[VideoCardz] GTX 1050/1050 Ti Specs & Pricing

E

EuphoricRage470

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 15, 2011
Messages
1,105
NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-1050-Ti-GTX-1050-e1476716498451-900x443.jpg


Exclusive: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti to cost 139 USD, GTX 1050: 109 USD | VideoCardz.com
 
The 1050 Ti has a base clock faster that the boost clock in their chart. Solid Videocardz reporting :p

Impressive to see Nvidia switch the full product range over to Pascal in such a short amount of time.
 
I love these low cost cards -- for $139 you can get some sweet performance with very low power consumption. If you've got a 1080p 60hz monitor, 1050 Ti is going to be killer.
 
This looks to be extremely strong at this price point. I remember getting the EVGA OC 750Ti, man that was a great card when it came out! Gave away system about 9 months ago with it. This is very tempting for a new build I am doing with a Node 202 case.
 
The ones with the 6 pin I wonder if they will OC like the bigger Pascals? You talking around a 40% OC here at 2000mhz over default boost clock! If they go faster even more. At default clocks they appear to be wasting the 460. Does not look too good for AMD, lower end Pascals will consume the mobile market like Maxwell before.
 
Ieldra said:
1455 rated boost eh? Expecting 1500+ effective boost, wouldn't be surprised to see this clock to 1800mhz fairly easily with some tweaking.

So much for glofo being the reason Polaris doesn't clock as high
Click to expand...

Die size is also fairly similar. 123mm2 vs 135mm2. Nvidia is just far, far ahead. And R&D matters :)
 
Ieldra said:
1455 rated boost eh? Expecting 1500+ effective boost, wouldn't be surprised to see this clock to 1800mhz fairly easily with some tweaking.

So much for glofo being the reason Polaris doesn't clock as high
Click to expand...

Expect the versions with PCIe connectors to hit >1.8GHz overclocks.

Anyway, looks like the AMD defenders have run out of excuses ;)
 
Ieldra said:
1455 rated boost eh? Expecting 1500+ effective boost, wouldn't be surprised to see this clock to 1800mhz fairly easily with some tweaking.

So much for glofo being the reason Polaris doesn't clock as high
Click to expand...


Well if this card does the same mhz as the other pascal cards yeah, GF won't be the issue, just want to see what voltage it needs to hit those mhz though, if the voltage is lower than the 16nm pascal cards, that would be the only reason I would think that nV would want to do a refresh on 14nm for the rest of the cards, if not then its not going to be worth it to do the refresh.
 
noko said:
The ones with the 6 pin I wonder if they will OC like the bigger Pascals? You talking around a 40% OC here at 2000mhz over default boost clock! If they go faster even more. At default clocks they appear to be wasting the 460. Does not look too good for AMD, lower end Pascals will consume the mobile market like Maxwell before.
Click to expand...


Well thats the thing everyone was so focused on AMD's perf/watt they all pretty much forgot what nV's cards were already capable of in that category lol.
 
jwcalla said:
As cheap as the 1050 Ti is I might as well just get one to replace my 570. It should be a lot faster and it gets me over the VRAM bottleneck on the 570.
Click to expand...


Yep thinking about getting one to replace my third system which as a 750ti in it (media server).
 
razor1 said:
Well thats the thing everyone was so focused on AMD's perf/watt they all pretty much forgot what nV's cards were already capable of in that category lol.
Click to expand...
Well the sad part, the gap for Nvidia Pascal generation over AMD Polaris is larger now than the previous generation perf/w at the low end/mobile market. Polaris 10 is OK for the price but nothing really spectacular, Polaris 11 I am beginning to believe is a flop.
 
Well if they don't fix their perf/watt with Vega all bets are on Navi, and if it doesn't happen there, man I don't see AMD ever coming back to the top end or even mid level anymore. The amount of money it costs to make these chips and time to rebound if you make a mistake is getting to the point that even one mistake in one generation can be the end.
 
razor1 said:
Well if they don't fix their perf/watt with Vega all bets are on Navi, and if it doesn't happen there, man I don't see AMD ever coming back to the top end or even mid level anymore. The amount of money it costs to make these chips and time to rebound if you make a mistake is getting to the point that even one mistake in one generation can be the end.
Click to expand...

Just look at R&D and you got your answer.
 
razor1 said:
Well if they don't fix their perf/watt with Vega all bets are on Navi, and if it doesn't happen there, man I don't see AMD ever coming back to the top end or even mid level anymore. The amount of money it costs to make these chips and time to rebound if you make a mistake is getting to the point that even one mistake in one generation can be the end.
Click to expand...

I can't wait to see pages-long dissertations from AMD fanboys about how the RX470 destroys the 1050 Ti in perf/price while handwaving away that not-so-important thing called 75W TDP and the entire 1060 line.
 
Palladium@SG said:
I can't wait to see pages-long dissertations from AMD fanboys about how the RX470 destroys the 1050 Ti in perf/price while handwaving away that not-so-important thing called 75W TDP and the entire 1060 line.
Click to expand...

There's a dude over on AnandTech forums who continues to do just that, LOL
 
razor1 said:
Well if they don't fix their perf/watt with Vega all bets are on Navi, and if it doesn't happen there, man I don't see AMD ever coming back to the top end or even mid level anymore. The amount of money it costs to make these chips and time to rebound if you make a mistake is getting to the point that even one mistake in one generation can be the end.
Click to expand...

This analysis assumes that NVIDIA will not also improve its performance/watt over time.
 
Well that is true, but AMD needs to catch up first to what is there already.
 
razor1 said:
Well that is true, but AMD needs to catch up first to what is there already.
Click to expand...

It's a moving target, though. AMD will eventually catch up to Pascal in terms of perf/watt, but if NVIDIA is steep in the ramp of Volta at that point, who cares?
 
well if Volta is going to be on 16nm or 14nm, I think its perf/watt is not going to be as great a leap as we saw with Maxwell to Pascal. This is hypothetical here, but at its max its going to be like Keplar to Maxwell, which is still damn good. Either way if Navi doesn't catch up on Perf/watt AMD has to pull out of the high end graphics business. Unless AMD's CPU division picks up enough to funnel money in their graphics..... Which I am skeptical by 2018 they will have enough money to do something like that
 
razor1 said:
well if Volta is going to be on 16nm or 14nm, I think its perf/watt is not going to be as great a leap as we saw with Maxwell to Pascal. This is hypothetical here, but at its max its going to be like Keplar to Maxwell, which is still damn good. Either way if Navi doesn't catch up on Perf/watt AMD has to pull out of the high end graphics business. Unless AMD's CPU division picks up enough to funnel money in their graphics..... Which I am skeptical by 2018 they will have enough money to do something like that
Click to expand...

Volta is 16nm. Also, the perf/watt move from Kepler -> Maxwell was actually larger than the perf/watt move seen with Maxwell -> Pascal. Architecture matters much more than process node, as the last couple of generations have clearly shown.

As for AMD's CPU division, if AMD's GPU division -- which has put out reasonably competitive products over the last couple of years -- is getting left in the dust by NVIDIA, then what chance do they have against Intel?
 
razor1 said:
well if Volta is going to be on 16nm or 14nm, I think its perf/watt is not going to be as great a leap as we saw with Maxwell to Pascal.
Click to expand...

That Volta-based Tegra chip that nvidia unveiled a couple of weeks ago was certainly promising good perf/watt gains. Of course they were bragging mostly from the perspective of 8-bit int operations, so maybe they are doing something special there to get the performance that won't carry over to GeForce.
 
jwcalla said:
That Volta-based Tegra chip that nvidia unveiled a couple of weeks ago was certainly promising good perf/watt gains. Of course they were bragging mostly from the perspective of 8-bit int operations, so maybe they are doing something special there to get the performance that won't carry over to GeForce.
Click to expand...

nah, Volta will bring a big leap in SP/DP compute as well.

0MIZJBn.png
 
EuphoricRage470 said:
Volta is 16nm. Also, the perf/watt move from Kepler -> Maxwell was actually larger than the perf/watt move seen with Maxwell -> Pascal. Architecture matters much more than process node, as the last couple of generations have clearly shown.

As for AMD's CPU division, if AMD's GPU division -- which has put out reasonably competitive products over the last couple of years -- is getting left in the dust by NVIDIA, then what chance do they have against Intel?
Click to expand...


Well I'm not going to take a stern direction yet till Zen comes out :), but I hear what you are saying. Yeah architecture has much mroe to do with it, but node helps too to drop voltage that is where Pascal got most of its power savings from, but the ability to clock so high is because of architectural improvements. So its a combination of both that made Pascal look better then Maxwell perf/watt improvement wise. But as you stated, Maxwell purely architecture gave them a larger perf/watt gain.

jwcalla said:
That Volta-based Tegra chip that nvidia unveiled a couple of weeks ago was certainly promising good perf/watt gains. Of course they were bragging mostly from the perspective of 8-bit int operations, so maybe they are doing something special there to get the performance that won't carry over to GeForce.
Click to expand...


It seems promising with SGEMM/w but how that translates to SP/DP we will have to see. I'm not taking anything away from what they have shown and their targets, just call me skeptical till I get more info :)
 
So, AMD claims that they want to focus in low/middle segment of market and wait with Vega, to consolidate their market share. WIth 1050/Ti, that strategy just is going down the drain. NV wins in premium and low-end segment, while only in 480X area, AMD can fight with 1060. If it goes, like it goes, NV won't have a reason to release 1080 Ti anytime near.
 
MorgothPl said:
So, AMD claims that they want to focus in low/middle segment of market and wait with Vega, to consolidate their market share. WIth 1050/Ti, that strategy just is going down the drain. NV wins in premium and low-end segment, while only in 480X area, AMD can fight with 1060. If it goes, like it goes, NV won't have a reason to release 1080 Ti anytime near.
Click to expand...

You realize their clams about Polaris are pure PR spin BS right? The truth is that they didn't have the resources to get a big GPU out as well as the smaller ones at the same time. One of them had to be pushed out and AMD tends to do better at the low end/value portion of the market anyway -- making the decision for them.
 
MorgothPl said:
So, AMD claims that they want to focus in low/middle segment of market and wait with Vega, to consolidate their market share. WIth 1050/Ti, that strategy just is going down the drain. NV wins in premium and low-end segment, while only in 480X area, AMD can fight with 1060. If it goes, like it goes, NV won't have a reason to release 1080 Ti anytime near.
Click to expand...


If Vega is coming out, they will release it, its just going to be a preemptive strike like they did with the 980 ti. Pricing wise, I don't think they are going to go down to 650 though, more like 700 or more, unless Vega looks to be closer then what Polaris showed up as in all metrics. Also pricing it at 650, is just weird place as the gtx 1080 would be put at a awkward position like the gtx 980 was.
 
Geez, Nvidia isn't showing any mercy to AMD with Pascal, I don't think I have seen a whole generation of AMD/ATI GPUs slaughtered this badly before. The only thing the RX460 won is the on release date and that was only because NV was prioritizing the more profitable higher-end segments first.
 
Palladium@SG said:
Geez, Nvidia isn't showing any mercy to AMD with Pascal, I don't think I have seen a whole generation of AMD/ATI GPUs slaughtered this badly before. The only thing the RX460 won is the on release date and that was only because NV was prioritizing the more profitable higher-end segments first.
Click to expand...

When I saw that the RX 460 was essentially on par with 950 in terms of perf/watt, it became clear to me why NV waited to launch GP107 -- they were allowing their partners to drain inventories before launching the new GPUs.

Had 460 been more competitive we might have seen a more aggressive GP107 release strategy.
 
I would actually recommend to all reviewers and hardware sites to ask Roy Taylor about the "months ahead" and VR TAM stuff. I think it is fair to hold AMD responsible for the promises they obviously failed to deliver.
 
Richthofen said:
I would actually recommend to all reviewers and hardware sites to ask Roy Taylor about the "months ahead" and VR TAM stuff. I think it is fair to hold AMD responsible for the promises they obviously failed to deliver.
Click to expand...

Well.... They *were* months ahead of Volta
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top