Soldato
You're right. Nobody has anything special under £200 these days. Not under the price of these cards trickle down. They are just being milked because of mining and such.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD RADEON RX 470 SERIES NOW AVAILABLE FROM £164.99 DELIVERED!!
- Thread starter Gibbo
- Start date
Caporegime
I mean when a £123 GTX750TI is considered a best seller due to power consumption marketing,now instead of AMD prioritising performance,they have realised maybe Nvidia was onto something so wanted to do the same.
Look at how many of the AMD cards were better performing than the Nvidia ones:
1.)HD7850/R7 370 and R9 270/R9 270X>> GTX750TI
GTX750TI wins by default.
2.)R9 380/R9 380X>>GTX960
GTX960 wins by default.
Now,AMD has realised,lets do some of that and I expect they will sell more cards now,and will Nvidia sell loads of cards still,yep!
The worst thing is now the GTX1050 3GB will be released,and be 10% faster than a RX470 in DX11 but with 25% less VRAM so it will probably crater in performance over time,and they will say we consume a bit less power,so you can save £5 to £10 a year.
None of them seem to be caring anymore.
It seems by default the £165 RX470 with the meh reference cooler has won under £200.
At this rate I wonder whether waiting for the refresh cards of the RX400 and GTX1000 series will be a better bet.
Last edited:
Soldato
The 470 is not so bad at £165 I think but it throttles unless you increase its power draw and up the fan speed. Also its kinda just another 7970 but this time with a die shrink. 7970-280-380-470 all basically the same thing. I bet if you had a water cooled 1300mhz 7970 it would perform just as good. Wondering how much more they can actually squeeze out of these cards before they need a proper redesign.
Going to take issue with that perceived perception
Nobody, and I mean nobody, was recommending the 960 to anyone. I think almost unanimously everybody here said the 960 was a turkey.
Lots of people recommended the 380, the 285 and the 280X before them.
Caporegime
Going to take issue with that perceived perception
Nobody, and I mean nobody, was recommending the 960 to anyone. I think almost unanimously everybody here said the 960 was a turkey.
Lots of people recommended the 380, the 285 and the 280X before them.
It still won in sales though as all the sites and YT channels were going on how much better it was than the AMD equivalents because of how it saved the environment and how many billion pounds/dollars/euro you would save.
The same when people were recommending the GTX750TI over the faster R7 265 or even the GTX660 or R9 270/R9 270X,because it consumed less power. The R7 265 comparison was even more of a joke when you saw this:
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_750_Ti/images/perfrel_1920.gif
The R7 265 was 15% faster,and its even more now if you look at newer benchmarks.
Yet,they were worrying about 35W:
https://tpucdn.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_750_Ti/images/power_average.gif
The GTX660 and R9 270/270X demolished the GTX750TI and they were like £20 more IIRC.
Nvidia did massively better selling "saving the planet" yet during the Fermi days apparently loads of people did not care either.
Now you see AMD trying to push power consumption savings,etc instead of pure performance,since it will probably end up with them selling more cards to the masses.
But for us more clued up people,we know that a decent 400W to 500W PSU will be fine.
I remember running a high VID overclocked Q6600 and a 8800GTS 512MB fine off a Shuttle SFF 400W/450W PSU.
Edit!!
Power savings are not a bad thing,but the thing is at the £100 to £150 we are already performance limited.
Last edited:
Caporegime
I can see some truth to that, a lot of agenda driven people pushing cards like the 750TI over much faster AMD cards on the power consumption ticket.
A couple of years ago no one talked about 30 Watts as if it was a huge issue, now people don't shut up about it and too many are sucked in by it, the 1060 is crap at modern API's, but it uses 30 watts less power than the one which is very good. the 1060 wins because its had all its guts stripped out and uses a bit less power.
Result, power consumption over outright performance is the new agenda of both GPU vendors, thats what sells GPU's now, thank you very much.
The way this community behaves in its very childish vendor loyalties is self destructive.
A couple of years ago no one talked about 30 Watts as if it was a huge issue, now people don't shut up about it and too many are sucked in by it, the 1060 is crap at modern API's, but it uses 30 watts less power than the one which is very good. the 1060 wins because its had all its guts stripped out and uses a bit less power.
Result, power consumption over outright performance is the new agenda of both GPU vendors, thats what sells GPU's now, thank you very much.
The way this community behaves in its very childish vendor loyalties is self destructive.
Last edited:
Caporegime
People forget one thing about the GTX1060 - it uses a 192 bit memory bus. So the fact that the RX480 has more VRAM chips is also adding to power consumption.
Caporegime
Here is another review of the RX460:
http://www.benchmark.rs/artikal/test_sapphire_radeon_rx_470_nitro_8_gb-4169/6
The slower other card tested is a Gainward Phantom GTX960:
http://www.eteknix.com/gainward-phantom-glh-geforce-gtx-960-2gb-graphics-card-review/
Its generally slower than the GTX960 tested but seems to have similar performance in Hitman,Total War: Warhammer and GTAV for some reason and is faster in AoTS.
Edit!!
If only it had 1024 shaders,14% more shaders might have made this not too bad at £100.
http://www.benchmark.rs/artikal/test_sapphire_radeon_rx_470_nitro_8_gb-4169/6
The slower other card tested is a Gainward Phantom GTX960:
http://www.eteknix.com/gainward-phantom-glh-geforce-gtx-960-2gb-graphics-card-review/
Its generally slower than the GTX960 tested but seems to have similar performance in Hitman,Total War: Warhammer and GTAV for some reason and is faster in AoTS.
Edit!!
If only it had 1024 shaders,14% more shaders might have made this not too bad at £100.
Last edited:
Wonder when the prices for the 470s might start to come down a little... ignoring reference cards, which aren't worth considering. A non-ref 4GB for £170, or a non-ref 8GB for £200, still expensive, but as someone stuck on iGPU I'd probably bite at those price points.
Doubt it'll happen in my lifetime tho.
Doubt it'll happen in my lifetime tho.
I woudn't count it out. Bear in mind that right now Sapphire basically have a monopoly as they are the only company to currently have 470s in stock. Once all the others finally have theirs out and the market floods i'd say there's a good chance prices will drop £10-£20.
Soldato
Really? A whole ten or twenty pounds? [/sarcasm]
The 470 is £40+ too high. The 480's are £60+ too high. The 1060 is £80+ too high. The 1070 is £100 too high. A £10 adjustment is nothing. A £20 adjustment is barely nothing and really only matters if you're a kid collecting pocket money.
Last edited:
Soldato
The PS4/Xbox including there upgraded versions all use SOC's so no Polaris dies are going to them. Such SOC's Sony/MS own the licences for them as well (bit like how ARM sell designs to the likes of samsung or apple to use/build) so its there responsibility to get the made which has advantages.
Why did they switch to this model of doing things ? well it was Nvidia's fault party with the original Xbox with the semi Custom NV2A, they always charged MS the same price for each unit so as yields improved and die shrink versions where introduced nvidia would make a greater margin and all MS would get is a chip that used abit less power but cost them the same.
Associate
A 5-10% price drop isn't nothing.
It would still be better than nothing though.
Associate
you're thinking of ps3 and 360 - specially on MS side as they licensed the graphics - this time around - AMD didn't license the graphics out but created complete socs for Sony and MS depending on what they wanted.....
World of difference - MS didn't mind changing with AMD as how well they worked with MS with the 360 - Same with Sony - would they do that with Nvidia nope....
Soldato
As I said both the PS4/XB1 (like with the custom semi Custom discreet Xenos/RSX gpus) are licensed SOC designs with there own names on them to avoid what happened with Nvidia on the original xbox.
Going back to my original point i was trying to make, no Polaris dies are being used in the new console as they are not using discreet GPU's with 99% certainty.
Really unsure on what to do!
I game at 1080p but looking at going to 1440p in 18 months time-ish.
Not sure whether to go 470 for now at 165 or go down the 1060 or 8gb 480 route for a bit more future proofing?
Recommendations would be welcomed!
I game at 1080p but looking at going to 1440p in 18 months time-ish.
Not sure whether to go 470 for now at 165 or go down the 1060 or 8gb 480 route for a bit more future proofing?
Recommendations would be welcomed!
Associate
Probably go with the 470 and expect to have to upgrade for 1440p imo. The 1060 and 480 will both be meh 1440p cards, 2 480's will be good for 1440p but at the same time crossfire won't work all the time. I also saw an fps over time map that showed crossfire reaching basically exactly the same fps lows as a single card, even with the average fps being around 50% higher, which is pretty disappointing, imo the lows are the most important parts, not that it reaches 150fps at the less demanding parts.
