Totally Agree, the fact AMD have crammed full fat Polaris in a Xbox APU makes the 580 incremental performance upgrade DOA!

They should have called it a 485 in fairness, small uplift for 20% TDP increase is fairly pointless, but if you're buying a new system/card I appreciate the need to differentiate the refined product from the original.

Oops, you're quite right - I was mistakenly comparing the 1060 with the aftermarket 480, not the 580! :neutral_face: That's what I get for commenting without coffee!

Try again, it appears you can't read a simple bar chart.

Huh, you make a good point. The 6GB 1060 gives an extra 3.5FPS over the 580, and is £5 cheaper. Yes, definitely - the 6GB 1060 does make a lot more sense than the 580 at these prices.

Edit: that's no 580... that's a 480!

It should be cheaper for AMD to make, and we consumers get a tiny speed bump. Its release isn't questionable - it's just that it should be called the 485, really. :wink: (And before we get the usual fanboy comments from certain people here who think everything is about brand - yes, the 3GB and 6GB 1060s should also have been named more appropriately - for instance, calling the 6GB variant the 1060 Ti.)

As for it being the same price... we've had several 8GB 480s for £180 and even cheaper over the past few months - and they were bundled with DOOM. Paying an extra 25% for this card when it's only a few percent faster...? I can only imagine the people who voted "Hot" had not yet read the reviews and didn't understand what to expect from this refresh.

AMD's decision to go without a reference card is an interesting one, almost like it's a dig at Nvidia who released their last two cards as reference designs only for a months before the other manufacturers were even allowed to sell their own card

That was my point.

Comparing the two well regarded AIB cards gives an indication of performance, versus the reference 480 with which you can make adjustments for driver maturation.

Yes, but TPU uses a reference version for their RX 480 results. And the reference RX480 couldn't even sustain it's speed due to poor cooling. To me fair to W1zzard, most of the TPU results are for stock reference models which always makes almost all third-party cards look very good in comparison. Have to say I prefer the way PCGH.de or purecp.pl do their reviews where they list the actual clock speeds in their results (or at least base clocks but boost during a run would make their results almost impossible to read).

Anyway, RX 580 seems to clock a bit better than RX 480 did but looking at the power it needs for that, you can tell that it's running way outside the process's sweet spot in terms of perf/watt. If GF's (and by implication Samsung's) 14nm FF+ LPP is a lot worse than TSMC's 16nm FF+ then it ought to be cheaper per waffer (and if not what's the point?).

Therefore, AMD really should have designed Polaris etc to run wider and slower. Sure they chip would have even worse perf/area metrics than it already has versus GP107 but at least it would be competitive in terms of power. They make a workstation Radeon Pro (used to be called FireGL/FirePro) which is based on Polaris 10 and only uses 75W mainyl due to down clocking.

The difference between AIB 480/580 is 5fps in this instance, not hugely significant but welcome.


There are no reference 580's and there won't be any.

I wish AMD had released some 3GB and 6GB models, that would have, maybe lock a few shaders in the process.

mmmmm vega one day

When did this come out? I read an article earlier that said it wouldn't be out till may

Eh I guess so, only time will tell I guess.

Apparently next month AMD will be releasing their long-awaited French revision for 'How to learn French'.

It's the same architecture though so optimisations would be beneficial for both

It's an overclocked RX 480. That's it.

Buy a 480 for the £180 they will no doubt go around for and stick some hertz on it. Same thing.

I'm struggling to see why the logic for choosing to name these the 5xx series. Marginal gains in performance, and very, very little in terms of efficiency, which these rebrands are often about.

On the plus side; I have a Nitro + 480, and the fans kick in very rarely, even when gaming.

Showing up as £239.99 for me

Bare in mind this is the 580 with its first set of drivers compared to a 480 with a year of support. Still not brilliant but a point worth noting.

Lmao. According to every Benchmark.

Linustechtips, Digital Foundry, Tech Deals....

The MSI 580 is only around 2-5% faster than a reference 480.

I really don't see much of a point in this card with improvements being so small, AMD just trying to desperately milk Polaris, but each to their own. At least it's the same price.

Ask the people over at OverclockersUK, I just cut and paste the link and thread title...

What makes it 'official'? Looks like a normal forum post by an anonymous nobody.

Yup that is a factory overclocked Sapphire Nitro+ card, wait for the RX 470/480 price cuts, expect price cuts for the GTX 1060 too. :wink:

Some places aren't even getting 5-10% on average:


Note that the benchmark pic in the deal is comparing a factory-overclocked 580 with a stock 480. :wink:

Haha I really don't think it's that bad
But I have the Sapphire 480 Nitro+ OC

Showing as £239.99 for me

...and wow that's an ugly backplate :smile:

expire plz

Prices of the 480 should fall as they're phased out, i'd wait for a decent price drop on a decent 480 and just OC it.

Most of the reviews published today suggest a 5-10% improvement in most games, with a small percentage getting slightly better results, but on the whole the performance gains are 5-10%, this isn't a new architecture, the main difference is the GPU being made on a more efficient fabrication process, which allows the GPU to be clocked higher, but beyond that it's the same GPU found in the RX 480.

AMD defence force....Assemble!

No free games :neutral_face:

I thought the NDA expired at 4pm!

Only about 5-10% quicker than a 480.

Nice for the 8gb refresh.