• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

PC Gamer: RX 6500 XT looks worse on paper than AMD's $199 GPU from six years ago

Joined
29 Mar 2007
Posts
3,791
Location
Essex
Idk why people are so upset about this card it's basically a 1650 super, brand new with warranty. Every semi new build will be PCI 4 anyway.

Look how much some crusty old used zero warranty 1650 supers are going for on eBay.

For the popular shooters right now. Apex, valorant, fortnite, warzone they're all cpu bound anyway.

this gpu is more than fine at 1080p.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
11 Jun 2021
Posts
1,024
Location
Earth
Idk why people are so upset about this card it's basically a 1650 super, brand new with warranty. Every semi new build will be PCI 4 anyway.

Look how much some crusty old used zero warranty 1650 supers are going for on eBay.

For the popular shooters right now. Apex, valorant, fortnite, warzone they're all cpu bound anyway.

this gpu is more than fine at 1080p.

u8fzyTw.jpg


I sang AMD praises on high for Zen3, only fair that they get a good slating for this POS :D
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Feb 2015
Posts
6,480
Idk why people are so upset about this card it's basically a 1650 super, brand new with warranty. Every semi new build will be PCI 4 anyway.

Look how much some crusty old used zero warranty 1650 supers are going for on eBay.

For the popular shooters right now. Apex, valorant, fortnite, warzone they're all cpu bound anyway.

this gpu is more than fine at 1080p.

People today, especially those on particular corners of the internet, have developed an almost pathological need to find outrage and offense in everything, they're taking a product release like a personal slight. For sure they've been plugged in too long without taking in some fresh air outside, that's why their thinking is so warped. Hell, you see even the reviewers have been affected by this malaise.

For sane people it's easy to simply look at the product, evaluate it within the market conditions that exist (not what used to be, or could be) and then decide if it's something worth buying or not. Apparently that's too much to ask from people these days.
 
Soldato
Joined
24 Aug 2003
Posts
3,399
Location
Gillingham Kent
People today, especially those on particular corners of the internet, have developed an almost pathological need to find outrage and offense in everything, they're taking a product release like a personal slight. For sure they've been plugged in too long without taking in some fresh air outside, that's why their thinking is so warped. Hell, you see even the reviewers have been affected by this malaise.

For sane people it's easy to simply look at the product, evaluate it within the market conditions that exist (not what used to be, or could be) and then decide if it's something worth buying or not. Apparently that's too much to ask from people these days.

Yes i done all that and my conclusion is its a POS
 
Associate
Joined
27 Mar 2010
Posts
1,463
Location
Denmark
This card seems to fit best the casual gamer with an old PCIe 3.0 system who needs to replace their dusty 5+ years old gfx card and is happy using normal graphic settings in games.
But why AMD choose to also limit the PCIe interface (4GB ram discourages miners so that’s understandable) to the smallest possible is beyond me since it hurts performance on older PCIe 3.0 systems.
 
Soldato
Joined
3 Sep 2008
Posts
3,401
This card seems to fit best the casual gamer with an old PCIe 3.0 system who needs to replace their dusty 10+ years old gfx card and is happy using normal graphic settings in games.
But why AMD choose to also limit the PCIe interface (4GB ram discourages miners so that’s understandable) to the smallest possible is beyond me since it hurts performance on older PCIe 3.0 systems.

FTFY
 
Associate
Joined
19 Dec 2009
Posts
1,700
This card seems to fit best the casual gamer with an old PCIe 3.0 system who needs to replace their dusty 5+ years old gfx card and is happy using normal graphic settings in games.
But why AMD choose to also limit the PCIe interface (4GB ram discourages miners so that’s understandable) to the smallest possible is beyond me since it hurts performance on older PCIe 3.0 systems.

A casual gamer should buy an Xbox instead of this card.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2019
Posts
17,464
Idk why people are so upset about this card it's basically a 1650 super, brand new with warranty. Every semi new build will be PCI 4 anyway.

Look how much some crusty old used zero warranty 1650 supers are going for on eBay.

For the popular shooters right now. Apex, valorant, fortnite, warzone they're all cpu bound anyway.

this gpu is more than fine at 1080p.

people are mad because cheaper cards from 2016 perform better, that's why!

At least when Nvidia screws you on price you get extra performance for it. With the 6500xt AMDs has screwed gamers on price and stolen performance away from them at the same time - Steve at Hardware Unboxed was right when the said "the 6500xt is the worst graphics card that has been released in my 20 year pc hardware career"
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
8 Nov 2006
Posts
22,966
Location
London
Reminds me of

8800GT -> 9800GTX -> 9800GTX+ -> GTS 250

But at least that was slightly better each time and wasn't crippled in features. Nevertheless nvidia were slated over it. Funny how people are desperate to let AMD off the hook.
 
Permabanned
Joined
7 Oct 2018
Posts
2,170
Location
Behind Pluto
Reminds me of

8800GT -> 9800GTX -> 9800GTX+ -> GTS 250

But at least that was slightly better each time. Nevertheless nvidia were slated over it. Funny how people are desperate to let AMD off the hook.

That was a strange era of video cards, on the one hand my 4870 was faster yet way less smooth compared to the then crappy 9800GTX+ that scored lower in all benchmarks, yet I went back to it as it was far more playable.

Trusty G92, had those cards on the AM3 Dragon platform (790FX).
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
12 May 2011
Posts
6,143
Location
Southampton
Reminds me of

8800GT -> 9800GTX -> 9800GTX+ -> GTS 250

But at least that was slightly better each time and wasn't crippled in features. Nevertheless nvidia were slated over it. Funny how people are desperate to let AMD off the hook.

I think the only one that works there is 8800 to 9800. The 9800GTX+ was just a mid-life clocked-up response to an ATi card (I forget which one), not a new generation mainstream launch. In much the same was the 8800GT was mid-life upgrade to the 8800GTS (I'm glad they moved away from this naming scheme!).

But the GTS250 was identical to the 9800GTX+, the fastest Nvidia card at the time, but the 250 is at the 'bottom of the middle' of the product stack, you had 260, 270 280 and 290 above it. Kind of like the 3060 is similar to the old 'fastest card of the time' 2080ti (I think?).

Meanwhile the 6500 is a bottom of the middle card replacing a previous bottom of the middle card, not a high end card.

Now my head hurts
 
Associate
Joined
6 Nov 2005
Posts
2,417
Genuinely curious, do people think the shortages and manufacturing cost increases are fake?

Because as bad as this card is and as bad as the market in general is, I don't think AMD are releasing a card like this because they think its gonna line their pockets.

If anything its more like what's the cheapest thing we can make that will allow people who want to buy 5000 series CPUs be able to get a video out

Edit- Oooo I've just thought of a new conspiracy theory, AMD specifically chose to go with gen 4 by 4 PCIe to discourage people from using the 6500xt in older machines and instead to buy new CPUs and motherboards
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom