GTX 1630 to release in 2022. Seriously.

Although rumors suggested $150 was the price for models in the U.S., EVGA’s first GTX 1630 is listed for $200. With GPU prices where they are now, you can purchase a brand-new RX 6500 XT for less money. And despite the fact that we called it one of the worst tech products of the year in our RX 6500 XT review, it’s still twice as fast as the GTX 1630.

https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/nvidia-gtx-1630-smoked-six-year-old-amd-gpu/



This is the saddest GPU launch in history and for once I'm not talking about the Intel Arc A380​

You're telling me they couldn't make a GTX 1650 Super for $159 today?

https://www.pcgamer.com/this-is-the...com&utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_medium=social

The GTX 1650 Super was actually a great 1080p GPU when it launched, and would still deliver an effective 1080p gaming experience on a host of popular games. The new GTX 1630, by contrast, absolutely won't. Checking out TechPowerUp's review(opens in new tab) of the Gainward version and its average frame rates across its full suite of gaming benchmarks sees the GTX 1630 performing 54% slower than the GTX 1650 Super.
 
Although rumors suggested $150 was the price for models in the U.S., EVGA’s first GTX 1630 is listed for $200. With GPU prices where they are now, you can purchase a brand-new RX 6500 XT for less money. And despite the fact that we called it one of the worst tech products of the year in our RX 6500 XT review, it’s still twice as fast as the GTX 1630.

https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/nvidia-gtx-1630-smoked-six-year-old-amd-gpu/



This is the saddest GPU launch in history and for once I'm not talking about the Intel Arc A380​

You're telling me they couldn't make a GTX 1650 Super for $159 today?

https://www.pcgamer.com/this-is-the...com&utm_campaign=socialflow&utm_medium=social

The GTX 1650 Super was actually a great 1080p GPU when it launched, and would still deliver an effective 1080p gaming experience on a host of popular games. The new GTX 1630, by contrast, absolutely won't. Checking out TechPowerUp's review(opens in new tab) of the Gainward version and its average frame rates across its full suite of gaming benchmarks sees the GTX 1630 performing 54% slower than the GTX 1650 Super.
My local Micro Center has 1650's (regular, not the Super) for about $200 (many models at $205 and $210). So a 1630 coming out for $200 is just LOL.

Not to say a base 1650 at $200+ is any good of a price either, but still, LOL.

EDIT: And what is with Nvidia branding. How is a 30-class card even a "GTX"? Shouldn't this be a GT at this point? Just further confirmation that both Nvidia and AMD don't give a rats ass about the sub $300 market.

EDIT 2: Also WTF EVGA. So they list the 1630 at $200 when you can get this from their website for...wait for it...$200! https://www.evga.com/products/product.aspx?pn=04G-P4-1357-KR
 
Last edited:
Moving on to the 12 game average data, we see just how inadequate the GTX 1630 is for gaming, delivering 37 fps on average, which means the GTX 1050 Ti is typically 16% faster and the RX 6400 almost 40% faster using PCIe 3.0, or a little over 60% faster using PCIe 4.0. The GTX 1650 is also typically 65% faster and the old RX 570 almost 80% faster

Screenshot_20220708-003832_Opera.jpg


Working out how much the GTX 1630 needs to cost in order to match the already underwhelming RX 6400 using PCIe 4.0, the answer to that is $105. Then in order to match the RX 6600 it can't cost more than $87.

https://www.techspot.com/review/2498-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1630/
 
Brutal. Congrats to Nvidia though. You beat AMD this year, for worst card produced.
 
Moving on to the 12 game average data, we see just how inadequate the GTX 1630 is for gaming, delivering 37 fps on average, which means the GTX 1050 Ti is typically 16% faster and the RX 6400 almost 40% faster using PCIe 3.0, or a little over 60% faster using PCIe 4.0. The GTX 1650 is also typically 65% faster and the old RX 570 almost 80% faster

View attachment 489906

Working out how much the GTX 1630 needs to cost in order to match the already underwhelming RX 6400 using PCIe 4.0, the answer to that is $105. Then in order to match the RX 6600 it can't cost more than $87.

https://www.techspot.com/review/2498-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1630/
Even less efficiement than the 2016 1050ti due to the higher clocks.
Screenshot_20220707-153157_Samsung Internet.jpg
 
I just watched a video showing that the GTX 970, which did not run as marketed (utilized only 3.5 GB of the 4 VRAM it was alleged to have), beats the 1630 in almost all aspects, and is available for half the price. [I still liked the 970 I had several years ago.] Congratulations, Nvidiots!
 
I just watched a video showing that the GTX 970, which did not run as marketed (utilized only 3.5 GB of the 4 VRAM it was alleged to have), beats the 1630 in almost all aspects, and is available for half the price. [I still liked the 970 I had several years ago.] Congratulations, Nvidiots!
You can go back and look at the GTX 1050 TI review and see that a 970 is about 40% faster than that card. That means that a 970 will be close to 60% faster than the 1630. The 970 was an insane value at the time and even 3.5 GB of vram was fine for all but the most extreme rare case. That said I sure as hell would not buy that old of a card right now as you can find something a lot newer with similar value.
 
You can go back and look at the GTX 1050 TI review and see that a 970 is about 40% faster than that card. That means that a 970 will be close to 60% faster than the 1630. The 970 was an insane value at the time and even 3.5 GB of vram was fine for all but the most extreme rare case. That said I sure as hell would not buy that old of a card right now as you can find something a lot newer with similar value.
Right. The 1060 3 GB was about on par with the 970, the 1050 Ti below it, and yeah I loved that card. Of course I wouldn't go back to it given what's available now, but I raved about the 970 even despite the 3.5 GB issue. This 1630 is a joke. If it can't beat an entry level card from two/three generations back, it should never have been developed.
 
Looks like I'm buying AMD next gen since they seem to be the more consumer friendly choice.
 
Because they keep lots of their features locked into their ecosystem only, such as G-sync and hardware PhysX. It's more consumer friendly to keep these features open to other brands.
PhysX runs in software fine. No one has cared in 5 years. G-Sync- get free sync, it works fine. Better than fine in many cases. (I have all 3 recent gens of both vendors).
 
A cheap-low end card with latest NVENC chip would be great for plex/emby usage. Was hoping this was it.
 
Why? It’s a card. I’d you don’t need it, don’t buy it.
$200 for something this slow? It's more expensive and slower than previous gen low end card. This move tells me Nvidia wants to jack up the MSRP across the board on cards. I may be wrong, but that's my gut feeling.
Not to mention the other news I read recently about Nvidia slashing orders for the 4000 series because they feel the 3000 series is currently too plentiful... and the fiasco with them selling to miners in the recent past....
Just too many things about them have irked me lately and I'm looking to upgrade later this year once both companies release their cards.
 
Last edited:
Not to mention the other news I read recently about Nvidia slashing orders for the 4000 series because they feel the 3000 series is currently too plentiful... and the fiasco with them selling to miners in the recent past....
If you are talking about this:
https://videocardz.com/newz/nvidia-...-gen-rtx-40-gpus-5nm-wafers-amid-lower-demand

The news was everyone slashing order except Nvidia that were trying to do the same but had locked themselves contractually too much to be able to do so.
 
PC gaming is going to die, if this is what nvidia and amd are going to do to $200~ video card buyers. My RX580 cost $175 in 2018~ (when i bought it) and absolutely wipes the floor with 2022 $150~200 releases?? insulting .. they must really think gamers are dumb ?? I feel bad for anyone that ends up getting a 6400 or even worse this flaming piece of crap 1630... yikes..

But yeah... in this economy if you need more than a $200~ video card to play 1080P decently... well pc gaming is toast imho.
 
PhysX runs in software fine. No one has cared in 5 years. G-Sync- get free sync, it works fine. Better than fine in many cases. (I have all 3 recent gens of both vendors).
Funny enough, freesync was a massive shitshow until nvidia decided to introduce gsync certification prompting monitors makers to clean up their act to get the certification, in turn allowing them to sell their monitors to both freesync and gysnc users equally on the same hardware.
This isn't the comments section over at a rumor mill website, so can you cut that shit out?
 
PhysX runs in software fine. No one has cared in 5 years. G-Sync- get free sync, it works fine. Better than fine in many cases. (I have all 3 recent gens of both vendors).

While that is true, my point still stands.
 
A cheap-low end card with latest NVENC chip would be great for plex/emby usage. Was hoping this was it.
Very true.
$200 for something this slow? It's more expensive and slower than previous gen low end card. This move tells me Nvidia wants to jack up the MSRP across the board on cards. I may be wrong, but that's my gut feeling.
Not to mention the other news I read recently about Nvidia slashing orders for the 4000 series because they feel the 3000 series is currently too plentiful... and the fiasco with them selling to miners in the recent past....
Just too many things about them have irked me lately and I'm looking to upgrade later this year once both companies release their cards.
Inflation hurts everything, sadly. That's fair to the arguments if they did slash orders like that - although there's also an argument to be made there that this gen was successful more than they thought, which also reduces the market for the next generation card (most folks don't upgrade every generation, after all - we're somewhat unique there). If everyone bought one of your current product, just recently, you expect that sales of the next might be lower - unless it's something that gets purchased every generation. Hell, I bought 3 of the 3000 series (and two 6800XTs) - I have no need for new cards for anything any time soon, unless the 4090 is something utterly insane.
If you are talking about this:
https://videocardz.com/newz/nvidia-...-gen-rtx-40-gpus-5nm-wafers-amid-lower-demand

The news was everyone slashing order except Nvidia that were trying to do the same but had locked themselves contractually too much to be able to do so.

PC gaming is going to die, if this is what nvidia and amd are going to do to $200~ video card buyers. My RX580 cost $175 in 2018~ (when i bought it) and absolutely wipes the floor with 2022 $150~200 releases?? insulting .. they must really think gamers are dumb ?? I feel bad for anyone that ends up getting a 6400 or even worse this flaming piece of crap 1630... yikes..

But yeah... in this economy if you need more than a $200~ video card to play 1080P decently... well pc gaming is toast imho.
The Polaris cards were surprisingly strong performers - I still have one. It's annoying that there isn't a cheap, entry-level card anymore (the 3050 being at $400 is a bit much), but I suspect the assumption is that folks will buy prior gen hardware used instead...
Funny enough, freesync was a massive shitshow until nvidia decided to introduce gsync certification prompting monitors makers to clean up their act to get the certification, in turn allowing them to sell their monitors to both freesync and gysnc users equally on the same hardware.

This isn't the comments section over at a rumor mill website, so can you cut that shit out?
True, but it did happen - and now it works just fine.
While that is true, my point still stands.
True, but if you don't want to use their proprietary protocols, you can use the others just fine...? Sony has exclusives on PS, Microsoft on Xbox, do those bother you too?
 
Very true.

Inflation hurts everything, sadly. That's fair to the arguments if they did slash orders like that - although there's also an argument to be made there that this gen was successful more than they thought, which also reduces the market for the next generation card (most folks don't upgrade every generation, after all - we're somewhat unique there). If everyone bought one of your current product, just recently, you expect that sales of the next might be lower - unless it's something that gets purchased every generation. Hell, I bought 3 of the 3000 series (and two 6800XTs) - I have no need for new cards for anything any time soon, unless the 4090 is something utterly insane.



The Polaris cards were surprisingly strong performers - I still have one. It's annoying that there isn't a cheap, entry-level card anymore (the 3050 being at $400 is a bit much), but I suspect the assumption is that folks will buy prior gen hardware used instead...

True, but it did happen - and now it works just fine.

True, but if you don't want to use their proprietary protocols, you can use the others just fine...? Sony has exclusives on PS, Microsoft on Xbox, do those bother you too?

Yes, Xbox exclusives do bother me because i'll never play them. At the same time though, I have enough to play already on my Playstation so i'll be okay. I'm pretty good at focusing on the positive in any given situation.
 
PC gaming is going to die, if this is what nvidia and amd are going to do to $200~ video card buyers. My RX580 cost $175 in 2018~ (when i bought it) and absolutely wipes the floor with 2022 $150~200 releases?? insulting .. they must really think gamers are dumb ?? I feel bad for anyone that ends up getting a 6400 or even worse this flaming piece of crap 1630... yikes..

But yeah... in this economy if you need more than a $200~ video card to play 1080P decently... well pc gaming is toast imho.
Yeah really hard to justify these "bargain" cards when a little more money will get you a Series S while sticking to the iGPU on the PC. Keep the pc in the office and the series S in the living room for others to use with much better performance.
 
Yeah really hard to justify these "bargain" cards when a little more money will get you a Series S while sticking to the iGPU on the PC. Keep the pc in the office and the series S in the living room for others to use with much better performance.
For these prices, it's better off buying something older like a 1050Ti which is floating around right now for $189 if I was in a market to build a media box. Other than that. I would wait to see what the new generation brings and it's affect on the current generation before plonking down some cash for any card really.

RX 6400 and 6500 XT have entered the chat.
1657577490667.png
 
RX 6400 and 6500 XT have entered the chat.
Both were bad cards and somehow Nvidia managed to make even more terrible card. It's pretty embarrassing actually, the 1630 makes those two cards look like a good deal in comparison.
So what's your point?
 
Both were bad cards and somehow Nvidia managed to make even more terrible card. It's pretty embarrassing actually, the 1630 makes those two cards look like a good deal in comparison.
So what's your point?

The 1630 is a better card for the sweet hardware media encoders.
 
Both were bad cards and somehow Nvidia managed to make even more terrible card. It's pretty embarrassing actually, the 1630 makes those two cards look like a good deal in comparison.
So what's your point?
No, all 3 of those cards are trash; it just so happens that only one of those 3 trash cards can encode.
 
Tell that to a gamer who wants to play games. It's trash in comparison to the competition.

$200 for a media encoder? What ever floats your boat...

It's only $200 because the card literally just launched. Try and have a little patience.
 
Both were bad cards and somehow Nvidia managed to make even more terrible card. It's pretty embarrassing actually, the 1630 makes those two cards look like a good deal in comparison.
So what's your point?
That they are both anti-consumer? One could argue the AMD cards are worse for basically being repurposed laptop parts missing basic features yet costing what they do. So go AMD or Nvidia, no one wins in that card class. AMD is not your friend any more than Nvidia.
 
How come these cards are the same TDP as the GTX 1650? Did they just run it's clockspeeda way too high like that RX 6500XT did? I would think the TDP would be less using a 64-bit memory bus.
 
Back
Top