5500 xt vs 5700 xt

[cathobb]

Hey guys how you all doing, hope that everything is ok

So here is the deal, I want to upgrade my very old graphics card to a new one and I am looking just at 2 at the moment 

Huge and fanboy btw....

I am looking at either a 5700 xt or a 5500 xt sapphire nitro, I like those models

The thing is that I would like to know if the investment is the best 

I don't have many money for the 5700, that would take me at least 2 months more 

I have enough for the 5500 

I have a 27 inch 1920, 144 hz monitor and don't plan to change it 

 

I dont do any AAA titles really, I play LoL, Rocket League, I think my most demanding game is monster Hunter 

I also do streaming from time to time 

 

My system is 

Ryzen 7 2700x water-cooled by masterliquid 240

B450 F Rog motherboard

Radeon R7 260x

16gb Gskill 3600 mhz

Ssd 240, 1.5 tb of hard drive

Masterwatt 600w 

Lian Li 011 Dynamic

Sceptre 27 inch 2019 monitor 

 

Hope you guys can help me with this, and that the info is enough 

Also, is it worth waiting for the 5600 series or is that jibber jabber?

[Meganter]

6 minutes ago, cathobb said:

 

Hello,

 

There is also the 5600XT that will be release soon and should be "the 1080p best" GPU for around 280$ MSRP.

[SavageNeo]

3 minutes ago, cathobb said:

Hey guys how you all doing, hope that everything is ok

So here is the deal, I want to upgrade my very old graphics card to a new one and I am looking just at 2 at the moment 

Huge and fanboy btw....

I am looking at either a 5700 xt or a 5500 xt sapphire nitro, I like those models

The thing is that I would like to know if the investment is the best 

I don't have many money for the 5700, that would take me at least 2 months more 

I have enough for the 5500 

I have a 27 inch 1920, 144 hz monitor and don't plan to change it 

 

I dont do any AAA titles really, I play LoL, Rocket League, I think my most demanding game is monster Hunter 

I also do streaming from time to time 

 

My system is 

Ryzen 7 2700x water-cooled by masterliquid 240

B450 F Rog motherboard

Radeon R7 260x

16gb Gskill 3600 mhz

Ssd 240, 1.5 tb of hard drive

Masterwatt 600w 

Lian Li 011 Dynamic

Sceptre 27 inch 2019 monitor 

 

Hope you guys can help me with this, and that the info is enough 

Also, is it worth waiting for the 5600 series or is that jibber jabber?

5700 XT is far better than 5500 XT. 5500 XT is like 5-15% worse than 1650 super, its not really worth it, for the future with 8gb vram, yeah sure but still not worth it.

 

Save for 5700

[Sir0Tek]

Unless you'd be satisfied with PCIe 8x on your PCIe3.x setup you shouldn't buy the rx 5500(XT). And yes, they DID cut the lines from 16x to 8x.

[Jurrunio]

5500XT struggles to beat the RX 580 by enough to be worth it, so skip that. 

 

19 minutes ago, cathobb said:

Huge and fanboy btw....

annnd you spelled the name wrong...

[191x7]

Wait for the 5600XT.

 

How about the Sapphire Pulse 5700?

 

The Pulse 5700XT uses the same variety heatsink like the one on the Nitro 380X meaning the Pulse cooler isn't bad.

[Princess Luna]

The 5500XT is kinda useless, it performs the same as the RX580~RX590 which are cheaper and due to AMD's decison to lock this card to 8x PCI-e only the 3.0 bus (which is wht you have on a B450) actually bottlenecks it making you lose even further performance.

 

So yeah 5500XT is a waste, either wait for the 5600XT or get one of the many GTX 1660 variances if you want a more budget friendly 1080p card.

[xAcid9]

Get non XT 5700 instead? should be $50-$100 cheaper. 

[cathobb]

1 hour ago, xAcid9 said:

Get non XT 5700 instead? should be $50-$100 cheaper. 

I'm actually going for the asthethics of the Nitro edition, that's what I like, but thanks for the recommendation

[cathobb]

4 hours ago, Jurrunio said:

5500XT struggles to beat the RX 580 by enough to be worth it, so skip that. 

 

annnd you spelled the name wrong...

Actually that was autocorrect

[Midnitewolf]

I honestly would save for the 5700XT if it were me.  In my opinion you can never have too much GPU power, especially if your looking to take advantage of 144 hz monitors.  60 fps at 1080p isn't that hard but even a 2080 Ti can struggle to achieve 144 fps at 1080p in some of the newer AAA titles like Metro Exodus and RDR2.  Having the 5700XT will just allow for you to take advantage of that 144 hz monitor in more titles for a longer period of time.

[Mira Yurizaki]

If it's down to either the 5500 XT, or the 5700XT, the 5700XT or even the 5700 will serve you better in the long run. If you want a third option, I recommend looking at the GTX 1660 Super.

