AMD Polaris Thread: Radeon RX 480, RX 470 & RX 460 launching June 29th

[AtenRa]

I sure hope by the time of the reviews they have ready DX-12 for Total War : Warhammer and Vulkan for DOOM. And I sure hope reviewers will include more DX-12 and Doom Vulcan benchmarks.

also, i want to see what "2" says on the notes.

 

[Flapdrol1337]

This 480 seems like a good replacement of my 670.

Either that or a dirt cheap used 290(x).

 

[antihelten]

They lied about competition not supporting async compute or shader intrinsics so them setting up an unfair comparison wouldn't really surprise me that much.

Nvidia not supporting async compute is obviously wrong (otherwise they wouldn't be DX12 compliant), but what AMD means when they claim that Nvidia doesn't support async shaders (their own made up term), is that they don't support a single CU/SM to run both graphics and compute concurrently.

Kepler didn't support this, Maxwell didn't support this, and as far as we know at this stage Pascal doesn't support it either.

This is what AMD (and people on various forums) refer to when they say that Nvidia doesn't support async compute. It's of course unfortunate that they can't be more accurate in their terms, but at this stage everyone pretty much knows what is meant.

Either way to get back on topic, it looks like AMD may have just created the new RV770

 

[selni]

I am sure they did....that's why Pascal has such awesome gains moving from DX11 to DX12 when using the graphics + compute paths simultaneously.

<image>

You should file a formal complaint to ID Software talking about Polaris having true hardware Async Compute and Custom Intrinsic (Shader) Constructions as key features NV current gen Pascal lacks:

https://youtu.be/ZwlQvjwYFEM?t=34m8s

Ignoring DX12 performance, NV has nothing worth buying in the $150-300 space the day RX 480 launches. Moving on now.

It's a bit hard to judge because of boost clocks but those DX12 fps numbers look pretty close to linear wrt peak flops. Maybe the reason AMD gains so much with explicit async compute in DX12 but nvidia doesn't seem to care is that is they're already getting good GPU loading but the larger GCN cards are problematic with AMDs current DX11 implementation?

The DX11 numbers for fury X in particular really indicate something's going wrong there relative to NV, equal to a 780 ti, and the 280X looks odd too. The DX12 numbers more or less put cards where you'd expect them to be from a very basic spec comparison in a compute bound game.

 

[AtenRa]

Nvidia not supporting async compute is obviously wrong (otherwise they wouldn't be DX12 compliant),

That is not true, you can be DX-12 compliant without Async Compute. Kepler doesnt support AC and still is DX-12 compliant.

Either way to get back on topic, it looks like AMD may have just created the new RV770

I want to see the $300 card.

 

[showb1z]

I want to see the $300 card.

So 480 is not full P10 then? 480X should have much higher clocks and/or more CU's to go from $200 to $300 no? 15-20% higher performance and 50% higher price would make no sense.
Something like 44CU's and an 8-pin. Just guessing. Then again it also wouldn't make sense for them not to show that chip.

 

[dacostafilipe]

AMD Radeon RX 480 Clock Speeds Revealed, Clocked Above 1.2 GHz

http://www.techpowerup.com/223043/amd-radeon-rx-480-clock-speeds-revealed-clocked-above-1-2-ghz

 

[AtenRa]

If the $199 card has 8GB at 8GHz GDDR-5 then the $300 cards could have GDDR-5X

 

[ShintaiDK]

150W TDP for ~Hawaii performance. My 1080 looks better and better. Far from 1070 performance, will lose big time in perf/watt to GP106. The 199$ model is 4GB only.

AMD wasn't giving out anything for cheap, this is what they can sell for. NVidia sits on GPUs this year for real.

If the $199 card has 8GB at 8GHz GDDR-5 then the $300 cards could have GDDR-5X

http://videocardz.com/60780/amd-announces-radeon-rx-480

Its 199$ for 4GB and dont expect premium GDDR5. Even less GDDR5X. AMD haven't even confirmed they have a GDDR5X controller.

 

[antihelten]

That is not true, you can be DX-12 compliant without Async Compute.

That is incorrect.

Async compute is a part of DX12's multi engine specification

Depending upon how AMD/Nvidia/Intel implements async compute, it can be used for different things. However the DX12 specifications doesn't mandate that async compute must be implemented in a way that allows concurrent execution of graphics and compute on a single CU/SM/EU.

Unlike Nvidia and Intel, AMD chose to implement async compute in such a way that they could execute graphics and compute concurrently, but that doesn't mean that Nvidia and Intel doesn't support async compute, they just don't support using it in this manner.

Alternatively you can also read an explanation of the various implementations here.

http://videocardz.com/60780/amd-announces-radeon-rx-480

Its 199$ for 4GB and dont expect premium GDDR5. Even less GDDR5X. AMD haven't even confirmed they have a GDDR5X controller.

It's not like they would even need GDDR5X either.

Supposedly the $300 card would be a fully enabled Polaris 10 with 2560 shaders or 11% more than RX 480. AMD should be able to squeeze that in with just normal GDDR5.

 

[Riek]

150W TDP for ~Hawaii performance. My 1080 looks better and better. Far from 1070 performance, will lose big time in perf/watt to GP106. The 199$ model is 4GB only.

AMD wasn't giving out anything for cheap, this is what they can sell for. NVidia sits on GPUs this year for real.



http://videocardz.com/60780/amd-announces-radeon-rx-480

Its 199$ for 4GB and dont expect premium GDDR5. Even less GDDR5X. AMD haven't even confirmed they have a GDDR5X controller.

TDP tells nothing right?

If 2 RX480 is more efficient than 1080 at similar performance that would mean that both of those RX480 are running <90W TDP instead of 150W TDP... right?

 

[mohit9206]

Really impressive card.I don't know how can ANYONE be disappointed in this launch.Especially those who were impressed with the 1080 should be the easiest to impress.$330 R9 390 performance for $230(8gb model) is good progress.
People disappointed in the TDP should know that 390 has 275W TDP which now has been brought down to 150W.And those disappointed that 480 does not have GDDR5X,i don't even know what to say to them..
As RussianSensation correctly pointed out,people like to move goalposts a lot.Showing your bias is not going to make your arguments convincing.

 

[Flapdrol1337]

Nvidia not supporting async compute is obviously wrong (otherwise they wouldn't be DX12 compliant), but what AMD means when they claim that Nvidia doesn't support async shaders (their own made up term), is that they don't support a single CU/SM to run both graphics and compute concurrently.

Kepler didn't support this, Maxwell didn't support this, and as far as we know at this stage Pascal doesn't support it either.

This is what AMD (and people on various forums) refer to when they say that Nvidia doesn't support async compute. It's of course unfortunate that they can't be more accurate in their terms, but at this stage everyone pretty much knows what is meant.

Either way to get back on topic, it looks like AMD may have just created the new RV770

The new RV770? I wouldn't say that. The RV770 went up agianst a massive compute oriented chip on an older nm process with a massive memorybus.

This time nvidia cards are small gaming focussed chips too.

 

[Noctifer616]

150W TDP for ~Hawaii performance.

150W is max board power. The power draw is actually less than 150W according to what Raja said.

 

[Element115]

I can't see what you posted but I am sure you can't prove a negative while it's pretty easy to prove a positive. Here we go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKkFqG77-x4

I had to register for this. The video you posted is more or less a lie. As you can see at the fraps counter this demo is running in DX11. If you watch the full video the guy on stage is asked about it and even admits it's DX11. What they are showing here is either a simulation of what Async would do to the frames or a driver preemtion like feature that has nothing to to with a DX12 hardware feature. Me thinks it's what they wanted to do for the 900 series but never dropped because Pascal was so close.

 

[khon]

I'm planning on building myself a new sub-1000$ mini-ITX VR-ready system, and this card looks like it would fit my needs very nicely, in terms of price/power/performance.

If I can actually buy the 8GB version on June 29th for 250 euros or less, I will do so.

Will be interesting to see how NVIDIA responds, will they have the 1060 ready in time to compete with the 480 ? And will it also be priced around $200 ?

 

[renderstate]

That is incorrect.

Async compute is a part of DX12's multi engine specification

Depending upon how AMD/Nvidia/Intel implements async compute, it can be used for different things. However the DX12 specifications doesn't mandate that async compute must be implemented in a way that allows concurrent execution of graphics and compute on a single CU/SM/EU.

Unlike Nvidia and Intel, AMD chose to implement async compute in such a way that they could execute graphics and compute concurrently, but that doesn't mean that Nvidia and Intel doesn't support async compute, they just don't support using it in this manner.

Alternatively you can also read an explanation of the various implementations here.



It's not like they would even need GDDR5X either.

Supposedly the $300 card would be a fully enabled Polaris 10 with 2560 shaders or 11% more than RX 480. AMD should be able to squeeze that in with just normal GDDR5.

Too bad NVIDIA demoed Pascal concurrently running compute and graphics and getting 15-20% higher perf. This FUD is getting boring so I'll repost this video once again:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKkFqG77-x4


Your thread crapping is getting old.

-Rvenger

 

[renderstate]

I had to register for this. The video you posted is more or less a lie. As you can see at the fraps counter this demo is running in DX11. If you watch the full video the guy on stage is asked about it and even admits it's DX11. What they are showing here is either a simulation of what Async would do to the frames or a driver preemtion like feature that has nothing to to with a DX12 hardware feature. Me thinks it's what they wanted to do for the 900 series but never dropped because Pascal was so close.

Give me a break. Once people get better performance because of async compute on Pascal I'll suggest you tell them it's all in their minds, it's a simulation!

In DX11 is even easier to run things in parallel since the driver has to explicitly know the dependency graph between compute and graphics tasks.

The amount of denial is outstanding. Pascal supports async compute just fine, eat it up and move on.

 

[AtenRa]

Pascal supports async compute just fine, eat it up and move on.

Async Compute on Pascal is still OFF in Ashes Of The Singularity, as well as in Rise Of The Tomb Rider (you know, the NVIDIA sponsored one and still AC doesnt works ).

Eat it up and move on as you say

 

[DamZe]

150W TDP for ~Hawaii performance. My 1080 looks better and better. Far from 1070 performance, will lose big time in perf/watt to GP106. The 199$ model is 4GB only.

AMD wasn't giving out anything for cheap, this is what they can sell for. NVidia sits on GPUs this year for real.



http://videocardz.com/60780/amd-announces-radeon-rx-480

Its 199$ for 4GB and dont expect premium GDDR5. Even less GDDR5X. AMD haven't even confirmed they have a GDDR5X controller.

Why not wait for the reviews to see just how good this new Card is? Unless you have some critical insider knowledge on the exact components used in these cards and their exact performance level you should rather hypothesise, the RX 480 could easily be on par with a 390X/Fury air for around 200-250 (4/8GB), which I doubt any future GP106 could rival just like that, remember GTX 960? Yeah I am not holding my breath for that cut down GP104…

 

[ShintaiDK]

150W is max board power. The power draw is actually less than 150W according to what Raja said.

I heard that excuse before. And it never turns out right. Its listed at 150W TDP because it is 150W.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Why not wait for the reviews to see just how good this new Card is? Unless you have some critical insider knowledge on the exact components used in these cards and their exact performance level you should rather hypothesise, the RX 480 could easily be on par with a 390X/Fury air for around 200-250 (4/8GB), which I doubt any future GP106 could rival just like that, remember GTX 960? Yeah I am not holding my breath for that cut down GP104&#8230;

We already got the 3Dmark numbers if true. And GP106 is 192bit, 6GB 90-100W 249-279$ from what the leaks show so far.

 

[AtenRa]

We already got the 3Dmark numbers.

yes, and now lets see actual gaming, including DX-12.

 

[DarkKnightDude]

Its 199$ for 4GB and dont expect premium GDDR5.

What? You can find 380s for like under 200 bucks and that has GDDR5, why wouldn't the 480? Weird reasoning.

 

[DamZe]

We already got the 3Dmark numbers if true. And GP106 is 192bit, 6GB 90-100W 249-279$ from what the leaks show so far.

Which still makes the RX480 look better on paper. It has full async compute capabilities (no preemption band aid), a wider bus width, and it may even sport much better DX11/tessellation performance vs older GCN cards. On paper this card looks to be insane for the asking price, if overclocked to let's say 1200+Mhz it comes around the 6TFLOPS territory which is massive for a 200+$ card IMHO. I predict this card selling like hot cakes.