NVIDIA GTX 1050 and GTX 1050 Ti Launch on October 25th

Subject: General Tech | October 18, 2016 - 09:01 AM |
Tagged: pascal, nvidia, GTX 1050 Ti, gtx 1050

NVIDIA has just announced that the GeForce GTX 1050 ($109) and GeForce GTX 1050 Ti ($139) will launch on October 25th. Both of these Pascal-based cards target the 75W thermal point, which allows them to be powered by a PCIe bus without being tethered directly to the power supply. Like the GTX 750 Ti before it, this allows users to drop it into many existing desktops, upgrading it with discrete graphics.

View Full Size

Most of NVIDIA's press deck focuses on the standard GTX 1050. This $109 SKU contains 2GB of GDDR5 memory and 640 CUDA cores, although the core frequency has not been announced at the time of writing. Instead, NVIDIA has provided a handful of benchmarks, comparing the GTX 1050 to the earlier GTX 650 and the Intel Core i5-4760k integrated graphics.

View Full Size

It should be noted that, to hit their >60FPS targets, Gears of War 4 and Grand Theft Auto V needed to be run at medium settings, and Overwatch was set to high. (DOTA2 and World of Warcraft were maxed out, though.) As you might expect, NVIDIA reminded the press about GeForce Experience's game optimization setting just a few slides later. The implication seems to be that, while it cannot max out these games at 1080p, NVIDIA will at least make it easy for users to experience its best-case scenario, while maintaining 60FPS.

So yes, while it's easy to claim 60 FPS is you're able to choose the settings that fit this role, it's a much better experience than the alternative parts they list. On the GTX 650, none of these titles are able to hit an average of 30 FPS, and integrated graphics cannot even hit 15 FPS. This card seems to be intended for users that are interested in playing eSports titles maxed out at 1080p60, while enjoying newer blockbusters, albeit at reduced settings, but have an old, non-gaming machine they can salvage.

View Full Size

Near the end of their slide deck, they also mention that the GTX 1050 Ti exists. It's basically the same use case as above, with its 75W TDP and all, but with $30 more performance. The VRAM doubles from 2GB to 4GB, which should allow higher texture resolutions and more mods, albeit still targeting 1080p. It also adds another 128 CUDA cores, a 20% increase, although, again, that is somewhat meaningless until we find out what the card is clocked at.

Update: Turns out we did find clock speeds! The GTX 1050 will have a base clock of 1354 MHz and a Boost clock of 1455 MHz while the GTX 1050 Ti will run at 1290/1392 MHz respectively.

NVIDIA's promotional video

Obviously, numbers from a vendor are one thing, and a third-party benchmark is something else entirely (especially when the vendor benchmarks do not compare their product to the latest generation of their competitor). Keep an eye out for reviews.

Source: NVIDIA

Video News

October 18, 2016 | 09:57 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

So these gpus sit below Amd radeon rx-470 which manages to run most games at 1080 60fps with high settings.

October 18, 2016 | 09:59 AM - Posted by Total Zombie (not verified)

heres a link to the specs, clocks etc

October 18, 2016 | 11:24 AM - Posted by Scott Michaud

Yeah. Ryan got them from NVIDIA a couple of hours before launch. He updated the post.


October 18, 2016 | 12:57 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Wonder how they will compete with an RX 470 price drop to $169. For $30 (assuming the $139 list price) more than the 1050ti you can (theoretically) get 50% more performance with a 470.

October 18, 2016 | 01:26 PM - Posted by Marees (not verified)

At this price range buyers are very sensitive to list price. Also you need to include the additional cost for upgrading the power supply when you move to the RX 470.

October 19, 2016 | 05:36 AM - Posted by JohnGR

You don't need to upgrade any power supply. Most cpus are under 100W and if we focus on Intel CPUs, that's more like 50-65W from the processor. 470 asks for about 150W, if not less. If we add 50 more watts for the rest of the system, any 350-400W good enough PSU will do the job. If we are talking about a $20.... 600W supply, that's another case.
If you are thinking about overclocking, then I am pretty sure that most people who know what overclocking is, already have a quality 80+ PSU from a known brand with at least 500W power and plenty of it on the 12V rail(s).

But you are absolutely right about the price sensitivity.

