"Alleged" Polaris Benchmarks

G

gamerk2

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 9, 2012
Messages
2,060
Make of it what you will:

Alleged AMD Polaris 10 benchmarks show up

amd-polaris10perfvc-1.jpg


If true, then anything priced over $300 is DOA.
 
Numbers look pretty bad but if their power is significantly less than nvidia or their cost is less than I think they have a viable product. If it's more power hungry low performance and parity on price they are screwed. Nice to see my 1year+ old titan-x still holding strong :).
 
If these are the numbers for the 480? then AMD is up Diarrhea Drive, on the other hand if these numbers are for say the 460's then these numbers could be quite acceptable even promising.
 
pretty sure these are supposed to be for the 480X

Although that is quite concerning for where the big Vega chip will slot in. It needs to be much faster than 480X crossfire to be competitive with the forthcoming 1080Ti
 
Truth is, without the cost of those cards attached, the numbers aren't really meaningful in terms of being "underwhelming".

No, if course they didn't have an answer yet to PASCAL - that is what Vega is to be. And from the beginning, they said they are targeting the mainstream with Polaris, not the high end.

So really, what matters here isn't the speed - the speed is about what was expected by Polaris. What matters is the PRICE.

If the card that can almost match a new GTX 1080 while in CF is $199 a card, then it is suddenly a LOT less underwhelming. However, if they price it too damn high, then yes, underwhelming and disappointing.

The real key here is the price.
 
spintroniX said:
pretty sure these are supposed to be for the 480X

Although that is quite concerning for where the big Vega chip will slot in. It needs to be much faster than 480X crossfire to be competitive with the forthcoming 1080Ti
Click to expand...


Nope, not for the 480x.
 
They would not release a new card that is weaker then the old card. This is obviously from a Nvidia fanboy playing with your minds.
 
The 480 will be as fast or slightly faster than the 390; the 480x will be as fast or slightly faster than the 390x. That is how GPU generations generally work, and the leaks support that.

The only bummer is that the 490 won't be available until 2017, which tempted Nvidia to downright exploitative pricing.
 
Umm guys the price point on the 80x series was 250 to 299 so under 300 for a card that runs with the 400+ cards...
 
YEa I mean I see a "rumored" 480x beating a 980. if the 480x released at $299? What is there not to love about it? rumored 150w for $299 faster then a 980 gtx?
 
Its not exciting, but im sure ill buy a couple when i sell off my 2gb r9 380s. mining efficiency is a big step up...all assuming there is some coin worth mining after september.
 
Yea don't get me wrong I will prob stick with what I have, but it isn't a horrible "rumored" Product.
 
gamerk2 said:
Make of it what you will:

Alleged AMD Polaris 10 benchmarks show up

amd-polaris10perfvc-1.jpg


If true, then anything priced over $300 is DOA.
Click to expand...
So 300+gpu is DOA, a gtx1070 is 370$ but reports say its few % faster then a titan x. So if use that its about 10% slower then 480x in Crossfire. SO tell me now that over $300 is DOA when 1 of them can almost match 480x in CF, 3dmark tends to scale better on CF/SLI then most games do so that real work fps of CF in games will be likely lower.
Zion Halcyon said:
If the card that can almost match a new GTX 1080 while in CF is $199 a card, then it is suddenly a LOT less underwhelming. However, if they price it too damn high, then yes, underwhelming and disappointing.

The real key here is the price.
Click to expand...
480x likely start at 250-300$, which if it takes 2 of them and still don't match a 1080, which even if 1080 costs more you don't have to worry about CF working properly and 100%.
 
Looks fine to me if the can release at less than $300 and come with a TDP of 100-130w. I'd like to buy a high end GPU, but I just don't have the need.
 
Arbit3r said:
So 300+gpu is DOA, a gtx1070 is 370$ but reports say its few % faster then a titan x. So if use that its about 10% slower then 480x in Crossfire. SO tell me now that over $300 is DOA when 1 of them can almost match 480x in CF, 3dmark tends to scale better on CF/SLI then most games do so that real work fps of CF in games will be likely lower.

480x likely start at 250-300$, which if it takes 2 of them and still don't match a 1080, which even if 1080 costs more you don't have to worry about CF working properly and 100%.
Click to expand...

The issue is you are assuming that is the 480x. That's not yet been confirmed.
 
It's not that bad if priced right. GTX 1080 is just too much for 1080p gaming and not fast enough for 4k. Too much compromise for something that expensive. I wouldn't mind getting a Polaris to tank until the actual highend cards come out next year.
 
Lunas said:
Umm guys the price point on the 80x series was 250 to 299 so under 300 for a card that runs with the 400+ cards...
Click to expand...
You're expecting people to face their biggest fear. READING! OMG it's not faster than a 1080/1070. Oh wait, it's a $200-$300 card? I guess that's O.K.
 
Arbit3r said:
a gtx1070 is 370$
Click to expand...

i really wish ppl would stop saying this..... i don't see ANY non FE 1080s out there right now at all so what makes you think there will be any non FE 1070s then? Nvidia did an amazing job with its marketing. Everyone says their MSRP for the non FE yet they don't sell any non FE cards... and most ppl seem to be ok with this...

on topic... if the performance is true from where the graph is.. i think what most ppl here said is true. it is all about price. I would probably bite if it was 400 Cad.
 
