Ok, the RX 6500XT is more or less faster than the GTX 1060 in 11 of 15 games - in 73% of all games ... Pretty good for such a "bad" card. Why don't people want to understand that this card is not designed for AAA and 2K or 4K titles.
Because in the cheaper and slot-powered RX 6400, 4GB and PCIe x4 are tolerable, but the more expensive 6500 XT should have: x8, 6+GB and encoders. Like the RTX 3050 6GB, which is the actually good "cheap" GPU.
@@lewzealand4717 My opinion is that the technical specifications are irrelevant - as long as the basic performance is right. Yes, the 6500XT is definitely not a big hit from AMD - but it is also not the absolute silicon disaster that it is always portrayed as. I only bought the 6500XT because my 1060 6GB at the time (how ironic) broke. And I hardly had any money to buy a big new card - so I got the Asus 6500XT. Overall, the card (with a Gen 11 Core i5) worked well to very well for my games - but I have since removed it as a reserve card because I got a cheap GTX 1070 - which runs better than the 6500XT in some games - but not in others. In the end, I decided on the 1070 because I like to record game content from time to time... but that is also the main reason for me...
The main issue in the core of RX6500XT launch is that it was basically a low budget mobile GPU for cheap gaming laptops with the corresponding restrictions (see the low power draw) and simply should've stayed this way, instead of relaunching it as a "budget" desktop. I own a dirt cheap laptop (429USD brand new!) with the mobile version (RX6550M) and it's... fine as an even lower budget alternative to the basic RTX3050 4GB for occasional light gaming and definite step up from the RTX2050 models, that are plaguing the lower price segment of the gaming laptops. If AMD had decided to push this GPU more seriously to laptop OEMs and improve the drivers in order to increase their market share in the lowest price segment it could've become actually an interesting and well know alternative to nVIDIA RTX3050 laptops, but instead they simply got greedy because of the chip shortages and embarrassed themselves with launching it as a desktop GPU .
the 6500XT was just a tragic case of AMD trying to stave off and disuade bitcoin mining scalpers from buying it back then. Unfortunately it cut off too much from the specs and ended up with consumers and gamers not buying it also. 😅 the only way i can see someone buying this card if they're for e-sports and buying it used with price cut heavily 👍
I don't think so. Recent released games require more than 4gb vram. And nvidia memory management is better thats why gtx 1060 using less vram in some games.
Timestamps:
00:00 Intro
00:14 S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2
01:02 (FSR 3.1 FG) S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2
01:47 God of War Ragnarök
02:37 (FSR 3.1 FG) God of War Ragnarök
03:22 Black Myth: Wukong
04:11 Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty
05:01 Silent Hill 2 Remake
05:48 Horizon Forbidden West
06:36 Ghost of Tsushima
07:25 Hogwarts Legacy
08:14 Red Dead Redemption 2
09:07 Spider-Man: Miles Morales
09:56 Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
10:46 PUBG Battlegrounds
11:33 Once Human
12:22 Apex Legends
13:09 Counter Strike 2
13:58 Average FPS
Gaming PC Specifications:
► CPU : AMD Ryzen 5 7600X amzn.to/3RAlT9P
► Motherboard : MSI PRO X670-P WIFI amzn.to/4bb5Tlx
► RAM : 32GB (2*16GB) DDR5 6400MHz CL32 amzn.to/3VAZ6fn
► CPU Cooler : MSI MEG Coreliquid S360 CPU Liquid Cooler amzn.to/3VAzKOn
► PSU : CORSAIR RM1000X - 1000 Watt PSU amzn.to/3RE9sK5
► GAMING SSD : WD BLUE SN570 2TB amzn.to/3VwgD8d
► Recorder : Corsair Elgato HD60 X amzn.to/4c6BZjC
► OS : Windows 11 Pro (x64) Build 24H2
► GPU 1 : GIGABYTE GTX 1060 6GB Windforce OC
► GPU 2 : SAPPHIRE RX 6500 XT 4GB PULSE OC
► Drivers : Nvidia GeForce 566.36 & AMD Adrenalin 24.12.1 Drivers
6500XT is a joke! At least on 1066 all of those are playable, but the "winner" on average is... 😂😂😂 RX 470 is better than that!
Ok, the RX 6500XT is more or less faster than the GTX 1060 in 11 of 15 games - in 73% of all games ... Pretty good for such a "bad" card. Why don't people want to understand that this card is not designed for AAA and 2K or 4K titles.
Because in the cheaper and slot-powered RX 6400, 4GB and PCIe x4 are tolerable, but the more expensive 6500 XT should have: x8, 6+GB and encoders. Like the RTX 3050 6GB, which is the actually good "cheap" GPU.
@@lewzealand4717 My opinion is that the technical specifications are irrelevant - as long as the basic performance is right. Yes, the 6500XT is definitely not a big hit from AMD - but it is also not the absolute silicon disaster that it is always portrayed as. I only bought the 6500XT because my 1060 6GB at the time (how ironic) broke. And I hardly had any money to buy a big new card - so I got the Asus 6500XT. Overall, the card (with a Gen 11 Core i5) worked well to very well for my games - but I have since removed it as a reserve card because I got a cheap GTX 1070 - which runs better than the 6500XT in some games - but not in others. In the end, I decided on the 1070 because I like to record game content from time to time... but that is also the main reason for me...
The main issue in the core of RX6500XT launch is that it was basically a low budget mobile GPU for cheap gaming laptops with the corresponding restrictions (see the low power draw) and simply should've stayed this way, instead of relaunching it as a "budget" desktop. I own a dirt cheap laptop (429USD brand new!) with the mobile version (RX6550M) and it's... fine as an even lower budget alternative to the basic RTX3050 4GB for occasional light gaming and definite step up from the RTX2050 models, that are plaguing the lower price segment of the gaming laptops.
If AMD had decided to push this GPU more seriously to laptop OEMs and improve the drivers in order to increase their market share in the lowest price segment it could've become actually an interesting and well know alternative to nVIDIA RTX3050 laptops, but instead they simply got greedy because of the chip shortages and embarrassed themselves with launching it as a desktop GPU .
the 6500XT was just a tragic case of AMD trying to stave off and disuade bitcoin mining scalpers from buying it back then. Unfortunately it cut off too much from the specs and ended up with consumers and gamers not buying it also. 😅
the only way i can see someone buying this card if they're for e-sports and buying it used with price cut heavily 👍
How about a gtx 1080 non ti vs rx 6600
6600 will win pretty much everything as it's newer and more expensive (used). 1080 will do OK in older DX11 titles like PUBG and Apex though.
Bro
In COD BO6 RX scored 2x the frames?
Wtf?
yeah COD is better optimized for AMD GPUs
@@NJTechBenchmark only this cod or all of them??
Most COD games run better on AMD GPUs.
@@NJTechBenchmark thks men
i would rather see it on 24.3.1 or 24.7.1 because 24.12.1 and 24.5.1 are using so much vram
I don't think so. Recent released games require more than 4gb vram. And nvidia memory management is better thats why gtx 1060 using less vram in some games.