Jan 9th, 2025 18:40 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts

Saturday, October 22nd 2016

AMD Wants You to Choose Radeon RX 470 Over the GTX 1050 Ti, For Now

Hot on the heels of NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 1050 Ti launch, AMD fired off an elaborate press-deck explaining why consumers should choose its $169 Radeon RX 470 graphics card over the $139 GeForce GTX 1050 Ti it announced last Tuesday (18/10), which is due for market launch a week later (25/10). The presentation begins explaining that the RX 470 is better equipped to offer above 60 fps on all of today's games at 1080p (Full HD) resolution, with anti-aliasing enabled.

Later down the presentation, AMD alleges that NVIDIA "Pascal" architecture lacks asynchronous compute feature. There are already games that take advantage of it. AMD also claims that its "Polaris" based GPUs RX 480, RX 470, and RX 460, will be faster than competing GTX 1060, GTX 1050 Ti, and GTX 750 Ti at "Battlefield 1" with its DirectX 12 renderer. The presentation ends with a refresher of the company's current product-stack, and how it measures up to NVIDIA's offerings across the competitive landscape. Turns out there is indeed a big price/performance gap between the RX 460 and RX 470, just waiting to be filled.
The Radeon RX 470, priced $30 above the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti, features double the memory bus width, translating into double the memory bandwidth. Memory bandwidth comes in handy with anti-aliasing, mega-textures, and in situations where the GPU needs to quickly move things in and out of its memory.
Add your own comment

113 Comments on AMD Wants You to Choose Radeon RX 470 Over the GTX 1050 Ti, For Now

#51
semitope
newtekie1I know the 960 is half the performance of the 1060, my point is I don't think the 1050Ti will be that slow. AMD's claim is that the 1050Ti will be that slow, but I don't think it will be.



The funny thing is, I use my 960 to play games at 1440p all the time. Mainly Fallout 4 right now though.
it should be around that slow. Probably slower than a 380/380x. Based on the leaked marketing slides comparing it to the 960(?) and 950. Maybe it overclocks beyond that, but a 470 is definitely a much better buy because I doubt a 1050ti is going to beat the 1060 3GB and this is the card the 470 regularly competes with depending on game. The 470 is even sometimes faster in dx12/vulkan vs 1060 6g.

AMDs comparison is really just going to save some people from buying a weaker card when they could have gotten a better more future proof one for a little bit more. I had thought they did not need to even bother since the 1050 ti did not seem in the same league, but I think some people will actually make that mistake and fall a tier behind thinking its all good.

The comparison actually seems to be with overclocked nvidia cards vs reference 470, so buying 1050 ti and not planning to OC would be an even bigger mistake.
Posted on Reply
#52
$ReaPeR$
this thread is hilarious.. so much hate for what? lower prices? are you serious people?!
Posted on Reply
#53
heydan83
I see a lot of comments saying that this looks desperate from AMD, well I say yes they should, because Nvidia´s marketing has transformed everyone into a zombie that just buy their products without looking what the competition have to offer.

I mean, AMD always release the "cheaper" product losing some frames against Nvidia´s "expensier" product and everyone doesnt care to spend the extra dollars for those few frames, but this time that AMD has released the expensier faster product, it seems like everyone´s into buying the cheaper less faster GPU, just because it´s an Nvidia product.

So this is disappointing....
Posted on Reply
#54
alucasa
Just stating my experience in Canada (A country right north of USA).

A 20 USD price difference generally translates to 2x, so 40 CAD difference. It should be more alike 30 but that doesn't happen, usually.

If Canada gets a gap like that, it'd be generally higher elsewhere.


Aaaaanyway, I see Green people vs Red people.
Posted on Reply
#55
BiggieShady
alucasaAaaaanyway, I see Green people vs Red people.
Posted on Reply
#56
Jism
$ReaPeR$this thread is hilarious.. so much hate for what? lower prices? are you serious people?!
Lower prices is best for all of us. The biggest market is not within 400$ price range, but those wanting to spend 100$ up to 250$ for a 'good' graphics card.

Vulkan is'nt everything, but it surely beats Nvidia products at a simular price-range. The future should be vulkan for many many games.
Posted on Reply
#57
OneMoar
There is Always Moar
I see potato
Posted on Reply
#58
efikkan
hojnikbSince when only gcn supprts async compute ?
Exactly.
Everyone remotely competent knows these are lies from AMD's PR department. Granted, every vendor tends to stretch the truth pretty far, but this is a lie that AMD keep spinning. AMD needs to spread lies to sell their products. Shame on them!

I really hope AMD will get sued for this. This is not only illegal, but it's also morally deplorable.
Posted on Reply
#59
heydan83
efikkanExactly.
Everyone remotely competent knows these are lies from AMD's PR department. Granted, every vendor tends to stretch the truth pretty far, but this is a lie that AMD keep spinning. AMD needs to spread lies to sell their products. Shame on them!

I really hope AMD will get sued for this. This is not only illegal, but it's also morally deplorable.
You should read more about async compute, they are not lying, and talking about selling with lies, do you remember the 970 fiasco?, I think that´s more like sell with lies...
Posted on Reply
#60
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
heydan83You should read more about async compute, they are not lying, and talking about selling with lies, do you remember the 970 fiasco?, I think that´s more like sell with lies...
Yup nvidia tried covering that up, got caught when many said the cards were 3.5 and not 4.
Posted on Reply
#61
TheDeeGee
It's the Red Crosses that tell me not to buy Red Products anymore.

