ASRock RX 5500 XT Challenger OC 8GB Review

1. Introduction2. ASRock RX 5500 XT Challenger 8GB3. Testing Methodology4. 3DMark Fire Strike & Time Spy (1080p, 1440p, 4K)5. Battlefield V (1080p, 1440p, 4K)6. The Division 2 (1080p, 1440p, 4K)7. F1 2019 (1080p, 1440p, 4K)8. Far Cry New Dawn (1080p, 1440p, 4K)9. Gears 5 (1080p, 1440p, 4K)10. Ghost Recon: Wildlands (1080p, 1440p, 4K)11. Metro Exodus (1080p, 1440p, 4K)12. Middle Earth: Shadow of War (1080p, 1440p, 4K)13. Shadow of the Tomb Raider (1080p, 1440p, 4K)14. Total War: Three Kingdoms (1080p, 1440p, 4K)15. Clock Speed16. Temperatures17. Acoustics18. Power Consumption19. Overclocking20. Closing Thoughts21. View All Pages

In the second of our launch day reviews for AMD's 5500 XT, we assess the ASRock Challenger 8GB OC Edition. It has taken some time for 5500 XT cards to come to market, with AMD's initial announcement made over two months ago, but they are finally here and today we see how this card compares to the likes of Nvidia's GTX 1650 SUPER, which itself only launched last month.

The first thing to note is that this review is concerned with ASRock's RX 5500 XT 8GB. 5500 XT is available in both 4GB and 8GB models (the only difference is the VRAM capacity), so if you want to see our review of a 4GB card, head over to the Sapphire Pulse HERE.

Secondly, AMD disclosed pricing to us yesterday, with the 4GB model retailing for £159.99 here in the UK, while the 8GB model is £20 more expensive at £179.99. While that means the 4GB model is going head-to-head with 1650 SUPER in the ~£150 market segment, the situation is a bit difference for the 8GB card. In fact, with GTX 1660 prices dropping since the arrival of the 1660 SUPER, cards are now available for as little as £180.

The last point to note in this introduction is how RX 5500 XT fits in with the rest of the RX 5500 series. When AMD made the initial announcement back in October, core spec was announced for the RX 5500 ‘series', but the 5500 XT was not explicitly mentioned. As it transpires, both the RX 5500 and RX 5500 XT use the exact same GPU, with the same core count. The primary differences are that RX 5500 (non-XT) has slightly lower clocks, is only available as a 4GB model, and is only available to OEMs. RX 5500 XT is available as a standalone part, so unless you want to buy a pre-built system, you can forget about the non-XT version of the 5500.

GPU	RX 5500 XT	RX 5700	RX 5700 XT	RX Vega 56	RX Vega 64
Architecture	Navi	Navi	Navi	Vega 10	Vega 10
Manufacturing Process	7nm	7nm	7nm	14nm	14nm
Transistor Count	6.4 billion	10.3 billion	10.3 billion	12.5 billion	12.5 billion
Die Size	158mm²	251mm²	251mm²	486mm²	495mm²
Compute Units	22	36	40	56	64
Stream Processors	1408	2304	2560	3584	4096
Base GPU Clock	n/a	Up to 1465MHz	Up to 1605MHz	1156 MHz	1274 MHz
Game GPU Clock	Up to 1717MHz	Up to 1625MHz	Up to 1755MHz	n/a	n/a
Boost GPU Clock	Up to 1845MHz	Up to 1725MHz	Up to 1905MHz	1471 MHz	1546 MHz
Peak SP Performance	Up to 5.20 TFLOPS	Up to 7.95 TFLOPS	Up to 9.75 TFLOPS	Up to 10.5 TFLOPS	Up to 12.7 TFLOPS
Peak Half Precision Performance	Up to 10.4 TFLOPS	Up to 15.9 TFLOPS	Up to 19.5 TFLOPS	Up to 21.0 TFLOPS	Up to 25.3 TFLOPS
Peak Texture Fill-Rate	Up to 162.4 GT/s	Up to 248.4 GT/s	Up to 304.8 GT/s	Up to 330.0 GT/s	Up to 395.8 GT/s
ROPs	32	64	64	64	64
Peak Pixel Fill-Rate	Up to 59.0 GP/s	Up to 110.4 GP/s	Up to 121.9 GP/s	Up to 94.0 GP/s	Up to 98.9 GP/s
Memory	4/8GB GDDR6	8GB GDDR6	8GB GDDR6	8GB HBM	8GB HBM
Memory Bandwidth	224 GB/s	448 GB/s	448 GB/s	410 GB/s	483.8 GB/s
Memory Interface	128-bit	256-bit	256-bit	2048-bit	2048-bit
Board Power	130W	185W	225W	210W	295W

With that in mind, GPU specs for the RX 5500 XT have therefore been online for two months, so nothing new is revealed to us. Built on the same Navi architecture as the RX 5700 and RX 5700 XT, and fabbed on TSMC's 7nm process, the RX 5500 XT consists of 22 Compute Units (CUs) and 1408 Stream Processors.

The same 14Gbps GDDR6 memory has also been brought down from the RX 5700 series, with 4GB or 8GB models. The 5500 XT however has a narrower, 128-bit memory interface, meaning total memory bandwidth is 224 GB/s, or half that of its pricier brethren.

As for clock speeds, the ASRock card here follows the reference specification with a 1845MHz boost clock. Total board power is rated at 130W, or 30W above GTX 1650 SUPER.

The ASRock RX 5500 XT Challenger 8GB ships in a black box, with the AMD Radeon and Challenger logos taking pride of place on the front.

Inside, the only accessory is a small quick installation guide.

Getting a look at the card itself, ASRock is using a black, silver and yellow colour scheme for the Challenger's plastic shroud. Being honest, I don't think it is the best looking card I have ever seen, but of course that is subjective. The shroud itself is quite flat and simple, so it's not an aggressive ‘gamer' look, it just looks a bit plain to my eye.

Still, we can see it's a dual-slot card with a dual-fan cooler – each fan measures 90mm.

I don't have official measurements for the Challenger, so I did my best to take them myself: 228mm x 110mm x 40mm. Official measurements on ASRock's website will likely differ slightly, but this should give you an idea of whether or not this card will fit in your chassis.

On the front side of the card, we can see a small yellow strip with ‘Challenger' written in tiny black text. We can also get a look at the metal backplate, which is mostly silver with some yellow and black sections too. This only covers the length of the PCB, so there's almost 5cm of space where the heatsink and shroud extend beyond the PCB.

The Challenger 8GB requires 1x 8-pin PCIe power connector, while we see display outputs consist of 3x DisplayPorts and 1x HDMI.

Taking off the cooler to look at the PCB, this is almost identical to the Sapphire Pulse we have also reviewed today, so it is highly likely both companies are using reference boards. That means the Challenger also has a 6-phase VRM for the GPU, while the memory VRM consists of a single-phase.

As for that GDDR6 memory, here things get interesting as this is an 8GB 5500 XT – but there's only four physical memory modules. It seems AMD is using double-density memory for the 5500 XT 8GB cards, so it's a 4x2GB configuration. Every other current-generation card I've seen that uses GDDR6 memory has used 1GB modules, so perhaps this will become more prevalent in the coming months. The fact that the ‘9TB47D9WZX' code does not show up on Micron's website, suggests this is a very recent development for its GDDR6 production.

As for the heatsink, this uses a single finstack with three copper heatpipes. The GPU die contacts with a central copper plate, and this is surrounded by another plate for the VRAM. One final plate for the VRM is also off to the side.

Our newest GPU test procedure has been built with the intention of benchmarking high-end graphics cards. We test at 1920×1080 (1080p), 2560×1440 (1440p), and 3840×2160 (4K UHD) resolutions.

We try to test using the DX12 API if titles offer support. This gives us an interpretation into the graphics card performance hierarchy in the present time and the near future, when DX12 becomes more prevalent. After all, graphics cards of this expense may stay in a gamer’s system for a number of product generations/years before being upgraded.

We tested the RX Vega64 and Vega56 using the ‘Turbo‘ power mode in AMD’s WattMan software. This prioritises all-out performance over power efficiency, noise output, and lower thermals.

