AMD Computex 2016 Live Stream - Watch it here - Polaris and Bristol Ridge

I think you missed the price through all that saltiness..

 

Well, it seems this is the best card for the average consumer now, gj amd!

 

Dvi

Looks to me like no DVI again from AMD?
I have an overclockable Korean monitor which only runs on dual link DVI.
I would have been interested in this card, but without DVI, will have to look to the much more expensive 1070.
Surely there are other market segments who will be missing this support too.

Is DVI something that the board partners can add? Or does it require support being baked in to the chip?

 

The ashes bench was run on Extreme preset on the amd card vs crazy on the nvidia 1080.

Extreme for 1080 @ anand.

http://ashesofthesingularity.com/me...-details/f00df630-16f2-49bf-a475-241209ef4128

And this is an RX 480 run with two gpus on same settings. Roughly comparable setups else. So going by this two of these equal 1080. For way less money.

http://ashesofthesingularity.com/me...-details/0561a980-78ce-4e24-a7c3-2749a8e33aac

One card equals roughly 390x and 980 ti on extreme settings. ON ASHES. If the damn gpu clocks it will be a gem. It is already amazing imo. And it won't be taking that 150w without overclock AMD simply reports 75+75 for it because that is the max it will eat.

http://ashesofthesingularity.com/me...-details/8b748568-fc96-4e48-9fed-22666a7149f5

and for comparisons sake here is a Fury card

http://ashesofthesingularity.com/me...-details/10ff69fc-86dc-4fed-b03f-82a7ae10f2f0

 

i like the APU stuff , very impressive


now the GPUpart where they compared a dual GPU setup with a single card is pure bull**** because we know what CF support is like

 

It is fine actually to compare then under 500$ vs 700$ even tho it might give some issues at times. Support for multi gpu setups with dx12 is out of the hands of nvidia and amd anyways. And it ain't that bad really the little experience I have with xfire it worked rather nicely even with 8xpcie3 and 4xpcie2, in the games that I played in rome 2 I had nearly double the fps of a single card.

 

I wonder that myself and interwebs don't come up with result.

 

Considering how small the amount of dvi only displays is now it is no wonder there might not be a dvi connector once again. Of course older monitors might be dvi only. But pretty much all of the displays now sold have that one hdmi at least. Market for korean overclockable monitors is smaller then small.

 

:banana:...damn I'm all over internet for this. I'm bleeding for more info on ZEN damn it :nerd::nerd::nerd::nerd::nerd:.
The products so far are as expected and the prices are pretty, BUT I WANT ZEN!!!
Damn Id Software really eat from AMD's hand at the moment :infinity:, it was about time for AMD to really invest more into this area, I like where that goes!

I love competition :banana::banana::banana:, everything spins aroung nvidia's 700$ solution!!!

 

According to reddit (which brought up the same issue) it's due to AotS' nature of procedurally generating terrain. Simply put the AMD benchmark seems to have more snow which has less details than a rock. However the same rock texture should be rendered beneath the snow, meaning it'd be in fact the same scene.

That said, no idea whether this is true and further, even if it is this particularly demo run may still be cherry picked.

Waiting for actual real world benchmarks come June 29th it is

EDIT: https://m.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/4lz6ay/anyone_else_noticed_this_at_the_amd_livestream/d3rc5hv

That said, as the AotS benchmark differs every time a single run could likely never deliver a representative result.

Bord partners can add outputs such as DVI themselves even if the reference doesn't include them. Those models may not be available right after launch, though.

Take the Fury Air for instance. AMD and others don't offer DVI outputs while Gigabyte and ASUS offer models with a DVI port. That said, your favorite model or the best OC model may or may not include one.

 

Let me put it that way, two things: Price was ALWAYS AMD's winning argument over Nvidia's comparable offerings (during the last years at least). So I usually don't state it because price/performance usually leans towards AMD. The other thing is, I'm in the happy situation I can afford whatever card(s) I think are reasonable, with better choices and worse ones (like 980s this time around), so price usually is not of concern to me. So the saltyness is basically disregard of price, and a lack of what I was hoping for, information on the 490 or Vega.

Yeah, it looks kind of odd to have those comparable shots and all... as you said, only real benchmarks are worth noting, since everything else we're discussing now is whitesheet data and PR work.

 

No DVI ports again AMD? This card is dead for me

 

Im sure that the side by side comparison of aots was running with different graphics settings. Very obvious.

 

you can always buy DP to DVI adapter, they are very cheap. Maybe they will come with the card bundle.

 

Other is run on crazy = 1080. And other is run on extreme = rx 480 times two.

When both run on extreme 1080 still loses but not as much. Simple. Did provide some benchies to compare earlier. Of Ashes with 480 and 1080.

http://ashesofthesingularity.com/me...-details/d80e73ae-e7ed-46e9-9b73-551276ac8a16

Here is the crazy preset run.

 

It's not that simple for Korean overclockers which I assume he is, for otherwise a complaint about missing DVI ports would be rather invalid

 

nothing, they dont have money like nvidia or intel

 

True, they don't.

I think id went with AMD because of better OpenGL performance, because they don't like dx(12) that much?

 

"Things to do:
1. get a job.
2. get 550$.
3. buy an 8 core Zen part, 2 RX480's and a 144Hz freesync monitor.
4. buy an extra large meat lovers pizza and play Battlefield 1 all night.
Problem is getting a job."

Internet things. :wanker:

 

the difference i see is in coloring mainly (with the nvidia monitor/recording having a higher saturation set up). and sometimes it just seems that one of the two screens are recorded from farther away because there is different sizes for the same objects in certain scenes.

Ryu5uzaku posted the result links on the aots websites for both runs and they clearly state the same settings for the dual 480 run and the 1080 run.

it seems like a recording/color-scheme/monitor type issue. well and as you said even if they didnt configure it correctly for that live run. the results are online and point out what they claim. CFX 480 is as fast as single 1080 at 200$ - 300$ less depending on VRAM choice.

(reminder: 4GB MGPU setups will effectively be 8GB setups as soon as games fully implement dx12)