Why do you hate me, /g/?

>>58152288
needs to be a 490X

>>58152288

dont hate it, but no need for it since i have a 290x which is either on par or a tad faster.

also needs to be a 490x

>>58152300
>>58154220
'OR 1=1

>>58152288
I don't, I just have a 980 Ti.

>>58152288
i don't hate it
i just don't feel like amd did 'enough' to stay competative in the pc gaming market
of course they're dominating mobile/console gpu markets, but honestly who cares about that
i'm no fanboy, but i am budgeted, and i'd like to see 1080~level performance for less than 1080~level prices
we'll see how 2017 goes

File: 1480873932613.png (42KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 653x726px

>>58152288
I can't say I won't leave you, but I won't ignore you.

I hate it because it's literally 390 performance just being 10% cheaper. Literally NOTHING. Hope VEGA brings something good this time.

>>58152288
No so efficient, not very fast, low overclocking potential

Nothing wrong if you absolutely need a cheap AMD car for Vulkan tho.

File: 1447138751837.jpg (77KB, 960x639px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 960x639px

>>58154220
>>58157437
>mfw won't have to upgrade 290x for at least a few more generations
get fucked kepler cucks

It's not a bad card for it's price. However I'm not upgrading until a decent HBM2 card.

got one on black friday for 240€, really like it

AMD buying ATI really fucked the brand... Their newer cards are really underperforming. Nvidia could just shit out a TitanXPTIMEGAULTRA edition without a problem and all AMD could do is release a mexican food double GPU card. Vega better be damn good.

>>58152288
It is a mess for AMD.
R480 is struggling to defeat GTX1060.
And no realistic cost effective challengers against 1070 and 1080

>>58158846
>R480 is struggling to defeat GTX1060.

You mean the card that's matching the 1060 already now that drivers are growing? At a $50 difference unless you're in EU?
The 480 did what it needed to, fanboys and hype-fanatics just wanted a 980ti for $200 instead.

>>58158994
I mean that:
(1) Rx8x class should not struggle against the lowest entry of Nvidia's x6xx gaming class, rather than waiting until the recent driver updates.
(2) R480 class is rated around 160W, it is clearly not design to compete against a 80W graphic card class. AMD has underestimated Nvidia's performance increase.

By all means, I would like AMD to improve the offerings, to increase the price competitiveness. I do not like the crazy pricing from Nvidia, once they monopolize the market.
Disclaimer, I am a Quadro user, not a gaming fanboi

>>58159123
>R480 class is rated around 160W, it is clearly not design to compete against a 80W graphic card class.

Either case is still more efficient than the 900 series, and definitely better than AMDs 300 lineup in terms of power usage.

Both are still good mid-tier cards, regardless. If the 480 didn't even come close to it's actual goal, the 1060 would be selling for around FE price for stock.

You want me to be honest with you? You don't perform well enough in blizzard games.

>>58154229
' OR '1'='1
or
' OR 1=1 -- -

but not your example

>>58157437
10% cheaper and almost half the power draw.

>>58152288
My 1060 generates less heat and watts compared to you.
But seriously though, was my 1060 good enough for my animu+madvr? Now I can use nnedi3 32 neuron on all upscaling.

Cause mediocre bitch

>>58160623
I'm dropping novideo because of their spyware drivers and shitty shadowplay updates.

Shadowplay's probably going to be thrown behind a subscription at some point too, and gsync is more expensive than freesync. I'd take an AMD GPU slightly underperforming its nvidia counterpart at this point.

Honestly, they're shooting themselves in the foot with their business decisions.

>>58160652
Pair point.
I can't even upgrade my monitor without breaking a bank.

>>58159123

Because of the 1080 drop, the retard execs told the engineers to pull up the RX480 early. Yes, even though they're at totally different performance tiers. It was to make investors happy.
This is part of why the driver updates as of late have been so effective.

There will likely be an "RX 485" which includes some of the hardware features originally designed into the Ellesmere XT/Polaris 10 spec that didn't make it in time.

If the RX480 was made at TSMC instead of GloFo, it would probably be hitting ~1500 Mhz and be shitting all over the 1060.

So blame management for this one.

File: 1456650219571.png (150KB, 359x414px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 359x414px

>>58159123
>Either case is still more efficient than the 900 series, and definitely better than AMDs 300 lineup in terms of power usage.

