Untitled
Yes what about it.
>a card with no pricing information
How useful
that's a minuscule fucking card
can it run farmville?
If the price is decent I'll surely buy one
I will wait for the Ti version, thanks.
>Nvidia
>nvidia
>decent price
But amd and nvidia were supposed to give up on the low end because of the used cards market.
Or get a used 1660 ti for the same price.
>not being single slot and low profile at the same time
>buying 1650 while the 570 exists
Just make a low profile RTX2050 all fucking ready.
This
Or the 580. The price difference is negligible.
The point of xx50 is the balance between power consumption and performance. That's why they never require more than PCI for power and they never really get hot.
>Has a fan
I don't get it. There were fanless GTX 1050 Ti cards and this one doesn't consume more power. So why aren't there any fanless GTX 1650 cards?
It's doable with that TDP, you just have to wait for some company make one. But maybe they are waiting for the Ti version? Who knows.
Whatever, it's simply not worth it when 580s have gotten so affordable. Even 700W power supplies for any future upgrades are affordable and the performance difference between 1660 and the 580 is not drastic. Both do 60fps with maybe some dips in unoptimized garbage like PUBG and Fortnite, but the 580 has 2 GB of VRAM more.
>msi
nobody gives a flying fuck about power consumption in desktop computers
the card is shit
What's wrong with MSI now?
>balance
casually 20-25% below 570
Not that user but I do somewhat especially since gpu's have started trying to push clocks higher than they need to be.
With Nvidia's boost 3.0, I need to have my own curves and profiles set up so my card doesn't exceed 75w constantly. If I just leave my card on the default curve with default clocks it's happy to eat up 150w for the same workload. Though it really doesn't matter when the system's idly since the card won't blow past 10-15w usually.
So I can easily see why people still care about power consumption and TDP on cards since I'd love to have a 75w card I could switch between.
How well that thing perform anyway? I thought about getting one for the hell of it.
Provided that's your picture of course.
Not mine. Gotten from here:
manatails.net
It's a pro version of RX560.
Had a feeling.
Thanks!
it was really good for CADs at affordable price, cheaper and faster than a ~600bux Quadro
shit for games
Palit might make another one since they made that fanless 1050ti
What about the rx 570? How is it?
>t. asus fanboy
faster than 1650 and cheaper too - look up benchies
Benchmarks doesn't matter
thats literally bullshit if it was some 150 watts or even 100 watts difference i would say ok its a big jump
but you get a lot more perfomance for what? 60 70 watts difference?
>only like 20% faster than 1050 Ti
>still slower than 1060
I have a computer that uses a low profile port, but this is a really really shitty upgrade from 1050 Ti. I'm not going to bother.
Look, the 1650 is slower than a 1060. The 570 is on par with (or better) than a 970.
it's not a question of benchmarks, the 570 is better in every way other than power consumption and form factor. But that doesn't justify how minimal an improvement over the 1050Ti the 1650 is.
That firepro is way slower than a 1050 Ti.
Even though it's not a cad card, gaming cards are better at cad shit than cad cards are good at gaming shit.
>but you get a lot more perfomance for what? 60 70 watts difference?
You don't get a lot more performance if it's doing this with capped framerates and it's boosting above and beyond what's necessary. Boost 3.0 isn't perfect, it's highly inefficient.
>thats literally bullshit if it was some 150 watts or even 100 watts difference i would say ok its a big jump
You don't consider nearly double the power to be a big jump? It doesn't cost much but it's still not ideal.
sage
>You don't get a lot more performance if it's doing this with capped framerates and it's boosting above and beyond what's necessary. Boost 3.0 isn't perfect, it's highly inefficient.
And there's plenty of games where the 1050 ti and 1650 can't maintain 60fps at high settings where the 570 performs nearly 50% to 100% better. So this argument is nil.
>And there's plenty of games where the 1050 ti and 1650 can't maintain 60fps at high settings where the 570 performs nearly 50% to 100% better. So this argument is nil.
I'm talking about performance on the same card. I don't care about your card wars bullshit and I don't care about your bench marks. I'm talking real world situations so fuck right off.
sage
I don't think you understand sage.
Anyway, the whole point of that discussion was why a 1050 would be any better than a 570. Power performance is the only metric it's better but it's moot because the 570 gets more performance out of that extra power. If you're only talking about for the same card you're a dumbass.
Well nvidia certainly did, basically the only sane choice is to buy a fucking RTX 2060, since everything under is garbage 5 year old tech. They just upped the whole market for 200$
>Anyway, the whole point of that discussion was why a 1050 would be any better than a 570.
No. It was a reply to a reply from my post.
Don't care about your card wars and I'm not reading any more of your post. You can stop responding now, no-one cares about the discussion you want to have
sage
>They just upped the whole market for 200$
Huh? aren't 2060's like $350?
>You can stop responding now, no-one cares about the discussion you want to have
It's literally what the whole thread is about.
Saging is pointless when people reply. The point of sage is when you don't want to contribute to discussion.
The way I look at it is if you compare it like this
gpu.userbenchmark.com
gpu.userbenchmark.com
The price difference between the mid lvl cards 960 -> 1060 was about 50-80$, the price between the mid lvl cards 1060 -> 2060 is about 170$.
And the only true middle lvl card to buy is a 1660 which is basically the same price as a 1060 when it was launched (without the miner inflation ofc) but its a rebranded 1060 that gives you 15% performance increase over a 1060.
Really hoped AMD would up their game to shake the market and fuck up this faggotry, but no luck there. At least they did wonders for the CPU market and gave us buyers better options and cheaper prices.
shit gpu
>You don't consider nearly double the power to be a big jump? It doesn't cost much but it's still not ideal.
for the perfomance increase? obviously not
Of course people care. Good perf/W is essential for silent systems.
>buys a six core
>slaps 16gb
>OYYY VEYYYY LETS BUY A 1650 FOR GOOD P/W
nope nobody ever does that only idiots that have no clue and shills that obviously have something better
It sells, so people care.
>Nvidia released a low power GPU
>GUYS just buy this AMD GPU from 1997, it performs better and costs less! Don't my the AC tier TDP tho
>but that's not the point of these cards, they purpose is to give decent performance under these power consumption constraints, it has many specif...
>WHO CARES about power consumption on desktop?? Card is shit by the way.
Every single time.
I need a low profile GPU for my HTPC that can decode HEVC up to 4K and has 3+ GB of VRAM. Where the fuck is the GT 1030 replacement?? The best low profile GT 1050 Ti has been £150ish for like a year, it's ridiculous.
I think at this point it'd be easier and maybe cheaper to get a £60 mobo, 4 GB of DDR4, and a cheap Athlon APU.
sure they do
afterall the TAM is on low powered gpus instead of mid range 150-250 watts
oh wait
About the only value this card has if for throwing in an Optiplex.
Even a Micro ATX case can fit a 1660/1660ti.
Sounds like a nice idea but dell are retards
>offers perfomance uplift to match its power leakage
>its CHEAPER
>has more vram
>will probably last longer due to fine wine
meanwhile
>a cut down of a cut down
>barely gets 60 fps in many games
>its more expensive
>vram limits you
>literally a piece of shit in general that nobody has ever recomended ever
oh look, another idiot who cant even read but must post his clueless useless opinion
>fine wine meme
Oh no it's retarded.
It sells because people are retarded, think "nvidia has the best card so therefore nvidia has all the best cards", and don't even consider AMD.
>ignores the whole purpose of the card again
do you have brain damage
>ignores the purpose of the card
last time i checked it was branded as
>the best 1080p card
so no
Get a fucking 1660, it's faster than 590, the 1650 is a mess