AMD RX 480 4GB vs. 8GB Benchmark – Is 8GB VRAM Worth It?

In this benchmark, we compare the RX 480 4GB vs. RX 480 8GB to determine if the difference is "worth it" in games. -

[crazychris4124]

Might as well spend the extra $30 for the 8GB card

[cleft5]

When you are only paying a extra a $39 there is no reason not to buy the 8gb card.

[SonyWarrior]

might as well spend 50 more and get a 1060

[Dabigsiebowski]

It's funny because for how much bs people say about AMD drivers they seem to be the only ones who increase performance of their cards over time unlike Nvidia who actually makes there cards stale on purpose for more fanboys to upgrade.

Quote me when I say the 480 will be faster than the 1060 here in a year. And people wonder why... I just feel bad for all those 980ti owners who literally have nothing more to look forward to with there current setup, Nvidia could...but they wont.

[SonyWarrior]

you are obviously clueless because 1060 is already leaked benchmarks against the 480 and they show the 1060 as being a LOT more powerful about 2 TIMES as powerful....... but since you are some one whos a fan of something that can only be compared to a 2.5 year old gpu (and still is weaker btw), i think your opinion doesnt matter. last time i checked 480 doesnt support pci-e...... lmao. what a joke of a company and its funny laughing at their supporters lack of knowledge. cool for you to buy some thing on the hopes and dreams of them magically making the card much more powerful with firmware, where im from we buy some thing for what it is at the current state

[neocores]

Ummm the idk if you been watching videos. The Rx480 is stronger then the 1060 and it almost close to the 1080.

[cd1]

The RX480 doesn't support PCI-E?...you don't half talk some rubbish. I will assume you are referring to the PCI-E slot power draw issues, last i heard that's being fixed tomorrow.

[SonyWarrior]

@neocores pick what source you like theres a ton of them...... https://www.google.com/sear... i personaly like http://www.forbes.com/sites... source since they have an accurate expected price of $249 #trash480 killer lol by the way at your intelligence @neocores "...and it almost close to the 1080" almost close? so basically youre saying that its not even close to the 1080 well your right there but its obvious you just used failed logic from your IQ of sub 70 to form that sentence probably wanted to say close but werent smart enough too...... sad really but hey you think the rx480 is heaven sent so it doesnt come as a surprise to me

[Nathan_Hale53]

@SonyWarrior
If you didn't read Dabigsiebowski, he said it'll definitely be faster in a year because Nvidia stop supporting their cards once another generation comes out and they also don't really improve as much per update.

[Erik7357]

Well in games your only getting like a 1 fps-3 fps difference...
Benchmark software, not game benchmarks, but like tech demos get like 5fps difference but who cares those arent games!

Every game only being 1-2 fps different with the exception of Black ops 3, the most graphical and best game ever made of course, having a stunning 3-4 fps difference for some reason out of all the games.

Not worth $39 more dollars

[Herbalistic]

8gb will be worth it in the long run

[CP_Company]

in the long run both cards are weak at best.

[Hold_It]

The RX480 was never about trying to be the new version of the Fury X or the Titian X. It's meant to be the replacement for the R9 380x at an accessible price. The fact that the card can handle VR in even the $199 version, is nothing short of amazing.

The 380x comes with 4GB of GDDR5 and starts at $204.99+
The RX 480 comes in 4GB and 8GB variants of GDDR5 starting at 199.99 + for the 4GB, and $229+ for the 8GB.

Here's the performance difference between the 4GB R9 380x vs the 8GB RX 480. Also protip, this site isn't biased.

http://www.hwcompare.com/30...

Here's the 4GB R9 380x vs the 4GB RX480

http://www.hwcompare.com/30...

[Erik7357]

Very true, the long run is irrelevant for these cards because by that time you'll be getting another card.

It's not the frontrunner for amd cards ,

[sadsatan]

the 4gb version can actually be unlocked to become an 8gb version, via the bios

[Hold_It]

Has anyone been able to confirm that, or is that just speculation?

[GameBoyColor]

What i heard was that reviewers were givin the 8gb variant and were able to switch it to 4 to benchmark it through bios. Maybe that's what he's talkin about? Idk

[Pandamobile]

It's true, but it won't work for all cards. It has to do with how the cards are 'binned' to meet production schedules.

[sadsatan]

i don't think amd are too happy about ppl doing the hack, strange that the loop actually exists!

[V0LT]

It's true.

[1nsomniac]

Last card I had from the red team was the Radeon 9700 Pro which you could force flash with a custom firmware to unlock the additional memory & up clock the cores which was cut to meet production. Which basically made it beat their top tier card in benchmarks.

Haven't heard anything about this being applicable to the RX480 & it would seem an odd ratio to be true so I'm not convinced. My card didn't last all to long either but it was ATI/AMD so they never did.

[Hold_It]

More memory bandwidth is always worth it, especially when most higher end PC games now require at least 3 to 4GB of Video Ram.

[Pekka]

Which games? Most higher end PC games only require 1 GB Video Ram, some even less. For example GTA V requires 1 GB Video Ram. I think there is now exactly 0 games which require 4 GB Video Ram.

[Christopher]

Well, he did say most higher end PC games. And, the ones that come to the top of my head are any recent Ubisoft game, Quantum Break, Forza on PC, and more. I'm sure there are a ton more that require more as well.

[Pandamobile]

By 'require', he probably means 'to run at 1080p60 ultra settings'. Actual RAM requirements are still pretty low, because most games scale down to run on budget hardware.

[Hold_It]

@Pekka
Yes, mostly reccomended and Directx 12 games, and Direct X12 is starting to get more developer support, so it's better in my opinion to plan for the future, than it is to get a GPU or CPU that is okay for today, but going to be on the minimum requirements list or not even on there in six months to a year. A lot of games I have checked on Steam that have come out recently require at least 2GB of video ram. I have a 7870 2GB overclocked, and it's barely cutting it for anything recent.

I'm also taking into consideration that a lot of the AAA games that are ported over to PC aren't optimizted well, because off the top of my head with the exception of MGS V: The Phantom Pain, and The Witcher 3, a lot of them require at least 2GB. I'm also taking into account that people don't want to play the game and feel like they're barely getting by, or the game is barely playable (25-30fps). Recommended is already requiring at least 3GB+ as you can see here, and technology is constantly evolving, and 2GB is probably going to not even be on the minimum starting Q1 or Q2 2017.

Recommended
Doom (2016) NVIDIA GTX 970 4GB/AMD Radeon R9 290 4GB or better
Mirror's Edge Catalyst (2016) NVIDIA GeForce® GTX 970 4GB or better / AMD Radeon™ R9 280x 3GB or better.
The Evil Within (2014) GeForce GTX 670 or equivalent with 4GBs of VRAM
Fallout 4 (2016) NVIDIA GTX 780 3GB/AMD Radeon R9 290X 4GB or equivalent
Quantum Break (2016) 4GB NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 or AMD Radeon R9 390. Ultra requires NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti or AMD Radeon R9 Fury X 6GB
Gears of War Ultimate Edition (2016) (4 GB VRAM), GPU: AMD R9 290X / NVIDIA GTX 970

[cd1]

For £30 you may as well get the extra VRAM, personally i'd spend another £20 more on the Sapphire Nitro+ OC RX480.