BREAKING NEWS
CARDS THAT SIT IN SIMILAR PRICE BRACKETS PERFORM SIMILARLY!
WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT?

>(2) R480 class is rated around 160W, it is clearly not design to compete against a 80W graphic card class. AMD has underestimated Nvidia's performance increase.

There are 95watt binned variants of Polaris 10. Gamers on the desktop don't get them because enterprise customers are willing to pay more for them. This shows in the pricing of the desktop lineup (rx 480 is $50 cheaper for equivalent performance). Power use as long as it is within a certain limit i literally irrelevant on desktop PCs. You can EASILY run a Skylake i5, 8gb ddr4, a HDD, a SSD, and still have plenty of headroom left over on anny decent 350 watt 80+ PSU to support a RX 480.

>>58157722
Are you forgetting the 7 series which was FIRMLY post buy out and was the shiniest shit on turd mountain at the time

>>58160678
You missed the point by a long mile.
- The price bracket is forced by the competition, not the original AMD's plan
- If you design a similar performance card but with consuming twice of the power, your design is bad, simple as that. RX480 class is supposed to be competing with GTXx800 class. AMD is seriously has a technological gap here.

>>58160678
>There are 95watt binned variants of Polaris 10.

not binning, just lower clocks and voltage. you don't ever get magical chips that consume 1/2 the power that a 'normal' chip would.

>>58152288
Hey anons there are R9 Fury's on sale for 260$ on Amazon and Newegg but get it on Amazon cause fuck Newegg kappa

I've had a gtx950 for a year now and have played all the newest games that I've wanted to play that absolutely needed a newer card and haven't been excited over any new PC games this year.

Even so, if there were a AAA title that I wanted to play right now, I'm happy to play it on High settings at 30fps, which the GTX950 is capable of doing. The 60fps meme is only mandatory when you're playing online multiplayer or a racing game.

I'd maybe upgrade to a radeon 480 if I could find one hell of a deal on one. Under $100 and I'll buy it. Otherwise, I'm probably good for the next several years, easy.

>>58160840
>I enjoy playing games at 30fps
Wew, how deluded can poorfags get?

File: sarkvh.jpg (70KB, 250x448px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 250x448px

>>58160760
You are fucking retarded. It's all about die sizes, yields, binning, and profit margins. They could make the rx 480 consume a LOT less power. But those dies have enterprise priority where they make 10x the profit margins. Same reason why the desktop rx 460 doesn't have the full 1024 shaders shaders and is clocked higher.

Power use is IRRELEVANT on desktop PCs so long as you fit within a reasonable power envelope (can function on a 350 or 400 watt OEM PSU).

What desktop users get from AMD are there leftover scraps. Lower binned and leaky dies that they pump extra wattage through to increase yields.

>>58160802
literally 5% lower stock clocks. Most of the desktop chips that are not even binned for it can run @ significantly lower volts than they are without reducing clock speed. It's all about yields m8.

>>58160864
if you're playing a slow paced game, it doesn't make any difference at all.

t. GTX950 guy playing Witcher 3 on high settings locked at 30fps

>>58160925
LOL
>Power Irrelavant, HOT? Let's put more more heatsink, don't let firmware downthrottle it
>Just use the same architecture and overclock it to 10 Ghz. That will teach Nvidia, who the boss is.
Seriously ?
>What desktop users get from AMD are there leftover scraps. Lower binned and leaky dies that they pump extra wattage through to increase yields.
So, you admit that Nvidia is technologically behind? The whole thread is about that issue, not talking that R480 is not value for money.

>>58160964
Sorry, Typo here.
So, you admit that AMD is technologically behind?

File: powercolor-red-dragon-radeon-rx-460-standing-angle.jpg (355KB, 700x525px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 700x525px

>>58160964
if you fit within the heatsinks TDP limit heat doesn't matter on desktop PCs. Even the cheapest solid aluminum block flower style coolers can cool a desktop 480 without it sounding like a jet so what does it matter?

>>58160802
>you don't ever get magical chips that consume 1/2 the power that a 'normal' chip would.
>he has never done well in the silicon lottery

>>58160970
No
I am saying that AMD has shittier fabs but are better at binning and that AMD pays far less per wafer than Nvidia does.

File: 1476811384006.png (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>58160964
>So, you admit that Nvidia is technologically behind?
Yes, I admit it, Nvidia is drastically far behind AMD! Just fuck my shillpucci right now and get it over with.

