Unitl vega is released and we can see how it performs against it or the upcoming 1080ti, for the absolute best performance right now form a single card, you need the 1080
Ribs85 to buckiebull
2 Feb 173#26
Not currently. Vega might rival it but we simply don't know yet as it's unreleased. Vega is coming out really soon (March) if rumours are to be believed.
jameshothothot to adams54
2 Feb 173#13
I got the RX470 4gb for £150 from amazon. Seen it around £165 lately. Very little difference between RX470 and RX480 at 1080p. This is 8gb so might be a bit future proof, but my logic is the RX 480 cannot do 4k so with the money saved, I can put it towards a RX580 or whatever next year for 4k gaming.
So see what you need for WoW but I think this is overkill
Summary: In normal horde mode i got 130FPS - 140FPS when running at 1080p Ultra preset- which is normal and similar to vs mode. When i ran benchmark, i got 78FPS on average, which matches what Guru3D got.
When i turned it down to low, it went over 200FPS
delahmed
6 Feb 17#62
I worked it out when I saw the watermark. I'll check the FPS in a minute and do a YouTube video.
rev6
6 Feb 17#61
Guru3d
delahmed
6 Feb 17#60
Where is that graph from? My 970 is not even using OC profile. Happy to do a video. But 100% sure it is hovers between 120 and 135 FPS depending on the scene and number of enemies wallbouncing around. I just set it to ultra preset and don't touch any of the advanced options. I'm using the gears internal FPS counter by the way. I might try fraps when I get home as I'm doubting the internal FPS counter now.
colganraz
5 Feb 17#59
Maybe he's using a custom ultra setting , AA and all that turned down maybe, or just means texture quality on ultra lol
vulcanproject
4 Feb 17#58
I'm just interested in clarifying. Usually I like to max OC parts if they are not top end to increase my bang per buck, RX 480 is a disappointing overclocker in that sense. It's probably down to it being power limited but also could be because it's not on the mature of process nodes.
I been knocking middling GTX970 chips beyond 1450mhz stable boost but it's difficult for your average non handpicked RX 480 sample to go much beyond 1350 stable boost in games. It's certainly unimpressive and does a lot to closing the gap between them at their preferable resolution @ 1080p.
Of course buying new your only option is an RX 480, but if you possess a decent GTX970 just push for overclocking, you'll get results on par (or potentially exceeding) a GTX980. Great OC card.
rev6
4 Feb 17#57
All that to end it with "meh". Disappointed.
vulcanproject
4 Feb 17#56
Arguable it's an upgrade. It's mildly faster in 1080p, doesn't use really use less power or run cooler despite being a completely new generation manufacturing node and overclocks worse. For example typical average OC boost on an RX 480 you might get 1375mhz from a reference 1266, but on a GTX970 with a stock of 1178 you'll usually easily manage a consistent boost of 1400+ which is a larger increase from a lower base speed.
Main advantages of RX 480 are DX12 performance and memory. Main weaknesses are it's AMD, so it's slower with greater CPU load on DX11 or older titles. Nvidia cards typically better paired with less than stellar CPUs then, like many people still have.
If it's an upgrade it's one measured under a microscope, I would never go from an Nvidia card to an AMD one that isn't comprehensively better. So meh.
Nate1492
3 Feb 17#55
Not at all, I'm arguing over a flawed concept that AMD's drivers have been some "Fine Wine" where it's more the case that AMD fanboys and GPU enthusiasts have been hoodwinked by a poor test setup.
When you try to claim that the performance improvements seen at the end of your article are because of better drivers, but you don't actually use the same set of games, it's *really* dodgy.
derp1664
3 Feb 17#54
@ 480p
:innocent:
delahmed
3 Feb 17#52
I bought a G1 970 when they were about £230 used 9 months ago. Brilliant card and currently playing gears 4 on ultra at 130fps.
Games in the original review (July) which are gone: Far Cry 4, RottR, Battlefront.
Two games that favor Nvidia, one Gaming Evolved.
Which were replaced by: Infinite Warfare, Mankind Divided, BF1.
All three favor AMD, two Gaming Evolved.
So yeah, remember when you checked the 'test setup' when someone posts something you disagree with? Maybe you should check the test setup when you agree with something too.
Always be skeptical, especially when you agree with something.
satchef1
3 Feb 171#49
I suppose I chose my words poorly; 16.7.2 are launch window drivers, found in many of the reviews that trickled in after launch. It's probably the most benchmarked driver version.
DX11, GTX 1060 12% better at 1080p, 8% better at 1440p.
DX12, GTX 1060 3% worse at 1080p, 4% worse at 1440p.
From Hardware Canucks 1060 vs 480 updated review, 5th December.
Drivers: Nvidia 376.09, Radeon 16.11.5.
DX11, GTX 1060 2% better at 1080p, 0% better at 1440p.
DX12, GTX 1060 6% worse at 1080p, 6% worse at 1440p.
So that's a 10 point improvement in relative performance between the two cards in DX11 at 1080p, and an 8 point improvement at 1440p. Hardware Canucks also found that the gap had widened under DX12.
The conclusion I take from that is that both cards are pretty good buys, with the GTX 970 also offering good value at <£140 used. For reference, my 480 Nitro+ OC cost me £175 used. It's newer than a 970. It's a bit quicker than a 970. It cost a little bit more. Seems fairly appropriate.
The 1060 6GB remains the better card overall - at the same price point, I wouldn't hesitate to choose that card over the RX 480. Even if the AMD card can now keep up in benchmarks, it's still larger, more power hungry, and runs hotter. My card is inside an SG13. Noise and temperatures are now down to acceptable levels after some experimentation and tweaking. But I have no doubt this would have been considerably less work with a 1060.
corrazy
3 Feb 17#48
Benchmark a game released after the update. Christ fanboys on both sides are mental
ned_ryerson
2 Feb 171#8
Worthy upgrade to a 4gb 970 or not worth the bother?
kietay12 to ned_ryerson
2 Feb 171#11
I'd wait for something else dude
enwod to ned_ryerson
2 Feb 17#18
I'm in a similar boat with a 970 and from what I've read they're similar in terms of performance, with the AMD pulling away on DX12 games and the Nvidia better or equal in some older ones. I think I'm holding out for Vega or a significant upgrade tbh.
Seanspeed to ned_ryerson
2 Feb 171#19
It's a relatively small upgrade, but the difference between a 480 and a 970 will grow more in time.
Depends on how unhappy you are with your 970, I suppose. Mine is still doing ok. I'm going to hold out til either my 970 becomes insufficient to do 1080p/60fps with decent settings, or until I can get a card capable of 4k/60fps for around £300-350. I feel like any upgrade in-between will feel like a stop-gap.
ace_rees to ned_ryerson
3 Feb 17#47
Not really in my opinion. It's not strong enough to do 4K gaming properly (hdmi will only do 30mhz). Try and save for a 1070
Nate1492
3 Feb 17#46
So, for starters, launch driers were 16.6.2.
So, common knowledge being so obvious, how much better are the most current drivers compared to the 16.7.2 drivers?
I'll wait for your % before we discuss further.
derp1664
2 Feb 171#45
They are very much neck and neck now. Make sure you check up to date reviews benchmarks because the RX480 is quite a bit faster now than it was at launch (at launch 1060 was faster in pretty much everything)
The 480 will likely 'age' slightly better than the 1060 but whether or not that's significant before both cards are obsolete performance-wise is anybodies guess tbh (likewise if you are going to upgrade again the next year or so it's fairly meaningless)
Like you say though, the only important benchmarks are the games you actually play.
I'm sure you'll be happy with either don't sweat it
Billythebubble
2 Feb 17#42
I recall this card had cashback direct from msi and was posted <£234 on scan around 3 months ago?
derp1664 to Billythebubble
2 Feb 171#44
Yep plus Civ 6 included at the time. The one I bought worked out to ~ £165 after i sold civ 6
akdeal
2 Feb 17#43
Thank you, that's a very useful review. I am just trying to decide whether to keep my order for the 480 or pay another £15 and get an nVidia 1060 instead. Another review I read seemed to show the 1060 was slightly faster in pretty much all of the games I play. I guess I have a few days to decide anyhow.
54M13
2 Feb 17#40
I got an r9 270x toxic 2gb. Cex round the corner from my work have a MSI GTX970 for sale for £185, they'll give me £50 for my GPU. Is it worth the upgrade? Could I get more that £50 if I sell it on?
satchef1 to 54M13
2 Feb 17#41
No.
That's not great value. If you can get £50 for your current card, but a used 970 for ~£140, or an RX 470, 480, or GTX 1060.
Driver version: 16.7.2
Release date: July 2016
:smirk:
It's fairly well accepted now that the 480 drivers were junk at launch, and that performance has improved ~10% since then.
As for Overclocking, it's not something I'm that bothered about. But doing a search for recent reviews with overclocking results, a review by HardOCP was the first result I came across. They got 1410MHz out of their card. However, reading around, architecture limitations mean anything over 1350MHz delivers roughly the same performance boost (~10%). Probably why there hasn't been an RX490.
Anyway, if you are paying the same price, the 480 is a better value, but if you can get a 970 for 100-140, it's a great deal.
akdeal
2 Feb 17#30
Will this 480 run GTA V with everything on its highest setting @ 1080p 60 FPS?
dreamager to akdeal
2 Feb 17#38
This review is a little old and the drivers have been further optimised since then, but it seems 1080p is fine
Nate1492
2 Feb 17#37
The reports of AMD 'pulling away' on DX12 are greatly exaggerated.
Many review sites have 2 games in favor of NVIDIA and 4 in favor of AMD. It's really far too early tell.
The sample size is small and the comparisons are generally very close.
But if you have a 970, there is no reason to buy a 1060, 480, or anything else unless you plan on going 1070/1080.
satchef1
2 Feb 17#36
Launch review = bad drivers for the 480.
Yes, the date at the top is 27th January 2017. But TR have simply republished their earlier review; it says so at the start of the first page.
Not that I'd suggest the 480 is significantly faster than the 970. It isn't. The extra RAM might have an effect going forward though; the 780Ti struggles with some newer titles.
480 isn't just beating 970 in modern DX12 games, but also DX11 games, too. Especially console-driven AAA titles. This should be quite relevant for anybody looking to buy a new GPU as most people dont buy these mid-range cards with no interest in playing new games at good settings and performance.
The gap will likely be quite drastic in two years or so. The vRAM difference alone will probably mean a significant difference in ability to run good textures and draw distances on the 970.
But yea, I dont feel the 1070 is good value. It's something like £70-100 more than the 970 was and it's likely going to be blown away by Vega here soon enough. Volta is probably not super far off either, given how early Nvidia were confident in releasing basically the full Pascal line-up. And the fact that Pascal itself was only a late stop-gap architecture to fill in between Maxwell and Volta means it's probably going to be significantly outdone here in pretty short order.
Volta will probably be the first chance of a 4k/60fps card at £300-350. If not at release, then maybe a year later or so with a price drop.
tom_gov
2 Feb 17#31
upgrade from rx460 2gb or wait ?
harisonwright to tom_gov
2 Feb 171#33
Why do you have a 460 if you wanted to upgrade it's still so new
fingers91
2 Feb 17#32
yes it will run it easy if that's all he is playing though i would recommend save yourself some monies and go for a gtx 1050ti 4gb. can pick them up around the £150 mark
buckiebull
2 Feb 171#29
Thanks guys, I will wait and see what happens in the next few months and save a wee bit more :smile:
MarcoLoves360
2 Feb 172#2
this or Vega... humm decisions decisions
ollie87 to MarcoLoves360
2 Feb 172#6
Vega won't be £225.
Anonknowmouse to MarcoLoves360
2 Feb 172#28
Get an aftermarket RX470/480 for £160-£200 now, or pay twice the price for Vega 10 in March or June (not sure) if you want to game at 4k 60fps. Also if you're input lag and screen tearing sensitive Freesync monitors whip Gsync monitors for value.
buckiebull
2 Feb 17#25
Does AMD have anything that rivals a Nvidia 1080 GFX Card ?
Ribs85 to buckiebull
2 Feb 173#26
Not currently. Vega might rival it but we simply don't know yet as it's unreleased. Vega is coming out really soon (March) if rumours are to be believed.
corrazy to buckiebull
2 Feb 173#27
nothing.
Unitl vega is released and we can see how it performs against it or the upcoming 1080ti, for the absolute best performance right now form a single card, you need the 1080
Scottc123
2 Feb 171#24
Game benchmarks universally show that your 970 will outperform a 480 at 1080p and 1440p in games that are a couple of years old, but not in very recent Direct X12 games, nor any game at 4k resolution. However, the 480 isn't enough to push 4k at reasonable framerate anyway. As said above, in your case, go 1070, or skip this generation entirely.
satchef1
2 Feb 17#23
Unless you've got money to burn or want to move up a model, skipping a generation is generally a good idea. 970 -> 1060 (or 480) makes little sense as it's a significant expenditure for a minimal upgrade. Likewise 980 -> 1070 or 960 -> 1050(Ti).
The 970 goes for about £120 at the moment, so £110 after postage costs. A £115 upgrade for a small increase in performance and some new features. Most likely the 970 will still be worth £80-£100 when the next generation launches and 1070 beating performance is available at this price point. Far more bang for your buck.
vulcanproject
2 Feb 172#21
RX480 is not an upgrade on a GTX970. Make it a GTX1070 or don't bother
rev6 to vulcanproject
2 Feb 174#22
It's an upgrade. Just not a worthy one.
jimferno
2 Feb 171#20
New cards must be round the corner, the RX 480 price seems to have dropped £50 across the board.
MSI is one of the better manufacturers, heat!
adams54
2 Feb 17#9
Would anyone know if this would be suitable for a lad who plays World of Warcraft please?
Domislice to adams54
2 Feb 172#10
Easily, this will run pretty much anything modern at 1080p60.
jameshothothot to adams54
2 Feb 173#13
I got the RX470 4gb for £150 from amazon. Seen it around £165 lately. Very little difference between RX470 and RX480 at 1080p. This is 8gb so might be a bit future proof, but my logic is the RX 480 cannot do 4k so with the money saved, I can put it towards a RX580 or whatever next year for 4k gaming.
So see what you need for WoW but I think this is overkill
thecurt96 to adams54
2 Feb 17#16
I use a GTX 560 and get high 60+fps, ultra takes a little bit of a dip but still very playable
enwod to adams54
2 Feb 17#17
Hi mate, this will easily run WoW. I don't play it however and I'm not sure how limited it is by the CPU but this GPU is more than enough for most games today on high at 1080p.
ned_ryerson
2 Feb 17#15
Thank you. I'm still keeping my eye on the 1070 price drops
Lahn
2 Feb 173#14
Definitely overkill for WoW, a 460 would play that happily!
gowf
2 Feb 17#12
Id say the sapphire nitro edition is the best but the twin frozr is pretty damn good too. At this price you can't go wrong
buckiebull
2 Feb 171#5
Is this any better than an MSI R390X 8gb ?
ollie87 to buckiebull
2 Feb 172#7
Not really. It'll run a lot cooler though.
poison3k
2 Feb 17#4
Nice price for a good card
rd3d2
2 Feb 17#3
derp1664
2 Feb 172#1
Have one of these and it runs nice and quiet. Stays cool under load ~65max w/o overclocking. Stable clocks no throttling. OCs pretty well too.
Good price
Opening post
absolute steal at this price
Top comments
Unitl vega is released and we can see how it performs against it or the upcoming 1080ti, for the absolute best performance right now form a single card, you need the 1080
So see what you need for WoW but I think this is overkill
Latest comments (63)
https://youtu.be/exLgoP_-NEA
Summary: In normal horde mode i got 130FPS - 140FPS when running at 1080p Ultra preset- which is normal and similar to vs mode. When i ran benchmark, i got 78FPS on average, which matches what Guru3D got.
When i turned it down to low, it went over 200FPS
I been knocking middling GTX970 chips beyond 1450mhz stable boost but it's difficult for your average non handpicked RX 480 sample to go much beyond 1350 stable boost in games. It's certainly unimpressive and does a lot to closing the gap between them at their preferable resolution @ 1080p.
Of course buying new your only option is an RX 480, but if you possess a decent GTX970 just push for overclocking, you'll get results on par (or potentially exceeding) a GTX980. Great OC card.
Main advantages of RX 480 are DX12 performance and memory. Main weaknesses are it's AMD, so it's slower with greater CPU load on DX11 or older titles. Nvidia cards typically better paired with less than stellar CPUs then, like many people still have.
If it's an upgrade it's one measured under a microscope, I would never go from an Nvidia card to an AMD one that isn't comprehensively better. So meh.
When you try to claim that the performance improvements seen at the end of your article are because of better drivers, but you don't actually use the same set of games, it's *really* dodgy.
:innocent:
About to upgrade to 1080 and x34a
https://hardforum.com/threads/amd-vs-nvidia-gtx-1060-vs-rx-480-an-updated-review.1919224/
They didn't use the same set of titles.
Games in the original review (July) which are gone: Far Cry 4, RottR, Battlefront.
Two games that favor Nvidia, one Gaming Evolved.
Which were replaced by: Infinite Warfare, Mankind Divided, BF1.
All three favor AMD, two Gaming Evolved.
So yeah, remember when you checked the 'test setup' when someone posts something you disagree with? Maybe you should check the test setup when you agree with something too.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/73945-gtx-1060-vs-rx-480-updated-review-2.html
Always be skeptical, especially when you agree with something.
From Hardware Canucks GTX 1060 review, 18th July.
Drivers: Nvidia 368.146, Radeon 16.7.2.
DX11, GTX 1060 12% better at 1080p, 8% better at 1440p.
DX12, GTX 1060 3% worse at 1080p, 4% worse at 1440p.
From Hardware Canucks 1060 vs 480 updated review, 5th December.
Drivers: Nvidia 376.09, Radeon 16.11.5.
DX11, GTX 1060 2% better at 1080p, 0% better at 1440p.
DX12, GTX 1060 6% worse at 1080p, 6% worse at 1440p.
So that's a 10 point improvement in relative performance between the two cards in DX11 at 1080p, and an 8 point improvement at 1440p. Hardware Canucks also found that the gap had widened under DX12.
The conclusion I take from that is that both cards are pretty good buys, with the GTX 970 also offering good value at <£140 used. For reference, my 480 Nitro+ OC cost me £175 used. It's newer than a 970. It's a bit quicker than a 970. It cost a little bit more. Seems fairly appropriate.
The 1060 6GB remains the better card overall - at the same price point, I wouldn't hesitate to choose that card over the RX 480. Even if the AMD card can now keep up in benchmarks, it's still larger, more power hungry, and runs hotter. My card is inside an SG13. Noise and temperatures are now down to acceptable levels after some experimentation and tweaking. But I have no doubt this would have been considerably less work with a 1060.
Depends on how unhappy you are with your 970, I suppose. Mine is still doing ok. I'm going to hold out til either my 970 becomes insufficient to do 1080p/60fps with decent settings, or until I can get a card capable of 4k/60fps for around £300-350. I feel like any upgrade in-between will feel like a stop-gap.
So, common knowledge being so obvious, how much better are the most current drivers compared to the 16.7.2 drivers?
I'll wait for your % before we discuss further.
The 480 will likely 'age' slightly better than the 1060 but whether or not that's significant before both cards are obsolete performance-wise is anybodies guess tbh (likewise if you are going to upgrade again the next year or so it's fairly meaningless)
Like you say though, the only important benchmarks are the games you actually play.
I'm sure you'll be happy with either don't sweat it
That's not great value. If you can get £50 for your current card, but a used 970 for ~£140, or an RX 470, 480, or GTX 1060.
Driver version: 16.7.2
Release date: July 2016
:smirk:
It's fairly well accepted now that the 480 drivers were junk at launch, and that performance has improved ~10% since then.
As for Overclocking, it's not something I'm that bothered about. But doing a search for recent reviews with overclocking results, a review by HardOCP was the first result I came across. They got 1410MHz out of their card. However, reading around, architecture limitations mean anything over 1350MHz delivers roughly the same performance boost (~10%). Probably why there hasn't been an RX490.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_970_Gaming/30.html
The MSI version of the 970 is within 5% performance of the MSI 480 before either are OC'd.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/RX_480_Gaming_X/26.html
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_970_Gaming/30.html
The 970 recovers the 5% in OC.
Anyway, if you are paying the same price, the 480 is a better value, but if you can get a 970 for 100-140, it's a great deal.
Many review sites have 2 games in favor of NVIDIA and 4 in favor of AMD. It's really far too early tell.
The sample size is small and the comparisons are generally very close.
But if you have a 970, there is no reason to buy a 1060, 480, or anything else unless you plan on going 1070/1080.
Yes, the date at the top is 27th January 2017. But TR have simply republished their earlier review; it says so at the start of the first page.
Not that I'd suggest the 480 is significantly faster than the 970. It isn't. The extra RAM might have an effect going forward though; the 780Ti struggles with some newer titles.
The gap will likely be quite drastic in two years or so. The vRAM difference alone will probably mean a significant difference in ability to run good textures and draw distances on the 970.
But yea, I dont feel the 1070 is good value. It's something like £70-100 more than the 970 was and it's likely going to be blown away by Vega here soon enough. Volta is probably not super far off either, given how early Nvidia were confident in releasing basically the full Pascal line-up. And the fact that Pascal itself was only a late stop-gap architecture to fill in between Maxwell and Volta means it's probably going to be significantly outdone here in pretty short order.
Volta will probably be the first chance of a 4k/60fps card at £300-350. If not at release, then maybe a year later or so with a price drop.
Unitl vega is released and we can see how it performs against it or the upcoming 1080ti, for the absolute best performance right now form a single card, you need the 1080
The 970 goes for about £120 at the moment, so £110 after postage costs. A £115 upgrade for a small increase in performance and some new features. Most likely the 970 will still be worth £80-£100 when the next generation launches and 1070 beating performance is available at this price point. Far more bang for your buck.
MSI is one of the better manufacturers, heat!
So see what you need for WoW but I think this is overkill
Good price