AMD Radeon RDNA2 Navi (RX 6500, 6600, 6700, 6800, 6900 XT)

With 3050 you're at least getting a ray tracing capable GPU with DLSS support.

A second hand 480/580/1060 would be more preferable than 6500XT any day.

The prices and availability between the two reflect that I'd say.

 

Oh yeah absolutely, if someone would have a gun to their head and had to choose between those, the 3050 obviously. Eitherway, its a bad deal value (price/performance) wise. Allegedly the same is happening in the sportscar industry, waiting lines are huge and even there your looking at anywhere between 25% to 50% above MSRP for specific models. And thats just the console, GPU and sportscar industry, many more markets are impacted somehow.

 

The 6500xt has a billion less transistors than the 5500xt... & is selling much closer to it's suggested MSRP than the RTX3050. Even so... the little 6500xt is being compared to a chip that has double the transistors. It might not be a "Buy" for you... but that does not mean it is not a good buy. Specially when RDNA2 is the gaming standard and RSR & FSR is going to proliferate, along with the ML enhanced games (3d sounds, etc).

For 1080p gaming, for small rig building.... how many more frames is the 3050 going to give you, for the extra $300..?

 

The reason the 6500xt is selling close to MSRP is pretty obvious.
Nobody Wants It: AMD's Radeon RX 6500 XT Is the Rare GPU Still in Stock

 

That article is based on situation in exactly one e-shop. At that time (January 26) Radeon RX 6500 XT wasn't even available in many countries yet. Also the fact, that the card is in stock, hardly tells anything about the number of sold cards. E. g. Mindfactory sold 60 GeForce RTX 3050 (almost unavailable) and 365 Radeon RX 6500 XT cards (several models in stock).

 

r/AMD_Stock/comments/sl3f8c/week_6_2022_mindfactoryde_total_gaming_gpu_sales/

 

Yeah, that^ sucks for miners and people who have older intel motherboards. For those who building a new low-budget mini-PC for 1080p gaming, that^ linked reason doesn't apply. Price/performance ratio counts @ $269.

Again, for the price of a RTX3050, I would rather just get a 6600xt. And so would anyone...!

 

6600XT cost about the same as 3060 and it's not a clear choice either.

 

Yeah but either is preferable to even a 3050, let alone a 6500!

I was talking to an old friend who used to work in AMD PR about the 3500 and how glad I was they weren't still there trying to polish that turd, they agreed most heartily.

 

No, it doesn't... (cost about the same).
And the exact point I am making to you and others...

RTX3050 is selling for $599 (on newegg) and yet, the lowest 6600xt is selling for $589 right now...! It has been like that ALL WEEK and you have not been able to find a single RTX 3050 under $500, anywhere...! If you were looking to buy, you would know.

I can buy multiple 6500xt right now for $269... almost half the price as a rtx3050.

 

And almost a third of the value.

 

Almost a third of the value? I thought you bought a GPU for how well it can run games? The 3050 is only roughly 25% faster on a PCIE 4 system and slightly worse on a PCIE 3 system.

Really, people's emotions getting the better of them.

Granted some people might be able to use RT on a 3050, but I'm certainly not one of them. I wouldn't be using RT on either of those cards.

If both cards were being sold for at or near MSRP, then yeah, the 3050 is easily the better card. At current market prices, however? I'd say the 3050 is a far worse value.

Regards,
SB

 

I really don't get the vitriol over this product, it has one of the best abilities of any gpu on the market. Availability. @MSRP.

 

Availability and price due to lack of interest shouldn't be lauded.

 

Absolutely. But then is a crap card for 269 USD (6500 XT) better or worse than a slightly less crap card for 569 USD (cheapest 3050 on Amazon as of this post)?

At that point if someone is spending 569 for a 3050, they should just pay a few dollars less and get a Radeon 6600 for 519 USD (cheapest on Amazon as of this post). It's cheaper and faster!

Regards,
SB

 

And absolutely no one in this thread has done that. They have merely suggested its price meets its performance standing.

 

Yeah it wouldn't bother me so much if people calling out the 6500 XT as being a crap card for the price were also pointing out that the 3050 is even more of a crap card at the price it sells for.

The point being that as of today, both cards are crap cards for the price they are selling at. But with that out of the way, the 6500 XT is less of a crap value than the 3050 at current market prices.

Regards,
SB

 

Interestingly, you actually can buy the 3050 for 480 € here in usually expensive germany at multiple non-crap shops - also all week. And you can get the 3060 for 619 € (6600XT for 590-ish, so not the same price point but the same segment). 6500 XT though is at 269 (40 € above MSRP which AMD cited with 229).

Objectively roughly half of the 3050, but still 17% above MSRP.

Subjectively, you might consider that a good deal, because it empties your pockets less. Also subjectively, you might find, that coming from a 5 year old gaming PC with a Vega 56 (399 at launch, sub 300 later) or RX 570 8 GB (below 200€), you wont be getting much of an upgrade performance wise. Coming from an integrated graphics or something like a GT 1030/RX 550, you generally will have better performance and features.

I won't objectively compare specs, but you could do that and argue about each and every item's subjective value in the process, arriving at the conclusion that depending on your own vendor preference, you might or might not find the 6500XT acceptable.

Given current pricing in my region (preselected in Geizhals price search engine here), both the 6500XT and the 3050 are no good value compared to 6600 and 3060. In Computerbase's test, the 6500XT is half as fast compared to the 6600 - non XT!! - and 3060 in 1080p while costing 56% of the 6600's price.

The 3050 is even more overpriced at 75% the performance of the 6600 but roughly the same price. You must love the Nvidia-features pretty dearly to accept that performance penalty at price parity.

 

The cards that have MSRP priced closer to street prices are criticized for having poor pricing to expected value. The cards that have MSRPs priced more in line with expected value are criticized for having unrealistically low MSRPs to street prices. It's a PR/optics issue that you can't please everyone with.

To me I still feel reviewers and commentators in general should move more towards a relative value system as opposed to an absolute value system. The demand/supply situation over the last year or so is pushing to the extreme on why MSRPs (or any official price) can be detached from street prices but this has always existed in the past as well. I know personally prior to this it was in the opposite direction in that all my GPU purchases had to factor in street prices below MSRP due to sales.

 

I quoted public numbers from the website.

//edit: Well, it doesn't change the fact, that even according to the reddit stats Radeon RX 6500 XT was the best selling Radeon in the 4th week (together with Radeon RX 6600) and also the best selling Radeon in the 5th week. So the article called "Nobody Wants It" seems to be pretty baseless anyway.