The question is why has every 10 series card had low availability? either nvidia have suddenly shut down lots of manufacturing capacity or its artificial to inflate prices.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
GTX1050 to be launched in October
- Thread starter CAT-THE-FIFTH
- Start date
The question is why has every 10 series card had low availability? either nvidia have suddenly shut down lots of manufacturing capacity or its artificial to inflate prices.
If a 1070 is on your radar you should just save for that, this isn't going to make a huge difference from the RX 460.
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,622
- Location
- Planet Earth
Your the one who made the statement,so in the end it needs to be followed by being consistent too and also considering compatability. As I mentioned twice already if an RX460 could have issues,then most likely it follows that an RX470 and probably a GTX1050/GTX1050TI will too.
Also,you might forget other statements I made here:
So I bemoaned the fact AMD only released a cut down Polaris 11 which meant Nvidia didn't need to do much especially when the WX4100 has a full Polaris 11 GPU in a low profile,single slot bus powered card.
Then also the fact none of them have released low profile or single slot cards.
There are plenty of desktop systems which can only take low profile cards,or don't have much room for a dual slot card(some of the systems with horizontal desktop cases).
How the heck can I get excited(and I only really build SFF systems like mini-ITX and Shuttle ones),when they make these oversized cards??
Surely use the TDP savings to make smaller cards??
At this rate if your system is compatible and not having a totally ancient CPU,it might even worth spending £30 to £35 extra on a PSU to get an RX470 or GTX1060 3GB because in FPS/£ metrics I suspect the GTX1050TI would need to be £224 to £240 if we used the Hexus EVGA GTX1050TI as a baseline.
They got so shocked by the ACTUAL price it appears,they went from reasonable praise of the GTX1050TI to saying to just spend the extra on a RX470 4GB or GTX1060 3GB!!
Last edited:
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,622
- Location
- Planet Earth
With AMD its hard to say really. I even predicted that the GTX1050 would probably be faster anyway. They always seem to set themselves up easily for Nvidia to pip them. Anything over £100 for a RX460 was not worth it even at launch. Luckily for AMD,Nvidia has priced the GTX1050 a tad higher but still if the difference is under £10,a GTX1050 probably has the edge in systems which do have weaker CPUs due to the DX11 driver overhead. AMD might get some back with DX12 and Vulkan but if the RX460 had not been so cut down it would have been no contest between the RX460 and the GTX1050. But once you knew it was a 14CU card,you could see where it was heading.
The lack of single slot and low profile RX460 and GTX1050 cards is also pathetic.
We had single slot bus powered 9800GT cards back in the day. 9800GT Green Edition was a great card.
Apparently this is beyond the means of many companies now.
Last edited:
That is a good point and quite a possibility, the only thing I can see against it is the immediate price reduction on the 470 that AMD have just done, which muddies the waters somewhat.
But these are both cheaper and faster than the cards they replace.
We have product in stock and more due very soon, as such there won't really be a supply issue on these and pretty much all other 10 series cards are in stock throughout the world.
Associate
- Joined
- 24 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 189
- Location
- Cardiff
Yeap, come on this is what I'm waiting for, give me low profile 1050 or 1050Ti and I'll smack that buy button!
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2014
- Posts
- 3,581
- Location
- Scotland
You can look at GTX 1050 Ti performance how it compare to other cards.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1050_Ti_Gaming_X/27.html
GTX 1050 Ti is 17% faster than GTX 960 at 1080p. A 15% OC would bring GTX 1050 Ti with 1669MHz boost clock to 115% performance close to stock RX 470.
https://nl.hardware.info/reviews/70...nchmarks-hardwareinfo-gpu-prestatiescore-2016
Hardware.info is probably the only one had included R9 290 in review but no GTX 960. A stock GTX 1050 Ti is only 2% slower than stock R9 290 at 1080p medium settings and a bit OC should match stock R9 290 at ultra settings but it would not matched R9 290 at higher resolutions due to 128 bit memory bus limitation.
OCUK has OCUK GTX 1060 Dual 3GB Halloween deal for £179.99 sound like better deal than MSI GTX 1050 Ti and RX 470 that you may find it more acceptance price.
I wouldn't read to much into his boast about the 1050TI being only 2% behind an R9 290, there is a lot more to it than that.
The same chart has the 290 only just faster than a mid range Kepler, the GTX 770, which is a clock bumped GTX 680, in other words for whatever reason the 290 on their test is under performing by at least 20%. look at the 390 in the same chart, they are the same card only the 390 has a proper cooler on it.
Its also the only chart on the net where the RX 480 is consistently faster than the 390X, a pretty clear indication the results on those older cards are 'as old as the cards' and completely wrong by todays drivers.
Everything but the Pascal and Polaris results on Hardware.info are way out of date and wrong.
A far more accurate thing for him to have said about this cherry picked chart is that the 1050TI is slightly faster than the GTX 770, but then that doesn't sound anything like as fantastic
And, the GTX 770 results there are probably 2+ years old.
Some really serious hard selling of this card by him in this thread.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,622
- Location
- Planet Earth
So an aftermarket pre-overclocked GTX1050TI 4GB against a reference GTX960 2GB with a blower cooler running at reference clockspeeds??
The aftermarket GTX960 4GB cards like mine,won't be much slower at all.
Don't believe me here is a review with a GTX960 4GB card:
http://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficzn...0_ti_alternatywa_dla_geforce_gtx_960?page=0,6
Its barely 10% faster on average.
Is the 960 Bus powered ? cos if the 1050TI is around the same level of performance but is bus powered whilst 960 needs a cable its a win for 1050ti, just wait a bit so it drops in price, black friday and I have a neat card for my home PC that i can play some low games on max details.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2014
- Posts
- 3,581
- Location
- Scotland
No but there is a version of GTX 960 for OEM which is bus powered, it has 192 bit memory bus and 3GB GDDR5.
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2782/geforce-gtx-960-oem
I found it very impossible to find GTX 960 OEM anywhere and really don't know which PC brands supplied GTX 960 OEM in PCs.
GTX 950 LP is available for retail and it is bus powered.
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2841/geforce-gtx-950-lp
Techpowerup had ASUS GTX 950 LP 2GB review.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GTX_950/26.html
GTX 950 LP 25% OC in performance test saw it get close to stock GTX 960 with 6 pin power's performance. Amazing for bus powered GTX 950 LP.
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,622
- Location
- Planet Earth
My system with a compact GTX960 4GB,Xeon E3 1230 V2,16GB of DDR3,a 480GB SSD and two 2TB HDDs consumes around 190W under load running 3DMark or Crysis 3. I have a relatively small case too(a mini-ITX one with limited cooling). Thing is the most I have ever seen it go upto is like 210W briefly. Many games are under that so that means the actual 12V line is much less loaded.Most modern OEM PSUs in system are from companies like Delta or FSP and are biased towards the 12V line anyway.
People overestimate how much of a PSU they really need since many PSU companies like to push excessive wattage PSUs at every turn.
Valve probably knows what they are talking about:
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/10/05/steam-box-specs-revealed/
Yep,Valve was powering a Geforce Titan and a Core i7 4770 off a small form factor 450W.
I wonder how a decade a go I managed with 250W to 400W PSUs in my SFF systems with half decent cards. Oh wait,my last two systems had under 500W PSUs too.
Do yourself a favour and buy a RX470 4GB or a GTX1060 3GB. Even if you have to spend £35 on a PSU,they are both better value.
Even my GTX960 4GB is pushed in games now,so the GTX1050TI is a waste of time at £140 to £160 and my card cost less too. Have you noticed how the review sites tested the expensive ones too??
If you want GTX960 level performance - buy a secondhand GTX960 4GB for under £100 or save up for a proper card. Companies like Gigabyte have transferable warranties as they are dependent on the serial number(not the original purchaser) IIRC.
You could have bought similar performance last year or even the year before. The card is not even massively cheaper. You could get GTX960 and R9 285/R9 380 2GB cards for £120 a YEAR ago,and 4GB cards for not much more on offer.
This is why on Steam more people bought a GTX970 or a GTX960 than either a GTX750TI or GTX750. In reality the GTX970 and GTX960 needing additional power didn't factor into most people's considerations. I would argue the fact the GTX750 and GTX750TI were £80 to £100 were more important.
The problem is that both the RX460 and GTX1050/GTX1050TI are using mobile GPUs tarted up in desktop cards. I am sure relative to their ancestors in each range they look much better in laptops where cooling and size is more limited.
The lack of low profile and single slot RX460,GTX1050 or GTX1050TI cards is hilarious. If companies are going to boast about power consumption and TDP at least make cards which can actually fit into more systems.
No,lets make cards BIGGER than a mini-ITX GTX1070 or a Fury Nano.
People overestimate how much of a PSU they really need since many PSU companies like to push excessive wattage PSUs at every turn.
Valve probably knows what they are talking about:
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/10/05/steam-box-specs-revealed/
Yep,Valve was powering a Geforce Titan and a Core i7 4770 off a small form factor 450W.
I wonder how a decade a go I managed with 250W to 400W PSUs in my SFF systems with half decent cards. Oh wait,my last two systems had under 500W PSUs too.
Do yourself a favour and buy a RX470 4GB or a GTX1060 3GB. Even if you have to spend £35 on a PSU,they are both better value.
Even my GTX960 4GB is pushed in games now,so the GTX1050TI is a waste of time at £140 to £160 and my card cost less too. Have you noticed how the review sites tested the expensive ones too??
If you want GTX960 level performance - buy a secondhand GTX960 4GB for under £100 or save up for a proper card. Companies like Gigabyte have transferable warranties as they are dependent on the serial number(not the original purchaser) IIRC.
You could have bought similar performance last year or even the year before. The card is not even massively cheaper. You could get GTX960 and R9 285/R9 380 2GB cards for £120 a YEAR ago,and 4GB cards for not much more on offer.
This is why on Steam more people bought a GTX970 or a GTX960 than either a GTX750TI or GTX750. In reality the GTX970 and GTX960 needing additional power didn't factor into most people's considerations. I would argue the fact the GTX750 and GTX750TI were £80 to £100 were more important.
The problem is that both the RX460 and GTX1050/GTX1050TI are using mobile GPUs tarted up in desktop cards. I am sure relative to their ancestors in each range they look much better in laptops where cooling and size is more limited.
The lack of low profile and single slot RX460,GTX1050 or GTX1050TI cards is hilarious. If companies are going to boast about power consumption and TDP at least make cards which can actually fit into more systems.
No,lets make cards BIGGER than a mini-ITX GTX1070 or a Fury Nano.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,622
- Location
- Planet Earth
Repeat.
So im looking at upgrading the 750Ti thats in my HTPC which has the following...
GB GA-H67N-USB3-B3
i5 2500K
16GB RAM
I have watch the Digital Foundry Youtube vids of the 1050Ti which they running very high settings and the card seems to struggle to hit a constant 60fps @1080p but im under the impression that DF always do there benchmarks with max AA and AF settings which kills fps in most cases (i only usually run x4 for both).
Do any 1050 owners have an remarks on 60fps @ 1080p with this card or should i get the 1060 3GB version??....i know its obviously a better card but its also more money!
PS. the PSU in my Sugo SG05 case only is 450watt, will this be an issue for either a 1050 or 1060?
GB GA-H67N-USB3-B3
i5 2500K
16GB RAM
I have watch the Digital Foundry Youtube vids of the 1050Ti which they running very high settings and the card seems to struggle to hit a constant 60fps @1080p but im under the impression that DF always do there benchmarks with max AA and AF settings which kills fps in most cases (i only usually run x4 for both).
Do any 1050 owners have an remarks on 60fps @ 1080p with this card or should i get the 1060 3GB version??....i know its obviously a better card but its also more money!
PS. the PSU in my Sugo SG05 case only is 450watt, will this be an issue for either a 1050 or 1060?
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2014
- Posts
- 3,581
- Location
- Scotland
No.
Accorded to Nvidia website on GTX 1050 & 1050 Ti spec required 300W PSU, GTX 1060 3GB & 6GB required 400W PSU but products listed on OCUK said it required 350W PSU.
So your 450W PSU will do fine.