In a rut? Reduce VRAM! RTX 3050 6GB launching with a rumoured MSRP of $180 with 96 bit bus

[filpo]

Summary

NVIDIA launches GeForce RTX 3050 6GB with GA107 GPU, 70W TDP, 96 bit bus and no power connectors

 

Quotes

GPU die

Quote

Specs in an image

Quote

Specs in words

Quote

To begin with, the most obvious change is memory. The new SKU features 6 GB of 14 Gbps GDDR6, across a narrower 96-bit memory bus, for 168 GB/s of memory bandwidth. That's not all, the GPU is significantly cut down, with just 16 SM instead of the 20 found on the original RTX 3050. This works out to 2,048 CUDA cores, 64 Tensor cores, 16 RT cores, 64 TMUs, and an unchanged 32 ROPs. The GPU comes with lower clock speeds of 1470 MHz boost, compared to 1777 MHz on the original RTX 3050. The silver lining with this SKU is its total graphics power (TGP) of just 70 W, which means that cards can completely do away with power connectors, and rely entirely on PCIe slot power

RTX 3050 cards

Quote

Rumoured prices

Quote

Mindfactory has recently listed two MSI cards for sale, with prices starting at €185. This price most likely confirms the rumors about a US MSRP of $179. Interestingly, both offers were already taken down, so one should assume it was an early listing. 

My thoughts

We can expect the 3050 to launch this month but it's not looking good

Sources

Gigabyte Launches GeForce RTX 3050 6G graphics cards | TechPowerUp

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Formally Launched | TechPowerUp

NVIDIA launches GeForce RTX 3050 6GB with GA107 GPU, 70W TDP and no power connectors - VideoCardz.com

Retail listing for Nvidia's RTX 3050 6GB details price, launch date, and has even fewer cores than expected | Tom's Hardware (tomshardware.com)

Nvidia RTX 3050 6GB spotted at retailer – but the specs don’t calm our fears that this might be a flop of a GPU | TechRadar

[RejZoR]

RTX 3050 E-Waste Edition. Only half redeeming value is lack of any PCIe power connector. And that's it.

[Needfuldoer]

Why?

 

Why not just cut it down to 4 GB across two memory chips and release it as a $120 "RTX 3030" so we can finally put the GT 1030 out to pasture? At that price I'd get it just as a transcoding card for my Plex server.

[Mojo-Jojo]

Why is this even an RTX? Who would run raytracing on this? Why not go and release another GTX range cards like with the 1600 series?

[filpo]

4 minutes ago, Mojo-Jojo said:

Why not go and release another GTX range cards like with the 1600 series?

but let's be honest. a 'gtx 1670' would sound pretty silly

 

34 minutes ago, Needfuldoer said:

$120 "RTX 3030"

I don't know why they went in the middle with this, it's too expensive for super budget but too bad to actually compete against the rx 6600 and the like 

 

43 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

RTX 3050 E-Waste Edition. Only half redeeming value is lack of any PCIe power connector. And that's it.

Maybe it can be useful in half height, no power connector desktops, but at this price I doubt it

[Mojo-Jojo]

17 minutes ago, filpo said:

but let's be honest. a 'gtx 1670' would sound pretty silly

I mean, I was thinking GTX 3660 but that's not much better

[porina]

1 hour ago, RejZoR said:

Only half redeeming value is lack of any PCIe power connector.

Don't under-estimate the market for that niche. The world is not based around PC gaming.

 

41 minutes ago, Mojo-Jojo said:

Why is this even an RTX? Who would run raytracing on this? Why not go and release another GTX range cards like with the 1600 series?

If you're referring back to Turing, they had separate silicon between the GTX/RTX offerings of the time. The 3050 is clearly an RTX offering. Besides, RTX doesn't only add RT. It also means you get things like DLSS and VSR.

[Alex Atkin UK]

37 minutes ago, porina said:

Don't under-estimate the market for that niche. The world is not based around PC gaming.

