2026 Mazda CX-5 vs. CX-50: Similar Mazda SUVs, But One Clear Winner

• What's new: The Mazda CX-5 was redesigned for 2026, offering more space and improved technology.
• Why it matters: We've always loved how both of these small SUVs drive. But upgrades were needed to make each of them more competitive, and the CX-5 gets the changes first.
• Edmunds says: The CX-5 has gone mainstream, but lost some of its soul in the process. Is it still the more well-rounded pick?

The tech is a big upgrade, but it still isn't perfect. There are times it lags and is slow to respond to inputs, especially when using apps. Additionally, most of the CX-5's settings have moved into the screen, including those for the climate. The steering wheel controls are also a problem: It might look like there are individual buttons, but there's actually just one touch-sensitive panel that doesn't accurately detect where your finger is.

Worse, though, is that the CX-5 lost its fun-to-drive verve. The CX-5's suspension is softer and therefore more comfortable on the road (if not as plush as some competitors, like the Honda CR-V). But that's taken away some of the handling prowess that we enjoyed so much before. It's hard to find compact SUVs that are fun to drive. No longer having a turbocharged engine option only adds to the sting.

1st place: Mazda CX-50

• Edmunds Rating: 6.8/10
• The good: Fantastic controls; great to drive; turbo and hybrid options
• The bad: Screen is frustrating to use; front seats need more padding

The CX-50, in contrast, has surprising agility and legitimately good handling chops. Its steering (and perfectly sized steering wheel) puts a smile on your face, sprinkling some joy into the daily commute.

Both the CX-5 and CX-50 we tested had the same 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine under the hood, and each feels underpowered; both SUVs take 9 seconds to get from 0 to 60 mph. But unlike the CX-5, the CX-50 offers alternatives, including a lovely turbo engine and an optional hybrid setup. We'll have to wait until next year to see a CX-5 hybrid.

We're also big fans of the CX-50's control scheme, with physical knobs and buttons for nearly everything, including all the climate functions. Mazda gets the details right, and the controls, including those on the steering wheel, have a nice tactility. 

However, the CX-50's multimedia screen is placed far away on the dashboard and is not meant to be used as a touchscreen. And even if you like using the knob, the other problem is that the menu structure is convoluted, and it takes way too much effort to do simple things like change the radio station or enter an address into the navigation system.

That's a problem the CX-5 attempted to rectify with some success, but that change wasn't enough to lift the newer SUV to a win. While the CX-5 has improved its day-to-day livability, it's come at the expense of some of the things that we enjoyed about this compact SUV. We've always loved Mazdas for their fun-to-drive personalities, and the CX-5 just doesn't have it. That gives the CX-50 a narrow win. It remains a unique proposition among small SUVs while still checking all the right boxes. By attempting to court a more mainstream audience, the CX-5 is now in danger of getting lost in the shuffle.