In the lab: AMD’s Radeon RX 460 graphics card

Morning, folks. As you read this, you're no doubt beginning to sort through a deluge of Radeon RX 460 reviews. I'd love to have made TR's among them, but FedEx put the handsome 4GB Sapphire card you see below in my hands just moments before the press embargo lifted. The good news is that the rest of the cards I wanted to bench the RX 460 against have all been tested, and I just need to plop AMD's mighty mite into our test system and go. It'll be interesting to see what the RX 460 can do in the $109-and-up price class.

Our review won't just be of AMD's latest card, however. I spent my weekend familiarizing myself with the ins and outs of PresentMon, so we now have a wealth of DirectX 12 and Vulkan data to share with you in addition to good old DirectX 11. I expect it'll be interesting. Stay tuned as we work to complete the review—it's my hope we'll have the vast majority of it done by the end of the day.

Comments closed
    • unclesharkey
    • 4 years ago

    Curious to see how they do in crossfire.

      • Meadows
      • 4 years ago

      What’s the point? If you’re going to buy two of these, you might as well just get an RX 480 and save yourself the driver troubles.

        • unclesharkey
        • 4 years ago

        I am curious, is that ok?

        • tipoo
        • 4 years ago

        Budget builders often go with a card like this, and then double down in 2-3 years when a second card to match it is dirt cheap on ebay.

          • Meadows
          • 4 years ago

          Yes, I have heard this argument before, but never actually seen it happen.

            • tipoo
            • 4 years ago

            I have. Anecdotes are anecdotal.

            • LoneWolf15
            • 4 years ago

            I bought a Radeon 6970 on budget pricing…and then six months down the road, NewEgg fire-saled a whole bunch from a different vendor for $99 apiece. So if you’d been in my neighborhood, you’d have seen it happen.

    • madseven7
    • 4 years ago

    For a new card that’s suppose to compete with the 950 i’m not very impressed. Looks to run a bit warm and not much more powerful than a 950.

    If AMD were to release say a full Polaris 11 at a similar price and lay the smackdown on the 950 and compete with 960 then I would definitely get some of these cards. Maybe say an
    RX 465

    • maroon1
    • 4 years ago

    Please don’t use an overclocked RX460 in the review

      • Jeff Kampman
      • 4 years ago

      You do realize we have to work with what we’re given, right? I can’t just go pick another RX 460 off the reference-clocked graphics card tree in my backyard.

        • ClickClick5
        • 4 years ago

        Sassy Jeff!

        I’m real curious to see how this card runs.

        • chuckula
        • 4 years ago

        Pshaww. Everybody knows you grow stock clocked cards on vines.

        • cphite
        • 4 years ago

        You have a reference-clocked graphics card tree in your backyard and you’re still reviewing overclocked cards?!?

        • Chrispy_
        • 4 years ago

        Do you have a GTX1080 tree?

        I’d be eternally grateful if you could mail me an offshoot or handful of seeds. I’ll plant them next to my magic beans!

        • Timbrelaine
        • 4 years ago

        I’m suddenly feeling better about GMOs.

      • xeridea
      • 4 years ago

      Most cards sold are non reference, with higher than reference clocks. Even if you downclocked a non reference card, you would get better performance since it will maintain higher boost clocks with better cooling and often beefier power delivery.

      • maxxcool
      • 4 years ago

      NV and AMD are deeply into ‘TDP clocking’ now for all their products.. Stock speeds quoted on ‘paper release day’ are irrelevant for the most part when it comes to real world testing, hence why the reviews and other reviews now watch the gpu clock and power circuit in heavy tests.

      • Meadows
      • 4 years ago

      Oh, you again.

        • maxxcool
        • 4 years ago

        Bahahahaha!

        • maxxcool
        • 4 years ago

        FYI, in my I heard GladOs’s voice for that phrase… 😉

      • wierdo
      • 4 years ago

      Imho it’s better to review the actual products than explore the theoretical baselines.

      If a reference solution is available in the lab and sells on the market then I can understand, but if what you have on hand is a specific company’s solution – and it’s actually what they sell of course – then it’s close enough to get a good idea of what to expect.

    • Koli
    • 4 years ago

    Something didn’t quite translate properly with the prices for us in the UK. On OCUK, the 2GB variants are £99.95 to £119.99 and the 4GB variants are all £134.99.

      • EndlessWaves
      • 4 years ago

      109USD at today’s exchange rate with tax added (which the Americans don’t include and UK retailers like OcUK do) is £100.32 inc. VAT

      It seems like a perfect translation to me, UK starting prices are a whole 37p cheaper (or even more if that’s 109.99USD)!

    • tanker27
    • 4 years ago

    I just came for the 99th percentile scatter plot……..

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 4 years ago

      Since you’re here, have a minus 1.

      sup?

    • deruberhanyok
    • 4 years ago

    WTF is up with the pricing on these cards.

    It looks like a competitive part at $100 or $110, but some of the ones on Newegg are listed at $130+, there’s even one at $150.

    That kind of changes the value proposition substantially.

      • sweatshopking
      • 4 years ago

      Same issue as all new gpus. Supply and demand?

      • tipoo
      • 4 years ago

      It’s just their auto-stock balancing price thing, it happens literally every card launch.

    • derFunkenstein
    • 4 years ago

    Thoroughly un-exciting launch. Newegg lists the [url=http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202228&cm_re=RX_460_2GB-_-14-202-228-_-Product<]Sapphire 2GB card for $120[/url<] (in stock right now, even). 28-nm Maxwell parts that cost $10 more, or actually [url=http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127904&cm_re=gtx_950-_-14-127-904-_-Product<]$20 LESS[/url<] after rebate substantially out-perform it, and nobody really has a power consumption advantage.

      • AnotherReader
      • 4 years ago

      There is no substantial performance advantage for Maxwell; however, even saying that is damning to Polaris 11. Still, the much smaller die should help AMD’s margins and it is much faster than AMD’s previous flagship in this space: [url=http://www.overclock3d.net/news/gpu_displays/low-tdp_amd_radeon_r7_360e_for_sale_in_japan/1<]the R7 360E[/url<]. Edit: Powercolor is available for [url=http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814131695&cm_re=radeon_rx_460-_-14-131-695-_-Product<]$110 at Newegg[/url<]. However, [url=http://www.computerbase.de/2016-08/radeon-rx-460-test/3/#diagramm-mirrors-edge-catalyst-1920-1080<]2 GB cards suffer compared to 4GB cards in some games[/url<], e.g. Doom and Mirror's Edge Catalyst.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 4 years ago

        Both Tom’s and PCWorld show the RX 460 consistently trailing the GTX 950, even in DX12 titles. Tom’s showed it losing by ~12% on AotS, although it wins in Doom Vulkan. It’s getting trounced in current-gem DX11 titles, too. AMD’s apparent effort to market this toward eSports titles like Dota2 and LoL means that DX11 performance is especially relevant (though Dota is getting Vulkan support).

          • AnotherReader
          • 4 years ago

          Hmm. I haven’t checked out all of the reviews, but Computer Base tests a large number of games and their average shows the reference 950 as 3% slower than Sapphire’s 460. Asus’s 950 Strix is 10% faster than the RX 460. Removing Doom and DX12 games changes this to 1% over reference 950 and an 11% lead for the Strix 950. Keep in mind that the [url=http://www.computerbase.de/2016-08/radeon-rx-460-test/6/<]Strix 950 equipped system draws 22W more than the Sapphire 460 and 46W more than the reference 460[/url<]. So it isn't a 75W 950 either. Don't get me wrong; it is disappointing that it is marginally more power efficient than a 950 designed on an inferior 28 nm process. It will still help AMD though as it is smaller and faster than their previous best in this space.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 4 years ago

            Honestly nobody should care about reference anything. Nobody should give any cares about reference RX 480s and nobody should show any empathy for a stock-clocked GTX 950. Basically everything is factory OCd these days. Even the $100 MSI GTX 950 I linked elsewhere is hot-clocked, and a $100 GTX 950 being faster than a $120 RX 460 is bad, bad news for AMD.

            I’m also not totally caught up in the 6-pinless craze. It’s something like a penny a day on my power bill if I have a 100W card vs a 75W card running 100 hours a month.

            • AnotherReader
            • 4 years ago

            Again, I agree that this is disappointing, but it is an improvement compared to what they had before. They would have been better served by using the full Polaris 11 for the 460; it is clear that there is enough room in the power consumption. The reference 460s means that the power cap is 75W; even those are custom cards. Gigabyte has two such cards for sale.

            Edit: the prices are disappointing; $100 for 2GB and 120 for 4GB should have been the norm. 75 W matters in case of some PSUs that don’t have 6-pin connectors.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 4 years ago

            Now that I think about it, you’re probably right about 6-pin vs no 6-pin. Untold legions of Dell, hp, and Acer PCs with crappy PSUs could drive a card without a 6-pin connector where they may not be able to take the extra load that a card that needs more power would demand.

      • pranav0091
      • 4 years ago

      Ben, that $20 link you passed is blocked by OpenDNS as a malware-host…

        • derFunkenstein
        • 4 years ago

        That’s odd, because when I click it it just goes to Newegg. I know that TR does automated modifications to certain website links to add affiliate info, so maybe that’s why.

        If you go to Newegg and search for N82E16814127904 you’ll find the card in question.

          • pranav0091
          • 4 years ago

          This the the domain being blocked :- www<dot>emjcd<dot>com

          The link takes you to kqzyfj<dot>com – I am used to this one since I have seen it being used in the Deals posts since forever. But this domain is new to me, and its being blocked.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 4 years ago

            When I edit the comment they both show newegg links. [url<]http://imgur.com/rzSLeIh[/url<] edit: I just right-click/copied both links and pasted them into a TextWrangler document. Both of them have kqzyfj<dot>com as the domain.

            • morphine
            • 4 years ago

            Those links are kosher.

            We have an auto-tagging script in the site that tags links to our partner stores with our referral code.

            The “kqzyfj” domain is kosher, though I never heard about the “emjcd” one (unless a click eventually reaches it). At any rate, everything goes to Newegg just fine.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 4 years ago

            Thanks for confirming. I don’t want to accidentally link to malware, that’s for sure.

            • morphine
            • 4 years ago

            See this post here: [url<]https://techreport.com/news/30485/in-the-lab-amd-radeon-rx-460-graphics-card?post=994932[/url<]

    • AnotherReader
    • 4 years ago

    Glad to know that you are incorporating DX12 and Vulkan in your test suite. It is sad though that you had to sacrifice a summer weekend to meet the needs of fickle readers. Are you expecting to receive any of the RX 460 AIBs that do without any PSU connectors?

    • AnotherReader
    • 4 years ago

    Are there any single slot variants of the RX460? Using two slots on a GPU with such modest power consumption seems wasteful.

      • chuckula
      • 4 years ago

      A single-slot Rx 460 that doesn’t require the 6-pin power connector is also a very useful yardstick to make estimates about a 2017 APU since the graphics in that APU will basically be a somewhat cut-down version of these cards.

      Limiting the power & cooling a bit will give a more accurate idea as to how the APU version of the graphics will perform.

        • AnotherReader
        • 4 years ago

        I agree, but I expect the APU to be hampered by much slower DDR4.

          • Concupiscence
          • 4 years ago

          If prior history is any indication, the APUs will also have reduced ROP and texture unit counts. That’s not necessarily a bad thing – it’s unlikely DDR4’s memory bandwidth could keep the extras reliably fed – but it’s another factor.

            • synthtel2
            • 4 years ago

            ?

            The ratios of different resources are pretty predictable across all GCN parts, including low-end APUs (so long as they’re not actually Terascale instead). There are always exactly 16 times as many shaders as TMUs, and until Polaris 10, there had always been between 32 and 64 times as many shaders as ROPs (mainly depending on shader count, since ROP count appears to always be a power of 2 on GCN).

            • Concupiscence
            • 4 years ago

            Gah, I forgot that they also dinged the shader count. Both the discrete 7730 and top-end FM2+ APU look similar: 384 shader processors, 24 TMUs, 8 ROPs. That jibes with your numbers. I’m just tired and [i<]really[/i<] sick of being on strong antibiotics for almost two weeks now. There's apparently a GDDR5 version of the 7730 too, though I've never seen one in the wild. edit: According to Tom's Hardware's [url=http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-7730-cape-verde-review,3575-11.html<]review[/url<], the GDDR5 model's performance advantage amounted to ~24% over DDR3. No matter how fast system memory is, it doesn't ever seem to be quite enough.

      • EndlessWaves
      • 4 years ago

      It’s hardly modest in absolute terms. It’s near the edge of what you can sensibly do with single slot cooling, and in the territory where dual slot offers advantages.

      Combine that with the fact that everything else is even higher power and any common components are being designed for dual slot coolers. It’s not surprising that these cards default to dual slot.

        • AnotherReader
        • 4 years ago

        I suspect that at least the solely bus-powered variants would find a single-slot cooler to be sufficient. If single slots are so woeful, then why do GPUs with nearly 4 times the power consumption, such as the 290X and Fury, stick with double-slot coolers?

    • DragonDaddyBear
    • 4 years ago

    I wonder what kind of FPS this would give in a very-budget build with an Athlon X4 (845 maybe?). It might make for a good-enough HTPC build for “casual” games and movies.

    It would be interesting to see how this compares to the top integrated graphics. Can you toss in an Iris Pro into the charts?

    EDIT: it would be interesting to see how this GPU compares with the Iris Pro CPU in comparison to the Athlon X4 (maybe an FX 6, too).

    EDIT2: I may have my answer. Anand reviewed the i3 series this morning and they have “low” and “medium” GPU’s in their test. It’s kinda all over the place with the low-end i3, X4 845, X4 860K, and the FX-6 when looking at the lower GPU’s.

      • chuckula
      • 4 years ago

      Be careful with lower-end CPUs since the results you see on review websites that are using high-end platforms might be reversed.

      Case in point: The Vulkan enabled version of Doom on the Rx 480 vs. the GTX-1060 where the Rx 480 does fine with a high-end Intel CPU but starts to lose badly when the CPU power drops: [url<]http://www.hardwareunboxed.com/gtx-1060-vs-rx-480-in-6-year-old-amd-and-intel-computers/[/url<]

        • DragonDaddyBear
        • 4 years ago

        You’re right in line with what I’m thinking. At what point do you need more CPU to feed this low-end card? Comparing with the standard bench setup would tell us if something cheap like the Athlon X4 (maybe an FX 6?) is strong enough to feed this card or if you need to drop more money on CPU to eek out every frame from this GPU.

        • BaronMatrix
        • 4 years ago

        That’s why most reviews suck… If you have an i5 or FX and want to see how the card will work in your system you can’t… Reviews should be 1 CPU from each range…

      • Concupiscence
      • 4 years ago

      It’d probably be fine, with the caveat that Radeon CPU usage is generally higher than that of a comparable Geforce. If your interest lies in casual games and movies, you might be better off with a competent Skylake i3; the GPU’s not depressingly slower, and the per-thread performance is crazily better than an Athlon X4. If you find that the IGP doesn’t have enough oomph, throwing in an RX 460 after the fact wouldn’t cost much more in the scheme of things, and the system will be better-rounded overall.

      edit: ^^^ Yep, looks like chuckula just beat me to it. ^^^

        • DragonDaddyBear
        • 4 years ago

        You’re probably right. But if I’m rolling budget I want as cheap as I can get. At what point do I have enough CPU for this GPU?

          • Concupiscence
          • 4 years ago

          Honestly, probably an i3. I’m not trying to be difficult or snarky in saying that, it’s just the truth. That said, you’re not talking about feeding a high-end GPU anyway, so if you find a great deal on an Athlon X4* + motherboard, go for it. It won’t lag too far behind the i3 in any but the most demanding apps, and would still get you most of the way there.

          * I’d steer clear of the X4 845 just because it’s a repurposed mobile part with generally inferior performance to its Steamroller-based peers. An 860K should rock, though.

        • EndlessWaves
        • 4 years ago

        Not depressingly slower?

        The HD 530 is just less than a third of the speed of the 750 non-ti/R7 360. Roughly the same difference in magnitude as between a 750ti and a 980ti. The difference in even greater compared with the 460.

        This is a huge upgrade from integrated graphics.

        Hopefully we will see this benchmarked against the cards below it like the 250 GDDR5 & 360 and the GT 740 GDDR5 and GT 750

          • derFunkenstein
          • 4 years ago

          I would like to see the 750Ti included, since system guide after system guide stated that this is the slowest card TR would recommend.