 

If you're referring back to Turing, they had separate silicon between the GTX/RTX offerings of the time. The 3050 is clearly an RTX offering. Besides, RTX doesn't only add RT. It also means you get things like DLSS and VSR.

Indeed, if it was just about the product then they could slap an RTX 4050 Mobile on a PCIe card and call it a day.

 

1 hour ago, RejZoR said:

RTX 3050 E-Waste Edition. Only half redeeming value is lack of any PCIe power connector. And that's it.

Actually I think this is precisely to avoid them being e-waste.  Getting rid of a load old RTX 3050 Mobile chips now that laptop manufacturers will want to be using the RTX 4050 instead.  Or because they have faulty memory lanes and/or SMs.

[Ydfhlx]

Finally, a GPU that doesn't make Ryzen 8700G look silly.

 

Seriously though, who is this for? I agree with other person saying they should've cut down it even lower, both CUs and memory, and call it RTX 3030.

 

And also another point is name, by the way. It shares the name "3050" with two other products, each one baying very different from another.

[Bitter]

If this was $150 it might might make sense. I'll keep using my GTX 1650S for my HTPC, might jump to Arc or even go AMD....or just recycle an unused 1660S in there. $180 is far far too much money for this. This has to be made to sell to OEMs so they can plaster RTX GRAPHICS on the side of the box for unwitting morons.

[starsmine]

180 is a tough pill to swallow, but we are not in 2019 anymore.

[Spotty]

As a replacement for the GTX1650 this actually makes sense. The 1650 only had 4GB of RAM so with the 3050 6GB you're getting +50% VRAM increase plus RTX features and probably a performance bump from the GPU. You're really just getting a better 1650 for basically the same price.

 

GTX 1650 MSRP $150 (Release 2019)

RTX 3050 6GB MSRP $179

 

Calculating inflation from 2019 to now for $150 is... $180

 

[WereCat]

1 hour ago, Spotty said:

As a replacement for the GTX1650 this actually makes sense. The 1650 only had 4GB of RAM so with the 3050 6GB you're getting +50% VRAM increase plus RTX features and probably a performance bump from the GPU. You're really just getting a better 1650 for basically the same price.

 

GTX 1650 MSRP $150 (Release 2019)

RTX 3050 6GB MSRP $179

 

Calculating inflation from 2019 to now for $150 is... $180

 

This will at best perform like the RTX A2000 and most likely lower and closer to a GTX 1650 Super / 1660... but for a lot cheaper than A2000.

A2000 is the only RTX card until now that does not require a power connector as far as I know so this will be a nice replacement for that card.

 

Still, getting a 2nd hand card in that price range will get you a much better upgrade as long as you don't need a card with no power connectors.

 

 

Still, the price is dangerously close to RX 6600 or Arc A750 which will absolutely decimate this card in performance even when comparing new for new. 3050 8GB was a bad value card to begin with.

 

Not sure who this is for really besides those people that need a small card to one of their old OEM pre-builds with proprietary PSU. If this was at least RTX 4000 series card with the new encoder it would make more sense but A750 will be better in that aspect as well.

[Spotty]

2 minutes ago, WereCat said:

Still, the price is dangerously close to RX 6600 or Arc A750 which will absolutely decimate this card in performance even when comparing new for new. 3050 8GB was a bad value card to begin with.

 

Not sure who this is for really besides those people that need a small card to one of their old OEM pre-builds with proprietary PSU. If this was at least RTX 4000 series card with the new encoder it would make more sense but A750 will be better in that aspect as well.

That's really it though. Cards like this and the 1650 exist for OEM systems with crap power supplies without PCIe connectors. AMD RX 6600 TDP 130W. Arc A750 TDP 225W. They're not really easy to compare to because for the people considering the RTX 3050 those probably aren't even an option. Really the only people who should be considering the RTX 3050 are people who are restricted by their system and limited to <75W options like the 1650...

