RX480 vs R9s listed

[Grovers1]

Hey everyone,

So what looks better here? These are all 4gb models

Rx480 valued at 319AUD  or one of the ones below? (also in AUD)

 

 

 

[wraptor]

2 minutes ago, Grovers1 said:

Hey everyone,

So what looks better here? These are all 4gb models

Rx480 valued at 319AUD  or one of the ones below? (also in AUD)

 

 

The RX 480 will be between a R9 380 and a R9 390 in benchmarks, the RX 480 supports VR with great FPS (Its made for this) and its great for your wallet as in $/performance.

[Morgan MLGman]

1 minute ago, tv15dsi said:

The RX 480 will be between a R9 380 and a R9 390 in benchmarks, the RX 480 supports VR with great FPS (Its made for this) and its great for your wallet as in $/performance.

Between R9 390 and R9 390X *
source: TechPowerUp

[App4that]

7 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Between R9 390 and R9 390X *
source: TechPowerUp
 

Linus and the rest of the reviewers are putting it at 970 level performance. Would love to see how they got that figure.

[Grovers1]

I did plan to get rx480 but with $229 GPU I could save $70 and upgrade from a i5 6500 and non OC motherboard to a i5 6600k with a OC board

[Grovers1]

12 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Between R9 390 and R9 390X *
source: TechPowerUp

Rx480, 4gb model?

[wraptor]

15 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Between R9 390 and R9 390X *
source: TechPowerUp

I've been watching Linus' newly video about the RX 480 which puts it below the 390 in gaming benchmarks

[Morgan MLGman]

19 minutes ago, tv15dsi said:

I've been watching Linus' newly video about the RX 480 which puts it below the 390 in gaming benchmarks

 

27 minutes ago, App4that said:

Linus and the rest of the reviewers are putting it at 970 level performance. Would love to see how they got that figure.

LTT's GPU benchmarks have been done poorly for quite some time. Small amount of games compared, small amount of GPUs compared, I wouldn't really take them into my heart if I were you.

 

Guru3D seems to confirm TechPowerUp's scores.

[App4that]

2 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

 

LTT's GPU benchmarks have been done poorly for quite some time. Small amount of games compared, small amount of GPUs compared, I wouldn't really take them into my heart if I were you.

 

Guru3D seems to confirm TechPowerUp's scores.

And this one?

 

 

How about it performing like a 980? What happened to that?

 

The logical fallacy at play here is called moving the goalpost.

 

[Morgan MLGman]

2 hours ago, App4that said:

And this one?

 

How about it performing like a 980? What happened to that?

 

The logical fallacy at play here is called moving the goalpost.

 

Ignoring the benchmarks in which the 480 did better is not the way to go, imho if the card did better than 970 and 390 for some reviewers, that might mean it's possible for it to do it better, and not everything was set to optimal settings for it to do the job. Not to mention very early drivers and the fact that it's only a reference-design card.

Honestly, I'd expect 5% perf. increase from the aftermarket designs and another 3-5% from the drivers in a month or two

[App4that]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Ignoring the benchmarks in which the 480 did better is not the way to go, imho if the card did better than 970 and 390 for some reviewers, that might mean it's possible for it to do it better, and not everything was set to optimal settings for it to do the job. Not to mention very early drivers and the fact that it's only a reference-design card.

Honestly, I'd expect 5% perf. increase from the aftermarket designs and another 3-5% from the drivers in a month or two

And the same happens to the 1060, 1070, and 1080. Why that argument never works when comparing cards.

[Morgan MLGman]

2 minutes ago, App4that said:

And the same happens to the 1060, 1070, and 1080. Why that argument never works when comparing cards.

Well, we all know that AMD is sloppier in terms of day-one drivers and their drivers tend to "mature" more than Nvidia's as there's more to improve, which is proven and widely known through the 780Ti/R9 290X case, that's why I mentioned that

[App4that]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Well, we all know that AMD is sloppier in terms of day-one drivers and their drivers tend to "mature" more than Nvidia's as there's more to improve, which is proven and widely known through the 780Ti/R9 290X case, that's why I mentioned that

But look at the Fury X and 980ti, right now? Or the 970 and 390? Or the 390x and 980? The Nvidia cards and AMD cards trade blows at reference speeds, and Nvidia has the overclocking edge.

 

 

[Morgan MLGman]

5 minutes ago, App4that said:

But look at the Fury X and 980ti, right now? Or the 970 and 390? Or the 390x and 980? The Nvidia cards and AMD cards trade blows at reference speeds, and Nvidia has the overclocking edge.

"Overclocking edge"? I wouldn't call it that, as a 1200mhz 390 should beat a 1500mhz 970 anyway. Not to mention gimped 4GB of VRAM, poor DX12 performance in which the 970 often loses performance instead of gaining it etc.

 

480 is a better buy than both of those cards, draws less power, is newer, newer manufacturing process, newer features, and performs on par to those cards in a worst-case scenario, because these are day one drivers + a reference design card. Not to mention that it's cheaper.