          • Concupiscence
          • 4 years ago

          I was under the impression it was around the level of a GTX 650 or Radeon 7750. Oh, well.

      • deruberhanyok
      • 4 years ago

      I’m curious about these numbers, too. I picked up a few parts on the very cheap recently and got a good deal on a Broadwell i5 with Iris Pro ($200, still more than I’d like, but a big enough discount that I thought it was worth trying out). It’s going into my TV system whenever I get the time to do a part swap.

      But I also picked up an A10-7860k and MSI’s A68HI-AC motherboard for tinkering – love/hate Microcenter’s combo pricing – and it’s going into a case with enough room in it for a regular size discrete video card (most of my systems don’t have room for one, but another good deal got me a case I’ve been wanting to check out on the very cheap).

      An X4 845 and an RX 460 would come in well under $200, whereas the Broadwell i5 typically retails for right about $300. And while Iris Pro is fast for an iGPU, I don’t see it matching Polaris 11, even with a “cheap” laptop-derived CPU pushing it. So I’d just guess a big old “no contest” there and say the AMD setup is a much better deal for a budget gaming system.

      Now, if Intel had Iris Pro available in processors that weren’t unicorns, it might be a different story.

      I haven’t had much time with mess with hardware recently but I was thinking of a similar comparison at some point to sate my own curiosity. Whenever I get the time to play around with these systems in more detail I’ll share in TR’s SFF forum.

      (mostly I was interested in comparing the Kaveri APU’s graphics performance to Iris Pro for myself, but Kaveri just seems so hampered by memory bandwidth, I expect that the next gen APUs with DDR4 support will fare much better)

      (sorry, got way off topic there)

      • DrDominodog51
      • 4 years ago

      When I had a Pentium AE @ 4.4 Ghz in my system, my 750 Ti was limited by the CPU in Borderlands 2, Bioshock Infinte, and GTA V. I don’t think a X4 will do much better than my Pentium AE with an even more powerful GPU.

      • ptsant
      • 4 years ago

      I would say, based on actual experience with an Athlon and a Radeon HD 7800, that you can probably get much more than “casual” games. Almost everything is playable at 40-60fps with the right mix of settings (medium, sometimes low and if necessary 720p). I haven’t played any of the latest and greatest games, but my collection includes many of the 2014-2015 hits.

    • tipoo
    • 4 years ago

    A 100 dollar card that punches just above the current console peak does have some significance. On low end “just above console” builds that could give it some staying power. Maybe replace the 750TI in a lot of those. Free up, what, 50 dollars of the BoM, which is big if you target a 500 dollar PC.

    • kuttan
    • 4 years ago

    The 460 uses the cut down Polaris 11 Pro die which perform similar to a R7 370, GTX950 which is somewhat a disappointing performance. The full Polaris 11 XT GPU had 1024 SPs compared to 896SP on the Polaris 11 Pro. The Polaris 11 XT likely to be as fast as GTX960 in DX11 games and faster in DX12 and Vulcan games. Its weird AMD not releasing the full Polaris 11 XT chip first. Could that be due to Apple buying all the Polaris 11 XTs ?

      • pranav0091
      • 4 years ago

      >> The 460 uses the cut down Polaris 11 Pro die
      Source ?

        • deruberhanyok
        • 4 years ago

        I know it’s traditional these days to just ask for citations whenever someone posts something you didn’t know about, but there were leaked slides a while back and a lot of sites had them posted.

        [url<]http://videocardz.com/61064/amd-polaris-10-and-polaris-11-specifications[/url<] [url<]http://wccftech.com/amd-polaris-11-gpu-specifications-leaked-compubench/[/url<] [url<]http://techfrag.com/2016/04/30/amd-polaris-10-polaris-11-opengl-benchmarks-leaked/[/url<] Indications seem to be that Polaris 11 has 16 CUs, which means, unless it has an entirely different block design than Polaris 10 (really unlikely), what we're seeing in the RX 460 has two of those disabled. Could leave the door open for a mid-cycle refresh, RX 465, RX 460 XT, whatever, or, alternate explanation is that Polaris "XT" is being saved for mobile GPUs only, as an RX 465M or something.

        • AnotherReader
        • 4 years ago

        Anandtech confirmed that the [url=http://www.anandtech.com/show/10424/a-bit-more-on-amds-polaris-gpus-36-16-cus<]full Polaris 11 has 16 CUs[/url<].

          • pranav0091
          • 4 years ago

          Thanks both of you 🙂

          I’m quite surprised that a floorswept chip from the low-end now sometimes needs external power supply (cue some of those custom 460s being mentioned by other folks here)…

          <I work at Nvidia, but my opinions are only personal>

      • ImSpartacus
      • 4 years ago

      That’s actually an interesting point. I’ve been racking my brain for why amd didn’t release a fully enabled Polaris 11 card. Apple probably IS buying them all – or they are buying the ones that are fully functional and have good power characteristics. Leaving amd with the power hogs, which forces amd to cut down to get under 75W.

      Thanks for sharing.

        • Mat3
        • 4 years ago

        Maybe Apple is getting them, but I think it more likely this is the only SKU there is and will be. The difference between this and a full die would be close to negligible so there’s little reason to have both especially with AMD’s product stack all cramped in the lower mid range and below. They already started this trend with the 370.

        • DragonDaddyBear
        • 4 years ago

        I think I read somewhere that Polaris 11 was more mobile focused. If my memory isn’t faulty, then it’s likely the best power consumption chips are being reserved for a mobile GPU launch of some sort.

          • Voldenuit
          • 4 years ago

          My guess is that the 1024 stream GPUs will be reserved for mobile so they can provide similar performance at lower clocks (and, presumably, power consumption). nvidia is doing something similar in the mobile 1070M parts.

      • ptsant
      • 4 years ago

      A simple answer is that with an immature process, this leaves them the possibility to mark two cores (CUs) as defective without throwing the chip away. This probably increases yield significantly: if 50% of chips are “perfect”, then probably 30% have one defective CU and 15% have two. By disabling two, they get 95% yield instead of 50%.

    • christos_thski
    • 4 years ago

    On a different note, I was checking the Tomshardware review and they’ve stooped to accepting “native advertising” for crackpot “Secret Miracle Diabetes Cures” and the like. That’s why I have my adblocker set to “off” for TechReport. You guys would never stoop this low, and it does not go unnoticed. Some people have absolutely no scruples when it comes to a quick buck. Absolutely Disgusting.

      • Zaphod1066
      • 4 years ago

      IIRC Toms (and Anand) both got bought up by an advertising firm in the past year, I don’t visit either site as often as I used to…

        • LostCat
        • 4 years ago

        There’s always Brave, once they get their ad network up and running. I’m actually excited, and I don’t even block ads.

        • Srsly_Bro
        • 4 years ago

        According to Wiki

        July 2013 – Bestofmedia Group, parent company of Tom’s Hardware, is acquired by TechMediaNetwork, Inc.[14]
        April 2014 – TechMediaNetwork, parent company of Tom’s Hardware, rebrands itself to Purch[15]

        We can blame Purch.

        [url<]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom%27s_Hardware[/url<]

      • Inkling
      • 4 years ago

      Thank you, christos_thski.

      Likewise, your views and support do not go unnoticed.

      – Adam (Inkling) Eiberger

      • morphine
      • 4 years ago

      Adam already said as much, but I’ll say it again: thank you, in the name of the staff.

      If it weren’t bad form, I’d be in the database giving you +9000 upvotes.

      The vast majority of users doesn’t know how difficult it is to walk away from those annoying-ad deals that unfortunately pay a lot of money, while still keeping the staff fed and the lights on.

      • UberGerbil
      • 4 years ago

      Some of the crackpots ads on the net just boggle my mind. I ran across [url=http://i.imgur.com/lIfhypt.png<]this one[/url<] over the weekend.

        • Firestarter
        • 4 years ago

        well I can see how it works from the antennas, yeah, that totally looks plausible!

        • sweatshopking
        • 4 years ago

        Image doesn’t go to the page! I want free electricity! Send me the original link!

          • UberGerbil
          • 4 years ago

          Go ahead and pollute your online history googling for it yourself.

        • tritonus
        • 4 years ago

        Thank you for not linking it directly.

      • arunphilip
      • 4 years ago

      I also noticed that their (Toms) ads use base 64 data inline, so its not easy to block the host that is serving up those ads. I’m not sure if that’s what you meant by “native advertising”. But yes, what’s more annoying is their ads are irrelevant – they talk of miracle cures, have click-bait titles, etc.

      • shank15217
      • 4 years ago

      Sigh, thanks for letting me know, i just turned on the ad blocker at anandtech.

      • pranav0091
      • 4 years ago

      Aaaand you get my first triple vote 🙂

      Dollars are way too expensive compared to rupees, but hey, I like this site, and like you mentioned, hate inline-js ads with a vengeance. For the kind of ads they display today, I wouldnt be surprised if they start delivering exploits tomorrow. I’d literally pay to not have to deal with that here.

      • maxxcool
      • 4 years ago

      Toms has ads ? 🙂 I don’t see any ads 🙂 /evil/

      • wizardz
      • 4 years ago

      TR is the only site worth supporting with both subscription and ads. They are, in my opinion, the best source for unbiased reviews. i used to read both tom and anand in their beginning but now i dont bother.

      please keep up the good work.
      PS: it doesnt matter if you have reviews online later than the others because you know that they will be thorough and meticulous.

      • WhatMeWorry
      • 4 years ago

      There’s no such thing as a free lunch. If it takes “Secret Miracle Diabetes Cures” to get quality websites like techreport for free, I can live with it.

        • pranav0091
        • 4 years ago

        Can you live with it if one of those miracle cures also delivers a miracle-exploit to your computer? I have had my accounts hacked, and let me tell you – the process of recovering every single account and resetting their passwords was painful (My bad that I had common passwords back then).

        I get the reason why there are ads. But there has to be some limits to how low you will stoop to get some money. If that involves delivering shady ads, then I’d either force my adblock to be ruthless on your site, or/and block JS to kill those “unblockable” ads or most likely just abandon the webpage altogether. Congratulations on driving away a reader, then I guess?

        Instead, like TR does now, if you allow me to pay a few bucks and contribute, I actually might if I value the site enough. And the money I donate would most likely be worth more than what I’d have been worth through ads. And the goodwill to boot.

        The problem that tech sites face that no other sites likely face is that most of the readers here are knowledgeable and know of adblock. You cant “force” them to accept something they don’t like – they’ll just block it or abandon the site. This is not a problem that tabloids or other websites face – their users are less likely to block ads. So I’m sympathetic to a subscription model here, particularly when its voluntary and I am free to subscribe with any amount – not everyone can afford the same number of dollars.

        But give me secret miracle diabetes cures and I promise I’ll block all ads and JS on your site. And if it breaks readability, I’ll just walk away, good riddance.

      • kn314159
      • 4 years ago

      Thanks for the reminder. I still had adblock on for TR.

      • TravelMug
      • 4 years ago

      Speaking about ads, TR gets my Chrome on Android hijacked by ads of the “We found 157 viruses on your phone, click here to solve the issue”. This is happening for a few days now, only read TR on Firefox on the phone with uBlock Origin active.

    • Hattig
    • 4 years ago

    From the reviews I’ve checked out, this card is fairly decent but you’d really just best save up the extra to get even a reference 470. However the core clock at 1250MHz is extremely stable, and depending on other components you may get Doom Vulkan at 60fps 1080p ultra.

    However there are closer-to-reference 460s out, e.g., Powercolor are selling one with 2GB and no 6-pin connector. I’m guessing you lose overclocking headroom on that model.

    The low-end is always a compromise, the non-GPU costs are a far higher proportion of the costs so perf/$ is never great.

    • christos_thski
    • 4 years ago

    I bought a 7870 for 220 euros more than 3 years ago. If this is going to give 7870 performance for 120-130 euros it’s far from earth shattering. OTOH, the discrete GPU [viable] bottom-end card never was a value proposition, so it’s still welcome.

      • jokinin
      • 4 years ago

      I also bought a 7870 GHz edition in spring 2012, for about 300€ (the 7950 was ~ 450€), and while it’s true what you say, you can also think that you can buy a 4GB custom RX480 with twice the memory and almost twice as powerful for 250€, and that is quite nice.

      • maxxcool
      • 4 years ago

      if you spent the same 200$ TODAY, you get a lot more .. 😉

    • tahir2
    • 4 years ago

    Take your time Jeff – would be a great review with a comparison to cards in its price bracket.

    • Chrispy_
    • 4 years ago

    \o/

    • chuckula
    • 4 years ago

    [quote<]It'll be interesting to see what the RX 460 can do in the $109-and-up price class.[/quote<] Sounds a tad more expensive than the $99 number that was floating around. Incidentally, the Asus models have been popular on other sites and they do expressly require a 6-pin PCIe connector, so the rumors that the Rx 460 didn't need an external power connector also appear to have been wrong. Does your Sapphire also require the external connector? [quote<]Our review won't just be of AMD's latest card, however. I spent my weekend familiarizing myself with the ins and outs of PresentMon, so we now have a wealth of DirectX 12 and Vulkan data to share with you in addition to good old DirectX 11.[/quote<] w00t! More frametime info is excellent. Guru3D has been presenting some of that information in DX12 games but I still prefer TR's analysis.

      • derFunkenstein
      • 4 years ago

      Link on Sapphire’s page:

      [url<]http://www.sapphiretech.com/productdetial.asp?pid=72407812-0BE6-49E0-B569-1364FAE7F4D7&lang=eng[/url<] 6-pin clearly visible on the back end of the card

      • Concupiscence
      • 4 years ago

      Do the Asus models just use the PCIe plug for powering the fans, like some models of GTX 750 Ti? It’s possible that they’re trying to goose the performance by ramping up the clocks, but either of those is possible. Early indications are that the card is generally faster than the R7 360 it’s set to replace, but those specifications don’t suggest it will stack up well against the oh-look-it’s-Pitcairn-again R7 370 outside of power use and h.265 acceleration.

        • chuckula
        • 4 years ago

        From what I can tell by Tom’s rail-by-rail power analysis, the 6-pin connector seems to be doing more than just powering the fans: [url<]http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-460,4707-5.html[/url<] [About 50 watts being pulled through the 6-pin PCIe connector, which I am assuming is more than what the fans need]

          • Concupiscence
          • 4 years ago

          Yeah, you’re right. On paper it looks like it’s drawing about as much power as my R7 370 and delivering similar performance, though h.265 acceleration would be nice. That said, this appears to be handsomely overclocked. At stock the RX 460 will look kinda sleepy.

          edit: “Handsomely” doesn’t fit here, it’s a 4% bump. But at least the performance is all right.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 4 years ago

            4% (50MHz on a max boost speed of 1200) does not seem like a handsome overclock to me. If they had to bump its power consumption by 40% (from “under 75W” to an actual measured 105W) to get a 4% overclock, they should have left well enough alone.

            • Concupiscence
            • 4 years ago

            You’re right. I haven’t had coffee this morning, and took care of my kids solo over the weekend. I think the results looked good compared to some leaked benchmarks from earlier this morning, and my smeary morning brain assumed that represented the overclock, not a weensy 4% quantitative bump. And… yeah, if that’s what it took to goose it, that’s atrocious.

            • chuckula
            • 4 years ago

            I guess it was a marketing decision to pursue a higher performance envelope with the 6-pin connector.

            At least it means that a stock-clocked Rx 460 has a chance of being able to run without the extra power connector, but at the cost of a performance drop.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 4 years ago

            Well, it’s getting embarrassed by the GTX 950, so I can kind of see why. It has “bleeding edge tech” according to that review, but the only thing bloodied is the nose of the RX 460.

            [url<]http://www.pcworld.com/article/3104596/components-graphics/amd-radeon-rx-460-review-an-affordable-graphics-card-with-bleeding-edge-tech.html[/url<] And of course Tom's is showing the same thing.

      • AnotherReader
      • 4 years ago

      Gigabyte has [url=http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2016/08/08/gigabyte-radeon-rx-460-windforce-2x-oc-2gb/2<]versions without any PSU power connectors[/url<]. As expected, these seem to [url=http://www.computerbase.de/2016-08/radeon-rx-460-test/3/<]throttle compared to 6-pin equipped ones[/url<]. Even this GPU can use 4GB of RAM. It seems that staying away from the 2GB versions is warranted.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This