Going forward, please keep outlining just how much the low end isn't moving. We need the love and support by you guys too. We're being ripped off for far too long now
@@gg-gn3re wuuut? Literally 6500xt is the most low-end gaming product even compared to last generation and still it's more than 3 times faster than Ryzen 5700G igpu
"No one iss going to pair a budget graphics card with such a CPU" Looks back at those 2 months I had a 5900x with a GT640. These are strange times we''re living in.
@@MaxIronsThird I run games from dosgamesarchive on my 8 year old laptop with Intel integrated graphics just fine. XQuest is still a fun and highly addictive game... And the best part of retro gaming is that I don't have to listen to 13 year olds fantasize about a sexual relation with my mother every time I gank them! :P
@@Puremindgames True, unfortunately they are an bit of a necessity. In that there are some applications that require an minimum amount of Vram. Even if your newer I GPU has plenty of power to run them. Which is where these low end cards kind of are needed. You don't need the performance. You just need that V ram to check a box for your software.
IGPUs can't really run above 720p and ALWAYS be playable still whilst the 6400 actually can run 1080p and at decent settings for older titles at just about playable FPS
I can't believe retailers we're selling GTX 1050Tis for $225 as an "offer" here in México at the end of 2021, worst part is that people did buy them. What price can I expect if this has similar RX 570 performance in some games? Probably around $250. This market is BS...
I think some reviewers forget the niche this card targets. Its TDP is a fraction of the other comparable cards and they have nothing on its size (LP single slot) while still providing far better performance than its predecessors of a similar form factor. Although it costs more, all these reasons outweigh it in my mind, since they fit in low power, ultra compact systems.
This is what has been so frustrating with some of these reviewers. They keep shitting on this card, while telling you how much better older full size cards perform. Like. Yeah, what an astute observation! Why are you recommending other normal size GPUs over this one? They don't fit! If you're looking to upgrade a sff you already own, the 6400 seems to be a pretty good option.
I remember getting those single-fan Powercolor "Red Dragon" RX 470's for like... What, $175-ish? Something like that, at the time. This card being $160 with current performance level is not good...
You said that no one would pair this card with 5950X, but I was genuinely thinking of doing just that for replacement of my current box. I have absolutely no need for a powerful GPU as I mainly do C++ programming and general pedestrian computer use. In fact, I've been doing just fine with iGP in my aging i7-7700-all I need is a card that can output 4K@60fps at the lowest possible power usage since my machine is on 24/7, so this card, barring an iGP that 5950X lacks, is a godsend. It only needs to get cheaper, and, in time, I think it will, and then I will strike.
This will be the end-state function for the 6500XT I got when it launched. Although for me it’s more immediately served as the temporary gaming solution while waiting for the market to restabilize, it will spend most of its life in an office-oriented PC where all it needs to handle is outputting a 4K desktop and occasional GPU-accelerated applications.
@@tilapiadave3234 C++ coding and compiling is all CPU based. Most devs prefer quiet systems and you can't get much quieter than a 53W GPU. Believe it or not, most computers in the world aren't gaming PCs.
I mean, even a used 750ti should do the job fairly well, or a 1030gt/rx560 (I believe that you're on linux and prefer the better driver support that amd offers)
I bought a 2nd hand 4gb rx570 for around $120aud for a mate a few years ago. It's pretty sad that the low end has stagnated so bad in recent years, especially with regards to price vs performance...
remember the 750ti era? even the gtx 950 was okay price to perf, sad times we live in now in terms of gpus, but atleast we're getting better cpus unlike the old 4c/4t days
I bought an 8GB RX570 for like ~120€ for a system which basically just needed a display output card with a modern feature set a few years ago. AMD is out of their mind.
Notice what you just said though "I bought a second hand 470 4GB for around $120AUD" That's a second hand, non-low profile card that requires a PCI-E power cable (possibly 2 depending on the model). Not only that, but this is a 400 moniker card. If an RX440, 540, or a 5400 existed, do you think it would've competed with this card that barely sips electricity?
I am glad this product exists. I think you should've tested for 720p. This seems like the kind of product someone might get if they have a lower end oem from a few years ago with an older monitor.
I disagree (but upvoted you anyway), I think 1080p has been a standard for so long that 720p is no longer a common resolution even among gamers with lower end hardware.
@@Ischemia24 Fair. I upgraded to 1080p in 2020, after being on 720p since 2014. I still have my old monitor and it still works, so I could downgrade if I ever needed to. I'm sure there are others out there still on 720p
It certainly has its place in the stack and it was much needed, but it costs WAY too much. It's going for $300 in Australia, a price point that was formerly occupied by the: RX 590 GTX 1660ti and the RX 5600. All 3 of these cards totally will destroy the 6400, and all are many years old. being based on Polaris, Pascal and RDNA1 respectively. The 6400 should be half the price (A$150), then it would be a compelling option for those people you are referencing.
This thing should go for half the asking ( msrp ) price. The low-end ( 199$ and below ) has become an absolute joke, same as the midrange ( 300$ and below ).
@@aleksazunjic9672 This is completely wrong. Inflation isn’t great *right now*, but that’s fairly recent, and even then it will take years for the dollar to lose half its value. It’s more like $112 today is $100 in 2019.
Normally you would imagine as you go even lower end pcie bandwidth should have lesser issue, apparently 6400 still managed to one up 6500XT, congratulations AMD!
@@GewelReal How's it not a bad thing? The APU's will still struggle vs dedicated desktop cards and titles will keep becoming more demanding (and 144hz screens will become more mainstream in the future) as GPU power in both desktop and Consoles increase. AMD relinquishing the low end means really bad time to low budget gamers as we'll be left at the mercy of NVIDIA and Intel, and those two have a very bad track record at it.
Consistently disappointing to see small form factor, low-profile solutions getting priced at such absurd premiums. And the PCI 3 vs PCI 4 performance difference just adds insult to injury.
@@PainterVierax If it's HTPC with directly attached KVM only then maybe, but in many cases nowadays such machines also host PLEX/Emby/Kodi/Jellyfin server for eg. DLNA media serving duties or for client app connected media serving purposes, and in this case having the availability to transcode efficiently on the HW accelerated blocks is paramount... And the hero of this video has none... Thus, bad move on AMD's part...
And now those cards like the GT 1050 low profile are still commanding an premium on Ebay. Because resellers know that they can command an premium with a lot of small form factor users. Which is the main reason why i'm glad this card is coming in. Even though the price is underwhelming. I hope that Intels PCIE power only low end card offerings will actually shake up the market. And free SFF form factor owners from the scalpers greedy reach. Just as the flood of new cards freed the rest of us from their exploitative pricing.
@@robertkeaney9905 You're better off making a "case" out of cardboard with a little scrap wood or just laying out all your desktop parts on a desk at this point.
@@depth386 I know you were making a Jest. But I've actually thought about doing something like that using the DIY perks tutorial on how to make a decent computer case. After all, the end product does look pretty sleek. And the build has more modularity than an Dell prebuilt like venerable Optiplex series. At the end of the day, the goal is just to build a computer that can play fortnight at 720p with decent frame rates. Which can be built for 300 dollars or less. So it can be sold for 400 dollars or less. Because that's what a lot grand parents and single parents are willing to pay for a "Gaming PC". So that's where a decent subset of the Ebay market is.
@@robertkeaney9905 dont use wood :) it will burn your house down, or if you must avoid welding use "mild steel angle" as the mounting point for gpu and not wood :) i might have had an issue with some wood and a small fire and all i can tell you is the pc is ruined.. possibly more so from me drop kicking it cleanly across the room and promptly out the door at the amusement of my child... she was right.. i should just buy a case...
@@dragonboyjazz Cases are decently affordable these days. I recommend the Corsair 4000D Mesh. There are a good number of tutorials around that one. Alternatively, if you are craft inclined Ply wood covered in vinyl wrap won't catch fire unless your PSU catches fire. But, making your own case also means your giving up on front IO. Which isn't fun. So buying a cheap case like the Corsair 4000d isn't a bad option.
