The rise of blockchain has led to the switch from using Direct X 11 to 12.0, released on December 10th, 2018. It includes various improvements that will bring new life into older games and give newer ones more power than ever before. These days graphics cards are becoming less important, as game engines themselves have become able to handle demanding visuals with ease. This means that if you want a gaming PC built for PUBG in 2020 but don’t care about graphics card specs you could probably get away with just building one yourself so long as it’s powerful enough for 4K resolution at 60fps or higher.,
The “best graphics card for pubg mobile” is a question that has been asked over and over again. There are 3 best graphics cards for 2020, but they all have different pros and cons.
In terms of gaming performance, cooling power, price, and more, we reviewed and selected the best graphics cards (GPUs) for PUBG (Playerunknown’s Battlegrounds).
Above you can see the rankings as well as the test results, and below you can find additional information about PUBG as well as detailed reviews on each Graphics card.
PUBG Strategy Guide
When Playerunknown’s Battlegrounds was initially published as an early-access version on March 23, 2016, no one could have predicted that the game would shortly after and throughout the early-access period gain a massive following. PUBG, or PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds, now reigns supreme on Steam, having dethroned long-time favorites like Counter-Strike: Global Offensive and DOTA 2.
This popularity is understandable while playing: the roughly 64 km2 landscapes, the random location of weapons and items, as well as the large number of players and their starting places, all contribute to a high level of dynamism from round to round.
Every game is distinctive in some way; you receive various weapon picks and upgrades, and you encounter other players who have varied equipment as well. You may play carefully or aggressively, hunt down or hide from your opponents, and all of your strategies will work.
As you combat other individuals and teams, you’ll need to collaborate with one another, assign responsibilities and assignments, and strategically place your squad.
As a result, the game idea is both thrilling and engaging. But, technically speaking, PUBG isn’t a revolutionary new concept; rather, it’s a progression of old-school free-for-all and team-based tactical shooters with last-man-standing win conditions and a little open-world flavor.
The Battle Royale genre, which includes PUBG, Fortnite, and others who are credited with inventing the genre in theory, has existed in a very similar form in the past – for example, the Arma 3 mod that spawned PUBG.
PUBG, on the other hand, has been a huge hit, and it is expected to be followed by a slew of imitators in the near future. Steam is already swamped with blatant PUBG clones, and a number of games, including Epic’s Fortnite, the hero shooter Paladins, Ark: Survival of the Fittest, H1Z1: King of the Hill, Minecraft: The Hunger Games, and Grand Theft Auto Online: Motor Wars, are getting Battle Royale features or spin-offs.
With PUBG’s continued success, it’s no surprise that others want to cash in on the lucrative trend – yet a saturation of the player population might occur quickly:
If, in addition to hundreds of unfinished early access survival sandboxes and MOBA hero-shooter hybrids (the last two trends running concurrently), just as many, if not more, unfinished but hardly distinguishable Battle Royale shooters compete for player attention, a few isolated successful top titles are likely to emerge.
Because PUBG is not only one of the – if not the – founders of the Battle Royale genre, but it also has a significant length of development time behind it, it may have an edge and even be able to grow on it.
New content has been released, and Playerunknown’s Battlegrounds, of course, has a significant lead in terms of player counts and public awareness.
The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super is ranked first.
- 4K, WQHD, and Full HD gaming at high speeds
- Several Ports (3 display ports, 1 HDMI, 1 USB type C)
- Very quiet + excellent cooling
After the RTX 2070 Super and RTX 2060 Super, Nvidia introduces the Geforce RTX 2080 Super, the Turing series’ third and, for the time being, final super model.
The 2080 Super competes with the RTX 2080, which is now out of stock owing to the debut of the RTX 2070 Super. The obviously more costly RTX 2080 Ti remains the quickest graphics card for gamers in the comparison 2080 Super vs. RTX 2080 Ti.
On July 23, 2019, the RTX 2080 Super will be released and sold simultaneously with the publication of this review. The 2080 Super Founders Edition reference card and several 2080 Super custom designs from different manufacturers are available to interested parties.
