AMD Radeon RX 470 4GB Review

[It's me!]

AMD seems to be content to own the low end, but they make a good point about that being where most gamers are anyway. They said only 1.62 % of users have 2560 res, and even less for 4K. 

I guess I would still want a Titan X< OF COURSE, but this seems a bit more realistic. 

 

Quote

 

We love to lust after the latest high-end hardware. It’s in our DNA. But just as most coffee enthusiasts can only dream of owning a $7000 La Marzocco, Titan X cards are simply beyond most gamers’ budgets. Architecturally, there’s nothing new to say about the “Ellesmere” GPU—it’s the same 5.7 billion transistor processor we introduced in our RX480 8GB Review manufactured on GlobalFoundries’ 14nm FinFET process and occupying 232 square millimeters of die space.

On the topic of dollars, we’ve never seen AMD so reluctant to discuss pricing. Hours before the RX 470’s introduction, we were handed a suggested $179 figure. However, there is no “reference” design, so it’s unclear what you’ll find at that price. Asus passed along that the Strix RX 470 OC Edition we tested would sell for $200, with the non-overclocked model offered at $195.

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Radeon-RX-470-4GB-Review,4703.html

 

 

 

 

[AlTech]

What's the point of the 470 if it's only slightly cheaper than the 480?

It has 4 CUs disabled and is $15-20 less..

[laminutederire]

1 minute ago, AluminiumTech said:

What's the point of the 470 is it's only slightly cheaper than the 480?

It's not slightly cheaper since we have asus' price, so we have the upper upper upper bound of prices

[rattacko123]

The RX 470 costs $179 which is $20 cheaper than RX 480, doesn't seem to make much sense price-wise, but still a great card.
 

Quote

As you could probably judge from the initial tone of this review’s introduction, I was really hoping this GPU would distinguish itself by offering a mid-point solution between the RX 480 4GB and AMD’s upcoming RX 460. That hasn’t happened as the RX 470 does absolutely nothing to push aside the murk which typically floats around the $99 to $199 price bracket. As a matter of fact the RX 470 muddies the situation even further, particularly when it comes to custom boards that tread so dreadfully close to the RX480’s price point without offering higher framerates. But if (and this is completely hypothetical) this MSI card with its higher-than-reference performance results were factored into the equation at $179 rather than $199, as seen above we’d have a new leader on our hands. 

 

Performs very close to GTX 970, and destroys the gtx 960

 

source:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/73155-amd-radeon-rx-470-4gb-review.html

[RagnarokDel]

outch, the 1060 losing to a 470 on Doom Vulkan

[xMishax]

why they dont put dvi-i ports anymore T.T

[EazyHTML]

1 minute ago, rattacko123 said:

 

Performs very close to GTX 970, and destroys the gtx 960

Well consider that the GTX 960 is 2 year's old as well for the GTX 970

[rattacko123]

3 minutes ago, xMishax said:

why they dont put dvi-i ports anymore T.T

because nobody uses Analog these days, get along with the times

[Hunter259]

Reason why I said the RX 480 4GB made no sense. They should have never released that and force people into the 470. Now it just does not make sense for people to buy this card.

[EazyHTML]

9 minutes ago, RagnarokDel said:

outch, the 1060 losing to a 470 on Doom Vulkan

Well,maybe only in games with good Vulkan support,Vulkan is not mainstream yet so the GTX 1060 is better since its all round better than the RX 470

[Hunter259]

1 minute ago, EazyHTML said:

Well,maybe only in games with good Vulkan support,Vulkan is not mainstream yet so the GTX 1060 is better since its all round better than the RX 470

Didn't ID come out and say they haven't optimized the Nvidia code path yet? 

[raphidy]

5 minutes ago, RagnarokDel said:

outch, the 1060 losing to a 470 on Doom Vulkan

Losing by 1 frame? pretty in margin of error.  Unless you only play Doom.. and not touch the endless library of steam...Yeah..

[zMeul]

15 minutes ago, rattacko123 said:

Performs very close to GTX 970, and destroys the gtx 960

are you seriously comparing a custom RX470 with a reference GTX970 

[EazyHTML]

1 minute ago, Hunter259 said:

Didn't ID come out and say they haven't optimized the Nvidia code path yet? 

I don't know if they did,but if they did we still don't know how good Nvidia is going to be doing,but should be better than OpenGL anyway

[Hunter259]

Just now, EazyHTML said:

I don't know if they did,but if they did we still don't know how good Nvidia is going to be doing,but should be better than OpenGL anyway

Ive seen OpenGL preform worse that vulkan on Nvidia cards. Really I think Nvidia doesn't have or hasn't released a DX12/Vulkan optimized driver and thats why they struggle right now. Not Async.

[ltguy]

Newegg email shows the rx470@ 209.00. Why would I pay more for the rx470 than the rx480??

[EazyHTML]

1 minute ago, Hunter259 said:

Ive seen OpenGL preform worse that vulkan on Nvidia cards. Really I think Nvidia doesn't have or hasn't released a DX12/Vulkan optimized driver and thats why they struggle right now. Not Async.

Like i said,even without any support or optimized drivers they still gain 2-3 fps in gain of Vulkan of OpenGL

[Hunter259]

1 minute ago, EazyHTML said:

Like i said,even without any support or optimized drivers they still gain 2-3 fps in gain of Vulkan of OpenGL

Preforms worse by a good margin here.

[EazyHTML]

9 minutes ago, zMeul said:

are you seriously comparing a custom RX470 with a reference GTX970 

Well even if he compared it to a custom GTX 970,18% for a reference,i guess it will be 8% for a custom

[zMeul]

Just now, EazyHTML said:

Well even if he compared it to a custom GTX 970,18% for a reference,i guess it will be 8% for a custom

how would you know!? crystal ball?

[ThinkWithPortals]

Price is weird, but well-played AMD.

[EazyHTML]

1 minute ago, zMeul said:

how would you know!? crystal ball?

I'm making a statement on his and yours,even if he did compare it to a custom GTX 970 by his statistics it would be slower 8% vs the reference 18% (I'm not saying his stats are true,i'm saying to you,even if he did compare it to a custom GTX 970 it still perform less by his stats)

[zMeul]

Just now, EazyHTML said:

I'm making a statement on his and yours,even if he did compare it to a custom GTX 970 by his statistics it would be slower 8% vs the reference 18% (I'm not saying his stats are true,i'm saying to you,even if he did compare it to a custom GTX 970 it still perform less by his stats)

yes, and I'm calling it bullshit 

[porina]

Give it a month to let the early hype pass and availability hopefully stabilise, then we can really see where the price:performance of it lies against the 480. For compute uses, I'd prefer a slightly lower power card than a 480, assuming performance:power:price scales.

[EazyHTML]

Just now, zMeul said:

yes, and I'm calling it bullshit 

Let's be honest,every benchmark Nvidia and AMD did on each other is shit