AMD Radeon RX 5300: Navi 14 May Be Back for More

By Zhiye Liu
last updated

Rumored entry-level Radeon RX 5300

Navi 14

Navi 14 (Image credit: AMD)

AMD might be expanding its entry-level Navi army very soon in the form of the AMD Radeon RX 5300. The unannounced Navi 14-powered graphics card (opens in new tab) has surfaced in the CompuBench (opens in new tab) database (via @Komachi_Ensaka (opens in new tab)), although it remains to be seen whether it will be an OEM-exclusive part or not.

Unlike AMD's other high-profile launches, the chipmaker didn't give the Radeon RX 5300-series much love. The mobile variants, which include the Radeon RX 5300M and Radeon Pro 5300M, are the only official SKUs so far. AMD hasn't formally announce the Radeon RX 5300 XT (opens in new tab) even though the graphics card has appeared in HP desktops (opens in new tab) since last year. 

The Radeon RX 5300 will likely employ the Navi 14 silicon, and support the PCIe 4.0 inteface. However, AMD would probably wire the Radeon RX 5300 in an x8 configuration, as it did with the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT (opens in new tab).

AMD Radeon RX 5300 Specifications

Swipe to scroll horizontally
AMD Radeon RX 5500 XTAMD Radeon RX 5300*Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650
Architecture (GPU)RDNA (Navi 14)RDNA (Navi 14)Turing (TU117)
ALUs1,4081,536896
Texture Units889656
Base Clock Rate1,607 MHz?1,485 MHz
Nvidia Boost/AMD Game Rate1,717 MHz?1,665 MHz
AMD Boost Rate1,845 MHz1,900 MHzN/A
Memory Capacity4GB GDDR63GB GDDR64GB GDDR5
Memory Speed14 Gbps14 Gbps8 Gbps
Memory Bus128-bit96-bit128-bit
Memory Bandwidth224 GBps168 GBps128 GBps
ROPs323232
L2 Cache2MB2MB1MB
TDP130W?75W
Transistor Count6.4 billion6.4 billion4.7 billion
Die Size158 mm²158 mm²200 mm²

*Specifications are not confirmed.

The Radeon RX 5300 is disguised with the AMD 7340:CF codename on CompuBench. The graphics card reportedly sports 24 Compute Units (CUs), which under the current RDNA architecture would work out to a total of 1,536 Stream Processors (SPs). If the reading is accurate, then the Radeon RX 5300 will leverage the full Navi 14 die and could pose a threat to AMD's own Radeon RX 5500 XT. CompuBench detected the Radeon RX 5300 with a maximum boost clock speed (opens in new tab) of 1,900 MHz during the benchmark.

The Radeon RX 5300 appears to retain the 3GB of GDDR6 memory, the same amount as on the mobile variant. If AMD's copying and pasting the specifications from the mobile to desktop variant, then the Radeon RX 5300 will probably come with 14 Gbps memory that's complemented with a 96-bit memory interface.

There are currently three CompuBench submissions for the AMD 7340:CF device, and they date back to August 2019. That's a very long time for AMD to tweak the Radeon RX 5300, so the performance could have improved greatly since then. But if we go by the dated results, the Radeon RX 5300's performance is more or less in the same ballpark as the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 (opens in new tab).

Zhiye Liu
Zhiye Liu
RAM Reviewer and News Editor

Zhiye Liu is a Freelance News Writer at Tom’s Hardware US. Although he loves everything that’s hardware, he has a soft spot for CPUs, GPUs, and RAM.

8 Comments Comment from the forums
  • InvalidError
    A new 3GB GPU in an age where 4GB is already getting awfully tight? That would be sad, especially with no 3.0x16 or affordable 4.0x8 motherboards to fall back on once VRAM has filled up.
    Reply
  • King_V
    Agreed. This seems really unlikely - that 3GB thing was a bit of a crippler even on the cut-down variant of the 1060. AMD hasn't ever done that, and I find it hard to believe they'd start doing so now. This product's supposed specs just seem really strange.

    I'm gonna take it with a larger boulder of salt than the usual rumor.
    Reply
  • cfbcfb
    Not sure why anyone would bother. You can pick up an RX550 or RX570 for probably less than this will cost. Or a 1650.

    In other news, comparing ALU's, texture units and so forth between two wildly different architectures doesn't mean anything whatsoever.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    cfbcfb said:
    Not sure why anyone would bother. You can pick up an RX550 or RX570 for probably less than this will cost.
    Hmmm... there's a pretty big gap between the two. What about The RX 560?

    I think it'd be nice to see a step up from the RX 550 & RX 560, that can scale down to 50 W for potential passive cooling and launch with a street price as low as ~$100.

    I have a 4 GB RX 550 that's a nice little card to have around to throw in a box for debugging/troubleshooting, or to slap in a server if I get frustrated with its BMC. They hopefully won't forget about that ~$100, 50 W market segment, but it doesn't usually get a proper refresh every generation. The RX 550 replaced my old HD 5450, which I think was passively-cooled.
    Reply
  • alextheblue
    InvalidError said:
    A new 3GB GPU in an age where 4GB is already getting awfully tight? That would be sad, especially with no 3.0x16 or affordable 4.0x8 motherboards to fall back on once VRAM has filled up.
    It would be a budget card, so I wouldn't be completely shocked. If the bus is cut down, they will be 3GB or 6GB. Better yet, both. A 3GB model would be a good replacement for the old 2GB 500 series cards, and a hypothetical 6GB version would likewise be far better than say a 4GB 560 - both in terms of grunt and bandwidth. Hopefully they price them right and work with vendors to liquidate older 550/560 budget cards.
    cfbcfb said:
    Not sure why anyone would bother. You can pick up an RX550 or RX570 for probably less than this will cost. Or a 1650.
    A 550 is no competition for one of these. Even a 560 doesn't come close. A 570 is a decent budget option while supply lasts, for sure.

    Side note: If an uncut Navi 14 is 24 CUs, they should release a 5500 XTX or something to help fill in that gap between Navi 14 and Navi 10 XT.
    Reply
  • cfbcfb
    alextheblue said:
    It would be a budget card, so I wouldn't be completely shocked. If the bus is cut down, they will be 3GB or 6GB. Better yet, both. A 3GB model would be a good replacement for the old 2GB 500 series cards, and a hypothetical 6GB version would likewise be far better than say a 4GB 560 - both in terms of grunt and bandwidth. Hopefully they price them right and work with vendors to liquidate older 550/560 budget cards.

    A 550 is no competition for one of these. Even a 560 doesn't come close. A 570 is a decent budget option while supply lasts, for sure.

    Side note: If an uncut Navi 14 is 24 CUs, they should release a 5500 XTX or something to help fill in that gap between Navi 14 and Navi 10 XT.

    You're assuming based on gaming performance. Gamers make up a comically small % of pc users. The 550 is fine for multiple monitors, htpc use and general office applications. It even does a fine job at low end gaming. I know, I have one. I can play many steam games, android games and even doom 2016 on it just fine. Ended up putting it in my htpc to replace the intel 530 graphics, and that was a big upgrade.

    The 5300 is going to go into the same usage model, probably at a higher price, and without any significant advantages other than AMD not having to make 5xx cards anymore.
    Reply
  • vov4ik_il
    Might be a solution for portables.
    Reply
  • InvalidError
    cfbcfb said:
    You're assuming based on gaming performance. Gamers make up a comically small % of pc users. The 550 is fine for multiple monitors, htpc use and general office applications.
    2GB may be getting a little tight even for desktop uses: I currently have 3GB allocated out of 18GB GPU-addressable (that's 2GB VRAM + 16GB system) and almost 2GB of it is common everyday stuff like FireFox, Chrome, Skype, Steam, etc.

    When I play games, I often have to disable hardware acceleration in FF and Chrome due to low VRAM causing severe performance and graphics glitching issues so I wouldn't recommend 2GB for anything beyond the most casual of casual 3D use. I was in practically the same boat with my 1GB HD5700 four years ago: severe performance issues (could rarely get GPU core load above 60%) from having only ~350MB of free VRAM after the OS and background apps when most games allocated well over 1GB.

    The viability of 2GB GPUs for modern OSes and software is almost over, better off using IGP/APU at that point.
    Reply