The successor with super addition uses the same TU104 graphics hardware as the regular Geforce RTX 2080, but has extra shader and texture units as well as faster clock rates. The following are the most significant changes between the RTX 2080 Super and the RTX 2080:
- 1.650 MHz (Boost 1.815 MHz) instead of 1.515 MHz chip clock rates (Boost 1.710 MHz)
- VRAM clock increased to 15.5 GHz instead of 14 GHz.
- There are 3,072 shader and texture units instead of 2,944 and 184.
- TDP increased to 250 watts instead of 215 watts (Custom Designs) or 225 watts (Standard Designs) (Founders Edition)
The Geforce RTX 2080 Super boasts a better raw performance than the regular RTX 2080, which, along with the increased chip and video memory clock speeds, allows it to run games like PUBG a few percentage points quicker.
In comparison to the previous 2080 type, the RTX 2080 Super boosts the amount of RT and Tensor cores important for raytracing and DLSS edge smoothing, as with other Super models. However, owing to the minor increase, you should not expect a major change in performance in the particular application case.
The Geforce RTX 2080 Super comes in second place behind the 2080 Ti in our graphics card ranking, and is on average 8% faster than the old RTX 2080 Founders Edition, which Nvidia delivered overclocked ex works in contrast to the new Super variant – custom designs of the RTX 2080 Super should be correspondingly faster.
The Geforce RTX 2080 Ti undoubtedly reigns supreme in terms of performance, but the RTX 2080 Super is its greatest opponent to yet. In WQHD resolution, the 2080 Ti has a ten percent advantage over the 2080 Super, while in UHD, the overclocked 2080 Ti Founders Edition may outperform the 2080 Super by 17 percent.
In the RTX 2070 super vs. RTX 2080 super comparison, the 2080 super may claim a comfortable projection of about 15% – but at a cost of roughly 40%.
The Geforce RTX 2080 Super is a highly fast graphics card that can effortlessly show PUBG in UHD quality with maximum details and often exceed 60 frames per second.
In our gaming benchmarks, the Geforce RTX 2080 Super Founders Edition clocks at roughly 1,900 MHz on average. As a result, as a reference model, it marginally outperforms its already overclocked predecessor: The RTX 2080 FE has an average clock rate of about 1,860 MHz, according to our calculations.
Noise levels, temperature, and power usage are all factors to consider.
The cooling architecture of the Geforce RTX 2080 Super Founders Edition is unsurprising. The two reference cards (Super and Non-Super) are similar in size, feature two slots, and employ two 90 mm fans for axial cooling.
The RTX 2080 Super’s fans, like the two previous Super models, the RTX 2070 Super and RTX 2060 Super, revolve at a faster rate than their predecessors.
The fan rotates at 1,500 revolutions per minute in idle mode and 2,020 revolutions per minute under load. Nvidia could wish to use it to offset the somewhat increased TDP (Thermal Design Power).
As a result, both in Windows mode and in PUBG, the RTX 2080 Super FE is a little louder than the regular RTX 2080 FE. While the fans are reasonably quiet in idle mode (39.6 decibels), they become rather audible under load settings (42.6 decibels).
In addition, the chip is kept cold at all times. With our open test setup, we recorded a temperature of 75 degrees in PUBG and 32 degrees in idle.
Despite the TDP of 250 watts, the power consumption rises relatively marginally. The overclocked predecessor measured 318 watts. 323 watts is required by the new RTX 2080 Super Founders Edition (entire test system without TFT).
Nvidia’s powerful trio is completed with the Geforce RTX 2080 Super in this test. The emphasis is once again on better performance at a cheaper price, since the 2080 Super only has the highest effective GDDR6 clock rate to date (15.5 GHz) aside from the marginally improved tech specifications.
The RTX 2080 Founders Edition outperformed the RTX 2080, but it still behind the Geforce RTX 2080 Ti, which only shines at UHD resolution and is still the fastest (and most costly) gaming graphics card.
In comparison to the RTX 2070 super, the RTX 2080 super can sustain a projection of around 15%, while also being almost 40% more costly (at a noncommittal price suggestion of $850) – an obvious premium per fps.