October 19, 2016 | 07:40 AM - Posted by Bianchi4me (not verified)

A lot (as in, millions upon millions) of pre-built entry-level computers ship with power supplies that don't even have an extra 6 pin connector. There is literally nothing to connect a typical GPU to without swapping out the power supply. Even without considering the extra expense, novice users who are comfortable snapping in a card may be a lot less comfortable doing a PSU swap. There is a reason the 750/ti still sell well, and these replacements will too.

October 19, 2016 | 08:58 AM - Posted by JohnGR

You are probably right here. While I see many prebuild PCs, even cheap, to have an adequate PSU, many probably don't.

October 18, 2016 | 01:42 PM - Posted by renz (not verified)

does the price drop for RX470 already confirmed? even if AMD drop RX470 price to $150 it is not a sure win for AMD. look what happen between 750ti and 270. back then AMD drop 270 price from $200 to $150 to counter 750ti but in some cases people still end up choosing 750ti because with 750ti they doesn't have to replace their 250w-300w PSU. this is one of the reason why 750ti is very successful for nvidia.

October 18, 2016 | 11:48 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Nvidia still gimping and pushing that power metric! JHH's contra revenue!

October 19, 2016 | 05:38 AM - Posted by JohnGR

How many use 250-300W PSUs? People where going to 750ti over 270 or 750 over 260 because of Nvidia's brand. They where just buying the stronger brand. The only exception is those who wanted a card for an HTPC. There, power consumption is an important factor, with performance secondary.

October 19, 2016 | 08:25 AM - Posted by Bianchi4me (not verified)

I see lots of SFF/Minitower PCs that have PSUs in the 180-220 watt range. Millions of moms and dads buy the cheapest PC at Costco/Best Buy/Sams/Wal-Mart which has a PSU that lacks any available 6 pin connectors. Right now, PCs that lack a traditional PSU entirely and use a laptop style power cord brick are becoming a thing. Those can't even be upgraded to something with 6/8 pin power.

October 19, 2016 | 08:59 AM - Posted by JohnGR

I see your point.

October 18, 2016 | 02:55 PM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

Reference rx 460 is supposed to be $110. 1050 is $109 hmmm awfully big coincidence.

You like to compare only using price but like these cards the 460 is supposed to be 75 watts as well. This is the competition not rx 470. No one is arguing that with a price drop 470 may be a better value but I don't see AMD invalidating the 460 this early after release.

AMD is ATM only sending custom versions of 460 for their reviews that have a six pin connector. Custom rx 460 cards are already at the $150 mark MSRP.

AMD hasn't provided any true reference 460 at 75 watts as of yet. Why the smokescreen? Is the performance at 75 watts that poor?

There probably will be a custom 1050 ti that has a higher power limit to compete properly with the 470 ie) six pin connector. Also at an appropriate price tag.

October 19, 2016 | 05:42 AM - Posted by JohnGR

460 can not fight the 1050Ti, and 1050Ti can't fight 470, no matter the extra power connectors. Nvidia will enjoy a clean victory between $140 and $160 price range. If people can't go over $130, they will choose the strongest brand(1050) or the bigger memory(460 4GB). If they can't go over $160, they will have only one option. The 1050Ti.

October 18, 2016 | 01:40 PM - Posted by Tucker Smith (not verified)

Recently, leaked pictures have surfaced showing the upcoming Pentium G4620 as a hyperthreaded dual core...


...and the i3-7300 clocked at 4GHz.

You're talking a lot of juice for $250 / 250 watts.

October 18, 2016 | 02:20 PM - Posted by JohnGR

2 cores/threads are dead. Even the unlocked Pentium at 4.5GHz is getting killed in many occasions.

October 18, 2016 | 03:15 PM - Posted by Tucker Smith (not verified)

Please reread, note "hyperthreaded."

2 cores, 4 threads. That's not dead. The Pentium appears to be clocked lower than the i3, and would presumably lack the usual instruction sets, but if it's churning 4 threads and resides in the normal Pentium price niche, it'll earn a deserved place in a lot of living rooms.

October 19, 2016 | 03:45 AM - Posted by JohnGR

Don't worry. I know what I read the first time. The fact that Intel enables HT on the Pentium, is a good indication that the 2 cores/2 threads processor is dead. only Celeron remains.

October 18, 2016 | 02:17 PM - Posted by JohnGR

The price for the 1050Ti is pretty good, for today's standards. It gives enough room to Nvidia's partners to breath, even if AMD lowers the price of the RX 470.

It's nice to have a little price war, don't you think? Next time you wish AMD to drop dead and die, just ask yourself. What would have been the $199 price of 1050Ti in that case?

October 18, 2016 | 03:07 PM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

When 750ti came out it was $150 retail. This comes in at $11 dollars cheaper and hardly any one gives them any praise for it. I'll give you credit for saying it is at a good price. There is no founders edition as far as I know. LOL.

Nvidia may be taking a loss here to effectively compete with AMD at all price points and not lose more market share than they already have.

The extra markup on the higher end cards give them a little more leverage vs AMD only coming out to market with $239/$200 rx 480 as their highest priced gaming card this year. They can afford to absorb a little here and actually come in under AMD's price.

October 18, 2016 | 11:15 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

The 1050Ti should be cheaper to make than RX 460, as GP107 is even smaller chip than Polaris11. Also GP106 is a smaller chip from Polaris10, even on 16nm. Plus Nvidia is amortizing cost of Pascal development across many chips. ...I don't think Nvidia would be losing money even in case of price war, surely not before AMD would.

October 18, 2016 | 11:36 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

"Nvidia is amortizing" but the retailers will tack on that Nvidia extra retailer markup, MSRP be damned!

October 19, 2016 | 04:07 AM - Posted by JohnGR

The 750ti was behind AMD's offerings in performance at the time it came out, but thanks to the low power consumption it was an excellent choice for the HTPC. In this case Nvidia seems to have the advantage in every case. Considering that Nvidia is increasing prices those last years, not decreasing, those -$11 is a nice surprise. As for founders Edition, with the RX 470 above, there isn't much space for milking. It's not that they don't want to milk Nvidia fanboys more. Here they just can't.

Nvidia is not taking any kind of loss. It's enjoying an over 50% profit margin in it's products in general, so they do have big margins to play. Also an 128bit card is not exactly something expensive to produce. AMD is selling 256bit cards at those prices, like the R7 360. Of course with a much lower profit margin, but definitely not a loss.

The 1050 cards with TDP under 75W and only an 128bit data bus, should be pretty inexpensive cards to produce. 6-8 years ago their price would have been closer to the $79-$99 point, but things changed those last years, and because of the integrated GPUs, there isn't much volume in the low end to support a $79-$99 price. So we get $109-$139 and we also say "thank you"

The extra markup in the hi end is to make their shareholders smile, not to gave them the chance to be more aggressive in pricing of lower models. Nvidia had abandoned the market under $300 with the Maxwell and only came back to that market because of Polaris. Please don't mention that joke, the 128bit GTX 960 with that ridiculous $200 MSRP.

October 19, 2016 | 01:13 PM - Posted by Stefem (not verified)

Then a look at the Steam hardware survey database would be pretty interesting for you...

October 19, 2016 | 02:17 PM - Posted by JohnGR

Or you can explain yourself. Don't tell "no no go there", because you can't expect me to be in your mind and also come to the same conclusion. If you want to say something, say it in detail.

October 18, 2016 | 06:47 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I'm not a fan of nVidia as a company but they do have a great marketing team.

October 18, 2016 | 07:51 PM - Posted by johnc (not verified)

It's easy to market when they have great products.

October 19, 2016 | 02:14 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Great products that move down a performance tier or two when running DX12.

October 19, 2016 | 02:42 PM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

When compared to AMD's gaming evolved titles perhaps. DX 12 is practically a custom API designed solely for AMD. Gears of War 4 and 3Dmark Timespy show that async can be programmed for Pascal. So why hasn't AMD titles been doing it? Ah right they want to win benchmarks and say Nvidia architecture don't support it. Losing by a few frames in dx12 titles isn't bad. Dx12 is not necessary anyways as there is no difference between dx11 and 12 versions so far.

Let's talk about AMD's crappy VR performance. They are losing by more than a few dropped frames and rendering times are generally atrocious.

October 19, 2016 | 08:45 AM - Posted by Bianchi4me (not verified)

I'm more excited to see these perform inside laptop applications. A genuine, gsync stable 60 frames per second at 1080p, even with somewhat reduced settings, used to require a dedicated gaming laptop with a 970m. If the 1050/Ti can creep into that territory, it will open up a huge number of mainstream laptop designs to gaming use.

October 19, 2016 | 01:00 PM - Posted by Fourty7

Ok, so on the 2nd or "Upgrading is Easy" image, the middle slide says "Click a button"...

I'm pretty sure installing drivers isn't that easy (especially now, thanks Nvidia!), but is this assuming everyone already has them installed?! It just bothers me to see them act like it's easier when they just made it harder I guess.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.