AMD Radeon RX 570 4GB Review

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Wildlands (DirectX 11): 1920x1080 Results

Surely something is wrong, right? The Radeon RX 570 can’t be losing to the previous-gen RX 470.

Drilling down into frame time over the benchmark run, it looks like the Radeon RX 580 and 570 struggle with large spikes. This manifests as uncommonly high variance and, ultimately, the two worst smoothness index ratings in our unevenness measurement. We used the Crimson ReLive Edition 17.4.2 driver for AMD’s Radeon RX 480, 470, and R9 380, and a special press driver for RX 580 and 570. Flip back through our Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB Review and you’ll see AMD’s Radeon R9 Fury X suffering from the same anomaly. We suspect AMD improved Ghost Recon performance for the 17.4.2 build, but didn’t incorporate that into its press driver.

Between RX 570’s driver issues and Nvidia’s traditionally consistent performance in DX11 games, the GeForce GTX 1060 3GB enjoys a rare ~11%-higher average frame rate.

2560x1440 Results

Although the RX 570 still trails AMD’s older RX 470, a higher resolution erodes the 3GB GeForce GTX 1060’s performance advantage, landing it behind both Ellesmere-based cards.

Not that a win matters much—an average frame rate in the 30s begs for less demanding settings. AMD positions its Radeon RX 570 as an ideal solution for 1080p with maxed-out quality, and in Ghost Recon, it runs out of steam if you push much harder.


MORE: Best Graphics Cards


MORE: Desktop GPU Performance Hierarchy Table


MORE: All Graphics Content

  • shrapnel_indie
    Again...
    Confusion caused by re-branding existing hardware

    Yet the exact same issue exists for the uninformed between the same gen GTX 1060 models (3GB and 6GB) which also differ in the available functioning parts of the GPU... There wasn't a big deal made about that, yet there seems to be with the Radeons.
    Reply
  • nzalog
    19583803 said:
    Again...
    Confusion caused by re-branding existing hardware

    Yet the exact same issue exists for the uninformed between the same gen GTX 1060 models (3GB and 6GB) which also differ in the available functioning parts of the GPU... There wasn't a big deal made about that, yet there seems to be with the Radeons.

    Uhh that's not quite the same. I get that you red hat might be on a little tight but RX570 and RX580 sound like a completely new gen card. Not a slightly overclocked RX470 and RX480. I was excited until I read into the actual specs.
    Reply
  • AndrewJacksonZA
    So basically it boils down to how much more it will cost for an RX570 over an RX470 for a 5%-10% improvement in performance.

    Thanks for your efforts Igor, we appreciate it. :-)
    Reply
  • josetesan
    if they only supported CUDA, i'll go definitively for it .. :(
    Reply
  • AndrewJacksonZA
    19583990 said:
    if they only supported CUDA, i'll go definitively for it .. :(
    Out of interest, what do you need CUDA support for?

    Reply
  • josetesan
    Machine Learning
    Reply
  • josetesan
    For the sake of comparison,
    see http://navoshta.com/cpu-vs-gpu/

    According to amazon specs, g2.2xlarge does offer a gtx680/gtx770GPU, so , as you can see, speed increase is amazing !
    Besides, i'd like a good gaming card .
    Reply
  • Roland Of Gilead
    18 pages for that Final Conclusion. These 'new' cards from AMD are a joke. Cynincal for AMD. For those that have zero or very little technical savvy, they will purchase these. For the more discerned among us, this is a non-story. C'mon AMD, give us something to cheer about!!! not being the 'also rans' who gave us good cards, and then re-released the same card the following year. Sick of this crap.
    Reply
  • AndrewJacksonZA
    19584028 said:
    Machine Learning
    Hooray for open standards like CUDA! /s

    (Sorry, closed systems like that are a pet peeve of mine.)
    Reply
  • dstarr3
    I keep wanting to do an AMD-based budget build, but... well, they just don't ever make anything that I feel is competitive. If eventually the price on this dropped to more like 1050 Ti prices, then absolutely, killer bang for the buck. But at the MSRP of $200, I'd rather spend just a little bit more and go for a 1060 6GB.

    And in terms of CPUs, I'd like to see what budget Ryzen chips AMD can come up with before I pull the trigger. i3s don't have the core count, so AMD's already ahead, but their budget lineup is getting a bit long in the tooth right now.

    Really, it's just not a compelling time to buy just about anything right now.
    Reply