Shadow of the Tomb Raider: RTX and DLSS Update
ASUS RT-AX88U (AX6000) router review
The Division 2: PC graphics performance benchmark review
URCDkey Spring Sale(up to 86% off) Windows 10 Pro $11
MSI GeForce GTX 1660 Gaming X review
MSI GeForce GTX 1660 VENTUS XS 6G OC review
Palit GeForce GTX 1660 StormX OC review
Corsair Crystal 680X PC Chassis Review
Corsair Carbide 678C review
Bitfenix Enso Mesh ATX Chassis review
ASUS Radeon RX 460 STRIX Gaming 4 GB review
Posted by: on: 08/08/2016 02:00 PM [
54 comment(s) ]
We review the ASUS Radeon RX 460 STRIX Gaming 4 GB. The graphics card is positioned in the budget range and will perform at entry level gaming wise.
Read article
Advertisement
pages 1 2 3
Undying
Senior Member
Posts: 10545
Senior Member
Posts: 10545
Posted on: 08/08/2016 02:18 PM
Again we in EU got fcked while US enjoyings decent prices. Card at 100$ US beating a gtx960?
Damn, nvidia is getting rekt at midrange segment lately.
Again we in EU got fcked while US enjoyings decent prices. Card at 100$ US beating a gtx960?
Damn, nvidia is getting rekt at midrange segment lately.
Agent-A01
Senior Member
Posts: 11332
Senior Member
Posts: 11332
Posted on: 08/08/2016 02:26 PM
Again we in EU got fcked while US enjoyings decent prices. Card at 100$ US beating a gtx960?
Damn, nvidia is getting rekt at midrange segment lately.
1060 is a better overall card than 480.
Won't take much for them to release a new 1050 to beat this one.
Comparing old gen and saying wrecked, lol you're going to have to try to be less obvious as a troll
Since this one has good power consumption, it seems AMD decided to just tack on more cores to make the 480 considering how badly inefficient it is.
A 470 is only 10% slower yet uses what, 30% more power?
A 1080 equivalent will be well over 250 watts using the same architecture.
Again we in EU got fcked while US enjoyings decent prices. Card at 100$ US beating a gtx960?
Damn, nvidia is getting rekt at midrange segment lately.
1060 is a better overall card than 480.
Won't take much for them to release a new 1050 to beat this one.
Comparing old gen and saying wrecked, lol you're going to have to try to be less obvious as a troll
Since this one has good power consumption, it seems AMD decided to just tack on more cores to make the 480 considering how badly inefficient it is.
A 470 is only 10% slower yet uses what, 30% more power?
A 1080 equivalent will be well over 250 watts using the same architecture.
Mica
Member
Posts: 36
Member
Posts: 36
Posted on: 08/08/2016 02:29 PM
1060 is a better overall card than 480.
For DX11 and OpenGL, but you won't see many future DX11/OGL releases, so the actual games will run well on both cards and future DX12/Vulkan will (probably) run better on RX480.
1060 is a better overall card than 480.
For DX11 and OpenGL, but you won't see many future DX11/OGL releases, so the actual games will run well on both cards and future DX12/Vulkan will (probably) run better on RX480.
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 11939
Senior Member
Posts: 11939
Posted on: 08/08/2016 02:38 PM
1060 is a better overall card than 480.
Won't take much for them to release a new 1050 to beat this one.
Comparing old gen and saying wrecked, lol you're going to have to try to be less obvious as a troll
The 1060 being better than the 480 is arguable. I'd say they are even, they trade blows in various areas and markets depending on pricing. Plus with newer drivers the 480 is gaining ground in performance. As DX12 gets further adopted performance will favor the 480.
That being said I also don't see how Nvidia is getting "rekt". AMD is beating them to market on the newer gen in the segment, but the 1060 is fine vs the 480, and while the RX460 beats the 960 in Doom, the 960 is much faster in Witcher/Division/GTA/etc. I'm also pretty sure reference 460's are $100 -- the AIB boards will be closer to $140, as Hilbert states in the article. You can buy a 960 now for $175 and I'm sure the price will drop when these hit the market.
Anyway, AMD is doing well in the segment which will hopefully gain them marketshare. Hopefully they can get these out in quantity before Nvidia launches their equivalent.
1060 is a better overall card than 480.
Won't take much for them to release a new 1050 to beat this one.
Comparing old gen and saying wrecked, lol you're going to have to try to be less obvious as a troll
The 1060 being better than the 480 is arguable. I'd say they are even, they trade blows in various areas and markets depending on pricing. Plus with newer drivers the 480 is gaining ground in performance. As DX12 gets further adopted performance will favor the 480.
That being said I also don't see how Nvidia is getting "rekt". AMD is beating them to market on the newer gen in the segment, but the 1060 is fine vs the 480, and while the RX460 beats the 960 in Doom, the 960 is much faster in Witcher/Division/GTA/etc. I'm also pretty sure reference 460's are $100 -- the AIB boards will be closer to $140, as Hilbert states in the article. You can buy a 960 now for $175 and I'm sure the price will drop when these hit the market.
Anyway, AMD is doing well in the segment which will hopefully gain them marketshare. Hopefully they can get these out in quantity before Nvidia launches their equivalent.
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 11939
Senior Member
Posts: 11939
Posted on: 08/08/2016 02:50 PM
I feel testing 1440p was a waste of your time and useless information for anyone reading, over say testing 1080p on medium settings or on 'lesser' games like LOL etc which would be useful for anyone looking to buy this card.
I noticed with most other reviews also, its like you guys all had a brain fart with this card and other low end releases lol
https://www.computerbase.de/2016-08/radeon-rx-460-test/4/#diagramm-counter-strike-go-1920-1080
This bench has some competitive games that Hilbert doesn't test.
While I agree with you that the game list should probably be altered for cards this low -- Hilbert's one dude and does a ton of benchmarks across every single vendor for almost every card. It would obviously take more time to adjust for each segment and you'd lose the comparisons to other segments, unless you expanded it all the way to the top. I think for the most part you can look at the games he's tested here and make reasonable assumptions on how the card would perform in other games.
I feel testing 1440p was a waste of your time and useless information for anyone reading, over say testing 1080p on medium settings or on 'lesser' games like LOL etc which would be useful for anyone looking to buy this card.
I noticed with most other reviews also, its like you guys all had a brain fart with this card and other low end releases lol
https://www.computerbase.de/2016-08/radeon-rx-460-test/4/#diagramm-counter-strike-go-1920-1080
This bench has some competitive games that Hilbert doesn't test.
While I agree with you that the game list should probably be altered for cards this low -- Hilbert's one dude and does a ton of benchmarks across every single vendor for almost every card. It would obviously take more time to adjust for each segment and you'd lose the comparisons to other segments, unless you expanded it all the way to the top. I think for the most part you can look at the games he's tested here and make reasonable assumptions on how the card would perform in other games.
AlmondMan
Senior Member
Posts: 436
Senior Member
Posts: 436
Posted on: 08/08/2016 02:56 PM
Yea. It might be superfluous for high-end cards to include benchmarks for certain games, like CS:GO, LoL, DOTA2 and a bunch of other popular games like them on highend cards, but I do feel they would make a lot of sense to include in reviews of cards in this end of the spectrum.
Yea. It might be superfluous for high-end cards to include benchmarks for certain games, like CS:GO, LoL, DOTA2 and a bunch of other popular games like them on highend cards, but I do feel they would make a lot of sense to include in reviews of cards in this end of the spectrum.
FrostNixon
Senior Member
Posts: 154
Senior Member
Posts: 154
Posted on: 08/08/2016 03:25 PM
Agreed with the posts above. Useless tests. Every game in that list is pretty much useless above 1080p. The list had to have CSGO, Dota2, LoL, WoW, SC2, overwatch, hots. After all the card's aim is competitive gaming.
Agreed with the posts above. Useless tests. Every game in that list is pretty much useless above 1080p. The list had to have CSGO, Dota2, LoL, WoW, SC2, overwatch, hots. After all the card's aim is competitive gaming.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 34651
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 34651
Posted on: 08/08/2016 03:26 PM
I feel testing 1440p was a waste of your time and useless information for anyone reading, over say testing 1080p on medium settings or on 'lesser' games like LOL etc which would be useful for anyone looking to buy this card.
I noticed with most other reviews also, its like you guys all had a brain fart with this card and other low end releases lol
No not really, in the end if you want to stick at older games or simple titles that is your choice of course, but technology should be advancing in bigger paces. RX 470 did it, RX 480 did it as well. This is a 169 EURO card that has problems playing proper PC game titles at even 1080P.
Including DOTA and COD just for the sake that it can render games properly with such titles imho doesn't reflect what the card should be doing with modern age titles. Also, DOTA/COD might not be in the benchmarks, but certainly a handful of older games are in there like Thief, Battlefield and Alien Isolation are in the benchmark suite for the reason of comparison.
But if you only want to play old titles at a lower resolution or even lower image quality settings for 169 EURO, be my guest. It's not a bad card whatsoever, but it could have been a notch better with such prices.
Sorry my articles are a waste of your time though.
I feel testing 1440p was a waste of your time and useless information for anyone reading, over say testing 1080p on medium settings or on 'lesser' games like LOL etc which would be useful for anyone looking to buy this card.
I noticed with most other reviews also, its like you guys all had a brain fart with this card and other low end releases lol
No not really, in the end if you want to stick at older games or simple titles that is your choice of course, but technology should be advancing in bigger paces. RX 470 did it, RX 480 did it as well. This is a 169 EURO card that has problems playing proper PC game titles at even 1080P.
Including DOTA and COD just for the sake that it can render games properly with such titles imho doesn't reflect what the card should be doing with modern age titles. Also, DOTA/COD might not be in the benchmarks, but certainly a handful of older games are in there like Thief, Battlefield and Alien Isolation are in the benchmark suite for the reason of comparison.
But if you only want to play old titles at a lower resolution or even lower image quality settings for 169 EURO, be my guest. It's not a bad card whatsoever, but it could have been a notch better with such prices.
Sorry my articles are a waste of your time though.
BLEH!
Senior Member
Posts: 5843
Senior Member
Posts: 5843
Posted on: 08/08/2016 03:29 PM
Good review, though the card itself seems somewhat underpowered. Better saving up a bit more and getting a 470...
Good review, though the card itself seems somewhat underpowered. Better saving up a bit more and getting a 470...
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 11939
Senior Member
Posts: 11939
Posted on: 08/08/2016 03:35 PM
In every single one of those games it basically matches what you see in all the DX11 games here, it's roughly the same as a 950. The only interesting tests are Doom and Hitman because it shows that the card will be significantly faster in upcoming Vulkan/DX12 titles.
I mean the trade-off is time. He could show those games, but it would just take longer to review all the games here + those. And then people would complain that he didn't show comparisons to more expensive cards or previous generation cards, etc.
Agreed with the posts above. Useless tests. Every game in that list is pretty much useless above 1080p. The list had to have CSGO, Dota2, LoL, WoW, SC2, overwatch, hots. After all the card's aim is competitive gaming.
In every single one of those games it basically matches what you see in all the DX11 games here, it's roughly the same as a 950. The only interesting tests are Doom and Hitman because it shows that the card will be significantly faster in upcoming Vulkan/DX12 titles.
I mean the trade-off is time. He could show those games, but it would just take longer to review all the games here + those. And then people would complain that he didn't show comparisons to more expensive cards or previous generation cards, etc.
Agonist
Senior Member
Posts: 2695
Senior Member
Posts: 2695
Posted on: 08/08/2016 03:47 PM
Personally I love that these games are not included.
How many of them will be running a 5960x @ 4.4ghz with a RX 460 anyways.
Hilbert would have to build a cheaper bench rig for a more real world scenario for that. Almost everyone of those games listed are more cpu intensive then gpu intensive.
Even this RX 460 would be an upgrade for my step sons rig. He is 11.
He is on 1055t @ 3.5ghz, 8GB DDR3 1600, HD 7850 1GB @ 1200/1425 and 1440x900 res. EVGA 600w.
Agreed with the posts above. Useless tests. Every game in that list is pretty much useless above 1080p. The list had to have CSGO, Dota2, LoL, WoW, SC2, overwatch, hots. After all the card's aim is competitive gaming.
Personally I love that these games are not included.
How many of them will be running a 5960x @ 4.4ghz with a RX 460 anyways.
Hilbert would have to build a cheaper bench rig for a more real world scenario for that. Almost everyone of those games listed are more cpu intensive then gpu intensive.
Even this RX 460 would be an upgrade for my step sons rig. He is 11.
He is on 1055t @ 3.5ghz, 8GB DDR3 1600, HD 7850 1GB @ 1200/1425 and 1440x900 res. EVGA 600w.
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 11939
Senior Member
Posts: 11939
Posted on: 08/08/2016 03:51 PM
Personally I love that these games are not included.
How many of them will be running a 5960x @ 4.4ghz with a RX 460 anyways.
Hilbert would have to build a cheaper bench rig for a more real world scenario for that. Almost everyone of those games listed are more cpu intensive then gpu intensive.
Even this RX 460 would be an upgrade for my step sons rig. He is 11.
He is on 1055t @ 3.5ghz, 8GB DDR3 1600, HD 7850 1GB @ 1200/1425 and 1440x900 res. EVGA 600w.
Isn't the 370 a rebranded 7850? If so it's tying the RX460 in most of these benchmarks.
Personally I love that these games are not included.
How many of them will be running a 5960x @ 4.4ghz with a RX 460 anyways.
Hilbert would have to build a cheaper bench rig for a more real world scenario for that. Almost everyone of those games listed are more cpu intensive then gpu intensive.
Even this RX 460 would be an upgrade for my step sons rig. He is 11.
He is on 1055t @ 3.5ghz, 8GB DDR3 1600, HD 7850 1GB @ 1200/1425 and 1440x900 res. EVGA 600w.
Isn't the 370 a rebranded 7850? If so it's tying the RX460 in most of these benchmarks.
Chaython
Senior Member
Posts: 30
Senior Member
Posts: 30
Posted on: 08/08/2016 04:19 PM
Does battlefield hardline perform similar to BF4?
Something is wrong with your results and conclusion;
My 260x gets a stable 30 fps at ultra, 4xmsaa 1080p
Here you're showing only 25 which I guess is fair but
Is a terrible conclusion seeing as it performs more on par with my 260x
Anyways, I hate this review overall, why review such a low end card with max settings, you know you should be running either no msaa or running high
kys
Does battlefield hardline perform similar to BF4?
Something is wrong with your results and conclusion;
My 260x gets a stable 30 fps at ultra, 4xmsaa 1080p
Here you're showing only 25 which I guess is fair but
this can be compared to say Radeon R9 370 performance
Is a terrible conclusion seeing as it performs more on par with my 260x
Anyways, I hate this review overall, why review such a low end card with max settings, you know you should be running either no msaa or running high
kys
holler
Senior Member
Posts: 208
Senior Member
Posts: 208
Posted on: 08/08/2016 04:29 PM
yea, everyone is reviewing these cards poorly. need an esport machine and esport games please.
would also like legacy game test, like crysis and half life 2, etc. this card is cheaper then a family night out, so needs to tested differently.
yea, everyone is reviewing these cards poorly. need an esport machine and esport games please.
would also like legacy game test, like crysis and half life 2, etc. this card is cheaper then a family night out, so needs to tested differently.
AlmondMan
Senior Member
Posts: 436
Senior Member
Posts: 436
Posted on: 08/08/2016 04:30 PM
Does battlefield hardline perform similar to BF4?
Something is wrong with your results and conclusion;
My 260x gets a stable 30 fps at ultra, 4xmsaa 1080p
Here you're showing only 25 which I guess is fair but
Is a terrible conclusion seeing as it performs more on par with my 260x
Anyways, I hate this review overall, why review such a low end card with max settings, you know you should be running either no msaa or running high
kys
Hardline is more demanding than BF4.
It makes sense to perform the tests at max. Who in reality runs 8x antialiasing on any card in modern titles? Unless you're one of the few people with a 1080 using 1080p monitors. Turn off intensive AA and you can gain upwards of 100% performance. So you could say that in every case the high settings are a detriment, but any comparison becomes void the moment you start changing up the settings.
This is annoying on other sites where if you try to compare, even if the base system is comparable, then they'll run different settings and for no apparent reason other than that's what they arbitrarily do.
The consistensy is what's great about this site. Everything gets the same treatment so you can see what you can achieve at max settings. Sure, it'd be nice to know if this card can run Witcher 3 at 1080p if I turn down to medium, but I can probably work it out that that's possible from years of experience with videogames and hardware. Is that possible for someone who doesn't have that experience? No, but then, a lot of things aren't possible or easy for someone who isn't an expert on a subject.
Does battlefield hardline perform similar to BF4?
Something is wrong with your results and conclusion;
My 260x gets a stable 30 fps at ultra, 4xmsaa 1080p
Here you're showing only 25 which I guess is fair but
Is a terrible conclusion seeing as it performs more on par with my 260x
Anyways, I hate this review overall, why review such a low end card with max settings, you know you should be running either no msaa or running high
kys
Hardline is more demanding than BF4.
It makes sense to perform the tests at max. Who in reality runs 8x antialiasing on any card in modern titles? Unless you're one of the few people with a 1080 using 1080p monitors. Turn off intensive AA and you can gain upwards of 100% performance. So you could say that in every case the high settings are a detriment, but any comparison becomes void the moment you start changing up the settings.
This is annoying on other sites where if you try to compare, even if the base system is comparable, then they'll run different settings and for no apparent reason other than that's what they arbitrarily do.
The consistensy is what's great about this site. Everything gets the same treatment so you can see what you can achieve at max settings. Sure, it'd be nice to know if this card can run Witcher 3 at 1080p if I turn down to medium, but I can probably work it out that that's possible from years of experience with videogames and hardware. Is that possible for someone who doesn't have that experience? No, but then, a lot of things aren't possible or easy for someone who isn't an expert on a subject.
mattm4
Senior Member
Posts: 157
Senior Member
Posts: 157
Posted on: 08/08/2016 04:36 PM
I feel testing 1440p was a waste of your time and useless information for anyone reading, over say testing 1080p on medium settings or on 'lesser' games like LOL etc which would be useful for anyone looking to buy this card.
I noticed with most other reviews also, its like you guys all had a brain fart with this card and other low end releases lol
Pretty sure Hilbert has a model he sticks too, and that is to run the same tests on all the cards across the board. If he didnt do 1440p guarantee you someone would make a big fuss about it. Also some users may want to see how it does in 1440p if they decided they want run low quality but higher resolution or etc.... Guess you needed something to complain about other than the card being reviewed?
I feel testing 1440p was a waste of your time and useless information for anyone reading, over say testing 1080p on medium settings or on 'lesser' games like LOL etc which would be useful for anyone looking to buy this card.
I noticed with most other reviews also, its like you guys all had a brain fart with this card and other low end releases lol
Pretty sure Hilbert has a model he sticks too, and that is to run the same tests on all the cards across the board. If he didnt do 1440p guarantee you someone would make a big fuss about it. Also some users may want to see how it does in 1440p if they decided they want run low quality but higher resolution or etc.... Guess you needed something to complain about other than the card being reviewed?
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 34651
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 34651
Posted on: 08/08/2016 04:36 PM
Does battlefield hardline perform similar to BF4?
Something is wrong with your results and conclusion;
My 260x gets a stable 30 fps at ultra, 4xmsaa 1080p
Here you're showing only 25 which I guess is fair but
Is a terrible conclusion seeing as it performs more on par with my 260x
Anyways, I hate this review overall, why review such a low end card with max settings, you know you should be running either no msaa or running high
kys
Yes, let's lower all image quality settings and use older games to show that FPS goes up, that makes sense and is fair just because you are used to it ? No sorry guys, all cards are tested equally and fair. You can easily compare and draw conclusions from the review, you might not like what you see, I agree that is different - but again .. this is a 169 EURO product and it is the year 2016.
Oh and yes, Hardline is more stringent on the GPU. Especially in the Gator Bait scenes where we test.
Does battlefield hardline perform similar to BF4?
Something is wrong with your results and conclusion;
My 260x gets a stable 30 fps at ultra, 4xmsaa 1080p
Here you're showing only 25 which I guess is fair but
Is a terrible conclusion seeing as it performs more on par with my 260x
Anyways, I hate this review overall, why review such a low end card with max settings, you know you should be running either no msaa or running high
kys
Yes, let's lower all image quality settings and use older games to show that FPS goes up, that makes sense and is fair just because you are used to it ? No sorry guys, all cards are tested equally and fair. You can easily compare and draw conclusions from the review, you might not like what you see, I agree that is different - but again .. this is a 169 EURO product and it is the year 2016.
Oh and yes, Hardline is more stringent on the GPU. Especially in the Gator Bait scenes where we test.
MainFrame Alpha
Senior Member
Posts: 138
Senior Member
Posts: 138
Posted on: 08/08/2016 04:46 PM
"The card is tweaked for you already, I'd suggest to leave it at that." i could feel the frustration in Hilberts words
.
i get it it is a new budget card, i really do, but to do 600 marks less in time spy against a GTX960 (2GB) am 18 months older BUDGET card dose say it all
Still, thanks for the time and the review Hilbert
"The card is tweaked for you already, I'd suggest to leave it at that." i could feel the frustration in Hilberts words
.
i get it it is a new budget card, i really do, but to do 600 marks less in time spy against a GTX960 (2GB) am 18 months older BUDGET card dose say it all
Still, thanks for the time and the review Hilbert
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 3708
Senior Member
Posts: 3708
Posted on: 08/08/2016 04:59 PM
I'm not sure I'd say this card is underpowered. It wouldn't surprise me if this, like many X60 range cards, are meant to be compatible with the IGPs of APUs. If the next gen APUs are based on the 460 and can be crossfired, that's actually some pretty significant performance.
Personally, I'm not sure if recommending the 4GB models, gaming or otherwise, is the right approach. I haven't seen benchmarks of 2GB models but it wouldn't surprise me if that performs roughly the same. This GPU clearly wasn't intended for 1080p gaming, so if you're at 720p or lower I think a 2GB model is plenty sufficient.
I'm not sure I'd say this card is underpowered. It wouldn't surprise me if this, like many X60 range cards, are meant to be compatible with the IGPs of APUs. If the next gen APUs are based on the 460 and can be crossfired, that's actually some pretty significant performance.
Personally, I'm not sure if recommending the 4GB models, gaming or otherwise, is the right approach. I haven't seen benchmarks of 2GB models but it wouldn't surprise me if that performs roughly the same. This GPU clearly wasn't intended for 1080p gaming, so if you're at 720p or lower I think a 2GB model is plenty sufficient.
Heaven
Junior Member
Posts: 5
Junior Member
Posts: 5
Posted on: 08/08/2016 05:02 PM
Why no idle power consumption test?
Nice card but pretty expensive in EU.
Why no idle power consumption test?
Nice card but pretty expensive in EU.
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 693
Senior Member
Posts: 693
Posted on: 08/08/2016 05:31 PM
i have friend specifically playing blade and soul with a core 2 duo 5200 and a gt 9500 ... yes 9500 on lowest details about 20 fps he was asking me how he can cheeply play on it decently my suggestion was to wait for a card like 460 for 90-100 euros he will see huge improuvement also for his cpu anything higher will be a waste ...but at this price .. i can not recomend the card anymore at all ...should i steer him to a used 280 or something ?
p.s. : obviously he can not afford a new pc right now
i have friend specifically playing blade and soul with a core 2 duo 5200 and a gt 9500 ... yes 9500 on lowest details about 20 fps he was asking me how he can cheeply play on it decently my suggestion was to wait for a card like 460 for 90-100 euros he will see huge improuvement also for his cpu anything higher will be a waste ...but at this price .. i can not recomend the card anymore at all ...should i steer him to a used 280 or something ?
p.s. : obviously he can not afford a new pc right now
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 3708
Senior Member
Posts: 3708
Posted on: 08/08/2016 05:38 PM
i have friend specifically playing blade and soul with a core 2 duo 5200 and a gt 9500 ... yes 9500 on lowest details about 20 fps he was asking me how he can cheeply play on it decently my suggestion was to wait for a card like 460 for 90-100 euros he will see huge improuvement also for his cpu anything higher will be a waste ...but at this price .. i can not recomend the card anymore at all ...should i steer him to a used 280 or something ?
p.s. : obviously he can not afford a new pc right now
Doing incremental upgrades are the most cost effective in the short term, but long term he may regret it. A 280 will likely be bottlenecked by his current PC's CPU or PCIe bandwidth, and by the time he replaces the rest of his system, the 280 might be underwhelming. Personally, I think getting an APU would be the best choice. If he keeps his current tower, PSU, and disk drives, a new APU + mobo + RAM wouldn't be that expensive but would keep him going for a while. If GPU performance starts to lag, get a GPU compatible with his IGP to crossfire with it.
i have friend specifically playing blade and soul with a core 2 duo 5200 and a gt 9500 ... yes 9500 on lowest details about 20 fps he was asking me how he can cheeply play on it decently my suggestion was to wait for a card like 460 for 90-100 euros he will see huge improuvement also for his cpu anything higher will be a waste ...but at this price .. i can not recomend the card anymore at all ...should i steer him to a used 280 or something ?
p.s. : obviously he can not afford a new pc right now
Doing incremental upgrades are the most cost effective in the short term, but long term he may regret it. A 280 will likely be bottlenecked by his current PC's CPU or PCIe bandwidth, and by the time he replaces the rest of his system, the 280 might be underwhelming. Personally, I think getting an APU would be the best choice. If he keeps his current tower, PSU, and disk drives, a new APU + mobo + RAM wouldn't be that expensive but would keep him going for a while. If GPU performance starts to lag, get a GPU compatible with his IGP to crossfire with it.
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 693
Senior Member
Posts: 693
Posted on: 08/08/2016 06:11 PM
oh no crossfire for him he is not good with pc's at all and i am the one always troubleshooting for him ...
thing is his budget is strictly 100 euros and bellow and i think the p33 chipset he has it is pcie gen 2 i am not sure he can get better perfomance with apu+motherboard+ram than changing his card well with max100 euros that is
APU + mobo + RAM wouldn't be that expensive but would keep him going for a while. If GPU performance starts to lag, get a GPU compatible with his IGP to crossfire with it.
oh no crossfire for him he is not good with pc's at all and i am the one always troubleshooting for him ...
thing is his budget is strictly 100 euros and bellow and i think the p33 chipset he has it is pcie gen 2 i am not sure he can get better perfomance with apu+motherboard+ram than changing his card well with max100 euros that is
Prince Valiant
Senior Member
Posts: 667
Senior Member
Posts: 667
Posted on: 08/08/2016 06:26 PM
Personally I love that these games are not included.
How many of them will be running a 5960x @ 4.4ghz with a RX 460 anyways.
Hilbert would have to build a cheaper bench rig for a more real world scenario for that. Almost everyone of those games listed are more cpu intensive then gpu intensive.
Even this RX 460 would be an upgrade for my step sons rig. He is 11.
He is on 1055t @ 3.5ghz, 8GB DDR3 1600, HD 7850 1GB @ 1200/1425 and 1440x900 res. EVGA 600w.
None of them.
Agreed on the pricing, Hilbert. Past $120 this card starts looking a lot less attractive.
Personally I love that these games are not included.
How many of them will be running a 5960x @ 4.4ghz with a RX 460 anyways.
Hilbert would have to build a cheaper bench rig for a more real world scenario for that. Almost everyone of those games listed are more cpu intensive then gpu intensive.
Even this RX 460 would be an upgrade for my step sons rig. He is 11.
He is on 1055t @ 3.5ghz, 8GB DDR3 1600, HD 7850 1GB @ 1200/1425 and 1440x900 res. EVGA 600w.
None of them
.
Agreed on the pricing, Hilbert. Past $120 this card starts looking a lot less attractive.
pages 1 2 3
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Member
Posts: 36
Expected GTX950 performance, so I'm not disappointed. It has indeed enough power for LoL and DOTA2 @1080p. How to flop? Price above 130/140€.
P.S: There is space for one RX465 @170€, one that can battle with GTX960 @DX11 and OpenGL and GTX970 @DX12 and Vulkan.