**Hands-On Testing with AMD Radeon RX 5700 and RX 5700 XT**

In this article, we'll delve into our hands-on testing experience with the AMD Radeon RX 5700 and RX 5700 XT graphics cards. We'll cover their performance in various applications, including video editing software like Handbrake and DaVinci Resolve.

**Performance Comparison with NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080**

We started by testing the RX 5700 against the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti in several scenarios. The tests revealed that the RX 5700 was about three minutes slower on most applications, which may not be a significant difference for some users. However, in our opinion, performance is crucial, and this slight delay might be noticeable in fast work environments. Nevertheless, we were impressed with the overall performance of the RX 5700.

**Handbrake Testing**

We also tested Handbrake on both cards to see how they handled various video encoding tasks. Our results showed that the RX 5700 detected NVIDIA's V-Cache technology by default, whereas the RX 5700 XT did not detect AMD's V-Cache support and required manual configuration. The RX 5700 XT still managed to render videos within one minute of each other, with the RX 5700 being slightly slower.

However, we observed some issues with the Handbrake encoder on both cards. On the RX 5700, the Hevc GPU-accelerated encoder was not optimized properly, leading to poor performance. We also noticed that the RX 5700 XT's video encoder was not utilizing its hardware features effectively, resulting in lower frame rates compared to the RX 2080 Ti.

**DaVinci Resolve Performance**

In DaVinci Resolve, we saw similar results. The RX 5700 and RX 5700 XT were able to render videos within a short timeframe, but the RX 5700 was about three minutes slower than the RX 2080 Ti on most tests. We also observed that the RX 5700's video encoder was not working properly, causing errors when attempting to use it.

**3D Rendering and Gaming Performance**

Unfortunately, we couldn't test the RX 5700 for 3D rendering or gaming performance due to our equipment limitations. However, we recommend checking out Gamer's Next's reviews for more information on these aspects of the cards' performance.

**Conclusion**

In conclusion, our hands-on testing with the AMD Radeon RX 5700 and RX 5700 XT has revealed some promising results. While they may not be able to match the performance of their NVIDIA counterparts in all applications, they offer an excellent value proposition for content creators on a budget. We recommend waiting for partner cards with improved cooling systems and optimizing their performance using software tweaks.

**Budget-Friendly Options**

For those building a budget-oriented video production rig or any type of computer, these cards are an excellent choice. Their performance per dollar is significantly better than that of the RX 2080 Ti, making them a great option for those who want to stay within budget while still delivering impressive results.

**Acknowledgments and Future Updates**

We'd like to thank AMD for their interest in improving the performance of their video encoders. The company has reached out to us, acknowledging some issues with their current implementation and expressing their commitment to resolving them. We'll keep you updated on any progress made by AMD in addressing these concerns.

**Recording Equipment and Setup**

As an aside, we want to mention that our recording setup was a bit different from what we normally use. Due to the amount of data being processed, it was easier to set up our camera here rather than using our usual equipment. We apologize for any inconsistency in our video quality compared to our usual recordings.

**Like and Subscribe**

Finally, if you enjoyed this article, please like and subscribe to our channel for more tech-related content. Your support means a lot to us, and we appreciate your interest in staying up-to-date with the latest developments in the world of technology.

"WEBVTTKind: captionsLanguage: entests of course are focused on content creation here specifically video production and video encoding with davinci resolve adobe premiere pro and handbrake and these results are pretty weird i will say that so a big thing i wanted to put or wanted to test was just to see whether it was really faster because that seemed to be the case with some of the tests and to reach past the limitations of my initial test run and i used a consistent project for both my premiere pro and my davinci resolve testing which was about seven minutes of clips of varying resolutions and frame rates scaled up to match the 4k timeline and rendered out to a variety of different codecs which have different cpu and gpu utilization not expecting the gpu to really stay on par but wanted to throw it in for the results and these are very different graphics cards the rtx 2080 is a 600 to 700 graphics card sometimes 550. the rx 5700 is a 350 graphics card that's a significant price difference and if you're looking at just pure video editing performance for everything i could test the performance difference is negligible enough that i can't in good faith say that it's worth spending an extra 250 to 300 to get nvidia's card unless you're doing some specific stuff which i'll hopefully mention before this video is over getting into the data itself i reran the original test project within premiere and resolve that i use for the launch date coverage because i had an exact same configuration just swapping the gpus and i only had a 2080 and the 5700 available but jumping through the codex looking at dnxhr the 50 air in premiere the 5700 was one second faster than the 2080 same thing jumping to h264 the 5700 was more was about eight seconds faster than the 2080. cineform again one second slower and prores in premiere pro it was seven seconds slower and same thing looking at resolve like we're seeing either neck and neck or exact same render times between the two graphics cards which is pretty bonkers but again there are limitations to this project because there's not a whole lot of effects or anything like that it is purely scaling and cutting and re-encoding the footage to match the different frame rates and codecs and things like that which does require quite a bit of work versus just a normal same resolution same frame rate transcode but it's a limited project for the limited scope of my original test run so i brought in the most ridiculous project that i've ever made in resolve to date which was my x264 slow is not worth it video which is it was a 30 minute video a lot of effects a lot of red giant universe transitions and effects which cause my 1080 ti which is what i primarily edit on to constantly throw gpu out of memory errors and weird errors like that which again i ran into on the 2080 here but not never did i see any of these errors on the 5700 so that's interesting but i brought in this project which took five hours of troubleshooting rendering when i first rendered it on my 2080 threw it on these two cards and rendering it out again it's a 30 minute project it's not the same project so time scales are different but between the two cards it took two sec two to three minutes longer on the 2080 to render than the 5700 for dnxhr it took the 5700 about four minutes longer to render on cineform than the 2080 and then it took about five minutes longer to render to h.264 native on the 5700 than the 2080. so again one codec it's faster on the 5700 two more it's slower but again by a matter of a couple minutes and then switching over to gpu hevc encoding and it's about 10 minutes faster on the 5700 so again trading blows or right exactly the same which is ridiculous for the price point now they have both have the same amount of vram but their compute power should still be different and i did notice as i'm going through i'm checking task manager to see the different like bits of the graphics card that reports are being used for this and trying to figure out some reasoning because my original explanation was i'm seeing copy be used a whole lot which i do still see here especially for codecs like cineform which is potentially pcie 4.0 benefiting this card over the pcie 3.0 rtx cards i'm not entirely sure that's the case also for this kind of cuda usage the 2080 reports all of this on the 3d category of the render usage on the graphics card and task manager and while some of that is being used on the 5700 they have a whole separate one called compute which is being heavily utilized here as well and the video encode and decode engines aren't being used a ton but that's probably because the amount of time per frame being spent is more on the edit the effects side than the actual encode and decode side and so that's part of why this is coming into play so again we're not super clear as to why just yet but it is still keeping up with a much more expensive graphics card for this purpose before we go any further i did want to clarify that yes there are still some gpu graphics driver bugs on the 5700 with both resolve and premiere which tells me that it is a driver bug not a specific program bug and this is something that could still be fixed as they can be patched up and this happens a lot especially with launch products resolve does now reflect the actual gpu it recognizes it as a 5700 but specific random files are still playing back with that weird line off by one error and the same thing with certain effects and while theoretically that muddies the results a bit the actual playback frame rate is the same as it is for similar files that isn't having the error and the same render speed still seems to be the same and it's still keeping up the same with the 2080. so i'm treating it as it's not displaying it to me properly but it's still you know the processing power of the footage is still the same even if it just looks different than it's supposed to because it's still treating the frames in the same manner that's my reasoning here i will return to this if needed although this was like a week's worth of testing so maybe not quite as detailed but i will return to this once this is fixed i do bring this up however because i especially encountered this with certain blackmagic raw files which i'll cover soon specifically using the noise reduction filter which is a gpu heavy process i wanted to throw into the testing that really screwed up the playback on the 5700 and this is something that that kind of playback was reported by puget systems back in march for the radeon 7 and it wasn't clarified if this was actually fixed so if this was never fixed then that is a problem if it was fixed then this is just a common thing for amd and they'll patch it up and if slight software issues are the only limiting factor between choosing this and the 2080 wait a little bit and then choose this once they fix it because your money is still best spent here from what i can tell going into premiere pro i chose a project for this which was about my hevc compression scripts that i just posted last week and i rendered it out on both graphics cards as well and between the 5700 and the 2080 in everything except h.264 the 2080 was a couple minutes faster and an h.264 the 5700 was a couple minutes faster and for all of these i turned on max render quality in premiere which uses the gpu a little bit to help clean up scaling so that is here now something i did want to note as well is some of these render times are actually inflated for example the bigger codecs versus h.264 you have a trade-off of these bigger bloatier codecs like dna dnxhr cineform and prores are actually easier and quicker to encode to at the you know result of file size bloat however that speed increase is offset by how long it takes to write that final file to disk and so you can have a render finish and then it take another five to ten minutes to actually finish because it's writing all of that data and i caught some of that in the screen recordings here and this is why i do recommend people were questioning that in my video with wendell why i recommend nvme drives for your cache and scratch and render because if you're using these codecs as your preview codecs and as your cache codecs and things like that you need that speed like this is maxing out nvme drives so a boring sata drive or even a hard drive is really going to struggle in these cases especially for writing those final files now puget systems also just released their own premiere pro benchmark during the time of me making this video and so i couldn't get the full 59.94 fps and 29.94 or 97 fps 2.5 hour benchmark to run it kept throwing errors and canceling out but i did get the longer the one hour uh 29.97 fps benchmark going and the 2080 in this benchmark does beat the 5700 by like a few points to maybe like 10 points in some of the different categories here however they are again very close and when you consider the price difference if you're talking value per performance it's really close and i would imagine the 5700 xt would be ever so slightly closer to the 2080 here so this was pretty cool and this does a whole lot of things like multi-cam playback and warp stab stabilization and a whole lot of stuff that i don't traditionally test because i just test things that are naturally in my project and workflow now i also used msi afterburner because that's the only real way actually msi afterburner and fraps which was the only real way i could test this but it doesn't entirely give accurate results but it gives enough accurate enough results that i used it to test uh playback frame rate playback or playback frame rate of the x264 slow is not worth it this big giant project that killed my main computer basically and see how it actually handled the playback real time playing through the timeline at a full 4k 60 timeline resolution and the 5700 averaged 42.2 fps the 2080 averaged 44.03 fps neck and neck within margin of error and some of the some of the holdups both for the render of this project and the playback is those red giant transitions where the frame rate drops to zero point five to zero to one frame per second and it has to catch up and so at per second difference is not worth it same thing for that hevc project that i rendered out in premiere pro i tested the playback and 5700 was an average of 29.887 2080 was 29.787 so 0.1 fps difference with the 5700 technically in the lead and the the min and max frame rates for both those graphics cards were exactly the same so it had no problem playing that back i then created another test project using exclusively black magic raw and cinema dng raw files from my ursa mini pro and the black magic pocket cinema camera 4k that i tested for review to see how it