Official AMD Polaris Review Thread: Radeon RX 480, RX 470, and RX 460

[tential]

Yea I start to wonder if I'm going to pay around $320 with tax included for an aib model I may as well just go for the gigabyte 1070 that's been out of stock for $399.

£250 translates to $350 minus the 20% VAT and that's $280 in US. But I'm hoping AIB offers performance improvements otherwise I could have just got a reference 4gb to hold me until Vega.

It's more expensive than the 290 I have now for less performance/similar. Meh, the 4GB model yes, that was more attractive to me at $200 direct maybe $220. Where this is priced for the 8GB, I just don't care. If I have 8GB of VRAM, I want a faster card to use it on. $520+ for crossfire RX480s isn't want I was excited about. I was excited about $400-460 crossfire selections.

I'm more concerned now about where Vega is ending up price/performance wise. When is Vega even coming? Will Vega itself have enough raw performance or will AMD be playing another price/performance style game at the high end too.

 

[sze5003]

It's more expensive than the 290 I have now for less performance/similar. Meh, the 4GB model yes, that was more attractive to me at $200 direct maybe $220. Where this is priced for the 8GB, I just don't care. If I have 8GB of VRAM, I want a faster card to use it on. $520+ for crossfire RX480s isn't want I was excited about. I was excited about $400-460 crossfire selections.

I'm more concerned now about where Vega is ending up price/performance wise. When is Vega even coming? Will Vega itself have enough raw performance or will AMD be playing another price/performance style game at the high end too.

Maybe we will see a nitro 4gb for $230 or so. I'm also curious on the 1060 scores and reviews but that is probably going to stay at $299 after it launches. Although I heard msi model will release at $249.

I've read an article on my phone's news feed about Vega coming March 2017. It's supposedly more powerful than what there is now and should be their top of the line cards like the 7970 was the generation before fury.

Once I can get me one of those top end models I'll keep it as long as I've had this card.

 

[Qwertilot]

Vega does look very likely to be forced into price/performance to at least some degree.

They'd need a huge jump in efficiency from somewhere to get past a 1080 let alone approaching NV's big chip which should be due to drop down to vaguely sane price levels around next Spring.

You presume also a card due at ~1070/080ish performance to fill that gap in their line up, although you can see AMD not bothering - launching that much later with merely equivalent performance isn't a recipe for success so they might plausibly have planned to save the R&D costs etc.

 

[Oyeve]

I'm playing doom with everything cranked to the highest ultra settings on this 480.plays great. Loving my card.

 

[sze5003]

Looks like the msi model will be $259 or $269 according to this article. Also a nice overview of the other AIB models.

http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-480-custom-models/

 

[dooon]

Radeon RX 470
Ashes of the Singularity Benchmark
Extreme 4K
http://www.ashesofthesingularity.co...-details/8c356274-1f64-4020-8e97-6e7f2b3d1f33
http://www.ashesofthesingularity.co...-details/83459caf-d7ca-4771-850e-99d742bd6a11
Extreme 1440p
http://www.ashesofthesingularity.co...-details/dab6d0ad-311e-4774-a03c-7d04ccc7c404
http://www.ashesofthesingularity.co...-details/b5c219d6-4059-4e63-afc2-cb5ed2cb0437
Extreme 1080p
http://www.ashesofthesingularity.co...-details/446cd478-4521-4acd-a715-6b537f876590
http://www.ashesofthesingularity.co...-details/c4f20d31-5c68-4047-973c-d67c3b8fec7c

 

[Hitman928]

I wonder why the vastly different results shown between the 2 hour gap in those results. If it's just a driver update, that puts the 470 just slightly slower than a 480. I'm guessing they've overclocked the 470 to reach 480 speeds which would still be a very sweet deal at < $200 if true.

 

[boozzer]

Yea I start to wonder if I'm going to pay around $320 with tax included for an aib model I may as well just go for the gigabyte 1070 that's been out of stock for $399.

£250 translates to $350 minus the 20% VAT and that's $280 in US. But I'm hoping AIB offers performance improvements otherwise I could have just got a reference 4gb to hold me until Vega.

there is no way you can find a 1070 for 399$ the only one in the usa with that price tag has been OOS on newegg since release date. it feels like they put up 1 card for the price just so forum shills(fyi, I am not calling you a shill) can use it as a talking point.

as long as 480 aib n 1070 aib has close to 200$ price difference, doesn't have to be exactly 200$, 480 will 100% be the better buy. 1070 only becomes the right choice if the difference shrinks down to 100$, you want the performance it offers and you can afford a 425+$ card. in that case you shouldn't be considering a 480 at all in the first place.

 

[sze5003]

there is no way you can find a 1070 for 399$ the only one in the usa with that price tag has been OOS on newegg since release date. it feels like they put up 1 card for the price just so forum shills(fyi, I am not calling you a shill) can use it as a talking point.

as long as 480 aib n 1070 aib has close to 200$ price difference, doesn't have to be exactly 200$, 480 will 100% be the better buy. 1070 only becomes the right choice if the difference shrinks down to 100$, you want the performance it offers and you can afford a 425+$ card. in that case you shouldn't be considering a 480 at all in the first place.

I saw it in stock 2 weeks ago and was close to pulling the trigger on it but decided not to. It does have about 18 reviews on newegg so it at least has been sold. Of course that price could be just a placeholder until it's actually in stock then newegg shifts the price up $10.

Well that's what I was saying. I'm planning on getting an AIB 480 nitro, xfx or Asus model. If the difference is very close to $100 the 1070 could be a better buy. The 480 is better for me as I'm still on 1080p.

I wont have a GPU soon as i'm giving this one away to a family member. So who knows how long before I'll be able to order something I want. I wish we would have aib reviews before they are released for sale but I doubt that will be the case.

 

[boozzer]

I saw it in stock 2 weeks ago and was close to pulling the trigger on it but decided not to. It does have about 18 reviews on newegg so it at least has been sold. Of course that price could be just a placeholder until it's actually in stock then newegg shifts the price up $10.

Well that's what I was saying. I'm planning on getting an AIB 480 nitro, xfx or Asus model. If the difference is very close to $100 the 1070 could be a better buy. The 480 is better for me as I'm still on 1080p.

I wont have a GPU soon as i'm giving this one away to a family member. So who knows how long before I'll be able to order something I want. I wish we would have aib reviews before they are released for sale but I doubt that will be the case.

it seems like the price of 1070 doesn't matter to you, and you can afford it. if you can afford the price, I would 100% go for it. assuming you need the performance? if you don't(you game in 1080p/1440p, and doesn't need max out graphics) I would still go for a 480 AIB even if the price difference is only 100$ save it for the next upgrade for your pc, whatever it is. :thumbsup:

 

[sze5003]

it seems like the price of 1070 doesn't matter to you, and you can afford it. if you can afford the price, I would 100% go for it. assuming you need the performance? if you don't(you game in 1080p/1440p, and doesn't need max out graphics) I would still go for a 480 AIB even if the price difference is only 100$ save it for the next upgrade for your pc, whatever it is. :thumbsup:

I'm going to save that money so I can get a decent 1440p monitor by the next wave of cards, when Vega comes out. I'll splurge then and most likely go for a top end card to keep as long as I've had the card I own now.

The 480 should max most games at 1080 according to reviews and what others have stated here after receiving theirs. It will be a decent upgrade for me and even though I can afford more sometimes I don't feel the need to spend that much at times.

 

[boozzer]

I'm going to save that money so I can get a decent 1440p monitor by the next wave of cards, when Vega comes out. I'll splurge then and most likely go for a top end card to keep as long as I've had the card I own now.

The 480 should max most games at 1080 according to reviews and what others have stated here after receiving theirs. It will be a decent upgrade for me and even though I can afford more sometimes I don't feel the need to spend that much at times.

it really depends on how much time you spend gaming. I am glad that you at least know what you want. :thumbsup:

 

[sze5003]

it really depends on how much time you spend gaming. I am glad that you at least know what you want. :thumbsup:

I'm also curious how well the 1060 will do. Their aib models most likely and hopefully will be sold for $250 or so. For example the msi model. But I'm more concerned about longevity and how it would perform over time vs a 480. In case Vega or what not doesn't perform as expected I will end up keeping what I buy now longer. Now a days it seems if you don't make up your mind and buy as soon as you can, you can be stuck waiting forever.

 

[AtenRa]

I wonder why the vastly different results shown between the 2 hour gap in those results. If it's just a driver update, that puts the 470 just slightly slower than a 480. I'm guessing they've overclocked the 470 to reach 480 speeds which would still be a very sweet deal at < $200 if true.

Dont thing so, 470 is not that much of cut down for a performance of 36fps when 480 gets 46+

 

[dark zero]

I guess no one put this...
http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-490-dual-gpu/

Seems that this is the last shot from AMD this year. I remember that AMD earlier in the year said that Polaris would have a Dual GPU version... so that might have sense.

Also... isn't supposed to Polaris to support HBM2? Maybe it might have it? Or just will have GDDR5X or regular Dual HBM.

Also. I don't be surprised if AMD is improving their chips and in 8 to 10 months in order to prepare the way to Vega they will not only rebrand, but launch the improved chip (Polaris 2.0) with GDRR5X and who knows HBM2 to mobile versions.

 

[crisium]

I guess no one put this...
http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-490-dual-gpu/

Seems that this is the last shot from AMD this year. I remember that AMD earlier in the year said that Polaris would have a Dual GPU version... so that might have sense.

Super disappointing to me if true.

 

[railven]

So is AMD going back to small chips? From my understanding, even Vega isn't aiming to be a big chip, at least not GP100 big.

I had a 4870X2 and it was a mix bag. It put me off from mGPU for a rather long time and I wouldn't blame AMD for it. (Well directly.)

7970 X2 was fun when it worked, but trying to take on a single GPU with a dual GPU setup doesn't sound like the right approach.

Can they afford to charge more than $550, when dual RX 480 8GBs can go for <$500?

This uphill battle is getting steeper with Vega not seeing light until 2017. Hope AMD is ready.

 

[littleg]

Not a big fan of mGPU as things stand at the moment. Support is a bit hit and miss.

The only way I think this would really work is if Microsoft somehow patch mGPU support into DX12 or make it in some way not reliant on devs to implement. While it's in the hands of the developers it's (rightly) never going to be a priority.

To say I don't know much about programming would be an understatement but would it be possible for them to implement some kind of generic profile in the driver so that it at least works although with a hit on scaling? Or does Xfire absolutely require a separate profile to be created for each game individually?

 

[24601]

Not a big fan of mGPU as things stand at the moment. Support is a bit hit and miss.

The only way I think this would really work is if Microsoft somehow patch mGPU support into DX12 or make it in some way not reliant on devs to implement. While it's in the hands of the developers it's (rightly) never going to be a priority.

To say I don't know much about programming would be an understatement but would it be possible for them to implement some kind of generic profile in the driver so that it at least works although with a hit on scaling? Or does Xfire absolutely require a separate profile to be created for each game individually?

No.

You are basically asking Microsoft to write a game engine for everyone else to be forced to use.

That's nowhere close to being realistic.

Not to mention the fact that if you demand good AFR scaling, you are massively limiting engine capabilities.

DX12 is the opposite of what you think it is apparently.

And that's before we get to the fact that AFR is good for movies only.

 

[littleg]

No.

You are basically asking Microsoft to write a game engine for everyone else to be forced to use.

That's nowhere close to being realistic.

Not to mention the fact that if you demand good AFR scaling, you are massively limiting engine capabilities.

DX12 is the opposite of what you think it is apparently.

And that's before we get to the fact that AFR is good for movies only.

Yeah, that's what I thought. It's a shame really as mGPU could potentially be extremely good but it needs to be transparent to the game for it to be widely adopted imo.

Hopefully some of those much cleverer people than me at AMD / NV / MS can find a solution

 

[24601]

Yeah, that's what I thought. It's a shame really as mGPU could potentially be extremely good but it needs to be transparent to the game for it to be widely adopted imo.

Hopefully some of those much cleverer people than me at AMD / NV / MS can find a solution

The only thing DX12 does is shift the responsibility of writing drivers from the IHVs to the game devs. (It adds a few new features too ofc)

It's not magic. If game devs suck at optimizing their game directly for GPU architectures, their DX12 game is going to suck in terms of performance. It's as simple as that

A clear example of that fact was Battlefield 4's mantle support.

You had one of the best staffed and best equipped game engine and game developers directly cooperating with an IHV (AMD) to write low level code for just GCN.

They predictably failed miserably on basically all accounts, and only supported R9 290 and 7790 (With a huge, debilitating memory leak, as well as much higher base VRAM usage). It had massive problems on basically every other GCN card.

 

[Bacon1]

No.

You are basically asking Microsoft to write a game engine for everyone else to be forced to use.

That's nowhere close to being realistic.

Not to mention the fact that if you demand good AFR scaling, you are massively limiting engine capabilities.

DX12 is the opposite of what you think it is apparently.

And that's before we get to the fact that AFR is good for movies only.

DX12 does split frame rendering not AFR like normal CFX / SLI.

 

[Bacon1]

Not a big fan of mGPU as things stand at the moment. Support is a bit hit and miss.

The only way I think this would really work is if Microsoft somehow patch mGPU support into DX12 or make it in some way not reliant on devs to implement. While it's in the hands of the developers it's (rightly) never going to be a priority.

To say I don't know much about programming would be an understatement but would it be possible for them to implement some kind of generic profile in the driver so that it at least works although with a hit on scaling? Or does Xfire absolutely require a separate profile to be created for each game individually?

Microsoft is making it easier to do MGPU in DX12 - http://www.winbuzzer.com/2016/07/05...lti-gpu-support-directx-12-developers-xcxwbn/

 

[24601]

DX12 does split frame rendering not AFR like normal CFX / SLI.

Poster was asking about something that would give good scaling.

Proper Split Frame Rendering gives extremely bad scaling.

Microsoft is making it easier to do MGPU in DX12 - http://www.winbuzzer.com/2016/07/05...lti-gpu-support-directx-12-developers-xcxwbn/

"bobbrow commented 2 days ago [Microsoft member]

@pritster5, the layer is shippable in UWP applications, so yes, titles in the Windows Store will be able to take advantage of the layer. I can't say whether they will all use it or not though. It's up to the studios producing the titles. We believe that studios that write their own mGPU solutions tailored to their engines can outperform our general purpose library, but for studios lacking the resources to do so, this library should be a very effective resource.

@tjukic, this first iteration of the layer will focus on providing a solution for alternate frame rendering (AFR). We will be publishing some documentation with the layer explaining what it does and does not provide and how to weave it into your project. It's more information than would fit nicely into an issue thread such as this, so I'll hold off on that for now.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves, there isn't even documentation for us to speculate on.

 

[Bacon1]

Poster was asking about something that would give good scaling.

Proper Split Frame Rendering gives extremely bad scaling.




Let's not get ahead of ourselves, there isn't even documentation for us to speculate on.

Ashes of the Singularity uses Split Frame rendering not AFR.

If you are thinking that it doesn't scale well because of Civ being a title that did it, that was by design:

If you don’t see 70-100% GPU scaling, that is working as intended, according to Firaxis. Civilization: Beyond Earth’s GPU-oriented workloads are not as demanding as other recent PC titles. However, Beyond Earth’s design generates a considerable amount of work in the producer thread. The producer thread tracks API calls from the game and lines them up, through the CPU, for the GPU's consumer thread to do graphics work. This producer thread vs. consumer thread workload balance is what establishes Civilization as a CPU-sensitive title (vs. a GPU-sensitive one).

http://techreport.com/blog/27258/civ-beyond-earth-with-mantle-aims-to-end-multi-gpu-microstuttering



The devs talk about it here as well:

SFR has very different characteristics than AFR, and our choice was heavily motivated by our design of the Civilization rendering engine, which fits the more demanding requirements of SFR well. Playing the game with SFR enabled will provide exactly the same quality of experience as playing with a single, more powerful GPU.

http://www.firaxis.com/?/S=813e3681...antle-multi-gpu-for-civilization-beyond-earth

Anyway, point is that with DX12 SFR can be very effective and we aren't limited to AFR.