OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

AMD Radeon RX 5600 review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£260VRAM:6 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):150 W

AMD Radeon RX 5600 Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 1 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Radeon RX 5600
5.9/10

Overall score

Score
5.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
Score components

40%

5.0

Technical score

25%

5.0

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.8, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–¼Worse than 90% of graphics cards
6.9

Value for money

Value for money
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
Score components

70%

5.9

Overall score

30%

9.2

Price

â–¼Worse than 79%
5.0

Technical score

Technical score
5.0/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components

44%

3.2

Performance

24%

3.8

Memory

12%

8.4

Power

11%

8.3

Features

5%

8.6

Design

4%

8.7

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 83%
5.0

Reviews score

Reviews score
5.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 89% of models

5.0

Mark 7.0 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.5

Average grade

20%

5.0

Popularity

Grades by review (1)
1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 89%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • amd-radeon-rx-5600
  • amd-radeon-rx-5600
  • amd-radeon-rx-5600
  • amd-radeon-rx-5600
  • amd-radeon-rx-5600
  • amd-radeon-rx-5600
  • amd-radeon-rx-5600
  • amd-radeon-rx-5600
amd-radeon-rx-5600
amd-radeon-rx-5600
amd-radeon-rx-5600
amd-radeon-rx-5600
amd-radeon-rx-5600
amd-radeon-rx-5600
amd-radeon-rx-5600
amd-radeon-rx-5600
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card AMD Radeon RX 5600

Technical score
Technical score
5.0/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
Score components:

44%

3.2

Performance

24%

3.8

Memory

12%

8.4

Power

11%

8.3

Features

5%

8.6

Design

4%

8.7

Connectivity

5.0
Reviews score
5.0
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
Score components:

70%

5.9

Overall score

30%

9.2

Price

6.9
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
7,500 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 7,500 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 79.2% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
11,428 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 11,428 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 82% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
5,301 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 5,301 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 81.9% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
7.19 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 7.19 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 78.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
6 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 6 GB of VRAM, which is less than 82.5% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
192 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 192 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 31.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 18.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
288 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 288 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 69.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.5% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
12,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 12,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 80.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.5% of graphics cards and equal to 50.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 17% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.3
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.3, which is older than on 79.2% of graphics cards and equal to 15.6% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21.7% of graphics cards and equal to 76% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.4a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4a, which is more advanced than on 19.3% of graphics cards and equal to 46.3% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
8.1 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 8.1 Gbps, which is slower than on 65.3% of graphics cards and equal to 22.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
150 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 150 W, which is lower than that of 72.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.8% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
150 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 150 W under peak load, which is lower than 75.9% of graphics cards and equal to 1.4% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
500 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 500 W PSU, which is lower than that of 75.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.8% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
150 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 150 W, which is lower than that of 75.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.9% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
150 W
Show more
Size
267x 111x 36 mm
Length
267 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 267 mm long, which is shorter than 59.3% of graphics cards and equal in length to 3.5% of graphics cards.
Height
126.5 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 126.5 mm tall, which is taller than 53.9% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
?
Show more

AMD Radeon RX 5600 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 30.2% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (150 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    150 W vs 215 W
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 31.8% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (150 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    150 W vs 220 W
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
    1:16 vs 1:64
  • 6.4 dB quieter under load
    This graphics card has a lower load noise level than the average graphics card (29 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    29 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 2x cheaper
    AMD Radeon RX 5600 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£260 vs £520).
    £260 vs £520
  • 2x cheaper
    AMD Radeon RX 5600 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£260 vs £520).
    £260 vs £520
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
    1:16 vs 1:64
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 30.2% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (150 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    150 W vs 215 W
  • 31.8% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (150 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    150 W vs 220 W
  • 6.4 dB quieter under load
    This graphics card has a lower load noise level than the average graphics card (29 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    29 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 37.7% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,560 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,560 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 6 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (6 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    6 GB vs 12 GB
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 41.1% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,130 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,130 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 30.6% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 89% of models

    5.0

    Mark 7.0 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.5

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.0 vs 7.2
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • 30.6% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 89% of models

    5.0

    Mark 7.0 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.5

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.0 vs 7.2
  • 7.7% worse value for money
    AMD Radeon RX 5600 has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.88 vs 7.4).
    6.88 vs 7.41
  • 37.7% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,560 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,560 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 41.1% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,130 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,130 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 47.2% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (199.7 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    199.7 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 56 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (128 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    128 vs 184
  • 8 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (32 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    32 vs 40
  • 38.1% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (99.8 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    99.84 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 68.2% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (7.2 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    7.19 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 49.5% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (11,428 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    11,428 points vs 22,638 points
  • 49.3% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (7,500 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    7,500 points vs 14,779 points
  • 3 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2020 vs 2023).
    January 2020
    2020 vs 2023
  • 56.1% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (5,301 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    5,301 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 56.7% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (12.8 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    12.78 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 2,304 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (2048 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    2,048 vs 4,352
  • 6 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (6 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    6 GB vs 12 GB
  • 36.8% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (12,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    12,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 35.7% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 87.5% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (3 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    3 MB vs 24 MB
  • 87.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (16 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    16 KB vs 128 KB
  • 14.3% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,500 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,500 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • 40% larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (7 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    7 nm vs 5 nm
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.3 vs 1.4).
    1.3 vs 1.4
  • Lower VRS tier
    This graphics card supports a lower VRS tier than the average graphics card (Tier 1 vs Tier 2).
    Tier 1 vs Tier 2
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 55% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (10,300 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    10,300 million vs 22,900 million
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.0b vs 2.1a).
    2.0b vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265/VP9 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • 62.5% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 15 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (110 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    110 °C vs 95 °C

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

4.0
Iceberg Tech
≈ estimated
08/10/2026
Benchmark review · game performance tests at 1080p
Verdict
AMD Radeon RX 5600 isn't worth buying at the asking price, though some people may find it a curiosity.
Not graded

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Radeon RX 5600

  • Excellent 1080p performance, capable of high to ultra settings in AAA titles
  • Competitive entry-level 1440p gaming at medium settings
  • High energy efficiency with relatively low power consumption compared to older architectures
  • Generally runs cool and quiet on most aftermarket models like the Sapphire Pulse
  • Significant performance uplift provided by official VBIOS updates at launch
  • Good value for money, often outperforming the similarly priced GTX 1660 Ti and matching the RTX 2060 in raw rasterization
  • Support for useful software features like Radeon Image Sharpening and Radeon Anti-Lag

What customers don't like about AMD Radeon RX 5600

  • Lacks hardware-accelerated ray tracing and Variable Rate Shading (VRS)
  • Limited to 6GB of VRAM, which can be a bottleneck in some modern memory-intensive games
  • Historical reports of driver stability issues, including occasional black screens or crashes
  • Confusion caused by the 'BIOS mess' where performance varies depending on whether the card has the updated VBIOS
  • Little to no meaningful overclocking headroom on many models as they ship near their limits
  • Market relevance is declining as newer budget cards like the RX 6600 offer better features for similar prices

Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX 5600 is a mid-range desktop graphics card launched in January 2020, built on the 7nm process with RDNA 1.0 architecture. It features a Navi 10 GPU core with 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, operating at a base frequency of 1130 MHz and a boost clock up to 1560 MHz. It is equipped with 6GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit interface, delivering 288 GB/s of bandwidth with a rated power draw of 125W-150W. Main pros include solid 1080p 'Ultra' gaming performance, high energy efficiency, and a competitive price-to-performance ratio for entry-level 1440p gaming. However, its main cons include a lack of hardware-accelerated ray tracing and limited VRAM capacity compared to newer competitors, which may hinder performance in demanding modern titles.

Compare AMD Radeon RX 5600 with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of AMD Radeon RX 5600 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found