Lastly happened the same with my RX 550 too. All was well until those ones up above decided to block the OVERCLOCKING option in the new update in Radeon Software. So I DDU'd the driver, just installed the driver files manually and have been using afterburner since then. It's still overclockable hehe
This is a $79 USD Card. Clearly AMD was banking on sustained higher prices and is getting burned on this. They packaged this in a pictureless box, id be so disappointed when i got open and pulled that little hd 5450 out of the box.
Not having hardware encoding on a card like this is such a miss. I have personally got 2 computers running a GTX 1650 for the main purpose of being a light work machine and playing some basic games. Having hardware encoding is such a gift when viewing media content. Especially when paired with a low end quad core CPU.
@@gg-gn3re the only drawback is not being able to livestream from your pc like uploading to twitch right? cause iv heard some ppl say streaming services like Netflix might not work and some services my not work in the future
Comparison to 5600G APU performance, and / or GT 1030 (what a lot of people currently have in their old Optiplexes, as it was one of very few low-profile options) would be nice...
I’d like to see the APU performance difference as well but a GT 1030 seems a bit pointless when the 1050 TI is in the results. It’s much better than the 1030.
Going to be difficult to buy a used system that supports pcie 4.0 and is cheaper then just building a whole new pc, not like the glory days of adding a 750ti to an optiplex
@@josh223 depends where you're from and you have to remember 1650 are now second hand for much cheaper. I've seen them for 120... And it also overclocks and encodes. Both of which the 6400 can't...
You know that even a mobile gtx 1050, that is bottlenecked by a shitty cpu and optimus would edge out those igpi's, right? The 6400 is 2x faster and the 6500xt is 2.5x faster.
The only thing I find great about this particular card is the box: reasonably sized, plain cardboard (maybe even refurbished?) without crazy folds. This should be mandatory.
yes! I was thinking the exact same thing. Easy to recycle since there's no plastic laminating. Since most people buy online or at the very least research what card to buy before buying at retail, I doubt the shinyness and complexity of the box design is what sells units these days. More manufacturers should move to this more eco friendly box, it would probably save them money too, lol.
@@Cmon3play I don't feel the same way at all, I open things once. I'm more excited about using whatever I have bought than opening it, although i appreciate that some people do consider the unboxing experience. It honestly degrades the experience for me when i end up with a pile of unrecycleable garbage that could have just been a few pieces of cardboard, but that's just my opinion.
@@jintsuubest9331 its only competition (right now) is the low profile 1650, so assuming now new low profile cards come out, and it's cheaper than the alternative, it's worth buying for 59
I like it that way though. I dunno, *JuSt BoOmEr ThInGs* But yeah I was thinking about it and I now want to build the *ultimate* meme machine when prices come down, and stick an old board with some legacy hardware like a Haswell or whatever and running quad GPUs or at least GTX 970 in SLI...IN MINERAL WATER ...I just can't justify building wasting up to four decimal places on pure memes I don't even need or will use but man, maybe even way older, like 3 banks of RAM and 8800's in SLI
I suppose that PCIe lanes price is not only in PCB, but in GPU built-in PCIe / Memory controller too. If you divide PCIe controller inside of chip to 2 or 4 segments, each capable of 4x PCIe lanes, chances are higher that after production at least 1 segment of that controller will work, giving 4x PCIe lanes. And dont forget that RX 6400 / 6500 is basically a reuse of laptop GPU chips. Reusing / Rebinning / Disabling sectors of the same crystal, using it in other models is basically industry standard now, both AMD and Nvidia are doing that kind of stuff. Consumer-grade products are always disabled / limited / defective by hardware or software. look at Nvidia`s top-grade GA100 chip, and its realization in CMP 170HX mining card, compared to Nvidia A100 graphics card. CMP 170HX has only 4x PCIe lanes, and A100 got full 16x.
Because this is a mobile GPU being put in a desktop format. Many of the missing features can be found on the laptops iGPU, such as the hardware encoder, etc. Cutting this chip down for desktop use is probably why they also cut the PCIE lanes down (and also halved the display outputs)
This is a great little card. I was unhappy with my APU build so wanted to a low-power card to pair it with. I'm hoping we see another revision with RDNA3. Paired with an AMD 5600G APU and 16GB RAM, the RX 6400 pushes Division 1 at 4K/30FPS at Low. I play at 1080p 60FPS at Medium. Comparatively, the AMD 5600g APU pushes Division 1 about 1080p 40-41FPS at Low, or 720p 60FPS locked at Medium settings.
Conclusion: Overpriced for an entry-level card. The target market (older hardware like old Dell Optiplexes) is not really well-served by this card. Performance wise you'd be better off getting a GTX 1650 low profile model if you're running a compact machine. So misses the target market and is overpriced for what you get. You'd be better off getting used hardware. Ironically, it makes the GTX 1650 look pretty good and the RX 6500 XT as "not so bad".
@@Psi-Storm Yeah I know. Pretty depressing that the RX 6400 is the only option but on the other hand, the only other alternatives are ... GT 1030s? Yuck.
Hey Steve, thank you once again for the great video. Over the past few weeks you often mention the RX 6600 as the only budget option worth considering for a 1080p gaming system since prices are dropping countinously and it is slowly approaching it's MSRP. With the arrival of RX 7000 and RTX 4000 on the horizon I hope that current gen cards might even fall below MSRP within the months to come. Therefore a quick roundup of RX 6600 AIB models regarding cooling solutions and noise emission would be really great for one of your next videos. Until then, keep up the great work and best regards from Germany!
On the AMD side there won't be any budget mid range cards (at least this year). Navi 33, the smallest of the coming chips, is still massive and will be around 6800XT performance for $500. The 6600 around 300€ will probably be the best value card you can get this year. Or the 6650xt that is coming in around two weeks gets a msrp close to 400€, then you might be able to grab a 6600xt for 350€.
Where was this a year ago!? The GPU market caused me to pivot from a SFF emulation machine (probably Optiplex) to just building the best PC I could afford- all or nothing I guess... I've wanted to do PCRV for a long time, so I'm happy in the end.
i think it's impressive to note that it even compares to the RX 570, a card that draws 150W vs the RX 6400, which only draws 53W. a testament to RDNA2's power efficiency.
This card is oddly a good value for low profile cards since it matches a 1650 but low profile 1650's are like 300 on eBay. Edit: It also wins the award for most adorable GPU
@@kell7689 True, but they were the most powerful PCIe-only power card before this card came out so they were priced high because they were the best at that niche. This card absolutely disrupted the scalpers on those low profile cards.
Thanks for the review, Steve. I always appreciate coverage of low end products and the PCIe 3.0 comparison was interesting. I'm in the market for this card (low profile PC), and will likely get it even with all the limitations. Pretty sad that there's nothing better for this market.
12:04 - according to the results for Cyberpunk 2077, the GTX 1660 SUPER in terms of performance, is between a RTX 3050 and RX 5600 XT. The 1660S isn't on the chart but I'm going by my own numbers I get playing CP2077 with it. Not bad for a GPU that only costed me $264 USD at the time.
I don't know about modern SFF systems, but the old Acer have (AX1935-UR20P) uses *standard* DTX sized motherboard (ITX + one more expansion slot) with *standard* ATX power connectors. I have successfully transplanted the motherboard into a different case, with standard power supply, allowing for the use of normal profile expansion cards. Just another option.
You seem to call the 6400 a fail but you fail to realize the 1650 does not come in a single slot configuration. I need a single slot card for a retro build and the 6400 seems like the only obvious choice.
Honestly, I find the performance shown here quite remarkable for such a small card and cooler. If you don't mind playing on lower settings, or older titles, games seem perfectly playable. Cool. It's too bad you really need PCIe 4.0 though. Thanks for testing it!
No exactly man... At 160$ is more expensive than 1650 and 1050 ti when launched... 1050 ti was an entry-level from 2016 and still win in some games WTF !?!? 6 years of difference and now entry level GPUs are weak, capped and expansive...
Given that it's over a generation ahead in manufacturing technology, it's not very remarkable. It's mostly sad that it's competing with 1650 in power to performance which is manufactured on TSMC's 12nm node, vs the TSMC's 6N for the 6400... An embarrassment is the right word, not remarkable.
Around Winter 2019, picked up a RX 5500 XT 8Gb single fan model for $189 US on Dell's website, had I it for a short time before I facebook sold it for $140 , Also I still have just one left of the RX 570 4Gb with free games $129 US
The fact that the 5500XT often beats even the 6500XT pcie 4 is ridiculous. I stand with what I said when the RX6000 series and RTX3000 series came out: unless you need something very specific or don't care about money, judging by MSRP, go with Nvidia on lower end and AMD on higher end. Though of course, in reality, the ideal is often to go with the best price to performance ratio in your price range.
The raw shading performance is so similar that I wonder if it’s was supposed to be called something like 6400 XT and AMD moved their naming up one level when they saw how much prices were going up. Something like the 6600 makes much more sense as a 5500 XT replacement.
I'd be really interested to see what this card performs like on a system that it would be good for - i.e. an old dell/hp office system from ebay. I understand why you test with high end cpu, but this is never going to be the position this gpu will be used in. I would like to see numbers with a i5 3470 or something! Thanks for the review though.
You really want to add this to an 11th gen Intel machine minimum because of the pcie 4.0 limitations could be tricky to get a deal on that. 3rd gen is far too old imo
I second this but to be fair, they have a unified test suite so they can just add the results of the new card while comparing it to the already existing results of other cards. Doing it all over again on another system would be time consuming. Maybe its good for another video, though.
@@CorbettK42 This limitation would also apply to the only competitor to this card, the 1030. The 1050ti was worse than this on PCIe 3.0, so you can expect it to beat the crap out of the 1030
Considering how SFF versions of the RX 550 were only made by Yeston (and the Radeon Pro WX 2100-4100) years after its initial release, it's easy to know that these will be more able to quickly source and buy. The lack of AV1 and H265 encoders will be the biggest sore spot of this, as was the GT 1030.
these are perfect for an office setup using VM's and the likes.. great idea to help get the actual gaming gpu's into the hands of gamers .. also would very nicely fit a retro gaming / media center pc
I fail to see the fit for an HTPC when it has no encoding hw, while for any office setup of that kind one could obtain vastly cheaper older Quadro cards which would be immensely more reliable. If gamer buy this trash then it only encourages AMD & NVIDIA to continue down the same road. Buy 2nd hand instead.
I have this in my wife's pc. It's a off the shelf ryzen 5300g HP desktop that had 16gb of ram(obviously 2400mhz) the 6400 fit the bill for a gpu for her tower. On that note we paid 130 not 160 woo 30$ still for how high everything is it's not bad if you got a limited tower like hers
I understand the price argument, but you are looking at new vs used in an inflated world. This isn't the same as say 2018 and never will be again as these companies will keep doing this.
I have 5900x underclocked by 1000 (in negative turbo) and undervolted , and paired with this gpu. Fueled by pico-psu and whole system is not taking more than 120W under full load. Its fits in A09m case from Aliexpress and oh boy, i love this small boi
@@BonusCrook He said MSRP. Not aftermarket price. And at $160, the gtx 1650 super would've indeed bodied the competition if it was available at its $160 msrp. The gtx 1660 super at $230 msrp would've obliterated pretty much any of these low end GPU's in terms of value and even rivaled or beaten them in efficiency.
@@BonusCrook Wow. Upon release the gtx 1650s DID exist. Could've bought one if you were in that dire of a need. Another option is a gaming laptop which have kept their MSRP's pretty well. The 3060 ones costed $1000/euros since their launch a year ago and ass whoop these budget options.
@@siyzerix hey can I ask you a favor? Can you go back to launch and get me a 1650S? Thanks. In the mean time im going to stick with the situation we are actually in
So on 3.0, its pretty close to even with a 1650. But in LP configuration, the 1650 is almost double the price. As of 4/27/22 I'm seeing about $330 for a LP 1650 and $265 for a LP 1050ti. So even with an older 3.0 system, if you need a low profile card, this is still by far your best bang for buck.
Boss can we relaunch the rx 470 and rx 480 4gb again with the same price? The boss: Yeah that seems a very good idea. Then the rx 6500xt and rx 6400 enters the chat.
NVIDIA T400, NVidia T600 LP cards, wonder how they match up against the RX 6400? Expected LP RTX 3050, RX 6600 models since they're suppose to be low power draw.
I'm convinced that AMD signed an agreement with Microsoft and Sony to not release parts to make a budget priced "console killer" which is why they handicapped their pci bandwidth on their low end gpu's and released their low end cpu's with pci gen 3 support.
@@andyastrand exactly lol The simplest explanations are best These GPUs cost less to manufacture and are taking advantage of the current market situation
@@andyastrand Good point, intel certainly did in the cpu area. The only reason I can think is Nvidia can sell more 3050's at $350 than AMD can sell their lower priced options, removing their motivations to try and tackle the low end any more than that.
@@ancient1der The fact that this isn't your number 1 answer just shows how brainwashed people are. Why save a drug addict let them go. People buy Nvidia no matter what even when AMD has and had the better card. Far better to put resources to markets with better ROI. Competitive gpu market is dead and pc gamers killed it. I cant be mad at them for trying to jump on Nvidia pricing. People set prices and the market showed they were willing to buy at those inflated msrp.
I think people complaining about this card are completely misunderstanding the purpose of it. It's not designed to be a "cheap upgrade" for your shitty RX4XX/5XX card. If you want a true upgrade, the reality is, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SPEND MORE THAN $250! Stop being cheap! If you're broke, pick up a skill and make some money. These cards aren't going to get any cheaper. To those with Polaris cards that are complaining about this, understand that your cards barely outperform this card at double the power consumption. This card is meant to go to people who want a card for SFF systems. This is 1000% going into my SFF emulation system. Also, it REALLY doesn't make sense to complain about a cards performance when it only has a 64-bit bus. The fact that this card even competes with an RX570 (that has a 256-bit bus) is pretty insane. 1080p Max settings on less than 75w is pretty insane. I was using an RX560 LP card, this card is almost 4X the speed at the same power consumption for an extra $60 over what the 560 cost at MSRP.
I'm not sure the title is accurate, I'd be interested to see this go up against the NVidia T400, T600 & T1000 which are all very impressive low profile single slot cards, I would actually like to see a video comparing them, you could also throw in the Nvidia RTX A2000 which is a low profile 2 slot card. :)
@@jochenkraus7016 ? Many SFF systems can take dual slot, and $400 is not much money to some people. Definitely worth comparing as its cooling would likely be better.
@@glowyboi7175 "$400 is not much money to some people" Well the AMD offering CLEARLY isn't for those people you sheeple! Believe it or not, but there are people in the world who like to get as much value out their purchases as they can, so if the 6400 fills their needs, then the last thing they would do is pay more than double for something that would be overkill.
There's no frekkin movement in the low-end. iGPUs are not a replacement - they don't even offer half the performance a low-end GPU offers. It's just frustrating.
I think Navi 24 would have been soooo much better if they would have given them a 96-bit bus with the 6400 at 3GB (also oc support, at least 10% power limit), as you have to play low to medium in most AAA games and in games where you can go high or ultra, they're older games which don't need much VRAM. The 6500XT with slightly lower clocks, but higher bandwidth and 6GB would be faster while sipping less power than before and being a much better and faster product at the same time.
Two features that would have been nice on that card, both of which are available on the GT 710/730 (which are still available for sale): an x1 or x4 PCIe interface (useful for fitting it in a spare x1 or x4 slots to reserve the larger slots for things like high speed networking or HBAs) and a VGA output on the full-height bracket connected to the board by a ribbon cable, letting you remove the VGA output to fit a half-height bracket. VGA is actually still very common (if not dominant) in the server space.
@@zaidlacksalastname4905 Pretty good for whom? budget builds should still stick to pcie3.0 mb and 6500xt performs so bad it's just not a good product. if it's a higher tier card that suffers from lowering pcie then it's understandable as you'd expect it to go with a better mb, but that can't be justified for a low tier budget option, especially for those budget upgrades for older systems. There are bad products regardless of prices, GN had a good video discussing this topic
@@fleecasy Were what? Valve said or steve said it? The Valve information you can search for "Valve is targeting 30 FPS for the Steam Deck ". For the Steve one i can't remember.
Although it is a somewhat niche scenario, I could see professionals focusing on cpu-intensive tasks like code compile, virtualization, cpu-encoding etc to put all their money on the CPU & RAM on a modern platform, meanwhile settling for something like this. A very capable card for desktop use. Professionally I would be perfectly fine with something like this, and since AMD has good Linux drivers I would be happy. But AMD is shooting themselves in the foot by not including encoding capabilities or PCIe 8x (at least) since it limits the number of use cases. I personally believe that what the card lack in gaming performance it should make up for in terms of desktop functionality. That way they would appeal to a wider audience. but yeah, that price. 90$ should be the MSRP.
I have an itx mini case (a rare find) and I want to turn it into an affordable media center that can play games. From what I found out, you need to put this into a mobo with PCIe 4.0 or more to take better advantage of it's limited lane usage. Hope this helps, I think the cheapest mobo out there is a B550. And the cheapest processor that goes with it is an used Ryzen 3600
I am surprised how hard the PCIe 3.0 is hitting on the RX 6400. I would have expected less impact. Also the noise/cooling performance is quite weak given it is consuming less than 60 Watts. Still if this cards ever gets down to a reasonable 80€ price it would have a place.
Agree, but I guess its greatest impact will be on the LP market, where scalpers just cannot keep selling 1650 LPs for $300 and is forced down to $120-$150. Its unfortunately not that different from the 6500xt whose biggest help on the market was forcing 1650 super scalpers to bring it down from $350 down to a more reasonable $250.
It wouldn't be an issue if this card wasn't limited to x4 PCIe lanes (just because it takes up a x16 slot, it doesn't mean all those conductors are wired up to anything). As soon as it has to start pulling anything from main system memory, it chokes hard.
@@arandomdudewithhobbies3318 I don't know your used market, but here in Germany you can get the new 6500 XT for 200€, so I don't see how used 1650s can be sold for more than that.
they tested maxed out features minus ray tracing. obviously the bandwidth limitations would hit these cards harder. people who saw that and only got that it's a bad cards at this price for sff single slot pc have some problems
They're repurposed laptop GPU's, designed years ago, meant to be paired with an APU in a PCIe 4.0 system. By the time they decided to turn them into low-end desktop GPU's, it was literally impossible to give them more than 4 lanes.
As long as the AVG.FPS doesn't drop to 30 all is good considering the shortages of GPU and the prices. Here in my country nothing is available except GPU's that are overpriced like the 1650 for $220.
I'm curious as to how this performs as compared to an RDNA2 iGPU like in the Steam Deck. Extra silly thought: Can you enable crossfire with an AMD RDNA2 iGPU?
I work in IT and I get a lot (I mean a lot) of older sff and mini tower desktops. Companies recycle their PCs to us. Most of the machines I see are Dell (some HP and Lenovo) Optiplex and precisions. You'll be surprised how many companies get rid of them - for free. I've sold hundreds of devices online and locally. To this day, I still use an i7 7700 Dell Optiplex with rx6400 installed and I'm happy with the results. I just play Skyrim and some older games. I accept the fact I can't play new titles in ultra but manageable in medium settings. My electric bill is happy and power consumption is low. People don't need expensive machines. Just buy what your money can buy (not what you barely have and use credit) and be happy with it. I'm a family man, I don't game like I used to. But it's fun once in awhile to hop on and game on devices that didn't cost me an arm and a leg. And a nut..