Overall, Nvidia improves the performance of the old 2080 with the new RTX 2080 Super while simultaneously lowering the price; however, the added value for buyers appears to be greater with the 2080 Super than with the 2070 Super and 2060 Super, which is why the RTX 2080 Super is ranked first on the Best Graphics cards for PUBG.
Second place goes to the PowerColor Red Devil Radeon RX 5700 XT.
- In PUBG, you have a good gaming performance (Best Quality settings)
- The most affordable price
- While gaming, you must be completely silent.
- Power consumption is a little high.
With the Navi-10 top model Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil, PowerColor is going all out with a gigantic cooler, new RGB lights, and two distinct BIOS versions.
The model has the potential to be the greatest bespoke navigation graphics card, even on paper. It’s also reflected in the pricing.
AMD has effectively advanced its own graphics card line into the next generation with the Radeon RX 5700 and Radeon RX 5700 XT. RDNA performs much better than the seasoned GCN.
One element, though, hasn’t changed: the loud reference cooler. And there have been a lot of people waiting for the so-called personalized designs.
On the Radeon RX 5700 XT, PowerColor adds a newly built cooler. This is roughly 2.5 slots high and is 30.5 cm in length. In addition, he stands at a respectable 13.6 cm in height. As a result, the cooler has a lot of room and capacity, which the maker makes excellent use of.
As a result, there are two distinct aluminum heat sinks built in, one of which is just over the Navi-10-GPU. Five heatpipes with a diameter of 6 mm join the two.
Three axial fans with a diameter of 85 mm are fitted to provide the required fresh air, and they turn off at low temperatures. The backplate completes the cooling system.
For strong overclocking results, the Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil depends on a specially constructed PCB with a 10-phase power supply and two eight-pin power connections. The components should be able to withstand up to 300 watts of power without issue. The PCB is much shorter than the cooler, at 24 cm.
On the Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil, PowerColor employs RGB lighting for the first time. Other features of the cooler, apart from the Red Devil insignia on the side, are also lit.
The RGB effect isn’t especially impressive, but it’s on pace with the solutions offered by most other board partners, such as Asus’ Strix series. The “Devil Zone” tool may be used to customize the illumination in a variety of ways.
An HDMI 2.0b output and three DisplayPorts 1.4 outputs may be used to control monitors (with DSC). The slot bracket has the moniker “Red Devil” imprinted on it. That looks nice, but there’s a catch: PowerColor’s name is punched out the incorrect way around, meaning it’ll be mounted upside down in a regular ATX chassis.
The manufacturer has already committed a blunder: the side branding on the Radeon RX 480 Red Devil was turned upside down.
On the Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil, PowerColor installs two separate BIOS versions, each with distinct differences. The OC-Bios is turned on by default. A big switch on the PCB may also be used to choose the “Silent BIOS.”
The OC-BIOS allows the GPU to function with up to 225 Watt. In addition, the fan control has been tweaked to promote low temperature development. However, with the Silent BIOS, only 185 watts are permitted.
Furthermore, the hardware is allowed to get warmer, resulting in much slower fan operation. As the set of measurements on the next page demonstrate, the impacts should not be overlooked.
It’s more difficult than ever to speak about fixed clock rates with navigation systems. As a result, PowerColor’s specs should not be regarded as fixed. The manufacturer claims that the applied frequencies should, in any event, be significantly higher than the reference.
The base clock is 1.770 MHz, while the PUBG clock is 1.905 MHz and the highest turbo is 2.010 MHz, according to PowerColor. This is a 165 MHz, 155 MHz, and 105 MHz increase over the reference design, respectively. The standard 7.000 MHz is used to run the 8 GB GDDR6 memory.
And how does the PowerColor Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil compare to the Radeon RX 5700 XT in reference design, Asus Radeon RX 5700 XT Strix OC, Sapphire Radeon RX 5700 XT Pulse, and XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT THICC2? This is summarized in the table below.
