What's new
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

The Radeon RX480 8GB Performance Review (Comment Thread)

SKYMTL

HardwareCanuck Review Editor
Staff member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
13,410
Location
Montreal
No overclocking anymore here. After buying a PCI-E riser card and a clamp meter on my way home yesterday from vacation and logging almost 100W draw when this thing is overclocked, NO WAY I am running it on my board. I'll wait for board partner cards thank you.
 

zoob

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 21, 2007
Messages
1,656
Location
Toronto, ON
Out of curiosity have you run any of the recent NVIDIA offerings on the same riser card and recorded power draw?
 

sswilson

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
17,897
Location
Moncton NB
How big of an engineering job would it have been to incorporate a single 8 pin as opposed to the 6? I'm sure it's not something that could be retroactively fixed on all current cards, but is it something that could relatively easily be resolved on a V 2.0 reference card?

If they haven't already been, somebody should be fired for this decision....

I've seen first hand what drawing too much current through the board can do back in my GPU farming days. :)
 

Squeetard

"Quote This..."
Joined
Nov 15, 2007
Messages
3,984
Location
Hell
OK Squeetard, I must be missing something here. The HWC review gave it a Conclusion titled "New High Water Mark" and a Damn Good Value award. The other reviews I have seen (small sample, but still) are saying things like the RX480 puts AMD in a good position for the mainstream market (AnandTech) and best budget graphics card (Ars Technica). Even Tom's Hardware review conclusion seems generally favourable saying that they appreciate that AMD has achieved "the combination of smaller, faster, cooler and quieter, all for less money".

So that's just like, their opinion man :)
None of that says anything positive to me. Maybe if you actually don't even own a gpu this would be a good choice to start? Considering only price.
Massive die shrink (2x!) and nothing to show for it. That's all I see when I read all the reviews. And performance per watt is abysmal. The 1070 consumes only 5 watts more at load (1%) and is almost twice as fast, severe WTF here?
So now AMD has to shoot themselves in the foot again on pricing just to move some of these.

Keep in mind I have been running 7970's in xfire for almost 3 years now, longer than any other gpu I've ever owned, pleased with them.
 

Fragman

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
95
AMD Radeon RX 400 series naming scheme explained | VideoCardz.com

If you check this article out. There will be some kind of revision on the RX cards.
The GF 14LPP process seems to be a major problem for AMD as there is so much variation among even reviewer samples. Some cannot even hit the advertised 1266 Mhz clocks in games without increasing fan speed.

AMD RX 480 review: The best budget graphics card—but for how long? | Ars Technica

AMD is stuck with the worst foundry for their products. If Vega and Zen are built at GF 14LPP then AMD is pretty much dead. AMD better push GF to get their process problems resolved asap or they should sue GF to get out of WSA. I am wondering how Polaris would have been if it had been manufactured at TSMC 16FF+. I would think that it would have hit 1.4 Ghz clocks while keeping power well below 150w. The problem with GF is they have the worst implementation possible of Samsung 14LPP. AMD can do nothing but just cringe in revulsion. I am thinking AMD won't last long as the bleeding will continue and AMD will run out of cash.
 

Coach

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 10, 2007
Messages
1,146
Location
Morden MB
Is it that simple? Could it also be that AMD did not have the resources to refine Polaris to the extent that Nvidia did with Pascal to achieve their clocks? I am no expert and I do not know how fabs re spin silicon, I do not know how those changes are made only that Nvidia mentioned its release of Pascal that at first Pascal came out with lower clocks and then after refinement they could optimize their chips to run faster... I would like all of this explained to me.
 

Latest posts

Twitter

Top