>>58160994
or alternatively, I can just buy 1060 with almost the same price, no worry about down throttling, in case of the heatsink is not enough, newer architecture and straight usable from the box.

>>58161009
>AMD pays far less per wafer than Nvidia does.

that's definitely not true. as of the last amendment to the WSA a few months AMD has to pay glofo for any wafer fabbed even if it's fabbed at a fab owned by intel/tsmc/samsung.

>>58161019
The RX 480 4gb is $60 cheaper than the GTX 1060 6gb. The 3gb 1060 performs closer to the even cheaper AIB rx 470s.

The RX 480 doesnt have throttling issues even on the abysmal reference cooler (that literally nobody uses because AIB custom cards with better coolers are the same price) so i don't know where you pulled that bullshit out of.

File: 1476819227420.jpg (19KB, 366x274px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 366x274px

>>58161019
>the 1060 is infallible compared to the shit 480! Nvidia doesn't fuck shit up ever!
>its essentially the same price! (at least a 10% price difference)

>>58161022
polaris is fabbed almost entirely @ glofo

File: 1476817001416.gif (1004KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

1004KB, 500x281px

>>58161062
.....So(flo)?

>>58152300
Underrated

>>58161047
>The RX 480 doesnt have throttling issues
fucking liar yes it does. the throttling is retarded, they have the stock fan profile so stupidly low you never hear it, but it hits the throttle limit constantly

File: Sapphire_20164115543.jpg (67KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 800x800px

Because I have this instead.

Yer pretty cool undervolted.
Still I wouldn't buy a midrange GPU because I'm not poor.

>>58159123
>(1) Rx8x class should not struggle against the lowest entry of Nvidia's x6xx gaming class, rather than waiting until the recent driver updates.

That's just what you think, their prices and more importantly die sizes are pretty near each other.

>>58160925
Then who is getting nvidia's leftover scraps? ;^)

>>58160963
I have a GTX950 and I regret paying $130 for the thing. 60fps/med it can do, but it's showing age fast.

Meanwhile R9 3xx owners are sipping on wine, and DX12/Vulkan will close the gap further. I'm getting a 470/480 tax season, assuming prices don't plummet.

>>58161252
should have gotten a 480 4GB

>>58161327
>Can not afford 1070 and 1080
>Sipping Wine

>>58157437
>~90-100w (GTR XFX)
vs >250-275w (390/290X)

>>58161403
>Cards that overtook their green mirrors with age
>Not a good deal

I didn't mean money sinks. 90% of people are just going to nab a 1070 unless they have high resolutions.

How silent are 470 / 480 cards? Literally the only thing that stops me from buying one of these. Not that I really NEED a gpu anyway.

>>58161454
If you avoid the Gigabyte G1 series you'll be fine.

>>58161461
Are we talking fully quiet under no / low load? How about full load?

>>58161327
>you'll never be able to spend $150 on a 6870 and max everything at 1080p for years
>and until the last couple years need to turn things down to med
why the fuck did the mid range bracket jump up $100? and why the fuck did the low bracket also jump $100 while providing performance only comparable to the mid range bracket of the year prior, which is fucking awful since we've had nothing but rebrands for about 3 years straight now

>>58161371
hahaha...fuck no.

How usable is a 460 on linux? Literally trash tier?

>>58161505
>0% performance increase while gaymen
or are you going to try and tell all of us you use it for something other than gay men?

>>58161535
Should be decent for most purposes with Linux 4.9 and Mesa 13.

>>58152288
you're not a geforce

>>58152288
>literally just a box with 1 fan

fuck you

>>58152288
I don't, but your big brothers need to exist. Nvidia has had a complete monopoly on $300+ GPUs for a long time now.

File: rx480.png (400KB, 1888x796px) Image search: [Google]

400KB, 1888x796px

i love her

File: rx480.jpg (879KB, 2448x2448px) Image search: [Google]

879KB, 2448x2448px

>>58162941

>>58161477
Most if not all of them have a zero fan mode while idling, the msi models are relatively quiet at 100% fan speed, not that you'd ever have to run them faster than 60-70%. Iirc my msi rx 470 ran at 65C under load with 60% fan speed in a case with sub par airflow. My xfx 480 gtr was really noisy in that particular case because I like to keep my gpu at 70c tops. But the combination of switching to a corsair air 540 (gives me a dedicated intake fan that just feeds the gpu) and the new driver update. It too runs fairly quiet while gaming,qnd just as cool as the msi.

>>58163110
Forgot to mention that the 470 was clocked at 1350 core/1850 mem, and the gtr I run stock at 1338, or if I need a little 3xtrq oomph I run it at 1400core/2350 mem.

>>58162941
>MSI
No thanks

>>58163157
What's there not to like?

I'm scared that Nvidia is going to have a monopoly in the coming years.

I cannot think of a single good reason to buy an AMD card.

>>58164827
>a single good reason

PRICE/VALUE?

>>58162948
I have one of these. Runs at about 95 watts on most loads, and stays cool to boot. Huge difference in wattage compared to my old 290x.

File: GTX-1060-UPDATE-100.jpg (66KB, 649x221px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 649x221px

>>58164827
Amd is the better choice for low budget gaming since ever

File: GTX-1060-UPDATE-101.jpg (69KB, 649x221px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 649x221px

>>58165600

>>58152288
Because you should NEVER buy the reference model, it doesn't matter if it's novidia or ayymd.

>>58161772
No I'm telling you a 4th card is fucking pointless...already some games need more.

Telling someone to get a 4gb rx480 is fucking troll advice.

>>58160925
>Power use is irrelevant

Yes that's why 480 has to be running 15 degrees hotter than 1060 while keeping the same noise level and having no room for OC if you're not willing to slap water-cooling on it. Not relevant at all.

>>58165797
You're not getting into high refresh 1080p gaming with an OC 1060 either, so it's not a gamechanger. Nevermind the xx60 series is 'budget' for the green side.

>>58161047
The RX 480 4gb is $60 cheaper than the GTX 1060 6gb. The 3gb 1060 performs closer to the even cheaper AIB rx 470s.

Do you honestly believe this or are you just playing stupid? Why every AMD fan on this board is such a lying slimy whore? Do you feel anything resembling shame when you compare MSRP of a 4GB reference 480RX to any good non-referenced 1060 gtx from Gigabyte, Asus or Zotac while mentioning performance of a 8GB heavily factory OCed version that only beats 1060 6GB in that single benchmark made by an Indian on the hardwarecucks channel.

The fact that the benchmark is obvious shilling that couldn't even bother showing us actual footage with framerates in it is besides the point, the fact that you need to straight out lie about hardware specs and pricing in order to make it look competitive is just laughable.

I really wished I was a reviewing shill and had a free sample of both 480RX and 1060 on me so I could do benchmarks with footage and post it on /g/ over and over again. Doing requests for every game and every setting out there so stupid cunts like you couldn't get away with it. Off yourself Ranjeet.

File: 1314023541176.jpg (96KB, 894x894px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 894x894px

>>58164996
>>58165600
Outside the US the RX lineup costs way more than their Nvidia counterparts. AMD can't get anything right.

>>58165981
Mentions the rx 480 4gb...as if that card has a right to exist...

Also the 3gb 1060 craps out on games with large textures like a motherfucker....that piece of shit has zero right to exist also.

>>58159123
>(2) R480 class is rated around 160W, it is clearly not design to compete against a 80W graphic card class. AMD has underestimated Nvidia's performance increase.
First off, you're wrong about the TDP for the 480, it's 150W, not 160.
And secondly, yeah, that's why it isn't going up against the 1050Ti (75W), it's instead going up against the 120W 1060 6GB.

Unless you're unreasonably talking about the 4GB 480 and the 3GB 1060, in which case it's not even a close game, the 4GB 480 slaps the shit out of the 3GB 1060.
Or, did you forget about all of this in your blind shilling?

>>58160802
>he has never won silicon lottery

>>58166003
Nvidia dramatically lowers prices to evade the extra taxes, AMD doesn't have the scratch to do that.

>>58160802
It doesn't magically consume half the power, it magically consumes ~7/8ths the power. 110W is nominal for the die alone, plus 30W for the memory plus some extra for leakage = 150W.

The 480 die comes stock at 1.1V for the core. That can easily be reduced on most cards by .02v, some as much as .05v. Very highly binned cards could probably come in at 1v, which would drop power draw by ~10W at least.

File: 14140662349131.jpg (79KB, 645x773px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 645x773px

>>58166262
I've had a 4870 for almost a decade. I don't want to get a Nvidia GPU when I make my next build once Zen comes out, but if prices really don't lower for Radeon cards I'll have no choice but to go with the green Jew.

File: Screenshot_20161225-202613~01~01~01.png (593KB, 1080x1700px) Image search: [Google]

593KB, 1080x1700px

>>58166003
Really makes

File: Screenshot_20161225-202708~01.png (595KB, 1080x1843px) Image search: [Google]

595KB, 1080x1843px

>>58166003
you think

File: it_feels_great_doesnt_it.jpg (46KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 500x500px

>>58166521
>>58166529
I live in an African tier, shit 3rd world country, not in germoney(stan) friend.

File: 1475102404047.jpg (50KB, 433x469px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 433x469px

>>58166521
>>58166529
>the US and the EU
>muh relevance

I'm about to buy an RX480 MSI Gaming X 4gb, should i do it?

Sapphire rx 480 4gb.
It's trash.
Keeps crashing on both debian and windows 7

>>58166068
>needing more than 4gb for a midrange 1080p card

>>58166761
RMA it
>>58166710
i have it myself, cool and quiet card.

I live in Canada. I have an HD 7870. I play at 1080p60 but I want more vram for GTA V so I can max it out. The 7870 gets 70 fps almost maxed out just with settings tweaked so it stays under 2gb vram.

I have been looking for a card and right now I am stuck deciding between either a 470 4gb for $280 a gtx 970 for $200 (used) or 1060/480 which are like $380.

The prices are so high because of leaftax and shipping. I find paying $200 for a used 970 a much better deal but that shitty vram is annoying :(

What do /g/?

>>58166981
Stop spreading this stupid fucking meme.

Yes modern cards need more...get the fuck over it and stop giving shitty advice.

>Because it wasnt 44 CU's
>because it wasnt 384 bit
>because the core wasnt pushed to inferno levels of the 1500-1600mhz range

I wanted an over engineered housefire that beat the gtx 1070 but sold for 250-299$ AMD bitched out and went for the safe power efficency, cool temps route.

>>58161496
Dude i have a 6870, trust me I don't get 60fps, more like 45-50 and that's often in mod-high settings
I'm buying a rx480 8gb for 250e, should be a huge improvement which will last

>>58168565
Remember to limit tesselation to x8 or x16 in Crimson panel.

You do that and you get 60 fps ULTRA settings in 1080p for all games WITH nvidia gameworks bullshit turned on.

Major redpill for me was when i discovered my Witcher3 game ran better on AMD with Hairworks turned on than on nvidia because I could limit the insane x64 tesselation and nvidia cards could not.

>>58168732
>Major redpill for me was when i discovered my Witcher3 game ran better on AMD with Hairworks turned on than on nvidia because I could limit the insane x64 tesselation and nvidia cards could not.

you were able to remove the tessellation AA with an INI tweak on release, and they added settings for it to the UI a few days after the game was released.

>>58152288

because you're too hipster to be hipster and the army of shills say so that I might be perceived as a contrarian and my benchmarks show I make the rational decision even if you might be a more honest product at the end of the day, it's all about image and I want to be part of that spinning eye because I don't want to be on the wrong side of the duel, I want to be with the good guys in the good club and I'm taking a risk with the industry on how they make their games because sometimes I'll be missed out on and then just get a blank stare when I mention my gpu as the root of all of my entertainment that's why radeon in fact maybe I'm attracted to you but a magnetic field is preventing me to reach you and my rational decision making shows the benchmarks in a manipulated industry are too complicated for me to simply think of this while I just want to sit and have fun.

>>58161019
>newer architecture
It's pretty much a shrink Maxwell, lmao

Yo famalam. Which is the best 1070 to get?

When is AMD Vega even coming out?

Not sure if I should take the plunge on a RX480 now or wait until comes out for prices to go down. Currently have a Radeon 6870 that can't play most newer games on anything better than low (1680x1050 resolution, last game I tried was Mafia III and I kept getting 20fps on avg).

>>58152288
Polaris, like the entire consumer Pascal line, is just rehashed cards from last gen on a 14/16 nm process.

The amount of architectural improvements was paltry, and I remember being promised HBM2 cards in Spring 2016, not Spring 2017.

what should I buy for 1080p lads?

think 470 should be enough but not sure of 4gb or 8gb.

also which brand to buy. I have XFX at the moment (270x) but one already died on me but it got replaced under warranty. XFX is the cheapest again but I wouldn't mind to spend maybe a bit more if I get a card that is quieter and cooler

https://www.pccasegear.com/category/193_1841/graphics-cards/radeon-rx-470