was a flaming shitbucket of a card, that's what allowed AMD to take the lead, but then they screwed it up royally with the antiquated design of the 290.

NVIDIA is too powerful to be beat, they have the market cornered, AMD is going bust.

>>55044612
7970 and 7950 were also pretty great cards. Easily more worth their money than a 680 or 670.

File: 1361762505374.jpg (649KB, 2848x2136px) Image search: [Google]

649KB, 2848x2136px

sold my 980 before the prices tank

looking for reasons to go AMD this time round but im scared ill end up with a 1070

>>55044719
I don't think there's much reason to go from a 980 to a RX 480.

>>55041437
>save up 150$ extra, get a card with 980ti levels of performance and drivers that actualy work

It's the last generation of cards all over again

>w-wait for fiji!
>a-amd will win n-next time!

>>55044760

im banking on the 490 being primo

nothing has leaked though AMD runs a tight ship

>>55041896
Currently using 1.7 GiB out of 7.8. I'd have few to no problems running with only 4 GB.

>>55041936
Yeah 480 in crossfire isn't benchmarked yet. Silly anon!

File: 1259250022064.jpg (11KB, 289x319px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 289x319px

>>55044832
>crossfire
>relevant

>>55044612

>antiquated design of the 290.

For the consumer hawaii is aging like fine wine.

>>55044856
Yeah, only because AMD has been rebranding for the last 3 years and thus is still optimizing for the same architecture

>>55041476
what's the stock GPU speed? I've seen info stating that it's either 1080Mhz or 1266Mhz

>>55043154
>And Pascal will be utterly BTFO by Vega
FTFY

>>55044910
Just like Fiji BTFO'd Maxwell

Oh wait

>>55044887

Is that a bad thing?

>>55044887

Again, this isn't a bad thing for the consumer. Especially given the performace remains competitive against Nvidia's offerings in the same price bracket.

>>55044887
That shit don't matter to me, as long as I get good performance for an affordable price

>>55044309
Kill yourself Nvidiashill.

>>55044941
Take a look at the amount of memory bus width, vram, cores and power draw AMD had to throw against comparable Nvidia Maxwell cards. And you can see GCN is miles behind Maxwell.

Yes, rebranding is a bad thing, not for old card users, but eventualy the competition will break you because they do actualy create new architectures that are far more efficient

>>55044973

>Take a look at the amount of memory bus width, vram, cores and power draw AMD had to throw against comparable Nvidia Maxwell cards.

You do realise hawaii was released to combat kepler right? The fact it directly fights maxwell is hardly a negative thing. In fact we should be questioning why maxwell (namely the 980 and 970) aren't absolutely slaughtering the hawaii rebrands.

>>55042759
>implying people buy that many high end gpus
>over 10 million steam users
>980ti isn't even used by 1%
Poorfags is where the real money is.

>>55045008
>You do realise hawaii was released to combat kepler right?
Irrelevant, we were talking about rebranding, and it was a bad or good thing
>in fact we should be questioning why maxwell (namely the 980 and 970) aren't absolutely slaughtering the hawaii rebrands.

Obviously because they have significantly less cores, smaller memory busses and less vram generally than their amd counterparts. Maxwell cards that aren't castrated like the 980tiblow their AMD equivalents (fury x) away
>muh Asots

>>55042487
Exactly the same results with 1070, 500mhz increase from 1500 gives ~20%

>>55042571
I think it will be like this. Not sure though.
1080 = RX490 (maybe OC'd?) > 1070 = 980ti = RX 480 OC > RX 480 > 390X > 980 = 390 > 970

>>55045095
seems about right

>>55044792
You sold your 980 now and plan to replace it with a card we were told will release in 2017? Do you plan to run on an iGPU for 6+ months or what?

File: 1452717560680.jpg (35KB, 593x452px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 593x452px

>>55045043

>Obviously because they have significantly less cores

You do realise core count across architectures is irrelevant right? AMD and Nvidia design their chips differently and thus number of compute units is only one of the other factors listed that make up a chip's performance. Flatout stating AMD needing more cores to rival Nvidia is woefully ignorant of chip design.

>smaller memory busses and less vram generally

This is one of the bigger factors into why AMD cards pull ahead when resolution increases. Plus some tasks a gpu can do (within vidya as well) cannot use the various bandwidth compression tricks both companies use, so raw bandwidth for these tasks is more important. Plus also consider Nvidia clocks their vram significantly higher than AMD does. This - again - goes to show the different design ethos. Nvidia is narrow and fast for their memoryt systems while AMD is slow and wide.

Both have their pros and cons and neither solution is inherently superior to the other in a general sense. Once you get down to specific workloads then you can start making claims one method is superior to the other.

>>55045108

my 7970 will keep me afloat for a while

>>55045114
>Both have their pros and cons and neither solution is inherently superior to the other in a general sense

Except you're wrong, when one architecture can reach a certain level of performance with much cheaper to produce hardware at a significantly lower power draw it is superior. As is the case with Maxwell compared to Hawaii

AMD manages to compete on price point, but there is no doubt in anyones mind that Maxwell is the superior architecture, unless you are tech illiterate ofcourse

>>55041579
All of us do.

>>55044973
>but eventualy the competition will break you because they do actualy create new architectures that are far more efficient
>"far more efficient"

Seeing how latest card doesn't give much competition to old card doesn't make them "far more efficient".
Same reason I don't upgrade my Sandybridge CPU to skylake, literally almost no noticeable performance boost and you still need to changed the board too.
Four fucking years and and we actually going backward compare to Athlon and C2D era, in term of CPU and GPU performance/year.
I've been using Pentium, PII and III, Athlon, and all GPU from 90s era and in each new generation they actually compete against each other.
You either compete with actual performance boost and not just some shinny side apps.

Remember when 8800GT actually the King of its era? or Fermi was promised to be 10x faster than the disappointing 2xx series?
Maybe for brand loyalist the tiny percentage boost in new generation meant something, but for me I don't give a damn.

good thing im not poor so i can get the best of the best whenever i want (nvidia)

keep arguing

>>55045153
>comparing the gpu market to the cpu market
Lol, no

File: implying maxwell can into double precision.png (21KB, 634x560px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 634x560px

>>55045138

>with much cheaper to produce hardware

You have no idea what AMD or Nvidia's BOM is.

>significantly lower power draw

They made design sacrifices to get the power draw down - their double precision performance is one example.

>but there is no doubt in anyones mind that Maxwell is the superior architecture, unless you are tech illiterate ofcourse

You really need to educate yourself some more my good anon.

>>55045179
>their double precision performance is one example.
Right, something that is useless for gaming

>>55045172

>Remember when 8800GT actually the King of its era? or Fermi was promised to be 10x faster than the disappointing 2xx series?

?

>>55041706


Lets say your race car runs off super capacitors, they charge from inductance coils under the race track, it takes longer to charge the capacitors than it does to drain them when under load.

My car with 2x the capacitance will outperform yours because I can store up more on the curves and have more energy to burn later.

>>55045208
>Same reason I don't upgrade my Sandybridge CPU to skylake, literally almost no noticeable performance boost and you still need to changed the board too.

Which is a retarded comparison, when mid range cards have been systematically beating enthusiast cards of the last generation of cards

>>55045200
>GPUs are only used for gaming

File: 1422917684557.png (433KB, 1780x1408px) Image search: [Google]

433KB, 1780x1408px

>>55045200

That maybe but both companies use the same designs in their gaming gpus as well as (some) of their workstation units.

>>55045231
It is what the types of cards we are talking about are sold for by almost everyone buying them yes

>>55045243
And?

File: mirrors edge catalyst.png (70KB, 955x777px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 955x777px

>>55045290

And nothing. Point is you are being retarded because you are just looking at small parts of what make up a GPU and declaring one better than the other because some of the numbers are smaller.

