- Status
Do we really have to lead reviews with Ashes of the Singularity? It should be an after thought, not the first impression.
It's clearly an AMD sponsored title. It's barely considered a game, as almost no one actually plays it.
GTA V, Doom, and BF4 seem like the real triple A titles that should be pulled to the front, with Hitman, Ashes, and Project cars scraping the barrel of obscurity.
It's clearly an AMD sponsored title. It's barely considered a game, as almost no one actually plays it.
GTA V, Doom, and BF4 seem like the real triple A titles that should be pulled to the front, with Hitman, Ashes, and Project cars scraping the barrel of obscurity.
genomeproject
Distinguished
- Oct 27, 2009
- 4
- 0
- 18,510
Why I chose the reference Sapphire RX 480 4gb:
-I got it for $200 dlls, taxes and shipping included
-I don't have plans for changing gpu in 4 years and this card seems to handle DX 12 and Vulkan titles really good (so far)
-I have a i5 750 OC'ed to 4.1 ghz and it may become a bottleneck with more powerful gpus
-Anything beyond 60fps on 1080p is a waste for me since I have a 60hz 1080p monitor
So for me the 480 was a clear winner
-I got it for $200 dlls, taxes and shipping included
-I don't have plans for changing gpu in 4 years and this card seems to handle DX 12 and Vulkan titles really good (so far)
-I have a i5 750 OC'ed to 4.1 ghz and it may become a bottleneck with more powerful gpus
-Anything beyond 60fps on 1080p is a waste for me since I have a 60hz 1080p monitor
So for me the 480 was a clear winner
mlscrow
Distinguished
- Oct 15, 2010
- 71
- 0
- 18,640
"The abandoned plans for an eight-pin plug are even more surprising in light of the fact that this is a RX 470-specific PCB. It's not a re-purposed RX 480 design. Believe us, we're just as curious as you about Asus' thinking here."
This is because 8-Pin isn't necessary. So many people, so many review sites, all focused so much on the power draw and deemed it as being a "potential" issue, but it remains a non-issue. AMD offered a driver fix, just to shut people up about it, beause it was making them look bad, when it shouldn't have. To this very day, there is still not a single piece of proof, that any of the very few problems that have occurred for users of the RX480, were specifically the result of power draw. The only things that can be actually and scientifically deduced from those few problems were that there was "some kind" of problem between the the motherboard and RX480, but there is no evidence to suggest that it has anything to do with power draw. Considering also that the amount of problems that have risen for those using an RX480 amounts to less than 1% of all users, which would put it in the range of expected manufacturing defects.
This is because 8-Pin isn't necessary. So many people, so many review sites, all focused so much on the power draw and deemed it as being a "potential" issue, but it remains a non-issue. AMD offered a driver fix, just to shut people up about it, beause it was making them look bad, when it shouldn't have. To this very day, there is still not a single piece of proof, that any of the very few problems that have occurred for users of the RX480, were specifically the result of power draw. The only things that can be actually and scientifically deduced from those few problems were that there was "some kind" of problem between the the motherboard and RX480, but there is no evidence to suggest that it has anything to do with power draw. Considering also that the amount of problems that have risen for those using an RX480 amounts to less than 1% of all users, which would put it in the range of expected manufacturing defects.
@cangelini:
It would be really helpful if a change could be made on the "Frame Time" and "Frame Variance" graphs. Given the cards spike at the same spots, what ever card was placed on the chart last with the bigger spikes, completely wipe out the graphics of those done before. It might be worth showing each card in their own separate section on the graph, or at least show the card being reviewed last, so it's graph is clearly seen.
It would be really helpful if a change could be made on the "Frame Time" and "Frame Variance" graphs. Given the cards spike at the same spots, what ever card was placed on the chart last with the bigger spikes, completely wipe out the graphics of those done before. It might be worth showing each card in their own separate section on the graph, or at least show the card being reviewed last, so it's graph is clearly seen.
- Oct 15, 2014
- 18,436
- 2,520
- 104,090
i'm a bit disappointed with the cooling of this card. the strix name has become known to mean "cool and quiet" and high quality standards. this card does not live yp to that standard at all. no cooling beyond the gpu with the obvious side effects is inexcusable from asus.
this gen of strix cards from both amd and nvidia models has seemed rather lacking in the quality i was used to seeing. throw in the high price for the card and it's one i will skip for myself and my clients' builds.
used to recommend the strix cards all around but seems i will be changing my tune from here out.
this gen of strix cards from both amd and nvidia models has seemed rather lacking in the quality i was used to seeing. throw in the high price for the card and it's one i will skip for myself and my clients' builds.
used to recommend the strix cards all around but seems i will be changing my tune from here out.
Zaxx420
Honorable
- Aug 7, 2013
- 137
- 0
- 10,710
The $180 price point tells me there will be no such thing as a $200 custom 480 aib card unless you want a piece of crap ref blower on a hot card that won't OC worth a crap...pushing the price to $220+ for a 4gb 480...thus putting the 8gb $260+. This is exactly why they pull this ref cards only for the launch crap. The 1060 might be $150 but they're not baiting you.
- Oct 15, 2014
- 18,436
- 2,520
- 104,090
what are you babbling about? the card reviewed here is $200. and as already noted in the article you clearly did not read, there will not be a reference card for the 470 from amd. the $180 is starting price for CUSTOM models.
there i read and summed up the words in the article for you since you only looked at the pretty pictures.
dragonopolis
Distinguished
- Sep 26, 2007
- 5
- 0
- 18,510
I hope Tom's Hardware re-evaluates when a review for a new gpu series is reviewed AMD or Nvidia... There is a enough historical evidence to suggest that there are often hardware/specification issues that crop up sometimes in new designs sometime in hardware.... sometimes in software .... sometimes both.
In my opinion, this ASUS card does not represent what third party cards should be addressing when releasing a card.... From what I read there were questionable issues/ideas with hardware decisions which did nothing to improve the hardware side of things and in some ways the ASUS board seemed to be nothing more than fancy looking reference card.....
At least change the title to "Asus Strix RX 470 review". Leave AMD out of it
Since AMD does not have a reference card for the RX 470 series they should not be held accountable for poor hardware choices made by a single company.
What about other companies that wish to sell RX 470 cards who may not make the hardware decisions that ASUS did when releasing this graphic card based on the 470 gpu????
A simple statement telling the public that delaying the release of ASUS review due to concerns that came up concerning the hardware and that your contacting ASUS until they send another board for to review; or review another company's board that seems to better address the concerns that we as consumers often share with those who review hardware.... This ASUS board appears to be flying by the seat of its pants and does not appear to give the appearance of longevity or efficiency.....
Unfortunately there are a lot of consumers that will look at this review and condemn all AMD RX 470's because the story was more important than the substance and because Tom's Hardware labeled the story as AMD RX 470 review instead of ASUS Strix RX 470.... Yes it is not Tom's fault that consumers do this but it is a disservices to AMD (or Nvidia when it applies to them).... and any other companies wish to sell graphic cards based on the RX 470 gpu
Despite what the software numbers say when testing with software; the hardware design by ASUS is questionable..... Do not buy this board regardless if the software testing numbers is acceptable or not... this board appears to be as bad as any reference board AMD has put out and is not a quality "hardware" product
Price wise to those who are questioning ASUS pricing 50% of $200 is $100 dollars and the RX 480 is not 50% more powerful.... Tom's Hardware review shows an average under 20% faster.... If you take 20% of $200 its $40 so minimum pricing would be $160 (10% would be $20 so price = $180)... This is, if your belief is that speed alone is the only factor in which to gauge pricing (it shouldn't be the case but that's a choice not industry standard).
It's easy to see where ASUS was going with the pricing but the Hardware design does not justify ASUS charging a premium price.
In my opinion, this ASUS card does not represent what third party cards should be addressing when releasing a card.... From what I read there were questionable issues/ideas with hardware decisions which did nothing to improve the hardware side of things and in some ways the ASUS board seemed to be nothing more than fancy looking reference card.....
At least change the title to "Asus Strix RX 470 review". Leave AMD out of it
Since AMD does not have a reference card for the RX 470 series they should not be held accountable for poor hardware choices made by a single company.
What about other companies that wish to sell RX 470 cards who may not make the hardware decisions that ASUS did when releasing this graphic card based on the 470 gpu????
A simple statement telling the public that delaying the release of ASUS review due to concerns that came up concerning the hardware and that your contacting ASUS until they send another board for to review; or review another company's board that seems to better address the concerns that we as consumers often share with those who review hardware.... This ASUS board appears to be flying by the seat of its pants and does not appear to give the appearance of longevity or efficiency.....
