Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 & 1050 Ti Review: Entry-level PC gaming FTW

[Kenrick]

This Pascal architecture is really impressive. Nvidia now covers all segment and a landslide win to them with all the reviews on its cards. Thanks for the review.

 

[Puiu]

The point is that a product that was launched less than 3 months ago is already being discounted due to its lower performance against competition. Unless I am reading the charts wrong the 1050 outperforms the 460 4GB for $109 launch price versus a $139 launch price. Even the $10 difference ($129) doesn't mean much. Combine that with better thermals and power consumption I still think that's an overall win.

Those are just reference prices. For example, where I live the RX 460 4GB is around 160$ (the 2GB is a bit cheaper but not by much) and the GTX 1050 is 195$. it's a given that I can't recommend the Nvidia card at such a big difference in price.

People will buy the card that is cheaper since the difference in performance isn't that much. (or they go with they brand they like more if the price delta isn't that big)

 

[Bigtruckseries]

I would expect the 1050 or even the TI to become a replacement for off-the-shelf gaming PC's GTX 745 4GB cards.

Any PC under $500 might come equipped with these.

Thing is: when all those more expensive, older cards are declining in value, why not just go after one of those instead?

If you've got so little money, you're shopping this cheap - then PC gaming might not be for you?

 

[Puiu]

I would expect the 1050 or even the TI to become a replacement for off-the-shelf gaming PC's GTX 745 4GB cards.

Any PC under $500 might come equipped with these.

Thing is: when all those more expensive, older cards are declining in value, why not just go after one of those instead?

If you've got so little money, you're shopping this cheap - then PC gaming might not be for you?

neah, the 1050 is too expensive for those type of PCs. You can expect them to continue using the cheaper older gen cards for a while longer. (or until they launch the 1040)

 

[Bigtruckseries]

neah, the 1050 is too expensive for those type of PCs. You can expect them to continue using the cheaper older gen cards for a while longer. (or until they launch the 1040)

$500 was too low. Maybe $700 - $900 Towers will have 1050 or 1050ti.

But there's also the 1060 and 1070 for incremental upgrades in configurators.

 

[OcelotRex]

Those are just reference prices. For example, where I live the RX 460 4GB is around 160$ (the 2GB is a bit cheaper but not by much) and the GTX 1050 is 195$. it's a given that I can't recommend the Nvidia card at such a big difference in price.

People will buy the card that is cheaper since the difference in performance isn't that much. (or they go with they brand they like more if the price delta isn't that big)

I understand the sentiment but regional/geographical differences aside using the MSRP is really the only way to compare them in a static nature. Of course if one is greatly cheaper than MSRP and the other is vastly greater than MSRP that's going to make a difference.

 

[Slappy McPhee]

Same status quo. Prices are inflated right off the bat. Amazon is listing limited quantities at $170+. Just ridiculous.

 

[Puiu]

I understand the sentiment but regional/geographical differences aside using the MSRP is really the only way to compare them in a static nature. Of course if one is greatly cheaper than MSRP and the other is vastly greater than MSRP that's going to make a difference.

market price means everything. MSRP be damned. I don't think I've seen current gen cards ever sell at the prices they were "advertised" at.

this is why I always advise people to buy either Nvidia or AMD as long as the price is good and if prices are similar (similar perf/$), as long as they don't need to use the CUDA cores for something, I tell them to get AMD because it has better OpenCL performance and it's generally more future proof.

 

[BlueDrake]

Not to poke fun but someone decided to measure temp, in watts instead of degrees so I was confused for a second.

Also what do you expect for things these days when even a few channels, have called out prices being way off the mark. Not just simply for converting from USD to CDN, Euro or such overall. It's simply they overprice their custom parts, and wanting anything close to MSRP is pretty impossible. Unless you want general reference design cards out of the box, which I'm not knocking but.. they do look a little cheap in comparison.

 

[SlickR]

if you mean the chart on page 9... you do realize the big winner was the RX 470, right? Better price-per-frame than the GTX 1050, much better price-per-frame than the 1050Ti (in fact, the spread between the RX 470 & the 1050Ti is the same as the spread between the 1050Ti & the RX 460).

That is in a different price bracket so of course its going to be faster. Nobody is arguing that. If you can afford a $200 card then this review isn't for you. They added that for a frame of reference. This card is meant to go against the 460, 960, etc....come on man.

OOps....checked out the 470 prices just now. They are slowly going to eat away at these lower priced cards so you are somewhat correct!

Actually the updated RX 470 4GB price is $170, considering it was only applied officially yesterday, I expect it will be about a week or so until prices stabilize at that price point, but even a day after there are few 470's at $170 price, Evga has a card at $170, Zotac has a $170 card, etc...

For just $30 more you get almost 50% more performance.

 

[GeforcerFX]

The 1050 looks like a nice improvment at the price point, but if we start to see those RX 460 2gb's down at $90 I would go for that and save the $20. But I would have a hard time going 1050 TI, literally $30 more and you are in a whole different level of performance. Unless there is some build restriction with heat or size the RX470 with the new price drop is really becoming a price/performance master.

 

[hojnikb]

Impressed with the performance. I could easily see throwing 1 or 2 of these in an entry level build for someone.

1050 series doesn't support sli though.

 

[OcelotRex]

market price means everything. MSRP be damned. I don't think I've seen current gen cards ever sell at the prices they were "advertised" at.

Newegg has been selling the 1060 6GB at or below MSRP since before launch.

Here's a Gigabyte model. Here's a Zotac. Here's the PNY. EVGA had one as well but it's out of stock.

Here's the 1060 3GB at MSRP (also Gigabyte.

Sapphire is even selling the 480 4GB at MSRP, though it's a sale. Admittedly the 480's were overpriced for a long while post launch but prices have come down.

(I've only been pricing 480vs1060 since I am in the market to replace my 760)

this is why I always advise people to buy either Nvidia or AMD as long as the price is good and if prices are similar (similar perf/$), as long as they don't need to use the CUDA cores for something, I tell them to get AMD because it has better OpenCL performance and it's generally more future proof.

And while that's good advice since reviews are static in time a recommendation has to be made off a fixed price I.e. MSRP. They cannot be updated each time AMD drops their price to remain competitive.

 

[Puiu]

Newegg has been selling the 1060 6GB at or below MSRP since before launch.

Here's a Gigabyte model. Here's a Zotac. Here's the PNY. EVGA had one as well but it's out of stock.

Here's the 1060 3GB at MSRP (also Gigabyte.

Sapphire is even selling the 480 4GB at MSRP, though it's a sale. Admittedly the 480's were overpriced for a long while post launch but prices have come down.

(I've only been pricing 480vs1060 since I am in the market to replace my 760)



And while that's good advice since reviews are static in time a recommendation has to be made off a fixed price I.e. MSRP. They cannot be updated each time AMD drops their price to remain competitive.

hey look NA prices, the rest of the world doesn't exist.

 

[OcelotRex]

hey look NA prices, the rest of the world doesn't exist.

I'm pretty sure this review was US-centric as evidenced by the prices on the first page of this review which are the NA prices in USD. The price-per-frame chart on page 9 is also NA prices in USD. Newegg is a reliable US based Online PC Component retailer. I understand that global pricing differs greatly but would be impossible to take into account all those variables in every review.

 

[christiangeli]

The competition is very rough

 

[Tanstar]

I just paid $185 for a 480 4GB (after Masterpass discount) from NewEgg and I have an additional $20 Rebate coming to me. Just saying.

 

[GreenNova343]

hey look NA prices, the rest of the world doesn't exist.

I'm pretty sure this review was US-centric as evidenced by the prices on the first page of this review which are the NA prices in USD. The price-per-frame chart on page 9 is also NA prices in USD. Newegg is a reliable US based Online PC Component retailer. I understand that global pricing differs greatly but would be impossible to take into account all those variables in every review.

Technically, the reviews are always US-centric, because the prices in the reviews here & on a lot of other sites are always listed in USD.

That being said, they also usually add in caveats about availability & price fluctuations (which happen in the US just like they happen in other countries). And whenever they give a "price-per-frame" comparison, they usually either provide the average framerate they used to calculate it, or they give the price-per-frame & the MSRP used to calculate it (which can then be used to backtrack to the the average framerate). Given the average framerate figures, then, you can figure out your own ratio of performance-to-price.

For example, that was why Techspot was hesistant to declare the GTX 1060 a real "winner" over the RX 480, because their testing showed no performance difference between the 4GB & 8GB RX 480 models, but the 4GB models' MSRP was much lower...which meant that the price difference between the 6GB GTX 1060 & the 4GB RX 480 was much, much higher than the performance differences.

Granted, MSRPs ended up differing greatly from actual prices (especially on the non-reference cards -- nothing new there, of course), but you can still use real-world prices to compare -- I.e. if card A provides 15% more performance but costs 30% more than card B, card B is still the better buy, even if both cards are more expensive than their MSRP -- especially if your budget is going to limit you. And yes, even for someone who buys a card like the GTX 1080, budget is still a concern, otherwise they'd be buying 4 of the Pascal GTX Titans to run in Quad SLI, & spend more than they spent on the rest of their system combined (even including the triple 4K monitors they bought).

 

[Thommos tech]

No low profile cards for sff and htpc's? Pathetic.

 

[CaptainTom]

The point is that a product that was launched less than 3 months ago is already being discounted due to its lower performance against competition. Unless I am reading the charts wrong the 1050 outperforms the 460 4GB for $109 launch price versus a $139 launch price. Even the $10 difference ($129) doesn't mean much. Combine that with better thermals and power consumption I still think that's an overall win.

LMAO. A pile of leaks pointed to AMD planning on the 460 costing $99, and the 470 costing $150 AT LAUNCH!

Then they saw Nvidia's complete lack of a challenge in this price bracket, and the 480 outsell the overpriced 1060. Go read the Tomshardware review - AMD wouldn't say the price until a couple hours before the embargo, clearly because they realized the 470 could be sold for the 480's intended price.

 

[OcelotRex]

LMAO. A pile of leaks pointed to AMD planning on the 460 costing $99, and the 470 costing $150 AT LAUNCH!

Interesting, but that was not the prices at launch. I don't see the humor.

Then they saw Nvidia's complete lack of a challenge in this price bracket, and the 480 outsell the overpriced 1060. Go read the Tomshardware review - AMD wouldn't say the price until a couple hours before the embargo, clearly because they realized the 470 could be sold for the 480's intended price.

They've released Q3 sales figures? The 480 was released right at the end and the 1060 was released with about a week into Q3 so I am not sure where you came up with that. In the Steam Survey the 480 lags behind the 1060 (as of September) by about 3-fold. The 470 hasn't shown up yet but the referenced Tom's Hardware review offers insight:

On the topic of dollars, we’ve never seen AMD so reluctant to discuss pricing. Hours before the RX 470’s introduction, we were handed a suggested $179 figure. However, there is no “reference” design, so it’s unclear what you’ll find at that price. Asus passed along that the Strix RX 470 OC Edition we tested would sell for $200, with the non-overclocked model offered at $195.

While you see this as a positive to me it looks like the 470 was supposed to fill the void of not being able to supply the 480 4GB, hence the similar price point. As of this morning there is a single RX 480 4GB at $199.99 on Newegg and 5 or so RX 470 4GB's at $199+

This puts “premium” Radeon RX 470 cards at the same level as reference-class 4GB RX 480s, which doesn’t make sense. Small performance delta aside, at $200, a Radeon RX 480 is the better buy.

Tom's agrees with me here but again the issue is finding the 480 4GB at $199. Three months after launch there still seems to be supply issues.

For now it’s mostly theory anyway. Newegg lists 13 different RX 480 models and none of them are available, even a month after launch. We’re sure they’re trickling out slowly (user reviews abound), but supply hasn’t caught up. Don’t be surprised if Radeon RX 470 is just as hard to get your hands on.

Nearly 2 months after this review the case remains the same. I don't see how charging more then decreasing prices shortly before competition hits is a good thing at all for AMD.

 

[Alex Voinica]

Where I live ( Romania ) the price difference between GTX 1050ti and GTX 1060 3 gb is around 10%. It's bad you did not include the 1060 3gb edition in the benchmark. I think that 10% cash at least in Romania it's worth for buying a GTX 1060 3 GB than a GTX 1050 TI.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

So indeed there is nothing inherently wrong with GCN's efficiency or overclocking. Pascal has barely any more efficiency and practically can't overclock at all when using the same cheap 14nm.

It's well known that GCN is much more inefficient at higher clocks then pascal, and that it cant clock as high. But GCN also has much better IPC, and doesnt need to clock as high. GCN at 925MHz (the sweet spot) I'd argue could give pascal a run for its money at 14nm. But you are right, glofo is still inferior to TSMC.

GCN also benefits from DX12, which nvidia really doesnt. So that also comes into the picture. IMO, GCN is superior. AMD just needs a bit more cash to get the really good chips out on TSMC.

 

[GhostRyder]

Love that 0 power connector 1050ti. Makes me wanna replace my GTX 950 Asus with no power connector just because of the performance!!!

 

[ScubaRhys]

I'm shocked at how poor the modern AMD cards seemed to be fairing at DX12, most of the cards still lose to their Nvidia counterparts in DX12 but just not by as much. What happened? I thought DX12 was AMDs saviour?