OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v1.0: technical specifications plus authentic consumer ratings, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v1.0

Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 570 8GB Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£250VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):225 W

Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 570 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 570 8GB
5.2/10

Overall score

Score
5.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the graphics card's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best graphics cards on the market.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 85% of models
Score components

90%

4.8

Technical score

10%

8.5

User score

▼Worse than 85% of graphics cards
6.4

Value for money

Value for money
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components

70%

5.2

Overall score

30%

9.2

Price

▼Worse than 83%
4.8

Technical score

Technical score
4.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 86% of models
Score components

44%

2.5

Performance

24%

4.7

Memory

12%

8.4

Power & Cooling

11%

7.6

Platform & Features

5%

8.4

Design

4%

7.9

Connectivity & Media

▼Worse than 86%
8.5

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
▲ Better than 71% of models
Score components

70%

8.5

User ratings

30%

8.4

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
▲Better than 71%
  • sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-570-8gb
  • sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-570-8gb
  • sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-570-8gb
  • sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-570-8gb
  • sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-570-8gb
  • sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-570-8gb
  • sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-570-8gb
sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-570-8gb
sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-570-8gb
sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-570-8gb
sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-570-8gb
sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-570-8gb
sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-570-8gb
sapphire-nitro-radeon-rx-570-8gb
Best prices
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 570 8GB

Technical score
Technical score
4.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 86% of models
Score components:

44%

2.5

Performance

24%

4.7

Memory

12%

8.4

Power & Cooling

11%

7.6

Platform & Features

5%

8.4

Design

4%

7.9

Connectivity & Media

4.8
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
▲ Better than 71% of models
Score components

70%

8.5

User ratings

30%

8.4

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
8.5
Popularity
Popularity
8.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you prefer a graphics card that has already been chosen and reviewed by many other users.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 78% of models
Popularity:
Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 570 8GB has a popularity score of 8.4 points, which is higher than that of 78.1% of products in this category.
8.4
Value for money
Value for money
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components:

70%

5.2

Overall score

30%

9.2

Price

6.4
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
5,026 points
Market range: <4k points – >34k points
This graphics card scores 5,026 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 84.6% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >25k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.2% of graphics cards and equal to 16.8% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
6,656 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 6,656 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 91.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
3,173 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 3,173 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 89.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Floating-point performance
5.49 TFLOPS
Market range: <4.38 TFLOPS – >57.42 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 5.49 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 86% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 57.5% of graphics cards and equal to 25.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR5
GDDR version
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.9% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
256 bit
Market range: <64 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 256 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 49.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 35.9% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
224 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 224 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 83.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.6% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.7% of graphics cards and equal to 20.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 23.4% of graphics cards and equal to 76.6% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.3
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.3, which is older than on 79.4% of graphics cards and equal to 15.7% of graphics cards.
vendor-name or prompt-tail contamination removed; Vulkan version unresolved.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 1.9% of graphics cards and equal to 98.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
5
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 5 displays, which is more than 97.2% of graphics cards and equal to 1.5% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
5120x2880
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 5120x2880, which is lower than that of 91.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.3% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
2
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 2 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 79.1% of graphics cards and equal to 9.5% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.4
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4, which is older than on 80.6% of graphics cards and equal to 13.3% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
8.1 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 8.1 Gbps, which is slower than on 65% of graphics cards and equal to 22.7% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
225 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 225 W, which is higher than that of 54.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.1% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
195 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 195 W under peak load, which is lower than 57.8% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
500 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 500 W PSU, which is lower than that of 75.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.9% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
150 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 150 W, which is lower than that of 75.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.8% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
225 W
Show more
Size
260x 135x 43 mm
This graphics card measures 260x135x 43 mm, which is more compact than 68.4% of graphics cards and equal in size to 0.7% of graphics cards.
Length
260 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >350 mm
This graphics card is 260 mm long, which is shorter than 65.5% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.6% of graphics cards.
Height
135 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 135 mm tall, which is taller than 69.9% of graphics cards and equal in height to 1.6% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 53.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 42.5% of graphics cards.
Weight
1,100 g
Market range: <500 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 1,100 g, which is heavier than 54.2% of graphics cards and equal in weight to 1.1% of graphics cards.
Show more

Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 570 8GB vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryPlatform & FeaturesConnectivity & MediaPower & CoolingDesign
  • 1 more displays supported
    This graphics card supports more displays than the average graphics card (5 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    5 vs 4
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 33.3% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (150 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    150 W vs 225 W
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • More compact card size
    This graphics card is more compact than the average graphics card (260x135 x 43 mm vs 285x127 x 52 mm). The average graphics card has a size of 285x127 x 52 mm.
    260x135 x 43 mm vs 285x127 x 52 mm
  • 6% 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 570 8GB
    the average graphics card
    Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 570 8GB has a higher user score than the average graphics card (8.48 vs 8.000).
    8.48 vs 8
  • 2.12x cheaper
    Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 570 8GB is cheaper than the average graphics card (£250 vs £530).
    £250 vs £530
  • 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 displays supported
    This graphics card supports more displays than the average graphics card (5 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    5 vs 4
  • 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
  • 33.3% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (150 W vs 225 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W.
    150 W vs 225 W
  • 11 °C lower idle temperature
    This graphics card has a lower idle temperature than the average graphics card (26 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    26 °C vs 37 °C
  • 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
  • More compact card size
    This graphics card is more compact than the average graphics card (260x135 x 43 mm vs 285x127 x 52 mm). The average graphics card has a size of 285x127 x 52 mm.
    260x135 x 43 mm vs 285x127 x 52 mm
  • 25 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (260 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    260 mm vs 285 mm
  • 47.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1325 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,325 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
  • 35.2% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1244 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,244 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.
  • 12.6% worse value for money
    Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 570 8GB has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.39 vs 7.2).
    6.39 vs 7.2
  • 47.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1325 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,325 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.
  • 35.2% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1244 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,244 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.
    42.88 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
  • 55% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (171.5 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    171.5 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/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
  • 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
  • 56 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (128 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    128 vs 184
  • 77.4% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (5.1 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
    5.09 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
  • 8 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (32 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    32 vs 40
  • 70.6% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (6656 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
    6,656 points vs 22,653 points
  • 65.8% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (5026 points vs 14678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14678.5 points.
    5,026 points vs 14,678.5 points
  • 73.7% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (3173 points vs 12074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12074 points.
    3,173 points vs 12,074 points
  • 81.5% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (5.5 TFLOPS vs 29.7 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.725 TFLOPS.
    5.49 TFLOPS vs 29.725 TFLOPS
  • 76.1% lower compute throughput
    This graphics card has a lower compute throughput than the average graphics card (5.5 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has compute throughput of 22.98 TFLOPS.
    5.49 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS
  • 2,304 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (2048 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    2,048 vs 4,352
  • 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
  • 63.2% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (7000 MHz vs 19000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19000 MHz.
    7,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 50% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (224 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    224 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.
    No vs yes
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3.0 vs 4.0
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • 6 older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2017 vs 2023).
    April 2017
    2,017 vs 2,023
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, 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).
    vendor-name or prompt-tail contamination removed; Vulkan version unresolved.
    1.3 vs 1.4
  • Lower VRS tier
    This graphics card supports a lower VRS tier than the average graphics card (Tier 1 vs Tier 2).
    Tier 1 vs Tier 2
  • 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 encoder generation
    This graphics card uses an older encoder generation than the average graphics card (6 vs 8). The average graphics card uses encoder generation 8.
    6 vs 8
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 3).
    2.1 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
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (1 vs 3.1).
    1.0 vs 3.1
  • 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
  • Narrower encode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware encode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 1.4a).
    1.4 vs 1.4a
  • Narrower decode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware decode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1).
    H.264/H.265/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1
  • 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
  • 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
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (5120x2880 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    5120x2880 vs 7680x4320
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • 15 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (110 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    110 °C vs 95 °C
  • 2.58x higher idle power draw
    This graphics card has a higher idle power draw than the average graphics card (31 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    31 W vs 12 W
  • 4.7% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (225 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    225 W vs 215 W
  • 10 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (135 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    135 mm vs 125 mm

Video reviews

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

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

T
trustedreviews.com
19/04/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon RX 570 Review - Trusted Reviews

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 570 8GB

  • Excellent value for budget-conscious 1080p gaming
  • Dual-X cooling system keeps temperatures low (often under 72°C)
  • Quiet operation with fans that stop spinning during light tasks
  • 8GB VRAM provides more longevity compared to 4GB models
  • Sleek design featuring a metal backplate and RGB lighting
  • Strong overclocking potential with dual BIOS and extra power connectors

What we don't like about Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 570 8GB

  • High power consumption compared to modern efficient cards
  • Arguably overkill VRAM as the GPU struggles at resolutions above 1440p
  • Lacks support for modern features like Ray Tracing or DLSS
  • Aged architecture may struggle with the most demanding AAA titles in 2025/2026
  • Larger physical size (2.2 slots) might not fit in very compact cases

Verdict

The Sapphire Nitro+ Radeon RX 570 8GB is a mid-range graphics card built on the 14nm Polaris 20 XL architecture, featuring 2,048 stream processors and a factory-overclocked boost clock of 1340 MHz. It is equipped with 8GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering an effective 7 Gbps memory speed and approximately 224 GB/s of bandwidth. Its main strengths include the efficient Dual-X cooling system with twin 95mm fans, a robust metal backplate for rigidity, and versatile connectivity via dual HDMI 2.0b ports, two DisplayPort 1.4a slots, and a DVI-D output. However, the card is held back by a high power requirement necessitating both 8-pin and 6-pin PCIe connectors for its 225W TDP, its reliance on the aging GCN 4.0 architecture, and its large physical footprint which may struggle in compact PC cases.

Compare Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 570 8GB with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Sapphire Nitro Radeon RX 570 8GB and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found