OVERALL

ALTERNATIVES

SPECS

VS AVERAGE

REVIEWS

Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£60VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):150 W

Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB Review: Compare 118 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB

5.4/10

▼Worse than 82% of graphics cards

6.8

▼Worse than 68%

5.0

▼Worse than 83%

8.5

▲Better than 71%

3.0
Gaming
Gaming
3.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Evaluates core hardware and software specifications for gaming performance.
When it matters
When you want to play demanding mobile games, 3D titles, or run graphics-intensive apps smoothly.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
45.0%
1.7
Floating-point performance
25.0%
4.9
VRAM
20.0%
1.0
Ray tracing cores / units
10.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
5.4
Video editing
Video editing
5.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Evaluates core hardware and software specifications for video editing performance.
When it matters
When evaluating how effectively this graphics-cards meets your specific video editing needs.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
35.0%
7.0
AV1 encode
30.0%
4.9
VRAM
20.0%
1.7
Floating-point performance
15.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3.0
1080p
1080p
3.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Evaluates core hardware and software specifications for 1080p performance.
When it matters
When evaluating how effectively this graphics-cards meets your specific 1080p needs.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
55.0%
1.7
Floating-point performance
25.0%
4.9
VRAM
10.0%
1.0
Ray tracing cores / units
10.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
2.8
1440p
1440p
2.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Evaluates core hardware and software specifications for 1440p performance.
When it matters
When evaluating how effectively this graphics-cards meets your specific 1440p needs.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
50.0%
1.7
Floating-point performance
30.0%
4.9
VRAM
15.0%
1.0
Ray tracing cores / units
5.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3.0
4K
4K
3.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Evaluates core hardware and software specifications for 4k performance.
When it matters
When evaluating how effectively this graphics-cards meets your specific 4k needs.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
40.0%
1.7
Floating-point performance
35.0%
4.9
VRAM
20.0%
1.0
Ray tracing cores / units
5.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version

Best prices

*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

Best rankings

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB

5.4

Show more

Hide

Performance

2.7

Show more

Hide

3DMark Time Spy benchmark score

3DMark Port Royal score

PassMark (G3D) result

PassMark (DirectCompute) result

Floating-point performance

Show more

Memory

4.9

Show more

Hide

VRAM

Memory type

GDDR5

GDDR version

Memory bus width

Maximum memory bandwidth

Show more

Platform & Features

7.5

Show more

Hide

PCI Express (PCIe) version

PCIe lanes

DirectX version

Vulkan version

OpenGL version

Show more

Connectivity & Media

8.1

Show more

Hide

Max displays supported

Max digital resolution

DisplayPort outputs

DisplayPort version

DisplayPort link rates

Show more

Power & Cooling

8.8

Show more

Hide

Thermal Design Power (TDP)

Power consumption while under peak load

Recommended PSU wattage

Board power limit

PCIe power spec

150 W

Show more

Design

9.1

Show more

Hide

Size

240x 125x 41 mm

Length

Height

Slot width

Weight

Show more

Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB vs the average graphics card

Why is Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB better than the average graphics card?

Show more

Hide

23.1% lower PSU requirement
This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
500 W vs 650 W
30.2% lower TDP
This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (150 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
150 W vs 215 W
45 mm shorter card length
This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (240 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
240 mm vs 285 mm
0.5 slot/s slimmer design
This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
14.3% faster VRAM clock
This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2000 MHz vs 1750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1750 MHz.
2,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
2 more GPUs supported
This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
2 vs 0
8.83x cheaper
Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB is cheaper than the average graphics card (£60 vs £530).
£60 vs £530
1 more DVI outputs
This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
1 vs 0

8.83x cheaper
Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB is cheaper than the average graphics card (£60 vs £530).
£60 vs £530
6.1% higher user score
User score
8.5/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
▼
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB
the average graphics card
Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB has a higher user score than the average graphics card (8.49 vs 8.000).
8.49 vs 8
2.13x more popular
Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB is more popular than the average graphics card (8.99 vs 4.2).
8.99 vs 4.22

Better FP64 ratio
This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
1:16 vs 1:64

14.3% faster VRAM clock
This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2000 MHz vs 1750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1750 MHz.
2,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz

2 more GPUs supported
This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
2 vs 0
Supports multi-GPU linking
This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.

