AMD RX 590 benchmarks

[Dissitesuxba11s]

38 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

AnandTech and Tom's Hardware showed the stock RX 590 consumes more power

Hardware Canucks also has the 590 consume a lot more. They even comment in the video that it consumes as much power as an RTX2080.

 

Spoiler

 

[Tech Enthusiast]

2 hours ago, BuckGup said:

Aight so the 1060 doesn't make any sense anymore.

Apart from being ahead in 25% of found benchmarks, close behind on the others AND is 50 bucks less (well, at least in germany).

[Blake]

Anyone have a graph comparing the R9 290 (X or non-X) and this?

 

I might consider something like this with the 3 free games.

[The Benjamins]

2 hours ago, Blake said:

Anyone have a graph comparing the R9 290 (X or non-X) and this?

 

I might consider something like this with the 3 free games.

A 290x is around the same fps as a rx 480

[Taf the Ghost]

2 hours ago, Blake said:

Anyone have a graph comparing the R9 290 (X or non-X) and this?

 

I might consider something like this with the 3 free games.

Haven't seen any direct ones, but you can cross compare a bit.

 

 

https://www.techspot.com/review/1747-amd-radeon-rx-590/

[dizmo]

11 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

No?

 

The RX 580 8GB for $230 is not bad although I doubt anybody is selling them for less than $250 new due to memory shortages with GDDR5.

 

The RX 590 is only $279 (Providing about 80% of the performance of a 1070)  vs the GTX 1070 which was selling for $449/499 at one point.

 

Previous 90 class cards from AMD (such as the R9 290 and R9 390) had an MSRP of like $300-500.

Sure...except you can find loads of 580's for around $200. So.

[Blake]

35 minutes ago, dizmo said:

Sure...except you can find loads of 580's for around $200. So.

okay... except if your looking for a GPU in the $2-300 range you now have another option.

How is that a bad thing? are there better GPUs? Yes, your complaining about there being more competition in the market.

 

Sure it's not Vega 2.0, but why would expect a 590 to be that? look at their naming convention recently, it'd be call vega 74 if it was going to be that.

41 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

Haven't seen any direct ones, but you can cross compare a bit.

Yeah, basically what I'm seeing is the 290 -> 580 is ~10-20% bump (https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-RX-580-vs-AMD-R9-290/3923vs2171)

So if the 580 -> 590 is another ~10-20% I'd be fine with it. Not looking to spend ~800+ on a GPU again.

 

[Taf the Ghost]

11 minutes ago, Blake said:

okay... except if your looking for a GPU in the $2-300 range you now have another option.

How is that a bad thing? are there better GPUs? Yes, your complaining about there being more competition in the market.

 

Sure it's not Vega 2.0, but why would expect a 590 to be that? look at their naming convention recently, it'd be call vega 74 if it was going to be that.

Yeah, basically what I'm seeing is the 290 -> 580 is ~10-20% bump (https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-RX-580-vs-AMD-R9-290/3923vs2171)

So if the 580 -> 590 is another ~10-20% I'd be fine with it. Not looking to spend ~800+ on a GPU again.

 

I think when the 590 drops into the low 200USD range, it'll be a good deal. (The RX570's price collapse in the last 7 months is kind of amazing. Right now, it is the Price/Performance buy.) One more actual generation of GPUs (so Navi + post-Turing) and 1080p/60 Hz gaming will be all but completely saturated on a modern CPU. We're rapidly approaching the saturation level of the technology at the core resolution/refresh rate of most gamers. Should drive prices even further down.

[williamcll]

Wonder if the new memory version of the 1060 can beat the 590

[Humbug]

Nothing exciting.. 

 

but it Seems like the main function of this launch is to put out something that is clearly faster than the gtx 1060 in the mid-range. The rx 580 and gtx 1060 are neck and neck. So when people start comparing those two as a potential purchase they will realize 'oh I can just spend a bit more and get the rx 590'.

 

This works because cause the Vega 56 and gtx 1070 are a lot more expensive.

[leadeater]

16 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

Previous 90 class cards from AMD (such as the R9 290 and R9 390) had an MSRP of like $300-500.

Previous 90 class cards were the Fury X's/Vega 64's, without sucking for what they actually are. All AMD did was create a line of GPUs pushed even higher in power target, the general increase in CUs and SPs was standard generation by generation affair. Significant amount of the TDP increase was hidden by the HBM. One of the reasons Vega 56 looks so good is it's more in line with what the 90 class cards are/were, with a lower than usual TDP to boot.

 

Far as I'm concerned Vega 56 (at 250W TDP) is the successor to the 290X/390X and all the Fury X/Vega 64 nonsense was a manifestation of having literally nothing to offer so resorted to 'extreme hot-wiring' to make something out of nothing.

[ScratchCat]

18 hours ago, M.Yurizaki said:

From what I've looked at, the increase is as if all you did was bump up the clock speed. The official specs have it at 15% higher clock speeds, and I was seeing about 10%-15% higher power consumption.

 

EDIT: I'm not trying to nitpick and say this card sucks. I'm trying to understand why this is happening.

If all they did was bump up clock speed they would have had to also bump up the voltage which in turn would have increased the power consumption at a greater than linear rate.  Instead AMD kept the voltage approximately the same but used the node change to bump up the clocks with only a (close to) linear increase in power.

 

If the node scales downwards as well as up AMD might be able to offer some more competitive mobile cards (however not enough to compete with Pascal let alone Turing).

 

[RejZoR]

Just like how people were complaining RX 580 doesn't make sense, it's same for RX 590 yet again. But they forget to take into account people who want to buy new device that wasn't used. And they aren't upgrading from anything recent. Or buying all new system.

 

In that case, RX 580 made sense. And so does RX 590. Sure, RX 590 wouldn't make sense for me if I was still on GTX 980 and even less now that I'm on GTX 1080Ti. But for someone coming from lets say GTX 760 or even something older, like Radeon HD5870, it's a great option.

[AlTech]

23 hours ago, Tech Enthusiast said:

Apart from being ahead in 25% of found benchmarks, close behind on the others AND is 50 bucks less (well, at least in germany).

No? The 590 is ahead of the 1060 in almost all titles.

 

If the 590 is ever slower than the 1060 I would consider that game to have issues. The 590 is the superior card.

[AlTech]

13 hours ago, dizmo said:

Sure...except you can find loads of 580's for around $200. So.

Used? Yes. New? No

[miagisan]

59 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

Used? Yes. New? No

PCPartpicker 580s

 

actually quite a number of 580's for $200

[Guest]

Nice to know they named a RX 590 after me, the 590 Fatboy. Bit offensive to use my nickname, but ill take it. 

[yian88]

Imagine if RX590 were a dual rx580 at 1ghz with 8GB GDDR5 on one board MCM no crossfire for 350$. AMD can go Ryzen mode on their GPU's, i dont know why they dont think of that, what are they waiting for.

[Humbug]

6 hours ago, yian88 said:

Imagine if RX590 were a dual rx580 at 1ghz with 8GB GDDR5 on one board MCM no crossfire for 350$. AMD can go Ryzen mode on their GPU's, i dont know why they dont think of that, what are they waiting for.

Lol no they have thought of it. In fact they are R&Ding it. But it's not ready yet and it won't be ready for 2019 Navi either. They got it working well for compute but gaming is more challenging.

[yian88]

11 hours ago, Humbug said:

Lol no they have thought of it. In fact they are R&Ding it. But it's not ready yet and it won't be ready for 2019 Navi either. They got it working well for compute but gaming is more challenging.

Yeah i hope thats their solution moving forward.

It just makes so much sense to make smaller dies put them on the same substrate connected togheter as 1 GPU, all they need is to make a new communication protocol thats not like crossfire, where the GPU firmware and drivers treat the GPU as 1 single unit, not requiring developers to program for xfire.

The scalability options are pretty great IMO, with GDDR6 256bit you can feed two rx 580 dies and you do not need double the memory or double the power feed, just lower the clocks from 1.2-1.4 ghz rx 580 to 1ghz and the voltage for both chips and you get about the same power delivery requirements as a single rx 580 OC to the max.

 

Witth 7nm that would be insane,  my rx580 eats ~140 Watt power at max load 1365 clock OC, with 7nm that can become half the power easily, and then you wont even need to drop the clocks and just get full speed 2x580 with highspeed G6 VRAM with good thermals, such a monster would crush 1070/1080/1080ti/2070/2080 easily.

 

Just look at game tests where CF 2x580's demolish 1080ti when they have good scaling like overwatch, if they could get 80-90% scaling at the chips level 2x580 7nm would just be mindblowing, im drooling the tought of that. They would also be cheaper to produce than vega 54/64 and beat those aswell easily.

 

[lukart]

It's funny to see XFX in most reviews, don't know if was AMD that sent the cards but they sure did sent the worst 590 of them all. If they wanted to look better they could at least had sent Sapphire or PowerColor's models.

 

XFX cooling sucks big time.

[Jito463]

On 11/15/2018 at 9:47 AM, BuckGup said:

Aight so the 1060 doesn't make any sense anymore.

Unless power draw/TDP is a major concern (which for the majority of us, it isn't).  That's the only case in which an argument could be made for the 1060 at this time.

On 11/15/2018 at 11:25 AM, AluminiumTech said:

The RX 590 is only $279 (Providing about 80% of the performance of a 1070)  vs the GTX 1070 which was selling for $449/499 at one point.

 

Previous 90 class cards from AMD (such as the R9 290 and R9 390) had an MSRP of like $300-500.

I bought my R9 390 3 years ago on Thanksgiving day for $280 (and I'm glad I did, because it went up the next day on "Black Friday").

16 hours ago, lukart said:

XFX cooling sucks big time.

I've been satisfied with the cooling solution on my XFX R9 390.  In fact, I'm very tempted to get the XFX RX 590 to replace my current card.  I wanted to go Vega, but I honestly can't justify it since I only play at 1080p.

[Blake]

On 11/16/2018 at 3:33 AM, Doobeedoo said:

I'm checking my retailers and prices for these cards are way higher than that though. I got R9 290 for like $300ish back then. Now RX570 is close to those prices where I am and RX580 is like almost twice the launch price. Specially looking at custom cards. 

So did I, but that was well after launch.

 

I got a R9 290 ~3-4 months after launch when the tri-X came out and then 12 months later again and ran them in X-Fire for a while. Keep in mind that was 300AUD, probs closer to 7-800AUD at launch.

 

the RX590 is mean to be a the same again. Greate deal if you looking at a mid range card on a budget. Are you gaming at 4k? no? it's an option. 1440p also an option, depending on the refresh rate. 1080p, there isn't really a point in going nVidia, unless there is a feature set you want. Just pick your budget and go (which ever team is closest to your budget).

 

[Syntaxvgm]

lol

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, Blake said:

I got a R9 290 ~3-4 months after launch when the tri-X came out and then 12 months later again and ran them in X-Fire for a while. Keep in mind that was 300AUD, probs closer to 7-800AUD at launch.

Still running my dual 290X's, other than just wanting to upgrade the only thing that's a slight issue is the 4GB VRAM as I'm running 2560x1600 which is right on the very limit of 4GB with newer games exceeding that. Was really hoping DX12 mGPU would go somewhere but alas it's not, again.