Which card would be the best bang for your buck for simple 1080p gaming. Friend is looking to upgrade

8 years ago

Comment has been collapsed.

Which is better?

View Results
GTX 1060
RX 480

1070 or GTFO. OK I guess maybe the 1060. Good luck to your friend.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

1060 if your friend doesn't have SLI plan in the future.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

voted for 1060, but if money is short, wait for the 1050 vs 470 battle (both will release soon)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I haven't heard any rumors about a 1050?

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

this rumor sugest december, could be a long wait :) http://www.fudzilla.com/news/graphics/41128-nvidia-gp106-300-gpu-could-launch-as-gtx-1050

but rx 470 is "really soon"

of course, if have the money, i would go 1060

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

According to PCGamer, 470 and 460 are due for release in the next 3 days. Depending where you live in the world - due for release in Australia in 2 days.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Those aren't gonna max out 1080p. Better go with 1060.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

RX480, DX12, Vulkan is the Future !

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

numerous test say it is better in those and from personal use amd rx 480 is amazing !

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Exactly, FUTURE. Right now it's still 1060 and by the time Vulkan becomes a widely supported API nvidia will make up for it and people will just upgrade anyway.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

1060!

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Given similarly performing cards, I'll always prefer the AMD because FreeSync will save you $150+ on your monitor.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

mmm - I saw a post the other day - OP was asking which monitor - Both 24inch, 1 supported freeSync and the other NVidia "whatever" it was - both were same price (around the AU$250 mark). The savings on that instance come down to the card.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

24" AU$250 is a terrible monitor. I'm talking actual good gaming monitors, 27" 1440p 144hz or even 34" 1440p ultrawide. For that Gsync adds $150+ over freesync.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Given that the topic is about 1080 gaming, would you still maintain your choice?
I'm usually an AMD guy, but I might need an upgrade soon so I'm thinking about going green this time around.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Most people are going to want to upgrade to a better monitor sooner or later.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Most people are also going going to upgrade to a better insert anything sooner or later...

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

When you're buying a card capable of 1440p gaming, it's going to make you want to upgrade to 1440p.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

If you had used "I" instead of "you" your sentence would have made a whole lot more sense. Personally I've owned a 1440 capable computer for quite some time and never had the slightest urge to "upgrade"

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Maybe, but maybe not.
I guess I could have said this when 1720x960 was the norm, but I don't think I'll need a 1440p monitor soon. A 27" would be nice, but getting older brings other priorities, so 1080p should do for now.
Instead of 1440p I might be more interested in the whole VR trend and I hear that the 480 has that pretty much covered. I don't know about the 1060 though.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Deleted

This comment was deleted 5 years ago.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Congratulations, now your build is crippled in all games with Nvidia GIMPWORKS.

(Also, crossfire/sli sucks in most games)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

And that's why we should boycott them.
They literally bribe developers to throw shit on AMD, just like Intel.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Plus don't forget AMD's new multi gpu plan is supposed to negate the NVidia disabling of the PhysX if combined with non NVidia GPU's.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Oh, right! Another one of their dirty tricks!
PhysX was originally an addon card (and an expensive one) made by Ageia, that worked with every GPU.

Nvidia acquired Ageia, and then purposely coded the driver to disable PhysX if it detected a non-Nvidia GPU.
So, those unfortunate souls who used to use the PhysX card in conjunction with other GPUs, found themselves with a $200 toy with limited resell value (since Nvidia started to include the PhysX software in their drivers).

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I'm not really sure disabling PhysX can be considered a bad thing… Have you seen that engine in action? Worse than Havok…

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I've seen it, and I completely agree! I heard some serious thrashtalks about Havok, but it just works, without bogging the system,
while PhysX looks more like a benchmark than a physics engine.

Although I was referring to the old days, when Nvidia basically said "f**k you", to those who bought the PhysX card from Ageia before the acquisition, and found themselves with an expensive, useless toy.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Oh, that old thing? Well, yes. What can I say, NVidia. Not that they are the only ones who'd do that, but many other companies would have kept at least some legacy support for the previously sold cards.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

The "fun" fact, is that they actually kept supporting it for some time after the acquisition... then they probably saw the possibility of driving higher profits if they kept that technology all for themselves.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

This, so much this. I refuse to buy anything from them on principles alone.

While AMD is always striving to provide standard and open-source solutions that will work for every manufacturer, Nvidia is bribing developers in using their proprietary solutions that they intentionally gimp on any competing hardware.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Invisible (for player) underground water tesselation in Crysis 2 FTW!

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Boycott all you want, it's not gonna make a difference besides maybe sleeping better at night.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

yep, and also its so f*cking funny, when a game doesn't have Gimpworks, and its getting optimized to AMD, rabid nvidia fanboys are getting rabid like dogs, because they card sucks balls in it. (so far what i've seen, they are blaming DX12 and Vulkan games for being optimized to AMD and thats why nvidia cards lose by so much... LOL, salty fanboys)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

What they did with projectCars was outrageous. They seriously fucked the performance of the game for every Amd hardware.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Congratulations, by supporting nvidia you're making the situations even worse for everyone and become a part of the problem...

Too bad I'm saying this as a 970 owner

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

But at least you will get 30$ because nvidia lied :D (sadly i don't live in the US and already sold my card so i can't get free money :( )

PS.: im sidegrading to RX480 from 970, because 8 is more than 3.5 and also 970 loses fps in some games in DX12.... xDDDDD

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I don't live in the US, but thanks for telling me because I have just now googled and I saw the news about that 30 usd thing. Still - I don't think they'll give it to people outside of the US (since that's where the verdict was given - California), but I'll keep an eye out at least.

Thanks

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Maybe AMD is improved nowadays, but I've always preferred Nvidia because their driver support tended to be better (despite the fact that AMD historically has offered a little better bang for your buck).

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Actually, AMD's drivers have always been mostly on par with Nvidia's, despite what the general consensus seem to be.
The "AMD GPU drivers are shit" antic, is probably due to the fact that people always complain when things don't work, but never praise them when they do.

Also, Nvidia now asks for your e-mail to get new drivers, how shady is that? And there's also GeForce Experience,
who knows what that software actually does, besides driver updates and games' optimization...

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

i thought it asked for email only if you download the drivers through GeForce Experience?

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I have no clue, I don't have a Nvidia card, so I just know it from news.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Website didn't ask for email when I downloaded drivers through their site yesterday, although, GFE didn't ask for email for drivers a year ago when I used it. Weird change from them.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

So far it doesn't do anything of the sort, but I heard that Nvidia is considering making accounts mandatory for the GameReady drivers and all that. Which basically means that yet another company joins the business of gathering data en masse to better flood you with adverts and such.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

AMD drivers have a bad rep for good reason, never had problems with Nvidia drivers, meanwhile I've seen AMD drivers cripple the gpu to the point where you're using your monitor in 256 colors lol.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Yes. Ok. You can stop now.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Did someone feed you after midnight?

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Would you care to explain the shady part in asking for your e-mail?

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Both are equally bad from a certain perspective. NVidia tends to push out a lot of drivers, of which most are worse than the one before it. Currently they are in the phase of every new driver breaking some "old" (since apparently more than 5-years-old is "old" now) games and they don't care to fix those. Ever.
AMD, on the other hand, still releases a new driver every once in a blue moon, which may or may not be better than the previous one. On the other hand, you can use an AMD driver for years on end, unless you always want to play the latest fad of a game, where they tend to have performance problems.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I really doubt that "most" driver releases from Nvidia are worse then the previous, unless you have a very peculiar definition of being worse.

I've never heard of or personally experienced a driver update breaking an old game and I mostly play older titles over and over, lol. But I would be interested in reading about the phenomenon if you have examples of this of the top of your head :)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Same here, for the past few years I have only been playing on a mediocre laptop, so only older games. I haven't noticed any of them being actually crippled (that is, beyond what my hardware limitations did).

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I suspect there have been some instance, or even instances of this happening and it got stuck in peoples mind.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

The one I can tell for sure is New Vegas/the old Gamebryo engine Bethesda used. Last year the forum started to fill up with posts of people saying their games didn't work any more. Right now there is also a case there that is very suspicious of being broke all of a sudden because of an NVidia driver update.
Another example should be Supreme Commander, which now seems to be a crapshoot if it works on a certain GTX card with a certain driver or not.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Is this problem with New Vegas current? I cant seem to find any current information about it.

Edit: Seems to be working fine for me, which is good because I still need to finish this game at some point :P

8 years ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I've never heard of or personally experienced a driver update breaking an old game

http://steamcommunity.com/app/22380/discussions/0/355043117502645874/

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Good thing I'm still on 368.81 then. Sadly I've run in to some bugs with Project Nevadas Cyberware and I cba to spend any more time trying to solve it :S
Other than that the game runs amazingly well with all the HD texture packs and whatnot installed. My 970 rarely breakes 30% utilization with 60 fps cap.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Since it is more or less an engine from around 1999, even that sounds high. Probably because the new shaders Bethesda added to it over the decade were terribly optimised.
(Well, not that it matters, the game relies on CPU anyway for performance. ^^)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

If the GPu is to not be susbtituted in a couple of years i highly recommend AMD, the main reason is that AMD rarely leaves cards behind in the driver department which means while the 480 right now might be inferior to the 1060 in some cases in the future it will be better. here is an example
An AMD 7970 beating a 780ti.
In a nutshell AMD supports their GPu for a lot longer but takes quite a while to launch the drivers while nvidia only supports their latest line of GPU which means that once the 1160 releases the 1060 will be left behind. AMD will (probably) not leave the 480 for now. So you can conclude that if you upgrade your GPU often (every 2-3 years) then nvidia will probably be the better option but if you intend to use your card for while AMD is better.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

That's true. but you have to consider that AMD keep using the same chip, same architect (GCN 1.1) for years. For example, if they improve the performance of 370 (which they have to), 4-year old 7850 will certainly gain from it.
On the other hand Nvidia upgrade their cards in a tick-tock pace similar to Intel, which means while they focus on new cards, old ones barely got improvement - the not too old Maxwell cards have just been moved to legacy category...however, old cards losing performance is only a rumor, they got slightly improve due to more tests.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I like to mention that AMD supports old cards because many people say nvidia has "better" driver support. I have had only AMD cards (until i buy me new desktop this month) so i might biased but i feel that AMD driver support makes old cards very worthwhile.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

IMO not any more for good old GCN 1.1, they will focus on Polaris (GCN 4.0) from now on, since 400 series use new architect form mid to high range. I'll keep an eye on custom 480 because of CF support and future driver potential, right now I'm satisfy with my good old 7950 Boost.
btw In Linux, Nvidia does have better driver than AMD.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

So AMD has a working driver now for Linux? The main reasons I gave up even laying around with Linux distros was that I managed to "BSOD" every single Linux I ever tried in 5 years on several machines by attempting to install and AMD GPU driver on them.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

"Working" is a bit of an overstatement...
I have to say it, Nvidia drivers, and even Intel's, are way better than AMD's under Linux.
Although AMD provides (almost) open source drivers, while Nvidia doesn't, so Linux purists would still prefer them.

And the OpenGL performance is atrocious, or at least it was when I tried some gaming on Linux Mint last year (I had to format Windows 7 and didn't have an installation disk ready), here is an example, Bioshock Infinite:
Linux Mint, lowest settings, 720p = 25 FPS with absurd stuttering
Windows 7, medium settings, 900p = 45 FPS
XCOM Enemy Unknown had a bug that caused the GPU fan to spin at max speed, and stuttered even on the menu...

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

What good are open source drivers even to Linux purists if they're crap anyway? I'd think a closed source working driver would be miles better.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Amd using GCN 1.0 *(First gen) in : DX 12 (11.1)

  • 7770 re-brand R7 250X
  • 7850 re-brand to R7 265 later to R7 370,
  • 7970 re-brand to R9 280x

GCN 1.1 (Second Gen): DX 12 (12.0)

  • 7790 re-brand R7 260x cut doe to R7 260 re-brand to R7 360
  • R9 290(X) re-brand R9 390 (x)

GCN 1.2 (third gen): DX 12 (12.0) * but have few more features

  • R9 285 re-brand to R9 380 fully unlocked to R9 380X
  • Fury series

GCN 1.3 (fourth gen): DX 12( ?) no info

  • Polaris GPUs

Full list here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_graphics_processing_units

About what brings each GCN:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_Core_Next#1.0

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Which card would be the best bang for your buck for simple 1080p gaming?

AMD Radeon Rx 480, hands down the best choice!
Preferably paired with a Display Port monitor to take advantage of Free Sync (which is royalty-free, unlike Nvidia's G-Sync).

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

No need for a Display Port monitor any more :)
http://www.amd.com/Documents/freesync-hdmi.pdf

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

AMD because driver support. my good old 7870 still gets performance boost 4 years in.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

The 7000 line users were lucky. Sadly, my 6850 was dropped to legacy support, so it now has the single one legacy Win10 driver that will never get updated. To salt the wound more, I always hear 7850/7870 users to still be able to play most anything even today on those. Considering their age, that's some feat.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Deleted

This comment was deleted 5 years ago.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

OpenGL issue, I assume? I know the newer AMD cards run OpenGL application properly now, but before that, everyone was so damn focused on Direct3D…

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

go for the 1060, but if he can go a bit over budget the 1070 is by far the best bang for your buck

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

And by "a bit" we mean "double it". :)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

About 10 years ago I bought 2 brand new 512mb 8800GT's for a new SLI PC - Because that was "the way to go" - Cost me AU$2000 for both. The same time my brother bought an AMD.
Within 2 years the cards were obsolete and I needed a new card - so I bought a new NVidia - which was obsolete in a year.
3 NVidia cards later I bought my first ever AMD card - Last year.
My brother is still using his and getting better performance then what my son is in my old machine with the newer NVidia card.
Nvidia seems to produce the best "In the NOW" cards - but then expects you to buy a new one every year or 2.
AMD Support seems to last years longer. I'll probably never go back to NVidia unless they reverse their attitude regarding the disabling of PhysX when installed with non NVidia cards, lower their prices and support their cards longer.
Wait a few days and have a look at the 460's and 470's (Due for release 4th August), then decide.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Nvidia, the way it's meant to be played bribed!

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Even though I'm in the AMD crowd, this sounds a little strange to me. Despite the lack of proper driver support, 750 Ti cards are still used to good efficiency.
Then again, with NVidia, they tend to have exactly one card in a 2-3 year period that has a good price, good performance, and can last for a while. It is the 970 now, was the 750 Ti before it. At this rate, the 11xx line should have the next decent one.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

The RX 480 supports Vulcan and DX12 better, as the Hitman tests show it.
The GTX 1060, despite its new architecture, acts more like a beefed-up 960. Currently it has an advantage of slightly better speed for costing a little more money, and it also needs less power. But if Vulcan really gets off (and it looks like it might), then the AMD card will leave it behind considerably.

If power supply is a concern, buy the NVidia one. If not, buy the AMD one.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Hitman is not a good game to test cards, since it's AMD "branded".
DOOM works with OpenGL/Vulkan, optimized by a team of great people and has no "branding" whatsoever. Look at that for GPU intensive benchmarking.
On the other hand for CPU/GPU intensive benchmarking Ashes of Singularity seems to be the better choice, even if it's AMD "branded".

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

If Hitman is not a good game to test because it is AMD branded, then I reserve the right to rebuke any Unreal Engine game tests showing NVidia dominance, because that engine is NVidia branded.
The average consumer doesn't care which company worked with which dev though. They can see that the 1060 is somewhat better in classic DX11 applications but the 480 shows strength now in Vulkan and some in DX12. They can choose accordingly. For example, if I would buy a card only for 12-18 months and change it again, I'd go for the 1060, as DX11 should dominate at least that long still. If I had to buy a GPU for over 3-4 years, then I don't see anything in NVidia's currently available line that I could recommend to anyone. When the 970 was released, it was a card like that, but now the new architecture made the 900 line pretty damn obsolete for new buyers.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

The 1060 gets better fps in DX11 titles because it has more clock speed, simple as that. To lower the price though they gave you lower memory transfer rate (this is huge and possibly a bottleneck when loading textures) and lower memory in general: 6GB vs 8GB.
The RX 480 has less clock speed but handles parallel requests better (better than any Pascal card, because 1060, 1070 and 1080 have the same base architecture), that's why (especially) Vulkan and DX12 benchmarks run better.

Btw, I'm quite sure that (at least) the UE4 is not nVidia "branded", it was just their first demo that was showed on nVidia cards.

Good impartial benchmarks to look at right now are:
OpenGL/Vulkan: DOOM, DOTA2 @4k, the Talos Principle
DX11: Unigine tech demos (GPU intensive)
DX12: Ashes of Singularity (again, even if AMD branded, since it's a mostly CPU intensive title) and maybe averaging the results from Hitman (AMD) and Rise of the Tomb Raider (nVidia, search for tests after AMD driver patch for AMD cards)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Please, Unreal engine have been NVidia branded since UE2. Epic even made a small fuss about it how they integrated GameWorks into UE4 even more to the point where they released a set of their own modified tools of GameWorks made for UE4 specifically. Epic has been the poster boy for NVidia since 2002-2003.

In the end though, the current small lead in Vulkan tests still point to AMD making a better card for long term, while the DX11 dominance of the 1060 should make it quite lucrative as a short term investment.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Then every DX11 game isn't a good game to test AMD cards, since they're NVIDIA "branded" + have Gimpworks (gameworks)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Tomb Raider is a DX11 game, AMD branded which makes use of AMD TressFX, and there are more. Just don't generalize.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Noone benchmarks with the old tomb raider game. (and the newer one has gimpworks.)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Beefed up 960? It gets 980 performance at stock speeds. Also Hitman is officially AMD optimised and Doom is the only Vulkan supported game right now.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Erm, this is why it is "beefed up"… But so far in tests it still performs like a DX11 card of the previous generation.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

The difference is gigantic, beefed up is seriously understating the performance upgrade.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Uhm no, Dota 2 and The Talos Princible has vulkan too.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Dota 2 can run on a toaster so doesn't really help much. I'm not sure how much bigger of a framerate do you want in Talos either.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I love these threads, simply for the rabid fanboy-ing. :X
They're always good for a laugh. XD

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

They are well prepared too! Both teams have polished their weapons for combat.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I know, right? They practice anywhere AMD or nVidia are mentioned, so they're always at the ready. :X

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

If you're like me, happy with 1920x1200, then the 1060 easily has all the juice you need. At least, based on the reviews I've seen. They convinced me so I bought the EVGA OC version yesterday.

Compared to the 480, much quieter and better performance (480 seems to move ahead on DX 12 games)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

GTX 1060 is better for most existing games (running DX11 and nVidia "branded"... f*** them)
RX 480 proved to be better on (early) Vulkan/DX12 titles. By early I mean we're most likely supposed to see even more performance boost in the future.

RX 480 (base) has a power issue with older motherboards, this was fixed with drivers (=kinda fixed) so if you're going for the card wait for manufacturers custom versions (like Asus strix/dual for example)
GTX 1060 has no SLI support, once you're done with it, you will have to just replace it, while the RX 480 can work together with other (older/newer) cards and even the CPU's graphic processor.

Long story short: if you plan to play only "old" DX11 titles in the near future (1~2 years) maybe the GTX 1060 is going to be better for you. On the other hand if you believe in Vulkan and (ugly Win10 only) DX12 you should go for the RX 480, again, wait for custom boards because of the power issue (unless you have a ~90$+ MoBo).

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Don't recommend ASUS cards, they are overpriced, Sapphire is the best currently, its price is normal + it has the highest factory OC.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Yes and no. Asus cards are highly durable so I wouldn't recommend saving a few bucks while sacrificing durability. Sapphire are great choices for AMD cards though.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

30-50 bucks is a few bucks? kkk

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

You're taking it too literally, you know what I mean and if I can get 1-2 extra years for the price of a few Starbucks coffees I'll take it.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

The reason why I'm recommending Asus for this particular card (and as I said only upcoming strix/dual versions) is because of the custom PCB that solves the power draw issue at hardware level avoiding any kind of downclock with any kind of MoBo.
Not to mention that asus has probably the best quality standards and best cooling among cards manufacturers.

If you're confident enough that your MoBo is solid, then you can go with whatever card you want, but as far as I know people at Asus are the only one that fixed this power draw issue with a custom PCB.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Sapphire has custom PCB too, and its much cheaper + fastest RX480 currently.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It has a custom PCB but they didn't change the power draw from the PCIe. Just read ffs. I'm not parting for Asus because I hate you, it's just the only manufacturer (for now) that looked into (and solved) this issue.
The Sapphire custom card has a modified PCB that is able to draw more power in general (through 2 additional pins) but it's just able to draw more power, not less power from the PCIe slot (which is the whole point here).

But again, if you have a good MoBo (around ~100$+) you're quite sure you'll never experience downclocking whatsoever with whichever RX-480 card.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

They did change it you frickin' asus fanboy, you should read. (in fact every custom RX480 has fixed powerdraw.)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

link pls, can't find anything official.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It's in every good review. Btw you should also link that only asus fix'd power issue :)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

«Power allocation has been redesigned compared to reference. ROG Strix RX 480 with the use of a custom VRM (voltage regulator module) and PCB (printed circuit board) draws 100% of the GPU power from the 8-pin PCIe power connector (rather than splitting the load between the connector and the PCIe slot). Such a design ensures that the PCIe slot specifications for power consumption is not breached (the card may throttle otherwise).»
source: http://rog.asus.com/23932016/gaming-graphics-cards-2/overview-rog-strix-rx-480/

«The new NITRO Boost switch increases the boost clock and power limit for higher performance to unleash the gaming performance of the card.»
source: http://www.sapphiretech.com/productdetial.asp?pid=251A3BDE-2CC1-4C49-B661-165D72DEA40A&lang=eng

As you can see, as I wrote before, they just increased the power draw limit (mostly for overclocking) but the PCIe power draw was not touched. It's a slight difference but, again, as far as I know only Asus redesigned the power allocation so far.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Then buy overpriced Asus. I will still get the much cheaper and faster Sapphire Nitro+ OC.

I won't reply to you anymore because you're a blind Asus fangirl, because you can't even comprehend if noone fixed RX480 power issue, then the internet would be full of "OMG SAPPHIRE\XFX\POWERCOLOR\Insert random non-asus brand here CUSTOM RX480 JUST FRIED MY MOTHERBOARD"

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

For simple 1080p gaming rx480/8gb is an overhead. So maybe rx480/4gb if you want a bang for buck or 1060 if you want shadowplay/ansel/someshitworks technologies.

And ofc there is no 480 custom boards (yet) while there is plenty of 1060 ones. And while Nvidia Founders Edition is a most expensive card, AMD reference is the cheapest one, so custom 480s may cost same as custom 1060s.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

ahh there are about 12 custom 480's out as of a week ago - Sapphire, XFX. MSI and Gigabyte all have stock/black/OC and tweaked versions - prices are ranging from AU$350 to AU$470 from PCCasegear.com and roughly 10-30% more on ebay. There are even a few water cooled versions available with AIO and some backplates and sinks for custom mods.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Well the only ones I see have reference cooler and custom cooled XFX is out of stock and costs way more than custom 1060. Temps and noise levels will be not as good on stock turbine cooler

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

There are tons of custom 480 out already. Check out overclockers.co.uk (but they are mostly out of stock since the demand is so big lol)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

970

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

But... Why? 1060 and 480 are both (mostly) same price and offer (slighty) more perfomance and draw less power. And more VRAM ofc

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

yep, 970 is a piece of potato, the only good point about that card now is that anyone who has\had one and lives in the US gets free 30$.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Let's not exaggerate, the card got the job done at 1080p despite that weird design issue.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Modded skyrim, dying light, shadow of mordor says hi (personally i had issue with GTA V, sometimes fps softlocked itself to 30)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I'm not sure how bad of a performance you got to say that but I doubt it's as bad aa you make it sound. And modded Skyrim can struggle on anything depending on mods, poor example.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

For me, dying light was out of memory simulator, since it didn't like my 970 it swapped into sysram after reaching 3.5GB, and first it stuttered a lot, then always crash. (and the graphics settings was okay for the card, since outside of that i was getting 40-60 fps, so the card would be able to handle it, but the VRAM wasn't able to.)

Good thing i sold that piece of crap, and now i can get custom RX480 for basically free.

I will never buy nvidia again, they lost my trust. (since i live in a shitty EU country, i wasn't able to get a refund from the place i got my 970, even contacted my country's relevant authoroties, they just basically said sucks to be you lol, meanwhile in the US nearly everyone who wanted a refund got one....)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Fair enough, although personally I can forgive one seemingly senseless screw up. Outside of a few exceptions where that dumb decision started impacting you it probably worked just fine, calling it a piece of crap seems a little much :). How the hek did you get enough money for it to get a new and better one though, what poor soul did you trick :))?

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

i didn't tricked anyone, used prices are insane in my country. (for literally everything, even for consoles), so thats why i sold it and im waiting for custom RX480 to be in stock :P

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

But if they had to pay so much for a used 970 why didn't they just get a new card themselves?

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

because new cards prices are even more bad? (for example its cheaper for me to order from the UK with shipping, than buying it in my country, thats why i will get my card from Germany, since one of my relatives work in germany so they can buy it from there + free shipping :P )

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

És a britektől mégis hogy, ha egyszer a vám azon nyomban rápakolja a helyi ÁFA-t, ha nincs rajta a pecsét, hogy az eladó már kifizette a 27%-ot?

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Eu-n belül ha áfásan veszel cuccot, akkor itthun már nemkell fizetni vámot. (és a britek még nemléptek ki az euból), nézz csak utánna.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Hm. Esetleg tudsz konkrét boltot is akkor? =D

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

overclockers.co.uk (a custom RX480-akból még mindig kivannak fogyva :( )

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Köszi, akkor majd észben tartom, ha nagyobbat akarok rendelni. :)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Yeah I know the feeling, the 1070 is like 600$ here.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I rate this post 3.5/4

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I think that's the worst card you can buy right now. At least in my country :P

8 years ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

In my country it is way more cheaper (less taxes)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

How much is it compared to the RX470, RX480 and GTX1060?

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

~$120 less

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

No point in getting that one now with 1060 out.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I recently got the GTX 1060 and paired with a third gen I5 proc, I'm pretty satisfied with the performance. I can run most recent games on max settings no problem.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

"Max settings" doesn't mean anything without mentioning the resolution you're playing on. Just saying.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I've tried on Black Ops 3, Wolfenstein, Need For Speed
1920x1080
Preset Ultra with everything switch on

Fallout 4 is a bit choppy on Ultra but runs great in if I lowered the Godrays a little bit

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It's a 1080p card, 1070 is a 2k card, and 1080 gets games playable in 4k.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Thanks, but I'm well informed. I've been a tech geek for almost 20 years now. ;)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Well then you shouldn't have needed to ask in the first place :P.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I never asked a single question. Open your eyes, fella. ;)

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Not directly but you implied one about the resolution. Perhaps you didn't mean to but it sounded like it.

PS. On behalf of everyone tnx for the truckload of GAs.

8 years ago*
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I just said that max settings mean nothing if they are not set in correlation with the used resolution. That's all.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Yeah, in hindsight I kinda figured that you were just trying to teach him, not asking. Minor misunderstanding.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

¯_(ツ)_/¯

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It's like those people you see on a game's forums who complain their game crashes constantly, but fail to list their PC specs and other apps they have running in the background.

After seeing it a thousand times, it gets annoying. :X

"Hi, Mister Mechanic? My engine won't start!"
"What kind of car do you drive, sir?"
"A blue one!"

-_-

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

My favorite color is blue! Haha, I get that, everything needs context.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Benchmarks and prices says 1060 wins...

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

The RX 470 is also a very good card for 1080p gaming

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Only if you're on a tight budget, it won't max out demanding games.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

1060 seems to be superior in DX11 and consumes less power, so I'd take that.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

1060 is unable to SLI so go with the 480. If there was a 3rd option go for 1070.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

+1 for Nvidia boycott no matter what.

8 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Sign in through Steam to add a comment.