Unfortunately there are a lot of consumers that will look at this review and condemn all AMD RX 470's because the story was more important than the substance and because Tom's Hardware labeled the story as AMD RX 470 review instead of ASUS Strix RX 470.... Yes it is not Tom's fault that consumers do this but it is a disservices to AMD (or Nvidia when it applies to them).... and any other companies wish to sell graphic cards based on the RX 470 gpu
Despite what the software numbers say when testing with software; the hardware design by ASUS is questionable..... Do not buy this board regardless if the software testing numbers is acceptable or not... this board appears to be as bad as any reference board AMD has put out and is not a quality "hardware" product
Price wise to those who are questioning ASUS pricing 50% of $200 is $100 dollars and the RX 480 is not 50% more powerful.... Tom's Hardware review shows an average under 20% faster.... If you take 20% of $200 its $40 so minimum pricing would be $160 (10% would be $20 so price = $180)... This is, if your belief is that speed alone is the only factor in which to gauge pricing (it shouldn't be the case but that's a choice not industry standard).
It's easy to see where ASUS was going with the pricing but the Hardware design does not justify ASUS charging a premium price.
- May 18, 2007
- 23,813
- 5,270
- 108,890
The whole 6-pin vs 8-pin argument is utterly pointless since the 8-pin connector adds nothing useful to actual power delivery, only an extra ground and ID/presence pin. The three 12V pins from the 6-pin connector are exactly the same as they are on the 8-pin one. At best, the biggest difference is the implied presence of #18 wires which even cheap PSUs already use for everything anyway.
The PCI-SIG should have simply specified the 6-pins connector as 150W in the first place and skipped the unnecessary two extra pins. Or made the 8-pin connector 4x12V + 3xGND + 1xDetect.
@dragonopolis
This Asus card was sent from AMD exactly for this review - to write about their RX 470. It is not our fault, that AMD selected especially this card and it was alone AMDs own decision. And the subtitle of the first page is "Asus Strix".
@InvalidError:
The PCI-SIG has to renew their standards, right. But it seems they will keep it as long as possible to be compatible with older hardware. We dicussed it with a PSU manufacturer and the engineer showed me a few PSUs for SI business with AWG20 cables (and bad cable quality) from as Chinese competitor. For this hardware - PCI compatible, is a 6-pin not the thing what I want to have in my PC
This Asus card was sent from AMD exactly for this review - to write about their RX 470. It is not our fault, that AMD selected especially this card and it was alone AMDs own decision. And the subtitle of the first page is "Asus Strix".
@InvalidError:
The PCI-SIG has to renew their standards, right. But it seems they will keep it as long as possible to be compatible with older hardware. We dicussed it with a PSU manufacturer and the engineer showed me a few PSUs for SI business with AWG20 cables (and bad cable quality) from as Chinese competitor. For this hardware - PCI compatible, is a 6-pin not the thing what I want to have in my PC
RedJaron
Splendid
- Sep 20, 2011
- 4,225
- 0
- 23,160
Dragonpolis, I agree with just about everything you said. People saying this should be a $130 card need to do the math. As Chris found, the 470 performs, altogether, at about 85% of what the 480 can do. That would mean a $170 central price point. $160 - $180 seems like a very reasonable price range for this performance. Whether that's a good value for your particular tastes is a completely different matter.
We might be seeing something like the 950 vs 960 here, and possibly in reverse. The 950 OC'd so well it could get within spitting distance of the 960, so it made sense to save the money over the 960. Since these cards don't have a lot of separation, one of them may fall to irrelevance after we see what better PSB designs and cooling situations can do for the OC potential.
Speaking of partner designs, I agree that Asus screwed up here., particularly the cooling on the power circuitry. I hope other boards don't make the same bad decisions.
I think AMD and/or board partners are using the 6-pin instead of the 8-pin for optics. When upgrading GPUs, especially on OEM pre-built computers, it's much more common to find a 6-pin lead instead of an 8-pin cable on the PSU. If AMD and partners want the 470 and 480 to appear as accessible as possible, then requiring an 8-pin could turn back a lot of people looking to buy one since they couldn't use it in their Best Buy special PC.
We might be seeing something like the 950 vs 960 here, and possibly in reverse. The 950 OC'd so well it could get within spitting distance of the 960, so it made sense to save the money over the 960. Since these cards don't have a lot of separation, one of them may fall to irrelevance after we see what better PSB designs and cooling situations can do for the OC potential.
Speaking of partner designs, I agree that Asus screwed up here., particularly the cooling on the power circuitry. I hope other boards don't make the same bad decisions.
I think AMD and/or board partners are using the 6-pin instead of the 8-pin for optics. When upgrading GPUs, especially on OEM pre-built computers, it's much more common to find a 6-pin lead instead of an 8-pin cable on the PSU. If AMD and partners want the 470 and 480 to appear as accessible as possible, then requiring an 8-pin could turn back a lot of people looking to buy one since they couldn't use it in their Best Buy special PC.
Zaxx420
Honorable
- Aug 7, 2013
- 137
- 0
- 10,710
470 availability already showing signs of life...
http://www.newegg.com/videocards/EventSaleStore/ID-2041860?utm_medium=Email&utm_source=IGNEFL080416&cm_mmc=EMC-IGNEFL080416-_-EMC-080416-Index-_-HeroBanner-_-RX470
looks like theres a real good chance that custom 480s will make it to the shelves about the same time as the 470s...imagine that. Hope I'm wrong about not ever seeing a custom 480 4gb for $200...just can't imagine only a $20 difference between custom 470 and 480.
http://www.newegg.com/videocards/EventSaleStore/ID-2041860?utm_medium=Email&utm_source=IGNEFL080416&cm_mmc=EMC-IGNEFL080416-_-EMC-080416-Index-_-HeroBanner-_-RX470
looks like theres a real good chance that custom 480s will make it to the shelves about the same time as the 470s...imagine that. Hope I'm wrong about not ever seeing a custom 480 4gb for $200...just can't imagine only a $20 difference between custom 470 and 480.
- Apr 27, 2009
- 38,430
- 3,826
- 143,290
Kinda sad that my only really good upgrade option, is still a GTX 1070. My old 780ti just keeps chugging along.
Brian_R170
Honorable
- Jun 24, 2014
- 288
- 2
- 10,785
Well, it's not cheap enough for the performance difference to the 480, and it's still 10 inches long, takes up 2 slots and consumes 140W+. Life sucks for people wanting to maximize perf/watt for SFF systems and not spend a fortune. I guess I will wait and see what other OEM 470 cards become available, or maybe the GTX 950.
Apparently, the GTX1060 was so disruptive it force AMD to lower the price range for 480 much lower than it was previously planned. And to add further confusion, AMD did not change the price range for 470.
Originally, the RX480 was planned for $259 for 8GB and $229 for 4GB. And the sub-$200 was suppose to fill with 470 with $199 for premium and $179 for value. Then GTX1060 came along and obliterates their comparable performance-value in that respect.
It's still not a bad price for a card of this caliber, but considering the big brother with 4GB sitting at $200 makes the comparable price-performance became redundant, so to speak.
An odd release, indeed.
Suppose nVidia release the 3GB version, it should push the 470 down further. And the winner would be us. As it should be. If you have the patience to wait, that is...
Originally, the RX480 was planned for $259 for 8GB and $229 for 4GB. And the sub-$200 was suppose to fill with 470 with $199 for premium and $179 for value. Then GTX1060 came along and obliterates their comparable performance-value in that respect.
It's still not a bad price for a card of this caliber, but considering the big brother with 4GB sitting at $200 makes the comparable price-performance became redundant, so to speak.
An odd release, indeed.
Suppose nVidia release the 3GB version, it should push the 470 down further. And the winner would be us. As it should be. If you have the patience to wait, that is...
Jinglenutz
Commendable
- Mar 31, 2016
- 3
- 0
- 1,510
WOW, somebody actually said that $180-200 is WWWWAAAAYYYY too much for this card. Nvidia fan boy surely, are u fricken serious? This card wipes the floor with a GTX960 and for only 10-20 bucks more? Dude, what r u smoking? And as usual, Toms is being so very careful with their wording, cuz letz not piss off Nvidia. Man, everything that Tom swore the site would never become six or seven years ago has now become. Pop-ups galore and gettin kick-backs from the big boyz. Well, guess that Kool-Aid was just too damn refreshing.
RedJaron
Splendid
- Sep 20, 2011
- 4,225
- 0
- 23,160
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
News Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger retires, effective immediately — also steps down from BOD, two co-CEOs step in- Started by Admin
- Replies: 124
-
Question I'm looking for a temporary new board after mine died ?
- Started by chucky9
- Replies: 3
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
Latest posts
-
-
Question Are there any compatibility issues I'm missing with this build- Latest: Vanquisher71
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram