Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050 Review: Availability is not guaranteed

Irata

Posts: 2,036   +3,459
So many words to tell how 6500 is not a better value, when it is much cheaper per frame. That's hilarious and salty.

If you want a NEW card for the new system to be able to play most games - go 6500XT low-medium settings fullhd.

Have some money - there is 6600 for you.

3050 sits in nowhereland, too slow to invest substantial money.
It‘s a paper launch and if MLID is right there won‘t be any meaningful stock going forward. Nvidia will gladly offer you a 1050Ti or 1650 in the 6500‘s price range though.

Really - 3060 prices and availability are known, so how reviewers could not figure out that this is a petty paper launch is beyond me. It‘s not like they haven‘t let themselves being consistently duped during the last year.
 

Irata

Posts: 2,036   +3,459
I know it‘s OT here, but just started watching your lame excuse video wrt the 6500XT/3050 reviews and launch.

Regarding the ‚how could we have known‘ and ‚it‘s hard to say right now‘…

Yes, you could and should have known and seriously, you have been duped into comparing the wrong products (e.g. 6600XT vs 3060Ti and 6600 vs 3060 based on msrp) several times now yet you still do not learn oddly.

How does the saying go…fool me once…

Note: Not trying to argue on the merits of the 6500XT here. It is what it is. But at least it‘s available and was available in the US at MSRP and even a couple of days afterwards. The 3050…nope. In Germany it wasn‘t even listed with many large retailers and when you could get it it was often at €500+.

So it seems like the 3050 is really a very low availability 6600 competitor but who could have guessed that based on the specs (cut down GA 106, 8GB vRAM) and pricing / availability precedent for e.g. the 3060 ?
 

Steve

Posts: 2,854   +2,978
Staff member
I know it‘s OT here, but just started watching your lame excuse video wrt the 6500XT/3050 reviews and launch.

Regarding the ‚how could we have known‘ and ‚it‘s hard to say right now‘…

Yes, you could and should have known and seriously, you have been duped into comparing the wrong products (e.g. 6600XT vs 3060Ti and 6600 vs 3060 based on msrp) several times now yet you still do not learn oddly.

How does the saying go…fool me once…

Note: Not trying to argue on the merits of the 6500XT here. It is what it is. But at least it‘s available and was available in the US at MSRP and even a couple of days afterwards. The 3050…nope. In Germany it wasn‘t even listed with many large retailers and when you could get it it was often at €500+.

So it seems like the 3050 is really a very low availability 6600 competitor but who could have guessed that based on the specs (cut down GA 106, 8GB vRAM) and pricing / availability precedent for e.g. the 3060 ?

Painfully childish, grow up, AMD's not going to look after you.
 

Irata

Posts: 2,036   +3,459
Painfully childish, grow up, AMD's not going to look after you.
Now, I‘m not saying that and I am sorry if this came across as fanboyish. AMD wants to make money just like the others.

I know the 6500XT is lacking in many aspects. Looking at 550/560 reviews makes this clear as those were actually decent e-sports cards that were not stupidly cut.

What disappoints me is that reviewers get repeatedly duped by nVidias unrealistic msrp and paper launches particularly in the lower end.

The market is terrible but so is the lack of insight many reviewers show.
Yes, you blasted nVidia for the 3080Ti but how relevant is that for the GPU market ?

And if you repeatedly do not get the msrp vs street price dilemma comparing the wrong products that‘s sad.

Either way, I do appreciate your reviews as far as the tests go so my post was not from a place of disrespecting your abilities in that regard.
 

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 3,317   +5,508
Now, I‘m not saying that and I am sorry if this came across as fanboyish. AMD wants to make money just like the others.

I know the 6500XT is lacking in many aspects. Looking at 550/560 reviews makes this clear as those were actually decent e-sports cards that were not stupidly cut.

What disappoints me is that reviewers get repeatedly duped by nVidias unrealistic msrp and paper launches particularly in the lower end.

The market is terrible but so is the lack of insight many reviewers show.
Yes, you blasted nVidia for the 3080Ti but how relevant is that for the GPU market ?
And if you repeatedly do not get the msrp vs street price dilemma comparing the wrong products that‘s sad.

Either way, I do appreciate your reviews as far as the tests go so my post was not from a place of disrespecting your abilities in that regard.
Street pricing does not justify changing a product's position in the stack. Did high launch prices suddenly mean the 5600x was a 12900k competitor? Nope.

People like you get REAL hung up on "street prices are the real price how DARE you compare MSRP to MSRP" for some odd reason. How much you are getting gouged and availoability vary from region to region, any reviewer trying to do this would have to check every market. This is not viable.

The 3050 is a 6500xt competitor. AMD royally ****ed up, and everybody dunked on them for it. That's life. the 3050 being hard to find does not change this.

The 3080ti was blasted for dramatically raising the MSRP while offering 2-3% in return. Interestingly, the 6500xt was blasted for the same thing, dramatic raise in MSRP while often being worse then the 5500xt or the 6 year old 480. 3050 reviews were also not kind on its street pricing, with $500 being seen as a total rip off for what is being offered.

Methinks you dont even bother reading the reviews and are charging in with the pre concieved notion that TS is somehow being duped for providing their opinion, and since it clashes with yours its obviously wrong.
 

Aaron Fox

Posts: 153   +90
'For those of you wondering why we are comparing with the RX 6600 and not the 6500 XT for the ray tracing benchmark, we simply didn't want to be so cruel. Seriously though, the 6500 XT is so weak with ray tracing enabled that the data isn’t useful for comparison.'

AMD is cruelly lying to shoppers by using ray tracing to sell the 6500 XT.

It's your job to show us the data. Let us make our minds up for ourselves.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,625   +1,275
Painfully childish, grow up, AMD's not going to look after you.
Says someone that has this kind of standards for review scores:

- Current situation, where cards are simply not available or miners grab them all, AMD releases card that's very bad for mining and has very good availability: 20/100

- Nvidia releases card that is 98% die shrink of previous architecture 100/100.

"(y) (Y)"
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,625   +1,275
The 3050 is a 6500xt competitor. AMD royally ****ed up, and everybody dunked on them for it. That's life. the 3050 being hard to find does not change this.
6500XT is widely available, 3050 is not. Basically you are saying AMD card should be compared to card that basically does not exist.

Using your logic, AMD should have released imaginary 6550XT that's much better and cheaper than 3050. And then AMD should be praised because it offers much better product. Even if no-one ever could buy 6550XT, it would still be 3050 competitor. Being impossible to find does not change that.

Sounds great, eh?

6500XT is clear proof that many hardware reviewers (so far all I have found) are either paid by Nvidia or total morons.
 

Irata

Posts: 2,036   +3,459
Street pricing does not justify changing a product's position in the stack. Did high launch prices suddenly mean the 5600x was a 12900k competitor? Nope.

People like you get REAL hung up on "street prices are the real price how DARE you compare MSRP to MSRP" for some odd reason. How much you are getting gouged and availoability vary from region to region, any reviewer trying to do this would have to check every market. This is not viable.
Those CPU you mention - yes, models are rightfully being compared based on their actual price across generations.

As a customer I care about what I get for my money, not any pretend phantasy prices. This is particularly important when one company repeatedly understates msrp by a large margin.

In the case of the 6500XT or 6600 vs the 3050, you can also base the comparison on the die used (cut down GA106 vs cut down Navi 23 rather than the half as large Navi 24).


Here‘s a quote from HUB‘s / Techspot‘s 11600k review where actual street prices were used, not msrp (5600x was selling a good bit above it at that time).

As of writing, we could find the Ryzen 5 5600X over on Newegg and Amazon selling for about $365 which is $65 over the MSRP. Meanwhile, the Core i5-11600K is listed on Amazon for $270 which is 26% cheaper than the 5600X. Frankly, the Ryzen part is not worth that price premium.
 

Burty117

Posts: 4,459   +2,642
Not trying to argue on the merits of the 6500XT here. It is what it is. But at least it‘s available and was available in the US at MSRP and even a couple of days afterwards.
6500XT is widely available, 3050 is not.
I don't think either of you have factored in the fact the 6500XT is utter garbage?
It's fine to have availability, no one should be buying it, it's terrible.

I feel bad for the reviewers having to test something that is considerably worse than it's much older brothers. What a waste of time that was...
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,625   +1,275
I don't think either of you have factored in the fact the 6500XT is utter garbage?
It's fine to have availability, no one should be buying it, it's terrible.

I feel bad for the reviewers having to test something that is considerably worse than it's much older brothers. What a waste of time that was...
If you haven't noticed, some people are still waiting for RTX 3080 cards they ordered on September 17, 2020. That makes, um, one year and 4 months waiting. It's probably good situation when you are Supposed to have good card but...

Another things you probably didn't realize: 6500XT is mobile chip and that explains most of it's drawbacks. Because it's mobile chip, it did NOT waste time, exactly opposite what you're trying to explain. Also because that chip is quite small, it also does at least Something to solve supply issues. On other side RTX 3050 uses same die (GA106) as RTX 3060 and as it's quite big 276mm2, it does basically nothing to improve supply issues.

Worse than older brothers? To remind: that's mobile chip! To remind again, because AMD cut down features, it also means smaller die area. That also means better availability.

First people complain about availability and when AMD makes everything they can to make availability better, people are yelling because it lacks features. Sounds pretty stupid to me.
 

Burty117

Posts: 4,459   +2,642
Another things you probably didn't realize: 6500XT is mobile chip.
Sold as a Desktop card being sold at $200+...

It's an absolutely terrible chip. You have no arguments here, it doesn't alleviate anything, if anything, it goes to show how gullible people like you are. They threw out possibly the worst product in Radeons history, no one should actually buy it, but because you can't buy anything (or should I also say, be able to use a discord bot that will alert you when a product is in stock) you are actually trying to defend it like it's actually a useful.
First people complain about availability and when AMD makes everything they can to make availability better, people are yelling because it lacks features. Sounds pretty stupid to me.
Which would be fine if it was sold at a price point that made sense to how bad its feature set is and performance but it's not, it's being sold at a ridiculous price.

You're being very careful not to mention the massive elephant in the room that it's of terrible value.
 

Watzupken

Posts: 570   +475
6500XT is widely available, 3050 is not. Basically you are saying AMD card should be compared to card that basically does not exist.

Using your logic, AMD should have released imaginary 6550XT that's much better and cheaper than 3050. And then AMD should be praised because it offers much better product. Even if no-one ever could buy 6550XT, it would still be 3050 competitor. Being impossible to find does not change that.

Sounds great, eh?

6500XT is clear proof that many hardware reviewers (so far all I have found) are either paid by Nvidia or total morons.
In an ideal situation, it will be great to have a card that is performant, good in value and readily available. But in these times, the latter 2 are lacking. RX 6500 XT is decent in performance, ONLY IF you are running a system that supports PCI-E 4.0. I think the conclusion of the RX 6500 XT review says the same. But the key issue to me is that the card is way off for budget gamers. How many budget gamers that you know rocks a spanking new B550, X570 (and not using an AMD APU), or Intel Rocket/ Alder Lake CPU? If not, yes you can buy the RX 6500 XT at a higher price than MSRP or even MSRP, but for -30 to 40% of the potential performance. I’ve also heard many people considering this card for HTPC use because it is quite ok in performance (again if the PCIE 4.0 condition is met), and also the small form factor. But surprise surprise, even modern decoder is removed. It is not an effective streamer due to lack of video encoder too. So should we buy a “bone” that AMD threw at us for the sake of their keeping cost in check? May be? But not recommended. The expectation of a new gen GPU is progression. But this card is mostly if not entirely a regression from the RX 5500 XT that it’s meant to replace. It’s innovation alright, but not for the benefit of people buying it.
Anyway, back to the main topic. Good to see a comparison between DDR4 and 5. It just proves there is little reasons to pay a steep premium for DDR5 at this early stage.
 