Dawill said:
Numbers look pretty bad but if their power is significantly less than nvidia or their cost is less than I think they have a viable product. If it's more power hungry low performance and parity on price they are screwed. Nice to see my 1year+ old titan-x still holding strong :).
Click to expand...

You realize this is a mid-range card right?
 
More importantly: OC Potential. How high can this baby go?? Give this thing even 15% OC and it may beat a 980 Ti!!. If, IF, this thing sells for less than $299 (hopefully less than $249) and can OC by at least 15%, we have one heck of a street-sweeper.
 
Well, they were right about GTX 1080 and this is the sort of performance that's been rumoured for months so it's reasonable-looking enough.
 
spintroniX said:
pretty sure these are supposed to be for the 480X

Although that is quite concerning for where the big Vega chip will slot in. It needs to be much faster than 480X crossfire to be competitive with the forthcoming 1080Ti
Click to expand...

you know that the crossfire on these graphs are about 42% scaling, where usualy crossfire sits around 80%-90%, so with normal drivers crossfire should be beating the 1080.
beside i think AMD could have 2 Vega GPUs like for polaris, high end with GDDR5x over 300mm², and an enthusiast one with HBM2 and over 400mm², i dont know why ppl always assume Vega is 1 single GPU.
 
variant said:
A another dual GPU one showed up after VideoCardz posted their article. It's above the 1080. Source.
Click to expand...
Where is the link to the 1080 numbers? less there is link to that then i would say that it beats a 1080 is a load of bull. Why? easy the polaris cards are tested using 1280x720 for rez so less you can show proof 1080 was tested as same rez and settings your claim well we all know the answer.

realworld said:
It's not that bad if priced right. GTX 1080 is just too much for 1080p gaming and not fast enough for 4k. Too much compromise for something that expensive. I wouldn't mind getting a Polaris to tank until the actual highend cards come out next year.
Click to expand...

gtx1080's home is pretty much 1440p graphic range. its not more to be a 4k monster.
 
Last edited:
Arbit3r said:
Where is the link to the 1080 numbers? less there is link to that then i would say that it beats a 1080 is a load of bull. Why? easy the polaris cards are tested using 1280x720 for rez so less you can show proof 1080 was tested as same rez and settings your claim well we all know the answer.



gtx1080's home is pretty much 1440p graphic range. its not more to be a 4k monster.
Click to expand...
The default settings for 3DMark 2011 Performance is 1280x720...
 
Last edited:
I'll take fury x performance for 300 or less. If this thing OCs to around 1450-500 it will be a beast of a card for that price. Hence AMD saying partners are free to do whatever they want. I see a card that can probably be tweaked a lot.
 
variant said:
Another dual GPU one showed up after VideoCardz posted their article. It's above the 1080. Source.
Click to expand...

If that's crossfire and it's scoring 18k with a Core i7 4770, I'd venture to guess this is dual Polaris 10 "pro" variant set up e.g. 380 (non-x). 380x (Polaris 10) should be scoring over 20k in crossfire if it's at least as fast as 390x.
 
harmattan said:
If that's crossfire and it's scoring 18k with a Core i7 4770, I'd venture to guess this is dual Polaris 10 "pro" variant set up e.g. 380 (non-x). 380x (Polaris 10) should be scoring over 20k in crossfire if it's at least as fast as 390x.
Click to expand...

There's lots of factors we don't know such as what this is exactly or if Crossfire support is up to par. It mirrors the previous crossfire benchmark except it performs better with an extra 2908 graphics score.
 
Last edited:
Many are over looking the fact that it just down graded most of the current cards to only performance level like the 980GTX/Fury if this is the 480X part .. Now can you stop and think for a second what a card like this means for HTPC as it said to have HDMI 2.0 and DP 1.3 ..


Now Nvidia will have a hard time fitting the 1060GTX into the line up without getting to close to the 1070GTX.. but i think we have not seen all of the performance from the 480X as those clocks are to close to 28nm parts as said already many Hawaii gpu's are running 1050Mhz stock without the node change.
 
unab0mb said:
They've done it before...
Click to expand...

I guess it all depends on what's actually going on. Given the most interesting new comment from Kyle today maybe there is more to this.
However it also depends again on what's happening. If they can build this Polaris at significantly reduced cost to them and they can get last gen performance at cheap prices then maybe they have something.
I know alot of people who would buy a new AMD card to replace seriously aging hardware if it was priced very seriously aka hundreds less then nvidia's new cards and less then the last gen cards. I wonder if Kyle is onto something and the team just plain failed entirely at meeting the performance goals. Or have we been double hoodwinked and this is some lower end product and they are actually hiding something bigger? That would be a good thing for them right now, but it doesn't sound like it will happen.
 
Something to note - I heard a rumor there was also a 67DF:C10 that was not listed here.

Also, I do wonder if the CF one is actually a dual 480x on a single card, ala Radeon Pro Duo.
 
Zion Halcyon said:
Something to note - I heard a rumor there was also a 67DF:C10 that was not listed here.

Also, I do wonder if the CF one is actually a dual 480x on a single card, ala Radeon Pro Duo.
Click to expand...


Wouldn't expect a dual GPU card to come out so soon. Maybe they did CF with 2 different cards (C4 with C7), which would explain the shitty scaling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top