Powercolor Presents Custom Red Devil RX 470 Graphics Card

[N.Broekhuijsen]

Powercolor is one of the first manufacturers to announce its custom Radeon RX 470 graphics card.

Powercolor Presents Custom Red Devil RX 470 Graphics Card : Read more

 

[cknobman]

This is for sale at NewEgg for $179 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131696&ignorebbr=1

Of course its out of stock, LOL.

IMO, for $179 this is a heck of a lot of card.

Personally I'd probably spend the extra $20 on a 480 but if something like this had rebates, or if I was on a super tight budget, I'd be all over this.

 

[3ogdy]

This is for sale at NewEgg for $179 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131696&ignorebbr=1

Of course its out of stock, LOL.

IMO, for $179 this is a heck of a lot of card.

Personally I'd probably spend the extra $20 on a 480 but if something like this had rebates, or if I was on a super tight budget, I'd be all over this.

It's quite a bit of GPU for $180, but its price is just not right. It looks like AMD has chosen to revert the route they followed with the R9 290X / R9 290 GPUs.

Back then they provided a monster for $500 and something VERY close to that monster for $150 less...about $350.
Now...they provide a mid-tier champion for $200 and something inferior (13FPS on average) for $180. It just doesn't work this way. This is a $130 - $150 max. card. It's a failed strategy unless their main objective is to sell as many RX 480 GPUs as possible ...or have as many users trying to decide which of the 2 cards to buy pick the more expensive one - then they've succeeded. Once there's huge stock of RX-470s, they'll force the retail price down to what it should've been from the beginning. It's only smart to wait or go for the faster card if you really must buy a GPU within that budget today.

In my opinion, the GTX 1060 is just much better for 1080p if you plan on keeping the GPU for a bit more time - but it also costs about $100 more than the RX-480, so it all boils down to how heavy your pockets really are.

 

[cknobman]

In my opinion, the GTX 1060 is just much better for 1080p if you plan on keeping the GPU for a bit more time - but it also costs about $100 more than the RX-480, so it all boils down to how heavy your pockets really are.

Well your opinion is dead wrong.

480 is the the best card you can get for 1080p.
$200 and plays everything at max settings.

In fact except for legacy games the 480 performs >= 1060 in many cases.

1060 is overpriced by about $50, maybe more than that.

 

[InvalidError]

This is a $130 - $150 max.

That's unrealistic. If the GPU performs 85% as good, it deserves to be priced about 85% as high and for the RX-470, that would be around $170. Lower than that and it begins to significantly under-mine higher-end GPUs, especially ones based on the same die when the "big brother" version is already this affordable. The cheapest 256 bits GPU AMD ever launched was $150 and I doubt AMD wants to take that much of a hit to their margins when they have two billion dollars worth of debt renewals on its doorsteps.

The RX-460 based on a cheaper, smaller die, 128bits GDDR5 memory controller, smaller, simpler and cheaper PCB will be in the $130-150 range.

 

[Bloob]

This is for sale at NewEgg for $179 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131696&ignorebbr=1

Of course its out of stock, LOL.

IMO, for $179 this is a heck of a lot of card.

Personally I'd probably spend the extra $20 on a 480 but if something like this had rebates, or if I was on a super tight budget, I'd be all over this.

It's quite a bit of GPU for $180, but its price is just not right. It looks like AMD has chosen to revert the route they followed with the R9 290X / R9 290 GPUs.

Back then they provided a monster for $500 and something VERY close to that monster for $150 less...about $350.
Now...they provide a mid-tier champion for $200 and something inferior (13FPS on average) for $180. It just doesn't work this way. This is a $130 - $150 max. card. It's a failed strategy unless their main objective is to sell as many RX 480 GPUs as possible ...or have as many users trying to decide which of the 2 cards to buy pick the more expensive one - then they've succeeded. Once there's huge stock of RX-470s, they'll force the retail price down to what it should've been from the beginning. It's only smart to wait or go for the faster card if you really must buy a GPU within that budget today.

In my opinion, the GTX 1060 is just much better for 1080p if you plan on keeping the GPU for a bit more time - but it also costs about $100 more than the RX-480, so it all boils down to how heavy your pockets really are.

At least Tom's used the 8GB version of 480 for comparison in the 470 review, so the card should be compared to the $240 version. The 4GB version is (IIRC) around 5-7% slower, making the 470 just 7-9% slower than that, for 10% less money. I don't know why AMD even bothered with having the 470 and the 480@4GB when they are this close though.

 

[3ogdy]

This is for sale at NewEgg for $179 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131696&ignorebbr=1

Of course its out of stock, LOL.

IMO, for $179 this is a heck of a lot of card.

Personally I'd probably spend the extra $20 on a 480 but if something like this had rebates, or if I was on a super tight budget, I'd be all over this.

It's quite a bit of GPU for $180, but its price is just not right. It looks like AMD has chosen to revert the route they followed with the R9 290X / R9 290 GPUs.

Back then they provided a monster for $500 and something VERY close to that monster for $150 less...about $350.
Now...they provide a mid-tier champion for $200 and something inferior (13FPS on average) for $180. It just doesn't work this way. This is a $130 - $150 max. card. It's a failed strategy unless their main objective is to sell as many RX 480 GPUs as possible ...or have as many users trying to decide which of the 2 cards to buy pick the more expensive one - then they've succeeded. Once there's huge stock of RX-470s, they'll force the retail price down to what it should've been from the beginning. It's only smart to wait or go for the faster card if you really must buy a GPU within that budget today.

In my opinion, the GTX 1060 is just much better for 1080p if you plan on keeping the GPU for a bit more time - but it also costs about $100 more than the RX-480, so it all boils down to how heavy your pockets really are.

At least Tom's used the 8GB version of 480 for comparison in the 470 review, so the card should be compared to the $240 version. The 4GB version is (IIRC) around 5-7% slower, making the 470 just 7-9% slower than that, for 10% less money. I don't know why AMD even bothered with having the 470 and the 480@4GB when they are this close though.

Honestly, ever since the R9 290 days I believe somebody at AMD has been working with certain people in their mind(s) - with people who have the following judgement:
"If I can get a cheaper card and overclock the hell out of it to achieve the performance of the slightly more expensive version, I will spend no time deciding on what to go with, I'll pick the cheaper one."
As long as that overclock comes at nearly no cost (of course, heat, electricity and all...but those are not on the GPU bill...it's more like running costs), OK...well...you can get the higher performance GPU for ...what was it...$20 less.
I've been giving this apparently idiotic strategy a thought.

It might be the fact that in certain countries where the main currency is weaker than the USD, $20 actually makes a difference.
In certain countries $20 is 10% of somebody's MONTHLY salary.
I've had people with dead-strict budgets - if they say "$1000" for my computer, then you know it cannot cost "$1001" as that is over the budget. In fact sometimes the PC can't even take up the whole budget as they have to spend on shipping from that same budget too.

I believe the RX-470 is for the countries where the economy is not exactly shiny.

 

[InvalidError]

I believe the RX-470 is for the countries where the economy is not exactly shiny.

Or people who just don't care about being able to hit 1080p ultra in most games if they can save $20-30, possibly more.

In my case, the most money I have ever spent on a GPU is $160: the HD5770 I bought when I got serious about playing WoW early in WotLK. After retiring from WoW, my PC gaming withered to only a few hours per month from lack of interest in most other stuff I have tried, which gives me very little motivation to waste $200 on a new GPU.

 

[3ogdy]

I believe the RX-470 is for the countries where the economy is not exactly shiny.

Or people who just don't care about being able to hit 1080p ultra in most games if they can save $20-30, possibly more.

In my case, the most money I have ever spent on a GPU is $160: the HD5770 I bought when I got serious about playing WoW early in WotLK. After retiring from WoW, my PC gaming withered to only a few hours per month from lack of interest in most other stuff I have tried, which gives me very little motivation to waste $200 on a new GPU.

Yeah, I know the feeling. I find myself replaying the older games more than trying new ones. They don't feel that appealing to me anymore either, but I believe driving 3 screens x1440p, doing AE, Photoshop and watching UHD videos is a bit more than what a mid-range GPU is usually designed for, even though Adobe's suite doesn't necessarily ask for powerful GPUs - it's mostly the CPU that makes the difference in them.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

I believe the RX-470 is for the countries where the economy is not exactly shiny.

Or people who just don't care about being able to hit 1080p ultra in most games if they can save $20-30, possibly more.

In my case, the most money I have ever spent on a GPU is $160: the HD5770 I bought when I got serious about playing WoW early in WotLK. After retiring from WoW, my PC gaming withered to only a few hours per month from lack of interest in most other stuff I have tried, which gives me very little motivation to waste $200 on a new GPU.

Yeah, I know the feeling. I find myself replaying the older games more than trying new ones. They don't feel that appealing to me anymore either, but I believe driving 3 screens x1440p, doing AE, Photoshop and watching UHD videos is a bit more than what a mid-range GPU is usually designed for, even though Adobe's suite doesn't necessarily ask for powerful GPUs - it's mostly the CPU that makes the difference in them.

I also am playing older games, my priorities have shifted. If I play games from 2005, there is no need for me to have a powerful GPU. My current priority with my PC is making it very quiet, so every little thing helps. I have a Noctua fan and CPU cooler now, and I might be picking up a passive GT 710 for the older games I play. I know, it's not even quite as good as the iGPU, but it does take some load off the CPU (and therefore quieter) and I just like the looks of the EVGA one honestly 😛

 

[3ogdy]

I believe the RX-470 is for the countries where the economy is not exactly shiny.

Or people who just don't care about being able to hit 1080p ultra in most games if they can save $20-30, possibly more.

In my case, the most money I have ever spent on a GPU is $160: the HD5770 I bought when I got serious about playing WoW early in WotLK. After retiring from WoW, my PC gaming withered to only a few hours per month from lack of interest in most other stuff I have tried, which gives me very little motivation to waste $200 on a new GPU.

Yeah, I know the feeling. I find myself replaying the older games more than trying new ones. They don't feel that appealing to me anymore either, but I believe driving 3 screens x1440p, doing AE, Photoshop and watching UHD videos is a bit more than what a mid-range GPU is usually designed for, even though Adobe's suite doesn't necessarily ask for powerful GPUs - it's mostly the CPU that makes the difference in them.

I also am playing older games, my priorities have shifted. If I play games from 2005, there is no need for me to have a powerful GPU. My current priority with my PC is making it very quiet, so every little thing helps. I have a Noctua fan and CPU cooler now, and I might be picking up a passive GT 710 for the older games I play. I know, it's not even quite as good as the iGPU, but it does take some load off the CPU (and therefore quieter) and I just like the looks of the EVGA one honestly 😛

Looks like looks must come into play haha. I usually prefer to get hardware that's more powerful than what I need at the time of building a computer as it will age in a prettier manner.
I happen to be the owner of an NH-D15. It's very silent even at max speed, I can call myself a very happy customer of theirs.

 

[InvalidError]

I have a Noctua fan and CPU cooler now, and I might be picking up a passive GT 710 for the older games I play. I know, it's not even quite as good as the iGPU, but it does take some load off the CPU (and therefore quieter) and I just like the looks of the EVGA one honestly 😛

Depending on what CPU you are using for that PC, the IGP might not be adding much of a meaningful amount to heat output. Depending on what Noctua (and CPU) you are using, passively cooling the CPU may also be an option. I'm passively cooling my Core2Duo in the living room with a 212+, the only fan in it is a tri-speed 120mm rear exhaust on low setting.

When I originally installed the 212+ in it because the stock HSF quit doing its job, I tried running it with the fan unplugged to see how well it would manage without it. When the core temperature never passed 70C even under full load, I removed the fan altogether. 212+ with no fan performs about on par against stock HSF with fan, good enough for me and one less fan to worry about.

 

[alidan]

This is a $130 - $150 max.

That's unrealistic. If the GPU performs 85% as good, it deserves to be priced about 85% as high and for the RX-470, that would be around $170. Lower than that and it begins to significantly under-mine higher-end GPUs, especially ones based on the same die when the "big brother" version is already this affordable. The cheapest 256 bits GPU AMD ever launched was $150 and I doubt AMD wants to take that much of a hit to their margins when they have two billion dollars worth of debt renewals on its doorsteps.

The RX-460 based on a cheaper, smaller die, 128bits GDDR5 memory controller, smaller, simpler and cheaper PCB will be in the $130-150 range.

If I was amd, I would sell the mid range line at a profit, low end at proffit, and high end at cost unless they are going to be killing the 1080 and titan with their offerings (the 1080 seems very possible given a 480 and what it does multi gpu and oc, while titan x seems a bit harder to match but seriously, 1200$ isn't an option for consumer gpu) till I had the marketshare to make gameworks a non viable option for a game dev, and I would openly come out telling everyone why the game performs like crap and I would do this till either I have more marketshare or the market is at least at 50~% then I would start going for profit at the high end again, but never go nvidia in their really crappy tactics.

Hitting that low to mid range, hitting it cheap, and hitting it with great gpus should do wonders for that market share as there are A LOT of people who won't spend more then 300$ on a gpu... that is my limit at least unless I have a VERY compelling reason to go bigger such as a sub 400$ gpu that actually works with gpgpu and can do 4k at a real frame rate, not console frame rate.

But yea, amd needs to give people a fantastic experience with their card, so when they go to upgrade, they look at amd first, have a high market share so things like gameworks becomes untouchable due to all the negative connotations it rightly has... those two things alone would be worth a significant dip in price so long as its pulling proffit. Their debt should be taken care of with zen and a re entry to servers.

 

[InvalidError]

Their debt should be taken care of with zen and a re entry to servers.

I doubt things will be that easy for AMD: even if Zen delivers on performance improvements, AMD will still be facing a shrinking PC market, offering chips that are barely on par with what people with i5-based systems already have and unless Zen offers something unique in the server space, it will take a few years to earn trust for server chip sales to gain momentum, which means limited server-space wins before the debts roll over.

If AMD cuts deep in their GPU profits to hurt Gameworks, their debtors may demand that AMD sell the GPU business since it contributes nothing to AMD's bottom line and low to mid-range discrete GPU sales are dropping rapidly thanks to IGPs eating that market segment. To get favorable terms when AMD renegotiates its debts, it needs to be showing value across as much of the business as possible and that won't happen if AMD nukes margins on GPUs at a time where people are looking to upgrade and whatever it is producing is still flying off the shelves regardless of final retail price.