The Radeon Rebellion Marches Forward with the Gamer-Optimized Radeon RX 470 GPU

razor1 said:
well yeah I'm ore concerned about the lack of innovation due to lack of competition.
Click to expand...

Competition is irrelevant. Without innovation people dont upgrade. This isnt the business of selling tap water with a static demand.

Also these companies relies on large cash flows, stop that and they go belly up.
 
Last edited:
Shintai said:
Competition is irrelevant. Without innovation people dont upgrade. This isnt the business of selling tap water with a static demand.

Also these companies relies on large cash flows, stop that and they go belly up.
Click to expand...

This I will agree with with one cavaet. That is new system builders will need new cards. And then there are those who's income has increased and want to upgrade. (Post college grads) But this is a small percentage of an already small enthusiast market.

AMD picked a bad time to thrust all it's weight into the low end market as these types of cards come prepackaged with new computer systems. And as we all know new system sales have been declining for years. While I do give them Kudos for their massive gains on Vulcan and DX12/async, it really doesn't mean much if they still can't make significant performance improvements generation over generation. A 390 and Fury will still kill their best new offerings. So where's the value for an enthusiast to upgrade? This is more like a side-grade....at best
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Shintai said:
Competition is irrelevant. Without innovation people dont upgrade. This isnt the business of selling tap water with a static demand.

Also these companies relies on large cash flows, stop that and they go belly up.
Click to expand...


Well they will innovate up to a certain point, unlike CPU's, GPU's are still a commodity that needs to be pushed more, but if nV doesn't need a Titan X to be released, they won't do it, cause using those chips for purely neuronet and compute purposes, would be far better margins for them (Well the need for GP 102 type chips won't be there), you still have innovation, but now you don't have peak performance.
 
razor1 said:
Well they will innovate up to a certain point, unlike CPU's, GPU's are still a commodity that needs to be pushed more, but if nV doesn't need a Titan X to be released, they won't do it, cause using those chips for purely neuronet and compute purposes, would be far better margins for them (Well the need for GP 102 type chips won't be there), you still have innovation, but now you don't have peak performance.
Click to expand...

And you have people not upgrading because that performance isn't there. Loss of cash flow, loss of revenue, loss of profit. There is absolutely nothing left in the performance oriented semiconductor business that benefits from competition. The only place you benefit is from who can sell the cheapest ARM SoC copy.

How many Hawaii series card owners that game is for example looking to sidegrade or even downgrade to the Polaris series? Those owners would like to see Vega now.
 
A 1080 is still a decent upgrade from previous Titan from last gen its 30% faster. Its not a side grade like a r390 to P10.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nobu
like this
hmm why would someone with a 390 go to a P10, when the performance is about the same, the only reason for those people to upgrade is

a) they want the latest AMD card
b) save on power

Only one of those is really a motivator at that is b, but how many people here stated they don't care about power lol. Plus if ya already have a system that can handle a r390, why not just wait for the r390 replacement.

AMD themselves stated this card is to get VR to the masses, they don't even think the P10 is a good replacement for the r390. Is that extra 240 or more bucks worth a side grade for the amount of power saved? or would it be worth saving that 240 bucks and wait for a performance part that is 400 bucks?
 
I think the confusion is from three people all saying the same thing: hawaii owners aren't upgrading to p10. It's for 270x and earlier, maybe 280.
 
razor1 said:
Its going OT because now people like you and Peiter, Just reason and few others can't have a disucssion., Any ways I have reported every single one of the posts, that have no meaning to what was being discussed......

If you don't want to have discussions or reposes about nV, no one here should even mention nV products in this thread, but they did so expect responses back about nV.
Click to expand...

We cant have a discussion because every single thread is going to be the same. AMD sucks, Nvidia Better. Isnt that the reason why almost all amd fans are at OCN now?
You should stick to your side of the fence, its more than clear you dont own an AMD product and currently not looking to so...
 
Did you read the post above?

I guess not, yeah you are going on my ignore list. You are the first in many many months.

Anyways back on topic.

Techreport pretty much stated the same thing I stated, the price of these cards at 220 for AIB overclocked 470, is just too close to the 480 8gb to make them viable

valuefps.png


The RX 470 is a great performer, to be sure, but the $220 price tag on the XFX card we tested is just too close to that of the Radeon RX 480 8GB card to make the lesser Polaris worth buying—and that isn't even taking the $200-in-theory RX 480 4GB card into account. Even XFX's hot-rodded RX 470 can't catch the fully-enabled Polaris 10 GPU all of the time, and the gap in price between this custom RX 470 and RX 480 8GB is small enough that you might as well go whole-hog and get the VR-ready, perfectly-competent-at-2560x1440 Radeon RX 480.
Click to expand...

So what did AMD do, they created internal competition for themselves, by introducing a non existent (for all intensive purposes) 4 gb version of the 480, and let AIB's price their overclocked versions of the 470 too close to rx480 8gb

Their pricing structure is FUBAR.
 
Last edited:
And another review

AMD Radeon RX 470 review: A great graphics card with a terrible price

Same conclusion
The Radeon RX 470 simply doesn't do enough to differentiate itself from the RX 480.
Click to expand...


There are no bad graphics cards, only graphics cards with bad pricing. And, well, the Radeon RX 470—especially XFX’s model—sits in a bad place. Rather than carving out a compelling new market segment, the Radeon RX 470 just plain feels irrelevant at $180 and up.

There’s no question the Radeon 470 is a great graphics card—at least in a vacuum. While it doesn’t quite hit a locked 60fps average at 1080p with all the bells and whistles cranked to 11, it comes damned close, and dropping the settings to High easily allows you to clear that gold-standard frame rate. Likewise, the RX 470 can generally hit 40-plus frames per second at 1440p at High or Ultra settings, making it a decent 1440p gaming option (especially if you have a FreeSync monitor to smooth out framerate hitches). It’s only a few frames behind a GTX 970 in most games. Heck, it even squeaks into the VR-capable category, albeit only by the thinnest of margins, thanks to the solid-for-Polaris out-of-the-box overclocks of this XFX model. That utterly blows away what the last-gen crop of $150 to $200 graphics cards were capable of!

But the world doesn’t exist in a vacuum. And in the real world, the 4GB RX 480 is a major spoiler for the RX 470 given the price of both cards and just how damned good the RX 480 truly is.
Click to expand...
 
razor1 said:
And another review

AMD Radeon RX 470 review: A great graphics card with a terrible price

Same conclusion
Click to expand...

from that review :
There are no bad graphics cards, only graphics cards with bad pricing. And, well, the Radeon RX 470—especially XFX’s model—sits in a bad place. Rather than carving out a compelling new market segment, the Radeon RX 470 just plain feels irrelevant at $180 and up.
Click to expand...

Factually rather silly because it feels not right.
If I could argue feelings are more important then facts then there is no end to the amount of BS I can sell on feelings alone.

Then he posts the facts , yes facts not feelings ...

There’s no question the Radeon 470 is a great graphics card—at least in a vacuum. While it doesn’t quite hit a locked 60fps average at 1080p with all the bells and whistles cranked to 11, it comes damned close, and dropping the settings to High easily allows you to clear that gold-standard frame rate.
Click to expand...

draw your own conclusions .....
 
And another

AMD Radeon RX 470 4GB Review: Pros, Cons & Verdict

On the topic of dollars, we’ve never seen AMD so reluctant to discuss pricing. Hours before the RX 470’s introduction, we were handed a suggested $179 figure. However, there is no “reference” design, so it’s unclear what you’ll find at that price. Asus passed along that the Strix RX 470 OC Edition we tested would sell for $200, with the non-overclocked model offered at $195.

This puts “premium” Radeon RX 470 cards at the same level as reference-class 4GB RX 480s, which doesn’t make sense. Small performance delta aside, at $200, a Radeon RX 480 is the better buy.
Click to expand...

and another

ASUS Radeon RX 470 STRIX OC 4 GB Review

However, the ASUS RX 470 is in my opinion slightly too expensive at $209; a better price would be $199 or $189 - if they fix that noisy cooler with a BIOS update. When I asked our head of news "What would you buy if you had $210?" he responded "I'd beg on the streets for $40 more if I had to for a 1060."
Click to expand...


and another

AMD Radeon RX 470 Review: Polaris Gets Even More Affordable - Page 7 | HotHardware

At these suggested prices, it makes much more sense to pick up a 4GB Radeon RX 480 at $199, despite of some the extra features offered by the custom boards.
Click to expand...

and another

Review: Asus Radeon RX 470 Strix Gaming OC 4GB - Graphics - HEXUS.net - Page 16

And while there's nothing intrinsically wrong with the Asus, AMD's pricing means that the RX 470 Gaming OC arrives at retail at £190, or just a tenner less than the manifestly faster Sapphire RX 480 Nitro 4GB.

Should AMD sort out the pricing structure of the RX 470 sensibly, to, say, £165 for a base GPU, then partners can have room to breathe with their aftermarket interpretations. As it is, the RX 470, despite being close to RX 480 in the financial stakes, is still the best GPU under £200 right now.

*Update 15:10: AMD has now reduced the pricing of the entry-level reference-designed RX 470 to £165. Given that move, Asus may need to rethink the Strix's value proposition.
Click to expand...

and another

Sapphire Radeon RX 470 OC review

The factory overclock adds a premium onto this budget-oriented card, pushing it far too close to the price of a 4GB RX 480. Cheaper, stock-clocked RX 470s may be great value, but the price point makes this tough to recommend.
Click to expand...

and another

Asus RX 470 Strix Gaming OC Aura RGB 4GB review

I have been told that while the 4GB Sapphire RX480 Nitro+ OC is £199.99 inc vat the Asus RX 470 Strix Gaming OC will hit retail at around £190 inc vat and the Sapphire RX470 Nitro+ OC will likely be around £195 inc vat. It doesn’t take an accounting genius to work out that this is only £10 and £5 less respectively than the custom Sapphire RX 480 Nitro+ OC.

Now, consider me a cautious person – I don’t enjoy throwing money away more than anyone else but would you save £5 and opt for a custom RX470 over a custom RX480? It is true, the RX480 isn’t in a vastly higher performance league, but the price difference should be clearly more than £5.

As it stands, it doesn’t matter how good these RX 470’s cards are from any of the partners, if you have a budget of £200 for a new graphics card then that 4GB Sapphire RX480 is the one to get. Without question.
Click to expand...

and another

The AMD Radeon RX 470 4GB Review - Page 12

The real head scratcher is that, for the life of me, I can’t determine whether or not AMD simply priced this card too high or they didn’t cut it down enough to justify charging less for it. I think this is a simple catch-22 situation. Had they introduced it at $149 or even $159 with custom cards like the Gaming X going for $179, sales of the RX 480 4GB could very well have been cannibalized. The RX 470’s performance per dollar metrics would have looked otherworldly. Meanwhile, had AMD sawed off more of the core to attain that lower price, its competitive aspects against whatever NVIDIA has up their sleeves may have been compromised. Neither situation is optimal but as it stands, the RX 470’s current positioning just feels off, almost like the RX 480 4GB was a simple last-minute placeholder that’s mucking up what should have been a flawless launch.
Click to expand...

and finally I think at least for English reviews

Sapphire Radeon RX 470 Nitro OC 4GB Review

Ultimately, the RX 470, and this card in particular has what it takes to be a very strong mid-range contender but it all depends on how the pricing settles in the coming weeks. AMD needs to keep just the right amount of separation between this and the RX 480. If it can do that, it's onto a winner.
Click to expand...

So what do you have almost all the English reviews say the same thing, AIB pricing of the rx470 is not ideal for it.

So pretty much AMD being AMD did this to themselves

0b6d9bc.jpg


Having an advantage of being alone in a particular segment for a period of time, instead of taking advantage of the situation, how moronic can a company get? I guess very.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I just bought the XFX RX 470 for $200. Newegg seems to have a lot of stock today.

XFX-Radeon-RX-470-DD-4.jpg


After looking at some reviews, seems the 470 is really close to the 480 in performance, and I just liked the look of the 470 model better (and of course the cheaper price doesn't hurt).

I think most of a flak the 470 is getting is because they are comparing it to the $200 480 marketing unicorn. Maybe there were a few of them, I don't know, but all I see is the more expensive model and none are in stock anyhow.

On it's own, it seems, the 470 still looks like a decent buy. I already have a mega-rig with GTX 1080 SLI, gonna use the 470 for an old HTPC rig just for fun. I didn't need super power, and my projector is only 720P anyway so I think the 470 is enough.
 
cybereality Yeah, there were 4gb 480s (reference design, had stopped looking once I got mine so I don't know about partner cards), I had even had opportunity and considered getting one, but decided to wait for the nitro 8gb.

