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

GIGABYTE Radeon RX 5700 review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£340VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):180 W

GIGABYTE Radeon RX 5700 Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 9 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

GIGABYTE Radeon RX 5700
6.8/10

Overall score

Score
6.8/ 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 74% of models
Score components

40%

5.7

Technical score

25%

8.1

Reviews score

25%

?

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

10%

5.7

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 74% of graphics cards
7.4

Value for money

Value for money
7.4/ 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 54% of models
Score components

70%

6.8

Overall score

30%

8.7

Price

â–¼Worse than 54%
5.7

Technical score

Technical score
5.7/ 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 76% of models
Score components

44%

3.7

Performance

24%

5.7

Memory

12%

8.9

Power

11%

8.0

Features

5%

8.2

Design

4%

8.7

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 76%
8.1

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.1/ 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–² Better than 60% of models

80%

8.0

Average grade

20%

8.5

Popularity

Grades by review (9)
6 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 3 video reviews, each 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–²Better than 60%
?

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
  • gigabyte-radeon-rx-5700
gigabyte-radeon-rx-5700
Where to buy
    N/A~ £340
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the GIGABYTE Radeon RX 5700

Based on 6 · 3

Praised for solid gaming performance and good value against rivals, but criticised for noisy operation and weak ray tracing.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the GIGABYTE Radeon RX 5700

Based on 164 owners sharing their experience in online comments

69%positive11%mixed20%negative

Owners praise its strong, affordable gaming performance, while driver crashes and heat remain the biggest frustrations.

What owners dislike

  • Owners report game crashes, freezes and driver problems, particularly with some Adrenalin 2020 releases; older or clean-installed drivers sometimes helped.39
  • Owners report random black screens or no signal, often with a second monitor or TV; changing AMD scaling to Fit display sometimes fixed it.21
  • Under heavy gaming, owners see 80–90 °C, with junction temperatures near 100 °C; dust buildup in the cooler made it worse, and cleaning helped.13
  • In some games at 1080p, the GPU downclocks and stays around 50% usage, leaving frame rates low; higher resolutions run better.11
  • Flashing the XT BIOS sometimes left cards not posting, unstable, or losing power under load, as the XT draws more power.6
  • Owners report micro-stutters and frame drops, especially with background apps or a second monitor; some say an older driver such as 20.4.1 helped.5
  • Owners report draws of 150–230 W, with an XT BIOS flash sometimes doubling consumption, and some needing a bigger power supply.5
  • Owners report random one-second black screens and micro-stutters when a second monitor or 4K TV is connected.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card GIGABYTE Radeon RX 5700

Technical score
Technical score
5.7/ 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 76% of models
Score components:

44%

3.7

Performance

24%

5.7

Memory

12%

8.9

Power

11%

8.0

Features

5%

8.2

Design

4%

8.7

Connectivity

5.7
Reviews score
8.1
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.4/ 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 54% of models
Score components:

70%

6.8

Overall score

30%

8.7

Price

7.4
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
8,376 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 8,376 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 76.8% 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
12,663 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 12,663 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 79.8% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
6,836 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 6,836 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 75.4% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
7.95 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 7.95 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 77.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 56.8% of graphics cards and equal to 25.7% 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
256 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 256 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 50.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 35.5% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
448 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 448 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 41.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 11.8% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
14,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 14,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 69.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 11.1% 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
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% 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
What reviewers say
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)
180 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 180 W, which is lower than that of 57.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 5% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
202 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 202 W under peak load, which is lower than 53.2% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
600 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 600 W PSU, which is lower than that of 53.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.6% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
180 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 180 W, which is lower than that of 61.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.4% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
180 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
280x 114.5x 49.5 mm
Length
279.85 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 279.85 mm long, which is shorter than 53.5% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Height
114.35 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 114.35 mm tall, which is shorter than 74.6% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2.5 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s, which is slimmer than 35.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 14.7% of graphics cards.
Weight
998 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 998 g, which is lighter than 54.3% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.7% of Graphics cards.
Show more

GIGABYTE Radeon RX 5700 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • 12.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.1/ 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–² Better than 60% of models

    80%

    8.0

    Average grade

    20%

    8.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (9)
    6 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 3 video reviews, each 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.
    8.1 vs 7.2
  • 10x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (40 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    40 MB vs 4 MB
  • 10.65 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (114.4 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    114.35 mm vs 125 mm
  • 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
  • 16.3% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (180 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    180 W vs 215 W
  • 7.7% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (600 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    600 W vs 650 W
  • 12.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.1/ 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–² Better than 60% of models

    80%

    8.0

    Average grade

    20%

    8.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (9)
    6 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 3 video reviews, each 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.
    8.1 vs 7.2
  • 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
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • 10x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (40 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    40 MB vs 4 MB
  • 16.3% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (180 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    180 W vs 215 W
  • 7.7% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (600 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    600 W vs 650 W
  • 10.65 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (114.4 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    114.35 mm vs 125 mm
  • 31.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,725 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,725 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
  • 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.
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 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.
  • 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
  • 26.9% lower sentiment score
    5.7 vs 7.8
  • 31.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,725 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,725 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.
  • 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
  • 23.7% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,465 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,465 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 33.3% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (252 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    252 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 64.8% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (8 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    7.95 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 31.6% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (110.4 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    110.4 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 40 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (144 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    144 vs 184
  • 4 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2019 vs 2023).
    August 2019
    2019 vs 2023
  • 44.1% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (12,663 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    12,663 points vs 22,638 points
  • 43.3% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (8,376 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    8,376 points vs 14,779 points
  • 4 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (36 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    36 vs 40
  • 96.7% lower INT8 performance
    This graphics card has a lower INT8 performance than the average graphics card (8 TOPS vs 242 TOPS). The average graphics card has INT8 performance of 242 TOPS.
    7.95 TOPS vs 242 TOPS
  • 43.4% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (6,836 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    6,836 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 26.3% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (14,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    14,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 83.3% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (4 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    4 MB vs 24 MB
  • 50% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (64 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    64 KB vs 128 KB
  • 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.
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • 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
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, 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
  • 27 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (27 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    27 dB vs 0 dB
  • 8 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (75 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    75 °C vs 67 °C
  • 8 °C higher idle temperature
    This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (45 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    45 °C vs 37 °C

Video reviews

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

8.0
MainstreamPC
≈ estimated
13/03/2020
Performance test · vBIOS flash and stress tests
Verdict
GIGABYTE Radeon RX 5700 gains about 8% performance from the higher-tier BIOS flash, which is recommended only if you accept the risk.
9.0
RedGamingTech
≈ estimated
13/11/2019
Hands-on review · gaming performance, drivers and cooler noise
Verdict
GIGABYTE Radeon RX 5700 is an excellent value for high-refresh 1080p and 1440p gaming, though its reference cooler is loud.
7.0
Timmy Joe PC Tech
≈ estimated
07/07/2019
First impressions · press driver issues and noise
Verdict
GIGABYTE Radeon RX 5700 is a good card with drawbacks and decent value for the price, but its loud blower cooler is hard to sell.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.5
techspot.com
✓ explicit
08/07/2019
Lab test · Performance and power
Verdict
The AMD Radeon RX 5700 matches the RTX 2060 Super within a few percent and is more efficient than the RTX 2060, though ray tracing is not very usable yet.
7.0
chip.de
≈ estimated
23/08/2020
Lab test · 1440p gaming
Verdict
The AMD Radeon RX 5700 handles 1440p well and nearly matches the RTX 2070 in places, but its loud blower fan and missing ray tracing hold it back.
9.0
tweakpc.de
✓ explicit
Not Dated
Chart analysis · Resolution comparison
Verdict
The Radeon RX 5700 and RX 5700 XT stand out at 1440p, where they deliver more frames per cost than rival cards, but 4K performance is weak.
6.0
jide.fr
≈ estimated
25/07/2022
Lab test · Noise and power
Verdict
The AMD Radeon RX 5700 suits smooth 1080p and 1440p gaming, but 4K is out of reach and its blower fan is loud at idle.
8.6
hardzone.es
✓ explicit
07/07/2019
Teardown · Reference card
Verdict
The AMD Radeon RX 5700 is a mid-range card with fast GDDR6 memory and a 7nm chip, placed between the RX 590 and RX 5700 XT.
9.0
global.techradar.com
✓ explicit
10/07/2019
Hands-on test · 1440p gaming
Verdict
The AMD Radeon RX 5700 runs games at 1440p on maximum settings with 8GB of memory, but it lacks ray tracing support.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about GIGABYTE Radeon RX 5700

  • Excellent price-to-performance ratio for 1440p gaming.
  • Efficient Windforce 3X cooling system that keeps the card relatively cool compared to reference models.
  • Features '3D Active Fan' technology which remains silent during low-load tasks.
  • Compact and sleek design that fits well in most mid-range builds.
  • Solid frame rates in competitive multiplayer titles like Warzone and Apex Legends.

What customers don't like about GIGABYTE Radeon RX 5700

  • Notorious history of driver stability issues, including intermittent black screens and system crashes.
  • Lack of hardware-based ray tracing support compared to NVIDIA's RTX 20-series rivals.
  • Limited overclocking headroom and low overclocking ceiling.
  • Aorus Engine software reported as occasionally unreliable for fan and clock control.
  • Reference blower-style versions (if used instead of custom coolers) are noted to be quite loud under load.

Verdict

The Gigabyte Radeon RX 5700 is a mid-range graphics card built on the 7nm RDNA architecture, featuring 2304 stream processors and 8GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit interface. It operates with a base clock of 1465 MHz and a boost clock up to 1725 MHz, supported by high-speed PCIe 4.0 for increased bandwidth and a typical board power of 180W. Its primary strengths include excellent price-to-performance for 1440p gaming, effective cooling through the triple-fan Windforce 3X system, and enhanced image quality via Radeon Image Sharpening and FidelityFX. However, users may encounter drawbacks such as the lack of hardware-accelerated ray tracing, relatively loud operation from blower-style reference models, and limited overclocking potential.

Compare GIGABYTE Radeon RX 5700 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 GIGABYTE Radeon RX 5700 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found