NVIDIA Readies GeForce GT 1030 to Compete with Radeon RX 550

[cbn]

The GT 730 has half the ROPs of the GT 740, and though it ran slower the real world performance gap was not as big as halving the back-end would have you believe.

Oh yes, that is true. It also had half the memory bus.

.......I just brought that up because the clockspeed was only 902 Mhz compared to the 1058 Mhz of the GTX 650. This despite it being Kepler v2 vs. GTX 650 (and GT 740's) Kepler v1. (So I am thinking Nvidia may do the same thing with GP108 (as it did for GK208) and run the silicon at a slower clockspeed than we normally see for desktop silicon)

384sp at GTX 1050 Ti speeds vs. 512sp at lower clockspeed? (The 512sp should be faster for any given level of TDP)

P.S. I wonder if we see the same relationship with GT1030 and GT1040 as we did with GT730 (GK208) and GT740 (GK107). (ie, GT1040 will be 512sp at higher clockspeed, 128 bit bus, higher TDP vs. GT1030's 512sp at lower clockspeed, 64 bit, lower TDP)

 

[mohit9206]

Here is an excerpt from the translation:



So 64 bit memory bus (like the GK208 used used in the GT 730 GDDR5). I wonder what speed the GDDR5 will be? GT 730 GDDR5 had its memory spec'd at 5 Gbps.....so maybe 7 Gbps for GT 1030?

64 bit is a mistake. That is intentionally cutting a chunk of its performance. It will be memory bandwidth starved.

Oh yes, that is true. It also had half the memory bus.

.......but the clockspeed was only 902 Mhz compared to the 1058 Mhz of the GTX 650. This despite it being Kepler v2 vs. GTX 650 (and GT 740's) Kepler v1.

Yeah the only difference between 730 and 740 was half the rops, half the bandwidth and lower clocks. Although I'm running my 730 Kepler v2 at 1100mhz core still within the 25W TDP.
So 1030 vs 1040 is probably going to follow similar pattern to 730 vs 740.

 

[cbn]

64 bit is a mistake. That is intentionally cutting a chunk of its performance. It will be memory bandwidth starved.

If the card were 384sp at GTX 1050 Ti speeds then it would have the same core and memory bandwidth balance as GTX 1050 Ti assuming GT 1030 Memory speed was 7 Gbps (like GTX 1050 Ti).

But since it is rumored to have 512sp then yes as you point out some imbalance would exist (compared to GTX 1050 Ti) unless Nvidia also bumps up memory speed to compensate.

......but then I'm looking at GTX 1060 6GB and its 1280sp @ 1506 Mhz base/1708 boost with only a 192 bit bus @ 8 Gbps and now I am thinking 512sp @ lower clocks and 64 bit 7 Gbps might not be so imbalanced. (re: GTX 1060 6GB has a ~48% higher core (using GPU base clock) to memory bandwidth ratio compared GTX 1050 Ti at 768sp @ 1290 MHz(base) 1392 Mhz (turbo)/128 bit GDDR5 @ 7 Gbps)

 

[mohit9206]

But why intentionally gimp it with a 64 bit bus? Even AMD is giving a full 128 bit wide bus in RX550.
1030 will be destroyed in dx12 so it will need that additional memory bandwidth. Doubt nvidia is saving any money on halving the memory bandwidth so why do it at all? Also launching a card with 64 bit bus in 2017 is... lame as hell.

 

[cbn]

But why intentionally gimp it with a 64 bit bus? Even AMD is giving a full 128 bit wide bus in RX550.
1030 will be destroyed in dx12 so it will need that additional memory bandwidth. Doubt nvidia is saving any money on halving the memory bandwidth so why do it at all? Also launching a card with 64 bit bus in 2017 is... lame as hell.

I think this 64 bit GDDR5 is meant to compete against 128 bit DDR4, etc. (Same relationship as GT 730 GDDR5 competing against R7 240 with its 128 bit DDR3 1800......but GT 730 GDDR5 was faster)

Then for RX 550, Nvidia would have GT 1040.

edit: changed gddr4 to gddr5

 

[mohit9206]

I think this 64 bit GDDR5 is meant to compete against 128 bit DDR4, etc. (Same relationship as GT 730 GDDR4 competing against R7 240 with its 128 bit DDR3 1800......but GT 730 GDDR5 was faster)

Then for RX 550, Nvidia would have GT 1040.

There is no ddr4. Its either ddr3 or gddr5. Also 1030 will be $70-80 so it competes with 550 while 1040 will be $90-100 which will compete with 560.

 

[cbn]

There is no ddr4. Its either ddr3 or gddr5. Also 1030 will be $70-80 so it competes with 550 while 1040 will be $90-100 which will compete with 560.

RX 550 is 65W TDP, so the low profile cards will likely be dual slot ones*. (just like we saw with the 60W GTX 750 Ti).

EDIT: Anandtech is claiming 50W for RX 550. So is Techreport and PC World.

This GT1030 will likely be under 40W (like the 64 bit GT 730 GDDR5) so the form factor would be low profile single slot.

*Sapphire at one point did make a HD7750 single slot low profile (TDP was 61W edit: It was 55W) and XFX did make a R7 250 GDDR5 (65W) that was near single slot.

 

[cbn]

At 50W TDP, single slot low profile is very possible for RX550. However, I have yet to see any product announcements with that form factor though.

 

[mohit9206]

At 50W TDP, single slot low profile is very possible for RX550. However, I have yet to see any product announcements with that form factor though.

TDP has nothing to do with that. GT710 which is a 19W TDP card, but only very few models are low profile, single slot.
Technically its possible to make a low profile, single slot for the 1050Ti which is many times more powerful than rx550 but there's a reason why there a so few of such models. Its probably because their demands for is not as much compared to standard sized cards.

 

[cbn]

TDP has nothing to do with that. GT710 which is a 19W TDP card, but only very few models are low profile, single slot.
Technically its possible to make a low profile, single slot for the 1050Ti which is many times more powerful than rx550 but there's a reason why there a so few of such models. Its probably because their demands for is not as much compared to standard sized cards.

On Newegg, there are 19 listings for GT 710:

https://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007709 601186533 8000 4814&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&order=BESTMATCH

Of those 19, 2 are standard width (ie, not low profile) single slot.

Of the 17 that are low profile, 11 of them are either true single slot or close to true single slot like the PNY GT 710 below:.

The other six are single slot and low profile, but they have a larger passive heatsink protruding above the single bracket.....making them effectively "dual slot size" low profile cards.

 

[cbn]

Yeah, it's probably true. Look at the RX460 Designs compared to RX550. Same ram, probably pretty similar pcb and even the coolers are the same size. So the only part where the cost are lower in the RX550 is the pure gpu die. But this is low end so cost are not so high, maybe P12 costs 10$ to make and P11 15$, maybe a bit more, but the difference in the bom of both cards will be probably in the 10$ region. Cheaper designs might use just DDR3/4 instead of GDDR5, that might lower cost more, haven't heard about it with the 550, but Nvidias Low-End the last times was always mixed GDDR5/DDR3.

Yes, with P12 having only 512sp but the same 128 bit bus as P11 (which has 2x the stream processors) I have to imagine there will be some DDR3 (or more likely DDR4) cards based on P12 as well.

I just wonder what speed the DDR4 controller will be rated at?

 

[cbn]

Looking at the Steam Survey (linked and quoted below) I am surprised to see the GTX 750 Ti (2nd place) and GT 730 (7th place) still very popular:

So this GT 1030 should do pretty well if it ends up GTX 750 Ti performance with the power consumption and single slot low profile form factor of GT 730. (Will be interesting to see how these rankings change in the upcoming months).

With this mentioned I am also hoping we see a low profile single slot RX 550 that could be used to upgrade used SFF Pre-builts as well.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

DIRECTX 12 GPUS
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
MAR

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
6.90%
6.50%
5.91%
5.72%
5.89%
+0.17%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti
4.70%
4.64%
4.70%
4.70%
5.13%
+0.43%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960
5.11%
4.97%
4.87%
4.90%
5.13%
+0.23%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060
2.06%
2.79%
3.37%
4.08%
4.45%
+0.37%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
2.15%
2.52%
2.69%
3.00%
3.26%
+0.26%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
2.56%
2.60%
2.75%
2.87%
2.80%
-0.07%

NVIDIA GeForce GT 730
1.91%
2.09%
2.27%
2.52%
2.25%
-0.27%

NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M
2.55%
2.42%
2.40%
2.24%
2.19%
-0.05%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760
2.36%
2.20%
2.03%
1.93%
1.96%
+0.03%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950
1.62%
1.56%
1.62%
1.64%
1.78%
+0.14%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750
1.71%
1.67%
1.63%
1.64%
1.70%
+0.06%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650
1.83%
1.82%
1.72%
1.69%
1.70%
+0.01%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080
1.17%
1.32%
1.35%
1.41%
1.61%
+0.20%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
1.82%
1.72%
1.59%
1.51%
1.49%
-0.02%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
1.34%
1.36%
1.44%
1.48%
1.48%
0.00%

NVIDIA GeForce GT 630
1.67%
1.63%
1.63%
1.67%
1.45%
-0.22%

AMD Radeon HD 7700 Series
1.53%
1.45%
1.42%
1.41%
1.34%
-0.07%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
-
0.33%
0.64%
1.04%
1.33%
+0.29%

Intel HD Graphics 5500
1.30%
1.33%
1.38%
1.25%
1.33%
+0.08%

AMD Radeon HD 7900 Series
1.69%
1.56%
1.43%
1.33%
1.32%
-0.01%

 

[cbn]

also 512SPs Pascal is going to be a lot faster than the 550 (512SPs Polaris);

GT 1030 @ 512sp should be clocked lower (compared to other desktop Pascal cards) due to the low TDP....but yes, normally one Pascal Stream processor is equal to something like 2 Polaris stream processors.

But then again RX550 has 128 bit bus.....and with GDDR5 this will greatly give it the advantage in terms of bandwidth compared to GT1030 and its 64 bit bus. Still I wonder if 512sp (Polaris) will be able to effectively make use of 128 bit GDDR5 @ 7 Gbps? (As a comparison my R7 250X (GCN 1.0 640sp @ 1000 Mhz has 128 bit GDDR5 @ 4.5 Gbps.....and gets by fine even without the bandwidth efficiency enhancing Delta Color compression of GCN 1.2 and later cards)

In fact, the more I think about RX550 (which should have the bandwidth efficiency enhancing Delta Color compression) the more I think perhaps DDR4 wouldn't be so bad. This provided it was at least a good speed DDR4.

P.S. Glad to find out that Delta Color Compression improved 17% on Polaris compared to GCN 1.2.

With Polaris, AMD supports a larger pattern library to better compress more buffers more often, improving on GCN 1.2 color compression by around 17%

(So with that noted, I am actually now fairly hopeful about the potential of Polaris 12 DDR4 card)

 

[nvgpu]

https://videocardz.com/69078/kfa2-geforce-gt-1030-exoc-white-pictured-and-detailed

Wished it had 2 DP 1.4 outputs instead of legacy DVI-D.

 

[SPBHM]

64bit might not be a huge deal, Pascal is a lot more efficient with memory bandwidth than Polaris and if you consider that the 550 (512SPs) is running with the same bandwidth as the 560 (1024SPs), it is perhaps a card that doesn't really benefit from all the bandwidth available.... now the 1030 is actually 384SPs (at 1.5GHz), considering that and bandwidth it might be a closer fight.

but it will be interesting to see the benchmarks, one thing is that I expect is the 1030 to be really nice on power usage, the card on that picture looks like one of those old 8400GS with 25W or something.

 

[mohit9206]

64 bit/384 cores, kind of sucky,better be under £60 but we know its going to be £80 because we don't deserve good things.

 

[cbn]

This link is claiming 6 Gbps for the GDDR5 on that 384sp KFA2 GT 1030......so not the 7 Gbps as found on the GTX 1050 Ti.

64bit might not be a huge deal, Pascal is a lot more efficient with memory bandwidth than Polaris and if you consider that the 550 (512SPs) is running with the same bandwidth as the 560 (1024SPs), it is perhaps a card that doesn't really benefit from all the bandwidth available.... now the 1030 is actually 384SPs (at 1.5GHz), considering that and bandwidth it might be a closer fight.

If RX550 eventually came out with DDR4 @ 3200 it would actually have more bandwidth than that KFA2 GT 1030.

But then again you mention Pascal is more efficient with bandwidth than Polaris.

P.S. Agree that with only 384sp the fight with the 550sp RX550 is closer.

 

[cbn]

I wonder how long it takes Nvidia to get the Pascal VRAM requirement down to 2GB (commonly found on cards like GT 1030) for 4K Netflix:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11306/nvidia-netflix-4k-pc-preview-launched

Despite this qualifier, 4K Netflix support should fully work on all Pascal GPUs with 3GB or more of VRAM, though this means that 2GB GTX 1050 cards are oddly excluded.

 

[cbn]

64 bit/384 cores, kind of sucky,better be under £60 but we know its going to be £80 because we don't deserve good things.

This article is claiming there will be a 512sp variant in addition to the 384sp card:

http://hothardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-gt-1030-retail-card-spotted

whereas the GT 1030 can be configured in either 384- or 512-core configurations.

P.S. Could this additional GT 1030 follow a branding scheme similar to the GTX 1060 6GB and 3GB? (ie, the card with the higher amount of VRAM has more GPU cores enabled)

So GT 1030 (512sp) 4GB and GT 1030 (384sp) 2GB?

 

[mohit9206]

This article is claiming there will be a 512sp variant in addition to the 384sp card:

http://hothardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-gt-1030-retail-card-spotted



P.S. Could this additional GT 1030 follow a branding scheme similar to the GTX 1060 6GB and 3GB? (ie, the card with the higher amount of VRAM has more GPU cores enabled)

So GT 1030 (512sp) 4GB and GT 1030 (384sp) 2GB?

No. 1030 will strictly be 384sp while 1040 will strictly be 512sp.
There would be 2 and 4gb models but 4gb is useless on a card like 1030 atleast for gaming not to mention 4gb models will be $100.
So from what we know
1030 - 384sp,64bit,2gb gddr5, 6gbps,$80
1040 - 512sp,128bit,2gb gddr5, 6gbps,$100
1040 is almost useless because 1050 is only $10 more.
Question is can the 1030 run games like Mafia 3, Mass Effect Andromeda, Battlefield One, etc at above 30fps on medium settings?
We already know they can run moba games easily on max settings so why not also test how they perform in AAA games.

 

[Madpacket]

I know these are niche cards but given the price you're better off going with a 4GB RX 460, and unlocking it to essentially what a 560 will be. These can be had for under $100.00 (just paid $90 for a Gigabyte model). They can only make these cards so cheap where the BoM breakdown would likely highlight the half the cost going to the PCB, RAM and VRM etc. Unless these cards can easily be used for 4K Netflix playback there's little incentive to save a few bucks to buy such a saddled card.

 

[cbn]

I know these are niche cards but given the price you're better off going with a 4GB RX 460, unlocking it. These can be had for under $100.00 (just paid $90 for a Gigabyte model). They can only make these cards so cheap where the BoM breakdown would likely highlight the half the cost going to the PCB, RAM and VRM etc. Unless these cards can easily be used for 4K Netflix playback there's little incentive to save a few bucks to buy such a saddled card.

For a person's main gaming rig I definitely agree with you.

However, for some desktop SFF computers a low profile single slot card is all they will take and/or the power supply isn't quite up to spec (especially if the max TDP CPU happens to be installed). So those instances, a card like the GT 1030, GT 730 or 50W RX550 becomes the maximum GPU possible.

For example, I am thinking about getting a Lenovo M91P SFF which will have Core i5 2400 (95W), full size optical drive, 3.5" HDD with room for another 3.5" HDD (so two 3.5" HDDs possible), 240W PSU with 17amps on the 12v rail (so 204W for 12v). Full loaded up that doesn't leave much room in the power budget for a video card.

P.S. Agree about the 4K Netflix.....I can't imagine Nvidia not fixing that issue.

 

[Madpacket]

For a person's main gaming rig I definitely agree with you.

However, for some desktop SFF computers a low profile single slot card is all they will take and/or the power supply isn't quite up to spec (especially if the max TDP CPU happens to be installed). So those instances, a card like the GT 1030, GT 730 or 50W RX550 becomes the maximum GPU possible.

P.S. Agree about the 4K Netflix.....I can't imagine Nvidia not fixing that issue.

You can already find low profile 460 or 1050 cards that run only off the PCIe slots. Or single slot 460 cards (regular height). These cards already sip power so I'd be surprised if you ran into power problems. It's more of a space / form factor issue where the 1030 or possibly even the new 550 would make sense but then there's the DRM issues.

 

[cbn]

*

You can already find low profile 460 or 1050 cards that run only off the PCIe slots. Or single slot 460 cards (regular height). These cards already sip power so I'd be surprised if you ran into power problems. It's more of a space / form factor issue where the 1030 or possibly even the new 550 would make sense but then there's the DRM issues.

Did you see my edit (shown below) from post #47?

For example, I am thinking about getting a Lenovo M91P SFF which will have Core i5 2400 (95W), full size optical drive, 3.5" HDD with room for another 3.5" HDD (so two 3.5" HDDs possible), 240W PSU with 17amps on the 12v rail (so 204W for 12v). Full loaded up that doesn't leave much room in the power budget for a video card.

With that mentioned, a person could free up power by substituting an SSD for 2 x 3.5" HDDs in RAID-0.

Furthermore, the Dell Optiplex 790 SFF (which shares the same PSU specs as the Lenovo M91p SFF) has a slim optical drive rather than a full size optical drive. This should also save some power.

P.S. Another Sandy Bridge era SFF desktop that I know about....the HP Elite 8200 SFF has a better PSU spec than either the Lenovo M91p SFF and the Dell Optiplex 790 SFF. The PSU used by HP on this model is also rated at 240W, but has two 12v rails rated at 16amps each (so the entire 240W of the PSU can be used by devices power off 12v):

 

[Madpacket]

*


Did you see my edit (shown below) from post #47?



With that mentioned, a person could free up power by substituting an SSD for 2 x 3.5" HDDs in RAID-0.

Furthermore, the Dell Optiplex 790 SFF (which shares the same PSU specs as the Lenovo M91p SFF) has a slim optical drive rather than a full size optical drive. This should also save some power.

P.S. Another Sandy Bridge era SFF desktop that I know about....the HP Elite 8200 SFF has a better PSU spec than either the Lenovo M91p SFF and the Dell Optiplex 790 SFF. The PSU used by HP on this model is also rated at 240W, but has two 12v rails rated at 16amps each (so the entire 240W of the PSU can be used by devices power off 12v):

Just read that now. 17 amps on the +12v should be enough provided a quality power supply is used. The i5-2400 isn't power hungry and would be surprised if it consumed anywhere near 95W. As long as you're not running Furmark + Prime95 at the same time you should be good but yeah that's cutting it a little close.