The AMD Radeon RX 590 Review, feat. XFX & PowerColor: Polaris Returns (Again)
by Nate Oh on November 15, 2018 9:00 AM ESTMeet The Cards: XFX & PowerColor
As there are no reference cards, for today's launch AMD sampled us the XFX Radeon RX 590 Fatboy. PowerColor also sampled us their RX 590 Red Devil. Both sport modest factory overclocks over the reference 1545MHz boost, and both feature dual BIOS with performance and quiet options. Broadly-speaking, if you're already familiar with PowerColor's Red Devil and XFX's GTS designs for Polaris, then you'll already know what these boards are like.
| Radeon RX 590 Series Cards | ||||||
| XFX RX 590 Fatboy | PowerColor RX 590 Red Devil | Radeon RX 590 (Reference) | Radeon RX 580 (Reference) |
|||
| Boost Clock | 1580MHz | 1576MHz | 1545MHz | 1340MHz | ||
| Memory Clock | 8Gbps | 8Gbps | 8Gbps | 8Gbps | ||
| VRAM | 8GB | 8GB | 8GB | 8GB | ||
| TBP | TBA | TBA | 225W | 185W | ||
| Length | 10.63" | 10" | N/A | N/A | ||
| Width | 2.5 Slot | 2.5 Slot | N/A | N/A | ||
| Cooler Type | Open Air | Open Air | N/A | N/A | ||
| Price | TBA | ~$299? | $279 | $229 | ||
Both of the cards are relatively typical for custom factory overclocked designs, featuring thick heatsinks, dual axial fans, 1x8pin + 1x6pin for power, and the extremely essential presence of LEDs. Right now we don't have a definitive answer on price, but expect them to be in the high $200s to low $300s range where heavily factory-overclocked GTX 1060 6GB cards reside. For the opening launch window, all the partner cards are marked at the $279 SEP.
XFX Radeon RX 590 Fatboy
From the outside, the XFX Radeon RX 590 Fatboy looks to be much of the same with its existing RX 500 and 400 series models. The card's amusing namesake comes from the new heatsink design that XFX is calling the 'Fatboy Unibody VRM Heatsink,' and the company claims the design brings 50% greater heatsink surface area over previous RX 400/500 series cards. So it would seem it's an iteration on the Unibody VRM Heatsink introduced by RX RS and GTR series cards.
As silly as the 'Fatboy' name may be, it seems to have done its marketing job by raising interest, critical or otherwise, and for a subdued Polaris refresh SKU, that extra differentiation can be helpful.
And in terms of 'fatness', the RX 590 Fatboy has the 2.5 slot Double Dissapation style cooler, leading up to a height of 2.09". Thick, but perhaps not as thick as the Red Devil, which stands at 2.24". In any case, the card is neatly clad in an aluminum backplate. Right next to the PCIe power connections is the BIOS dip switch, toggling between Performance and Quiet/Lower RPM.
The display output situation is fairly standard for both cards, with 3 DisplayPorts, 1 HDMI, and 1 DL-DVI-D port.
PowerColor Red Devil Radeon RX 590
For the Red Devil RX 590, the thermal solution doesn't appear unchanged from the RX 580 version, sharing the same dimensions, 4x8mm + 1x6mm heatpipes, 6+1 power phases, and DrMos. At 10" long but 2.24" (57mm) high, the Red Devil RX 590 is a particuarly squat but thick card - just 3mm away from the standard triple-slot width. So prospective buyers should keep that in mind for smaller form factors, occupied neighboring PCIe slots, or chassis airflow management.
While the card has the red Red Devil LED, one of the more easily overlooked features is a small dip switch to disable LEDs. Both BIOS and LED switches are labelled so on the pentagram-emblazoned 1.5mm metal backplate.
Both the XFX Fatboy and PowerColor Red Devil have zero dB fan functionality as well, turning off the fans under certain temperatures and lighter workloads.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
136 Comments
View All Comments
silverblue - Thursday, November 15, 2018 - link
I was talking about the process; I know the 2000 series has done well.I didn't even know TSMC had a 12nm process, but either it's not very well suited to this application or AMD have just clocked it far too highly, so it's not a successful product in that sense.
frenchy_2001 - Thursday, November 15, 2018 - link
Nvidia's Volta and Turing are fabbed on TSMC 12nm.So, it seems to work well for GPUs, but AMD's architecture is just not competitive in their perfs/watt.
silverblue - Thursday, November 15, 2018 - link
I completely forgot about them.It feels like Polaris is bottlenecked in some way, and increasing clock speeds is just a brute force way of alleviating the issue at the cost of significant power consumption. Perhaps the design is just broken to begin with.
Manch - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link
Memory bandwidth is the bottleneck for Polaris.deksman2 - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link
Power consumption - wise, its the process node from GLOFO that's limiting Polaris mainly from achieving high frequencies and low power consumption.GLOFO nodes are designed for low clocks and mobile parts... 12nmLP is designed for the same, and AMD used it for RX 590.
That's why power consumption explodes on high frequencies.
deksman2 - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link
Polaris is bottlenecked by the GLOFO 12nmLP process that's being used here.It's designed for low clocks and mobile parts.
There was NOTHING posted about AMD using TSCM 12nm node for Polaris refresh. TSMC 12nm was slated for Nvidia.
AMD gets to use TSMC 7nm high performance process node for Zen 2, Vega Instinct and Navi.
eek2121 - Saturday, November 17, 2018 - link
"Limited" is the word you want to use to describe Polaris. "Broken" would imply it doesn't work at all. Polaris was never meant to be a high end architecture. They have just been doing refreshes because they are likely reorganizing their GPU division and coming up with a new architecture to replace GCN. Doing something like that takes time, and AMD has to continue generating revenue. Also, the 590 is not a bad card at all, while I have a 1080ti in my machine, I would definitely consider a Polaris card in any new machine I build (for friends, family, etc.)deksman2 - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link
Incorrect on AMD's architecture not being competitive because AMD is still using GLOFO 12nm LP process for RX 590 which is designed for low clocks and mobile parts.TSMC 16nm and 12nm processes are designed for high performance and efficiency... those nodes are superior to GLOFO (that's why AMD's GPU's end up sucking up A LOT of power at high frequencies - its because the process node from GLOFO cannot take it, and partly because the compute performance on Polaris is a lot bigger than on GTX 1060).
porcupineLTD - Thursday, November 15, 2018 - link
I highly doubt that, any source?deksman2 - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link
Actually 'Cooe', you are incorrect.AMD is using 12nmLP process from GLOFO for RX 590.
You can read about that here:
https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd-rx-590-overclocking-p...
Furthermore, the power consumption on RX 590 should be a dead give-away, because this is exactly the same thing that happened for Ryzen+ too (not to mention the fact we had 0 indications that AMD would refresh Polaris on TSMC 12nm process. NV got access to 12nm TSMC process, not AMD... AMD got access to TSMC's 7nm high perf. process and they have reserved Zen 2, Vega Instinct and Navi for that).
They increased the frequencies on 12nmLP, but as a result they also saw an increase in power consumption.
Polaris is clocked WAY beyond the voltage comfort zone on GLOFO processes (which are designed for low clocks and mobile parts).
If they wanted a refresh, they should have just dropped the frequencies down to 580 levels and call it a more power efficient rebrand.
If AMD moved to TSMC 12nm for RX 590, power consumption on this GPU would actually be lower than on GTX 1060 with those frequencies.