AMD: Speculation, Rumors, and Discussion (Archive)
- Thread starter iMacmatician
- Start date
- Status
D
Deleted member 2197
Guest
The posting, quote and link was talking about the Sapphire model, though.
Fresh from the Sapphire press release:
SAPPHIRE NITRO+ Radeon™ RX 470
[…]
„Entwickelt mit der Prämisse eines niedrigeren Stromverbrauchs bleibt bei der vierten Generation der Graphics Core Next Chips der typische Verbrauch der Grafikkarte bei etwa 170 Watt.“
Translated manually:
Engineered with an emphasis on lower power consumption, the typical power consumption of cards equipped with chips based on 4th gen Graphics Core Next stays below 170 watts.
D
Deleted member 2197
Guest
Could be error. Think he rushed review since he got card yesterday.
$179 is correct. That's AMD's MSRP for the RX 470.
Do they sell reference cards in the US? Here in Europe, they told us, there'd be only partner cards in the channel, the cheapest of whose start at 215 EUR including all necessary taxes (19% VAT) here in GER. Frankly, I find most of the AIB's prices a bit too high, with an early price for the MSI 8 GB model announced at 269 EUR (that's what the 8 GB RX 480 retails for currently). But that 8 GB model has been reduced/corrected to 239 EUR already.
That, combined with the fact that AMD sent out only OC cards (which almost by default operate outside the rated TDP for the reference card) for a perf/watt/dollar product makes me feel there's a lot of wasted potential on RX470's first impression.
That, combined with the fact that AMD sent out only OC cards (which almost by default operate outside the rated TDP for the reference card) for a perf/watt/dollar product makes me feel there's a lot of wasted potential on RX470's first impression.
I can see why they priced it at $179 MSRP. A quick glance at some benchmarks tells me the difference in gaming between this and the 480 isn't much. Granted, that was not a reference card reviewed, but still I think it'd be silly to pay more for the 480 when an 8gb 470 is almost the same.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
The beginning of this gen is completely bonkers. Every single 14/16FF card is being sold way above its MSRP, months after release. I guess the demand for the new cards corresponds to how long the 28nm process stayed in the market.
That said, $180 for the RX470 makes little sense if we consider the $200 RX480 4GB, but the later is not being sold at its MSRP, and probably won't be for many months to come. The RX480 isn't being sold for less than $220-230, so the $50 difference planned between the 470 and the 480 was simply adjusted for the market reality.
$180 for the RX470 is still a spectacular value though, considering how close it is to the GTX 970 which was sold at almost twice that price not that many months ago.
The really small performance difference to the RX 480 shows that the P10 chip seems to be ROP/fillrate limited in most situations, even AotS.The only game showing a FPS delta that somehow corresponds to the compute throughput delta is Doom. id Tech 6 is really squeezing every last drop of GFLOP in all GPUs.
That said, $180 for the RX470 makes little sense if we consider the $200 RX480 4GB, but the later is not being sold at its MSRP, and probably won't be for many months to come. The RX480 isn't being sold for less than $220-230, so the $50 difference planned between the 470 and the 480 was simply adjusted for the market reality.
$180 for the RX470 is still a spectacular value though, considering how close it is to the GTX 970 which was sold at almost twice that price not that many months ago.
The really small performance difference to the RX 480 shows that the P10 chip seems to be ROP/fillrate limited in most situations, even AotS.The only game showing a FPS delta that somehow corresponds to the compute throughput delta is Doom. id Tech 6 is really squeezing every last drop of GFLOP in all GPUs.
There are no pure reference boards. I suspect AMD has a reference PCB that some partners opt to use - and the Sapphire card I have even uses a tweaked version of the reference RX 480 blower - but there are no full buy-from-AMD reference boards like 480. It's vendor semi/fully custom in the US, just like EMEA. That said, this is pretty common for the sub-$200 market. I would have been more surprised if there was a reference board.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
I'm still hoping for that mini-ITX RX460 we saw in the presentation to be a de facto reference for the card, though.
Gigantic dual-fan heatsink designs are such a waste for a sub-75W card of that performance level.
Though we did see all the OEMs doing that to the GTX 950 which doesn't consume much more, so it wouldn't be really unprecedented.
8GB is completely useless even at 4K. Since the card are not mean to play at 4K 4GB is more than enough to play at 1080p.
Thanks for confirming the US situation to be the same as here. While there were reference boards for review up until prior to the Rx 300 series, those almost never made it into the channel. I can understand AMDs approach from that point of view.
OTOH though, with the higher than initially expected power consumption of the RX 480 (which I can see was necessary because of performance target R9 290/GTX 970), the RX 470 does not have such hurdles to overcome.
Here, AMD could have used reference cards to augment their Polaris story about good perf/watt - or at least better select AIB cards, instead of wasting that perf/watt potential RX 470 had with partners placing their OC variants for review. Among which some are by itself less than convincing products compared to the rest of AMDs lineup.
I would hope for that too. The one RX 460 I've seen so far unfortunately is not a sub-75 watt model and while being pretty small, definitely is larger than the pseudo-reference card from AMDs presentations. But other than that (implementation detail), P11 as a chip seems to look quite promising.
Well, that wasn't exactly my point, but mentioning the 8gb 470 didn't help me make my point either. What I meant to say is that AMD has to price the 470 so close to the 480 because their fps difference is really only in the 10 fps range. If they priced it lower it would completely erode 480 sales. I personally wouldn't pay $20 more for 10 extra fps if these cards really were available at MSRP.
I would. In future with better drivers, games/tech I think it would make the difference bigger.
Enviado desde mi HTC One mediante Tapatalk
Well looks like the 470 runs about 30w less and somewhat cooler than the 480 so the $179 MSI 4Gb starting to look good.
So @Dave Baumann are you able to confirm whether the 470/480 supports PlayReady 3 SL2000 and SL3000 levels?
So @Dave Baumann are you able to confirm whether the 470/480 supports PlayReady 3 SL2000 and SL3000 levels?
I certainly would. If I got my favourite game from 20 to 30, heck, even from 30 to 40 Fps, I would gladly pay the 20$ extra.
monstercameron
Newcomer
Perhaps AMD could have named the 4GB 480 the "Radeon RX 470X," to appease people who find fault in pointless nomenclature.
- Status
