LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.Radeon RX 480 finally stepping up to the plate.
Read more.Radeon RX 480 finally stepping up to the plate.
£200 card going toe to toe with a £300 card depending on the game and engine. And it looks like it'll just get better going forward. Will we l see a 1060 price chop now that the competition is properly established?
Even the reference isn't £200, but I'll give you a hint (this isn't the reference model)Originally Posted by jimbouk
The 4Gb is £200 and available from scan/overclockers...Even the reference isn't £200, but I'll give you a hint (this isn't the reference model)
Any how pleased with those benchmarks. Had a 8Gb model on preorder for a while now. Can't wait for it to arrive as it should leave my 580 in the dust. I'd rather have the extra memory personally as I've hit the limits on the 1.5Gb on the 580 a few times and I imagine I'll keep this card for a while (which is why good DX12/Vulkan performance is essential).
jimbouk (29-07-2016)
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/sapph...gx-37d-sp.html for £199.99 or https://www.scan.co.uk/products/nda-...u-1306mhz-boos for £199.54 (linked from the article).
Think I might need a bit more help with that hint!
Forgot to say thank you Tarinder. Been badgering you for this review for a while.
Fury doesn't seem much hampered by 'mere' 4GiBs @ 2160p. Might be bargains to be had as stocks are run down, especially on non-X cards.
------------------
Valar Morghulis
I would have expected lower temps given the elevated fan speeds on a pretty beefy cooler. The manually reduced fan speed measurements to give sensible noise look too high as well - 83 degC - won't that be putting it close to thermal throttling?
Just an idea - was the PCB photo taken before or after testing? The thermal paste looks a bit excessive - any chance it now runs cooler after reassembly with a better application?
However, for £200 it looks good value but think I'll wait to see what a 470 with a similar cooler looks like.
That Sapphire 8GB would have been in my machine had it been available. Pity about the marketing and non delivery. On the plus side, Sapphire continues to be THE AMD supporter and puts the right cards in the market. The other manufacturers are surely in Nvidia's pockets jusdging by the amount of Nvidia derivatives they push out. I still believe there was a concerted effort by them and Nvidia to ensure that they wouldn't make their 480s available for sale before the 1060s. I smell a very big rat in this saga.
Picture was taken after all testing. The 8GB card's thermal application is identical. I'll clean it up, add some decent thermal paste and then run a couple of benchmarks.
sisters ordered the 4GB version. she gave up waiting for the 470 as there wasn't any news of it. then HEXUS posted this http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/...rx-470-rx-460/
she doesn't regret it though.
just need to wait until its in stock and despatched.
she did have a 6850, which one of the fans broke on, so she's been using my spare 4650 for the past few months. has a whopping 256mb ram. ooh massive (which is actually what she said)
she might notice the difference....
A question about DOOM Vulkan perf: Are you running incorrect drivers also? IE:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/07/19/nvidia_geforce_gtx_1060_founders_edition_review/4
While AMD is winning here, note NV isn't using the latest API yet as they state in the review. It remains to be seen how much improvement you get from 1.0.8 vs. 1.0.11.1 vs. 1.0.17.0. Since the libraries are loaded with NV's driver, this may just be a glitch that will be fixed shortly. Until they're on the same playing field I'm skeptical here. NV is loaded using the OLDEST version with doom.
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Doom-2016-Spiel-56369/Specials/Benchmark-Test-1195242/
One more point showing something fishy with doom/pascal. 980ti should not be eating 1070 for breakfast! Clearly pascal is hindered by something. I'm thinking the glitch is massively hurting NV's new cards perhaps because Id obviously has had more time with the older gen which sold pretty massively by now.
https://community.bethesda.net/thread/54585?tstart=0
Bethesda faq, showing NV not working right yet, updates coming, and many cards with issues:
“Does DOOM support asynchronous compute when running on the Vulkan API?
Asynchronous compute is a feature that provides additional performance gains on top of the baseline id Tech 6 Vulkan feature set.
Currently asynchronous compute is only supported on AMD GPUs and requires DOOM Vulkan supported drivers to run. We are working with NVIDIA to enable asynchronous compute in Vulkan on NVIDIA GPUs. We hope to have an update soon.”
Kind of important to have the right stuff working before claiming a victor in Doom or Vulkan correct? Bethesda is actually AWARE of the problem and working on it with NV. You should include what version you're running and if it's wrong, you should be indicating that in the review. Please update your review to include what DOOM is running on NV hardware as hardocp did. People should know it isn't working right on NV Pascal parts yet.
That Rise of the Tomb Raider driver giving massive performance boost is par for the course for AMD - that's why the 480 is the card to get over the 1060. They may be similar performance at launch, but slowly AMD optimizes their card for the latest games through drivers as they often do not have the resources to do this to the same extent as Nvidia at launch.
I can't imagine anyone is going to base their buying on just that one game, specially when neither card is struggling. Right now it is sort of just a bonus point to AMD, and not a surprising one given the AMD Mantle heritage of Vulkan.
It is however really interesting in an academic way, as a snapshot of what is happening right now. But then I play The Talos Principle in Vulkan despite the lower frame rates and rendering glitches just because I can
Plenty of sites used AMD's poor performance in OpenGL doom and ROTT to compare the 480 against the 1060 and slate it (despite the fact Vulkan doom and the ROTT DX12 patch were out which evened up the averages). These things swing both ways...
That doesn't really answer the question now does it? Plenty of people murder...So I might as well too? ROFL. So because other sites don't get it right, hexus shouldn't either? My point was, if there seems to be a driver issue, it should always be reported. All sites turn off hairworks despite the fact it works on both sides. Does an NV user go home and do that (or even AMD when they can easily run 4x?)? No. I wouldn't go as far as testing in 64x tessellation but all cards perform about the same (~7-10% hit) at 4-8x and it's in just about the same amount of games as dx12 now. Maxwell2/pascal just happen to perform far better in this area, and that is a bonus of those cards, yet all sites ignore it also.Plenty of sites used AMD's poor performance in OpenGL doom and ROTT to compare the 480 against the 1060 and slate it (despite the fact Vulkan doom and the ROTT DX12 patch were out which evened up the averages). These things swing both ways...
Nothing wrong with showing ALL sides, but acting like certain features for one side or the other doesn't exist? I say that as a current radeon 5850 owner, and I'd like to know how these things work when using every advantage each side has before I buy. That is the point of a review correct? Bad reporting is just bad reporting. If AMD's drivers aren't working in game X, then report it too. If there's a patch out and you're not testing with it, explain why. It's kind of hard to ignore the fact that bethesda says pascal doesn't work right yet in doom. ROTT only evens up above 1080p, and considering the mins, I'm pretty sure everything above that will go below 30fps. Neither of these cards are 1440p cards unless you like turning stuff down IMHO (and I don't, which is why I've been playing GOG games for a while...LOL). There is literally 1fps difference between OpenGL/vulkan on 1060 here. Would you want to buy a card thinking vulkan was better on AMD then get burned once NV turns on Async in doom etc? This site reported both with vulkan and without, so not sure why you bring in other sites. My comment on vulkan/doom is about this site not reporting a malfunction (perhaps they didn't know, hence the question of what is being reported).
I'd also like to see some Adobe apps tested since a lot of us use them. Pick whatever runs faster and report both sides (OpenGL, OpenCL or Cuda). It would be nice if 3dsmax/maya/blender was included too. There are a LOT of indie devs/content creators out there so it's a shame to ignore that these cards can be used for that stuff too. Personally I'm waiting for Vega/1080ti/Titan tests in this stuff before I make my move. Again, it's a shame so many sites act as though the only purpose of these cards is gaming. Students can get the entire Adobe collection for $20 a month, and even non students can get single apps for $10-20 (IE photoshop/lightroom $9.99/mo). Blender is free, and again great for Indie people. Heck a review of the coming Titan next week without this stuff is almost meaningless as it's aimed AT these people. That is why they removed the GTX moniker. Vega/1080ti should be tested in this stuff too. Can you save $400-600 (assuming vega/1080ti are far cheaper than titan) by going with these and still do well with content creation stuff? Do any of these get close to quadro M6000's in this stuff? I know I'm not the only one who wants to do more than game on my next card.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
