Upcoming GTX 1650 to beat 1060

[NumLock21]

49 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

So? Tough fucking luck. My expensive GTX 980 also got challenged by an RX480 a year after I bought it. For basically half as much as I paid for GTX 980.

GTX 980 while it's a much older card, it's overall a better performing card than a RX480. Counting up to right now, GTX 980 is 5 years old and RX480 is 3 years old.

 

9 minutes ago, System32.exe said:

This is literally how computer hardware has worked for decades.

Newer hardware will always be faster than its predecessor, but there is also tiers. They're not going to let a low-end tier, that's only 1 generation newer, out perform their older mid-range or high-end tier.

[Zando_]

11 hours ago, VegetableStu said:

wait ... for ... benchmarks ...

 

EDIT: even if true, that's still not a great incentive to upgrade from a 1060 ._. unless Turing NVENC engine, but that's still a highly specific sidegrade

I thought the 1600s didn't have that, just the 2000 series? 

[Zando_]

1 minute ago, Tegos said:

The 1650 and 1660 are Turing-based, so there's a chance the 1650S could feature it.

Yee I know, I've got a 1660 Ti I've ran games on and currently have chugging away at F@H. 

Oke, just checked and the 1660/1660 Ti does have it, though it's not as fast as the 2060, which isn't as fast as the 2070, and so on up the line. Should still be a vast improvement over the older stuff though. 1650 does not have it though, it uses the Volta NVENC encoder: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1650-volta-nvenc,39161.html. Will be interesting to see what the 1650 S gets. 

[NumLock21]

1 minute ago, Tegos said:

If that's how it works then it's some pretty bad business practice.

They're still here making new cards, so where is the bad business practice?

 

 

[RejZoR]

13 minutes ago, NumLock21 said:

GTX 980 while it's a much older card, it's overall a better performing card than a RX480. Counting up to right now, GTX 980 is 5 years old and RX480 is 3 years old.

 

Newer hardware will always be faster than its predecessor, but there is also tiers. They're not going to let a low-end tier, that's only 1 generation newer, out perform their older mid-range or high-end tier.

It doesn't matter. I bought GTX 980 later in time and just 1 year after I bought it, there was RX480 that frankly delivered same performance and cost basically half of what GTX 980. But that's how it is.

 

My GTX 1080Ti was also around 800€. 2 years later, RX5700XT delivers basically same performance for half as much. It's similar for ppl who bought RTX 2080 for big money not that long ago. And is challenged by same Radeon card for half the price. But that's how it is.

[NumLock21]

1 minute ago, RejZoR said:

It doesn't matter. I bought GTX 980 later in time and just 1 year after I bought it, there was RX480 that frankly delivered same performance and cost basically half of what GTX 980. But that's how it is.

 

My GTX 1080Ti was also around 800€. 2 years later, RX5700XT delivers basically same performance for half as much. It's similar for ppl who bought RTX 2080 for big money not that long ago. And is challenged by same Radeon card for half the price. But that's how it is.

Of course AMD is going to release a card that's going to out perform its competitor at a much lower price tag. I was talking about the release of new cards from the same company. Not Nvidia vs AMD

A mid-range or high-end Maxwell card (like your GTX 980) isn't going to get beaten by a entry level Pascal card or Turing.

[NumLock21]

5 minutes ago, Tegos said:

It kind of sounds like they're restricting themselves in order to not surpass previous-gen mid and high-end cards.

I get that entry level is supposed to be not as powerful and cheaper compared to the the rest of its lineup, but it seems counter-intuitive to make a newer-gen card that's still slower than previous-gen

Newer entry level cards will out perform older gen mid-range and high-end, but it takes about 2 to 3 generation for that to happen.

 

[RejZoR]

1 hour ago, NumLock21 said:

Of course AMD is going to release a card that's going to out perform its competitor at a much lower price tag. I was talking about the release of new cards from the same company. Not Nvidia vs AMD

A mid-range or high-end Maxwell card (like your GTX 980) isn't going to get beaten by a entry level Pascal card or Turing.

Well, GTX 980 was last year's high end. Then GTX 1060 arrived. It was as fast as GTX 980 while costing half as much as GTX 980 did not long ago. Same company.

[Xiee]

I currently use a 1060 (6gb). Should I consider getting the 1650 or maybe the 1660 in light of this news?

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, RejZoR said:

Well, GTX 980 was last year's high end. Then GTX 1060 arrived. It was as fast as GTX 980 while costing half as much as GTX 980 did not long ago. Same company.

 

the 980 is like 4 years old or something now, what are you talking about?

 

EDIT: and I believe the 1060 didn't release until 2016, so it almost 2 years between the two.

EDIT2: or are you comparing the 980 to the 1060 with GDDR5 that was only released last year? because that's even longer again.

[xARACHN1D]

14 hours ago, floofer said:

well this is just ridiculous. Nvidia is now having to compete with itself.

Gemini Part 2?

[Algebruh]

WOW. A new entry-level GPU is faster than a 3-year-old mid-range GPU????

How is that possible??? So exciting!1!!1