Discussion Radeon 6500XT and 6400

[GodisanAtheist]

Just getting a thread up for this. Navi 24 will ride... Q1 2022... ish.

AMD Readies Radeon RX 6500 XT and RX 6400 Graphics Cards

AMD is preparing to wrap up its Radeon RX 6000 series desktop discrete graphics card family with two new SKUs, the RX 6500 XT and the RX 6400. The two debut the company's smallest piece of silicon based on the RDNA2 graphics architecture, codenamed "Navi 24," to the desktop space. The RX 6500 XT...

www.techpowerup.com

I fugure the 6500XT lands ~5500XT territory for ~$200.

 

[waffleironhead]

IMO, these cards(rx6400 and rx6500x) are a cheap to make replacement for the rx550 and 5500xt in HP prebuilts. Which is where the vast majority of them are going to be found.

 

[SPBHM]

this feels like a GT 1030 class product for 2022,
but with 2022 pricing....

it's kind of terrible, but in desperate times like these, if you can find one, hey, better than nothing I guess.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

Why would you buy a new GPU for a PCIE 3.0 system? The folks buying these cards are building budget systems. Rocket Lake and Zen 2 both supported PCIE 4. Sure, AMD should have went with x8, but I feel like all of this is overblown.

That's asinine. Maybe because I'd be a gamer on a budget who didn't buy a newly released cpu in the last year or two? Hell last year i5-10400F was still considered a great budget buy and no one ever figured we'd see crap like 4 lane gaming gpus that make PCIE-3.0 a legit handicap in the budget segment. You seriously think a gpu that's supposed to target the budget segment and then gets kneecapped hard running on anything but the newest platforms makes any sense whatsoever? How many people bought Zen 2 with a B450 board?

 

[SteveGrabowski]

Why would you buy a new GPU for a PCIE 3.0 system? The folks buying these cards are building budget systems. Rocket Lake and Zen 2 both supported PCIE 4. Sure, AMD should have went with x8, but I feel like all of this is overblown.

Also what about people who bought Ryzen APUs so they'd still have something to game on while putting away money for a gpu later? They'd be hosed by this garbage release since Ryzen APUs are PCIE-3.0. Don't tell me these kind of buyers don't exist. AMD is giving them the middle finger here.

 

[AtenRa]

Out of stock MSRP cards mean nothing.

It could very well settle below the 1650 given how crippled it is on PCIe 3, and how the crippled the media section.

It's a garbage card. No need to defend everything AMD does.

Even at PCIe gen 3.0 its on par with GTX1650 according to HWU.
As I have said before, if you building a new system its the best choice currently at the price point.
If you are on a PCIe gen 3.0 you may very well consider the faster 3050 at a higher price though.

 

[Leeea]

You guys are all wrong!

The 6500 XT is the best release from AMD all year!


This thing absolutely blows the doors off its competitor, the GTX 1050 Ti. PCIe 3 or 4, it beats down on the GTX 1050 Ti.

. . .
Now, I know what you are going to say, the GTX 1050 Ti is the cheapest piece of . . . Nvidia makes.

Thing is the GTX 1050 Ti goes for over $300 new:

Are you a human?

www.newegg.com

For $279 a buyer can get the rx6500xt:

Are you a human?

www.newegg.com

This thing completely destroys the desperation* video card market!



*unless of course we consider used options, at which point a used 4g rx 580 is superior to this piece of crap in every way. They can be found on ebay just a bit over $200 and are superior to both of the above mentioned cards.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

Even at PCIe gen 3.0 its on par with GTX1650 according to HWU.
As I have said before, if you building a new system its the best choice currently at the price point.
If you are on a PCIe gen 3.0 you may very well consider the faster 3050 at a higher price though.

It's below the 1050 Ti in three games in their testsuite. One game maybe you could say ok it's just an outlier, but three out of twelve?

 

[Leeea]

It's below the 1050 Ti in three games in their testsuite. One game maybe you could say ok it's just an outlier, but three out of twelve?

I missed that in the review, which review did that come from? ( hardware unboxed, gamers nexus, etc )

I feel this is a 1050 Ti competitor more then anything, so that would be interesting.

 

[Shivansps]

Why would you buy a new GPU for a PCIE 3.0 system? The folks buying these cards are building budget systems. Rocket Lake and Zen 2 both supported PCIE 4. Sure, AMD should have went with x8, but I feel like all of this is overblown.

PCI-E 4.0 leaves out EVERYONE whiout a B550/X570 (and forget APUs) or 11th Gen+ and 500 series chipset what is likely the vast mayority of users out there. So this is a very low end gpu that can only work in high end systems and is no better than a 5 year old RX 580 and in some games can be considerably slower.

This GPU is only for Intel 11400F+H510/B560 or 12100F/12400F+H610/B660 users!!!! Any B550 + Ryzen 3000 user probably has a GPU that is either better than this is not worth the upgrade, and it is AMD doing, the choosed to artificially segment PCI-E 4.0. And im not even sure right now why they bother upgrading APUs from x8 to x16 on the main slot with Renoir if they were going this way.

Do i need to say more?

 

[Stuka87]

That's asinine. Maybe because I'd be a gamer on a budget who didn't buy a newly released cpu in the last year or two? Hell last year i5-10400F was still considered a great budget buy and no one ever figured we'd see crap like 4 lane gaming gpus that make PCIE-3.0 a legit handicap in the budget segment. You seriously think a gpu that's supposed to target the budget segment and then gets kneecapped hard running on anything but the newest platforms makes any sense whatsoever? How many people bought Zen 2 with a B450 board?

I agree that a big chunk of people buying these are putting them into older machines.

But its important to note that not all games have a big hit on performance. Some games show a less than 5fps difference at ultra settings. And with both PCIE 3 and 4, the total FPS is low enough that people are going to adjust down some settings anyway, making it less of an issue. The FPS hit only rears its head when a game is having to swap the memory buffer. Some of the reviews used settings that are unrealistically high. TechSpot especially did this. Its as if they purposely set everything to Ultra settings on games that specifically want more than 4GB of VRAM to make this issue seem worse than it is.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

I missed that in the review, which review did that come from? ( hardware unboxed, gamers nexus, etc )

I believe you, I just want to look myself. I just made a ranting post proclaiming this as better then the 1050 Ti so I want to prepare myself for the incoming.

Hardware Unboxed. Games were Doom Eternal, Rainbow Six Siege, and F1 2021. F1 2021 the average is better but the low is worse, R6S avg is pretty much the same but low is worse, Doom Eternal is just a disaster all the way around.

 

[AtenRa]

Guys, for those that have a PCIe gen 3.0 they will have a better option at the end of the month with the new NVIDIA 3050 with 8GB but at higher price.
6500XT its only meant for those that have PCIe gen 4.0 or above, so its not for everyone but if you have PCIe gen 4.0 its the better choice currently vs the alternative of GTX1650.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Doesn't DOOM Eternal use whatever newest iD Tech engine, with mega-streaming textures? It seems like it's that sort of game engine that is hardest-hit by this PCI-E limitation, and mainly on PCI-E 3.0 systems.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

I agree that a big chunk of people buying these are putting them into older machines.

But its important to note that not all games have a big hit on performance. Some games show a less than 5fps difference at ultra settings. And with both PCIE 3 and 4, the total FPS is low enough that people are going to adjust down some settings anyway, making it less of an issue. The FPS hit only rears its head when a game is having to swap the memory buffer. Some of the reviews used settings that are unrealistically high. TechSpot especially did this. Its as if they purposely set everything to Ultra settings on games that specifically want more than 4GB of VRAM to make this issue seem worse than it is.

I didn't think any of Hardware Unboxed's settings were unrealistically high and they showed super disappointing results against the 1050 Ti at PCIE-3.0 in 3/12 games.

 

[coercitiv]

RDNA = Raja DNA ?

Always has been.

 

[ultimatebob]

Guys, for those that have a PCIe gen 3.0 they will have a better option at the end of the month with the new NVIDIA 3050 with 8GB but at higher price.
6500XT its only meant for those that have PCIe gen 4.0 or above, so its not for everyone but if you have PCIe gen 4.0 its the better choice currently vs the alternative of GTX1650.

If you already have a motherboard capable of PCIe gen 4, you (hopefully) already have a better GPU than the 6500XT in most cases. I mean, this thing is barely better than the integrated graphics on newer high-end APU's.

On the flip side, they successfully made a GPU so bad that even crypto miners wouldn't be interested in it. Who knows, you might actually be able to find this one in stock.

 

[AtenRa]

If you already have a motherboard capable of PCIe gen 4, you (hopefully) already have a better GPU than the 6500XT in most cases. I mean, this thing is barely better than the integrated graphics on newer high-end APU's.

Im talking mostly for new builds.

 

[blckgrffn]

Come on guys. The answer is obvious.

Don't spend less than $500 on a GPU.

Problem solved.

Doom Eternal has always been a the poster child for PCIe bandwidth, we can see reviews for the 6600XT highlighting this.

A year from now all new builds - especially the HP Omens and Ibuypower and all of that ilk - are going to PCIe 4 only. This is a win for system integrators who can finally have a DX12 Ultimate (lol) card for their ~$1K or lower PCs.

I still don't understand how this is "AMDs" fault. If nvidia is pricing the 1050ti at $300 (they are) and the 1650 Super at @ $350 to $400 (also... they are) then why would we expect this card, which competes with them even if the bad benches shown overall, to be priced so low?

If we want it cheaper then we need some market pressure - outside of a massive shortage of chips and huge costs of import shipping - to make it happen.

So let's see it. The 8GB 3050 is a non-starter because it won't be available to normal people. So, the 4GB 3050. Let's see it at $300 or less on the street, nvidia.

Haha, like that will happen.

 

[TESKATLIPOKA]

Even at Full HD It's slower than RX 5500XT. Energy efficiency is also hilariously bad. At least the average clockspeed is almost 2.9GHz.

 

[Shivansps]

Im talking mostly for new builds.

Even for new builds with PCIE 4.0, there is no excuse for this.

The 2 year old RX5500XT 4GB (with full media block, more video outputs and $169 launch MSRP) cant be outperforming the RX6500XT.
I can say the same about the 5 year old RX 580, but the RX5500XT has the same nomenclature thus the RX6500XT is its direct successor.

 

[DeathReborn]

I have done a pretty comprehensive check on UK pricing and not a single MSRP card today, closest to MSRP is £219 (£40 over MSRP) and that was OOS, in stock £229+. Prices are expected to go up by 20% very soon to boot. The same money can get you a NEW 1650 D6, T600 or a used 1070, 580 8GB.

 

[Stuka87]

Even at Full HD It's slower than RX 5500XT. Energy efficiency is also hilariously bad. At least the average clockspeed is almost 2.9GHz.

Energy Efficiency is a nonsense metric. The card uses the least amount of power of any desktop card on the TPU chart (101W).

But its certainly disappointing that it is slower than the 5500XT. That tiny bus kills what is otherwise a good chip most likely.

 

[AtenRa]

Even for new builds with PCIE 4.0, there is no excuse for this.

The 2 year old RX5500XT 4GB (with full media block, more video outputs and $169 launch MSRP) cant be outperforming the RX6500XT.

The RX 6500XT is here to compete against the GTX1650, It is not replacing the RX 5500XT
If prices where normal 6500XT would cost $129 with NVIDIA RTX3050 at $179

 

[Heartbreaker]

I didn't think any of Hardware Unboxed's settings were unrealistically high and they showed super disappointing results against the 1050 Ti at PCIE-3.0 in 3/12 games.

Yeah.

Techspot/HWUB used the same settings they always do. They don't lower them because a card sucks.

 

[TESKATLIPOKA]

Energy Efficiency is a nonsense metric. The card uses the least amount of power of any desktop card on the TPU chart (101W).

It's not a nonsense metric. The performance is pretty bad for a 101W power consumption.