>Radeon 480
>5.5 TFLOPS
>8GB GDDR RAM
>$199.99
Nvidia Shills party cut short! Mass suicide incoming!
>>54837886
>8gb GDDR5
>256 bit
>>54837920
You mean just like the 1080 and 1070?
>>54837972
1060 too.
Although that might be 6GB
>>54837972
Having wider memory bus was one of main reasons why AMD is better than Nvidia according to AMD fanclub. Now they go with same bus as Nvidia abandoning 512bit.
>>54837886
>$199
Jesus Christ
We all knew it was gonna be around $200-300, I assumed best case scenario to be around 250, but damn. That thing is gonna sell like hot cake if its at that performance/price ratio.
Man that 50w power consumption looks nice for my old pc. Is 460 a rehash? Stream processors is identical.
>>54837886
aww shit my 7870 is more powerfull than 460
not upgrading anytime soon
>>54838115
To be fair, the 7000 series is like the sandy bridge of GPUs. It's really hard to improve on them.
>>54838115
>using pleb tier cards
KEK
>>54838115
Nigger your 7870 uses like 400% the power the 460 does.
Start comparing to the 480.
>>54838115
I would doubt that the old 270 was basically 7870 and 260X was about half a tier below that.
460 should be in between 7870 and 7950.
>>54838113
Same number of stream processor does not a rehash
Interesting.
Now I want to see how the performance is for most titles, as well as temp.
It's happening
Wait fags rejoice
>>54837886
soif the 480 really does end up costing $200 then in CF it'll be almost at 1080 levels of performance maybe even equal or greater depending on how well it overclocks all for $400.
>>54838169
100w power consumption difference is alot
I think passive cooling would be possible with this thing
NVIDIA WON
>>54838169
Who the fuck cares about the power you stupid nigger?
>>54838066
Uhhhh, are you not seeing that each one is replacing a model, and the previous model had the same bus width? The 490'll have a 512 bus width, since the 390 has 512, and whatever R9 Fury substitute comes out'll have the 4096-bit bus width, more than likely.
>>54838267
Anybody who isn't content to wallow about with Pentium 4s and Fermi, you dumb cunt.
>>54837886
Considering the absurd price of nVIDIA's flagship, that is quite something.
It's a little odd: nVIDIA launched with the expensive flagship, AMD are releasing their low-to-midrange? From the Polaris/Vega thing, that was always their plan, it's just kind of an odd plan, unless competing on price first was actually their strategy. (Maybe they can't compete with nVIDIA for the high-end Tesla deep-learning supercomputer stuff, which is where NV makes most of its money; maybe they don't even want to?)
Let's actually see how they all perform before breaking out the streamers. Also, this is WCCF, so apply the usual grain of caution.
>>54837886
What is the Geforce equivalent of Radeon 480 / 5.5 TFLOPS? I don't understand AMD speak.
>>54838328
GTX 1060
>>54838310
Maybe AMD is confident about their Vega and waiting for the hype/speculation to build up around its Polaris cards. Scaled up version of Polaris might be a really something or it could be the new Fury vs 980ti
>>54837886
Let the shilling begin
>>54838310
AMD have always been focused on the midrange and now that they're so powerful for their energy use and price, this strategy is going to absolutely pay off now.
Who gives a shit about the 1080 when you can buy something that'll do 1440p60 and then have enough money left over to buy a fucking car or a holiday?
>>54838251
>cf/SLI
>ever acceptable compared to an equal or greater single card solution.
Anon.
Unless DX12 does something miraculous for resource pooling, don't ever do CF/SLI
t. - SLI 980 owner.
>>54838400
Or 2 of the same AMD gpu and use the saved money in other components or just save it.
Is the 490 gonna be vega or what?
NVIDIA IS LITERALLY FINISHED AND BANKRUPT
NVIDIOTS BTFO
>>54838328
In terms of TFLOPS, between 980 and Titan X
>>54838328
...in theory. We have no idea what that translates to in real-world performance. As always really, much depends on the drivers.
>>54838342
My guess is, Vega just is not ready yet, and AMD simply weren't expecting nVIDIA to ship Pascal as-is in stepping A0, as they did.
Which makes me wonder about Pascal's errata - nVIDIA simulate, not validate, these days, even more so than AMD. Hopefully any fuckups (which are basically inevitable in any chip) are not too serious, but I personally got stung by the 7900 GTX VRAM-overvoltage bug so I'm a little cautious either way these days of getting anything at the high-end without a seriously good warranty.
>>54838429
The 490 either won't be a thing or it'll take the place the 480X otherwise would've.
I'm predicting multiple tiers of Fury. If you notice, they've done away with the R5/7/9 this generation and gone RX, and they've made no mention or 480'X' or 460'X' or anything.
>>54838482
So why are people bitching about a $200 980-Titan X? Last I checked just a few months ago, $200 gets you a 960.
>>54838115
really? my 7870 runs games like shit, i've been waiting to upgrade for a few years
You guys realize TFLOPS aren't a direct measure of gaming performance, right? The 290x had the same TFLOP performance as the 980 TI but the 980 TI smoked it when it came to game performance.
This is basically a re-branded 390 with better thermals and much lower TDP.
>>54838524
Nvidia shills are triggered
>>54838524
Because people are retards who go 'hurr nvidia performance king AMD can't compete', not realizing that nobody gives a fuck about a card too powerful for the resolutions people use right now and not powerful enough for serious 4K.
>>54838413
AMD showed two RX 480 in CF beating a GTX 1080 on the Polaris tech day.
>>54838538
>This is basically a re-branded 390 with better thermals and much lower TDP.
so it isn't a 390 then
>>54838538
...and a new node process
just a rebrand though, i promise!!
>>54838538
If DX12/AsyncCompute are the future, then nVidia is finished.
>>54838573
That's in optimal scenarios anon. CF/ SLI isn't like that 100% of the the time.
>>54838597
CF generally has better scaling than SLI and they get about 80-90% scaling rate
>>54838310
They're following the same strategy Nvidia did with Maxwellv1
So should I replace my 750Ti with one of these or a 1070?
>>54838538
Some time later you got the 290X competing with the 980TI
>>54837886
Well what a price not it should just work.
>Random Display Driver crashes
>The Target FPS function doesn't work, (never worked)
>AMD only has shit software
>Nearly every AAA title is build in favor of Nvidia
>Nvidia overall usage in programs like Sony Vegas is 100x better
I'm never going red again. I owned a GTX 560 Ti and a GT9500 before and never had any problems with them. Once I fell for the AMD shilling I have to put with random crashes, some games just don't starting with no solution in sight (Arkham City) and AMD driver functions that don't even work.
Fuck AMD
>>54838642
>Should i replace my card that doesn't use additional PCIe power with one that does?
Why the fuck do you even have a 750 Ti, then?
>>54838674
I was told 750ti was the best bang/buck. I bought it cheap for $200 a year ago
>>54838672
>Windows 10
Well clearly you're a retard, it's no wonder you're having so many problems.
>>54838672
you're a moron. uninstall windows 10 and go back to 7 you fucking retard
>>54838692
You were told bullshit.
>>54838692
Pretty sure 750 Ti is a $150 card a year ago.
>>54838674
It was dirt cheap when I bought it and it's handled most games just fine.
>>54837886
So a non-1080 competitor, why should one care?
When will AMD come up with a 1080 or 1080Ti competitor? Might considering buying two because my 1080s run pretty hot.
>>54838169
>Upgrading a gaming GPU for power consumption, not performance
I guarantee nobody does this unless your power is like $1/kw
>>54838696
Not sure where you're geting it, but I'm on 7950 and Win10 has been very smooth so far for AMD. Only issue I've gotten is when I had unstable OC, which would cause artifacts and crash driver. Easy fix for that was lower clock/mem speed a bit.
>>54838734
But all the nvidiafanboys says they bought their GPU because power consumption.
Did they all get replaced by doplegangers this time around?
>POWER CONSUMPTION DOESN"T MATTER IM BUYING 10800000000
>>54838193
well considering the 7870 is now 770 tier and the 7950 is 780 tier this is going to be an amazing chip.
>>54838696
>>54838712
You autistic retards I had these problems even won Windows 7.
Go hide in your basement you scum
>>54838748
Well I'm no nvidiot, I buy my GPUs based on price/performance regardless of the company.
They probably were paid shills.
>>54838169
And?
Nobody puts power consumption on a pedestal like that except for fanboys but even they are full of shit and just using it to jockey for position in their little spats.
>>54838696
>>54838712
I don't get why so many people (or as I suspect, a very loud minority) recommend using outdated software that is objectively worse than the current version at 99% of tasks.
If you truly hate the telemetry or whatever then why in the world are you using windows in the first place? In that case go linux. If you're gonna use windows, use the most modern edition, anything else is just masochistic, especially when the mainstream support period has already ended and ESPECIALLY when upgrading, like you will eventually literally be forced to anyway, will cost money in the future and not now.
>>54838792
Then you're clearly a retard because i can clock my 280X so hard it hits 95 when stress testing and the drivers are still rock solid.
>>54838230
>tfw I only waited because I was broke
>tfw many hours of OT coming in just before these cards drop
>>54838809
Power consumption is directly related to heat.
A 50w card that's powerful enough to do 1080p@60 in every modern game is fucking perfect for small, silent cases.
>>54838737
>>54838868
>will cost money
Are you actually fucking implying we pay for windows?
>>54838868
Name one thing Windows 10 does better than Windows 7. 7 will be supported until 2020 and by then I'll have to get a new computer ANYWAY, which voids the "free" upgrade.
>>54838873
But I never overclocked my card you retard?
>>54838944
DX12, WDDM, multiple display handling, native USB drivers, overall better performance
>>54838868
>very loud minority
>w7 has 55% of the market share
>w10 only 15%
50 Bingâ„¢ Points have been awarded to you!
>>54838672
>>54838891
w r o n g
power consumption is tangentially related to heat.
>>54838891
>1080p
Jesus Christ my eyes
>>54839034
Conservation of energy
All consumed electrical energy becomes heat energy inside a computer.
>>54839224
I think he was trying to say, wattage is tangentially related to temperature. Given the same heatsink and fan, a 140W chip runs much hotter than a 53W one.
>>54839275
>>54839224
These days temperature is far more dependent on transistor/logic density, because otherwise a 4W CPU wouldn't run at 60+ Celsius
>>54838066
>>54837920
They were forced through design choices to use a larger than needed bus. At least they didn't just cripple a card with a 128bit like the 960.
LAUNCH THE POLARIS
>>54839275
The temperature it runs at doesn't matter for shit, the chip can run at 10 degrees or 100 degrees and still be emitting the same heat into the case.
>>54838413
They have new bridges that do away with many of the issues with sli in the past. Supposedly. But now you get to buy a new hard bridge, not use your old one if you upgrade.
>>54838538
2 loo dollars have been deposited into your account, pajeet.
>>54839386
Meanwhile, AMD know how much spare bandwidth there is in PCIe 3.0 and did away with retarded extra cables years ago.
>>54838885
God speed
>4GB GDDR5
I wonder if someone will sell Radeon 460s with 2GB, I don't really have a need for all that VRAM so I'd rather just get a cheaper card.
>this is it ladies and gents, AMD is against the ropes and NEEDS to succeed in other to regain some momentum! What will AMD do?!
>AMD goes all in on a market they can be easily pushed out of just with Nvidia doing aggressive price cuts.
UUUUMMM.....
I have no gpu right now and need one ASAP. I was going to buy a 1070 for my vive computer.
Should I wait for Polaris?
>>54838596
Post the AoTS one where the fury x is rivalling the 1080.
>>54839460
Technically, their market share is rising right now.
>>54839475
Ah, found it.
>>54839460
>Nvidia
>Not charging every cent they can for their cards
What the FUCK are you thinking? You think this is a goddamn game, pajeet?
1070 price just went up by $25 for that stupidity
>>54839304
4W is a fuck-lot. If you put it in a tiny package without proper cooling, of course it will be hot as balls.
Try touching a 1-Watt linreg sometime.
>>54839473
Just buy 1080.
>>54839489
Ah, the meme game nobody plays that exists solely to make AMD cards look good.
>>54839460
What's the point of Nvidia selling at a loss when their fanboys will buy at full prices anyway?
Also you can't undercut too much or you risk regulator's anti-competitive wrath
>>54839460
>implying pricecuts are bad for consumers
I hope you enjoy the 1270/1280 costing $1000/1500 when AMD fails.
so, anyone got geforce 1060/70/80 specs as comparison?
>>54839473
No, you should buy one of the 980 Tis morons are now selling in order to get a 1080
>>54839515
>Recommending buying old nVidia tech that will get left behind in the dust in driver updates and support.
LOL :SMILEFACE:
>>54837886
This card doesn't compete with Pascal, but it gives a good low power solution for the mainstream market. 256-bit 2048SM for 200 € sounds good. Much better than any 970 or 980 or even the 960 that currently fits in that spot.
>>54839473
390 Nitro is amazing if you can get it cheap
>>54839500
Remember: any game in which AMD bests Nvidia is a game nobody plays.
>>54839541
It competes with pascal, it just doesn't compete with GP104 and was never meant to.
>>54837886
This just got them another big Apple contract.
>>54839535
Have a look at this.
>>54839576
And yet they'll still find a way to make the 45w card thermal throttle
>>54839489
Is there a formula to extroplate these figures to determine which hardware would be required to achieve 120FPS @144Hz at these resolutions?
>>54839500
Someone I know said the same thing to me when I brought up "how is the 3.5 gigs of vram treating you. The then proceeded to should my some shadow of mordor on a 970 using all 4 gigs of vram( obviously fake)
>>54839603
Depends of the resolution.
You probably need 1080TI for 120fps 1440p 144hz
>>54839569
It seems Vega will. But I hope they have something to compete with GP102. I would consider a Vega CfX when it could compete with GP102 for less plus HBM2. But I don't buy shitty solutions like the 4 GB Fury.
>>54839592
All the nvidia that bought 780tis are still denying that to 290x is faster to this day.
>>54839603
A completely maxed out Vega should be capable of around 90-120FPS in 4K, providing you don't care about AA.
>>54838066
256b is still pretty shit, but at least AMD isn't trying to peddle that shit in its high-end products.
Vega will probably force 1080 out of the market entirely and cause 1070 to drop from $450 to below $300, assuming that a GP102 really is waiting in the wings.
>>54838672
>AMD
I found your problem.
>>54839662
I don't deny that, the 780Ti is shit. I get half the FPS of a 970 in Witcher 3 and my card should be faster in theory. All the old games work, but the newer ones kill it.
But I want to see that AMD still supports their old cards when Polaris and Vega are out. Fermi still gets new drivers, the 5000 and 6000 AMD series only get legacy drivers.
>>54839683
>No AA
Be realistic, 60 FPS with all details and no AA. The 1080Ti won't be much faster. 80 % to a 980Ti if you overclock it properly.
I asked yesterday but didn't get an answer, why don't AMD and Nvidia make single purpose hardware blocks for SSAA and other postprocessing instead of running them in the shaders?
STREAM IN 7 HOURS
>>54839603
No as not all games hit the hardware the same and even within a family of cards the different ratio of shaders, clocks etc etc make it borderline impossible to make a remotely accurate guess.
Even looking squarely at AMD only in ashes does the fury x scale roughly as it should over a 390x due to the enormous compute aspect of the game. In every other game (even other DX12 ones) something is throttling the fury x hard.
Plus going beyond this people forget that - especially in ashes - nearly every cpu in exiustence actually holds back the top end cards. Its a little known thing due to it being hard to easily spot but current top end cards are generally cpu throttled because so few games can scale well enough to threads when single threaded performance is still the limiting factor. Ashes cpu benchmarks are very, very interesting once you start testing on the newer xeons.
>>54839714
Yeah, no. Vega is set to be an absolute beast, 60FPS in 4K should be expected from the low-to-mid models.
>>54839709
256-bit is awesome for a middle-class mainstream card. The 960 got only 128-bit. The 280X was the best, 384-bit in the middle-class, the 380 was a downgrade again, also a good example how AMD gimps their cards, the 380 is faster with less memory bandwith.
>>54839683
.. you don't need AA in 4k.
>>54839714
for good and ill, Polaris is still a GCN architecture, and Vega is presumed to be as well.
it's frankly a shame that Hawaii wasn't on a more efficient process than TSMC 28nm, since they will likely have absurd longevity in driver support by modern standards.
>>54839717
Cost.
>>54839683
1080 doesn't even do that, 55-70FPS in Doom 4 and TW3 (everything maxed)
>>54839736
You do, just not much of it. 2x smaa is more than enough or (for the performance focused gamer) fxaa - raw resolution should tackle its biggest weakness.
>>54839731
> low end Vega models
que?
>>54839750
Vega is going to be much more powerful than the 1080.
>>54837886
SO how long until i can buy this? My Asus Radeon 7870 HD is starting to have problems keeping up.
>>54839797
if i remember correctly it was launching at computex inside few weeks?
>>54839778
>>54839565
>>Remember: any game in which AMD bests Nvidia is a game nobody plays.
O god you can't make that shit up :) lol
Giving your 2 cents on something you have no idea what's going lol .
>People thinking these AMD cards will compete against the GTX1070/GTX1080
How retarded are you guys?
So how does 400 compare to 300?
Are they more powerful or are they the same thing but cheaper
>>54839933
Not as retarded as the person who can't read or make basic logical conclusions.
>>54839984
The high end 400 series are not out ... Your comparing right now the 480 to the 390 and they are on almost par with performance. So Mid range of the 400 compare to the high end of the 300 series.
480 consuming close to half the energy for the same performance.
The 490 and 490x will come out later this year around October from what the rumors are going for.
>>54840037
Which is implied with my statement.
>>54840080
>The 490 and 490x will come out later this year around October
What's taking AMD so long?
They are once again late to the party.
But how well will it run Doom 4?
>>54840115
They didn't rush their release like nvidia did.
You can see this by the way none of the 1080s can overclock, i bet nvidia have been throwing out 8/10 of the chips they get due to the node being so immature.
AMD are waiting for things to be good before launching.
>>54840115
If you look at their progression Leak from Last year
their high end the 490 and 490x where always dated After Polaris.
But also 2 companies 1 launches it's niche high end product first and the other one launch is Mid class GPU first ... Same could be said about Nvidia Why so late with the 1060 ??? There wont be anything to compete with the 480 price point of AMD
>>54840145
as well as a 390?
>>54840115
>>They are once again late to the party.
What's taking Nvidia so long into releasing low/mid range cards? Dunno, probably wafer supply, both companies shifted focus to different markets this time.
>>54840115
because people mostly buy 100-200 dollar GPUs
>>54837886
>in between 390 and 390x performance
Wow it's nothing, guess AMD has nothing on offer for people who want to upgrade to some serious fireworks
>>54840213
But they do.
The Radeon Pro Duo.
Still the single most powerful graphics card ever made.
>>54839489
the 970, i have that :(
>>54840253
Except that's a dual GPU card
>>54840287
And more powerful than anything nvidia has.
>>54840287
Where is nvidias dual gpu card?
>>54839896
>>54840181
Only?
>>54838102
Don't get so excited just yet. That's the 480; not the 480X, which probably will still go for $250+.
>>54840308
>>54840312
Stick two 1080's in your system and you have a dual gpu setup that shits over the Radeon pro duo.
Is this the kind of goalpostmoving AMDtards resort to these days?
>>54840287
poor fag detected
>>54840364
Needs twice as much space, twice as many lanes, twice as much power etc.
>>54840364
I have a mini ITX build.
Where's nvidias answer to the most powerful graphics card ever made?
>>54838146
>To be fair, the 7000 series is like the sandy bridge of GPUs. It's really hard to improve on them.
This. The reason the 290/390 had to use so much power was because they overclocked them to all shit. I recall the 7970 was something like 800MHz at first, then they noticed that it can go way over a GHz.
They could've just sold the 290x at a lower clock too, then it would've used 170W like the NVidia 900 series, but then it wouldn't have been as impressive on the first benchmarks.
>>54840395
>Needs twice as much space,
Not an issue
> twice as many lanes
Not an issue
> twice as much power
No it doesn't
Not to mention the fact that two 1080's will be about 50-70% faster than your shitty card
>>54837886
>AMD
>Linux drivers
>nope
>>54840402
>I have a mini ITX build.
Well that sucks for you, the answer is buy a decent case instead of being an idiot
>>54838310
Not really odd for 2 reasons:
- midrange cards sell the most; AMD needs the money.
- everyone kept using the housefire meme against the 290/390, so now they went for super low power usage.
>>54840433
And my answer is that you're a moron and that nvidia have no competition to the fastest graphics card ever made.
>>54840430
>AMD
>LINUX DRIVERS
YES!
>>54840430
buttfrustrated nvidiot detected
>>54839361
THE END DOESN'T SCARE US
>>54839565
That pic looks like a typical post on here. Where was that from? Looks like Anandtech or ArsTechnica.
6 HOURS
I trust master race White engineers over POO IN LOOS
>>54840682
I don't know the source - I nabbed it from (ironically) a thread on anandtech mocking Nvidia users.
>>54840651
>>54839361
Polaris theme song
http://youtu.be/dOLL0bW65qg
>>54840870
RIP AMD
>>54838310
AMD is waiting for HBM2. On the Nvidia side you'll only see HBM2 on the 1080ti and new Titan.
>>54840870
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkGtGt1L6iU
>>54838538
Watch over the next year the 290x will somehow magically start catching up in performance with the 980ti now that Pascal is out and Maxwell has been "depreciated"
>>54840287
can I xfire two pro duos on a 1000w PSU?
>>54841426
but why does it take AMD so long to squeeze the juice out of their cards with their drivers?
>>54841492
No you need a 9001W+ PSU. A lesser PSU wouldn't be able to handle the awesomeness.
THANK YOU BASED RAJA
Only 5 hours left. Get your pee bottles ready.
>>54841528
It takes money to hire engineers.
Will I need my 1500w PSU still?
How many RX 460s can I run on this power supply?
It has 8x 12v rails with 25 amps each. I pulled nearly 1400w full load on this setup
>>54841601
>4x GTX 590
>SLI Disabled
What the fuck?
>>54840329
its a power efficient 390 for only $200 its perfect ill probably crossfire a pair until vega
>>54841543
it can't be that much
>>54841528
Money and now there is DX12.
>>54840213
lower TDP
lower price
not even the 480X version
you should be able to work out this is better
>>54841601
>4 Thermiâ„¢ GPUs with SLIâ„¢ disabled.
>A literal housefire-tier SSD
>i7-E
>1500W PSU
Pretty sure you could run as many 460s as you can fit on your motherboard.
>>54841601
you'll be fine with 4 rx 480s, forget rx 460s
the thing is, sli/crossfire with dx12 is now game developer dependent, not driver dependent
NVIDIOTS ON SUICIDE WATCH
Also, isn't this the weaker one out of the two Polaris 10 GPUs?
>somehow
>even right to this moment
>some here are still surprised that Polaris 10 is only AMD's mid range
Ridiculous. How do you guys always fail at basic understanding?
Polaris 11 is an entry level low power GPU, likely close to what will be featured in the Raven Ridge APUs. Its pitted against the GTX 950/960 which also means it replaces the 7750, 7770, 7790, 7850, and 7870.
Polaris 10 is mid range and replaces everything from the 290/390 down to the R9 285. AMD is finally culling off the oldest GCN cards in their lineup.
Vega will replace everything Fury, and have a healthy performance uplift over it.
>>54841699
polaris 11 are gpus for laptops
>AMD is finally culling off the oldest GCN cards in their lineup
will still have driver support since those are GCN
>>54841633
pulls 480w at idle too =(
>>54841674
Will there be 480x with stacked HBM?
>>54841671
>tfw rendering in blender and it has to be full load for 18 hours straight
![BN-NR191_0421am_P_20160421161318[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/ksdds8t.jpg "BN-NR191_0421am_P_20160421161318[1].jpg")
>New line of graphics hardware to be priced at $199
THANK YOU BASED AMD!
http://www.wsj.com/articles/amd-prices-3-d-cards-to-spur-virtual-reality-market-1464725394
>>54841727
fucking kek'd
>>54841727
>HBM
you're looking at Vega and Navi, not Polaris
it looks like all polaris cards are all GDDR5
what's ridiculous is the power consumption and what will probably be the actual card size, it's significantly smaller
>>54841721
Scaling down to mobile doesn't mean they are explicitly for laptops.
