AMD Radeon RX 470 4GB Graphics Card Review

Print
by Rob Williams on August 5, 2016 in Graphics & Displays

AMD’s second Polaris graphics card has arrived, and it comes to us in the form of the Radeon RX 470. As its name implies, AMD’s latest model slots in just under the RX 480 – really close. The SRP difference between these two cards is a mere $20, so let’s dive in and see what you can expect from either one.

Page 1 – Introduction, About The RX 470 & Testing Notes

It sure has been an active summer for graphics so far. It all kicked-off in May, with the release of NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX 1080, which was quickly followed by the launch of the GeForce GTX 1070. Fast-forward to the following month, and AMD unleashed its Radeon RX 480, a card that saw NVIDIA leap into action to release the GeForce GTX 1060.

As if that wasn’t enough for a two-month span, both AMD and NVIDIA announced their brand-new Radeon Pro and Quadro workstation graphics cards at SIGGRAPH. Then, for good measure, and in advance of this review, we posted a look at 2560×1080 ultrawide performance of both the GTX 1060 and RX 480.

Whew. It’s been busy, and it doesn’t look like things are going to be slowing down. On the test bench today is AMD’s second Polaris-based release, the Radeon RX 470. The card comes in at $179 SRP, and it aims to become the ultimate “HD gaming” (1080p) card for the money.

AMD Radeon Series Cores Core MHz Memory Mem MHz Mem Bus TDP
Radeon RX 480 2304 1266 ≤8192MB 8000 256-bit 150W
Radeon RX 470 2048 1206 4096MB 7000 256-bit 120W
Radeon RX 460 896 1090 4096MB 7000 128-bit 75W
Radeon Pro Duo 4096*2 1000 4096MB*2 1000 4096-bit*2 350W
Radeon R9 Fury X 4096 1050 4096MB 1000 4096-bit 275W
Radeon R9 Fury 3584 1000 4096MB 1000 4096-bit 275W
Radeon R9 Nano 4096 1000 4096MB 1000 4096-bit 175W
Radeon R9 390X 2816 1050 8192MB 6000 512-bit 275W
Radeon R9 390 2560 1000 8192MB 6000 512-bit 275W
Radeon R9 380X 2048 970 4096MB 5700 256-bit 190W
Radeon R9 380 1792 970 4096MB 5700 256-bit 190W

Based on the RX 470’s specs, it’s not hard to glean that it should prove just a bit slower than the top-dog RX 480. That makes it a bit of an odd model in AMD’s current lineup, but that’s not as odd as the pricing. The RX 480 4GB costs $200 SRP, while this RX 470 has an SRP of $180. It’d be nice to see some greater separation here, but AMD is in a bit of a rough spot since it’s currently only catering to the $200-and-under market (minus the 8GB RX 480).

Despite the odd pricing and minor specs difference, if performance scaling matches what we’d expect, then it kind of makes sense that this card would be priced at $180, $20 price difference be damned.

Unlike the RX 480, which AMD produced a reference model for, the company is relying entirely on AIB vendors to craft cards around its GPU. A fleet of such cards can be seen below. An overclocked (+50MHz) XFX model is the one we received for testing.

ASUS Radeon RX 470 4GB Strix
GIGABYTE Radeon RX 470 4GB Gaming G1
MSI Radeon RX 470 4GB Gaming X
PowerColor Radeon RX 470 4GB Red Devil
Sapphire Radeon RX 470 4GB
XFX Radeon RX 470 4GB

There’s not much else to say about the RX 470, because we’ve known about the card for so long, and we know what to expect from its performance. So without further ado, let’s just get right into testing – right after a quick look at our test system and methodologies.

Testing Notes

When we need to build a test PC for performance testing, “no bottleneck” is the name of the game. While we admit that few of our readers are going to be equipped with an Intel 8-core processor clocked to 4GHz, we opt for such a build to make sure our GPU testing is as apples-to-apples as possible, with as little variation as possible. Ultimately, the only thing that matters here is the performance of the GPUs, so the more we can rule out a bottleneck, the better.

That all said, our test PC:

Graphics Card Test System
Processors Intel Core i7-5960X (8-core) @ 4.0GHz
Motherboard ASUS X99 DELUXE
Memory Kingston HyperX Beast 32GB (4x8GB) – DDR4-2133 11-12-11
Graphics AMD Radeon R9 Nano 4GB – Catalyst 16.5.3
AMD Radeon RX 470 4GB – Catalyst 16.8.1 Beta
AMD Radeon RX 480 8GB – Catalyst 16.6.2 Beta
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 4GB – GeForce 365.22
NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X (First-gen) 12GB – GeForce 365.22
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB – GeForce 368.64 (Beta)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 8GB – GeForce 368.19 (Beta)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 8GB – GeForce 368.25
Audio Onboard
Storage Kingston SSDNow V310 1TB SSD
Power Supply Cooler Master Silent Pro Hybrid 1300W
Chassis Cooler Master Storm Trooper Full-Tower
Cooling Thermaltake WATER3.0 Extreme Liquid Cooler
Displays Acer Predator X34 34″ Ultra-wide
Acer XB280HK 28″ 4K G-SYNC
ASUS MG279Q 27″ 1440p FreeSync
Et cetera Windows 10 Pro (10586) 64-bit

Framerate information for all tests – with the exception of certain time demos and DirectX 12 tests – are recorded with the help of Fraps. For tests where Fraps use is not ideal, I use the game’s built-in test (the only option for DX12 titles right now). In the past, I’ve tweaked the Windows OS as much as possible to rule out test variations, but over time, such optimizations have proven fruitless. As a result, the Windows 10 installation I use is about as stock as possible, with minor modifications to suit personal preferences.

In all, I use 8 different games for regular game testing, 3 for DirectX 12 testing, and 1 for Vulkan testing. That’s in addition to the use of three synthetic benchmarks. Because some games are sponsored, the list below helps oust potential bias in our testing.

(AMD) – Ashes of the Singularity (DirectX 12)
(AMD) – Battlefield 4
(AMD) – Crysis 3
(AMD) – Hitman (DirectX 12)
(NVIDIA) – Metro: Last Light Redux
(NVIDIA) – Rise Of The Tomb Raider (incl. DirectX 12)
(NVIDIA) – The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
(Neutral) – DOOM (incl. Vulkan)
(Neutral) – Grand Theft Auto V
(Neutral) – Total War: ATTILA

If you’re interested in benchmarking your own configuration to compare to our results, you can download this file (5MB) and make sure you’re using the exact same graphics settings. I’ll lightly explain how I benchmark each test before I get into each game’s performance results.

Support our efforts! With ad revenue at an all-time low for written websites, we're relying more than ever on reader support to help us continue putting so much effort into this type of content. You can support us by becoming a Patron, or by using our Amazon shopping affiliate links listed through our articles. Thanks for your support!

Rob Williams

Rob founded Techgage in 2005 to be an 'Advocate of the consumer', focusing on fair reviews and keeping people apprised of news in the tech world. Catering to both enthusiasts and businesses alike; from desktop gaming to professional workstations, and all the supporting software.

twitter icon facebook icon instagram icon