NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is Still the Most Popular GPU in the Steam Hardware Survey

[Dr. Dro]

/perusing at your system specs/

I'm even wondering why...

Jokes aside, considering current econonic situation worldwide and massive cock-ups with prices (not to mention mining fever impact) people are now more sure it's not the greatest idea to invest in a gaming PC for gaming. Add worst game optimisation and gameplay crimes possible wreaked throughout last five years and finish it by "this mammoth don't fit my PC case and will nuke my PSU."

Dark times have come.

I mean, yes, they're nice. But I had a 5950X and could have perfectly gotten a 4090 instead, if it wasn't so obnoxiously priced. I've had this GPU for 3 years, and it's a geological age when it comes to hardware.

The rest of the stuff? All of it combined cost me less than a 4080 would. It's insane, NV is pushing enterprise prices on their gear.

I'm not buying into this nonsense and have been very outspoken about it. VOTE with your wallet.

And many people like myself... did.

Yes, agreed... That's what I have decided to do.

 

[evernessince]

Only if game developers take these Surveys into consideration and optimize the games more.

No, I don't want game makers optimizing for the most common PC Cafe cards.

 

[AusWolf]

In my opinion PC gaming is an old people hobby, sure there are kids who are still enthusiastic about building a computer and playing fortnite and e-sports games but it's nothing like in the old days when we marveled at the first Diablo, Warcraft, Starcraft, C&C, Doom, Quake..... and so on.
In those days there was a thirst for new technology, we would make sacrifices to buy a new GPU.
Nowadays most kids have no idea how to build a computer and don't even care, play on phone, console or some gaming laptop.
Some are lucky to have someone to build them a gaming computer and this is rare.

We would make sacrifices to buy a new GPU because we had to. Some new technology came out every year that was incompatible with last year's GPU. Now, you could even play today's games on a Kepler GPU that came out 10 years ago if you really wanted to. Sure, hardware prices have gone up a lot recently, but you don't have to upgrade every generation, like you had to back then.

And of course, kids don't buy gaming PCs, but their parents do, like our parents did back then.

 

[Vayra86]

It's not a matter of being broke. For some of us it is about the BS of greed from these tech companies. I'm still on a 5700/XT and my backup is a 1070.

Do you really think that the AAA gaming industry is just going to cut people off because people are on 6+year old video cards/equipment? HELL NO! They got to make their money somehow beside selling their customer base broken games on launch. They read the and know the data like I do.

I'm not buying into this nonsense and have been very outspoken about it. VOTE with your wallet.

And many people like myself... did.

That's right, it'll all balance itself out. Gaming exists, despite the shitstorm that is GPU land. It'll remain so.

This is one of the main reasons I think RT isn't going places... Look at the 4060. It has to keep up / report any semblance of generational improvement by use of DLSS3.

 

[AusWolf]

I mean, yes, they're nice. But I had a 5950X and could have perfectly gotten a 4090 instead, if it wasn't so obnoxiously priced. I've had this GPU for 3 years, and it's a geological age when it comes to hardware.

No, it's not. Like I said above, you could play on a 10 year-old Kepler GPU if you wanted to, or on a 1650 like many do, as the article demonstrates. Hardware upgrades aren't like they were 20 years ago when you had to buy a new GPU every year because the old one didn't play the newest games. We're a bit like in Intel's quad-core era now, when upgrading isn't a necessity, but a choice.

 

[kapone32]

I have 5 PC connected to Steam in my house. Which one does it pick. Most likely my 3060 based laptop.

 

[Dr. Dro]

No, it's not. Like I said above, you could play on a 10 year-old Kepler GPU if you wanted to, or on a 1650 like many do, as the article demonstrates. Hardware upgrades aren't like they were 20 years ago when you had to buy a new GPU every year because the old one didn't play the newest games. We're a bit like in Intel's quad-core era now, when upgrading isn't a necessity, but a choice.

I agree with you, but it's not that we have been without progress in the meantime. Let's use as a baseline the Radeon VII, now a roughly 4 year old GPU: the 3090 was easily twice as fast as that card, and now the 4090 is also almost twice as fast as the 3090, accounting the numerous refreshes and models released since, if you disregard price in the upper gamut GPUs available you're looking at around 3.5x to 10x+ (RT accounted for) the amount of GPU muscle in 4 years. And a GPU that's as powerful as the Radeon VII would still be competent enough to play almost any game if you lower the settings and, of course, disable the things it can't support. Way less gloomy than this just sounded, btw - that card will still provide a great experience.

It's true you don't need to rush for an upgrade to simply run things, but the new GPUs do have some substantial muscle upgrades: the question is, when is it worth spending money to upgrade? The prices have gone up way more than the performance we've gotten in terms of relative value, because the cards we have still work fine - which leads to the shameless product segmentation stunts that Nvidia has pulled (DLSS3)

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

upgrading isn't a necessity, but a choice.

That's why I choose to upgrade my secondary RX 480 to something from RTX 2000 series. Sounds dumb, I know, the only reason I'm doing it is because I've never had any RTX 2000 series GPU. Will go for anything but 2060 6 GB (because it's too slow) and 2080 Ti (too expensive where I live). I'd go for some RTX 3000 card as well but considering our 2nd hand market prices and YOLO PC tasks it makes no sense. 2070 is the sweet spot.

How do I sell my 1060-3 and 480-8 is a million dollar question here. NO ONE WANTS THEM. This is how dead the market is.

 

[Fluffmeister]

But but but.... RayTracing. Gaming doesn't exist without RayTracing.
Right? Right? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight???????????????????????

After the release of the great and amazing and super and wonderful RTX 4060, I see the RTX 3060 becoming an amazing hit in new and second hand market. Wouldn't be surprised to see it's percentage going up.

Yes, and all gamers need vast amounts of VRAM too, honest.

 

[AusWolf]

I agree with you, but it's not that we have been without progress in the meantime. Let's use as a baseline the Radeon VII, now a roughly 4 year old GPU: the 3090 was easily twice as fast as that card, and now the 4090 is also almost twice as fast as the 3090, accounting the numerous refreshes and models released since, if you disregard price in the upper gamut GPUs available you're looking at around 3.5x to 10x+ (RT accounted for) the amount of GPU muscle in 4 years. And a GPU that's as powerful as the Radeon VII would still be competent enough to play almost any game if you lower the settings and, of course, disable the things it can't support. Way less gloomy than this just sounded, btw - that card will still provide a great experience.

It's true you don't need to rush for an upgrade to simply run things, but the new GPUs do have some substantial muscle upgrades: the question is, when is it worth spending money to upgrade? The prices have gone up way more than the performance we've gotten in terms of relative value, because the cards we have still work fine - which leads to the shameless product segmentation stunts that Nvidia has pulled (DLSS3)

It doesn't matter. If your X year-old GPU can play your games the same as the newest shiny thing can, then why upgrade? Who cares if it's faster?

 

[eidairaman1]

Yup poor.

 

[AusWolf]

That's why I choose to upgrade my secondary RX 480 to something from RTX 2000 series. Sounds dumb, I know, the only reason I'm doing it is because I've never had any RTX 2000 series GPU. Will go for anything but 2060 6 GB (because it's too slow) and 2080 Ti (too expensive where I live). I'd go for some RTX 3000 card as well but considering our 2nd hand market prices and YOLO PC tasks it makes no sense. 2070 is the sweet spot.

That's why I bought a 2070 myself, to be honest. I never needed it, I was just curious. Now that I've seen RT/DLSS not living up to the hype, I'm happy with a 6750 XT that is also way faster than what I'd ideally need. Yolo.

If I upgraded only out of pure necessity, I'd still be on a 1660 Ti that I bought back when it came out.

 

[Beginner Macro Device]

way faster than what I'd ideally need

This is why your 6750 XT, be it framecapped, eats way less ctricity, thus you gain even more longevity, physical one.

 

[wolf]

Yes, and all gamers need vast amounts of VRAM too, honest.

Be careful dude, if you say VRAM 3 times in front of a mirror Lisa Su will appear and bludgeon you to death with an RX 7600.

Well, either her or one of her volunteer marketing department goons, she's got a pretty busy schedule.

 

[Karti]

Anyone curious how GTX 1650 beaten GTX 1060 in the Steam Survey - it is mostly about last 2 years and how hard it was to build a proper PC.

It was simply easier and cheaper to buy an OEM PC and fit it with GTX 1650 than even doing a second hand build with GTX 1060 - was forced to do it myself during covid pandemic...


As well - GTX 1650 is still the crowned king of low profile consumer GPUs - A2000 is NOT a typical gamer product and the price is still too high for the low profile market - which says a lot
tho fun fact... if A380 will still get updated with better drivers AND officialy released in LP model - in some time A380 might take a crown of the best low profile GPU because even with similar performance, it still rocks RT, XeSS (better than 1650) full encode and decode possibilities, 3-4 video outputs (better than RX 6400) and 6GB instead of 4GB VRAM (better than both GTX 1650 and RX 6400)

 

[Keullo-e]

The graphics card shortage mostly rised its popularity.