AMD reveals the full specs of the Radeon RX 460 and RX 470

Back when AMD’s Radeon RX 480 broke cover, we knew the Polaris party was just getting started. When the RX 480 bared all, AMD teased two more cards in its lineup that were meant to carry the $100-to-$300 PC gaming flag forward: the Radeon RX 470 and the Radeon RX 460. Today doesn’t mark the full Monty for these cards, but we do know enough about them now to make some bets about their place in the budding next-generation GPU landscape.

We’re left guessing at the exact holes in its lineup that AMD expects to fill with these cards because the company isn’t sharing pricing info yet, even as it gears up to launch this duo next week. We feel like we can make some educated guesses about the price points these graphics cards will hit, though, thanks to some simple math and a long history of reviewing these things. Let’s dive in.

The Radeon RX 460: drop-in desperado

The Radeon RX 460 is aimed right at the heart of the entry-level gaming market: folks who want titles like Dota 2, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, League of Legends, and Rocket League to run smoothly, perhaps with a little bit of graphically-intensive gaming on the side.

The final RX 460 is a little different-looking than the bare-heatsinked model we’ve seen until now. AMD seems to have borrowed a page from the Radeon R9 Nano’s cooler when it designed the RX 460’s. The final card is kind of a one-and-a-half slot design that uses a single-slot bracket with a blower exhuast. The reference card appears to have one DisplayPort 1.3 out, one HDMI 2.0 out, and a DVI out. AMD will offer the RX 460 with 2GB or 4GB of 7GT/s GDDR5 RAM on board. 

The RX 460 is special because it’s AMD’s first card built with the smaller Polaris 11 GPU. As a quick refresher, this chip is a little less than half of the larger Polaris 10 chip that powers the Radeon RX 480. It has half the ROPs, less than half of the shaders, half the triangles per clock, and a memory bus that’s half as wide. It also has 1MB of L2 cache. It should be way smaller Polaris 10’s 232-mm² die, and AMD has also claimed that this chip is its thinnest GPU ever. That may sound like a weird point to make, but it’s important for achieving the kind of console-class gaming experiences in thin-and-light notebooks that AMD wants to deliver with the presumed mobile derivatives of the chip it has in the works.

  Base

clock

(MHz)

Boost

clock

(MHz)

ROP

pixels/

clock

Texels

filtered/

clock

(int8/

fp16)

SP

TFLOPs

Stream

pro-

cessors

Memory

path

(bits)

Memory

transfer

rate

(Gbps)

Memory

bandwidth

(GB/s)

Peak

power

draw

R7 260X 1100 16 56/28 2.0 896 128 6.5 96 115W
R9 265 925 32 64/32 1.9 1024 256 5.6 179 150W
RX 460 1090 1200 16 56/28 2.2 896 128 7 112 < 75W
GTX 750 Ti 1020 1085 16 40/40 1.4 640 128 5.4 86 60W
GTX 950 1024 1188 24 48/48 1.8 768 128 6.6 106 90W

Going by the basic numbers above, the RX 460 is a smidge more powerful than a GeForce GTX 750 Ti, our long-time favorite card for entry-level gaming systems. In certain measures, it even matches or exceeds the GeForce GTX 950, a perfectly competent card for gaming at 1920×1080.

If the RX 460’s performance in real-world testing shakes out similarly, it gives AMD a weapon it’s needed for a while now in the graphics card wars: a quiet, power-sipping card that can play popular games at or beneath 1920×1080 while dropping right into a PCIe slot with no need for external power. The card’s claimed “less than 75W” board power attests to that fact. That’s a big deal for prebuilt systems that need extra gaming oomph.

Given the huge communities around the e-sports titles that AMD is calling out in its materials, it’s a good bet the company will move a lot of these things if the RX 460’s performance is solid. If we had to guess, we’d expect the prices on reference 2GB RX 460s to be no more than $120 list—but that’s just a guess.

 

The Radeon RX 470: giving budget 1920×1080 gaming a boost

To nobody’s surprise, the Radeon RX 470 fills in the gap between the RX 460 and the 4GB RX 480. Here’s how it stacks up against a number of past graphics cards with similar specs:

  Base

clock

(MHz)

Boost

clock

(MHz)

ROP

pixels/

clock

Texels

filtered/

clock

(int8/

fp16)

SP

TFLOPs

Stream

pro-

cessors

Memory

path

(bits)

Memory

transfer

rate

(Gbps)

Memory

bandwidth

(GB/s)

Peak

power

draw

R9 280X 1000 32 128/64 4.1 2048 384 6 288 250W
RX 470 926 1206 32 128/64 4.9 2048 256 6.6 211 120W
RX 480 1120 1266 32 144/72 5.8 2304 256 7 224 150W
R9 290 947 64 160/80 4.8 2560 512 5 320 290W?
GTX 950 1024 1188 24 48/48 1.8 768 128 6.6 106 90W
GTX 960 1126 1178 32 64/64 2.4 1024 128 7.01 112 120W
GTX 970 1050 1178 56 104/104 3.9 2048 256 7.0 224 145W

To make the RX 470, AMD took the Polaris 10 GPU from the RX 480, turned off a few of its stream processors and texture units, and downclocked its GPU a bit, all while leaving its ROP count alone. The company then slapped 4GB of GDDR5 clocked at 6.6GT/s on board. The cuts made this way don’t seem to hurt the RX 470 much in our theoretical numbers, and they also let the card hit a 120W board power spec.

To give you a broad idea of where the RX 470 will land, AMD says the card can deliver more than 60 FPS in a range of popular titles like The Witcher 3, Rise of the Tomb Raider, Crysis 3, and Far Cry 4. Looking over the company’s endnotes suggests that many of those games were running at High or Ultra presets. If real-world performance matches those numbers, the RX 470 could be quite a compelling card for low-midrange gaming PCs.

AMD’s more specific set of performance numbers heavily favor games with implementations of next-generation APIs, where Radeons have so far enjoyed an advantage—Doom with its Vulkan renderer, and Total War: Warhammer and Hitman with DirectX 12. Still, in the two DX11 games on display, the RX 470 seems plenty up to the task of delivering a good gaming experience at 1920×1080 with a fair dose of eye candy on. Still, readers should take these internal numbers with the usual dump truck of salt.

Most everything else about the RX 470 seems pretty similar to the reference RX 480, right down to the reference cooler design. The card has three DisplayPort 1.3 outs and a single HDMI 2.0 out, and it’ll require a six-pin power connector.

Since we’re already playing the guessing game with pricing, we don’t feel bad saying that we expect the RX 470 reference card to ring in at about $160. The GTX 950 stalked that territory until just recently, and it seems probable that AMD wants to deliver a boost in performance at that price point, similar to what it’s done with the RX 480 at $200. Once again, however, this is just our gut estimate.

We’re still waiting on AMD’s official word for pricing, and we can expect to be smug or eat our crow pretty soon on this point. AMD is targeting an August 4 release for the RX 470, and the RX 460 will follow on August 8. We should get full information on each card then. Regardless of their actual prices, this duo of Polaris cards makes an exciting summer for PC gamers that much hotter.

Comments closed
    • ronch
    • 3 years ago

    Just a thought. What if Zen is supposed to be something like Polaris: a serious attempt at hitting the performance per dollar sweet spot? Sandy Core i5 performance for $100, anyone? If that’s the case then Polaris will go well with it as both target Hyundai buyers. But if Zen will pull off the miracle of miracles of Silicon Valley then AMD will have to put out Vega alongside it to make a clean sweep in the image department.

      • tipoo
      • 3 years ago

      How many Overwatts in Zen then?

    • watzupken
    • 3 years ago

    Its quite worrying to see AMD release a comparison of the RX 460 vs their old GPU (R7 260x), instead of something like a GTX 950. From reviews I read, R7 260X was trailing the GTX 750Ti quite often. I feel they are gonna sell something like superior DX12 performance over GTX 950, which I am not surprise it will do better in DX12.

    • not@home
    • 3 years ago

    I wonder how these card compare to my 7870 GHz edition?

      • jokinin
      • 3 years ago

      I think the RX460 will be slower and the RX470 will be faster.

      • Mat3
      • 3 years ago

      Just thinking about the top cards from a few years ago, the 580 and 6970, and how this tiny 460 puts them to shame.

        • OneShotOneKill
        • 3 years ago

        Edit: “few” = 6 years

        Not an impressive statement with that in mind.

      • CaptTomato
      • 3 years ago

      I estimate that the “480” is 100% more powerful than my 7950ghz{but more with Vulkan}, so the 470 would be probably 50% faster than 7950, and approx 70-75% faster than your 7870.

      With old systems{CPU/ram}, 480 is as high as I’d go otherwise the GPU will be bottlenecked.

    • rudimentary_lathe
    • 3 years ago

    Can’t wait to see how the RX 470 overclocks, particularly on the memory side. If you can boost that comparatively low memory frequency up to RX 480 8GHz levels, it could be a heck of a bargain.

    • OneShotOneKill
    • 3 years ago

    The AMD bias is strong with this one!

      • Krogoth
      • 3 years ago

      Please put down the green-shaded glasses. You look very silly even to Jen-Hsun Huang……

        • OneShotOneKill
        • 3 years ago

        I have owned ATI cards since the ATI Rage, I currently own an HD 7970 and an R9 Fury.

        That does not blind me from seeing that AMD is a generation behind the green team.

    • Meadows
    • 3 years ago

    If the the RX 460 is half of an RX 480, it will still be a very capable card, especially considering the purported price.

    However, I just can’t understand why it’s made with a double wide cooler, unless it’s to make it subliminally seem more similar in power to its big siblings.

      • EndlessWaves
      • 3 years ago

      …because that’s standard these days?

      It’s a shame, but hardly unexpected.

    • ronch
    • 3 years ago

    I’d probably go with the RX 470 given how it’s about 3x faster in terms of shader throughput than my HD 7770.

    • DPete27
    • 3 years ago

    If the RX480 launch is anything to go by (RX480 = GTX 970 in performance and power, so AMD is basically a generation behind Nvidia on power consumption), I’d expect the RX460 to match the GTX950 and be priced similarly.
    Since GTX 950s are going for [url=http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487159<]$110 after MIR[/url<] that ought to be the target price for the RX460. I'd bet the launch price to be closer to $125 though.

    • derFunkenstein
    • 3 years ago

    The 470 looks like Tonga with a faster clock and faster memory. That’s pretty good, especially if it fits in that expected $150 range. Not a revelatory increase in performance, but a drop in power along with some good gains. Nvidia isn’t really competing in that space yet, though I sort of expect a GTX 1050 to come along soon.

      • taisserroots
      • 3 years ago

      Some places have found about a 20%ipc increases clock for clock, who knows, AMD says 15%, so I am more inclined to go closer to AMD’s number

        • derFunkenstein
        • 3 years ago

        20% compared to what? I could see that compared to the R9 280X/Radeon 7970 Tahiti chip, since Tonga brought some improvements, but the RX 480 vs. the R9 390 looks very linear based on clock speeds.

          • RdVi
          • 3 years ago

          Yes but R9 390 has more shader processors, ROPs etc than RX480 where as the RX 470 and R9 380X are equal on most fronts.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 3 years ago

            Clock speed makes up for a lot of that. Most 28nm AMD parts are running ~1GHz for boost, whereas max boost on the RX 480 is 1.26GHz.

            • CaptTomato
            • 3 years ago

            R390/X, and Fury are still quite powerful and prices have dropped, but the best buy is still the 480 for efficiency and DX12 power.
            I’m not in the market for a card just yet, but if it was me, i’d get the 480Saphire nitro….should be another epic Saphire, I’ve had two from saphire, 6850 and the mighty 7950, 3.5yrs old and going strong on 1080p.

    • OneShotOneKill
    • 3 years ago

    Pointless cards.

      • travbrad
      • 3 years ago

      Not as pointless as your post.

      Low end graphics cards don’t really excite me either, but that doesn’t make them pointless. If there wasn’t a market for these cards AMD and Nvidia wouldn’t be making them.

    • Lord.Blue
    • 3 years ago

    Just an editing niggle, on page 2, right after the Brilliant HD Gaming graphic, you refer to the RX470 as the RX480. Other editing mistakes have been noted below, and thus are not mentioned here.

      • Jeff Kampman
      • 3 years ago

      Fixed, sorry.

    • tviceman
    • 3 years ago

    Will the RX 460 beat the GTX 950’s with no power connectors? Those cards have been out for ~6+ months now, and based on AMD’s own graphs showing the RX 460 being 1.2x-1.3x faster than the 260x doesn’t distill a ton of enthusiasm. GTX 950’s have been regularly on salefor $120-130, and AMD’s MSRP for the RX 460 is $110, so there may be very little or no movement in perf/$ between the two products despite the generational gap.

      • Magic Hate Ball
      • 3 years ago

      RX470 with 4gb @ $150 will pretty much crush the GTX950.

      I just moved from a GTX950 to a RX480 myself, and the performance increase was 2-3 fold.

      If the RX470 is even just 75% as fast as a RX480, it’ll still eat the GTX950 for breakfast, assuming you have a 6-pin to power it.

        • ImSpartacus
        • 3 years ago

        Hell, the 460 oughta beat the 950. Remember the ces demo where Polaris 11 matched 950 with a massive power savings.

        • DPete27
        • 3 years ago

        GTX950 to RX480 is more like 1.9x – 2x performance increase. I get that you were guestimating, but others may not.

      • taisserroots
      • 3 years ago

      Vulkan on dota2 and low level apis might come into play here.
      Who knows?

    • geniekid
    • 3 years ago

    The RX 460 doesn’t look like it is “blower exhaust” and the Nano definitely was not. Shorter cards generally aren’t blower style. Necere from HardForum does a good job explaining why [url=https://hardforum.com/threads/asus-geforce-gtx-970-directcu-mini.1842972/#post-1041267308<]here[/url<].

      • taisserroots
      • 3 years ago

      I love the hypothetical blower card

    • EndlessWaves
    • 3 years ago

    The 470 is surprisingly fast.

    Given that they’re obviously pushing the 460 further towards the low end than the 360 was and will presumably be opening the price gap too I’d have expected the 470 to sit somewhere in between the 25% improvement of the 460 and the 75% improvement of the 480 but it looks like they may be averaging closer to 60% faster than 50%.

    I guess it’s to keep within comparison distance to a GTX 1050. They’re aiming to make it feel almost as fast but substantially cheaper instead of being seen as the next model down.

      • Goty
      • 3 years ago

      A lot of that is because the resources are better balanced than the 480. The 480 is likely hindered by its relatively low ROP count. Keeping the same number of ROPs as the 480 means that the 470 will likely stay closer to the 480 in performance than its shader count implies.

    • Chrispy_
    • 3 years ago

    I’m a little worried that the CU count on the 460 is only 14 (896 SPs).

    Is that because the die is only 14CU or is it because of yield issues meaning that they can’t get all 16CU’s working or within the 75W power budget?

      • kalelovil
      • 3 years ago

      The die has 16 CUs. AMD have detailed a 35W 16CU laptop part (RX 480M). The best dies will go toward such laptop parts as they traditionally have a greater profit margin.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 3 years ago

        Still that’s a precipitous drop for an (assumed) $40-50 savings for the desktop card. I get that they had targets over than performance with this card, but it’s going to be a pretty bad price/performance proposition.

          • taisserroots
          • 3 years ago

          That is how the low end has kind of been, after the 950 and 360 any lower would have poor value proposition

            • derFunkenstein
            • 3 years ago

            Yeah, I guess that’s true, but man.

            • jihadjoe
            • 3 years ago

            All the more reason to shop at the sweet spot. (which is usually the mid range)

      • taisserroots
      • 3 years ago

      Apple and a few places made a deal with them, no one knows on what, this might be it, maybe in new IMACs and Macbook Pros

    • Shobai
    • 3 years ago

    Here’s hoping that someone manages to bring a low profile version to market, to take over from the 750 Ti. If they can manage a single slot version while they’re at it, I’ll be looking to upgrade my wife’s HD 7750.

      • kalelovil
      • 3 years ago

      I would expect so. The WX 4100 shows it can be done.

    • Shobai
    • 3 years ago

    [quote<] Still, in the two DX11 games on display, the RX 480 seems plenty up to the task of delivering a good gaming experience at 1920x1080 with a fair dose of eye candy on. [/quote<] That should be RX 470. The next sentence also starts with "Still,", while you're tweaking.

    • joselillo_25
    • 3 years ago

    I am going to upgrade an ancient q6600 with and rx460. do you think I will have problems to boot due the lack of uefi support in the bios? I am using windows 10.

      • Krogoth
      • 3 years ago

      Negative, the RX 480 will work just fine.

      UEFI only matters if you want to use secure boot and/or boot from a GPT partition.

      • Concupiscence
      • 3 years ago

      From my experience with a Q6600, you should be fine. The only BIOS-equipped systems I remember having problems were Sandy Bridge-era boxes from big OEMs like Dell and HP, one of which I own… Figuring out something to do with it is kind of frustrating.

      • taisserroots
      • 3 years ago

      If you do have Uefi issues you can legacy boot. In Wendell’s personal dual xeon build video uploading to teksyndicate today atabout 8 minutes in he shows you how to do it, it only really gave him an issue on fedora installation as everything was oversized

    • Srsly_Bro
    • 3 years ago

    Less than 75W? I have my suspicions….

      • kalelovil
      • 3 years ago

      I don’t doubt it.
      It only has 38% of the shader throughput and 44% of the memory bandwidth of the RX 480.

    • insulin_junkie72
    • 3 years ago

    There’s already a Sapphire RX460 up for pre-order from Amazon (NOT one of their third parties).

    It’s $150 as I write this:
    [url=https://www.amazon.com/Sapphire-Radeon-NITRO-GDDR5-11257-02-20G/dp/B01J1M4HDS<]https://www.amazon.com/Sapphire-Radeon-NITRO-GDDR5-11257-02-20G/dp/B01J1M4HDS[/url<] Hopefully this is more pre-order gouging and not AMD doing AMD things. I was possibly interested in a RX470, depending on pricing and power consumption, but we'll see... the lack of announced pricing worries me a bit.

    • christos_thski
    • 3 years ago

    Hope they’re a smoother launch than RX 480, which -at least in europe- is selling NOTHING close to the announced price. It’s actually closer to current GTX 970 and GTX 1060 debut prices, and that is not the appealing proposition we were promised… Paper launching at 200 bucks and sellling for 300-something is lame. It’s been a full month since initial “release”, there’s no excuse anymore…

    I hope we don’t again celebrate “RX 470’s amazing value at 150 dollars” only for it to sell for 200 or 250 a month after release.

      • crystall
      • 3 years ago

      Actually price gouging around here (NL) is happening both for the AMD and nVidia offerings. The Radeon RX 480 is being sold for 290-320€ (8GB version) and the GeForce 1060 for 350-400€ (6GB version, and yes, there’s non-reference 1060s being sold for 400€, it’s insane).

      • EndlessWaves
      • 3 years ago

      Well, component retailing is a competitive market. You can’t blame them for taking the chance to increase their profits when demand exceeds supply.

      If you want it at the announced price then go and lose yourself in a game for a month or two. Once the initial demand is satisfied and/or production capacity has had the time to ramp up then they’ll come back down.

      • taisserroots
      • 3 years ago

      In the UK it is, Some shops are mentioning shipments 2 days from now

    • anotherengineer
    • 3 years ago

    I have seen the $179 number rumored a few times for the RX470 on the internets. I’m hoping it comes in closer to $150 ish mark.

      • raddude9
      • 3 years ago

      Isn’t it $150 for the 4GB RX470 and $179 for the 8GB. Or at least it will be when the prices settle down.

    • mcnels1
    • 3 years ago

    The R9 290 row on the RX 470 comparison chart seems to be a victim of copy/paste errors. Most of the number are from the 750 Ti.

      • f0d
      • 3 years ago

      i was looking at that and thinking
      r9-290 “640 shaders” “86gb/s” WTF?

      • flip-mode
      • 3 years ago

      The numbers for the R9 290 look way off.

      • Shobai
      • 3 years ago

      Heh, “60W” is probably my favourite!

        • Concupiscence
        • 3 years ago

        Man, dare to dream.

      • Jeff Kampman
      • 3 years ago

      Fixed, sorry.

    • Forge
    • 3 years ago

    I still want to get an RX 480 and check out AMD’s new amdgpu driver for Linux, but finances aren’t cooperating. I hope I don’t miss the 4GB/8GB free upgrade!

    • CScottG
    • 3 years ago

    The 460 is the card I’ll be getting for my dad’s new system (..assuming they hold to the $99).

    Cheap + HDMI 2.0b connected to a 50 or 55″ 4k TV for his general use (..he doesn’t “game”).

    The lower power (lower heat/noise) is also a close-second requirement.

    -I’d never recommend the 460 for any gaming no matter how it’s marketed.

    EDIT:

    ..and for the wankers down-voting this post because of my decision to never recommend the 460 for gaming:

    [url<]http://videocardz.com/63033/gigabyte-radeon-rx-460-windforce-2x-performance-leaked[/url<] -it's not a "snobbish" statement, rather the card just does NOT PERFORM for gaming. To put it into proper perspective, it only performs about 10% better than the integrated graphics portion of a Skylake i3-6100 (..which you can get for about $113).

      • Krogoth
      • 3 years ago

      It’s good enough for a cheap LOL, DOTA2, Starcraft 2, TF2 and Overwatch box. The intended market for the RX 460.

        • anotherengineer
        • 3 years ago

        Don’t forget CS:GO

        • kalelovil
        • 3 years ago

        I’m looking forward to its laptop incarnation (or Nvidia equivalent), to eventually replace my current GTX 850M system without breaking the bank.

        • Concupiscence
        • 3 years ago

        Just spitballing it, the 460 should be noticeably faster than the R7 370 currently pulling duty in my home theater PC. That card manages Doom (in Vulkan) at 1600×900 in High quality at a nice framerate, so the 460 could be the ticket to a playable 1080p experience with reasonable quality to boot.

          • CScottG
          • 3 years ago

          I think it’s certainly possible, but it’s something of a comparative value judgement – pay about $50 more and you should be able to improve performance substantially, particularly if you wait for Nvidia’s 950 replacement, or perhaps the 470 at a discount.

          I’d much rather skimp on other aspects of a computer for gaming than on video card, particularly when even less intensive games (iterations) will become more intensive over time.

          It’s why I wouldn’t recommend the 460 for that purpose.

          Perfect for HTPC though.

          EDIT: turns out it doesn’t even perform as well as your old card.

      • raddude9
      • 3 years ago

      The 460 will be fine for 1080p gaming…. as long as you know how to turn the settings down a bit.

      • kuttan
      • 3 years ago

      The 460 is intended to replaces old GTX 750Ti and R7 260X segment cards. Those cards still sell pretty well despite their old age and limited gaming performance. It looks like 480 perform similar to a 270 with much lower power, new features at a cheaper price.

      • JustAnEngineer
      • 3 years ago

      I go about that differently.

      Dad’s next graphics card will be the old Radeon HD7870 from another family member’s former gaming PC when I eventually upgrade my graphics card and the trickle-down upgrades bump the old gaming hardware down to less demanding users.

        • CScottG
        • 3 years ago

        Yup, that’s the way it’s been in the past.

        In fact it will also utilize one of his old cards that were mine at one time.

        It will also use integrated graphics. The base OS (debian) will use the integrated graphics along with a few VM’s (for browsing, word processing, email, etc.). 2 * 21″ monitors for it from prior system.

        The two Windows VM’s will use the cards. A 50″ or 55″ 4k TV and the 460, with a GT 760 for 2 * 24″ monitors from his prior system.

      • Narishma
      • 3 years ago

      If he doesn’t game, why does he even need a graphics card?

        • Prion
        • 3 years ago

        I tried running without a graphics card once but I just kept getting a black screen.

          • K-L-Waster
          • 3 years ago

          I think the point is “why not just use IGP instead of a discrete card?” If all you are after is playing videos and operating a Windows UI, the IGP in any Intel CPU or AMD APU will be more than sufficient.

          EDIT: sorry, meant “IGP” not “IPC” (brain fart…)

            • Prion
            • 3 years ago

            :whoosh:

        • CScottG
        • 3 years ago

        VM’s.

        Also – 4k TV with 60 Hz.

      • smilingcrow
      • 3 years ago

      I’d get a lower power card for HTPC and non gaming usage although not sure what has been released yet that supports HDMI 2.0b?
      Hopefully this doesn’t suffer from the very high idle power draw of the RX 480 which was surprising.

      • ronch
      • 3 years ago

      If I had your dad I’d honestly just grab a $70 A8-7600 from Newegg and build him a cheap but capable system for what he does. Should be good for internet, email, Word, HD videos, and even games from gog.com.

        • CScottG
        • 3 years ago

        He needs a LOT of desktop space – futures trading.

          • ronch
          • 3 years ago

          Desktop space? Storage?

            • Meadows
            • 3 years ago

            I imagine he’s referring to a very high resolution. But you’re right, even cheaper cards should handle that as long as there’s no actual gaming.

            • CScottG
            • 3 years ago

            Yes, 4k at 60 Hz – resolution and frame-rate. It’s not really about the card’s performance, but rather the output format. (..actually it UHD, not real 4k.)

            I could also opt for a 950 that will provide 2.0a that will do it, OR a display-port to HDMI 2.0 – but in either case that (at least) requires a new card (..he doesn’t currently have one that has HDMI out OR display port), and assuming the 460 holds to its $99 price it would be about $30 cheaper than the 950 while overall requiring less power and being more up-to-date with HDMI 2.0b.

      • KeillRandor
      • 3 years ago

      It’s gotta be a step up from a 1GB Radeon 7850, right?

    • chuckula
    • 3 years ago

    BTW, videocardz had a breakdown of an Rx 460 card with the GPU die exposed and the Polaris GPU chip looked to be in the 100 mm^2 range, so less than half the size of Polaris 10.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This