 

The closest (non-Nvidia) competitors for this type of card would be Intel Arc A380 6GB (currently $120) or AMD RX 6400 4GB (currently $130). The Arc A380 being $120 does kind of make $180 for the RTX 3050 6GB seem like a tough sell.

[WereCat]

23 minutes ago, Spotty said:

That's really it though. Cards like this and the 1650 exist for OEM systems with crap power supplies without PCIe connectors. AMD RX 6600 TDP 130W. Arc A750 TDP 225W. They're not really easy to compare to because for the people considering the RTX 3050 those probably aren't even an option. Really the only people who should be considering the RTX 3050 are people who are restricted by their system and limited to <75W options like the 1650...

 

The closest (non-Nvidia) competitors for this type of card would be Intel Arc A380 6GB (currently $120) or AMD RX 6400 4GB (currently $130). The Arc A380 being $120 does kind of make $180 for the RTX 3050 6GB seem like a tough sell.

Well, now I think about it.

For AMD RX 6400 / 6500 XT you're pretty much screwed for the old OEM machines as those cards run like dogshit without PCI-e 4.0 as they only have 4 lanes.

Intel Arc completely relies upon resizable BAR support which those old OEM systems may not have.

 

This does not seem like a hurdle for the RTX 3050 though.

 

Still, I think it's way too high of a price. People who are looking for cards like this probably have systems that cost less than this card.

[Middcore]

On 2/2/2024 at 4:20 AM, Mojo-Jojo said:

Why is this even an RTX? Who would run raytracing on this?

 

Most people buying RTX cards, even high end ones, are not running ray tracing in most games they play. 

 

[Orangeator]

For $100, this card would be somewhat compelling for use in a small form factor PC (no external power required). At $180 I cannot imagine this card selling well (at least it shouldn't). I suppose I will wait for some idiot to buy one, wait for them to realize how under-powered it is, then buy it used for $100 and build myself a nice living room emulation machine.

[manikyath]

i was half way down this thread when i realised they're not even pretending like it's a new card, and just slapping last-gen naming scheme on it.

 

at least when they sell mediocre garbage, they're starting to be honest about it.

 

also - IMO without a 6-pin requirement, as long as the price/performance ratio isnt too bad, this could be one of those few cards that can go in a low power living room pc for "some" gaming.

[PowerPCFan]

2 hours ago, manikyath said:

also - IMO without a 6-pin requirement, as long as the price/performance ratio isnt too bad, this could be one of those few cards that can go in a low power living room pc for "some" gaming.

Yes, perfect for an Optiplex Gaming PC, home server, or something else like that. 

 

But if you can get a GTX 1650 for $80 on eBay, is the RTX 3050 6GB really worth $100 more, assuming it sells at MSRP?

 

IMO, there's no way it's that much better than a 1650 and not worth $100 more. 

 

I'd say the 1650 competes with an RX 570, and the 3050 competes with a 6600xt, so I guess you could just get those cards too. 

 

Or you could get THE AMD RADEON RX 6700 XT, the GREATEST GRAPHICS CARD THATS EVER LIVEDDDDDD!

[manikyath]

3 minutes ago, PowerPCFan said:

But if you can get a GTX 1650 for $80 on eBay, is the RTX 3050 6GB really worth $100 more, assuming it sells at MSRP?

that assumes you can find a 1650 second hand, and that you're willing to take a bet on a second hand card.

[Ydfhlx]

On 2/3/2024 at 10:17 AM, Spotty said:

As a replacement for the GTX1650 this actually makes sense. The 1650 only had 4GB of RAM so with the 3050 6GB you're getting +50% VRAM increase plus RTX features and probably a performance bump from the GPU. You're really just getting a better 1650 for basically the same price.

 

GTX 1650 MSRP $150 (Release 2019)

RTX 3050 6GB MSRP $179

 

Calculating inflation from 2019 to now for $150 is... $180

 

RTX features? Ray tracing will run like dogshit on this card, and DLSS at only 1080p has noticeable issues, too (due to not enough data at so low render resolutions). Frame generation would be a good thing but it's limited to rtx 4000 series because nvidia.

