As AMD's low-profile graphics cards gain popularity

Article written by Guillaume
Published on 10/25/2026

Follow us and share this article

This article has been automatically translated.

Shortly after Vastarmor, Powercolor is now also launching a low-profile Radeon RX RDNA 4.

In the PC world, there are those who love large cases and imposing machines, and there are those who swear by the infinitely small. Without going to such extremes, many enthusiasts—even among gamers—appreciate having a relatively compact PC. After all, that’s part of the charm of the game consoles that take pride of place in our living rooms. It’s hard to squeeze a big tower next to the TV, isn’t it? To achieve small PCs, there’s always the option of what are known as mini-PCs. The problem is, they often use proprietary components, making any maintenance or upgrades difficult.

The mini-ITX form factor was born from this idea, with its 17 cm x 17 cm motherboard, and the increasingly widespread adoption of SO-DIMM modules also plays a role. When it comes to graphics cards, however, it’s often a different story. For one thing, these cards are often very long (over 25 cm), very tall (10, 12, or even 15 cm), and can occupy three PCIe slots. Fortunately, a very specific format—originally designed for slim servers—can come to the rescue: low-profile graphics cards. They are “half-height” compared to standard cards and therefore fit easily into a slimmer case. They’re also often a bit shorter and never take up more than two PCIe slots.

And that’s good news because, one after another, two RDNA 4 graphics card models—AMD’s latest generation—are hitting the market, just as the market was previously dominated exclusively by NVIDIA and its GeForce RTX 5060. On one hand, we have the Vastarmor RX 9060 XT low-profile, equipped with a powerful GPU (32 compute units, up to 3040 MHz) and 16 GB of GDDR6. On the other hand, Powercolor is offering an RX 9050 that’s identical to the standard model, though it still only has 16 compute units and 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The difference between the two cards will be noticeable, as will the power consumption: 140 W for the 9060 versus 92 W for the 9050. In any case, having a choice is always better!