Tech Guru wrote
haidcar wroteit's funny that some people are hating on the RX480.

First thing first, it's $200 card, as much as GTX 960 now going for.

relative performance is better than GTX 970.

Card is geared toward mainstream consumer, those who don't want to spend more 200-250 on a GPU. This card will run games 1080p MAXed settings and will average 60 FPS in the latest games.

This is NOT the Flagship AMD card that's coming up later this year, Vega will come out to compete vs 1080, 1080ti, Titans.

Last but not least chat speaks for itself.

http://i.imgur.com/YzsWsxU.png?1
Still a 2 years old 970 Maxwell with a 3.5 GB + 0.5 GB Vram issue is relatively slower by 5%. Where is the place of such card , r9 390 , 390x , 970 , 980 even r9 380x or 960 OC will not be tempted to upgrade. It is good for what it is nothing more & I suspect It will make @ 250 USD in the MENA Region.
i think you're looking at it wrong. I don't suspect a person with 970 or 390x to upgrade ( unless the 390x person wants to replace the space heater with something more efficient). A person still rocking a 280X (like me) or GTX 950, 960, 770,760... would be inclined to upgrade. believe it or not, people don't upgrade their GPUs whenever a new generation comes out.

Last year AMD released Fury GPUs, they were geared toward high end and enthusiast consumers. they compete with 980ti and titan. However enthusiast community is actually a minority, and to be fair no one in his right mind would spend $700 to $1000 on GPU that would be obelect and gets beaten by a mid ranger in a couple of years.

With Polaris they're targeting the the vast majority of PC gaming community. these people looking for the best perf/$, not looking to spend more than $300 on a GPU.

That's not to say AMD given up on the enthusiast community, i am waiting for their Vega, at the end of this year to compete in the high end 1080, 1080ti range.

alk wroteLet it be said first, the amd rx 480 is a good deal bang/buck, but why are some people defending it more than the company itself did. AMD at the unveil pit the crossfire 480 against a 1080 and claimed it was faster, so saying this is a mid range card now is just backing down the claim of AMD, they had it against the high end card even if in crossfire, that is how they chose to show and decided their customer range as the high end card users claiming it is faster for far less price.
And the hate is not towards the 480, it is towards AMD as a whole, not first time they do so, and they always fail to polish the drivers to the extent of really showing of the performance of the card. yes they solved some issues, but let us be objective their drivers still lack in more than one area.
As a rating the 480 as the graph shows is about 5% faster than a 970 which is good, but by that the 1060 should also be faster than 970 and not by only 5%, as the graph shows, the 970 is faster than 780ti, i think the 1060 would be close to 980ti.
when you show two cards that's 2X RX480 in CF, edging out a single 1080, that alone clearly shows they're not claiming that a single GPU would be anywhere equal or as fast. I think you got the wrong message here.
1060 would not be as fast 980ti, no matter what. The 980ti is as fast as the 1070, right now. 1060 would be in the 980-960 range, which is the same relative position as the RX 480.
You've posted the image, and as i said based on the image, i didnt create random numbers, i took data from the image you have posted ... Where the 1070 is 18% faster than the 980ti, If you don't think these are actual numbers why did you post the image?
I never said claiming the single gpu faster card, i said claiming it to be a high end competitor in crossfire, again the selling point was faster than 1080 with lower price? They marketed their product that way, and according to that marketing it failed to impress!
Nvidia and AMD both fueled the hype train starting with Nvidia at the GTX1080 launch, did anyone forget the 2x980 performance claim (turned out to be 63% better peformance), and the 65C of the GTX1080, it turned out that it throttles in frequency which would also affect the fps, and how about the word that Nvidia is not able to spell: MSRP, prices are up the roof on Amazon/Newegg for the GTX1080 in the 820$ range and the GTX1070 520$ range, both FE edition, for custom units the difference is 50$ (or more) which is crazy! Even the GTX1060 rumored to be priced at 300$ with only 15% better performance of the RX 480.

All these Nvidia claims that never met compared to 2 claim that are not met from AMD side which is GTX980 performance of the RX 480 which could happen with aftermarket RX 480 and driver update but this will not be more expensive than 200$ and the other claim which was a 150w TDP that turned out to be 165W
agh? wut? I draw your attention to the chat. GTX 1070 is 13% faster than GTX 1080ti. Chart is normalized at RX480.
GTX 1070 is about 50% faster than RX480.

no one advertised as an alternative competitor the to gtx 1080. AMD advertised the best Pref/Watt, Pref/$ cards at given price point. and they delivered on that promise.
During a demo, they pitted two RX480 in CF vs a single GTX 1080 in order to show how efficient and price competitive the card is. being two $200 midrange cards, being able to achieve GTX 1080 level performance in a DX12 game.

I think people misunderstood that.
alk wroteYou've posted the image, and as i said based on the image, i didnt create random numbers, i took data from the image you have posted ... Where the 1070 is 150% faster than the 980ti, If you don't think these are actual numbers why did you post the image?
I never said claiming the single gpu faster card, i said claiming it to be a high end competitor in crossfire, again the selling point was faster than 1080 with lower price? They marketed their product that way, and according to that marketing it failed to impress!
The 1070 is 150% faster than the 980 Ti?!

And they specifically used AoftS, a fully-enabled DX12 game that uses A-Sync compute and scales much better with multi-GPU setups than DX11 games, they didn't claim it's better than the 1080 in DX11.
Tech Guru wroteNVIDIA Unveils The GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB For $299 US – Features GP106 Core With 1280 Cores, 1.7 GHz Core and 8 GHz Memory Clock, 19th July Launch @USD $299

Read more: http://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-unleashed-249-usd/#ixzz4DjB7hcb1

Let Us See, if AMD RX 480 will fall lost in the green grasses , initial benchmarks are tipping to that , but let us give it time :)
Here I fixed it for you. FE FTW!
250$ lol, that's the best joke I ever heard, 300$ for FE and custom units will be priced for more, for 200$ the RX 480 will be a better deal
anayman_k7 wrotedid anyone forget the 2x980 performance claim (turned out to be 63% better peformance)
Their claim was that it outperformed two 980s in SLI, not two 980s at full scale so 63% sounds about right.
4 days later
All this won't matter when the pricing difference percentage is higher than the performance difference, with these benchmarks can the GTX1060 claim the king of performance per dollar? I highly doubt it.
The RX 480 will still a serious contender for a 200$ as a starting price

Edit: Tech Guru, just check the comment section of the article that you brought this image from. These numbers are inaccurate specially for the RX 480

Edit2: After additional digging I found out that the benchmarks were made by Nvidia them-self between a stock (1260mhz) RX 480 using 16.6.2 drivers (old un-optimized for the 480) against a fully overclocked GTX1060, also the result of the RX 480 are much less of what reviews got. Thats the setup configuration


And thats the url of where the leak came from (with some additional funny photos)
http://videocardz.com/62138/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-reviewers-guide-leaked

Conclusion: lets wait the real reviews, I have a feeling that the difference will not be more than 5% in favor of the GTX1060 which does not justify the price difference, in addition to the recent Vulkan results that will give the advantage to the 480
have you guys seen the shit storm that nvidia got after doom released vulkan patch

rx 480 on par with 980 ti

fury x on par with 1080 trashing 1070 by a huge margin

if the trend is to go by vulkan/dx 12 amd will be on top from now on , well played amd well played
anayman_k7 wroteAll this won't matter when the pricing difference percentage is higher than the performance difference, with these benchmarks can the GTX1060 claim the king of performance per dollar? I highly doubt it.
AMD can make cards that cure cancer but people would still buy Nvidia no matter how overpriced and underpowered they are.

You heard it first here, the 1060 will equal the 480 in performance or, at best, be 5-10% better than the 480, the 480 will catch up as drivers mature and will overtake it in 6-7 months time.
At least an Nvidia card won't blow up like my 7970 did
nas93 wroteAt least an Nvidia card won't blow up like my 7970 did
It would...


DOOM is optimized for AMD cards. Benchmark must be made in neutral games so this doesn't say anything about performance for all games. It is just better for DOOM.
Geez my good old 970 gaming is as good as this AMD 480.
I was expecting something as revolutionary as the 4850HD when they could triumph nvidia with a super GPU at 1/2 price, but this RX480 is a big deception, they are 1 generation late
vegetaleb wroteGeez my good old 970 gaming is as good as this AMD 480.
I was expecting something as revolutionary as the 4850HD when they could triumph nvidia with a super GPU at 1/2 price, but this RX480 is a big deception, they are 1 generation late
No way in hell it's a bad card, it just needs some time for the drivers to mature. You're just expecting too damn much, even from a node shrink, and should I mention that power efficiency, not raw performance, was the main focus of Polaris? Because it's been said a lot.

Also, as good is a bit of an understatement, it's better than the 970 in everything but the most GameWorks of titles (aka totally unoptimized for Radeons), it's a bit worse than the 390 but it has much more potential as drivers mature, it has a full 4GB (or 8GB should you go with that) of VRAM unlike the 970, and AMD won't stop supporting it like Nvidia will do with the 970, not to mention, superior tesselation performance compared to the 390 and much much much better Vulkan and DX12 performance compared to nearly any Nvidia card, not just a 970.