Sunday, August 9, 2026

Has the RX 6000 reached "GOAT" status for me?

 So...I did a tier left of GPU generations a while back, and perhaps the most controversial pick for me was the RX 6000 series. It was borderline S (GOAT) tier, but I knocked it down to A because it wasn't all roses. However, after looking at the current GPU market, the loss of cheap RX series cards is being felt, and I feel like we've regressed. The market was literally better 3-4 years ago when I bought my last GPU, and people today are getting a rawer deal than they were back then. I shouldnt have to recommend Arc cards for entire price ranges because nothing else was available, and that RX 6600 series sweet spot is just...gone. The closest thing is the 7600, which is still sitting above its MSRP, and for a while there was hovering around $300. I just can't help but feel like people really had a much better deal just a few years ago, and that maybe it's time to consider the RX 6000 series as "GOAT" status.

History

So, one of the reasons I didn't make RX 6000 GOAT status was because of its history. It didn't start out as a series of cheap cards that revolutionized the market, but a series of overly expensive ones that tried to compete directly with Nvidia but totally failed. The series launched in 2020-2021 to compete with the RTX 3000 series. Unlike the 5000 series that came before, it had modern features like ray tracing, newer API support, etc., which makes a big deal with compatibility. It didn't quite reach feature parity with nvidia as they had better ray tracing/upscaling, but it was still new enough to "just work" and not have the issues of the previous series. But yeah, price was, it literally wasnt any better than the RX 5000 series, which were an okay value for their time, but lacked the modern features the 6000 series had. It also started out where the 6600/6600 XT were the lowest end cards priced at $330 and $380 respectively, trying to compete directly with the RTX 3060/3060 Ti, despite being inferior. Not that prices mattered because YAY! COVID AND CRYPTO SCAMS! So for much of its early life, it was always sold out, always at an insanely high price, and not available. 

The real magic, and why I love the series so much, is because in late 2022, as the market finally returned to "normal" the price of this particular series of cards crashed faster and harder than the others, leading to a renaissance in PC gaming. The market had been stagnant and even regressed since the 1000/1600/400/500/5000 series of cards in the late 2010s, and us old 2016-2017 era buyers had ZERO upgrade options for the same price since then. While that is part of what makes the Nvidia 1000 series GOAT status for me, having a huge price/performance bump and not being challenged in price/performance significantly after that, it also has been terrible for the market as the value structure did not move either, trapping people on those older cards as they aged. But with these cards reaching as low as 55-60% of their original MSRPs, they ended up defining the market in the post COVID era, with the subsequent RX 7000 series and RTX 4000 series following the general price structure that the 6000 series set. 

The series was sold well into 2025 until the release of the RX 9000 series finally obsoleted it. Those $200-220 RX 6600s stopped looking as good when the RX 9060 XT 8 GB was $270 and offered significantly more performance, not to mention nvidia options like the RTX 5050 and 5060 being available at $250-300. Since then, the supply of 6000 series cards has dried up, and then RAMpocalypse has made things unaffordable again, with the current value of cards being similar or worse than what the RX 6000 series offered in its hey day. If anything, doing my "what card should people buy now", the loss of the 6000 series is acutely felt, with many of the deals being equivalent at best and often worse than the RX 6000 series offered. 

Given that, if I bought now to replace my nearly 4 year old card, I'd be replacing the RX 6650 XT which I paid $230 for, with a 7600 for $260 or a 5050 for $300, it's time to consider elevating the  RX 6000 series to GOAT status, since this is getting ridiculous. 4 years with barely any price/performance boosts in the market and the card still going strong? I expected to replace this thing by the end of 2027, but it looks like there's no point until the RAMpocalypse ends. With that said, this card is on track to last longer than my venerated GTX 1060, or other GOATed beasts like the 8800 GT in its day. 

Discussing the RX 6000 product stack and why it offered better value than today's offerings

Looking at the offerings today, it's pretty obvious why I feel nostalgic for this series now. It really has "you dont know you're in the good times until you've left them" energy. While not all cards were winners and some were flat out stinkers, given the  state of the current market, even the bad ones are getting rehabilitated to some degree.

RX 6400- $130

So...the RX 6400 sucked. Everyone knew it sucked. It was a cut down 6500 XT and that sucked too. It was severely cut down vs the RX 6600 series, only being around 1/3 as powerful, offering 4 GB VRAM, and having 4 PCIE lanes, which severely crippled performance in older systems. BUT....would I have recommended it over an Arc A380? Of course I would have. Honestly, while it was kind of a crap card and a crap value, well....in a sea of GTX 1030 tier ewaste, it still stood out. And it was a serviceable bare minimum graphics card at the time. 

RX 6500 XT- $160

Once again, this was always a bad product. It launched at the height of COVID price gouging for $200 and was the 5th coming of the RX 480...a card from 2016 that had 8 GB VRAM for $250. This one came with 4, said to be good because "crypto people wouldnt want it, only gamers", but yeah, basically, this was an RDNA2 version of a 480/580/590/RX 5500 XT. And it was worse actually because again, only 4 GB, and 4 PCI lanes, which crippled it. At the time, I probably would've said go for a 1650 or 1650 super, but....in the modern era, NONE of these cards are sold at the appropriate price point, so again, you cant even get a card new like this at a decent price any more. I've seen these being sold at $200+, which is ridiculous. Speaking of ridiculous...

RX 6600- $190-210

So...for years after the Pascal/Polaris era of 2016-2017, I've long castigated the market for lacking a $200 "every man's card". Everyone wants to pursue the high end market, but we need a card for mainstream gamers, stuff that costs $200-300. I always respected the 480/580 cards, and even though I went 1060 instead, I always felt like cards like this were good for gamers. We need cheap, available cards. Well, post COVID, this became "it". The RX 6600 was a blistering 75% or so faster than the RX 6500 XT, and came with 8 GB VRAM. It became THE affordable budget card for years to come, with its value not really being beaten by anything. While gamers still flocked to nvidia and paid out the butt for it, I considered the 6600 to be the new 480 of our time at the time. Only reason I didn't buy one was because I bought the next one on the list.

Currently if you wanna pay this much, you get an Arc A580, which is roughly as powerful while having way more drawbacks, or the RTX 3050 6 GB which is...well....kinda pathetic for the money. 

RX 6600/6650 XT- $230-250

This is MY card. A bit faster than the RX 6600, but still mostly the same thing. About 20% better, costs about 20% more. Similar performance to the newer RX 7600, which is currently going for $260. But yeah, same level of power, lower price. Imagine telling myself that 4 years later you'd get worse price/performance. I cant say I wouldnt believe it, given I just lived through the COVID pandemic and crypto boom, but it would be an OH GOD I BETTER BUY NOW moment. I might've even upgraded up to a 6700 XT to make sure I got something more futureproof. 

RX 6700- $310

The RX 6700 was an awkward card and not widely loved by the community. The big thing is that it was barely faster than a 6650 XT.....but cost like $60-80 more. You get 10 GB VRAM with this one, but oh wow big deal. Really, it wasn't a huge huge deal. And it was always awkwardly priced and an awkward value.

RX 6700/6750 XT- $350

This was the one to get if you wanted a more premium but still budget friendly card. At $350, it competed favorably against the RTX 3060 at the time, and had 12 GB VRAM. It was kind of the big step up from the 6600 or 6650 XT style cards. But it was also a bit of an awkward value too IMO. It was only 25-33% better give or take than the 6650 XT, while costing upward of 50% more, and the big draw was the VRAM. As it has aged, it feels like it falls in a weird place. RDNA2 is showing its age a bit and outside of VRAM constrained situations it really doesnt come off as significantly better than the 8 GB cards below it, but when VRAM does become an issue, it can shoot up to 50% better. I feel like the architecture is aging faster than the actual VRAM or lack thereof, especially with 8 GB still being mainstream and probably remaining mainstream until we're finally done with RAMpocalypse. 

Vs the 5060 today....well the 5060 is a little more powerful in terms of raw power but the 8 GB VRAM is oof. So not really a significantly better card than this. 

RX 6800- $480

So....at this point we're out of the "low end" like full stop IMO, but the RX 6800 was a pretty decent value too for the money. It had 16 GB RAM and offers similar price/performance to a 16 GB RX 9060 XT today. Which is actually kinda sad, and another reason why I'm writing this. We really havent moved from late 2022 pricing here. 

For a while this was available down around the $400 mark, competing directly with the 7700 XT, with the 7700 XT having a newer architecture, but the 6800 having more VRAM. Again, I actually wonder if the way things are going if RDNA2 will actually fully need to utilize its VRAM in its effective life time. It seems like with RAMpocalypse that's gonna become a major constraint where other issues like driver support and an aging architecture AMD is not enthusiastic about supporting (they tried to cut support for it, only for the community to lose their crap because hey, it's still perfectly modern and these things were being sold well into 2025...) are going to become issues first. Still, the price/performance is there.

RX 6800 XT- $600

So this is where the RX 6000 series falls off vs modern cards. Modern $600 cards like the RTX 5070 and RX 9070 are a bit more powerful than this, but it did provide a decent value in the day. Most 6000 series cards kicked nvidia in the rear enough to force them to compete better.

RX 6900/6950 XT- $700

Same here. By the time 6000 series became affordable, Nvidia was already rolling out the 7000 series, with the 7900 XT/XTX variants being the top tier premium option, but the 6900/6950 XT were made cheaper in response. While the 9070 XT offers a full 35% more performance for the same money today, for 4 years ago...not fricking bad at all. And again, we're out of the more budgety price range.

RX 6000 vs GTX 1000 series

All thing considered, the pricing structure is very reminiscient of the venerated GTX 1000 series of GPUs. You had the "50" series (RX 6400/6500 XT) for like $150ish, and while not a good value and very anemic for their time, hey, beats a 1030, and probably a better product than an Arc A380. The RX 6600 and 6650 XT were the GTX 1060 equivalents at the $200-250 price range and they are the GOATs of the modern era for affordable GPUs. The RX 6600 is sorely missed from the market, although if it still existed it would probably be closer to what the 6650 XT used to be price wise. 

The RX 6700 was an awkward product, but the 6700 XT was priced a bit lower than a 1070, and offered a similar value arguably, being a bit more futureproof but probably going to hit architectural limits the way pascal did before it's fully required for modern gaming. Might last a bit longer than the "60" cards but it arguably shouldnt matter much. 

The 6800 cards are similar to a 1070 ti/1080 price wise and offer similar value arguably. Once again, probably will hit architectural or driver related limits rather than be flat out obsoleted. 

The 6900 XT/6950 XT were like the modern 1080 ti price wise and are aging similarly well.

However, there is one thing that holds me back from just flat out GOATing the 6000 series in the same way, and that is AMD's software support. Assuming AMD supports these cards, they can be considered GOAT status, equalling or even surpassing the likes of the GTX 8000 series or 1000 series respectively. Those cards were viable for a solid 6-8 years in part due to them aging well and in part due to drivers. The 6000 series is aging similarly well, BUT, the driver support remains a possible issue. AMD is not nvidia. While for a while, through the GCN (HD 7000 series - RX 500 series) era, AMD did have a level of "fine wine" driven by long driver support, AMD seems a lot less willing to offer similar longevity to RDNA2, despite them selling along side RDNA3 cards for most of their lifespans. Theyve already attempted to move RDNA2 (6000 series) to the legacy driver branch and are slow to release new features for the series like FSR 4, because they dont have the same fancy AI architecture that is driving up the price of modern cards. As a result, performance is starting to lag in some newer titles, although it will at least RUN them. Still, if AMD drops support for RDNA2 sooner than later, we could get a situation where these cards die not because the specs are actually obsolete, but because the software is just not supported. 

It's hard to say. Assuming AMD offers at least basic driver support, they should work. To my knowledge the only real benefit of the newer architectures is newer versions of upscaling that look better than older ones, but as long as games support FSR 2/3, things should be fine. 

In all fairness, Nvidia 1000 had a similar issue. While AMD's FSR greatly expanded these cards' lifespans by giving it some basic form of upscaling, Nvidia largely abandoned new features like ray tracing and DLSS on them. And ultimately, while the GTX 1000 series still had driver support until 2025, AMD support is already winding down with AMD focusing their primary improvements toward the 7000 and 9000 series, while putting the 6000 series in a legacy branch. While new games will still run on the 6000 series, as I see it, it's only a matter of time before AMD pulls the plug entirely. 

It's kind of sad because literally the only thing newer architectures offer to my knowledge is on board AI capabilities that allow better upscaling, but if I'm fine playing with older upscaling (I mean, I hate upscaling but as a card ages I'd rather have it than not have it), then I'd rather get at least basic support there. So the future of the 6000 series and how it continues to age is in question. In raw specs, the power is there, and the architecture is powerful enough to run newer games, again, the real question is whether AMD will offer extended software support to maintain compatibility over the long term. Right now it promised to do so, but it's AMD and they dont have the best track record at doing this. I've seen AMD users get burned over time as well. Heck, my last AMD card, the HD 5850, suffered a similar issue as AMD just dropped support for the 5000/6000 series in 2015 despite the higher end models still being capable. The GTX 400 series, on the other hand, was supported until 2018. 

So....GOAT or not?

Honestly? I think it's the only thing in the modern era that qualifies. Here's the options. 

RTX 2000 series- prohibitively expensive, cheaper models aged poorly, but expensive ones are still viable today.

RTX 3000 series- Also expensive. Became cheaper like the 6000 series did, but not to the same extent and didn't offer similar value IMO. 

RTX 4000 series- At least it had the 4060. That one was decent. But honestly, at this point, I might as well consider the RX 7000 series, which has aged similarly well.

RTX 5000 series- Between 8 GB VRAM on the low end, and RAMpocalypse, not counting on it, if we eventually get a $200 16 GB card if RAM prices crash, I'll consider it, otherwise I consider it mid at best. 

RX 5000 series- It had value, but lacked long term support due to poor drivers and a poor feature set, also topped out at the 5700 XT.

RX 6000 series- started out poorly as indicated but is borderline GOAT at this point due to affordable cards that, in theory, have the power to have long life spans. Being the prime AMD series between the crypto boom and RAMpocalypse and the fact that 8 GB cards are going to have their lifespans expanded makes me hopeful it will become GOAT status, but it could easily be sabotaged by AMD's competence.

RX 7000 series- Also theoretically in the running, similar price/performance as 6000 series and longer driver support, but it being newer automatically means less overall lifespan. I expect this to be a strong series, but an average one. 

RX 9000 series- Started out strong but RAMpocalypse has reduced its price/performance to not a whole lot better than the 6000 series, despite being several years newer. 

All in all, the 6000 series is probably the best series of the modern generation. Not only are the cards seemingly aging relatively well so far, still offering awesome value years later, but honestly, they also power a lot of interesting devices that also contribute to their longevity. They're the technology behind the PS5 and Xbox Series X. They power the steam deck with a IGP 2/3 as powerful as the entry level RX 6400. It's in everything. Idk, again, if anything is "GOAT" in the modern era, it's this. But yeah, it's still like borderline A/S tier for me. Ultimately it depends on software support and how long 8 GB VRAM is supported, if the 6600 can still run new titles in 2028, on low, with a decent level of performance, I think it's time to say, yeah, it's officially GOAT. But it's kinda early to tell, and it's kind of tenuous. 

No comments:

Post a Comment