Geforce GTX 1050 / 1050 Ti Launch Thread ($109 / $139 - October 25th)

[dark zero]

Time to cut the price of the 460 to only 84 dollars. They are forces to do that.

And nVIDIA still didn't managed to fully go after the 460 but at least it directly attacked the 470 with everything.

 

[cbn]

$109 and 75w with no 6-pin will be a nice card for prebuilt systems where it's not always easy to add that $25 (after rebate) replacement PSU.

I might sneak one in to my desktop at work....

These GTX 1050/Ti cards also meet Oculus Rift's minimum specification of GTX 960 (without needing a power connector).....so that I wonder (with cheap or discount pre-built desktops available) how much that helps acceptance for that VR platform over SteamVR/Viveport which has higherGPU requirements?

 

[John Carmack]

As another poster pointed out in the other thread, even the 1060 can be a 60W TDP card at less than 1500Mhz.

I was waiting to see how the GTX 1050 Ti would stack up against the RX460/465 before deciding which 75W card to get for my mini box but seriously that's terrible.

GTX 1060 with double the cores, running at higher clock speed, with more and faster memory, still uses less power?

I think I'm going to end up with a 6GB mini 1060 with the power target set lower. Is Samsung 14nm really that bad?

 

[LTC8K6]

I was waiting to see how the GTX 1050 Ti would stack up against the RX460/465 before deciding which 75W card to get for my mini box but seriously that's terrible.

GTX 1060 with double the cores, running at higher clock speed, with more and faster memory, still uses less power?

I think I'm going to end up with a 6GB mini 1060 with the power target set lower. Is Samsung 14nm really that bad?

Why not wait a few days for the reviews?

 

[whm1974]

I've been recommending The GTX 750 Ti to folks who have prebuilts ever since it came out. Now the 1050 will do the job for those who play esports and casual games, and the the 1050 Ti for the more demanding ones.

 

[Azix]

I've been recommending The GTX 750 Ti to folks who have prebuilts ever since it came out. Now the 1050 will do the job for those who play esports and casual games, and the the 1050 Ti for the more demanding ones.

those prebuilts typically lacked a pci-e cable?

 

[whm1974]

those prebuilts typically lacked a pci-e cable?

Most prebuilts tend to use low wattage PSUs in addition to missing a PCIe power cable as well. OEM budgets systems are bad about this.

 

[John Carmack]

Why not wait a few days for the reviews?

What would I be waiting for? I don't expect the 1050 cards to use much below their 75W TDP spec, certainly not low enough to match the 1060 in overall efficiency.

 

[frozentundra123456]

What would I be waiting for? I don't expect the 1050 cards to use much below their 75W TDP spec, certainly not low enough to match the 1060 in overall efficiency.

I think the point was to compare the 1050/1050Ti performance to a 1060 underclocked and undervolted sufficiently to acheive the same TDP. I also would take those power consumption curves with undervolting with a grain of salt. There is no guarantee that every card will be able to maintain performance and achieve such power savings.

In addition, if the performance is good enough, a 1050Ti, if it really comes out at 139.00 is a hundred dollars (or more) cheaper than a 1060. I mean, if the 1050/1050Ti were months from release, it might make sense not to wait, but with only days to go, just seems a no brainer to wait and see how they stack up.

 

[coercitiv]

In addition, if the performance is good enough, a 1050Ti, if it really comes out at 139.00 is a hundred dollars (or more) cheaper than a 1060. I mean, if the 1050/1050Ti were months from release, it might make sense not to wait, but with only days to go, just seems a no brainer to wait and see how they stack up.

I would definitely wait to see how stack up: in the end, considering the low power target for these desktop units, price and performance are the criteria that matter most.

The only thing that bothers me is... what happens with the mobile chips? In that case there the perf/power ratio is paramount.

 

[LTC8K6]

What would I be waiting for? I don't expect the 1050 cards to use much below their 75W TDP spec, certainly not low enough to match the 1060 in overall efficiency.

Actual comparisons at various power levels?

That's what I'd be waiting for.

Are those numbers we have seen from cards with power connectors rather than from cards limited to 75W?

 

[guskline]

Nvidia now has true top to bottom pascal coverage.

 

[LTC8K6]

I wonder why cards like the OEM 950 and 960 are not released as regular consumer cards?

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-950-oem/specifications

http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-960-oem/specifications

 

[nathanddrews]

I wonder why cards like the OEM 950 and 960 are not released as regular consumer cards?

I think for two reasons. One, they make these variants using the lowest binned parts and sell them to OEMs at greater profit than they could make from the retail channel (the SKU stacks are different in OEM-land). Two, it would mess with the consumer product stack too much where the$100-150 GPUs are already extremely competitive. Everything under $100 is already a rebranded SKU from a prior generation that they're trying to get rid of. If anything, these chips will get rebranded as the 1040/1030 or 2035/2030 next year.

 

[LTC8K6]

I think for two reasons. One, they make these variants using the lowest binned parts and sell them to OEMs at greater profit than they could make from the retail channel (the SKU stacks are different in OEM-land). Two, it would mess with the consumer product stack too much where the$100-150 GPUs are already extremely competitive. Everything under $100 is already a rebranded SKU from a prior generation that they're trying to get rid of. If anything, these chips will get rebranded as the 1040/1030 or 2035/2030 next year.

Except that these two seem to be higher performing parts, instead of the lower performing parts that you typically get with OEM cards?
They have more cuda cores and in the case of the 960oem, also more memory bandwidth.

 

[nathanddrews]

Except that these two seem to be higher performing parts, instead of the lower performing parts that you typically get with OEM cards?
They have more cuda cores and in the case of the 960oem, also more memory bandwidth.

Lower binned doesn't always mean less performance, but it does usually mean lower clock speeds, which is exactly what you get with these OEM cards (compared to their retail counterparts). In the case of the 960 vs 960 OEM, the OEM version is clocked a lot lower (both core and VRAM), but has more CUDA cores and 192-bit instead of 128-bit memory interface and the overall performance appears similar. That said, you probably can't overclock the OEM model much. In the case of the 950 vs 950 OEM, the situation is similar, but the effective output of the OEM model is significantly lower in performance.

 

[LTC8K6]

Lower binned doesn't always mean less performance, but it does usually mean lower clock speeds, which is exactly what you get with these OEM cards (compared to their retail counterparts). In the case of the 960 vs 960 OEM, the OEM version is clocked a lot lower (both core and VRAM), but has more CUDA cores and 192-bit instead of 128-bit memory interface and the overall performance appears similar. That said, you probably can't overclock the OEM model much. In the case of the 950 vs 950 OEM, the situation is similar, but the effective output of the OEM model is significantly lower in performance.

I see that these cards were already covered, if a bit inaccurately.
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-preparing-launch-geforce-gtx-960-ti/

 

[nathanddrews]

I see that these cards were already covered, if a bit inaccurately.
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-preparing-launch-geforce-gtx-960-ti/

I just used NVIDIA's own specifications pages that you linked.

 

[antihelten]

EVGA clearly states GTX 1050 TI is "only" 26% faster then GTX 950

If i remember correctly, 960 is ~15% faster then 950

*edit*

http://techreport.com/review/29061/nvidia-geforce-gtx-950-graphics-card-reviewed/11

If my "math" is correct, then 470 is ~30% faster then 1050TI (161/126)

100%baseline gtx 950
115% gtx 960
126% 1050 TI
161% 470 (115% * 1.4)

Yes the one slide from EVGA using a synthetic benchmark indicates a 26% difference between the 1050 Ti and the 950. This is perfectly in line with the numbers from Sweepr's previous slides which showed a 24% difference in Timespy (2351 vs. 1889). In other words, the slide from EVGA actually supports the numbers from the slides Sweepr posted (those slides are from Galax and Gainward btw, not Nvidia as RS tried to insinuate).

Now when we move away from synthetics and on to actual games, the gap grows to roughly 40%, this is what I based my post on, since like any sensible person I would never evaluate GPUs based on synthetics, when numbers from actual games are available (whether said numbers are reliable we won't know until we start seeing some reviews).

I did leave one of the tested games out however, since it wasn't included in the slides Sweepr posted, and that's Dark Souls 3.

Based on the slides from Galax and Gainward the difference between the 1050 Ti and the 950 is as follows:

Rise of the Tomb Raider - 29.6%
GTA V - 64.4%
Overwatch - 32.6%
Dark Souls 3 - 23.6%
NBA 2K17 - 42.6% (only Galax tested this game)

Average - 37.9%

RX 470 is roughly 75% faster than GTX 950, so by extension it would be 26.5% faster than the 1050 Ti (1.75 / 1.379 = 1.265).

So your math ends up at almost the exact same spot as me (I had the 470 as 25% faster, you have it as 30% faster).

The stock 1050 Ti isn't going to be anywhere near 960 performance. It'll be barely faster than the 1400 Mhz 950's.

You are free to believe so, but every single leak so far would indicate that you are wrong (i.e. the chinese leak Sweepr posted and the slide from EVGA). Remember a 960 is only about 15-20% faster than a 950.

Based on the leaks we are seeing so far, the regular 1050 might actually end up matching the 960, with the 1050 Ti of course being somewhere ahead of both.

 

[LTC8K6]

I just used NVIDIA's own specifications pages that you linked.

It still looks like the 960OEM will be faster than the 960 at stock clocks, though. Slightly higher texel and pixel rates.
I think it's a moot point, though.
No one cares about those cards and you could only get one as a pull.

 

[nathanddrews]

It still looks like the 960OEM will be faster than the 960 at stock clocks, though.

Which is relevant and significant, but only if NVIDIA can provide them with good binning to support higher clocks, otherwise AIBs won't be able to bring out OC/SC versions to compete with existing 960 models. A 960Ti that can't beat a vanilla 960 by more than 5% would be pointless.

 

[Sweepr]

1050 Ti's

1050's PCB

Performance

 

[nvgpu]

Nice upgrade for current HTPC GTX 750 Ti users because it supports HEVC 8K Main10/Main12 hardware decoding, VP9 8K hardware decoding & HDMI 2.0b which GTX 750 Ti didn't support and because it's small like the reference GTX 750 Ti PCB, simple and easy upgrading, just plug and play.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_750_Ti/images/front.jpg

 

[krumme]

Nice upgrade for current HTPC GTX 750 Ti users because it supports HEVC 8K Main10/Main12 hardware decoding, VP9 8K hardware decoding & HDMI 2.0b which GTX 750 Ti didn't support and because it's small like the reference GTX 750 Ti PCB, simple and easy upgrading, just plug and play.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_750_Ti/images/front.jpg

I tend to disagree. Not because of the argument that rs presented that buying a new ps will give far better perf per dollar because often thats not a viable solution but plain and simply becaue the difference to 750ti is to small unless you need the features like hdmi 2.0b.
Upgrading from integrated is like 500% as fast while this upgrade is 50%. For a usage model like this in theese machines its noth worth it as it will be the same gaming opportunity at 1080 at somewhat reduced settings. Better wait a year or two and get a new machine this time with a proper ps to use the gfx a level up !

 

[LTC8K6]

Imo:
50% more performance is definitely worth upgrading if the price is reasonable.
25%-30% maybe.
10% definitely not.