I think AMD's numbers are quite misleading and the 480 might not be that great...

[Starelementpoke]

1 minute ago, GiSWiG said:

And if AMD does sell the 8GB version for around $225, wouldn't they have said <$450 vs the $700 solution?

$450 is still <$500

[GiSWiG]

5 minutes ago, Starelementpoke said:

$450 is still <$500

But if you're trying to attract gamers who don't want to spend a lot of money, $450 is definitely more attractive than $500. For gamers that buy Titans or 980 Tis, $50 is nothing.

[ivan134]

15 minutes ago, GiSWiG said:

But if you're trying to attract gamers who don't want to spend a lot of money, $450 is definitely more attractive than $500. For gamers that buy Titans or 980 Tis, $50 is nothing.

The mental gymnastics is strong in this one. 

[pedro69]

22 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

The mental gymnastics is strong in this one. 

Not his fault if you are a mental midget.

[hex4]

I just see a butt hurt OP, nothing more.

[App4that]

What this topic has taught me.

 

Nvidia stretches the truth for marketing purposes, people cry foul.

 

AMD stretches the truth for marketing purposes, people cry foul and the fans come racing in to defend AMD.

 

Yep, same Linus Tech tips. War never changes.

[PlayStation 2]

As I said in another thread, AMD basically pulled smoke and mirrors with AotS.

It's an irrelevant "game", and as I said in said thread, I wanted to see them showing games like Hitman or Star Wars Battlefront on their RX 480.

[App4that]

1 minute ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

As I said in another thread, AMD basically pulled smoke and mirrors with AotS.

It's an irrelevant "game", and as I said in said thread, I wanted to see them showing games like Hitman or Star Wars Battlefront on their RX 480.

My guess is the drivers aren't ready yet. AotS doesn't need a crossfire profile, so they could use that game regardless.

[Unhelpful]

10 minutes ago, App4that said:

 

Fuck nvidia. Fuck AMD. Judge products not companies.... Imo that's how every should treat them.

[Dackzy]

1 minute ago, JoeyDM said:

Fuck nvidia. Fuck AMD. Judge products not companies.... Imo that's how every should treat them.

Yep, but fanboys will be fanboys

[App4that]

1 minute ago, JoeyDM said:

Fuck nvidia. Fuck AMD. Judge products not companies.... Imo that's how every should treat them.

No shit. I swear the way people suck on AMD's balls you'd think Bernie Sanders owns AMD  

[AlwaysFSX]

2 minutes ago, App4that said:

No shit. I swear the way people suck on AMD's balls you'd think Bernie Sanders owns AMD  

Now that'd be something to see, I wonder how many people would be fondling at that point.

[Unhelpful]

2 minutes ago, App4that said:

No shit. I swear the way people suck on AMD's balls you'd think Bernie Sanders owns AMD  

Oh. And fuck Bernie Sanders  with a cactus. And Trump. Not fuck Sanders with Trump, that'd be weird... Okay I'm not going to go down this road lol

[hex4]

To avoid any issues with DX11 or DX12, just buy a Radeon 4890, DX10 FTW.

[GiSWiG]

And one of the things I was pointing out is that after nvidia announced the MSRP for $599, everyone started wondering what the board partners were going to do. I haven't seen anyone ask that question for the RX 480.

[hex4]

1 minute ago, JoeyDM said:

Oh. And fuck Bernie Sanders  with a cactus. And Trump. Not fuck Sanders with Trump, that'd be weird... Okay I'm not going to go down this road lol

Why does your avatar look like a male sex toy?

[hex4]

1 minute ago, GiSWiG said:

And one of the things I was pointing out is that after nvidia announced the MSRP for $599, everyone started wondering what the board partners were going to do. I haven't seen anyone ask that question for the RX 480.

The GTX 1080 is far overpriced, it's 900 dollars in the UK...

[DXMember]

1. Give me a link to 5 product pages that list 1080 for $600

2. The reference 8GB model's MSRP is at $229 - the reason they say it's < $500 is because they do consider the AIB cut and retail cut

 

your math seems to be biased towards nVidia

and you didn't mention the fact that Raja pointed out how his < $500 solution is running at only 51% utilization and more performance improvements are to be seen with updates to the game engine and driver refinement

[Unhelpful]

4 minutes ago, hex4 said:

Why does your avatar look like a male sex toy?

I.... I don't see it. It's an eyeball.

[App4that]

5 minutes ago, GiSWiG said:

And one of the things I was pointing out is that after nvidia announced the MSRP for $599, everyone started wondering what the board partners were going to do. I haven't seen anyone ask that question for the RX 480.

Because people don't fucking listen. They look for what confirms their opinion.

 

AMD said all through he press conference that this move is about closing the gap between Console and PC. Which is actually a smart move. Get more people into the PC side and offer a entry level option that offers some good setting and fps and everyone wins. I back AMD on that pursuit. But yeah, how much will the open cooler cost? Why is the 480 worth 380x money if AMD is looking to make the card more accessible?

[GiSWiG]

4 minutes ago, DXMember said:

1. Give me a link to 5 product pages that list 1080 for $600

2. The reference 8GB model's MSRP is at $229 - the reason they say it's < $500 is because they do consider the AIB cut and retail cut

 

your math seems to be biased towards nVidia

and you didn't mention the fact that Raja pointed out how his < $500 solution is running at only 51% utilization and more performance improvements are to be seen with updates to the game engine and driver refinement

Someone linked a reddit link, supposedly from AMD marketing. In there, he showed these benchmarks:

2x Radeon RX 480 - 62.5 fps | Single Batch GPU Util: 51% | Med Batch GPU Util: 71.9 | Heavy Batch GPU Util: 92.3%

GTX 1080 – 58.7 fps | Single Batch GPU Util: 98.7%| Med Batch GPU Util: 97.9% | Heavy Batch GPU Util: 98.7%

 

So it shows 51% under single batch but 92.3% under heavy batch. Again, it seems like they are playing the number to their advantage.

[Megahurt]

The 1080 doesn't seem to be such a good overclocker to me, I've seen 2 MSI Gaming overclocked, and neither reached even 2,1GHz, so same as FE. It boosts to around 1850 MHz at stock, when it isn't too hot, and overclocks are around +175 to +250 MHz, that's less than 15%.

 

The only bias here is using ashes of the singularity in the first place, which is known to work better on AMD, and thus may not be the most representative of overall relative performance, but it's the only real DX12 benchmark out there.

 

If the RX 480 is indeed close to 390X/980 performance, 2 way crossfire could very plausibly be as fast as a 1080, and I doubt overclocking would be much worse than the 1080.

[App4that]

2 minutes ago, Megahurt said:

The 1080 doesn't seem to be such a good overclocker to me, I've seen 2 MSI Gaming overclocked, and neither reached even 2,1GHz, so same as FE. It boosts to around 1850 MHz at stock, when it isn't too hot, and overclocks are around +175 to +250 MHz, that's less than 15%.

 

The only bias here is using ashes of the singularity in the first, which is known to work better on AMD, and thus may not be the most representative of overall relative performance, but it's the only real DX12 benchmark out there.

 

If the RX 480 is indeed close to 390X/980 performance, 2 way crossfire could very plausibly be as fast as a 1080, and I doubt overclocking would be much worse than the 1080.

But crossfire doesn't work in many games, the reason AMD themselves had to use Ashes. That's not a representation of real world performance. SLI scales for shit but it's applicable in more games.

[DXMember]

5 minutes ago, GiSWiG said:

Someone linked a reddit link, supposedly from AMD marketing. In there, he showed these benchmarks:

2x Radeon RX 480 - 62.5 fps | Single Batch GPU Util: 51% | Med Batch GPU Util: 71.9 | Heavy Batch GPU Util: 92.3%

GTX 1080 – 58.7 fps | Single Batch GPU Util: 98.7%| Med Batch GPU Util: 97.9% | Heavy Batch GPU Util: 98.7%

 

So it shows 51% under single batch but 92.3% under heavy batch. Again, it seems like they are playing the number to their advantage.

and what are the FPS numbers under heavy batch?

because there's supposed to be an individual fps report for every batch in AotS

[Prysin]

4 hours ago, GiSWiG said:

AMD showed how the <$500 beats the $700 solution. I assume that the $199 is for 4GB and the 8GB version will be $249. If 2x RX 480s truly beat out the GTX 1080, then that statement is true, but there's a catch...there comparing REFERENCE designs.

 

This time around, Nvidia is actually making a $700 reference card, $100 more that their MSRP of $600 for basically the base level GTX 1080 for board partners. It is a given that board makers will be selling GTX 1080s at stock settings for $600.

 

So really, AMDs reference cards against board partners base level cards would be <$500 against the <$600 solution...

 

Also, notice the < meaning less than (in case your bad at math). 2x 8GB RX 480 at $249 = $498. I think its a given that the 8GB RX 480s will be $249 because they would have said <$400 if the 8GB were $199. If the 8GB 480s were going to be $224.99, x2 would be <$450. If they applied the same tactic to the Nvidia reference price (i.e. Founders Edition) and used Nvidia's MSRP then it would really be <$500 vs <$600...

 

But we already know that board partners will be putting out cards at about Founders Editions prices that are going to be running between 100-150mhz higher than the FEs. I think it is safe to say, that AMD's statement that the <$500 beating the $700 solution is defuncted.

 

Obviously, the board partners producing overclocked versions of the RX 480s and because AMD announced baseline prices will be $199-$249, OC'd board partner cards will hit over $300, possibly $325. I don't think board partners will bother with 4GB cards. That ship has sailed. 

 

So lets take 2x 8GB RX 480s OC'd at $299 vs a GTX 1080 OC'd at $699. Now we got <$600 vs <$700 but I bet the GTX 1080 will get better overclocks than the RX 480s. I doubt 2x OC'd RX 480s will match one OC'd GTX 1080.

 

I also think that the watts required by 2x OC'd RX 480s will roughly equal or exceed one OC'd GTX 1080.

 

Now if you take a single OC'd 8GB RX 480 against a OC'd GTX 1070, I think the 480 would win. However, if your considering an OC'd GTX 1070, 2x 480s at reference specs might be better unless your mobo can't support CrossFire or two GPUs.

 

Yes, I'm speculating, but I wanta see the 490 from AMD. It will probably be Vega based and know the GTX 1080's socks off but I bet Nvidia will have a GTX 1080 Ti or maybe the next Titan available around the same time.

 

Either way, I'm shooting for 1440p gaming and an OC'd 1070 or 2x 480s would be good enough for me. I'll be going for MSI's GAMING version too.

 

P.S. I'm no fanboy of either. I've had AMD cards for years but the GTX 1070 is pulling me in Nvidia's direction. I'd got AMD again if their numbers do really look good for $400.

AMD has officially stated that the 8GB MSRP is 229 USD.

 

that makes the total of 2x 8GB cards 460 USD.

 

The 1080s MSRP is 599 for the "customs" and 699 for the "Fanboy Edition" as the internet seems to call it these days.