AMD Radeon R7 470 and R9 480 at Computex or E3
Click here to post a comment for AMD Radeon R7 470 and R9 480 at Computex or E3 on our message forum
Denial
Well I mean it's nice to have good power consumption but I also want it to come with more performance. I don't care if you can hit 2.5x performance per watt if the final chip is less then what we have now.
-Tj-
^
Yeah exactly and Imo this is just what Polaris and NV GP104 will be..
//ps got ninja'd 🤓
Groovy-Music
Power Efficiency
The leaders want us to consume LESS, not more. ---> Agenda21
More power Efficient, not more PowerFull!
2.5x more power efficient per watt means:
Radeon R7 470 (50 Watt) comparable to today's 150 Watt cards
Radeon R9 480 (130 Watt) comparable to today's 325 watt cards
Fox2232
That power efficiency this time with 14/16nm is very important to us with high end GPUs.
Even if it takes another year to get next big GPU, we will benefit from mobile/low end users upgrading to new architecture.
Take all those low cost 'gaming notebooks' their main limitation is power consumption and heat. Solving those two comes at additional cost. Now you can have at least twice as fast GPU in same TDP. Next generation of gaming notebooks will move Low End Gaming UP a lot.
On desktop, sub 50W GPU is something what should be integrated in APU. End of story.
Even that 1024SP in r7-470 is low and I would like to have lowest desktop part with 1280SP.
With 14nm APU can have 1024 SP and with bit lower clock than dedicated card it can eat like 35~40W on GPU. More than doubling today's desktop APUs performance.
And cost? A10-7850K with 512SP costs about same as r7-360 with 768SP.
I think APUs can easily remove low end dedicated GPUs from market and be much more cost effective.
Koniakki
On the power consumption subject, let do a quick math of how this will work.
So we can buy a new GPU which "assumingly" will offer same/a bit higher performance while costing($300-400?) the same/a bit higher than previous generation which will get probably a nice discount.
We save, lets go with 100W for the 470 and 200W for the 480. Multiply it by, again lets say 6 hours straight of gaming and multiply it again by another 25 days for the month to get the saved wattage and the divide it by 1000 to get the Kilowatts. The multiply it by the cost of Kilowatt in current Country/State etc.
So we have:
AMD 470 Savings:
100x6x25=15000watts/1000=15KWx$0.2=$3 extra worth of power consumption each month or $0.12 per day for 6 Hours of gaming 25 days each month.
AMD 480 Savings:
100x6x25=30000watts/1000=30KWx$0.2=$6 extra worth of power consumption each month or $0.24 per day for 6 Hours of gaming for 25 days each month...
I probably loose more than that in my car every time I get out of it. And I got tight pockets too.
The savings would be even less if we take a more realistic 2x power efficiency.
Don't know why I'm even discussing this. I need to go to sleep since I'm working night shift today. :P
This.
RzrTrek
Nothing to see here, move along...
PrMinisterGR
Well, this is still the rumor and if these are the replacements for the 380/370, then they are kinda awesome. I don't believe that they will have anything regarding the higher models leaked yet. The clocks also remain a question still.
Clouseau
To be expected. When ATI released the 2900XT, their answer was that their methodology for solving issues was through brute force first (wattage), efficiency later. Evidence of this pattern has been seen ever since. This release falls in the efficiency phase. Increased performance would be nice but does not need to be. Remind me again, how large of a slice is the enthusiast market?
BColt
Just what I thought - probably some minor improvements in what actually matters for gamers - FPS.
And yet everybody was throwing +40% and so on around
PrMinisterGR
These are the middle of the pack replacements of the 370 and the 380. If the specs are true they will be very close to +40%.
zer0_c0ol
these are not 380 replacements.. these will be if the rumors are true the 480x could be on par with the nano
PrMinisterGR
They are middle of the pack replacements, yet they get Nano performance, hence the +40%. Even by the naming and the supposed specs you can see they will be middle of the pack. The top will be probably close to 5000+ shading units, or something like a Fiji configuration at 1.5GHz+
sykozis
I'm just hoping someone puts out a low profile card this go round.....
fry178
you gonna give me those 80$ so i can buy me a better card? no? well...
Hughesy
I won't be buying a new GPU from either side this year, promised myself to stop buying new stuff for small gains haha. My 980 is still performing well at 1440p, there's the odd few games that I have to turn down settings for, but it's really not worth buying a new one for. I still love looking at/reading about new products though.
TBPH
How the hell are you getting that impression? Just from the specs you can tell that they'll at least match the R9 390/390X.
icedman
Im very excited to see the guru3d review of these new cards
Pete J
Edit: whoops, somehow put this in the wrong thread!
Noisiv
From the raw specs? Just barely...
2816SP vs 2560
memory 512bit vs 256bit
But to surpass 390/X you need to include GCN improvements, better texture compression, and increased clocks. Which are all reasonable assumptions.
Except for bandwidth issue, where some serious work regarding efficiency should have taken place in order to come close to Fury perf. levels.
ddelamare
No, the question mark at the end of the sentence denotes uncertainty, this was a question. I assumed it would be around that mark.
Since i am not a GPU specialist, i cant say that with any degree of certainty.
