AMD Radeon RX 570 4GB Review
Why you can trust Tom's Hardware
Battlefield 1 (DirectX 12): 1920x1080 Results
AMD’s Radeon RX 470 is already faster than GeForce GTX 1060 3GB in Battlefield 1 using the game’s Ultra preset at 1920x1080. Asus’ ROG Strix Radeon RX 570 then adds 6% to the previous model’s average frame rate.
2560x1440 Results
The Radeon RX 570 even manages to pass Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 1060 6GB at 2560x1440. Excellent consistency means this should be a playable resolution and quality preset on AMD’s card.
Whereas the RX 570 retains 73% of its performance pushing from 1920x1080 to 2560x1440, the 3GB GTX 1060 takes a nearly 50% hit, landing right alongside the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti. AMD’s 4GB of GDDR5 is already proving wiser than Nvidia’s decision to trim 3GB (plus CUDA cores/texture units) from its GeForce card.
MORE: Best Graphics Cards
MORE: Desktop GPU Performance Hierarchy Table
MORE: All Graphics Content
Current page: Battlefield 1 (DirectX 12)
Prev Page Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation (DirectX 12) Next Page Civilization VI (DirectX 12)Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
-
shrapnel_indie Again...Reply
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. -
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. -
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.Reply
Thanks for your efforts Igor, we appreciate it. :-) -
AndrewJacksonZA
Out of interest, what do you need CUDA support for?19583990 said:if they only supported CUDA, i'll go definitively for it .. :(
-
josetesan For the sake of comparison,Reply
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 . -
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
Hooray for open standards like CUDA! /s19584028 said:Machine Learning
(Sorry, closed systems like that are a pet peeve of mine.) -
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.Reply
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.