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

MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£130VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):185 W

MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X 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.

MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X
6.9/10

Overall score

Score
6.9/ 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 69% of models
Score components

40%

5.0

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%

10

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 69% of graphics cards
7.8

Value for money

Value for money
7.8/ 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–² Better than 86% of models
Score components

70%

6.9

Overall score

30%

9.8

Price

â–²Better than 86%
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%

2.8

Performance

24%

4.9

Memory

12%

8.6

Power

11%

7.5

Features

5%

7.9

Design

4%

8.0

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 83%
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
  • msi-radeon-rx-580-gaming-x
msi-radeon-rx-580-gaming-x
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.

What reviewers say about the MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X

Based on 6 · 3

Reviewers like how quiet it runs, but it was hard to find, and views on performance and power draw are split.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X

Based on 369 owners sharing their experience in online comments

83%positive8%mixed9%negative

It still handles games well, while high temperatures and occasional crashes can make stable tuning difficult.

What owners dislike

  • Pushing memory or core clocks too far, or undervolting too low, causes crashes, black or grey screens, and driver timeouts for some owners.7
  • Under heavy gaming, many cards reach 85 to 90 degrees Celsius, with loud fans and sometimes throttling until the card is tuned.6
  • Changing clock speed or voltage can make the card crash or shut down, and some cards only run stable at specific settings.5
  • Some owners find demanding modern games run slowly, often limited to 720p or 30 to 60 frames per second at 1080p.4

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

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X

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%

2.8

Performance

24%

4.9

Memory

12%

8.6

Power

11%

7.5

Features

5%

7.9

Design

4%

8.0

Connectivity

5.0
Reviews score
8.1
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.8/ 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–² Better than 86% of models
Score components:

70%

6.9

Overall score

30%

9.8

Price

7.8
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
4,450 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 4,450 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 87.8% 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
8,799 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 8,799 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 87% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
3,889 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 3,889 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 86.8% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
6.36 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 6.36 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 82.8% 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
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.4% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% 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
256 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 256 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 80% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.8% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
8,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 8,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 86.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.6% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.1% 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
2
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 2 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 78.3% of graphics cards and equal to 9.8% 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
1.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 1.4 Gbps, which is slower than on 96.5% of graphics cards and equal to 3.6% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
185 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 185 W, which is lower than that of 55.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.5% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
210 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 210 W under peak load, which is lower than 52.9% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% 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
185 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 185 W, which is lower than that of 59.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
185 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
276x 140x 42 mm
Length
276 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 276 mm long, which is shorter than 54.8% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.6% of graphics cards.
Height
140 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 140 mm tall, which is taller than 79.5% of graphics cards and equal in height to 5.4% 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
978 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 978 g, which is lighter than 56.6% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of Graphics cards.
Show more

MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 14.3% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 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
  • 28.2% higher sentiment score
    10.0 vs 7.8
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • 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
  • 28.2% higher sentiment score
    10.0 vs 7.8
  • 4x cheaper
    MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X is cheaper than the average graphics card (£130 vs £520).
    £130 vs £520
  • 5% better value for money
    MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X has better value for money than the average graphics card (7.78 vs 7.4).
    7.78 vs 7.41
  • 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
  • 14.3% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • 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
  • 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
  • 44.4% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,393 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,393 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.
  • 2.8x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (14 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    14 nm vs 5 nm
  • 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
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • 44.4% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,393 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,393 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.
  • 30.2% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,340 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,340 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 72.6% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (44.2 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    44.16 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 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
  • 47.4% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (198.7 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    198.7 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 32 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    32 vs 64
  • 71.9% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (6.4 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    6.36 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 6 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2017 vs 2023).
    April 2017
    2017 vs 2023
  • 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
  • 61.1% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (8,799 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    8,799 points vs 22,638 points
  • 69.9% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (4,450 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    4,450 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
  • 67.8% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (3,889 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    3,889 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 79.1% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (6.2 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    6.17 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 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
  • 57.9% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (8,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    8,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 42.9% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (256 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    256 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 91.7% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (2 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    2 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
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 2.8x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (14 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    14 nm vs 5 nm
  • 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.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3 vs 4
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, 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 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
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 3).
    2.1 vs 3
  • 75.1% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (5,700 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    5,700 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.7 vs 6.8).
    6.7 vs 6.8
  • 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
  • 1 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    2 vs 3
  • 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
  • 93.5% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (1.4 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    1.4 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
  • 5.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (41 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    41 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 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
  • 15 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (140 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    140 mm vs 125 mm

Video reviews

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

7.0
Matt's Paddock
≈ estimated
18/04/2017
Review vs RX 480 · overclocking, temperatures and game tests
Verdict
The MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X is slightly better than the RX 480 at the same or lower price, though the gap is small.
7.0
Gamers Nexus
≈ estimated
18/04/2017
Full review · benchmarks against GTX 1060 and RX 480
Verdict
The MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X is nothing special, but a decent small step up from the RX 480 rather than a major leap.
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.0
gamersnexus.net
≈ estimated
18/04/2017
Benchmark review · GTX 1060 comparison
Verdict
The MSI RX 580 Gaming X matches the GTX 1060 SSC in most games, but it draws far more power and is only a small step up.
9.2
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
04/08/2017
Lab test · Noise and temperatures
Verdict
The MSI RX 580 Gaming X 8G is the quietest and coolest RX 580 tested, though it was hard to find in stores.
9.2
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
04/08/2017
Lab test · Overall package
Verdict
The MSI RX 580 Gaming X 8G is the best all-round RX 580 tested: it runs quiet and cool and is only slightly slower in frame rates.
9.2
gamestar.de
✓ explicit
04/08/2017
Lab test · Noise and heat
Verdict
The MSI RX 580 Gaming X 8G runs quieter and cooler than rival RX 580s, but its 185 W board power means it runs hotter than the GTX 1060 Gaming X.
6.0
hardware.fr
≈ estimated
28/04/2017
Lab test · Infrared heat photos
Verdict
The MSI RX 580 Gaming X is silent when idle and shows no overheating, but its RX 480 cooler gets loud and whiny under load.
10
tweakers.net
✓ explicit
27/06/2017
Hands-on review · Noise and size
Verdict
The MSI RX 580 Gaming X+ 8G is quiet and cool with FreeSync, but its 2.5-slot body is bulky and stock was hard to find.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X

  • Excellent 1080p gaming performance for modern titles and budget builds
  • Generous 8GB VRAM provides headroom for high-resolution textures
  • Effective Twin Frozr VI cooling system keeps temperatures low under load
  • Very quiet operation with fans that can remain idle during light use
  • Solid build quality featuring a sturdy backplate and attractive RGB LED design
  • Great value for money, especially in the used or refurbished market
  • Good overclocking and undervolting potential for enthusiast users
  • Supports AMD FreeSync for smooth, tear-free gameplay

What customers don't like about MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X

  • High power consumption compared to modern efficient alternatives
  • Large physical size may not fit in smaller or compact computer cases
  • Requires an 8-pin power connector, which may necessitate a PSU upgrade for some
  • Official AMD driver development for the Polaris architecture has largely ceased
  • Can run hot in cases with poor airflow or without manual fan curve adjustment
  • Occasional software glitches with MSI's gaming apps or initial driver setup
  • Lacks support for modern technologies like hardware-accelerated Ray Tracing

Verdict

The MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X 8G is an enthusiast-level graphics card built on the 14nm Polaris 20 XTX architecture, featuring 2,304 stream processors and 8GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus. It offers three performance profiles, reaching a boost clock of 1393 MHz in OC mode with a memory speed of 8100 MHz, and includes a premium Twin Frozr VI cooling system with Torx 2.0 fans and Zero Frozr technology for silent operation under low loads. Main pros include its robust 1080p gaming performance, high-quality build with a solid metal backplate, and customizable RGB lighting via the MSI Gaming App. However, its notable cons include a high power consumption rated at 185W TDP, requiring an 8-pin power connector, and its significant physical size which may challenge smaller PC cases.

Compare MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X 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 MSI Radeon RX 580 Gaming X and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found