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 Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£130VRAM:4 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):185 W

Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB 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 Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB
5.1/10

Overall score

Score
5.1/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
Score components

90%

4.7

Technical score

10%

8.1

User score

â–¼Worse than 86% of graphics cards
6.5

Value for money

Value for money
6.5/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
Score components

70%

5.1

Overall score

30%

9.8

Price

â–¼Worse than 80%
4.7

Technical score

Technical score
4.7/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 88% of models
Score components

44%

2.8

Performance

24%

3.8

Memory

12%

8.5

Power & Cooling

11%

7.4

Platform & Features

5%

8.9

Design

4%

7.6

Connectivity & Media

â–¼Worse than 88%
8.1

User score

User score
8.1/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 63% of models
Score components

70%

8.4

User ratings

30%

7.6

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
â–²Better than 63%
  • sapphire-pulse-radeon-rx-580-4gb
  • sapphire-pulse-radeon-rx-580-4gb
  • sapphire-pulse-radeon-rx-580-4gb
  • sapphire-pulse-radeon-rx-580-4gb
  • sapphire-pulse-radeon-rx-580-4gb
sapphire-pulse-radeon-rx-580-4gb
sapphire-pulse-radeon-rx-580-4gb
sapphire-pulse-radeon-rx-580-4gb
sapphire-pulse-radeon-rx-580-4gb
sapphire-pulse-radeon-rx-580-4gb
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 Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB

Technical score
Technical score
4.7/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 88% of models
Score components:

44%

2.8

Performance

24%

3.8

Memory

12%

8.5

Power & Cooling

11%

7.4

Platform & Features

5%

8.9

Design

4%

7.6

Connectivity & Media

4.7
User score
User score
8.1/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 63% of models
Score components

70%

8.4

User ratings

30%

7.6

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
8.1
Popularity
Popularity
7.6/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 71% of models
Popularity:
Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB has a popularity score of 7.6 points, which is higher than that of 70.9% of products in this category.
7.6
Value for money
Value for money
6.5/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
Score components:

70%

5.1

Overall score

30%

9.8

Price

6.5
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
4,417 points
Market range: <4k points – >34k points
This graphics card scores 4,417 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 87.8% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% 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
9,500 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 9,500 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 85.7% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
3,452 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 3,452 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 88.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Floating-point performance
6.29 TFLOPS
Market range: <4.38 TFLOPS – >57.42 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 6.29 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 84.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
4 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 4 GB of VRAM, which is less than 88% of graphics cards and equal to 6% 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.
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
5.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 5.4 Gbps, which is slower than on 87.8% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
185 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 185 W, which is lower than that of 56.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.4% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
225 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 225 W under peak load, which is higher than 51.7% of graphics cards and equal to 1.2% 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
185 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 185 W, which is lower than that of 60.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
185 W
Show more
Size
230x 125x 40 mm
Length
230 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >350 mm
This graphics card is 230 mm long, which is shorter than 81.5% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.3% of graphics cards.
Height
125 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 125 mm tall, which is shorter than 49.2% of graphics cards and equal in height to 2.9% 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
1,000 g
Market range: <500 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 1,000 g, which is lighter than 51.5% of graphics cards and equal in weight to 3.1% of graphics cards.
Show more

Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB 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
  • 55 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (230 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    230 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
  • 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
  • Supports virtual GPU
    This graphics card supports virtual GPU features, the average graphics card does not.
  • 4.08x cheaper
    Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB is cheaper than the average graphics card (£130 vs £530).
    £130 vs £530
  • 4.08x cheaper
    Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB is cheaper than the average graphics card (£130 vs £530).
    £130 vs £530
  • 1.9% higher user score
    User score
    8.1/ 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
    â–¼
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB
    the average graphics card
    Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB has a higher user score than the average graphics card (8.15 vs 8.000).
    8.15 vs 8
  • 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
  • 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 virtual GPU
    This graphics card supports virtual GPU features, the average graphics card does not.
  • 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
  • 55 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (230 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    230 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
  • 45.5% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1366 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,366 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 GB vs 12 GB
  • 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.
  • 34.5% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1257 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,257 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.
  • 10.8% worse value for money
    Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.49 vs 7.2).
    6.49 vs 7.2
  • 45.5% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1366 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,366 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.
  • 34.5% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1257 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,257 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 73.2% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (43.7 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
    43.71 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
  • 49.4% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (193 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    193 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
  • 72.1% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (6.3 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
    6.29 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
  • 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
  • 58.1% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (9500 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
    9,500 points vs 22,653 points
  • 69.9% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (4417 points vs 14678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14678.5 points.
    4,417 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
  • 71.4% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (3452 points vs 12074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12074 points.
    3,452 points vs 12,074 points
  • 79.2% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (6.2 TFLOPS vs 29.7 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.725 TFLOPS.
    6.17 TFLOPS vs 29.725 TFLOPS
  • 72.6% lower compute throughput
    This graphics card has a lower compute throughput than the average graphics card (6.3 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has compute throughput of 22.98 TFLOPS.
    6.29 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 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.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3.0 vs 4.0
  • 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 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 vs 8
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • 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.
  • 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
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes
  • 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
  • 73% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (5.4 Gbps vs 20 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 20 Gbps.
    5.4 Gbps vs 20 Gbps
  • 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
  • 2.5x higher idle power draw
    This graphics card has a higher idle power draw than the average graphics card (30 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    30 W vs 12 W
  • 8 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (75 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    75 °C vs 67 °C
  • 6 °C higher idle temperature
    This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (43 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    43 °C vs 37 °C
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.
    No vs yes

Video reviews

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

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

P
pcworld.com
15/05/2017
Summary of the review
Sapphire Radeon RX 570 PulseGo to product viewer dialogue for this item. and RX 580 Pulse review
T
trustedreviews.com
25/04/2017
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon RX 580Go to product viewer dialogue for this item. Review
K
kitguru.net
14/09/2018
Summary of the review
Sapphire RX 580 Comparison – Pulse vs Nitro+!

Third-party reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
Reviews last updated: June 2026 · How we calculate this

What we like about Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB

  • Excellent value for money and price-to-performance ratio
  • Strong 1080p gaming performance for older or less demanding titles
  • Compact design that fits well in most cases
  • Quiet operation, with fans that remain idle under light loads
  • User-friendly 'Quick Connect' fans that are easy to remove and clean
  • Includes a stylish and durable metal backplate
  • Reliable choice for budget Linux or Mac Pro upgrade builds

What we don't like about Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB

  • 4GB VRAM is insufficient for many modern AAA games at high settings
  • Vulnerable to stuttering and frame drops in memory-intensive titles
  • Can run hot under heavy loads, sometimes requiring custom fan curves
  • Lack of ray tracing support
  • Higher power consumption compared to newer competitors
  • Some users report issues with coil whine or loud fan noise at high RPMs
  • 8GB version is often recommended as a better long-term value for a small price increase

Verdict

The Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB is a Polaris 20-based graphics card featuring 2,304 stream processors, a boost clock of 1,366 MHz, and 4GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with a 7,000 MHz effective clock. It is built on a 14nm FinFET process and utilizes Sapphire's Dual-X cooling system with two dual ball-bearing fans and a metal backplate for structural rigidity and heat dissipation. Main pros include solid 1080p gaming performance, a user-friendly 'Quick Connect' fan system for easy maintenance, and multiple output options including two HDMI 2.0b and two DisplayPort 1.4 ports. However, its 4GB VRAM capacity is increasingly restrictive for modern AAA titles at high settings, and the card's 185W TDP makes it less power-efficient than newer competitors.

Compare Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB 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 Pulse Radeon RX 580 4GB and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found