# ASUS Radeon RX 460 STRIX OC 4 GB



## W1zzard (Aug 10, 2016)

AMD's Radeon RX 460 promises entry level gaming for the masses, with pricing starting at $109. We are reviewing the ASUS RX 460 STRIX OC, which comes with 4 GB instead of 2 GB and an additional 6-pin power connector, at a $140 price point.

*Show full review*


----------



## mastershake575 (Aug 10, 2016)

Ouch (over 400 video cards reviewed on this site and this is on the top 5 lowest scoring list). 

What a disappointment


----------



## HD64G (Aug 10, 2016)

The RX460 2GB is the best choice for anyone to spend about $100 for a GPU. This one for $140 isn't the best choice though as @W1zzard wrote in the conclusion.


----------



## dj-electric (Aug 10, 2016)

Remember when mid-range cards used to overclock insanely high? Like the HD 7850?
Yeah, this is not happening anymore.

And the fact that 28nm maxwell cards beat this one if perf\watt makes me lose my faith. 
If you were told me that in HD4870\GTX260 era in 2008, i would hold my head and drink myself to sleep out of this depressing fact. Everything that is being said about Polaris' efficiency is sugar-coated, even as bad as it can sound.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Aug 10, 2016)

$140 for this makes zero sense.

Save up ladies, you can buy more performance.... honest.


----------



## jabbadap (Aug 10, 2016)

Hmm, wondering how much slower cards without 6-pin connectors will be. Power consumption is still surprisingly high, I really hoped it would be very much lower than 75W. Does not really bode well considering laptop market.

BTW, is this thing really pcie x8 card? There are pins for x16 but are they connected, vanilla RX 460 should be pcie x8 card.

Edit. Ahh that GPU-Z screenie on OC page says PCIe 3.0 x8, so that it most likely is.



Dj-ElectriC said:


> Remember when mid-range cards used to overclock insanely high? Like the HD 7850?
> Yeah, this is not happening anymore.



Hmm I thought this is low end. Comparable to hd 7750 in that era. But yeah is it manufacturing process or what, but that OC is really really meaningless.


----------



## W1zzard (Aug 10, 2016)

jabbadap said:


> Hmm, wondering how much slower cards without 6-pin connectors will be.


Not more than 5%



jabbadap said:


> BTW, is this thing really pcie x8 card? There are pins for x16 but are they connected, vanilla RX 460 should be pcie x8 card.


Yes, ASUS just put the golden traces on the socket, which end after a cm or so. You can see on the PCB shots that they have no terminating circuitry


----------



## lanlagger (Aug 10, 2016)

is this card aslo used for mining? cuz those prices makes no other sense  - yea I know it is cheap - but performance and price/performace are WORSE than previous gen rebrands (that orginally was launched god knows how many years back)... in fact I would like to see this vs Intel iGPU.... yea - I know ti whould be better than Skylake iGPU and iGPU is nothing to be excited about anyways, but I can bet, that those who shed 140$+for this weak crap would not be happy to see that review


----------



## hardcore_gamer (Aug 10, 2016)

GTX 950, which has similar performance and power consumption is available at $129. This card is pointless at any price above $100.


----------



## bug (Aug 10, 2016)

Fluffmeister said:


> $140 for this makes zero sense.
> 
> Save up ladies, you can buy more performance.... honest.


Yup, just checked and $160 buys you a 960 which much faster than this (if you don't play Rise of Tomb Raider). Plus, a two-slot cooling solution on a budget card? Really?


----------



## Zakin (Aug 10, 2016)

My biggest issue with the RX460/470 isn't really that they are totally awful, it's that they would have to be priced down quite a bit more. The RX460 doesn't seem like it's doing the proper generational thing, it's not creating a new performance segment, they're dropping a card into the same performance segment that existed for the past 1.5-2 years and hoping that it's the THING. I don't get the strategy.


----------



## nem.. (Aug 10, 2016)

460 still with drivers very inmature, with Async, 4GB , DP 1.4 / HDR, etc

vs

950 2gb with drivers legacy , with out Async , highter power consumtion , oh wait..


----------



## Zakin (Aug 10, 2016)

nem.. said:


> View attachment 77782
> 
> 460 still with drivers very inmature, with Async, 4GB , DP 1.4 / HDR, etc
> 
> ...



Except Async isn't magically going to make these grudge worthy framerates in most games to 50-60+, and the 2GBs more of VRAM seems mostly a waste with this type of horsepower behind it. This card has no balance, it would've been fine at 2GB, maybe 3GB. Before the argument piques that this is made for CSGO, League and such, true. But at the same time built in Intel even does that fairly well now, let alone a plethora of GPUs you could get ridiculously cheap where it doesn't so much matter if driver support is waning or if it has less ram.


----------



## XiGMAKiD (Aug 11, 2016)

With at least 50% the performance of a RX470, it's a nice card
But with it's current price, it's a bad buy

Looks like if you go for the Red team, it's either 4GB RX470 or 8GB RX480


----------



## ShurikN (Aug 11, 2016)

This card shouldn't have had a 6-pin power (75W max) and such a robust cooling, not to mention the price tag. $100 for the 2GB and ~$115 for 4GB, and I'm talking custom builds here, not reference (which doesn't exist anyway). At $140 there's really no point.


----------



## Shatun_Bear (Aug 11, 2016)

hardcore_gamer said:


> GTX 950, which has similar performance and power consumption is available at $129. This card is pointless at any price above $100.



Should be much cheaper for sure, but this would be a better buy than a 950 if it was priced around $120.



XiGMAKiD said:


> With at least 50% the performance of a RX470, it's a nice card
> But with it's current price, it's a bad buy
> 
> Looks like if you go for the Red team, it's either *4GB RX470 or 8GB RX480*



Yeah, although in England I am seeing Sapphire Fury Tri-X's  go for £300 new or £250 second hand. Not bad.


----------



## wiak (Aug 11, 2016)

ShurikN said:


> This card shouldn't have had a 6-pin power (75W max) and such a robust cooling, not to mention the price tag. $100 for the 2GB and ~$115 for 4GB, and I'm talking custom builds here, not reference (which doesn't exist anyway). At $140 there's really no point.


i wonder how this asus card compares to the gigabyte windforce 2X RX 460 2GB no-6-pin
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2016/08/08/gigabyte-radeon-rx-460-windforce-2x-oc-2gb/13

pretty sure those two extra gb memory will use more watts on asus cards etc


----------



## maximoor (Aug 11, 2016)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> Remember when mid-range cards used to overclock insanely high? Like the HD 7850?
> Yeah, this is not happening anymore.
> 
> And the fact that 28nm maxwell cards beat this one if perf\watt makes me lose my faith.
> If you were told me that in HD4870\GTX260 era in 2008, i would hold my head and drink myself to sleep out of this depressing fact. Everything that is being said about Polaris' efficiency is sugar-coated, even as bad as it can sound.



yeah.. I remember that. I still have an MSI 7850 Power Edition OCed to 1290 mhz (on my extreme profile) with "only" 1.250v. Remember.. Stock card is 860Mhz, so that's a 430 mhz improvement over reference or, in other words, an woopi 50% overclock! In some benchs/games, like BF3 or Metro LL, i had an extra ~40% boost. It's like... a 7950 boost ed. or close to GTX670 which is 2 classes above.

Even today, like.. 4 years after it's release date, i still think that this is the best GPU for overclock. i never see a card with a stock air cooler (here on TPU or other websites) doing ~400mhz OC, except Pitcairn Pro.

For instance, @Wizzard achieved 1245/1545 on a Powercolor PCS+ with the default fan and voltage settings. The Msi Power Edition OC wasn't that good in this review, only 1120mhz, still, +18% increase. Performance increase is much higher on MSI than what we see on other brands. I don't know why but i noticed it.

So, despite this RX 460 is on the same level of performance and price as 7850/ R7 265/ R7 370, i think those are much better cards, specially the original Pitcairn.


----------



## rruff (Aug 11, 2016)

HD64G said:


> The RX460 2GB is the best choice for anyone to spend about $100 for a GPU. This one for $140 isn't the best choice though as @W1zzard wrote in the conclusion.



I bought a GTX 950 for $100 last fall and OC'd it will beat this 460 easily.  Power consumption on the 460 is higher on a half sized process! What happened to the purported huge improvement in efficiency? You can buy <75W GTX 950s also. AMD isn't even matching Maxwell on FPS/W, and FPS/$ is probably a wash even when prices settle down. 

And forget about AMD in laptops. I was hoping for some competition there, but it will be just like last generation. Pascal will destroy Polaris.


----------



## dat_boi (Aug 11, 2016)

I wouldn't dare to assume that he just took the results of an aftermarket overclocked RX 460 4GB to deduce price/perf of the RX 460 2GB, which is almost a tier lower performance wise(~20%). That'd be really bad for this web's credibility.

I'm kind of annoyed how many sites lately side with the "underdog" and try to put its products into a better light on the expense of the consumers, this whole Polaris line up would be quite the epitome of it. They aren't doing the consumers or the hardware scene any favors by doing this, quite the opposite actually. If the underdog isn't even trying to offer a better deal than the competition and his product strategy doesn't make any sense, it's time for him to go, he doesn't deserve to gain market share like this and normally wouldn't be able to, don't support this behavior or it won't get any better moving forward.

I don't know if the hardware sites even care anymore, it's just the business as usual year after year, just some companies trying to milk the consumers with the same generational performance leaps even though the technology and manufacturing costs change significantly. I'd probably get disillusioned and apathetic as well, why even risk aggroing the wrath of fanboys if you don't really have your own skin in it, just recommend that crappy product and move on...


----------



## nem.. (Aug 11, 2016)




----------



## Assimilator (Aug 11, 2016)

nem.. said:


> View attachment 77782
> 
> 460 still with drivers very inmature, with Async, 4GB , DP 1.4 / HDR, etc
> 
> ...



Immature drivers: I don't buy a product based on how it may or may not perform in six months if AMD gets off their butts and fixes their drivers, I buy a product based on how it performs when reviewed at its release.
Async: Requires game support, and even then is not gonna make a card that's slow as dog s**t perform decently.
4GB: As already noted, absolutely pointless on this card and just adds to the cost.
DP 1.4 / HDR: You really think the people who will be buying this card care about that?

Also, Maxwell does have async, but I see you're one of those mentally handicapped AMD fanboys who doesn't understand what async actually is. It's okay, you can go sit in the corner with all of the other special ones and have a Polaris group wank.


----------



## techy1 (Aug 11, 2016)

price made this product usless crap (seriosly check out if irisPro does not beat this before you buy one). nice to see wizzard also places this product as low as he could - 7.8 - is lowest I have seen - lets face it, he can not give 1.0 and "do not waste your time or money with this crap" award (or simillar) - because he must still please the vendors and be nice to them....


----------



## HD64G (Aug 11, 2016)

rruff said:


> I bought a GTX 950 for $100 last fall and OC'd it will beat this 460 easily.  Power consumption on the 460 is higher on a half sized process! What happened to the purported huge improvement in efficiency? You can buy <75W GTX 950s also. AMD isn't even matching Maxwell on FPS/W, and FPS/$ is probably a wash even when prices settle down.
> 
> And forget about AMD in laptops. I was hoping for some competition there, but it will be just like last generation. Pascal will destroy Polaris.


That ASUS isn't the best offer as @W1zzard wrote ok? A not oced with lower than 75W power consumption and a $110 price tag IS imho. Don't make me write it again.


----------



## BiggieShady (Aug 11, 2016)

nem.. said:


>


They should have used water cooling ... /end sarcasm ... talk about overkill for the little baffin


----------



## 64K (Aug 11, 2016)

nem.. said:


>



That may be a new record for you @nem 

15 ads in one post.


----------



## BiggieShady (Aug 11, 2016)

64K said:


> 15 ads in one post.


That's the complete marketing campaign ... time to move on to multiple campaigns per post, the records are meant to be broken


----------



## Assimilator (Aug 11, 2016)

64K said:


> That may be a new record for you @nem
> 
> 15 ads in one post.



15 times the s**tposting!


----------



## Monsuta (Aug 11, 2016)

W1zzard said:


> Not more than 5%
> 
> 
> Yes, ASUS just put the golden traces on the socket, which end after a cm or so. You can see on the PCB shots that they have no terminating circuitry



Ain't the TMU count is 56? The first page wrongly said 48.


----------



## jabbadap (Aug 11, 2016)

Monsuta said:


> Ain't the TMU count is 56? The first page wrongly said 48.



True, it should be 56. That leaked old slide had wrong tmu count(48), which seems to mess some reviewers.


----------



## W1zzard (Aug 11, 2016)

Monsuta said:


> Ain't the TMU count is 56? The first page wrongly said 48.


Fixed, thanks!


----------



## acperience7 (Aug 11, 2016)

Very underwhelming performance. I wasn't expecting a lot of this card, but even at the minimum tested resolutions it struggles in a lot of games.


----------



## Nokiron (Aug 11, 2016)

nem.. said:


> View attachment 77782
> 
> 460 still with drivers very inmature, with Async, 4GB , DP 1.4 / HDR, etc
> 
> ...


Oh wait, you should probably know what you are talking about before linking that image.

Every card that is not the current generation ends up there. It has absolutely nothing to do with support, but hey fanboys will be fanboys.

https://www.nvidia.com/page/legacy.html


----------



## jabbadap (Aug 11, 2016)

acperience7 said:


> Very underwhelming performance. I wasn't expecting a lot of this card, but even at the minimum tested resolutions it struggles in a lot of games.



Yeah used settings are too much for this card, not single one test gives over 60fps on 1080p. Maybe W1zzard should make a parallel test portfolio for low/mid end cards, with only 900p and 1080p res and mid/high settings. That Diashow on 2160p must have been quite painful to watch . I liked Bit-tech review the most for showing results with more earth like settings for such a card.


----------



## deu (Aug 11, 2016)

I would love to see a test with this card done with all the "eSport" games that this is aimed for; LoL, DOTA2, WoW, CSGO, HS, rocket league / whatever. (not saying Techpowerup should change their test-case for this in general), but I think this is what matters to potential buyers of this card


----------



## Frick (Aug 11, 2016)

About €130 for the 2GB version and more than €150 for the 4GB version. The R7 360 was/is about €110, and there were 1GB versions of that card. The entire Polaris line is slightly too expensive here.

EDIT: The best bang/buck card to buy now is definitely the GTX 970.


----------



## TheinsanegamerN (Aug 11, 2016)

Talk about a disappointment. I am moving to a tiny HTPC as my main desktop, and was really hoping that a 460 would be good, but looking at that performance....if it cant beat a 950, then what is the point? There is no upgrade there. 

Man, if nvidia releases a 1050, AMD isnt going to have much of a market at all. And here I was hoping for some actual competition at the low end. Polaris is a generation or two behind nvidia at this point, and is just turning into failure after failure.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Aug 11, 2016)

Completely fair summary at the end there.


At $110 this card is an excellent entry level card that decimates its surrounding competition (750 Ti, 260X, 370) with better performance and efficiency.  But the second you price it at $140 - $150 it is a pathetic value proposition.


----------



## xorbe (Aug 11, 2016)

I wish 750Ti was in the charts, just curious. Ah, here we can estimate that 750Ti is 72-74% of 950 at 1080p, which would be 72-74% of RX460 also.  So RX460 is approx 40% faster than 750Ti.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GTX_950/23.html


----------



## Nabarun (Aug 11, 2016)

@W1zzard Can you PLEASE include Warface when you review these low-end and mid-range cards?


----------



## PopcornMachine (Aug 12, 2016)

Great price/performance.

Too bad that performance doesn't include playing games.


----------



## nem.. (Aug 12, 2016)

Nokiron said:


> Oh wait, you should probably know what you are talking about before linking that image.
> 
> Every card that is not the current generation ends up there. It has absolutely nothing to do with support, but hey fanboys will be fanboys.
> 
> https://www.nvidia.com/page/legacy.html



the end production of maxwell happen some months before the series maxwell change to legacy drivers=product mode.






aaaaah what a sadness , keep dreaming than the legacy mode does not exist.


----------



## Frick (Aug 12, 2016)

PopcornMachine said:


> Great price/performance.
> 
> Too bad that performance doesn't include playing games.



Sure it does, as long as you lower the settings. If you read the review from a 2GB/$110 view it's actually quite good.


----------



## FYFI13 (Aug 12, 2016)

They say it was made for e-sports? Intel/AMD integrated graphics can do that. For free. Scan.co.uk selling this card for 169.99 GBP  Absolute maximum i would pay for this, thing, would be 69.99. Maybe.


----------



## Frick (Aug 12, 2016)

FYFI13 said:


> They say it was made for e-sports? Intel/AMD integrated graphics can do that. For free. Scan.co.uk selling this card for 169.99 GBP  Absolute maximum i would pay for this, thing, would be 69.99. Maybe.



That would be the steal of the century.


----------



## FYFI13 (Aug 12, 2016)

Frick said:


> That would be the steal of the century.


169.99GBP for this joke... It *IS* the steal of the century.


----------



## Nokiron (Aug 12, 2016)

nem.. said:


> the end production of maxwell happen some months before the series maxwell change to legacy drivers=product mode.
> 
> aaaaah what a sadness , keep dreaming than the legacy mode does not exist.


You have no idea what you are talking about. GameGPU has no credibility what so ever, and I don't know what Kepler has do with your talk about Maxwell?
You apparently believe that drivers is everything and that the underlying architechture is somehow irrelevant.

Sure dude.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...iews/70125-gtx-780-ti-vs-r9-290x-rematch.html



> Some said AMD’s drivers were lacking while others went so far as to claim NVIDIA may have purposely crippled Kepler’s performance in an effort to drive 900-series sales. None of that was evident after running through each game’s respective benchmark scene at least four times over.


----------



## Nabarun (Aug 12, 2016)

Over here the 4GB Sapphire Nitro is priced at  Rs 13999 (210 USD) !!! and the 2GB one @ 180 USD...


----------



## ASOT (Aug 12, 2016)

Not worth it


----------



## Palladium (Aug 12, 2016)

Matching a 950 released one year earlier and on a much smaller process has fail written all over it in my book. Nobody is going to buy ~$100 cards for DX12 anyway so that's a moot point.


----------



## rruff (Aug 12, 2016)

Palladium said:


> Matching a 950 released one year earlier and on a much smaller process has fail written all over it in my book. Nobody is going to buy ~$100 cards for DX12 anyway so that's a moot point.



This factory OC'd 4GB 460 matches _950 *reference*_. This card only managed a 2.4% performance boost with OC, while 950s average a 20% performance increase over reference (I bought one so I checked all the reviews). The real difference is *15-20% in favor of the 950*, based on W1zzard's reviews.


----------

