AMD Radeon RX 480

[mapegl]

Selling my 290 ASAP! ;-)

 

I know there will not really be a big performance increase (which I really don't need), but I would love to get a blower and a lower TDP card!

[SkyLakeJunkie16]

actually 200$ isnt too much for a vr ready gpu 

compare this to something like a gtx 960 and you can finally say amd has created something really nice  

[spwath]

I need it. My 7950 is kind of old...

[Cificio]

tell me about nvidia physx? amd physx plz !

[handymanshandle]

6 hours ago, bill52600 said:

Am I the only one who stopped watching once I saw it was sponsored?

 

I'm going to get a lot of hate for this comment, but I simply can't trust the video given how AMD sponsored the whole thing.

Just that video and it really didn't have anything to do with performance but rather how much it'll cost.

What can't you trust exactly?

[WereCat]

1 hour ago, Cificio said:

tell me about nvidia physx? amd physx plz !

Honestly.. who cares about PhysX? How many games in the last 5 years had it? 5 games? Every game is just using CPU based PhysX as it works on everything.

 

RX 480 so far looks like a really nice upgrade to my GTX 770. I will wait for RX 490 first though.

[Danielys]

This seems the perfect card to upgrade from my 260x 

[kol]

Looks like I might be selling my GSYNC monitor soon...

[Unhelpful]

9 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

usually me too but at least 1080p goes into 4K at a perfect 4:1.  It won't look perfect since afaik all cards and displays will still interpolate unnecessarily, but it's a lot better than, say, 1080p on a 1440p screen

For people who want me info on why it ends up just being a myth that 1080p scales perfectly to 4k, here you go:

"Does 1920×1080 scale perfectly on 3840×2160 (4K UHD) monitors? What exactly happens when you run a non-native resolution on a display?" Section.

[Stefan95]

What do you guys thing about driver support, i mean w/ nVidia we have insta updates? I've never had amd gpu, because my friends were crying for fu**** drivers all the time... 

Spoiler

 

[othertomperson]

10 hours ago, wcreek said:

Kind of makes me want to cringe when one doesn't utilize the resolution of their display but I suppose. Maybe that's why 1440p is being left out. Maybe these need to become things #No1440PLeftBehind #1440PLivesMatter

I would argue that they are utilising their resolution. Just because they aren't playing games at the full resolution doesn't mean that they aren't watching YouTube, Amazon Prime and Netflix in 4K. UHD Blu Ray is becoming a thing now too, and not to mention that a 40" 4K display is a decent replacement for a wall of monitors for productivity purposes.

[TheRandomness]

11 hours ago, othertomperson said:

Boring. I don't care about highly efficient low end cards. I don't even really care about VR. I just want something that is better than what I currently have that doesn't cost over £600.

Fury performance for £200... I'd say that's better than what you have now.

25 minutes ago, Stefan95 said:

What do you guys thing about driver support, i mean w/ nVidia we have insta updates? I've never had amd gpu, because my friends were crying for fu**** drivers all the time... 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Drivers should be fine. I've never had any issues with my 290 c:

[othertomperson]

3 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

Fury performance for £200... I'd say that's better than what you have now.

Even if that weren't laughably optimistic (this isn't a Fury replacement by any stretch of the imagination), no it isn't better than two overclocked 970s in SLI. In all likelihood this is slightly better than one 970 (I'm expecting in the 390-980 sort of performance range), and let's remember that the 970 only cost £275 at launch.

[TheRandomness]

5 minutes ago, othertomperson said:

Even if that weren't laughably optimistic (this isn't a Fury replacement by any stretch of the imagination), no it isn't better than two overclocked 970s in SLI. In all likelihood this is slightly better than one 970 (I'm expecting in the 390-980 sort of performance range), and let's remember that the 970 only cost £275 at launch.

It isn't a fury replacement, I know. I guess we have to wait for benchmarks before we can really continue this. It would be nice if it was Fury performance though

[othertomperson]

1 minute ago, TheRandomness said:

It isn't a fury replacement, I know. I guess we have to wait for benchmarks before we can really continue this. It would be nice if it was Fury performance though

Fury-level performance will be in the 490/490X, and then a true replacement (as in something that is to the 400 series what Fury was to the 300 series) will come with Vega.

[TheRandomness]

8 minutes ago, othertomperson said:

Fury-level performance will be in the 490/490X, and then a true replacement (as in something that is to the 400 series what Fury was to the 300 series) will come with Vega.

Just saying, I didn't read the SLI part in your profile so I thought you only had one 970

Considering the fact that the 380 and 390 were both launched at the same time and we haven't heard anything about the 490 from AMD I think it's safe to assume Polaris will be everything but the 490/X and those 2 will be coming around October under Vega. It makes sense because we've only heard of 2 Polaris classes (10 & 11) and 11 is said to be low end with 6 cards coming out.

[handymanshandle]

19 minutes ago, othertomperson said:

I would argue that they are utilising their resolution. Just because they aren't playing games at the full resolution doesn't mean that they aren't watching YouTube, Amazon Prime and Netflix in 4K. UHD Blu Ray is becoming a thing now too, and not to mention that a 40" 4K display is a decent replacement for a wall of monitors for productivity purposes.

Still way more expensive for 4K TVs and Monitors.

[IGJoe2192]

I am gonna vote with my money, $700 for a reference card is outrageous. I received a notification last night at about 11pm that EVGA had more FE 1080's in stock, woke up less then 8hrs later and they are sold out again. Sure it is a great card but we need to show them they're pricing things way too high. I am gonna go for the RX 480 because it looks to be slotted around 390X performance and I am currently running an HD7970Ghz, $200 to give me a little bit better performance at 1440P and it should have freesync which my monitor supports. 

[othertomperson]

5 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

Just saying, I didn't read the SLI part in your profile so I thought you only had one 970

Considering the fact that the 380 and 390 were both launched at the same time and we haven't heard anything about the 490 from AMD I think it's safe to assume Polaris will be everything but the 490/X and those 2 will be coming around October under Vega. It makes sense because we've only heard of 2 Polaris classes (10 & 11) and 11 is said to be low end with 6 cards coming out.

 

The 380 and 390 were both rebrands (of the 285 and 290 respectively) so it's not really comparable. 

 

5 minutes ago, wcreek said:

Still way more expensive for 4K TVs and Monitors.

1440p TVs don't exist. 4K TVs and Monitors are in the £360-450 price range though, which makes them quite affordable. Particularly when it comes to TVs when a good 1080p TV will cost you around the same amount anyway.

[TheRandomness]

3 minutes ago, othertomperson said:

 

The 380 and 390 were both rebrands (of the 285 and 290 respectively) so it's not really comparable. 

 

1440p TVs don't exist. 4K TVs and Monitors are in the £360-450 price range though, which makes them quite affordable. Particularly when it comes to TVs when a good 1080p TV will cost you around the same amount anyway.

Rebrands with refinements*

If they were exact copies then how isn't the 290 performing the same or better than the 970 (it's just under last time I checked)

[iPolymer]

12 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

well according to the demo two of them competes with a 1080, not a single one

Still cheaper than the 1080, I might go team Red this time around and give up my 980ti. 

[handymanshandle]

1 hour ago, othertomperson said:

1440p TVs don't exist. 4K TVs and Monitors are in the £360-450 price range though, which makes them quite affordable. Particularly when it comes to TVs when a good 1080p TV will cost you around the same amount anyway.

Wouldn't have guessed. 

Honest though the price difference is still a deterrent and harder to run at native res. 

[Monkey Dust]

After Nvidia's OMFG pricing on the 1080 this is certainly refreshing. No proper benchmarks yet though, so a bit early to declare it a gift from the value gods, and saviour of our bank balance, but it looks promising.

 

[FairMaiden]

Every card has been professionally dropped by one of our top engineers to ashore quality and durability.

[othertomperson]

2 hours ago, TheRandomness said:

Rebrands with refinements*

If they were exact copies then how isn't the 290 performing the same or better than the 970 (it's just under last time I checked)

It does when you overclock it. The 390 is a 290 with a factory overclock and a better heatsink. The reason the 390 and 390X don't have the overclocking headroom that the 970 and 980 have is that they have been clocked about as aggressively as they can be out of the gate, and binned more rigorously to guarantee that higher stock clockspeed. If you clock a 390 down to 290 stock speeds they perform absolutely identically.

 

1 hour ago, wcreek said:

Wouldn't have guessed. 

Honest though the price difference is still a deterrent and harder to run at native res. 

You keep saying this as if we're talking about gaming rather than streaming YouTube and such. It isn't "harder to run" any cheap piece of shit APU can do it easily.