AMDVLK 2022.Q1.1 Released With Radeon RX 6500 XT Support

[coder]

Don't spread FUD.

We've been down this road before (I mean specifically with Intel's upcoming dGPUs) and it seems there's no convincing him. Luckily, we have only another 2 months or so to wait.

[smitty3268]

Looks like it's basically a low-power 4GB 580 card on PCI4. 10% slower on PCI3.

Not too impressive unless you're desperate for a card right now.

[bridgman]

bridgman can you tell us if the PRO card of this Navi24 chip has 8gb vram ? did read some news about new pro card with navi24 chip-

As far as I can see the PRO card is 4GB as well:

https://www.amd.com/en/products/professional-graphics/amd-radeon-pro-w6400

No mention of AV1 decode on the PRO version either, sorry.

[onlyLinuxLuvUBack]

i do not buy anything without AV1 decode support...

"neither cheap"

looks like you did not read the news... the Radeon Pro W6400 is 229 US-Dollars...

for a PRO card this is very cheap...

"You should wait for Intel's XE low end chip, that should feature AV1 decode and 6 GB VRAM if I am not mistaken."

yes exactly for my mother if intel does have AV1 decode i will buy a intel gpu

but i think intel will make sure their GPUs only work with intel CPUs...

just look at the size of the NO column for AV1-decode ( all my amd cards are in the no) .....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Video_Decoder#VCN_1

[khnazile]

As far as I can see the PRO card is 4GB as well:

https://www.amd.com/en/products/professional-graphics/amd-radeon-pro-w6400

No mention of AV1 decode on the PRO version either, sorry.

I think this W6400 is way more interesting than "6500XT". 50W, sane clocks and low-profile design - looks like a proper card. Too bad amd does not make something like this for consumer market.

[skeevy420]

Huh? It should run fine @ PCIe 3.0, but the x4 thing could bottleneck some games.

It doesn't change the fact that I bought a new 2021 APU within the year and it's not good enough to be paired with their budget GPU. This is a product release ripped directly from the Intel playbook. I don't know why and can't explain it, but this GPU feels like some Intel tick-tock bullshit. Perhaps it's because I haven't owned my system for 11 months and yet it's outdated for the crappiest of the new GPUs around -- that does feel like some Intel bullshit. Trust me when I say that if I thought artificial PCIe limitations were going to be a thing I wouldn't have bought my Ryzen Pro.

There is no amount of AMD Fan Blinders that'll make me say that good things about this GPU. Well...the messed up thing is I'm actually fine with the price. I totally get the current market and was willing to spend that simply because I've rode my 580 hard lately. That's as nice as it gets -- I'm in a bind and gotta buy what's available.

[Teggs]

As far as I can see the PRO card is 4GB as well:

https://www.amd.com/en/products/professional-graphics/amd-radeon-pro-w6400

No mention of AV1 decode on the PRO version either, sorry.

It's a good thing I'm not in the target audience for that product. The marketing on that page was cringey. The grammar was atrocious, the word choice screamed 'I'm in marketing and don't know what I'm talking about!', and while I know that they had a difficult task trying to sell a laptop GPU as workstation, pretending it only has two video outs because AMD deliberately cut costs on behalf of their workstation customers... *sigh*

That's at least half the problem with the 6500 XT, the way it's presented. If AMD had said, 'Hey everyone, here's our new RX 6300. As a converted laptop GPU, it does not include all of the features of our other RX 6000 offerings. However, this does make the die and the board it is placed on inexpensive to produce, and happens to leave the 6300 unattractive for crypto mining at the same time. Check our benchmarks and independent performance reviews to see if the RX 6300 is right for you!' ...it wouldn't make it physically better, but there would be a lot less negativity around it.

[smitty3268]

That's at least half the problem with the 6500 XT, the way it's presented. If AMD had said, 'Hey everyone, here's our new RX 6300. As a converted laptop GPU, it does not include all of the features of our other RX 6000 offerings. However, this does make the die and the board it is placed on inexpensive to produce, and happens to leave the 6300 unattractive for crypto mining at the same time. Check our benchmarks and independent performance reviews to see if the RX 6300 is right for you!' ...it wouldn't make it physically better, but there would be a lot less negativity around it.

I actually agree with that. Nobody was going to love this card, but if AMD had marketed it the right way I think most people would have shrugged and moved on while talking about how the GPU market still sucks. They also may have just wanted to target the OEM market to avoid all the press anyway, since I'm guessing that's where the majority of sales are going to end up.

[billyswong]

That's at least half the problem with the 6500 XT, the way it's presented. If AMD had said, 'Hey everyone, here's our new RX 6300. As a converted laptop GPU, it does not include all of the features of our other RX 6000 offerings. However, this does make the die and the board it is placed on inexpensive to produce, and happens to leave the 6300 unattractive for crypto mining at the same time. Check our benchmarks and independent performance reviews to see if the RX 6300 is right for you!' ...it wouldn't make it physically better, but there would be a lot less negativity around it.

I agree. Call it RX 6400 XT and market it such, then customers will be a lot more satisfied. They branded the OEM sub-75W version RX 6400 already anyway. A "5"-level cards are expected to be full featured, regardless of its speed. Not this current cut-cornered product.

[qarium]

We've been down this road before (I mean specifically with Intel's upcoming dGPUs) and it seems there's no convincing him. Luckily, we have only another 2 months or so to wait.

right i am not convinced because the existing PCIe cards are made in a way that they only run with intel cpus...

also also by logic if intel do not follow this OEM only stradegy to push their chipset sales and cpu sales with cheap GPUs then they will lose many Xeon sales beause the people get ECC without buying Xeon.

so by logic they make it an OEM product only and make it only run with intel cpus or else they will hurt themself.

and for sure they will not do this.