Nvidia GTX 1050 leaked specifications surface

[Kenrick]

The 1070 and 1080 don't have counter-parts, the 1060's MSRP is higher than the RX 480s at a slight performance increase, and the 1050 is looking to be more expensive with a slight performance increase. Aside from the overly expensive RX 480 right now, the general trend with Nvidia has always been a bit more performance and allot more money. If you look at the R9 290x vs the 780 Ti you can see the R9 290x has aged better. Nvidia cards for the most part outperform their counterparts but I wouldn't call it handily and it's usually at the cost of future performance. Ergo, GTX 970, a $350 card that after only one year is showing memory deficiencies in more demanding games. Usually you'd expect to get more than 2 years out of a video card. Nvidia cards are excellent if you plan to upgrade rapidly but they usually aren't designed with the future in mind.

Another again. Man, just let it off with your AMD is superior to Nvidia. Your comparisons are assumptions at best. The RX 480 8gb is a great card but that is the only great card from AMD right now in every segment. Seriously you are jabbing old nvidia cards just to make AMD cards look better? Why not jab at the present cards now. Are you really that desperate. Jeez Tell AMD to release new cards already so gamers will have a lot of options. Just let it go and be happy with your 290x. Seriously.

 

[Evernessince]

Except the R9 390X came out a YEAR later.... obviously it should be a bit better... And of course it's "aged better" - it's NOT AS OLD!

And let's look at the most recent prices for the 1060 vs 480.... almost the same (the 3GB is actually cheaper) and it beats it hands down... I refer you to the techspot review of the 1060.... check real world prices on newegg....

We can also look at AMD's last attempt at the high-end gaming market... the FuryX... same price as it's Nvidia counterpart - how'd that turn out?

You said the 970's counterpart, the R9 390x is it's counterpart. The R9 290x was pitted against the 780 Ti.

I already stated that the 480's pricing was off, as we all know right now. You need only look at the MSRP. I also already stated that the 6% it has on the RX 480 isn't a "hands-down" win. It doesn't win across the board and usually by a small margin.

The Fury X is cheaper than a 980 Ti by a good chunk and holds it's own at higher resolutions, the only thing you should be using these cards for anyways. The 980 Ti is great at 1080p but the playing field levels above that.

 

[Evernessince]

Another again. Man, just let it off with your AMD is superior to Nvidia. Your comparisons are assumptions at best. The RX 480 8gb is a great card but that is the only great card from AMD right now in every segment. Seriously you are jabbing old nvidia cards just to make AMD cards look better? Why not jab at the present cards now. Are you really that desperate. Jeez Tell AMD to release new cards already so gamers will have a lot of options. Just let it go and be happy with your 290x. Seriously.

Unlike you I don't follow people around because I have my purchase to protect. First, I never said AMD is superior. I don't think you know what the word assumption means, given I've provided links and all you seem to be able to do is make snide remarks.

The only thing your comment proves is that you are following me around TechSpot commenting on anything I say that could possibly be interpreted as anti-Nvidia. It's pretty obvious where your interest lie.

The GTX 1060 is definitely the better buy right now given the RX 480's price point.

 

[Squid Surprise]

You said the 970's counterpart, the R9 390x is it's counterpart. The R9 290x was pitted against the 780 Ti.

I already stated that the 480's pricing was off, as we all know right now. You need only look at the MSRP. I also already stated that the 6% it has on the RX 480 isn't a "hands-down" win. It doesn't win across the board and usually by a small margin.

The Fury X is cheaper than a 980 Ti by a good chunk and holds it's own at higher resolutions, the only thing you should be using these cards for anyways. The 980 Ti is great at 1080p but the playing field levels above that.

The FuryX's MSRP was $649.... same as the 980Ti....

And the MSRP of the 1060 is $250, with the 480 at $240... even if the increase is only 6%, the extra $10 would be well worth it.

Nvidia tends to rule virtually unopposed because just about the only time AMD can produce a superior card is when they release it a year later!!

 

[Kenrick]

Another again. Man, just let it off with your AMD is superior to Nvidia. Your comparisons are assumptions at best. The RX 480 8gb is a great card but that is the only great card from AMD right now in every segment. Seriously you are jabbing old nvidia cards just to make AMD cards look better? Why not jab at the present cards now. Are you really that desperate. Jeez Tell AMD to release new cards already so gamers will have a lot of options. Just let it go and be happy with your 290x. Seriously.

Unlike you I don't follow people around because I have my purchase to protect. First, I never said AMD is superior. I don't think you know what the word assumption means, given I've provided links and all you seem to be able to do is make snide remarks.

The only thing your comment proves is that you are following me around TechSpot commenting on anything I say that could possibly be interpreted as anti-Nvidia. It's pretty obvious where your interest lie.

The GTX 1060 is definitely the better buy right now given the RX 480's price point.

I don't follow you around. Not worth it.

Inserting AMD superiority remarks in Intel and Nvidia articles seems your forte and trying hard to mask your AMD preference is so obvious.

BTW, I'll give you something to pull your hair. Take a look at the updated table. Now check where RX 480 is.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html

 

[Evernessince]

I don't follow you around. Not worth it.

Inserting AMD superiority remarks in Intel and Nvidia articles seems your forte and trying hard to mask your AMD preference is so obvious.

BTW, I'll give you something to pull your hair. Take a look at the updated table. Now check where RX 480 is.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html

Says the guy who so badly wants a fairy tale to come true

The FuryX's MSRP was $649.... same as the 980Ti....

And the MSRP of the 1060 is $250, with the 480 at $240... even if the increase is only 6%, the extra $10 would be well worth it.

Nvidia tends to rule virtually unopposed because just about the only time AMD can produce a superior card is when they release it a year later!!

I wasn't going off of MSRP. You were using the 1060's current market price vs the RX 480s. Why would it be ok for you to use current market price but not me? The 8 GB RX 480's MSRP is $240 but that is not the best value, the 4 GB model is essentially the same in benchmarks and much cheaper. Right now I would buy a GTX 1060 either way, it's the only card at or below it's MSRP. When or if the RX 480 reaches it's MSRP I would then consider it.

 

[Squid Surprise]

I wasn't going off of MSRP. You were using the 1060's current market price vs the RX 480s. Why would it be ok for you to use current market price but not me? The 8 GB RX 480's MSRP is $240 but that is not the best value, the 4 GB model is essentially the same in benchmarks and much cheaper. Right now I would buy a GTX 1060 either way, it's the only card at or below it's MSRP. When or if the RX 480 reaches it's MSRP I would then consider it.

Except you said you were... and I gave BOTH arguments with the 1060 vs 480.... the MSRPs of both are within $10, as well as the real world prices being virtually identical... but we both agree on the 1060 being the better buy, so dunno what your issue is there...

I already stated that the 480's pricing was off, as we all know right now. You need only look at the MSRP.

That's why I gave them to you... if you're going to argue, make it consistent...

And the reason the Fury X is cheaper than its MSRP now is because it couldn't compete with the 980Ti, even though that's what it was designed to do...

 

[Evernessince]

Except you said you were... and I gave BOTH arguments with the 1060 vs 480.... the MSRPs of both are within $10, as well as the real world prices being virtually identical... but we both agree on the 1060 being the better buy, so dunno what your issue is there...



That's why I gave them to you... if you're going to argue, make it consistent...

And the reason the Fury X is cheaper than its MSRP now is because it couldn't compete with the 980Ti, even though that's what it was designed to do...

I think we agree on everything here. Right now the GTX 1060 > RX 480 and the 980 Ti > Fury X. I would only choose either AMD card if I was going to be playing allot of DX 12 games, which is unlikely. The Fury X's gains in DX 12 are amazing but there are only a handful of games on the market. It's also priced decently if you don't quite have enough for a 1070 or 980 Ti.

 

[Pewzor]

The GTX 970's counterpart is the R9 390x and no, the GTX 970 wins in very few games, mostly Nvidia sponsored

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10446/the-amd-radeon-rx-480-preview/4

The R9 390x takes a lead in most games, especially above 1080p and in DX 12 / Vulkan titles.

"How about a lot more performance and just a bit more money..."

I'd like to see you provide an example of that.

Well maxwell gpus see performance degradation using dx12 and vulkan in pretty much every single game that has it even in Tomb Raider which is an nVidia game.

Most nVidia fans are pretty selective in what they choose to see. Usually only games with GimpWorks is taken seriously.
Understand what I mean? basically only nVidia GameWorks games are legit benchmarks, AMD Gaming Evolved games are clearly not legitimate benchmarks. Or any game where nVidia doesn't come out on top is not legitimate. They are conditioned to think like that, there's not much you can do.

http://I.imgur.com/NeqHcbs.png

 

[GreenNova343]

Wow, a lot of argument & vitriol for an unconfirmed rumor. Every single page I can find that talks about the GTX 1050's supposed "specs" -- Motley Fool, Digital Trends, Techspot, etc. -- all reference WCCFTech's translation of a single Chinese-language page, with a supposed "screenshot" of GPU-Z -- & a partial one at that, as it cuts off the parts that would show the app used to "detect" those supposed specs.

Here's the thing: there's zero news about it from nVidia. Now, maybe for some reason they'd want to keep it quiet, even though the rumored launch is not that far away ("mid-October" is literally only 5 weeks away). But why keep it quiet? And why is everyone making claims about performance based on a single, unsubstantiated partial screenshot?

 

[Evernessince]

Wow, a lot of argument & vitriol for an unconfirmed rumor. Every single page I can find that talks about the GTX 1050's supposed "specs" -- Motley Fool, Digital Trends, Techspot, etc. -- all reference WCCFTech's translation of a single Chinese-language page, with a supposed "screenshot" of GPU-Z -- & a partial one at that, as it cuts off the parts that would show the app used to "detect" those supposed specs.

Here's the thing: there's zero news about it from nVidia. Now, maybe for some reason they'd want to keep it quiet, even though the rumored launch is not that far away ("mid-October" is literally only 5 weeks away). But why keep it quiet? And why is everyone making claims about performance based on a single, unsubstantiated partial screenshot?

Nvidia doesn't release news for it's lower end cards until they are released, ergo the GTX 1060 3 GB. Heck, even reviews are minimal on that card.

The rumors have been pretty dead on this year. The leak of the 1080 / 1070 shroud was correct as were the specs. The leak of the 1050 seems pretty much dead on with what we were expecting. The only leak I remember disappointing is the RX 480 getting good overclocks and frankly AMD really needed that to help it against the 1060.

Why keep it quiet? Well that's for whoever to speculate on. I'm guessing it's the same reason as the 3 GB 1060, it's just not something you can trumpet up with promotional material.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Well maxwell gpus see performance degradation using dx12 and vulkan in pretty much every single game that has it even in Tomb Raider which is an nVidia game.

Most nVidia fans are pretty selective in what they choose to see. Usually only games with GimpWorks is taken seriously.
Understand what I mean? basically only nVidia GameWorks games are legit benchmarks, AMD Gaming Evolved games are clearly not legitimate benchmarks. Or any game where nVidia doesn't come out on top is not legitimate. They are conditioned to think like that, there's not much you can do.

http://I.imgur.com/NeqHcbs.png

Interesting.... got any other proof other than 1 benchmark of Doom at 1080p? Other than the 2 bottom cards, they all play it at over 100FPS, so "vulcan degradation" is rather irrelevant... can u post a 1440p or 4k?

https://www.techspot.com/review/1173-doom-benchmarks/page3.html
https://www.techspot.com/review/1173-doom-benchmarks/page4.html

Fury X not looking quite as hot any more... and this is the benchmark that flatters AMD the most...

And the same kind of goes for AMD fanboys... only dx12 titles (of which there are less than a dozen!) seem to matter to them....