As always I like to start off my testing with a few synthetic benchmarks. 3DMark especially is one of my favorites because it is very optimized in both Nvidia and AMD drivers. It's nice to not have to worry about it being favored too much either way and the repeatability of the results makes it a nice chance to compare from card to card. I started off with the three Fire Strike benchmarks which are a little older and focused on DX11. The range in tests allows a look at different levels of detail. Going in I was curious how the 5600 XT compares to the 5500 XT and the RX 5700, then on the Nvidia side the RTX 2060 and the GTX 1660 Ti. In all three of these tests, the RX 5600 XT Phantom Gaming came in ahead of the stock clocked RTX 2060 Founders Edition with the 2060 SUPER then being ahead of it. The gap between the 5600 XT and the 5500 XT is surprising, and the RX 5700 is out ahead but in this situation, it is running with the 2060 SUPER.
Sticking with 3DMark, for the second round of tests, I went with the newer Time Spy benchmarks. There are two different details and these are DX12 based. All of the Turing based Nvidia cards have done really well in Time Spy and you can see the significant difference between the results here and in Fire Strike. The 5600 XT, even with its overclock comes in with the RTX 2060 ahead of it and the GTX 1660 Ti behind it with nothing really in the same range. Like before, the RX 5600 XT is a lot closer to the RX 5700 which here was running with the RTX 2060. Then the RX 5500 XT is a lot farther away. In the Extreme test, the 5600 XT drops slightly when compared to the RTX 2060 but still sticks between the 1660 Ti and the 2060 overall.
The last synthetic test was using Superposition which is based on the Unigine engine. For this test, I ran two different 1080p tests, one at medium detail and another at the extreme detail setting. Once again the RX 5600 XT fell in between the RTX 2060 and the 1660 Ti but it is shockingly close to the RTX 260, especially in the medium detail test.