AMD Radeon RX 570 4GB Review

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

This thread is closed for comments
42 comments
    Your comment
  • shrapnel_indie
    Again...
    Quote:
    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
    330834 said:
    Again...
    Quote:
    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.

    Thanks for your efforts Igor, we appreciate it. :-)
  • josetesan
    if they only supported CUDA, i'll go definitively for it .. :(
  • AndrewJacksonZA
    2459790 said:
    if they only supported CUDA, i'll go definitively for it .. :(
    Out of interest, what do you need CUDA support for?
  • josetesan
    Machine Learning
  • 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 .
  • keith12
    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.
  • AndrewJacksonZA
    2459790 said:
    Machine Learning
    Hooray for open standards like CUDA! /s

    (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.

    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.
  • Michael_627
    Cool, my friend has a skate company, he's really cool. It's called that. Ryzen.
  • shrapnel_indie
    1612573 said:
    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.


    Too bad that the GTX-1050Ti loses 100% of the time to the RX-470 and RX-570... and loses a majority of the time to a lowly R9-380. The 470 and 570 were meant to compete with the 1060 3GB (Crippled 1060 GPU)
  • madmatt30
    So essentially its a 480 4gb at the end of the day but at this point in time it costs more money !!

    Its a good card but the pricepoint at this minute in time is way off kilter.
  • shrapnel_indie
    2392437 said:
    330834 said:
    Again...
    Quote:
    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.


    True, not exactly the same....
    The 1060 3GB is a cut down 1060 with half the RAM (due to the cutting) while the 1060 6GB is the full thing. (more like a 470-480 or 570-580 comparison in that sense.) HOWEVER The naming convention, just like the 4xx - 5xx issue can be just as confusing to the uninitiated/uneducated in the matters... for the opposite reasons. the 1060 users would expect same performance outside of RAM limitations, while in this case the 5xx users won't be expecting a new and improved Polaris. For that matter, Kaby-Lake is a new and improved Skaylake with an updated hardware codec for video decoding.
  • cangelini
    330834 said:
    Again...
    Quote:
    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.


    We were never sampled a 3GB card in the U.S. Our German team did get a 3GB card, which made it into our GeForce GTX 1060 round-up, and yes, a big deal was made about the problematic naming. Then, again, in today's story, the 1060 3GB is explicitly recommended against.
  • dstarr3
    330834 said:
    1612573 said:
    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.
    Too bad that the GTX-1050Ti loses 100% of the time to the RX-470 and RX-570... and loses a majority of the time to a lowly R9-380. The 470 and 570 were meant to compete with the 1060 3GB (Crippled 1060 GPU)


    Right. Which is why I'd rather see this AMD card at 1050 Ti prices, or else I'm just going to go with the 1060 6GB.
  • madmatt30
    ^ not really a fair comment , the 1060 6gb is in almost all locations $100 more than a comparable 1050ti.

    The 570 needs to be at the current 470 pricepoint - the issue at the minute is the prices of 470/480 cards have gone through the roof (in the UK at least,) for some peculiar reason.

    I would be happy that at this moment in time there is a GPU choice for pretty much every variable budget - just not all from the same range or even manufacturer.
    Amd IMO were very clever with the RX cards , they've hit a market sector performance & pricewise that is missing from nvidias current lineup.

    More choice is always a good thing
  • Tech_TTT
    I have the feeling that the Vega is going to be delayed ...
  • shrapnel_indie
    134065 said:
    330834 said:
    Again...
    Quote:
    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.
    We were never sampled a 3GB card in the U.S. Our German team did get a 3GB card, which made it into our GeForce GTX 1060 round-up, and yes, a big deal was made about the problematic naming. Then, again, in today's story, the 1060 3GB is explicitly recommended against.


    I guess I'll need to go review it again as I don't remember it sticking out as much as it does here and with the 580 review.

    ...

    Okay... after review, yes, the 1060 3GB model was not recommended and it was mentioned how-the naming scheme wasn't liked. Unfortunately, it seems a little more time was spent running out of synonyms and more "print space" was used to express the dislike of "improved" older gen tech that is still performance competitive by AMD.
  • imlock
    I dont understand the "unevenness" graph. Is there any explanation of it in another article?
  • dstarr3
    1031363 said:
    ^ not really a fair comment , the 1060 6gb is in almost all locations $100 more than a comparable 1050ti. The 570 needs to be at the current 470 pricepoint - the issue at the minute is the prices of 470/480 cards have gone through the roof (in the UK at least,) for some peculiar reason. I would be happy that at this moment in time there is a GPU choice for pretty much every variable budget - just not all from the same range or even manufacturer. Amd IMO were very clever with the RX cards , they've hit a market sector performance & pricewise that is missing from nvidias current lineup. More choice is always a good thing


    I'm not comparing the pricing of the 1050 vs 1060. I'm just saying that the pricing of this card is a bit too close to the 1060 6GB (which can be had for about $220). For the difference, I'd rather go for the 1060. Now, if AMD had priced this closer to the 1050 Ti, that'd be a no-brainer. But they haven't, so I'm kinda gonna have to overlook this card.
  • madmatt30
    1612573 said:
    1031363 said:
    ^ not really a fair comment , the 1060 6gb is in almost all locations $100 more than a comparable 1050ti. The 570 needs to be at the current 470 pricepoint - the issue at the minute is the prices of 470/480 cards have gone through the roof (in the UK at least,) for some peculiar reason. I would be happy that at this moment in time there is a GPU choice for pretty much every variable budget - just not all from the same range or even manufacturer. Amd IMO were very clever with the RX cards , they've hit a market sector performance & pricewise that is missing from nvidias current lineup. More choice is always a good thing
    I'm not comparing the pricing of the 1050 vs 1060. I'm just saying that the pricing of this card is a bit too close to the 1060 6GB (which can be had for about $220). For the difference, I'd rather go for the 1060. Now, if AMD had priced this closer to the 1050 Ti, that'd be a no-brainer. But they haven't, so I'm kinda gonna have to overlook this card.


    at this moment in the uk you can get the 8gb 580 for £230 which is the same price as a 1060 6gb.

    ON newegg Im seeing plenty of 4gb 570's for $169 - Id say that price is absolutely right for what youre getting.
  • falcompsx
    I would much rather see a slightly spec bumped but otherwise identical product receive a new name to differentiate it, than see an entirely new generation of product recycle an existing name of the previous generation product like nvidia did with the Titan X and the new Titan X.
  • dstarr3
    133390 said:
    I would much rather see a slightly spec bumped but otherwise identical product receive a new name to differentiate it, than see an entirely new generation of product recycle an existing name of the previous generation product like nvidia did with the Titan X and the new Titan X.


    That's how cars are named and no one seems to be confused by that convention. Honestly, if the industry switched to that kind of naming convention, like a 2016 nVidia 1060 and a 2017 nVidia 1060, etc, that would only make things like required spec sheets on games easier to read.