1 more DVI outputs
This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
1 vs 0

23.1% lower PSU requirement
This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
500 W vs 650 W
30.2% lower TDP
This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (150 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
150 W vs 215 W

45 mm shorter card length
This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (240 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
240 mm vs 285 mm
0.5 slot/s slimmer design
This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s

Why is Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB worse than the average graphics card?

Show more

Hide

46.4% lower boost clock speed
This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1342 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
1,342 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
40 fewer ray tracing cores
This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
0 vs 40
2.8x larger process node
This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (14 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
14 nm vs 5 nm
No CUDA support
This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
4 GB less VRAM
This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
8 GB vs 12 GB
37.1% lower base clock speed
This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1208 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
1,208 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
1 fewer fans
This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
2 vs 3
No DLSS support
This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.

6.4% worse value for money
Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.76 vs 7.2).
6.76 vs 7.2

46.4% lower boost clock speed
This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1342 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
1,342 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
40 fewer ray tracing cores
This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
0 vs 40
No CUDA support
This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
37.1% lower base clock speed
This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1208 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
1,208 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
73.7% lower pixel rate
This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (42.9 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
42.9 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
144 fewer AI cores
This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
0 vs 144
49.3% lower texture rate
This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (193.2 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
193.2 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
32 fewer ROPs
This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
32 vs 64
72.6% lower FP32 performance
This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (6.2 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
6.18 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
62.3% lower PassMark score
This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (8544 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
8,544 points vs 22,653 points
40 fewer TMUs
This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (144 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
144 vs 184
70.8% lower gaming score
This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (4280 points vs 14678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14678.5 points.
4,280 points vs 14,678.5 points
4 fewer compute units
This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (36 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
36 vs 40
80.4% lower FP16 performance
This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (5.8 TFLOPS vs 29.7 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.725 TFLOPS.
5.83 TFLOPS vs 29.725 TFLOPS
73.1% lower compute throughput
This graphics card has a lower compute throughput than the average graphics card (6.2 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has compute throughput of 22.98 TFLOPS.
6.18 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS
46.1% lower compute score
This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (6512 points vs 12074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12074 points.
6,512 points vs 12,074 points

4 GB less VRAM
This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
8 GB vs 12 GB
57.9% slower memory speed
This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (8000 MHz vs 19000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19000 MHz.
8,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
42.9% lower memory bandwidth
This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (256 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
256 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
91.7% smaller L2 cache
This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (2 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
2 MB vs 24 MB
87.5% smaller L1 cache
This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (16 vs 128). The average graphics card has 128 L1 cache.
16 vs 128

2.8x larger process node
This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (14 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
14 nm vs 5 nm
No DLSS support
This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
No ray tracing
This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
Older PCIe version
This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
3.0 vs 4.0
7 older
This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2016 vs 2023).
July 2016
2,016 vs 2,023
No mesh shaders
This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
No vs yes
No XeSS support
This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
Older encoder generation
This graphics card uses an older encoder generation than the average graphics card (3 vs 8). The average graphics card uses encoder generation 8.
3.0 vs 8
No DirectStorage support
This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
No vs yes
Worse SAM support
This graphics card offers worse SAM support than the average graphics card (no vs yes).
Older Vulkan version
This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.3 vs 1.4).
1.3 vs 1.4
Older DirectX version
This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
12 vs 12 Ultimate
Older OpenCL version
This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
2.0 vs 3.0
No sampler feedback
This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
No vs yes
75.1% fewer transistors
This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (5700 million vs 22900 million). The average graphics card has 22900 million transistors.
5,700 million vs 22,900 million
Older shader model
This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.7 vs 6.8).
6.7 vs 6.8

No AV1 encoding
This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
No vs yes
No AV1 decoding
This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
No vs yes
1 fewer DisplayPort outputs
This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
2 vs 3
Older HDMI version
This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.0b vs 2.1).
2.0b vs 2.1
Lower display resolution
This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (3840x2160 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
3840x2160 vs 7680x4320
Older HDCP version
This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
2.2 vs 2.3
2 fewer monitors per output type
This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
1 vs 3

1 fewer fans
This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
2 vs 3
10 °C higher load temperature
This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (77 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
77 °C vs 67 °C
6.6 dB noisier under load
This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (42 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
42 dB vs 35.4 dB
8 °C higher idle temperature
This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (45 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
45 °C vs 37 °C

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

tomshardware.com

04/04/2017

Summary of the review

Sapphire Nitro+ Radeon RX 480 Review - Tom's Hardware

The Sapphire Nitro+ Radeon RX 480 is a factory-overclocked graphics card featuring an aggressive maximum boost clock of 1342 MHz, customizable RGB lighting, and a dual-BIOS switch. It is structurally compact, weighing only 774 grams and measuring 24.1 cm long. This makes it a great physical fit for smaller PC cases. In terms of performance, the card delivers good 1080p and 1440p gaming capabilities and offers practical connectivity like dual HDMI 2.0 ports tailored for VR users. Furthermore, a secondary "silent" BIOS is easily accessible to drop frequencies down to a reference-matching 1266 MHz. This efficiently curbs power consumption close to standard 165W levels. However, the card suffers heavily from an undersized thermal solution pushed to its absolute brink by overzealous stock power limits. When running on its default overclocked settings, the card pulls an immense 223W during gaming loops, causing voltage regulation components to spike up to a dangerous 96°C to 97°C inside closed cases. To cope with this immense heat, the 95mm fans aggressively spin up to 2200 RPM. This generates a loud and disruptive noise level exceeding...

pcworld.com

22/07/2016

Summary of the review

Sapphire Nitro+ RX 480 review: Polaris rethought and refined

The PCWorld review praises the Sapphire Nitro+ RX 480 as a premium, refined take on AMD’s Polaris architecture, highlighting its superior Dual-X cooling, 0 RPM fan feature, and robust 8-pin power delivery. It excels in 1080p and 1440p gaming, enhanced by aesthetic, functional touches like a metal backplate and customizable RGB lighting. Conversely, the card's aggressive factory overclock results in higher power consumption and audible fan noise under maximum load, limiting its energy efficiency. Furthermore, the heavy stock tuning leaves very little room for additional manual overclocking by enthusiasts. YouTube ·

hardware-mag.de

24/03/2017

Summary of the review

Sapphire NITRO+ RX 480 8G D5 OC im Test - Hardware-Mag

The Hardware-Magazin review evaluates the Sapphire NITRO+ RX 480 8G D5 OC, a custom graphics card built on AMD's 14nm FinFET Polaris 10 architecture featuring 2,304 shader units and an 8 GB GDDR5 memory interface. The card stands out due to its substantial out-of-the-box factory overclocking, pushing the base clock up by 7.9% to 1,208 MHz and the maximum boost clock to 1,342 MHz (a 6% increase over AMD's reference design). To handle this added performance, Sapphire replaced the standard reference blower with their custom Dual-Slot cooling system, which utilizes an aluminum radiator with a copper core, three copper heatpipes, and two axial 95mm fans. The review highlights modernized display connectivity, including two HDMI 2.0b and two DisplayPort 1.4 ports, ensuring full compatibility with VR setups and multi-monitor 4K displays. The review outlines several distinct advantages and a few downsides to this particular custom design. On the pros side, the card features advanced modern features like support for DirectX 12, HEVC 4K video decoding at 60 FPS, and a Dual-BIOS switch that lets users seamlessly toggle between "Boost-BIOS" and "Quiet-BIOS"...

tomshardware.fr

18/04/2017

Summary of the review

Comparatif de Radeon RX 480 : 7 cartes testées en profondeur - Tom's Hardware

The review provides an in-depth comparison of seven custom AMD Radeon RX 480 graphics cards, highlighting that overall performance differences are minimal because the underlying Polaris architecture limits clock speeds. Instead, the real differentiators are the quality of the cooling systems, noise levels, and power delivery design. Standout performers include the Asus RX 480 Strix, praised for its balanced, quiet operation and excellent thermal management, and the Powercolor RX 480 Red Devil, which delivers impressive power efficiency, whisper-quiet fans, and aggressive pricing. On the other hand, the Sapphire RX 480 Nitro+ struggles due to a severely under-dimensioned heatsink that leads to thermal throttling and deafening 47 dB noise levels under load. In terms of technical execution, the review exposes severe engineering and power regulation flaws in specific models. The XFX GTR Black Edition and HIS IceQ X² Roaring Turbo share a common PCB layout that dangerously overdraws power; both cards exceed 7 Amps on the 12V motherboard slot, violating the 5.5A PCI SIG standard by up to 30%, making them unsafe for older or cheaper motherboards. Conversely, the MSI RX...

hardware.fr

29/07/2016

Summary of the review

RX 480 Sapphire Nitro+ vs GTX 1060 Gainward : match à 280 - Hardware.fr

This review pits the overclocked Sapphire Radeon RX 480 Nitro+ (in 4GB and 8GB variants) against a budget, baseline Gainward GeForce GTX 1060 6GB in a €280 price match. The Gainward GTX 1060 emerges as the preferred choice for 1080p gaming due to its exceptional power efficiency and thermal performance. Pros for the GTX 1060 include a highly effective, Whisper-quiet cooling system (measuring just 33.1 dBA under load), zero fan noise at idle, and strong overclocking headroom ( % on the GPU). On the downside, its build quality is overtly cheap with a low-end plastic shroud, it lacks a backplate or dual BIOS features, and its retail availability at the €280 price point is highly unstable. Conversely, Sapphire's RX 480 Nitro+ prioritizes raw performance over noise control, pushing power limits to 215W by raising the factory GPU voltage. Its main pros are a premium physical construction featuring a sleek design, an aluminum backplate, a user-friendly Quick Connect fan replacement system, dual BIOS options, and an unbeatable price-to-performance ratio for the €240 4GB edition. However, the cons are significant: the graphics...

Third-party reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.

Reviews last updated: June 2026 · How we calculate this

What we like about Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB

Excellent 1080p performance, capable of reaching 60+ FPS on ultra settings in modern titles
Premium build quality featuring a sturdy aluminum backplate and a clean aesthetic
Removable 'Quick Connect' fans make cleaning and individual fan replacement easy without an RMA for the whole card
Zero RPM fan mode (Nitro Cooltech) keeps the card silent during idle or light tasks
User-friendly features including a dual BIOS switch and customizable 'Nitro Glow' RGB LED logo
Versatile video output selection with two HDMI ports, making it ideal for VR headset users

What we don't like about Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB

Fan noise can become quite audible and aggressive when the card is under heavy load
Operating temperatures often reach 75-80°C, which is considered high by some users compared to other aftermarket models
Limited overclocking headroom as the card is already pushed near its factory limits
Awkward power connector placement at the back of the card rather than the side can interfere with cable management in tight cases
Occasional reports of coil whine in some units

Verdict

The Sapphire Nitro+ Radeon RX 480 8GB is a high-performance variant of AMD's Polaris architecture, featuring 2,304 stream processors and a factory-overclocked boost clock of 1,342 MHz. It is equipped with 8GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit interface, operating at an effective speed of 8 Gbps. Key characteristics include the Dual-X cooling system with twin 95mm fans, a custom aluminum backplate, and Nitro Glow RGB lighting. Its main pros are excellent 1080p and 1440p gaming performance, a dual BIOS for 'Quiet' or 'Boost' modes, and a 'Quick Connect' fan system for easy maintenance. However, some cons include high power consumption (reaching up to 223W–225W under load) and audible fan noise when operating at peak RPMs to manage heat.

Best alternatives

MSI Radeon RX 480

Graphics cards

Sapphire Radeon RX 480 8GB

Graphics cards

MSI Radeon RX 480 Gaming 8GB

Graphics cards

GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 1060 WINDFORCE 2X 6GB

Graphics cards

ASUS Dual GeForce GTX 1060 OC

Graphics cards

PNY GeForce GTX 1060 6GB

Graphics cards

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980

Graphics cards

EVGA GeForce GTX 550 Ti 2GB

Graphics cards

ASUS GeForce GTX 980

Graphics cards

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960

Graphics cards

ASUS Radeon RX 550 4GB

Graphics cards

AMD Radeon R9 380

Graphics cards

See best alternatives in Buying Guide

Compare Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB with other products in the Graphics cards category

Graphic comparison of Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 480 8GB and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found