Radeon rx 470 hashrate

1356

Comments

  • adasebadaseb Member Posts: 1,043 ✭✭✭
    The only 480s for that price are reference and they are bad for mining because they are a fire hazard due to the pcie slot power draw. You are better off getting the aftermarket 470s which are 8pin.
  • Lokken86Lokken86 Member Posts: 28
    I bought a 4gb 470 plat oc (non nitro) for £165 to see what it could do. The cheapest 8gb one was £219, £54 more. Anyway. It does 22.2mhs out the box at about 105w. Can even maintain that hash undervolted. Will test to see how low I can get it to run.
    Looks like overclocking memory after 1750mhz does nothing for it due to memory timings. Perhaps a different bios could get this thing up to 25mhs. All in all it's £54 cheaper than the 8gb and the loss of 3mhs is not so bad, it would take forever to make up £54 on 3mhs...
  • TimboSliceTimboSlice Member Posts: 76 ✭✭
    edited August 2016
    Just got in my XFX 4GB 470 and figured I'd post up my results.
    Install wasn't too bad, took a couple crashes and restarts and some messing around in claymore's, but it wasn't anything unexpected.
    Stock MH/s: 22.1 eth/exp and 330 MH/s DCR at 30 intensity, which is exactly what everyone else was reporting.
    Unfortunately this thing sucks up 170-180 watts dual mining. I was expecting a little more that the reference cards @ 110w, but not that much. The weird thing is that not dual mining doesn't use any more power, so it seems like the card can definitely stretch its legs a bit more. Hopefully some OCing and undervolting can get it to ~24-25MH/s at 150w or so.
    All in all, it seems like a decent card if you missed the train on the reference 480's since it seems like the branded/custom 480's are going to be way more expensive, and might turn into a damn fine card if the driver and OC issues get fixed. I'll try playing around with OCing this weekend, but after Boysie's reports, I don't have high hopes.
  • Jotun70Jotun70 Member Posts: 107 ✭✭
    adaseb said:

    The only 480s for that price are reference and they are bad for mining because they are a fire hazard due to the pcie slot power draw. You are better off getting the aftermarket 470s which are 8pin.

    Don't spread that FUD please. Reference 480s are fine and are in fact great for mining. You been reading the Nvidia reddit or something?
  • th00berth00ber Member Posts: 213 ✭✭
    @Jotun70 Ref RX480 draw a lot of power from the PCI-E Slot because AMD was too optimistic with the 6pin connector.
    This card is pulling the max allowed on the PCI-E slot ... wich can be ok for a gaming conf, but it's not good for a mining rig because you have to be really carefull of the riser you will use and be sure you will not overload the motherboard on their PCI-E slot.

    That's what there is a lot of article and review on internet of reference RX 480 overloading PCI-E slot where others cards are OK.
    https://forum.ethereum.org/discussion/8037/psa-rx480-and-unpowered-risers-exceeds-75w-atx-spec
    https://forum.ethereum.org/discussion/8975/rx-480s-burning-up-my-powered-rises
    https://forum.ethereum.org/discussion/8318/rx-480-with-powered-usb-riser-problems

    And the reference design is really bad for cooling the card (GPU @80°c when mining).
    So, in my own opinion. Mining is already using a lot of time with tuning, maintaining the rig, handle the crash or failover etc ... You don't want you to add some trouble to your list.

    For me the only good RX 480 is a custom one
  • restlessrestless Member Posts: 80
    edited August 2016
    jstefanop said:

    budhzie said:

    @25.3MHps with 16.8.1, coreclock -20%, vcore all @800, memclock 2100, vmem 900
    running 3, full system load 330-360W

    edited, using Sapphire RX470 Nitro+ 8GB OC @250USD

    Why are you buying RX470s at 250 when you can get 480s for the same price and get 29MH? Any 470 over $200 is a huge ripoff.
    CAn you explain how to get 29MH from 480 ?!

