16 Replies Latest reply on Aug 4, 2016 8:18 PM by derrickgott007

    AMD rx 480 specs

    l4nttu

      Hello!

       

      It's my first time here and have an important question  about the rx 480. So I've read all the possible reviews and benchmarks and comparisons between rx480 and the new nvidia cards. There is just one thing that I don't get the about the new rx 480. Why has the CU been redused to 36!?!!? Sorry if I'm a pleb in this matter but is the ROPs amount the same thing? Looking at one comparison, the new rx480 beats gtx 980 in EVERY spec but the rop number. And 980 is almost in every game beating 480 by 10fps. So why has this decision been made and is there any reason to consider for example old r9 390x which loses in base clock ofc but does have 64 cu, right? Looking at the benchmarks no matter what the price is I'd really want to switch my decision to 1070/1080 but I have a freesync monitor and I want to benefit from it so I'm stuck with AMD Well my plan is to go crossfire if the need for more power comes to question.

       

      Thanks in advance and sorry if the tone towards AMD sounds a bit hostile, I appreciate the budget option and that's why I'm going with AMD.

       

      And by the way I'm going with the asus strix model when it comes out eventually.

       

      BR Lauri

        • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
          black_zion

          Architectural improvements, and the fact that the RX 480 is this generation's midrange chip and not higher end. The 390X is faster when AA is cranked up, like

           

          metro 1440p

          But the RX 480 is this generation's R9 380X, not really intended to directly replace the 390X, and that's also why the 390 is still selling for at least $280 while the RX 480 is $229ish.

            • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
              l4nttu

              So if I could get the 390x for 230$ (which I could) would it really be a solid option for the rx480? After saying this I'll probably stick with the 480 anyway :b

              And what's your take on the CU question? I heard rumours about AMD coming with the hjigh end model some time this year but I'm done waiting frankly as all other components I have already bought. I would actually just pay for the 1070 if I wouldn't have bought the freesync monitor already, from which I want to benefit as I said earlier

                • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
                  black_zion

                  The only new model we should see this year is the RX 490 which is highly speculated to be a dual GPU card considering the RX 480 is the fully fledged Polaris 10 GPU, but that's not really a big deal considering DirectX 12 differences meaning multiple GPUs aren't the answer like they once were (see also: why nVidia declined to implement SLI on the GTX 1060). The successor to the Fury series, Vega 10, is in the finial design phase and will no doubt correct all the mistakes of the RX 480, as well as eat the 1080 for lunch.

                   

                  Polaris is first generation 14nm silicon so I'm sure AMD had to make some compromises in order to get the price at $229, and I also have a feeling AMD wasn't enthusiastic about releasing a product made on a more advanced process node yet consuming much more power, and Su probably gave the fab engineers an earful, but they had to release it. They also gambled on the 1060 not being on the market for months which would leave a massive price gap, but nVidia was able to put it on the shelves quicker than anyone thought. Technically AMD has the advantage because the performance difference between the RX 480 and 1060 isn't THAT great yet the 480 can do Crossfire, but again the days of multiple GPUs giving massive performance gains are coming to an end unless the API can truly combine multiple GPUs into a single large virtual GPU (think old style parallel processing).

                   

                  If I were you though, I'd wait a few months and let the price wars come out in force unless you have a legacy card.

                  2 of 2 people found this helpful
                    • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
                      l4nttu

                      Thanks for your insight! Unfortunately I don't want to postpone the process any longer as I have all the other components already bought. My philosophy in buying electronics is usually to go with the expensive, quality one which in this case would be 1080/1070 and I want to think that when counting the years the computer will run just with its present components I want to think saving couple of hundred of dollars is short sighted. But I do want to belive that gsync/freesync is technology worth having so in nvidia's case it would mean not just more expensive graphics card but also monitor and the total price difference would rise just by these two changes something like 500$. I'm sorry to hear about the crossfire not being the ultimate solution but I think I will do fine for quite a long time with just one rx480 and after that I can just inspect the markets again. As I said if I hadn't bought the monitor yet I would probably spalsh the cash for the nvidia GPU + monitor but I guess for my use I just should be happy about the money saved

                       

                      I have to say it didn't add to my excitement reading this support forum because there's just endless amount of crash reports and the original posters have just given up not getting help by AMD and have switched to nvidia. But I do want to believe that I made a good call so now just waiting for the strix 480 tio come out

                       

                      Thanks again foir your help and feel free to comment to this one if you still have something to say.

                        • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
                          black_zion

                          The question is going to be what your monitor is and what its Freesync range is. Some of them have very horrid ranges, such as 45-75, and if that's the case and it's a 2560x1440 or UHD display, then you're still going to need a Fury X.

                            • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
                              l4nttu

                              I bought an Asus MG248Q

                                • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
                                  black_zion

                                  According to Review: Asus MG248Q - Monitors - HEXUS.net the adaptive sync range is 40-144 and a miserable 1920x1080 resolution (along with the worst panel in the world with a worse color gamut than Soviet Russia but that's another story), so the RX 480 isn't going to have a problem meeting that minimum number. There's two reasons not to use Crossfire, one is that DirectX 12 is killing it, the second is that with adaptive sync it doesn't matter where you fall in that range, it'll all be just as smooth.

                                    • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
                                      l4nttu

                                      Wow that's some harsh text there. I'm actually fine with the 1920x1080, but is the color stuff really that bad? Sure it's not an ips monitor but I use it for gaming so I wanted a 1ms response time monitor...

                                        • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
                                          black_zion

                                          Response times are market hype and the figures are manipulated in order to achieve a figure they can call "1ms", and there are a host of different ways to measure it. There's only two situations where you can actually run into problems with monitor response times, and those cannot exist in 2016. One of those situations is if the response time is over 10ms, which hasn't been seen since the first generation TN and IPS panels. The other situation is when the response time exceeds the refresh rate. At 144hz, the monitor refreshes every 6.944ms, so even with a 6ms response time the screen would fully refresh each time. Point is, doesn't matter if it's "rated" at 1ms, which is what many TN panels are, or 6ms, which is what many IPS screens are, you can't see 5ms (or really faster than 42ms but that's another story).

                                           

                                          Now, color. 72% gamut plus color shift being a TN panel unless it's viewed dead on (170° viewing angle rating doesn't take into account the color shift), yea, it's bad, but I'm pretty bias after having used a 24" Samsung TN panel and then moving to a 24" HP IPS panel.

                                            • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
                                              l4nttu

                                              Wow is that really the case with response times? Are you 100% sure? Never actually have seen an article anywhere explaining the math behind the response times. No I feel like a f*cking idiot! Why didn't I know that before I bought the monitor!?!? The same effect have happened to me with almost every component during this PC building process but I've always studied enough before buying to get all the important facts. So there is no benefits AT ALL from the TN panel's response time?

                                               

                                              Well still after all this I can't be 100% angry cause the IPS monitors do cost lot more if you're reaching the same high/mid-tier range than in TN panels. But still. When buying the monitor I knew all the time that the IPS panel would be the best choice but as I plan to do gaming I dind't want to compromise even the slightest bit about the frames and reaction times :b

                                                • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
                                                  black_zion

                                                  Well, when you have Amazon.com: LG 29UM68-P 29-Inch 21:9 UltraWide IPS Monitor with FreeSync: Computers & Accessories which is larger, better panel, higher resolution, and a $287 price tag, and your ASUS MG248Q Black 24" TN Widescreen LCD/LED Monitor, 144Hz 1ms(GTG) Adaptive-Sync technology, Pivot &Height Adjustment, … which is smaller, lower end panel, lower resolution, and a $290 price tag, that's a reason to get angry.

                                                   

                                                  Anyway, Exposed: Input Lag vs. Response Time | DisplayLag

                                                   

                                                  What is response time?

                                                  The response time of a display is how quickly it can change its pixels from black-to-white or gray-to-gray. A display while turned on usually shows a black screen when nothing is being shown on it, and the time it takes to display a gray or white pixel from this state is recorded as its response time rating. So those pretty logos you see on the boxes of displays that state “2ms”, “6ms”, and so on reflect this measurement. It simply dictates how fast a display can go from a black-to-white or grey-to-grey pixel.

                                                  Response Time Explained

                                                  Generally, manufactures report their fastest time, whether that is gray-to-gray or active black to inactive white and back. They may not disclose which they used to determine their typical time. The formal definition characterizes response time as the time it takes for an LCD pixel to change from completely active black to inactive white then back again. However, manufactures often report their gray-to-gray speed (or color to color).

                                                   

                                                  So tell me, what's the point of knowing how fast a pixel can change from one shade of grey to another when you are playing a game where pixels change from green to blue, such as between a leaf and sky, or purple and yellow, such as a moving sports uniform? Or even from black to white when you're in an FPS, in a dark room, and someone shines a flashlight or turns on the lights. It's about as useful as the EPA estimated fuel mileage on a car isn't it?

                                                    • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
                                                      l4nttu

                                                      So after comparing monitors yesterday I have to say I can't judge my decision that harshly, because 27" (which is the minimun size they sell IPS atm) 144Hz freesync monitor costs from asus 600€ and from acer at least 500€. So I will upgrade at somepoint but this was certainly the right call for my budget. I looked up that LG monitor just a second ago and for a moment it seemed perfect and the price was beyond belief but it's 75Hz!?!? You don't do sh*t with that refresh rate these days. Let's say that it would work out in some newer games IF you don't have a GPU as good as GTX 1070/80 because your fps will not go over 75,  but in fps games the 144Hz is a must. The biggest change every expert is saying you can get in monitor technology is not going from TN to IPS, or from size to another, but going from 60Hz monitor to 144Hz.

                                                        • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
                                                          black_zion

                                                          So some frames can be displayed two or three times because you are only getting 60-75fps? 144hz monitors are as much of a gimmick as 240hz televisions. Adaptive sync effectively changes the refresh rate to be equal to your frame rate anyway, so unless you are getting 144fps, a 144hz refresh rate doesn't do anything.

                                                            • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
                                                              l4nttu

                                                              Yeah I know that ofc But if playing a "competitive" fps game like cs:go which I do, you will get easily over 140fps probably over 200 even. And it's not only about the smoothness of the image which you get by using freesync/gsync but the refresh rate as well. If you're playing on a 128 tick server with your PC producing 200fps and have a 144Hz monitor, you're maxing the 128 ticks. So if your opponent has let's say 60fps or 200 fps but a 60Hz monitor, his GPU is producing a new image to the monitor half as often or the monitor is refreshing half as often (if it's a 60Hz monitor) as mine. And in a super fast paced game like cs, that will matter. Offiously you don't play multiplayer fps and that's fine but that's how it goes. And with 1080 for example, practically any game will run way over 144fps @1080p. With 1440p or 4K it's a different story ofc.

                                          • Re: AMD rx 480 specs
                                            derrickgott007

                                            Direct X12 will use Mgpu....or multiple GPU api.  That will allow multiple GPU's to work better together than they have in the past, couple that with Vulkan and dual Polaris chips (Even Dual RX-480's) will then show their true strength.