AMD Lists The Radeon RX 490 Flagship – Polaris based Dual GPU Graphics Card For 4K Ready Gaming

[Phoenix721]

God fucking damn it, AMD. I have been an AMD fan for a VERY long time, but THIS would be stupid. As far as I know, there is a Vega 10 with 4096 stream processors and a Vega 11 with a 6144 stream processors coming next year. Why can't they WAIT for the vega 10 to be a 490 and the vega 11 to be the new fury instead of going with the god damn dual GPU solution? Yes, they do need a high end card now, but it will be underwhelming.
Damn it, AMD.

[Trixanity]

1 hour ago, Devin92 said:

Lets see this tru. 480 is 970lv performance with 165w. and 1070 is 980ti lv performance with 150w. For AMD to have a card with 1070 lv performance I would guess a 200ish Watt power draw. sure 40W is no biggie.

However, with the same architecture,  what will the power draw be for a 1080 lv performance? We now know 2xRX480 wont outperform a 1080 thats 165X2 = 330W vs a 180W for 1080. Now tats a huge deal (150W difference). You need a waaay better PSU and a way better cooling system. Also, the overclock headroom is way thinner with tat heat output under same cooling conditions.

Now, how much power will AMD need to give a Titan P performance? God knows. 500W? tats even more heat output and even thinner overclock headroom. And THIS is why I am very disappointed with polaris architecture.

That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

 

Power/performance doesn't scale like that. You can reduce the performance of an RX480 by 2-3% resulting in power reduction of 11%. It does not scale linearly. I don't have any numbers on overclocking but the performance/power scaling won't be linear either.

[AlTech]

2 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

 

Power/performance doesn't scale like that. You can reduce the performance of an RX480 by 2-3% resulting in power reduction of 11%. It does not scale linearly. I don't have any numbers on overclocking but the performance/power scaling won't be linear either.

EXACTLY! Power doesn't scale well with performance.

 

Beyond 2GHz efficiency goes out the Window. The higher the Mhz, the more the TDP will increase per MHz.

[NuclearPeace]

If the 490 is dual Polaris... I cant even just fathom how dumb that would be. AMD is pretty slow when it comes to Crossifre profiles and they even abandoned trying to get rid of the bugs and issues out of some game's Crossfire profiles. Not only that, you would have a 300w+ card that would struggle to beat a ~160w 1080.

 

I thought AMD had a winner with Polaris but with each passing day it becomes more disappointing. After 5 years, the most real world improvements that AMD managed to get out of GCN is porting it to 14nm and getting maybe a 5-10% performance per core improvement.

[gamervivek]

It's quite unlikely to be a dual GPU card if the C99x card they mention is RX 490.

 

From the shipping manifests, where they are taking their reasoning from,

 

C882 - Fiji nano

C888 - Fiji x2 (Gemini)

C880 - Fiji XT

 

So the second digit stands for the chip while third gives you the config. Yet the author thinks that C98x is somehow the same chip as C99x.

 

[Trixanity]

5 minutes ago, NuclearPeace said:

I thought AMD had a winner with Polaris but with each passing day it becomes more disappointing. After 5 years, the most real world improvements that AMD managed to get out of GCN is porting it to 14nm and getting maybe a 5-10% performance per core improvement.

It replaces an R380(X). It's about 50% faster than that with only a few extra resources. They both have 32 ROPs, 380(X) has 112(128) TMUs vs RX 480 with 144 TMUs and it's 28(32) CUs vs 36 CUs. That and added clock speed due to the new process.

 

Yet still 50% faster than the predecessor. I'd say the scaling is actually similar to Nvidia's at a glance. The 1080 is 70% faster than a 980 but adds more resources to achieve that 70% than the RX 480 does to achieve 50%. If the RX 480 was bigger, I'd be disappointed too but given the size I think it's fairly reasonable.

[Devin92]

30 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

 

Power/performance doesn't scale like that. You can reduce the performance of an RX480 by 2-3% resulting in power reduction of 11%. It does not scale linearly. I don't have any numbers on overclocking but the performance/power scaling won't be linear either.

In my post I didn't say any AMD new card TDP but rather based on the tdp of rx480. Maybe the 200ish watt for 1070 lv AMD card is a wild guess. but you cant deny if ppl run 2x 480 in CF it is gonna be 330w. which is 150w over 1080 with subpar performance and way less overclock headroom.

 

I bet if AMD releases any 1080 lv card it would be around 250-300 watt TDP (given rx490 IS a dual 480). 290x tdp is 290w and 295x2 tdp is 500w, so i think my prediction is around the corner. that is still abt 100W more and thats STILL a lot of heat output.

[Devin92]

18 minutes ago, NuclearPeace said:

If the 490 is dual Polaris... I cant even just fathom how dumb that would be. AMD is pretty slow when it comes to Crossifre profiles and they even abandoned trying to get rid of the bugs and issues out of some game's Crossfire profiles. Not only that, you would have a 300w+ card that would struggle to beat a ~160w 1080.

 

I thought AMD had a winner with Polaris but with each passing day it becomes more disappointing. After 5 years, the most real world improvements that AMD managed to get out of GCN is porting it to 14nm and getting maybe a 5-10% performance per core improvement.

Thats exactly y i am disappointed. 480 has 970 performance NOT becuz of any breakthru from AMD rather becuz ppl can manufacture under 14nm instead of 28nm. Nvidia won with their Maxwell under 28nm and lead EVEN more under 16/14nm.

[Bleedingyamato]

4 hours ago, ModuleLFS said:

endless loop, make it s t o p

I doubt it will ever stop.  It's like a GPU Cold War.  lol

[laminutederire]

4 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

Really?

All throughout 2015 and most of 2016 AMD had better offerings at nearly every single tier but the enthusiasts cards which was the 980ti untouched. AMD made not much progress in overall sales and market shares. It's unfair that they're not doing any better but what you're saying here it's been inaccurate for many many years.

Yeah well idiots think the only card you can buy is from nvidia because they don't do any research and they have just seen an nvidia logo in advertising.

Not everyone buy things smartly.

[Trixanity]

2 minutes ago, Devin92 said:

In my post I didn't say any AMD new card TDP but rather based on the tdp of rx480. Maybe the 200ish watt for 1070 lv AMD card is a wild guess. but you cant deny if ppl run 2x 480 in CF it is gonna be 330w. which is 150w over 1080 with subpar performance and way less overclock headroom.

 

I bet if AMD releases any 1080 lv card it would be around 250-300 watt TDP (given rx490 IS a dual 480). 290x tdp is 290w and 295x2 tdp is 500w, so i think my prediction is around the corner. that is still abt 100W more and thats STILL a lot of heat output.

120W TDP for 1060. RX 480 has 150-165W TDP. The 1060 is presumably only 10% faster at best. These chips are probably similar in die size, so they're better to compare.

 

There is a 30-45W difference. Oh and the bus is smaller on the 1060 so the memory should use less power, so the GPU is not necessarily 30-45W less power. So that needs to be taken into account as well. I could imagine a 1080ish card doing 225W, I'd say that's fair but still speculation. 250W is probably the absolute maximum but definitely not 300W.

 

Also, you're kinda just correcting your post. You did say stuff like "Titan P performance would need to be 500W" etc.

That makes no sense in the way these things work. You can't take an RX 480 and just say how the power and performance will scale. It just doesn't work. There is a 30W difference between the 1060 and 1070 but the performance is very different. And again, wider bus on the 1070 so more power to the memory. So you see where this is going?

 

And usually dual GPU cards rein in the TDP so they don't double it. This might be different but it might not. Also, the RX 490 is not confirmed to be dual GPU. It's all speculation.

[DarkBlade2117]

Fuck those idiots at WCCFTech.

They do nothing but hype shit up for AMD to piss people off when the product gets release and AMD gets all the hate.

[DarkBlade2117]

1 hour ago, Phoenix721 said:

God fucking damn it, AMD. I have been an AMD fan for a VERY long time, but THIS would be stupid. As far as I know, there is a Vega 10 with 4096 stream processors and a Vega 11 with a 6144 stream processors coming next year. Why can't they WAIT for the vega 10 to be a 490 and the vega 11 to be the new fury instead of going with the god damn dual GPU solution? Yes, they do need a high end card now, but it will be underwhelming.
Damn it, AMD.

WCCFTech, take everything they say and shit on it.

[Misanthrope]

9 minutes ago, laminutederire said:

Yeah well idiots think the only card you can buy is from nvidia because they don't do any research and they have just seen an nvidia logo in advertising.

Not everyone buy things smartly.

True, just releasing a better product isn't enough they need to overcome heavy bias and such. 

[Devin92]

4 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

120W TDP for 1060. RX 480 has 150-165W TDP. The 1060 is presumably only 10% faster at best. These chips are probably similar in die size, so they're better to compare.

 

There is a 30-45W difference. Oh and the bus is smaller on the 1060 so the memory should use less power, so the GPU is not necessarily 30-45W less power. So that needs to be taken into account as well. I could imagine a 1080ish card doing 225W, I'd say that's fair but still speculation. 250W is probably the absolute maximum but definitely not 300W.

 

Also, you're kinda just correcting your post. You did say stuff like "Titan P performance would need to be 500W" etc.

That makes no sense in the way these things work. You can't take an RX 480 and just say how the power and performance will scale. It just doesn't work. There is a 30W difference between the 1060 and 1070 but the performance is very different. And again, wider bus on the 1070 so more power to the memory. So you see where this is going?

 

And usually dual GPU cards rein in the TDP so they don't double it. This might be different but it might not. Also, the RX 490 is not confirmed to be dual GPU. It's all speculation.

1. 1060 performance is yet to be benchmarked. So we dont know.

2. 1080 beat 2x480 in CF and only 60W increase from 480's 165W will give 1080ish performance? Doubt it. I still think its gonna be 250-300. Again we will see.

3. the titan P part I do have a ‘?’ after 500W, thats only a wild guess. My point in my first post is, polaris architecture DO consume waay more power than passcal and this hurts their overclocking headroom as well as higher end card heat output more. As a result polaris is not a very successful architecture. This is all I want to establish with my original post.

[Sharkyx1]

4 hours ago, goodtofufriday said:

As an AMD builder, I HIGHLY doubt that the 490 is going to be competition to the 1080. Even if they did a dual gpu card You cant really put that in the same vain.

 

That's within 5-10% and a 490 could deliver more power and have a better cooler 

[PlayStation 2]

I hope to god that it's actually not a dual GPU card.

[MrDynamicMan]

On 8 July 2016 at 6:37 PM, Phoenix721 said:

God fucking damn it, AMD. I have been an AMD fan for a VERY long time, but THIS would be stupid. As far as I know, there is a Vega 10 with 4096 stream processors and a Vega 11 with a 6144 stream processors coming next year. Why can't they WAIT for the vega 10 to be a 490 and the vega 11 to be the new fury instead of going with the god damn dual GPU solution? Yes, they do need a high end card now, but it will be underwhelming.
Damn it, AMD.

WE DIDNT DIE FOR THIS.

[patrickjp93]

1 hour ago, Trixanity said:

That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

 

Power/performance doesn't scale like that. You can reduce the performance of an RX480 by 2-3% resulting in power reduction of 11%. It does not scale linearly. I don't have any numbers on overclocking but the performance/power scaling won't be linear either.

300n is still linear. You should say the scaling is not 1:1

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, samcool55 said:

You forgot the r9 295x2 so it would make sense imo...

Yeah I guess.

AMD has been changing naming scheme as often as I change underwear recently. Who knows what they will call their next card.

 

1 hour ago, Khvarrioiren said:

I think he meant the HD 7990.

Oh right.

AMD had an official 7990 as well. It was just that the first 7990 was a custom design by some company (I think Powercolor). They did however make an official one.

[Deletist_Jerk]

2 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Yeah I guess.

AMD has been changing naming scheme as often as I change underwear recently. Who knows what they will call their next card.

So you change your underwear once a year? 

[handymanshandle]

I think it'd be better if it would be a single SoC solution, but I guess doing the classic dual GPU is an option too.

[Misanthrope]

On second thought, maybe they will be doing this from now on for all cycles:

 

1) High end reléase: Fiji cards

2) Mid range new architecture: Polaris

3) In-between dual gpu: 490 as Dual Polaris

4) Repeat 1 now with Vega cards instead of Fiji, etc.

[laminutederire]

41 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

True, just releasing a better product isn't enough they need to overcome heavy bias and such. 

Yeah, well they kinda have themselves to blame on a few things. For instance AMD product are superior to nvidia's products in terms of raw performance, but in game performance isn't like that because AMD doesn't have as well optimized drivers, and it's their fault.

But yeah there is a strong bias, for CPU as well by the way.

[Energycore]

3 hours ago, patrickjp93 said:

Multi-Logic interposers won't be ready for prime time for at least another year. It will be XFire. Of that you can be certain.

Well, shit.

 

After all, Navi was the one that they branded for "scalability"