Not the lowest price but a good price for budget GPU under $200 with solid performance.
Edit: price increased by $3
CamelCamelCamel.
The Nvidia alternative (1650 Super - $300) is a fair bit more so this is a good price.
How is that the nvidia alternative? The 1650S outperforms this by quite a fair bit, if you wanted to compare it to an AMD card it'd be closer to the 580, which is still a worse performing card.
Feel free to link the Nvidia alternative you think is fair. It slots in the middle of the 1650 and 1650 Super which if you check PCCG are quite similarly priced ($249 for the 1650 and $299 for the 1650 Super). Check the 17 game average here: https://youtu.be/l1zgAJK4TO0?t=686
Regardless the RX570 is superior to the 1650 in performance and price, and about 10-15% slower on average and almost on par in some games while being much cheaper.
@Yuri Lowell: In the middle of the 1650 and 1650 Super does not mean the nvidia alternative is the 1650 Super… The 1650S slaps this card, they are not on the same level at all. An old 3GB 1060 would be a closer match but even that beats it.
@s1Lence: You must have a different definition of slapped if you consider 10-15% slapping. I'm not trying to argue semantics here but I can't see how $120 extra is worth 10-15% performance. 1060 3GB is a depreciated card that you can't buy new anymore, so it's not unfair to say 1650 Super is the alternative. Saying the 1650 is the alternative makes the RX570 look even better value.
@Yuri Lowell: How can the 1650S be the alternative to the 570 if it is already the alternative to the 580? Also I don't know where you got 10-15% from, it's more like 15-20%. The 570 alternative is an old 1060, to compare the 570 with the 1650S is like comparing the 1650 with the 580.
@s1Lence: There is no Nvidia alternative that's exactly on par with the RX570 with performance though. It sits between the 1650 and 1650 Super. I can say the 1650 if you want. The RX570 is 15-20% faster than a 1650 while being $60 cheaper.
The Nvidia alternative (1650 Super)
There is no Nvidia alternative that's exactly on par with the RX570
That's all I needed to hear.
@s1Lence: That's a dumb statement to make though. Of course there is an alternative with the competition.
@Yuri Lowell: You're the one who made the statement, not me. I agree it's dumb as they are clearly not alternatives to one another. I think the fact that you've already contradicted yourself is enough to show that you are wrong, but too bad you can't admit it. There are alternatives, but that is not it.
@s1Lence: You missed the part where I said exactly. They don't have to be exact to be a valid alternative. Also I don't consider the 580 a good value card (I'd recommend an RX570 over it unless the price difference was only $20-30) as the performance delta is quite small just like the 1650 Super.
Don't get so hung up on a comment. I literally checked the Nvidia card prices and their performance and saw the difference, hence the RX570 is a good deal. It would make no sense to say the 1650 because it costs more and performs worse, the only advantage it has is power consumption.
@Yuri Lowell: I didn't miss anything, they're just so far off that they aren't alternatives. 20% is too big a difference to be considered an alternative. Either way, I think I've made my point clear.
@s1Lence: 20% is generous but you can justify that for $110 extra? Edit: It doesn't matter anyway, just arguing semantics at this point and we've certainly made our points.
@Yuri Lowell: By that logic nobody should ever buy a 5700xt. 3x the price of a 570 for only 2x the performance? What a terrible card!
@Yuri Lowell: We've been done for ages, but if you wish to make a few contradictions before you leave feel free to.
@s1Lence: No contradictions here, you just lack the reading comprehension and take things too literally.
@Yuri Lowell: When you consider two things that perform 20% differently as alternatives you're the one whose comprehension is questionable.
@s1Lence: It's closer to 10-15% not 20%. And when no exact alternative exists, it's not unfair to give a alternative so someone can compare what they are. Simply highlighting why this is a good deal. Have you got nothing better to do than argue ridiculous semantics? Why do you comment in bad faith and start arguments?
@Yuri Lowell: I did not comment in bad faith, I just stated facts while you were simply biased from the start. I get it, you own a 570 so you want to big it up, but that doesn't mean you need to lie or misrepresent the truth.
@s1Lence: If I wanted to make the 570 look better I would've said the 1650 which didn't even cross my mind at the time as it was below what I'd deem acceptable performance for a gaming card (and priced higher). Seems you have the wrong idea, because I'm simply looking at the facts. You sound biased yourself getting hung up on it like this.
@Yuri Lowell: How am I hung up lmao just telling you that the 570 and 1650s are not on the same level, if you wanna keep being an idiot and arguing about that fact go ahead, not gunna waste any more time on you
It's $240-250 for a Galax model, considering the low TDP you don't need a good cooler for it.
I went the other way my Aus Rx 570 and undervolted it. Sips instead of gulps power. Whole PC (16gb and i3570) sits around 90 watts while in game (not including monitor).
I'm still using an rx580 and it seems barely alright, which can also be had for 260-270 nowadays. I'd go for more though, it struggles with MS Flight Sim even at 1440p. The 570 would struggle even more.
MS Flight sim isn't the best for gauging performance though (unless it's the main game you will play). It is currently one of the most demanding games out there, so saying it doesn't perform that well in that game isn't really representative of how it will perform in other games.
Unless you are talking about FSX (the last game), in which case it is mostly CPU bound anyway so not really relevant for GPU comparisons.
It's also not really a 1440 card i believe
For light games like Overwatch it is, closer to 4K. But yeah I stress the card more than a 1080p user would. Still would recommend getting the best you can afford, you know you'll be stuck with it for years so it may as well be a really good one.
How did you manage this? Using the Asrock graphics software?
Should I just put it into manual mode and change those values hah
MSI afterburner is best bet, just trial and error.
OverdriveNTool for AMD. It doesn't need to run in the background (only on startup then it goes away), nor does it conflict with drivers like MSI Afterburner does on occasion.
There are a few good YouTube videos that show this. But yes, abut of trial and error. I think one ended at 1080mV
If its good enough for Flight Simulator, it's good enough for me.
lol, didn't realise it was minimum for Flight Simulator (the Crysis of 2020).
@1080p to allow a steady 30fps.
It's a beast of a game.
Luckily, being a 'slow' sim, 30fps is almost as smooth as just watching a 30fps youtube video.
Quite playable.
580 must give me around 30 frames at 1440p. I'd settle for 30 at 4k, you don't need 60+ just to fly.
30FPS avg all mid settings with a 6c/12t cpu
I get 5fps with low settings 1080p. Seems to hit the VRAM limit of the card quite quickly. Might be a driver issue.
nice find, good enough for a lot of 3a games under 1080p@60hz with medium to hight quality
Closer to max settings. It's a very capable 1080p card in most games.
i guess amd gonna keep on producing these chips and forget about 6400xt / 6500xt whatever
Paired this in an old Optiplex 990 with a 2600, can play games very comfortably
Not bad at all š Will this fit my Optiplex 9020 sff?
No, it's not a low profile card. The best bang-for-buck LP GPU for a SFF would be the RX550. The entry-level GT1030 will give you sub-par performance and the top-end GTX 1650 is too expensive and runs hot, especially in something like the 9020 SFF. A 1050ti would be good too if you can find one under $200 (it was around this price pre-COVID).
@Yeemail probably has an MT model Optiplex which is a tower case and will accommodate a full-sized GPU that can be powered by the anaemic factory PSU.
Yeh, using the mini tower variant. Upgraded my PSU to a 700w one
I put a Sapphire Pulse RX 570 in an Optiplex 7010 MT, works well. Had to replace the PSU too.
Thanks. Iām interested in an AMD card so that I can hackintosh my machine. The RX550 is a little hard to find. Would a LP RX560 or 570 work? Thanks again
You'll find a couple of local sellers on eBay flogging the Yeston RX550. Watch out for dubious listings claiming to have local stock though.. there's no LP version of the 560 or 570 (it would be awesome if they existed)
New? Nice. Got mine used from JW for ~150 delivered few months ago.
Im currently using onboard graphics Ryzen 3400G to play Dota 2. Wondering if this will make any improvements? Will it also allow me to get 144hz since i have a 144hz monitor but when i do an online test its at 60hz?
For the 144hz, have you looked at whether your cable meets the minimum? It needs HDMI 2.0 or DP1.2. I got 1440p 144hz (medium settings) using a GTX970 which is roughly on par with this RX570, so you should be able to get it too with this.
From memory the Ryzen APUs match up to a 1030 or so. So this would be notably better.
It would get around 100-160fps depending on what's happening on screen at 1080p max settings.
Just to add some comments. I have this card and just had a quick benchmark. With around 10% OC on this RX570, I can get 60-80 fps at teamfight (1080p medium/high settings).
How does this compare to an AMD R9 280x? Have been out of the loop with pc parts the past few years.
It should be better according UserBenchmark
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-RX-570-vs-AMD-R9-2ā¦
The RX 570 is a better card, probably winning most benchmarks by 20-50% and doing it with ~25% less power consumption.
I've got a side question. I've got an i7 4790 with 32gb RAM, it still works well but I don't know if I should stick with my i7 and buy a much better GPU, or have a whole system overhaul with a less powerful GPU. Any suggestions? Would my i7 4790 bottleneck on something like an Nvidia 2070 or an RX 5700-XT?
It will bottleneck those cards due to being a quad core but you would still get a decent performance boost. Even a low end Ryzen quad core would be an upgrade though. I'd recommend a Ryzen 3600 or 3700.
@Yuri Lowell: How much approximately % difference would I have between an i7 4790 with a 2070, and a Ryzen 3700 with a 2070? Is it really big of a difference?
@GallBall2606: I'm not sure exactly, but it would depend on the game. As others have said you'll still see a massive increase in performance (I'm guessing you have a GPU from the 4790 era), but you just won't see the full performance of a cards like the 2070 and 5700XT. I'd still go for a GPU upgrade first if gaming is the priority.
If your only concern is gaming you'll get more value out of a graphics card update than any other move.
But if it were me personally I'd sell off the existing system/parts while they still have some value and replace the whole shebang.
@DonWilson: I haven't played games for the past 2-3 years, but looking to get info Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020. It looks amazing. It may be time to have an upgrade so might look into upgrading the whole system. Cheers guys!
This is the only value card to own right now until the next gen. It's a good time to upgrade CPU, more so just for the satisfaction of having done it, though it won't upgrade performance that much.
Just bought Galax GTX 1650 Super from U mart for $239 free pick up. Also saw they had RX 570 8GB version for $218.
Great card for older Mac Pros (4,1 / 5,1)
I bought this exact card at $199 and I use it to play Halo MCC at 4K 55-60fps its a great card for the money
kinda hilarious these cards are more expensive now given the mini crypto mining boom
These cards aren't bad, managed to oc mine to 1400mhz and 2100 memory.
Should be lower than this by now though.