Discussion Radeon 6500XT and 6400

Page 26 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Panino Manino

Senior member
Jan 28, 2017
654
825
136
On this site, we should aim to be wiser than the tech plebs. Ray Tracing was always going to be a check box item for low end this generation and probably several more to come.
A box that Jensen wasn't able to check.
Between not giving me RT (and AMD managed to deliver their RT solution without sacrificing something in exchange) I prefer having RT, as little as it may be. The performance may be poor but people that aim for these low end iGPUs already expect low performance.
 

maddie

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2010
4,149
3,416
136
A box that Jensen wasn't able to check.
Between not giving me RT (and AMD managed to deliver their RT solution without sacrificing something in exchange) I prefer having RT, as little as it may be. The performance may be poor but people that aim for these low end iGPUs already expect low performance.
This is a realistic expectation.

I have no problem with individuals accepting the poor performance in low end cards when enabling RT effects, but with those who then whine about how bad it is. It's almost like product user comments when someone buys a 6 core CPU and puts as a negative that it doesn't have 8 cores. Idiocy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

LightningZ71

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2017
1,403
1,563
136
Its not whining about how its a poor performing card, it's whining about how it was needlessly gimped to save a few pennies. With just a minor change, they could have easily got away with an MSRP that was $25 more, for less than $5 cost.
 

Panino Manino

Senior member
Jan 28, 2017
654
825
136
Its not whining about how its a poor performing card, it's whining about how it was needlessly gimped to save a few pennies. With just a minor change, they could have easily got away with an MSRP that was $25 more, for less than $5 cost.
Gimping the RDNA2 GPU to not have RT and make it cheaper? Don't think it's possible on hardware, doing it on software would be awful and give very bad public reaction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea and Tlh97

LightningZ71

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2017
1,403
1,563
136
Not about the RT. I could care less about RT at that performance level as it is next to useless at present (though, I don't discount the possibility that someone might find a use for them some day). My focus is on the PCIe interface. That was a design choice. No one forced them to cut it down to 4 lanes. IT doesn't affect add in card size, it doesn't affect the number of layers, it doesn't affect the cost of the substrate. The only change to the cards would have been additional traces, which add an insignificant amount to the cost. Yes, it would have cost a slight increase in the size of the chip itself. Yes, those lanes wouldn't have been used in most of the mobile applications of the chip. Yes, there would have been a very minor hit to the number of dice that they would get from a wafer. To hit the same revenue targets, they would need to price the chips less than $5 more than they currently do. No, it wouldn't be a power hit in mobile applications as those extra lanes would be easily power gated off.
 

igor_kavinski

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2020
4,847
3,054
106
Worst mining card ever? Uses MORE power for mining than a 6600 / 6600 XT, with lower output.
Maybe AMD should stop being greedy and rework this card with two lower clocked GPU dies? At least that should increase the perf for gamers somewhat. I know it's a futile thought. AMD's never gonna cut their 6500 XT profits in half by doing this but maybe they should coz this is one way to right their wrong and they seem to be so big on doing things the right way and doing right by gamers.
 

Shivansps

Diamond Member
Sep 11, 2013
3,636
1,314
136
Maybe AMD should stop being greedy and rework this card with two lower clocked GPU dies? At least that should increase the perf for gamers somewhat. I know it's a futile thought. AMD's never gonna cut their 6500 XT profits in half by doing this but maybe they should coz this is one way to right their wrong and they seem to be so big on doing things the right way and doing right by gamers.
I think this gpu should be 8GB, it would mitigate a lot of the issues it has, and its not going to be used for mining anyway. But im petty sure AMD knew that from day -99.
 

RnR_au

Senior member
Jun 6, 2021
674
1,774
96
I think this gpu should be 8GB, it would mitigate a lot of the issues it has, and its not going to be used for mining anyway. But im petty sure AMD knew that from day -99.
One of the AMD guys said a while back that we might see an 8GB version released at some point, but memory prices for the sku was quite expensive then and maybe still is.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
54,096
8,299
126
One of the AMD guys said a while back that we might see an 8GB version released at some point, but memory prices for the sku was quite expensive then and maybe still is.
In prior years, AMD wouldn't think to let such a large gap in pricing in their product stack exist.

Right now, you have the RX 6500 XT around $250-280, and the RX 6600 at around $430-500.

Where's the card @ $350-380? That's where they should plop down an 8GB RX 6500 XT, if they make one, which given the existence of that pricing gap, they probably should.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and RnR_au

scineram

Senior member
Nov 1, 2020
243
206
76
That would have to be a clamshell config or what is it called. So I doubt it's coming. More likely the 6600 comes down at retail to sub $400.
 
Last edited:

Dribble

Golden Member
Aug 9, 2005
1,979
497
136
In prior years, AMD wouldn't think to let such a large gap in pricing in their product stack exist.

Right now, you have the RX 6500 XT around $250-280, and the RX 6600 at around $430-500.

Where's the card @ $350-380? That's where they should plop down an 8GB RX 6500 XT, if they make one, which given the existence of that pricing gap, they probably should.
Any increase in price and it's up against a nvidia 3050 which it would lose too even with 8GB.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97

aigomorla

Cases and Cooling Mod PC Gaming Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 28, 2005
19,679
2,046
126
Is this a bad thing?
well under normal conditions no... but its also a dog pile of manure of a video card AMD threw together if you ask me.

If anyone is interested in one... STOP.
Goto newegg even tho we have a newegg boycott, and keep spaming refresh on a 6600XT or 6700XT as they are unloading them at very good prices as of recently.

I think this gpu should be 8GB, it would mitigate a lot of the issues it has, and its not going to be used for mining anyway. But im petty sure AMD knew that from day -99.
i don't think that would even help.
The card is hard capped @ 4x PCI-E.
To me that honestly sounds they intended on miners to grab the card as miners only use 1x pci-e.

Possibly and i say possibly it was directed at the lowest end segment gamers, or productivity users who have a shortage on pci-e lanes from having more then 3 nvme's + other cards on a non HEDT platform.

But still its such a bad videocard that AMD is not benefiting from anything by releasing it.
Your really better off waiting for intel's Alchemist or seeing how far the 6600XT will go and hoping the two combined will bring down the 3000 series from nvidia. (which i predict will unless by some unforeseen magic cryto decides to take a vertical climb up on Hashimoto based Algro's)
 
Last edited:

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
13,817
3,023
136
well under normal conditions no... but its also a dog pile of manure of a video card AMD threw together if you ask me.

If anyone is interested in one... STOP.
Goto newegg even tho we have a newegg boycott, and keep spaming refresh on a 6600XT or 6700XT as they are unloading them at very good prices as of recently.



i don't think that would even help.
The card is hard capped @ 4x PCI-E.
To me that honestly sounds they intended on miners to grab the card as miners only use 1x pci-e.

Possibly and i say possibly it was directed at the lowest end segment gamers, or productivity users who have a shortage on pci-e lanes from having more then 3 nvme's + other cards on a non HEDT platform.

But still its such a bad videocard that AMD is not benefiting from anything by releasing it.
Your really better off waiting for intel's Alchemist or seeing how far the 6600XT will go and hoping the two combined will bring down the 3000 series from nvidia. (which i predict will unless by some unforeseen magic cryto decides to take a vertical climb up on Hashimoto based Algro's)

6600 is double the price of 6500XT , they are not in the same segment.

Also, 6500XT is currently available at $230 when the much slower GTX1650 can be found at $260 (both newegg prices)
No matter how bad you think RX 6500XT is, currently its the best choice at it price range for an entry level 1080p gaming PC.
 

Shivansps

Diamond Member
Sep 11, 2013
3,636
1,314
136
The 4 lanes thing is exactly why it's obvious that AMD never intended to make desktop parts out of it.
And why they released a FirePro version then? AMD just dosent have enoght mobile market share to develop a low end gpu only for notebooks, specially when they already have the APU that covers most of that market anyway.

Navi 24 is AMD GP108, low end sku developed mainly for notebooks and other low end markets, with just x4 pci-e, 2 video outputs and no encoders. Its just a matter of accepting they are selling the GT1030 killer and RX550 replacement for $200 MSRP.

Most of the discussion over the 6500XT is because people expect a lot more out of a $200 msrp gpu that with that name should be replacing the 5500XT, if you consider this gpu as what it is (a RX550 replacement), it is a great GPU. Thats the problem here, its no the lack of encoders, the 4GB or the x4 pcie.
 
Last edited:

igor_kavinski

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2020
4,847
3,054
106
Thats the problem here, its no the lack of encoders, the 4GB or the x4 pcie.
1647347880572.png
1647347905761.png

RX 550 is superior in the encoding dept. If 6500 XT was supposed to be its replacement, it would have preserved the RX 550's basic capabilities. AMD is either pretending that gamers don't really have any need to encode or going forward, they will market encoding capabilities as a premium feature worthy of minimum RX 6600, RX 7600 etc.

The real kicker will be if RX 6500 or 6400 somehow launch WITH encoding capabilities.
 

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
13,817
3,023
136
View attachment 58655
View attachment 58656

RX 550 is superior in the encoding dept. If 6500 XT was supposed to be its replacement, it would have preserved the RX 550's basic capabilities. AMD is either pretending that gamers don't really have any need to encode or going forward, they will market encoding capabilities as a premium feature worthy of minimum RX 6600, RX 7600 etc.

The real kicker will be if RX 6500 or 6400 somehow launch WITH encoding capabilities.
The vast majority of gamers dont really need encoding, only a very small percentage of people need encoding.
Im not saying 6500XT shouldnt have encoders, but this is not a problem for the vast majority of people.
Also, most CPUs from Intel do have iGPUs with encoders and some from AMD, so I dont see the problem people have with 6500XT lack of encoders.
You can use both GPUs under Windows 10 to do different tasks, so again not a major obstacle.
As Shivansps said above, the only problem with RX 6500XT is its MSRP of 200 USD for a RX550 replacement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: waffleironhead

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
12,255
3,663
136
And why they released a FirePro version then?
That's funny they did that. I guess when they decided to do a desktop card you may as well do a FirePro version. Doesn't look like there are any difference between it and the 6400 other than the Pro App drivers support.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY