PSA: DON'T Buy The RX 6500-XT (Unless There's LITERALLY Nothing Else)

[r.linder]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFpuJqx9Qmw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArW4-mkGHSw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmE8iZWaLWE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5_oM3Ow_CI

Right out of the gate, the RX 6500-XT is being outperformed by the RX 580, a 5 year old refresh of a 6 year old GPU architecture. It can sometimes win against the 580, but it loses battles against it more than it wins, and there's just other issues with the card, like the fact that it only uses up to 4 PCI-e lanes out of a x16 PCI-e slot, and lacking some encoding support like HEVC.
AMD seems to have intentionally stripped down the 6500-XT, I guess to cut cost, but the MSRP is still basically around the same as what the RX 580 was, and that number doesn't mean anything anymore because of scalpers, that card is probably still going to be scalped even though it's terrible, which makes it even worse for people who might end up buying a scalped 6500-XT.

In my opinion, don't buy the 6500-XT, you're much better off paying more for a GTX 1660 SUPER or RTX 2060. If the 6500-XT sells out, it'll only show AMD that their shady design choices are a-okay with us, but it shouldn't be, this is absolutely disgusting that a 4 year old GPU is still consistently faster than their latest. And don't give me that "well the RX 580 was the top end of Polaris" crap, they've released the RX 590, which is even faster, than the 5500-XT, which was slower than that, and now the 6500-XT, which is basically the same GPU but actually worse in some aspects. The 580 was always a mid-range GPU in actual performance when it launched, now it's just barely above entry level, this isn't acceptable.
I don't really recommend buying Radeon GPUs at all at this point. AMD is starting to become more like Intel and NVIDIA and they're doing it wrong, they're making it too obvious that they're flipping their budget users off. At least their competitors are a lot more subtle about it.

[emoticorpse]

İlk olarak 尺.ㄥ丨几ᗪ乇尺 tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Witski tarafından gönderildi:

So why nvidia sells rtx 2000 when the 1080 / 1080 ti is still superior to anything except 2080 super ?

Moot point, they don't even manufacture those anymore, and when you buy used, you don't get any kind of warranty, so if the card dies, you're just stuck with a dead GPU with no backup plan other than to buy a new GPU if you can't fix it :-)

So for his question you will ignore the numbers?

[r.linder]

İlk olarak Witski tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak 尺.ㄥ丨几ᗪ乇尺 tarafından gönderildi:

I'd be shocked if the 3050 comes out slower than the 6500-XT, considering that the 3060 is around a 2060 SUPER. The 3050 could easily be equal to the 1660 SUPER or Ti.
No point in making an RT GPU if the raster performance is that slow.

Got it, it's a "moot" point only when suits your narrative.
Also moot point.

İlk olarak emoticorpse tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak 尺.ㄥ丨几ᗪ乇尺 tarafından gönderildi:

Moot point, they don't even manufacture those anymore, and when you buy used, you don't get any kind of warranty, so if the card dies, you're just stuck with a dead GPU with no backup plan other than to buy a new GPU if you can't fix it :-)

So for his question you will ignore the numbers?

I think both of you have completely missed the whole point, because no ♥♥♥♥ they weren't going to make the following generation's weakest card better than a 1080 Ti.

The point is, after 5 years and 2 generations of their video cards, they have the gall to release a GPU that is literally worse than their previous generation's lowest end desktop GPU, and that card was barely an improvement over its predecessor. AMD looks to their Polaris users and flips them the bird, telling them to spend more money if you want to upgrade, because we don't care that you want a more affordable GPU to upgrade to.

Has NVIDIA done that? No, not recently. They already learned their lesson.

The 1650 replaced the 1050/Ti, was a pretty good improvement. The 1660 replaced the 1060, was a pretty good improvement. The SUPER and Ti models of 16 series were just there because they could, and guess what, they weren't terrible, but they were just weird additions.

The 2060 was an RT successor to the 1060, the 2070 to the 1070, the 2080 to the 1080, and the 2080 Ti to the 1080 Ti. Who cares if an overclocked 1080 Ti could beat a 2080? That's pretty much to be expected of flagships. But was the RX 580 really a flagship? Hell no, it was a mid-range GPU that could barely compete with the GTX 1060 at launch and had the price tag to match it. In recent times, Radeon barely had any competition in the high end, the best they had it was Vega, and it was just barely reaching for it.

Now look at RTX 30 series, pretty much everything above the 3060 is a pretty substantial improvement, with the 3060 being pretty lackluster but ultimately not actually half bad, it's just about 2070 level, which is pretty much expected. Similar gains with RDNA2, but there were actual high end GPUs involved and not just the same old crap from before, from the Vega 64, to the Radeon VII, to the 5700-XT.

The RX 590 was the first indication that AMD either really didn't care, considering it was a second refresh of the 480. Then the 5500-XT comes out, and it's slower than the last Polaris refresh, but at least slightly faster than the RX 580.
And then AMD decides to take a big stinky dump on their lower end users by dropping them a laptop GPU that performs worse than all three of those cards, while not even using that much less power than its latest predecessor (107W vs 130W TDP).

Is it really that difficult to see the problem with that? It shouldn't, and consumers have a right to be outraged by the fact that AMD is not only not making any progress in the low end, but went out of their way to make their low end WORSE than last generation, and then peddling it off like it's not.
You can see the same thing happening with their CPUs now, there's no new Ryzen 3 CPUs or Ryzen 5 Non-X CPUs for Zen3, only APUs that are slightly behind what a 5100, 5300X, and 5600 would actually be without that iGP in the way that can't even be used if you're using a video card. As a result, there's no budget option for Ryzen CPUs anymore unless you're buying used.

[emoticorpse]

İlk olarak 尺.ㄥ丨几ᗪ乇尺 tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak Witski tarafından gönderildi:

Got it, it's a "moot" point only when suits your narrative.
Also moot point.

İlk olarak emoticorpse tarafından gönderildi:

So for his question you will ignore the numbers?

I think both of you have completely missed the whole point, because no ♥♥♥♥ they weren't going to make the following generation's weakest card better than a 1080 Ti.

The point is, after 5 years and 2 generations of their video cards, they have the gall to release a GPU that is literally worse than their previous generation's lowest end desktop GPU, and that card was barely an improvement over its predecessor. AMD looks to their Polaris users and flips them the bird, telling them to spend more money if you want to upgrade, because we don't care that you want a more affordable GPU to upgrade to.

Has NVIDIA done that? No, not recently. They already learned their lesson.

The 1650 replaced the 1050/Ti, was a pretty good improvement. The 1660 replaced the 1060, was a pretty good improvement. The SUPER and Ti models of 16 series were just there because they could, and guess what, they weren't terrible, but they were just weird additions.

The 2060 was an RT successor to the 1060, the 2070 to the 1070, the 2080 to the 1080, and the 2080 Ti to the 1080 Ti. Who cares if an overclocked 1080 Ti could beat a 2080? That's pretty much to be expected of flagships. But was the RX 580 really a flagship? Hell no, it was a mid-range GPU that could barely compete with the GTX 1060 at launch and had the price tag to match it. In recent times, Radeon barely had any competition in the high end, the best they had it was Vega, and it was just barely reaching for it.

Now look at RTX 30 series, pretty much everything above the 3060 is a pretty substantial improvement, with the 3060 being pretty lackluster but ultimately not actually half bad, it's just about 2070 level, which is pretty much expected. Similar gains with RDNA2, but there were actual high end GPUs involved and not just the same old crap from before, from the Vega 64, to the Radeon VII, to the 5700-XT.

The RX 590 was the first indication that AMD either really didn't care, considering it was a second refresh of the 480. Then the 5500-XT comes out, and it's slower than the last Polaris refresh, but at least slightly faster than the RX 580.
And then AMD decides to take a big stinky dump on their lower end users by dropping them a laptop GPU that performs worse than all three of those cards, while not even using that much less power than its latest predecessor (107W vs 130W TDP).

Is it really that difficult to see the problem with that? It shouldn't, and consumers have a right to be outraged by the fact that AMD is not only not making any progress in the low end, but went out of their way to make their low end WORSE than last generation, and then peddling it off like it's not.

So when Nvidia came out with the Super versions of the 2xxx immediately obsoleting the originals and screwing over people who just paid retail price for those cards when they could have had a Super version, where were you screaming "these cards shouldn't exist!. They're screwing over the consumers!?

You were eagerly suggesting those Super cards. Nothing wrong there.

[r.linder]

İlk olarak emoticorpse tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak 尺.ㄥ丨几ᗪ乇尺 tarafından gönderildi:

I think both of you have completely missed the whole point, because no ♥♥♥♥ they weren't going to make the following generation's weakest card better than a 1080 Ti.

The point is, after 5 years and 2 generations of their video cards, they have the gall to release a GPU that is literally worse than their previous generation's lowest end desktop GPU, and that card was barely an improvement over its predecessor. AMD looks to their Polaris users and flips them the bird, telling them to spend more money if you want to upgrade, because we don't care that you want a more affordable GPU to upgrade to.

Has NVIDIA done that? No, not recently. They already learned their lesson.

The 1650 replaced the 1050/Ti, was a pretty good improvement. The 1660 replaced the 1060, was a pretty good improvement. The SUPER and Ti models of 16 series were just there because they could, and guess what, they weren't terrible, but they were just weird additions.

The 2060 was an RT successor to the 1060, the 2070 to the 1070, the 2080 to the 1080, and the 2080 Ti to the 1080 Ti. Who cares if an overclocked 1080 Ti could beat a 2080? That's pretty much to be expected of flagships. But was the RX 580 really a flagship? Hell no, it was a mid-range GPU that could barely compete with the GTX 1060 at launch and had the price tag to match it. In recent times, Radeon barely had any competition in the high end, the best they had it was Vega, and it was just barely reaching for it.

Now look at RTX 30 series, pretty much everything above the 3060 is a pretty substantial improvement, with the 3060 being pretty lackluster but ultimately not actually half bad, it's just about 2070 level, which is pretty much expected. Similar gains with RDNA2, but there were actual high end GPUs involved and not just the same old crap from before, from the Vega 64, to the Radeon VII, to the 5700-XT.

The RX 590 was the first indication that AMD either really didn't care, considering it was a second refresh of the 480. Then the 5500-XT comes out, and it's slower than the last Polaris refresh, but at least slightly faster than the RX 580.
And then AMD decides to take a big stinky dump on their lower end users by dropping them a laptop GPU that performs worse than all three of those cards, while not even using that much less power than its latest predecessor (107W vs 130W TDP).

Is it really that difficult to see the problem with that? It shouldn't, and consumers have a right to be outraged by the fact that AMD is not only not making any progress in the low end, but went out of their way to make their low end WORSE than last generation, and then peddling it off like it's not.

So when Nvidia came out with the Super versions of the 2xxx immediately obsoleting the originals and screwing over people who just paid retail price for those cards when they could have had a Super version, where were you screaming "these cards shouldn't exist!. They're screwing over the consumers!?

You were eagerly suggesting those Super cards. Nothing wrong there.

I'm not ignoring the fact that they did that, but at least the SUPER cards were at least better than at least the non-Ti variants. That isn't even as close to being as bad as the 6500-XT is compared to the 5500-XT, they're BOTH low end GPUs in the same nomenclature and hardware class, but the older one is faster.

The 2070 SUPER was one rank down and it was REALLY close to the 1080 Ti, the 2080 SUPER was faster and in the same general class, the 2060 SUPER is of course slower but it's 2 classes lower.

At least NVIDIA actually releases cards that are actually an improvement to their DIRECT PREDECESSOR. AMD was doing that too up until they decided to use a laptop GPU that had no business becoming a desktop GPU.

[emoticorpse]

İlk olarak 尺.ㄥ丨几ᗪ乇尺 tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak emoticorpse tarafından gönderildi:

So when Nvidia came out with the Super versions of the 2xxx immediately obsoleting the originals and screwing over people who just paid retail price for those cards when they could have had a Super version, where were you screaming "these cards shouldn't exist!. They're screwing over the consumers!?

You were eagerly suggesting those Super cards. Nothing wrong there.

I'm not ignoring the fact that they did that, but at least the SUPER cards were at least better than at least the non-Ti variants. That isn't even as close to being as bad as the 6500-XT is compared to the 5500-XT, they're BOTH low end GPUs, but the older one is faster.

You are ignoring the fact that they did that (the big point is past tense). Like I said where were you when they did that? That's pretty busted up of them to do that to the people who JUST paid the price for a regular 2xxx card to find out people can now buy a Super version for the same exact price. So you're whole entire point here is AMD using anti-consumer practices and you sure didn't point that out and say "we need to let Nvidia know this won't stand, stop buying Supers". So if it's about business practices leave out the "AMD knows they can get away with this so they did it" stuff just like you did for Nvidia, or well too late now since the Super thing is already done with. Can't go back in time and change how you behaved so it's consistent with what you're doing now. All you can do is not talk about business practices for either, yet here you are talking about AMD doing shady stuff when it comes to making a buck off selling gaming hardware.

Focus on the numbers alone, sure ok. At least that alone would begin to make some sense.

Also so you're saying the 5500 Xt is faster than the 6500 xt?

[r.linder]

İlk olarak emoticorpse tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak 尺.ㄥ丨几ᗪ乇尺 tarafından gönderildi:

I'm not ignoring the fact that they did that, but at least the SUPER cards were at least better than at least the non-Ti variants. That isn't even as close to being as bad as the 6500-XT is compared to the 5500-XT, they're BOTH low end GPUs, but the older one is faster.

You are ignoring the fact that they did that (the big point is past tense). Like I said where were you when they did that? That's pretty busted up of them to do that to the people who JUST paid the price for a regular 2xxx card to find out people can now buy a Super version for the same exact price. So you're whole entire point here is AMD using anti-consumer practices and you sure didn't point that out and say "we need to let Nvidia know this won't stand, stop buying Supers". So if it's about business practices leave out the "AMD knows they can get away with this so they did it" stuff just like you did for Nvidia, or well too late now since the Super thing is already done with. Can't go back in time and change how you behaved so it's consistent with what you're doing now. All you can do is not talk about business practices for either, yet here you are talking about AMD doing shady stuff when it comes to making a buck off selling gaming hardware.

Focus on the numbers alone, sure ok. At least that alone would begin to make some sense.

As if the SUPER cards were even as outrageous of a thing as this, it's not even close.

The 6500-XT should be faster than the 5500-XT, not slower, they're both low end cards, capiche? It's slower, AMD made a worse decision than NVIDIA did in recent history, pretty simple concept to understand, I thought. Apparently not, apparently it's a thought process beyond some people.

Mods can lock the thread, AMD simps and sympathisers are only focusing on the fact that I'm not happy with AMD's decisions with this card and not WHY I'm not happy with AMD about their decisions with this card.

[r.linder]

İlk olarak emoticorpse tarafından gönderildi:

Also so you're saying the 5500 Xt is faster than the 6500 xt?

Are you seriously responding in defence to AMD when you're not even aware that it's slower than its RDNA predecessor?

https://www.theverge.com/22892273/amd-radeon-rx-6500-xt-meta-review-gpu-graphics-card
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/amd-radeon-rx-6500-xt-poor-performance-explained-by-amd-employee/?amp
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6500-xt-review-xfx
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFpuJqx9Qmw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqHijT83sVE

Should probably actually enlighten yourself with the performance benchmarks and reviews, then maybe it'd actually make sense why people hate it.

[emoticorpse]

İlk olarak 尺.ㄥ丨几ᗪ乇尺 tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak emoticorpse tarafından gönderildi:

You are ignoring the fact that they did that (the big point is past tense). Like I said where were you when they did that? That's pretty busted up of them to do that to the people who JUST paid the price for a regular 2xxx card to find out people can now buy a Super version for the same exact price. So you're whole entire point here is AMD using anti-consumer practices and you sure didn't point that out and say "we need to let Nvidia know this won't stand, stop buying Supers". So if it's about business practices leave out the "AMD knows they can get away with this so they did it" stuff just like you did for Nvidia, or well too late now since the Super thing is already done with. Can't go back in time and change how you behaved so it's consistent with what you're doing now. All you can do is not talk about business practices for either, yet here you are talking about AMD doing shady stuff when it comes to making a buck off selling gaming hardware.

Focus on the numbers alone, sure ok. At least that alone would begin to make some sense.

As if the SUPER cards were even as outrageous of a thing as this, it's not even close.

The 6500-XT should be faster than the 5500-XT, not slower, they're both low end cards, capiche? It's slower, AMD made a worse decision than NVIDIA did in recent history, pretty simple concept to understand, I thought. Apparently not, apparently it's a thought process beyond some people.

Mods can lock the thread, AMD simps and sympathisers are only focusing on the fact that I'm not happy with AMD's decisions with this card and not WHY I'm not happy with AMD about their decisions with this card.

No one cares if you're unhappy about it. It's your life. It's the fact that we have to hear about it.

[r.linder]

İlk olarak emoticorpse tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak 尺.ㄥ丨几ᗪ乇尺 tarafından gönderildi:

As if the SUPER cards were even as outrageous of a thing as this, it's not even close.

The 6500-XT should be faster than the 5500-XT, not slower, they're both low end cards, capiche? It's slower, AMD made a worse decision than NVIDIA did in recent history, pretty simple concept to understand, I thought. Apparently not, apparently it's a thought process beyond some people.

Mods can lock the thread, AMD simps and sympathisers are only focusing on the fact that I'm not happy with AMD's decisions with this card and not WHY I'm not happy with AMD about their decisions with this card.

No one cares if you're unhappy about it. It's your life. It's the fact that we have to hear about it.

Unsubscribe and ignore it, you chose to spend time responding to it, that makes it your own problem :-)

[emoticorpse]

İlk olarak 尺.ㄥ丨几ᗪ乇尺 tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak emoticorpse tarafından gönderildi:

No one cares if you're unhappy about it. It's your life. It's the fact that we have to hear about it.

Unsubscribe and ignore it, you chose to spend time responding to it, that makes it your own problem :-)

I never subscribed to begin with yet your blog came to me. Hehe I don't want to leave here on bad terms though. So really good luck. Maybe one day I will agree with you but so far not today.

[r.linder]

İlk olarak 尺.ㄥ丨几ᗪ乇尺 tarafından gönderildi:

İlk olarak emoticorpse tarafından gönderildi:

No one cares if you're unhappy about it. It's your life. It's the fact that we have to hear about it.

you chose to spend time responding to it, that makes it your own problem :-)

^

[UserNotFound]

I dunno, seems like OP is acting like AMD owes him money. The RX 6500XT, while far from being good, does fill an important gap, a budget card with performance enough to do decent enough 1080P gaming. Look at some of the vids on YT, when compared to the $300+ GTX1650 (non-Ti, non-Super), the RX 6500 XT still does pretty well against it, yet would probably cost less. I seriously doubt the RTX 3050 would be priced lower or equal to the RX 6500 XT, and let's not talk about the illusion that is MSRP that is often bandied about. It'd most likely cost a bit more....

Why talk about older cards? That was a different time where even mid range cards cost less than present entry level cards. In the crazy times we're in now, we can forget Moore's Law, or any other observations/theories due to COVID-19 situation that has brought us to the current dystopian GPU/hardware state that we've been afflicted with.

[xSOSxHawkens]

İlk olarak 尺.ㄥ丨几ᗪ乇尺 tarafından gönderildi:

AMD was doing that too up until they decided to use a laptop GPU that had no business becoming a desktop GPU.

Its almost as if you are forgetting that we are in a massive silicon shortage and massive mining demand (despite regulation turns in SEA).

The reason the 6500xt exists at all is b/c it is made on a dif fab and is able to be produced without (meaningful) impact on the majority of the Ryzen/Radeon product stack for the desktop platform.