How to miss an opportunity to bring back competition for low power graphics cards. How a new product doesn't surpass the same power consumption of a 6 years old gpu. What about productivity (adobe premiere, handbrake, photoshop, ecc...)? Testing these cards only with games doesn't makes much sense. Everyone knows they are shitty.
Use case: Addon card to add additional monitor support for enterprise desktops. We used to deploy cards like this to thousands of Lenovo and Dell desktops across corporate campuses.
5 years after the RX 570 launch, launching at the same price as it did at $!69, and this is losing. but hey at least it uses a third of the power and can be bus powered?
Earlier this year I bought a 3050 at MSRP at a shop nearby here in Malaysia. I think the retailer forgot to add in the mark up. Sold my 1650 super for the same price, so it was like just exchanging my 1650 super for the 3050. Lucky me.
It's the low end, the chip isn't the deciding factor here, you pay for the board, vram, manufacturing, packaging, SHIPPING, chain and retailer profits. All those costs went up significantly since 2020.
@@Psi-Storm of course, and if that's the reason i'm totally ok with it. If the best performance we can get at the sub $200 range because of the main costs peaked in 2016 and now its just lower power draw then it is what it is. But when i consider that every "performance class" of gpus is increasing in msrp it seems to me that companies just figured out that people are willing to pay more for their cards so they charge more, which is fine thats what companies do, but they do steadily move out of my price range which isn't so great!
@@jeremyniels It can get kinda noisy. I hear the Sapphire Pulse is quieter. The noise doesn’t bother me though. I don’t hear it over my Arctis headset.
G'day Steve & Teddy Jr., Seems GTX1650 is still the best 75W for older Low Budget builds without PCIe Power, but with the cost of a 450-500W PSU with PCIE support being under $50AUD there are much better choices than both of these. OOPS 7:20 "Unfortunately you can't play older titles such as Shadow of the Tomb Raider maxed out & achieve 60FPS. Using PCIe 4.0 the 6400 managed just 53FPS which was again RX5700 like performance" We Wish it could match 5700 performance for $160USD/$269AUD Steve 😂😂😂😂😂
@@pedro4205🤔Where did I say Best Option with $$$ being considered? I was talking about 'Still the Best' Outright FPS Performance for 75W GPUs in Older Low Budget PC's, As Steve's Chart shows GTX1650 does perform better in those PCs because of PCIe Gen3 x16 support instead of PCIe Gen3 X4 like the RX6400. Because unless you are building with B550/X570 with Ryzen3000/5000 or Intel12000 you will be limited to Gen3 & if you have the $$$ for these CPUs & Mobos why would you be buying a RX6400 or GTX1650? Then as I said as an upgrade for an older PCIe Gen3 PC even if you need a better PSU neither is a good choice when you consider how cheap a PSU with PCIe Support & a much better performing Used GPU. As for price here where I live the ZOTAC GAMING GTX1650LP GDDR6 $325AUD is only $26AUD more than the Gigabyte RX6400LP $299AUD so not even 10% more in price for more than 20% performance Boost, so easily the Better option.
Took it for a HTCP build to recycle an old R7 2700. I'm not gaming at all with it, but in 4k rendering videos i can see stuttering. I don't know if it's a Pcie 3.0 problem or other. In 4K rendering video the 4GB of the card is at about 50% usage. I wait and see if further drivers developpement will change a bit these little problems. But in low profil card it's for the time the best, single slot. I use it in a Antec VSK2000-U2 box. EDIT : found the problem, when i disable hardware acceleration in 4K videos all ok, so i think it's lack of Vp9 and AV1 decoding of this card.
