# Gigabyte AORUS RX 580 XTR 8 GB



## W1zzard (Jul 24, 2017)

The AORUS RX 580 XTR is Gigabyte's highest-clocked Radeon RX 580 variant. The large overclock out of the box ensures that the card can beat the GTX 1060 6 GB. Also included is the crucial idle-fan-off feature and adjustable RGB lighting.

*Show full review*


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 24, 2017)

GTX 1080 Ti power consumption, but not GTX 1080 Ti performance.


----------



## Outback Bronze (Jul 24, 2017)

Fluffmeister said:


> GTX 1080 Ti power consumption, but not GTX 1080 Ti performance.



Not for the Ti price, no


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 24, 2017)

Muahaha, It's performance per watt falls short of even Maxwell.


----------



## HD64G (Jul 24, 2017)

Great review as usual @W1zzard. Almost the same performance as the Nitro Limited edition, so nothing new here for me at least. 

The biggest find in this review though is that Fury X at 4K is on the GTX1070 level of performance and left clearly behind the 980Ti by 10%. A surprise to me I confess by its beginning on market when @W1zzard found it just on par with 980Ti @4K. Even at 1440P, at start 980Ti was faster by 5% and now Fury X wins by 3-4%. Massive difference for the exact same products imho.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/31.html


----------



## MAXLD (Jul 24, 2017)

Hmm, interesting card, let me check the stores.....







damn miners.

Seeing my good old R9 290 giving up her soul two days ago, there's almost nothing out there to buy. If Vega doesn't help, in a couple of years we'll all be budget plebs or damn broke 1080Ti owners.
Where's actually that "multi-gpu DX12 / double VRAM" miracle we were all hoping for? Could be handy during these dark days... two junk cards could possibly almost make a decent one (almost)...


----------



## Casecutter (Jul 24, 2017)

"AMD misplanned their GPU chip production" W1zzard... So their crystal ball was on the fritz that day?

Dammed if you... dammed if you don't.  If RTG pressed GloFo to make more neither can ask for better margins.  While just as they add volume and cards make it in the channel "it all goes bust" and RTG is stuck with excess new product, as the miner's dump theirs on Ebay... 

Sorry RTG has got bit once and they've learned, they can ever slowly up wafer starts, but the can't replay what happen the last go around.


----------



## coolernoob (Jul 24, 2017)

"270$" is not how you spell 450$ - please fix this error, because this card makes zero sense at current price (current - for last 3 months not "just a little spike till next cargo")


----------



## notb (Jul 24, 2017)

I struggle to understand how this card got such a high mark. :-(
If NVIDIA made a 1060Ti with identical results, it would be called the largest failure of its generation.


----------



## jabbadap (Jul 24, 2017)

Hmm there's some odd cards on the some of the charts, like RX 550 and gt1030... Upcoming low end review perhaps?

On the topic though, great review as always .  Everything on this card screams that clocks are pushed out of arch optimum, no OC room left and very high power consumption.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 24, 2017)

HD64G said:


> The biggest find in this review though is that Fury X at 4K is on the GTX1070 level of performance and left clearly behind the 980Ti by 10%. A surprise to me I confess by its beginning on market when @W1zzard found it just on par with 980Ti @4K. Even at 1440P, at start 980Ti was faster by 5% and now Fury X wins by 3-4%. Massive difference for the exact same products imho.
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X/31.html



PC Games Hardware has done a nice follow up, as well as Tech Spot, worth a look:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Grafi...s/Rangliste-GPU-Grafikchip-Benchmark-1174201/

https://www.techspot.com/review/1329-buying-gpu-radeon-fury-geforce-980/



Outback Bronze said:


> Not for the Ti price, no



https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...03900&cm_re=rx_480-_-9SIA85V5J03900-_-Product

Pesky miners eh?


----------



## hapkiman (Jul 24, 2017)

Good review, thanks.  Sounds like a nice overclocked 480.


----------



## notb (Jul 24, 2017)

Fluffmeister said:


> https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...03900&cm_re=rx_480-_-9SIA85V5J03900-_-Product
> Pesky miners eh?


I don't understand where are these prices coming from (and I've seen up to $800...). RX580 can be had for under $450.


----------



## Kissamies (Jul 24, 2017)

Low stock because of toy money miners.


----------



## Casecutter (Jul 24, 2017)

I'm hoping when it goes "bust" and all the RX and this time around even GTX's that the prices will crash to the floor and a average 580 8Gb or GTX106 6Gb will be like <$100.  Figure if we weren't riding this "mining wave" those card would be like $150-170 working a rebate.   When all such volume finally avalanches back onto the market prices, will be rock bottom. 

Both sides are surely pushing back they're next releases and letting this run course (face it they're selling all they ever committed in wafers from GloFo/TSMC) as production for both are firing on all cylinders until the first real sign of "hick-up" in mining.  Then they'll cease production and start the new stuff.  By the time they've volume to go market most of the Ebay frenzy will have subsided. Let's hope the next chip's give a high enough boost in performance and lower power (and low MSRP's) to really draw gamers to think about a new purchase.


----------



## bug (Jul 24, 2017)

hapkiman said:


> Good review, thanks.  Sounds like a nice overclocked 480.


Performance per watt is worse than 480, tho.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 24, 2017)

So...





And






If mining is pushing the 580 to that level, how much will e-tailers charge for Vega RX?

Looks like a 1070 is a far better bet for mining, especially on power/perf (which is important for mining).


----------



## bug (Jul 24, 2017)

the54thvoid said:


> So...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So... maybe mining isn't the cause then?


----------



## 0x4452 (Jul 25, 2017)

The card is nice - crammed PCB with powerful VRMs, good layout and decent cooling. But hard to justify over a 1060 6GB for me. Its marginally faster for double the power consumption.


----------



## Caelestis (Jul 25, 2017)

HD64G said:


> The biggest find in this review though is that Fury X at 4K is on the GTX1070 level of performance and left clearly behind the 980Ti by 10%. A surprise to me I confess by its beginning on market when @W1zzard found it just on par with 980Ti @4K. Even at 1440P, at start 980Ti was faster by 5% and now Fury X wins by 3-4%. Massive difference for the exact same products imho.



I think on the one hand it is a result of the good driver support from AMD for older GPU and secondly because of DirectX 12 & Vulkan. Similar results can be seen when comparing the 970 and the 390. When the 390 came out, it was pretty much on the same level of the 970. Now the 970 is far behind the 390 in modern titles. But this is certainly also a result of the higher VRAM.


----------



## notb (Jul 25, 2017)

Caelestis said:


> I think on the one hand it is a result of the good driver support from AMD for older GPU and secondly because of DirectX 12 & Vulkan. Similar results can be seen when comparing the 970 and the 390. When the 390 came out, it was pretty much on the same level of the 970. Now the 970 is far behind the 390 in modern titles. But this is certainly also a result of the higher VRAM.


Actually this is mostly a result of lack of new products. They're concentrating on their old architecture.
Just wait for the RX Vega and rebuilt drivers - you'll see how quickly the older cards will lose performance.


----------



## Joss (Jul 25, 2017)

The complains about power consumption are exaggerated in my opinion. The card pulls 243 W peak gaming (should be closer to 200 W most of the time) which any good 550 W PSU will handle.


----------



## Gin (Jul 25, 2017)

Nvidia's DX12 performance is really poor. RX580 matching/beating 980Ti and Fury X  matching/beating 1070.


----------



## notb (Jul 25, 2017)

Gin said:


> Nvidia's DX12 performance is really poor. RX580 matching/beating 980Ti and Fury X  matching/beating 1070.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_DirectX_12_support


Joss said:


> The complains about power consumption are exaggerated in my opinion. The card pulls 243 W peak gaming (should be closer to 200 W most of the time) which any good 550 W PSU will handle.


But it's still 100W more that could be saved (as NVIDIA has shown).
Keyword: heat.


----------



## bug (Jul 25, 2017)

Joss said:


> The complains about power consumption are exaggerated in my opinion. The card pulls 243 W peak gaming (should be closer to 200 W most of the time) which any good 550 W PSU will handle.


For the millionth time: when expressing concerns about power usage people are not worried about their electrical bill or whether the system can cope with it. Performance per watt is an indicator of how efficient an architecture is compared to another and a higher TDP means you'll have to move more air to cool the thing which translates into more noise. If you don't care about efficiency and can find a card that's silent enough _for you_ even when drawing more power, buying a more power hungry part _is_ a viable option.

In short, TDP _is_ a parameter of the card and it will be mentioned whenever a new card is released.


----------



## Casecutter (Jul 25, 2017)

notb said:


> Actually this is mostly a result of lack of new products. They're concentrating on their old architecture.
> Just wait for the RX Vega and rebuilt drivers - you'll see how quickly the older cards will lose performance.



I agree, and it's both that will stretch out releases as long as they are selling chips to mining.  Why either would show their best at this point when no gamers (very few) are willing to purchase, especially in mid-range.  Like said even 1070's are not immune for mining as long as there's a payback either in hash/payback or electrical cost/return in coins.

If Vega is still provides hash and can be bought it will get the same exorbitant mark-up in retail and won't go to gamers.  RGT would almost be smart to under-rate it in gaming then when this mining goes "bust" drop new Vega drivers that has it get better to pull gamers to it. 

Given the place the last Nvidia "top dog" the GTX980Ti is at now... RGT should be into quietly position themselves as supporting gamers longer term viability.  I mean there's plenty of gamers who got R9 280 (and even X versions) that paid from a low of $144 -AR new (even 280X new got to like $175) once mining went bust the last time.  Not to mention many are on used mining cards off Ebay and such, and in various instances today playing in 970 ($270-330) 1080p territory.  A card that's a year it senior using not as new architecture (Tahiti from 2012) is still "biting at it heels" for much less invested, I find that great long term viability.  And let's not bring in the R9 290 which was initially more 780/970 competition.


----------



## Athlonite (Jul 25, 2017)

Bought a Sapphire Nitro+RX480 8GB OC months ago when they were cheaper and just upgraded to RX580 with a BIOS update left it at 480 clocks and it now uses less power than before for the same perf


----------



## fullinfusion (Jul 28, 2017)

@W1zzard is there a reason that you use the Anniversary edition of windows over the Creator?

It seems 95% of us use the Creator update.


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 28, 2017)

fullinfusion said:


> @W1zzard is there a reason that you use the Anniversary edition of windows over the Creator?
> 
> It seems 95% of us use the Creator update.


Uh I use Creators of course, let me fix that


----------

