rx480 best gpu under $200 ?

[alphaproject]

Dang, the 1060 Ti would have to be roughly $200-250 and perform REALLY close to the 980 cards to make it worthy. If they are $300... not worth it.

 

The 480X is said to be $200, done....  Maybe board partners will add $30 for extra cooling or whatever... who knows.  I think the reference boards at $200 is a good starting point though. At least they don't charge you $100 extra for reference boards, rotfl.

[thewipyk]

35 minutes ago, 00Titan00 said:

they say rx480 would be launched on 29th of june,  few days back i started a topic in which i wanted advice for gpu under $200 usd , many said wait for polaris ,now my question to you is , should i wait more until nvidia launches their new pascal based gpu in this range? what do you think ,have any better suggestion then plz reply 
thank you

 

What i say is w8 for 29 june, and see the real benchmarks. From the presentation they did, it looked like they compared 1080 running at ~ 4k, vs 2 rx 480 running at 1440p or 1080p. Yes the price is good, but they showed no real info abut how powerful the card is. I pray that is at least above a gtx 980 ti, if it is, i'm sold, but i have my doubts. I would so much like it to be good enough, but at this point, i am still edging for the 1070. That might(and i hope it will) change on 29 june when the embargo ends and the real benchmarks will be available. Until than, is better to just wait and don't make speculations. Based strictly on the "Compute power" the rx 480 has ~ 5 tflops, while the r9 390 has 5.1 tflops, so i would say that there is a high probability that the rx 480 will just be a cheaper and more energy efficient r9 390, and that's rather sad.

[BrightCandle]

Plenty of evidence to suggest the settings were turned down in Ashes of Singularity, which is already a heavily AMD favouring title. So that is likely a contributing factor. What we know from the specs is its a 5 tflops card which assuming a similar AMD architecture (and they are using the same terms) then its about the performance of a 390 in compute but with 2/3 the memory bandwidth. Its a 390 performance like card for $200, that is pretty decent but it also wont be out for over a month.

[Dzzope]

2 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

that is not the only problem . Bad dx12 support, lied about tdp, power delivery and the price they cost about 6000kr (900$) in Denmark and the 480 if it follows the 380 price they will cost about 1500-1800kr (about 250$)

 

 

Bad dx12 compared to what... it's double a 980. Which is the card it replaces.. not the ti and it's not an AMD card.

Not sure where they lied about the TDP, not seen that.

Price.. they are what they cost... It's not Nvidia's fault if places are gouging.. Or that you don't realize there are taxes and such to be added (which in the US are added after check-out..) Once you put duties and VAT and any extra mark-up stores or manufacturers add, It balloons fast. Do the math yourself and work out the cost without taxes of any kind.

 

Or compare any other component similarly priced in the states to what your priced in Denmark.

 

I don't think Nvidia are perfect by any means.. but you seem to have a bit of a gripe..

 

I try take each product on it's own merits vs similarly priced products or similar performance... To compare a 1080 to something thats not released yet, never-mind reviewed and tested or pricing or bigger, availability which AMD have been truly horrible at the last few launches. Just doesn't make sense till we see what they both have.

 

At the end of the day they are both just corporations trying to beat the competition to get your money.. so who cares what they do as long as you have something good to choose between.

[Dackzy]

2 minutes ago, Dzzope said:

Bad dx12 compared to what... it's double a 980. Which is the card it replaces.. not the ti and it's not an AMD card.

Not sure where they lied about the TDP, not seen that.

Price.. they are what they cost... It's not Nvidia's fault if places are gouging.. Or that you don't realize there are taxes and such to be added (which in the US are added after check-out..) Once you put duties and VAT and any extra mark-up stores or manufacturers add, It balloons fast. Do the math yourself and work out the cost without taxes of any kind.

 

Or compare any other component similarly priced in the states to what your priced in Denmark.

 

I don't think Nvidia are perfect by any means.. but you seem to have a bit of a gripe..

 

I try take each product on it's own merits vs similarly priced products or similar performance... To compare a 1080 to something thats not released yet, never-mind reviewed and tested or pricing or bigger, availability which AMD have been truly horrible at the last few launches. Just doesn't make sense till we see what they both have.

 

At the end of the day they are both just corporations trying to beat the competition to get your money.. so who cares what they do as long as you have something good to choose between.

AMD cards has much better support for dx12 and that is a fact, the 10x0 series will not ever have that kind of support. The TDP they said it was what 180W, but it is only that when it is running stock speed aka no boost this is a very important thing for people who build smaller systems a 10TDP difference is a huge deal for those people so imagine a 40TDP increase. The price well I know things are more expensive in Denmark and I know it is because tax and VAT, but it is still a bit higher than the 780ti or 980ti came to marked and they were also over priced for a month or two. I don't have anything against Nvidia I have owned the 780ti, but Nvidia kinda gives up on drivers so customers will buy the new cards that is also a fact you can just look at any of the top end cards they have released they get worse over time not by much and mist people will not notice it. AMD will most likely also do this if they end up being the top dog, but as we have seen now with the last couple of gens AMD cards get better over time. I am very neutral when it comes to brands, but I call bs when there is bs there. If it was AMD I would bash them the same.

[Dackzy]

18 minutes ago, Dzzope said:

SNIP

You can think of Pascal as Maxwell with a die shrink and higher clock speeds, because that is basically what they are...

[ybriK]

Watch the people saying the reference will suck at 150W TDP LUL!

[Dackzy]

2 minutes ago, ybriK said:

Watch the people saying the reference will suck at 150W TDP LUL!

It can't be much worse than the 1080FE (Fanboys Edition)  

[Dzzope]

33 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

AMD cards has much better support for dx12 and that is a fact, the 10x0 series will not ever have that kind of support. The TDP they said it was what 180W, but it is only that when it is running stock speed aka no boost this is a very important thing for people who build smaller systems a 10TDP difference is a huge deal for those people so imagine a 40TDP increase. The price well I know things are more expensive in Denmark and I know it is because tax and VAT, but it is still a bit higher than the 780ti or 980ti came to marked and they were also over priced for a month or two. I don't have anything against Nvidia I have owned the 780ti, but Nvidia kinda gives up on drivers so customers will buy the new cards that is also a fact you can just look at any of the top end cards they have released they get worse over time not by much and mist people will not notice it. AMD will most likely also do this if they end up being the top dog, but as we have seen now with the last couple of gens AMD cards get better over time. I am very neutral when it comes to brands, but I call bs when there is bs there. If it was AMD I would bash them the same.

They do, I didn't dispute AMD had better DX12 performance.. just that compared to the card it replaces (which is a legitimate thing to do) they had a huge leap forward.

 

even building a small system, this is an efficient card.. could they have said a range.. probably.. but no card does and the TDP is usually the guaranteed, base clock (assuming no issues) everywhere. If it has room, it will run higher.. thats always been the case with GPU boost. But you shouldn't be pushing a PSU to it's limit anyway.. and if your talking heat, blowers remove it from the case. Not sure what your issue is here.. power or heat, of course it will run hotter and take more power at higher speeds. This is why you see the clocks reduce over time as the cooler reaches it's limits of transferring the heat and why board partners spend so much on cooler design.

 

Don't forget that the dollar is very strong too... exchange rate makes another chunk of difference.

 

On the lack of support for "older" cards.. I agree, it's shitty and I think there should be full driver support like new cards for anything not EOL in the last 5 years.  That means optimizations and such as and where possible.. though some take advantage of technology not available in older cards and thus you get diminishing returns on the optimizations you can make.

 

AMD seems to always squeeze more out because GCN is great and evolving.. But I also think that if Nvidia had the platform, they would have gotten more done sooner. Look at the size and frequency of driver releases in the last 5 years from both sides... I think AMD have made a few big leaps but Nvidia have many many more steps. Their driver development and spending shows effective use of resources and regular, incremental updates which can resolve issues fast and bring lots of optimizations regularly.

 

Or maybe as you and many others believe, they are trying to push people into upgrading.

Problem is that with such a huge market share, they can do it.. untill AMD answer in a big way... Hope it will be polaris.. but I reserve judgement till numbers.

 

 

Nvidia has 3 huge issues IMO,

1 is their price.. they need a more granular product base with a visible curve to the price to performance.. at the moment it looks like a cliff.

2. Their marketing dept and engineering seem to have a huge disconnect like it's going through 3 committees before info is shared. It's the only way I can realistically think for them to have made the errors they have in the last few releases as far as some details are concerned.

3. They are trying to cover that the fe is an early adopters tax. At least in part.

What it does provide is a premium blower design that had got an extra cost. However, the difference between the FE and the MSRP is far more than that alone.

I have no problem with early adopter tax.. it comes with everything, prices (apart from some consumables) generally fall as production gets cheaper and more efficient.... But call it what it is. Don't try to cover it up. It's not a dirty word, there are extra costs involved in launch than in later life-cycle items.

 

27 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

You can think of Pascal as Maxwell with a die shrink and higher clock speeds, because that is basically what they are...

Thats like saying the 390 was JUST a re-badged 290.. There were allot of refinements made as well as some new features.. And at the end of the day who cares how they do it as long as we benifit.

 

The 390 got slammed cos it didn't offer much increase in performance. Pascal is MUCH faster than the 980

 

And as far as a company claiming something it's not... anyone remember the "Fury will be an overclockers dream" bit?

 

 

[l__T__l]

1 hour ago, revsilverspine said:

I assume that $200 price tag is before board partners get their hands on the cards, so expect actual prices to be closer to $300. Even at that price it's a hell of a card if the benchmarks are to be believed

If the reference card is priced at $199 a board partner is very unlikely to sell their card for %50 more unless it's a kingpin styled card or watercooled card which I can't see being to popular with a mid range GPU. I expect most board partners having their base tier cards with custom coolers being no more than $30 over reference.

[Dackzy]

4 minutes ago, Dzzope said:

They do, I didn't dispute AMD had better DX12 performance.. just that compared to the card it replaces (which is a legitimate thing to do) they had a huge leap forward.

 

even building a small system, this is an efficient card.. could they have said a range.. probably.. but no card does and the TDP is usually the guaranteed, base clock (assuming no issues) everywhere. If it has room, it will run higher.. thats always been the case with GPU boost. But you shouldn't be pushing a PSU to it's limit anyway.. and if your talking heat, blowers remove it from the case. Not sure what your issue is here.. power or heat, of course it will run hotter and take more power at higher speeds. This is why you see the clocks reduce over time as the cooler reaches it's limits of transferring the heat and why board partners spend so much on cooler design.

 

Don't forget that the dollar is very strong too... exchange rate makes another chunk of difference.

 

On the lack of support for "older" cards.. I agree, it's shitty and I think there should be full driver support like new cards for anything not EOL in the last 5 years.  That means optimizations and such as and where possible.. though some take advantage of technology not available in older cards and thus you get diminishing returns on the optimizations you can make.

 

AMD seems to always squeeze more out because GCN is great and evolving.. But I also think that if Nvidia had the platform, they would have gotten more done sooner. Look at the size and frequency of driver releases in the last 5 years from both sides... I think AMD have made a few big leaps but Nvidia have many many more steps. Their driver development and spending shows effective use of resources and regular, incremental updates which can resolve issues fast and bring lots of optimizations regularly.

 

Or maybe as you and many others believe, they are trying to push people into upgrading.

Problem is that with such a huge market share, they can do it.. untill AMD answer in a big way... Hope it will be polaris.. but I reserve judgement till numbers.

 

 

Nvidia has 3 huge issues IMO,

1 is their price.. they need a more granular product base with a visible curve to the price to performance.. at the moment it looks like a cliff.

2. Their marketing dept and engineering seem to have a huge disconnect like it's going through 3 committees before info is shared. It's the only way I can realistically think for them to have made the errors they have in the last few releases as far as some details are concerned.

3. They are trying to cover that the fe is an early adopters tax. At least in part.

What it does provide is a premium blower design that had got an extra cost. However, the difference between the FE and the MSRP is far more than that alone.

I have no problem with early adopter tax.. it comes with everything, prices (apart from some consumables) generally fall as production gets cheaper and more efficient.... But call it what it is. Don't try to cover it up. It's not a dirty word, there are extra costs involved in launch than in later life-cycle items.

 

Well it clocks down because thermal throttling or power limet. Yeah AMD will do the same thing if they had the same kind of power over the marked(I also said that). I have never refeared to the price as anything else than early adopter price. The fact is that Nvidia is right now kinda doing the same thing as AMD did with the 300 series in many ways and I also bashed AMD for that, but Nvidia did not really have any product that could compete with AMD at a lot of the price points, so that is fine with me that AMD did that, if it ends up being the same thing this year just where it is Nvidia that does this I am fine with that, but it will most likely not be because of DX 12 support and well if the prices are true right now about the 480 I can go out and buy 3 of them for what a single 1080 will cost me, but the prices of the 1080 will drop.

[Dackzy]

6 minutes ago, l__T__l said:

If the reference card is priced at $199 a board partner is very unlikely to sell their card for %50 more unless it's a kingpin or watercooled card which I can't see being to popular with a mid range GPU. I expect most board partners having their base tier cards with custom coolers being no more than $30 over reference.

It would be stupid to buy a watercooled 480 since you can most likely go a tier up and get a better card. EVGA is also only Nvidia so there is that.

[BrightCandle]

I am quite disappointed in the power efficiency. 390 ish like performance so some 40-50% behind a 1070 at the same TDP is really poor efficiency. High end AMD cards are going to be super hot and noisy again this generation unless they work out how to fix that for Vega.

[l__T__l]

3 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

It would be stupid to buy a watercooled 480 since you can most likely go a tier up and get a better card. EVGA is also only Nvidia so there is that.

That's exactly what I was saying. I did mean to say a  K|NGP|N style card but didn't so I'll edit that in.

[Dackzy]

1 minute ago, BrightCandle said:

I am quite disappointed in the power efficiency. 390 ish like performance so some 40-50% behind a 1070 at the same TDP is really poor efficiency. High end AMD cards are going to be super hot and noisy again this generation unless they work out how to fix that for Vega.

You don't know that and how is 130TDP disappointing? The high end AMD cards will most likely be around the same TDP as Nvidias high end cards.. Vega is a different architecture so you cant compare TDP between Polaris and Vega-

[Dackzy]

4 minutes ago, BrightCandle said:

I am quite disappointed in the power efficiency. 390 ish like performance so some 40-50% behind a 1070 at the same TDP is really poor efficiency. High end AMD cards are going to be super hot and noisy again this generation unless they work out how to fix that for Vega.

Oh and the 480 is made to compete with the 1060 not 1070.

[BrightCandle]

27 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

You don't know that and how is 130TDP disappointing? The high end AMD cards will most likely be around the same TDP as Nvidias high end cards.. Vega is a different architecture so you cant compare TDP between Polaris and Vega-

Errmm its been announced at 150W. Considering hardware wise it looks to be about a 390 that is 40-50% slower than a 1070 but its at precisely the same TDP. Even if it does come in above the 390X its still 30% slower at the same TDP, that is quite a bit less efficient. This does strongly suggest that Vega on the same process and a larger die of a similar design (which is how this works, its not like its a 100% redesign) will be hot or limited on its size by power constraints in a way that Nvidia wont be, that would let Nvidia get 30% more performance at the same power usage or allow them to be 30% less power at the same performance.

 

That is quite a deficit AMD is starting out with.

[Dackzy]

17 minutes ago, BrightCandle said:

Errmm its been announced at 150W. Considering hardware wise it looks to be about a 390 that is 40-50% slower than a 1070 but its at precisely the same TDP. Even if it does come in above the 390X its still 30% slower at the same TDP, that is quite a bit less efficient. This does strongly suggest that Vega on the same process and a larger die of a similar design (which is how this works, its not like its a 100% redesign) will be hot or limited on its size by power constraints in a way that Nvidia wont be, that would let Nvidia get 30% more performance at the same power usage or allow them to be 30% less power at the same performance.

 

That is quite a deficit AMD is starting out with.

You have not seen what TDP the 1060 will have and it will most likely not be much less than the 1070 and the GTX 1080 also runs hot you cannot deny that and the TDP Nvidia released is for base clock without any boost and then you also have to factor in that when you OC a AMD card you get more fps per MHz you OC than you do with Nvidia, so the Nvidia card will draw more power to see the same FPS boost with OC than the AMD card will. You can't really factor the base TDP that much because there is a lot more behind how much power it will use than just that. The boost the 1080 gets when it is not limeted by heat or power is also quit a bump in TDP, so if AMDs bump is not as big they will be more power efficient. 

If the 1060 has a lower TDP it will most likely cost about 300$ and so little the power difference will no be anything anyone will notice on the power bill. 

 

Just to give you are reference the TDP of the 980ti is 250W at stock speed. I did not see people complain about that.

[BrightCandle]

16 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

You have not seen what TDP the 1060 will have and it will most likely not be much less than the 1070 and the GTX 1080 also runs hot you cannot deny that and the TDP Nvidia released is for base clock without any boost and then you also have to factor in that when you OC a AMD card you get more fps per MHz you OC than you do with Nvidia, so the Nvidia card will draw more power to see the same FPS boost with OC than the AMD card will. You can't really factor the base TDP that much because there is a lot more behind how much power it will use than just that. The boost the 1080 gets when it is not limeted by heat or power is also quit a bump in TDP, so if AMDs bump is not as big they will be more power efficient. 

If the 1060 has a lower TDP it will most likely cost about 300$ and so little the power difference will no be anything anyone will notice on the power bill. 

 

Just to give you are reference the TDP of the 980ti is 250W at stock speed. I did not see people complain about that.

Nope that is wrong you seem to be confused about how the 1080/1070 functions in regards to its TDP. The Founders edition card thermally throttles and also TDP throttles but the performance difference is with that considered as in what the benchmarks actually show without a power boost or custom cooling. Those cards stay within their TDP bounds for that level of performance. If the RX 480 also stays within its 150W TDP than its 30-50% less efficient at base behaviour, that is a huge deficit there is no other way to say it. We know don't anything about unannounced cards and unbenchmarked scenarios such as how the RX 480 handles overclocking, but base card to base card if what AMD said is accurate (why wouldn't it be?) they have a problem with thermals from the start with this generation. 150W is much more than it should be, that card should be in the 100W range to be competitive based on its performance level.

[Dackzy]

9 minutes ago, BrightCandle said:

Nope that is wrong you seem to be confused about how the 1080/1070 functions in regards to its TDP. The Founders edition card thermally throttles and also TDP throttles but the performance difference is with that considered as in what the benchmarks actually show without a power boost or custom cooling. Those cards stay within their TDP bounds for that level of performance. If the RX 480 also stays within its 150W TDP than its 30-50% less efficient at base behaviour, that is a huge deficit there is no other way to say it. We don't anything about unannounced cards and unbenchmarked scenarios such as how the RX 480 handles overclocking, but base card to base card if what AMD said is accurate (why wouldn't it be?) they have a problem with thermals from the start with this generation. 150W is much more than it should be, that card should be in the 100W range to be competitive.

You see the TDP and heat will not be a problem at all since the cooler is made to handle it and that little in difference it not something you will notice on your power bill. If you look at the former AMD cards they had a much better FPS to MHz OC than Nvidia did and that also means that if you wanted a Nvidia card to see the same performance boost you would have to OC it even more and then it will draw more power. So you cant really call it shit for having a higher TDP if it follows what all the other AMD cards did when you OC them. Most people don't even look at the TDP, they look at okay what performs the best and what has good temps and you can easily cool a 150W card with no problem at all and it will run cool. I think you need to look in the real world if you think a TDP of 150 is a problem and it will run hot, the 980ti did not run hot when you got a card with a okay cooler, so why should a card with a 150W TDP. The top cards will most likely be 200-250W and there is no problem with that, you can get GPUs with a cooler that can handle 600W TDP.

[Dackzy]

2 minutes ago, Dackzy said:

You see the TDP and heat will not be a problem at all since the cooler is made to handle it and that little in difference it not something you will notice on your power bill. If you look at the former AMD cards they had a much better FPS to MHz OC than Nvidia did and that also means that if you wanted a Nvidia card to see the same performance boost you would have to OC it even more and then it will draw more power. So you cant really call it shit for having a higher TDP if it follows what all the other AMD cards did when you OC them. Most people don't even look at the TDP, they look at okay what performs the best and what has good temps and you can easily cool a 150W card with no problem at all and it will run cool. I think you need to look in the real world if you think a TDP of 150 is a problem and it will run hot, the 980ti did not run hot when you got a card with a okay cooler, so why should a card with a 150W TDP. The top cards will most likely be 200-250W and there is no problem with that, you can get GPUs with a cooler that can handle 600W TDP.

TDP is the last thing most people look at, if they even look at it. The first thing they look at are performance per dollar and Nvidia does not have a good record with that in the longer run or just in general when you compare them to AMD just look at last gen cards the only card that out performed AMD in performance per dollar was the 980 ti because the fury x was not that good.

[Dackzy]

Dont get me wrong I dont have anything against Nvidia at all, but when BS happens I call it out and I do the same for AMD. I am very neutral.

[stconquest]

1 hour ago, BrightCandle said:

Errmm its been announced at 150W. Considering hardware wise it looks to be about a 390 that is 40-50% slower than a 1070 but its at precisely the same TDP. Even if it does come in above the 390X its still 30% slower at the same TDP, that is quite a bit less efficient. This does strongly suggest that Vega on the same process and a larger die of a similar design (which is how this works, its not like its a 100% redesign) will be hot or limited on its size by power constraints in a way that Nvidia wont be, that would let Nvidia get 30% more performance at the same power usage or allow them to be 30% less power at the same performance.

 

That is quite a deficit AMD is starting out with.

What numbers did you see at this event? 

 

From what was revealed at the event, two 480s could keep up with a reference 1080.  Taking in to account that Crossfire does not perfectly scale, you could deduce that a single RX 480 is 50% of a GTX 1080.  So let's think a bit more:  50% the performance of a 1080 at 1/3 the price.

 

I don't believe these deductions as I have learned not commit to trusting companies 100% the way at marketing events.  I just don't understand where all these numbers, or predictions, are coming from?

 

150W TDP bothers you, really?  For what may be GTX 980 performance?  Seriously?

[othertomperson]

If you think about how long it took Nvidia to release the 960 after the initial 980/970 launch, you could be waiting a little while.

 

4 minutes ago, stconquest said:

What numbers did you see at this event? 

 

From what was revealed at the event, two 480s could keep up with a reference 1080.  Taking in to account that Crossfire does not perfectly scale, you could deduce that a single RX 480 is 50% of a GTX 1080.  So let's think a bit more:  50% the performance of a 1080 at 1/3 the price.

 

I don't believe these deductions as I have learned not commit to trusting companies 100% the way at marketing events.  I just don't understand where all these numbers, or predictions, are coming from?

 

150W TDP bothers you, really?  For what may be GTX 980 performance?  Seriously?

You know what other card had 980 performance and 150W TDP? A 980. That was on 28nm too.

[stconquest]

3 minutes ago, othertomperson said:

If you think about how long it took Nvidia to release the 960 after the initial 980/970 launch, you could be waiting a little while.

 

You know what other card had 980 performance and 150W TDP? A 980. That was on 28nm too.

...and a GTX 980 (brand new) for $200 is a great deal.