 

While the 5600 XT is around the corner, it's a $280 card and AMD compared it to a $220 card. While AMD claims you can get up to 15% better performance on average, you're also paying ~27% more.

[cathobb]

13 hours ago, Midnitewolf said:

I honestly would save for the 5700XT if it were me.  In my opinion you can never have too much GPU power, especially if your looking to take advantage of 144 hz monitors.  60 fps at 1080p isn't that hard but even a 2080 Ti can struggle to achieve 144 fps at 1080p in some of the newer AAA titles like Metro Exodus and RDR2.  Having the 5700XT will just allow for you to take advantage of that 144 hz monitor in more titles for a longer period of time.

Yeah, but as i mentioned, i dont have any AAA titles, the heaviest games i have are gta, monster hunter, dead by deadlight, all of therse should do about 70 fps at ultra if im not mistaken

[cathobb]

13 hours ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

If it's down to either the 5500 XT, or the 5700XT, the 5700XT or even the 5700 will serve you better in the long run. If you want a third option, I recommend looking at the GTX 1660 Super.

 

While the 5600 XT is around the corner, it's a $280 card and AMD compared it to a $220 card. While AMD claims you can get up to 15% better performance on average, you're also paying ~27% more.

I havent really considered the Nvidia side, but at this moment is either 5500 xt or 5700 xt, 

[Mister Woof]

I like my 5700 xt.

 

What is your display refresh rate

[xAcid9]

14 hours ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

While AMD claims you can get up to 15% better performance on average, you're also paying ~27% more.

They did? I though having similar core count as 5700 will make it perform just slightly lower because of the lower memory bus and clock speed.

Does that mean Navi is bandwidth limited? 

[Mister Woof]

1 minute ago, xAcid9 said:

They did? I though having similar core count as 5700 will make it perform just slightly lower because of the lower memory bus and clock speed.

Does that mean Navi is bandwidth limited? 

I was watching an Actually Hardcore Overclocking (Buildzoid) vid the other day about the potential of 5900xt.....seems even current iterations of the 5700 xt is memory bandwidth limited. Just like Vega was.

[GoldenLag]

3 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

I was watching an Actually Hardcore Overclocking (Buildzoid) vid the other day about the potential of 5900xt.....seems even current iterations of the 5700 xt is memory bandwidth limited. Just like Vega was.

keep in mind its not just Navi that is memmory limited. 

 

Turing is limited by the same issues sadly. moving to the maximum of 384-bit on the 2080ti will give you about 20-30% more performance including moving from 14 gbit to 16 gbit memmory chips. 

 

it would be a pleasant suprise to see both companies surpass that limit, but its honestly rather unlikely. 

[Midnitewolf]

9 hours ago, cathobb said:

Yeah, but as i mentioned, i dont have any AAA titles, the heaviest games i have are gta, monster hunter, dead by deadlight, all of therse should do about 70 fps at ultra if im not mistaken

I just wanted to put that information out there because a lot of people make a blanket statement that you don't need a higher end GPU for 1080p gaming which isn't true in all cases.  Also to go back to my original point, sure you won't have an issue getting that 70 fps, but that isn't 144 fps which means your not being able to take advantage of your monitors capabilities and getting that butter smooth high refresh gaming experience.  If your 100% fine with that, then you can go with a much lower end GPU for 1080p gaming, however, if you want to try to take advantage of a much of that capability as you can, you can't go wrong getting as high end of a video card as you can afford.  Also while you might not have any games now that push the limits, you never know when that will change. 

 

For example, I did a new computer build at Christmas but kept my old Vega 56 thinking because I could get like 70-80 fps a very high setting in the Division 2 while using my old Ryzen 1600 processor.  I figured since I had moved up to a 3800X, I would have no issues keeping the Vega 56 for 6-8 months until the next gen of GPUs came out.  However the first game I installed, Mechwarrior 5, turned out to be a unoptimized mess and I have had to drop my setting way down and still am only managing 30-50 fps at the lowest visual settings I can tolerate and I can't really even use the zoom function without getting stuttering so bad that the game becomes unplayable. If I would have spent the extra $250 it cost to get a 1080 TI at the time I bought my Vega 56, I wouldn't be having this issue now.  This is why I say, get as high end of GPU as you feel you can comfortably afford, at least as long as the pricing makes sense.

[SPARTAN VI]

I'd go with a 5700 non-XT and flash it or power play registry mod it for basically 5700 XT performance. Even if you don't flash it, very difficult to beat its bang for buck. 

[Mira Yurizaki]

9 hours ago, xAcid9 said:

They did? I though having similar core count as 5700 will make it perform just slightly lower because of the lower memory bus and clock speed.

Does that mean Navi is bandwidth limited? 

 

I also don't know why they compared their $280 card to a $220 card. The GTX 1660 Ti costs about the same and performances a smidge better than the 1660 Super. I also don't know what the heck an "OC" means beyond that the 1660 Super was overclocked.

 

Also yes, the RX 5600 XT is literally a 5700 with a missing memory controller