Mhmm well I never used an LG monitor before and I never used an Ultra wide monitor before either. Do you happen know what it does when you hook up a console to it? Like does it stretch it out or just put black bars on the side?

There are more real info and "leaks" about the RX 480 and RX 470:

Real info

AMD confirms Polaris 10 and Polaris 11 specifications / Radeon RX 470 Benchmarks

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/radeon-rx-470-benchmarks.html
also: http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Polaris-Hardware-261587/News/Spezifikationen-Polaris-10-11-Benchmarks-1198621/
and: http://videocardz.com/61064/amd-polaris-10-and-polaris-11-specifications

It is now confirmed that Polaris 10 has 36 Compute Units (2304 Stream Processors), while it’s slower brother features 16 CUs (1024 Stream Processors). Smaller Polaris chip is also confirmed to feature 128-bit memory bus.

AMD claims that Polaris architecture has 2.8 times the performance per Watt compared to older architecture (Radeon R9 270X to be specific).

AMD Radeon RX 480 8GB scores 6.3 points in Stream VR benchmark. As noted by ComputerBase, R9 390 has similar/indentical score, which explains why AMD used R9 380 in this comparison.

Let me clearly state that the benchmarks have been performed by AMD so we cannot verify quality settings. The scores have been derived from the footnotes of the PDF:

Polaris 10 2.8x performance per watt: Testing conducted by AMD Performance Labs as of May 10, 2016 on the AMD Radeon™ RX 470 (110w) and AMD Radeon™ R9 270X (180w),one test system comprising i7 5960X @ 3.0 GHz 16GB memory, AMD Radeon Software driver 16.20 and Windows 10. Using 3DMark Fire Strike preset 1080p the scores were 9090 and 5787 respectively. Using Ashes of the Singularity 1080P High, the scores were 46 fps and 28.1 fps respectively. Using Hitman 1080p High, the scores were 60 fpsand 27.6 fps respectively. Using Overwatch 1080p Max settings, the scores were 121 fps and 76 fps respectively. Using Performance/Board power, the resulting average across the 4 different titles was a perf per watt of 2.8X vs the Radeon R9 270X. Test results are not average and may vary.

Using those performance numbers, PCGamesHardware has made this table

AMD Radeon RX 480/470 PCB pictured up close

http://videocardz.com/61091/amd-radeon-rx-480470-pcb-pictured-up-close

As you might remember from official RX 480 renders the D009 board number is equipped with Polaris 10. In fact it appears that both RX 480 and RX 470 will share the same PCB. It has eight single-sided memory modules with up to 8GB of capacity. The circuit is powered through single 6-pin connector, and the power is split into 6+1 phases, which is actually more than GTX 1080 (5+1).

The reference board comes with four display outputs (three DisplayPort 1.3/1.4HDR and one HDMI 2.0).

"Leaked" info (take with a pinch of salt)

AMD RX 480 Rivals R9 Nano, GTX 980 – Runs At 1266Mhz, ~60c Degrees & Draws ~100W

http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-480-faster-than-nano-980/#ixzz4BftDPc2j

Let’s start off with pricing. AMD’s RX 480 4GB will sell for as low as $199 and the 8GB version for around $29-$39 more. Custom versions from AMD’s add-in-board partners with unique cooling solutions, over-engineered power delivery circuitry and custom PCBs will naturally sell for more than that.

We’re told that AMD’s partners are preparing a huge array of graphics card options. Including some serious “beast mode” 8GB cards that will sell for up to $299 and overclock to the moon.

Both the 4GB and 8GB versions are based on the exact same Polaris 10 XT GPU & both of them will give the R9 Nano and GTX 980 a real run for their money in terms of performance per dollar. The RX 480 cards feature a base clock speed of 1080Mhz and a boost clock speed of 1266Mhz out of the box. The cards will always run at the boost clock while gaming except in synthetic stress tests like Furmark.

The reference design is slightly over 9 inches long and features an Aluminum fin array heatsink.

Under typical gaming loads the RX 480 draws roughly 100 watts and cruises along at around 60 degrees Celsius/Centigrade in an open air bench. The reference design’s maximum power delivery through the 6-pin PCIe connector and the PCIe slot is 150W. Some custom variants will feature single 8-pin PCIe connectors while others will feature dual 6-pin PCIe power connectors. The “beast mode” AIB cards that we mentioned earlier will feature a single six pin and a single eight pin design.

Now let’s look at the performance numbers. Our source has provided us with performance figures for both the RX 480 4GB version and the RX 480 8GB version.  The benchmark in question is 3DMark Firestrike Ultra 1.1.

As I said before, take it with a pinch of salt.

I couldn't find any reviews/impressions about this monitor mentioning the aspect ratio, but from other Ultrawide LG monitors, I know hat some of them have the option to change the aspect ratio into a 16:9 one in the menu, with black bars on the side.

Mhmm I see! Thanks for your help!

After a bit more research, I hate to leave questions like this unfinished, I found that the LG 25UM58-P is the successor of the LG 25UM65-P, and that monitor had the option to set an aspect ratio of 16:9, as this video proves: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fP-eX16ig24

I would guess that the successor would carry over that useful feature.

Woo thanks a lot! Yea it certainly sounds like a good monitor then. Time to buy it next week!

Look at this:

ASUS and MSI accused of sending modified cards to the press

http://videocardz.com/61121/asus-and-msi-accused-of-sending-modified-cards-to-the-press

Source: http://www.hardware.fr/news/14693/gtx-10x0-asus-msi-bios-special-presse.html

According Damien Triolet, a known and respected GPU reviewer (who, as you might remember, helped to unravel the secrets in GTX 970 memory allocation problem), ASUS and MSI are sending cards with modified BIOSes to the press. Such software enables more power on review samples, which leads to increased frequencies and better results overall.

Damien reports that those ‘optimized’ BIOSes are a very common problem in GPU industry. Manufacturers often encourage GPU reviewers to enable special overclocking presets before attempting to review those cards. Luckily, with little success.

The alternative is to supply optimized BIOSes to the press, so such settings are enabled by default. This usually means a gain of few MHz. Something that you won’t get on retail sample.

For such reason Damien asks manufacturers to supply retail BIOSes for his tests. Obviously manufactures are not eager to supply such software.

The problem was discovered with MSI GTX 1080 GAMING X and ASUS GTX 1070 STRIX, so might want to take reviews of those cards with a grain of salt. Gigabyte on the other hand does not use such practices with its G1 GAMING Series.

UPDATE: Guys over at TechPowerUP have just confirmed that the problem is present with their MSI sample as well:

Great, now we do not only have to worry about biased reviews, but also about "fake" cards sent to reviewers :-/

There goes the laughing ex-[insert] guy meme. x.x

Steam Sale is coming:

It’s official: the @Steam_games sale starts 23rd June. https://t.co/6EdbWFScCW

— PayPal UK (@PayPalUK) June 16, 2016

It's about time! My annual Steam Share is on a historical low so far:

So they'll start in a week... Interesting.

Tho I don't think I'll get many games. Maybe a Final Fantasy and/or Trails in the Sky. If they had the monumental edition of Cities Skylines I'd get it, but alas, it's not there .

As a side note: Conina, that excel of yours is a bit alarming.