[App4that]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

"Overclocking edge"? I wouldn't call it that, as a 1200mhz 390 should beat a 1500mhz 970 anyway. Not to mention gimped 4GB of VRAM, poor DX12 performance in which the 970 often loses performance instead of gaining it etc.

 

480 is a better buy than both of those cards, draws less power, is newer, newer manufacturing process, newer features, and performs on par to those cards in a worst-case scenario, because these are day one drivers + a reference design card. Not to mention that it's cheaper.

"newer" does not equal "better". Ask someone who bought a 71 Chevelle.

 

1200MHz 290/390 are much more rare than 1500MHz 970s, most of my friends with 970s clear 1500 easy and some hit the 1600s while gaming. I'd take the 390 over the 480 right now. Maybe if Sapphire pulls AMDs ass out of the fire I'd rethink that.

[Morgan MLGman]

2 minutes ago, App4that said:

"newer" does not equal "better". Ask someone who bought a 71 Chevelle.

 

1200MHz 290/390 are much more rare than 1500MHz 970s, most of my friends with 970s clear 1500 easy and some hit the 1600s while gaming. I'd take the 390 over the 480 right now. Maybe if Sapphire pulls AMDs ass out of the fire I'd rethink that.

But why would you take a 390 over the 480? As you said yourself, aftermarket designs from the likes of MSI and Sapphire might improve the performance significantly, I've read that XFX annouced like a 1380mhz base clock 480 as the highest-stock OC'd version of their 480s, because there are going to be three of them

[App4that]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

But why would you take a 390 over the 480? As you said yourself, aftermarket designs from the likes of MSI and Sapphire might improve the performance significantly, I've read that XFX annouced like a 1380mhz base clock 480 as the highest-stock OC'd version of their 480s, because there are going to be three of them

Because the 480 is a cheaper design. Even if Sapphire makes a custom PCB for it to allow better overclocking, it's still not going to be a high performance card. In a year the 480 will be viewed just like a 380, and the 280, and so on. But, I'm a Sapphire fanboy so if they bring back the Vapor X I will squeal like a girl.

[Simon771]

If you are playing on 1080p, you can also get 4GB version ... it more than enough for 1080p resolution.

If you are on tight budget. Otherwise just get 8GB version  

[SteveGrabowski0]

3 hours ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Between R9 390 and R9 390X *
source: TechPowerUp

But the 4GB model uses 7GHz vram instead of the 8 GHz vram used in the 8GB model. As we saw in R9 390 vs R9 290, that kind of bump in vram clockspeed can make a real difference.

[ybriK]

2 minutes ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

But the 4GB model uses 7GHz vram instead of the 8 GHz vram used in the 8GB model. As we saw in R9 390 vs R9 290, that kind of bump in vram clockspeed can make a real difference.

lolwat. No.

[SteveGrabowski0]

1 minute ago, ybriK said:

lolwat. No.

That's what Digital Foundry said in their review: 4GB gets 7GHz, 8GB gets 8GHz vram.

[Morgan MLGman]

2 minutes ago, App4that said:

Because the 480 is a cheaper design. Even if Sapphire makes a custom PCB for it to allow better overclocking, it's still not going to be a high performance card. In a year the 480 will be viewed just like a 380, and the 280, and so on. But, I'm a Sapphire fanboy so if they bring back the Vapor X I will squeal like a girl.

I'm torn myself between a MSI Gaming X 480 and a Sapphire 480. If they release a Vapor-X one, I'm getting the Vapor-X one. Because I plan to get two of those around the end of summer.

 

As for performance, biggest and the best Polish tech store youtube channel posted a review of a 480, and they did a good thing imo, instead of wasting time on benchmarking other, higher end GPUs along those, they benchmarked GPUs that the 480 will be competing with only, here are the results:

(I marked with the green lines which card 970 or the 480 wins, and with the orange lines which card 390 or 480 wins)

 

[ybriK]

6 minutes ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

That's what Digital Foundry said in their review: 4GB gets 7GHz, 8GB gets 8GHz vram.

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about the reason why you're seeing a performance gap on the 290 vs 390 is the higher CORE clock speeds on the 390. The memory clock speeds are insignificant. You can even test it on whatever GPU you have, try 5000MHz vs 6000MHz I guarantee you, you're not going to see 10%-20%~ performance loss/gains.

[SteveGrabowski0]

2 minutes ago, ybriK said:

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about that the reason why you're seeing a performance gap on the 290 vs 390 is the higher CORE clock speeds on the 390. The memory clock speeds are insignificant.

Aftermarket 390 vs aftermarket 290 had pretty similar clockspeeds, didn't they? If I remember right the big difference was uglier coolers and better quality vram.

[ybriK]

1 minute ago, SteveGrabowski0 said:

Aftermarket 390 vs aftermarket 290 had pretty similar clockspeeds, didn't they? If I remember right the big difference was uglier coolers and better quality vram.

Depends which one you're comparing. Reference 390 has a higher core/mem clock than reference 290.