Benchmark Scores for Unannounced AMD Radeon RX 590 Posted Online

Ugh... I keep thinking that the so-called Polaris 30, or this RX 590, is nothing more than rumor.

Still, if it's not so much fairy dust, then it's probably perfect for and upgrade for my son. 2560x1080 FreeSync monitor with a 50Hz minimum on the FreeSync range.

If it can do high or max details reliably at that resolution at 50fps (not a typo) or above, it'd be perfect, as it seems like a 1070 or Vega 56 is definitely overkill for his needs.
 
I've seen RX 580's with the bios hacked performing better. Could be a bios hack of his RX 580 that allowed a gpu name change. Either way I would expect more with a node change given the 480 to 580 yielded about 6% gains at the same node with a smaller bump in speed.
 


If it's legit, it's not surprising. The clocks have been increased by about 15%, but memory throughput is still unchanged, so an 8-ish% performance increase is not entirely surprising.
 

alextheblue

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2001
3,078
106
20,970
2
They're not aiming for the crown. If they supplant the current Polaris models with a 12nm dieshrink, it's a minor bump for mid-tier cards. It's not meant to be anything else. Their next high-end card probably won't hit until after the professional market gets something new. That's where the money is, especially when initial production is limited.
 
If AMD releases a RX 590 with a sub-$300 price tag, AMD could possibly have a winner on its hands and potentially steal some of Nvidia's GTX 1060 market share.
The problem isn't stealing the GTX 1060's market share, but competing with Nvidia's next generation of hardware. The 1060 is well over two years old at this point, and is already long overdue for a successor, which will likely be coming within the next couple months or so. If the RX 590 only offers around 10% better performance than an RX 580, then chances are good that it's not going to outperform the competition's next sub-$300 graphics card. And while a process shrink of this existing architecture from 14 to 12nm may help efficiency slightly at a given performance level, Nvidia are also moving to 12nm, so no gains will be made against the competition there, unless Nvidia simply re-badges existing Pascal cards for their new mid-range lineup. Even if they simply called a 1070 a 2060 and tossed a $300 price tag on it, it would still likely offer better efficiency and significantly more performance than what is seen here though.

Had a 12nm refresh been launched this spring, around 2 years after the RX 480, it would have been a bit underwhelming, though it would have at least given AMD the mid-range performance crown for a little while. It's likely that they didn't go that route due to cryptocurrency mining severely messing up the market at the time though. By this point however, AMD has been talking about 7nm GPUs being on the Horizon, and there had been rumors that they might be available in early 2019, but with a refreshed collection of 12nm GPUs likely coming out this fall, it means that 7nm mid-range parts might be farther away, and probably not within the first half of 2019. The RX 480 was great when it launched for $200-$240 in the first half of 2016. Two and a half years later, a heavily-overclocked RX 480 is not going to be all that impressive though.
 

hannibal

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2004
2,360
58
19,890
14
Nah, this is just fine! If the price is ok as I supose, this is very good gpu. If the Nvidia 2060 gets the same price high as other 2xxx series this is very good compared to upcoming 2060.
It is about bang for the buck and these new nvidias Are not that!
The previous generation of Nvidia cards Wins hands down the new ones so I would not put too big weigth in the next generation on 1060 series. If this new AMD is faster than previous with the same price. It is good enough!
 


Those are big ifs, though, to expect from Nvidia.

The 1060 6GB is currently (in the US) generally more expensive than the RX 580 8GB.

If the 2060 is on the new architecture, I can see it easily being $50 or $100 more than the current 1060 6GB. If it's a rehash of existing architecture, I don't see it performing any better, and it's already more expensive than the AMD cards in the same class, while performing slightly less or equal, depending on the game.

I very highly doubt that Nvidia is going to relabel a 1070 as a 2060. If they do, the chance that they'd match or undercut current 1060 prices, or even dip much below 1070 prices, seems extraordinarily remote.

 

adamrcharles

Prominent
Oct 16, 2018
3
2
515
0
I think this may be a fairly clever strategic play. AMD know NVIDIA have a huge surplus of mid range GPUs like the 1060 and are holding release of a 2060 type card until that back log is cleared. If AMD can deliver in this segment it will hold back a future release or force NVIDIA to cut their losses.

Also, let's not forget that this mid market is where the actual money is, there is no volume in the high end. AMD can't effectively compete in the top end right now, so this is the most sensible place to play. Though I'd rather have seen a Vega 36 or whatever would have been equivalent.
 

average joe

Distinguished
Jan 24, 2009
337
0
18,790
4
I've been following the rumors or the 670 and 680 being a navi 30 refresh that was supposed to drop last weekend but there was no news. I had heard 15% performance bump. As it is, the new sweet spot for montors is 1440p and the 580 isn't quite enough for maxing out 1440p so a slight boost and the 8 gig of memory for textures for ~$300 is better for me than a $600 RTX2070 that cant play at 4k and is overkill at 1440p. I have 970 right now and the 4 gig of memory causes issues above 1080P so either I grab a 1070 ti 1080 before they disappear or wait for AMD.. Freesync 2 supports HDR which is maybe happening before ray tracing as hdr monitors are approaching mainstream pricing. A 1440 HDR Screen with freesync is also 200 dollars less than any gsync monitor at any resolution. So who cares really? Plus most of games I play use less GPU than ever. I play like path of exile or Civ 4 more than I play AAA titles that suck and need a year of patches to be worth installing. Plus even the 2080TI has to drop to 1080P to get 30 FPS with ray tracing turned on and that s in an optimized demo.
 


lol, I must have missed that episode. It's originally a Monty Python quote.
 

alextheblue

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2001
3,078
106
20,970
2

If they release it at all, I'd be surprised if it was 15%. Unless they bump memory clocks to match.
 

average joe

Distinguished
Jan 24, 2009
337
0
18,790
4
this is fake news. the 200mhz is about what an overclocked 580 can do so its not faster than anything but reference. there's a lot of boards with this clock for sale. its not quite enough to be a 1070 killer for 1440p. I was hoping for a free sync card that can do 1440p maybe hdr (freesync2). the 1070 is a ripoff since the 1080 is under 50 dollars more and the 1080 is overkill for 1440p and requires a gysync monitor for hdr I believe. so its 400 vega 56 and 200 dollar monitor or a 2070 for 600 and 600 for gsync monitor.
 

Erik_1

Reputable
Aug 28, 2015
4
0
4,510
0
I'm not familiar with TimeSpy, but in the entry quoted the CPU figures look off. If I read this correctly the CPU time improved going from a Ryzen 7 2700X to a 2700 ???

Can someone more familiar with this benchmark tell me what I'm missing?
 


I see what you are saying and that is odd.

The difference in this supposed RX 590 vs the 580 is less than the difference between an RX 570 and 580. That's disappointing.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS