AMD RX 500 = Rebrandeons

>tfw bought a rx 480 just a few months ago
Feels good, man

File: endlesstrash.jpg (177KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 1280x720px

>MFW AMD 2 years behind Nvidia
>MFW AMD 2 years behind Intel in gaming.

File: amdvega.jpg (156KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 633x758px

>>59405142

>>59405142
DELET

>>59405142
wasn't the rx480 rebranded r9 390 which were r9 290x?

>>59405274
No. It is new chip.

>>59405274
On architecture design level - no. Rebrands started with 7000 series and ended with 300 series.

In terms of performance? AMD is releasing the same card for 5 years while giving it minor upgrades like more vram and dx12 support and selling it for $50 less with each rebrand.

>>59405319
False. 290 was a different chip than 7990.

>>59405337
Reading comprehension of an average AMD drone.

- I've never mentioned 290x however other 200 cards were rebranded like 280x so my statement holds true

- In terms of performance it's literally the same as 390 and 480. My statement still holds true.

ANOTHER

MASSIVE

DISAPPOINTMENT

FOR YOU

TO WAIT FOR

>>59405142
>RX 580 and RX 570 are basically rebrands of RX 480 and 470
>rx 480 and 470 line is basically rebrands of R9 390 and 390x
>r9 390x and 390 are just rebrands of r9 290x and 290
>r9 290 and 285 are just rebrands of 7970GE and 7950
wow that's a fucktonne of rebranding since they bothered releasing something new.
no wonder AMD is so fucking far behind nshidya

AYYMD REBRANDEON

THE WAY IT'S MEANT TO BE REBRANDED

>>59405424
You realize that and yet you buy their garbage.

Why may I ask?

7970 = 280x
7990= 280x2
290x = 390x

290x was a new GPU

>290 on its last legs
>Vega still haven't released

Compared to Nvidia that's releasing Pascal refresh this year? How is it different?

Volta is 2018.

>>59405446
It was a new jet engine alright.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5YJsMaT_AE

>>59405484
>reference card with a small aluminum heatsink with no pipes

No shit, how would you cool it besides going full Fermi

File: Nvidia_Child.png (650KB, 512x800px) Image search: [Google]

650KB, 512x800px

>>59405398
>Reading comprehension of an average AMD drone.
>- I've never mentioned 290x however other 200 cards were rebranded like 280x so my statement holds true
You said
>Rebrands started with 7000 series and ended with 300 series
That means you're lumping 200 series in with that statement. If you didn't want to be called incorrect perhaps you should be more careful with your words.
>- In terms of performance it's literally the same as 390 and 480. My statement still holds true.
It is not the same as a 480 in performance.

>>59405473
That's factually wrong and even then each release of Nvidia actually boosts performance by 30-50 percent across the board when compared to its previous numerical alterations.

Meanwhile 390X was a 5% upgrade while costing the same and RX 480 is a 5% downgrade while costing more in EU than what I could pay for a 390x when sellers where making room for Poolaris.

>>59405444
i bought a 6870 :^)

>>59405539
Where's Volta anon? Is this gonna be another GP100 where we pretend Pascal 'launched' at GDC but came 6 months later?

>>59405537
It's literally the same in terms of performance you underage nigger. At least compared to Nvidia where releases actually mean performance gains are displayed in dozens instead of fractions. Big chunk of 200 series was rebrands, I've never stated that all cards in 200 series were rebrands you school dodging underage subhuman.

Is a 480 a downgrade from a 290? I'm just so fucking done with waiting.

>>59405473
>gp100 and gm100 are the same gpu

Poo

File: Smug.png (204KB, 463x293px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 463x293px

>>59405462
>tfw bought R9 290 for $280 3yrs ago still going strong
>tfw it performs better than $700 780ti and now trades blows with Jewvidya 1070

>>59405424
they aren't rebrands when it's a different chip, it is however about the same performance.

>>59405575
>Where's Volta

>no zauba shipping manifests
>no tape out news

In 2018.

File: IMG_5815.jpg (174KB, 2048x1147px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 2048x1147px

Is this the new vega gpu everyone's anticipating for?

>>59405142
>According to a Chinese website, AMD has allegedly pushed back Radeon RX 500 series launch by two weeks.
>We do not have any confirmation about those dates
>but we did ask around and it appears that the market is not very enthusiastic about those cards, as RX 580 and RX 570 are basically rebrands of RX 480 and 470.
>Source: MyDrivers
It's a shitpost.

Nvidia has turned into a Giant in the business.

They are pushing hard.
Look at how much a stock costs.

Compared to Intel Nvidia is doing very well and they will even do better in the future.

While AMD can close the gap regarding the CPUs, it's very doubtful that they could ever catch up to Nvidia GPUs, especially efficiency wise (the GTX1070 doesn't need more power than a RX480) again.

>>59405142
Allow me to interject for a moment. According to this: http://www.overclock.net/t/1605802/official-radeon-rx480-470-460-owners-club/950_50
"RX 480 scales nearly perfectly linearly with memory frequency. It is ABSURDLY bound by memory performance" So, with this known we can assume that these will be the same good old Polaris architecture with dat GDDR5X™. Raja did say that it's compatible so, this might actually be cool...or a flop. Who knows.

>>59405621
it's slightly better.

>>59405626
>R9 290

>and now trades blows with Jewvidya 1070

>anime picture

Braindead idiot

>>59405577
>I've never stated that all cards in 200 series were rebrands you school dodging underage subhuman.
>>59405319
>On architecture design level - no. Rebrands started with 7000 series and ended with 300 series.
When you say "starts and ends" that means everything in between is included unless otherwise stated. You did not state otherwise.

>implying Nvidia doesn't do the same thing
>implying GTX 11xx series won't be Pascal rebrands

>>59405636
No, its just an updated version of the RX480.

File: 1464046339870.jpg (36KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 640x640px

>>59405142
wait for hbm2

>>59405640
Nah

>The Radeon RX 580 will be rebranded from RX 480. The new model will receive a moderate clock speed bump to 1340 MHz. That’s 74 MHz more than RX 480. Meanwhile, the RX 570 is said to be 38 MHz faster than RX 470. Of course, those are just the reference clocks and they might be changed as we get closer to the launch. Both RX 580 and RX 570 will be available in 4GB and 8GB variants

https://videocardz.com/66359/amd-radeon-rx-500-series-to-launch-in-april

Are you retarded or something?
Vega 11 = RX400 rebrand
Vega 10 = 1080 competition

>>59405908
>>59405142
Should I just buy a fury? Holy shit

why not just make the the 475 and 485 to save the butthurt

AMD should give full focus on Intel. Intel's revenue is 15 times that of Nvidia, clearly there's more money in CPUs

>>59405895
>hbm2

>expecting those cards will be cheaper than the Nvidia counterparts

Good luck

File: 1463305343924.jpg (125KB, 1375x749px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1375x749px

>>59405938
>Fury
>Housefire
>Overclocker's dream
>is a powerhungry card which draws close to 300Watt alone

>>59406009
Performs better then 480,cost the same

>>59406023
For god's sake, then buy a RX580, but not a Fury unless you get free electricity.

>>59406082
>Buying a rebrand

I rather die

>>59406023
1060 is miles better and is cheaper

If they're rebranding and upping the price it is consumer antitrust.

If they're rebranding and the cost is the same/lower then there's nothing wrong with that at all.

What's the big deal OP?

>>59406095
1060 is not better you gotta be a retard to say such things you only go Nvidia for 1070 and up, and below 1070 is amd

>>59406095
Than the 480? Fuck no it ain't.

>>59406146
wrong. rebrands mostly consist of higher binned chips you pay for

>>59406167
>>59406146
Wrong rebrands are just overclocker with warranty

>>59405577
>>59405779
>>59405537
>he doesn't realize the 290x performs identically to the rx 480

>>59405424
Polaris is not the same as fiji you retarded nigger

File: power_average.gif (73KB, 400x1227px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 400x1227px

>>59406183
no you're wrong you shithead!

another
massive
disappointment

But where's Volta?

File: __kurumizawa_satanichia_mcdowell_gabriel_dropout_drawn_by_disco_brando__4a270940d4081df9d9ed8ffad6edf19e.png (370KB, 723x1001px) Image search: [Google]

370KB, 723x1001px

>>59405142
AMD is redoing their naming scheme.
It's the same thing as when the 7970 was rebranded into the 280x.
Nothing wrong with re-releasing a older product, The RX580 and 570 are not the only cards AMD is releasing.

>tfw still reason to upgrade from my 7950
t-thanks amd.

File: radeon.png (30KB, 888x432px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 888x432px

>>59405142
>The 400 series literally only had 3 cards
>start another series
WTF amd


>>59405175
How is it good when the rabrand will be cheaper?!?

File: a9Jm9Vs1YjHW-fVmcDC0mvN4LaMCcaTGgeNzGppywdo.jpg (112KB, 1024x503px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 1024x503px

>>59406095
Not even good bait

>>59406300

>$900

this is worse bait

>>59406281
it can't be cheaper if you're in for secondhand

>>59406265
Same here

I'm buying a 1080Ti superclocked, recommend me a good 1080p monitor.

>>59406281
550 is the new Vega,but low power

>>59405920
Both Vega chips will be new tho

it's like saying polaris 11 was a rebrand

>>59406338
>Using a 1080ti for 1080p

Oek

Literal rebrand, or will we get a few tweaks and enhancements along the way?

Usually each "rebrand" managed to squeeze out better performance and power consumption

>>59405955
Intel does things other than CPUs

Plus the radeon pro/fire pro compete with Xeon Phi

>>59406281
Even if amd sets a lower msrp, online stores are still going to inflate the prices. That's how it works.
And anyway,
>implying it will be cheaper

>>59406381
>Intel does things other than CPUs
Their x86 revenue is around 13 billion, the other 2 billion is SSDs, software support, and IoT(still x86) nonsense

So yeah, while Intel does other things than "CPU", it's pocket change for them.

>>59406338

im going to punch you in the face if you use a 1080ti for 1080p

>>59406387
the prices aren't inflated by the stores though, but by demand

>>59406412
>>59406370
I'm a competitive 240Hz gamer

>>59405908
damn not impressive, my 470 is currently 1375/1800

Could just be a shitpost but I think im done giving amd the benefit of the doubt, even If Im planning on grabbin an r5

580/570 is rebranded polaris with minor improvements probably

VEGA is a whole new architecture and is exclusively high-end and is estimated to perform between 1080gtx and 1080ti

>>59406412

nice job you gave him the (You) he so desperately wanted

kys

>>59406427
when will you realise that it doesn't need me a 75hz monitor to kill you on my monitor?

>>59406427
I'm competitively gaming in your mom's shithole you fucking dung beetle

>>59406427
then you already know which monitor to get

troll unsucessful

>>59406427
Then you need a CRT at 800x600

>>59406338
Thunderbolt Display.

>>59406469
im pretty sure above 200 Hz you are actively damaging the CRT at that refresh rate

File: screenshot-2017-03-14-19-38-04.png (96KB, 948x822px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 948x822px

>>59405908
R E B R A N D E O N

>tfw my r9 390 broke a month ago
>tfw got the full price from 1 1/2years as coupon
>tfw i will just wait another month safe money and get a brand new rx 580

>>59406409
Is this yearly revenue?

They have nearly 1.7 billion in FPGAs since the altera deal

File: Screenshot_20170315_005304.png (68KB, 850x694px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 850x694px

>>59406719
No, quarter.
You can clearly see client and datacenter make out the large majority of revenue.

>>59406821
I'd really want to see net profit per group instead of revenue, I think datacenter should have much higher margins since they don't have 24/7 marketing like PC market does.

File: GrammarFaust.gif (84KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 480x360px

vvat iz HBM2?
>achtung juden

>>59406146
>If they're rebranding and upping the price it is consumer antitrust.
tell that to nvidia
look what happened with their last lawsuit. you'll waste countless dollars fighting them and get barely $30 back for your years and court fees fighting.

have fun!

>>59406219
>performs exactly the same
>both GCN with the same board layouts
srsly now
srsly.

>>59407154
>>performs exactly the same

???

>>59406338
kek

>>59407299
fiji performs the same as poolari
what's so hard to comprehend about rebrands anon?

File: patchy4.png (275KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 600x600px

>buying amd

>>59406556
Sacrifies must be made for e-sports glory.

>>59405142
If it leads to an even better price/performance GPU, it can only be a good thing.

>>59407519
The 390 was better than the 970 and I prefer freesync to gsync

File: Mhm.jpg (63KB, 728x546px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 728x546px

>>59407491
Nothing; sorry for doubting you, anon.

File: Girls.png (490KB, 449x401px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 449x401px

>>59407154
>>performs exactly the same

ahahahahahahaha


Also about GCN, yes its GCN 4th Generation, if you understand how GCN works you would know why its good. AMD takes the best technology from GCN3 and put it in to GCN4. This leads to long term support for features. Some driver made for Polaris will still work with R2xx and R3xx. But no you just look at the name. I guess Windows 1, and Win10 are the same in your book.

>>59406219
see>>59407596

>>59407573
you think you are hot shit, dontcha?

>>59407665
N-no! Please, I said I was s-sorry!!

>>59406427
Games that need that kind of FPS to play competitively can push those frames out of a toaster and are usually heavily CPU bound.

>>59407596
>winblows 1 and Win10 are the same in your book.
they obviously aren't you massive fucking cuck
everything after vista though? are just rebranded windows 6.

>>59406427
>competitive 240Hz gamer
>competitive
is tehre any other way to play any game?
maybe if you don't want to play a game that's fun or have a good time...

>>59407729
>Windows 8 a rebrand of Vista
>Windows for tablets

Better binned chips with a slightly higher clock out of the box. Pretty much that is the only change.

File: 1488399933.jpg (16KB, 104x132px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 104x132px

>>59407729
>everything after vista though? are just rebranded windows 6.

nope wrong again. At this point you should stop responding. its good that there are no real user names on this site. your lack of understanding technology is showing

File: 1489003509230.jpg (16KB, 490x490px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 490x490px

>>59405895
>wait

>>59405142
should've named it 400x.

>>59405142
Nvidia is replacing the memory on their cards with faster memory and calling it the same thing, at least AMD is straightforward about their refreshes

>>59409962
lol

>>59406199
It literally doesn't. RX480 > 290/390 with lower power draw.

>>59407769
vista laid the groundwork for it
win7 was supposed to be their touchbased OS
but mobile devices flopped hard as apple pushed their nano and wheel control bullshit. also touch screens weren't developed enough to be functional anyway.

>>59407962
>windows vista= windows 6
>windows 7=windows 6.01
>windows 8=6.1.1
etc, even win10 is still based around windows 6

just because the packaging is different, doesn't mean the product is.

>>59405972
>>hbm2
>
>>expecting those cards will be cheaper than the Nvidia counterparts
>
>Good luck

If they are both high price high performance, competition will drive prices down across all levels of GPUs

>>59405142
Nvidia and AMD have both been doing this for years you stupid cuck

>>59411908
yea the 290 is worse than the 480
while the 290x and 390 perform identically to a 480
go figure. also an OC 480 performs on par with 390x..

>>59411955
oh, Nvidia more so, in 00s they rebranded thrice in a row

580 going to be OC'ed 150Mhz 480 => it's good
xfx cards are great, they perfected fabrication process
it draws less power, runs better and has higher OC potential, and drivers are good now
it's right decision to rebrand it, since nobody retested 480s later in the year, market is not aware
these 580s will kick 1060 good.

>>59405142
>rebrands of rebrands of rebrands of rebrands
Seriously, what the fuck? Looks like I'll be going Nvidia this time. Been waiting for something new for over a fucking year now and still there is nothing outside the poorfag shit tier.

>>59405676
It also scales very well with temperature/voltage.
I've gained between 20 to 25% perf increase depending on the game from tweaking timings, overclocking VRAM to 2150 and overclocking core to 1500. Perf gain is pretty evenly split between core and memory.
If AMD process has matured enough to allow for that level of performance, without increasing power consumption too much, on their rebrands consistently I actually wouldn't mind the rebranding. And if they keep the same cost it'd be an okay upgrade for those still rocking the 200/300 series.

File: 1488408867093.png (91KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 653x726px

NOOO

>>59412032
AMD has been rebranding since the 7000 series lmao. that's already 4 and thte rx 5 line isn't even out yet.

>>59412294
>overclocking core to 1500
volts? what kind of cooler?
thing must be loud as fuck at those speeds.

>>59412528
1.225V, custom fuckhuge air cooling. The loudest things on it are the three Arctic F9 fans, but they idle at 400rpm, and don't really spin up past 1200rpm under load. It's quiet enough for my OCD to not get triggered. Stays under 60C.

>>59405319

Please, it would be $100 less for the same processing power and VRAM but with greatly reduced power consumption as well. $50 more for double the VRAM.

It's not really forward-looking, but don't act like it's not a good deal.

>>59405626
>R9 290
>trades blows with Jewvidya 1070

Stop lying anon, the only AMD cards that trade blows with the 1070 are the Fury series.

>>59405626
>R9 290
>1070
Wrong.
Dumb anime faggot.

File: 1488512278703.jpg (80KB, 766x960px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 766x960px

>>59405142
Had high hopes, by the time these come out i'll have enough money for a 1080TI
I feel let down

>>59405856
>it´s fine if amd does it because nvidia does it too

>>59405142
FUCK SAKE

>>59405952
cause normies wouldn´t buy it
this way they may feel like they´d get better performance

>>59405142
Pascal is a rebranded Maxwell too, no one complained and i speak this as a GTX 1070 owner.

>>59413448
>Pascal is a rebranded Maxwell

File: 1488343476914.png (19KB, 500x590px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 500x590px

>>59413448
>Pascal is a rebranded Maxwell too

The GTX 1070 is the rebrand of which Maxwell card??????????

>>59413476
The GTX 980ti.

>>59413480

>980ti
>2816 core with 384bit memory bus

>1070
>1920 core with 256bit memory bus

>the same gpu

You are a cancer

>>59413480
Lol

File: nigga.png (670KB, 840x922px) Image search: [Google]

670KB, 840x922px

>>59413480
>t. amdrone

Fuck off

>>59405214
>>MFW AMD 2 years behind Nvidia
>>MFW AMD 2 years behind Intel in gaming.
Is it really being behind if it wasn't intentional choice to join the budget Market

Can I expect a 480 8go to drop to 150euros?

>>59405142
>implying this matters unless its a rebranded flagship

>>59413506
its the same arch, just on 16nm so he does have a point, but its not a straight rebrand

>>59413587
>1070
>Cut down version of 980Ti
>Costs more

Funny that.

>>59405424
You don't know what the fuck you're talking about, you stupid cunt

>>59413646
that's a big gpu

>>59415707
>go
Go eat some frogs Pierre Ahmed

>>59413476
it's not really a rebrand but it's the same architecture with a die shrink.

>>59405142
give me poolaris with 1600mhz core pajeets

>>59413476
Laptop GTX 1070 = 2048 cores
Desktop GTX 1070 = 2048 cores
GTX 980 = 2048 cores

File: gpuz_oc.gif (23KB, 400x494px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 400x494px

>>59417412
>GTX 1070
>2048 cores

are you stupid?

File: amd kid.jpg (2MB, 8624x3896px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 8624x3896px

>>59417412
>Laptop GTX 1070 = 2048 cores
>Desktop GTX 1070 = 2048 cores
>2048 cores

>>59405424
290 was a new chip

280x was 7970 rebrand

>>59406565

It's the 300-series all over again.

I am thinking of dropping freesync and just getting that fucking used 980 ti.

File: samefag.jpg (529KB, 1340x1588px) Image search: [Google]

529KB, 1340x1588px

>>59418290
yep

>>59405142
both companies throwing out pipe clearing cards?

SHAME!

also they are all rebrands since 2011

>>59418931
The last NVIDIA rebrand was the GTX 680 to GTX 770 in 2012...

>tfw Nvidia has shit as drivers and you become forced to upgrade gpu
>tfw Intel is way over priced and AMD can do the same thing for way cheaper
>tfw AMD is the better price to performance option both cpu and gpu

It's gonna have more than 3 cards so

Is it true that Nvidia's 2000 series is going to be a rebrand too?

>>59417011
4u

>>59418973
>amd
>drivers
Wait ™

>>59413480
>28nm is the same as 16nm
do you get paid to act retarded on forums?

>>59418961
really?

can you please provide us the changes from maxwell to maxwell 2.0 to pascal?

friedel has the worst accent ever

>>59419060
Give the name of the GPU and his rebrand pls.

>>59419087
the entire line from maxwell 1.0 to 2.0 to pascal is a rebrand

>>59419106
Which one? Give me the NAME of the card please.

>>59419116
the entire UARCH you idiot is a rebrand from gm1xx to gm2xx to gf 10xx

File: 354deaa3770912621bb816da070346ab.jpg (12KB, 258x245px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 258x245px

>AMD waitfags will have waited so long for Vega that by the time it comes out, we will be closer to the launch of Volta than Polaris
>Vega will be on the market with Pascal levels of performance, competing with Vega for most of its life cycle

>>59419106
No. Just no

>>59419106
>not the same number of cores
>not the same memory bandwidth
>not the same ROPs
>not the same TMUS
>not the same size

You are stupid anon

>>59419153
What is the 970 Pascal rebrand?
What is the 1060 Maxwell rebrand?
What is the 980 Pascal rebrand?
What is the 1070 Maxwell rebrand?

I wait you anon

>>59405938
Yes it's 30 percent better than the 1060 and rx 470 and can keep up with the 1070

So I'm looking at the specs posted in this thread and...
Are modern GPUs really mem-clocked 8 GHz?

This sounds extremely ridiculous, my card is overclocked to 1GHz and that's as far as it will stably go.

I understand if it were HBM since new technology yadda yadda, but it says it's GDDR5?
Can anyone confirm those frequencies are correct?

If yes - isn't that a bit excessive?

>>59419282
effective GHz =/= real GHz

File: gp100_SM_diagram.png (421KB, 975x707px) Image search: [Google]

421KB, 975x707px

>>59419181
>>59419218
not him but whoever thinks that nvidia didnt just rebranded their entire line because they just node shrink it is delusional

>>59419308
Well it's memory frequencies we're talking about and same memory standard means they are all comparable clock for clock.
And they're still DDR, so, what's your point?
Effective = 2 times real? My question still starts.

Still doesn't explain why memory frequencies have octupled past 6 years.
Is the idea to minimize latency or what?

>>59419153
holy shit neck yourself

When will we see a 4k card that isn't at it's limit hitting 60fps day one? Will Volta or Navi be able to do this?

>>59419674
i trust nvidia to be able to achieve this

not so much with amd

>>59406281
>How is it good when the rabrand will be cheaper?!?
hey if you want 50 years you'll get the best deal possible

Are you AYYMDPOORFAGS retarded?

Pascal is not a rebrand of Maxwell at all

It has full HEVC Main10/Main12 hardware decoding, VP9 hardware decoding that Maxwell didn't support at all except GM206 which only supports HEVC Main10

It has DisplayPort 1.4, which is significantly better than DisplayPort 1.2

KYS if you're that clueless and ignorant

>>59419874
Please actually read the posts. The next batch of cards from Nvidia in 2017 are looking to be refreshes of Pascal a la devil's canyon was to haswell.

>>59419874
this is microcode upgrades idiot

>>59419906
[citation needed]

>>59419906
No, don't post if you don't know shit

>>59419906
kek, stop

>>59405539
>Meanwhile 390X was a 5% upgrade while costing the same and RX 480 is a 5% downgrade while costing more in EU than what I could pay for a 390x when sellers where making room for Poolaris.
In the USA, RX480 was almost half the price as the 390X. And its performance became better with driver updates for it. It's all around much better than the 390X now days.

I've never seen one of you Europoors able to explain how it's AMD's fault your country sucks ass, yet it's all you guys can ever say.

>>59406281
nvidia did the same shit with the 700 series

>>59418290
What?

What did you expect the 500 series to be?

Everyone knew it's not Vega.

Vega isn't coming until late April or early March.

>videocardz
>Wccftech
These threads need to fucking stop

>>59421317
even the frogs say it

http://www.comptoir-hardware.com/actus/cartes-graphiques/33705-les-cartes-rx-570-et-580-polaris-refresh-le-mois-prochain-.html

>>59405424
whoa how do they improve performance with a rebrand?

>>59421351
Moar MHz with the SAME chip

I don't get it. Why release a series of rebrands when they'll release a series of Vega cards around summer?

>>59421381
wow they must have be doing some serious electrical wizardry to continually up the clock speeds for continual performance gain

File: power_maximum.png (30KB, 500x690px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 500x690px

>>59421396
nah, they don't give a fuck, look the 390x power draw.

>>59421268
Why the fuck would they release two different series of video cards very close to one another?

>>59418881
memory clocks are nothing to scoff at, plus nobody should be upgrading gpus every single time a new generation is out.

>>59418881
>>59421430
If it wasn't for FreeSync and more feature rich driver updates I'd go Nvidia without thinking twice.

>>59421430
eh I've never even begun to care about power consumption

>>59405142
>Release Fury and Fury X
>Cards are technically the fastest cards ever released
>Instead of releasing more of those for cheaper but with more Ram they keep rereleasing the 290 that uses less power

How horrible are the yeilds on HBM2? They should of just said fuck it and gave us something better with DDR5.

>>59421600
Supposedly they spent most if not all their budget on their CPU devision so they had to cut corners.

>>59405142
At least the 480 and 470 might have a price drop

>>59421600
R9 Fury were a beta test for HBM. They don't utilize it the way Vega will.

What's the purpose behind rebrands like this?

>>59421199
>europe
>country
American education

File: samhyde.jpg (9KB, 300x262px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 300x262px

>>59405142

What's with you fucking Stalltists and those fucking clickbait websites?

>>59422335
Europeans live in a country as well.

Nice education you got there.

>>59406082
Unless you live in Venezuela the perf/watt is irrelevant. 300W (only under load) is fucking nothing.

>>59405142
Im interested in the RX 550.

If RX 460/560 was supposed to be the counter part of GTX 1050/1050Ti then this card will be the GT 600-740 counterpart?
About time we got new $40-50 GPUs.

>>59422464
But why.

Who does this?

Just wait for a 1050 or 460 to go on sale for $50. It happens.

Who the fuck buys new dogshit GPUs instead of waiting for the last gen GPUs to go on sale?

The worst cards I ever bought are the 9600GTX and 5770.

>>59422544
Not all computers need a GPU that let you run games at high settings.

A good amount of people want a videocard that can do video output and strong enough to play youtube videos and office.
Not all CPUs come with a IGPU.

>Who
Normal people who need to change a dead video card or literally any office computer.

>>59422565
>Not all computers need a GPU that let you run games at high settings.
Where in my post did I say they do?

Doesn't change that it makes more sense getting the previous generation lower-midrange on sale instead of the most garbage new GPU.

>>59422565
>Not all CPUs come with a IGPU.

and this is why i'd never buy ryzen

>>59422640
Or X series Intel CPUs, or Xeon CPUs.

>>59422640
Raven Ridge will have APUs

>>59422270
It's just a newer version of the card.

>>59422270
Better power efficiency, slightly better overclocking, cooler.
That's it.

>>59422713
It's the same card
>>59422725
>Better power efficiency
How?

>>59422749
They'll likely have a matured manufacturing process.

>>59422749
fixing small bugs and errors in circuit and compiler

>225+ replies of shit
Someone please nuke this board and its side mentality. Both release good cards, why is there so much fascination between choosing a side? Nvidia are assholes, but they are releasing some high end cards. The 1070 looks like a decent buy again and the 1080 is still a retarded buy. AMD brought an amazing card for $200 and you can get it with special for less than $150. Fuck you guys, kill yourselves.

>>59422811
So that's not a 290->390 tier update?

>>59422661
but will the i5 7500 equivalent have igpu?

>>59422869
Yes...?

The APUs are going to be 4 cores. Maybe they'll have a 3 core as well, and ones without SMT are likely.

Except the iGPU is going to be 5 times better than the i5-7500 iGPU.

>>59405142
Who's with me in waiting on the 490's?

>>59422973
There is no 490.

There is just RX Vega.

>>59405274

basically same performance. my 290x's are so fucking relevant it's not even funny.

>>59422998
My 7970 is still relevant. I don't see how that's a bad thing.

Like, no games are requiring more power than a 290X for 1080p. Or even 1440p as long as they have enough VRAM, sometimes.

Is that a bad thing? Because many of these games like BF1 still look gorgeous.

What's the point in more power unless it's to run 144hz or 4k, which almost no one actually uses?

AMD's strategy made sense. Almost everyone had 1080p 60hz and just needed to best affordable GPU for that. Until they can deliver 4k 60fps, nothing in between, like the 1070, really makes sense.
Yet the 1070s sell like hotcakes anyway. Go figure.

>>59422948
are you sure?

i'm not waiting 8 months for disappointment when the 7500 is already $150

>>59423152
>are you sure?

>this fucking cuck believes the shitposts made by shitposters
delete system32 for massive gaymen boost to your feepee ess

>>59423063
it wouldn't be a bad thing if they had continued to push the envelope
but it's the exact same performance while they end support for anything less than a 7850
even though a 6970 is more than capable and even better than that shit it's still not being supported.

so yeah, what the fuck is the point in releasing rebrands if they're going to end support for products that are more than capable of running modern software but can't because literal no driver meme

>>59405424
>there are people this dumb

>>59405626
Come on man, I'm also a 290 owner, dont make us look bad

>>59423314
are you sure?

i was looking for a way too boost my fps desu. might try it out.

>>59422461
>300 watts under load is nothing!
>lol @ the 7700k 125 watt housefire!
Choose one and only one.

pls top rebranding

just make one new good card every year

>>59411956
Wait, really? I have my 290 overclocked to 1150/1500 which is on par with a 390x with half the VRAM. You're saying my 290 OC is on par with a 480 OC?

>>59423400
My undervolted 7700 barely cracks higher than 60W

>>59421396
>electrical wizardry
>it's a wonder as to why these new gpus are twice the size with coolers capable of twice the TDP
>>59405424
>whoa how do they improve performance with a rebrand?
they improved performance since the 290x? with what? the $500 fury? lmao..

>>59423394
i'm sure you're a stupid cuck, yes.

>>59405424
Man, it would be sad if the 970 and 1060 got beaten by a rebranded 7970

>>59423429
the 290x=rx480 why is this so hard to comprehend? view the benchmarks yourself you fucking idiot.
8gb of either unused or useless vRAM as it's too slow to make any use of it all

>>59423436
>My under volted anything does not run as high as its max wattage.
Does this surprise you in some way?

>>59423473
considering it's on par with a 6870 (which is about 225w)
yeah it's fucking surprising

>>59423342
The big leaps, like the 7970, Maxwell, and R9 Fury made, interest me more that the small iterations.

That's why I'm waiting for Vega/Navi/Volta.
I'm not an "upgrade every 2 years" cuck.

And the 6990, I think you mean, doesn't perform well anymore for games that don't support dual GPU.

>>59423460
Polaris is a different architecture. The 480 is at least 10% better in most games. Even more so at 1440p.
Most of those benchmarks were before driver updates that benefited Polaris more than the others.

>>59405142
I wish they launched a RX 490 with 40 CU, but it probably would have no ground in price or performance against Nvidia.

>53% van de GL stemmers zijn hoog opgeleid

Weet men wel wat Klaver wil doen met het salaris van hogeropgeleiden?

>>59405319
>literally the same
Not even close.

>>59423486
smart anon.
but the 6970 is more than capable to handle modern titles, bf1 hacks to get it working on the gpu proves it. AMDs lack of support for their hardware is concerning desu.

>>59405142
>tfw rx 480 crossfire
should i upgrade to rx 580 crossfire also?

>>59405626
How the hell it would trade blow with a 1070?

>>59423451
are you sure?

i always thought i'm a little bit slow but being stupid never crossed my mind.

>>59423605
making fun of you is no fun.
yes i'm sure.

>>59423516
They support better than Nvidia does.

Nvidia has been intentionally gimping Tesla, Fermi, and Kepler cards for a while now. Those are roughly the same age as the 6990 and 7970.

>>59423739
well yeah nvidia is shit, but that's to be expected and is still no excuse for AMD neglecting their most expensive products after just a few years "bcus it's an old arc!" : /

>>59423429
the only thing you gain with the 480 is big power savings. the 290/x and 390/x are on par with the 480 but there's no point in buy the older ones new since you can get a new 4gb 480 for 160 bucks.

>>59423739
there is no evidence of gimping. prove to me there is dodgy code within the drivers which hampers performance.

>>59413476
Titan

>>59424087
Autism: the post

>>59424076
doesn't have to as the performance decrease is substantial and viewable by tests you can do yourself. that and the fact that they release drivers which specificy broke gpus of previous years.

so much for that WHQL standard lmfao.

>>59424076
Is a fact that a 960 outperforms a 780 on Witcher 3 due to Gameworks.

File: s-l300.jpg (11KB, 300x278px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 300x278px

>>59405142
I'm literally finished with AMD. Now that I'm not a poorfag anymore I got a 7700k and a 1080 after years of AMD shitrigs. AMD have lost their competitive edge, I won't even recommend AMD budget PC solutions anymore.

>>59405274
roughly the same performance, but not a rebrand
and the 390 was a rebrand of the 290 just with higher clocks and memory
same with the 290x and 390x
>>59405537
he never specifically mentioned the 290 as a re brand of the 7990 you genius.
He said that they started to rebrand stuff with the 7000 series and stopped after the 300 series
he never say the ENTIRE series was a re brand
>>59405424
480 and 470 aren't re brands, they are brand new chips
they just have about the same performance as the 390/x but use like half the power

>>59424168
nope.

>>59424192
they patched this straight away though.

>>59424000
Got mine for $120 USD and power usage and heat output arent a concern, so definitely satisfied.

>>59419034
>architecture is the same as node size
You do get paid to act retarded on forums

>>59419106
No, it's a refresh. They use the same architecture, but have a difference in transistor size which results in lower thermal output and electrical input, thus more headroom for higher clock speeds.

The performance benefits of Pascal come from this feature of the die shrink, which is the major difference across the two generations. If you had an equal number of cores at the same clock speed with equal quantities of memory at equal bandwidth, you would theoretically get the same or similar performance across both generations.

Since it is not a direct rebrand like the 680 to 770 (both have the full GK104 chip, 1536 cores) was with the only difference being clock speeds and binning of chips for those speeds (faster RAM and higher core clocks, although this was mostly due to power delivery increases), it is not a rebrand.

>>59405484
Remember Fermi?

>>59419391
Memory frequency isnt as important as bus width, but it can reduce power usage if the VRAM chips are well binned and highly clocked and the memory controller bus width is smaller (this is part of the reason why the 290(x)/390(x) is so hot, as they have a 512-bit bus width) instead of having low clocked memory with a large bus width.

Production yields and processes are improving over the years, and greater demand for better performance helps accelerate this. When the average screen is 720p and games dont demand much, VRAM speeds arent made to be excessive. GDDR5 was born out of necessity, not desire.

Effective memory speed is used to show Gbps, gigabits per second. You divide this number by 8 Gb/GB/s to get GB/s (this value assumes a bus width of 1 bit) and then multiply that by the bus width to get the memory bandwidth. Therefore, 7GHz effective speed is 7Gbps, so 7/8 is 0.875 GB/s. Multiply by 256 bits, and you have ~224 GB/s memory bandwidth.

>coil whine on my rx480
>Can hear microstutters because the coil whine has gaps in it.

Fuck me. Will messing with the Vcore get rid of it? What's a stable voltage?

>>59423460
Holy christ, why are you so mad?

File: 1489416218479.gif (492KB, 460x345px) Image search: [Google]

492KB, 460x345px

Why is AMD staggering the release of their new chips?

They've almost certainly lost a shitload of sales to people who would have wanted an r5.

File: Okay.jpg (51KB, 785x644px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 785x644px

I really hope that this shit isn't true. Devoting an entirely new series to SLIGHTLY matured wafers?

These deserve to be called the RX481 at best


But I want one

File: 1488408198311.png (42KB, 653x726px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 653x726px

>>59405142
DELETE

>>59426492
Because the 8 cores are for early adopters who are accustom to bugs and shit. It's a completely new uarch.
Poorfags are so whiny.

And because yields are so good, they needed so sell more 8 cores.

>>59426626
Yeah honestly they should have just called them the RX485, RX475, RX465.

I think people would be way upset over a refresh then.

>>59426454
Turn off all software that access the controller on the card. That includes stuff like custom fan curves or temperature monitoring. Stutters should be gone.

As for coil whine... Sometimes yoi can get rid of it by over/undervolting and over/underclocking, sometimes enabling vsync helps, some psu/gpu combos produce coil whine no matter what, sometimes it's a QC issue.

Tldr;
Stop talking to i2c, stuttering should stop. It's a known issue.
Coil whine ymmv, too many vatiables.

>>59407572
This,I have no regrets with my 390, although once I jump up from 1080 I'll need a new card

File: 1485641055099.jpg (93KB, 640x492px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 640x492px

>>59405142
>amd-radeon-rx-500-series-pushed-back-to-mid-april
So vega is definitely coming out first?

>>59428063
I don't know, is April before May or after?

>>59428063
>>59428096
summer

vega better be cheap

Those are the weaked vertions of RX400 As long as price/perf is good, I don't see the problem. Those will likelly end up in the ZENR3 APU and laptops.

Still, I'm waiting on Vega.

>>59419874
>It has full HEVC Main10/Main12 hardware decoding, VP9 hardware decoding
How will the next AMD gpu compete? Serious question.

>>59432724
Curent RX400 series already support all these features.

>>59433030
I heard that the VP9 decoding is hybrid

>>59433083

Only the part that nobody ever use.

>>59419874
>add HEVC 4k decoding on Kaby Lake and turn up the clocks to oblivion
>totally not a rebrand of Skylake

File: princess.png (958KB, 1200x1200px) Image search: [Google]

958KB, 1200x1200px

>>59433103
>I-It doesn't matter if amd doesn't support it
>a-amd knows best what you need

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtyaGppWknE

>>59433217
my god that is bad, the video not vega

I stopped when he said its 8+6 pin, not by increasing brightness to see it but by referencing the engineering board shown a while ago which also had the USB. Having a youtube account does not mean you have to produce insightful or value content I guess.

>>59433103
Like what parts? Because I need something that's future proof regarding video decoding.