AMD Radeon RX 480 8 GB

[HD64G]

Maybe one reason because as with the case of the R9 390 vs. GTX 980 the AMD offering (RX480 vs. GTX 1060) is still considerably more power hungry and hot running for the same performance (more or less). Which is unfortunate given its most current API advantages.

Considerably more power hungry eh? We are talking about a few tens of watts when gaming here, when most of their life GPUs are sleeping or idling. Stop trying so hard to justify what cannot be by any means and check this re-review. DX12 and Vulcan clearly show the future in gaming there.

 

[TheGuruStud]

Considerably more power hungry eh? We are talking about a few tens of watts when gaming here, when most of their life GPUs are sleeping or idling. Stop trying so hard to justify what cannot be by any means and check this re-review. DX12 and Vulcan clearly show the future in gaming there.

Going to be excellent perf/watt with the refresh.

 

[EarthDog]

Considerably more power hungry eh? We are talking about a few tens of watts when gaming here, when most of their life GPUs are sleeping or idling. Stop trying so hard to justify what cannot be by any means and check this re-review. DX12 and Vulcan clearly show the future in gaming there.

A few 10's of watts when you are talking ~150W is significant. Now, that doesn't translate into $$$ as you point out, but the point isn't wrong either.... in fact, he didn't mention money, just power and heat. YOU added a monetary value to support your thinking about a point he never made.

 

[bug]

Considerably more power hungry eh? We are talking about a few tens of watts when gaming here, when most of their life GPUs are sleeping or idling. Stop trying so hard to justify what cannot be by any means and check this re-review. DX12 and Vulcan clearly show the future in gaming there.

Those "few tens of watts" that you are trying so hard to ignore, means Nvidia can put Pascal on mobile mostly as-is, while AMD cannot do that. Nvidia also uses their architecture for Tegra SoCs, another market where AMD doesn't exist.
So yes, AMD may be competitive on one front, but they're a no-show on others, precisely because of power consumption.
Btw, did you own a P4 back in the day, or where you ignoring "a few tens of watts" at the time?

 

[TheGuruStud]

Those "few tens of watts" that you are trying so hard to ignore, means Nvidia can put Pascal on mobile mostly as-is, while AMD cannot do that. Nvidia also uses their architecture for Tegra SoCs, another market where AMD doesn't exist.
So yes, AMD may be competitive on one front, but they're a no-show on others, precisely because of power consumption.
Btw, did you own a P4 back in the day, or where you ignoring "a few tens of watts" at the time?

It's already in the shitbook pros.

 

[Steevo]

It's already in the shitbook pros.

Also seems to ignore the fact that AMD is getting higher yields by allowing the TDP to be on average higher, and binning "great" chips for use in said shitbooks. its almost like we have an influx of people who cant or won't read up on technology and instead want to be spoonfed ideas that reinforce their own.

 

[TheGuruStud]

Also seems to ignore the fact that AMD is getting higher yields by allowing the TDP to be on average higher, and binning "great" chips for use in said shitbooks. its almost like we have an influx of people who cant or won't read up on technology and instead want to be spoonfed ideas that reinforce their own.

I'm not ignoring anything. You just said they were a no show in laptops. Apple are inconsequential in numbers, but they can be used. I'm sure nvidia is unwilling to sell them dirt cheap for such low quantities.

 

[bug]

It's already in the shitbook pros.

Of course it is. My point was Nvidia's mobile GPUs are almost the same as their mobile counterparts (if nothing else, that's manufacturing costs savings right there), whereas AMD has to stick to the more traditional specially designed chips (e.g. their mobile 480 isn't even Polaris 10, it's some sort of Polaris 11).

Also seems to ignore the fact that AMD is getting higher yields by allowing the TDP to be on average higher, and binning "great" chips for use in said shitbooks. its almost like we have an influx of people who cant or won't read up on technology and instead want to be spoonfed ideas that reinforce their own.

Point taken, next time I'll try to buy the most power hungry GPU I can get my hands on, because yeah, efficiency is for noobs.

 

[Prima.Vera]

Well, they're right if they just want smooth performance at 1080p. You don't buy a 1080 unless you need it, otherwise you're kind of wasting money.

There can never be too much performance even with the latest Titan on 1080P.
Just how many fps do you think you'll get with MSAAx8 and DSR 4.00x in any game? And I'm not talking about latest game, even 5 years old ones
There's no such thing as a too strong card, or a too strong CPU, stop fooling yourselves.

 

[Ungari]

Of course it is. My point was Nvidia's mobile GPUs are almost the same as their mobile counterparts (if nothing else, that's manufacturing costs savings right there), whereas AMD has to stick to the more traditional specially designed chips (e.g. their mobile 480 isn't even Polaris 10, it's some sort of Polaris 11).


Point taken, next time I'll try to buy the most power hungry GPU I can get my hands on, because yeah, efficiency is for noobs.

There are no RX 480s on Polaris 11.
Polaris chips in Laptops are binned for lower temps achieved by TDP lower than those used in the desktop cards.
Commercial binned Polaris 11 has a TDP of 50W.

 

[HD64G]

Those "few tens of watts" that you are trying so hard to ignore, means Nvidia can put Pascal on mobile mostly as-is, while AMD cannot do that. Nvidia also uses their architecture for Tegra SoCs, another market where AMD doesn't exist.
So yes, AMD may be competitive on one front, but they're a no-show on others, precisely because of power consumption.
Btw, did you own a P4 back in the day, or where you ignoring "a few tens of watts" at the time?

I am a desktop PC owner, so your point was?

 

[HD64G]

A few 10's of watts when you are talking ~150W is significant. Now, that doesn't translate into $$$ as you point out, but the point isn't wrong either.... in fact, he didn't mention money, just power and heat. YOU added a monetary value to support your thinking about a point he never made.

30W diff only when gaming without v-sync is a monetary factor eh? Whatever...

 

[Aquinus]

There can never be too much performance even with the latest Titan on 1080P.
Just how many fps do you think you'll get with MSAAx8 and DSR 4.00x in any game? And I'm not talking about latest game, even 5 years old ones
There's no such thing as a too strong card, or a too strong CPU, stop fooling yourselves.

If you're using 8x MSAA and 4x DSR together, you're a special kind of stupid because you won't see half of it but, you'll be giving up half of your performance to get it. This comment is so outlandish that I would expect it to be sarcasm. You say, "There is no such thing as too strong a card," but you know what is? Too big of a price tag just to run 1080p.

 

[bug]

There are no RX 480s on Polaris 11.
Polaris chips in Laptops are binned for lower temps achieved by TDP lower than those used in the desktop cards.
Commercial binned Polaris 11 has a TDP of 50W.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Radeon_400_series#Mobile

RX480M is listed as Polaris11.

 

[Ungari]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Radeon_400_series#Mobile

RX480M is listed as Polaris11.

Sorry, you are correct.
This is an awful naming convention by AMD, as it is confusing.
However, this chip has a TDP of 35W!

 

[Prima.Vera]

If you're using 8x MSAA and 4x DSR together, you're a special kind of stupid because you won't see half of it but, you'll be giving up half of your performance to get it. This comment is so outlandish that I would expect it to be sarcasm. You say, "There is no such thing as too strong a card," but you know what is? Too big of a price tag just to run 1080p.

You completely missed the point.
Anyways, let's leave it as it is, you already start your usual name calling and verbal bullying, so continuing this "conversation" further is pointless.
Cheers.

 

[Aquinus]

You completely missed the point.
Anyways, let's leave it as it is, you already start your usual name calling and verbal bullying, so continuing this "conversation" further is pointless.
Cheers.

My "usual name calling"? I almost never name call and I didn't call you stupid, I said anyone who does what you suggest is stupid because no one buys a Titan X (with a huge price tag nonetheless,) to run at 1080p with 4x DSR and 8x MSAA. Your point was missed because it made no sense.

 

[EarthDog]

30W diff only when gaming without v-sync is a monetary factor eh? Whatever...

Didn't say it was... YOU brought cost into it. Just saying that 30W is 20% more power for the same performance. Again, YOU brought money into it when it was never a talking point, not us. You are absolutely right, but again, that wasn't the talking point in the first place.

 

[Ungari]

My "usual name calling"? I almost never name call and I didn't call you stupid, I said anyone who does what you suggest is stupid because no one buys a Titan X (with a huge price tag nonetheless,) to run at 1080p with 4x DSR and 8x MSAA. Your point was missed because it made no sense.

I plan on purchasing a Pascal Titan X for my 720p display.

 

[bug]

I plan on purchasing a Pascal Titan X for my 720p display.

Obvious flame bait is obvious. Obviously you'd need tri-SLI Pascal Titan X to drive that setup.

 

[EarthDog]

Speaking of wasting money... where is Trog and his dopey capped dual 980Ti setup? LOLOLOLOLhahahah!

 

[Ungari]

Obvious flame bait is obvious. Obviously you'd need tri-SLI Pascal Titan X to drive that setup.

I was thinking of buying a second Titan X to use as a PhysX card.

 

[rruff]

There are no RX 480s on Polaris 11.
Polaris chips in Laptops are binned for lower temps achieved by TDP lower than those used in the desktop cards.
Commercial binned Polaris 11 has a TDP of 50W.

Alienware has laptops with RX 470s in them but that's all I've heard about Polaris 10 in laptops.

"The AMD Radeon RX 480M (formerly known as R9 M480) is a mobile high end graphics cards. It is based on the new Polaris architecture (Polaris 11 chip) and manufactured in 14nm FinFET. Compared to the faster RX 490M, the M480 should be a slightly stripped down version based on the same chip. Up to now AMD only published benchmarks at the TDP of 35 Watt with 16 CUs. With these scores the card is slightly faster than a Nvidia GeForce GTX 960M."

http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-RX-480M.164291.0.html

AMD is still about a generation behind with FPS/W competing with Maxwell, not Pascal. EDIT: Or maybe not. If they really get that performance with 35W it will be significantly better than Maxwell.

 

[Ungari]

Alienware has laptops with RX 470s in them but that's all I've heard about Polaris 10 in laptops.

"The AMD Radeon RX 480M (formerly known as R9 M480) is a mobile high end graphics cards. It is based on the new Polaris architecture (Polaris 11 chip) and manufactured in 14nm FinFET. Compared to the faster RX 490M, the M480 should be a slightly stripped down version based on the same chip. Up to now AMD only published benchmarks at the TDP of 35 Watt with 16 CUs. With these scores the card is slightly faster than a Nvidia GeForce GTX 960M."

http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-RX-480M.164291.0.html

AMD is still about a generation behind with FPS/W competing with Maxwell, not Pascal. EDIT: Or maybe not. If they really get that performance with 35W it will be significantly better than Maxwell.

RX 480M is not Polaris 11.

 

[rruff]

RX 480M is not Polaris 11.

Source? I see a lot of places claiming it is, and none saying otherwise.