ASUS Radeon RX 6500 XT TUF Gaming

[Ravenas]

Power efficient? It has worse performance to power ratio than the 1650 Super, which is based on a 12 nm chip. This one is 6 nm. It sips 100 Watts for nothing, barely surpassing the base 1650 which doesn't even need a power connector! I can de-tune my 2070 to 125 W, and it will still run miles around this thing overclocked.

It’s power consumption is extremely low, it plays most games at 1080P well, and it costs only $200. It’s not a bad card. Expecting more for $200 is pretty much just fantasy thought.

 

[Mistral]

Did AMD mean to launch this card with RSR always enabled and the software team was just behind schedule?

 

[InVasMani]

AMD just needs to make a APU that can crossfire with these and suddenly they would actually sell, but apparently they are sold out anyway at scalped prices, but like to who!!?

 

[phanbuey]

AMD just needs to make a APU that can crossfire with these and suddenly they would actually sell, but apparently they are sold out anyway at scalped prices, but like to who!!?

I hope it's just a bunch of scalpers who get stuck with them... maybe this is the long game for amd... "The way we are going to get GPUS to gamers is to release a card no sane gamer will buy at MSRP but scalpers will buy up instantly, then stick them with millions of dollars of worthless GPUs LEL"

"And we are going to do it right before the 7000 series launch just so those guys are sitting on a ton of inventory when the new cards drop."

 

[seth1911]

2022 hall of fame worst GPU's ever made. #1

No its the CAD Radeon Pro W 6300M with 32bit Interface

 

[wolf]

It's a power efficient card

It’s power consumption is extremely low

Power efficiency and low consumption are not the same thing. A card could use only 50 Watts, but if it only performed 25% as good as this card it would be half as efficient. Just because it's 'low' doesn't mean it's good, and with the 6500XT that seems to be exactly the case.

Power efficient? It has worse performance to power ratio than the 1650 Super

Spot on.

I keep looking for a way, any way, that this card can redeem itself or claw back some positives, and I'm just not seeing any.

 

[Ravenas]

Power efficiency and low consumption are not the same thing. A card could use only 50 Watts, but if it only performed 25% as good as this card it would be half as efficient. Just because it's 'low' doesn't mean it's good, and with the 6500XT that seems to be exactly the case.

Spot on.

I keep looking for a way, any way, that this card can redeem itself or claw back some positives, and I'm just not seeing any.

I did misspeak, I was referring to power consumption, and responded that way in my follow up. The card is priced accordingly, and delivers at that price. A $200 1080P gaming card at a relatively small power draw. Again it’s not a bad card for the price point.

People expecting significantly more for $200 at this day are just in La La land. The 1650 has been on eBay priced at ~ $299, if it is SO much better go buy them.

 

[wolf]

Again it’s not a bad card for the price point.

Hard disagree, when equal or more performance was on offer for less money 2-3-4-5 years ago, even a $199 MSRP for this card is an insult, let alone the street price.

The 1650 has been on eBay priced at ~ $299, if it is SO much better go buy them.

Some definitely will.

I did misspeak, I was referring to power consumption, and responded that way in my follow up.

Fair and no worries.

But for real, while everything in this market is overpriced relative to the performance you get, I'd much rather pay more and actually get a much better product, even the 6600/XT are a major step up in performance for similar price to performance, not to mention far less gimped.

 

[InVasMani]

It's barely a flesh wound best describes all the ways this cards been cutdown at the expense of performance.

 

[W1zzard]

Watch Dogs Legion uses the Disrupt Engine and not Dunia. Dunia is only used on Far Cry games with Far Cry 3-6 using Dunia 2. Dunia is a fork of CryEngine 1

Indeed, and nobody noticed that mistake for like a year. Fixed in 34 reviews

 

[InVasMani]

The fact that a GTX 285 has more memory bandwidth is rather cringe.

 

[AusWolf]

It’s power consumption is extremely low, it plays most games at 1080P well, and it costs only $200. It’s not a bad card. Expecting more for $200 is pretty much just fantasy thought.

Only 200 bucks? Really? Its main competitor, the 1650 Super was launched for 159 in 2019! So for 40 bucks more, you get a 3 year-old entry level card? It doesn't look like a good value proposition to me. As for its power consumption, it's not low enough to get rid of a power connector, despite being based on the soooo advanced 6 nm process. So for extremely small form factor PCs, it's rubbish. It doesn't have Navi 2's video decode engine, so it's rubbish for HTPCs as well. It's already been established that it's too expensive for the gaming performance it offers. What is it good for, then?

