As these two series are pretty close to each other price-wise, I can see them becoming a usual dilemma among users who are in search for a budget gaming graphics card, which is why I decided to check out how they fare against each other in this GTX 1650 Super vs RX 5500 XT 4GB battle, and see which one should you go for when we draw the line. If you’re curious about these two particular models, Gigabyte GTX 1650 Super WindForce OC and Sapphire RX 5500 XT Pulse 4GB, you can find my reviews on them on the channel, there will be links in the right top corner of this video.
This, in particular, is the 4 GB version of the RX 5500 XT series, as it didn’t make sense for me to include the 8 GB model in this video since at the moment it’s far more expensive compared to the GTX 1650 Super.
I will also do a comparison of the 8 GB and 4 GB version of RX 5500 XT, be sure to subscribe for that down the line, so you can compare those results with this video and the GTX 1650 Super, maybe by the time you are watching this it will already be up, I’ll put a link in the right top corner of this video once it’s live.
The ultimate budget battle – RX 5500 XT vs GTX 1650 Super
Since these two series of graphics cards are based on a completely different architecture philosophy, there’s no point in comparing them GPU specs-wise, expect mentioning the video memory capacity, memory bus width, and type, although they both have very similar number of ROP’s and texture units, while RX 5500 XT has 128 more shaders cores, but again, there’s no point in comparing it like that, since they’re built on a different architecture. Back to the video memory, if you compare RX 5500 XT vs GTX 1650 Super in that regards, both of them have very similar specs, 4 GB’s of GDDR6 video memory with 128-bit memory bus width on their disposal, while AMD’s RX 5500 XT has a higher bandwidth throughput since their reference clock is 1750 MHz instead of 1500 MHz, or 14 Gbps rather than 12 Gbps with GTX 1650 Super. With that out of the way, let’s take a look at the performance.
Before we jump over to the results, let’s first take a look at some of my gameplay footage with these two series, I will put them side by side, you can see the live performance figures of each in the left top corner of their screen. You can find my setup which I used here to test them in the description box down below, and if you have any questions about them, free feel to leave them in the comment section down below and I will try to help you out!
Coming down to the benchmarking figures, in synthetic benchmarks the RX 5500 XT 4 GB takes a pretty convincing win over the GTX 1650 Super, but once we cross over to games, we have a pretty different situation. They both trade blows, depending on the title and resolution, they will either be neck and neck, like in Strange Brigade and Doom, where we have Vulkan API doing it’s thing, pulling the best out of both of them and the CPU that they have on hand, or one will be much better than the other, and vice versa, like in Assassins Creed Origins, so it really boils down to what title are you going to play. What’s also interesting is that when you average in the frame-rates through these 11 games, for example at 1080p resolution, the resulted total average between them is basically the same.
GTX 1650 Super cheaper, RX 5500 XT a tad more efficient, but take that with a grain of salt
In terms of their efficiency, in-game they have very similar power draw figures, at least according to GPUz power consumption readout, while the RX 5500 XT, or the Navi architecture in general, handles Furmark’s GPU stress test a bit worse, as it shows almost 20W more compared to the GTX 1650 Super, which copes with this specific power hogging software like it better, so I will stick with the in-game readout as it’s a more realistic scenario.
Plus, depending on how efficiently is your power supply, the power consumption from the wall can vary, which then is not the actual representation of the actual GPU’s power need. With that said, they both have around 100W of in-game power consumption and since both cards have very similar total FPS average, the performance per watt is, well the same if I don’t go for the third decimal number.
On the other hand, since the official MSRP launch price for the GTX 1650 Super is 10$ lower than the one for the RX 5500 XT 4 GB model, the value proposition of it is a bit better, but honestly, this information wouldn’t make me any smarter in deciding which one should I go for, RX 5500 XT or GTX 1650 Super cause bottom line it’s a close call.
GTX 1650 Super vs RX 5500 XT – no obvious winner?
The RX 5500 XT series should overall be cheaper considering that it’s bringing in very similar performance compared to its older RX 580 series, more so with RX 590, which can be found for ridiculously low price, new and specially used, and this would definitely help in fighting off the GTX 1650 Super, making it a more obvious decision, but this way it’s a bit harder to get to a final conclusion. AMD does have a better track record in terms of pulling the most out of their models long-term wise when it comes to drivers updates, but other than that, in this particular case, I would say that it all comes down to personal preferences, especially if you’re leaning towards titles which one or the other handle better.
If you’re looking to buy a GPU with this particular budget in hand, It’s maybe better that you take a look at a used RX 590 or GTX 1070, 1070 Ti, or something similar with a warranty, I think that will be your best bet price to performance-wise.
That’s it for this time, I hope this GTX 1650 Super vs RX 5500 XT 4GB comparison help you in making your final decision, if you have any question feel free to hit me in the comments section of my YouTube video listed above, you can contact me via my social media channels!