Thursday, April 27th 2017

NVIDIA's Pascal GP108-300 GPU Pictured, Benchmarked - Powers Upcoming GT 1030

We've already covered how NVIDIA is looking to take a slice of the IGP-replacement discrete GPU market after AMD brought it back to life with the RX 550 (of which you can see some examples here). Considering how the last NVIDIA entry into this market was the GT 730, it's safe to say a refresh is past due.

The most recent information points towards a chip sporting 512 CUDA cores and a 30W TDP - absent of any auxiliary power connectors. Pricing should be close to the RX 550's, though the performance difference between both parts is still up in the air - though an average 12 FPS in Ashes of the Singularity on 1080p is nothing to write home about, even if that is expectable given the GPU's price/performance bracket. The GT 1030 is currently expected to make landing on the second week of May.
Sources: Expreview, Videocardz
Add your own comment

29 Comments on NVIDIA's Pascal GP108-300 GPU Pictured, Benchmarked - Powers Upcoming GT 1030

#1
qubit
Overclocked quantum bit
I'm looking forward to getting this card and comparing it to my Zotac GTX 1080. I did that with my GTX 580 / GT 520 combo and the difference was vast.
Posted on Reply
#3
RejZoR
Lowest end card should be able to run any modern game at 60fps when using lowest settings at 1080p since that's the most common monitor resolution. Otherwise, what's the point? IGP's can already accelerate web, HD videos and stuff so you certainly don't need extra GPU. But if that extra GPU can't even run games smoothly on lowest possible settings (lets be honest here, games would look pretty crap like this). But for someone who values gameplay and entertainment above all and any visuals, they'd be perfect. So, 12fps in Ashes of Singularity at Standard with 1080p is pretty weak and shouldn't even exist because on low, that would probably hardly be even 30fps...
Posted on Reply
#4
alucasa
Will it play Wash Dogs? That's the grand question.
Posted on Reply
#5
blibba
RejZoR said:
Lowest end card should be able to run any modern game at 60fps when using lowest settings at 1080p since that's the most common monitor resolution. Otherwise, what's the point? IGP's can already accelerate web, HD videos and stuff so you certainly don't need extra GPU. But if that extra GPU can't even run games smoothly on lowest possible settings (lets be honest here, games would look pretty crap like this). But for someone who values gameplay and entertainment above all and any visuals, they'd be perfect. So, 12fps in Ashes of Singularity at Standard with 1080p is pretty weak and shouldn't even exist because on low, that would probably hardly be even 30fps...
Why "any modern game"? What if I want to play WoW or LoL without replacing my entire PC, but my integrated graphics won't cut it? Or what if my integrated graphics are broken but the rest of the PC is fine? Or what if I am using a motherboard without graphics output but I don't play games?

Come on man, think a little.
Posted on Reply
#6
NeDix!
64K said:
Baby Pascal is born.

If it does perform around a RX 550 then it will be fine for games like Dota 2 and CS:GO and will be a good bit faster than integrated graphics. They need to get the price right though.

If the GT 1030 is comparable to a RX 550 then theses benches are relevant



http://www.pcworld.com/article/3190695/components-graphics/amd-radeon-rx-550-review-a-thrilling-budget-graphics-card-with-a-perplexing-price.html?page=2
Well, first i want to know the price, because if this is placed at the same price of RX 550, i wont even bother in check review
Posted on Reply
#7
pky
RejZoR said:
Lowest end card should be able to run any modern game at 60fps when using lowest settings at 1080p since that's the most common monitor resolution. Otherwise, what's the point? IGP's can already accelerate web, HD videos and stuff so you certainly don't need extra GPU. But if that extra GPU can't even run games smoothly on lowest possible settings (lets be honest here, games would look pretty crap like this). But for someone who values gameplay and entertainment above all and any visuals, they'd be perfect. So, 12fps in Ashes of Singularity at Standard with 1080p is pretty weak and shouldn't even exist because on low, that would probably hardly be even 30fps...
Everybody's so used to processors having integrated GPUs... well, Ryzen doesn't. And some people need the additional cores, but they don't play games and just need something to drive their monitor(s)... sadly the 550 and 1030 are a bit too expensive for what they deliver.
Posted on Reply
#8
RejZoR
Ryzen doesn't have GPU because AMD also sells APU's, remember? Which still aren't released. That's why.

@blibba
I honestly don't understand your rant. If you only play WoW and LoL, this means you'd just get WAY more frames and better image quality? How is that bad? 60fps at low for any game could be a norm for prices we have now for this useless garbage. But since everyone seems to be fine with it (like you), you have this stuff that hardly displays desktop. And you still pay quite a lot for it... Yeah, think a little...
Posted on Reply
#9
medi01
RejZoR said:
Lowest end card should be able to run any modern game at 60fps when using lowest settings at 1080p since that's the most common monitor resolution. Otherwise, what's the point?
Ryzen has risen, that's the point.
No IGP crap on the chip.

RejZoR said:
Ryzen doesn't have GPU because AMD also sells APU's, remember?
Erm, are you sure about that is the reason?

So if a C++ dev grabs 1800x, what graphic card should he buy?
Posted on Reply
#10
bug
blibba said:
Why "any modern game"? What if I want to play WoW or LoL without replacing my entire PC, but my integrated graphics won't cut it? Or what if my integrated graphics are broken but the rest of the PC is fine? Or what if I am using a motherboard without graphics output but I don't play games?

Come on man, think a little.
Or maybe someone needs a backup card to diagnose systems whose video output craps out. Limited (maybe even fringe) scenarios, but they do exist.
On the other hand, all I need to know about these cards is that they exist and a price range. Performance, VRAM and other things I don't care about.
Posted on Reply
#11
Raevenlord
News Editor
bug said:
Or maybe someone needs a backup card to diagnose systems whose video output craps out. Limited (maybe even fringe) scenarios, but they do exist.
On the other hand, all I need to know about these cards is that they exist and a price range. Performance, VRAM and other things I don't care about.
Never thought I'd say this, but I used to think IGP is just a waste of silicon (for my use case at least.) But here I am, currently driving my monitor from the i5 6400's IGP after selling my RX 480 before its pricing decreased further. Since I have no other graphics card, and no way to borrow one, I was suddenly extremely happy for the presence of the integrated graphics on Intel's chip.
Posted on Reply
#12
blibba
RejZoR said:
Ryzen doesn't have GPU because AMD also sells APU's, remember? Which still aren't released. That's why.

@blibba
I honestly don't understand your rant. If you only play WoW and LoL, this means you'd just get WAY more frames and better image quality? How is that bad? 60fps at low for any game could be a norm for prices we have now for this useless garbage. But since everyone seems to be fine with it (like you), you have this stuff that hardly displays desktop. And you still pay quite a lot for it... Yeah, think a little...
Your assumption seems to be that people can get something better for the same money, and to be fair, I think that will often be true - especially if you're looking to go used.

But I've purchased cards of this ilk several times in the past, when I've been fixing something for a relative and needed to buy from a physical store or whatever, or when they fall to £20 on Amazon and the PSU isn't up to scratch for something older but better.

Generally though, if this is the cheapest thing, and the performance is sufficient, then the performance is sufficient - not everyone can afford to spend more for unnecessary performance. If these aren't the cheapest thing, that's just market failure imo, and not the fault of the card itself.
Posted on Reply
#13
silentbogo
Theoretically, considering the spec and assuming that it will be 128-bit GDDR5-only, it should be on par with my current GTX950, if not a little faster.
And my GTX950 is powerful enough to do most of my work on 4K screen and play most of my games in steam library from 1080p to 1440p, med to high settings.
You say "work, WoW, LoL", I say "Alien Isolation in 2k"!
Posted on Reply
#14
Slizzo
medi01 said:
Ryzen has risen, that's the point.
No IGP crap on the chip.


Erm, are you sure about that is the reason?

So if a C++ dev grabs 1800x, what graphic card should he buy?
If you want Zen with an IGP, you need to wait until AMD releases their APUs with a Zen core.
Posted on Reply
#15
alucasa
I would rather have an IGP instead of none. It won't heavily weight on my decision when choosing a CPU though.

It's very handy in numerous situations.
Posted on Reply
#16
Fx
bug said:
Or maybe someone needs a backup card to diagnose systems whose video output craps out. Limited (maybe even fringe) scenarios, but they do exist.
On the other hand, all I need to know about these cards is that they exist and a price range. Performance, VRAM and other things I don't care about.
I wouldn't say fringe. This commonly happens and as such, I always keep some older graphics cards for just this reason.

I am looking towards learning the performance vs Intel IGP and price.
Posted on Reply
#17
bug
Raevenlord said:
Never thought I'd say this, but I used to think IGP is just a waste of silicon (for my use case at least.) But here I am, currently driving my monitor from the i5 6400's IGP after selling my RX 480 before its pricing decreased further. Since I have no other graphics card, and no way to borrow one, I was suddenly extremely happy for the presence of the integrated graphics on Intel's chip.
It's not only a waste of silicon, it's a waste of money. People generally don't realize it, but the cost of a chip is largely derived from the die size. For Skylake, IGP is 30-40% of the die.
While I love to be able to build a desktop for work and not having to buy a video card, I'd still like to have the option of foregoing the IGP for my home gaming desktop. And yes, I know Ryzen gives me that option.
Posted on Reply
#18
Slizzo
bug said:
It's not only a waste of silicon, it's a waste of money. People generally don't realize it, but the cost of a chip is largely derived from the die size. For Skylake, IGP is 30-40% of the die.
While I love to be able to build a desktop for work and not having to buy a video card, I'd still like to have the option of foregoing the IGP for my home gaming desktop. And yes, I know Ryzen gives me that option.
And so does X99/X299.
Posted on Reply
#19
xorbe
pky said:
sadly the 550 and 1030 are a bit too expensive for what they deliver.
Evga 1050 Ti SC 4GB is at Amazon for $115, is that a decent deal?
Posted on Reply
#20
Brusfantomet
for those of you that are having trouble with the "why" part of this chip not that intel has integrated a GPU in the CPU. Its to get to use a proper GPU driver, because the intel ones are not good enough.

"but" you say, "my experience with the intel drivers are quite pleasant, they run all my games at reasonable settings and i can watch hardware accelerated HD videos without the CPU burning through the chassis of my laptop"

And sure, for everyday usage they do the job. But, for example at my job i sometimes program PLCs, and the intel drivers DOES not play nice with the programing tool, making it crash on some occasions. for those scenarios having an option is important.
Posted on Reply
#21
Caring1
Raevenlord said:
Never thought I'd say this, but I used to think IGP is just a waste of silicon (for my use case at least.) But here I am, currently driving my monitor from the i5 6400's IGP after selling my RX 480 before its pricing decreased further. Since I have no other graphics card, and no way to borrow one, I was suddenly extremely happy for the presence of the integrated graphics on Intel's chip.
I'm in the same situation after having removed my Graphics Card, and in no rush to buy one.
I can wait until Intel brings out their CPU with on die APU for comparison with AMD's offerings.
Posted on Reply
#22
Manu_PT
Is always good to have OPTIONS. Even if this was similar to IGP performance (wich isn´t, is a lot faster) the drivers and overall compability are way better. Running emulators with this chip will be way better than doing it with Intel IGP, due to optimization stuff. Like I said, options. Doesn´t hurt. Also Ryzen doesn´t come with IGP so this is a good option for that, as imo Ryzen shines in workstation applications, wich means a lot of "non-gamers" would get it.
Posted on Reply
#23
medi01
xorbe said:
Evga 1050 Ti SC 4GB is at Amazon for $115, is that a decent deal?
Yes it is.
Posted on Reply
#24
ratirt
I wonder. What would those APU's perform like. Especially from AMD since a lot has changed since the last time I saw their released APU's. It would be great to get one of those just in case when you switch cards or you plan to :) With good performance it might be a great idea.
Posted on Reply
#25
Vayra86
Once you get a higher end card, or even a decent midranger like GTX x60, you know these cards are pointless versus an IGP.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment