Addlink S70 1TB NVMe M.2 SSD review
G.Skill KM360 Keyboard Review
Promo: VIP-SCDKey Games and Windows 10 / Office
Alphacool EISBAER Ex BLACK LCS review
Netgear Nighthawk AX12 Wi-Fi 6 router review
Corsair HS60 PRO Surround Headset Review
MSI Radeon RX 5700 Gaming X review
Team Group Cardea II NVMe 1 TB SSD Review
ASRock X570 Phantom Gaming ITX/TB3 review
Promo: URCDKey Autumn Sale Windows 10 Pro for $11
AMD Radeon Rx 480 3DMark 11 Performance Benchmark Surfaces #2
I'll post a little addendum on the news coverage from yesterday where a Radeon Rx 480 3DMark 11 Performance surfaced at futuremark. Yesterday I didn't look too deeply into the database, however ever since late May there are multiple entries of the card, also one showing a P17244 score.
BTW finding stuff like this is all about Google really. Just go to google an go for this: site:www.3dmark.com 67DF:C7 and you'll be surprized to see what you find. Now back to the post, the P17244 is intersting. Scores range from 11K towards 17K now, a rather wide margin. The P17244 result was done on a Core i7-4770 setup, however with two cards ...
Anyway browse a little for yourself, here's a more complete comparison link. Click on graphics card to see the 67DF:C7 entry confirmes. The fastest scores are based on build 16.200.0.0 drivers.
AMD Radeon Rx 480 3DMark 11 Performance Benchmark Surfaces - 06/10/2016 01:53 PM
Yes, I am fairly certain this is the real thing you guys, in the Futuremark database an entry appeared under device ID 67DF:C7, that Hardware ID has been tied to the AMD Radeon RX 480 for a while no...
AMD Radeon Rx 480 runs at 1267 MHz - Product Photos - 06/01/2016 09:28 AM
So the official product photos of the Radeon Rx 480 Photos are in. I do not have any more confirmed detail other then what was shared in the livestream that we coverThe Radeon RX 480 delivers premium...
Leaked slide Shows AMD Radeon RX 480 at 5.5 TFLOPs and 8GB GDDR5 - 05/31/2016 09:55 PM
On Baidu a slide appeared that seems to originate from AMD, and is listing the Radeon RX 480 with both a picture and some specs, the product is listed to perform at 5.5 TFOPS (single precision perfor...
Download AMD Radeon Software Crimson Edition Graphics Driver 16.5.2 Hotfix - 05/12/2016 09:05 AM
AMD once again released a new hotfix driver, this one brings support for Oculus Rift SDK v1.3, the HTC Vive but also adds a Crossfire profile for Hitman and support for Doom and Battleborn. You can ...
AMD Radeon Software Crimson Edition 16.5.1 Beta Drivers Out - 05/05/2016 07:34 PM
AMD issued a new Radeon Software Crimson Edition 16.5.1 Beta driver. Version 16.5.1 adds optimization for "Forza Motorsport 6: Apex," and a few other enhancements, later today I will mirr...
Embra
Senior Member
Posts: 897
Joined: 2014-11-19
Senior Member
Posts: 897
Joined: 2014-11-19
#5287286 Posted on: 06/10/2016 02:00 PM
I believe that is just a 6-pin card. I would say for $200+ it is very good.
I believe that is just a 6-pin card. I would say for $200+ it is very good.
Embra
Senior Member
Posts: 897
Joined: 2014-11-19
Senior Member
Posts: 897
Joined: 2014-11-19
#5287287 Posted on: 06/10/2016 02:04 PM
Seems really good for $200.
I wonder what it is about graphics test 4 that makes Polaris perform better than the Fury? Also has there been any rumors about the wattage on the 480? I know they listed 150w as the max (75+75) but there was people over on /r/amd saying it was going to be only 90w, which seems insanely low to me.
I heard it was to be 130-140w.
Seems really good for $200.
I wonder what it is about graphics test 4 that makes Polaris perform better than the Fury? Also has there been any rumors about the wattage on the 480? I know they listed 150w as the max (75+75) but there was people over on /r/amd saying it was going to be only 90w, which seems insanely low to me.
I heard it was to be 130-140w.
Undying
Senior Member
Posts: 11764
Joined: 2008-08-28
Senior Member
Posts: 11764
Joined: 2008-08-28
#5287288 Posted on: 06/10/2016 02:05 PM
Nwm. If only AMD keep its promise it price it at 200$.
Nwm. If only AMD keep its promise it price it at 200$.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 36089
Joined: 2000-02-22
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 36089
Joined: 2000-02-22
#5287291 Posted on: 06/10/2016 02:08 PM
Seems really good for $200.
