 |
| Games Tested RX 580 8GB vs RX 5500 XT 8GB |
Buy from Amazon
The 8GB model of the new AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT graphics card costs $ 200, but how does it compare to the old 8GB RX 580 card? You compare 17 games with a resolution of 1080 pixels and 1440 pixels to determine which games deserve an upgrade. Let's first consider the differences in technical data. The RX 580 is based on the fourth generation of GCN 14Nm technology and was launched in April 2017. The newer RX 5500 XT was released in December 2019 and uses a new RDNA 7nm chassis. The 5500 XT has fewer computing units and fewer processors today, but at higher clock speeds. Both have 8 GB RAM, but use 580 GDDR5 while 5500 XT uses GDDR6. 580 TDP is also higher, so we want to use more energy, but we'll compare it later. The price of the 8 GB RX 5500 XT is $ 200, while the new RX 580 ranges between $ 160 and $ 170. The updated link price can be found in the description. For the tests I used Gigabyte RX 5500 XT Gaming OC 8 Go and Gigabyte RX 580 Gaming 8 Go. The tested system has an overclocked Intel Core i7-8700K processor on all 5GHz MSI Z390 ACE motherboard centers and 16GB DDR4-3200-CL14 dual channel memory. You can refer to the links in the description for more details on all components and fixed prices. The tests were performed only using the latest version of Windows 1909 and the latest Radeon drivers that were available at the time of testing. So let's look at the results. "Call of Duty Modern Warfare" game is tested in campaign mode. I have 1080p results in the bottom half of the chart and 1,440 pixels in the top half. In this test, the frame rate of 5500XT increased by 15%, while installations of 1440 pixels and up to 10% resulted in 5500XT. Control is one of the games I've always found that the 5500 XT has a slightly lower frame rate. This time, the RX 580's performance increased by 5% on average, but reached as low as 1%. Red Dead Redemption 2 tested using an advanced game
In the reference tool. In a 1080p test, the 5500 XT ratio achieved a 7% higher frame rate, which corresponds to a slight increase from 6% to 1440 pixels. Battlefield 5 was tested in campaign mode with an average FPS average of 1080 pixels and the results were in error range, but it was slightly lower by 1%. At 1,440 pixels, peaks are close to 1%, but 5500 XT is only 3.6% above average FPS. Shadow of the Tomb Raider was tested using the game benchmarking tool, and the test was not that different significantly. With 1080p, it is 7% faster than 5500 XT, and by 1440p, it is just above FPS, which corresponds to almost 5% increase. Apex Legends has been tested in all graphics settings: at 1080p and 1440p, the average FPS only increased by 6% and 4%, but continued to improve with a value of less than 1%. At 1080 pixels, 5500 XT is 1%, 1%, and 10% less than 1440 pixels. Borderlands 3 was tested against the game standard: at 1080 pixels, the game had the biggest difference between the 17 games I tested with 25% and the lowest image - the average is only 580, higher than the average of 580%. At 1,440 points, the big win with the 5500 XT is still saved, but the gap is 12.5% lower. Fortnite was tested with restart feature, and all tests used exactly the same restart file. At 1080 pixels, the FPS rate increased to approximately 5500 XT by 10%, and once the resolution was raised to 1,440 pixels, it decreased to 7%. PUBG has also been tested with reboot function, as well as with the same reboot file. The average FPS increased from 5500 XT by about 7% in both resolutions. Assassin's Creed Odyssey uses an integrated scale. There is nothing special to mention here: at 1080p, the average 5500 XT speed increased by 13% and slightly decreased to 12.5% at 1440p. Witcher 3 is often a fairly heavy GPU game, but the difference in this test is quite small, and the frame rate at only 5500 XT increased from 2% to 3%. Section 2 was tested against the game benchmarks, and the average 5500 XT rose around 9% on average
1080p FPS, 8% at 1440p. Ghost Recon Breakpoint was also tested with built-in indicators and the improvement here was above average. The average FPS of 5500 XT increased by almost 20% at 1080p and 16.5% at 1,440p. Overwatch was tested in practice. Even if it doesn't quite match the actual game, I can do the same test more precisely and it's good for comparison. With 1080p resolution, the frame rate is increased by 14% at a frame rate of 5500 XT and by 12% at 1440 pixels. Rainbow Six: Siege Tested with Game Performance Measurement Tools: At 1080 pixels, the average FPS increased from 5500 XT by approximately 7%, and at 1,440 pixels, the difference was only 2%, or one change in FPS improved by 1%. This strange brigade was tested with Vulcan and standards were combined. In this case, the results between the two were the same. With 1080p, the 580 levels are a bit advanced, but they're actually still pretty close to the error range, so the 1440p-like windshield with 5500XT is just 1 FPS. I've tested CS: GO using the Ulletics FPS standard and this test is one of the biggest improvements in all the games tested. At 1080p, the average frame rate was improved by 24%, then rose sharply to 1,440 pixels, and the average frame rate increased by 30%. Of the 17 games tested, the new RX 5500 XT was 9.5% faster than the old RX 580. As you can see, it depends on the game, but in general the 5500 XT has performance advantages. If the frame rate is increased by 8%, the total RX 5500 XT rate will drop slightly if the total rate is 1440 pixels. Although I personally don't want to buy these games for 1440 pixel games, you can be sure that you will use them in many games with low settings. The overall strength of the wall system is an interesting result. Although it provides a higher level of performance, the new AMD 7nm architecture is more energy efficient. I measured performance in two different games. Either way, the power consumption of the RX 580 is 30% higher than that of the 5500 XT.
So, the 5500 XT is better than the 580. Given that the two labels contain different thermal solutions, I didn't consider the temperature because it was not fair to compare. Due to the low traction, the 5500 XT is a little cooler, but quieter. Now for the last difference, the price. The updated link price can be found in the description. At the time of registration, 8 GB 5500 XT was priced at $ 200, while the new RX 580 was priced at $ 160. However, $ 170 seems to be more popular as cheaper elections since it costs more than $ 2. Years. In terms of cost-per-image, the older RX 580 has a better value. I took up to $ 160 in Newegg, but there seems to be more. If you already have 8GB 580, there is no good reason to upgrade to 5500 XT, and in most games we have tested, the difference in performance is not enough to justify it. If you buy today, the 580 is a better option than the price of the image and still provides an excellent 1080p gaming experience. You can say the latest energy efficiency of 5500 XT is useful, but you have to play a lot of games for a year before you notice the big difference in energy costs. In the end, more and more people seem to prefer higher tire frequencies over strength. Frankly, in terms of performance improvements, we don't see any major price gains given the fact that the RX 580 was launched two and a half years ago. It might be advisable to compare the RX 590, but I currently don't have any of the devices available for testing. So consider all of that, which one will you choose? The latest RX 5500 XT or older RX 580?