Some RX 480 4GB stuff leaking out.1080Mhz Clock

One 290x core 1050 mem 1350 give 7.6 on steam vr test.

 

It isn't a bad card for the money, but people expected more. You can't blame them for being disappointed. Amd has been talking about Polaris for ages, the disappointment has seemed inevitable to me for a while.

VR doesn't matter much yet though, the important thing is games. If it can essentially match a 980 **across the board** then it will be a success in my opinion. But I mean across the board, geometry and tesselation heavy games are where gcn 1.3 should outshine Hawaii and fiji

 

You can always alter the tessellation level in Crimson. Reducing it down to 16/32 from 64 is a noticeable improvement without any reduction in quality. Can improve vastly performance in some scenes.

Nvidia users call us "cheaters" when we do it but hey, its not our fault nvidia isnt giving them the option.

 

I dont see the problem. Especially with someone with older card, wether nvidia or amd to turn down settings.

Thats all the tess slider is.

 

Yes agree with,people expected bit more from those cards,me personally I will be getting two 8GB for OpenCL as right now Nvidia doesn't support OCL 2.0 and this card will fit my bill nicely...

Agree too with VR thing and regarding games,we will see and I'm very curious how this card will perform in games and in LuxMark/LuxRender

I will wait on benches there for now

Thanks,Jura

 

Have I missed something or the page contains RX 470 benchmarks only?

 

inside the slides...

Spoiler

 

Already posted. Pls delete

 

7.4 here. From 980ti performance to less than a 290 in a week. I just wait another week then.

 

Based on the spec confirmation from E3, the Polaris cards won't have GDDR5X memory, which contributes to keeping the price low. It would be interesting to know what cost would be if it did have and the clock and performance gain.

Are the likes of ASUS, XFX, etc constrained to using GDDR5 or could they opt to use GDDR5X if possible at a higher price and justifiable performance increase?

 

Some more stuff

AMD RX 480 Rivals R9 Nano, GTX 980 – Runs At 1266Mhz, ~60c Degrees & Draws ~100W

AMD RX 480 4GB & 8GB performance benchmarks, power consumption, base and boost clocks as well as temperatures. That’s right folks we have a bunch of goodies to share with you today about AMD’s RX 480 graphics card. So let’s get straight to the juicy bits!

Let’s start off with pricing. AMD’s RX 480 4GB will sell for as low as $199 and the 8GB version for around $29-$39 more. Custom versions from AMD’s add-in-board partners with unique cooling solutions, over-engineered power delivery circuitry and custom PCBs will naturally sell for more than that.
We’re told that AMD’s partners are preparing a huge array of graphics card options. Including some serious “beast mode” 8GB cards that will sell for up to $299 and overclock to the moon. We’ll tell you more about those custom cards in due time, but today we’re going to be talking strictly about AMD’s reference designed 4GB and 8GB RX 480 graphics cards which will officially retail on the 29th of June.
amd-ellesmere-rx-480-4amd-ellesmere-rx-480amd-ellesmere-rx-480-3amd-ellesmere-rx-480-2amd-ellesmere-rx-480-4amd-ellesmere-rx-480

7 mins ago by Khalid Moammer submit to reddit
AMD RX 480 4GB & 8GB performance benchmarks, power consumption, base and boost clocks as well as temperatures. That’s right folks we have a bunch of goodies to share with you today about AMD’s RX 480 graphics card. So let’s get straight to the juicy bits!
AMD Polaris 10 and Polaris 11 Radeon RX 480 RX 470 RX 460 GPUs_5
Let’s start off with pricing. AMD’s RX 480 4GB will sell for as low as $199 and the 8GB version for around $29-$39 more. Custom versions from AMD’s add-in-board partners with unique cooling solutions, over-engineered power delivery circuitry and custom PCBs will naturally sell for more than that.
We’re told that AMD’s partners are preparing a huge array of graphics card options. Including some serious “beast mode” 8GB cards that will sell for up to $299 and overclock to the moon. We’ll tell you more about those custom cards in due time, but today we’re going to be talking strictly about AMD’s reference designed 4GB and 8GB RX 480 graphics cards which will officially retail on the 29th of June.
amd-ellesmere-rx-480-4amd-ellesmere-rx-480amd-ellesmere-rx-480-3amd-ellesmere-rx-480-2amd-ellesmere-rx-480-4amd-ellesmere-rx-480

AMD RX 480 Edges Out R9 Nano & GTX 980 – Runs At ~60c & Draws ~100W
Both the 4GB and 8GB versions come out ahead of the R9 Nano and GTX 980 in terms of performance. Both cards feature a base clock speed of 1080Mhz and a boost clock speed of 1266Mhz out of the box. The cards will always run at the boost clock while gaming except in synthetic stress tests like Furmark.

The reference design is slightly over 9 inches long and features an Aluminum fin array heatsink. Naturally as this is a blower style cooling design all of the card’s heat is exhausted out the back of the card. As standard the card features 3 DisplayPort and one HDMI connections. However, some custom designs will also feature DVI-D ports.
Under typical gaming loads the RX 480 draws roughly 100 watts and cruises along at around 60 degrees Celsius/Centigrade in an open air bench. The reference design’s maximum power delivery through the 6-pin PCIe connector and the PCIe slot is 150W. Some custom variants will feature single 8-pin PCIe connectors while others will feature dual 6-pin PCIe power connectors. The “beast mode” AIB cards that we mentioned earlier will feature a single six pin and a single eight pin design.
Now let’s look at the performance numbers. Our source has provided us with performance figures for both the RX 480 4GB version and the RX 480 8GB version. The benchmark in question is 3DMark Firestrike Ultra 1.1. We have added our own GTX Titan X, GTX 980 OC, R9 390 OC & R9 Nano results for comparison. Our tests were conducted by our own Keith May with our newly acquired Intel i7 6800K six core Broadwell-E CPU. The RX 480 4GB & RX 480 8GB were benchmarked with an Intel Core i7 4960X six core Ivy Bridge-E CPU by the source.

Our slightly better CPU & overclocked graphics cards skew the results marginally in favor of our graphics card lineup vs the RX 480. Regardless of this handicap, the RX 480 managed to edge out our overclocked GTX 980 & R9 390 samples in addition to our R9 Nano sample.

So there you have it folks. A $199 graphics card that gives our $500 arsenal of heavy hitters a run for its money. In 3DMark Firestrike Ultra 1.1 at least. There’s a lot more independent testing that needs to be done before the bell is rung and a victor is declared.
Although very excitingly, according to what we’ve learned, AMD’s RX 480 and even the RX 470 put on a better show in actual games vs what we’re seeing in 3DMark. Especially in DirectX 12 games. So if the cards end up showing better gaming performance come June 29th than what’s indicated by the 3DMark scores we’ve seen, do not be surprised.
Regardless, the mere thought that gamers will be able to get R9 Nano & GTX 980 performance for $199 — that’s less than half of what we would’ve had to pay just a couple of weeks ago — at the end of the month is simply astounding.







Read more Remove space:http://wccftech .com/amd-rx-480-faster-than-nano-980/

 

VS the 200$ 380 it will be a nice upgrade. But we have to wait for the 1060...and also OC tests to see the truth.

The 380 has beaten the 960 on both price and performance, I think AMD will re-win on this price range

 

That wccftech slide is definitely a fake.

How could RX480 have ~650pts lead over R9 390 in Firestrike
while RX480 VR score is only 6.3 and R9 390 is 6.8?

 

Different type of workload, and VR slide used 16.1 driver.

 

RX 480 it's really an efficient card compared too Hawaii...
But has "less metal" compared to a 390x, and a lot less shading unit.
So I think in OpenCL calculations and in games that do not cap the gpu (mainly in non geometry intensive games) the 390x will outperform the RX 480.

We actually do not know if it will have some new hardware feature, I hoped for something similar to "Nvidia Simultaneous Multi Projection" to increase VR performance, but the low SteamVR score has really disappointed me!

 

I currently can't be disappointed by VR experience of any GPU. Because while I am supporter of VR, VR headsets themselves disappointed me.

They do not have Adaptive Sync. Rly? Not even jumping into nVidia camp for GSync?
What better way to reduce latency and stutter which causes nausea to those less resilient?

VR is no good to me on PC till it has Adaptive Sync. I can still watch large screen 3D movies in virtual Cinema with GearVR.

 

There are detailed explanations about it on /r/vive and /r/oculus but basically there is no point with low persistence OLED displays (https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/447042740463751168). I also guess that every developer is also targeting framerates above the display refresh rate anyway, so it would be useless in pretty much all the experiences.

As for the SteamVR rating thing -- I wouldn't give it much thought. You overclock a card by like 100mhz and the score goes up like exponentially. The test is really finicky. RX480 will be great in VR.

 

Some more stuff:Latest rumor

AMD RX 480 Can Hit 1.5Ghz+, New Overclocking Tool With Voltage Control Coming

Read more Remove space:: http://wccftech .com/amd-rx-480-1500mhz-overclocking-tool-voltage-control/#ixzz4BolCzo1g

 

Here new 3D mark score 2x RX480 (reference design)

videocardz com /61154/amd-radeon-rx-480-crossfire-3dmark-performance

cdn.videocardz com/1/2016/06/AMD-Radeon-RX-480-CrossFire.png

22721 pts.

Single GPU hits -> 10110 pts. GPU score ~12k

 

Hmm, so 480 CFX scores slightly higher than a single 980ti (22k gpu score for 480 CFX vs 21k for 980ti at 1500 in Fire Strike)

Dunno, doesn't seem to be that good a value.

My 970 would score 13.6k gpu score in Fire Strike, just for comparison.