Since Adrenalin 19.7.3, AMD has made certain adjustments to the fan management, which affects all variants of the Radeon RX 5700 and Radeon RX 5700 XT. The modification is shown in custom graphics cards by an excessively high fan speed under load.
However, with a changed BIOS, the fan control may be adjusted regardless of the driver used. This issue was seen in the test sample of the PowerColor Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil.
However, the manufacturer released a customized BIOS before the launch that changes the behavior of the fan controller independently of the driver. All commercially available cards will have the modified BIOS loaded.
The PowerColor Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil can attain a high clock rate because to its high GPU power of 225 watts.
When the OC BIOS is enabled and the Asus Radeon RX 5700 XT Strix OC is used, the red devil doesn’t give anything away, which isn’t unexpected given the similar GPU power.
In most games, there is a tie, with the Asus graphic card clocking slightly faster on occasion. In games, the clock rate is therefore between 1.866 MHz and 2.009 MHz.
Those that turn on the quiet BIOS will be without a clock: The graphic card now operates at 1.671 MHz to 1.871 MHz and clocks at the same frequency as the reference card.
This is clear since the GPU power in this situation is exactly the same, at 185 watts apiece. Thus, the quiet BIOS and the XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT THICC2, whose Navi 10 may similarly utilize up to 185 watts, have only minor variations.
Clock speeds reduce by roughly 100 to 200 MHz when compared to OC-BIOS.
The PowerColor Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil is 4 percent quicker than the reference design when using the factory OC-BIOS.
As a result, although having the same GPU power of 225 watts, the graphic card must “admit defeat” by about 1% to the Asus Radeon RX 5700 XT Strix OC.
The PowerColor model is so 7% behind a GeForce RTX 2070 Super, while the following generation’s “cheap consumers” are trounced by 3 to 5%.
The maximum GPU power is reduced to 185 watts with the quiet BIOS, and the frames per second are reduced by 4%.
Despite having the same GPU power as the other partner cards, there isn’t enough power to stay up with AMD’s reference architecture. The regular card is just around 1% quicker.
The difference between the OC and quiet BIOS in PUBG is between 4 and 6%. This is dependent on how much processing power the graphics card needs for the 3D engine in use, such as in PUBG.
Noise levels and air conditioning
The OC BIOS is geared for great performance and low temperatures, however the PowerColor Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil’s noise level suffers as a result.
With 42.5 decibels, the graphic card is quieter than the standard design, but the “volume pairing” with the Asus Radeon RX 5700 XT Strix OC results in a product that draws a lot of attention when gaming.
The Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil, on the other hand, may be practically silent.
The graphics card changes with the Quiet BIOS, allowing the fans to spin at 1,370 RPM instead of 2,000 RPM. The Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil is hardly audible when gaming, with just 34 dB remaining — you have to listen very carefully to hear the 3D accelerator.
The recorded result is 2 decibels lower than the Radeon RX 5700 XT Strix OC with Quiet BIOS, although the reference and other custom versions of the current generation evaluated so far are much louder.
The PowerColor Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil works well in a Silent PC with the Silent BIOS. In this performance level, there are few comparable quiet graphics cards for PUBG, and none from AMD.
The PowerColor Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil graphics card is an excellent choice for PUBG. During gaming, the Navi-10 GPU barely warms up to 72 °C with the default BIOS.
This implies that the 3D accelerator stays cooler than the other Radeon RX 5700 XT models while also providing superior performance. The junction temperature in PowerColor is a maximum of 96 °C, but the “memory sensor” – which, according to Igor’s Lab’s study, either doesn’t have the exact value or doesn’t reflect it correctly – indicates 80 °C.
For a Navi-10-XT product, these are also record values. Because the competition’s GPU becomes warmer, this relativizes the equal volume level in contrast to the Asus Strix OC.
The quiet BIOS keeps the temps down as well. With 77°C, the GPU achieves a 5°C higher temperature.
With 94 °C, the junction temperature is 2 °C cooler, but the memory sensor records an 8 °C increase with 88 °C. The temperature numbers are still excellent even with the quiet BIOS.
Consumption of energy
During gaming, the PowerColor Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil consumes an average of 251 watts. This is 16 watts less than the Asus Radeon RX 5700 XT Strix OC and 41 watts more than the standard design. With the quiet BIOS, the energy consumption is lowered by 48 watts to 203 watts.
That’s 7 watts less than the reference card, which is in line with the clock speeds being much lower. The PUBG graphics card functions in the same area as the other constellations, with a GPU power of 185 watts, 201 and 207 watts, respectively.
Because of the greater power consumption and only marginally improved performance, the OC BIOS has a worse performance per watt ratio. The reference architecture from AMD provides 16 percent greater frames per watt.
The situation changes with the quiet BIOS: the PowerColor graphics card for PUBG now performs 3 percent more effectively. On the Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil, the difference in efficiency between the two BIOS versions is 18%.
The PowerColor Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil uses a very high 17 watts of power on the Windows desktop. With 8 watts less, the reference design is fulfilled.
The same 17 watts are delivered by the Asus Radeon RX 5700 XT Strix OC. This demonstrates that a power supply designed for overclocking has drawbacks in terms of idle usage.
Overclocking the PowerColor Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil is difficult. The GPU only supports a bonus of 30 MHz, and any more beyond that causes the test pattern to crash.
The default clock voltage curve of the WattMan is 2.069 MHz at 1.198 volts. At the same voltage, a maximum of 2,150 MHz (+81 MHz) is feasible. The memory can be overclocked from 600 MHz to 7,600 MHz with ease.
The fact that the OC BIOS improves game performance by 4 to 5% is mostly due to the increased power limit.
The Navi-10-GPU operates at a frequency of 2,010 to 2,030 MHz in games. The cooler is unaffected by the increased power usage. The temperature rises just little, and the noise level rises only slightly.
The PowerColor Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil isn’t ideal, but it’s a fantastic PUBG graphics card when used with the quiet BIOS. The PowerColor variant thus gives the same performance as AMD’s reference card while operating silently in PUBG.
In this situation, the Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil is also quieter than the Asus Radeon RX 5700 XT Strix OC with the Quiet BIOS, making it the quietest navigation custom card ever released, perfect for a silent PC without limitations.
There’s also the possibility of further manual upgrades or hot summer days since it still cools better.
You may utilize the factory active OC-BIOS if you desire additional performance. Then there’s a 4% increase in FPS over the standard design. The capacity is the same as the Strix OC, and the speed is even quicker, but the temperatures are lower.
The OC BIOS, on the other hand, will be too noisy for most purchasers, particularly because the benefits are mostly of a metrological nature — if custom Navi 10 design experiments have revealed anything so far, it’s that the GPU can’t be overclocked much even with substantial extra consumption.
The built-in cooler, on the other hand, is adequate for the Red Devil to establish a happy medium with an appropriate fan control. Anyone who enjoys tinkering with electronics may easily make the OC-BIOS quieter.
Aside from the redesigned cooler, the Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil with RGB lighting is a “first time” for PowerColor. This isn’t as good as Gigabyte’s Aorus solution, but if you’re looking for a PUB solution that’s light on the graphics card, this is a good option.
During testing, the graphic card showed no significant flaws. The upside down Red Devil insignia on the slot bracket is at worst annoyance-inducing. This isn’t something that should happen to a seasoned graphics card maker.
Nonetheless, PowerColor offers the Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil, which is the most well-rounded of all the custom versions we’ve seen so far.
The graphics card for PUBG understands how to delight, especially with the quiet BIOS. The fixed price of $450, which is very affordable when compared to the pricing of other rivals previously stated, should also be praised.
The PowerColor Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil is well worth the additional $50 above the standard design, Sapphire charging so much for a product that is plainly inferior. And Asus is almost certainly asking for more than $100 extra for the Strix OC.
The Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil is a strong candidate for the title of “best custom design of the Radeon RX 5700 XT” based on its performance, which is why it’s ranked second in our list of the top Graphics Cards for PUBG.
The Radeon RX 5700 XT Red Devil also took first place in our ‘Best Price’ category, so if you’re looking for a good graphics card at a reasonable price, this is the one to acquire.
AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT is ranked third.
- Graphics Card for PUBG for Beginners
- a low cost
- While gaming, you must be completely silent.
- Not Recommended for 4K Gaming or Virtual Reality
The Radeon RX 5600 XT is a slimmed-down Radeon RX 5700 (which is, in turn, a trimmed RX 5700 XT), with which AMD hopes to target the $300 pricing range. As a result, no new GPU is required.
All RX-5000 GPUs are based on AMD’s RDNA architecture, which was released in July 2019 and is manufactured by TSMC in Taiwan. They employ the most modern method of mass producing graphics chips, the 7nm FinFET process with DUV lithography.
The first graphic chips with extreme ultraviolet (EUV) exposure, which will have a higher packing density and performance per square millimeter, will be available in 2020.
For the first time in recent times, AMD broke with the strategy “XT branding Equals fully active chip” with the Radeon RX 5500 XT. The Radeon RX 5600 XT not only maintains this dubious moniker, but goes even farther afield: The memory subsystem and the core are both reduced.
The Radeon RX 5700 is the hardware foundation, and it is built on AMD’s biggest RDNA chip to yet, Navi 10. Both the Radeon RX 5700 and the Radeon RX 5600 XT retain 36 of the 40 physically available processing units.
AMD limits the clock speeds to prevent the smaller model from functioning as quickly as the larger one: the RX 5600 XT is at least entitled to roughly 1.4 GHz, whereas RX-5700 cards often run in the 1.7 GHz region. There’s a lot more to say about clock rates and sheer power.
The Radeon RX 5600 XT was created for the “ultimate 1080p experience,” according to AMD. This includes not just Triple A titles such as PUBG and Borderlands 3, but also popular e-sports titles such as Fortnite, Apex Legends, Overwatch, and others, which are graphically demanding.
The RX 5600 XT is a new addition to AMD’s range, with the RX 5500 XT and RX 5700 still available — the former for entry-level 1080p gaming and the latter for WQHD gaming.
The benchmarks will reveal if the RX 5600 XT fills a true void or merely sits in the middle of the pack.
The loss in the storage subsystem is much more unpleasant than the GPU: AMD disables 64 of the 256 data routes to the GDDR6 memory, leaving the Radeon RX 5600 XT with just 192 bits.
Furthermore, instead of the 14 GT/s (“7,000 MHz”) utilized in many other models, the memory performance is just 12 GT/s (12 GT/s or “6,000 MHz”). As a consequence, the memory transfer rate is 35.7 percent lower than the RX 5700, at 288 instead of 448 GBytes per second.
As a result, the Radeon RX 5600 XT’s ratio of gigaflops to gigabytes tends to be a memory limit, which is particularly noteworthy for overclockers.
Let’s come to the true benefit of this trimming: the reduction in memory capacity. A graphics card can’t have any quantity of memory — at least not without negative consequences. It is customary to install one GiByte per memory channel, for example.
Using the Radeon RX 5700 (XT) as an example, with four channels (4 64 = 256 bit), the overall capacity is 8 GiBytes, symmetrically outfitted with 8 1 GiByte GDDR6 RAM.
The entire price is therefore calculated from the width of the interface, which may easily be increased. Technically, 16-gigabyte RX-5700 graphics cards are conceivable, but they would be prohibitively costly.
The RX 5500 XT already comes with double the memory of the 8 GiByte model. The Radeon RX 5600 (XT), on the other hand, is only available with 6 GiByte. This not only seems to be in need of explanation, but it also has an impact on PUBG performance.
In terms of memory allocation, symmetry is clear and practical, but it isn’t the only choice. Graphics memory may also be deployed in asymmetrical configurations, with differing speeds per module.
The seven-year-old Geforce GTX 660 (Ti) shows how to fill a 1.5-gigabyte memory subsystem with 2-gigabyte memory.
Chart board.jpg AMD Radeon RX 5500 Spider
As a result, the memory modules are not all connected to the controllers evenly, but are instead separated into groups (clamshell mode). 1.5 GiByte operate at full speed; however, when a bigger capacity is required, one GiByte shares the existing data channels, halving the transfer rate.
Even while this is significantly quicker than shifting to the system main memory (particularly with contemporary GDDR6 RAM), it is still a viable backup option. As a result, it’s not unexpected that this concept is seldom employed.
Note that the Geforce GTX 970 is not identical to the GTX 660. (Ti). Nvidia has disabled a cache block corresponding to the rearmost memory controller in the GTX 970 for the first and so far only time.
In exchange, the controllers are all active, but they can’t all function at maximum speed at the same time — see the recent post for additional information.
Because Navi/RDNA is a one-button operation, AMD wishes to take a new approach to clock rates, one that is comparable to Nvidia’s in terms of fundamental features: Because it is never attained in actuality, the fundamental clock is irrelevant.
The base clock is the frequency that is maintained even under the worst of circumstances (high temperature and load). The “Game Clock,” initially presented with Navi and characterized by Nvidia as “Typical Boost,” is more relevant: the average achieved over a broad variety of games, resolutions, and copies of the particular graphic card model.
On the basis of the available RX-5000 samples, Techtestreport can validate that AMD’s Game Clock is a credible benchmark for projected clock rates while gaming.
In most cases, it is higher than indicated. Aside from that, there’s the maximum GPU boost clock, which is a little higher but never sustained at full load.
What transpired behind the scenes right before the introduction of the RX-5600-XT is fascinating. While the first batch of RX-5600-XT graphics cards for PUBG had already been delivered to dealers and samples had been sent to the press, news of a price decrease for the Geforce RTX 2060 surfaced.
The Nvidia variant is now available for roughly $350, making it comparable to the Radeon RX 5600 XT. At the very least, a distinction must be drawn between the reference design/minimum performance and the board partners’ bespoke designs.
Consumption of energy
With an average power consumption of 150 watts, the Radeon RX 5600 XT is a mid-range graphics card for PUBG (Total Board Power). Without factory overclocking, standard models may use this setting.
The GPU has a maximum power budget of 135 watts, with the remaining 15 watts going to the graphics memory, voltage conversion, ventilation, and other tiny components on the board.
All of our measurements are based on partner designs since AMD hasn’t released a reference design for the Radeon RX 5600 XT.
While the loudness of the RX-5600-XT test cards is the topic of the PCGH market overviews and varies widely from manufacturer to manufacturer and model to model, we do at least evaluate the actual power consumption obtained by the test cards.
Only in this manner can energy efficiency claims be made. The findings are impressive: at idle, the XT models are quite cost-effective.
The current RX-5600-XT designs, like the RX 5500 XT before them, do not completely use their power limits in most circumstances, resulting in good efficiency under gaming stress.
One complaint remains: AMD has yet to provide a universally functional low-power multi-monitoring mode. As soon as multiple distinct displays establish contact, the RX 5700 (XT) and RX 5500 (XT), as well as the RX 5600 XT, function with full memory clock.
A 2160p60 LCD connected through display port and a 1080p60 screen connected via HDMI resulted in a full memory clock and needlessly high power usage in our circumstance.
The RX 5600 XT, on the other hand, aids AMD’s choice to operate just a 12 GT/s memory frequency to produce substantially more cost-effective outcomes than its larger brothers.
PUBG Gaming Performance
Enough with the theory; let’s get down to business with the beloved beams. How does the current RDNA architecture of the Radeon RX 5600 XT perform in gaming?
With the PCGH graphics card course 2020, we’ll find out. We’ll concentrate on the quantity of pixels in the benchmarks since the Radeon RX 5600 XT is officially a Full-HD graphics card for PUBG (1,920 x 1,080 pixels). We also provide results in WQHD (2,560 x 1,440 pixels).
Of course, comparator cards should not be overlooked, so we’ll round up the test field with PUBG’s predecessor graphics cards, as well as different Nvidia and older versions.
Finally, the PCGH performance index awaits you, which, as expected, displays reference cards side by side. There is just one thing to keep in mind: we provide total performance rather than specific indices for each of the four resolutions.
The Radeon RX 5600 XT is, as predicted, considerably closer to the Radeon RX 5700 than the RX 5500 XT – anything other would be unexpected given the hardware foundation.
The Radeon RX 5600 XT is roughly 20% slower than the RX 5700 and may therefore compete with the Geforce GTX 1660 Super, GTX 1660 Ti, or RTX 2060 depending on the game.
Overall, Techtestreport recommends using any 6-GiByte graphics card if you don’t want to sacrifice texture details now and want to enjoy trouble-free gaming in the near future.
Our advice is to put the extra cash into a Radeon RX 5700 or a Geforce RTX 2060 Super.
The PCGH performance index is obtained by combining all performance data and allowing each Fps value to flow into the computation in equal amounts.
The following ranking results apply to the Radeon RX 5600 XT. Overall, the new AMD PUBG graphics card performs almost identically to the Radeon RX Vega 56 or Geforce GTX 1660 Ti:
With the Radeon RX 5600 XT, AMD hopes to appeal to consumers of the popular Geforce GTX 1060, among others. The benchmarks demonstrate that, like with other models in this range, there is a significant performance boost can be obtained here.
If you have a GTX 970/980, R9 290(X), or RX 470/570, buying a Radeon RX 5600 XT will give you a substantial performance boost.
The first graphics card of 2020, AMD’s Radeon RX 5600 XT, elicits conflicting reactions. On the surface, everything seems to be in order: the model is 17 percent slower on average than the Radeon RX 5700, but it is cheaper and consumes less energy.
The efficiency of the graphics card for PUBG, which is rated at 150 watts but often uses less, is even higher.
However, upon closer inspection, AMD must be accused of a lack of idea, which does not paint the new model in the best light, particularly when compared to the well-established RX 5700.
Or the last-minute modification in the specification for bespoke designs, which will now be permitted to function far more energy-hungry and quicker — as long as the maker has the proper firmware and cooling design in place.
Because it is uncertain, at least at first, which models will be loaded with which firmwares, if there will be more changes over time, and how long the transition phase will run, this move leads to uncontrolled market expansion.
Only the Radeon RX 5600 XT’s minimum performance is clear: if you purchase a cheap model under $300, you can expect a GPU energy budget of 135 watts, which corresponds to the performance between the RTX 2060 and GTX 1660 Super indicated below.
Beyond that, the Radeon RX 5600 XT should have a wider spread than any other presently available graphics card. It’s feasible that highly bred variations of the Radeon RX 5700 will be able to compete with basic versions of the Radeon RX 5700.
While this creates a vibrant market with a wide range of species, a greater baseline performance would have been more clear to buyers from the outset.
Another topic up for debate is storage capacity. AMD has been the scrooge for a long time, and their PUBG graphics cards have more than ample capacity.
This, together with excellent driver support, contributes significantly to the fact that Radeon graphics cards for PUBG are typically regarded as long-lasting.
AMD has long made 8 GiByte standard, and if it isn’t, the user may pick between 4 and 8 GiByte.
AMD has thrown this once-dominant edge overboard with the Radeon RX 5600 XT, and now finds itself in the same chilly water as Nvidia.
Since 2016, their Geforce midrange has had 6 GByte of memory and has had to make due with this capacity up to and including the RTX 2060. (non-super).
Increased texture and shadow quality is well recognized to have a significant impact on whether or not we find a game like PUBG appealing.
It’s less generally known that these nuances are practically free as long as the graphics card has enough capacity, which the Radeon 5600 XT has, which is why it’s ranked third among the top Graphics cards for PUBG.
The “best nvidia graphics card for laptop” is the graphics card that will be most suitable for playing PUBG. The Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060, RTX 2070, and RTX 2080 are three of the best cards in 2020.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which GPU is best for PUBG?
A: The best GPU for playing PUBG is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070.
Is RTX 3060 Good PUBG?
A: RTX 3060 is a great graphics card for PUBG. It has excellent performance and good value for the price!
- best graphics card for laptop 2020
- best graphics card for laptop gaming
- best graphics card for photoshop 2020
- best graphics card for laptop 2021
- best graphics card for pubg mobile emulator