>>55045227
>when mid range cards have been systematically beating enthusiast cards of the last generation of cards
You meant like a four years old 290x card beaten by 970 by a mere percentage?

>inb4 AMDshill
I've been using 8800GT for 5 years kid.
I care about actual performance that worth an upgrade than just a tiny boost.

File: 10955435_1610788595819392_730851838_n.jpg (13KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 306x306px

you know nothing about this 480. Absolutely nothing. What if it turns out to be a poo in the loo?

>>55045437

What if it turns out to be a cunt destroyer?

File: 10505334_452830704878857_5293442733502279741_n.jpg (36KB, 500x415px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x415px

>>55045470

Then nvidia is officialy kill at the mid-range level

>>55044788
>save up 150$ extra, get a card with 980ti levels of performance and drivers that actualy work
>wanting nvidia to brick your card with a driver update

File: amd-rx480-1.jpg (144KB, 1100x550px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1100x550px

Just so you guys know.....Expect this card to be crap on DX11 and good on DX12/Vilkan

>>55045594

Vulkan and DX12 wont be a hit for at least another year.
Why even bother with this generation at all?

Waitfag is so retarded.

File: Polaris5.png (166KB, 1382x774px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 1382x774px

>>55045594

Lrn 2 command processor.

>>55045594
Yeah I hope dx12 and vulkan give it some legs at 1080p with the 8gb version. Mirrors Edge 2 seems like a preview of whats to come.

AMD will never be the leader ofanything.

nvidia will always be #1

get cucked You AMD cucks

>>55041437
>Where were you when AMD won the GPU wars?
looking for my wallet, I want my $199 AMD

>>55044838
AMD is probably going to push it harder so they have some way to compete with the 1080 until vega

DX12 makes it easier as well on them at least because it's up to the dev to build in explicit multi-GPU

>>55041437
>3194

KEK. that's slower than a 970, and one that is about ~200mhz lower than it's maximum overclock too.

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6200041

File: 30141641202l.jpg (73KB, 900x506px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 900x506px

It really looks like Nvidia has no answer to the RX 480.

>GTX 1080 is in the Titan X price segment.
>GTX 1070 is in the 980 Ti price segment.
>GTX 1060 will be between 970 and 980 costwise
>No cheaper cards announced

>>55046145

They don't need an answer. The 480 has been proven to be slower than a 970.

>>55046167
I actually hard it's aruond 960 speeds.

>>55046197
nah, its slower than a 750

>>55046544
Probably close to a 460 once real benches are out

>>55046551
Haha AMD is so fucking shitty holy hell

>>55041936

actually, the radeon pro duo is still the fastest card on the planet, followed by the 3 year old 295x2

>>55042491

veg is slated for late 2016 release you dumbfuck.

>>55042715

How can anyone possibly spin this into a bad light:
>Respect their investment. “They wanted us to pay respect to the dollars they were giving us and do things in the architecture or transistors or APIs or ASync Compute, that provided a measure of ‘futureproofness.’ They wanted to be reassured that even if they’re only spending $200 they’d feel secure in their investment for a couple years.”

if your answer is anything close to mentioning poorfags and such, you deserve to die in a horrible fashion.

2xOC RX480 will crush a single OC'd 1080 for 2/3 of the price!

>>55046760
>if your answer is anything close to mentioning poorfags and such, you deserve to die in a horrible fashion.

the only person dying will be you once we automate you out of a job

>>55044309
>bitch about people advising to wait
>tell people to wait for 1060

>>55044895
the 1080 was a downclock. The chinese dude says so in the translation.

>>55046961

damage control

>>55046551
More like GT710

File: 1465765578208-g.jpg (76KB, 526x989px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 526x989px

>>55041437
NVIDIA GETS REKT BY THE RX480 OVERCLOCKS IT'S ALL OVER.
PACK YOUR SHIT IT'S TIME TO MOVE TO RED LAND.

File: 1465031593649.jpg (141KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 1024x1024px

Serious question, I bought a used 980 in may last year for 325, wat do? Sell or wait for another once 480 drops?

>>55047032
Well how much could you sell it for? if the 480 on average OCs pretty high it'll be faster and cheap

>>55046981
see
>>55047025

File: 1465031698486.jpg (29KB, 660x330px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 660x330px

>>55044309
You fucking idiots acting like a world without AMD is a good thing, nvidia doesn't give a shit about you.

>>55047047
I think, (based on Craigslist listings in my area) like 290

>>55047088
sell it asap before price drops to the floor once the 480 comes out

>>55046892
Joke's on you. A neet robot would be both expensive and useless as fuck.

>>55047025
>$199

POO

ON

NOVIDYA

>>55046961
It downclocks itself due to thermal throttling

Get poo'd on familia

if the 1060 isn't between the RX 480 and 1070, costs $250 and doesn't have a least 6gb of Vram, nvidia has truly lost the mid range GPU market for this generation of cards.

>>55047101
That's what I'm leaning towards, what about the possibility of buying a second 980 after it launches?

File: 1461505130956.gif (3MB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 720x480px

>>55044432
>>55044314

>>55047032
I don't think it's nevessary to get rid of your 980 right now, but riding Nvidia's damage control shilling against AMD prelaunch might be a good idea if you want to maximize your resell value.

>>55047025
Holy shit

>>55047065
>tfw you take a huge poo on the designated poo gpu manufacturer

>>55041437
>480 only just under half way up the list
>beats a card that's at the top of the list
Tim, I...

>>55047160
get rid of it asap

>>55047197
did you even look at the list?

File: That's bullshit.jpg (260KB, 570x558px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 570x558px

>>55047025
I want to believe, but there's no fucking chance they're deprecating the entire GPU lineup. It would be the first coming of Christ all over again.

>>55047146
>>55047101
Dual GPU is never really worth it, and if you can sell it for that much do it, the 8GB 480s should only be maybe $250 at the most

and then later on you save money if you get a free-sync display rather than if you were stuck with a G-sync display

>>55047221
>1080 getting higher passmark than 480
Yeah I did. Unless it's some reverse moonspeak wank where the lower score wins.

>>55047238
Who said anything about a 1080

>>55047025
This must be fake. Where did the Titan X go?

File: wat.jpg (7KB, 204x247px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 204x247px

>>55047235
>mfw Navi will be stacked dies

>>55047252
>Who said anything about a 1080
the actual list.
Maybe it's you who didn't look at the list.

>>55042360
>actually believing this FUD

>>55047229
AMD is in a better position to cannibalize their own old SKU's. The rebrandeons already paid for their R&D a long time ago. Nvidia is in a far tighter spot with their own xx80/70's intruding on the last gen Ti's and below territory.

>>55047238
>RX 480 for $200 is better than a GTX 980.
>1080 getting higher passmark than 480

looks like you are the moonspeaking one today, sir

that or you've committed an off-by-100 error

>>55047282
what

>>55047282
Are you actually illiterate? Maybe you should read the OP again, and then go hang yourself or something.

>>55047298
So let me get this straight:
The 1080 is at the top of the list (highest passmark)
480 is pidgeonholed far lower down the list between it;s own older cards and older nvidia cards.
Somehow it's won despite having lower score than a frikkin nano or vanilla fury
please tell me squire: if this victory meant to be based around higher or lower scores because either way it still got asspounded

>>55047334
omg you're making me rage, who said anything about a 1080 you stupid fucking cunt

FUCK

>>55047271
Into the trash, that's where

I just ordered a 1070. will my intel core i5-4570 4x 3.20 ghz bottleneck it hard?

File: SAPPHIRE-Radeon-RX-480-NITRO-2.jpg (143KB, 743x502px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 743x502px

How accurate is Firemark for real-life performance ? I'm on GTX760 and been waiting for a new graphics and RX480 seems like the perfect candidate to upgrade to, i play videogames at 1080p/60fps anyway.

Also how long does it take for aftermarket cooled carts to appear on shelves ?

>>55047334
you will get this straight.
Just accept the fact that you're a flaming retard and forget about it.

which you will. In 5 secs or thereabouts.

>>55047334
Two hundred american shekels you fucking goy.

>>55047334
>The 1080 is at the top of the list (highest passmark)

No one gives a shit about the 1080, this thread is about:
>Where were you when AMD won the GPU wars?
>RX 480 for $200 is better than a GTX 980.

Rad the OP before posting, moron.

>>55047334
Because it's a third of the price of the 1080?

>>55047379
wait for benchmarks but I believe the 480 will deliver on always >60fps on 1080p.

File: 1356150808001.jpg (5KB, 195x224px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 195x224px

>>55041437
>2 generations later high-mid card has competitions high performance.
Wew lad. Its like they actually caught up to 2014 levels of performance.

>>55041454
>>55041437
These results are in line with the 3dmark tests earlier, which had it a hair under the Fury at the 1266 clock

Dumbshill Nvidiots keep referring back to overpriced Jew card 1080.

Ignores the fact a 480 reks a 980.
Ignores the fact a 4GB OC 480 comes close to a $350 (most likely more) 1070 whilst only costing $199.

>But muh green card is top of chart!

Nvidiots are salty as fuck.

>>55047489
>$350
I thought the MSRP was $380.. anyway they go for $450

>>55047529
Yeah probably closer to $380 for the Non-FE

>$199
oh boy

>>55047564
>Non-FE
When will nvidiots stop this myth?

>>55047601
Yeah the demand for that performance is going to keep prices sky high, but this is also why I'm skeptical there won't be scalping on the 480 when it comes out as well.

>>55047612
I don't think there will be, these cards are expected to sell in high volumes

File: Stoptron.gif (3MB, 640x362px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 640x362px

This whole thing is one big pissing contest. Nobody cares what GPU's you use except for the other lonely autistics on here.

Jon goes in all fields.

>>55047448
nvidia shill pls try at least

>>55042926
Selling 2 millions 200$ cards.

>>55047025
I hope this corean faggot isn't lying.

File: 1433726224538.jpg (12KB, 173x215px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 173x215px

>>55047025
There's no way. I want to believe this so bad but there's just no fucking way.

>>55047360
Shit's fake brah. Someone just shopped the Titan X out and rearranged the numbers while changing the bar to red. The OP image I believe though.

>release 1060 with 980+ performance for $230
>Nvidia wins again with software stack
2ez

>>55041694
You realise nvidia had cuda years before AMD even jumped into the markt.
That is why more software supports it and why stability and driver compatibility is better.

>>55043537
I suppose you do not know the meaning of "allegedly".

all I see is nvidia on the top AMDcucks

>>55048354
AMD's card is half and a third of the price of Nvidia's card

>>55041437
>AMD won
>top gpu in chart is gtx1080

Wew lad.

>>55042381
i commonly see after markets sell for msrp unless the aftermarket also ocs the thing out the ass.

>>55043500
for me, 144hz is far more valuable then 1080p+ resolutions.

>>55043758
>>55043676
less you got a source on the zen, its speculation based on intel delaying their cpus.

>>55048457
2 0 0 $

Did the site crap out for anyone else?

>>55048569
It did for me too, you're not alone.

>>55048072
>>55047025

this is complete bullshit,

the oc is about 23%
but it gained over 23% preformance,

WITH THAT SAID, 23% scaling 100% would put it at 3928, that is fairly respectable none the less. but this is all speculation based on obvious bullshit unless something else is going on behind the scenes in that bench.

>>55041637
my system with a game running eats around 1gb of vram on its own.

games are getting damn near to 4gb on ultra with a few going over

you need the head room unless you want to close fucking everything to play a game.

>>55048662
I'm still using a 7850 2GB just fine for low setting 1440p gaming, all you really need to do is drop textures to lower VRAM usage

>>55048662
You do know that in fullscreen mode the GPU has access to 100% of the resources, right? Thats why alt-tabbing is so slow.

>>55047013
my dad works at geforce and told me that it's around a geforce 6800 ultra

>benchmarks

i seriously can't trust these anymore, in-game fps from both amd and nvidia optimized games are the only way

>>55042701
>>55042688
if the top benchmarks is right, and the 490 is a polaris with 40cu apposed to 36, yea, its very possible an oc of that will land in between a 1070 and 1080, however.

>>55048563
>$200 card
>performing half as good as a $700 card

It's common knowledge that once you move past a certain price point it's not going to offer as much value. You're still getting much better raw performance on the $700 gtx1080.

Rx480 is nice at $200, but it's clearly not winning any gpu wars. That's the gtx1080 on top of everything right now.

>>55048880
Performing exactly as good as a 400$ 1070 and that's not half of a 1080 mong

>>55048982
>$400 1070
it is $450 and it is sold 500€there, so fuck this GPU. I just hope amd won't increase the prices too much

>>55042942
at least not without a need.

>>55048880
>Rx480 is nice at $200, but it's clearly not winning any gpu wars. That's the gtx1080 on top of everything right now.

gtx1080 cannot into 4 way SLI, only 2
480 can into 4 way CFX
2x 480 beats 1080
4x 480 beats 2x 1080
4x 480 is half the cost of 2x 1080

>>55049106
multi GPU scaling is like 40% for third and 20% for fourth GPU

>>55049125
varies, but even if you cut those numbers in half, the 4x 480 would still be a better value.

Also, stuck-in-90s nVidia will never release a "1080x2" but the 480x2 and 490x2 will trounce the original 1080 on a single card and still cost far less.

>>55049167
gtx 690 was dual chip

your argument was value at equal performance, even a single 480 is better value per performance than 4 1080s

>>55045122
good enough to get by on, that said, im going from 280x to 480 day one pending benches are even close to rumors

>>55049106
That's nice theory, have you used CF for the past 2 years?

According to that leaked chink vid the RX480 scores just over 3500 in Firestrike Ultra. If that is without any overclocking and genuine it bodes well for a 1070 competitor. BTW My R9 290 scores 2835 with a mild overclock.

Why do you guys act like the 980 is relevant? The new series came out already. Why do amd fags always use old as fuck models to compare to their new models lmao

>>55049184
Also I meant 2 1080s

File: 1465702164586_0.jpg (277KB, 1616x2048px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 1616x2048px

>>55044432
>>55044314

Its not porn ya dips

>>55049293
fucking this. it would be like comparing the 390 (if the 970 didn't exist at the time) to a gtx 770. it's pure idoicy

>>55049357
Like comparing 380 to 780 in this case retard

>>55048694
I refuse to compromise on textures, damn near everything else I will but not textures as they currently are what make games look amazing sense we hit the polly diminishing return wall and ray/path tracing is still nearly a decade out.

>>55048700
never fullscreen, fucking hate it when a game crashes and then takes my entire system with it because the full screen wont go away, a lesser issue now then before but i still refuse to full screen.

>>55048982
25% behind the 1070 in an artificial benchmark. Oh no nvidia is finished.

>>55049106
4 cards would barely give you 250%. Scaling is horrible for anything more than 2 cards and you're relying on the developer to actually care.

There's only one benchmark showing 480 cfx barely beating a 1080, in an amd sponsored game. Did they even include min fps or frame times?

Also 2 480s would consume more power than a 1080, so 4 480s would be stupid without spending extra on a beefy psu, so it'll cost a lot more.

>>55049293
>>55049357
>being this dense
It has to do with the price/performance, fucking idiots. People aren't excited that it's as powerful as a 980. They're excited they can get performance that would cost them $500 on June 28th for $200 on June 29th.