• 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.

AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT & Radeon RX 5500 7nm Navi 14 GPUs Unveiled

I was looking for reference to the x8 lanes and found this from the aandtech review. Oh how wrong they were....

While we're on the subject of PCIe, it’s worth mentioning quickly that while the Sapphire Pulse is physically a PCIe x16 card, electrically it’s only a x8 card. A traditional cost-optimization move for AMD, they have only given the underlying Navi 14 GPU 8 PCIe lanes, so while the card uses a full length x16 connector, it only actually has 8 lanes to work with. This won’t present a performance problem for the card on PCIe 3.0 systems, and better still as Navi offers PCIe 4.0 connectivity, it means those 8 lanes are twice as fast when paired with a PCIe 4.0 host – where coincidentally enough, AMD’s Ryzen processors are the only game in town right now.
Click to expand...

I am curious if my b350 board that still has the beta pci-e 4 bios on it (hopefully I am not going crazy and I did update it for that lol).... Would work better.
 
Hardware Unboxed have followed up on the PCIe x8 "issue".


Really hard to draw any solid conclusions, other than that it seems to see much less of a/no performance penalty at x8 3.0 on an Intel platform, yet can in the same test scenario with Zen 2. The major difference seems to come when you're out of VRAM, when the faster bus speed helps mitigate the performance penalty of accessing system memory. Then there's also Battlefield V as an outlier, which sees an across-the-board performance increase from PCIe 4.0 for some reason, especially in terms of minimum framerate.
 
If true and not drivers or something, why would AMD do this, to forced pcie X8 hurts the 5500xt 4GB on pcie 3.0 on some titles it just gimps the card against other cards even last Gen cards as hardly anyone will pair this card with a expensive 570 board and most will just drop it into a pcie 3.0 board., it has to be cost cutting, this is why people say AMD shoots themselves in the foot time and time again, AMD keeps giving AMMO for people to **** off AMD.
 
queamin said:
If true and not drivers or something, why would AMD do this, to forced pcie X8 hurts the 5500xt 4GB on pcie 3.0 on some titles it just gimps the card against other cards even last Gen cards as hardly anyone will pair this card with a expensive 570 board and most will just drop it into a pcie 3.0 board., it has to be cost cutting, this is why people say AMD shoots themselves in the foot time and time again, AMD keeps giving AMMO for people to **** off AMD.
Click to expand...

Saving money to make more profit per board. Zero other reason. They can justify it with the pci-e 4 boards, but those are crazy prices for a budget platform as we already discussed.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
yeah 1650 super over the 5500xt 4GB junk, GJ AMD.
Click to expand...

The problem for AMD is that the super clocks realllly well. It also performs better in memory intensive areas. Under the memory limit the 5500xt 4gb is still a good card but priced too high for the limitations. Against the other AMD cards which there are plenty of stock, it is stupidly priced.
 
Scougar said:
They are competing against themselves *facepalm*.
Click to expand...

Well, AMD going to struggle kill the 570/580/590 immediately, like Nvidia 2 years later still trying to kill the GTX1080Ti and took them 4 years to kill the GTX970 with a worthy replacement.
And especially today is crazy someone not grab a RX590 8GB and contemplates to buy a 1650S 4GB. Thought, in this forum I have seen people justifying buying £250 GTX1660 & 1660S over the similarly priced RX5700
 
After learning about the pci 8x debacle and the 4gb model getting hosed if you go passed the memory limit....I have ruled out the card. I actually WANT.to buy the 8GB version but it just seems a bad value proposition compared to AMDs older cards or Nvidas.

They really should have kept the 24 CUs to justify the inflated price.

Actively looking at 1650 supers / 580 and 590 / 1660 and 1660 supers. 6gb really seems like the new minimum looking at game reviews.

Psychology.. buying the older cards feels like a failure lol. In reality it is a reasonably smart move. (Quibbling over a few tens here when I lose thousands on car trade in' lol)
 
Last edited:
I was in Microcenter this afternoon (I assume it's OK to mention.. pretty sure they don't ship to the UK!), and there was an amazing lack of Nvidia product. That is the first time I can ever remember that happening. Pretty much the biggest set of cards they had were the 1650's (non-supers) that were clearly overstocked, and now extremely overpriced. AMD product galore, such a selection. 5500 XT's 590's. Was just nice to see the upswing.

Also found the first reasonabley priced x570 motherboard from Asrock. I know this is the GPU thread, but I was very surprised at the cost (under 150). Now linking this back.. that does make it a LITTLE closer to making sense for a 5500 with PCI-E 4.. but those are still XT's overpriced lol.

Oh AMD, why oh why didn't you give us the full fat XT, and actually make it a worthwhile purchase to justify the clearly inflated costs.
 
Scougar said:
After learning about the pci 8x debacle and the 4gb model getting hosed if you go passed the memory limit....I have ruled out the card. I actually WANT.to buy the 8GB version but it just seems a bad value proposition compared to AMDs older cards or Nvidas.

They really should have kept the 24 CUs to justify the inflated price.

Actively looking at 1650 supers / 580 and 590 / 1660 and 1660 supers. 6gb really seems like the new minimum looking at game reviews.

Psychology.. buying the older cards feels like a failure lol. In reality it is a reasonably smart move. (Quibbling over a few tens here when I lose thousands on car trade in' lol)
Click to expand...

In terms of value you can't beat a Vega for £200 or a 590 for £150 both with 8gbs of VRAM. It'll be a while until new gen match that value.
 
Scougar said:
I was in Microcenter this afternoon (I assume it's OK to mention.. pretty sure they don't ship to the UK!), and there was an amazing lack of Nvidia product. That is the first time I can ever remember that happening. Pretty much the biggest set of cards they had were the 1650's (non-supers) that were clearly overstocked, and now extremely overpriced. AMD product galore, such a selection. 5500 XT's 590's. Was just nice to see the upswing.

Also found the first reasonabley priced x570 motherboard from Asrock. I know this is the GPU thread, but I was very surprised at the cost (under 150). Now linking this back.. that does make it a LITTLE closer to making sense for a 5500 with PCI-E 4.. but those are still XT's overpriced lol.

Oh AMD, why oh why didn't you give us the full fat XT, and actually make it a worthwhile purchase to justify the clearly inflated costs.
Click to expand...

I recall the 590 was launched at a stupid price and made no sense over the 580, wasnt far off a discounted vega. It settled to a much better price which the 5500XT will do too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom