Should the 5700xt be considered one of the greatest of all time?

Smoked Brisket

Smoked Brisket

Gawd
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Messages
773
I have owned many cards since my first build in 2001. I started with a 9800pro. That card lasted many years. By that time I had the bug to build, I loved it, and I lived by the mantra that an enthusiast builds with the best product at the time, regardless of brand. I got lucky three times, in terms of video cards, when doing a brand new build. I was doing a new build when the first Titan was released( a card that was made obsolete two months later),I built a system with the legendary 8800xt and I got into building when the great 9800pro was THE card. Ok the ATI 9800xt was around but the pro is a classic. I missed out on the incredible 1080ti, I already had a 980ti hydrocopper and, at the time, did not see the value in upgrading. Boy was I wrong! Then the 2080's with raytracing came out and NVIDIA changed the pricing game so much, so disgustingly, pricing their Titans at 2000 dollars and their TI's at 1300, seemingly(definately) taking advantage of a mining craze that boosted sell prices and created a shortage of graphics cards. Then AMD finally released a card that was priced well and competed with NVIDIA's third best card for 300 less. This was the value that made me buy the components to a new custom watercooled build rather that buy a last gen cpu/gpu.

Despite the value charts, this AMD GPU was now offering value and was competing with a 2070 at 200 less. The reviews and charts all showed that it wasnt quite as good but should be purchased over team green whenever possible. Now we sit a year and a half later with big navi and the rtx30 series out(sort of). The 5700xt was buyable throughout this drought at close to msrp, and as of right, now it beats a 2070pro and competes with a 2080. It is a last gen card that can still be recommended, if caught at msrp, against current gen cards that are una vailable. It HAS aged like fine wine(stupid catch phrase I know) just like AMD said it would.

Take that all into consideration, and I ask you: Is this card one of the greats, a classic? Is this AMD's 1080ti?
 
Last edited:
Smoked Brisket said:
Is this AMD's 1080ti?
Click to expand...

Not even close. The 7970 (in all its iterations) was way more long-lived and compelling to purchase throughout its lifetime, seeing as how it competed favorably against Nv's mid to high-tier offerings for nearly 3 years, and offered more VRAM (not counting the limited 4GB 670/680/770s) and compute performance than Nv put into its consumer offerings, until the advent of the Titan.
 
290 (or Hawaii chips in general) was pretty long lived as well. Heck I'm still rocking one I had from the mining days and it will run just about any game in a playable fashion at 1080p. 480s also left more of a mark then 5700xts.

And why compare it to the 1080ti? 980ti was superior for far longer in addition too taking the crown back from amd.
 
Not at all. The 5700XT is a minor footnote in video card history. It was another card that failed to compete against the high end NVIDIA cards at the time of it's release. It's price had to be slashed before release in order to give it a chance against NVIDIA'S mid range offerings. That's the most interesting thing about it.
 
5700 XT is a good card, I have one but not compared to a 1080 Ti for it's day (have two of those) or compared to the 7970 (had one of those). 9700pro (Had) and the 7970 was about the best ATi/AMD cards out there. RNDA2 cards look fairly good, need to see more time on how they progress with RT and scaling reconstruction.

At MSRP of $399 and also not readily available and the remaining ones popping up way above that price point. Might as well search for an Ampere 3060 Ti at MSRP and reap a much better performing and feature rich card. Except MSRPs are rising fast. With how well the 5700 XT mine, going used is probably out of the question as well.
 
Last edited:
Smoked Brisket said:
Take that all into consideration, and I ask you: Is this card one of the greats, a classic? Is this AMD's 1080ti?
Click to expand...

I will have some of what you are smoking please!!

It's just another mediocre AMD card. And it's even more mediocre than usual for AMD, It won't have the same longevity as it doesn't support DX12 ultimate.

As others have mentioned, the 7970 is a much better candidate for this.
 
Yeah I think the 7970/7950 was insane for its time.

Those cards can still play Doom at decent framerates
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
I think the 7970/7950 was AMD's last truly great GPU. It did everything and did it well. What's cool about it is that it actually got better as time went on.

The 5700(xt) is an excellent card, but the problem with it is that Nvidia's RTX high end was faster and launched earlier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Dan_D said:
Not at all. The 5700XT is a minor footnote in video card history. It was another card that failed to compete against the high end NVIDIA cards at the time of it's release. It's price had to be slashed before release in order to give it a chance against NVIDIA'S mid range offerings. That's the most interesting thing about it.
Click to expand...
It didn't fail to compete against high end Nvidia cards, that's like saying the 1060 failed to compete at the high end. That's a misleading argument, it was never intended to compete against the high end, it's price point supports this.

That said, I do agree this isn't a 1080ti moment from AMD. It was a decent card with a price to match it's performance, not a bad deal, but as mentioned, more noted for it's mining ability (hashes/watt) than it's gaming ability.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
Ready4Dis said:
It didn't fail to compete against high end Nvidia cards, that's like saying the 1060 failed to compete at the high end. That's a misleading argument, it was never intended to compete against the high end, it's price point supports this.

That said, I do agree this isn't a 1080ti moment from AMD. It was a decent card with a price to match it's performance, not a bad deal, but as mentioned, more noted for it's mining ability (hashes/watt) than it's gaming ability.
Click to expand...
Would it have been fair to say that their flagship card didn't compete anywhere near their counterparts flagship? Would it be fair to say that about the previous generation as well?

Not to get into a pissing match, but AMD regularly says their cards are going to compete with Nvidia at the high end. When the benches come out, and they don't come close, AMD lowers their prices and everyone claims "look at the price! It wasn't meant to compete!".

Please.

My vote is for the 7970 as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
auntjemima said:
Would it have been fair to say that their flagship card didn't compete anywhere near their counterparts flagship? Would it be fair to say that about the previous generation as well?

Not to get into a pissing match, but AMD regularly says their cards are going to compete with Nvidia at the high end. When the benches come out, and they don't come close, AMD lowers their prices and everyone claims "look at the price! It wasn't meant to compete!".

Please.

My vote is for the 7970 as well.
Click to expand...
I agree that AMD has had a problem with overpromising and underdelivering with GPUs, but I don't think that was the case at all with Navi. 5700XT wasn't a flagship card. AMD never presented it as their flagship card. If they had, it would have been a fail, but they didn't.
 
auntjemima said:
Would it have been fair to say that their flagship card didn't compete anywhere near their counterparts flagship? Would it be fair to say that about the previous generation as well?

Not to get into a pissing match, but AMD regularly says their cards are going to compete with Nvidia at the high end. When the benches come out, and they don't come close, AMD lowers their prices and everyone claims "look at the price! It wasn't meant to compete!".

Please.

My vote is for the 7970 as well.
Click to expand...
It would have been accurate to say AMD did not target the high end, this I agree with. They failed to target/compete with the high end of Nvidia. It is not fair to say a $400 card did not complete with an $800 card, they obviously weren't intended to compete. The fact that it was so close in performance 2070 super at a significant price savings made it a pretty decent card for it's price.

I'm not against the thought that AMD failed to compete at the high end, I'm just saying we should compare the 5700xt against cards of similar price/perf to draw conclusions for how good of a value it is/was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
I have one. Pretty solid for 1080p performance high refresh, but it wasn't a blockbuster by any measure.

A good card, sure, but I don't know about greatest of all time. I liked it though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
Dan_D said:
Not at all. The 5700XT is a minor footnote in video card history. It was another card that failed to compete against the high end NVIDIA cards at the time of it's release. It's price had to be slashed before release in order to give it a chance against NVIDIA'S mid range offerings. That's the most interesting thing about it.
Click to expand...
Agreed, add to that the driver problems the card had and that firmly places it as a mediocre offering. OP is smoking crack.
 
KATEKATEKATE said:
I agree that AMD has had a problem with overpromising and underdelivering with GPUs, but I don't think that was the case at all with Navi. 5700XT wasn't a flagship card. AMD never presented it as their flagship card. If they had, it would have been a fail, but they didn't.
Click to expand...
The 5700 XT was compared against RTX 2070 which it handily outperform at a cheaper cost, not against the 2080 or 2080 Ti. Nvidia responded with the Super line with the 2060 Ti at $399, virtually a slight cut down 2070 which the 5700 XT beat more. Now it performs with the 2070 Super, so it gained ground since launch with the Nvidia cards of the day. A good card overall but Ampere cards of today such as the 3060 Ti is a better capable card for the same suppose MSRP.
 
It's a good card at it's price point(assuming availability) and has aged well but is in no way one of the greatest of all time even if you ignore the early driver issues which were enough to keep me from buying one last spring.

I think the 5600xt is an even better bang for the buck though which is why I bought one last month when my card died, well that and it's just to hold me over until I can get a 6800xt or possibly a higher VRAM 3080.
 
I think I badly wrote the post and misrepresented my point. I am not saying that the 5700xt was like a 1080ti because it competed and was viable for a long time at the very high end. I meant that at it's intended tier(mid to high end) it was an incredible bargain and has remained viable. I think it will be remembered.
 
ATI/AMD has had a lot of market-shaping products but I wouldn't even put the 5700XT on the list. It's competitive because they cut it's price to compete. That's it.

The 9700 Pro, 4870, or the 7970 were significantly more impactful.
 
4saken said:
whats a 5700xt? :D
Click to expand...
not sure why people are saying this thing is the GOAT, but what do I know :confused:

Screenshot_2021-01-09-16-34-00~2.png
 
Smoked Brisket said:
I think I badly wrote the post and misrepresented my point. I am not saying that the 5700xt was like a 1080ti because it competed and was viable for a long time at the very high end. I meant that at it's intended tier(mid to high end) it was an incredible bargain and has remained viable. I think it will be remembered.
Click to expand...

How? why? It has no stand out features. It didn't bring anything new to the table and doesn't even support Directx 12 ultimate. It was just a stop gap card.

The Rx 580 is a far better card than this if you those are criteria.
 
i still maintain the 9500 non pro is one of the greatest video cards of all time because it was able to be soft modded into a 9700. I think that video card was important because i found that is when i started looking at a bang for your buck ratio. To this day, i still follow that too.
 
noko said:
The 5700 XT was compared against RTX 2070 which it handily outperform at a cheaper cost, not against the 2080 or 2080 Ti. Nvidia responded with the Super line with the 2060 Ti at $399, virtually a slight cut down 2070 which the 5700 XT beat more. Now it performs with the 2070 Super, so it gained ground since launch with the Nvidia cards of the day. A good card overall but Ampere cards of today such as the 3060 Ti is a better capable card for the same suppose MSRP.
Click to expand...
yes, exactly. the 5700XT was an excellent card for the price point it targeted, but it's longevity is limited by the pace of new releases in the midrange.


reaper12 said:
How? why? It has no stand out features. It didn't bring anything new to the table and doesn't even support Directx 12 ultimate. It was just a stop gap card.

The Rx 580 is a far better card than this if you those are criteria.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised more ppl haven't brought up Polaris in this thread... it's in its 5th year of being the budget champ and even the GTX 1650S and AMDs own 5500XT haven't really unseated it. I'd argue that deserves more acclaim than Navi1, even if Navi was a big deal due to the new architecture.
 
KATEKATEKATE said:
yes, exactly. the 5700XT was an excellent card for the price point it targeted, but it's longevity is limited by the pace of new releases in the midrange.



I'm surprised more ppl haven't brought up Polaris in this thread... it's in its 5th year of being the budget champ and even the GTX 1650S and AMDs own 5500XT haven't really unseated it. I'd argue that deserves more acclaim than Navi1, even if Navi was a big deal due to the new architecture.
Click to expand...

Polaris brought the performance of the $400+ R9 290 (a high end card when it was released) down to ~$200 and made that performance the mainstream baseline. Although it has never really been impressive from a high-end enthusiast standpoint, it brought a heretofore out of reach level of performance to the masses and forced nVidia to play in that space as well.

I can think of no similar jump in performance in the midrange space in that short a period time neither before nor since - especially with manufacturer's pretending that $400 is "midrange" now...
 
mvmiller12 said:
Polaris brought the performance of the $400+ R9 290 (a high end card when it was released) down to ~$200 and made that performance the mainstream baseline. Although it has never really been impressive from a high-end enthusiast standpoint, it brought a heretofore out of reach level of performance to the masses and forced nVidia to play in that space as well.

I can think of no similar jump in performance in the midrange space in that short a period time neither before nor since - especially with manufacturer's pretending that $400 is "midrange" now...
Click to expand...

Keep in mind 290s were only selling for ~$200 upon introduction of the 480. However eth mining had become profitable right around that time as well and Polaris absalutly thrived at that. I picked up lots of 290s around the $100-150 mark about this time.

I would still say Polaris is a decent contender if we are strictly talking about mid range value. Especially considering the playability they brought to nearly all games. I believe the 480 thoroughly dethroned the 750ti that was sitting in this position from before.
 
I had the RX 480 in Crossfire a while back, it could actually run some older games in 4K, like GTA V. Definitely a good card for the price.
 
mvmiller12 said:
Polaris brought the performance of the $400+ R9 290 (a high end card when it was released) down to ~$200 and made that performance the mainstream baseline. Although it has never really been impressive from a high-end enthusiast standpoint, it brought a heretofore out of reach level of performance to the masses and forced nVidia to play in that space as well.

I can think of no similar jump in performance in the midrange space in that short a period time neither before nor since - especially with manufacturer's pretending that $400 is "midrange" now...
Click to expand...
the closest I can think of is probably 8800GT in terms of how long its stayed on the market as a good $200-and-under option and the perf/$ increase it represented at launch
 
OP obviously is very proud of his card, so proud that he's a little deluded to even mention it in the same sentence as a GTX 1080 Ti. The RX 5700 XT is nothing but a place holder card that was plagued by horrible drivers at launch (black screen anyone?) and piss poor thermals in the reference board. Now this isn't to say that it's a horrible card, because no, it's not it is a decent card but nowhere near AMDs best. It won't be remembered for anything nor will it be held in such high regard as the true greats like the GTX 1080 Ti or the HD7970 to name the recent few.
 
CraptacularOne said:
OP obviously is very proud of his card, so proud that he's a little deluded to even mention it in the same sentence as a GTX 1080 Ti. The RX 5700 XT is nothing but a place holder card that was plagued by horrible drivers at launch (black screen anyone?) and piss poor thermals in the reference board. Now this isn't to say that it's a horrible card, because no, it's not it is a decent card but nowhere near AMDs best. It won't be remembered for anything nor will it be held in such high regard as the true greats like the GTX 1080 Ti or the HD7970 to name the recent few.
Click to expand...
Most did not experience horrible drivers, most reviewers were scratching their heads on the issue they could not find. Now I did experience some of it but it was not as if I could go back one driver, very short lived for me. Frankly I had more issues with the 1080Tis (HDR, VRR, VRR in SLI, VRR with HDR and SLI, Dual Monitor support). The 3090 so far has been rock solid, much better than the 5700 XT initial drivers.
 
I bought the ref XFX RX 5700 at MSRP from Best Buy and flashed it to XT first week I bought it in Aug 2019 .. Still plays great .

 
I have a 5700xt in my gaming pc for 1440p and a 480x in my htpc for 1080. Both are amazing cards for the cost and resolution. That being said, no way in hell does the 5700xt compete with a 2080, no where close. It loses out to a 1080ti most of the time too by 7-10% depending on resolution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top