Price tag of RX 480 Revealed: $199 4GB, $229 8GB (Confirmed)

[Starelementpoke]

3 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

But they could have charged more and had better margins since they don't really have any competition until the 1070 at $400. 

 

Although, having seen the release I'm a bit skeptical of the performance and as such more than $200 might not be cost effective. AMD releasing it with a single benchmark running in XFIRE, in a highly AMD favoring game, just comparing it to a 1080 with what looks like different settings, and only showing a 50% utilization makes me really worried about what a single 480 will actually do. I really hope I'm worried over nothing, but AMDs release choices really are a bit perplexing.

They´ve been perplexing since the FX6300.

[Briggsy]

Just watching a video from gamers nexus, $199 is for the 4GB model. No idea on the 8GB model... it could be $249 if the <$500 CF slide means anything.

[dmegatool]

1 hour ago, awesomeness10120 said:

Why the hell is everyone getting so heated about this. Relax guys, the RX 480 is A THIRD of the price of the cheapest GTX 1080 you can get. Saying it's meant to compete with it is like saying that a nice sedan is meant to compete with a fucking Bugatti. Wait till the GTX 1060 comes out to see the actual competition.

It's as if Nvidia gonna stay arms crossed, looking pass the AMD train. Yeah right.

 

200$ is right in the ball park of the 1060 so they'll go head to head. And if performance ain't there, prices will be adjusted to make competiting cards to go against each other. Like if the 1060 doesn't cut it (which I doubt), why would Nvidia keep the 1070 at 380$ ?  They could lower the price of both card so the RX480 would fall right in between in terms of performance and price, as it  should. 

 

Anyway, yay for competition. Can't wait for both companies complete line up. 

[Shahnewaz]

$200 and $230 confirmed. Holy **** that is some aggressive, aggressive pricing.

Looks like Polaris and 14nm are going pretty well. And the PCB is pretty damn small too.

 

Can't wait to see the rest of the lineup.

[Prysin]

2 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

But they could have charged more and had better margins since they don't really have any competition until the 1070 at $400. 

 

Although, having seen the release I'm a bit skeptical of the performance and as such more than $200 might not be cost effective. AMD releasing it with a single benchmark running in XFIRE, in a highly AMD favoring game, just comparing it to a 1080 with what looks like different settings (not to mention he made it a point to say that they ran similarly and never mentioned anything about settings being the same), and only showing a 50% utilization makes me really worried about what a single 480 will actually do. I really hope I'm worried over nothing, but AMDs release choices really are a bit perplexing.

charging more makes no sense.

 

AMD is trying to build a BRAND. ATM they dont have the marketing power to "beat" the GeForce branding. So they have to further cement the Radeon brand. By proving to the public how good it is, and by making it truly affordable, they can undercut Nvidia. All those who were planning to buy a nearly 75% more expensive but just 20-25% more powerful GTX 1070, will be much more inclined to take a second look at this card. It is faster then existing 700 series cards and all the way up to the 970, but costs dramatically less.

 

Also, there is two ways to make margins.

Volume vs raw profit.

 

You can simply outsell the competition and thus make your margins that way.

 

 

[Prysin]

38 minutes ago, Shahnewaz said:

$200 and $230 confirmed. Holy **** that is some aggressive, aggressive pricing.

Looks like Polaris and 14nm are going pretty well. And the PCB is pretty damn small too.

 

Can't wait to see the rest of the lineup.

you can get 2-4GB chips of GDDR5 now, so you only need 2-4 memory chips to get the desired VRAM amount. This saves both space and power.

[Notional]

4 hours ago, Prysin said:

Anyone else noticed that AMD skipped DP1.3 and went straight for DP1.4??

The diff is 1.3 can do UHD 120Hz 8bit, whilst 1.4 can to UHD 120Hz 10bit....

Considering DP1.4 was released 1st of march this year.... yeah. either a typo or they really stepped up their game.

DP 1.4 is more or less a firmware upgrade it seems. Hardware wise it seems to be identical or very similar. So it's more of a controller issue in the GPU itself that needs the upgrade. So at least NVidia won't be in a better position there.

[Starelementpoke]

40 minutes ago, Shahnewaz said:

$200 and $230 confirmed. Holy **** that is some aggressive, aggressive pricing.

Looks like Polaris and 14nm are going pretty well. And the PCB is pretty damn small too.

 

Can't wait to see the rest of the lineup.

Lez go. Upgrade´s are no longer so bleak for me.

[Prysin]

1 minute ago, Notional said:

DP 1.4 is more or less a firmware upgrade it seems. Hardware wise it seems to be identical or very similar. So it's more of a controller issue in the GPU itself that needs the upgrade. So at least NVidia won't be in a better position there.

uhm, 10bit requires insanely much more bandwidth then 8bit...

[Notional]

3 minutes ago, Prysin said:

uhm, 10bit requires insanely much more bandwidth then 8bit...

DisplayPort version 1.4 was published March 1, 2016.^[20]No new transmission modes are defined, so HBR3 (32.4 Gbit/s) as introduced in version 1.3 still remains as the highest available mode. DisplayPort 1.4 adds support for Display Stream Compression 1.2 (DSC), Forward Error Correction, HDR extension defined in CTA-861.3, the Rec. 2020 color space, and extends the maximum number of inline audio channels to 32.^[21]

[TidaLWaveZ]

9 hours ago, FatalityDiablo said:

hahaha get rekt nvidia and all thy fanboys! First thing I'll do is put two of them mofuckers in cf and outrun 1080s by a longshot hahaa, gj AMD!

 

Pipe dreams, probably won't outrun the 1080 at all. A single 1080 FE with no overclock beats the RX480 CF by ~2,000 points in 3Dmark.

[Prysin]

18 minutes ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

Pipe dreams, probably won't outrun the 1080 at all. A single 1080 FE with no overclock beats the RX480 CF by ~2,000 points in 3Dmark.

3DMark is best game ever. Ive spent more time playing 3DMark with my friends then any other game.

[TidaLWaveZ]

1 minute ago, Prysin said:

3DMark is best game ever. Ive spent more time playing 3DMark with my friends then any other game.

 

When people can't debate properly, they usually get angry and attempt to insult the opposition.

[Prysin]

1 minute ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

 

When people can't debate properly, they usually get angry and attempt to insult the opposition.

when people can't win an argument properly, the usually resort to irrelevant measures of performance in order to make a case.

[TidaLWaveZ]

1 minute ago, Prysin said:

when people can't win an argument properly, the usually resort to irrelevant measures of performance in order to make a case.

 

I see your still beating around the bush instead of providing an argument as to why you think the RX 480 in crossfire will best a single 1080.

[PLME888]

But AMD needs to use 2 cards for that performance, what about power consumption? NVIDIA will win again i think...

[TidaLWaveZ]

 

11 minutes ago, Prysin said:

when people can't win an argument properly, the usually resort to irrelevant measures of performance in order to make a case.

 

Furthermore 3Dmark probably gives a lot better crossfire results than most games, so real game benches will likely show a bigger performance gap.

[Sauron]

I hope nvidia either lowers their ridiculous prices or loses half their marketshare. But who am i kidding.

[goodtofufriday]

11 hours ago, Briggsy said:

Yeah, this isn't gonna be a big shitstorm for AMD or anything...

"

Ashes of the singularity uses some form of procedual generation for its texture generation ( aswell as unit composition/behavior to prevent driver cheats) which means that every game session and bench run will have various differences in some details.

You can see this quite well in the second image. Looking at the chasm like drop off in front of the mountain (top portion) you can see that on the 480 side it's actually half filled with snow, while the 1080 run is pretty much... "dry" down there. Same can be observed with various mountain ledges where any remotely flat surface is covered in thick white snow on the 480 and hardly any on the 1080. Lastly the plateau on top of the same mountain is basically all snow on the 480 with almost no rock texture retained while on the 1080 the would-be snow layer is thin enough to show some of the rock's detail beneath.

Obviously, thick layers of snow will reduce apparent detail but that does not mean the scene becomes any easier to render. It's just that one seed looks more complex than the other.

tl;dr: Procedual terrain texture generation gave the 480 a much more snowy "seed". Differences in perceived detail are due to snow being inherently "boring" and probably purely aesthetic."

[byalexandr]

14 hours ago, themaniac said:

or you can wait to see how the 480x, 490, and 490x perform and cost

I'm 90% sure the RX 480 is the 480X. Think of it this way:

 

R7 460

RX 460 (which would normally be the 460X, I think you're starting to get the idea)

R7 470

RX 470

R9 480

RX 480

R9 490

RX 490 (which I hope is Vega and they don't make another Fury X or something)

[Briggsy]

2 minutes ago, goodtofufriday said:

"

Ashes of the singularity uses some form of procedual generation for its texture generation ( aswell as unit composition/behavior to prevent driver cheats) which means that every game session and bench run will have various differences in some details.

You can see this quite well in the second image. Looking at the chasm like drop off in front of the mountain (top portion) you can see that on the 480 side it's actually half filled with snow, while the 1080 run is pretty much... "dry" down there. Same can be observed with various mountain ledges where any remotely flat surface is covered in thick white snow on the 480 and hardly any on the 1080. Lastly the plateau on top of the same mountain is basically all snow on the 480 with almost no rock texture retained while on the 1080 the would-be snow layer is thin enough to show some of the rock's detail beneath.

Obviously, thick layers of snow will reduce apparent detail but that does not mean the scene becomes any easier to render. It's just that one seed looks more complex than the other.

tl;dr: Procedual terrain texture generation gave the 480 a much more snowy "seed". Differences in perceived detail are due to snow being inherently "boring" and probably purely aesthetic."

It's not just where snow is covered or not, but the terrain that is visible for both. The geometry is much more detailed on the right side, in spots where there is no snow for either.

[Starelementpoke]

9 minutes ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

 

 

Furthermore 3Dmark probably gives a lot better crossfire results than most games, so real game benches will likely show a bigger performance gap.

Probably?

[goodtofufriday]

1 minute ago, Briggsy said:

It's not just where snow is covered or not, but the terrain that is visible for both. The geometry is much more detailed on the right side, in spots where there is no snow for either.

Thats, supposedly, because it is still a snowy terrain, just at some points this snow is more transparent. If the 480 had generated the same terrain it should look the same.

[MadyTehWolfie]

16 hours ago, shdowhunt60 said:

As much as I'm inclined to call this bullshit, man do I really want this to be a thing. $200 would be absolutely incredible for a GPU that's gunning for the 980.

980 is old news 1070 beats a titanX I want to see a chip that will compete with that for 300. untill then this will most likely only compete with the 1060 if the trend in performance for the 1000 series continues.

[79wjd]

1 hour ago, Prysin said:

charging more makes no sense.

 

AMD is trying to build a BRAND. ATM they dont have the marketing power to "beat" the GeForce branding. So they have to further cement the Radeon brand. By proving to the public how good it is, and by making it truly affordable, they can undercut Nvidia. All those who were planning to buy a nearly 75% more expensive but just 20-25% more powerful GTX 1070, will be much more inclined to take a second look at this card. It is faster then existing 700 series cards and all the way up to the 970, but costs dramatically less.

 

Also, there is two ways to make margins.

Volume vs raw profit.

 

You can simply outsell the competition and thus make your margins that way.

 

 

You're right, except for one small detail. Nvidia can drop prices if AMD is gaining a sizeable market share (Nvidia isn't selling as well as they would like). Undercutting isn't an effective tool when you're competition can do exactly the same thing. A price war would occur either way, but pricing something far lower than the competition only speeds up the decline (good for consumers, not great for a bottom line). 

 

Oh, and the last time I checked, being known as the "cheaper" option hasn't worked out too well for AMD.