Nvidia could be readying two new GeForce RTX 3050 models to improve availability

nanoguy

Posts: 1,233   +24
Staff member
Rumor mill: Although Nvidia's GeForce RTX 3050 does tick most of the boxes for a mainstream graphics card, availability has been far from ideal. The company is reportedly working on a solution to this problem that would come in the form of additional RTX 3050 models based on the smaller GA107 die.

Last month, Nvidia’s GeForce RTX 3050 launched to great reviews, making a much better first impression when compared to AMD’s RX 6500 XT. Unfortunately for many would-be buyers, it sold out in a matter of hours and pricing also shot up to less palatable levels. Part of the problem is that Nvidia chose to use a cut-down version of the GA106 die from the RTX 3060, which is relatively large and expensive.

There are only so many GA106 dies you can fit on a wafer, so the decision was likely motivated by the relatively poor yield of Samsung’s 8nm process node. In other words, Nvidia may be reusing defective RTX 3060 dies to produce RTX 3050 graphics cards, so availability is still far from ideal.

That said, Nvidia is rumored to have at least two other models in the works, both of which could be based on the GA107 die. This is the same diminutive Ampere die that powers RTX 3050 laptop graphics solutions, which means it could have slightly lower power requirements when compared to the existing RTX 3050 desktop card.

The GA107 die offers the same 2,560 CUDA cores, 80 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 80 Tensor cores, and 20 RT cores as the GA106-150, as well as a 128-bit memory bus and eight PCIe 4.0 lanes. But more importantly, it’s said to be pin-compatible with the latter part, so manufacturers should have an easy time integrating it into their existing PCB designs.

If a recent TechPowerUp entry (spotted by Twitter user @harukaze5719) is to be believed, Nvidia is also readying an RTX 3050 variant with only 4 gigabytes of GDDR6, presumably to meet a lower price point of $199. This could be Team Green’s response to AMD’s RX 6500 XT — a graphics card that isn’t appealing to miners and is relatively easy to produce in large quantities.

Permalink to story.

 

QuantumPhysics

Posts: 6,308   +7,247
The RTX 3050Ti was plagued by lack of VRAM.

All you really ought to do is stop building cards without enough VRAM.

None of your cards should have less than 6GB.
Both the 3050 and 3050Ti should have 6GB GDDR6 at a minimum while the 3050Ti should simply have more CUDA cores.
 

Dimitriid

Posts: 2,216   +4,268
Please remind me, when was the last time they promised availability and there actually was improved availability?

I don't count 2019 since there were no availability problems and henceforth, no promises back then. So I think you have to go back to like 2018 or so?

Closing in on 4 years now, I don't expect prices to stabilize for all of 2022 either so it might end up being 5 or 6 years total by the time MSRP are actually prices you can find.
 

BSim500

Posts: 905   +2,128
All you really ought to do is stop building cards without enough VRAM.

A 4GB card will be VRAM limited no matter how powerful anything else is. You will run games at 80 FPS but still have stutters when VRAM gets filled up. Almost every new game fills up 4GB with just medium textures.
You guys realise not everyone buys low-end GPU's to play AAA's right? Reality check - 4GB cards will run 29,000 out of the 30,000 games on Steam (and 99.9% on GOG) just fine. They're also crap for Ethereum mining, so for those who don't need more, a 4GB VRAM option actually means 4GB VRAM and not 0GB VRAM (if they can't actually buy 8GB versions due to mining...)
 

QuantumPhysics

Posts: 6,308   +7,247
You guys realise not everyone buys low-end GPU's to play AAA's right? Reality check - 4GB cards will run 29,000 out of the 30,000 games on Steam (and 99.9% on GOG) just fine. They're also crap for Ethereum mining, so for those who don't need more, a 4GB VRAM option actually means 4GB VRAM and not 0GB VRAM (if they can't actually buy 8GB versions due to mining...)


No one said anything about AAA games. We are talking about new games to market running at 1080p or 1440p with decent graphics settings, or running HD texture packs.

3050Ti was a laptop GPU and you'd expect some good playability from a $899 - $1100 laptop.
 

Nobina

Posts: 3,835   +4,284
You guys realise not everyone buys low-end GPU's to play AAA's right? Reality check - 4GB cards will run 29,000 out of the 30,000 games on Steam (and 99.9% on GOG) just fine. They're also crap for Ethereum mining, so for those who don't need more, a 4GB VRAM option actually means 4GB VRAM and not 0GB VRAM (if they can't actually buy 8GB versions due to mining...)
The year is 2022 and we are talking about new cards and cards that are not even released yet. I think 4GB cards still have a place in the world but not at these prices. If you're going to pay 2.5x the price for a card, at least do so for a card that will last you some years, not what is basically an RX 580 from 2017. And saying they run 99% of games is silly cause people tend to play what everyone else plays, not some obscure indie titles that can be run on anything.
 

meric

Posts: 364   +359
Going off topic here but this crisis is going to end at some point and at this rate it looks like there may be an over-supply of graphics cards (and perhaps other silicon too). With intel's involvement we may see this over-supply which may result in a good price reduction.

/dreamer
 

maroon1

Posts: 134   +147
The RTX 3050Ti was plagued by lack of VRAM.

All you really ought to do is stop building cards without enough VRAM.

None of your cards should have less than 6GB.
Both the 3050 and 3050Ti should have 6GB GDDR6 at a minimum while the 3050Ti should simply have more CUDA cores.

Techspot review for laptop RTX 3050 Ti tested every game at max setting. Thats why RTX 3050 Ti had issue in a lot of games.

They did not even bother to try test the games on medium or high setting. It is dumb thing to benchmark game on max setting specially when reviewing a budget gaming laptop. Not many people will run demanding like Cyberpunk 2077 on highest setting for example.


A 4GB card will be VRAM limited no matter how powerful anything else is. You will run games at 80 FPS but still have stutters when VRAM gets filled up. Almost every new game fills up 4GB with just medium textures.

Proof ??? I like to show me proof that "almost every game stutter" on 4GB card (like GTX 1650 Super) when running at medium setting.

Funny that GTX 1650 Super easily beat GTX 1060 6GB in almost every game at medium setting. Not just average but also in 1% lows

Look at tom's hardware review, they tested games in both 1080p medium and ultra. GTX 1650 Super 4GB had better average and 99th in every game they tested at medium setting and sometimes the difference is massive.
However when they tested the game at ultra setting + HD textures (like Far Cry 6) GTX 1060 6GB won but both card had poor fps anyway

4GB is not issue for medium setting. If it was an issue you would get big hit in average and in smoothness (poor 99th and low 1%), but we don't see such things on medium setting, the big hits in fps and poor low 1% only happens when you run on higher settings
 
Last edited:

Nobina

Posts: 3,835   +4,284
Proof ??? I like to show me proof that "almost every game stutter" on 4GB card (like GTX 1650 Super) when running at medium setting.
You literally put in quotes something I didn't say, right above it, where you quoted me, you can see I never said that. Do you think we all are that stupid? Re-read what you quoted, LMAO!