I keep looking for a way, any way, that this card can redeem itself or claw back some positives, and I'm just not seeing any.

Same here.

 

[Turmania]

On average rx 6600 consumes 15W more but performs twice of this. So 70fps becomes around 130. And considering this is built on world first 6nm.

 

[Pepamami]

Its main competitor, the 1650 Super was launched for 159 in 2019

its 250$-400$ in 2021-2022. In 2019 that new "abomination" would have cost like 80-100$ max, amd literaly made it out of dirt.
This card is not amd problem, its a new symbol of "current GPU market drama"

 

[mama]

Who is this card for? If AMD made a low end card, why cripple PCIe Gen 3?

 

[wolf]

This card is not amd problem, its a new symbol of "current GPU market drama"

This card is absolutely AMD'S problem, and they could have gotten away with a much less negative launch if it had pcie 8x and didn't strip the encoding capabilities (yes, I realise why this had to be this way for navi 24 specifically), OR, called it the Radeon 6300/6400 or maybe 6500 LE and charged an msrp of $119-149 which would affect the street price.

 

[AusWolf]

its 250$-400$ in 2021-2022. In 2019 that new "abomination" would have cost like 80-100$ max, amd literaly made it out of dirt.
This card is not amd problem, its a new symbol of "current GPU market drama"

The 1650 Super is currently priced by scalpers. The 6500 XT is priced by AMD and partners. So yes, it's absolutely AMD's problem.
They're not simply going with the flow of "GPU market drama". They're outright profiteering on it.

I've just checked, Sapphire's Pulse is out at Overclockers UK for £225. That's 306 US dollars. The Asus TUF in this review goes for £329 = 448 USD. These are retail prices, not scalped ones. The 1650 goes for £150-200 on ebay, and that's a GPU that doesn't cry for mama when used in a PCI-e 3.0 (let alone 2.0) motherboard.

 

[seth1911]

The fact that a gt710 have a 8 lane connection

 

[catulitechup]

This card is absolutely AMD'S problem, and they could have gotten away with a much less negative launch if it had pcie 8x and didn't strip the encoding capabilities (yes, I realise why this had to be this way for navi 24 specifically), OR, called it the Radeon 6300/6400 or maybe 6500 LE and charged an msrp of $119-149 which would affect the street price.

this utter garbage dont deserve money because many old gpus like gt 730 (gt 710 of 192 shaders i think so too, gk208 based model*) have nvenc and appear around 70us (microcenter) and older radeon too VCN case radeon hd 77xx and newer models, almost forget various apus models have encode capabilities too

*

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-gt-710.c3027

curiously fucked nvidia delete nvenc listed gpus like kepler gpus but this gpus still in market, this article from el gato have more information about nvenc present in various kepler gpus

Which NVIDIA graphic cards do support NVENC technology?

NVENC is a technology used by NVIDIA that handles video hardware encoding. Many NVIDIA GPUs support this technology, among others some GeForce GPUs used in desktop and mobile computers.In order to ...

help.elgato.com

@W1zzard maybe good add encode and decode support in gpu database for more information

 

[ARF]

This card is absolutely AMD'S problem, and they could have gotten away with a much less negative launch if it had pcie 8x and didn't strip the encoding capabilities (yes, I realise why this had to be this way for navi 24 specifically), OR, called it the Radeon 6300/6400 or maybe 6500 LE and charged an msrp of $119-149 which would affect the street price.

Or simply Radeon R3 6050 LE..

 

[Ravenas]

Hard disagree, when equal or more performance was on offer for less money 2-3-4-5 years ago, even a $199 MSRP for this card is an insult, let alone the street price.

Some definitely will.

Fair and no worries.

But for real, while everything in this market is overpriced relative to the performance you get, I'd much rather pay more and actually get a much better product, even the 6600/XT are a major step up in performance for similar price to performance, not to mention far less gimped.

I find it comical that people are still talking about pricing that was 3-5 years ago, and using that as a baseline for what they should be paying for a GPU today. It’s absurd. You can spend the last two years complaining about pricing, or you can move on and just play consoles.

I think $200 for a card that can play most games at 1080P is not a bad proposition, especially for someone who is not looking for anything more than that. Why would I buy a 6800 XT if I don’t need it? You’re complaining about pricing, but on the opposite hand your recommending spending extra dollars just to justify what you think is the most well engineered for an environment you may not need.

 

[Chrispy_]

it doesn't correlate with what the APU will perform. I'd think it actually bodes pretty well for the APUs given they have similar compute unit counts.

I read yesterday that the limited display outputs and lack of HW encode/decode features are because Navi24 was never planned as a desktop dGPU. This is the primary reason for the limitation of two display outputs.

It was originally intended as a mobile dGPU to boost Ryzen 6000-series APUs so the removed HW encode/decode blocks are not included because they already exist in the APU and would be a superfluous waste of silicon on the dGPU. The limited memory bus width is also because it was only ever going to be given access to slow main memory over a 64-bit bus. The PCIe x4 interconnect is because that's all it needed to talk directly to the APU, and wider buses drain power and the extra traces take up extremely valuable PCB real estate in a mobile part.

So, this is a laptop dGPU hastily cobbled together into a desktop card and clocked to the moon. It doesn't tell us anything useful about scaling like I originally thought, because it's completely incomparable to the desktop RX6000-series with its GDDR6 and fully-featured silicon.

 

[catulitechup]

I read yesterday that the limited display outputs and lack of HW encode/decode features are because Navi24 was never planned as a desktop dGPU. This is the primary reason for the limitation of two display outputs.

It was originally intended as a mobile dGPU to boost Ryzen 6000-series APUs so the removed HW encode/decode blocks are not included because they already exist in the APU and would be a superfluous waste of silicon on the dGPU. The limited memory bus width is also because it was only ever going to be given access to main memory. The x4 bus is because that's all it needed to talk directly to the APU, and wider buses drain power and the extra traces take up extrememly valuable PCB real estate in a mobile part.

So, this is a laptop dGPU hastily cobbled together into a desktop card and clocked to the moon. It doesn't tell us anything useful about scaling like I originally thought, because it's completely incomparable to the desktop RX6000-series with its GDDR6 and fully-featured silicon.

this irresponsible amounts of mediocrity in new gpu

 

[Tetras]

I find it comical that people are still talking about pricing that was 3-5 years ago, and using that as a baseline for what they should be paying for a GPU today. It’s absurd. You can spend the last two years complaining about pricing, or you can move on and just play consoles.

I think $200 for a card that can play most games at 1080P is not a bad proposition, especially for someone who is not looking for anything more than that. Why would I buy a 6800 XT if I don’t need it? You’re complaining about pricing, but on the opposite hand your recommending spending extra dollars just to justify what you think is the most well engineered for an environment you may not need.

You have a different opinion to practically every tech reviewer on this card. Technology is supposed to progress and this can't beat cards released half a decade ago for the same price. People have been waiting for reasonably priced upgrades for a long time and to be confronted with this, it's just insulting how much they crippled it. It can't even beat the preceding model (5500 XT).

I agree that it's nice to have something at this price point, but wolf is right, it's bad value for money, especially on PCI-E 3.0. A 6600 or 6600 XT on launch day was much better value than this and it was a meaningful upgrade for many people, the architecture is actually an improvement on the market too (fps vs watt), unlike with the 6500 XT. It's not new that the midrange card is better value than the budget one(s), it's been like that for years, but the performance level here is a big regression (especially when it's realistically going to end up $300-$400). We'll see if the 3050 is better, but AMD gave it a low-bar to beat.

 

[trsttte]

I read yesterday that the limited display outputs and lack of HW encode/decode features are because Navi24 was never planned as a desktop dGPU. This is the primary reason for the limitation of two display outputs.

It was originally intended as a mobile dGPU to boost Ryzen 6000-series APUs so the removed HW encode/decode blocks are not included because they already exist in the APU and would be a superfluous waste of silicon on the dGPU. The limited memory bus width is also because it was only ever going to be given access to slow main memory over a 64-bit bus. The PCIe x4 interconnect is because that's all it needed to talk directly to the APU, and wider buses drain power and the extra traces take up extremely valuable PCB real estate in a mobile part.

So, this is a laptop dGPU hastily cobbled together into a desktop card and clocked to the moon. It doesn't tell us anything useful about scaling like I originally thought, because it's completely incomparable to the desktop RX6000-series with its GDDR6 and fully-featured silicon.

I agree, what I meant and what I was answering to is that given the similar number of compute units the ryzen 6000 APUs should perform quite well and give quite the uplift compared to previous generations.

I don't think there's any info on die size yet for Ryzen 6000, but going by 5000 series APUs which had a 180mm2 die and 4000 series which used 156mm2, and doing some napkin math with the Ryzen chiplet size of ~75mm2 and navi24 size of 100mm2 we'll be looking at pretty damn competent APUs. We can also see that any Ryzen 6000 laptop that ships with a navi24 dGPU will be a waste of silicon and power because it won't offer that much more than what the APU already had (unless we see the return of some crossfire scheme)