    And buying 470 for less than 200$... where are you living? Buying 470 for less than 250$ and 480 for less than 300$ is next to impossible for some of us...
  • boysieboysie Member Posts: 591 ✭✭✭

    Just got in my XFX 4GB 470 and figured I'd post up my results.
    Install wasn't too bad, took a couple crashes and restarts and some messing around in claymore's, but it wasn't anything unexpected.
    Stock MH/s: 22.1 eth/exp and 330 MH/s DCR at 30 intensity, which is exactly what everyone else was reporting.
    Unfortunately this thing sucks up 170-180 watts dual mining. I was expecting a little more that the reference cards @ 110w, but not that much. The weird thing is that not dual mining doesn't use any more power, so it seems like the card can definitely stretch its legs a bit more. Hopefully some OCing and undervolting can get it to ~24-25MH/s at 150w or so.
    All in all, it seems like a decent card if you missed the train on the reference 480's since it seems like the branded/custom 480's are going to be way more expensive, and might turn into a damn fine card if the driver and OC issues get fixed. I'll try playing around with OCing this weekend, but after Boysie's reports, I don't have high hopes.

    I'm at 22/330 @ dcri 30 using 110w so not sure why you are sucking up 170w, that sounds like stock power settings, dropping ALL power to 800 drops it to 110w same perf less heat less watts.

    Boysie
  • TruthchanterTruthchanter Member Posts: 549 ✭✭✭
    boysie said:

    Just got in my XFX 4GB 470 and figured I'd post up my results.
    Install wasn't too bad, took a couple crashes and restarts and some messing around in claymore's, but it wasn't anything unexpected.
    Stock MH/s: 22.1 eth/exp and 330 MH/s DCR at 30 intensity, which is exactly what everyone else was reporting.
    Unfortunately this thing sucks up 170-180 watts dual mining. I was expecting a little more that the reference cards @ 110w, but not that much. The weird thing is that not dual mining doesn't use any more power, so it seems like the card can definitely stretch its legs a bit more. Hopefully some OCing and undervolting can get it to ~24-25MH/s at 150w or so.
    All in all, it seems like a decent card if you missed the train on the reference 480's since it seems like the branded/custom 480's are going to be way more expensive, and might turn into a damn fine card if the driver and OC issues get fixed. I'll try playing around with OCing this weekend, but after Boysie's reports, I don't have high hopes.

    I'm at 22/330 @ dcri 30 using 110w so not sure why you are sucking up 170w, that sounds like stock power settings, dropping ALL power to 800 drops it to 110w same perf less heat less watts.

    Boysie
    I didn't find a clear answer to this, so if the current way you have the 470 undervolted gives 22mhs/110w, how does this compare to the low power 480 settings you posted (-16.5% frequency/ 900v core, ~2200mem/ ~800v mem voltage)?
  • TimboSliceTimboSlice Member Posts: 76 ✭✭
    boysie said:

    Just got in my XFX 4GB 470 and figured I'd post up my results.
    Install wasn't too bad, took a couple crashes and restarts and some messing around in claymore's, but it wasn't anything unexpected.
    Stock MH/s: 22.1 eth/exp and 330 MH/s DCR at 30 intensity, which is exactly what everyone else was reporting.
    Unfortunately this thing sucks up 170-180 watts dual mining. I was expecting a little more that the reference cards @ 110w, but not that much. The weird thing is that not dual mining doesn't use any more power, so it seems like the card can definitely stretch its legs a bit more. Hopefully some OCing and undervolting can get it to ~24-25MH/s at 150w or so.
    All in all, it seems like a decent card if you missed the train on the reference 480's since it seems like the branded/custom 480's are going to be way more expensive, and might turn into a damn fine card if the driver and OC issues get fixed. I'll try playing around with OCing this weekend, but after Boysie's reports, I don't have high hopes.

    I'm at 22/330 @ dcri 30 using 110w so not sure why you are sucking up 170w, that sounds like stock power settings, dropping ALL power to 800 drops it to 110w same perf less heat less watts.

    Boysie
    I looked up your settings after posting that and saved 30-40w, so better but still not awesome. The XFX card might just use more power or I just need to play around more in Wattman and learn how to use it better.
    For some reason in Wattman, I can't control the core and mem voltages separately, they both switch to auto/manual when I change it and I can only adjust the mem voltage, is that normal?

  • boysieboysie Member Posts: 591 ✭✭✭

    boysie said:

    Just got in my XFX 4GB 470 and figured I'd post up my results.
    Install wasn't too bad, took a couple crashes and restarts and some messing around in claymore's, but it wasn't anything unexpected.
    Stock MH/s: 22.1 eth/exp and 330 MH/s DCR at 30 intensity, which is exactly what everyone else was reporting.
    Unfortunately this thing sucks up 170-180 watts dual mining. I was expecting a little more that the reference cards @ 110w, but not that much. The weird thing is that not dual mining doesn't use any more power, so it seems like the card can definitely stretch its legs a bit more. Hopefully some OCing and undervolting can get it to ~24-25MH/s at 150w or so.
    All in all, it seems like a decent card if you missed the train on the reference 480's since it seems like the branded/custom 480's are going to be way more expensive, and might turn into a damn fine card if the driver and OC issues get fixed. I'll try playing around with OCing this weekend, but after Boysie's reports, I don't have high hopes.

    I'm at 22/330 @ dcri 30 using 110w so not sure why you are sucking up 170w, that sounds like stock power settings, dropping ALL power to 800 drops it to 110w same perf less heat less watts.

    Boysie
    I looked up your settings after posting that and saved 30-40w, so better but still not awesome. The XFX card might just use more power or I just need to play around more in Wattman and learn how to use it better.
    For some reason in Wattman, I can't control the core and mem voltages separately, they both switch to auto/manual when I change it and I can only adjust the mem voltage, is that normal?

    yep you have to have manual on both you cant have auto mem power and manual core power...think this is yet another bug although maybe by design cant really tell

    boysie said:

    Just got in my XFX 4GB 470 and figured I'd post up my results.
    Install wasn't too bad, took a couple crashes and restarts and some messing around in claymore's, but it wasn't anything unexpected.
    Stock MH/s: 22.1 eth/exp and 330 MH/s DCR at 30 intensity, which is exactly what everyone else was reporting.
    Unfortunately this thing sucks up 170-180 watts dual mining. I was expecting a little more that the reference cards @ 110w, but not that much. The weird thing is that not dual mining doesn't use any more power, so it seems like the card can definitely stretch its legs a bit more. Hopefully some OCing and undervolting can get it to ~24-25MH/s at 150w or so.
    All in all, it seems like a decent card if you missed the train on the reference 480's since it seems like the branded/custom 480's are going to be way more expensive, and might turn into a damn fine card if the driver and OC issues get fixed. I'll try playing around with OCing this weekend, but after Boysie's reports, I don't have high hopes.

    I'm at 22/330 @ dcri 30 using 110w so not sure why you are sucking up 170w, that sounds like stock power settings, dropping ALL power to 800 drops it to 110w same perf less heat less watts.

    Boysie
    I didn't find a clear answer to this, so if the current way you have the 470 undervolted gives 22mhs/110w, how does this compare to the low power 480 settings you posted (-16.5% frequency/ 900v core, ~2200mem/ ~800v mem voltage)?
    I don't think its possible to have 2200 mem @ 800...not sure I posted that if I did it mush be a misstype

    I'm currently running -

    -10.5%/900 2200/940

    getting 26.9/471 @ DCRI 35.

    3 cards running at 596w (50 for system) = 182W at wall

    Boysie
  • boysieboysie Member Posts: 591 ✭✭✭
    480 = 182/26.9 and 182/471 = 6.7w per Mh (eth) + 0.38w per MH (sia)
    470 = 107/22 and 107/330 = 4.8w per Mh (eth) + 0.32w per Mh (sia)

    470 system = 695w at wall (50 for system) = 107.5w at wall
  • FurryBuxyFurryBuxy Member Posts: 42
    @boysie the 470's are more power efficient than the 480's? :o
  • TimboSliceTimboSlice Member Posts: 76 ✭✭
    Thanks for sharing all of your settings and results @boysie. I think we can all agree that you're the MVP of this forum when it comes to 470/480 tweaking.
  • dephcondephcon Member Posts: 39
    @boysie are you less salty over the drivers now that you've proven the 470 is more efficient? you had me regretting my purchase for a bit :tongue:

  • cscheatcscheat Member Posts: 147 ✭✭
    boysie said:

    480 = 182/26.9 and 182/471 = 6.7w per Mh (eth) + 0.38w per MH (sia)
    470 = 107/22 and 107/330 = 4.8w per Mh (eth) + 0.32w per Mh (sia)

    470 system = 695w at wall (50 for system) = 107.5w at wall

    @boysie wondering how many HASHRATE your RX 470 (4G) can do now???
  • Techman34Techman34 Member Posts: 405 ✭✭✭
    boysie said:

    480 = 182/26.9 and 182/471 = 6.7w per Mh (eth) + 0.38w per MH (sia)
    470 = 107/22 and 107/330 = 4.8w per Mh (eth) + 0.32w per Mh (sia)

    470 system = 695w at wall (50 for system) = 107.5w at wall

    Thanks @boysie! Have 4 x 470's on the way...
  • Jotun70Jotun70 Member Posts: 107 ✭✭
    edited August 2016
    @th00ber I am quite aware of the controversies that surrounded the 480 at launch. However, I feel it was largely blown out of proportion. AMD did go as far as to reduce the power usage from the PCIe slot on the 2nd driver that was released after the card hit store shelves, but it still hovers around the 75w "limit", sligthly lower with Compatibility mode turned on. To this day I have yet to see someone's motherboard fail/burn up as a result of this card drawing too much power, though.

    As far as mining rigs and risers, my 480s are indeed on powered risers that are using SATA --> Berg (yes, those POS) connectors... and they are not even warm to the touch. In fact, I am running 2 cards per line from the PSU despite seeing various people say "only run 1 card per molex/sata line from the PSU". Still, the cables are not warm/hot, neither are the connectors. Running 24/7 for a couple weeks now. This isn't to say that one shouldn't be extra careful. I don't recommend people just plugging these cards in, cranking them up, dual mining, and expecting all to be well. You should indeed be careful. Which leads me to my next point...

    One thing I feel AMD did get wrong with these cards, is the massive amount of voltage on the core. It is quite well known at this point that even at overclocked settings, undervolting yields a much more stable (and obviously cooler) running card. I am not sure if AMD was just being extra safe to ensure no crashing, or didn't have time to test the limits of the chip, but I am pretty well convinced at this point that they could have shipped these things with a lot less voltage on the core. Just look at the reviews and user feedback on the custom 480s. Can barely overclock higher than reference, if at all! To an extent, the problem isn't the reference design board or cooler. The chips themselves are just only capable of so much. Perhaps some bios limitations in there as well, but the efficiency goes very far out the window very quickly with ANY of the designs when you try pushing toward 1400mhz.

    With proper tweaking, reference runs very efficient and cool. I currently have mine running at 75c with stock (quiet) fan settings

    Here are my current settings for 27mh/s on the 480:

    880mv/1050mhz core (equivalent to -17%)
    920mv/2200mhz mem

    -25% power limit
    75c target temp
    85c max temp

    My new Kill-a-Watt meter arrives tomorrow. I will do some measurements then. I will even unplug the 2x 380s and just measure the 4x 480s at the wall. IIRC, @boysie said he was getting ~120-130w per card with 900mv core, 920mv mem, so I'm curious to see how mine land with the 880mv cores.
  • merkleminermerkleminer Member Posts: 15
    @boysie previously you listed a ramping voltage on core: 850/875/900/920/929. Are you still doing that, or just flat 900 across the board to keep it simple?
  • boysieboysie Member Posts: 591 ✭✭✭
    ramping up to 900 I tend to just start at the goal and ramp down 10 a time. it wont be using them lots but it needs um to get there as it ramps up.

    the only time I've gone flat is when you do -20%/800

  • boysieboysie Member Posts: 591 ✭✭✭
    edited August 2016
    cscheat said:

    boysie said:

    480 = 182/26.9 and 182/471 = 6.7w per Mh (eth) + 0.38w per MH (sia)
    470 = 107/22 and 107/330 = 4.8w per Mh (eth) + 0.32w per Mh (sia)

    470 system = 695w at wall (50 for system) = 107.5w at wall

    @boysie wondering how many HASHRATE your RX 470 (4G) can do now???
    because they setup the memory with some strange timing settings even the smallest of changes in clocks/mem results in either a tine perf increase with a huge amt of more power or a huge amt more power and less perf...tbh I gave up and settled for that magic -20/800 1750/800 option given its so solid and every thing else is so far from not solid its a fools game after that. maybe a driver update will win the day one day but amd dont seem to have this one in the bag quite yet. maybe they did it so that the same proc/mem wont compete with the 480 hell they nurffed the 4GB 480s

    I posted a while ago about just because it uses more power doesn't mean its less profitable.

    And I'm assuming you are all here for profit/fun and sand :)

    if you can increase the Mh at a cost of power the likely hood is you will over all make more profit until some sort of tipping point....the 480s have one around 27.7 ish...after the power cost takes over to get much more out of them vs Mh.

    the 470 4GB I have is not like this....the power almost doubles (If you could ever get it stable) for time amts of increase in perf...like 0.4Mh for 2/3rds more power...and that's pointless.

    so for me the optimal is lowest possible power/core/mem setting to achieve the best power/Mh ratio and for now that's the magical -20/800/1750/800 setting.

    I tried very small 0.5% variations on the core and it caused utter chaos bsod and card boot failures the lot...so stick with the known working and save your self some time until we get a new driver and it prob wont change but at least it will be worth another go then.

    btw as some others have eluded you can get the 480 lower on power for the 27Mh settings but not by much for now I'm happy its stable as it had may issues with lower power settings.

    Boysie

    PS: glad its all helping you out a bit.. :)
  • boysieboysie Member Posts: 591 ✭✭✭
    dephcon said:

    @boysie are you less salty over the drivers now that you've proven the 470 is more efficient? you had me regretting my purchase for a bit :tongue:

    not really the drivers are terrible and that's not some thing that I can change...so quite frustrating.

    I expect when we get better drivers we will see better perf but that could be a pipe dream

    the time I have wasted clearly I will never get back...maybe I should send AMD a bill lol.
  • dephcondephcon Member Posts: 39
    @boysie How many 470s do you have? just wondering if you just got a bad card.

  • LogicaluserLogicaluser Member Posts: 214 ✭✭
    edited August 2016
    Has anyone here with a RX470 tried underclocking the memory, to look for a lower memory timing strap?
    I ask because these results are so poor that it's possible that 1625mhz or 1500mhz might actually outperform the 20-22mh you guys are seeing if there's a tighter strap within reach.

    If anyone with RX470s wants to post BIOS extracts, I can take a look at the timing ranges. (use the latest GPU-Z)

    Unfortunately can't do any modification for windows miners (AMD windows drivers have BIOS signature enforcement), but if there are any linux users here who want to be guineapigs for some BIOS timing mods let me know.

    I have my modded R9 380 up to 23.6mh at 1000/1625mhz (24.6mh @ 1000/1700mhz but unstable).
    With the right timings the 470 should easily match/beat it.
  • boysieboysie Member Posts: 591 ✭✭✭
    1750 is the lowest option on mine. I think they have put some strange things in the bios to prevent it performing as well as the 480.
  • Jotun70Jotun70 Member Posts: 107 ✭✭
    boysie said:

    1750 is the lowest option on mine. I think they have put some strange things in the bios to prevent it performing as well as the 480.

    it's only a matter of time before someone figures out a hack on the bios for these and we see 470s unlocking to 480s. Memory might still be a small issue (lower rated speed), but hopefully timing adjustments come as well.
  • th00berth00ber Member Posts: 213 ✭✭
    @Jotun70 Thanks for the review, I'm interested to kown your power consumption when you will recieve your kill-a-watt meter :)

    @boysie when you "say the magical -20/800/1750/800 "
    It's
    -20% power limt
    800 MHz core
    1750 MHZ mem
    800mV core

    ?

    Did you change the memory voltage too ? (if it's possible in wattman ?)
  • XenoXeno Member Posts: 58
    @th00ber, I think what boysie means is

    -20% MHz/core
    800mV core
    1750 Mhz/mem
    800mV mem

    I'm sure he will correct me if wrong.
  • th00berth00ber Member Posts: 213 ✭✭
  • budhziebudhzie Member Posts: 9
    jstefanop said:

    budhzie said:

    @25.3MHps with 16.8.1, coreclock -20%, vcore all @800, memclock 2100, vmem 900
    running 3, full system load 330-360W

    edited, using Sapphire RX470 Nitro+ 8GB OC @250USD

    Why are you buying RX470s at 250 when you can get 480s for the same price and get 29MH? Any 470 over $200 is a huge ripoff.
    sadly i can't get 480 with that price :D , in my place 480 ref price start at ~USD280 and 480 non ref start at ~USD290, i don't like that reference cooling, too noisy

    with this nitro+ oc most high temp recorded 62C, and other 2 @59C, still much silent than my cheap processor fan ahahaha
  • vtkvtk Member Posts: 7
    Sapphire RX 470 Titanium OC 4GB: 22M/330M

    470.jpg 188.1K
Sign In or Register to comment.