They are entry level GPUS.
>>54841727
>pulls 480w at idle too =(
holy shit i have two 1080s and they dont even pull that amount in game use
>>54841728
>subscribe or sign in
pastebin that
I hate paywalls
>>54841671
Bro, he can run more than that.
He could fucking run enough 460s to crossfire an entire 20 person LAN party.
>>54841783
sure, but we will see polaris 11 everywhere on laptops or small form factor computers
the last time I had a mobile amd card was on a macbook pro from 2011
>>54841792
Right, the limiting factor is the motherboard not the PSU.
>>54841787
Werks for me, idunno.
> Advanced Micro Devices Inc. is angling to lower the cost of virtual reality, targeting the field with a new line of graphics hardware priced at $199—half or less the cost of comparable products.
AMD said the first chips based on its new Polaris design are expected to arrive in graphics cards for personal computers at the end of June.
>>54838596
>buy r9 390
>it's never mentioned in benchmarks
>>54841601
>that Corsair FireForce 3 SATA-SSD
uhh
wat
>>54841784
Has enough cooling but the room does not
>>54841792
What mobo has the most PCI-E slots? IIRC they have PCI splicers?
>>54839565
God I love how buttmad nvidiots get about DX12.
When will they learn that AMD has been making their cards with DX12 and vulkan in mind for the past 2 generations
>>54841830
It's pretty much a 290x.
>>54837886
so when I can buy this in Europoor??
![original[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/4RI7RcH.jpg "original[1].jpg")
>>54841787
http://pcpartpicker.com/p/Cmp48K
How would this compare against a
Dell Optiplex 7010
i5 3470
Zotac GTX 970
16GB of RAM
EVGA 500W PSU
How much could I sell this Dell for?
>>54841830
I know what you mean. Just subtract like 4 fps from 390x
>>54841876
but 290x is 5.6 tflops
>>54841846
Doesn't matter how many PCIe slots it has, there's no hardware on the market with enough lanes for you to max out with 460s.
Even assuming a dual 40 lane xeon board, we're talking a maximum of 20 cards (PCIe 3.0 x4), at 45w a pop you're STILL not even breaking 1200w for the entire system.
>>54837886
Nvidia announces card showingvonly tflops
>Tflops don't matter wait for actual benchmarks you Nvidia
Amd announces cards showing only tflops
>Nvidia btfo
???
>>54841728
Fucking Sold. Hell I could see myself buying another down the line and finally trying out crossfire like the rich kids.
>$200
Nice, this is Evergreen-tier undercutting only possible due the much cheaper price per die AMD pays.
>>54841899
>Closed-loop liquid cooler
>GAMING motherboard
>implying the GTX 1070 will be buyable for $380
Don't get this shit.
>>54838260
it's spelled "a lot"
not "alot"
>>54841948
you could always suck a dick for the money, you seem like you'd like it anyway
Tell all your friends and family to not buy AMD this gen, these GPUs should be $300 at least, pricing them at $200 is bordering illegal and outright throat cutting for Nvidia, this is a free market, there are rules to play and selling at a loss just to make the competitor look bad is not cool.
Serious question.
I had crossfire 4870s, and every game ran like complete shit with massive screen tearing because of shitty AMD drivers. Went NV and haven't looked back.
Have things gotten better since then? Should I even consider moving to an AMD 480 from a GTX970?
>>54841899
Basically the same
Just buy a i5 6400 and z170 combo from frys or microcenter for 220$ and OC it
Here is mine on the stock intel cooler
Using DDR3 non L too
Fuck the police
>>54841727
Hey, I had a GTX 480.
I only burned my finger twice.
>>54837972
Nvidia has much better memory compression than AMD.
It's not perfect, and 384 bit is still much better. But 256 + memeory compression isn't terrible
>>54841837
it's a fireforce, those temperatures are expected
>>54841846
looks like something out of Lain, looks cool
how much did it cost you
>>54841991
>i5 6400
>OC
These two are not compatible.
>>54839714
>the 5000 and 6000 AMD series only get legacy drivers
Actually they received an update back in 1 March
http://support.amd.com/en-us/download/desktop/legacy?product=legacy3&os=Windows+7+-+64
>>54841899
I'd probably list at 650 and come down to maybe 550. Depends on area a bit.
>>54841988
They're not selling at a loss, AMD is just that much better than Nvidia at getting the most out of small diesize. Nvidia, however, will have to sell at a loss to even hope to compete.
>>54842008
Yes, they are.
Just because intel try to be jew cunts doesn't mean motherboard manufacturers agree with their big nosed bullshit
>>54842018
Neither will sell at a loss, Nvidia just wants higher margins even in high volume markets.
>>54841952
so we really are back to the evergreen vs fermi days
>>54837886
How will it fare against the R9 Nano?
FUCKING REKT
>>54837886
less than 50w is very efficient. now just need benchmarks to see how it performs.
Nvidia already has GP106 around 200mm2, smaller than Poolaris and more power efficient thanks to superior TSMC process that they'll sell at $199
AMD can't compete at all and in a price war AMD will lose
>>54840165
>You can see this by the way none of the 1080s can overclock, i bet nvidia have been throwing out 8/10 of the chips they get due to the node being so immature.
There was a leak a while back from TSMC that they had finished chip production in January of last year. I don't see why supply would be a problem unless this really is Fermi 2.0
Looking to build my first PC, and I know it's early and we don't have benchmarks yet, but will a 480 handle 1080p gaming for AAA titles?
This is a victory for capitalism.
GPU prices have been heavily inflated for years, and now AMD is breaking the truce with Nvidia and slashing the price because they have no choice: do it or die.
>>54842025
I wish that was true, but my motherboard doesn't let my OC.
My i5-6400 gets BTFO by an i3-6100 in singlethread.
>>54842008
See image
Notice 158mhz bus speed?
>>54842042
All we know of GP106 rumors is that its even more binned GP104 because yields are awful.
Which is probably not true, but not impossible.
tl;dr there's nothing on your GP106 so it's probably not launching anytime soon.
>>54837886
>135w TDP
Woah. That's going to be trouble for Nvidia. This thing can become the go-to for people upgrading their prebuilts.
>>54842064
???
It works perfectly fine
You have a z170 mobo? Hell even some H series boards will OC via BCLK
>>54842067
No, I don't see anything indicating 158Mhz bus speed.
Doesn't the -X series CPUs have the multiplier unlocked already?
>>54841989
The problems you described are nothing like that anymore, now it's crossfire works or it doesn't and will run on one card for the most part with both side having flaws with multi GPU with AMD being better than nvidia almost always as far as scaling goes. When it works though it's great.
970 to 480 first sound like a worth while upgrade though, unless you are having problems with it or need more vram.
Would RX460 be an upgrade to my GTX460?
>>54839714
>Fermi still gets new drivers, the 5000 and 6000 AMD series only get legacy drivers.
Fermi gets drivers that either do 0 change, or worse, gimp performance to force you to newer hardware.
>>54842031
>>54842080
There is no awful yields, TSMC yields are superior to Samshit process on GloFo's shitty fabs
Keep on lying though, AMDPOORFAG
>>54842058
the 480 is replacing the 390 which is a 1440p card
>>54841948
Fuck, me too.
>>54842030
Look at the R9 390 vs the Fury Nano.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1556?vs=1594
Probably within a few percent of that.
>>54842049
Unfounded rumor nonsense. Tech sites are losing money from ad revenue, so they'll post literally anything to get clicks.
Someone on Anandtech says something like
>I've got a hunch that X will launch this July
12 hours later wccftech has an article
>INDUSTRY INSIDER CONFIRMS X LAUNCHING THIS JULY
Then techpowerup has this on their front page
>X AVAILABLE IN TIME FOR SUMMER ACCORDING TO SOURCES
Its all one big echo chamber of desperation. God knows these cretins would starve if they ever had to find real jobs.
>tfw my 6950 is still going strong
