AMD's Full Teaser Text

On June 01, 2016 at 10 a.m. China Standard Time (3 a.m. BST / 4 a.m. CEST) the Radeon Technologies Group will be announcing:

  • Radeon™ RX 480 set to drive premium VR experiences into the hands of millions of consumers; priced from just $199
  •  First Polaris architecture-based graphics processor to deliver VR capability common in $500 GPUs; expected to accelerate the size of the VR-ready install-base and dramatically increase the pace of VR ecosystem growth
  • RadeonTM RX 480 specifications including:
  AMD Radeon RX 480
TFLOPs (FMA) >5 TFLOPs
Compute Units 36
Memory Bandwidth 256GB/sec
Memory Clock 8Gbps GDDR5
Memory Bus Width 256-bit
VRAM 4GB/8GB
Typical Board Power 150W
VR Premium Yes
AMD FreeSync Yes
DisplayPort 1.3/1.4 HDR

Set to formally launch on June 29th, the Radeon™ RX 480 will deliver the world’s most affordable solution for premium PC VR experiences, including a model that is both HTC™ Vive Ready and Oculus™ Rift™ certified and delivering VR capability common in $500 GPUs.

In a notable market survey, price was a leading barrier to adoption of VR. The $199 SEP for select Radeon™ RX Series GPUs is an integral part of AMD’s strategy to dramatically accelerate VR adoption and unleash the VR software ecosystem. AMD expects that its aggressive pricing will jumpstart the growth of the addressable market for PC VR and accelerate the rate at which VR headsets drop in price:

  • More affordable VR-ready desktops and notebooks: AMD expects that affordable PC VR enabled by Polaris architecture-based graphics cards will drive a wide range of VR-ready desktops and notebooks, providing a catalyst for the expansion of the addressable market to an estimated 100 million consumers over the next 10 years.
  • Making VR accessible to consumers in retail: Thus far, retail has not been a viable channel for VR sales as average system costs exceeding $999 have precluded VR-ready PCs from seeing substantial shelf space. The Radeon™ RX Series graphics cards will enable OEMs to build ideally priced VR-ready desktops and notebooks well suited for the retail PC market.
  • Unleashing VR developers on a larger audience: Adoption of PC VR technologies by mainstream consumers is expected to spur further developer interest across the ecosystem, unleashing new VR applications in education, entertainment, and productivity as developers seek to capitalize on the growing popularity of the medium.
  • Reducing the cost of entry to VR: AMD expects that affordable PC VR enabled by Polaris architecture-based graphics cards will dramatically accelerate the pace of the VR ecosystem, driving greater consumer adoption, further developer interest, and increased production of HMDs, ultimately resulting in a lower cost of entry as prices throughout the VR ecosystem decrease over time.

The Radeon™ RX Series launch represents the first salvo in AMD’s new “Water Drop” strategy aimed at releasing new graphics architectures in high volume segments first to support continued market share growth for Radeon™ GPUs. In May 2016, Mercury Research reported that AMD gained 3.2% market share in discrete GPUs in Q1 2016. The Radeon™ RX Series will address a substantial opportunity in PC gaming: more than 13.8 million PC gamers who spend $100-300 to upgrade their graphics cards, and 84% of competitive and AAA PC gamers. With Polaris architecture-based Radeon™ RX Series graphics cards, AMD intends to redefine the gaming experience in its class, introducing dramatically improved performance and efficiency, support for compelling VR experiences, and incredible features never before possible at these prices.

Supporting Quotes:

“VR is the most eagerly anticipated development in immersive computing ever, and is the realization of AMD’s Cinema 2.0 vision that predicted the convergence of cinematic visuals and interactivity back in 2008,” said Raja Koduri, senior vice president and chief architect, Radeon Technologies Group, AMD. “As we look to fully connect and immerse humanity through VR, cost remains the daylight between VR being the purview of the wealthy, and universal access for everyone. The Radeon™ RX Series is the disruptive technology that adds rocket fuel to the VR inflection point, turning it into a technology with transformational relevance to consumers.”

“The Radeon™ RX series efficiency is driven by major architectural improvements and the industry’s first 14nm FinFET process technology for discrete GPUs, and could mark an important inflection point in the growth of virtual reality,” said Patrick Moorhead, principal analyst, Moor Insights & Strategy. “By lowering the cost of ownership and increasing the VR TAM, Radeon RX Series has the potential to propel VR-ready systems into retail in higher volumes, drive new levels of VR content investment, and even drive down the cost of VR headsets.”

“We congratulate AMD for bringing a premium VR ready GPU to market at a $199 price point,” said Dan O’Brien, vice president of virtual reality, HTC.  “This shows how partners like AMD survey the entire VR ecosystem to bring an innovative Radeon RX Series product to power high end VR systems like the HTC Vive, to the broadest range of consumers.”

AMD Teases Radeon RX 480
Comments Locked

377 Comments

View All Comments

  • Yojimbo - Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - link

    And if it's really slower than the 390X it's going to be going toe-to-toe with NVIDIA's largest GP106 card if NVIDIA clocks it at 1.6 GHz. But the TDP of the NVIDIA card is going to be less than 150W. NVIDIA would have to price that card at $220 or less, I think. It's not too far out of line with what their Pascal pricing has been so far. The GTX 780 was priced at $650 and the GTX 760 had half the cores (clocked higher) and was priced at $250. The GTX 980 was $550 and the GTX 960 had half the cores (clocked the same) and was priced at $200. The GTX 1080 is prices at $600. A GP106 card with half the cores clocked the same, priced at $220 seems about par for the course.
  • Eden-K121D - Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - link

    But the efficiency is still less than 1070
    GTX 1070 - 6.5 Tflops for 150W TDP with 8 pin connector
    RX 480 ~ 5.5 Tflops for 150W TDp with 6 pin connector(absolutely no overclocking headroom)
  • Yojimbo - Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - link

    Yeah. I do think the RX480 is far less efficient, but TDP is a poor substitute for performance per Watt efficiency, and I wouldn't directly compare real world Pascal performance to real world Polaris performance by theoretical peak performance. NVIDIA cards have been more efficient in terms of real world performance compared with peak theoretical performance. That pushes the efficiency argument further in the favor of NVIDIA, of course. GCN 4 may make more efficient use of its peak theoretical performance than previous generations of GCN, but I doubt its caught up to Pascal.
  • SaberKOG91 - Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - link

    If anything, 150W is an overestimate. Think of it this way: 75W Max for PCIe x16 slot. Another 75W for 6-pin or another 150W for 8-pin.

    For the RX480 the 6-pin just means that they expect it to draw more than 75W and that overclockers might want a little head room for the reference cards.

    For the 1070, it is probably running close to the 150W TDP at 100%, so NVIDIA opted to give another 75W to offset peak power throttling and to give headroom for factory overclocked cards (a la 980 Ti).

    But of course, that's just peak power draw. I expect that Polaris averages closer to 100W and peaks near 125W.
  • Valantar - Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - link

    Tom's Hardware's reviews have great power measurements (detailed graphs of card-only power draw over time), but unfortunately they don't have that for the 1070 yet. However, if the 1080 is anything to go by, the 1070 averages very close to TDP (the 1080 in their measurements averages at 173W, while peaking at around 300). The 8-pin connector is most likely for several reasons: a) most importantly: Pascal, like Maxwell, spikes at far higher power than its TDP, but only for a few miliseconds at a time, and 8-pin power connectors make up for ay any out-of-spec power spikes; b) to add a modicum of OC potential (although that drives the power spikes far higher, if the 1080 is anything to go by), and c) to underscore that it's a high end card - using a single 6-pin connector for their 2nd-from-the-top card would make many enthusiasts wary and skeptical of its performance potential.

    Considering that the Fury X shows pretty much the same behaviour as Nvidias architectures in terms of average draws and power spikes, I'd be surprised if the 480 was far below 150W.
  • rderubeis - Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - link

    but look at the price difference. If this 480 is even close to this 1070 its going to b amazing
  • Jimster480 - Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - link

    The truth is that you don't. If it weren't for scam modes like "Ultra" with fake "optimizations" like "hairworks" there would be no need for these pricy cards.
    Try checking around YT to see people who do these sort of independent investigations into Ultra settings in most games and you will notice that there are stupid things such as 8 million tessellated textures on rocks for no reason. Something that just kills GPU performance.
    I have found that I can still play most games on high @ 60fps in 1080p mid/high settings with my 2013 7870Ghz which I bought for $125 on sale back then.
  • Meteor2 - Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - link

    But it looks better.
  • Michael Bay - Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - link

    >hairworks

    They should have done it just for the AMD user butthurt factor alone.
  • Alexey291 - Wednesday, June 1, 2016 - link

    Shame it looks so awful though

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now