The benchmarks are at the link . I don't like posting entire articles as I want you to check it out and give them some visits/revenue.

But if you want them:

As for the temps, without knowing how long was the test and what kind of airflow the cards had, it's hard to take conclusions.

And, as shikamaru said, it's not much different than Nvidia's card. For example, look at [H]ardOCP's review of the GTX 1080 Founders Edition:

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/05/17/nvidia_geforce_gtx_1080_founders_edition_review/5#.V21tE6J9Wds

This is the temp of the card over time while playing Battlefield 4

It reaches 83ªC, and in the article they note that the fan never went above 55% (the RX 480 Xfire setup had the fan speed at 49 and 44%).

And also look at the boost speed of the card during that time

That's more worrying that the temp, as the cooler isn't able to cope with the heat at the default setting of 55% fan, and that limits the card performance.

I just read that article.

That's a fine example of how to make a click bait article, because all of it revolves around this small part:

You simply can't extrapolate what happens in one store to a whole country... because VGC numbers come from more than one store per country, right?

I read on a forum, and posted by a journalist, that AMD would have 8,000 cards at launch in the U.S., all reference designs.

I have no idea if it's true or not, and I don't know if eight thousand cards are a lot or not, but I though it was worth sharing it.

And the RX 470 seems to be even better value than the 480.

My gawd AMD are practically giveing these things away for nothing (compaired to compeititons prices).
A 5 Teraflop 470 4gb card for 149$

Holy f***ing hell..... thats insane.

Thanks, I did my research and sure did have a lot of fun building it

Your case is nice, NZXT is a very good company, so I'm sure it's good and of high quality. For me the colour would be too flashy and I love my 140 mm fans, but they aren't really necessary, just make better airflow and run quieter. My case is a miditower as well, but it also feels huge and weights 11 kg! Without anything in it, it's 11 kg for the case alone! But it's very sturdy, I've seen photos of people standing on it I think our cases are of similar size. I also really like that I could take out the parts where you put HDDs and optical drive (in the front), so the case is EMPTY and has insane airflow, since there's nothing between the fans and my components to block the air.

Psst! FreeSync = AMD, G-Sync = nVidia

This Acer looks like a great monitor and I have no doubt you're gonna love it. It's like the one I've got, but bigger (29" vs 34") and with higher resolution - the rest is the same, 75Hz IPS and FreeSync. The main difference is the price. My LG (LG 29UM68-P) was 4 times cheaper I think that when you're buying 34", you need at least 1440p, while 29" is fine with 1080p. The pixels per inch is fine in these instances, I wouldn't recommend 34" with 1080p. I guess it's your call. We both noticed that the new king comes every other day and pushes the technology slightly forward. I've decided that if I am to spend 1000 Euro or more on a monitor, it's going to stay with me for a longer while So I plan to spend that money, when the technology matures and reaches that magical 144Hz (I want to see why people love it so much). The 5120x2160p resolution is because my girlfriend has a 4K monitor and I like that fidelity and I think that by the time I decide to upgrade, that resolution will already be here. Nothing against the 3440x1440p Obviously, running games at that resolution at 144Hz will require a future generation of cards, but hey, that's why I've decided to futureproof the rest of my PC and go with this monitor and this GPU for now I'll upgrade the GPU and monitor together in, let's say, 2 years and I'll be fine again for quite some time.

I agree, if you want to go with 3440x1440p, I'd personally wait for Vega, Polaris probably won't cut it. Judging from what we know about Polaris, I think Vega will be perfect for that Acer, I would expect it to allow you to play 3440x1440p @ ultra settings at around 60-75 fps. And it would be awesome.

Ultrawide is the new standard for me. I work in MS Office and being able to have 3 full documents opened next to each other is a blessing for productivity! I can even fit 4 if I want to and on that Acer, you'll be able to do even more. Some games (and most youtube videos, though it's changing as well) don't fully support this resolution, but most do and even if they don't, I don't mind the black bars on the sides at all. For me there's no turning back. I was hesitating between this 21:9 75Hz IPS and a 16:9 144Hz TN monitor, and I'm happy I went with the first option.

All in all, there's no doubt in my mind, that you won't regret having that monitor. It looks like a great piece of tech and if you pair it with a Vega, you're gonna have a blast for years!

Oops. Freesync it is.

Speaking of which, do you notice any difference between Freesync and v-sync? I know the technical difference, but I haven't figured out the actual effect. Will the framerate in a game somehow look smoother in front of you, or is it just a way to save frames in the framebuffer to allow a higher effective framerate or something?

Yeah, €1000 for a monitor is a lot of money and about three times as much as I've spent in the past. That's why I'm not sure about the curved Acer 3440x1440 monitor yet. I agree about the pixels per inch and what should be optimal.

I've never had an IPS panel and never seen one that I knew was IPS so that's going to be exciting. And like you I'm puzzled by 144Hz, will it really feel as amazing as they say? What do you think of IPS? Any noticeble difference compared with TN and VA?

And the question of betting on ultrawide or not, I think you've convinced me now.  Damn, I'm excited now.

How long do you think 'til you upgrade your monitor? And the rest of PC hardware too.

My thumb rule in theory is every three years for the PC build including OS (the whole package excluding monitor), every two years for GPU and every 4 years for monitor, but since the first two don't sync with each other, it's different every time - sometimes a CPU lasts two GPU cycles, sometimes only one for practical reasons.

Freesync & G-sync stop split frames from happending, which can still happend with vsync on.

Suppoedly its without extra latency or input lag. Just buttery smooth frames.

€1000 for a monitor... thats alot, with that amount your probably getting one hellva good monitor.

I heard people say that with freesync/g-sync, your 30fps lock game *feels* better than most do without at 60 fps.

Sony & microsoft need to get this into consoles, and TV manufactures need to add this feature to future TVs (along with HDR).

Not sure if I want to wait for Vega or Navi or just get four Radeon 480's.

I can't say about the difference between FreeSync and V-Sync, cause I need to get that RX 480 first For it to work you need an AMD GPU and a FreeSync monitor, I'm using the Intel iGPU, so no FreeSync for me till I buy the card. But from what I've heard it's like JRPGfan says, there are no chopped frames and the gameplay seems more fluid than it is. You don't notice the drops as much, as long as you stay within the FreeSync range.

I'm no expert when it comes to panels, but for an ultrawide you can't use TN, cause the colours would be distorted on the sides. You need IPS or VA. I doubt I'd notice any difference really, I'm not editing graphics. IPS is said to be slightly superior, but I honestly doubt VA would make a difference for anyone who isn't into making graphics, but then again - such a person cannot use a curved monitor either.  I love the fact that it doesn't matter what angle you're looking at it, the colours stay perfect. Makes watching movies with my girlfriend much easier, since nobody loses the "sweetspot", which is a problem with TNs. And the colours look great

I really enjoy the extra estate I get from such a wide screen. I think at this point you've seen Linus' reviews of ultrawide screens? In one he put it simple - ever since he got a 34" 1440p ultrawide, he no longer cares about 4K 16:9 monitors. Also, if you want to make the choice more suited to you - think about what you use the computer for. If you play competitive CS:GO or other FPS games or Blizzard games, you may prefer a 16:9 144Hz (Blizz doesn't support this aspect ratio and people say 144Hz helps at competitive FPS). But if you do office work, watch movies and play mainly RPGs, TPP games, LOL, racing games, etc. you'll be much better off with ultrawide.

I don't know really when I'm going to upgrade, I have no experience here, since in the past I'd just buy a new laptop. For this PC I've decided to futureproof the power supply, motherboard, CPU (I don't think it'll be obsolete anytime soon, all rumours say Zen won't even be as fast as it is and Kaby Lake will only be a minor update) and I have the capability to go up to 32GB of RAM at any time. As for the monitor I've set the requirements I want my future monitor to meet (resolution, size, refresh rate, FreeSync, HDR probably) and I'm going to upgrade to it in 2-3 years, when they drop to around 600 Euro, or possibly even lower by that time. I'm also going to upgrade the GPU simultanously, since the one I buy this year won't allow me to benefit from the added capabilities of that monitor. Much higher resolution and refresh rate will call for a much better GPU, but then again - there's no point buying a GTX 1080 now, since a better card will be cheaper in the future and my current monitor won't show me the extra fps now either way I've basically decided that I'm going to futureproof everything outside of the GPU, since it's easiest to upgrade. And since the monitor tech is volatile, it improves every month, I've decided there's no point in spending too much cash now, since the same money will give me a better monitor in half a year. I've went with a monitor that satisfies my needs now and decided to get a GPU that maxes out that monitor's capabilities. As a result the GPU+monitor combo will cost me around 550 Euro (much less than that Acer alone ) and I'll be enjoying 2560x1080p@ultra@75Hz, which won't bother me at all these upcoming two years. I kinda think it's better value to spend more on stuff that doesn't get old and outdated fast, like the CPUs currently.

But that was my train of thought, you may do a different thing I've decided 550 Euro combined for a monitor and GPU is better value than 1400-1500 Euro it takes to have a slightly bigger screen, higher resolution and enough juice in the GPU to render the pixels. Though there's no questioning, that the second solution gives a better experience But there's no doubt such a setup will be much cheaper and better in 2 years.

@Permalite - I guess you won't have trouble selling them later on, though I doubt it makes much sense to buy 4 cards. Nobody is supporting SLI for more than 2 cards.

BTW. I've heard a rumour AMD has 25 times as many RX 480 cards, than nVidia had 1080s. That'll do wonder for your marketshare Shows how smart they were releasing a smaller GPU first, when the process still isn't optimal and yields are much better this way. AMD is owning this gen so far!

It doesn't sound like a lot (at launch day), but that's still a lot more than what Nvidia had of their latest cards.

We'll see how are the shortages, but with the folks that will buy them for their mining farms, there could be some.

Do you still have your eyefinity setup?