AMD Radeon RX 570, 580 Released

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/...80_Nitro_Plus/

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11278/...-rx-570-review

Some of my thoughts about it.

The 5xx series are much worse overall than the 4xx series, I expected a lot more from them. There is nothing better or refined about the 5xx series. Whoever wants performance without needing a super ultra power supply, better to go quick and buy the 4xx series before its too late.

If at least they had updated its memory to 9ghz, then it would be a reason to justify it but nothing was really done about it. They actually increased the clock on core and then increased the voltage and there we go rx 580.

Plus, now you need an extra 6 pin connector to feed the beast, the rx 580 looks now a rx 590 in power usage. Many of you were waiting for the rx 590, there you go, you got it from AMD.

So what are your thoughts about it?

Wow, i figured the "new" revision would have better power efficiency... Before judging though, I wouldn't mind seeing a the 580 clocked to 480 stock clocks and compare.

Geez did they not learn anything??

I think this explains why it's taking so long for Vega 10 to come out. AMD/ATi has another dud GPU release on their hands and they don't want to show it....sigh.

Guess the next thing to look forward to is $1500 top of the line GPU's from nvidia, I mean, cause who's going to stop them? lol

Obviously, this is just off the cuff speculation on my part, but if true, I'm really disappointed as I was hoping AMD could bring some competition with the 500 series (more so attributed to Vega 10 however).

People are coming in on this badly.
There are no reference 580 models.
Almost all of them are overclocked by default, some of them employ a second bios/settings to get power/noise lower.
All of them are overclocking better than the 480.
What was the worst thing about 480 launch ?
Cooling and the pcb/throttling. No more.
AMD made a mistake naming those 580 instead 485 like they initially INTENDED.But thats just a name.
Did nvidia release 1160 on volta ? No, so are they still fighting 1060 ? yea.
If power consumption UNDER LOAD is so important to you, just underclock it , it will have similar or lower power draw like 480.Or buy a version with lower clocks and/or quiet mode.
I mean, i have 290X, that pulls power. But still, i have good cooling on it, amd made some great improvements on the drivers through the years, its really silent like 80% of time, and even under hard game load doesnt get that much louder.This thing pulls much less W.
As for the vega state, we dont know, but amd isnt launching it because they cant buy enough HBM2 not because they dont want to sell them, even if they sux .
Theres also this improvement in memory states, look on the anandtech.

Quote:

---

Video Playback Power Testing (Power Draw at Wall)
Idle High Bitrate H.264 High Bitrate HEVC
Radeon RX 480 76W 125W 125W
Radeon RX 580 74W 90W 93W

---

I watch a lot more video than play games.

that power and clocks is looking about the same as my msi gaming x and it looks like they overclock the same. :shakes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EternityZX9

Geez did they not learn anything??

I think this explains why it's taking so long for Vega 10 to come out. AMD/ATi has another dud GPU release on their hands and they don't want to show it....sigh.

Guess the next thing to look forward to is $1500 top of the line GPU's from nvidia, I mean, cause who's going to stop them? lol

Obviously, this is just off the cuff speculation on my part, but if true, I'm really disappointed as I was hoping AMD could bring some competition with the 500 series (more so attributed to Vega 10 however).

---

no one is shipping bulk hmb2. since it uses samsung lithography we know it will be low clocked or have huge power requirements. but for vega overall we know no one is shipping hmb2 so that is why it did not come out. that also looks why the gp100 titan did not come out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanzabar

that power and clocks is looking about the same as my msi gaming x and it looks like they overclock the same. :shakes: ...

---

You get 1500mhz ? :eek:

Thats a msi gaming x 580
http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=a...=file&id=30561

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vario

You get 1500mhz ? :eek:

Thats a msi gaming x 580
http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=a...=file&id=30561

---

i can get like 1482 then i hit the bios limit for amps

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanzabar

no one is shipping bulk hmb2. since it uses samsung lithography we know it will be low clocked or have huge power requirements. but for vega overall we know no one is shipping hmb2 so that is why it did not come out. that also looks why the gp100 titan did not come out.

---

Yeah, I suppose that plays a major part in it. I still feel like they should have released Vega 10 before now...maybe with a different memory. Seriously feels like it's been eons since AMD has challenged nvidia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EternityZX9

Yeah, I suppose that plays a major part in it. I still feel like they should have released Vega 10 before now...maybe with a different memory. Seriously feels like it's been eons since AMD has challenged nvidia.

---

NV made the gp102 when they were SOL on a high end chip, i dont know enough about the amd platform to say if they could do that, but they have the shared memory interface now so running 2GB of HMB (same pin compatibility for the most part but lower clock) then linked a good chunk of gddr.

Start the countdown to Vega........................any rumors? This aint even gonna get Nvidia to drop prices is it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EternityZX9

Geez did they not learn anything??

I think this explains why it's taking so long for Vega 10 to come out. AMD/ATi has another dud GPU release on their hands and they don't want to show it....sigh.

Guess the next thing to look forward to is $1500 top of the line GPU's from nvidia, I mean, cause who's going to stop them? lol

Obviously, this is just off the cuff speculation on my part, but if true, I'm really disappointed as I was hoping AMD could bring some competition with the 500 series (more so attributed to Vega 10 however).

---

I've been pointing out for a while that AMD's silence on Vega speaks volumes. They couldn't shut up about how awesome Ryzen would be (and it was awesome for certain use cases) - but even that didn't quite live up to the hype. The fact that they literally just let Nvidia drop the 1080 Ti on them with no press release of their own points to Vega underperforming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanzabar

that power and clocks is looking about the same as my msi gaming x and it looks like they overclock the same. :shakes:

no one is shipping bulk hmb2. since it uses samsung lithography we know it will be low clocked or have huge power requirements. but for vega overall we know no one is shipping hmb2 so that is why it did not come out. that also looks why the gp100 titan did not come out.

---

I don't think Samsung's process is necessarily that bad. Seems to be fine for their exynos processors. The big difference imo is that Nvidia optimized Pascal to gain the most performance out of a small transistor footprint, so the power consumption is inherently going to be better than the equivalent GCN counterpart. Vega's architecture theoritically is supposed to fix a lot of GCN's inefficiencies (namely the fact that they have tons of brute compute power that doesn't translate well in most games).

If by failed to live up to the hype you mean outperformed their design targets and for prices lower than most were expecting, sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EternityZX9

Yeah, I suppose that plays a major part in it. I still feel like they should have released Vega 10 before now...maybe with a different memory. Seriously feels like it's been eons since AMD has challenged nvidia.

---

I don't think you can make a GPU compatible with GDDR5 and HBM2 :shrug:

I'm sure if they could release Vega they would. They gambled on HBM2 availability and lost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Particle

If by failed to live up to the hype you mean outperformed their design targets and for prices lower than most were expecting, sure.

---

No, I meant explicitly what I said. It was awesome in some use cases, and failed to live up to the hype in others. I'm not going to waste time arguing with a troll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AliG

No, I meant explicitly what I said. It was awesome in some use cases, and failed to live up to the hype in others. I'm not going to waste time arguing with a troll.

---

Your having built up unrealistic expectations beyond what AMD was claiming isn't anyone else's fault but your own, nor does it make me a troll to point that out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AliG

I don't think Samsung's process is necessarily that bad. Seems to be fine for their exynos processors. The big difference imo is that Nvidia optimized Pascal to gain the most performance out of a small transistor footprint, so the power consumption is inherently going to be better than the equivalent GCN counterpart. Vega's architecture theoritically is supposed to fix a lot of GCN's inefficiencies (namely the fact that they have tons of brute compute power that doesn't translate well in most games).

---

graphics cards dont actually run at the clock they tell you. nvidia runs all in shader clocks at 2x and amd runs some at 2x, some at 3x, and some at 4x. the samsung lithography looks like it wont let anything run over 4ghz without spiking the voltage. amd has poor clocking gpu and cpu using samsung and i think it will ever get fixed. it dose work well for low clocked things like the arm for phones or the low wattage zen parts, but getting clocks they dont seem to work for desktops.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StAndrew

I'm sure if they could release Vega they would. They gambled on HBM2 availability and lost.

---

That's exactly what I mean. Sad turn of events it seems.

This time AMD will have a very hard time because AMD released a very competitive card against AMD.

Everyone was unhappy with power throttling, and with cards that couldnt supply enough juice, and with overclocks.And with cooling.
AMD gives them exactly what people were :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:ing about. Power rises, as everyone should be aware it would.
People :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana: again.
Ive reread some rx480 launch and later reviews. They are overclocking up to 200mhz higher (from reference models) and 100mhz higher not reference models.Yes from time to time someone got a better rx480.
But on average ~1370mhz for 480.
And 580 does 1470 on average .
And for the same price as 480.Lower than the launch price of 480.
I mean , they could be A TAD lower in price to offset worse power consumption than the 1060. But theyre good cards, and mostly quiet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanzabar

graphics cards dont actually run at the clock they tell you. nvidia runs all in shader clocks at 2x and amd runs some at 2x, some at 3x, and some at 4x. the samsung lithography looks like it wont let anything run over 4ghz without spiking the voltage. amd has poor clocking gpu and cpu using samsung and i think it will ever get fixed. it dose work well for low clocked things like the arm for phones or the low wattage zen parts, but getting clocks they dont seem to work for desktops.

---

Yeah but even when AMD built their chips on the same TSMC process as Nvidia they still had worse power consumption the past few generations. I'll give you that Samsung's process is optimized for low wattage chips, but I also think GCN is an inherently inefficient process (the massive spike in DX12 performance proves just how much optimization it needs).