Wednesday, January 22nd 2020

GIGABYTE Outs RX 5600 XT Gaming OC VBIOS Update and Easy Updater

GIGABYTE late-Tuesday released a video BIOS update for its Radeon RX 5600 XT Gaming OC graphics card (model: GV-R56XTGAMING OC-6GD). The new FA0 video BIOS increases TGP of the card to a massive 180 W (up from 150 W original spec), gaming clocks up to 1670 MHz, boost clocks up to 1750 MHz, and memory clocks up to 14 Gbps (GDDR6-effective), up from 12 Gbps. Gigabyte's BIOS update package for the RX 5600 XT Gaming OC includes a Windows-based GUI updater that's a lot easier to use than manually updating the BIOS using ATIWinFlash. Grab the update package from the link below.

DOWNLOAD: GIGABYTE RX 5600 XT Gaming OC New FA0 BIOS Update
Add your own comment

30 Comments on GIGABYTE Outs RX 5600 XT Gaming OC VBIOS Update and Easy Updater

#1
Chomiq
It's really a joke when everyone has to release vbios update because someone at AMD made a last minute call to "boost" the performance.
Posted on Reply
#2
lynx29
Chomiq
It's really a joke when everyone has to release vbios update because someone at AMD made a last minute call to "boost" the performance.
yeah agreed, this is a really shite move.
Posted on Reply
#3
R-T-B
We live in a world of artificially firmware limited cards now, so this probably is only going to become more common.

I hate signed vbioses with a passion.
Posted on Reply
#4
notb
lynx29
yeah agreed, this is a really shite move.
It's just a factory OC bios. Nothing wrong about it.

The main problem for me is that AMD decided to call this "stock". It's such a weird move for a large, serious company that AMD would like to become.

Makes me wonder what AIB think about it. Some designs may not be ready to handle the extra heat. Cards are already manufactured.
Plus, AIBs surely wanted to launch some high-end variants with factory OC, which now became pointless and badly priced (like the ASUS Strix TOP).

Another example of AMD not being an easy business partner... And AMD fans complain that their favourite company doesn't get as much OEM/AIB attention as Intel or Nvidia.
Posted on Reply
#5
steen
notb
Another example of AMD not being an easy business partner... And AMD fans complain that their favourite company doesn't get as much OEM/AIB attention as Intel or Nvidia.
Heh, by corollary Nv being an easy business partner...
Posted on Reply
#6
notb
steen
Heh, by corollary Nv being an easy business partner...
Actually they're fantastic. Everyone who worked with Nvidia (on any project) will tell you it's a pleasure.

As for AIB/OEMs using Nvidia GPUs - I can't recall any major problem (made public). Any example? :)
Posted on Reply
#7
Nater
notb
Actually they're fantastic. Everyone who worked with Nvidia (on any project) will tell you it's a pleasure.

As for AIB/OEMs using Nvidia GPUs - I can't recall any major problem (made public). Any example? :)
GPP scandal...
Posted on Reply
#8
kapone32
notb
Actually they're fantastic. Everyone who worked with Nvidia (on any project) will tell you it's a pleasure.

As for AIB/OEMs using Nvidia GPUs - I can't recall any major problem (made public). Any example? :)
Wow there is a reason that Sapphire and PowerColor don't make Nvidia cards. You should really read the history of Nvidia before making that type of statement. Or maybe you can ask the people that created Physx.

How else was AMD supposed to respond. It would have been totally different if they had reference cards for the 5600XT.
Posted on Reply
#9
xkm1948
notb
Actually they're fantastic. Everyone who worked with Nvidia (on any project) will tell you it's a pleasure.

As for AIB/OEMs using Nvidia GPUs - I can't recall any major problem (made public). Any example? :)
Can confirm as Academia research. Nvidia’s support for biology researchers are top notch. Professional, extremely helpful and pleasent.
Posted on Reply
#10
iO
notb
As for AIB/OEMs using Nvidia GPUs - I can't recall any major problem (made public). Any example? :)
*cough* Bumpgate *cough*
Posted on Reply
#11
Berfs1
hold up i thought the TBP was gonna be 160W wtf now i have to edit my database again i am extremely big sad. :(
Posted on Reply
#12
Ferrum Master
R-T-B
We live in a world of artificially firmware limited cards now, so this probably is only going to become more common.

I hate signed vbioses with a passion.
We hate anything closed sourced, encrypted residing in our daily drivers.
Posted on Reply
#13
notb
xkm1948
Can confirm as Academia research. Nvidia’s support for biology researchers are top notch. Professional, extremely helpful and pleasent.
Well exactly. Nvidia (and Intel) provide proper consulting for users of their products. "Services" and "support" are an important part of their offer.

I have very limited personal experience with Intel, but Nvidia - compared to a 20-30 companies I closely worked with in academia and business - is really a gold standard.

Now, this may not be as good all over the world, because Nvidia has a very large office where I live (Warsaw, Poland) - but from what I've heard they're just as mobile and professional as Big4 or other large players.
Posted on Reply
#14
RH92
Nater
GPP scandal...
GPP '' made up '' scandal .... there i corrected it for you ! Don't get me wrong not saying there was nothing going on but GPP was way too overblown and looked more like an AMD PR stunt than anything else so calling this a ''scandal'' is a joke especialy in 2020 !
Posted on Reply
#15
Nater
RH92
GPP '' made up '' scandal .... there i corrected it for you !
Oh nice. You fixed your post before you got lit up, but I don't think it's going to help your claims.

nvidia gpp scandal was very real.
Posted on Reply
#16
kings
notb
The main problem for me is that AMD decided to call this "stock". It's such a weird move for a large, serious company that AMD would like to become.
Many people will buy the card and end up with significantly lower performance. Most consumers don´t update Bios, nor should they have to do it to have the performance of what AMD calls "stock" for this card.

I think this could have been handled much better, even if they postponed the launch for a few days. It shouldn't be the end consumer doing something that had to come ready from AMD and AIBs. Mainly, since it is something that, although little, always has some degree of risk.
Posted on Reply
#17
TheMadDutchDude
Postponing would be longer than "a few days" and it would be a logistical nightmare. Think how many tens of thousands of cards they'd have to have sent back to them, re-flashed, and shipped back out. That's not an overnight task, is it? It would cost millions. Just make it public knowledge, provide the easily run solution, and call it a day.
Posted on Reply
#18
gamefoo21
RH92
GPP '' made up '' scandal .... there i corrected it for you !
How many GPUs were affected by NV deciding to cheap out on the solder used? NV never accepted fault and the only actual fix was to get a new run of GPUs made. All of the suggested fixes only delayed the GPU failures. I only know of one company that actually forced NV to make a corrected run, and they are incredibly rare. I managed to snag a reissue motherboard for my T61.

OpenCuda like most of Nvidia's tech is closed and designed to force you onto their hardware. CUDA cores suck compared to AMDs compute units, but NV tries their hardest to kill or stall OpenCL adoption because the only company that can make CUDA cores is NV, so they cripple OpenCL on their hardware, and make CUDA look so much better.

Stuffing black box code into games that devs aren't even allowed to look at. That suspiciously enhances performance for one side but causes problems for the other.

G-sync is more of the same, let's make a piece of hardware mandatory that doesn't actually improve upon frame sync tech that's built into Display Port, but few monitors actually supported both. Now they came out with gSync that le gasp uses the open standard but they still try to spin it as the gimped edition. Intel started pushing the open standard, so NV had to cave.

Look at EVGA, they literally can't even make an AMD chipset motherboard. Ever wonder why?

PhysX... Oh we can't have people getting PhysX with a Radeon or other GPU, so let's lock the drivers and kill that. RTX is the same closed source garbage, NV is sweating because the consoles will be all rocking open standard RTRT... How much is it going to cost them to buy off the devs to redo the RT coding so NV doesn't have to run it through a wrapper.

Yeah, NV is a dream to deal with if you aren't a consumer who wants choice. They'll throw money and samples at you, coddle and swaddle you, but there's a real price.

I'm sorry I should clarify they do have one GPU that can actually do FP64 than AMD... It certainly isn't affordable though...

Volta is a beast, but the cheapest version is the Titan V and it costs what $3000usd

Titan V $2,999 USD 7.45Tflops FP64
Radeon VII $699 USD 3.36Tflops FP64
Ok we'll add in the special kid...
2080 Ti $999 USD 0.42Tflops FP64

Aww isn't it cute...

Oh and that glorious chunk of NV silicon... Only supports OpenCL 1.2... But it supports the latest CUDA. While the V20 series supports OpenCL 2.0...

The Radeon HD 7790 supports OpenCL 2.0, that's 7 years ago... Nvidia wants to lock you onto their hardware...

I seriously suspect if Intel's GPU takes off, you'll suddenly see NV supporting the open standard, because Intel does OpenCL...

Nvidia is a company that just abuses it's dominant position in a different way than most.

I just dislike their practices and when I can I will always support the open standard hardware. If this was NV they wouldn't have improved the cards performance while not charging a penny more. Actually NV showed what they would do, push failed cores at a slightly reduced price that use more power than the slightly more expensive versions.

TLDR...

AMD did something that NV would never have done. AMD gave people a 5600XT Super basically for free...

That is a good guy move and the competition is good, hopefully it'll chew into NV's market share more.

Edit: NV also makes a requirement that GPUs are tested outside of a case on a test bench for all temp and performance testing, but for noise testing they want the card in a case... Review like the guide wants or no samples for you! Ever wonder why all of those GPUs are tested like they are...Oh because when you get it home mount it in a case and game long and hard, you won't notice the GPU pulling clocks because of the heat, right?

*whistles innocently*
Posted on Reply
#19
RH92
Nater
Oh nice. You fixed your post before you got lit up, but I don't think it's going to help your claims.

nvidia gpp scandal was very real.
Up untill now and considering all the informations that have been made public in regards to GPP there is nothing that leads to believe GPP was as bad as some made / wanted to make it look like , not me saying it but trusted techmedia sources such as GamersNexus etc . As i said calling it scandal is a joke , you are entitled to believe this joke im not here to stop you , just don't make bold claims !
gamefoo21
Look at EVGA, they literally can't even make an AMD chipset motherboard. Ever wonder why?
You lost me there pal , i can't discuss seriously with someone who believes Nvidia ( a GPU company ) is the reason on why EVGA doesn't make AMD MOTHERBOARDS ......... this is just ridiculous , next level mental gymnastics !
Posted on Reply
#20
Nater
RH92
Up untill now and considering all the informations that have been made public in regards to GPP there is nothing that leads to believe GPP was as bad as some made / wanted to make it look like , not me saying it but trusted techmedia sources such as GamersNexus etc . As i said calling it scandal is a joke , you are entitled to believe this joke im not here to stop you , just don't make bold claims !
I'll take Kyle Bennet's word over anyone at nVidia/AMD/Intel, all day, every day. If it wasn't for HP/Dell putting their foot down, nVidia would have gotten away with it.
Posted on Reply
#21
kapone32
RH92
Up untill now and considering all the informations that have been made public in regards to GPP there is nothing that leads to believe GPP was as bad as some made / wanted to make it look like , not me saying it but trusted techmedia sources such as GamersNexus etc . As i said calling it scandal is a joke , you are entitled to believe this joke im not here to stop you , just don't make bold claims !



You lost me there pal , i can't discuss seriously with someone who believes Nvidia ( a GPU company ) is the reason on why EVGA doesn't make AMD MOTHERBOARDS ......... this is just ridiculous , next level mental gymnastics !
Indeed I think EVGA does not make AMD motherboards due to a contract with Intel and not Nvidia. The better question would have been why EVGA does not make AMD GPUs.
Posted on Reply
#22
RH92
Nater
I'll take Kyle Bennet's word over anyone at nVidia/AMD/Intel, all day, every day. If it wasn't for HP/Dell putting their foot down, nVidia would have gotten away with it.
Thats cool considering i didn't asked you to take Nvidia/AMD/Intel word but GamersNexus word , which i will take all day every day over any Kyle Bennet ( and i know very well who Kyle Bennet is ) . Fun fact is Kyle Bennet moved to work for Intel after that story blow off and this kills any journalistic credibility he had because there is no turn back from such a move ( would had been the same for AMD or Nvidia for that matter ) not judging him for doing so , just saying !
kapone32
The better question would have been why EVGA does not make AMD GPUs.
Why Sapphire , XFX , Powercolor , Asrock don't make Nvidia GPUs ? That kind of logic flows both ways , yet somehow you focus only on one side of the coin . I would be impressed if you came up and accused AMD for this !
Posted on Reply
#23
gamefoo21
RH92
You lost me there pal , i can't discuss seriously with someone who believes Nvidia ( a GPU company ) is the reason on why EVGA doesn't make AMD MOTHERBOARDS ......... this is just ridiculous , next level mental gymnastics !
Well they can't and have never made a GPU that wasn't powered by NV. They also were strictly NV chipset mobo based until Intel killed that off.

I guess I just wish EVGA would at least make a Ryzen board but I doubt they will.

I've heard rumours that EVGA basically signed a contract that locks them to NV and they can only do things with companies that don't compete with NV.

Remember when NV tried to force the AIBs to basically only use their card series and designs for NV based ones and that they'd have to split the other GPUs off to their own series with their own designs.

Kind of shady move designed to force the splitting of marketing and engineering funds, that would have had the result of less competitor based cards getting released.
Posted on Reply
#24
RH92
gamefoo21
I guess I just wish EVGA would at least make a Ryzen board but I doubt they will.
As a Ryzen user myself i wish the same but that doesn't oblige me to believe to nonsensical theories !
gamefoo21
I've heard rumours that EVGA basically signed a contract that locks them to NV and they can only do things with companies that don't compete with NV.
Yeah well I would like to see how much water does this theory holds now that Intel is making their own discrete GPUs , so accoding to this theory EVGA will stop making Intel products now right ? .......

Point being , believing to such rumours that defy any sense of logic is not going to get you far !
Posted on Reply
#25
Cheeseball
Not a Potato
gamefoo21
OpenCuda like most of Nvidia's tech is closed and designed to force you onto their hardware. CUDA cores suck compared to AMDs compute units, but NV tries their hardest to kill or stall OpenCL adoption because the only company that can make CUDA cores is NV, so they cripple OpenCL on their hardware, and make CUDA look so much better.
CUDA is open-source and ties into existing OpenCL code quite well. Even by itself, it is still more fleshed out than OpenCL. Most machine learning libraries that have a CUDA backend can still run the code directly on a x86 CPU or any other GPGPU without major issues.

AMD doesn't care much about the machine learning market as much as NVIDIA does. If they did, they should've continued with GCN (the Vega 56, 64 and Radeon VII are great cards for the enthusiast researcher) and not step backwards with RDNA (1.0, however they say 2.0 would be robust for developers).

ROCm (uses Google's pre-owned TensorFlow), which thankfully is still alive, is still primitive to NVIDIA's cuDNN. MIOpen (AMD's deep learning math library) works extremely well on NVIDIA's own tensor cores (which is not surprising since it's HIP-compatible).

NVIDIA's current CUDA cores are the same as AMD's GCN/RDNA shader processors. It all depends on the libraries used. It just so happens that NVIDIA's implementation is the most compatible at the moment.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment