AMD Radeon RX 6400

[W1zzard]

The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is targeting entry-level gamers wanting to spend less than $200 for their graphics card. Priced at $160, the RX 6400 is the most affordable new release in a long time, but does it have the graphics horsepower to deliver an AAA gaming experience?

Show full review

 

[AdmiralThrawn]

Yikes 46 fps on witcher 3 1080p. I know it's entry level but that game is over 7 years old. Not the best from AMD, performance might be better with a 6gb model.

Additionally I just noticed Forza 5, a console game. Only gets 20-30 fps. I feel like this card is lacking but who knows it could be good for some games like apex or Terraria.

 

[defaultluser]

Well, the 1650 is still a better slot-powwered option,.

Yikes 46 fps on witcher 3 1080p. I know it's entry level but that game is over 7 years old. Not the best from AMD, performance might be better with a 6gb model.

Additionally I just noticed Forza 5, a console game. Only gets 20-30 fps. I feel like this card is lacking but who knows it could be good for some games like apex or Terraria.

Yeah, a 96-bit bus would have been essential to keep that already-castrated x4 connection fed.

There seems to be power to spare in these things...unless the target here is a replacement fr RX 550? Maybe if they included it in the more expensive 6500?

 

[GoldenX]

I'm pretty sure if AMD allowed proper VRAM overclocking, this thing could do a lot better. It's the main performance limitation after running it in PCIe 3.0.
The 6500 XT is rock solid at 2400MHz, it could go higher, I hope someone manages to unlock that somehow.

 

[ModEl4]

@W1zzard out of curiosity, in your 6500XT Pulse review (stock clocks, no OC) 1650 super was only 1% faster in 1080p, now is 6% faster, did you change something in the review process?

https://tpucdn.com/review/sapphire-radeon-rx-6500-xt-pulse/images/relative-performance_1920-1080.png

 

[W1zzard]

did you change something in the review process?

Yeah, new games, new drivers

 

[ModEl4]

@W1zzard out of curiosity, in your 6500XT Pulse review (stock clocks, no OC) 1650 super was only 1% faster in 1080p, now is 6% faster, did you change something in the review process?

https://tpucdn.com/review/sapphire-radeon-rx-6500-xt-pulse/images/relative-performance_1920-1080.png

Thanks, sorry I just saw the new games.

 

[catulitechup]

@W1zzard very good review however lack of 720p, this card suffer with many games at 1080p

raytracing in this card level is a joke but results are..................

decode and encode capabilities are more usefull than fucking joke raytracing

 

[ARF]

The whole AMD management in the Graphics division should be fired and replaced by normal employees.

 

[catulitechup]

The whole AMD management in the Graphics division should be fired and replaced by normal employees.

only can think about this:

 

[ModEl4]

Lol what a dud, in a PCI-express 3 system should be -10%, so RX570 is going to be around 30% faster in 1080p.
Why in the early design stages AMD team thought that this is going to be acceptable for the desktop segment I don't know. It would be preferable not to launch a desktop Navi 24 model at all, and have only mobile solutions.
The performance will not be so easily tracked, no PCI-express 3 deficit , you would have the APU option for encoding and less negativity all around, now even the mobile suffers from all this negativity potentially influencing the future OEM RX6400 based contracts.

 

[docnorth]

My (maybe unfounded) guess is that the performance loss on pci-e 3 will be smaller or negligible. IIRC 1030gt runs on pci-e 3 x4, of course with only 1/3 of rx 6400 performance to be fair. But still 1650 performance for 159 usd in 2022 is rather disappointing. A slightly larger GPU using let’s say 15 more watts could maybe reach rx 570 levels and still remain slot-powered.

P.S. @W1zzard I still hope you can find time and check pci-e scaling. Thanks anyway for the review.

 

[W1zzard]

P.S. @W1zzard I still hope you can find time and check pci-e scaling. Thanks anyway for the review.

AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT PCI-Express Scaling

The AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT comes with only a narrow PCI-Express x4 interface. In this article, we took a closer look at how performance is affected when running at PCI-Express 3.0; also included is a full set of data for the academically interesting setting of PCI-Express 2.0.

www.techpowerup.com

Results should be similar, not sure if worth doing another round of testing

 

[RedBear]

Why in the early design stages AMD team thought that this is going to be acceptable for the desktop segment I don't know.

It was acceptable because the GPU market was willing to accept pretty much anything. They just had to raise a bit the official price in order for AMD and its partners to get a nice fat margin from the extra Navi 24 chips that they didn't need for laptops. Reputation was the only casualty.

 

[ghazi]

So AMD released a 53W RX 470 at a $20 discount after 6 years. Bravo.

 

[Valantar]

As I've said elsewhere the MSRP of this is about $40-50 too high, but other than that I don't see what people are complaining about. It's a low end GPU, and it delivers passable performance at excellent efficiency. It's not a 1080p Ultra card, but expecting it to be is just silly. As long as prices creep down to reasonable levels, this is an excellent entry level card, perfect for the 400 tier. If anything it just highlights how stupidly configured the 6500 XT is, managing just 28% more performance for a massive power increase.

Now for them to deliver the fully enabled Navi 24, <75W RX 6500 non-XT most people in this market would really want. Sure, you can downclock an XT, but that's a hassle, and it needs a 6-pin. Slot powered full Navi 24 (at a decent price) would be fantastic.

 

[ModEl4]

It was acceptable because the GPU market was willing to accept pretty much anything. They just had to raise a bit the official price in order for AMD and its partners to get a nice fat margin from the extra Navi 24 chips that they didn't need for laptops. Reputation was the only casualty.

I know, although I said early design stages not post 2020 era, unless AMD team was forecasting somehow the inflation which is in contrast with what RX6800XT/6800 pricing strategy indicates.
You say reputation was the only casualty, this isn't a negligible casualty, they made a wrong judgment call imo.
The should have forecasted production to suffice for mobile contracts only or launch with competitive desktop pricing (RX 6400 launched now and it doesn't seem to be acceptable in the same way RX 6500XT wasn't acceptable forcing AMD partners to sell at SRP or below in some cases in Europe when at the same time were selling 6800XT/6800 with +50% from SRP (and Nvidia solutions also +50% in ASUS/MSI/GB case) So no, I don't think partners gained anything from the price strategy only AMD had some financial gains, partners lose potential margins and reputation (GB 3 fan 6500XT design lol)

 

[Selaya]

why is OCing completely locked on this fucking gpu??????
amd becoming the new intel FML

EDIT: given the primary target audience for this card, would it be possible to add some RTX A2000 results to the charts?

 

[tussinman]

So AMD released a 53W RX 470 at a $20 discount after 6 years. Bravo.

Yeah I shook my head a week ago when the rumor was that this card was going to be somewhere inbetween the GTX 960 and gtx 970 level performance.

Thats like 2014 era mid-range performance on a 150+ dollar 2022 card

 

[docnorth]

EDIT: given the primary target audience for this card, would it be possible to add some RTX A2000 results to the charts?

+1. Well RTX a2000 was marginally below 3050 without OC and again marginally above 3050 with OC.

 

[Selaya]

As I've said elsewhere the MSRP of this is about $40-50 too high, but other than that I don't see what people are complaining about. It's a low end GPU, and it delivers passable performance at excellent efficiency. It's not a 1080p Ultra card, but expecting it to be is just silly. As long as prices creep down to reasonable levels, this is an excellent entry level card, perfect for the 400 tier. If anything it just highlights how stupidly configured the 6500 XT is, managing just 28% more performance for a massive power increase.

Now for them to deliver the fully enabled Navi 24, <75W RX 6500 non-XT most people in this market would really want. Sure, you can downclock an XT, but that's a hassle, and it needs a 6-pin. Slot powered full Navi 24 (at a decent price) would be fantastic.

considering the (lack of) featureset of this card ... no.
this is definitely a <$100 card.

i mean, for fucking god's sake YOU CANT EVEN OVERCLOCK THIS CARD
thats ... something. thats less features than a gt 1030.

 

[lightofhonor]

I reviewed this on my YouTube channel. It fairs pretty well in eSports titles and on low quality settings for newer games.

 

[simlife]

"Remember, there were times when entry-level graphics card cost around $100"

yeah the same time 11 bucks a hour was consider decent in low cost non city's now be 14-15+ or wtf and over a year fyi that is a ton of money before any overtime if you want to do math... companys cant pay enginers and taxes and ect ect ect cant and do 100... keep in mind tech is CHEAP now.. the neo geo console was 649.99 dollars in the 90s when if you made 11 bucks you were doing decent for yourself... perspective boy perspective..

As I've said elsewhere the MSRP of this is about $40-50 too high, but other than that I don't see what people are complaining about. It's a low end GPU, and it delivers passable performance at excellent efficiency. It's not a 1080p Ultra card, but expecting it to be is just silly. As long as prices creep down to reasonable levels, this is an excellent entry level card, perfect for the 400 tier. If anything it just highlights how stupidly configured the 6500 XT is, managing just 28% more performance for a massive power increase.

Now for them to deliver the fully enabled Navi 24, <75W RX 6500 non-XT most people in this market would really want. Sure, you can downclock an XT, but that's a hassle, and it needs a 6-pin. Slot powered full Navi 24 (at a decent price) would be fantastic.

"Remember, there were times when entry-level graphics card cost around $100"

yeah the same time 11 bucks a hour was consider decent in low cost non city's now be 14-15+ or wtf and over a year fyi that is a ton of money before any overtime if you want to do math... companys cant pay enginers and taxes and ect ect ect cant and do 100... keep in mind tech is CHEAP now.. the neo geo console was 649.99 dollars in the 90s when if you made 11 bucks you were doing decent for yourself...( and a low end computer could cost like 2k again a TON for the time) perspective boy perspective..

you have to pay the warehouses, driver if not the brick and mortor ppl.. before the tech and actual cost of copper ect ect of everything they use...(just to have a physicals item that works is a base cost then the ppl who ship or stores who stock it... this is the 1030 again... 100000% just dont go super cheap ppl dont do that when they buy plains or cars their is a mimmum cost you want
"its to high becuse its power is to low"... if you said it before then you are wrong before... unless you think ppl should make 30k or less to stock or ship stuff like food other items

 

[Tetras]

So AMD released a 53W RX 470 at a $20 discount after 6 years. Bravo.

awesome (* a 53W RX470 -$20 -20% performance)

the next gen will be different

 

[mechtech]

2017 RX 570 called

Sapphire Radeon RX 570 Pulse 4 GB Review

Pulse is a new graphics card series by Sapphire, which does away with some rarely needed features in order to achieve better pricing. The Radeon RX 570 Pulse we review today is only $10 more expensive than the RX 570 base price and still comes with a backplate and an overclock out of the box.

www.techpowerup.com

it said bahahahahaha

As I've said elsewhere the MSRP of this is about $40-50 too high, but other than that I don't see what people are complaining about. It's a low end GPU, and it delivers passable performance at excellent efficiency. It's not a 1080p Ultra card, but expecting it to be is just silly. As long as prices creep down to reasonable levels, this is an excellent entry level card, perfect for the 400 tier. If anything it just highlights how stupidly configured the 6500 XT is, managing just 28% more performance for a massive power increase.

Now for them to deliver the fully enabled Navi 24, <75W RX 6500 non-XT most people in this market would really want. Sure, you can downclock an XT, but that's a hassle, and it needs a 6-pin. Slot powered full Navi 24 (at a decent price) would be fantastic.

W1zz needs to add a GT1030 to the list to compare this card too