AMD RX 400 series (Polaris) MegaThread! FAQ & Resources

[Sakkura]

Yeah all I'm disappointed by is that it doesn't beat the 750 Ti. Low-end cards are never going to be good value for money, especially not the ones that come without a power connector, since manufacturers know they can charge a premium for the best card in that category. That's why you hear about a sweet spot in the midrange.

 

[cdrkf]

Yeah all I'm disappointed by is that it doesn't beat the 750 Ti. Low-end cards are never going to be good value for money, especially not the ones that come without a power connector, since manufacturers know they can charge a premium for the best card in that category. That's why you hear about a sweet spot in the midrange.

It does beat the 750ti though, pretty consistently. The only game it doesn't in the posted benchmarks is Doom (which is odd)...

Also just a side note- the RX460 uses a *cut down* polaris 11 gpu (whereas Apple are confirmed as getting the full fat version, probably as well as lots of laptop OEMs...). I have a feeling that we'll get an RX 465 next year that uses the full gpu which should give it a nice boost.

 

[Sakkura]

It does beat the 750ti though, pretty consistently. The only game it doesn't in the posted benchmarks is Doom (which is odd)...

Also just a side note- the RX460 uses a *cut down* polaris 11 gpu (whereas Apple are confirmed as getting the full fat version, probably as well as lots of laptop OEMs...). I have a feeling that we'll get an RX 465 next year that uses the full gpu which should give it a nice boost.

The 750 Ti also beats it (barely) in Crysis 3. I'm not saying I was too lazy to scroll down and check the other graphs, but...

😉

 

[Rogue Leader]

But isn't AMD just giving the GPUs to the partners and then they decide on what version to make, anyway?

Also, that 8GB disguised as 4GB was the ultimate form of stupidity... They did it before, IIRC, but I never would have guessed they would've do it again. In any case, if they clock the 4GB past the 8GB speeds, I'm 100% sure the 4GB will be the better buy *period*. The RX480 seems to be a bit constrained in the VRAM speed department. Anyone has noticed anything in the reviews around that? I just want to know if I'm more crazy or just mildly.

Cheers!

Working in Corporate America maybe has changed me a bit but I need to say this comment is ridiculous. They did it for a marketing reason and in reality other than enthusiasts not many people are the wiser. They advertised EVERYWHERE that they would be selling a $200 4GB card on release day, imagine the uproar had they released it and no $200 price leader card available but heres an 8gb one for 50 bucks more. There was a supplier shortage, they put enough of these "4gb" cards out in the wild to satisfy folks that they did exist, and lucky for them it didn't turn into 2 media disasters (with the power issue being the main one).

It wasn't stupid at all, it was smart marketing to piss off as few customers as possible.

No, it is not a ridiculous remark. AMD is just adding insult to injury by doing that stupid conversion (however they play it). If you look at it from the cost perspective, that makes the OEMs *lose* projected money on each 4GB card sold. What kind of incentive is that for 3rd parties to actually *make* such a card? Is AMD paying for the "lost profit" on each sold?

Even from a marketing point of view, the best *deal* AMD currently has in its portfolio is nowhere to be found. And you have it two fold. Like I said, it leaves no incentive for 3rd parties to make such a card and second, yield issues might as well push the 470 instead of the 480 to the 200+ price point in the eyes of the 3rd parties.

AMD is just lucky nVidia is keeping the 1060 where it currently is. If they lower the price just a bit to $230 MSRP, then the 480 (and 470) lose their value proposition to consumers.

I am using all my willpower to *wait* for a Nitro+ card in 4GB flavor, because it still is the better deal, but if they price gouge it, I'll have to get a decent 1060 for ~$270 instead or bite the bullet with a Nitro+ 8GB for the same price, which is not the better purchase.

Cheers!

EDIT: For what it's worth, here is a bit of positive news around RX480s: http://techreport.com/news/30482/report-amd-shipping-100k-more-polaris-10-gpus-to-board-partners

No, it is ridiculous. The price difference for them to manufacture 4gb vs 8gb even taking the cost of the memory into account is likely a couple of bucks. Not enough to make a huge profit difference considering what their real gross profit margins are (probably about 35-40%). On top of that they released an EXTREMELY limited number. So the OEM's took a minimal loss on them. This was clearly an effort to have SOMETHING out there for release day, giving them time to get the memory chips they need into the production line.

