NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Specifications and Price Revealed

[sergionography]

View attachment 121232

Based on the specs; I anticipate it to be on par or within 5% performance of a gtx1060 3GB

As we've seen previously; Turing seems to be around 15% faster per core/shader than pascal. And with higher clocks it shouldn't be much of a problem. We are likely to see certain memory bandwidth limitations effecting some workloads, but overall this card is hardly going to be targeted for such workloads anyways. Think of it as a 1060 3gb but with even more sacrifices. Though perhaps what it loses in memory bandwidth it makes up with that extra 1GB or memory, who knows.

 

[Ruru]

What would be the application? Any PC that has that drastic power issues is a SFF for office or HTPC. None of them need the extra processing power that this card adds, so it won't be a good buy there.

It won't beat any of those.

The same application as low-power cards of previous generations without the power connector.

 

[trog100]

it will also be popular in a mobile version..

trog

 

[SoNic67]

The same application as low-power cards of previous generations without the power connector.

I just showed that something better is just not needed in those applications, and gave examples. If you can't give exact examples of the contrary, then... don't just say generic things like that.

 

[Ruru]

I just showed that something better is just not needed in those applications, and gave examples. If you can't give exact examples of the contrary, then... don't just say generic things like that.

Well, since there isn't any test results and I don't have a crystal ball, I can't give any examples because it's performance is a mystery.

 

[SoNic67]

I was asking if examples of low power GPU applications that need improved performance. So regardless how "improved" this new card will be, just there is no market requesting it.

 

[jabbadap]

I was asking if examples of low power GPU applications that need improved performance. So regardless how "improved" this new card will be, just there is no market requesting it.

Well thinking about HTPC, madVR 1080p->4k upscaling does need some serious shaderpower, which this card might have.

 

[Ruru]

Gaming? There's been nice boost from 750 Ti -> 950 -> 1050 Ti, and I'm sure that the trend continues.

e: Hell, I'm running an overclocked/overvolted R9 290 myself and I don't give a crap about power consumption, but when I once say something positive about low power consumption, then there's this "what's the need of a card like this" etc.

 

[jabbadap]

Gaming? There's been nice boost from 750 Ti -> 950 -> 1050 Ti, and I'm sure that the trend continues.

e: Hell, I'm running an overclocked/overvolted R9 290 myself and I don't give a crap about power consumption, but when I once say something positive about low power consumption, then there's this "what's the need of a card like this" etc.

Well it's not that power consumption alone, it's the needed means to get that heat out of the hot box.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I'd love to see how this fares against RX 570 looking at some of those custom-design card prices.

Agreed, that would be an interesting set of benchmark tests.

 

[Ruru]

Well it's not that power consumption alone, it's the needed means to get that heat out of the hot box.

Exactly, and small cases (where this would be ideal) doesn't have that much airflow than an EATX case for example, like I have.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I was asking if examples of low power GPU applications that need improved performance. So regardless how "improved" this new card will be, just there is no market requesting it.

That's not true at all. There are many use cases that need a powerful GPU that also stays within the PCIe power delivery spec. Open your mind a little.

 

[notb]

Depends how you define segment.

By the dominant use scenario. I don't have a better way.

Price-wise, it's very close, even if it draws more power. There's no denying Nvidia's efficiency and perf/W lead, but perf/$ is just as important.

Cards like RX560 and GTX1050 are chosen not because of how much performance they provide, but how much performance they provide with external limitations: case size, power supply, cooling etc.

This also means the price for these is rather high if you look at the whole lineup (RX560 vs RX570, GTX1050 vs GTX1050Ti). That's simply because for a big part of target consumers these cards have no competition from the higher models. Hence, they're willing to pay a premium as if GTX1050 was the top performer (just like you would pay a premium for 1080Ti).

Even if you accept a larger form factor, moving from GTX1050 to GTX1050Ti could mean you have to replace the case, the PSU or improve airflow. It all costs.

RX570 pulls 190W under heavy load and over 170W in gaming. Even if you make a small one, it may not fit in a power budget that many SSF systems provide (~200-300W).

I was asking if examples of low power GPU applications that need improved performance. So regardless how "improved" this new card will be, just there is no market requesting it.

Why not? Why wouldn't low-power PCs evolve like everything else?
With your logic, SFF would still perform as they did in the 90s.

 

[Ruru]

That's not true at all. There are many use cases that need a power GPU that stay within the PCIe spec. Open your mind a little.

Exactly. Here in Finland there's pretty damn much old (Sandy/Ivy/Haswell) cheap office PCs which could be upgraded to lightweight gaming PCs with a card like this.

 

[notb]

Exactly. Here in Finland there's pretty damn much old (Sandy/Ivy/Haswell) Office PCs which could be upgraded to lightweight gaming PCs with a card like this.

Isn't that happening?
Where I live (Poland) virtually all low-end office desktops end up on second market as cheap home PCs - often with a GPU that wasn't available originally.

 

[Ruru]

Isn't that happening?
Where I live (Poland) virtually all low-end office desktops end up on second market as cheap home PCs - often with a GPU that wasn't available originally.

Yeah, and now there's once again a better solution for those. From last gen, 1050 Ti was pretty damn popular with those. 950 wasn't that popular, but 750 Ti was also very popular upgrade for those.

 

[IceScreamer]

Can't wait for benchmarks, for this and the eventual Ti version, should be a great GPU for my needs.

 

[notb]

Yeah, and now there's once again a better solution for those. From last gen, 1050 Ti was pretty damn popular with those. 950 wasn't that popular, but 750 Ti was also very popular upgrade for those.

In Poland second hand PC market is mostly happening on an auction site called Allegro (total domination - it stopped ebay from growing here), so it's pretty easy to check.
Here's an example:
https://allegro.pl/oferta/komputer-do-gier-dell-i5-gtx-1050ti-16gb-ssd-250gb-7814277348
i5 2400, 1050Ti, 16GB RAM, SSD, legal Windows Pro, 12 month warranty. Not bad for ~$500.
It's "minitower" rather than SFF, but actually quite small - similar to FR Define Nano S.

There are better deals on used HP, but I just can't stand the looks of their office cases. :-D

 

[kanecvr]

896 shaders and 1485/1665MHz compared to GTX 1660's 1408 and 1530/1785MHz makes this about 40% slower. Right in the middle of 1050Ti and RX570.

The niche it fills is 75W TDP so price/performance may not end up being the most important characteristic for it.
The performance gap is rather large though, I would expect a 1650Ti at some point as well.

These simple aluminium coolers will be horrible as usual though

You're forgetting the crippled memory controller and 128 bit bus. It will more likely be over 50% slower. I'll wager the performance gap between the 1660 and 1650 will be the same or (very close) to the gap between the 1050ti and the 1060 6gb, witch is roughly 70% according to techpowerup's GPU database.

wack.
no one buy this.
this belongs in entry-level gaming laptops.


wrong.

cards from this segment just never have made any sense price/performance wise,be it amd or nvidia. and lower you go in this sub-$150 segment,the worse it gets. I had radeon r7 250 back in the day and while it was cheap it was the worst investment to my PC I have ever made.sold it for 7870xt that cost 3x as much and I was super happy.

For ~150$ (this thing's MSRP) one can get an RX 570 witch I'll wager my left nut is 20-30% faster. Heck, if you're patient, you can find a deal on an RX 580 4GB @ about 160$.

 

[lexluthermiester]

You're forgetting the crippled memory controller and 128 bit bus. It will more likely be over 50% slower.

That's an assuption you can not prove.

1050ti and the 1060 3gb

Fixed that for you.

which is roughly 70% according to techpowerup's GPU database.

However, you're comparing the wrong two GPU's.

 

[kanecvr]

That's an assuption you can not prove.

Fixed that for you.

However, you're comparing the wrong two GPU's.

You fixed nothing - why would I compare it to the 3gb model? I'm comparing it to the 6Gb model with 1280 shaders. As for the memory bus is says right there in the article - 128 bit memory interface - how is that not crippled? Have you tried comparing the filtrate of a 1050ti vs the one on a 1060 or RX570/580? I'd call that crippled.

 

[lexluthermiester]

You fixed nothing - why would I compare it to the 3gb model? I'm comparing it to the 6Gb model with 1280 shaders. As for the memory bus is says right there in the article - 128 bit memory interface - how is that not crippled? Have you tried comparing the filtrate of a 1050ti vs the one on a 1060 or RX570/580? I'd call that crippled.

Clearly you understand how manufacturing works...

 

[jabbadap]

Yeah, and now there's once again a better solution for those. From last gen, 1050 Ti was pretty damn popular with those. 950 wasn't that popular, but 750 Ti was also very popular upgrade for those.

Vanilla gtx950 was with one 6-pin power connector and with 90W TDP(chip was gm206). There were couple of models with "75W" TDPs and no extra power, but they were late in the market and stayed relatively rare.

 

[cucker tarlson]

You're forgetting the crippled memory controller and 128 bit bus. It will more likely be over 50% slower. I'll wager the performance gap between the 1660 and 1650 will be the same or (very close) to the gap between the 1050ti and the 1060 6gb, witch is roughly 70% according to techpowerup's GPU database.



For ~150$ (this thing's MSRP) one can get an RX 570 witch I'll wager my left nut is 20-30% faster. Heck, if you're patient, you can find a deal on an RX 580 4GB @ about 160$.

it'll be nowhere near that much faster but still faster.

 

[tvamos]

In Poland second hand PC market is mostly happening on an auction site called Allegro (total domination - it stopped ebay from growing here), so it's pretty easy to check.
Here's an example:
https://allegro.pl/oferta/komputer-do-gier-dell-i5-gtx-1050ti-16gb-ssd-250gb-7814277348
i5 2400, 1050Ti, 16GB RAM, SSD, legal Windows Pro, 12 month warranty. Not bad for ~$500.
It's "minitower" rather than SFF, but actually quite small - similar to FR Define Nano S.

There are better deals on used HP, but I just can't stand the looks of their office cases. :-D

I bought custom built 4670k + gtx1050 for 350€ for my brother in law, so I think that it is too much for price difference.