AMD RX 6950 XT, 6750 XT & 6650 XT Review ft. Sapphire

1. Introduction2. Sapphire RX 6650 XT Nitro+3. Sapphire RX 6750 XT Nitro+4. Sapphire RX 6950 XT Nitro+ Pure5. Testing Methodology6. 3DMark Fire Strike & Time Spy7. 3DMark DirectX Raytracing8. Assassin's Creed Valhalla9. Cyberpunk 207710. Dying Light 211. F1 202112. Far Cry 613. Forza Horizon 514. God of War15. Horizon Zero Dawn16. Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy17. Red Dead Redemption 218. Resident Evil Village19. Total War: Warhammer III20. Performance Summary (12-Game Average)21. Ray Tracing: Cyberpunk 207722. Ray Tracing: Metro Exodus Enhanced Edition23. Ray Tracing: Resident Evil: Village24. Clock Speed25. GPU Temperatures26. Acoustics27. Power Draw: 1080p28. Power Draw: 1440p29. Power Draw: 2160p (4K)30. Performance per Watt: 1080p31. Performance per Watt: 1440p32. Performance per Watt: 2160p (4K)33. Total System Power Draw34. Overclocking35. Closing Thoughts36. View All Pages

With more and more rumours pointing to AMD's next-gen GPU architecture, one might consider today's launch the last stand for RDNA 2. AMD has released the RX 6950 XT, 6750 XT and 6650 XT, using the same Navi 21, Navi 22 and Navi 23 GPUs that we are accustomed to, but bumping the frequencies and memory speeds to net extra performance. It's very much a refresh, but just how much difference has it made?

Well, to get right into the performance summary, over our 12 games we found the RX 6650 XT to run 6% faster than the RX 6600 XT, the RX 6750 XT is 8% faster than the RX 6700 XT, while the RX 6950 XT proved 10-12% faster than the RX 6900 XT depending on the resolution tested.

Just to re-iterate as well, these numbers don't take into account the fact that we tested three heavily factory overclocked models from the the Sapphire Nitro+ series, while our comparison cards were all tested at reference clocks. That means, if we were testing reference models against reference models, I would expect smaller margins than what is shown here – the Nitro+ Pure RX 6950 XT has an 11% factory overclock for instance, which would definitely boost performance by a decent chunk compared to a reference card.

Additionally, the fact that the makeup of each GPU has not changed, and there's no extra RT cores, means that ray tracing performance is also just a small improvement over the original models thanks to that extra clock speed. Nvidia still has the edge in terms of its ray tracing, but AMD has now closed the gap ever so slightly due to the extra clock speed on offer.

One clear downside to the decision to increase GPU and memory frequency is the corresponding increase in power draw. This has also been exacerbated by the fact that our factory overclocked models have higher still power targets compared to AMD's reference 6X50 cards, but there's no getting around the fact that overall efficiency is worse with these new cards. The RX 6650 XT is about 10% less efficient than the RX 6600 XT for instance, while at 4K, the RX 6950 XT's performance per Watt is 19% lower than that of the vanilla RX 6900 XT.

With that in mind, it is actually a credit to Sapphire that the three cards we tested today all proved to run cool and quiet, despite the increased power limits. Noise levels are a particular highlight, and I would say these are some of the quietest graphics card I have ever reviewed, with noise levels hovering around the 32dBa mark. If you do end up picking up one of these Nitro+ models, I'd say they are among the best AMD-based AIB cards I have ever tested.

Still, whether or not you should actually buy a 6X50 series graphics card all depends on one thing – pricing. While AMD told us that the RX 6650 XT is going to be a direct replacement for the RX 6600 XT, the RX 6950 XT and RX 6750 XT will co-exist with the RX 6700 XT and RX 6900 XT, just at slightly higher prices. Because the only real difference between these new cards and the original GPUs is clock speed and memory frequency, it becomes pretty easy to judge whether or not it is worth paying a premium for the refreshed series.

That could be the main sticking point for this series of cards. The RX 6700 XT for instance, can be found, right now, starting at £499.99 on Overclockers UK. Sapphire also told us that the MSRP for the RX 6750 XT Nitro+ model is looking like it will hit £599.99. So that's a 20% price increase, despite just an 8% performance boost.

Plain and simply then, if you are in the market for a new GPU right now, it is definitely worth considering the RX 6X50 series… provided pricing is sensible, ideally within 5-or-so percent of the original models. But if the price is 10, 15, even 20% higher than the originals, it really is not worth splashing out on.

You will be able to see the range of AMD RX 6X50 series GPUs, including these Sapphire models, from Overclockers UK. Sapphire communicated the following MSRPs to us: NITRO+ 6950XT PURE – £1169.99, NITRO+ 6750XT – £599.99, NITRO+ 6650 – £429.99.

Discuss on our Facebook page HERE.

AMD RX 6650 XT:

Pros

• Direct replacement for RX 6600 XT.
• Faster than RTX 3060.
• Most efficient of the RX 6X50 series cards.

Cons

• Not much faster than the RX 6600 XT.
• Not worth paying a premium for over the 6600 XT if they are both available.

AMD RX 6750 XT:

Pros

• Faster than the RX 6700 XT.
• Competitive with the RTX 3070.

Cons

• Can't justify a 20% price premium over the RX 6700 XT.
• Least efficient of all RX 6X50 series.

AMD RX 6950 XT:

Pros

• Decent uplift over the 6900 XT, at least in the case of the Nitro+ Pure model.
• Fastest GPU for 1080p and even 1440p gaming.

Cons

• Big increase in power draw.
• Efficiency is worse compared to the RX 6900 XT.
• Needs to be priced competitively to make sense.

KitGuru says: AMD's RX 6X50 refresh isn't wildly exciting, we just hope the pricing will end up making sense. Credit to Sapphire however for making three terrific aftermarket cards.

Become a Patron!