Gigabyte RX 5600 XT Gaming OC 6G Review: Priced Right, Performs Well

This RX 5600 XT is inexpensive, quiet, and performs well: Can we ask for more?

Reviews
By Joe Shields
last updated
Gigabyte RX 5600 XT Gaming OC 6G
(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.

Moving up in resolution but dropping down to medium settings, the Gigabyte card averages 103 fps across all games—one fps more than the 1080p ultra results. All 11 titles are above 60 fps, including Metro: Exodus at 72.5 fps. Meanwhile, the rest are all in the 90s or well above 100 fps. While some games could likely run using high or even ultra settings at this resolution, a few need lower image quality settings to maintain a stutter-free gaming experience.

At the higher resolution, we saw nearly the same performance gap between all the tested cards. The biggest difference is with the Asus card, where the gap increased by around 1%, again due to the slower memory speeds. Outside of that, the Gigabyte continued to trade punches with the Sapphire card—there's less than a 1% difference between the two, which is within the margin of error.

The RX 5600 XT and Gigabyte's overclocked variant proved to be plenty capable at 1440p using medium settings. Many less demanding titles should be able to run with higher settings and still reach 60 fps. However, if you own a 144Hz display, you'll want FreeSync as the 5600 XT generally can't maintain anywhere close to 144 fps in more demanding games.

The 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 Raide

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.

18 Comments Comment from the forums
  • King_V
    Interesting that the fan speeds were higher than that of the Sapphire Pulse, yet the conclusion has "less apparent noise" relative to the Pulse.

    And, by the graphs, kept things several degrees cooler.

    I think that this Gigabyte model might beat out the Pulse on which one I choose when I do the GPU upgrade for my son's computer.
    Reply
  • AlistairAB
    King_V said:
    Interesting that the fan speeds were higher than that of the Sapphire Pulse, yet the conclusion has "less apparent noise" relative to the Pulse.

    And, by the graphs, kept things several degrees cooler.

    I think that this Gigabyte model might beat out the Pulse on which one I choose when I do the GPU upgrade for my son's computer.

    Gigabyte can have wacky fan behaviour married to good fans. I usually just set a fixed rpm and call it a day with them, as their zero rpm mode can be bad. Same as Zotac. If you want good zero rpm modes, you have to buy MSI usually.
    Reply
  • g-unit1111
    I got the XFX Thicc II 5600XT and I've been pretty pleased with it so far. It's good to see AMD upping their GPU game after losing to NVIDIA for so long.
    Reply
  • Nick_C
    IceQueen0607 said:
    How does this compare to the MSI GTX 1660 Ti Gaming X?

    Given that the GTX 1660 Ti is $150 cheaper, for a small percentage performance improvement It's not really worth the buy?
    Can you please provide a link to that card for sale new at $150?

    (given that the 5600XT MSRP is $300)
    Reply
  • You misunderstood. I didn't say the GTX 1660 Ti was $150 new, I said it was $150 less than the RX 5600 XT. I'm in Australia, so prices are AUD.
    Reply
  • Nick_C
    IceQueen0607 said:
    You misunderstood. I didn't say the GTX 1660 Ti was $150 new, I said it was $150 less than the RX 5600 XT. I'm in Australia, so prices are AUD.
    Without stating that the $ being referred to is AUD, not USD, context was lacking - as the default meaning of $ on an international site is almost always USD.
    Reply
  • Wow! I actually didn't quote any prices, only saying that it was $150 LESS. The context was supposed to be that it was 25% less than the AMD card. Anyway, if the lack of an A in front of the $ is misleading, I'll stick with percentages.
    Reply
  • Like I said "Wow!"

    The question regardless of what the currency is "If the GTX 1660 Ti is cheaper, is the RX 5600 XT worth the purchase if the performance increase is in the low single digits? I haven't seen any comparisons for those two cards, and I don't trust userbenchmark for performance.

    Disappointing that a question about whether or not a card is worth purchasing has come down to a chastening for a missing 'A' in the question :!
    Reply
  • Nick_C
    IceQueen0607 said:
    Wow! I actually didn't quote any prices, only saying that it was $150 LESS. The context was supposed to be that it was 25% less than the AMD card. Anyway, if the lack of an A in front of the $ is misleading, I'll stick with percentages.
    The "25% less" was completely absent from the post quoted - thanks for adding that important detail.

    I'd also expect that new hardware attracts a vendor premium due to initial supply / demand levels. The 1660Ti is probably well down that curve by now whereas the 5600XT is a relatively new release and prices will be on the high side for a while.
    Reply
  • King_V
    g-unit1111 said:
    I got the XFX Thicc II 5600XT and I've been pretty pleased with it so far. It's good to see AMD upping their GPU game after losing to NVIDIA for so long.

    Wasn't the cooler (or shroud) on the Thicc II problematic for thermals? Or at least it was for the 5700 or 5700XT? I was given to understand that there was some redesign of it, and possibly an exchange program XFX offered... and also why they went to the Thicc III. Kinda going from memory here, though.
    Reply