That heritage alone comes with compromise (AV Encode/Decode) and is a reality of the markets plain and simple. If they made this a full desktop part on TSMC 7nm it would impact anything else 7nm.

As for most of the hardware limits (4GB VRAM, etc) they suck for sure, but they are (mostly) aimed at reducing mining interest which they can and do, and they are also *not* something that can be out-done unlike the competitors mining limiters that have been broken and have seen the "limited" cards becoming profitable.

To be clear, the 6500xt is not a great card, and in both a vaume alone as well as when historically compared to its past co-horts provided the comparison is done from a mindset of pre-2020. In all those contexts, its crap. When looked at through the reality of 2020+ and how the GPU market, mining market, and Silicon shortage have gone...

Well as one smart personal review on one of the models on newegg put it, (paraphrased) "Is little ceasers pizza good? No, buts it hot and ready at an affordable price, much like the 6500xt".

Fact is its a card that worst case matches or outperforms the 1650. A card that new runs for an average of $100 more atm from most retailers. Meanwhile despite being cheaper, in the right builds (pcie gen 4) it can match the 1650s, a card closer to $200-$300 more new at most retailers atm.

Does the 6500xt suck both on paper and compared to the past? Yes. Is it still, when compared to current market conditions, an OK option, oh heck ya. Only thing to wait and see is if the 3050 blows it down... Which will come down to real world pricing. Right now there are three 6500xt card models available to buy at 270 or under on newegg. If the 3050 stays at or near the same price, while also (likely) outperforming, it will be hands down the winner. But if it hits market at 50-100 more, and then shows up at retailers for 100-200 more, well, it will be back to which is better for the budget and wont be a clear cut winner anymore.

If buying *today right now* you can choose between a used 1650 @ ~250-280, a new 1650 @ ~300-350 or a new 1650s @ ~400-500, or you can go with a 6500xt at 270 which will match the 1650 (gen3) or Super (gen-4). You get either warranty at higher cost, or performance on used costs, but not both with the Nvidia options.

I wish the 6500xt were a better product, and to be clear I think it is worse than it had to be. But I also see the reasoning behind most every one of the limits (most, not all, looking at you x4 pcie). It will serve its intended market well in the long run I think, though not as well as it could have had they figured out a way to add hardware encode/decode better.

İlk olarak 尺.ㄥ丨几ᗪ乇尺 tarafından gönderildi:

Mods can lock the thread, AMD simps and sympathisers are only focusing on the fact that I'm not happy with AMD's decisions with this card and not WHY I'm not happy with AMD about their decisions with this card.

I kinda hope they do. This thread seems in no way started as a conversation, it seems to have been started as your fun place to rant on why you dont like the card. No where in this was there discussion or interest in changing your mind. Its set. This whole thread is just you espousing your views and then either getting echo-chambered by others or calling anyone who disagrees a fanboi regardless of their level of logic or discussion intended while hurling insults their way like calling them "simps". At least thats how it seems having watched 13 pages of it over the past few days.

Good popcorn fodder, bad tech thread.

[It's Chase]

If you can actually get it at $200 I'd say that's alright considering the GPU market right now.

Yeah it's worse than an RX 580, but it's this or nothing for most people looking for a budget GPU.

[UserNotFound]

İlk olarak xSOSxHawkens tarafından gönderildi:

Its almost as if you are forgetting that we are in a massive silicon shortage and massive mining demand (despite regulation turns in SEA).

The reason the 6500xt exists at all is b/c it is made on a dif fab and is able to be produced without (meaningful) impact on the majority of the Ryzen/Radeon product stack for the desktop platform.

That heritage alone comes with compromise (AV Encode/Decode) and is a reality of the markets plain and simple. If they made this a full desktop part on TSMC 7nm it would impact anything else 7nm.

As for most of the hardware limits (4GB VRAM, etc) they suck for sure, but they are (mostly) aimed at reducing mining interest which they can and do, and they are also *not* something that can be out-done unlike the competitors mining limiters that have been broken and have seen the "limited" cards becoming profitable.