Last edited:

HardReset

Posts: 1,625   +1,275
Sold as a Desktop card being sold at $200+...

It's an absolutely terrible chip. You have no arguments here, it doesn't alleviate anything, if anything, it goes to show how gullible people like you are. They threw out possibly the worst product in Radeons history, no one should actually buy it, but because you can't buy anything (or should I also say, be able to use a discord bot that will alert you when a product is in stock) you are actually trying to defend it like it's actually a useful.
You obviously didn't read my previous post. I won't repeat same things again.
Which would be fine if it was sold at a price point that made sense to how bad its feature set is and performance but it's not, it's being sold at a ridiculous price.

You're being very careful not to mention the massive elephant in the room that it's of terrible value.
Here I list every new graphic card that is not currently selling at ridiculous price:



When it comes to features, cutting them down reduces die area and make availability better. AMD does at least something to improve supply. What Nvidia does? Nothing. That's your problem: you cannot see bigger picture.
In an ideal situation, it will be great to have a card that is performant, good in value and readily available. But in these times, the latter 2 are lacking. RX 6500 XT is decent in performance, ONLY IF you are running a system that supports PCI-E 4.0. I think the conclusion of the RX 6500 XT review says the same.
And that is problem why? If you don't have PCIe 4.0, then buy something else. Problem solved.
But the key issue to me is that the card is way off for budget gamers. How many budget gamers that you know rocks a spanking new B550, X570 (and not using an AMD APU), or Intel Rocket/ Alder Lake CPU? If not, yes you can buy the RX 6500 XT at a higher price than MSRP or even MSRP, but for -30 to 40% of the potential performance.
Again, how is that problem? PCIe 3.0 owners that don't want to sacrifice performance have tons of other options. If product not for you, then don't buy it. Simple.
I’ve also heard many people considering this card for HTPC use because it is quite ok in performance (again if the PCIE 4.0 condition is met), and also the small form factor. But surprise surprise, even modern decoder is removed. It is not an effective streamer due to lack of video encoder too. So should we buy a “bone” that AMD threw at us for the sake of their keeping cost in check? May be? But not recommended. The expectation of a new gen GPU is progression. But this card is mostly if not entirely a regression from the RX 5500 XT that it’s meant to replace. It’s innovation alright, but not for the benefit of people buying it.
Not just cost but availability too. Considering current situation, having at least Something available is huge thing. Since next gen video cards are coming later this year, there is no point designing another chip just for desktops. That's why AMD decided to offer mobile chip on desktop. And once again, at least AMD does SOMETHING to improve supply. What Nvidia does at same time? Very simple answer: absolutely nothing. 6500XT is not new gen card, those are probably coming later this year.

There's nothing wrong with 6500XT. It was meant to be solution to improve existing GPU supply. And it does that. It's completely pointless to compare 6500XT against older cards that basically have no availability. To put it another way, throw away all your existing graphic cards and shop new card for around $300-400. You'll notice that 6500XT isn't actually so bad. Just because it's available and so called "better choices" are not.
 

Steve

Posts: 2,854   +2,978
Staff member
Says someone that has this kind of standards for review scores:

- Current situation, where cards are simply not available or miners grab them all, AMD releases card that's very bad for mining and has very good availability: 20/100

- Nvidia releases card that is 98% die shrink of previous architecture 100/100.

"(y) (Y)"
I don't do review scores, you'll have to give @Julio Franco a hard time over that. Though I don't necessarily disagree with the score. At $200 it deserves a better score, but at $270, there are better hold over options.

As for the RTX 3050 I wouldn't have given it a score yet and I certainly didn't make any concrete claims in our video. I was very clear with where I thought that product would fall in the current market.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,625   +1,275
I don't do review scores, you'll have to give @Julio Franco a hard time over that. Though I don't necessarily disagree with the score. At $200 it deserves a better score, but at $270, there are better hold over options.
I see. Then I can finally forget commenting you about those review scores.

What are those better options or "better hold over options"? I just looked at few shops in my country. At around around under $350 dollar range leaving out trash (GT730 etc), about only cards available at that price are GTX1050Ti and RX6500XT. Prices are around same for those too. If you need new card for around that price and need it now, choice is very simple.

I agree that 6500XT sucks against many older cards, is overpriced and lacks features etc. But because it's really available and those "other options" are not, 6500XT starts to look pretty good.

20/100 is simply absurd score and makes me wonder if USER=1]@Julio Franco[/USER] is living in alternate reality. Welcome to real world where you just cannot buy what are supposed to be "best options" but have to stick with what really exist. I suggest review score is at least doubled.
 

Steve

Posts: 2,854   +2,978
Staff member
I see. Then I can finally forget commenting you about those review scores.

What are those better options or "better hold over options"? I just looked at few shops in my country. At around around under $350 dollar range leaving out trash (GT730 etc), about only cards available at that price are GTX1050Ti and RX6500XT. Prices are around same for those too. If you need new card for around that price and need it now, choice is very simple.

I agree that 6500XT sucks against many older cards, is overpriced and lacks features etc. But because it's really available and those "other options" are not, 6500XT starts to look pretty good.

20/100 is simply absurd score and makes me wonder if USER=1]@Julio Franco[/USER] is living in alternate reality. Welcome to real world where you just cannot buy what are supposed to be "best options" but have to stick with what really exist. I suggest review score is at least doubled.
You have to overlook a lot of shortcomings to justify the 6500 XT, even at $200 US. I personally wouldn't buy it as I use the hardware encoder daily. The PCIe 3.0 performance is generally terrible as well. I'll be honest I don't have the time nor the energy to talk about the 6500 XT anymore, I've said all I want to in my review, as well as this follow up video with Tim.
 

Julio Franco

Posts: 8,856   +1,790
Staff member
Says someone that has this kind of standards for review scores:

Confirmed. Scores are part of TechSpot’s editorial layer and thus my responsibility.

I could justify or write about why a product received this score and why this other received this other score. But the easiest way to go is to simply read the conclusion of each review where it’s well founded and better explained.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,625   +1,275
You have to overlook a lot of shortcomings to justify the 6500 XT, even at $200 US. I personally wouldn't buy it as I use the hardware encoder daily. The PCIe 3.0 performance is generally terrible as well. I'll be honest I don't have the time nor the energy to talk about the 6500 XT anymore, I've said all I want to in my review, as well as this follow up video with Tim.
Basically you missed whole point for lack of features:

- x4 PCIe interface = smaller die area.
- Lack of encoder/decoder = smaller die area
- 64-bit memory interface = smaller die area
...

Smaller die area = more chips per wafer. Since wafers are in short supply, more chips per wafer means more chips available.

And it works. 10 days after launch 6500XT is still widely available. That's The point.
Confirmed. Scores are part of TechSpot’s editorial layer and thus my responsibility.

I could justify or write about why a product received this score and why this other received this other score. But the easiest way to go is to simply read the conclusion of each review where it’s well founded and better explained.
OK.

I read conclusion on GTX1070 review, it received 100/100. About only things I can find on conclusion to justify 100/100 are following parts:
The key advantage here for GTX 970 owners other than the huge jump in performance is the fact that it comes without a power penalty.
Overall, the GTX 1070 is an exceptional upper-tier offering that delivers previous-gen flagship performance at a serious discount.
However you are completely ignoring fact that GTX1070 uses (at that time) 4 years newer manufacturing technology (2012 vs 2016) than previous flagship did. Basically you are rewarding Nvidia for making obsolete products before and of course modern product looks much better then. For comparison, Zen3 uses only about 2 year newer manufacturing tech than Zen (around 2016 vs around 2018).

For 6500XT conclusion completely ignores fact that lack of features and VRAM means better availability (see above). Additionally 6500XT is mobile chip and while one can say AMD should have designed new low end desktop chip (despite new generation coming later this year), that's something Nvidia didn't do either.

For those reasons, review scores are not justified. If you want to use review score that tries to say how good product is, then you simply cannot miss anything major. As for GTX1080/1070, manufacturing tech part is completely ignored. As for 6500XT, availability is completely ignored. Because of those reasons, review scores are simply not justified. Not to mention conclusion part of both reviews miss those points.
 

Steve

Posts: 2,854   +2,978
Staff member
Basically you missed whole point for lack of features:

- x4 PCIe interface = smaller die area.
- Lack of encoder/decoder = smaller die area
- 64-bit memory interface = smaller die area
...

Smaller die area = more chips per wafer. Since wafers are in short supply, more chips per wafer means more chips available.

And it works. 10 days after launch 6500XT is still widely available. That's The point.

OK.

I read conclusion on GTX1070 review, it received 100/100. About only things I can find on conclusion to justify 100/100 are following parts:


However you are completely ignoring fact that GTX1070 uses (at that time) 4 years newer manufacturing technology (2012 vs 2016) than previous flagship did. Basically you are rewarding Nvidia for making obsolete products before and of course modern product looks much better then. For comparison, Zen3 uses only about 2 year newer manufacturing tech than Zen (around 2016 vs around 2018).

For 6500XT conclusion completely ignores fact that lack of features and VRAM means better availability (see above). Additionally 6500XT is mobile chip and while one can say AMD should have designed new low end desktop chip (despite new generation coming later this year), that's something Nvidia didn't do either.

For those reasons, review scores are not justified. If you want to use review score that tries to say how good product is, then you simply cannot miss anything major. As for GTX1080/1070, manufacturing tech part is completely ignored. As for 6500XT, availability is completely ignored. Because of those reasons, review scores are simply not justified. Not to mention conclusion part of both reviews miss those points.
That point was addressed in the video and no we're not missing the point at all. The x4 PCIe interface doesn't just equal a smaller die area, it in many instances equals absolutely **** performance for those using PCIe 3.0.

We're well aware of how small the die is and what benefits that brings for AMD, we even discussed those points in the video linked above. Our point is if you can't make a technically better and faster product than those on the market 5 years ago and are available today for less on the second hand market, you probably shouldn't make that product.

There are a number of other good reasons why we think the 6500 XT is poor value and those were discussed in the video. As I said I don't wish to waste any more time arguing about the 6500 XT. I'd rather revisit it in a year or two and see how it's holding up in the latest games compared to parts like the 4GB RX 580, GTX 1650S and 4GB 5500 XT.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,625   +1,275
That point was addressed in the video and no we're not missing the point at all. The x4 PCIe interface doesn't just equal a smaller die area, it in many instances equals absolutely **** performance for those using PCIe 3.0.

We're well aware of how small the die is and what benefits that brings for AMD, we even discussed those points in the video linked above. Our point is if you can't make a technically better and faster product than those on the market 5 years ago and are available today for less on the second hand market, you probably shouldn't make that product.

There are a number of other good reasons why we think the 6500 XT is poor value and those were discussed in the video. As I said I don't wish to waste any more time arguing about the 6500 XT. I'd rather revisit it in a year or two and see how it's holding up in the latest games compared to parts like the 4GB RX 580, GTX 1650S and 4GB 5500 XT.
Can't make? Of course AMD could make much better product, but since new generation is coming later this year, it would be waste of resources. Did Nvidia design new low end chip for current generation? No, they just cut RTX3060 and renamed it RTX3050.

Shouldn't make that product? Again, reality check: there is very little use for card that don't exist. Many people are still waiting for GTX 3080 they ordered 1 year and 4 months ago. And again, if you need card right now and you have two choices: GTX1050Ti and 6500XT. Which one you would take? That's situation in my country right now. No, none of those "better choices" are available. Those are only those two options at that price range. Still say 6500XT should not exist?
 

Watzupken

Posts: 570   +475
You obviously didn't read my previous post. I won't repeat same things again.

Here I list every new graphic card that is not currently selling at ridiculous price:



When it comes to features, cutting them down reduces die area and make availability better. AMD does at least something to improve supply. What Nvidia does? Nothing. That's your problem: you cannot see bigger picture.

And that is problem why? If you don't have PCIe 4.0, then buy something else. Problem solved.

Again, how is that problem? PCIe 3.0 owners that don't want to sacrifice performance have tons of other options. If product not for you, then don't buy it. Simple.

Not just cost but availability too. Considering current situation, having at least Something available is huge thing. Since next gen video cards are coming later this year, there is no point designing another chip just for desktops. That's why AMD decided to offer mobile chip on desktop. And once again, at least AMD does SOMETHING to improve supply. What Nvidia does at same time? Very simple answer: absolutely nothing. 6500XT is not new gen card, those are probably coming later this year.

There's nothing wrong with 6500XT. It was meant to be solution to improve existing GPU supply. And it does that. It's completely pointless to compare 6500XT against older cards that basically have no availability. To put it another way, throw away all your existing graphic cards and shop new card for around $300-400. You'll notice that 6500XT isn't actually so bad. Just because it's available and so called "better choices" are not.
In other words, you are putting yourself in a corner. I don't see the point of defending a product that is ill suited for the target market. While it may sound harsh, but consumers and reviewers should be feeding back to the product maker. AMD's pitch is that they made a card "for gamers", and not suited for miners. In my mind, cutting the VRAM could alleviate the mining issue, but what is the point of cutting on the PCI-E bus, removing the video encoder/ decoder? Are miners utilising the full x16 or x8 bus in the first place or are they using the mining rig to also stream movie at the same time they are mining? This is just an excuse for AMD to cut cost in my opinion, and not" for gamers". Please remember, each card targets a specific market. This card again, is meant for budget gamers. If you are telling to me look for other options, what other options are there that is budget and don't sux this much when all I have is a PCI-E 3.0 x16 slot? Isn't it penalising budget gamers? When 1 reviewer says its bad, there could be something wrong with the reviewer. When almost all the reviews have fairly similar concerns with the product, there is certainly an issue with the product. Some reviews may be milder and trying to find some positives with the product, but the limitations certainly cannot be overlooked. I am no reviewer, but objectively speaking, the card does NOT suit most budget gamers, and certainly not some olive branch that AMD has stuck out to help budget gamers. And when you are telling me to look for other options, basically you acknowledged that it is not suitable for most people.
 

Watzupken

Posts: 570   +475
Can't make? Of course AMD could make much better product, but since new generation is coming later this year, it would be waste of resources. Did Nvidia design new low end chip for current generation? No, they just cut RTX3060 and renamed it RTX3050.

Shouldn't make that product? Again, reality check: there is very little use for card that don't exist. Many people are still waiting for GTX 3080 they ordered 1 year and 4 months ago. And again, if you need card right now and you have two choices: GTX1050Ti and 6500XT. Which one you would take? That's situation in my country right now. No, none of those "better choices" are available. Those are only those two options at that price range. Still say 6500XT should not exist?
May be you should try and be the reviewer? When you review something, it has to be compared with another product and some assumptions, I.e. pricing, etc. No reviewers will look price and availability in every single country before coming out with a conclusion of the product. If that is the case, the review will never be released because prices differs from country to country, so is the availability, or other moving factors. Again, I find people try to defend AMD's RX 6500 XT by putting themselves in a "no choice" situation. Hey AMD, I have no choice, so I think the card is ok, and I will buy it since there are no options. But is that the right feedback? So you mean to say if AMD is going to continue to pull a fast one on you next time, you will welcome their cost cutting measures? No wonder progress is stagnated because people don't expect a new generation product to work better than its predecessor, and happy with the lack of progress or even regression in this case. The product can certainly game if you have a PCI-E 4.0 or 5.0 slot in your system, but warnings from reviewers should also consider who is the target market of this product. People should not be using PCI-E 2.0, but 3.0 is common. So you pay xx amount of a card expecting 100% performance, only to be crippled to about 60 to 70% when using in an old system which the graphic card died and the only cheap card is the RX 6500 XT. Are you using one with PCI-E 3.0? How would you feel if you are? And don't forget, almost everybody uses a PC, but only a tiny fraction is up to date with new technology. This is almost like AMD pulling a fast one on unknowing users and hopefully people buying a new PC don't buy one with PCI-E 3.0 support only.