Nice try AMD, but no thanks i was done with you ages ago.
Posted on Reply
#62
TheGuruStud
TheDeeGeeIt's the Red Crosses that tell me not to buy Red Products anymore.

Nice try AMD, but no thanks i was done with you ages ago.
I'm buying vega (and zen) on release and dumping the 980ti. It performs well, but I'm not giving these schmucks a dime for adaptive sync. If the fury x was better, I would have never bought it. My 290x (and 7950s etc) served me very well.
Posted on Reply
#63
bogami
A What is there really praise for! Who has inferior architecture ask yourself. I remember pictures which were shown how the AMD RX480 stepped on GTX 1080 which was complete sham. I do not believe the commercials. They lie on both sides. The winner will be more powerful card but if they were equally strong, the price will be decided. So far, if I am waiting for GTX1080ti and AMD 490 or better.
So bad a product I do not want for my enemy not to mention myself . Poor advertisement AMD .
Posted on Reply
#64
FR@NK
Everything in these slides is fairly accurate. GCN was "Purpose-built" for async compute whereas maxwell was not. Although at first glance it looks like AMD is saying async compute isnt supported on maxwell/pascal until you read the silde.
Posted on Reply
#65
mcraygsx
Fair enough Radeon 470 seem to have reasonable advantage over 1050 Ti especially at FHD 1080.
Posted on Reply
#66
$ReaPeR$
JismLower prices is best for all of us. The biggest market is not within 400$ price range, but those wanting to spend 100$ up to 250$ for a 'good' graphics card.

Vulkan is'nt everything, but it surely beats Nvidia products at a simular price-range. The future should be vulkan for many many games.
well, yes.. but take a look on this thread.. take a long good look at it, see the people complaining and laugh loudly. this is so funny.
ps. at this point in time, you get what you pay for in hardware. so whatever you choose for a given price you cant really go wrong. people have been whining for so long for AMD to provide some competition and when AMD delivers (in price cuts in this case) they whine about it. it really boggles my mind.
Posted on Reply
#67
illli
If things were reversed, people would praise Nv for such a bold move, but instead people are caliming it to be desperate. :wtf:
Posted on Reply
#68
DeathtoGnomes
illliIf things were reversed, people would praise Nv for such a bold move, but instead people are caliming it to be desperate. :wtf:
The Nv groupies are panicking, just like those that follow Hillary-ous, it cant be helped now the competition is on the doorstep.
Posted on Reply
#70
AsRock
TPU addict
IceScreamerHey, a business is a business, just saying, to me, it looks dumb.
What be dumb is not doing it, even more so when your company is on the edge of going bankrupt.

Better of trying than just hoping it turns out for the better. They learned that lesson with Intel.
Posted on Reply
#71
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
AsRockWhat be dumb is not doing it, even more so when your company is on the edge of going bankrupt.

Better of trying than just hoping it turns out for the better. They learned that lesson with Intel.
Yeah I recall 2 years ago, card prices weren't moving. It's a good move, keeps them competitive too
Posted on Reply
#72
LiveOrDie
Sounds like AMD is scared there going to lose sales, AMD these days is like a seagull that sits on the Nvidia flag poll shitting on there flag when trying scab for chips.
Posted on Reply
#73
efikkan
heydan83You should read more about async compute, they are not lying, and talking about selling with lies, do you remember the 970 fiasco?, I think that´s more like sell with lies...
You should refrain from talking about matters you clearly know nothing about.
These are deeply technical matters only programmers will fully understand, but Futuremark has made a small overview:
Above is a corresponding trace from an NVIDIA GTX 1080. As can be seen the general structures resemble those which are found on AMD Radeon Fury, albeit with extra queues that do not originate from the engine and which contain only synchronization items. From this image we can see that the GTX 1080 has an additional compute queue which accepts packets in parallel with the 3D queue.
This should put an end to this nonsense once and for all.
Posted on Reply
#74
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
Live OR DieSounds like AMD is scared there going to lose sales, AMD these days is like a seagull that sits on the Nvidia flag poll shitting on there flag when trying scab for chips.
I remember Nvidia slashing prices the same way so Its a good move that both companies make.
Posted on Reply
#75
sutyi
newtekie1I know the 960 is half the performance of the 1060, my point is I don't think the 1050Ti will be that slow. AMD's claim is that the 1050Ti will be that slow, but I don't think it will be.



The funny thing is, I use my 960 to play games at 1440p all the time. Mainly Fallout 4 right now though.
Well... if you take a gander at the specs of the 1050Ti 4GB, you'll see it will be in the same ballpark as 960 4GB model.

There are three things where I can see the 1050Ti edge out the 960 4GB.
  • 1440p gaming due to better DCC in the memorycontroller + higher pixel fillrate
    • Probably kinda dubious as the raw horsepower isn't really there, so going per se from 30 to 33fps at that resolution is pointless imo.
  • Power consumption / Heat generated making it a better choice for ITX and HTPC builds
  • Overclock headroom, if they don't limit it severely in the BIOS and what not.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Jan 9th, 2025 18:40 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts