AMD RADEON RX 460 NOW IN STOCK FROM £99.95 & OcUK VIDEO REVIEW !!

Tommy_Here · 8 Aug 2016 at 17:41

Tommy_Here said:
you stop when eventually you get considerably less increase in performance for that extra £30-£40 but for an extra £50 ish for a good 460 to a good 470 you're getting around double the performance give or take. the 460 isn't really great bang for buck.

although I see what you mean, a budget is a budget yes, but unless you A, seriously can't afford another £50 or so give or take or B, just plainly stupid you'd go for the card that gets you around double the performance for not double the price, surely the right thing to do would be to save up that little extra?

Armageus · 8 Aug 2016 at 17:42

FoxEye said:
As analogies go it's not perfect, but you get the idea. The 460 isn't a great card for £100-£130. It's pretty much going to disappoint anyone who buys it for 1080p gaming.

It's a poor analogy - as a 460 will still allow you to play games even if you have to lower a few details.

Just because it doesn't offer much of a performance increase vs say a 7850 doesn't make it terrible.

It's not aimed at users of existing low-mid cards, but for a new low end pc it will be hard to beat.

Obviously if you have the money you are better off with a 470, but on a tight budget this is a decent option.

Tommy_Here · 8 Aug 2016 at 17:43

RavenXXX2 said:
We are talking £30 more for double the performance, this aint the weekly shopping, it's the difference between console performance or PC master race performance at 1080p.

exactly this, you'd have to be pretty dam very tight on your budget if you go with 460 over 470

tommybhoy · 8 Aug 2016 at 17:56

RavenXXX2 said:
We are talking £30 more for double the performance, this aint the weekly shopping, it's the difference between console performance or PC master race performance at 1080p.

Tommy_Here said:
exactly this, you'd have to be pretty dam very tight on your budget if you go with 460 over 470

Believe it or not, people have other things to spend money on and £100 could be them pushing out the boat in the first place-welcome to the real world outside your bubbles.

I know what you are both saying and agree, however, no matter what you get for an extra £5/£10/£30/£50 and so on, most will not spend a penny over a given budget for reasons of their own, that's exactly why Nv/AMD launch these (crap in our eyes)cards.

Telecaster · 8 Aug 2016 at 17:58

If you can't find the extra £30 for a 470 then you should be asking yourself if you should be spending it on a PC/GPU in the first place.

Armageus · 8 Aug 2016 at 18:01

Telecaster said:
If you can't find the extra £30 for a 470 then you should be asking yourself if you should be spending it on a PC/GPU in the first place.

So if your budget is only £400 for a pc for example, and you can't afford the extra £30 then you shouldn't have a PC? Nice elitest attitude there.

AllBodies · 8 Aug 2016 at 18:02

Looks to be a bit disappointing on AMD's part tbh :/

According to Guru3d's review it's only ~45% the performance of an RX480. Meaning the RX470 is just shy of twice as fast.

You'd hope low-end cards would be better relative value, but this needs to be around £80 just to make it the same performance per £ as the RX470.

karik666 · 8 Aug 2016 at 18:07

As i said earlier,there are still loads of people with monitors at 1650 by 1050 and lower,looking at the steam hardware survey 25% of people game at 1366 x 768 res,
so the 460 would be a good card for them.

Winky_The_Winking_Turtle · 8 Aug 2016 at 18:08

Telecaster said:
If you can't find the extra £30 for a 470 then you should be asking yourself if you should be spending it on a PC/GPU in the first place.

The people buying these kinds of cards only have a budget of £100 to spend.

So you're asking them to spend an extra £30, nearly a third of their original intended budget?

Telecaster · 8 Aug 2016 at 18:08

Armageus said:
So if your budget is only £400 for a pc for example, and you can't afford the extra £30 then you shouldn't have a PC? Nice elitest attitude there.

Not at all what I'm saying, I'm saying that buying a NEW PC probably isn't the best option if you can't find the £30 for a 100% better performing GPU.

Nothing to do with being elitist, just common sense. Spunking money on things you can't really afford is what gets 99% of people into trouble. Just because they have £400 doesn't mean they should throw it a brand new very mediocre performing PC that will be relevant for about 12 months, that just sounds like a terrible idea.

Aretak · 8 Aug 2016 at 18:29

Telecaster said:
Not at all what I'm saying, I'm saying that buying a NEW PC probably isn't the best option if you can't find the £30 for a 100% better performing GPU.

Nothing to do with being elitist, just common sense. Spunking money on things you can't really afford is what gets 99% of people into trouble. Just because they have £400 doesn't mean they should throw it a brand new very mediocre performing PC that will be relevant for about 12 months, that just sounds like a terrible idea.

I don't get this attitude at all. Not everybody wants to play the latest AAA graphicsfests. For lighter gaming such as MOBAs, MMOs and even things like Overwatch, a PC like that would offer a great 1080p/60fps experience on maximum settings. Sure, you could get a better deal buying used parts, but not everybody wants that potential hassle, with no warranty and no comeback if things go bad. You say that people shouldn't waste money on things they don't need, so why would they need to spend any more than that sort of money if that level of gaming is their goal? If anything, they'd be far better off spending the mythical £30 extra people are talking about on their CPU instead, since a graphics card can so easily be swapped out in the future for something better.

DethThrasher · 8 Aug 2016 at 18:38

Weaker than I expected..maybe my expectations were just out of whack.

h4rm0ny · 8 Aug 2016 at 18:41

RavenXXX2 said:
470 up to 100% faster at £30 extra cost, who is buying a 4gb 460?

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/sapp...s-graphics-card-with-backplate-gx-37g-sp.html

Some people on this forum never seem to get their head around the idea that not everyone has the same amount of disposable income they do. If you're a kid asking your parent for a new toy for your computer then maybe you can get away with asking for something less than a £100 but not £130. Someone might have £100 but not £130. Maybe they have £130 but want to get a card AND a game.

To someone whose spending upper limit is far above the cost of graphics cards, then they focus only on price-performance because they have no real constraints on the price part of the equation. And they forget that some people do.

Incoming argument that someone could just work harder / save longer in 3...2...1...

RavenXXX2 · 8 Aug 2016 at 18:53

I would forgo the game and take the twice as fast gpu.

Telecaster · 8 Aug 2016 at 19:15

h4rm0ny said:
Some people on this forum never seem to get their head around the idea that not everyone has the same amount of disposable income they do. If you're a kid asking your parent for a new toy for your computer then maybe you can get away with asking for something less than a £100 but not £130. Someone might have £100 but not £130. Maybe they have £130 but want to get a card AND a game.

To someone whose spending upper limit is far above the cost of graphics cards, then they focus only on price-performance because they have no real constraints on the price part of the equation. And they forget that some people do.

Incoming argument that someone could just work harder / save longer in 3...2...1...

Is this not exactly just who the console market is aimed at then?

Armageus · 8 Aug 2016 at 19:31

Telecaster said:
Not at all what I'm saying, I'm saying that buying a NEW PC probably isn't the best option if you can't find the £30 for a 100% better performing GPU.

Nothing to do with being elitist, just common sense. Spunking money on things you can't really afford is what gets 99% of people into trouble. Just because they have £400 doesn't mean they should throw it a brand new very mediocre performing PC that will be relevant for about 12 months, that just sounds like a terrible idea.

There's a huge stretch between someone who has a fixed budget and someone overstretching themselves.

A lot of people don't want to buy used parts because they don't want the risk.

Telecaster said:
Is this not exactly just who the console market is aimed at then?

Not sure if you mean kids/parents or whether you mean budget conscious people?

In either case, why shouldn't either have access to the platform of "the master race" and the exclusive games e.g
RTS/Sims/MMOs etc?

MagicBoy · 8 Aug 2016 at 19:31

Telecaster said:
Is this not exactly just who the console market is aimed at then?

You're making the massive assumption that everyone plays AAA console titles there. PC exclusives anyone?

This card is the answer to the question - "What's the fastest £100 card I can get with a 75W TDP". As per my previous question to Gibbo about low-profile versions - I'd be all over one of these as an upgrade for the SFF PC plugged into my living room TV. Currently the only option is a 750Ti.

eddyr · 8 Aug 2016 at 19:33

DethThrasher said:
Weaker than I expected..maybe my expectations were just out of whack.

It is a little. Shame it is not the full die. They should have targeted comfortably above Pitcairn as avg performance to guarantee at least one favourable comparison against the outgoing cards. Although I guess historically this class of card would not have had as much attention in a larger line up.

DONOHUE07 · 8 Aug 2016 at 20:41

Could be a decent card for my 720p projector, time for some research...

FoxEye · 8 Aug 2016 at 21:02

David Bisset said:
Something was wrong with your 7850 then mate, can get 60fps @ 1080p in many games on medium, some games on high.

Like I said earlier, you can play 2011 games on a 7850 reasonably well.

You won't be playing anything recent. You won't be playing MGS5, GTA5, FO4, etc, on high settings at 60 FPS on a 7850.

Tell me I'm wrong.

Heck, you won't even do medium settings at 60 FPS.