Review: XFX Radeon RX 590 Fatboy 8G

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Nov 16, 2018.

  1. warlord

    warlord Guest

    Messages:
    2,760
    Likes Received:
    927
    GPU:
    Null
    It is my will and wishing list to ask and demand a gpu faster than what I already have by a generous margin under 399$.

    At least NVidia still have a card to play called 2060 if it will ever happen. And if it does, it will be equal or faster than 980ti/1070. AMD, gave me one of the same (or shame to be honest). I have any right to bitch about the obvious. This 590, should be between Fury and Vega. Period.
     
  2. Exodite

    Exodite Guest

    Messages:
    2,087
    Likes Received:
    276
    GPU:
    Sapphire Vega 56
    I figure a large part of the reason for the stagnating midrange is exactly that, it hasn't really budged performance-wise since the 1060/480 so there's been nothing to upgrade to unless you're willing to go up to the enthusiast range. And then there were the whole mining thing.

    It's not been a good couple of years to build new rigs, for sure. :(

    Navi is likely to be the RX 680/670 I reckon, at least going by the rumors of it being a midrange-focused chip. At 7nm and with a new architecture it should finally give the midrange the bumps it needs. *fingers crossed* :)

    The 2060 probably isn't imminent, given Nvidia's stockpile of Pascal chips and the persistent rumor of midrange chips not getting the RTX branding/support I imagine they'd want to exhaust that supply as the midrange bridge. Then again the prices of the 1070 and 1080 aren't really dropping to the point of being a viable midrange substitute, at least not yet.

    2019 can't come fast enough, or rather 7nm can't! ;)
     
    airbud7 and -Tj- like this.
  3. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    290X was high end and did cost $549. Refreshed by same chip in form of 390X (5% increased clock) for $429 and still considered high end.
    RX-480 was meant to be mainstream and came at $229, refreshed by RX-580 (6% increased clock; currently sold with 15% increased clock) at same $229.

    To sum it up:
    20 months after release of R9-290X, you got ~5% more at 22% lower price in form of R9-390X
    12 months after release of R9-390X, you got ~5% more at 47% lower price in form of RX-480
    9 months after release of RX-480, you got ~10% more at 0% lower price in form of RX-580
    Normalizing this information to price evolution over time at certain performance class, I can say that Polaris did better than Hawaii. And it is 2.9 times cheaper at given performance.
    But it is to be expected as it is smaller (fewer transistors) mainstream chip at smaller node.
     
    warlord likes this.
  4. warlord

    warlord Guest

    Messages:
    2,760
    Likes Received:
    927
    GPU:
    Null
    1060 6gb (2016) gtx came three years after 780ti (2013) to beat it at 100% at very cheap price.

    290x 8gb (2014)as overclocked it is like 390x surpassed finally 4 years after launch by 590(2018).

    Meaning AMD needed a whole 1 year more than Nvidia to provide a proper midrange gpu.

    My angered question is why they lost time by refreshing twice the same thing? I felt like being trapped in this situation. Nvidia gives a refresh 1060. No hope for mid range in new condition with proper strength, they are forcing people to seek used gpus more often than ever before.
     

  5. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    Those are $699 (780Ti) and $299 (1060 6G) GPUs. Put them into relevance of price normalized to performance point of r9-290X as I did above, and they will look bad.
    GTX 1060 came within 1 month's time from RX-480. 1060 was definitely better card from business perspective. (14% smaller = cheaper to make, 10% faster due to clock, 31% more expensive because market ate it.)

    As of your anger, nVidia reacts to market and does not bring you cheaper HW than they have to. So being angry on AMD that they did not bring new GPU yet? Happens. Maybe if more people bought some decent version of RX-480 as it was card with greatest value at given time... No, AMD needed crypto-minors to get decent sales. And one is surprised that they release card which may prove to be ready for next wave. (But Bitcoin does exactly what I said it will.)
    RX-590 is not good value card, that's for sure. But it will not harm AMD in smallest.
    = = = =
    And I'll add you little detail:
    Here RX-590 costs about same as did RX-580 three months ago.
    RX-580 is now 22% cheaper, and GTX 1060 followed.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2018
  6. BlackZero

    BlackZero Guest

    Hawaii ≠ Polaris and Kepler ≠ Pascal.

    The RX 480/580 has nothing to do with the 290x/390x, nor does the 1060 have anything to do with the 780. They just happen to be mid range cards with a completely different architecture and mainly aimed at price/performance efficiency that happen to fall in a similar performance category in some cases. Something which has always been the case with every single newer generation of GPUs.

    There are no rules stating a new generation must be X times faster or more efficient, or even aimed at the same rendering techniques because they change or evolve with time.

    Finally, AMD and Nvidia have completely different outlooks on GPU production. AMD is clearly more focussed on its CPU side at the moment, and has had serious financial troubles, while Nvidia is a traditional GPU producer. If anything, being the major console partner has probably enabled AMD to produce newer mainstream cards that may not have been able to otherwise.

    There's also more than enough choice where it matters for most people, as the very extreme end is never going to be anything other than a niche. There's nothing wrong with the RX 590's market placement, most people won't want to pay 50% more for a card that enables them to play with slightly higher settings at 1440p, and will really be looking at how much benefit they would get compared to the RX 580/1060.

    Where not talking about hot dogs here, these things cost hundreds of pounds/dollars etc.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 18, 2018
    airbud7 and Fox2232 like this.
  7. Amx85

    Amx85 Master Guru

    Messages:
    335
    Likes Received:
    10
    GPU:
    MSI R7-260X2GD5/OC
    Worse die shrink ever, no performance per watt improvements, also has memory bottleneck, it need faster stock memory

    greetings
     
  8. leszy

    leszy Master Guru

    Messages:
    348
    Likes Received:
    39
    GPU:
    GB 7900XT Gaming OC
    RX590 are the fastest cards in the price group up to $ 300. For 25 $ we get a 20% faster card than the GTX 1060. In addition, we get free FreeSync, which for mainstreem cards makes a huge difference. I completely do not understand why these cards have been criticized.
     
  9. Rich_Guy

    Rich_Guy Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    13,138
    Likes Received:
    1,091
    GPU:
    MSI 2070S X-Trio
  10. Bitey

    Bitey Member

    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    7
    GPU:
    Fury X fx5
    Is there any particular reason why the last 2 AMD video cards reviewed have no guru rating?
     

  11. vbetts

    vbetts Don Vincenzo Staff Member

    Messages:
    15,140
    Likes Received:
    1,743
    GPU:
    GTX 1080 Ti
    Honestly, not much to give on the card.

    A very decent binned 480 even can come close or match the card in clocks. What this card tells me, and utilizing Vega20 instead of having something else ready is development from AMD is slow right now.

    Although Polaris is a very decent architecture. What I don't understand, is why not rework this card with faster GDDR6 memory? Or even increase the shader count if possible? I don't think it's a bad card, but it's not a great one for the price. If it were at say 580 pricing or just a little over, it wouldn't be so bad.
     
  12. Bitey

    Bitey Member

    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    7
    GPU:
    Fury X fx5
    Only other reviews I recall seeing without ratings were pretty much broken, you even give ratings to items that were acknowledged to be overpriced.
     

Share This Page