Whenever the 4gb 480s start appearing again, the 470 price will have to drop. It may not happen soon, but...well I guess in the end it comes down to how much you really want to upgrade, and whether you can stand to wait.
 
Shintai said:
Competition is irrelevant. Without innovation people dont upgrade. This isnt the business of selling tap water with a static demand.

Also these companies relies on large cash flows, stop that and they go belly up.
Click to expand...

Well, Look at Intel. They've managed to rake in money by only increasing the net performance of their CPUs by 5-10% yearly, and they do that by making sure they change chipsets and sockets simultaneously, and EOL their year-old products as soon as new products hit the assembly line. This way they can lock people into buying their chipsets AND CPUs when they need to upgrade.

Nvidia stops supporting their GPU architectures (IE, optimizing drivers) as soon as newer ones come out in order to ensure their older products are limited as much as possible so people feel more need to upgrade.

Trust me, innovation does not sell: obligation does. and when you have no competition, you have the power to enforce obligation.
 
KazeoHin said:
Nvidia stops supporting their GPU architectures (IE, optimizing drivers) as soon as newer ones come out in order to ensure their older products are limited as much as possible so people feel more need to upgrade.
Click to expand...

THIS so much. Nvidia is no longer competing against AMD, so their only competition is last year's GeForce model. When the GTX 970 came out, it was slower than the 780ti, but now it's faster. By ceasing development of performance enhancing drivers for last generation's product, Nvidia can create an artificial advantage for the new generation. Otherwise, fewer would upgrade. And when you draw this out, suddenly a new card is much faster than its equivalent from 2-3 generations ago, more so than it would have been had the prior models still received driver-based performance enhancements.
 
razor1 said:
The x2's and athlon's top CPU's sold for 2k a piece, just like Intel is doing now.
Click to expand...

As someone who has an old A64 s754 3200+ launch clawhammer from when you could only bclk them, they certainly were not 2k a piece. Which ones were?
The P4s were pretty competitive especially in video editing for a while, it wasn't until the presshots that shit became really obvious even to the more uninformed buyers.
 
The price would have been great at 200€. Unfortunately, it's 280-320€ ($310-$350), and that's seriously way, waaaay too much. I'm gonna have to wait for a year until prices drop down to a reasonable amount.
 
N4CR said:
As someone who has an old A64 s754 3200+ launch clawhammer from when you could only bclk them, they certainly were not 2k a piece. Which ones were?
The P4s were pretty competitive especially in video editing for a while, it wasn't until the presshots that shit became really obvious even to the more uninformed buyers.
Click to expand...


I'm not talking about 3200+, I'm talking about Opterons, Intel doesn't sell their normal desktop CPU's for 2k, only their extreme editions. which are Xeon equivalents.

Intel P4 days, I think I had one P4, right around launch, after that, never touched a Intel CPU till Core 2 duo.
 
I got my XFX RX 470. It replaced a 280X. Not a huge upgrade, I know, but I wanted something more modern.

Performance in DX11 was better, but not by a huge margin. Was playing Bioshock Infinite on High settings 720P, and getting around 100 - 120 FPS.

However, Vulkan performance in DOOM is insane. I think also because my CPU is cheapo (FX-4100) DX11 is bottle-necked by the CPU.

In DOOM (High 720P) I am getting a good 90FPS in heavy fire-fights or upwards to 120 - 150 FPS in static scenes. Damn.

RX470_01.jpg


RX470_02.jpg


RX470_03.jpg
 
Your problem is that you are running at 720p. That means you are hitting an FPS cap caused by your CPU, not your GPU. So you'd see little to no benefit in upgrading from the 280x to the 470. Since what you're describing doesn't match the specs in your sig, I'm guessing that this was for a secondary system plugged into a 720p display? If so, try using VSR to get a higher resolution. You can then get better visual fidelity, and likely not even impacting the frame rate too much.
 
Yes, this is an old HTPC machine I have in the living room using a 720P projector. I bet you're right, the CPU is junk and likely limiting performance.
 
cybereality said:
Yes, this is an old HTPC machine I have in the living room using a 720P projector. I bet you're right, the CPU is junk and likely limiting performance.
Click to expand...

If you're getting 100+FPS, your CPU is fine. Just means that you aren't fully utilizing the GPU. To correct this, you can crank up certain graphics settings, and/or use VSR to increase resolution.
 
Right, I see what you are saying. I pumped up DOOM to Ultra settings and enabled VSR. There was some hit, but I was still getting around 75 FPS in action scenes, so very smooth and playable (and looked great).

Kind of crazy that I can max out a game that just came out with a $200 video card in a computer I built 4 years ago for $750. Was also getting nice performance in Tomb Raider and Bioshock Infinite maxed out.

Thanks a bunch Daniel_Chang , I feel much better about the upgrade now after seeing games maxed out and still getting above 60FPS.
 
Ended up selling my 280X for around $100, so I could think the RX 470 upgrade only cost me $100 bucks. Not bad.
 
cybereality said:
Ended up selling my 280X for around $100, so I could think the RX 470 upgrade only cost me $100 bucks. Not bad.
Click to expand...
I feel the 470 is the better card price to performance-wise from AMD right now, cant say for certain why, maybe the power issues with the 480 although slight. So yes you have a great deal for a great card for the price.
 
I'm honestly not sure why the 470 isn't getting more attention. It's actually a nice card, within spitting distance of the 480 performance-wise and at a more solid price (got mine for $200, good luck finding a $200 480).

The computer I upgraded I don't really use that much, and since I built this mega-computer (see sig) I mostly just game on that. But the 470 still seems pretty nice if you don't need super-power.
 
cybereality said:
I'm honestly not sure why the 470 isn't getting more attention. It's actually a nice card, within spitting distance of the 480 performance-wise and at a more solid price (got mine for $200, good luck finding a $200 480).
Click to expand...

The 4GB RX 480 was advertised at $199. I have yet to see a 4GB 470 below $199 except for the launch PowerColor that has since had it's price raised.

It's hard for me to see the value in the 470 when the source of its value is based more on the 480's price gouging than on its own performance.
 
Think about all the RX470 buyers who bought them at $200 who'll feel shafted when the unicorn 4GB RX480 comes back in a few weeks/months at $200.

/s

Seriously, though, what was the point of the 4GB RX480 except deceptive marketing?
 
trandoanhung1991 said:
Think about all the RX470 buyers who bought them at $200 who'll feel shafted when the unicorn 4GB RX480 comes back in a few weeks/months at $200.

/s

Seriously, though, what was the point of the 4GB RX480 except deceptive marketing?
Click to expand...

Even so, if the 4GB 480 was announced at $199, the 4GB 470 has no business being the same price. And the 8GB 470 costs as much as the 8GB 480 (reference).
 
Yeah, there's definitely some funky business with the pricing when you look at the 470 versus the 480.

I assume once inventory gets better, the prices will settle into more honest ranges.
 
AMD is offering less value with it's cut down P10 SKU compared to past products.

Polaris (470/480) - $180/$200 = 0.9

Hawaii (290/290x) - $400/$550 = 0.727

Tahiti (7950/7970) - $450/$550 = 0.818

Pitcairn (7850/7870) - $250/$350 = 0.714

Lowest price cut ratio. It is also the first to cut down memory bandwidth and not just CUs (4 CU cut for all 4 listed).
 
limitedaccess said:
AMD is offering less value with it's cut down P10 SKU compared to past products.

Polaris (470/480) - $180/$200 = 0.9

Hawaii (290/290x) - $400/$550 = 0.727

Tahiti (7950/7970) - $450/$550 = 0.818

Pitcairn (7850/7870) - $250/$350 = 0.714

Lowest price cut ratio. It is also the first to cut down memory bandwidth and not just CUs (4 CU cut for all 4 listed).
Click to expand...
Not sure the correlation is very accurate. The 290s and 79xx are in way higher price brackets. Also was the $179 actually listed from AMD or is that just the initial price of one of the vendors? I never saw anything, not that I really looked.
 
JustReason said:
Not sure the correlation is very accurate. The 290s and 79xx are in way higher price brackets. Also was the $179 actually listed from AMD or is that just the initial price of one of the vendors? I never saw anything, not that I really looked.
Click to expand...

That was the MSRP given to reviewers.
AMD Radeon RX 470 - PowerColor Red Devil Radeon RX 470 Video Card Review
AMD's Radeon RX 470 graphics card reviewed

Pitcairn is the most comparable data point and it is worse then that.

Also if we use the argument that the higher SKUs full configurations had a higher premium due to their halo/crown factor, 390/390x had a 0.767 ratio when re-branded a segment down, this is with 390 maintaining the same memory bandwidth as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top