• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD Radeon RX 480 8 GB

Jeffredo said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
HD64G said:
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.
Click to expand...

Going to be excellent perf/watt with the refresh.
 
HD64G said:
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.
Click to expand...
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. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: bug
HD64G said:
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.
Click to expand...
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?
 
bug said:
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?
Click to expand...

It's already in the shitbook pros.
 
TheGuruStud said:
It's already in the shitbook pros.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Steevo said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
TheGuruStud said:
It's already in the shitbook pros.
Click to expand...

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).
Steevo said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Aquinus said:
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.
Click to expand...
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. :)
 
bug said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
bug said:
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?
Click to expand...
I am a desktop PC owner, so your point was?
 
EarthDog said:
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. ;)
Click to expand...
30W diff only when gaming without v-sync is a monetary factor eh? Whatever...
 
Prima.Vera said:
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. :)
Click to expand...
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. :slap:
 
Aquinus said:
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. :slap:
Click to expand...
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.
 
Prima.Vera said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
HD64G said:
30W diff only when gaming without v-sync is a monetary factor eh? Whatever...
Click to expand...
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. ;)
 
Aquinus said:
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.
Click to expand...

I plan on purchasing a Pascal Titan X for my 720p display.
 
Ungari said:
I plan on purchasing a Pascal Titan X for my 720p display.
Click to expand...
Obvious flame bait is obvious. Obviously you'd need tri-SLI Pascal Titan X to drive that setup.
 
Speaking of wasting money... where is Trog and his dopey capped dual 980Ti setup? LOLOLOLOLhahahah!
 
bug said:
Obvious flame bait is obvious. Obviously you'd need tri-SLI Pascal Titan X to drive that setup.
Click to expand...

I was thinking of buying a second Titan X to use as a PhysX card.
 
Ungari said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Last edited:
rruff said:
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.
Click to expand...

RX 480M is not Polaris 11.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top