Radeon RX 5600 XT Launch Review Round Up

Ranulfo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
1,825
Evidence?
That AMD seemed to want to compete with the 1660ti and not the 1660super.

If they had put out the lower power/clocked 5600xt at $250 and the high power at $280-300 they'd be competitive or better in most cases. The 1660ti was effectively dead once the 1660super came out. The 2060 was dead when the 5700 came out last summer, especially when the custom cards released. Nvidia keeping the 2060 at $350 earned them a lot of scorn and laughs. Now they're laughing and the new KO is apparently good for some workstation programs.

Now we have a 5600XT that is $280-300+ that is moving in on 5700 territory. If I'm spending $300+ on a card, I'm thinking 5700 offers more at 8gb of ram and a 256bit bus, longevity wise. Performance/price wise, well the 5700 is not looking so hot now. Its just the same old story we had last year from Nvidia. Stagnation and a way to upsell customers on buying more card for more money. Looking at the DF video linked they made a pretty compelling case for just going with a 1660Super at $230-250 for most games.

Yay, 1080p ultra with less or equal ram for the same prices as 2016/17 cards. Cards that you can still buy new for $150 or $100 used. Any of the new touted techs aren't that much of a seller IMO.
 

DrDoU

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
2,517
is 6gb going to be good enough going forward. i am looking at the sapphire pulse and wanting to know.
 

Marees

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2018
Messages
343
is 6gb going to be good enough going forward. i am looking at the sapphire pulse and wanting to know.
As of today 6gb is good enough even at 1440p

If you are planning to play only at 1080p, then the 1660super should be good enough
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrDoU
like this

Marees

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2018
Messages
343
That AMD seemed to want to compete with the 1660ti and not the 1660super.

If they had put out the lower power/clocked 5600xt at $250 and the high power at $280-300 they'd be competitive or better in most cases. The 1660ti was effectively dead once the 1660super came out. The 2060 was dead when the 5700 came out last summer, especially when the custom cards released. Nvidia keeping the 2060 at $350 earned them a lot of scorn and laughs. Now they're laughing and the new KO is apparently good for some workstation programs.

Now we have a 5600XT that is $280-300+ that is moving in on 5700 territory. If I'm spending $300+ on a card, I'm thinking 5700 offers more at 8gb of ram and a 256bit bus, longevity wise. Performance/price wise, well the 5700 is not looking so hot now. Its just the same old story we had last year from Nvidia. Stagnation and a way to upsell customers on buying more card for more money. Looking at the DF video linked they made a pretty compelling case for just going with a 1660Super at $230-250 for most games.

Yay, 1080p ultra with less or equal ram for the same prices as 2016/17 cards. Cards that you can still buy new for $150 or $100 used. Any of the new touted techs aren't that much of a seller IMO.
As PC Gamer said: A classic case of a day late & a dollar short

https://grammarist.com/idiom/a-day-late-and-a-dollar-short/
 

Marees

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2018
Messages
343
No, games are already taking up more than 6 - ie ROTTR RE2
This would dictate 8GB as a min for 1440

View attachment 218146
Do we have a list that is updated for 2020 with new releases ? ( & also a few examples with 1080p ray tracing too )

https://www.techspot.com/article/1785-nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-vram-enough/

Looks like Call of Duty: BlackOps 4 can benefit from high vram when you try to play with high FPS.

https://community.activision.com/t5...p/10800015/highlight/true?profile.language=fr
 
Last edited:

Auer

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 2, 2018
Messages
1,551
1080p Raytracing on high in SOTTR uses between 6-7.5 GB of ram in 1080p. RTX2070
 

Marees

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2018
Messages
343
Google translate from computerbase.de

https://www.computerbase.de/2020-01/radeon-rx-5600-xt-test/4/

via
https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-h...-emerges-victorious-over-NVIDIA.451092.0.html

Several AIBs confirmed to ComputerBase that the first batch of the graphics cards produced had already arrived at distribution hubs based on the old specifications and BIOS versions in order to guarantee availability at the start. This means that the cards can no longer be easily equipped with the adapted BIOS without major delays

AMD must either have kept the decision secret internally for a long time or made it at very short notice. Not only did Sapphire have a BIOS ready at first, (but other board ) partners also didn't know where the "new" Radeon RX 5600 XT would end up. Rather, ComputerBase was asked to repeatedly answer the question whether it is actually (close) enough to a GeForce RTX 2060.

The change caused irritation not only for the board partners concerned, but also for the competitor Nvidia, who repeatedly called several editors and asked about the current situation. Not without reason: If Nvidia was still certain the day before that the GeForce RTX 2060 would achieve a simple victory after the price cut, this worldview was suddenly on the brink. And as the test showed: it has tilted
 

Marees

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2018
Messages
343
Google translate from computerbase.de

https://www.computerbase.de/2020-01/radeon-rx-5600-xt-test/4/

via
https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-h...-emerges-victorious-over-NVIDIA.451092.0.html

Several AIBs confirmed to ComputerBase that the first batch of the graphics cards produced had already arrived at distribution hubs based on the old specifications and BIOS versions in order to guarantee availability at the start. This means that the cards can no longer be easily equipped with the adapted BIOS without major delays

AMD must either have kept the decision secret internally for a long time or made it at very short notice. Not only did Sapphire have a BIOS ready at first, (but other board ) partners also didn't know where the "new" Radeon RX 5600 XT would end up. Rather, ComputerBase was asked to repeatedly answer the question whether it is actually (close) enough to a GeForce RTX 2060.

The change caused irritation not only for the board partners concerned, but also for the competitor Nvidia, who repeatedly called several editors and asked about the current situation. Not without reason: If Nvidia was still certain the day before that the GeForce RTX 2060 would achieve a simple victory after the price cut, this worldview was suddenly on the brink. And as the test showed: it has tilted
Also from computer base:

The AIBs want to be as helpful as possible and, for example, provide instructions and some videos. If you buy a Radeon RX 5600 XT from Sapphire and do not dare to update it, you can send the graphics card to Sapphire Germany if necessary, who will then update the BIOS themselves. No matter who updates the bios, the guarantee is retained in any case.
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,341
It makes perfect sense. Where did you get the idea that they don't validate memory overclocks? The problem is that AMD gave its AIB partners no time to do so. They made a judgement call and sent out the bios to reviewers anyway and hoped for the best.

MSI is simply saying that instead of stealth upgrading cards that have not been validated they will create a new "Gaming Z" SKU that they have validated to run at the new clocks. Seems like the right move to avoid customer confusion and possible RMA headaches.
Because literally msi and Asus said exactly that. They said they don't pick the memory or validate it.
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,341
This seems like poor planning for MSI. They had to know Nvidia was going to respond. Why they made so many SKUs just doesn't make sense even if Nvidia didn't price cut. With the price cut it makes their blunder even more pronounced.
You mean like launching tons of super skus ? o_O
 

MangoSeed

Gawd
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
708
Because literally msi and Asus said exactly that. They said they don't pick the memory or validate it.
Source? Of course they don’t validate stock clocks that will be silly. Where did you see they don’t validate core/memory overclocks?
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,341
Source? Of course they don’t validate stock clocks that will be silly. Where did you see they don’t validate core/memory overclocks?
"Interestingly, MSI had no problem sending 14 Gbps BIOSes to reviewers who already received GAMING X models. They were told to flash GAMING Z bios onto their X’s and rename their products in reviews. So yes, from the reviewers’ perspective, the explanation in the video is a bit embarrassing to listen to. After all, MSI did not validate their review samples to run at 14 Gbps either."

https://videocardz.com/newz/msi-explains-why-not-all-radeon-rx-5600-xt-can-get-14-gbps-memory

So it doesn't really make any damn sense to say the memory won't run at those speeds of you're not buying the memory yourself. You really believe the higher spec is only going to cost $10 extra? Lol
 

MangoSeed

Gawd
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
708
"Interestingly, MSI had no problem sending 14 Gbps BIOSes to reviewers who already received GAMING X models. They were told to flash GAMING Z bios onto their X’s and rename their products in reviews. So yes, from the reviewers’ perspective, the explanation in the video is a bit embarrassing to listen to. After all, MSI did not validate their review samples to run at 14 Gbps either."

https://videocardz.com/newz/msi-explains-why-not-all-radeon-rx-5600-xt-can-get-14-gbps-memory

So it doesn't really make any damn sense to say the memory won't run at those speeds of you're not buying the memory yourself. You really believe the higher spec is only going to cost $10 extra? Lol
Of course they didn’t validate the review samples to run at 14 Gbps. AMD dropped the bios on them after the samples already went out.

Your argument is basically that since they didn’t validate the review samples (due to AMD giving them no time) it must mean they don’t “normally” validate overclocked products. Which of course is silly.
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,341
Of course they didn’t validate the review samples to run at 14 Gbps. AMD dropped the bios on them after the samples already went out.

Your argument is basically that since they didn’t validate the review samples (due to AMD giving them no time) it must mean they don’t “normally” validate overclocked products. Which of course is silly.
You missed the part where they said they don't buy their own memory. They don't buy it for the other cards either. What you think AMD isn't going to validate it either? Really?
 

MangoSeed

Gawd
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
708
You missed the part where they said they don't buy their own memory. They don't buy it for the other cards either. What you think AMD isn't going to validate it either? Really?
You’re going in circles. AMD sold its partners 12 Gbps memory and then asked them to run it at 14 Gbps at the last minute. That is the only issue here.

AMD fucked up. No need to bend over backwards trying to twist the story. It’s not the end of the world.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,528
A friend of mine expressed interest in one of these -- and upon reading through this thread, it looks like business as usual.
 

Ready4Dis

Gawd
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
777
A friend of mine expressed interest in one of these -- and upon reading through this thread, it looks like business as usual.
Business as usual? I'm not sure what that means, but the Sapphire Pulse at $289 ($10 over MSRP for base model) seems like a descent deal if he doesn't care for ray tracing (which, lets be honest, a base model 2060 isn't really that good at it in most cases). It takes less power and has slightly higher speeds (on average). Again, not sure what business as usual is for you, but perf/$ seems like it has a place and would be a decent card for under $300. So, if you are indeed company indifferent as you claim, then it would be hard to recommend anything else in the same price range at this time. Now if he's got a bit more $, then maybe some better options, but that's normally what more $ gets you.
 

GhostCow

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
368
Business as usual? I'm not sure what that means, but the Sapphire Pulse at $289 ($10 over MSRP for base model) seems like a descent deal if he doesn't care for ray tracing (which, lets be honest, a base model 2060 isn't really that good at it in most cases). It takes less power and has slightly higher speeds (on average). Again, not sure what business as usual is for you, but perf/$ seems like it has a place and would be a decent card for under $300. So, if you are indeed company indifferent as you claim, then it would be hard to recommend anything else in the same price range at this time. Now if he's got a bit more $, then maybe some better options, but that's normally what more $ gets you.
Personally I still wouldn't buy it because AMD's drivers are often shit and their cards just aren't as well supported by devs because Nvidia goes out of their way to get devs in their pocket. They'd have to have a significantly faster card at the same price point as an Nvidia card to get me to bite. Being similar speeds and $10 cheaper isn't going to cut it for me.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,528
Business as usual? I'm not sure what that means
It means that AMD probably has something good on their hands, after all the various issues have been worked out. They're not lonely in that space, looking at you Turing, but it's hard to remember their last 'clean' GPU launch with cooling, power, firmware, and drivers all firing on all cylinders right out of the gate.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,562
I was set to pick one of these up... and well, I picked up a 5700 XT instead. lol Be awhile before there is good enough stock on the 5600s... and before AMD finishes fire selling all the 580/590 stock for the price to drop to where it should really be. The local part shop here had 5600s for $400-420 Canadian. I got a MSI 5700 XT evoke for $499 Canadian... and MSI has a $30 mail in on it to boot. For $50 more Canadian it was really easy to justify.

These new 5600 XTs will shake out on the bios stuff... but its probably 4-6 months before they drop to the price they should be at.
 

pendragon1

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 7, 2000
Messages
16,853
I was set to pick one of these up... and well, I picked up a 5700 XT instead. lol Be awhile before there is good enough stock on the 5600s... and before AMD finishes fire selling all the 580/590 stock for the price to drop to where it should really be. The local part shop here had 5600s for $400-420 Canadian. I got a MSI 5700 XT evoke for $499 Canadian... and MSI has a $30 mail in on it to boot. For $50 more Canadian it was really easy to justify.

These new 5600 XTs will shake out on the bios stuff... but its probably 4-6 months before they drop to the price they should be at.
i was just noticing that too. trying to find a 5600xt online and they are few and far between but the 5700 and xt seems to be on sale all over and not much more than the 5600xt. thinking about it...
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,528
Personally I still wouldn't buy it because AMD's drivers are often shit and their cards just aren't as well supported by devs
Despite my reprimands -- I'd buy one right now, if I needed a GPU in that price / performance bracket, simply because the performance / noise is superior. I'll live with noise where I have to, but I'll also cut it everywhere I can. Further, potential uses for this class of GPU really do favor quieter solutions.

because Nvidia goes out of their way to get devs in their pocket.
I'd recommend looking closely at Nvidia's history, and perhaps, drawing a comparison to less successful consoles. Software sells hardware, and as the premiere innovator in the GPU space (and GPGPU space), before Nvidia worked with developers to get solutions out there there were no solutions. Instead of hoping that developers will decide to commit the resources to make use of Nvidia's latest new shiny, they're providing the support needed to get most of the way there.

This is something that their competitors are keen to match, of course. As AMDs revenue increases and as Intel starts producing graphics parts worth developing for, we should expect to see more software technologies from them used by developers.

They'd have to have a significantly faster card at the same price point as an Nvidia card to get me to bite. Being similar speeds and $10 cheaper isn't going to cut it for me.
I like faster, but it's not always the goal, so I try to frame the problem in terms of fitting a particular solution. Like getting a lower-noise part with the same price and performance.
 

GhostCow

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
368
I like faster, but it's not always the goal, so I try to frame the problem in terms of fitting a particular solution. Like getting a lower-noise part with the same price and performance.
If that's the kind of reasoning you have to use to justify buying one then more power to you. Personally I've never cared about noise, heat, or power consumption. All I care about is how much speed I can get for the price and if I'll have any issues with my weeb games. Weeb games pretty much always have problems on AMD cards. Often months or years after release. The new Dragon Ball Z: Kakarot needed a driver update to even start up on AMD cards for example. I know the Hyperdimension Neptunia games have always had issues on AMD cards too and I don't even know if those issues have ever been fixed.
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
13,528
If that's the kind of reasoning you have to use to justify buying one then more power to you. Personally I've never cared about noise, heat, or power consumption. All I care about is how much speed I can get for the price and if I'll have any issues with my weeb games (weeb games pretty much always have problems on AMD cards. Often months or years after release.)
I cut my teeth (and fingers, and even fingernails) on Delta fans while overclocking Socket A Durons. I work around servers.

If my home systems don't have to be loud, they won't be ;)
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,341
You’re going in circles. AMD sold its partners 12 Gbps memory and then asked them to run it at 14 Gbps at the last minute. That is the only issue here.

AMD fucked up. No need to bend over backwards trying to twist the story. It’s not the end of the world.
I'm not going in circles you just basically threw insults when the reality became apparent. How do you know what memory they sold them?

You also apparently have a personal problem with AMD. Neither of which I can fix.
 
Last edited:

Snowdog

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
10,228
I'm not going in circles you just have a really big problem with AMD competing and it's exactly how you get a monopoly.
The real problem I see, is some folks believing AMD can do no wrong.

AMD fumbled this launch.

It's not really a big deal. Except defenders of the faith have to keep leaping to AMDs defense, because AMD can never do anything wrong, so it must be all the AIBs that simultaneously and coincidentally screwed up, and thus messed up AMDs, otherwise perfect launch. ;)
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,341
I didn’t insult you. Unless you work for AMD.
You said I went in circles. I merely started fact. You asked for a link that backed up my statement. I provided that as well. At this point you've got some grudge.
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,341
The real problem I see, is some folks believing AMD can do no wrong.

AMD fumbled this launch.

It's not really a big deal. Except defenders of the faith have to keep leaping to AMDs defense, because AMD can never do anything wrong, so it must be all the AIBs that coincidentally screwed up, simultaneously, and thus screwed up AMDs would be perfect launch. ;)
AMD does fuck things up but this isn't anything that Nvidia hasn't done.

How would it have been perfect? Oh your mad because the card performs better. Ah I get it unless every launch AMD loses you're not happy.
 

MangoSeed

Gawd
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
708
You said I went in circles. I merely started fact. You asked for a link that backed up my statement. I provided that as well. At this point you've got some grudge.
You claimed AIBs do not validate memory overclocks. You have provided zero evidence to back that up. It’s not a fact simply because you say so.
 

kac77

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
2,341
You claimed AIBs do not validate memory overclocks. You have provided zero evidence to back that up. It’s not a fact simply because you say so.
That's literally in the link I provided. So this topic is obviously more for you than me. I at least observe fact good grief.
 
Top