I wonder what it is about graphics test 4 that makes Polaris perform better than the Fury? Also has there been any rumors about the wattage on the 480? I know they listed 150w as the max (75+75) but there was people over on /r/amd saying it was going to be only 90w, which seems insanely low to me.
Reference 4GB models should be 200 USD, 8GB more likely 249 USD'ish.. still very OK though
Seems really good for $200.
I wonder what it is about graphics test 4 that makes Polaris perform better than the Fury? Also has there been any rumors about the wattage on the 480? I know they listed 150w as the max (75+75) but there was people over on /r/amd saying it was going to be only 90w, which seems insanely low to me.
Reference 4GB models should be 200 USD, 8GB more likely 249 USD'ish.. still very OK though
xIcarus
Senior Member
Posts: 941
Joined: 2010-08-24
Senior Member
Posts: 941
Joined: 2010-08-24
#5287297 Posted on: 06/10/2016 02:10 PM
Seems really good for $200.
I wonder what it is about graphics test 4 that makes Polaris perform better than the Fury? Also has there been any rumors about the wattage on the 480? I know they listed 150w as the max (75+75) but there was people over on /r/amd saying it was going to be only 90w, which seems insanely low to me.
People at /r/amd also said that the Fury X was a Ti killer before its launch. Insisted so much on that aspect such that most people actually believed it. Look how well that panned out.
90W sounds a bit low for such a card, 150W sounds too high. If it's indeed 150W, AMD are going to lose the efficiency race this generation too. I just hope they don't do anything stupid like trying to port the 390x on 14nm and calling it a new architecture. Although by the number of cores and CUs it doesn't seem to be the case.
However, Nvidia did go mental with the clocks on the 1070 and 1080. Maybe 90W is possible at 480's frequency.
Seems really good for $200.
I wonder what it is about graphics test 4 that makes Polaris perform better than the Fury? Also has there been any rumors about the wattage on the 480? I know they listed 150w as the max (75+75) but there was people over on /r/amd saying it was going to be only 90w, which seems insanely low to me.
People at /r/amd also said that the Fury X was a Ti killer before its launch. Insisted so much on that aspect such that most people actually believed it. Look how well that panned out.
90W sounds a bit low for such a card, 150W sounds too high. If it's indeed 150W, AMD are going to lose the efficiency race this generation too. I just hope they don't do anything stupid like trying to port the 390x on 14nm and calling it a new architecture. Although by the number of cores and CUs it doesn't seem to be the case.
However, Nvidia did go mental with the clocks on the 1070 and 1080. Maybe 90W is possible at 480's frequency.
Undying
Senior Member
Posts: 11764
Joined: 2008-08-28
Senior Member
Posts: 11764
Joined: 2008-08-28
#5287301 Posted on: 06/10/2016 02:14 PM
That's sounds reasonable. Cant wait for you to benchmark this thing, HH.
Reference 4GB models should be 200 USD, 8GB more likely 249 USD'ish.. still very OK though
That's sounds reasonable. Cant wait for you to benchmark this thing, HH.
gerardfraser
Senior Member
Posts: 2789
Joined: 2008-03-08
Senior Member
Posts: 2789
Joined: 2008-03-08
#5287302 Posted on: 06/10/2016 02:14 PM
These are the same benchmarks that was out 2 weeks ago with the same scores,just letting you know.
These are the same benchmarks that was out 2 weeks ago with the same scores,just letting you know.
SHS
Senior Member
Posts: 436
Joined: 2001-05-02
Senior Member
Posts: 436
Joined: 2001-05-02
#5287304 Posted on: 06/10/2016 02:15 PM
Keep in people the Performance Benchmark are with 8GB ver
AMD Radeon Rx 480 4GB $200
AMD Radeon Rx 480 8GB $230
Keep in people the Performance Benchmark are with 8GB ver
AMD Radeon Rx 480 4GB $200
AMD Radeon Rx 480 8GB $230
Ryu5uzaku
Senior Member
Posts: 6770
Joined: 2006-09-24
Senior Member
Posts: 6770
Joined: 2006-09-24
#5287307 Posted on: 06/10/2016 02:20 PM
Keep in people the Performance Benchmark are with 8GB ver
AMD Radeon Rx 480 4GB $200
AMD Radeon Rx 480 8GB $230
That 8 gigs won't matter in 3dmark 11 performance test really. It will not be an issue until rather high settings the 4gb model actually.
I've seen 110-130w being thrown around for this card. Well who knows. It will be max 150w I doubt it tho it would be worse then Nano then.
I am going to buy the 8gig model maybe for another build.
It is indeed interesting that in test 2-3 it is rather close to fury and 980. But int test 1 it loses kind of hard and in test 4 it blows the other two out of the water pretty much.
Keep in people the Performance Benchmark are with 8GB ver
AMD Radeon Rx 480 4GB $200
AMD Radeon Rx 480 8GB $230
That 8 gigs won't matter in 3dmark 11 performance test really. It will not be an issue until rather high settings the 4gb model actually.
I've seen 110-130w being thrown around for this card. Well who knows. It will be max 150w I doubt it tho it would be worse then Nano then.
I am going to buy the 8gig model maybe for another build.
It is indeed interesting that in test 2-3 it is rather close to fury and 980. But int test 1 it loses kind of hard and in test 4 it blows the other two out of the water pretty much.
SHS
Senior Member
Posts: 436
Joined: 2001-05-02
Senior Member
Posts: 436
Joined: 2001-05-02
#5287310 Posted on: 06/10/2016 02:23 PM
That 8 gigs won't matter in 3dmark 11 performance test really. It will not be an issue until rather high settings the 4gb model actually.
I've seen 110-130w being thrown around for this card. Well who knows. It will be max 150w I doubt it tho it would be worse then Nano then.
I am going to buy the 8gig model maybe for another build.
That not the point
when price for that card show is $230
That 8 gigs won't matter in 3dmark 11 performance test really. It will not be an issue until rather high settings the 4gb model actually.
I've seen 110-130w being thrown around for this card. Well who knows. It will be max 150w I doubt it tho it would be worse then Nano then.
I am going to buy the 8gig model maybe for another build.
That not the point
when price for that card show is $230
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 12342
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 12342
Joined: 2004-05-16
#5287312 Posted on: 06/10/2016 02:25 PM
That 8 gigs won't matter in 3dmark 11 performance test really. It will not be an issue until rather high settings the 4gb model actually.
I've seen 110-130w being thrown around for this card. Well who knows. It will be max 150w I doubt it tho it would be worse then Nano then.
I am going to buy the 8gig model maybe for another build.
It is indeed interesting that in test 2-3 it is rather close to fury and 980. But int test 1 it loses kind of hard and in test 4 it blows the other two out of the water pretty much.
Yeah I was going to say the same, the 8GB won't matter in 3DMark11 and I think that you can still kind of get away with 4GB cards in modern games at 1080p, which is most likely the resolution cards like this will be paired with. VR is generally higher but it's usually paired with flat textures in order to conceal the resolution issues.
That not the point
when price for that card show is $230
Why? A 4GB card would perform identically in that benchmark.
That 8 gigs won't matter in 3dmark 11 performance test really. It will not be an issue until rather high settings the 4gb model actually.
I've seen 110-130w being thrown around for this card. Well who knows. It will be max 150w I doubt it tho it would be worse then Nano then.
I am going to buy the 8gig model maybe for another build.
It is indeed interesting that in test 2-3 it is rather close to fury and 980. But int test 1 it loses kind of hard and in test 4 it blows the other two out of the water pretty much.
Yeah I was going to say the same, the 8GB won't matter in 3DMark11 and I think that you can still kind of get away with 4GB cards in modern games at 1080p, which is most likely the resolution cards like this will be paired with. VR is generally higher but it's usually paired with flat textures in order to conceal the resolution issues.
That not the point
when price for that card show is $230
Why? A 4GB card would perform identically in that benchmark.
thatguy91
Senior Member
Posts: 6648
Joined: 2010-08-27
Senior Member
Posts: 6648
Joined: 2010-08-27
#5287317 Posted on: 06/10/2016 02:39 PM
I wonder why Graphics Test 4 was so fast (16 percent faster) compared the Fury when the other tests were all a tad slower? Immature drivers meaning the full potential of the other 3 testa are yet to be realised, maybe?
I wonder why Graphics Test 4 was so fast (16 percent faster) compared the Fury when the other tests were all a tad slower? Immature drivers meaning the full potential of the other 3 testa are yet to be realised, maybe?
RooiKreef
Senior Member
Posts: 365
Joined: 2016-06-08
Senior Member
Posts: 365
Joined: 2016-06-08
#5287319 Posted on: 06/10/2016 02:39 PM
Can't wait to get one of these ones. Very competitive price vs performance.
Can't wait to get one of these ones. Very competitive price vs performance.
Anarion
Senior Member
Posts: 13517
Joined: 2005-08-13
Senior Member
Posts: 13517
Joined: 2005-08-13
#5287321 Posted on: 06/10/2016 02:43 PM
No point is even considering Polaris then... My GTX 970's graphics score is 18156.
No point is even considering Polaris then... My GTX 970's graphics score is 18156.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 12342
Joined: 2004-05-16
Seems really good for $200.
I wonder what it is about graphics test 4 that makes Polaris perform better than the Fury? Also has there been any rumors about the wattage on the 480? I know they listed 150w as the max (75+75) but there was people over on /r/amd saying it was going to be only 90w, which seems insanely low to me.