Could you name a single product, which offers better performance for the same price or lower price for the same performance? The so called "$249" GeForce RTX 3050 costs $599 (the cheapest available models at Amazon and NewEgg), compared to $269 for Radeon RX 6500 XT. Yes, one of these two products has terrible price / performance ratio, but it's not Radeon RX 6500 XT.Besides cost and performance? Yes.
AMD Radeon RDNA2 Navi (RX 6500, 6600, 6700, 6800, 6900 XT)
digitalwanderer
Legend
Cheapest 6500 I could find was $289, and I'd take a 1650 over it for $10 more.
Radeon RX 6500 XT for $269:
https://www.newegg.com/asrock-radeon-rx-6500-xt-rx6500xt-pgd-4go/p/N82E16814930067
https://www.newegg.com/powercolor-radeon-rx-6500-xt-axrx-6500xt-4gbd6-dh/p/N82E16814131793
Gigabyte for $259 was available last week, but it's out of stock at the moment.
Anyway, GeForce GTX 1650 vanilla is significantly slower, yet more expensive. GeForce GTX 1650 Super is comparable (in performance) to Radeon RX 6500 XT, but significantly more expensive
https://www.newegg.com/asrock-radeon-rx-6500-xt-rx6500xt-pgd-4go/p/N82E16814930067
https://www.newegg.com/powercolor-radeon-rx-6500-xt-axrx-6500xt-4gbd6-dh/p/N82E16814131793
Gigabyte for $259 was available last week, but it's out of stock at the moment.
Anyway, GeForce GTX 1650 vanilla is significantly slower, yet more expensive. GeForce GTX 1650 Super is comparable (in performance) to Radeon RX 6500 XT, but significantly more expensive
digitalwanderer
Legend
Vanilla 1650 has h264 decoding hardware. 
EDITED BITS: The very fact that it's available and even near retail should be a SCREAMING red light to anyone in the current times of just how bad it is.
EDITED BITS: The very fact that it's available and even near retail should be a SCREAMING red light to anyone in the current times of just how bad it is.
Vanilla 1650 has h264 decoding hardware.
This isn’t an issue if you have a CPU with an IGP. So most Intel users in this price class should be fine.
But yes: the GPU market is depressing.
digitalwanderer
Legend
I haven't used an Intel CPU since the Pentium III. :|
DegustatoR
Legend
Most Intel users will be on PCIE 3.0 and certainly not "fine" with a 6500XT because of that.
So does the RX 6500 XT. It's lacking AV1 decode (as does the 1650) and H.264/H.265 (HEVC) encode.Vanilla 1650 has h264 decoding hardware.
Plus this is shifting goals from the gaming product.
DegustatoR
Legend
If you're talking about that only then there are no reasons to even buy a 6500XT for someone who has an iGPU. So either way what you're suggestion makes zero sense.
digitalwanderer
Legend
My bad, I misunderstood. Thanks for setting me straight.
I still dislike the 6500 though.
Well you won’t be doing any real-time encoding on a 6500xt anyway.
I’m not suggesting anyone to buy a 6500 XT.
Put down the axe — I trashed the GPU previously in this thread.
digitalwanderer
Legend
/me puts down the axe and smiles.
gamervivek
Regular
There were rumors of refresh for other chips, maybe laptop only and then Navi21 doesn't get one. Quite ambivalent at this point, refresh with faster memory is quite likely.
https://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-...ed-for-mid-2022-launch-rx-6500-non-xt-in-may/
RDNA3 this year could be the Navi33 only on 6nm while the MCM cards come out next year and so AMD will need something faster this year.
That's fine, since Navi21 cards can hit 2.7-2.8GHz easily but get too power constrained. Using MPT some folks can run 6900XT around 2.9GHz and I've seen at least one guy get close to 3GHz on his 6900XT without LN2. So power/voltage improvements should be enough.
And the record changed hands with even faster card,
OGS Reclaims 3DMark Fire Strike Hall of Fame Top Spot With Insane 3.3 GHz AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT Overclock
https://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-rx-...f-fame-top-spot-insane-3-3-ghz-overclock-ogs/
4GHz should be the next frontier.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Besides cost and performance? Yes.
So then you agree that currently the 6500 XT is a better card than the RTX 3050?
Currently, if you have PCIE 4, you'll on average pay over 200% more for an RTX 3050 to have ~25% more performance.
If you only have PCIE 3, then worst case (not all cases) You may have up to 200% more performance on RTX 3050, but in general it'll probably be closer to 25-50% more performance, again for 200% or more cost. The RTX 3050 almost looks good there compared to the 6500 XT.
MSRP while nice to look at on paper is almost meaningless if cards aren't available for that price.
The market has the 6500 XT close where it should be. Everything else on the market is vastly overpriced.
Technically it's not a good card. But when cost to the consumer is accounted for, it likely has the best performance to price ratio of anything available.
Regards,
SB
Last edited:
digitalwanderer
Legend
Nope, not one tiny little bit.So then you agree that currently the 6500 XT is a better card than the RTX 3050?
None of these GPUs are any good deal, hardware prices arent really what they should be now. If you can hold out with your current system thats obviously a good idea. Due to shortage/mining etc my 2080Ti was probably the best GPU value/purchase ive ever done alongside the Ti4200 128 (oced to 4600 clocks). MSRP doesnt seem to exist atm, PS5 consoles are going for 12000kr here (over 1200USD), 3050 gpus for what you could get a 2070 or better for back in the day. Crazy.
