RX 480 is AWFUL

New benchmarks coming in show the RX 480 can't even beat a GTX 970:

imgur.com/a/3iTkS

reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/4pzcl1/xfx_rx480_unboxing_benchmarks/

See pic, the Fire Strike score is significantly lower than a 970.

This thing is just plain garbage, you can even buy some 970s for $200 right now.

Other urls found in this thread:

futuremark.com/hardware/gpu/NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970/review
wccftech.com/radeon-rx-480-wattman-overclocking/
3dmark.com/fs/5057209
3dmark.com/fs/6311035
3dmark.com/fs/5970292
twitter.com/AnonBabble

The score actually puts it between a 380 and a 380x, truly awful.

I fucking called it.

Never trust pajeet the con man.

Can you do it in English?

>hurr

The graphics score on the left is all that matters and that beats a 970. The overall score is dragged down by the shitty CPU. My 6700K scores 15K in the physics test and that one doesn't even manage 10K.

Nice try, shill.

Wow, damage control already? Face it pajeet, Nvidia has won yet another generation of GPUs.

Umm the 970 gets a 15730, while this gets 12467

If you're going to start throwing around accusations we're going to need more information, in English, because unlike you, i'm not a foreigner.

It also runs at 88 degrees and uses 147W, what a disaster.

>Umm the 970 gets a 15730

Keep dreaming. A 970 at 1600MHz gets 14.5K. At stock under 12K. Need to shill better than this if you're going to get paid for the day my friend.

And a 1080 draws over 300W as well if we're gonna talk about maximum power draw.

>he doesn't know reference cards are always housefires by both companies

Literally right here: futuremark.com/hardware/gpu/NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970/review

GTX 970 15730

RX 480 12467

This is looking really bad for AMD, I almost feel sorry for them at this point.

>MAX and a overclock
Are you positively retarded?
That's like saying my Honda redlines every time because I do it once every month.

WORSE THAN A 960! DON'T BUY FROM AMD!
BUY A 1070 WHILE PRICES ARE LOW!

This

The score for the GPU alone puts it in 980 territory, overall score gets bogged down by a haswell Xeon that can't outperform a 3770K.

Wow, peaked at 80 degrees which for a reference card is good. My 780 Windforce gets that high under load as well. Also AMD said the tdp is 150W so 147 is spot on

>Literally right here

That's 3DMark 11, you dumb autist, not Fire Strike. A completely different benchmark.

>The score for the GPU alone puts it in 980 territory

It's not even close to the 980, it barely even competes with a 970

Holy fucking Jesus' balls, a 150W TDP chip maxes out at 147W ?

Call the press

It gets to 88 degrees.

Even my blower 970 never got above 83

So what's the power use in average gaming?

>Even my blower 970 never got above 83

Yeah, because that's the point where they start thermal throttling. AMD allow higher temperatures before thermal throttling kicks in. How about actually looking at your clock speeds once in a while?

135w
the new turbo is aggressive

Fuck back to gaymer manchild

Scroll down to the 6th image and just go down, somewhere around 110W like it was said.

wccftech.com/radeon-rx-480-wattman-overclocking/


Also, do remember that GPU-z sensor readouts are highly inaccurate and you should really wait for power consumption tests at the rails with proper tools not a fucking bugged Microsoft API

Video cards aren't technology?

>Last 2 weeks on Sup Forums
>rx 480 everywhere
>AMD shills shilling like crazy
>"970 killer, nvidia housefire, legimpmeme.jpg, 480 exceeding 980ti in benchmarks, beating fury, too good for gtx 980, 970 in the trash"

No games were actually tested, just synthetic crap.
Can't you wait 2 days?

...

Seriously I legitimately feel bad for AMD and the fanboys now. I mean I knew it wasn't going to be everything they said it was, but this is just amazingly bad.

>games
Fuck off back to

Hell, I became very optimistic about the rx 480. 200$ for 980-level performance? Shieeet, guess I'll just buy a second-hand gtx 980 on warranty

Not going to lie, it's going to hurt a little on the inside if this is how the card actually performs. I was really hoping to be able to get a new video card, but it's looking like I'm going to be buying a used R9 290.

Come on, AMD. You had one job. Why is your last viable series of cards 3 generations old? Why is the 7970 still one of your best cards?

LOOL only 10101 score my 960 can score mroe ahAHAHAHAHAH AMD IS FUCKING DEAD

And you judge a video card based on "game performance"?
Wow shows your actual interest full well

LOOOOOL THIS I CAN'T BELIEVE HOW BIG OF A FLOP IT IS AMD SHOULD FUCKING KILL ITSELF ALREADY AHAHAHAHAH

thanks for the heads up, fudzilla

My GTX 970 gets 12145

The RX 480 gets 12467

So this is barely better than my 970, WTF?

My 970 scores 14k!
14000!

AMD IS FUCKING DEAD INT HE WATTER, STILLBOURNE AND FINISHED AND BANKRUPT!

This is a 200$ gpu. It's not designed for rendering or anything, it's supposed to be a budget gaming thingy and was supposed to beat the 970/980.

Curry dindu Kadouri lied I guess.

It does seem to beat the 970, but just barely.

It's basically the exact same as a 970 or 390

>guy from XFX posts
>redditors all accept him as their new god
>"you're so cool m8, love you!"

disgusting.

KILL YOURSELVES YOU SHIT INDIAN COMPANY FUCKNIG DIE ALREDY!

Please explain what you use video cards for

its in gobbely goop because its got an underpowered Athlon cpu.
>rx 480 $200-230
>gtx 970 ~$400

hmmm I wonder why it might not be as strong.

FOOOOOOKIN TOLD YA, M80S!

fitting

So we got a bunch of benches going from Nano to under the 970 performance.

Who to believe.

You can literally pick up a brand new 970 for $250 right now

>$400
>970
this trolling attempt was unsuccessful, try again?

So, it's closest to score with a 390X and a 1418MHz overclocked 970.

But man, these things are all over the place.

Wait two days and see.
I wouldn't believe the really inflated ones, clearly not true. Expected it to be better than 970, not beating 980. That's the top of what I can believe at the given price.

If it really does turn out to be worse than 970, that would break my heart, but it's not like I was going to buy it anyway. I'll be stuck with my R9 380 for a bit longer.

>GTX 970
>Graphics Score 11 739
3dmark.com/fs/5057209


POO
IN
LOO
RAJSH
45 RUPEES
IN
YOUR
ACCOUNT

AMD looks good in benchmarks but in real life(benchmarks ARE NOT real life) they're usually 2-2.5 times slower than the Nvidia equivalent, AMD is like those concept cars that can do anything but are just cheap shit with a coat of paint on them.

They don't even look good in benchmarks

Uhm this seems utterly fake.. Just wait for official benching.. also seen it beat the 980 in firestrike.. so we dont know shit yet..

It looks like it's about equal to a 970

Pretty disappointing when you can already get a 970 for $250 right now

standardized poo-in-the-loo names
rajas/koduris shill amd
pajeets shill nvidia

Can I be retarded too? Here's a 980ti with a 13000 GFX score
3dmark.com/fs/6311035

OP benchmark is above 970 performance
OP benchmark is done with release candidate drivers that were pressed on disk weeks ago and are not the actual release drivers.
Not a single leak was done with correct drivers because even the press only just got the correct drivers.

facts usually sound good but not from your ass(not facts)

>still slower than Nvidia

AHAAHAHA FUCKING AMDKEKS

Fan is running under 20% and he prolly fucked the gpu in the afterburner setup or what ever hed using.. and that CPU is shit

And here's a 960 with a 16000 gfx score

3dmark.com/fs/5970292


This benchmark is retarded.

CPU is not shit, it's actually a good xeon

>xeon
>good

Pick one

Not where I live, the cheapest I can find is $389. See, this is why I buy AMD, I got R9 380 for around $270.

Will be a while until I see R9 480 here as well, so it doesn't matter. I reckon it will be around $300, and I don't suppose I'll see price cut for 970 soon, seeing as all shops are probably waiting to sell what they have in stock currently.

>I have no idea what I'm talking about

why is everyone in this thread confuse firestrike with 3dmark11?

This is with a 5960X with a 4.4GHz OC

>5960X with a 4.4GHz OC
Why don't they test with CPUs people actually use and at clockspeeds people actually use?

Like a i5 at 4.2 or something.

My 6 year old 1090T blackedition wipes as with that xeon

Something is very wrong with their benchmark, my 970 gets 12145

why? it will scale down with CPU and will be relatively the same to others
at least this way it excludes any kind of bottleneck for better understanding how gpu works

That's overall score, not GFX score.

The Xeon 1231v3 has identical performance to an i7 4770

OK that makes sense

So would a 480 with that CPU score around 11k?

You'll see in two days.

It should put the 480 slightly better than a 970

it has higher graphics score you dimwitted tool.

>Fury X slower than 980Ti at stock clocks
>meanwhile equal to 980Ti in games at stock clocks but slightly faster at 4k
This benchmark is full retard.

Synthetics were never a good indicator of gaming performance, as seen here AMD does worse in ONE(1) synthetic but better in gaming.

Is my GPU better than the 480?

>ran at 20% fanspeed

What the fuck?
Did he intentionally throttle the card?

No, that's actually how AMD sets it up by default

Guess this confirms it uses 150W

Man, people, just wait for the fucking reviews in 2 days, these scores are all over the place.

It's almost exactly the same

>GPU load 100%
>65W

Uhh yeah, about that GPU-z sensor accuracy?
It's kinda shitty.

Literally 330aud right now from MSY.

Your 970 has a factory OC. The synthetic score difference between a 390, 970, 390x, and 980 is very small and easily muddled by differing core clocks.

A 980 with a high OC only does 14000, a ref RX 480 will get in the mid 13500 range with OC. Partner cards will likely hit 13000 out of the box and manually OC into the 14000 score range. Get some perspective about FS scores.

Buttshilled AMDcuuck

buy a 970 then dipshit, its more expensive, older, and slower.

Holy, I can't wait to undervolt this thing.
AMD has put a large voltage range again with these chips for binning purposes.

It's painfully simply:

If the 250$ 480 performs slightly better than the 970 -- it's a no brainer since the 970 is about 250-300 right now.

If it's worse, than fuck it, you may as well get a gtx 980.

Trying times for AMD -- will they succeed in the mid-range or fail miserably?

It's not looking good.

If they could hit 980 performance, it would be worth it, but at this point it's basically just another 970.

Yeah now try it in a game with the shitty driver overhead from amd.

And don't waste my time with a 6700k.
It's a budget card, pair it with a budget cpu like athlon 880k, i3 6100, or i5 6400.

What's the point of these leak threads? AMD shills will latch on to high scores to make the thing look good while Nvidiots will latch on to low scores to make AMD look bad.
There's fucking over 25% variance between leak scores over the last few DAYS

>slower
Clearly not, judging by OP's info.
>more expensive and older
Well yes, you'd think 2 extra years would give AMD some time to make a card that's better than a 970 somehow, but apparently not.
still want to try again?

It's Sup Forums, people love bickering over this shit, when they don't realize that good competitions from both manufacturers leads to better and cheaper products for all consumers.

Let me tell you why there's such a large variance between scores.

>multiple CPUs
>different clocks for both CPU and GPU
>different drivers
>fanspeeds set to low
>throttling
>different benchmarks

Anything else?