a 5600 v. cheap say 100. 160 for 6500xt =260 vs 280 or less 6600 that destroys that 5600.6500xt combo, am i missing something here???
If someone was already planning on doing a new build with pcie 4 then the 6500xt is cheaper than splashing out on a 6600, especially if you are looking for an esport or light gaming rig, say for a child. Although for many people the 6600 will provide more acceptable performance in demanding games like Cyberpunk, be more future proof and be their option.
In my situation I still have an AMD 6800 to swap to if I want to play more demanding games. However, I rarely need more performance than the 6500xt gives me, indeed on the 6500xt I actually cap performance in most of my games like LOTRO and MWO. Using the 6500xt means I am wearing out a card which is cheaper to replace and cheaper to run. The 6500xt should more than pay for it self in reduced energy costs with the amount that my PC is on, because even with capping the 6800, the 6500xt uses less power. For a start the 6500xt has to power 12GB less memory.
When graphic cards were cheaper, eg I bought a 970 for £180, I would use that card all of the time and replace it if it developed a fault. Now I would rather use a cheap £150 card most of the time (as it mostly does more than I want) and replace that when needed rather than use a 6800 all of the time and find £700 to replace it when it develops a fault.