Sapphire RX 5500 XT Pulse 4GB vs 8GB Review
Test Setup and Overclocking
Published: 12th December 2019 | Source: Sapphire | Price: |
Test Setup
Sapphire RX 5500 XT Pulse 4GB and 8GB
Adrenalin 19.12.2
Intel i7 6850K
ASUS X99 Strix (1902)
Corsair ROG Dominator Platinum 3200
Corsair RM1000i
Corsair LX 512GB OS
Corsair LS 480GB x2 Raid0 Games
Corsair H100i V2
Windows 10 18362
Overclocking
There isn't much to pick between the two variants of the Sapphire Pulse, although the 4GB model can overclock just a shade better than the 8GB, in real world average clock speed terms there isn't room to get a Christmas card between them.
4GB RX 5500 XT
8GB RX 5500 XT
Most Recent Comments
Looking at the reviews across the board, I'm disappointed in AMD's performance per dollar, especially with the 8GB variant—that seems to be an especially poor recommendation. The 1650, 1660, and 1660Ti, and even the RX 590 all offer superior performance per dollar. I know OC3D has given it a solid recommendation, but comparing a variety of reviews, I wouldn't agree personally.Quote
This seems pretty reasonable to me, it's like a 590 at 580 pricing a few months ago but with much lower power draw and all that. Still I think I'll wait to see how the 5600 stacks up/if ones coming since it's definitely not blowing anything away with the prices today.Quote
What is the reason to buy this 200 GPU while having RX 580 for 160 ? Are they mocking us?Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jcchg
What is the reason to buy this 200 GPU while having RX 580 for 160 ? Are they mocking us?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AngryGoldfish
Personally I don't think it's totally fair to compare a three year-old product that's been rehashed a bunch of times to a brand-new product on a process node that's short in supply. Don't get me wrong, I definitely think AMD are letting themselves down by doing this, but for me it's the poor showing against Nvidia that's disappointing, as well as their other Navi cards. Any of the green team equivalents offer more performance per watt & per dollar (it's not huge, but it's there), and they've been out for a long time. AMD's own higher end 5700 XT has superior performance per watt. I don't understand what AMD are doing. I feel like they're high on Zen2.
|
Remember Vega Mobile? It's basically a Mac-only product. The RX 5500 is a mobile play. That's why there is such a big gap between the RX 5500 XT and the 5700.
This card is basically a repeat of the RX 560/460 and RX 570 situation. HUGE performance gap. The rumoured RX 5600 could fix that, but it is likely a cut-down RX 5700.
Performance per watt wise, it is also worth noting that AMD's Game Frequency is 1717MHz, which is almost as high as the RX 5700's full boost. That should help explain the lower performance/watt. The best power chips go to mobile and AMD uses high clocks to make the desktop model competative.Quote
CSS Valid