XFX Radeon RX 590 Fatboy OC+ Video Card Review @ [H]

trentchau said:
The last several years, Nvidia has released something immediately after AMD. I wouldn't be shocked to see a 2060 announced within a short period.

If this does sell for $289 new though, you gotta be really a hard core AMD(Anti Nvidia) guy to not get a 1070 IMHO. But I can understand what another person posted that some people aren't comfortable buying used, and this is what's in their budget.
Click to expand...

NVIDIA is updating the 1060 with faster DDR5x memory to counter act. It will still be slower.
 
And we're back up to 7970 GHz Edition power consumption folks. Get your ludicrous-speed factory overclock here, folks :D

The 590 gives yout the exact same performance as a factory overclocked GTX 1060 6GB for TWICE the (card alone, not system) power consumption, and $20 higher price.

If it was $240, this would be a lot more interesting.
 
Last edited:
Stoly said:
Didn't you hear? $300 is the new $200 :D:D:rolleyes::rolleyes:

I don't think its a bad price. But I guess many people were expecting performance more in line with a GTX1070 (wishful thinking IMO)
Click to expand...

Why would people have that expectation? This is a Polaris based card. They have a competitor for the GTX 1070, it’s called Vega 56. No idea why anyone ever would have thought that was going to happen.
 
I don't see this as being a 1060 killer (yet, anyway). The 1060 6GB has been out long enough that if you shop around, you can find it well under MSRP. You can pick up a used 1060 6GB for $160 and Newegg currently has a new Gigabyte card on sale for $229. At MSRP, it's no competition, especially factoring the current software bundle, but at least the 1060 should still be able to compete by way of promotional pricing.

I wonder if this will force Nvidia to lower MSRP on these cards. I also wonder if it will change when and how the inevitable RTX 2060 enters the market.
 
Viper87227 said:
I don't see this as being a 1060 killer (yet, anyway). The 1060 6GB has been out long enough that if you shop around, you can find it well under MSRP. You can pick up a used 1060 6GB for $160 and Newegg currently has a new Gigabyte card on sale for $229. At MSRP, it's no competition, especially factoring the current software bundle, but at least the 1060 should still be able to compete by way of promotional pricing.

I wonder if this will force Nvidia to lower MSRP on these cards. I also wonder if it will change when and how the inevitable RTX 2060 enters the market.
Click to expand...

Who knows, they may use a throwback like they used to do - fab the low-end dies on cutting-edge processes. And since they were already made on Samsung, there's rumors they would shrink down to 8nm early next year.

TU107 uncut could be 80% of the performance of the RX 2070, while ditching the RTX units, it could end-up pretty slim.

RTX 2060 Ti could be a cut 2070 with 192-bit memory, and be priced at $400.

And regular 2060 and 2050 ti be based on TU107. For the 2060, you could probably cut the memory bus to 128-bit, and price it under $250.
 
Lord_Exodia said:
AMD still not challenging Nvidia on the high end :sleep:

Sorry, Yes this is a good card for the price bracket. But wake me up when they Hit the High end segment causing competition and making the market better for us customers. Better prices, better performance etc.. Until then, I'm done celebrating their Mediocrity.

This is how we get $1200 Non-Ti graphics cards from Nvidia. /EndRant
Click to expand...
If this isn't the market you are in, why even bother taking the time to post? As if everyone at [H] didn't already know this wasn't a 1080/2070 competitor before the reviews even landed? What are we supposed to do, gather around and congratulate you on not giving a crap about the majority of gamers (those still using 1080p<->1600p)? This article was extremely relevant to the vast majority of the market at large, whether or not you bother to accept that as fact.
 
For people concerned about the additional power used compared to a 1060, consider the 590 is using about one additional kilowatt per 8 hours of gaming. So, gaming an average of 3 hours a day each day, every day means about 130-140 additional kilowatt hours used per year equating to $13-28 in additional electrical costs per year at $0.10 - $0.20 per KWH.

Newegg is currently selling 1060's, with only a single free game, for about $250 - $330 excluding some pricing outliers on both ends. In general and ingnoring the better performance of the 590, you would need to game on a 590 for literally years before before the 1060 would become a better price value.
 
I am wondering why reviews of gaming oriented cards not mention the FreeSync vs. G-Sync issue. One of the main reasons I am contemplating upgrading is the ability to play action FPS games at steady 60FPS @ 1080p, which means rapid shifts of view, and being highly susceptible to tearing effects. Both technologies fix the issue, but G-Sync will add between $70 to $100 to the price of Monitor upgrade (current one is due for a replacement, and does not support either).

For anyone with a similar interest, that price difference in monitors is directly related to the choice between AMD and Nvidia. In my mind I have to add $70 to the price of any Nvidia option, which makes them much less attractive.

I would love to see a HardOCP analysis review of the current state of FreeSync and G-Sync, and how it affects GPU Value.
 
kirbyrj said:
This card for $290 or a brand new 1070 for $310 or a Vega 56 for $330 (both of which have come up in the past month)? This is a $200 card priced $90 too high.
Click to expand...
You can't use slippery slope arguments with real world money. You're talking performance per dollar and totally ignoring the fact that come December there are people all over the world that can just barely afford $290 to buy their son/daughter a Christmas present but would have to sacrifice elsewhere on presents if they were to spend an extra $20+ here.
 
SmokeRngs said:
Because of how much the card could be heating up the room. The power draw difference between the 1060 and 590 is considerable and more than enough to make a difference in the temperature of a room. Sure, that's going to be great for me in the winter but it would seriously suck in the summer.
Click to expand...

A standard light bulb consumes around 60w, the toaster in my kitchen pulls out 600w from the wall, none of them make any difference in the temperature of the room. Do you really think a 100w delta will make any difference?
 
The prices are as always ridiculous in Sweden.
The cheapest I've found is $342.
Most 1060 6gb are around the same price though. Some 1060 6gb are at $290.
 
trentchau said:
Yeah but a few years to late imho. The 1060 is literally over 2 years old (release date July 2016). Nvidia queue'ing up something that will fuck over amd's world in 3...2...1...


I'm happy the performance is there. While I want the card to do well, $300 is no joke and after buying a 1070 on the FS thread for just $200 I kinda feel like $280-300 is way to high for a 2nd gen rehashed card. It's almost better just go green and buy used 1070's at this point.
Click to expand...
Honestly, age is irrelevant. Price point and performance is. And that's what you're getting here. A product that wins on all fronts.
 
FlawleZ said:
Honestly, age is irrelevant. Price point and performance is. And that's what you're getting here. A product that wins on all fronts.
Click to expand...

Completely disagree. Age is completely relevant. For $280~300 for a rehash of a product that came out 2.5 years ago that sold then for $229 on release. That's not a win imho, but I'm not one to judge what people spend their money on. It's to close to the 1070 which completely oblierates it performance wise imho. This should of been $229 like the the original 480 8gb. Then it would of been a revolution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jza
like this
Riccochet said:
This is [H]. I don't care if a card pulls 1000W as long as it performs good for the price and stays cool while doing so. I'll buy a bigger PSU if I need to.
Click to expand...

Indeed this is [H], where people have diverse opinions on all things tech and [H] readers have never thought as a monolith. As much as I love AMD and my latest AMD build, the 590x is good, but not good enough. That power usage compared to the competitors isn't good enough. Hopefully 1060 and 1070 prices drop a little bit in response to the 590. Thanks for trying AMD, please do better next time. I don't like giving NVIDIA $$$.
 
I'm not a fan boy, but every time I get an AMD card, I seem to regret it and have less issues/a better overall experience with Nvidia.
 
lightsout said:
I'm not a fan boy, but every time I get an AMD card, I seem to regret it and have less issues/a better overall experience with Nvidia.
Click to expand...
Isn't that crazy how that works? I've always had less issues with all things AMD over Intel, AND AMD over NVIDIA for graphics. But if you can sort out the issues for NIVIDIA, it's pretty good. I'll never forget my friends 3 consecutive NVIDIA purchases all with crashing issues. 8800GT x2, then a 9800 GTX (also G92), all crashing his new build. I told him about my G92 also completely bricking and we got a HD4000 series card from ATI/AMD and all problems were gone. I don't want NVIDIA to win, but 590 just not good enough. Still thankful for review, and it looks like a good card.
 
defaultluser said:
And we're back up to 7970 GHz Edition power consumption folks. Get your ludicrous-speed factory overclock here, folks :D

The 590 gives yout the exact same performance as a factory overclocked GTX 1060 6GB for TWICE the (card alone, not system) power consumption, and $20 higher price.

If it was $240, this would be a lot more interesting.
Click to expand...
What review did you read? Certainly not the [H] review if you come up with that conclusion!
 
Atearen said:
A standard light bulb consumes around 60w, the toaster in my kitchen pulls out 600w from the wall, none of them make any difference in the temperature of the room. Do you really think a 100w delta will make any difference?
Click to expand...

100w does make a difference. It always has. If it didn't make a difference to people and situations Kyle wouldn't bother putting the figures for the cards in the reviews because it would be a complete waste of his time and money and the reviewer's time.

By the way, how often are you running that toaster without stopping for multiple hours on end? I'm guessing you never do that but I'm pretty sure you run your computer hard gaming rather often and probably for multiple hours at a time which makes for just a bit of difference in that comparison. I would also hope that your kitchen is at least a little bit larger than the average room that most people end up having their computers in. Just about every kitchen I've ever seen tends to be larger and in most cases a bit more open than a typical computer room meaning much more space to heat up so that you don't notice temp changes since they are smaller.

There's also the thought that some people have more than one computer which can definitely compound the issue. Also, if you want some anecdotal information when my son is in the same room as my computers with his laptop it definitely increases the temperature of the room and in some cases by a very noticeable amount. I'm quite sure that his laptop isn't putting out anything near 100w which makes a 100w difference between cards look even worse.

I'm personally not all that concerned about the extra wattage being used. I was just answering someone who asked why anyone would care about a difference such as that.
 
Take the bickering somewhere besides our review thread, PLEASE.

Keep Calm 2.png
 
Thanks for the review! I'm considering this for a sidegrade to my 580. The higher clocks would be nice. This should hold me over until the Navi comes out next year.
 
How much less power would the card use, if you capped the frame-rate to match the monitor's 60Hz refresh rate? You can't test performance that way but you can use it for every day gaming.
 
Nuby1Canuby said:
How much less power would the card use, if you capped the frame-rate to match the monitor's 60Hz refresh rate? You can't test performance that way but you can use it for every day gaming.
Click to expand...

It would certainly use less.
 
Thank you for the review. Without shilling for XFX, i want to point something out.

Its nice to see a piece of technology, The Polaris, pushed to its full potential, and to see what the final offering yields. I've always been a fan of the Champion products in any product line and i'm really happy with the results on this one. The results aren't always so good and sometimes they get skipped entirely (Hawaii?)

Regarding the name, "Fatboy," Ill omit my comment and rely on you guys to pass judgement

Mark at XFX
 
Last edited:
XFXSupport said:
Thanks for all the review. Without shilling for XFX, i want to point something out.

Its nice to see a piece of technology, The Polaris, pushed to its full potential, and to see what the final offering yields. I've always been a fan of the Champion products in any product line and i'm really happy with the results on this one. The results aren't always so good and sometimes they get skipped entirely (Hawaii?)

Regarding the name, "Fatboy," Ill omit my comment and rely on you guys to pass judgement

Mark at XFX
Click to expand...
Any comment on the BIOS switch confusion?
 
defaultluser said:
And we're back up to 7970 GHz Edition power consumption folks. Get your ludicrous-speed factory overclock here, folks :D

The 590 gives yout the exact same performance as a factory overclocked GTX 1060 6GB for TWICE the (card alone, not system) power consumption, and $20 higher price.

If it was $240, this would be a lot more interesting.
Click to expand...

Few points. you clearly didn't read the review to what Kyle wrote. It was faster than gtx 1060 at its highest clocks. like 2151. And at times up 20% faster. Also don't get your argument about power consumption if you are plugging both in the same system overall its the same difference no? Its not like you can run the card alone by itself.

Your are getting similar power consumptions as the rx 580 running at 1425. So clock for clock its more efficient still. Why not go read probably the best review on the internet here and then refresh your opinion on it. All the other reviews I read are half assed, Kyle puts it to work. Also kyle did notate only the peaks were higher but average was almost same as rx 580 running at 1425 on the golden sample.
 
Last edited:
Viper87227 said:
I don't see this as being a 1060 killer (yet, anyway). The 1060 6GB has been out long enough that if you shop around, you can find it well under MSRP. You can pick up a used 1060 6GB for $160 and Newegg currently has a new Gigabyte card on sale for $229. At MSRP, it's no competition, especially factoring the current software bundle, but at least the 1060 should still be able to compete by way of promotional pricing.

I wonder if this will force Nvidia to lower MSRP on these cards. I also wonder if it will change when and how the inevitable RTX 2060 enters the market.
Click to expand...

you can pickup used anything cheaper. I don't understand why people compare brand new cards to used. I can pretty much bet these will be down to 250ish in a month or two after AMD clears up the rx 580s that are selling for 200 since few days closing in on launch of this product. Since they both have had excess inventory or the older cards. I think AMD priced it where its to move more buyers towards rx 580s. They will probably drop these to 250 once they clear out alot of the rx 580 cards and likely make them 200 msrp when they drop this. I can already see it coming.
 
Thanks for the review. Not the most exciting product release but hey it's 2018
 
Viper87227 said:
I don't see this as being a 1060 killer (yet, anyway). The 1060 6GB has been out long enough that if you shop around, you can find it well under MSRP. You can pick up a used 1060 6GB for $160 and Newegg currently has a new Gigabyte card on sale for $229. At MSRP, it's no competition, especially factoring the current software bundle, but at least the 1060 should still be able to compete by way of promotional pricing.

I wonder if this will force Nvidia to lower MSRP on these cards. I also wonder if it will change when and how the inevitable RTX 2060 enters the market.
Click to expand...

The 580 is faster, especially on DX12 and 1440p and comes in at the same price.
 
I have a stupid question.

Will this crossfire with a RX480, since they are so close to the same?
 
NKD said:
Few points. you clearly didn't read the review to what Kyle wrote. It was faster than gtx 1060 at its highest clocks. like 2151. And at times up 20% faster. Also don't get your argument about power consumption if you are plugging both in the same system overall its the same difference no? Its not like you can run the card alone by itself.

Your are getting similar power consumptions as the rx 580 running at 1425. So clock for clock its more efficient still. Why not go read probably the best review on the internet here and then refresh your opinion on it. All the other reviews I read are half assed, Kyle puts it to work. Also kyle did notate only the peaks were higher but average was almost same as rx 580 running at 1425 on the golden sample.
Click to expand...

Thank you, those are the key points to focus on.

The fact it can beat an overclocked 1060 at 2152MHz still by 20%+ is good news for performance at 1080p and 1440p. The 1060 doesn't do so well at 1440p, this card does. DX12 is a little better on 590 as well, and Vulkan of course continues to perform well on AMD.

Power utilization is on par with a highly clocked 580 at the XFX clocks. Overclock it of course wattage will increase (especially with our voltage increase) but it's really not all that wild in terms of power draw overclocked.

I'm not concerned at all about the power usage. That extra power is being put to use by producing better performance and a better gameplay experience, it is not wasted.

AMD could have delivered this GPU at a lower wattage at the same clocks as 580, but it chose to use that extra power savings to give us better performance.

We are only talking a small, very small difference between 12nm and 14nm, you cannot expect miracles.
 
SmokeRngs said:
Because of how much the card could be heating up the room. The power draw difference between the 1060 and 590 is considerable and more than enough to make a difference in the temperature of a room. Sure, that's going to be great for me in the winter but it would seriously suck in the summer.
Click to expand...

You know you can just use google to pull up the formulas and literally see mathmatically what the difference would be between the two would be as far as added heat to the room.

If I were to guess, if you had identical rooms, one with a 1060 and one with a 590 running for 24 hours at 100% load, the difference might be 1 or 2 degrees...
 
yeah dont think it should get a gold at that price maybe silver but it needs to be more like 200 bucks i got my 1070 this time last year for 320 and you can get new 1070 still for around 300 now
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top