Closed

AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB Review

AMD is ready to introduce Radeon RX 580. Utilizing the same Ellesmere GPU at a slightly higher core clock rate, the company hopes to win over gamers using older graphics cards based on 28nm processors.

AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB Review : Read more
101 answers Last reply
More about amd radeon 580 8gb review
  1. Battlefield 1 2560x1440, Ultra benchmark Radeon RX 580 minimum fps does not look right.
  2. Unless I am really missing something, can't you just slightly overclock the 480 to match the slight performance boost the 580 has?
  3. max0x7ba said:
    Battlefield 1 2560x1440, Ultra benchmark Radeon RX 580 minimum fps does not look right.
    Take a look at the frametimes at start. I think, it's a driver issue, because it was reproducible ;)

    lasik124 said:
    Unless I am really missing something, can't you just slightly overclock the 480 to match the slight performance boost the 580 has?
    No, it were in each case less than 1375 MHz. Slower as the Silent Mode of this 580 and simply too hot for my taste. The problem is not the pre-defined clock rate itself but the reduced real clocks from power tune due temps and voltage/power limtations;)
  4. FormatC said:
    max0x7ba said:
    Battlefield 1 2560x1440, Ultra benchmark Radeon RX 580 minimum fps does not look right.
    Take a look at the frametimes at start. I think, it's a driver issue, because it was reproducible ;)

    lasik124 said:
    Unless I am really missing something, can't you just slightly overclock the 480 to match the slight performance boost the 580 has?
    No, it were in each case less than 1375 MHz. Slower as the Silent Mode of this 580 and simply too hot for my taste. The problem is not the pre-defined clock rate itself but the reduced real clocks from power tune due temps and voltage/power limtations;)



    So i guess what Im trying to ask is it worth buying at 580 (Currently at a 7870) or save a couple bucks pick up a 480 non reference cooler and be able to slightly overclock it to get in game benchmarks similar if closely identical to the current 580?
  5. no, you'll get the 480 numbers with a 480. the tested card was already oc'ed and you won't get any better manually. the changes made to the 580 can't be done to the 480.

    want the extra few fps, then you'll want to get a 580.
  6. I like the design of the Nitro card.
  7. I dont get it , for sure AMD could release this card as the original RX 480 long ago , why did they allow Nvidia GTX 1060 to steal the RX 480 share ?

    Very Stupid Strategy ... I now alot of people who bought GTX 1060 and wished AMD were better Just to take advantage of the cheaper Freesync Monitors.

    AMD you lost millions of buyers !!! for nothing !!!
  8. Tech_TTT said:
    I dont get it , for sure AMD could release this card as the original RX 480 long ago , why did they allow Nvidia GTX 1060 to steal the RX 480 share ?

    Very Stupid Strategy ... I now alot of people who bought GTX 1060 and wished AMD were better Just to take advantage of the cheaper Freesync Monitors.

    AMD you lost millions of buyers !!! for nothing !!!


    Don't think it's as simple as you make it out to be. They're a huge company with a ton of professionals, they know what they're doing.
  9. Tech_TTT said:
    I dont get it , for sure AMD could release this card as the original RX 480 long ago , why did they allow Nvidia GTX 1060 to steal the RX 480 share ?

    Very Stupid Strategy ... I now alot of people who bought GTX 1060 and wished AMD were better Just to take advantage of the cheaper Freesync Monitors.

    AMD you lost millions of buyers !!! for nothing !!!

    .
    Better binning ,refinements on the power circuitry - something thats come with time after the initial production runs of the rx470/480.
    Fairly normal process for how amd work in all honesty.
    Has it lost them some custom to prospective buyers in the last 6 months since the rx series was released ?? Maybe a few - not even 1% of the buyers they'd have lost if theyd actually held the rx series release back until now though!!
  10. madmatt30 said:
    Tech_TTT said:
    I dont get it , for sure AMD could release this card as the original RX 480 long ago , why did they allow Nvidia GTX 1060 to steal the RX 480 share ?

    Very Stupid Strategy ... I now alot of people who bought GTX 1060 and wished AMD were better Just to take advantage of the cheaper Freesync Monitors.

    AMD you lost millions of buyers !!! for nothing !!!

    .
    Better binning ,refinements on the power circuitry - something thats come with time after the initial production runs of the rx470/480.
    Fairly normal process for how amd work in all honesty.
    Has it lost them some custom to prospective buyers in the last 6 months since the rx series was released ?? Maybe a few - not even 1% of the buyers they'd have lost if theyd actually held the rx series release back until now though!!


    Thats the Job of the R&D in the beta testing interval .. not after release, I am not buying this explanation at all.
  11. turkey3_scratch said:
    Tech_TTT said:
    I dont get it , for sure AMD could release this card as the original RX 480 long ago , why did they allow Nvidia GTX 1060 to steal the RX 480 share ?

    Very Stupid Strategy ... I now alot of people who bought GTX 1060 and wished AMD were better Just to take advantage of the cheaper Freesync Monitors.

    AMD you lost millions of buyers !!! for nothing !!!


    Don't think it's as simple as you make it out to be. They're a huge company with a ton of professionals, they know what they're doing.


    Blind faith ?

    sorry does not work .

    well Apple were huge once and they knew what they were doing and still lost the market when they kicked Steve Jobs out ...

    Digital Equipment were huge once ... they knew what they were doing

    SGI were huge once they knew what they were doing ...

    Comaq once were better than Dell they knew what they were doing .. where is Compaq now ?

    sorry does not work this way .
  12. Pretty sure they've released the rx480 ASAP
    And the Rx580 now wasn't ready back then

    It was important to release the 480 before the 1060 would come out to get early buyers.
    The fact that it took almost a year to release the 580 shows a lot.

    If they'd had waited with the 480 a few month they'd probably lost a huge amount of money
  13. Not seeing any reason to be disappinted at all personally.
    The 480 is still a good card for anyone who bought one on release - for anyone who hasnt it means a big price drop to the same pricepoint as the 1060 3gb for the 8gb models.

    The rx cards were a totally new fabrication process for amd after using pretty much the same stuff for the last 3 generations.
    Better binning refinements come with time on a new process!

    Where do you think the intel kaby lake chips appeared from 12-18 months after skylake ?? Theyre quite simply from a refined process & better binning of the same production line.
    Its a normal process , amd actually just managed it a bit quicker than is normal for them.
  14. Tech_TTT said:

    Blind faith ?

    sorry does not work .

    well Apple were huge once and they knew what they were doing and still lost the market when they kicked Steve Jobs out ...

    Digital Equipment were huge once ... they knew what they were doing

    SGI were huge once they knew what they were doing ...

    Comaq once were better than Dell they knew what they were doing .. where is Compaq now ?

    sorry does not work this way .


    Apple lost the market and were huge once? Excuse me, they just set a quarterly revenue record with 78 billion dollars earned in Q4 2016 (fiscal Q1 2017).

    The RX 480 was held to low clocks because the process node wasn't mature, and it was one of the first gaming GPUs in a long time not built by TSMC. It's only natural that they would eventually be able to reach higher clocks, which were not feasible at the 480 launch.

    Funny thing is it bears at least a passing resemblance to Nvidia's troubles with the GTX 480 back in the day. The GTX 580 polished that up.
  15. lasik124 said:
    Unless I am really missing something, can't you just slightly overclock the 480 to match the slight performance boost the 580 has?

    The 480 has a voltage limit of 1.15v so you had to mode the bios on the 480 to break beyond 1.4Ghz. Yes it could be done but only those that know how. Last OC I remember for the 480 was 1.65Ghz using LN2. I think the best Air OC was mid-ish 1.5Ghz but most on air wouldn't break 1.5Ghz due to the silicon lottery. The 580 seems to have a best performance around 1.48Ghz anyways with the memory OC'ed 50Mhz.
  16. I think you can attribute this to process maturity and design refinement. Have to remember that the 14nm process was brand new and as we always see, when the process matures, we get some enhancements. ALL companies do this.

    I have to admit I was surprised to see a 8 and 6 pin power connector on the 580, especially since the 480 took 1 - 8pin to be properly powered. But since this isn't a arch tweak, I understand it.

    So what it comes down to now is:
    Better efficiency and preference for older DX11 games = 1060
    Better DX12 and Vulcan + equal current DX11 games = 580

    I think this is a win for AMD overall. Guess we will have to wait for the 680 for architecture refinements or maybe by then we will be getting a look at Navi.
  17. a win for AMD ? it is TOOO LAATE .. ALL are waiting for the VEGA now... TOO LAATE ...
  18. Sakkura said:
    Tech_TTT said:

    Blind faith ?

    sorry does not work .

    well Apple were huge once and they knew what they were doing and still lost the market when they kicked Steve Jobs out ...

    Digital Equipment were huge once ... they knew what they were doing

    SGI were huge once they knew what they were doing ...

    Comaq once were better than Dell they knew what they were doing .. where is Compaq now ?

    sorry does not work this way .


    Apple lost the market and were huge once? Excuse me, they just set a quarterly revenue record with 78 billion dollars earned in Q4 2016 (fiscal Q1 2017).

    The RX 480 was held to low clocks because the process node wasn't mature, and it was one of the first gaming GPUs in a long time not built by TSMC. It's only natural that they would eventually be able to reach higher clocks, which were not feasible at the 480 launch.

    Funny thing is it bears at least a passing resemblance to Nvidia's troubles with the GTX 480 back in the day. The GTX 580 polished that up.


    I was talking about Apple old times when they struggled after kicking out Steve Jobs ... READ
  19. Sakkura said:
    Apple lost the market and were huge once? Excuse me, they just set a quarterly revenue record with 78 billion dollars earned in Q4 2016 (fiscal Q1 2017).


    I think they were referring to how they dominated the PC market back in the 70's, then Jobs made some really bad business decisions, got removed from the company and Apple spent several decades as a footnote. Today, their computer business isn't exactly booming, just the phones and tablets.
  20. Tech_TTT said:
    a win for AMD ? it is TOOO LAATE .. ALL are waiting for the VEGA now... TOO LAATE ...


    Vega is top end, this is a mainstream market refresh. Not too late for anything, they tuned and corrected some design flaws while the maturity of the process let them boost the clocks.

    nVidia could potentially do a similar thing, but they are probably just moving on.
  21. Tech_TTT said:
    a win for AMD ? it is TOOO LAATE .. ALL are waiting for the VEGA now... TOO LAATE ...


    What?
  22. Tech_TTT said:


    I was talking about Apple old times when they struggled after kicking out Steve Jobs ... READ


    Try being a little more respectful to those you are speaking to here. We will not tolerate rude or disruptive behavior.
  23. Rogue Leader said:
    Tech_TTT said:


    I was talking about Apple old times when they struggled after kicking out Steve Jobs ... READ


    Try being a little more respectful to those you are speaking to here. We will not tolerate rude or disruptive behavior.


    saying read is rude ? I meant read again . nothing else.
  24. 0,5% increased power consumption for 5%-10% better performance. I would say that doesn't warrant a negative bulletpoint for the card using more power than the 480. Might very well just be the binning lottery, but if anything better efficiency would be a neutral or positive point for a consumer considering buying this card :P
  25. I like the metal backplate on the card. My MSI R9 390 sags because the backplate is plastic.
  26. And again, we are left with a 9 page review which tells us nothing about the performance of the card in a manner which 98% of us will use it .... tweaked to the best performance we can get using MSI Afterburner or alternate utility. This is akin to a review comparing off road performance of 3 cars, (one 4WD, one AWD and one 2WD) and testing them all in 2WD mode. Since the 2xx series. AMD had done a lot of reissuing older GPus with faster clocks which I don't have a real problem with, if it cam deliver a performance improvement. The 10xx series brought 50+% performance improvements and we are not seeing that here.

    My objection is the testing methodology does not take into account the major difference between the two camps. Whereas in recent generations, nVidia is hitting overclocks, depending upon how high up the price tiers, from upper teens to 32%. AMD has been stuck for the most part in single digits. Again here, it's just 4%. So while the information as to how they perform isn't exactly worthless, just like the vehicle comparison, when I go off roading, I will put the vehicle in 4 WD, And when using the card for gaming, CAD, whatever, I will be using it ONLY at it's maximum stable OC. If I don't see that in the article index or the graphs, I'm not going to read it. I am going to read this instead.

    https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/RX_580_Nitro_Plus/33.html
  27. madmatt30 said:
    Tech_TTT said:
    I dont get it , for sure AMD could release this card as the original RX 480 long ago , why did they allow Nvidia GTX 1060 to steal the RX 480 share ?

    Very Stupid Strategy ... I now alot of people who bought GTX 1060 and wished AMD were better Just to take advantage of the cheaper Freesync Monitors.

    AMD you lost millions of buyers !!! for nothing !!!

    .
    Better binning ,refinements on the power circuitry - something thats come with time after the initial production runs of the rx470/480.
    Fairly normal process for how amd work in all honesty.
    Has it lost them some custom to prospective buyers in the last 6 months since the rx series was released ?? Maybe a few - not even 1% of the buyers they'd have lost if theyd actually held the rx series release back until now though!!


    AMD absolutely needed a new GPU when they launched Polaris. Fury/Fury X was just not keeping up with nVidia and the older GCN cards were showing their age.

    However I wonder when they will launch Vega. nVidia needs some top end competition and right now the 1080/1080Ti sit relatively unchallenged.

    Hopefully Vega has some power to it as well. From what I can find they might be launching it near the same time nVidia might push Volta and that might not be a pretty battle.
  28. You guys talking about AMD being "too late" are wrong. The 480 was the perfect MID-RANGE card to have. It's not AMD's greatest offering, like the Fury X and 290x/390x.

    Every manufacturer does this. Intel, AMD, Nvidia, etc...
    What do you think Kabylake is? It's Skylake with refinements and a higher clock ceiling. Why hold back improvements?

    There is nothing wrong with releasing a better version of one of the top MID-RANGE GPUs. RX Vega is what will replace the Fury and 290/390 cards as the AMD Flagship GPU.
  29. JackNaylorPE said:


    Interesting that they used BF3 to test the overclock. Talk about dusting off an old title. It would have been more interesting to see current DX11 and DX12 results.

    But a 5% OC = 4.4% performance increase it's too bad. I think AMD has just about topped out these cards at the stock power settings.
  30. Really should have called it the 485 to reflect the fact that it's just a minor factory update and not a wholesale new card.
  31. Quote:
    And again, we are left with a 9 page review which tells us nothing about the performance of the card in a manner which 98% of us will use it .... tweaked to the best performance we can get using MSI Afterburner or alternate utility.


    The card was running in all benchmarks at 1450 MHz in Boost-Mode. Even more OC will give you simply nothing or - maybe 1-2 fps more - with a lot of luck. :D
  32. why_wolf said:
    Really should have called it the 485 to reflect the fact that it's just a minor factory update and not a wholesale new card.


    Intel didn't call Kaby a 6750k and there is little to no difference from what Intel did to this.
  33. Wonder how long unitl the 580 can break the LN2 record of 1.7Ghz.
  34. lasik124 said:
    Unless I am really missing something, can't you just slightly overclock the 480 to match the slight performance boost the 580 has?


    I was able to OC my ASUS 480 to 1.4Ghz with 1.2v, 2200Mhz on the memory, but this wasn't my search. (A lot of users say its a golden sample idk). Few 480's models go higher than 1.4Ghz. But i assume this models will be good to overclocking (hope this can reach 1.5Ghz maybe??, not this one :( )

    Sapphire, Gigabyte (Aourus XTR), MSI Gaming X Plus seems to have the best clocks out the box.
  35. I tried three of my 480's - only 1375 to 1380 MHz was the ROCKSTABLE maximum, only one card was going a tick over 1,4 GHz, but not really stable over a few hours. But I had to modify my BIOS to get more voltage.
  36. Martell1977 said:
    why_wolf said:
    Really should have called it the 485 to reflect the fact that it's just a minor factory update and not a wholesale new card.


    Intel didn't call Kaby a 6750k and there is little to no difference from what Intel did to this.


    Just because Intel jumped off a bridge doesn't mean its right either.
  37. I remember the old XFX GTR was a good overclocker, but i agree with elbert, hope this is a good overclocker. Some models comes with 2x8pin yay.
  38. Normal mid-range small refinery upgrade. Interestingly waiting next year for small version of Vega. Maybe Vega12, or whatever it will be called. Vega improves a lot of efficiency. Same tile based rastering as with Nvidia cards and so on. So in the meantime this is ok small upgrade. Vega is the one that will bring some really big architectural upgrades!
  39. lucas_7_94 said:
    I remember the old XFX GTR was a good overclocker, but i agree with elbert, hope this is a good overclocker. Some models comes with 2x8pin yay.


    that is if you were lucky to get one that can OC very high. when Jay show his XFX GTR able to reach 1475mhz (one that was given to him directly by XFX for review) i see many people expecting any XFX GTR are guaranteed to at least OCed to 1450mhz mark. but it turns out there are people with the card can't even get 1400mhz stable even when voltage was crank to the max.

    btw Power Color Red Devil Golden Sample is one that able to get 1528mhz when OCed.

    http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/powercolor_radeon_red_devil_rx580_8gb_golden_sample/3.htm
  40. This are pre-selected chips, no retail for the masses ;)

    For XFX 480 GTR read, what I wrote about the HIS in my roundup and the VR balancing, it is the same, crappy PCB layout. Without OC the card is sucking over 7(!) Ampere alone over the mainboard slot (30% above specs). This is nothing to have it in a PC. We disussed it with the HIS distributor here and we found a few RMA cases with damaged mainboards.

    My GTR is running NOT stable above 1,4 GHz. All this OC'ers are showing only a few cherry-picked scenes but no long-term runs under heavy conditions in closed cases. If I monitor the clock rate, it is falling down permanently after the complete heating up.

    The Red Devil has a good PCB layout, combined with a very good cooler. But it is difficult to get Golden Samples on the free market.
  41. Was hoping to pick up a 470 on the cheap, but Newegg has not lowered the prices on the 470 and 480. Which they need to do. So I will wait until prices settle down.

    As far as the "new" cards go, a lot of the appeal for the 470 and 480 was lower power consumption while still performing very well for mainstream cards. meh, coin toss.
  42. Almost twice the power consumption of its competitor? No thanks. While I don't obsess over ever watt used by my system that's ridiculous.
  43. Tech_TTT said:


    Thats the Job of the R&D in the beta testing interval .. not after release, I am not buying this explanation at all.


    Right, because there's never been a real-world situation where a single company failed to detect 100% of the errors, mistakes & problems with their product before it was released to the public, there's never been an item released that suffered from glitches & issues while still within its warranty period, & there's never been a reason for the various consumer protection laws & regulations (i.e. "lemon laws") that have been passed over the decades.

    Oh, wait, that's right...

    [slaps the "Sarcasm" tag on his post]

    There, that's much better...
  44. JackNaylorPE said:
    And again, we are left with a 9 page review which tells us nothing about the performance of the card in a manner which 98% of us will use it .... tweaked to the best performance we can get using MSI Afterburner or alternate utility. This is akin to a review comparing off road performance of 3 cars, (one 4WD, one AWD and one 2WD) and testing them all in 2WD mode. Since the 2xx series. AMD had done a lot of reissuing older GPus with faster clocks which I don't have a real problem with, if it cam deliver a performance improvement. The 10xx series brought 50+% performance improvements and we are not seeing that here.

    My objection is the testing methodology does not take into account the major difference between the two camps. Whereas in recent generations, nVidia is hitting overclocks, depending upon how high up the price tiers, from upper teens to 32%. AMD has been stuck for the most part in single digits. Again here, it's just 4%. So while the information as to how they perform isn't exactly worthless, just like the vehicle comparison, when I go off roading, I will put the vehicle in 4 WD, And when using the card for gaming, CAD, whatever, I will be using it ONLY at it's maximum stable OC. If I don't see that in the article index or the graphs, I'm not going to read it. I am going to read this instead.

    https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/RX_580_Nitro_Plus/33.html


    That would be your individual preference, but I would dispute that "98%" of even the users here, let alone teh gaming population as a whole, actually OC their GPUs. Significant? Sure. Possible majority (majority following the dictionary-based definition of "higher than 50%", which could mean maybe 51% of the group)? Yeah, I'll agree with that. But 98% of the population? Really, really doubt it, as that's a high enough number that it would need some hard evidence to back it up.
  45. renz496 said:
    lucas_7_94 said:
    I remember the old XFX GTR was a good overclocker, but i agree with elbert, hope this is a good overclocker. Some models comes with 2x8pin yay.


    that is if you were lucky to get one that can OC very high. when Jay show his XFX GTR able to reach 1475mhz (one that was given to him directly by XFX for review) i see many people expecting any XFX GTR are guaranteed to at least OCed to 1450mhz mark. but it turns out there are people with the card can't even get 1400mhz stable even when voltage was crank to the max.

    btw Power Color Red Devil Golden Sample is one that able to get 1528mhz when OCed.

    http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/powercolor_radeon_red_devil_rx580_8gb_golden_sample/3.htm


    Very true. I remember with my XFX R9 280 it straight up said "Unlocked Voltage" on the box, all the reviews showed it being overclocked to a certain point, etc. Yet I go to OC it and the voltage is locked. I contact XFX and I get a pretty jerkey response about how overclocking voids the warranty and while it says unlocked on the box they can't guarantee that it will actually be unlocked unless I buy the "Black Edition", based on chip binning. PS none of the review cards were "Black Editions" i checked the model numbers. If this is the case then don't write it on the box!

    Anonymous said:
    JackNaylorPE said:
    And again, we are left with a 9 page review which tells us nothing about the performance of the card in a manner which 98% of us will use it .... tweaked to the best performance we can get using MSI Afterburner or alternate utility. This is akin to a review comparing off road performance of 3 cars, (one 4WD, one AWD and one 2WD) and testing them all in 2WD mode. Since the 2xx series. AMD had done a lot of reissuing older GPus with faster clocks which I don't have a real problem with, if it cam deliver a performance improvement. The 10xx series brought 50+% performance improvements and we are not seeing that here.

    My objection is the testing methodology does not take into account the major difference between the two camps. Whereas in recent generations, nVidia is hitting overclocks, depending upon how high up the price tiers, from upper teens to 32%. AMD has been stuck for the most part in single digits. Again here, it's just 4%. So while the information as to how they perform isn't exactly worthless, just like the vehicle comparison, when I go off roading, I will put the vehicle in 4 WD, And when using the card for gaming, CAD, whatever, I will be using it ONLY at it's maximum stable OC. If I don't see that in the article index or the graphs, I'm not going to read it. I am going to read this instead.

    https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/RX_580_Nitro_Plus/33.html


    That would be your individual preference, but I would dispute that "98%" of even the users here, let alone teh gaming population as a whole, actually OC their GPUs. Significant? Sure. Possible majority (majority following the dictionary-based definition of "higher than 50%", which could mean maybe 51% of the group)? Yeah, I'll agree with that. But 98% of the population? Really, really doubt it, as that's a high enough number that it would need some hard evidence to back it up.


    This x100. I want a card to work best out of the box, and not every card overclocks the same, some can't overclock at all. Not only that, at this point in life I don't have the time or care to jerk around with it, I want it to just work well. So only testing all cards on an overclock level that an average user might not be able to get at home is useless information.
  46. Tech_TTT said:
    madmatt30 said:
    Tech_TTT said:
    I dont get it , for sure AMD could release this card as the original RX 480 long ago , why did they allow Nvidia GTX 1060 to steal the RX 480 share ?

    Very Stupid Strategy ... I now alot of people who bought GTX 1060 and wished AMD were better Just to take advantage of the cheaper Freesync Monitors.

    AMD you lost millions of buyers !!! for nothing !!!

    .
    Better binning ,refinements on the power circuitry - something thats come with time after the initial production runs of the rx470/480.
    Fairly normal process for how amd work in all honesty.
    Has it lost them some custom to prospective buyers in the last 6 months since the rx series was released ?? Maybe a few - not even 1% of the buyers they'd have lost if theyd actually held the rx series release back until now though!!


    Thats the Job of the R&D in the beta testing interval .. not after release, I am not buying this explanation at all.

    Refinement is a continual process that is never truly finished. If AMD had waited until the RX 480 was perfect, it would have never been released. They refined it to a certain point they deemed good enough (obviously taking factors other than just performance into account, such as the competition and need to get the card to market) and then released the RX 480. Since then, they've have time to tweak it a bit more, and they wanted/needed to release something for the RX 500 series, so now we have the RX 580.

    Also, some of the refinements/improvements are from the semiconductor fabrication itself, which means it's probably not something that AMD had direct control over, but instead was up to Global Foundries.
  47. Math Geek said:
    no, you'll get the 480 numbers with a 480. the tested card was already oc'ed and you won't get any better manually.

    Page 3 said:
    AMD’s Radeon RX 580 [...] demonstrates an ~8% advantage over our overclocked Radeon RX 480

    I'm assuming that the "overclocked" 480 simply refers to the fact that the model used in this review comes with a (small) factory overclock, not that the card was manually tweaked to find max overclock?
  48. Tech_TTT said:
    madmatt30 said:
    Tech_TTT said:
    I dont get it , for sure AMD could release this card as the original RX 480 long ago , why did they allow Nvidia GTX 1060 to steal the RX 480 share ?

    Very Stupid Strategy ... I now alot of people who bought GTX 1060 and wished AMD were better Just to take advantage of the cheaper Freesync Monitors.

    AMD you lost millions of buyers !!! for nothing !!!

    .
    Better binning ,refinements on the power circuitry - something thats come with time after the initial production runs of the rx470/480.
    Fairly normal process for how amd work in all honesty.
    Has it lost them some custom to prospective buyers in the last 6 months since the rx series was released ?? Maybe a few - not even 1% of the buyers they'd have lost if theyd actually held the rx series release back until now though!!


    Thats the Job of the R&D in the beta testing interval .. not after release, I am not buying this explanation at all.


    Hardware is not software. If you put it like that, every card is a beta of the card after it. These changes were not possible then because they did not produce several million chips at that point to actually extract the data they needed to make the binning improvements they did. AMD, ATI, Intel, hell even Xbox and Playstation hardware all get revised mid lifecycle for efficiency based on new improvements in manufacturing and this is no different.
  49. jeffredo said:
    Almost twice the power consumption of its competitor? No thanks. While I don't obsess over ever watt used by my system that's ridiculous.


    I kind of have to agree. I was hoping the RX 500 series refresh might reduce power consumption a bit while offering similar performance, but it seems they went for increasing performance at the expense of power. Perhaps the 570 might fare better though. Of course, this is also a card with a relatively high OC, and things get very inefficient when you're overclocking to a chip's limits, so it's possible that cards with less-extreme overclocks will be more comparable in power use to the RX 480s.

    Supposedly Vega will offer improved efficiency, but how much remains to be seen. They won't likely be offering lower-end parts based on the new architecture within this price range for a while, but it seems conceivable that they could offer a card for under $300 to fill the gap between the RX 580 and their higher-end parts.
Ask a new question

Read More

Graphics Cards AMD