1050 ti vs 580: GeForce GTX 1050 Ti vs Radeon RX 580 [in 6 benchmarks]

AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies.
Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark — G3D Mark, PassMark — G2D Mark, Geekbench — OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike — Graphics Score.

AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP

Buy on Amazon

vs

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)

Buy on Amazon

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 11 month(s) later
• 1000x more memory clock speed: 7000 MHz vs 7 GB/s
• Around 26% better performance in PassMark — G3D Mark: 7937 vs 6296
• Around 1% better performance in PassMark — G2D Mark: 661 vs 652
• Around 86% better performance in Geekbench — OpenCL: 40609 vs 21864
• Around 52% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s): 115.237 vs 75.758
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1890.261 vs 843.503
• 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.121 vs 5.071
• 6. 1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s): 149.333 vs 24.676
• 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 614.542 vs 301.168
• Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9258 vs 8496
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames): 3709 vs 3687
• Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9258 vs 8496
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps): 3709 vs 3687
• Around 63% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike — Graphics Score: 3807 vs 2337

Launch date	15 October 2018 vs 25 October 2016
Memory clock speed	7000 MHz vs 7 GB/s
PassMark — G3D Mark	7937 vs 6296
PassMark — G2D Mark	661 vs 652
Geekbench — OpenCL	40609 vs 21864
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s)	115.237 vs 75.758
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1890.261 vs 843.503
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s)	10.121 vs 5.071
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s)	149.333 vs 24.676
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	614.542 vs 301.168
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	9258 vs 8496
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames)	3709 vs 3687
GFXBench 4. 0 — T-Rex (Frames)	3351 vs 3336
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	9258 vs 8496
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps)	3709 vs 3687
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps)	3351 vs 3336
3DMark Fire Strike — Graphics Score	3807 vs 2337

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)

• Around 19% higher core clock speed: 1392 MHz vs 1168 MHz
• Around 8% higher boost clock speed: 1392 MHz vs 1284 MHz
• 2x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 150 Watt

Core clock speed	1392 MHz vs 1168 MHz
Boost clock speed	1392 MHz vs 1284 MHz
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	75 Watt vs 150 Watt

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)

PassMark — G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2
PassMark — G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2
Geekbench — OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	115.237 75.758
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1890.261 843.503
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	10. 121
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	149.333 24.676
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	614.542 301.168
GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2
GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2
3DMark Fire Strike — Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2

Name	AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
PassMark — G3D Mark	7937	6296
PassMark — G2D Mark	661	652
Geekbench — OpenCL	40609	21864
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s)	115.237	75.758
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1890.261	843.503
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s)	10.121	5.071
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s)	149.333	24.676
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	614.542	301.168
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	9258	8496
GFXBench 4. 0 — Manhattan (Frames)	3709	3687
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames)	3351	3336
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	9258	8496
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps)	3709	3687
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps)	3351	3336
3DMark Fire Strike — Graphics Score	3807	2337

Compare specifications (specs)

	AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
Architecture	GCN 4. 0	Pascal
Code name	Polaris 20	GP107
Launch date	15 October 2018	25 October 2016
Place in performance rating	247	403
Type	Desktop	Desktop
Launch price (MSRP)		$139
Price now		$159.99
Value for money (0-100)		46. 07
Boost clock speed	1284 MHz	1392 MHz
Core clock speed	1168 MHz	1392 MHz
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	14 nm
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	150 Watt	75 Watt
Transistor count	5,700 million	3,300 million
CUDA cores		768
Floating-point performance		2,138 gflops
Maximum GPU temperature		97 °C
Pipelines		768
Texture fill rate		66. 82 GTexel / s
Display Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
G-SYNC support
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	241 mm	145 mm
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	None
DirectX	12.0 (12_0)	12.0 (12_1)
OpenGL	4. 5	4.6
Vulkan
Memory clock speed	7000 MHz	7 GB/s
Maximum RAM amount		4 GB
Memory bandwidth		112 GB / s
Memory bus width		128 Bit
Memory type		GDDR5
Shared memory		0
3D Vision
Ansel
CUDA
Multi Monitor
Multi-Projection
VR Ready

gtx 1050 Ti vs RX 580

gtx 1050 Ti vs RX 580

FPS Benchmark

gtx 1050 Ti vs RX 580

gtx 1050 Ti

RX 580

Benchmarks

working with

Ryzen 7 3700x

gtx 1050 Ti

RX 580

CSGO

129 fps

148 fps

LOL

116 fps

134 fps

Warframe

88 fps

102 fps

DOTA2

85 fps

98 fps

overwatch

83 fps

95 fps

Path of Exile

81 fps

94 fps

StarCraft 2

78 fps

90 fps

Call of Duty ww2

73 fps

84 fps

A Way Out

71 fps

82 fps

Sea of Thieves

68 fps

79 fps

Frostpunk

68 fps

78 fps

Fortnite

67 fps

77 fps

AirMech Strike

66 fps

77 fps

destiny2

63 fps

72 fps

Far Cry 5

55 fps

64 fps

apexlegends

53 fps

61 fps

rainbow6siege

51 fps

59 fps

Radical Heights

48 fps

56 fps

BATTLETECH

44 fps

51 fps

GTA

43 fps

50 fps

PUBG

43 fps

50 fps

Total War THREE KINGDOMS

40 fps

46 fps

World of Tanks

36 fps

41 fps

Battlefield 4

34 fps

40 fps

More Benchmarks

Games

destiny2

overwatch

GTA

DOTA2

CSGO

Warframe

rainbow6siege

Fortnite

Sea of Thieves

A Way Out

LOL

Far Cry 5

PUBG

Call of Duty ww2

Radical Heights

Battlefield 4

World of Tanks

apexlegends

Path of Exile

Total War THREE KINGDOMS

Frostpunk

BATTLETECH

AirMech Strike

StarCraft 2

GPUs

RTX 3070

RTX 4090

RX 7900 XTX

RTX 4080

RTX 4070 Ti

RX 7900 XT

RTX 4070

RX 6900 XT

RX 6800 XT

RTX 3080

RX 6800

rtx 2080 Ti

RX 6700

rtx 2080

gtx 1080 Ti

gtx Titan X

rtx 2070 super

rtx 2070

gtx 1080

rx 5700 xt

rtx 2060 super

rx 5700

rtx 2060

RX Vega 64

gtx 1070 Ti

gtx 1070

gtx 1660 Ti

gtx 1660 super

gtx 980 Ti

gtx 1660

CPUs

i9 13900k

i7 13700k

Ryzen 7900x

i7 12700k

Ryzen 5900x

Ryzen 5800x

i5 13600k

Ryzen 5700x

Ryzen 5600

i5 13500

i5 12600k

Ryzen 5500

i5 13400f

i7 9900k

i7 10700k

i7 9700k

Ryzen 7 3900x

Ryzen 7 3800x

i5 10400

Ryzen 7 3700x

Ryzen 5 3600x

i7 8700K

Ryzen 5 3600

i7 7700K

©fpsbenchmark. com

Radeon RX 580 2048SP VS GEFORCE GTX 1050 TI

Page Content

• Graphic processor
• Video card
• Memory
• Render
• Design and size

9000

GPU

98 KB (Per SM)

KESH L2

KESH

performance

Chip	32	32
Calculation units	32	—
Kesh L1	16 KB (Per Cu)
KESH L2
1024 KB
Summer SM	—	6

::>Video cards
>2022
> Radeon RX 6400 vs. RX 6500 XT, RX 580, GTX 1650, GTX 1060, and GTX 1050 Ti

11-10-2022

Meet AMD’s epic test of the Radeon RX 6400, the most affordable 6000 series card. We waited until the hype on it subsides, prices stabilize, and now we’ll figure out with a cool head what’s wrong with it.

We will test the GPU itself on the example of the ASUS Radeon RX 6400 DUAL card provided by the friendly store CompX.com.ua. In addition to video cards, there is a whole range of components and everything connected with it: ready-made computers, mini-PCs, peripherals, monitors, laptops and accessories. Trade-In is working. If you sell an old piece of iron, you get a discount on a new one. Used goods are also available, including when paying with cryptocurrency or in installments.

Pro Radeon RX 6400

So, at the heart of the Radeon RX 6400 is a 6nm Navi 24 GPU. It has 768 stream processors, 32 ROPs and 48 texture units. There is also support for accelerated ray tracing, just to see if the technology works. The frequencies of the card from ASUS are reference — up to 2321 MHz Boost Clock and up to 2039 MHz in game mode. 4 GB GDDR6 memory running on a narrow 64-bit bus with a bandwidth of 128 GB/s. Of the minuses, there are only 4 lanes of the PCIe 4. 0 interface, so when you install the card in an old system with PCIe 3.0, the performance will decrease slightly. How much? We’ll find out soon.

All of the above is wrapped by ASUS in a very efficient 2-slot cooling. The design includes 2 Axial-tech fans with a reduced central part and extended blades. Unlike analogues, they create a concentrated air flow with increased pressure.

Double ball bearings provide direct rotation. They are 2 times more reliable than analogues with a sliding system. That is, they work smoothly and for a long time and without extraneous sounds.

Without load, the cooling system is generally silent on 0 dB technology. Fans start only when the GPU is heated to 52°C.

From HDMI 2.1 and DisplayPort 1.4a card interfaces with HDCP 2.3 support. She does not need additional power — just 53 watts out of a total of 75 from the PCIe slot. The power supply is recommended at 350W for reference cards, but ASUS suggests taking 500W just in case. After all, they are of different quality.

At maximum stress test load, the GPU temperature did not exceed 61°C, and the memory almost 65°C. With fan speeds up to 59The % card made a comfortable noise level. According to monitoring, power consumption was only 43 watts. Although it happens that monitoring evaluates the power of Radeon cards only by GPU consumption, without taking into account other components, memory and cooling.

With whom can we compare?

Now about the opponents. There are an incredible number of them — for every taste. The Radeon RX 6400 is one of the cheapest cards that, on paper, provides the ability to more or less play modern games. Therefore, it is likely that it will be installed in low-cost PCs that only support PCIe 3.0. So the first opponent for the RX 6400 in the PCIe 4.0 slot is the same only in PCIe 3.0 mode. Let’s find out how much we lose performance in this case.

The second opponent is the familiar ASUS TUF Gaming Radeon RX 6500 XT OC Edition. This card has the same Navi 24 GPU, but with more stream processors and texture units — 1024 and 64 respectively. As well as higher frequencies. Here we will evaluate the feasibility of overpaying.

The third competitor is the GeForce GTX 1650. There are options on the market with GDDR5 and GDDR6 memory. The second one is on average 10% faster — and they took it. This GPU contains 896 CUDA cores, 32 ROPs and 56 texture units. And 4 GB of video memory work on a 128-bit bus.

You can also find the new GTX 1050 Ti video cards in retail. Theoretically, they should be slower than the RX 6400, which we will check. These are almost 6 years old cards on an old chip. Inside there are 768 shader processors, 32 ROPs and 48 TMUs. Memory 4 GB type GDDR5 with 128-bit bus. We do not recommend such new cards, but they are available on the used market, where they are much cheaper.

And if you already touched the market of «used» video cards, you can find another competitor there — the GTX 1060 with 6 GB of memory. Now it’s even a little cheaper. Although the card is also 6 years old, its drivers have an option for software emulation of ray tracing. Of course, there will be a wild slideshow, but there will be an opportunity to look at Ray Tracing at least on a freeze frame. In the end, people go to art galleries and nothing)) In all respects, this card is much better than the GTX 1050 Ti and will compete with the RX 6400.

Plus or minus for the same money now you can find the good old Radeon RX 580. And technologically old in the literal sense of the word. We took the 8-gig version. And in terms of memory, it is the most productive thanks to a 256-bit bus with a bandwidth of 256 GB / s. There are also relatively many structural blocks here — only 2304 stream processors. In general, a very interesting competitor for the RX 6400.0027

The main brain of our hive is the Intel Core i7-12700K processor. It has 8 high performance Hyper Threading cores and 4 energy efficient cores for a total of 20 threads.

We installed cards on the ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-F GAMING WIFI motherboard. And the switching of PCIe modes was carried out in the BIOS settings. Among other advantages, it has a cool ALC4080 audio codec with a Savitech SV3H712 amplifier. And programmatically, this bundle is improved by DTS Sound Unbound and Sonic Studio III technologies.

The dropsy ASUS ROG STRIX LC II 240 ARGB helped the processor to be with a cold mind. In addition to high performance and compatibility with multiple platforms, it makes a significant contribution to the design of the system with ARGB illumination of the pump cover and fans. There is also a ROG engraving that complements the components from the same series.

We have a lot of RAM, and it’s fast — commissioned by Intel 12th generation: 32 GB DDR5-5600 with two Kingston FURY Beast sticks.

The system, games and benchmarks started and ran very quickly thanks to the 1 TV ASUS ROG STRIX SQ7 NVMe SSD. Read and write speeds are 7000 and almost 6000 MB / s. In addition, comprehensive hardware encryption is supported, and the bundle includes a data protection utility — ASUS NTI Backup Now EZ.

The 1000W power supply is from previous Seasonic PRIME GX-1000 tests. Even in such a not too demanding system, it is appropriate. Because it is completely modular, convenient to use, quiet and cool. A 12-year warranty will allow you to survive more than one system.

All assembled in a Be quiet! Pure Base 500FX. 4 installed fans created very comfortable working conditions for video cards with the same comfortable noise level.

We also remind you that we do not lose FPS during gameplay recording, because this is done by a separate PC with an AVerMedia Live Gamer 4K capture card.

Radeon RX 6400 vs 5+1 competitors

So, let’s start comparing a slide of available video cards and one standby RX 6400 with PCIe 3. 0 interface versus more modern 4.0.

As you can see, using the RX 6400 in a system with an old slot, reading and writing to memory is reduced by just 2 times, as evidenced by AIDA64 GPGPU. But in a more productive 4th version, these speeds are at the level of the RX 6500 XT.

Next, look at 3DMark Port Royal. Here, half of the cards are not supported, but we are interested in something else. So, in a more modern PCIe 4.0 interface, the RX 6400 is twice as fast as with version 3.0. Although even so, it is 35% weaker than the RX 6500 XT.

And 3DMark Time Spy did not feel any difference from the PCIe speed. In any case, the RX 6400 is 33-35% behind the RX 6500 XT and is almost equal to the GTX 1650. The outsider of the test is the 1050 Ti. She is 49% behind the heroine of the review.

3DMark Wild Life Extreme also doesn’t care how the RX 6400 works — whether in the old slot or in the new one. The schedule of forces has not changed much, except that the old RX 580 caught up with the leader of the previous test RX 6500 XT. Together they outperformed the heroine of the review by 31%.

So, if we take the average percentage for all synthetics, then the RX 6400 in the old system will work worse by 14%. In general, almost all cards turned out to be faster in comparison:

• GTX 1650 — by 6%;
• RX 580 — by 17%;
• RX 6500 XT — by 30%;
• GTX 1060 6G — by 91%, if we take into account the faster work of trace emulation in Port Royal and Blender’s love for green and large video buffers.

The RX6400 in PCI-e4.0 mode scored a clear victory only over the GTX 1050 Ti — by 33% on average.

Well, we’ve got some rough guidelines for using cards for work tasks. Now let’s see how the places are distributed in gaming benchmarks in Full HD resolution. There is hope that the RX 6400 will show itself.

In Assassin’s Creed Valhalla chose medium graphics settings in DX12. First of all, we evaluate the difference between the two modes of the RX 6400 — it is 10 and 14% in terms of average frequency and rare events. The heroine of the review definitely wins only in 1050 Ti — from 15 to 33%. And other cards bypass it, including the GTX 1650 — by 8% in the average frequency and by 29% for very rare events. Although the real gap from the previous hit GTX 1060 is quite small — only 5 fps in key indicators.

Cyberpunk 2077 is also more or less playable on all maps at low graphics settings. Even 4 GB of video buffer is enough for everyone. Despite this, the RX 6400 in PCIe 4.0 mode is 21 — 36% better than itself in PCIe 3.0 mode. Considering this game’s love for NVIDIA, the 6400 performed well. It caught up with the GTX 1650 in average frequency and rare events and outperformed the GTX 1060 by 7-10% in the same indicators.

With these graphics cards Forza Horizon 5 allows you to set high graphics in DX12. The leader of the benchmark was the Radeon RX 6500 XT. It outperformed the fully functional RX 6400 by 24%. In turn, it outperformed the GTX 1050 Ti by 40-41%, outperformed the legendary RX 580 by several FPS and competed on equal terms with the GTX 1650 and GTX 1060. Even despite the almost completely filled video buffer, the RX 6400 produced very smooth and stable gameplay.

And finally Resident Evil 8: Village with the «Graphics Priority» preset. This is not the best option for cards with a 4 GB buffer because the memory is small.

For example, the RX 580 and GTX 1060 use just over 5 GB, while the RX 6400 makes up for this lack of space with RAM that threatens to draw down. So, in this scenario, the difference between PCIe 3.0 and 4.0 is the most significant, up to 88% in terms of 0.1% low.

The RX 6400 even outperformed the GTX 1050 Ti by 67-103%. And only a little ahead of the GTX 1060 and GTX 1650 — by 8-9%.

The leader in this test, like a miracle, was the RX 6500 XT. She bypassed the RX 6400 by 16-25%.

As you can see, the Radeon RX 6400 received a GPU similar in power to the GeForce GTX 1650 and the once popular GTX 1060. On average, they are on the plus or minus one level for all benchmarks. Considering the GTX 1650 is a bit more expensive, that’s a plus. You can forget about the GTX 1050 Ti at all — the RX 6400 overtook it by an average of 40-62%. Again, at similar prices.

If we take the sum of the average frame rates for all benchmarks, we get the following distribution of places:

1. Radeon RX 6500 XT 4 GB — 294 fps

2. Radeon RX 580 8 GB — 262 fps

3. GeForce GTX 1650 4 GB — 238 fps

4.0 Radeon 84 GB 6404 PCIe 4.0 — 237 fps

5. GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB — 234 fps

6. Radeon RX 6400 4 GB | PCIe 3.0 — 202 fps

7. GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4 GB — 149 fps

Compare them with real prices on the market for new and used graphics cards and choose what is best for you. At the same time, remember that the RX 6400 and RX 6500 XT are best installed in a system where the processor and board support PCIe 4.0.

Live gameplay in Full HD

Now let’s look at the real gaming capabilities of the Radeon RX 6400 in PCIe 4. 0 mode. Will it have enough video memory and will the gameplay be comfortable?

Apex Legends opens the hit parade at maximum graphics settings and high textures that promise to fit into a 4 GB video buffer. In general, the gameplay is comfortable and smooth, but with nuances — sometimes there are small twitches that are not removed by changing the settings. On average, the frequency counter was at around 72 fps.

Battlefield 2042 is experiencing GPU low graphics in 128 player mode on the Kaleidoscope map. As a result, on average we get the coveted 60 + fps, which only sometimes sag to 29. Again, the gameplay is mostly smooth, and the CONTROLS are obedient. Small slowdowns still happen, but the language does not turn to call them critical.

In CoD: Warzone is best played with the «Near Medium» preset, that is, «near medium» settings. Our 100,500 professional testers did not notice any serious problems. Unless sometimes there can be something like a small twitch. But despite this, it’s nice to play plus or minus at an average of 60 fps.

For Dying Light 2 the best setting is low. Traditionally, at first there are blunting, but in this game this happens with TOP-level video cards. But after warming up, we get excellent smoothness and stability — on average, 50 fps on monitoring, there is enough video memory, and the frame duration graph is almost perfect.

To watch the broadcast of the match in Dota 2 selected the maximum graphics setting. We repeat the same mantra again. First, we wait until everything loads, settles down, and then we play. On average, 130 fps, and very rare events — at least 88 fps.

In Far Cry 6 aimed at the noble 60 fps, so we chose the medium preset. Everything worked out. The frame time graph is even, the counter is almost always about 60 fps and only occasionally the picture can twitch a little. The video memory is occupied by almost 4 GB, so it is possible in other locations, but not with such a fast RAM, you will have to slightly reduce the quality of the textures.

Fortnite launched with high graphics and full render resolution. This game once again confirms why it is better to watch not silent benchmarks without comments on Western channels, but our live impressions. If you look at the monitoring, everything is not very good there — the frame duration graph looks like a puddle during a rainstorm, and very rare events are half the average frequency. But in a live game, none of this is felt. Small dullings were only during warm-up and landing.

God of War and low graphics. In general, everything is fine, smooth and obedient. On average, the picture is updated 58 times per second — what more could a person with a 60 Hz screen want?

Multiplayer Halo Infinite was tested in training mode with bots on the Fragmentation map at low image quality. Sometimes there can be almost imperceptible twitches, but in general the video sequence is smooth. Play comfortably.

Red Dead Redemption 2 started up on medium settings and even let me choose ultra textures. Oddly enough, 4 GB of VRAM was enough for them. No special problems were found, only in some places, in scenes loaded with events, the smoothness can sag a little. But otherwise — everything is OK. Punishing O’Driscoll’s boys can be done with joy and efficiency.

Total and

Based on the results of 10 games, the conclusions are as follows. The Radeon RX 6400 is a good option for the casual gamer looking for casual online gaming. Although heavy hits are also quite possible to pass with a minimum or average picture. In this case, sometimes there may be minor twitches that do not affect the enjoyment of the gameplay. Otherwise, it is an affordable, cold and economical card that does not even require additional power from the PSU.

Pixel Lort