Monday, May 2nd 2016

AMD Radeon R9 480 (non-X) Performs Close to R9 390X

In all the 16 nm NVIDIA "Pascal" GPU fervor, it would be foolish to ignore AMD's first "Polaris" GPUs, built on the more advanced 14 nm process. Hot on the heels of reports that a fully-equipped "Ellesmere" GPU based Radeon R9 490 performs close to NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 980 Ti (and AMD's own R9 Fury X), with nearly half its power-draw, new numbers from an early GFXBench run suggests that its cut-down R9 480 (non-X) sibling performs close to the Radeon R9 390X. The R9 480 succeeds the currently-$200 R9 380, and its prospect of offering performance rivaling the $400 R9 390X at half its power-draw appears to meet AMD's "generational leap" claims for the "Polaris" architecture. Similarly, the R9 490, based on a better-endowed "Ellesmere" chip, offering performance rivaling current $600 GPUs at a $350-ish price-point (succeeding the R9 390), appears to meet expectations of a generation leap.
Add your own comment

31 Comments on AMD Radeon R9 480 (non-X) Performs Close to R9 390X

#26
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
N3M3515, post: 3452598, member: 89162"
So.....it's really a good bye to performance leaps.... :(
This days the only thing i read half power this lower power that, etc. I think that's good and all but i've been waiting like almost 3 years to replace my $250 R9 280X and even with this new polaris i won't see a huge jump in perf......i expected at least fury x performance for 300 bucks like it normally was when the new generation midrange performed equally or better than previous gen highend.
Less leakage means that they can cram more circuit in a single die while staying within thermal constraints but, I get what you're saying. I look at it a different way. If I were to upgrade, such a lineup would make a second 390 a lot cheaper.
Posted on Reply
#27
MrGenius
The other thing nobody's mentioning here is that the GFXBench site has it listed as a mobile GPU(or was it a smartphone GPU?). Not dedicated. I believe we've been duped. Now if we can all stop hitting that site at the same time, maybe some of us that haven't seen it yet can take a look at what I'm talking about.

Anyhow...I think I'm going with post #7 on this one. Since that makes the most sense so far.

EDIT: I think I were wrong about that. Yep. I was.
Posted on Reply
#28
-1nf1n1ty-
NEAT! I am glad I purchased a 390 (sarcasm). I'm actually still a bit confused on GPU's, will the older cards (r9 2xx/3xx GTX9xx/7XX) still be relevant once these newer cards are released? Just sounds like the ultimate goal is to hit 60+ FPS 4k resolution. I just don't have that much interest in 4K just yet.
Posted on Reply
#29
laszlo
does anyone know when will be available in market?

seems like a good upgrade as is time....
Posted on Reply
#30
N3M3515
laszlo, post: 3452796, member: 6256"
does anyone know when will be available in market?

seems like a good upgrade as is time....
Long overdue dude, that's a fossil.
Posted on Reply
#31
Sir Alex Ice
The comparison is wrong from the start, on one side you have rumored GPUs with dreamed up performance and on the side you have the competition's old products.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment