33 months ago
I see that many people use RX's for gaming and I was looking at 4GB RX 480 v.s. a 1050 Ti 4GB. What's the benefit?
The RX 480 obliterates its.
Quite a bit. Anandtech shows the 480 to perform loads better than the 960, which performs nearly identically to the 1050ti.
Why? The 1050 TI seems to be much faster and much cheaper.
What benchmarks are you looking at? The 480 is hands down better, no contest.
I'm looking at the clock speeds
The rendering pipeline of the RX 480 is wider than a GTX 1050Ti.
Clock speeds are only one piece of a much larger picture. The GTX 1050Ti, only has 16 render output units, the RX 480, has 32. The GTX 1050 Ti only has 48 texture mapping units, the RX 480 has 144. The 1050Ti has about 3.3 billions transistors. The RX 480 has about 5.7 billion transistors.
That being said, even those numbers, can be misleading, because the these cards have different architectures, so a render output unit or texture mapping unit or shader on one of these GPU's is not exactly the same as on the other. They can't be contrasted directly either.
A GPU's render throughput, can't be compared based on any one of these specifications like clock speed, or VRAM size, or core configuration by itself. All of the factors have to be considered together, which is really best done by measuring/comparing the render throughput in actual rendering workloads.
When we do this, we see that the RX 480 delivers about 50% better render throughput than a GTX 1050Ti. Coincidentally, this is pretty close to the transistor count ratio multiplied by the clock speed ratio of these cards, but don't try to use that to compare any 2 cards, as it won't always play out so accurately.
Well then overall, it seems that the RX 480 is a better performer. That clarified a lot.
I have seen websites like GPUBoss which say that the RX is better but it doesn't seem like it.
Clock speeds mean absolutely nothing when comparing different GPUs. A GTX 1060 can boost higher than a Titan x Pascal, but the Titan is on a whole different level. And GPUBoss and any other Boss sites are garbage.
Clock speeds have nothing to do with performance. Historically, Nvidia has clocked their GPU's higher, but gave them a lower IPC (instructions per clock). AMD's GPU's may have lower clocks, but they can perform more operations within that time.
Horrible way to compare cards, clock speeds mean nothing if you are not comparing the exact same two cards.
You've responded to quite a few of my posts already so thanks for that!
If you're talking about the 1050ti vs. the 960, digitalfoundry did a great video showing the two head to head, which actually had the 960 leading in some games.
I am talking about the RX480 vs the 1050 Ti
The 480 is much faster.
RX 480 needs more wattage and runs hotter , 1050 and 1050 Ti are fast and cheap but 470 & 480 are more capable .
A closer match would be an RX 460 compared to a 1050 TI.
or an R9 280
the 480 is a much more powerful card. Do not compare cards by clock speeds unless theyre the same card. If you want to spend more go with a 480 if not the 1050ti