Pascal drops some weight; GTX 1050 and 1050 Ti fight in the under $150 category

Subject: Graphics Cards | October 25, 2016 - 01:21 PM |
Tagged: pascal, nvidia, msi, GTX 1050 Ti, gtx 1050, GP107

The Guru of 3D tested out MSI's GeForce GTX 1050 and 1050 Ti, with MSRP's of $109 and $139 respectively.  The non-Ti version has the lowest count of Texture Mapping Units of this generation but a higher GPU frequency that the Ti model, it also has the smallest amount of memory at 2GB though at least it is clocked the same in both models.  DirectX 12 testing offers variable results, in many games the two are bookends to the RX 460 with the GTX 1050 a bit slower and the 1050 Ti a bit faster but this does not hold true in all games.  DirectX 11 results were more favourable for this architecture, the two cards climbed in the rankings with the 1050 Ti offering acceptable performance.  Check out their full review here.

View Full Size

"Last week Nvidia announced the GeForce GTX 1050 series, with two primary models. In this article we'll review the MSI GeForce GTX 1050 and 1050 Ti Gaming X, two graphics cards aimed at the budget minded consumer. We say budget minded as these cards are very affordable and positioned in an attractive 109 and 139 dollar (US) segment."

Here are some more Graphics Card articles from around the web:

Graphics Cards

Source: Guru of 3D

Video News

October 25, 2016 | 01:31 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Perfect little GPU for your sexy ass Jeremy :p

October 25, 2016 | 03:03 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Hahahaha ROFL! #NINJA'd

October 25, 2016 | 01:35 PM - Posted by JohnGR

GTX 1050 is nothing special, but the 1050Ti is a nice one. Excellent choice for those that under no circumstances they will go over $150.

October 25, 2016 | 02:33 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I'd go the extra $20-$30 and get the RX470! There is a problem with MSRP pricing and GPUs, so it's better to look at the average pricing from the retailers to see just what extra value can be had. Those RX470 prices are falling even without the new MSRP pricing reductions from AMD taken into account. I'm looking at dual RX470's and a very affordable Dual GPU solution that Nvidia does not allow currently for its low cost SKUs.

Maybe DX12's/Vulkan's multi-adaptor support can let dual GTX 1050 or dual GTX 1050Ti owners make use of dual GPU configurations that Nvidia does not allow for with SLI. Dual RX470's can use CF or DX12's/Vulkan's multi-adaptor support. I'd really like to see some DX12/Vulkan GPU multi-adaptor benchmarks on the Nvidia offerings once the new Graphics API software ecosystem catches up in the gaming engines and games over the next few years. Will CF/SLI become obsolete when the new graphics API managed Multi-GPU technology takes over.

October 25, 2016 | 03:02 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

You're a fucking idiot.

October 25, 2016 | 04:07 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

You're an fucking Nvidiot, you like eating Green Goblin snot!

October 25, 2016 | 04:58 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

an incredible display of projecting ones own insecurities that is generally only seen by politicians and the very people whom this assumed human being is attempting to insult.

October 25, 2016 | 05:34 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Psychobabble qu'est-ce que c'est fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa far better. To make them mad! Those Gaming Gits throwing fits! It's fun to egg them on, both Green and Red, and hope they kill each other, dead!

October 25, 2016 | 04:14 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Fantastic rebuttal sir, you showed him!

The 1050 beats the 460 at a similar price, so get the 1050.

The 1050ti is about 25-30% slower than the 470 but only about $10-20 less, so get the 470.

It's not hard to understand...

October 25, 2016 | 06:14 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

is  #MAGA something that only kids born in the '00's know?

October 25, 2016 | 08:13 PM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

It's the slogan for Donald Trump. Make America Great Again.

October 26, 2016 | 01:19 PM - Posted by Jeremy Hellstrom

but that's just wrong ...


October 25, 2016 | 08:04 PM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

You are paying $20 extra for 20-30% more performance and are using 67.5% more watts to do it (129 vs 77). Not a very good deal if you ask me. Heck the 1060 uses only 5 more watts than a 470. Starve that 470 down to the 77 watts the 1050ti uses and see how much of your framerate lead survives.

Higher wattage is the gift that keeps on giving you bigger electric bills. Before you start with it doesn't cost that much more at 52 watts more. That's $5.31 a year at 4 hrs a day at .07 per killowatt hour. The rate here is really cheap but elsewhere it's a lot more or if you game more well you get the picture.

And remember AMD knocked $10 off the price because well they want people to buy their more inefficient card.

October 26, 2016 | 08:19 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Desktop gaming involves no batteries to worry about, as long as the cooler is going a good job I couldn't care less how much power a GPU uses.

GPU A saves me £10 a year over GPU B in electric a year? I'm never going to notice it. I'd rather change the 60w light bulbs in my house to 8w LED and save a load more (I have).

What I am going to notice is a shitty framerate that an extra £20 would have cured.

October 26, 2016 | 11:48 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Just like Nvidia to try and spin that async compute deficiency as power saving. Oh those DX12 and Vulkan benchmarks that show GCN improvements from Polaris and even a few GCN GPU versions back on AMD's more hardware enabled GPU SKUs! It's Nvidia trying to justify its gimping and charging a lot more for a lot less hardware FP/other performance. Let's look at the RX 470's FP resources while Nvidia just throws ROPs at the problem to throw out a few more non quality FPS while regressing on the newer Graphics APIs.

For a few dollars more any user can see that the RX 470 is the price/performance leader. AMD's GPUs have instruction prefetch hardware to allow its Polaris GPUs to more efficiently make use of those extra async compute resources and primitive discard accelerators to get any unneeded geometry out of the execution pipelines earlier in the cycle to prevent any unnecessary wasting of GPU execution resources. With Vulkan and DX12 the GPU will be there for more than just graphics on AMD’s GCN/Polaris SKUs there will also be more non graphics gaming compute accelerated on the GPU where GCN has more FP compute while Nvidia strips out the FP to charge for every little bit of gimped compute for those extra Green Goblin dollars.

Just you watch how that Nvidia hardware ages and what new regressions will come to be, intentional and unintentional, as the result of Nvidia’s gimping. AMD is getting more efficiency out of its GCN all while not getting rid of FP/Other resources and the whole gaming market is shifting over to Vulkan and DX12 where the gaming engine makers will make good use of all the extra metal to get close to on AMD’s Polaris based SKUs. Nvidia’s GPUs will have to rely on the CPU for more compute assistance while AMD’s GCN will be doing that compute with lower latency right on the ACE units. Enjoy your DX11 Nvidia but it’s on to the new and future with DX12/Vulkan and much more metal on AMD’s Polaris GPUs for the gaming engine makers and games to utilize.

Hey Nvidia! Where’s the Metal?

October 26, 2016 | 03:18 PM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

There are two directx 12 programs that have async compute performance improvement for Nvidia pascal: Timespy and Gears of War 4. Denial of reality is a sign of potentially serious problems. Maybe this card has half the compute but so what. It's true competitor is supposed to be the 460.

I can say spring an extra $20 or so and get the 1060 over the 470 as it's the better card as well. How's the 470 at doing Physx? You can even get a 480 over the 470 as well for a $20 more.

AMD dropped their price by $10 because they were scared of the 1050/ti coming out. Nvidia can lower their price by $10-20 as well but probably is not needed as 1050ti will be bought at that price regardless.

Also it can run in low wattage systems. Hey where are the 460 cards that can run at 75 watts tdp? How weak are they compared to 1050/1050 ti? What's 460's compute look like?

On directx 12 and Vulkan. Nvidia is improving their performance in directx 12 as they absolutely smash AMD in Gears of War 4. Doom finally updated their Vulkan drivers and Nvidia frame rates are much improved.

Almost every directx 12 game to come out is poorly optimized as both companies lose frame rate instead of gain over dx11. Why is this happening? Programmers have to devote more time and money to program for dx12 and are largely unfamiliar with it while they can practically code dx11 in their sleep. Dx11 may even outlast dx12. More games still come out on dx11 than dx12. Dx12 has been out well over a year and are there even a dozen games for it yet? Dx12 is the future? Denial of reality going on again.

Maybe Nvidia will release a 1055 or 1050ti+ to compete properly with the 470. Probably not needed as most would just spring a little more and get the 1060 instead.

How about that 1050ti it's able to be overclocked to around 1900 mhz. Can your Polaris do that?

October 26, 2016 | 05:22 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Polaris does not need to be overclocked to give those GFlops of SP FP compute, Polaris has more hardware. The proof is in the Polaris RX 470's twice as high+ numbers of SP FP GFlops relative to the GTX 1050Ti/1050. So folks doing some Blender 3D Ray Tracing/rendering can get the extra SP FP compute to calculate the ray interactions much faster. Even the bitcoin miners like AMD's GPUs more for the compute! And the DX12/Vulkan games will make use of that extra compute/dollar in AMD's mainstream GPUs that can be Crossfired/Multi-adaptor to make for even more compute. Nvidia's GTX 1050/1050Ti and GTX 1060's can not use SLI, but maybe in the future DX12/Vulkan multi-GPU adaptor will allow for Nvidia's GTX 1050/1050Ti/1060s to be used in a dual or more configuration, if Nvidia does not gimp things.

Sure a GTX 1070/1080 at more than twice the cost should be able to best an RX 470, but the RX 470 is a low cost/mainstream SKU to begin with while the GTX 1080s, 1070s are Flagships. I see many of the technology review sites not doing much dual RX 480/RX 470 configuration benchmarks for fear of what that Nvidia Review Manual advises. I’m also seeing many websites’ benchmarking rundowns omitting the RX 480 and including only the RX 470 so Nvidia’s lineup can look a little better with its older SKUs and GTX 1060/1050/1050Ti SKUs. Nvidia has the marking funds to pay for the spin, and that review manual/Review samples strings to keep any dual RX 480 or Dual RX 470 benchmarks under wraps. They do not want many to see any dual RX 480s/RX 470s doing so much for so little cost, dual configurations that cost less than any single GTX 1080 or 1070 SKUs.

Nvidia is master at using ROPs to put out the frames but the newer DX12/Vulkan titles will begin to make even more use of GPU compute, especially in the VR games. Let’s remember that the RX 480’s and RX470’s are priced for the mainstream so try not to compare single mainstream AMD GPUs with Flagship Nvidia SKUs that cost way too much to begin with. I can get 2 RX 470s and still not have spent as much as the 1070/1080 SKUs, ditto for 2 RX 480s that will have as much SP FP compute as a GTX Titan(Pascal) at the Titan's way out of this world pricing!

October 26, 2016 | 12:19 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

You are paying $20 extra for 100% more BUS width on the RX 470(256 bits) and 4.9 GFlops SP FP performance over that GTX 1050 Ti's 128 bit BUS and only 1.9 SP FP Gflops/SP FP 2.1(Boost). That's more than 100% more SP FP GFlops performance for the RX 470 than the GTX 1050 Ti! And the RX 470 runs at much lower clocks and still gives more SP FP GFlops, more than twice the SP FP amount over the 1050 Ti’s total FP performance.

I'll point that out because I do not have to follow Nvidia's review manual in order to get any review samples. But look at the Green Goblin Emperor, it’s wearing no clothes, and I can’t even tell the Green Goblin Emperor gender as it’s not readily viable even though old Green Goblin is buck necked. Talk about gimped, that Green Goblin Emperor’s got no jewels also, they’ve been so gimped of FP performance.

October 26, 2016 | 12:32 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Edit: viable
To: visable

October 26, 2016 | 08:44 PM - Posted by quest4glory

I don't game in watts per hour. I game in days shaved off my life per hour.

November 22, 2016 | 06:09 PM - Posted by Joe Snow (not verified)

Except you can't go for a 470 if you have a weak PSU like in a budget machine where you may not even have any spare power connectors. For a card that stays under the 75W draw of the PCIe slot, your only choice from AMD is the 460 which underperforms the 1050Ti by a wide margin.

October 25, 2016 | 01:49 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Battle of the feather weights. Emmm, whatever...

October 25, 2016 | 03:43 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

That chart just further shows how strange a decision it was to not call the 6gb version of the 1060 a 1060ti and keep the 1060 3gb, the 1060. I just don't get it.

October 25, 2016 | 04:15 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Nvidia's good at product segementation and charging for the smallest feature improvments. I'd like to see Nvidia's binning operation in action, oh the nunbers of bins and confusing product branding. Oh the fusing of cores continues at team green.

October 25, 2016 | 07:28 PM - Posted by bburnham37 (not verified)

" many games the two are bookends to the RX 480..." (emphasis mine)
Are you sure about that Jeremy? I think you meant a different, lower-end RX.
Am I right?

October 25, 2016 | 07:33 PM - Posted by btdog

I was going to comment on the same thing. I believe he means the RX 460 4GB version.

October 25, 2016 | 07:56 PM - Posted by Jeremy Hellstrom

yup, totally missed that.  thanks.

November 21, 2016 | 04:00 PM - Posted by eternalozzie (not verified)

this is a battle for the people out there who have OEM systems with small proprietary power supplies ... i have a dell inspiron 3650 desktop w/240 w power supply in need of a modern video card so these could work ... the best solution i have seen so far is youtuber austin evans put a gigabyte rx 460 in my model pc and it worked fine for testing. no one is publishing the actual TDP of these low end cards so it's tough to make any real shopping decisions. all reviews just say "75 w" without testing. sites like this one and others just focus for the hard core gamers so the little cards don't get tested for us mere mortals :)

November 22, 2016 | 06:06 PM - Posted by Joe Snow (not verified)

Why does the 1060 3gb lose some of it's render units?

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.