Driver Notes

• All AMD graphics cards (except RX 5500 XT) were benchmarked with the Adrenalin 19.9.2 driver.
• RX 5500 XT graphics card were benchmarked with the Adrenalin 19.12.2 driver supplied to press ahead of launch.
• All Nvidia graphics cards (except 1650/1660 SUPER) were benchmarked with the Nvidia 436.48 driver.
• All GTX 1660 SUPER graphics cards were benchmarked with the Nvidia 441.07 driver supplied to press ahead of launch.
• GTX 1650 SUPER was benchmarked with the Nvidia 441.20 public driver.

Test System

We test using the Overclockers UK Germanium pre-built system, though it has been re-housed into an open-air test bench. You can read more about it over HERE.

CPU	Intel Core i7-8700K Overclocked to 5.0GHz
Motherboard	ASUS ROG Strix Z370-F Gaming
Memory	Team Group Dark Hawk RGB 16GB (2x8GB) @ 3200MHz 16-18-18-38
Graphics Card	Varies
System Drive	Samsung 960 EVO 500GB
Games Drive	Kingston UV500 960GB
Chassis	Streacom ST-BC1 Bench
CPU Cooler	OCUK TechLabs 240mm AIO
Power Supply	Corsair AX1500i 80+ Titanium PSU
Operating System	Windows 10 1903

Comparison Graphics Cards List

• PNY RTX 2080 Ti XLR8 Gaming 11GB
• Nvidia RTX 2080 Ti Founders Edition (FE) 11GB
• Nvidia RTX 2080 SUPER Founders Edition (FE) 8GB
• Nvidia RTX 2070 SUPER Founders Edition (FE) 8GB
• Nvidia RTX 2060 SUPER Founders Edition (FE) 8GB
• Nvidia RTX 2060 Founders Edition (FE) 6GB
• Gigabyte GTX 1660 Ti OC 6G
• EVGA GTX 1660 SUPER SC Ultra 6GB
• Gigabyte GTX 1660 SUPER Gaming OC 6G
• Palit GTX 1660 SUPER GamingPro OC 6GB
• Gigabyte GTX 1660 Gaming OC 6G
• ASUS ROG Strix GTX 1650 SUPER 6GB
• Palit GTX 1650 StormX OC 4GB
• Nvidia GTX 1060 Founders Edition (FE) 6GB
• AMD RX 5700 XT 8GB
• ASRock RX 5700 XT Taichi X OC+ 8GB
• PowerColor RX 5700 XT Red Devil 8GB
• Sapphire RX 5700 XT Nitro+ 8GB
• ASUS RX 5700 TUF Gaming X3 8GB
• AMD RX 5700 8GB
• AMD Radeon VII 16GB
• AMD RX Vega 64 Air 8GB
• AMD RX Vega 56 8GB
• Sapphire RX 590 Nitro+ SE 8GB
• Sapphire RX 580 Pulse 8GB
• ASUS RX 570 ROG Strix Gaming OC 4GB

Software and Games List

• 3DMark Fire Strike & Fire Strike Ultra (DX11 Synthetic)
• 3DMark Time Spy (DX12 Synthetic)
• Battlefield V (DX12)
• The Division 2 (DX11)
• F1 2019 (DX12)
• Far Cry New Dawn (DX11)
• Gears 5 (DX12)
• Ghost Recon: Wildlands (DX11)
• Metro: Exodus (DX12)
• Middle Earth: Shadow of War (DX11)
• Shadow of the Tomb Raider (DX12)
• Total War: Three Kingdoms (DX11)

We run each benchmark/game three times, and present averages in our graphs.

3DMark Fire Strike is a showcase DirectX 11 benchmark designed for today’s high-performance gaming PCs. It is our [FutureMark’s] most ambitious and technical benchmark ever, featuring real-time graphics rendered with detail and complexity far beyond what is found in other benchmarks and games today.

 

Early indications are mixed when looking at 3DMark. The Fire Strike score seems to put the 8GB 5500 XT just below the GTX 1660, but in Time Spy it's scoring less than GTX 1650 SUPER.

Battlefield V is a first-person shooter video game developed by EA DICE and published by Electronic Arts. Battlefield V is the sixteenth instalment in the Battlefield series. It was released worldwide for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 4, and Xbox One on November 20, 2018. (Wikipedia).

We test using the Ultra preset, DX12 API.

Battlefield V kicks things off, and here the 5500 XT is averaging over 70FPS at 1080p. The ASRock Challenger holds a 3% performance advantage over GTX 1650 SUPER.

Tom Clancy's The Division 2 is an online action role-playing video game developed by Massive Entertainment and published by Ubisoft. The sequel to Tom Clancy's The Division (2016), it is set in a near-future Washington, D.C. in the aftermath of a smallpox pandemic, and follows an agent of the Strategic Homeland Division as they try to rebuild the city. (Wikipedia).

We test using the Ultra preset, but with V-Sync disabled, DX11 API.

 

It's another case of fine margins when we test The Division 2, but here the Challenger 8GB is 2% slower than 1650 SUPER at 1080p.

F1 2019 is a racing video game based on the 2019 Formula One and Formula 2 Championships. The game is developed and published by Codemasters and is the twelfth title in the Formula One series developed by the studio. The game was announced by Codemasters on 28 March 2019. (Wikipedia).

We test using the Ultra High preset, with TAA and 16x Anisotropic Filtering, DX12 API.

The performance difference between 5500 XT and 1650 SUPER widens slightly when testing F1 2019, with the ASRock 8GB card 5% slower than 1650 SUPER at 1080p.

Far Cry New Dawn is an action-adventure first-person shooter developed by Ubisoft Montreal and published by Ubisoft. The game is a spin-off of the Far Cry series and a narrative sequel to Far Cry 5. It was released for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 4 and Xbox One on February 15, 2019. (Wikipedia).

We test using the Ultra preset, with the  HD Textures pack, DX11 API.

The 8GB 5500 XT sits much closer to GTX 1660 in Far Cry New Dawn, and it holds a 6% performance advantage over the 4GB 5500 XT we've also tested today. This is one of the few games we tested where it seems 4GB VRAM is a limiting factor at 1080p.

Gears 5 is a third-person shooter video game developed by The Coalition and published by Xbox Game Studios for Microsoft Windows and Xbox One. It is the sixth instalment of the Gears of War series, and is the second Gears of War game not to be developed by Epic Games.

We test using the Ultra preset, with Best Animation Quality (instead of Auto), DX12 API.

Gears 5 shows hardly any difference between the two 5500 XT models, so memory is clearly not an issue here. That said, the Challenger is 4% faster than 1650 SUPER and it is again not too far behind the GTX 1660.

Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Wildlands is a tactical shooter video game developed by Ubisoft Paris and published by Ubisoft. It was released worldwide on March 7, 2017, for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 4 and Xbox One, as the tenth instalment in the Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon franchise and is the first game in the Ghost Recon series to feature an open world environment. (Wikipedia).

We test using the Very High preset, DX11 API.

Moving onto Ghost Recon Wildlands, here things swing back in Nvidia's favour, with the 1650 SUPER proving almost 4FPS faster at 1080p.

Metro Exodus is a first-person shooter video game developed by 4A Games and published by Deep Silver in 2019. It is the third instalment in the Metro video game series based on Dmitry Glukhovsky's novels, following the events of Metro 2033 and Metro: Last Light. (Wikipedia).

We test using the Ultra preset, but with Hairworks and Advanced PhysX turned off, DX12 API.

Metro Exodus sees the 5500 XT 8GB run the 1660 close, but Nvidia's card is still 5% faster at 1080p.

Middle-earth: Shadow of War is an action role-playing video game developed by Monolith Productions and published by Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment. It is the sequel to 2014’s Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor, and was released worldwide for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 4, and Xbox One on October 10, 2017. (Wikipedia).

We test using the Very High preset, DX11 API.

Middle Earth: Shadow of War is another title where we see the benefit of the 8GB VRAM, as the Challenger is 5% faster than the 4GB Sapphire Pulse. It's not a massive difference, but it enough to suggest the difference isn't purely because of the slight variation in the cards' clock speeds.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider is an action-adventure video game developed by Eidos Montréal in conjunction with Crystal Dynamics and published by Square Enix. It continues the narrative from the 2013 game Tomb Raider and its sequel Rise of the Tomb Raider, and is the twelfth mainline entry in the Tomb Raider series. The game released worldwide on 14 September 2018 for Microsoft Windows, PlayStation 4 and Xbox One. (Wikipedia).

We test using the Highest preset, with AA disabled, DX12 API.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider is the last title where we see memory limitations come to the fore – in this game, the 8GB 5500 XT is 8% faster than its 4GB counterpart at 1080p.

Total War: Three Kingdoms is a turn-based strategy real-time tactics video game developed by Creative Assembly and published by Sega. As the 12th mainline entry (the 13th entry) in the Total War series, the game was released for Microsoft Windows on May 23, 2019.

We test using the Ultra preset, DX11 API.

Testing ends on a positive note in Total War: Three Kingdoms, with a very healthy 10% performance advantage for the 5500 XT 8GB over the 1650 SUPER.

Here we present the average clock speed for each graphics card while running the 3DMark Fire Strike Ultra stress test for 30 minutes. We use GPU-Z to record the GPU core frequency during the Fire Strike Ultra runs. We calculate the average core frequency during the 30 minute run to present here.

The ASRock RX 5500 XT Challenger 8GB averaged 1828MHz under load, meaning it is 24MHz faster than the 4GB Sapphire Pulse model based on this testing. That is not much at all, so it means we can confidently say that where we saw performance margins of 5-8%, this must be due to the difference in VRAM capacity.

Typically, where memory limitation is not a factor, such a small difference in clock speed results in performance differences of just 1%, if not less. In the three games where the 8GB model outperformed the 4GB model by 5-8%, we have to attribute that to the memory capacities.

For our temperature testing, we measure the peak GPU core temperature under load, as well as the GPU temperature with the card idling on the desktop. A reading under load comes from running the 3DMark Fire Strike Ultra stress test for 30 minutes. An idle reading comes after leaving the system on the Windows desktop for 30 minutes.

As for the Challenger's thermal performance, it's a very impressive performer. Edge temperature peaked at just 64C, with junction temperature hitting 82C. Lastly, a memory temperature result of 70C is 2C cooler than the Sapphire Pulse model.

This thermal performance is reflected when looking at our thermal imaging camera, with hot spots in the card barely reaching 50C.

We take our noise measurements with the sound meter positioned 1 foot from the graphics card. I measured the noise floor to be 32 dBA, thus anything above this level can be attributed to the graphics cards. The power supply is passive for the entire power output range we tested all graphics cards in, while all CPU and system fans were disabled.

A reading under load comes from running the 3DMark Fire Strike Ultra stress test for 30 minutes. An idle reading comes after leaving the system on the Windows desktop for 30 minutes.

While the Challenger proved slightly cooler-running than the Sapphire Pulse 5500 XT, it is also slightly noisier. A result of 42dB is still good and this is certainly not a loud card, but it is more audible than the Pulse. Under load, we observed its fans spin up to around 2000rpm, or 52%.

We measure system-wide power draw from the wall while the card is sat idling at the Windows 10 desktop for 30 minutes. A reading under load comes from running the 3DMark Fire Strike Ultra stress test for 30 minutes.\

Total system power draw is just under 210W for this Challenger 8GB, a small increase over the Pulse 4GB model. In terms of AMD's own products, this marks a noticeable improvement over the RX 580 – total system power draw is down almost 70W, despite the 5500 XT 8GB also proving the faster card.

Then again, AMD still has work to do to catch Nvidia in this regard, with total system power draw roughly 55W less with 1650 SUPER, and 30W less with GTX 1660.

Just a quick note on overclocking – I was unable to properly test this due to time limitations and experiencing some erratic behaviour during what testing I was able to do. In essence, I found manually overclocking either the GPU core or memory for 5500 XT would occasionally result in higher performance in my testing, but then – without changing any settings – performance would often fall the next time I ran the same benchmark. This is something that will require further investigation in the weeks to come.

Despite the fact that RX 5500 series was announced over two months ago, we've had to wait until today to get our first look at the Navi 14-based RX 5500 XT. In this review, we have assessed the 8GB ASRock Challenger model, but if you want to see our review of the 4GB Sapphire Pulse, head over HERE.

If we look first at the card's overall performance, the RX 5500 XT GPU slots in very close to the GTX 1650 SUPER, which was itself launched just last month. Generally speaking the two cards are pretty much matched in terms of their 1080p gaming performance, with the 5500 XT 8GB edging ahead in six of the ten games we tested. Averaging out all of our 1080p performance testing, the Challenger 5500 XT is 1% faster on average than our ASUS ROG Strix 1650 SUPER.

To give a few more general comparisons, we see a 6% performance lead for the Challenger when compared to the ageing RX 580 8GB, but this new GPU is still 5% slower than RX 590 8GB and 8% slower than Nvidia's GTX 1660 (non-SUPER).

It's also going to be worth directly comparing this 8GB ASRock Challenger model to the Sapphire 4GB 5500 XT. By and large, the difference in memory capacity is inconsequential, as the Challenger is just 2% faster when averaged across all of our games. However, in three of the ten titles we tested, we saw performance differences between 5-8% at 1080p. This is a much larger gap between the two cards than what would be explained by the very small difference in operating clock speed, so it does suggest in some cases there is a benefit to having more than 4GB VRAM for 1080p gaming.

Of course, this argument can easily go both ways. Some may say a 8% performance gap – at most – is not very significant at all, and they would be happy saving the £20 and buying a 4GB model. On the other hand, there is an argument to be made for ‘future-proofing' your purchase, as if AAA games today are benefiting from more than 4GB VRAM, who knows what the situation will be like in a year or two.

In terms of the Challenger card itself, it's worth touching on its thermal and noise performance. ASRock has done a good job here, as the card peaked at just 64C for its edge temperature, while junction temperature barely exceeded 80C. While the card does produce a bit more noise than the 4GB Sapphire model, it is still far from loud.

Additionally, AMD has significantly improved its power efficiency with the Navi architecture. Compared to RX 580, the 5500 XT is both faster and also pulls significantly less power at the wall. That said, Nvidia is still the clear winner in this department, with both the 1650 SUPER and GTX 1660 pulling less power than the 5500 XT.

Drawing everything together, here our conclusion does differ slightly for the 8GB SKU. In my view, the 4GB model is an easier recommendation as it's priced very close to 1650 SUPER and offers essentially the same level of performance. For the 8GB 5500 XT, however, pricing starts at £179.99 – putting it on the same level as some GTX 1660 SKUs currently available.

That is a battle where the 5500 XT 8GB is going to struggle. While performance does get close in some scenarios (four of our ten titles tested have the 5500 XT within 5% of the GTX 1660 at 1080p), the 1660 is still the overall faster card at 1080p and it is also less power-hungry. You could make an argument for the 8GB VRAM capacity coming in handy down the line, but 6GB for 1080p gaming is still plenty and we can't really say if 8GB is going to prove beneficial over 6GB within a reasonable timeframe.

In my view, the 5500 XT 8GB model does need to be a bit cheaper. If both 5500 XT SKUs dropped in price by £20, things would look really good for AMD – and it is quite possible we will see price cuts in the not-too-distant future as existing RX 500-series inventory is finally exhausted. As of right now, the 4GB RX 5500 XT does have a stronger market position than its 8GB counterpart.

The RX 5500 XT will be available from Overclockers UK, with prices starting at £179.99 for the 8GB model. We will update this review with a buy link for the ASRock Challenger model as soon as we have one.

Discuss on our Facebook page HERE.

Pros

• Solid 1080p gaming performance.
• 8GB VRAM does help in some situations, and will likely prove beneficial over 4GB in the long run.
• Cool-running card.
• Relatively quiet.
• Increased power efficiency when compared to RX 580.

Cons

• 8GB model at £180 is going to struggle against GTX 1660.
• 8GB VRAM doesn't make a huge difference for 1080p gaming today.
• Still less efficient than GTX 1650 SUPER/1660.

KitGuru says: RX 5500 XT 8GB is a solid 1080p gaming graphics card, and we can see the benefit to having more than 4GB VRAM down the line. That said, at £180 this GPU faces stiff competition from GTX 1660.

Become a Patron!