Delaying it would completely torpedo every bit of marketing they had. Sometimes you need to take a hit to feed the greater good, and many times it works out to much less loss than you believe. If somehow nobody figured out it was the same memory, (and they didn't mess up the drivers) it would have been perfect, of course we all know that didn't happen. I know from experience working at a different consumer electronics brand, not having the cheaper version on release day would have been way way worse.

And I agree with you that the fact that there is nothing to show since release day however turned that effort into somewhat of a waste. For the same reason that having them was good. We are a microcosm here of enthusiasts. There are tons of folks out there who would never put the effort in to post here. Those people would be annoyed if the $200 RX 480 was a complete no show, and those same people are now annoyed it is sold out, and are likely considering something else. If there was a 3gb 1060 that was supposed to be out close to $200 that card would be selling to those folks like hotcakes.

 

[-Fran-]

No, it is ridiculous. The price difference for them to manufacture 4gb vs 8gb even taking the cost of the memory into account is likely a couple of bucks. Not enough to make a huge profit difference considering what their real gross profit margins are (probably about 35-40%). On top of that they released an EXTREMELY limited number. So the OEM's took a minimal loss on them. This was clearly an effort to have SOMETHING out there for release day, giving them time to get the memory chips they need into the production line.

Delaying it would completely torpedo every bit of marketing they had. Sometimes you need to take a hit to feed the greater good, and many times it works out to much less loss than you believe. If somehow nobody figured out it was the same memory, (and they didn't mess up the drivers) it would have been perfect, of course we all know that didn't happen. I know from experience working at a different consumer electronics brand, not having the cheaper version on release day would have been way way worse.

And I agree with you that the fact that there is nothing to show since release day however turned that effort into somewhat of a waste. For the same reason that having them was good. We are a microcosm here of enthusiasts. There are tons of folks out there who would never put the effort in to post here. Those people would be annoyed if the $200 RX 480 was a complete no show, and those same people are now annoyed it is sold out, and are likely considering something else. If there was a 3gb 1060 that was supposed to be out close to $200 that card would be selling to those folks like hotcakes.

I'm not talking about "cost", but "projected loss". It's different. AMD is making OEMs put a product in the market that forces them to have lower margin and that in turn, makes said product a no-show. Why would OEMs want to fill in a market gap in AMD's lineup because AMD makes them to? They made the stupid call to do it like this and the absence of 4GB versions is the result.

In particular, why not make the 4GB the release card and later on add an 8GB version like they have done in the past? At $200, with enough supply, they would be selling even more than they currently are. They could have clocked the 4GB VRAM at the same speed of the current 8GB and I'm sure it would be incredible. But no, they had to disguise the 8GB as a slower 4GB model. Hell, they could have just made it 4GB and let OEMs decide if they wanted to make an 8GB version.

The only reason why it would have been a non-stupid call, is because in bulk the VRAM chips were *cheaper* to make it an 8GB model flavor. That would be the only reason, in my eyes, it wouldn't have been an stupid call, but an "acceptable" one 😛

Cheers!

 

[Rogue Leader]

"Projected loss"? That is simply a made up metric that doesn't exist. Its all about gross sales, cost of sales, and gross profit. Gross sales is obvious, cost of sales is basically the manufacturing, materials, logistics, etc costs. Gross sales less cost of sales is gross profits, thats ALL they care about, trust me. They project Gross profits, they are ABSOLUTELY not projecting taking any sort of loss on selling an 8gb card as 4 GB. Especially one they did a minimal production run on.

One small run of cards by the manufacturers had a slightly more expensive set of memory chips in it, just to put enough on the market to clear the gap to when they could have the less expensive chips ready for the low cost leader. Heck AMD may well have rebated or incentivised the cost difference to the manufacturers where for them (XFX, Sapphire, etc) the cost difference becomes nothing. Happens all the time. The manufacturing of both cards is nearly identical, same number of chips, etc.

AMD had everything to lose by not showing up with a 4gb card on release day. Your solutions all end up in retooling the entire line due to a shortage of memory chips, its doesn't work like that at all. They needed a 4gb to meet the price, they needed an 8gb to meet the wants of those that feel that 8gb is required for a "high performance card" now. Had that 8gb version not existed, a whole large group of armchair quarterbacks would have discounted the whole line.

Again, believe what you want but as I said I've been working for many years on the inside of very similar companies, I see how this stuff works all the time. The only thing working against AMD now is they can't produce enough to satisfy demand, because despite the other the missteps (people figuring out about the memory, bad day 1 drivers) there is still a ton of people who want a $200 4GB RX 480 (and a $240 8gb RX 480).

 

[-Fran-]

I couldn't think of the exact term, but I do know there is one. I do think they are not losing money and I am not saying they are. It's a missed opportunity for the OEMs, since they can't put enough 4GB versions out there and justify it to their bottom line saying "yeah, we'll sell the lower margin 4GB because it makes perfect sense". I also didn't say they shouldn't have the 4GB; it has to exist to fill in a gap given the price structure they set up. Although, as it stands, it might as well never existed just to justify the "hey, 200 and up!" marketing slogan.

In any case, my point still stands: it's stupid because they had a non-stupid way of doing it. If the industry as a whole does it, then the whole industry is stupid then, haha.

Cheers!

 

[Sakkura]

Opportunity cost? That's definitely a thing.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

RX 460 benchmarks seem to have been leaked. If these are true, it's a huge disappointment (and I think I know why). It seems to perform underneath a 750Ti and R7 370. My thinking is they must have cut down on the chip a lot to put power below 75W. Is priced right, it can still be competitive. It definitely should not be priced above $100; that is even too high, as a 750Ti or R7 370 may be found for around $100. It seems like it will belong in the $90 price bracket. But whatever they price it at, that leaves a huge gap in the $90-$170 arena.

 

[Rogue Leader]

I couldn't think of the exact term, but I do know there is one. I do think they are not losing money and I am not saying they are. It's a missed opportunity for the OEMs, since they can't put enough 4GB versions out there and justify it to their bottom line saying "yeah, we'll sell the lower margin 4GB because it makes perfect sense". I also didn't say they shouldn't have the 4GB; it has to exist to fill in a gap given the price structure they set up. Although, as it stands, it might as well never existed just to justify the "hey, 200 and up!" marketing slogan.

In any case, my point still stands: it's stupid because they had a non-stupid way of doing it. If the industry as a whole does it, then the whole industry is stupid then, haha.

Cheers!

I'll agree in saying it this way. It wouldn't be a stupid idea if they actually had a consistent level of product to deliver to make a smooth transition and meet the demand at all levels. However we both can agree what they did, didn't help anything because supply is nowhere near demand, negating any benefit having some low price leaders available on day 1.

 

[Ags1]

At the moment the GTX1060 and RX480 are selling at effectively the same price as the GTX970 and R9 390 (i.e. their price as of three months ago) , so purchasing them simply makes no sense. Instead of waiting for this new generation I could have got the same performance for 320-350 euros last year. So AMD and NVidia have just wasted my time.

I will not be buying anything until I see the RX480 8GB back at 260 euros.

 

[-Fran-]

Opportunity cost? That's definitely a thing.

Ah, that's the one. "Cost of opportunity". I don't really know if it's a valid "accounting" term, but at least in concept it does exist.

I'll agree in saying it this way. It wouldn't be a stupid idea if they actually had a consistent level of product to deliver to make a smooth transition and meet the demand at all levels. However we both can agree what they did, didn't help anything because supply is nowhere near demand, negating any benefit having some low price leaders available on day 1.

Yes, since they wouldn't be having supplies issues if they just went with 1 model at launch. Or at least, the version *we all want* would be in actual supply focusing all the efforts into a single card. I know there are unsold RX480 8GB in some places, because it doesn't make sense to buy it when the 4GB is the better purchase and the 1060 right next to it (notice next and not above).

A very rocky start indeed, but at least there is hope, since people *do want* the RX480 anyway. I wonder if the same will happen with the RX470 though. In my eyes, it's not a good purchase and please prove me wrong with some counter examples.

In regards the RX460, we'll have to wait for official benchmarks and see the methodology for them. I am very keen on giving props to reviewers who actually include games where the card was aimed at. I bet we'll find some surprises there, specially when including other cards in the price range.

Cheers!

 

[Rogue Leader]

I meant really that not only was the 4gb basically scarce but overall even the 8gb seems to be hard to come by. What good is a launch like that if a month later you STILL can't get the product.

As an AMD fan (and at one point investor) the fact that every time they release something they seem to screw it up in some way or another makes me wonder how much longer this company will last.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

One RX 460 on Newegg, sold out, priced at $170! Oh come on.

 

[AndrewJacksonZA]

One RX 460 on Newegg, sold out, priced at $170! Oh come on.

You have *GOT* to be kidding! Lol!
.
.
.

Although, with so much price gouging that has been happening with this gen so far... :-/

 

[turkey3_scratch]

I have trouble figuring out where it lands in terms of performance, so the conclusion of the Toms review stated in DX11 slightly below or at an R7 270, and in DX12 between a 270 and 270x. For the $110 these are supposed to go for, that's not a good deal. A 750Ti can be had for $95 on Newegg and is way more efficient. An R7 370 can get quite cheap. So if it was actually sold at $110 it still is only a very tiny increase in price/performance over the R7 370.

 

[AndrewJacksonZA]

I have trouble figuring out where it lands in terms of performance... So if it was actually sold at $110 it still is only a very tiny increase in price/performance over the R7 370.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

I wish there weren't so many power limitations on these RX cards. It doesn't seem to be too much of a problem in gaming but you can tell Furmark is an issue. Temps clearly aren't an issue. If the power envelope is opened more performance can be gained.

 

[AndrewJacksonZA]

t doesn't seem to be too much of a problem in gaming

That pretty much sums it up. So what about Furmark? It's the games that matter. What would you say had this card only given 2 FPS @ 240x480 in Furmark but the results in the games were exactly the same? As others have said before, "Who runs benchmarks the whole day?"

 

[turkey3_scratch]

Yeah but it limits overclocking is the problem.

 

[TehPenguin]

Yeah but it limits overclocking is the problem.

Overclocking low end cards seems pointless to me. Even if you gain 10% performance. What difference would it make if your game runs at 30 vs 33 fps? Really don't think this matters for the RX460.

Also: Toms review shows that the 460 beats the 750ti. It's faster by 20-30%, depending on the game.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

Tempting http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150780&cm_re=rx_460_xfx-_-14-150-780-_-Product

 

[renz496]

Yeah but it limits overclocking is the problem.

Overclocking low end cards seems pointless to me. Even if you gain 10% performance. What difference would it make if your game runs at 30 vs 33 fps? Really don't think this matters for the RX460.

Also: Toms review shows that the 460 beats the 750ti. It's faster by 20-30%, depending on the game.

but the real competition for RX460 is GTX950 not 750ti. even AMD compares the card to GTX950 back in january. and that probably one of the mistake AMD did. if they did not spill the info about polaris to create hype back in january RX460 will be the fastest sub 75w card right now.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

I bought this http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150780 not too badly priced. Same price/performance as the 750Ti (since the 750Ti can be had cheaper). The GTX 950 has quite better price/performance but money saved is still money saved. That was my thinking at least. Something better than a 750Ti, albeit a little, for a little more money, and then not as expensive as a GTX 950. I needed an ITX card in particular, so that's why I got this one, and I've always been fond of the appearance of XFX cards.

 

[Math Geek]

seems to me that the 460 replaces the 750ti as the "power saving budget card" and that's about it. this assumes the price is actually as low as amd says it should be (remains to be seen since no other releases are at MSRP). true the 750ti is dropping in price but it would have to get to $75 or so to be viable to me.

other than that, for now, there are better performing cards for a little bit more money if you got the case space and psu to run it.