To be clear, the 6500xt is not a great card, and in both a vaume alone as well as when historically compared to its past co-horts provided the comparison is done from a mindset of pre-2020. In all those contexts, its crap. When looked at through the reality of 2020+ and how the GPU market, mining market, and Silicon shortage have gone...

Well as one smart personal review on one of the models on newegg put it, (paraphrased) "Is little ceasers pizza good? No, buts it hot and ready at an affordable price, much like the 6500xt".

Fact is its a card that worst case matches or outperforms the 1650. A card that new runs for an average of $100 more atm from most retailers. Meanwhile despite being cheaper, in the right builds (pcie gen 4) it can match the 1650s, a card closer to $200-$300 more new at most retailers atm.

Does the 6500xt suck both on paper and compared to the past? Yes. Is it still, when compared to current market conditions, an OK option, oh heck ya. Only thing to wait and see is if the 3050 blows it down... Which will come down to real world pricing. Right now there are three 6500xt card models available to buy at 270 or under on newegg. If the 3050 stays at or near the same price, while also (likely) outperforming, it will be hands down the winner. But if it hits market at 50-100 more, and then shows up at retailers for 100-200 more, well, it will be back to which is better for the budget and wont be a clear cut winner anymore.

If buying *today right now* you can choose between a used 1650 @ ~250-280, a new 1650 @ ~300-350 or a new 1650s @ ~400-500, or you can go with a 6500xt at 270 which will match the 1650 (gen3) or Super (gen-4). You get either warranty at higher cost, or performance on used costs, but not both with the Nvidia options.

I wish the 6500xt were a better product, and to be clear I think it is worse than it had to be. But I also see the reasoning behind most every one of the limits (most, not all, looking at you x4 pcie). It will serve its intended market well in the long run I think, though not as well as it could have had they figured out a way to add hardware encode/decode better.

İlk olarak 尺.ㄥ丨几ᗪ乇尺 tarafından gönderildi:

Mods can lock the thread, AMD simps and sympathisers are only focusing on the fact that I'm not happy with AMD's decisions with this card and not WHY I'm not happy with AMD about their decisions with this card.

I kinda hope they do. This thread seems in no way started as a conversation, it seems to have been started as your fun place to rant on why you dont like the card. No where in this was there discussion or interest in changing your mind. Its set. This whole thread is just you espousing your views and then either getting echo-chambered by others or calling anyone who disagrees a fanboi regardless of their level of logic or discussion intended while hurling insults their way like calling them "simps". At least thats how it seems having watched 13 pages of it over the past few days.

Good popcorn fodder, bad tech thread.

I think the anti-RX 6500XT or haters (OP is obviously right on top) do not acknowledge the fact that this card was compromised so that miners would have no interest in it, thus hopefully freeing up supply to actual budget gamers. I'm expecting the RTX 3050 to be sold at much higher prices (than the illusion that is MSRP), nVidia has a history of soft-modding their product so that it'd still appeal to miners regardless of what half-hearted attempt nVidia implement to limit their mining appeal.

From many YT posts, at 1080P with mix of Low-High settings (depending on game) the card outperforms the GTX 1650 and is yet cheaper than a new GTX 1650 (other than those crazy higher tier models from MSI/Asus/Gigabyte).

Judging from thread title alone, it's obvious the OP has an axe to grind with AMD and this particular card, but IF one can be bought at a lower price than brand new GTX 1650, why not? It outperforms the GTX 1650 at a lower price, what's not to like? That is can't handle 1440P or Ultra setting is a given, the same applies to the GTX 1650, doesn't it? Let's not dwell in the past and talk about it costing as much as a mid range card from 3-4 years ago, it's a different time we live in thanks to COVID-19 and all the various restrictions and supply issues that have been brought about by it.

Again, I repeat, it's not a good card, but strictly for 1080P gaming at reasonable settings, it does get the job done. IF better performance is needed, then the RX 5700XT/RX 6600/RTX2060/RTX3060 would be good considerations, but they would cost a fair bit more, wouldn't they?