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

XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£400VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):225 W

XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 3 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB
6.5/10

Overall score

Score
6.5/ 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 82% of models
Score components

40%

5.8

Technical score

25%

5.8

Reviews score

25%

?

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

10%

8.2

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 82% of graphics cards
7.1

Value for money

Value for money
7.1/ 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 71% of models
Score components

70%

6.5

Overall score

30%

8.4

Price

â–¼Worse than 71%
5.8

Technical score

Technical score
5.8/ 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 75% of models
Score components

44%

4.2

Performance

24%

5.6

Memory

12%

8.1

Power

11%

8.2

Features

5%

8.5

Design

4%

8.7

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 75%
5.8

Reviews score

Reviews score
5.8/ 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 85% of models

5.8

Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.7

Average grade

20%

7.4

Popularity

Grades by review (3)
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–¼Worse than 85%
?

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
  • xfx-radeon-rx-5700-xt-8gb
xfx-radeon-rx-5700-xt-8gb
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 XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB

Based on 0 · 3

Reviewers agree the drivers work well, with no clear complaints raised.
Praised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB

Based on 324 owners sharing their experience in online comments

72%positive9%mixed19%negative

Owners praise its strong gaming performance and efficiency, while driver crashes and black screens remain a serious frustration.

What owners dislike

  • Many owners reported black screens, blue screens and game crashes, and some said driver updates often brought new problems.22
  • Owners say junction temperatures often reached 95 to 110 °C at stock, and fixes included undervolting, repasting or a more aggressive fan curve.8
  • Owners reported VRAM crashing above roughly 1820 to 1850 MHz, and some cards were unstable at higher clocks, so they had to back off.6
  • Owners reported stutter, mouse lag and screen tearing in games, and one said FreeSync caused stuttering.5

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

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB

Technical score
Technical score
5.8/ 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 75% of models
Score components:

44%

4.2

Performance

24%

5.6

Memory

12%

8.1

Power

11%

8.2

Features

5%

8.5

Design

4%

8.7

Connectivity

5.8
Reviews score
5.8
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.1/ 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 71% of models
Score components:

70%

6.5

Overall score

30%

8.4

Price

7.1
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
9,500 points
Market range: <4k points – >34k points
This graphics card scores 9,500 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 73% of graphics cards and equal to 0.5% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >25k 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
16,167 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 16,167 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 73% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
5,636 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 5,636 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 80.2% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
9.75 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 9.75 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 73.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 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
?
Memory bus width
256 bit
Market range: <64 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
12.1
This graphics card supports DirectX 12.1, which is older than on 77.2% of graphics cards and equal to 4.5% 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
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)
225 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 225 W, which is higher than that of 55.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.1% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
225 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 225 W under peak load, which is higher than 52.5% of graphics cards and equal to 1.2% 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
225 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 225 W, which is higher than that of 50.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
225 W
Show more
Size
?
Length
267 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >350 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
111 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 111 mm tall, which is shorter than 83.6% of graphics cards and equal in height to 5.1% 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
1,000 g
Market range: <500 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 1,000 g, which is lighter than 50.9% of Graphics cards and equal to 3.3% of Graphics cards.
Show more

XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB 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
  • 14 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111 mm vs 125 mm
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 14 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111 mm vs 125 mm
  • 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
  • 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
    XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB 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
  • 24% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1905 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,905 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 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
  • 19.4% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.8/ 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 85% of models

    5.8

    Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.7

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    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.
    5.8 vs 7.2
  • 4.9% worse value for money
    XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB has worse value for money than the average graphics card (7.07 vs 7.4).
    7.07 vs 7.41
  • 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.
  • 24% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1905 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,905 MHz vs 2,505 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
  • 56.9% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (9.8 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    9.75 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 16.4% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,605 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,605 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 24.4% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (121.9 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    121.9 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 19.4% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (304.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    304.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 4 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2019 vs 2023).
    2,019 vs 2,023
  • 28.6% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (16,167 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    16,167 points vs 22,638 points
  • 35.7% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (9,500 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    9,500 points vs 14,779 points
  • 24 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (160 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    160 vs 184
  • 53.3% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (5,636 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    5,636 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
  • Less advanced frame generation
    XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB 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 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 DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12.1 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12.1 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 3.0
  • 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
  • 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
  • 4.7% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (225 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    225 W vs 215 W

Video reviews

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

8.0
Gamer Meld
≈ estimated
20/10/2019
Hands-on review · noise, temperature and overclocking tests
Verdict
XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB is not a standout card, but it is quiet and worth buying at a good price.
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict

Third-party reviews

What customers like about XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB

  • 448 GB/s of memory bandwidth moves data quickly.
  • 40 compute units give 9.75 TFLOPS of FP32 power.
  • 8 GB of VRAM covers 1080p and many 1440p games.
  • FSR upscaling can lift frame rates in demanding games.
  • Overclocking support lets you push the card further.
  • At 111 mm high it is short, which suits some cases.

What customers don't like about XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB

  • No ray tracing, so newer lighting effects are out of reach.
  • No DLSS, so upscaling relies on FSR alone.
  • No CUDA support, so CUDA-based software will not run.
  • At 267 mm long, it needs a roomy case.
  • The 225 W power draw calls for a 600 W power supply.

Verdict

Strong memory bandwidth is the main reason to look at the XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB. Its 448 GB/s and 256 bit bus move data quickly, and 40 compute units give 9.75 TFLOPS of FP32 power for traditional games. The card supports FSR upscaling and overclocking, so you can push it further. Its 8 GB of VRAM suits 1080p and many 1440p titles. The trade-off is what it lacks. There is no ray tracing, no DLSS, no CUDA and no AV1 decoding, so newer lighting effects are out of reach. At 267 mm long and two slots wide, it also needs a roomy case, and a 600 W power supply is recommended. It suits a buyer who mostly plays traditional titles and wants raw rendering speed without needing ray tracing.

Compare XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB 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 XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT 8GB and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found