The Test

As is usually the case for launches without reference hardware, we’ve had to dial down our Sapphire cards slightly to meet AMD’s reference specifications. In this case, Sapphire’s secondary BIOS offers reference settings, so for our reference-spec testing, we’re using that BIOS. Otherwise, for at-stock testing of the Sapphire Pulse RX 5500 XT 8GB, that is being done with the primary (performance) BIOS.

Meanwhile on the driver front, we’re using AMD’s new Radeon Software Adrenaline Edition 19.2.2 software set, which are the launch drivers for the RX 5500 XT. AMD has introduced a number of control panel features here (not to mention a UI overhaul) that we’ll cover in a separate article. Otherwise for performance testing, these drivers are not substantially different from earlier AMD drivers – though we’ve retested the RX 570 and RX 5700 to ensure those results are fully up to date.

Finally, as the RX 5500 series is focused on 1080p gaming, this is what our benchmark results will focus on. I have also tested the RX 5500 XT 8GB at our 1440p settings – as expected, it’s not very playable there – and while these results haven’t been graphed, they are available in our Bench system.

CPU: Intel Core i9-9900K @ 5.0GHz
Motherboard: ASRock Z390 Taichi
Power Supply: Corsair AX1200i
Hard Disk: Phison E12 PCIe NVMe SSD (960GB)
Memory: G.Skill Trident Z RGB DDR4-3600 2 x 16GB (17-18-18-38)
Case: NZXT Phantom 630 Windowed Edition
Monitor: Asus PQ321
Video Cards: AMD Radeon RX 5700
Sapphire Pulse RX 5500 XT 8GB
Sapphire Pulse RX 5500 XT 4GB
AMD Radeon RX 580
AMD Radeon RX 570
AMD Radeon RX 460 4GB
AMD Radeon R9 380
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Super
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB
Video Drivers: NVIDIA Release 441.41
NVIDIA Release 441.07
AMD Radeon Software Adrenalin 2020 Edition 19.12.2
AMD Radeon Software Adrenalin 2019 Edition 19.10.2
OS: Windows 10 Pro (1903)
Meet the Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 5500 XT Tomb Raider, F1 2019, & Assassin’s Creed
Comments Locked

97 Comments

View All Comments

  • StrangerGuy - Friday, December 13, 2019 - link

    Yeah, In Singapore a RX570 8GB is $100 and 1660S is $200. Not even sure why anyone in that price segment should bother with anything between those two.
  • catavalon21 - Saturday, December 14, 2019 - link

    I guess AMD wanted something in this performance band which cannot run OpenCL (at least not worth a hoot)

    No, I'm not over it.
  • CHADBOGA - Thursday, December 12, 2019 - link

    Such a disappointing product. :(

    Now I am left with choosing between a 1660 Super and a 5700XT.

    Nothing else makes any sense to me.
  • PeachNCream - Friday, December 13, 2019 - link

    I recommend buying something that does make sense to you and makes you feel accomplished/empowered/etc. for a couple of months until your mind adjusts to the new normal and is no longer impressed by your own purchase and you begin to feel compelled to repeat. Go for it! None of us are going to turn up at your home to make comments about your computer's components.
  • GreenReaper - Friday, December 13, 2019 - link

    Speak for yourself . . .
  • lenghui - Friday, December 13, 2019 - link

    This still can't beat the value of RX570 4GB for $110-$120 (current prices on the egg). I am quote a bit disappointed with the lack of progress in value/dollar lately.
  • AntonErtl - Friday, December 13, 2019 - link

    I had hoped for a card that would form the basis for a replacement for my passively cooled Radeon HD 6770, but I guess I'll have to keep the 6770 for some more years (no, a semi-passive card that's quiet in the beginning and turns into a siren after a while does not cut it; BTDT).
  • a5cent - Friday, December 13, 2019 - link

    Until AMD supports MxGPU on these cards or on their APUs, I can't care about AMD's graphics division anymore. Intel has supported GVT-g in their iGPUs for years already.

    I'd instantly go with AMD if they had anything comparable.
  • philosofool - Friday, December 13, 2019 - link

    Could we see some 1440p results in the future? For me, a $200 dollar card is always the sweetspot. My computer is not primarily a gaming device, but I really like my 27" 1440p monitor. I need to know whether a card meets my needs, not whether it would be great if I only had a different monitor.

    Besides, not everyone insists on 60fps or Ultra settings.
  • philosofool - Friday, December 13, 2019 - link

    I found a review that included 1440p results. In most games, including some benched here, the 99th percentile is north of 30fps, which I consider totally playable. However, a GTX 1660 Super appears to increase its lead there: 99th percentile @ 56fps in a 12 game average.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now