Nvidia GeForce GTX 1630 Review: An Insult to Gamers?

Tom Yum

Posts: 189   +451
A score of 20 is generous, given the 6500XT got the same score and offers double the performance for about the same price. To my mind, if they have the same score they should equally as bad as each other, but clearly the 1630 is objectively more 'bad' than the 6500 from a price performance and feature set perspective.
 

Steve

Posts: 2,932   +3,082
Staff member
A score of 20 is generous, given the 6500XT got the same score and offers double the performance for about the same price. To my mind, if they have the same score they should equally as bad as each other, but clearly the 1630 is objectively more 'bad' than the 6500 from a price performance and feature set perspective.
I don't do the scores but it's worth keeping in mind that as trash tier as the GTX 1630 is, it can support more than two displays, it supports encoding and has x8 PCIe lanes, all things the 6500 XT/6400 lack.
 

nodfor

Posts: 322   +578
Thanks for the review.

I am curious - how does this card released during the mining / GPU price crash get the same score (20) as the 6500 XT that was released while a $300+ 1050Ti was the #2 selling card on Newegg ?

Not saying the 6500XT is a good card but it‘s twice as fast as the 1630 and can be had for $185 on Newegg right now.

There are still different degrees of bad.
6500 ΧΤ helped the market a lot back then. Pricing decrease in low budget gpus followed immediately after its release and before the crypto crash
This thing now, it is just irrelevant, it just gives an impression of nvidia being out of touch with reality.
 

amghwk

Posts: 1,237   +1,190
I know it's not worth the card, but please highlight the card in question in the charts for a at-a-glance view.
 

Irata

Posts: 2,221   +3,857
I don't do the scores but it's worth keeping in mind that as trash tier as the GTX 1630 is, it can support more than two displays, it supports encoding and has x8 PCIe lanes, all things the 6500 XT/6400 lack.
OK, having eight lanes is nice but what good does it do when the 1630 is still slower than a 6400 on a PCIe 3 system.

Also, having encoding is great (the lack thereof is a deal breaker for me as my kid likes to stream / record gameplay) but what would you realistically encode using the 1630 ? Gameplay seems out of the question looking at the fps numbers.

Checking feature boxes is all well and good and complaining about missing features is justified when it comes to the 6400/6500XT but having them does not make a completely underwhelming POS graphics card like the 1630 any better.
 

Tom Yum

Posts: 189   +451
I don't do the scores but it's worth keeping in mind that as trash tier as the GTX 1630 is, it can support more than two displays, it supports encoding and has x8 PCIe lanes, all things the 6500 XT/6400 lack.
I'll give you encoding, but I would counter that PCI-E 8x is irrelevant when the performance is so low, even your testing showed that the 6400 comprehensively beats the 1630 even on PCI-E Gen 3 4x. Likewise with 3 display support, if you just need to drive three monitors there are cheaper ways to do that.
 

nismo91

Posts: 1,255   +304
Product like this is the reason why people should read or learn if they don't want to get ripped off.

when our work laptop was replaced 3 years ago, we've got the hp laptop running i7 8665U (Iris 620) with Radeon 530. at first I can't believe why such a crappy configuration exist but then I realize there must be someone stupid enough to bulk-purchase it.
 

kmo911

Posts: 352   +43
Good enough for that time I was released. 1650 ok but a more low gpu can only run far cry 1 2. forget about high end gpu fps. this is a limited version. but not bad. loosing bad to other but hey it was not meant to go against super rx g rtx 1080 ti RTX 20XX 30XX intel 380 gpus. plays fine on older games bioshock 1 2 3 remastered. doom can be run in 320x200. so nothing to say on that. a good win dos card in THAT time not 20xx.
 

Steve

Posts: 2,932   +3,082
Staff member
OK, having eight lanes is nice but what good does it do when the 1630 is still slower than a 6400 on a PCIe 3 system.

Also, having encoding is great (the lack thereof is a deal breaker for me as my kid likes to stream / record gameplay) but what would you realistically encode using the 1630 ? Gameplay seems out of the question looking at the fps numbers.

Checking feature boxes is all well and good and complaining about missing features is justified when it comes to the 6400/6500XT but having them does not make a completely underwhelming POS graphics card like the 1630 any better.
It doesn't make the 1630 any better, it makes them all sh*t. I'm not sure how else to put that one for you. They all suck, they all have issues and you shouldn't buy any of them at the current asking prices.
 

zulu53

Posts: 193   +70
It would be nice if Nvidia just described the target audience for this card instead of clearly, in the minds of gamers, not doing this and leading to the obvious critisism. Maybe this card is targeted at less than 1% of the buying public but Nvidia should just say that instead of implying the it is a "sheep dressed up as lamb" as this testing implies. Who knows why they produced this card unless they just tell us who the target audience is - speculation does not help. Techspot. In your review compare what Nvidia say on their website about the purpose (target audience) for this card against what the compeditors cards can do. Maybe Nvidia don't want it to run the games you use; and are not selling it for that purpose. Attack false advertising, if it is false not them not meeting your expectations. There are means to punish Nvidia for false advertising; there is not punishment for them in not meeting your expectations.
 
Last edited:

Steve

Posts: 2,932   +3,082
Staff member
It would be nice if Nvidia just described the target audience for this card instead of clearly, in the minds of gamers, not doing this and leading to the obvious critisism. Maybe this card is targeted at less than 1% of the buying public but Nvidia should just say that instead of implying the it is a "sheep dressed up as lamb" as this testing implies. Who knows why they produced this card unless they just tell us who the target audience is - speculation does not help. Techspot. In your review compare what Nvidia say on their website about the purpose (target audience) for this card against what the compeditors cards can do. Maybe Nvidia don't want it to run the games you use; and are not selling it for that purpose. Attack false advertising, if it is false not them not meeting your expectations. There are means to punish Nvidia for false advertising; there is not punishment for them in not meeting your expectations.
All of this is completely irrelevant. All that matters is what it can do and the price. We don't need Nvidia to tell us who the product is intended for, that's nonsense. But of course they've done that anyway with the GeForce GTX branding.

"Who knows why they produced this card unless they just tell us who the target audience is"

Umm they produced it to make money :S The target audience is anyone foolish enough to buy it, Nvidia couldn't careless who that is.
 
What a f%46kin bullhorn, who the heck says these buyers want to play the super structure games. That's gonna run plenty of awesome older games... talk about the beefhouse why don't you
 
The only reason to purchase this card is for those that want to say hey I have an Nvidia card in my computer on the cheap. Otherwise, this is Nvidia giving all gamers the middle finger.
All gamers dont need massive horsepower
 
Product like this is the reason why people should read or learn if they don't want to get ripped off.

when our work laptop was replaced 3 years ago, we've got the hp laptop running i7 8665U (Iris 620) with Radeon 530. at first I can't believe why such a crappy configuration exist but then I realize there must be someone stupid enough to bulk-purchase it.
Not even you're in the corpo backpocket, most old gamers are happy with Balders Gate 1 and 2 you know
 

Steve

Posts: 2,932   +3,082
Staff member
All gamers dont need massive horsepower
Bizarre viewpoint. You know you don't need to spend $170-$200 on a piece of rubbish GPU to play older games right? Why would you defend/justify Nvidia or any other company taking advantage of unsuspecting consumers? I assume you have shares in the company, it's the only way you could begin to justify such a horrible take.
 

Tom Yum

Posts: 189   +451
All gamers dont need massive horsepower
That argument completely dies in the a*se when there are video cards that offer much higher performance for the same money. Like, why would you buy an objectively worse card if it costs the same as a better one? That better card will also play older games, and be able to play newer games at higher fps.

Which is why the problem with this card isn't the performance, it is the price. If this was sub-$100 it would probably be well received. But at $150-200 it makes zero sense.
 

Irata

Posts: 2,221   +3,857
It doesn't make the 1630 any better, it makes them all sh*t. I'm not sure how else to put that one for you. They all suck, they all have issues and you shouldn't buy any of them at the current asking prices.
Don‘t disagree with you on the ‚not buying‘ part -the 6500XT / 6400 series was a big disappointment for me.

Still, at least they had a justifiable use case. Someone with an Intel Core 11th or 12th gen non F CPU who wanted something cheap that allowed for decent gaming at the time the card was released got it for less than a 1050Ti and did not make a bad purchase compared to the alternatives. On top of that, it did drive prices for cards like a 1050Ti or 1650 down by a good bit.

The 1630 otoh does not have any use case where there isn‘t an objectively better alternative. I think this is the issue some are taking here - both are not equally bad, the 1630 is - all things considered - far, far worse.

But yes, right now with falling prices neither should be purchased.
 

TheRealSCDC

Posts: 459   +777
You see, the joke will end up being on the uneducated consumer. Not all of us at Techspot. The average schmoe will walk in and see that fancy box, a gaming card. Will buy it and think it's great :poop:
 

EdmondRC

Posts: 402   +580
I always saw the GTX 730 as kind of a backup GPU just in case my main GPU failed on a system that required dedicated graphics. The 1630 price point is too much for that. Making the RX 6400 look good was quite a feat. Good job Nvidia.
 
R

Red34jfp

I can't wait for the GTX 1630 DDR4 review, please make it happen.
 

bviktor

Posts: 1,066   +1,556
Steven, you act like you don't know this GPU is intended as an iGPU replacement.

Nevertheless, that idle power consumption is pathetic. But that's just how NV (and Intel) think of efficiency these days. We live in a world where we should reduce our power consumption, yet they keep pushing the industry in the opposite direction. Awful.
 

Steve

Posts: 2,932   +3,082
Staff member
Steven, you act like you don't know this GPU is intended as an iGPU replacement.

Nevertheless, that idle power consumption is pathetic. But that's just how NV (and Intel) think of efficiency these days. We live in a world where we should reduce our power consumption, yet they keep pushing the industry in the opposite direction. Awful.
A $200 US iGPU replacement that's barely faster than an iGPU, I'm an epic actor thanks.