First Thoughts

Bringing our first look at AMD’s new architecture to a close, it’s exciting to see the field shape up for the FinFET generation. After over four years since the last great node transition, we once again are making a very welcome jump to a new manufacturing process, bringing us AMD’s Polaris.

AMD learned a lot from the 28nm generation – and more often than not the hard way – and they have put those lessons to good use in Polaris. Polaris’s power efficiency has been greatly increased thanks to a combination of GlobalFoundries 14nm FinFET process and AMD’s own design choices, and as a result, compared to AMD’s last-generation parts, Polaris makes significant strides where it needs to. And this goes not just for energy efficiency, but overall performance/resource efficiency as well.

Because AMD is launching with a mainstream part first they don’t get to claim to be charting any new territory on absolute performance. But by being the first vendor to address the mainstream market with a FinFET-based GPU, AMD gets the honor of redefining the price, performance, and power expectations of this market. And the end result is better performance – sometimes remarkably so – for this high volume market.

Relative to last-generation mainstream cards like the GTX 960 or the Radeon R9 380, with the Radeon RX 480 we’re looking at performance gains anywhere between 45% and 70%, depending on the card, the games, and the memory configuration. As the mainstream market was last refreshed less than 18 months ago, the RX 480 generally isn’t enough to justify an upgrade. However if we extend the window out to cards 2+ years old to things like the Radeon R9 280 and GeForce GTX 760, then we have a generational update and then-some. AMD Pitcairn users (Radeon HD 7800, R9 270) should be especially pleased with the progress AMD has made from one mainstream GPU to the next.

Looking at the overall performance picture, averaged across all of our games, the RX 480 lands a couple of percent ahead of NVIDIA’s popular GTX 970, and similarly ahead of AMD’s own Radeon R9 390, which is consistent with our performance expectations based on AMD’s earlier hints. RX 480 can't touch GTX 1070, which is some 50% faster, but then it's 67% more expensive as well.

Given the 970/390 similarities, from a price perspective this means that 970/390 performance has come down by around $90 since these cards were launched, from $329 to $239 for the more powerful RX 480 8GB, or $199 when it comes to 4GB cards. In the case of the AMD card power consumption is also down immensely as well, in essence offering Hawaii-like performance at around half of the power. However against the GTX 970 power consumption is a bit more of a mixed bag – power consumption is closer than I would have expected under Crysis 3 –  and this is something to further address in our full review.

Finally, when it comes to the two different memory capacities of the RX 480, for the moment I’m leaning strongly towards the 8GB card. Though the $40 price increase represents a 20% price premium, history has shown that when mainstream cards launch at multiple capacities, the smaller capacity cards tend to struggle far sooner than their larger counterparts. In that respect the 8GB RX 480 is far more likely to remain useful a couple of years down the road, making it a better long-term investment.

Wrapping things up then, today’s launch of the Radeon RX 480 puts AMD in a good position. They have the mainstream market to themselves, and RX 480 is a strong showing for their new Polaris architecture. AMD will have to fend off NVIDIA at some point, but for now they can sit back and enjoy another successful launch.

Meanwhile we’ll be back in a few days with our full review of the RX 480, so be sure to stay tuned.

Power, Temperature, & Noise
Comments Locked

449 Comments

View All Comments

  • sonicmerlin - Friday, July 1, 2016 - link

    Job not well done. Doesn't come close to reaching AMD's advertised 2.8x performance/Watt improvements. The mass market $200 reference board is drawing power over PCIe outside of spec. If Nvidia comes out with an overclockable 1060 for $250 no one is going for the hot and dangerous 480 over the power sipping 1060. And regardless of what some people claim, even 3 GB of VRAM is plenty for 1080p.
  • mickulty - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link

    >50% performance jump over 380X, I'll take that.
  • sonicmerlin - Friday, July 1, 2016 - link

    Even with the benefit of 2 node shrinks?
  • Geranium - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link

    By your logic 45% to 70% performance improvement over previous generation is F-up? LOL.
  • Geranium - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link

    wrong reply. It was for first comment.
  • MATHEOS - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link

    Agree
  • dustwalker13 - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link

    a massive F-up?
    only if you compare a 200,- card to a 500,- or 700,- and expect the same performance. this card sits right in the sweet spot of performance and efficiency for a really nice price.
    granted it is not for me, but i am one of those crazy people who shell out 500,- or more for a graphics card - this puts me in the top roughly 5% of gamers i would suspect, the rest will buy cards below 300,- and there the 480 delivers extremely well.

    no it is not a high-end card, but then it never was supposed to be a 1080 killer.

    the interesting question now will be what the 1060 will deliver in terms of price/performance/efficiency.
  • Byte - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link

    Ouch AMD can't catch a break. Promised lower power consumption, but seems to be surpassing it, possibly blowing out the PCIE. Performance is about what expected, but won't turn heads. Looks like the GPUs are following CPUs succession in disappointment. Lets hope Vega will be a stunner and nVidia won't have a 1080Ti in time to rain on it like they did with Fury. We need to give AMD a surviving chance!
  • cocochanel - Thursday, June 30, 2016 - link

    With people like you, how could they get a break ?
  • Frenetic Pony - Wednesday, June 29, 2016 - link

    And yet they'll make bank off of it. Learned over the past few years that GPU quality and sales have little to do with each other. Nvidia made a ton of money off their last generation despite the fact that no desktop user should give much of a shit about TDP, but it worked anyway despite AMD beating them price for perforrmance in almost every category. Similarly this card sucks while Pascal is quite impressive, but this all the good will and PR in the world so will sell like hotcakes anyway.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now