Aorus RX 5700 XT 8G Review: As Fast as XT can Be?

The best Navi card for 1440p?

Reviews
By
last updated
Aorus RX 5700 XT 8G
(Image: © Gigabyte)

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

If we expand our view to competing Nvidia cards, the RTX 2070 Super Gaming OC is over $500, while the RTX 2060 Super Gaming OC is $399.99. Is $50 more worth a 5% performance bump and RTX capabilities? Or would 10% less performance be worth saving $50? All of those questions are down to the individual buyer. That said, so long as ray tracing isn’t a requirement, the Radeon 5700 XT makes for a compelling part in that $400-450 price bracket.

Running at 2560 x 1440 resolution using ultra settings, the 5700 XT provided smooth gameplay running over 60 fps in 10 of 11 games. Between the three cards tested, the Aorus RX 5700 XT 8G and the ASRock RX 5700 XT Taichi tied, averaging 90.9 and 90.7 fps respectively, across all eleven titles. The much-lower-clocked Gigabyte RX 5700 XT Gaming OC 8G averaged 3% slower at 88 fps. The Aorus card’s lowest fps was in Metro: Exodus at 56.2 fps. Ghost Recon: Breakpoint and Borderlands 3 sat in the mid-60s, while the rest were well above that.

As the numbers tell us, all three of our 5700 XT samples are close in performance. The difference between them, outside of cooling capability and acoustics, is the price. In this case, the Aorus 5700 XT costs $449.99 on Newegg while the ASRock Taichi is $10 cheaper at $439.99. At $399, the Gaming OC 8G from Gigabyte by far the least expensive of the three. From a performance standpoint, it’s up to you if a $50 increase is worth three fps.

Division 2

Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Ghost Recon: Breakpoint

Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Borderlands 3

Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Gears of War 5

Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Strange Brigade

Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Far Cry 5

Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Metro: Exodus

Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Final Fantasy XIV: Shadowbringers

Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Forza Horizon 4

Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Battlefield V

Image 1 of 3
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

MORE: Best Graphics Cards

MORE: Desktop GPU Performance Hierarchy Table

MORE: All Graphics Content

Joe Shields
Joe Shields
Motherboard Reviewer

Joe Shields is a Freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware US. He reviews motherboards.

8 Comments Comment from the forums
  • g-unit1111
    Love to see that AMD is coming very close to matching NVIDIA's best cards while at the same time costing a lot less than the comparable NVIDIA product. Some competition in the graphics department is very badly needed these days.
    Reply
  • pahbi
    I was all set to build a new all AMD pc, but seeing all the problems folks are having with 5700 XT GPUs pushed me back to a intel/nvidia build.

    Seems like crashes or under-whelming drivers should have been one of the cons to this card.

    - P
    Reply
  • mitch074
    pahbi said:
    I was all set to build a new all AMD pc, but seeing all the problems folks are having with 5700 XT GPUs pushed me back to a intel/nvidia build.

    Seems like crashes or under-whelming drivers should have been one of the cons to this card.

    - P
    Why would unstable GPU drivers make you buy an Intel CPU? Well, enjoy your CPU security vulnerabilities...
    Reply
  • waltc3
    pahbi said:
    I was all set to build a new all AMD pc, but seeing all the problems folks are having with 5700 XT GPUs pushed me back to a intel/nvidia build.

    Seems like crashes or under-whelming drivers should have been one of the cons to this card.

    - P

    But you see the problem is that with my 50th Ann. Ed 5700XT, I'm not having crashes or underwhelming drivers, so it's indeed hard to sympathize...;)
    Reply
  • JayGau
    Kind of disappointing to see 500$ range cards doing as good as my Evga RTX 2080 XC Ultra for which I paid 750$ five months ago. And even more disappointing to see that the "super" version of this model is now cheaper than that (730$ on Amazon). Maybe when the next gen cards will arrive I should buy the ti version right away. It cost an arm and a leg but at least you know your card will not be beaten by cheaper ones a few months later.
    Reply
  • waltc3
    JayGau said:
    Kind of disappointing to see 500$ range cards doing as good as my Evga RTX 2080 XC Ultra for which I paid 750$ five months ago. And even more disappointing to see that the "super" version of this model is now cheaper than that (730$ on Amazon). Maybe when the next gen cards will arrive I should buy the ti version right away. It cost an arm and a leg but at least you know your card will not be beaten by cheaper ones a few months later.

    Don't be so hard on yourself....;) Just be delighted you weren't one of those poor suckers who spent $1400 or more for a 3d card. Same thing will happen to those GPUs as well--only it may take a bit longer, is all. Progress is inevitable and inexorable. No matter what you buy it will be eclisped by something better it's only a matter of time. That's why it's best to spend as little as you can to get performance and quality that are acceptable to you--it leaves room for "next" GPU, and etc. and etc.
    Reply
  • JayGau
    waltc3 said:
    Don't be so hard on yourself....;) Just be delighted you weren't one of those poor suckers who spent $1400 or more for a 3d card. Same thing will happen to those GPUs as well--only it may take a bit longer, is all. Progress is inevitable and inexorable. No matter what you buy it will be eclisped by something better it's only a matter of time. That's why it's best to spend as little as you can to get performance and quality that are acceptable to you--it leaves room for "next" GPU, and etc. and etc.

    Thank you for the comforting I appreciate it :)

    I actually still like very much my 2080. It can run any games at 2K max details at above 70 fps. The only game I cannot max out without dropping below 50 fps is Control but according to benchmarks and reviews even the ti version struggles to run that game (thanks to the full scale implementation of ray tracing... ...and it's beautiful!).

    I know there will always be progress but my frustration is more about the price matching. I have been buying graphics cards for almost 20 years and the prices have never been so inconsistent. Having paid 750$ for a 2080 five months ago to see a 500$ 2070 doing the same performance is certainly disappointing at best.

    But I also understand that AMD's return to the market competition after years of NVIDIA domination can lead to some strangeness like that. At least the RTX 2080 doesn't seem to be available anymore (beside from third party sellers at ridiculously high price) and only the super versions can be purchased at a similar price the non super models were before. So it looks like the consistency is back but too bad it's five months too late for me!
    Reply
  • waltc3
    JayGau said:
    Thank you for the comforting I appreciate it :)

    I actually still like very much my 2080. It can run any games at 2K max details at above 70 fps. The only game I cannot max out without dropping below 50 fps is Control but according to benchmarks and reviews even the ti version struggles to run that game (thanks to the full scale implementation of ray tracing... ...and it's beautiful!).

    I know there will always be progress but my frustration is more about the price matching. I have been buying graphics cards for almost 20 years and the prices have never been so inconsistent. Having paid 750$ for a 2080 five months ago to see a 500$ 2070 doing the same performance is certainly disappointing at best.

    But I also understand that AMD's return to the market competition after years of NVIDIA domination can lead to some strangeness like that. At least the RTX 2080 doesn't seem to be available anymore (beside from third party sellers at ridiculously high price) and only the super versions can be purchased at a similar price the non super models were before. So it looks like the consistency is back but too bad it's five months too late for me!

    It's amusing to think about things...years ago, before 3dfx and the V1 then the V2, everything was 2d--"3d" hadn't yet come to market in a viable, playable form. Card to have in those days was the Matrox Millennium--the card cost $475-$575--probably like ~$800 today, with inflation--depending on where you bought them--I had one--it was a great card--but I cannot recall if it had 4 Megabytes of Vram or 8 MBs--anyway--for the same or a bit more money now look what we can get! GBs of onboard VRAM...processors maybe 1000X faster than in those days and infinitely faster in processing polygons! You're running 2k; I'm running 4k--but at either res it's still amazing to think how much things have improved! You seem very happy with your choice, and that's what it's all about, isn't it?....;) Of course, at 4k max eye-candy I don't get 70 fps most of the time, but in some games I get a tad more and when the fps drops to below 60--as it often does--it's still stutter free and smooth--so I'm happy, too! Anyway, "new and improved" is always there just around the bend...;) No such thing as "future proof"--learned that long ago! Happy gaming!
    Reply