Sapphire Intros Radeon RX 6500 XT Graphics Card with Off-Spec 8GB Memory

[btarunr]

Sapphire introduced one of the first Radeon RX 6500 XT graphics cards in the retail channel to feature 8 GB of video memory, double that of the 4 GB standard for the SKU. The Sapphire Pulse RX 6500 XT 8 GB resembles the company's standard Pulse RX 6500 XT in design. At this point it's unclear how Sapphire went about deploying 8 GB of memory with the RX 6500 XT, given its narrow 64-bit GDDR6 memory interface.

Sapphire probably used four 16 Gbit memory chips, with two chips piggybacking a 32-bit memory channel. This would finally put the metal backplate to some use, as two of the chips could be located on the reverse side of the PCB. The memory ticks at the same 18 Gbps speed as the standard RX 6500 XT. The card's typical board power is increased to 130 W, up from the 107 W AMD reference. This is probably because the added memory chips, as well as slightly increased clock speeds of 2685 MHz (game clock), vs. 2615 MHz reference. The company didn't announce pricing or availability, but is planning a global launch for this card.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[ravenhold]

How faster is from 4GB version?

 

[eidairaman1]

How faster is from 4GB version?

Larger frame buffer helps to keep the gpu from having to refer to the Ram/SSD as often.


No Sign of it being 16x though.

 

[ixi]

How faster is from 4GB version?

We need to wait for reviews .

 

[konga]

Larger frame buffer helps to keep the gpu from having to refer to the Ram/SSD as often.

This seems to be the main point. Less data will need to be transferred over the cut-down PCIe bus in real time, which should hopefully improve performance when running in PCIe 3.0 mode (and probably improve performance at least a little bit in 4.0 mode)

 

[Chaitanya]

Larger frame buffer helps to keep the gpu from having to refer to the Ram/SSD as often.


No Sign of it being 16x though.

16x wont happen unless AMD redesigns the GPU also that 8GB wont help much other than in some niche scenarios.

 

[Selaya]

[ ... ] also that 8GB wont help much other than in some niche scenarios.

unless the 6500xt's behaving like crazy different from anything else, 8gib of memory actually will help.

 

[konga]

unless the 6500xt's behaving like crazy different from anything else, 8gib of memory actually will help.

Testing has shown that the 6500 XT does indeed behave in the same manner. Again, this will help people who want to put this card into PCIe 3.0 systems a great deal since the card won't have to do real-time data transfers over the card's nerfed PCIe bus as much.

Also, even low-end cards can benefit from more VRAM because it means being able to use high-resolution textures, which is something that doesn't require more processing power. Being able to use high-res textures at 1080p without running out of VRAM and destroying your performance due to the x4 lanes will help a lot.

 

[Bomby569]

the true marketing should be: the card no one should buy, now more expensive

 

[Selaya]

Testing has shown that the 6500 XT does indeed behave in the same manner. Again, this will help people who want to put this card into PCIe 3.0 systems a great deal since the card won't have to do real-time data transfers over the card's nerfed PCIe bus as much.

Also, even low-end cards can benefit from more VRAM because it means being able to use high-resolution textures, which is something that doesn't require more processing power. Being able to use high-res textures at 1080p without running out of VRAM and destroying your performance due to the x4 lanes will help a lot.

read the article. at 4x4, the 6500xt'll basically see a universal uplift in performance by going up to 8gib of vram. perhaps the card'll finally be useful now.

now all we need now is a 6500-8gb that's low profile, then we can finally retire the fucking 1650. without spending $500 on the a2000.

 

[Bomby569]

read the article. at 4x4, the 6500xt'll basically see a universal uplift in performance by going up to 8gib of vram. perhaps the card'll finally be useful now.

there is a difference, but it's still a stupid card to buy. And now it will cost more. Useful for what?

 

[IceShroom]

there is a difference, but it's still a stupid card to buy. And now it will cost more. Useful for what?

What you insist people with budget to buy?? 3 years old mined GTX 1650?? Or even more old GTX 1050 Ti? Or RX 5500 XT, which is out of production. Or twice expensive RTX 3050?

 

[JAB Creations]

290X with 4GB of video memory and zero games loaded. I literally have to close my browser before I can open a game or I get GPU memory errors most of the time if not outright destroyed "performance".

I'll be upgrading in literally a week from now though today's minimum for 1080p gaming is 8GB and I run games at 1440p however I can survive off of less intensive games until I get a 16GB card.

 

[kapone32]

there is a difference, but it's still a stupid card to buy. And now it will cost more. Useful for what?

The 6500XT is not a stupid card to buy. It is great for 1080P Gaming. BTW it also does what a lot of the other budget cards don't do. Like run at 2900+ MHZ, consume 80-100 Watts Max and support HDMI 2.1. What does that mean? 120HZ support on the panel. That means that your 4K TV will be happy to run Games using the 6500XT. At $300 ($232 US) CAD there is no other card (new) in that price range that is better.

 

[konga]

The 6500XT is not a stupid card to buy. It is great for 1080P Gaming. BTW it also does what a lot of the other budget cards don't do. Like run at 2900+ MHZ, consume 80-100 Watts Max and support HDMI 2.1. What does that mean? 120HZ support on the panel. That means that your 4K TV will be happy to run Games using the 6500XT. At $300 ($232 US) CAD there is no other card (new) in that price range that is better.

Would you pay $30 CAD more for something that is 25% faster and supports hardware encode/decode? https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/product...-xs-oc-video-card-gtx-1660-super-ventus-xs-oc

If $300 is a hard limit, then sure, I guess, though it's still a poor value from a price to feature-set/performance standpoint.

 

[kapone32]

Would you pay $30 CAD more for something that is 25% faster and supports hardware encode/decode? https://ca.pcpartpicker.com/product...-xs-oc-video-card-gtx-1660-super-ventus-xs-oc

If $300 is a hard limit, then sure, I guess, though it's still a poor value from a price to feature-set/performance standpoint.

Not a chance. my 6500XT actually cost me $219 CAD and that's 2019 calling. They must be selling because it is up by $100, but you can still buy the MSI Mech unit for $249.99. BTW that HDMI 2.0 only supports 60 HZ. Yes I know the 1660S has DP 1.4 but I have never seen a 4K TV with a DP port. So my point remains that the 6500XT is a new card with modern specs (for my use case). There is no doubt in my mind that the 6500XT does not suffer with the lack of an encoder due to the presence of HDMI 2.1 and indeed DP 1.4 for Gaming. Yes there is only 2 ports but it is a budget card regardless of how we feel. When is it bad that you could pair this with a 5600/B550 with a 450W PSU and have a nice Gaming system for around $900-1000? Why do I laud on HDMI 2.1? Freesync Premium Pro is supported across 44-120 Hz and Games like Total War are much more enjoyable with that refresh range, shooters like Division 2 are much smoother and it just feels more smooth to run 120Hz vs 60Hz on a 4K TV. Though a monitor would be fine for this card too. The reason I am so keen about all of this is I have thoroughly tested the 6500XT @ 1080P vs a 570 8GB and laptop 3060. Guess who wins in straight up Gaming on a 4K 120 Hz TV? They all used 5000 chips too so the CPU difference is moot. The GPU clock speed is no joke and an 8 GB VRAM buffer may actually allow the 6500XT to rival the 6600 in straight up Gaming performance, in some scenarios. The best is your PC consuming less power than your TV while Gaming. As the 6500XT uses less power than the 3060 laptop (GPU alone). That means I don't always have to run my balls to the wall 600+ Watt 6800XT based system all the time to get into some sweet Gaming. When it is 30+ C outside that kind of stuff matters.

 

[Ripcord]

The 6500xt is a great card, its getting a lot of hate for no good reason; look at what the competition is releasing in this price range its awful. AMD should be commended for thinking outside of the box and delivering a great product at a good price. But back to topic.
I'm not sure if I have read the article right but if I have will 8Gb on a 32bit bus hurt performance compared to 4Gb on a 64bit bus?

 

[Ruru]

The 6500xt is a great card, its getting a lot of hate for no good reason; look at what the competition is releasing in this price range its awful. AMD should be commended for thinking outside of the box and delivering a great product at a good price. But back to topic.
I'm not sure if I have read the article right but if I have will 8Gb on a 32bit bus hurt performance compared to 4Gb on a 64bit bus?

Of course it will affect performance as it would cut the memory bandwith in half. But this card has 2x 32bit = 64bit bus just like any 6500 XT.

 

[Ripcord]

Of course it will affect performance as it would cut the memory bandwidth in half. But this card has 2x 32bit = 64bit bus just like any 6500 XT.

What I wrote wasn't very clear.
You have double the memory using the same width bus, in effect that's half the bandwidth per chip. I'm just assuming that a 4GB card is arranged with 2, 2GB chips, each with its own 32bit bus but an 8GB card will most likely be arranged with four 2GB chips (2)32 +(2)32 in effect 4x16 (although not quite).
I seem to remember when gddr3 memory was cheap they used to put silly amounts on some cards (silly for the time) mainly Nvidia for marketing purposes, connecting the chips in pairs like this. The high ram models were always slower. It may be different in this case as most games can use more than 4GB of memory today so that 8GB will get used but before they couldn't even come close to using all the ram.