Why you can trust Tom's Hardware
Staying at 1080p resolution but lowering the image quality settings to medium allowed all the games to reach over 60 fps. The ASRock Phantom Gaming D averaged 102 fps along with the Asus. The Gigabyte Gaming OC averaged 101 fps—all are within 1% of each other, which is basically the margin of error for our testing and wouldn’t be noticeable in gaming.
At these settings, the Sapphire Pulse didn’t choke on its 4GB of VRAM with medium settings and ended up only 4% behind. Most games were over 80 fps with a few (The Division 2, Strange Brigade, Final Fantasy XIV, Forza Horizon 4 and Battlefield V) averaging well over 100 fps. Dropping down to the medium settings shows a significant performance increase over ultra.
Performance differences between the ASRock Phantom Gaming D and the Nvidia cards are similar to the 1080p ultra results, with the GTX 1650 Super about 5% slower and the GTX 1660 almost 4% faster. This is a more CPU bound setting so the performance gaps tend to shrink at these settings compared to higher resolutions and image quality.
The Divison 2
Borderlands 3
Gears of War 5
Strange Brigade
Shadow of the Tomb Raider
Far Cry 5
Metro: Exodus
Final Fantasy XIV: Shadowbringers
Forza Horizon 4
Battlefield V
MORE: Best Graphics Cards
MORE: Desktop GPU Performance Hierarchy Table
MORE: All Graphics Content
Current page: Performance Results: 1920 x 1080 (Medium)
Prev Page Performance Results: 1920 x 1080 (Ultra) Next Page Power Consumption, Fan Speeds, Clock Rates and TemperatureJoe Shields is a Freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware US. He reviews motherboards.
Elon Musk set up 100,000 Nvidia H200 GPUs in 19 days - Jensen says process normally takes 4 years
TSMC could build more fabs in Europe - Chairman of Taiwan's National Science Council
Arrow Lake non-K CPUs may suffer from lower RAM speed limits — ASRock QVL shows RAM up to DDR5-7200 as opposed to DDR5-9066 for K-series chips
-
NightHawkRMX What's with the pulse 5500xt being so far behind the other models? It runs at the same clocks according to your test but performs worse.Reply -
EndEffeKt_24
Its the only 4GB model and the test uses ultra settings.NightHawkRMX said:What's with the pulse 5500xt being so far behind the other models? It runs at the same clocks according to your test but performs worse. -
NightHawkRMX
Somehow overlooked that. ThanksEndEffeKt_24 said:Its the only 4GB model and the test uses ultra settings. -
King_V The table on the first page of the review, with the specs for the 4 cards has the wrong information for the Asus ROG Strix 5600 XT for memory capacity, bus, and bandwidth.Reply -
JarredWaltonGPU
Sorry, I've corrected this. It was the name: it's supposed to be the Asus ROG Strix RX 5500 XT O8G Gaming (not the Asus ROG Strix RX 5600 XT O8G Gaming, which isn't even a real product given there aren't 8GB 5600 XT cards). The specs were correct, the name was not.King_V said:The table on the first page of the review, with the specs for the 4 cards has the wrong information for the Asus ROG Strix 5600 XT for memory capacity, bus, and bandwidth. -
King_V LOL, I didn't even look fully at the name, I just zoomed in on 5600XT and, when I got to the memory specs, my brain did the record-scratching noise and said "wait, what??"Reply -
JarredWaltonGPU
I actually googled the name for the Asus specs page and got the 5600 XT O6G page. I started editing, and thought, "How did we get these specs SO WRONG!?" Then I realized it was actually the product name that was an error. I was about to redo the whole table, thinking I was somehow looking at the 5600 XT review (which I edited a few weeks back). LOLKing_V said:LOL, I didn't even look fully at the name, I just zoomed in on 5600XT and, when I got to the memory specs, my brain did the record-scratching noise and said "wait, what??" -
King_V Sort of reminds me of when the RTX cards first came out. It got really funny trying to remember whether to type RTX, RX, or GTX...Reply -
JarredWaltonGPU
It's still bad! Muscle memory for typing is a harsh mistress. I've had some very odd 'typos' crop up over the years, including just stupid stuff like writing "their" instead of "there" or "they're". Like, I know the difference, but sometimes in my brain I think "they're" and my fingers receive "their" and I look like an idiot. I have typed GTX 2080 more times than I can count, though now it's starting to go the other way -- I've typed RTX 1660 quite a few times now.King_V said:Sort of reminds me of when the RTX cards first came out. It got really funny trying to remember whether to type RTX, RX, or GTX... -
King_V JarredWaltonGPU said:It's still bad! Muscle memory for typing is a harsh mistress. I've had some very odd 'typos' crop up over the years, including just stupid stuff like writing "their" instead of "there" or "they're". Like, I know the difference, but sometimes in my brain I think "they're" and my fingers receive "their" and I look like an idiot. I have typed GTX 2080 more times than I can count, though now it's starting to go the other way -- I've typed RTX 1660 quite a few times now.
That happens to me a lot as well - oh, on a cellphone, I can blame it on autocorrect. But I know EXACTLY what you mean! My brain says ONE version of their/they're/there, and my hands just on their own type one of the others out. And I'm someone who generally cringes when I see other people mix those up, so it's particularly strange and embarrassing for me!