Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
review said:While we did not log a lot of data on the wattage while the RX480 was overclocked, we did witness it pushing 284W for extended periods of time while gaming. Remember we saw 249W under normal clocks while gaming. 14% more wattage got us a 6% overclock that was stable.
Yea H.265 4K encode and decode is still awesome. The new Nvidia cards are H.264 still? I forget.
We are unsure if we will see any benefit to a 8GB RX 480 at 1080p, but we will be testing that.
Rise of the Tomb Raider and The Witcher 3 are two very GPU intensive games, and both were playable at the highest settings. With the on board 8GB of VRAM Tomb Raider used over 6GB of it while gaming at maximum settings just at 1080p, so that capacity was welcomed.
970 performance.
Just 32 ROPS, which should castrate MSAA performance and VSR compared to the 390 it's replacing
Not massively smaller die size than GP104, which means AMD's been posturing about "cost savings." Nvidia has 35% more die area for a part that's 80% faster!
AMD Radeon RX 480 8 GB Review
I mean, if they can get it in-stock at $240 by next week it should sell well, but because there's nothing to challenge the 1070 it's a dead-end product with little hype.
The 1060 will be released, and nobody will remember this ever existed.
970 performance.
The 1060 will be released, and nobody will remember this ever existed.
Was it supposed to challenge the 1070?
It's consuming roughly the same power. You tell me.
No, no it wasn't.
TPU and Tom measure at the rails. 170w almostOther reviews have it exceeding it's 150 Limit (168Watts) on average at STOCK on quite a few benchmarks.
Polaris is a massive perf/watt failure. Mid-range Pascal GP106 will run all over Polaris in efficiency. My apologies to Kyle for being rude towards his earlier statements on Polaris inefficiency. AMD has got into the habit of overhyping and underdelivering. Nvidia already had the architectural lead in efficiency with Maxwell. With Pascal Nvidia also has the TSMC process lead which has exacerbated the efficiency problem. I think GF 14LPP process is one of the major problems here as TSMC 16FF+ is a significantly superior process with much better electrical characteristics and yields for high performance GPUs. Basically AMD has chosen the wrong fab partner due to their WSA commitments. Anyway AMD has rolled their dice. Nvidia's domination of the GPU market will continue. AMD has to just shut up and go back to the drawing board and come up with something much more competitive in terms of perf/watt. Most importantly they should stop talking. period. They are now bordering on the ridiculous with their pre release hype (Fury X and Polaris). Its unfortunate that AMD has failed to compete and the Nvidia lead is only widening. The only saving grace is DX12 performance is still solid on Polaris.
The Radeon RX480 8GB Performance Review - Page 24
The AMD Radeon RX 480 Review - The Polaris Promise | Gears of War: Ultimate Edition
The AMD Radeon RX 480 Review - The Polaris Promise | Rise of the Tomb Raider
The AMD Radeon RX 480 Review - The Polaris Promise | Hitman (2016)
Polaris is a massive perf/watt failure. Mid-range Pascal GP106 will run all over Polaris in efficiency. My apologies to Kyle for being rude towards his earlier statements on Polaris inefficiency. AMD has got into the habit of overhyping and underdelivering. Nvidia already had the architectural lead in efficiency with Maxwell. With Pascal Nvidia also has the TSMC process lead which has exacerbated the efficiency problem. I think GF 14LPP process is one of the major problems here as TSMC 16FF+ is a significantly superior process with much better electrical characteristics and yields for high performance GPUs. Basically AMD has chosen the wrong fab partner due to their WSA commitments. Anyway AMD has rolled their dice. Nvidia's domination of the GPU market will continue. AMD has to just shut up and go back to the drawing board and come up with something much more competitive in terms of perf/watt. Most importantly they should stop talking. period. They are now bordering on the ridiculous with their pre release hype (Fury X and Polaris). Its unfortunate that AMD has failed to compete and the Nvidia lead is only widening. The only saving grace is DX12 performance is still solid on Polaris.
The Radeon RX480 8GB Performance Review - Page 24
The AMD Radeon RX 480 Review - The Polaris Promise | Gears of War: Ultimate Edition
The AMD Radeon RX 480 Review - The Polaris Promise | Rise of the Tomb Raider
The AMD Radeon RX 480 Review - The Polaris Promise | Hitman (2016)
Apology accepted. I think I can count on my fingers how many people have apologized after ripping me to shreds. They usually just act like it did not happen. Thank you sir.My apologies to Kyle for being rude towards his earlier statements on Polaris inefficiency.
According to the licensing contract for the spec, if they do not fix this within 3 months, AMD will NOT be able to call the card a PCI Express card. If they do, they face not only litigation, but if my understanding is correct an action before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) to ban the importation of the card as counterfeit goods. You might think the PCI-SIG will give AMD a pass, but if they do, they risk loosing the trademark entirely. An unforced trademark gets invalidated. The SIG won't let that happen.
With Tom's Hardware reporting that the RX 480 draws (substantailly) more than the 75W allowed from the motherboard (for example, the PCI Express high-power card spec allows a mazimum of 66W to be drawn from the 12V pins of the PCI Express slot, and the RX 480 averages 79W from the 12V lines alone) AMD seems to be violating the PCI Express(R) spec. Of course, I'd love to see HardOCP try to duplicate Tom's results.
According to the licensing contract for the spec, if they do not fix this within 3 months, AMD will NOT be able to call the card a PCI Express card. If they do, they face not only litigation, but if my understanding is correct an action before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) to ban the importation of the card as counterfeit goods. You might think the PCI-SIG will give AMD a pass, but if they do, they risk loosing the trademark entirely. An unforced trademark gets invalidated. The SIG won't let that happen.
So what does this mean to the consumer? I think there are two possibilities, if we assume AMD will not choose to remove the PCI Express logos from these cards: Either they will alter the boards to have an 8-pin socket and to pull more power from there, or they will neuter the card to ensure it doesn't draw more power than the PCI Express specification allows. I don't see any other options.
Disclaimer: I am an attorney, but I practice patent law, not trademark law. This post does not constitute legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Other reviews have it exceeding it's 150 Limit (164Watts) on average at STOCK on quite a few benchmarks.
AMD Radeon RX 480 8GB Power Consumption Results
I can guarantee you that is not the case. Not for sale yet assuredly. Not a phantom product....and I know a lot about those.GTX 1060? Currently a phantom product.
That's why I'd like Kyle and Co. to "science the shit out" of the Tom's Hardware's power consumption claims. No experimental result has science cred until it is independently replicated.That's Tom's hardware though.
They post bad data intentionally, they get sued for liable. And TPU had the same readings (more or less)That's Tom's hardware though. Everything they say is to be taken with a pinch of salt. They aren't exactly the historically most reliable review site... They ahve done a remarkably good job of burying their pay-for-reviews scandal on google though. Almost impossible to find any references to it anymore.
Air.Does high end custom mean air or water? I really can't see many people justifying a $100+ waterblock for a card that even with extra power circuitry will be about $250.
It wasn't supposed to rival the 1070.
I asked you if it was supposed to challenge the 1070, you said "You tell me". It wasn't. Simple english. I didn't mean that it doesn't draw the power you said it draws.