Radeon Rx 5500

[masethekiller]

Anyone have more info on this than press release. They don't even provide a release date but I presume around 1660 super. Hopefully this card is good/cheap or pushes down prices

[Streetguru]

11 minutes ago, masethekiller said:

Anyone have more info on this than press release. They don't even provide a release date but I presume around 1660 super. Hopefully this card is good/cheap or pushes down prices

We have 0 info, it's supposed to be like 25% faster than the RX 580

[masethekiller]

I figured. That would put it between a 1660 and 1660 ti, which is maybe why Nvidia is releasing the super

[masethekiller]

If that's the case than 200 would be a good deal

[kungfuevil]

Well. Igor's lab estimates the card to be on par with the 1660 super, that sits between the 1660 and 1660 TI.
While raw numbers (core/memory speed) indicate something like that, it doesn't make any sense to compare it to the 1650.
Amd talks about the 4gb version to beat the 1650 by 37% in select titles, but that would put it on ar with the 590 and 1660, not the super version.
Unless ofc 37% faster than trash sounds a lot better than on par with XY.

Currently the prices are the following in Hungary.
1650: 165$

1660: 235$
RX 570: 165$
RX 580: 200$

RX 590: 235$
(quoted prices are the cheapest that can be found, in case of amd, 8GB versions.)

I didn't really follow hardware news until recently, when i started building my new machine.
But i suspect the starting price will be around 200 or more, and the 580 and 590 will drop in price.
Because if this card would come for around 1650/RX570 price, nobody would buy the remaining supply of 580 and 590.
That is ofc if it delivers performance on par with those cards.
 

[BTGbullseye]

From what I can tell with the specs and pre-release info, it should have performance just under the 1660TI... It's also going to have 4GB and 8GB versions, but retains the GDDR6 memory. It will only have a 128-bit memory bus, limiting memory bandwidth to half that of other GDDR6 implementations, though it's still well above that of all all cards with lower performance than the 1660TI, as well as a higher memory clock than the 1660TI. It will only require a single 8-pin power connector, (150w maximum power draw) and it will be PCIe 4.0 compatible. (which only really matters if you're putting it in a PCIe 4.0 x4 slot, which should have the same performance as sticking it in a PCIe 3.0 x8 slot)

 

This is all absolute bare minimum spec, so expect performance to rival the 1660TI for most AIB boards, and/or for an XT version that can match or beat a 1660TI Super. (if Nvidia ever decides to do such a thing)

[masethekiller]

What's an aib board? The card after the "reference" one?

[BTGbullseye]

23 minutes ago, masethekiller said:

What's an aib board? The card after the "reference" one?

AIB is the partner manufacturer's designed board versions. They are anything that isn't "reference", regardless of when they are released. (some cards don't have a reference model, and some release the reference model at the same time as the AIBs)

[kungfuevil]

2 hours ago, BTGbullseye said:

From what I can tell with the specs and pre-release info, it should have performance just under the 1660TI... It's also going to have 4GB and 8GB versions, but retains the GDDR6 memory. It will only have a 128-bit memory bus, limiting memory bandwidth to half that of other GDDR6 implementations, though it's still well above that of all all cards with lower performance than the 1660TI, as well as a higher memory clock than the 1660TI. It will only require a single 8-pin power connector, (150w maximum power draw) and it will be PCIe 4.0 compatible. (which only really matters if you're putting it in a PCIe 4.0 x4 slot, which should have the same performance as sticking it in a PCIe 3.0 x8 slot)

 

This is all absolute bare minimum spec, so expect performance to rival the 1660TI for most AIB boards, and/or for an XT version that can match or beat a 1660TI Super. (if Nvidia ever decides to do such a thing)

That'd mean, the expectations of this being a 150$ card are a far cry from reality.
At the other hand, a 1660 super or ti is anything but a 37% improvement from a 1650.

Would they understimate the capabilities of the card so much?

This whole announcement was a mess, with so little information.

[BTGbullseye]

15 hours ago, kungfuevil said:

That'd mean, the expectations of this being a 150$ card are a far cry from reality.

Yeah, this is looking to be a $200 card at the low-end.

[masethekiller]

Hopefully you can bios hack the 5500 to 5500 xt like the 5700

[BTGbullseye]

14 hours ago, masethekiller said:

Hopefully you can bios hack the 5500 to 5500 xt like the 5700

And risk bricking it? I doubt there will even be a dual BIOS version.

[masethekiller]

There doesn't seem to be any problems changing the 5700 to a 5700 xt, although your right there is some risk 

[Boltcranck]

TechEpiphany https://mobile.twitter.com/TechEpiphany has posted some benchmarks

 

[xAcid9]

Techpowerup slip in 5500 in their 1650s review.

Tldr, perform similar to rx580. 

 

While in other reviews, 5500 perform similar to 1650s.

[Mark Kaine]

8 hours ago, xAcid9 said:

Techpowerup slip in 5500 in their 1650s review.

Tldr, perform similar to rx580. 

 

While in other reviews, 5500 perform similar to 1650s.

Both of these cards really make no sense for the consumer? 

 

Just spend a little bit more ($100 or so max) and you get something much better,  and even with RTX if you want to? 

Or spend much less get a previous card and get almost the same performance!? 

 

Just more stop gaps imo! 

 

But of course it's great for manufacturers, people love "new" stuff and surely will upgrade soon enough when they learn their new,  cheap cards don't really cut it (in games like Cyberpunk etc)

[xAcid9]

1 hour ago, Mark Kaine said:

Both of these cards really make no sense for the consumer? 

 

Just spend a little bit more ($100 or so max) and you get something much better,  and even with RTX if you want to? 

Or spend much less get a previous card and get almost the same performance!? 

 

Just more stop gaps imo! 

 

But of course it's great for manufacturers, people love "new" stuff and surely will upgrade soon enough when they learn their new,  cheap cards don't really cut it (in games like Cyberpunk etc)

Why? These filled the low end range GPU. 

$100 more is like 1660 Ti territory, it's not that much faster. 

 

You can spend on last gen if it much cheaper but it won't be around for long since most already EOL. I'm not sure about AMD Polaris but Nvidia 1000 series EOL before 2000 series launch. 

 

People that buy these cards usually doesn't need much GPU power, mostly only play e-Sport games. 

[Mark Kaine]

5 minutes ago, xAcid9 said:

Why? These filled the low end range GPU. 

$100 more is like 1660 Ti territory, it's not that much faster. 

 

You can spend on last gen if it much cheaper but it won't be around for long since most already EOL. I'm not sure about AMD Polaris but Nvidia 1000 series EOL before 2000 series launch. 

 

People that buy these cards usually doesn't need much GPU power, mostly only play e-Sport games. 

If that's the case it's probably ok,  for me as a hardcore gamer these cards are completely useless - but I agree they obviously aren't aimed at people like me. 

[masethekiller]

RX 5500 review came out before release, same performance as RX 580. .  

[steelo]

34 minutes ago, masethekiller said:

RX 5500 review came out before release, same performance as RX 580. .  

Interesting. I was under the impression that performance was on par/slightly better than a RX590? I'm wondering now if it would be worth upgrading to from a RX570...doesn't sound like it.

 

I only have a 1080/60 hz monitor and my RX570 runs games on mostly high settings just fine at 60 fps while overclocked. However, I'm looking for an AMD card that is able to more comfortably maintain 90 fps with Oculus VR titles. It works, but is certainly on the low end. I am finding that I'm having to run just about everything on low to medium graphics detail and frame rates will sometimes dip. 

 

5500xt's are a bit out of my price range though =(

[masethekiller]

You can read it on techpowerup.  It's very disappointing and I thought the 'rdna' architecture would make ATI more competitive.  They are coming with a 5500 XT maybe that will be much better but I doubt it considering how the 5550 is. 

 

570 is not bad, I had a temporary 560 and it was ok, although it did not play far cry 5 or some more intensive games well. I have a 1660 Super now, its the best card in my opinion in terms of value now.  You could try a 1650 super, Nvidia has some really competitive cards now.  And I say that as someone who until recently always bought ATI.    

[masethekiller]

The 1550 XT is out.  Review on techpowerup.     It is not much of a better card as I predicted based on the 5500. 

 

It's less fast than 1660 although marginally but for 10 dollars more you can get the 1660. The cheapest XT is 200 on newegg.  Also for 30-40 dollars more you can get the Super card which is significantly faster.    

 

This is very disappointing from ATI, they are not offering a better performance or a better value.    

[Otto_iii]

4gb at 169$ is worth it, it beats a 1650 by decent margin, but 8gb at 200$ isn't, any 1660, especially the Super is better and its too close to the cost of those.  IMO if you have a budget card like this you are going to have to turn down setting in intensive games to get the fps high enough that its enjoyable, which reduces vram usage, so having 8gb is pointless for this card, especially with the current price. 

Plethora of reviews came out today, feel free to check any or all of them out if you want. I watched all i could find and opinion above is what i've come to. 
 

Last one has great bass boosted ASMR effect, don't agree with him about 8gb given other tests but eh who cares. 

[bkrownd]

On 11/26/2019 at 8:57 AM, steelo said:

Interesting. I was under the impression that performance was on par/slightly better than a RX590? I'm wondering now if it would be worth upgrading to from a RX570...doesn't sound like it.

 

Performance in the reviews is right alongside the Rx 580.  In that way it doesn't seem like a functionally new product, but these companies have a habit of refreshing the packaging annually just to get the free advertisement from a new round of reviews. edit: I guess I'm having trouble setting aside my initial expectation that it would be at least 10% faster than the Rx 590.  The main "feature" seems to be that it does knock 80-100 Watts off the power consumption in exchange for a bit lower performance.

 

 

 

 

[Otto_iii]

3 minutes ago, bkrownd said:

Performance in the reviews is right alongside the Rx 580.  In that way it seems like a useless product, but these companies have a habit of refreshing the packaging annually just to get the free advertisement from a new round of reviews. 

Guys the RX 5550 =/= RX 5500XT

The RX5500 isn't on sale anywhere, its only for OEMs, the faster 5500XT is the one that launched today at 169$ for 4gb and 199$ for 8gb.  You're looking at the wrong card and the wrong benchmarks.