AMD RX 480 Cost per WSJ: $199

Zion Halcyon

Zion Halcyon

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 28, 2007
Messages
2,108
AMD Prices 3-D Tech to Spur Virtual Reality Market

WCCFTech has the blurb for those who don't have the Wall Street Journal Sub:

AMD Radeon RX 480 Graphics Card With Polaris 10 Leaked - 5.5 TFLOPs Compute, 8 GB GDDR5 Memory, Competes Against NVIDIA GM204



I said all along this should be the price (despite Tainted Squirrel fighting with everyone that it would likely be $299-349).


Regardless of the internal strife in AMD, if they want to be aggressive and pursue market share, this is the way to go. Spitting distance of a GTX 1080 for $400 if you Crossfire.


Gauntlets are off now.
 
isn't it gloves or are you going Robinhood men in tights style: Gauntlets. lol
 
JustReason said:
isn't it gloves or are you going Robinhood men in tights style: Gauntlets. lol
Click to expand...

Yeah me mixed up two different sayings (that mean kinda sorta the same thing) lol

The gloves are off.

The gauntlet has been thrown down.
 
199 Would be insane...It might be good enough to make me skip all GPUs until Vega/BigPascal
 
If the "leaked" benchmarks are true...with a $199 price point then this card could be a big deal.
 
Very nice if true. That's exactly what we need - a killer product under $200 to shake things up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yakk
like this
TaintedSquirrel said:
According to AMD it's equivalent to current $500 cards, meaning 980~Fury.
Click to expand...
image.png


That means that it would fall in line with these "leaked" benches.
 
If it can match VCZ's leak @ $200 it will exceed previous expectations of $250-$300.
Trading blows with Fury is a very good spot to be in.
 
So... what about the 480x? How much will that cost? Is it even being released?
 
470? Who knows.
AMD was demoing the 480 (non-X) at their tech day event. Today's leak shows 480 as well. There's no info on the 480X whatsoever.
 
What I find funny now is a couple of things.

1: so many said that below $300 it would be a success. Releases at $199 and some of these same people are now stating its still a failure because of where the performance lies, although it landed in the same spot as expected when discussing $300.

2: AMD lowers their TDP and power usage, and they say no one cares. Yet with the 290/390 that is all they could talk about when saying Nvidia was better because of the efficiency although the AMD counterparts were better performers.

This is very entertaining.
 
JustReason said:
What I find funny now is a couple of things.

1: so many said that below $300 it would be a success. Releases at $199 and some of these same people are now stating its still a failure because of where the performance lies, although it landed in the same spot as expected when discussing $300.

2: AMD lowers their TDP and power usage, and they say no one cares. Yet with the 290/390 that is all they could talk about when saying Nvidia was better because of the efficiency although the AMD counterparts were better performers.

This is very entertaining.
Click to expand...

Who?
 
depends on end average performance at least for people here. For OEM's yeah now they have an option to choose from, but I'm thinking the gp106 is going to cut power down quite a bit more too. So we will see how it goes. Starting off good, but lets see if nV responds in kind.....
 
JustReason said:
What I find funny now is a couple of things.

1: so many said that below $300 it would be a success. Releases at $199 and some of these same people are now stating its still a failure because of where the performance lies, although it landed in the same spot as expected when discussing $300.

2: AMD lowers their TDP and power usage, and they say no one cares. Yet with the 290/390 that is all they could talk about when saying Nvidia was better because of the efficiency although the AMD counterparts were better performers.

This is very entertaining.
Click to expand...


You've never done sales have you? It's not about what's better or worse, it's about highlighting whatever advantage your product/preference has at a given time and ignoring the rest.

When nvidia has higher performance with the 970 vs the 290 at launch, the focus is on both power and performance for price, when the 390 refresh comes out and bests the 970 in terms of performance for cost, the performance argument gets ignored and only power is focused on.

Now that amd parts are both cheaper and lower power usage, but less performance than their more expensive nvidia counterparts, everything negative will be ignored and the focus will be on raw performance uber alles.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
470? Who knows.
AMD was demoing the 480 (non-X) at their tech day event. Today's leak shows 480 as well. There's no info on the 480X whatsoever.
Click to expand...


if the 480 is the high end model in that chart, for 200 dollars, that would be pretty incredible. I'd swap my stock 290 for that to tide me over until vega arrives as I'd get a reasonable performance boost and better connectors, waiting to see if amd unlocks any new capabilities on the newer cards that only work with them.
 
The 970 was about 150W, whereas the 390 was around 300W. Pretty stark contrast.
Compared to the 1070 at 150W, versus the 480 which will probably be 100~130W.

If the 480 can match the Fury at sub-100W, then AMD will have made an achievement in efficiency. Otherwise, meh.
Once you get below 150W, most people stop caring about power.
 
JustReason said:
What I find funny now is a couple of things.

1: so many said that below $300 it would be a success. Releases at $199 and some of these same people are now stating its still a failure because of where the performance lies, although it landed in the same spot as expected when discussing $300.

2: AMD lowers their TDP and power usage, and they say no one cares. Yet with the 290/390 that is all they could talk about when saying Nvidia was better because of the efficiency although the AMD counterparts were better performers.

This is very entertaining.
Click to expand...


Noticed the same thing - the tone of people (and even Kyle in the other thread) seemed very testy if not bordering on angry once the price was leaked. Personally, I'm not one to greet a decent price with snark bordering on unfettered rage, but hey, that's just me.

That said, it is time I own up to something......


I totally MANGLED THE SHIT out of that cliché in my first post, lol....
 
The original article cites VR performance quite a few times which reminds me of what Nvidia did during the 1080 presentation. Something to keep in mind.
 
Yakk said:
If $200 is indeed the price point.... AMD nailed it... [H]ard!
Click to expand...


I think the thing is, if this was meant to go toe to toe with the 1080 and 1070 originally, they did bomb, but they made up with it in strategy and marketing.

They can buy themselves time with this strategy, but only for once development cycle. Vega needs to deliver, and on high end as well.

They can't keep over-promising and under-delivering, else they just should rename themselves Lionhead Studios (hey, I hear the name's available now :p ).
 
If that price is accurate - and the supply is right:

Count me in for 2. Not trying to play F5 wars on newegg for a 1070
 
Yakk said:
If $200 is indeed the price point.... AMD nailed it... [H]ard!
Click to expand...


I'll say this as well, 200 dollars used be the standard for midrange. Not 300, 300+ was the price point where enthusiast started in my mind, and 400 on up was where top end cards began.

I remember the retail cost of the 9700 pro when that dropped being around 399. That was a top end flagship, granted those chips were probably less expensive to manufacture, but then basic stuff was still more expensive back then so that cut both ways.

Now the lower end "performance" part from nvidia is 370 as an entry point, just 20 dollars shy from where the ultimate dreadnought flagship gpus used to ship for in cost.
 
IF that price is accurate they'll have gotten me to change my mind about upgrading my GPU, and if there are others like me (married, kids, have to save up disposable income for hobby purchases etc) they could get a lot more sales to go with it. For someone like myself, $200 is a magic price point. It means I only have to save my "self" money a couple of weeks one month to make the purchase without skipping coffees and lunch.
 
If that card is indeed at 199 and it is trading blows with fury and 390x and 980. That is a killer price. I have never in my life seen a card priced at that price with that much performance. And if overclocking models like amd said that AIB partners will be able to tweak it the way the want, I say watch out. If this thing overclocks to 1500-1600 with customer solutions on non reference design and sells for 250 or less. That will be hitting close to 1070 performance and all for 250 and below. That is pretty damn insane.

At that price I won't even consider anything over 300. I might not even buy vega. I think AMD will release vega quarter later for those who demand best of the best but they are trying to go hard at it here if they price this thing at 199. I know I will be picking up a custom msi or asus or gigabyte. If not a great overclocker, stick with stock for 199.. can't beat that price.
 
NKD said:
If that card is indeed at 199 and it is trading blows with fury and 390x and 980. That is a killer price. I have never in my life seen a card priced at that price with that much performance. And if overclocking models like amd said that AIB partners will be able to tweak it the way the want, I say watch out. If this thing overclocks to 1500-1600 with customer solutions on non reference design and sells for 250 or less. That will be hitting close to 1070 performance and all for 250 and below. That is pretty damn insane.
Click to expand...
Yeah I can't recall seeing a jump from $500-tier to $200-tier in one cycle. 8800 GTX --> 8800 GT?
If they can hit Fury performance I'll probably buy two just to support AMD.
 
I was waiting for Greenland/Vega with intentions to push one 290 and its waterblock into my son's pc, but, I might be willing to drop for two of these to replace my 290's. I'm sure my summer loop temps wouldn't be hurt by that switch. Price/Performance/Overclock ability dependant. Come on AMD.
 
Zion Halcyon said:
I think the thing is, if this was meant to go toe to toe with the 1080 and 1070 originally, they did bomb, but they made up with it in strategy and marketing.

They can buy themselves time with this strategy, but only for once development cycle. Vega needs to deliver, and on high end as well.

They can't keep over-promising and under-delivering, else they just should rename themselves Lionhead Studios (hey, I hear the name's available now :p ).
Click to expand...


If the die size of the new polaris parts really is 232 mm, and pascal is 314mm, then polaris is over a quarter of the die size. It should be expected to perform lower than the nvidia parts.
 
tybert7 said:
If the die size of the new polaris parts really is 232 mm, and pascal is 314mm, then polaris is over a quarter of the die size. It should be expected to perform lower than the nvidia parts.
Click to expand...

Polaris isn't going against a 314mm part.,...

Its going against a gp106 which will have a similar die size to Polaris.

We have already seen pics of the gp106 too, so we know they are about the same.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
Yeah I can't recall seeing a jump from $500-tier to $200-tier in one cycle. 8800 GTX --> 8800 GT?
If they can hit Fury performance I'll probably buy two just to support AMD.
Click to expand...
LOL I am waiting to build a system, lol. I actually wanna wait for zen but I was thinking about intel as well this tempts me but I might still hold off for zen. But this is a killer price if true I might get it for my nephew.
 
As I explained before on this forum, the original price rumors were that the Polaris 10 would be 390X performance at $200 and 980Ti at $300. The 390X at $300 was a conflation of those two rumors. I think a couple of people basically said that 390X at $200 was impossible for why they dismissed the original rumors.
 
variant said:
As I explained before on this forum, the original price rumors were that the Polaris 10 would be 390X performance at $200 and 980Ti at $300. The 390X at $300 was a conflation of those two rumors. I think a couple of people basically said that 390X at $200 was impossible for why they dismissed the original rumors.
Click to expand...

Exactly what happened, and yet exactly what we got.
 
razor1 said:
Polaris isn't going against a 314mm part.,...

Its going against a gp106 which will have a similar die size to Polaris.

We have already seen pics of the gp106 too, so we know they are about the same.
Click to expand...


Until the 1060 hits the market, the polaris chips will be compared and contrasted directly against the pascal parts because those are the new cards on the block. This is what will happen, not what should.

The area between the top end polaris card and the low end 1070 will be a source of debate and contention. Which way should one go?
 
you still aren't factoring in the transistor density vs the two GPU's either.

But yeah for now mid range vs performance is what you are looking at, We have seen this before..... rv680, and it looks to be 2 P10's get close to a gtx 1080, wasn't 2 rv680's close to a gtx 8800 in performance?

These cards are going to be more important in the OEM space than retail space....
 
Last edited:
AMD said at the partner meeting that they plan to leave a lot of overclocking headroom for AIB partners so they can release more powerful versions of the cards. We could very well see a 980Ti or more for $300 depending on what kind of overclocking headroom exists.
 
variant said:
AMD said at the partner meeting that they plan to leave a lot of overclocking headroom for AIB partners so they can release more powerful versions of the cards. We could very well see a 980Ti or more for $300 depending on what kind of overclocking headroom exists.
Click to expand...

Did they say it was "an overclocker's dream"? :ROFLMAO:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top