Thursday, April 20th 2017

NVIDIA Readies the GeForce GT 1030 to Compete with Radeon RX 550

With the Tuesday (18/04) launch of the Radeon RX 550 at US $79, the market for IGP-replacement discrete GPUs sprung back to life. NVIDIA is preparing to address the market with the new GeForce GT 1030 graphics card, based on its "Pascal" architecture. The SKU will be based on the new 14 nm "GP108" silicon, and could feature up to 512 CUDA cores, and up to 2 GB of GDDR5 memory across a 128-bit wide interface.

With tiny board and electrical footprints, one can expect the chip to rely on the PCI-Express slot entirely for its power, and come in low-profile and fan-less designs. It could feature an up-to-date I/O, including HDMI 2.0b and DisplayPort 1.4, which its predecessor, the GT 730 lacks. The company could formally announce the GT 1030 around mid-May, 2017.

Source: Expreview
Add your own comment

37 Comments on NVIDIA Readies the GeForce GT 1030 to Compete with Radeon RX 550

#1
Prima.Vera
How will this compare with an iGPU found on the latest CPUs?
Posted on Reply
#5
Komshija
Prima.Vera said:
How will this compare with an iGPU found on the latest CPUs?
If Nvidia GT 1030 will have similar performance to RX 550, it will be much more powerful than Intel's HD 630 (Kaby Lake) considering that RX 550's performance is approximately equivalent to Radeon HD 7790 and GTX 650 Ti Boost.
Intel HD 630 has slightly better performance than Nvidia GT 635 and Radeon HD 7570.
Posted on Reply
#6
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Oohhhh I want reviews on both of these. There better not be any DDR3 versions.
Posted on Reply
#7
john_
Considering we are talking about Nvidia, this could have been a rebranded Fermi/Kepler/Maxwell mess under one unique model number(like GT 730). Thankfully it's a Pascal? That's nice. Probably this explains why AMD gone with an 128bit data bus in the RX 550 model. They knew they would have competition.
Posted on Reply
#8
P4-630
The Way It's Meant to be Played
But....Does it run Crysis? :D.........
Posted on Reply
#9
jabbadap
Prima.Vera said:
How will this compare with an iGPU found on the latest CPUs?
It's quite bit faster, 512 shaders means the same amount as old gtx750(which is like 15% faster than fastest iris pro) but the clocks are a lot higher. I would say performance to be close to gtx750ti.

IceScreamer said:
Green PCB, oh hell yes.
That pic is just for illustration, Pascal does not have analog vga outputs.
Posted on Reply
#10
blibba
P4-630 said:
But....Does it run Crysis? :D.........
The 8800 Ultra, the top uber-high end card at the time of Crysis's release, had:
  • 128 shaders at 1500MHZ (vs. 512 at presumably ~1200?)

  • 768MB GDDR3 memory (vs 2GB GDDR5)

  • An effective 2160MHZ over a 384-bit bus (vs. an effective speed of 6GHZ+ over a 128-bit bus)
A surprisingly close comparison, but yeah, it'll run Crysis, probably very comfortably, although possibly not maxed out at >1080p :D
Posted on Reply
#11
Tartaros
blibba said:
A surprisingly close comparison, but yeah, it'll run Crysis, probably very comfortably, although possibly not maxed out at >1080p :D
We need another extremely beautiful yet bad optimized game for modern jokes. Even low end cards can run crysis now, how disappointing. Where are you crytek?
Posted on Reply
#12
NeDix!
wait ... 79 usd for the RX 550 ? its that real ? i mean the RX 460 99 usd (MSRP) and its the double of RX 550, in other hand good to see this kind of cards.
Posted on Reply
#13
Basard
Reminds me of one of them old VW Beatles that they make new in Mexico.
Posted on Reply
#14
P4-630
The Way It's Meant to be Played
Basard said:
Reminds me of one of them old VW Beatles that they make new in Mexico.
Wasn't it Brasil?
Posted on Reply
#15
jabbadap
P4-630 said:
Wasn't it Brasil?
Hmm I'm not quite sure what he mean, but last new old beetle were made in Mexico 2003. Brazilian Beetle "Fusca" manufacturing ended in 1996.
Posted on Reply
#16
notb
NeDix! said:
wait ... 79 usd for the RX 550 ? its that real ? i mean the RX 460 99 usd (MSRP) and its the double of RX 550, in other hand good to see this kind of cards.
RX460 is an entry-level gaming card and in some variants (e.g. ASUS STRIX) can easily pull almost 100W.

Both RX550 and GT1030 are not gaming cards. They're IGP replacements for systems without such "luxury" (Ryzen, Intel HEDT and so on). That's something we haven't seen since Kepler.

On the NVIDIA side we can basically expect passively-cooled (or almost noiseless), single-slot cards using under 30W. It's hard to say what AMD will offer, but if it's on par with the Radeon Pro they make for Apple, it'll be a decent competitor.
Posted on Reply
#17
crow1001
notb said:
RX460 is an entry-level gaming card and in some variants (e.g. ASUS STRIX) can easily pull almost 100W.

Both RX550 and GT1030 are not gaming cards. They're IGP replacements for systems without such "luxury" (Ryzen, Intel HEDT and so on). That's something we haven't seen since Kepler.

On the NVIDIA side we can basically expect passively-cooled (or almost noiseless), single-slot cards using under 30W. It's hard to say what AMD will offer, but if it's on par with the Radeon Pro they make for Apple, it'll be a decent competitor.
Of course they are gaming cards doh. There is cheaper tat if you just want a display output that are not good for gaming.
Posted on Reply
#18
3rold
Judging by the specs this card could be as powerful as GTX 750 Ti but use ~35W. That's a great deal if you ask me. It should be a great bargain for lower end PCs which just want to casually play a game. or HTPCs
Posted on Reply
#19
jabbadap
3rold said:
Judging by the specs this card could be as powerful as GTX 750 Ti but use ~35W. That's a great deal if you ask me. It should be a great bargain for lower end PCs which just want to casually play a game. or HTPCs
x16 low profile power by pcie spec is 25W max, Nvidia might want to get it close to that by cutting the perf a bit. But that's probably just for oems, for retail your estimation might be quite correct.
Posted on Reply
#20
notb
crow1001 said:
Of course they are gaming cards doh. There is cheaper tat if you just want a display output that are not good for gaming.
I think the most recent chip falling into that description would be GT730 and yes - you can still buy these cards easily. But they are becoming slightly old by now.
Just the simplest example: GT730 supports a up to 3840x2160, so it could struggle with modern multi-monitor setup. GTX1050 supports 4 times as much.

Also the efficiency improved a lot. You can find a passively cooled GT730, but it could get to high temperatures under load.
Based on what other Pascal cards can do, the GT1030 could be passively cooled by default (and really cool with that ;)). This is important.
Basically, we're getting back to a point where a "productivity" card can look like it used to 20 years ago:

It's obviously a single-slot card and the heatsink is covering memory (most cards didn't have that).

By comparison, this is a passively cooled GT730:


I remember only one single-slot passive card from GT7xx era - Zotac GT 710. AFAIK it needed a decent air circulation.
Posted on Reply
#21
xorbe
So there's a gap wrt missing GTX 1040?
Posted on Reply
#23
notb
xorbe said:
So there's a gap wrt missing GTX 1040?
The *40 cards were named GT, not GTX. :)

Honestly, hard to say.
AMD decided to revive a whole lineup of cheap Radeons for their Ryzen lineup - basically like it used to be before IGP became ubiquitous.
We'll see what will happen. I don't think Intel will remove IGP from it's cheaper models, so the market for such cards will be much smaller than it used to.

But think about it. Some of these cards will be designed to work with high-end CPUs (Ryzen 7, Intel HEDT) in productivity rigs.
I think we could see some "pro" models - with relatively weak chips, but good features and high quality (also for the cooling solutions).
The Radeon Pro 460 in latest MacBook Pro can support 2x5K or 4x4K (beside the built-in 2880x1800). Check if you desktop gaming monster can do that. :)
I think we could use a passively cooled, single-slot card that can support multiple high-resolution monitors for some CAD or graphic editing environment (Matrox-style :)). That should sell well - even for a fairly large price.
Posted on Reply
#24
TheinsanegamerN
jabbadap said:
x16 low profile power by pcie spec is 25W max, Nvidia might want to get it close to that by cutting the perf a bit. But that's probably just for oems, for retail your estimation might be quite correct.
X16 is 75 watt. Low profile is in reference to the card, the slot is the same, unless some dolt OEM decides to limit things (looking at you dell)
Posted on Reply
#25
john_
notb said:
I think the most recent chip falling into that description would be GT730 and yes - you can still buy these cards easily. But they are becoming slightly old by now.
Just the simplest example: GT730 supports a up to 3840x2160, so it could struggle with modern multi-monitor setup. GTX1050 supports 4 times as much.

Also the efficiency improved a lot. You can find a passively cooled GT730, but it could get to high temperatures under load.
Based on what other Pascal cards can do, the GT1030 could be passively cooled by default (and really cool with that ;)). This is important.
Basically, we're getting back to a point where a "productivity" card can look like it used to 20 years ago:

It's obviously a single-slot card and the heatsink is covering memory (most cards didn't have that).

By comparison, this is a passively cooled GT730:


I remember only one single-slot passive card from GT7xx era - Zotac GT 710. AFAIK it needed a decent air circulation.
You talk about the GT 730 as if it was ONE card. In fact you have 3 TOTALLY DIFFERENT models under the same name. There is no comparison for example between a GT 730 with 12GB/sec memory bandwidth and one with 40GB/sec memory bandwidth.

jabbadap said:
radeon 520, radeon 530
Rebrands. For the 520 it says 1st Gen GPU, so possibly a 7730, and for 530 it says 3rd Gen, so possibly a 240/250 rebrand.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment