AMD Announces The Radeon RX 480 Starting At Just $199

It's a fine product for what it is, but it is a continuation of their CPU strategy-- release lower-end products and compete on price. That has not worked out well for AMD so far.
 
primetime said:
Finally a 200 dollar value card that gives me (R9 280x) a 60% bump in performance including a power usage decrease:)....All those acting like this launch is dooming amd are acting funny.
Click to expand...
They're not going to make much money with this strategy, which is what they desperately need to do.
 
primetime said:
Finally a 200 dollar value card that gives me (R9 280x) a 60% bump in performance including a power usage decrease:)....All those acting like this launch is dooming amd are acting funny.
Click to expand...

I think by itself all the Improvements from GCN 1 to GCN 4 worth the upgrade.. specially the Geometry performance which hurt so much the 280X..
 
Yakk said:
Doom & gloom?! [H] can be quite a funny place :ROFLMAO:. Haven't been this excited for a GPU and market strategy in years!
Click to expand...

may I ask why?. I still can not understand the excitement of some people with this card...
 
schizo said:
It's a fine product for what it is, but it is a continuation of their CPU strategy-- release lower-end products and compete on price. That has not worked out well for AMD so far.
Click to expand...

not necessary, because their CPUs are plagued by inefficiency and low performance. their highest end octa core CPUs, compete with lower-ends i5 and i3.. so they have no other choice that price at low-end market... with this card things are little better however they are still pricing too low, I think if the stated performance its real, which we know isn't because its AMD and they always blatantly lie in presentations/announcements, then this could be a solid ~250$ card (the 8gb version).. they probable were just scared by the GTX 1070, I just think that people that are excited by the AMD presentation will be seriously disappointed when the real benchmarks hit the web, specially [H] reviews, as always they are putting false high expectations in an announcement which could be really a double-edged sword in the future as nobody will take AMD announcements seriously. people can say whatever they want from Nvidia, they overcharge, they rip-off with prices etc, but they advertised performance numbers in announcements/presentations are always close to the reality, [H] have corroborated that lot of times..
 
Stereodude said:
They're not going to make much money with this strategy, which is what they desperately need to do.
Click to expand...
Depends on how many they can sell.....and if i had to guess it depends on how fast they can pump these cards out....Lowish margins on extremely high volume is better than they anything they achieved last few years. IF they can meet demand i see positive market share
 
Araxie said:
I think by itself all the Improvements from GCN 1 to GCN 4 worth the upgrade.. specially the Geometry performance which hurt so much the 280X..
Click to expand...


geometry performance will only show if a particular game is pushing it to be a bottleneck for AMD hardware, which we know what games would that and when, Gameworks titles with tessellation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Araxie said:
not necessary, because their CPUs are plagued by inefficiency and low performance. their highest end octa core CPUs, compete with lower-ends i5 and i3.. so they have no other choice that price at low-end market... with this card things are little better however they are still pricing too low, I think if the stated performance its real, which we know isn't because its AMD and they always blatantly lie in presentations/announcements, then this could be a solid ~250$ card (the 8gb version).
Click to expand...
Eh? I totally believe that the 480 will offer 390/390x-class performance. And the 8GB version probably will cost around $250.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fun
like this
I believe it, to expect more than that tough seems to be folly now though.
 
primetime said:
Depends on how many they can sell.....and if i had to guess it depends on how fast they can pump these cards out....Lowish margins on extremely high volume is better than they anything they achieved last few years. IF they can meet demand i see positive market share
Click to expand...
Because that has worked so well for their CPUs after Intel started beating them like a drum with the Core2 processors?
 
Araxie said:
may I ask why?. I still can not understand the excitement of some people with this card...
Click to expand...
I believe its because he to is using tahit generation gpus....yea if your rocking newer stuff, you have a legit point. If their on track for a non delayed vega in October, then some high end upgraders will wait it out.
 
primetime said:
This thread has NOTHING to do with cpus
Click to expand...
It has everything to do with profitability, which is exactly what my post referred to. Competing on price is often good for customers, not good for their bottom line. You countered that it could be okay for their bottom line if they sell a lot of them. I pointed out that the same strategy on CPUs didn't make them profit where they sold a lot of them.
 
it's stupid strategy. being a budget producers only works if your competition is considered a budget producers, and people are choosing only on price. So long as both Intel and Nvidia are considered superior companies because of halo devices. more often people will choose to spend a little more for a product that might be a little less, if they believe the brand is better. The CPU market is similar to the GPU market in that respect. An Oem gets more value saying intel inside, even if it's a crappy intel, because the intel name carries cache. Same things with GPU more often than not people will rather get a product in their price range from the Company putting out the all world 1080GTX because they feel that it's product will be better than the Budget company. ATI/AMD did the best when it had flat out the best product at the top ie 9700pro, because having the best product sets the tone. I have a feeling that the moment AMD drops vega, Nvidia will again one up them. AMD needs to come to senses, ditch this stupid idea it has for while, In thinking that somehow CF is ever going to be equivalent to having the best single GPU, its not, and has never been and that has been proved by history. It needs to go back to its 9700pro roots, build the best baddest single GPU you can build and work backwards. I give NVidia credit, when it when wrong with the FX series, they didn't backdown, they stayed true to the course. one big GPU disappointment and AMD/ATi threw in the towel, and it's been same for one generation down hill ever since.
 
This all seems right in line with what Raja Koduri said he was expecting 2 years down the pipe back in 2014. The ability for a VR experience for the masses and the capability to push higher resolution with bigger adoption rates of higher resolution displays that 90% of owners possibly could/can afford, I didn't hear any reference to price but to me it felt inferred "mass market". I could be wrong but its always felt like AMD has always catered to the mass market with the enthusiasts in a kinda second place or a afterthought. They seem to shine a bit brighter once their AIB partners take over, not that their happy with what gets thrown to them to improve on...I think they kinda saved the R9 series.

I just hope they get decent margins to keep it all going. I expect they will sell a crap ton of these card if they perform anywhere close to whats been speculated...especially if they throw a game in and/or a rebate. Can you imagine that kinda performance upgrade for the average Joe with a new game and maybe 25 off coupon would mean.

Also been reading allot of the AMD drama here last few weeks and find it very interesting how it could all play out for both companies and us, the end users. I'm also amazed at the latest 1070 marks! Now I feel really greedy that a 200 card isn't good enough when just days ago that might be several hundred for equal performance.


Not sure if this is allowed but this is the interview I was drawing comparisons from:) ill delete if it is.
 
Araxie said:
may I ask why?. I still can not understand the excitement of some people with this card...
Click to expand...
980 performance for $200 is amazeballs. Along with AMD so far having a better track record with DX12 games(see Quantum Break ongoing Nvidia driver issues and performance)

Possible low cost high reward upgrade, just what exactly are you excited about... I'm excited to upgrade my video card finally and not pay $800 CAD for a stupid overpriced 980
 
NKD said:
i am thinking they might have an RX 490 as well. Then the Vega cards will replace the fury cards. They might be keeping under raps to not kill the sales of 390 series for another month.
Click to expand...

Polaris 10 is the RX 480 series or RX 480 and RX 480X. Vega 11 is the RX 490 series or RX 490 and RX 490X while Vega 10 is the Fury and FuryX replacement.
 
Wondering if we'll see any more off the beaten path designs like a RX 480x2 or 480x(x2) - would be a pretty sweet single card.
 
shinotenshi said:
it's stupid strategy. being a budget producers only works if your competition is considered a budget producers, and people are choosing only on price. So long as both Intel and Nvidia are considered superior companies because of halo devices. more often people will choose to spend a little more for a product that might be a little less, if they believe the brand is better. The CPU market is similar to the GPU market in that respect. An Oem gets more value saying intel inside, even if it's a crappy intel, because the intel name carries cache. Same things with GPU more often than not people will rather get a product in their price range from the Company putting out the all world 1080GTX because they feel that it's product will be better than the Budget company. ATI/AMD did the best when it had flat out the best product at the top ie 9700pro, because having the best product sets the tone. I have a feeling that the moment AMD drops vega, Nvidia will again one up them. AMD needs to come to senses, ditch this stupid idea it has for while, In thinking that somehow CF is ever going to be equivalent to having the best single GPU, its not, and has never been and that has been proved by history. It needs to go back to its 9700pro roots, build the best baddest single GPU you can build and work backwards. I give NVidia credit, when it when wrong with the FX series, they didn't backdown, they stayed true to the course. one big GPU disappointment and AMD/ATi threw in the towel, and it's been same for one generation down hill ever since.
Click to expand...

AMD are not budget producers.

Polaris 10 replaces the Radeon R9 380 series. Basically... Polaris 10 brings R9 390 series performance down to the R9 380 series market segment. Vega 11 will be the RX 490 series while Vega 10 will be the RX Fury series.

AMD are not budget producers... they simply started with their mainstream cards in order to capture more market share. The high end cards will be releasing around Oct or November. That is around the same time frame that the GTX 1060 will be releasing from nVIDIA.

So AMD will be lacking a high end response to nVIDIA until this fall while nVIDIA will be lacking a mainstream volume response to AMD until this fall. See how that works?

As for Kyle and his horde of simpletons freaking out over the fact that a mainstream card is not competitive with a high end card... sounds to me like there is a lot of willful ignorance going around. Sour grapes have turned HardOCP into one large tweenfest screaming match between two gangs of boy band fan girls emoting all over the place and spilling menstrual fluids all over the floor.

Yeah.. descriptive but seriously... WTF is wrong with the majority of the folks here??? It is like being on some XBox chat filled with half witted dude bros.
 
Last edited:
shinotenshi said:
How is this not a disaster? it's trying to put lipstick on a pig, apologies to all the pig lovers. it's not going to work for the same reason it didn't work the last time, and the same reason it doesn't work in CPU land. You can make a good profit as a budget brand, so long as brand remain segregated. In most markets this happens, Porsche doesn't make a budget car, most brand feel going for that level devalues their own brand. that's not the case in CPU or GPU land, you can buy an intel processor or Nvidia processor for slightly more than the budget price and judging by history many people choose to pay a little more so they can say they have "intel" or "NVidia" inside. In my opinion a budget card like this only works, if 1. you are the only choice in the market, or 2. you build up a large enough cache that people don't like they are buying a budget card, but instead getting a great deal from a premium manufacture. So the choice is I can buy this budget AMD card, or I can buy the little brother of the currently all mighty 1080GTX and get this GP106 card. I agree with the above poster that this is the RV680 all over again. I don't think this is what they intended. Ever since gave up doing what NVidia does, by trying to design the biggest baddest chip they can and work down, it has been all down hill, which is what I said all those years ago. Mindshare is important in the electronics world, being cheap can only take you so far.
Click to expand...

What's funny is Porsche and Audi are owned by Volkswagen, the budget cars of the three.
 
Commander Suzdal said:
AMD has delivered value like this before. And they have made promises that turned out to be empty before. In recent history, more of the latter than the former. Perhaps we can all remember the promises of being 4K-ready that came with many recent products? Given that, I think proof will need to be established by testing before any VR-conquest scenarios are spun into the stratosphere.
Click to expand...

Their entire 300 line was promoted as being "the GPU" at a resolution one higher than it was actually best suited for. We called them out on that on each and every one. 390/390X was marketed as 4K GPUs :/ 380/380X as above 1080p (i.e. 1440p) GPUs. We actually found in our testing for this not to be the case, based on their performance 390/390X were best suited at 1440p, and 380/X at 1080p for gaming.

I don't know yet if this is true for the 400 series yet, only that, as you say, there is precedent for AMD doing this.

Screenshots | [H]ard|OCP

Yes, that is 380 being touted as designed for 1440p experience and 390 for 4K :/

I just hope they are positioning 480/X, 490/X correctly this time.
 
Brent_Justice said:
Their entire 300 line was promoted as being "the GPU" at a resolution one higher than it was actually best suited for. We called them out on that on each and every one. 390/390X was marketed as 4K GPUs :/ 380/380X as above 1080p (i.e. 1440p) GPUs. We actually found in our testing for this not to be the case, based on their performance 390/390X were best suited at 1440p, and 380/X at 1080p for gaming.

I don't know yet if this is true for the 400 series yet, only that, as you say, there is precedent for AMD doing this.

Screenshots | [H]ard|OCP

Yes, that is 380 being touted as designed for 1440p experience and 390 for 4K :/

I just hope they are positioning 480/X, 490/X correctly this time.
Click to expand...
Why do none of those say "Designed for 1080P gaming"?
AMD's marketing is so weird sometimes.

Let me guess the 480 is designed for 8K gaming.
 
Mahigan said:
As for Kyle and his horde of simpletons freaking out over the fact that a mainstream card is not competitive with a high end card... sounds to me like there is a lot of willful ignorance going around. Sour grapes have turned HardOCP into one large tweenfest screaming match between two gangs of boy band fan girls emoting all over the place and spilling menstrual fluids all over the floor.

Yeah.. descriptive but seriously... WTF is wrong with the majority of the folks here??? It is like being on some XBox chat filled with half witted dude bros.
Click to expand...

It's not that bad here. Nobody is surprised that a $200 card doesn't compete with a $400 card. We are simply trying our best with the information we have to compare the two architectures to see which is inherently stronger.
 
Brent_Justice said:
Their entire 300 line was promoted as being "the GPU" at a resolution one higher than it was actually best suited for. We called them out on that on each and every one. 390/390X was marketed as 4K GPUs :/ 380/380X as above 1080p (i.e. 1440p) GPUs. We actually found in our testing for this not to be the case, based on their performance 390/390X were best suited at 1440p, and 380/X at 1080p for gaming.

I don't know yet if this is true for the 400 series yet, only that, as you say, there is precedent for AMD doing this.

Screenshots | [H]ard|OCP

Yes, that is 380 being touted as designed for 1440p experience and 390 for 4K :/

I just hope they are positioning 480/X, 490/X correctly this time.
Click to expand...

Oculus are the ones who specced the R9 390 as being the minimum spec for VR. Valve followedsuit. So AMD is simply quoting them as it pertains to VR. I would assume that gaming wise... Polaris 10 is geared for 1440p gaming.

You folks are unreal.
 
Mahigan said:
Oculus are the ones who specced the R9 390 as being the minimum spec for VR. Valve followedsuit. So AMD is simply quoting them as it pertains to VR. I would assume that gaming wise... Polaris 10 is geared for 1440p gaming.

You folks are unreal.
Click to expand...

Cruising for a one way ticket to a place you'd seemingly rather be real quick.

Personally I still don't think any cards plays well enough for 4k, IDC what it is. So no idea where AMd ever got that idea, or Nvidia, at any point. 1440p is just getting respectable on one card imo, from either side. 4k...AMD plz.
 
Mahigan said:
AMD are not budget producers.

Polaris 10 replaces the Radeon R9 380 series. Basically... Polaris 10 brings R9 390 series performance down to the R9 380 series market segment. Vega 11 will be the RX 490 series while Vega 10 will be the RX Fury series.

AMD are not budget producers... they simply started with their mainstream cards in order to capture more market share. The high end cards will be releasing around Oct or November. That is around the same time frame that the GTX 1060 will be releasing from nVIDIA.

So AMD will be lacking a high end response to nVIDIA until this fall while nVIDIA will be lacking a mainstream volume response to AMD until this fall. See how that works?

As for Kyle and his horde of simpletons freaking out over the fact that a mainstream card is not competitive with a high end card... sounds to me like there is a lot of willful ignorance going around. Sour grapes have turned HardOCP into one large tweenfest screaming match between two gangs of boy band fan girls emoting all over the place and spilling menstrual fluids all over the floor.

Yeah.. descriptive but seriously... WTF is wrong with the majority of the folks here??? It is like being on some XBox chat filled with half witted dude bros.
Click to expand...

It's the Internet, you're going to get a wide variety of folks. You can try and argue points if you want. To be honest you sound like the one menstrating all over the place.

The price sounds fantastic. The performance shown by AMD some are skeptical about. I.E. AoTS showed higher framerates and 51% usage in crossfire. So even with 100% scaling they are saying a 480 ~ 1080 which is hard to believe. Then the IQ differences... given the track record of AMD, why you'd have to be blind about not being skeptical.

I see a lot of excitement, some skepticism and some fan boys (or company PR) thrown in. I didn't notice an overwhelming amount of nonsense yet...
 
Dayaks said:
It's the Internet, you're going to get a wide variety of folks. You can try and argue points if you want. To be honest you sound like the one menstrating all over the place.

The price sounds fantastic. The performance shown by AMD some are skeptical about. I.E. AoTS showed higher framerates and 51% usage in crossfire. So even with 100% scaling they are saying a 480 ~ 1080 which is nonsense. Then the IQ differences... given the track record of AMD, why you'd have to be blind about not being skeptical.

I see a lot of excitement, some skepticism and some fan boys (or company PR) thrown in. I didn't notice an overwhelming amount of nonsense yet...
Click to expand...

I plan to wait for benchmarks. The thing is it looks like $199 is for the 4GB model and $229 is for the 8GB model. Still not bad considering it has 390x/980 performance.

Some people are upset that it doesn't match the 1070/1080. The thing is AMD never once said it would. Only that they are targeting mainstream audience. Well It looks like they nailed that one.

1 thing I mentioned before imagine them offering $229 for the 8GB and free Deus Ex (the new one). The cards will fly off the shelves!
 
Brackle said:
I plan to wait for benchmarks. The thing is it looks like $199 is for the 4GB model and $229 is for the 8GB model. Still not bad considering it has 390x/980 performance.

Some people are upset that it doesn't match the 1070/1080. The thing is AMD never once said it would. Only that they are targeting mainstream audience. Well It looks like they nailed that one.

1 thing I mentioned before imagine them offering $229 for the 8GB and free Deus Ex (the new one). The cards will fly off the shelves!
Click to expand...

Agreed.

And those that compare it to the cards costing 2-3x more are quickly reminded how asinine that is.

For once I agree with what AMD is doing. If it pans out as a 980ish performance for $200 that'll be a steal.

Hell they even got the jump on nVidia!
 
Mahigan said:
Oculus are the ones who specced the R9 390 as being the minimum spec for VR. Valve followedsuit. So AMD is simply quoting them as it pertains to VR. I would assume that gaming wise... Polaris 10 is geared for 1440p gaming.

You folks are unreal.
Click to expand...
No single card solution even today is capable of 4K. Unless we are talking about Pro Duo. Everytning else needs to run SLI or xFire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Dayaks said:
Agreed.

And those that compare it to the cards costing 2-3x more are quickly reminded how asinine that is.

For once I agree with what AMD is doing. If it pans out as a 980ish performance for $200 that'll be a steal.

Hell they even got the jump on nVidia!
Click to expand...

A 1500mhz (avg oc) 980 is 6.144 Tflops

Imhotep said:
No single card solution even today is capable of 4K. Unless we are talking about Pro Duo. Everytning else needs to run SLI or xFire.
Click to expand...

Radeon pro duo is running xfire
 
Araxie said:
does not matter.. it still depend of Xfire to fully performance.
Click to expand...
Yes it does my 5970 still mines:D. Again single card...:)
Pro Duo, 980Ti in SLI , Titans you name it can barely run 4K. 4K at 60Hz or 1080 at 60Hz is crap.
 
Last edited:
Dayaks said:
Agreed.

And those that compare it to the cards costing 2-3x more are quickly reminded how asinine that is.

For once I agree with what AMD is doing. If it pans out as a 980ish performance for $200 that'll be a steal.

Hell they even got the jump on nVidia!
Click to expand...


it's a stupid plan, and can't have been on purpose. and how is it new? it's what they have been trying for years now, in both CPU and GPU. you can't win the budget market, or mainstream if you want to use euphemisms if the other brand is considered better than you. Oem's the ones who buy the vast majority of these "mainstream" cards care about cache and price. if two brands are close enough in price they are going to pick the ones they can market. if the consumer rightly or wrongly thinks NVidia is better because of the 1080GTX exists, OEMs are going to take that into consideration. History proves this to be the case, ATI/AMD was at it's Zenith when it competed and blow for blow with NVidia at the top. this will fail, just like it fails with CPUs. AMD was most successful when opterons and athelons when toe to toe with P4s. That's the mentality they need. all people are going to see and hear is about how nvdia cards are faster, that they are in dfferent price brackets, doesn't matter in the realm of mindshare.
 
Jerry Sanders once said that volume is the vaccine. It was an interesting statement at the time, and it made a lot of sense. Frankly, AMD had the production capacity at the time (Athlon / Athlon 64), but with Intel marketing agreements to OEMs based on volume sold, they weren't able to keep up enough momentum before they fell behind technologically. Regardless, the point was that if you can keep the fabs going, then the marginal benefit of even lower ASPs outweighed the drag of having idle fab production.

Although AMD no longer owns fabs, they do have a wafer agreement with Global Foundries. Since we don't know the details, we can only speculate, but I would think that if AMD can ramp up enough volume quickly enough, they could actually wind up with not so insignificant wafer cost savings (probably more volume, the lower the cost per wafer - perhaps once certain benchmarks are met). In this scenario, instead of wasting larger dies on an immature fab process, AMD can ramp up the learning more quickly through sheer volume. And if they can meet the wafer agreement (instead of having to negotiate out a penalty), then the marginal benefit might outweigh the impact of lower ASPs. Just speculation, but it would be a valid reason (aside from incompetence) for what they are doing. And although AMD is not perfect, I do not believe they are incompetent.

I would expect that AMD will pick up incremental market share with Polaris (which is something required to get out of the whole Gameworks debacle they have been battling for a while - at this point Gameworks is everywhere and from AMD's perspective that has to stop). That won't happen without market share to back up the effort.

In the meantime, all this learning on smaller dies will set them up nicely for larger die, higher performance chips by the end of the year. AMD will be nicely positioned to ramp up volume on a much more mature process (less waste, lower cost relative to launching big early). This should allow them to price competitively with larger chips as needed.

Ultimately, big is flashy and certainly will sell well. But I have a feeling NVidia might wind up capacity constrained for a while with these big die products. Meanwhile, AMD will move a lot of volume quickly downstream and that's where the biggest market share gains are likely to come. By the time they launch the high-end, it won't matter (necessarily) as AMD will have gained the share they need to bring better balance to the market.

Naturally, this post is about as optimistic as the negative posts are, well negative. But to me, launching small is an aggressive (and risky) play designed to leverage some tactical strengths that AMD has at this point in time (small, simple, volume, + wafer agreements?).
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Sharps97 said:
Jerry Sanders once said that volume is the vaccine. It was an interesting statement at the time, and it made a lot of sense. Frankly, AMD had the production capacity at the time (Athlon / Athlon 64), but with Intel marketing agreements to OEMs based on volume sold, they weren't able to keep up enough momentum before they fell behind technologically. Regardless, the point was that if you can keep the fabs going, then the marginal benefit of even lower ASPs outweighed the drag of having idle fab production.

Although AMD no longer owns fabs, they do have a wafer agreement with Global Foundries. Since we don't know the details, we can only speculate, but I would think that if AMD can ramp up enough volume quickly enough, they could actually wind up with not so insignificant wafer cost savings (probably more volume, the lower the cost per wafer - perhaps once certain benchmarks are met). In this scenario, instead of wasting larger dies on an immature fab process, AMD can ramp up the learning more quickly through sheer volume. And if they can meet the wafer agreement (instead of having to negotiate out a penalty), then the marginal benefit might outweigh the impact of lower ASPs. Just speculation, but it would be a valid reason (aside from incompetence) for what they are doing. And although AMD is not perfect, I do not believe they are incompetent.

I would expect that AMD will pick up incremental market share with Polaris (which is something required to get out of the whole Gameworks debacle they have been battling for a while - at this point Gameworks is everywhere and from AMD's perspective that has to stop). That won't happen without market share to back up the effort.

In the meantime, all this learning on smaller dies will set them up nicely for larger die, higher performance chips by the end of the year. AMD will be nicely positioned to ramp up volume on a much more mature process (less waste, lower cost relative to launching big early). This should allow them to price competitively with larger chips as needed.

Ultimately, big is flashy and certainly will sell well. But I have a feeling NVidia might wind up capacity constrained for a while with these big die products. Meanwhile, AMD will move a lot of volume quickly downstream and that's where the biggest market share gains are likely to come. By the time they launch the high-end, it won't matter (necessarily) as AMD will have gained the share they need to bring better balance to the market.

Naturally, this post is about as optimistic as the negative posts are, well negative. But to me, launching small is an aggressive (and risky) play designed to leverage some tactical strengths that AMD has at this point in time (small, simple, volume, + wafer agreements?).
Click to expand...
There is a reason Nv is not in consoles. This alone proves your theory. The end result is always the same. AMD simply is a better value in the long run. Things are only improving with DX12.
Its kind of cool that I will be adding a Pro Duo to my single Fury X with a big % of this expense covered by mining. Can Nv. cards do this>? Not even when overclocked. Not when water cooled.
This $200 RX 480 simply owns. :D
 
Last edited:
Imhotep said:
No single card solution even today is capable of 4K. Unless we are talking about Pro Duo. Everytning else needs to run SLI or xFire.
Click to expand...
Imhotep said:
There is a reason Nv is not in consoles. This alone proves your theory. The end result is always the same. AMD simply is a better value in the long run. Things are only improving with DX12.
Its kind of cool that I will be adding a Pro Duo to my single Fury X with a big % of this expense from mining. Can Nv. cards do this>?
Click to expand...
lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top