Review AMD RX 5600XT Review Thread

[Hitman928]

Print Media

The AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT Review, Feat. Sapphire Pulse: A New Challenger For Mainstream Gaming

www.anandtech.com

AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT im Test

Mit der Radeon RX 5600 XT platziert AMD eine Grafikkarte auf Augenhöhe zur Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060. Die Effizienz ist sehr hoch.

www.computerbase.de

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://www.computerbase.de/2020-01/radeon-rx-5600-xt-test/ [translated]

AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT Review: Look out, RTX 2060

1660 Ti-like pricing and better-than-2060 performance!

www.tomshardware.com

Video Reviews

From early reviews it seems like the 5600XT and Nvidia 2060 are basically tied both in performance and power consumption although GN's 12V rail power numbers and Anandtech's system power numbers don't agree, not sure why that is.

 

[Shivansps]

Is not a bad card, but i dont consider 6GB to be enoght to maintain ultra quality gaming for the games launching this year.

We already know that 8G makes a diference over 4GB on a RX5500XT, this means 6GB is barely enoght for the games that we currently have. Specially for a card that targets ultra quality.

 

[insertcarehere]

Yup, let's push out a critical, updated VBIOS to the AIB cards just days before launch, while all their Taiwanese/Chinese board partners (Asus/Gigabyte/MSI/Sapphire/Powercolor et al) are either preparing for or already going through their CNY holidays, surely that's not gonna piss them off...

The card itself is fine, even if its obvious that they're pushing clocks harder than they want to, but I can't imagine their board partners being remotely happy with AMD's shenanigans.

 

[sandorski]

Yup, let's push out a critical, updated VBIOS to the AIB cards just days before launch, while all their Taiwanese/Chinese board partners (Asus/Gigabyte/MSI/Sapphire/Powercolor et al) are either preparing for or already going through their CNY holidays, surely that's not gonna piss them off...

The card itself is fine, even if its obvious that they're trading off power efficiency hard for performance, but I can't imagine their board partners being remotely happy with AMD's shenanigans.

They gave up 10w and it is still more efficient than the 2060.

 

[AtenRa]

They gave up 10w and it is still more efficient than the 2060.

Yeap excellent card, i might get one in February. I consider the RX5700 to be DOA now and RTX2060 only have the RTX meme for those that want to try it.
AMD should also release an RX5600 at 125W to compete directly against GTX1660 Super at $200-230. The RX5500 8GB at $210 is DOA from the first day.

 

[tamz_msc]

Meh, I'd spend the extra $10 and get the RTX 2060. Better drivers, stability, NVENC, CUDA, better performance in old DX9/OpenGL games is worth that little extra.

 

[AtenRa]

Meh, I'd spend the extra $10 and get the RTX 2060. Better drivers, stability, NVENC, CUDA, better performance in old DX9/OpenGL games is worth that little extra.

what $10 extra ??? Its $290 for the OC 5600XT vs $320 for the 2060 KO at newegg.

 

[insertcarehere]

They gave up 10w and it is still more efficient than the 2060.

That's a lot more than 10w between the old and new bios.

The <10w seperating 5500XT and old bios 5600xt (despite the latter's ~50% perf advantage) shows how efficient the process is when the clocks arent pushed out of their sweetspot.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

I don't see the appeal of this card at this price point of $280 to $290, at least for US buyers who can often find RX 5700 for $320 to $330. I'd much rather buy either the RX 5700 on sale for $320 to $330 for the extra 2GB of VRAM or a $300 RTX 2060 based on the chance the new consoles will spike demand for pretty low end ray tracing.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

what $10 extra ??? Its $290 for the OC 5600XT vs $320 for the 2060 KO at newegg.

$300 is the MSRP on the Founders 2060 and that 2060 KO is listed at $300 on newegg. Though out of stock at both places so maybe this was just a dirty trick from Nvidia to steal some thunder from 5600 XT right at review time.

 

[tamz_msc]

what $10 extra ??? Its $290 for the OC 5600XT vs $320 for the 2060 KO at newegg.

The price cut will take a short while to come into effect. Even then it's worth paying the extra $30 for the aforementioned features.

 

[linkgoron]

The 5600XT is pretty decent after the changes. Beats the 2060 @ $300 for perf/price, perf/watt and just perf.
Still disappointing that it only has 6GB. The 5700 is now in a weird place, although with 8GB memory and being 10% faster it has its place.

The new clocks stuff is really weird. They should've just gone for $250 instead of the new bios stuff, and just cut the pricing of the 5700 and 5700XT. The old clocks had really impressive perf/watt, so a very wide RDNA card with lower clocks could be really impressive.

The price cut will take a short while to come into effect. Even then it's worth paying the extra $30 for the aforementioned features.

So basically nothing AMD offers will be good enough for you anyway.

 

[MangoX]

That VBIOS last minute shenanigans is retarded. We consider ourselves enthusiasts but I have plenty of friends/acquaintances that wouldn't touch a BIOS update within a 10 foot pole. They just don't trust bricking their hardware. This isn't going to be good.

A lot of regular people are just expecting their hardware to work out of the box without expecting to mess around with updates besides drivers, let alone flashing their video card BIOS. I know most people don't even flash their motherboard BIOS, at that.

 

[tamz_msc]

So basically nothing AMD offers will be good enough for you anyway.

What's 'good enough' about this card? Same performance and power consumption as an RTX 2060, worse drivers and software support, worse video encode/decode features at a slightly lower price? On top of it in my country the RTX 2060 is cheaper.

No thanks.

 

[Hans Gruber]

This is a RX580 replacement card. It should be priced accordingly. AMD can't show up in the GPU game many months late and say. Hey 2060 we have a card that is about the same and so we want to charge the same price. What is worse the RX580 comes in 8GB flavors. Obviously this is much better than a RX580. The point is AMD is late to the game. Their best move has always been the value play. This is a $179-$199. At that price point they would do very good with an 8GB part.

 

[AtenRa]

The price cut will take a short while to come into effect. Even then it's worth paying the extra $30 for the aforementioned features.

Perhaps for you, not everybody thinks the same.

 

[linkgoron]

What's 'good enough' about this card? Same performance and power consumption as an RTX 2060, worse drivers and software support, worse video encode/decode features at a slightly lower price? On top of it in my country the RTX 2060 is cheaper.

No thanks.

The card is slightly faster and more efficient than the competition and you stated that you wouldn't buy it even if the competition cost 10% more. You just like Nvidia more, and that's fine. Now that perf/watt is slightly better on AMD, there's just another reason for an Nvidia build. CUDA is one, NVENC is one, gameworks, RTX, physx, stereoscopic 3d or whatever. Just pick one.

Most people don't care about CUDA or NVENC, or DX9 games (how many are there that are actually taxing anyway?). If the 5600XT as a gaming card isn't worth it, then the 2060 for $30 more definitely isn't worth it.

 

[AtenRa]

That VBIOS last minute shenanigans is retarded. We consider ourselves enthusiasts but I have plenty of friends/acquaintances that wouldn't touch a BIOS update within a 10 foot pole. They just don't trust bricking their hardware. This isn't going to be good.

They can wait a few days for the new cards with OC BIOS to arrive

 

[Glo.]

NVM.

 

[Glo.]

This is a RX580 replacement card. It should be priced accordingly. AMD can't show up in the GPU game many months late and say. Hey 2060 we have a card that is about the same and so we want to charge the same price. What is worse the RX580 comes in 8GB flavors. Obviously this is much better than a RX580. The point is AMD is late to the game. Their best move has always been the value play. This is a $179-$199. At that price point they would do very good with an 8GB part.

They charge the same price as GTX 1660 Ti, not RTX 2060...

 

[uzzi38]

The price cut will take a short while to come into effect. Even then it's worth paying the extra $30 for the aforementioned features.

The drivers I agree with. AMD has work to do there, but they are pumping out drivers that aim to fix the black screen issues etc (one came out today for example). For the rest, it depends heavily if you use it.

NVENC? Since when did everyone need this? That's like saying everyone should be buying a 3900X because they could stream on it.
RTX? As if it's useful on the 2060 anyway.
DLSS? Lul.
CUDA? Why are you even considering the 5600XT, you're locked into your choice.

And that 'small' $30 price difference is a 10% increase. If you can afford that, then I'd argue you should be looking for a 5700 on sale and looking to flash a 5700XT BIOS or power mod to get 5700XT performance. Far better bang-for-buck for the vast majority of users than buying a 2060.

 

[amrnuke]

This is a RX580 replacement card. It should be priced accordingly.

A RX580 replacement according to whom? Just based on die size? Really? If that's the case then isn't it really also the RX590's replacement (251mm2 for 5600XT vs 232mm2 for RX590)? That means the price increase is only about, let's check... yes, $0 over the RX590. And it slaughters it in performance, all while being quieter and using less power.

AMD can't show up in the GPU game many months late and say. Hey 2060 we have a card that is about the same and so we want to charge the same price.

They didn't. They came many months later than the original 2060, with a card that performed better and cost less (when 2060S came out, 2060 cost $349). Because of this, it forced a price drop. The 5600XT is still cheaper than and faster than a 2060. They aren't late any more than Nvidia were late to release the 1650 or 1660 etc.

What is worse the RX580 comes in 8GB flavors. Obviously this is much better than a RX580. The point is AMD is late to the game.

What do you mean by late to the game? Why are AMD late and not Nvidia as well?

Their best move has always been the value play.

Yes, that got them so far with Polaris. I'm sure AMD wants to be seen as the "value play" company, which is why they are releasing 64C/128T HEDT chips and soul-crushing Epyc server chips and 16C/32T consumer chips and GPUs that beat Nvidia in the same price brackets.

This is a $179-$199. At that price point they would do very good with an 8GB part.

Given the 5500XT and 5600XT, as well as the 1660S and 2060, all being 6GB, I really fail to see why AMD would take a loss putting 8GB chips out at $199. AMD are using 12 layer PCB (vs Nvidia's 6 layer), higher quality controllers, etc. - I'm not privy to the exact financials of the card, but I doubt they have the margins to cut prices $80-$100 while also adding more memory (and hence bumping back up to a 5700 level of bandwidth). What you're asking for is nice, it's a request, but it isn't going to happen any time soon.

 

[tamz_msc]

Perhaps for you, not everybody thinks the same.

Have a look over at r/AMD, most people over there have the same opinion as mine.

The card is slightly faster and more efficient than the competition and you stated that you wouldn't buy it even if the competition cost 10% more. You just like Nvidia more, and that's fine. Now that perf/watt is slightly better on AMD, there's just another reason for an Nvidia build. CUDA is one, NVENC is one, gameworks, RTX, physx, stereoscopic 3d or whatever. Just pick one.

Most people don't care about CUDA or NVENC, or DX9 games (how many are there that are actually taxing anyway?). If the 5600XT as a gaming card isn't worth it, then the 2060 for $30 more definitely isn't worth it.

It isn't any faster than a 2060 and is certainly not more efficient. There is a graph from TechPowerUp in a post above which shows essentially the same power consumption with the new VBIOS.

And as for features, AMD is certainly not up to par with NVIDIA. Borked drivers and features, broken compute, lack of software optimization and a poor h264 video encoder are documented issues with Navi cards. There are many people who stream/record gameplay and for them NVENC is incredibly important. Same goes for CUDA - if anyone uses any professional apps then it's much more common to find CUDA than OpenCL support. Even Anand Tech says that compute is broken on Navi since launch. Head over to r/AMD to hear about the downclocking bug on Navi which affects older games, which is a big deal - even Steve from Gamers Nexus talks about it in the video review.

Navi is in a mess right now and even though AMD has acknowledged that there are problems, why should anyone get their card when the competition is simply better due to not having any of these issues?

 

[uzzi38]

Have a look over at r/AMD, most people over there have the same opinion as mine.

It isn't any faster than a 2060 and is certainly not more efficient. There is a graph from TechPowerUp in a post above which shows essentially the same power consumption with the new VBIOS.

And as for features, AMD is certainly not up to par with NVIDIA. Borked drivers and features, broken compute, lack of software optimization and a poor h264 video encoder are documented issues with Navi cards. There are many people who stream/record gameplay and for them NVENC is incredibly important. Same goes for CUDA - if anyone uses any professional apps then it's much more common to find CUDA than OpenCL support. Even Anand Tech says that compute is broken on Navi since launch. Head over to r/AMD to hear about the downclocking bug on Navi which affects older games, which is a big deal - even Steve from Gamers Nexus talks about it in the video review.

Navi is in a mess right now and even though AMD has acknowledged that there are problems, why should anyone get their card when the competition is simply better due to not having any of these issues?

Compute is fixed as of the patch last week. Seti@Home etc are working now, and it wasn't even entirely a problem with Navi, which is why these compute programs also require an update now to work.

Also, r/AMD is filled with people who think Navi 10 should have been sold at $250 and that by not doing so AMD are price fixing with Nvidia. There's a reason we nobody sane cares for their opinions.

 

[tamz_msc]

The drivers I agree with. AMD has work to do there, but they are pumping out drivers that aim to fix the black screen issues etc (one came out today for example). For the rest, it depends heavily if you use it.

NVENC? Since when did everyone need this? That's like saying everyone should be buying a 3900X because they could stream on it.
RTX? As if it's useful on the 2060 anyway.
DLSS? Lul.
CUDA? Why are you even considering the 5600XT, you're locked into your choice.

And that 'small' $30 price difference is a 10% increase. If you can afford that, then I'd argue you should be looking for a 5700 on sale and looking to flash a 5700XT BIOS or power mod to get 5700XT performance. Far better bang-for-buck for the vast majority of users than buying a 2060.

NVENC is a selling point because it lowers the bar for entering into streaming, if you care for that sort of thing.

CUDA is another selling point for those who do run stuff like Blender or Premiere, or those who do development work.

And let's be honest AMD's driver issues are far more severe than just simple random black screens.

And an overwhelmingly large majority of customers will never do a BIOS mod on a 5700 to get XT levels of performance, because they want a strictly hassle-free out of the box experience.