handled a raw codec that i know was very cpu and gpu optimized and played it back and so i just threw a bunch of clips in the timeline added some luts and some color grades and then for some specifically dark ones i also added some noise reduction to three clips and that was super gpu intensive and played them back and measured the frame rate and for the 1080p timeline the 2080 had a two and a half point lead in average frame rate the min and max and 0.1 percent lows are honestly going to be all over the place and not the most useful numbers but you know 52.7 frames per second versus 55.1 on the 2080 and then same thing at a full 4k timeline preview res the timeline was set to 4k in both of these but the monitoring resolution was lowered to 1080p or 4k at 4k the 2080 had 54.9 frames per second average playback and the 5700 was at 52.4 so again two to three frame per second difference i rendered out that project and the 5700 was about three minutes slower on pretty much all of the tests so hebc cineform h264 dnxhr it's about three minutes lower that's not a significant amount of time but if you need it in a fast work environment perhaps that matters to you but for the most part like the performance is so much of a percent of the way there that it's totally fine in my opinion now lastly i wanted to test handbrake i had some requests for this and i do think something is wrong here as it detects nvinc in my on my rtx 2080 by default whereas on the 5700 it doesn't detect amd vce support and i have to manually go in and check it in the advanced settings and relaunch the software and even when it's encoding it's not really using any of the video encode integer engine percentage and i even click through the different video in code engines and it's not really using it a whole lot and so at 4k and this was actually over the network too so it was network limited as well but both of them were they rendered within one minute of each other and the 5700 was actually faster however at 1080p the 5700 took three times longer than the 2080 to render and this is at the exact same settings using the hevc gpu accelerated encoder but in any of my other testings of the encoders and in my video editor renders at hevc the 5700 outperforms the 2080. here like i said i don't think it's working right i still don't think a lot of programs recognize the encoder and in none of these tests can i use the h.264 encoder on the graphics card for resolve or anything like that because it just errors out and doesn't work and i think something fishy is still happening here because at a 1080p video the 2080 was rendering at an average of like 228 frames per second whereas the 5700 was averaging like 89 frames per second and so it took 30 minutes instead of 10 but again it wasn't really using any of the horsepower so i wouldn't get the 5704 handbrake which has been requested a couple times if that's what you're going for but i also think this is something that could be fixed and i've covered the encoder issues extensively at this point i have a couple other videos about it amd has reached out and they are interested in trying to make this work and so i will update once they have resolved this if that happens but wanted to put the data out there for now with that caveat so overall can i back up my claims which was meant to be kind of a jokey title but that the 5700 is faster than a 2080 ti yeah kinda especially if we're considering performance per dollar by a long shot the 5700 and the 5700 xt are fantastic choices if you're getting into content creation and don't immediately immediately need their video encoders because they've got some work to do there but they seem to be really wanting to actually do that and in fact the general manager of radeon even reached out to me on twitter and mentioned in a overclocking live stream i forgot whose stream it was i have it linked in the video description that as soon as they saw that video on reddit they like put the team to the test to really get working on it so pretty good choices i wouldn't get the founders edition cards with the blower coolers i'm not going to say that it got hot enough that you could cook food on it although it felt that way but the shroud on it got hot enough that i could not comfortably touch it for any extended period of time and the card got it was just so ridiculously loud and hot however the actual core temperature measured in hardware info wasn't it was like 67 degrees you know it was cooler than my 1080 ti usually gets but the actual physical card itself got ridiculously hot and i would definitely wait for partner cards but otherwise like these are really good choices if you're building like um budget oriented you know comparatively for new parts video production rig of any sorts so i haven't i don't have the ability to test for 3d rendering or cat or anything like that i think gamer's next has covered that a little bit but just wanted to cover this thank you so much for watching hit the like button if you enjoyed subscribe for more tech education thank you for your support on all of these videos and i do promise i usually record with a different camera entirely uh i don't usually do all of my videos at this setup but when i'm looking at so much data and things like that it's just easier to set up here at the moment and so i haven't touched my normal recording setup for a few weeks nowtests of course are focused on content creation here specifically video production and video encoding with davinci resolve adobe premiere pro and handbrake and these results are pretty weird i will say that so a big thing i wanted to put or wanted to test was just to see whether it was really faster because that seemed to be the case with some of the tests and to reach past the limitations of my initial test run and i used a consistent project for both my premiere pro and my davinci resolve testing which was about seven minutes of clips of varying resolutions and frame rates scaled up to match the 4k timeline and rendered out to a variety of different codecs which have different cpu and gpu utilization not expecting the gpu to really stay on par but wanted to throw it in for the results and these are very different graphics cards the rtx 2080 is a 600 to 700 graphics card sometimes 550. the rx 5700 is a 350 graphics card that's a significant price difference and if you're looking at just pure video editing performance for everything i could test the performance difference is negligible enough that i can't in good faith say that it's worth spending an extra 250 to 300 to get nvidia's card unless you're doing some specific stuff which i'll hopefully mention before this video is over getting into the data itself i reran the original test project within premiere and resolve that i use for the launch date coverage because i had an exact same configuration just swapping the gpus and i only had a 2080 and the 5700 available but jumping through the codex looking at dnxhr the 50 air in premiere the 5700 was one second faster than the 2080 same thing jumping to h264 the 5700 was more was about eight seconds faster than the 2080. cineform again one second slower and prores in premiere pro it was seven seconds slower and same thing looking at resolve like we're seeing either neck and neck or exact same render times between the two graphics cards which is pretty bonkers but again there are limitations to this project because there's not a whole lot of effects or anything like that it is purely scaling and cutting and re-encoding the footage to match the different frame rates and codecs and things like that which does require quite a bit of work versus just a normal same resolution same frame rate transcode but it's a limited project for the limited scope of my original test run so i brought in the most ridiculous project that i've ever made in resolve to date which was my x264 slow is not worth it video which is it was a 30 minute video a lot of effects a lot of red giant universe transitions and effects which cause my 1080 ti which is what i primarily edit on to constantly throw gpu out of memory errors and weird errors like that which again i ran into on the 2080 here but not never did i see any of these errors on the 5700 so that's interesting but i brought in this project which took five hours of troubleshooting rendering when i first rendered it on my 2080 threw it on these two cards and rendering it out again it's a 30 minute project it's not the same project so time scales are different but between the two cards it took two sec two to three minutes longer on the 2080 to render than the 5700 for dnxhr it took the 5700 about four minutes longer to render on cineform than the 2080 and then it took about five minutes longer to render to h.264 native on the 5700 than the 2080. so again one codec it's faster on the 5700 two more it's slower but again by a matter of a couple minutes and then switching over to gpu hevc encoding and it's about 10 minutes faster on the 5700 so again trading blows or right exactly the same which is ridiculous for the price point now they have both have the same amount of vram but their compute power should still be different and i did notice as i'm going through i'm checking task manager to see the different like bits of the graphics card that reports are being used for this and trying to figure out some reasoning because my original explanation was i'm seeing copy be used a whole lot which i do still see here especially for codecs like cineform which is potentially pcie 4.0 benefiting this card over the pcie 3.0 rtx cards i'm not entirely sure that's the case also for this kind of cuda usage the 2080 reports all of this on the 3d category of the render usage on the graphics card and task manager and while some of that is being used on the 5700 they have a whole separate one called compute which is being heavily utilized here as well and the video encode and decode engines aren't being used a ton but that's probably because the amount of time per frame being spent is more on the edit the effects side than the actual encode and decode side and so that's part of why this is coming into play so again we're not super clear as to why just yet but it is still keeping up with a much more expensive graphics card for this purpose before we go any further i did want to clarify that yes there are still some gpu graphics driver bugs on the 5700 with both resolve and premiere which tells me that it is a driver bug not a specific program bug and this is something that could still be fixed as they can be patched up and this happens a lot especially with launch products resolve does now reflect the actual gpu it recognizes it as a 5700 but specific random files are still playing back with that weird line off by one error and the same thing with certain effects and while theoretically that muddies the results a bit the actual playback frame rate is the same as it is for similar files that isn't having the error and the same render speed still seems to be the same and it's still keeping up the same with the 2080. so i'm treating it as it's not displaying it to me properly but it's still you know the processing power of the footage is still the same even if it just looks different than it's supposed to because it's still treating the frames in the same manner that's my reasoning here i will return to this if needed although this was like a week's worth of testing so maybe not quite as detailed but i will return to this once this is fixed i do bring this up however because i especially encountered this with certain blackmagic raw files which i'll cover soon specifically using the noise reduction filter which is a gpu heavy process i wanted to throw into the testing that really screwed up the playback on the 5700 and this is something that that kind of playback was reported by puget systems back in march for the radeon 7 and it wasn't clarified if this was actually fixed so if this was never fixed then that is a problem if it was fixed then this is just a common thing for amd and they'll patch it up and if slight software issues are the only limiting factor between choosing this and the 2080 wait a little bit and then choose this once they fix it because your money is still best spent here from what i can tell going into premiere pro i chose a project for this which was about my hevc compression scripts that i just posted last week and i rendered it out on both graphics cards as well and between the 5700 and the 2080 in everything except h.264 the 2080 was a couple minutes faster and an h.264 the 5700 was a couple minutes faster and for all of these i turned on max render quality in premiere which uses the gpu a little bit to help clean up scaling so that is here now something i did want to note as well is some of these render times are actually inflated for example the bigger codecs versus h.264 you have a trade-off of these bigger bloatier codecs like dna dnxhr cineform and prores are actually easier and quicker to encode to at the you know result of file size bloat however that speed increase is offset by how long it takes to write that final file to disk and so you can have a render finish and then it take another five to ten minutes to actually finish because it's writing all of that data and i caught some of that in the screen recordings here and this is why i do recommend people were questioning that in my video with wendell why i recommend nvme drives for your cache and scratch and render because if you're using these codecs as your preview codecs and as your cache codecs and things like that you need that speed like this is maxing out nvme drives so a boring sata drive or even a hard drive is really going to struggle in these cases especially for writing those final files now puget systems also just released their own premiere pro benchmark during the time of me making this video and so i couldn't get the full 59.94 fps and 29.94 or 97 fps 2.5 hour benchmark to run it kept throwing errors and canceling out but i did get the longer the one hour uh 29.97 fps benchmark going and the 2080 in this benchmark does beat the 5700 by like a few points to maybe like 10 points in some of the different categories here however they are again very close and when you consider the price difference if you're talking value per performance it's really close and i would imagine the 5700 xt would be ever so slightly closer to the 2080 here so this was pretty cool and this does a whole lot of things like multi-cam playback and warp stab stabilization and a whole lot of stuff that i don't traditionally test because i just test things that are naturally in my project and workflow now i also used msi afterburner because that's the only real way actually msi afterburner and fraps which was the only real way i could test this but it doesn't entirely give accurate results but it gives enough accurate enough results that i used it to test uh playback frame rate playback or playback frame rate of the x264 slow is not worth it this big giant project that killed my main computer basically and see how it actually handled the playback real time playing through the timeline at a full 4k 60 timeline resolution and the 5700 averaged 42.2 fps the 2080 averaged 44.03 fps neck and neck within margin of error and some of the some of the holdups both for the render of this project and the playback is those red giant transitions where the frame rate drops to zero point five to zero to one frame per second and it has to catch up and so at per second difference is not worth it same thing for that hevc project that i rendered out in premiere pro i tested the playback and 5700 was an average of 29.887 2080 was 29.787 so 0.1 fps difference with the 5700 technically in the lead and the the min and max frame rates for both those graphics cards were exactly the same so it had no problem playing that back i then created another test project using exclusively black magic raw and cinema dng raw files from my ursa mini pro and the black magic pocket cinema camera 4k that i tested for review to see how it handled a raw codec that i know was very cpu and gpu optimized and played it back and so i just threw a bunch of clips in the timeline added some luts and some color grades and then for some specifically dark ones i also added some noise reduction to three clips and that was super gpu intensive and played them back and measured the frame rate and for the 1080p timeline the 2080 had a two and a half point lead in average frame rate the min and max and 0.1 percent lows are honestly going to be all over the place and not the most useful numbers but you know 52.7 frames per second versus 55.1 on the 2080 and then same thing at a full 4k timeline preview res the timeline was set to 4k in both of these but the monitoring resolution was lowered to 1080p or 4k at 4k the 2080 had 54.9 frames per second average playback and the 5700 was at 52.4 so again two to three frame per second difference i rendered out that project and the 5700 was about three minutes slower on pretty much all of the tests so hebc cineform h264 dnxhr it's about three minutes lower that's not a significant amount of time but if you need it in a fast work environment perhaps that matters to you but for the most part like the performance is so much of a percent of the way there that it's totally fine in my opinion now lastly i wanted to test handbrake i had some requests for this and i do think something is wrong here as it detects nvinc in my on my rtx 2080 by default whereas on the 5700 it doesn't detect amd vce support and i have to manually go in and check it in the advanced settings and relaunch the software and even when it's encoding it's not really using any of the video encode integer engine percentage and i even click through the different video in code engines and it's not really using it a whole lot and so at 4k and this was actually over the network too so it was network limited as well but both of them were they rendered within one minute of each other and the 5700 was actually faster however at 1080p the 5700 took three times longer than the 2080 to render and this is at the exact same settings using the hevc gpu accelerated encoder but in any of my other testings of the encoders and in my video editor renders at hevc the 5700 outperforms the 2080. here like i said i don't think it's working right i still don't think a lot of programs recognize the encoder and in none of these tests can i use the h.264 encoder on the graphics card for resolve or anything like that because it just errors out and doesn't work and i think something fishy is still happening here because at a 1080p video the 2080 was rendering at an average of like 228 frames per second whereas the 5700 was averaging like 89 frames per second and so it took 30 minutes instead of 10 but again it wasn't really using any of the horsepower so i wouldn't get the 5704 handbrake which has been requested a couple times if that's what you're going for but i also think this is something that could be fixed and i've covered the encoder issues extensively at this point i have a couple other videos about it amd has reached out and they are interested in trying to make this work and so i will update once they have resolved this if that happens but wanted to put the data out there for now with that caveat so overall can i back up my claims which was meant to be kind of a jokey title but that the 5700 is faster than a 2080 ti yeah kinda especially if we're considering performance per dollar by a long shot the 5700 and the 5700 xt are fantastic choices if you're getting into content creation and don't immediately immediately need their video encoders because they've got some work to do there but they seem to be really wanting to actually do that and in fact the general manager of radeon even reached out to me on twitter and mentioned in a overclocking live stream i forgot whose stream it was i have it linked in the video description that as soon as they saw that video on reddit they like put the team to the test to really get working on it so pretty good choices i wouldn't get the founders edition cards with the blower coolers i'm not going to say that it got hot enough that you could cook food on it although it felt that way but the shroud on it got hot enough that i could not comfortably touch it for any extended period of time and the card got it was just so ridiculously loud and hot however the actual core temperature measured in hardware info wasn't it was like 67 degrees you know it was cooler than my 1080 ti usually gets but the actual physical card itself got ridiculously hot and i would definitely wait for partner cards but otherwise like these are really good choices if you're building like um budget oriented you know comparatively for new parts video production rig of any sorts so i haven't i don't have the ability to test for 3d rendering or cat or anything like that i think gamer's next has covered that a little bit but just wanted to cover this thank you so much for watching hit the like button if you enjoyed subscribe for more tech education thank you for your support on all of these videos and i do promise i usually record with a different camera entirely uh i don't usually do all of my videos at this setup but when i'm looking at so much data and things like that it's just easier to set up here at the moment and so i haven't touched my normal recording setup for a few weeks now\n"