IT'S OVER, AMD IS FINISHED.
If you care about value then the 1070 is the go to card, if you care about performance then the 1080 is the current king.
Anything less than that is just poorfag tier and not worth buying unless you only need extra video out ports in your pc.
(you)
>380
>care about value
minimum monthly income in my country is 350
So i can get 980 performance for 200$ and thats a bad thing? With some OC im sure itll get closer to the 980ti.
RX 480 will be my next purchase undoubtedly now (I play at 1080p)
>better than the 390x
Thank fuck I decided to wait.
OC is what is impressive. Other benches show up to a 50% performance increase.
>If you care about value then the 1070 is the go to card
Sorry, I'm not paying €500 for a gpu.
>380$
>value
what the fuck are you talking about
>GTX 1070
>$379
>44% fatser
>8GB
>RX 480
>44% slower
>4GB
>but only $199
Hmm
>better than a factory overclocked 3 year old GPU
Are the standards for all AMDrones this low?
>$379
kek
It still costs way more.
Although most of the cards are not $380 I still bought gigabyte g1 1070. Not the best value but im not a poorfags so there's that.
This
>see the pic
>oh some amd fag started a thread
>actually op trying to trow shit at amd
you uploaded the wrong pic buddy
1070 vs 480 = 45% difference in performance
1070($379) vs 480($199) = 90% difference in price
1070 ($450) vs 480($199) = 125% difference in price
1070 ($450) vs 480 ($249) = 80% price difference
>If you care about value
Return to shill when we can buy cards that are not fucked edition, value-kun.
If you pair an AMD GPU with a cheap/budget cpu, you're not going to get your promised performance user.
If you're too poor for a 1070 then I feel bad for you.
>r9 290 on sale from newegg for $199 last year
>same performance
Nvidiots don't care about cost or value when it doesn't benefit them. In this case the RX 480 not being able to beat the 1070 or 980 is a major victory regardless if the thing costs about half as much.
>If you pair an AMD GPU with a cheap/budget cpu, you're not going to get your promised performance user.
When you buy Nvidia you're more likely to have to settle with a budget CPU than when you buy AMD and have another $150 to spend.
especially if it can't beat a 1060 for like $50 more
I don't give a shit about the founders edition.
...
>gtx 970 with an i5 4460 destroying an r9 290x with an overclocked i7 4770k
>thinking having an extra $150 for the cpu will actually make it worth it
If you honestly cared about value, you'd get the 1070 with an i3 6100. If you cared about performance, you'd get an i5 6600k or i7 6700k instead, and if you have enough money to blow, you'll get the i7 and a gtx 1080 for 4k gaming.
no one is going to release a $379 card when idiots are snapping up the FE for $80 more
Did you even read the post? Because I was shittalking nvidiots and their "This GPU that costs almost twice as much despite not even being anywhere near that much faster definitely is a victory"-stupidity.
It's faster than a Fury X which also costs $600.
I'm a stupid biased ass consumer who has no idea how competition in the economy works, AMD is dead, NVIDIA can monopolize yaaayy.
woah scalpers on amazon who knew
An i3 is most definitely going to bottleneck a 1070 while something like a 6600k (which you should be able to afford with the difference) is not going to bottleneck an RX 480.
b-b-but user, that is just price gouging
n-nvidigoy will save pc gaming user
you are just AMDelusional user
>cantholdallthesememes.webp
Who the fuck is talking about the Fury-X? Everyone is talking about price performance of the RX480.
>amazon
Except it will. Amd drivers are so bad a 290x is bottlenecked by an overclocked 4770k.
I3 6100 is the king of budget performance right now and considering most games are gpu bound, and upcoming games are dx12, the i3 won't hold the gtx1070 back.
The 480 is going to be a fucking hit internationally. Nvidiots know it, can't stop it, and are mad as fuck about it.
I still cannot tell if people are genuinely "fans" of nvidia and/or amd, or if this is just a constant stream of bait and shitposts
...
I don't know jack shit about GPUs, how do I learn to tell the difference?
The RX 480 is already too slow for games today.
...
only for few unoptimized titles like ubisoft games, but next year it will struggle to play 50% of AAA games and in 2 years 90% of games won't be playable at 60fps.
Funny how nvidia cards won't have this problem :')
So this is probably b8, but scoring around a 980/390X is pretty amazing for a $200 mid-range card. Obviously it won't compare to the 1070 considering it costs twice as much. The high-end RX cards (Vega/Navi) should compete with 1070/1080, not the RX 480.
>bad amd drivers meme
Not a meme when it's true. Why do you think they're pushing dx12 so hard?
Shhhh, don't use logic here. They don't understand. If you don't buy tech you don't need, you're a poorfag.
1.44 times 200 is 288 retard. AMD RX 480 is literally quantifiably more valuable. What a fuking twat. And I'm not even from the UK. Autistic fucktaed.
Oh cool, are you able to post benchmarks taken from current generation games for me, please? I'm super interested to see them, and I didn't know AMD released test versions 14 days before the official release.
user, I'm sitting on 2 780s that I can almost never update the drivers for because while SLI will (barely) work in a new game, they break performance in about 20 other games. I literally haven't purchased DOOM because of this.
Meanwhile, the 290x that I have -- granted, it's not my daily driver system -- hasn't had a problem since I got it. It's a PCS+ 290x and I had some shitty GPU utilization (it's paired with my old 4.8GHz 2500k), but it got fixed within a week of having it.
tl;dr confirmation bias -- everyone conveniently ignores bad nvidia drivers
Not him but you need 2 just for AoTS. I'd say that's pretty shit.
And let's not forget how bad drivers will be on launch. You'll need 6 months before the 480 will be performing competitively, which means nvidia can release a gimped 1060 and get away with it.
The RX 480 is as fast as the 290 (minimum VR specs) which only gets 35 FPS in modern games which is just not enough to have any fun.
> it takes two mid-range cards to match a single top-tier card
Stop the fucking presses.
You could also turn down the settings. But you'd have to not be fucking retarded, so that's not an option for you
But...why does everything need to be on Very High Quality or Ultra to be enjoyable? I was playing Crysis 3 with no AA and everything on Medium and it still looked beautiful, especially compared to console variants.
Higher quality is always nice, but it should've be the make or break for game enjoyment. If your enjoyment of a game entirely hinges on how pretty it looks, it's more often than not a poorly written game.
>1920x1080
>780ti getting 39 FPS
Those benchmarks are so hilariously inaccurate.
A single one of my 780s gets 60FPS+ (1150core/3500mem) at 1080p in W3, so those benchmarks are either wrong as fuck or with shillworks on.
> should've
I meant 'shouldn't be the make or break'
>>r9 290 on sale from newegg for $199 last year
>>same performance
Same performance as RX 470. Runs much hotter, no support for HEVC / 4K60FPS. Cost more 50$+ more.
>8327 / 380$msrp = 21.91
>5708 / 200$msrp = 28.54
Heres your (you)
>The RX 480 is as fast as the 290
>citation needed
Why get a Lamborghini when you can get an Accord for way cheaper? You get way more horsepower/dollar. :^)
>implying it's good value to buy a card that can't even get 60fps on last year's titles
ITS OVER
AMD IS FINISHED
>480 overclocks 30% in synthetic benchmark
>meets the performance of a card 200$ more for free
damn, start selling those AMD stocks now guise, they're done 4 !!
>he doesn't know what a command processor is
Topkek. They added one for Polaris.
B-but then i-i won't be part of the masterrace.. and muh bragging rights..
Third time I have seen this. IT'S FAKE!
Fake, it's the Titan X
>Had an 280 from Sapphire
It was good, but a bit hot
>Had a 380 from Gigabyte
It was okay, but the fan RPM was broken
Who should I try next? MSI cards looks nice
>amd added a command processor
>amd copying nvidia yet again
Why buy from the brand that can't even innovate or afford to write drivers?
its cheaper and offers a better performance per dollar whats the problem? and in the least your money wint go to supporting a company that tries its hardest to monopolize the industry kek
>finds thread about GPUs
>Still has a GeForce GT 745m
>Still a decent gaymen laptop desu
MSI cards have never let me down, but I'm not sure about them on the AMD side.
Broken as it displayed wrong RPM
I know Gigabyte doesnt care jackshit about optimizing the heatsink for AMD. They just copy paste it from Nvidia.
Poorfag. You don't deserve to call yourself a PC gamer.
That's asus...
Gigabyte uses thicker heatsinks for amd last time I checked
If I want more power but still want to stick to AMD, is it stupid to want the r9 Fury?
Why not buy a 480 now and then another one later?
Multi gpu is still shit, don't do this.
You'll be the victim of developers, especially with dx12
Could I get the opinion of someone who isn't a tripfag?
What this user said, I'd rather have one good GPU over two okay GPU's. There's no denying the 480 is a great price/performance card, but considering I have a 280x that's still going strong, I want a bigger leap in performance.
Multi gpu is still shit, don't do this.
You'll be the victim of developers, especially with dx12
I don't really care. I'm wet thinking about a cute itx card thats as good as a 980, all with >150 watts.
Honestly it's best to wait for 490 for that, since hopefully it'll be fury x performance.
Why didn't you get the nano? Cute as fuck gpu too.
>150 watts
>@ 200 burgers.
Are there any rumors saying 490 will have HBM?
If you have that kind of money then go for it. No one is stopping you
The upcoming Vega line was always supposed to have HBM2 according to AMD roadmaps.
The only thing we know now is that anything named 490 and above will not be a Polaris based chip. 460, 470, 480 are it for Polaris. There's the $100-$300 right there.
We both know that's never happening.
So then to have HBM 2 and competition for the 1080/1070, I have to waitfag some more to avoid jewish tactics of nvidia? This sucks
AMD targeted the largest market share first.
Nvidia targeted a tiny niche first.
Do you know how much the 480 needs? I have a dual fan 750 ti, and was wondering if I should upgrade.
Isn't it a single 6 pin?
Why is multi gpu shit?
Where are the 480X benchmarks? That's the one with true value for cost
Yeah, just one
It either doesn't work at all, or scales like shit. You'll rarely find a game that scales well like bf4 or AoTS. And with dx12 multiadapter is even harder for devs to implement it.
It sounds like a great idea on paper but what's going to happen behind the scenes is a ton of money being thrown around at developers either way to get it implemented or not implemented (depending on who is paying) that's going to determine mGPU's fate.
mGPU as a technology isn't shit. Ashes of the Singularity showed that a second GPU scales at something like 83% bonus performance on top of the first GPU. That's a pretty good indication that the technology itself can work but whether devs invest in it or not remains to be seen.
> yes goyim, buy a new laptop even though you don't need it :^)
There is no 480x. Just a 4GB and an 8GB version of the same chip, RX 480.
By the look of that chart, they just put out a $200 GPU that gives you performance within a couple percent of a $500-$600 GPU. Is this right?
>Is this right?
It's impossible to prove until legit benchmarks come out on the 29th but it seems to line up with what little we know so far.