 

Also, let's not forget GTX 1650 was horrible value at launch. In titles/thumbnails, Hardware Unboxed called it "horrible value" and "pointless product", Gamer's Nexus "dead on arrival". LTT used it as prime example of GPUs you should avoid in the video "cheap does not mean good value", with gtx 1650 being claaed "trash" on thumbnail if I'm not mistaken. Point being, 1650 was launch-day-e-waste when it launched, and almost certainly so will be this.

 

Also it's trash value compared to competition. Rx 6600 is just $20 more but is already 25% faster than normal 3050, let alone this cut down one. And it also has 8GB of VRAM.

 

Edit: They call it 'RTX' - wonder how many frames you'd get in Cyberpunk native 4K ultra settings w/ pathtracing. I'd guess like 3fps. Maybe 5.

[Kisai]

Everyone go look at the spec table again and note that it's also a 30% nerf to the clock speed from the 8GB version. In fact, the specs are also nerfed from the 6GB Mobile part.

 

Like I get trying to recycle/reuse parts that maybe didn't sell (I'm sure the 30xx part glut affected laptops too), but these parts with the small amounts of memory/memory bandwidth are barely better than iGPU's.

 

It's pretty much worse specs than the 1660Ti Mobile by likely 20%.

 

[WereCat]

5 hours ago, PowerPCFan said:

and the 3050 competes with a 6600xt

It does not. It does not even compete with 6600 nor it can even compete with 5600 XT. 3050 is significantly slower card than 3060. The card is an absolute joke for the price.

[PowerPCFan]

1 hour ago, WereCat said:

It does not. It does not even compete with 6600 nor it can even compete with 5600 XT. 3050 is significantly slower card than 3060. The card is an absolute joke for the price.

I guess I get a bit confused with my Nvidia/AMD conversions

maybe RX 5500 XT? 

 

Sort of off-topic, but speaking of the 3050 - Someone recently asked me, "I'm going to build a gaming PC. Should I get an i7-14700k and a 3050?" That question made me realize how stupid people are. You're right, someone would be stupid if they bought a 3050 because the 6600xt is so cheap and like you said, faster. And if you want a 3050, PLEASE don't pair it with a 14th gen i7. Maybe a 12100f would be better. 

[porina]

1 hour ago, Kisai said:

Like I get trying to recycle/reuse parts that maybe didn't sell (I'm sure the 30xx part glut affected laptops too), but these parts with the small amounts of memory/memory bandwidth are barely better than iGPU's.

What is the best graphics performance APU right now? 8700G? There's still a big gap between that and other low end dGPUs.

 

I'm going to use the 1650 as an intermediate step in this comparison. AMD used the 1650 as a reference point, although Tom's Hardware's testing showed AMD used aggressive upscaling to keep up. Without the benefit of such, the 8700G lagged on average over 20% behind a 1650.

 

3050 6GB is harder to reference since it doesn't seem widely tested by more reputable sites yet. Computerbase results put the 6GB model around 20% slower than the 8GB. Tom's Hardware puts the 1650 at about 60% of the 3050 8GB. If the 3050 6GB does end up generally 20% slower than the 8GB model, it still is clearly faster than a 1650, which itself is clearly faster than the 8700G. The exact gap will need more targeted like-for-like testing to be performed but we're looking in ball park of 40% here.

 

Since memory bandwidth was mentioned, 8700G with officially supported ram (5200) gets 81GB/s. But enthusiasts will know to get something faster, so pony up for 6000. That gets you to 94GB/s. The 3050 6GB bandwidth is 168GB/s, so the 8700G is running 48% to 56% the bandwidth of a 3050 6GB. This is a big reason why APUs will struggle to reach even lower end dGPUs, unless there is a radical implementation change. Either provide more bandwidth (LPDDR helps a little bit, GDDR/HBM better), or provide a much bigger cache. But these are all high cost options.

 

Above is based on gaming performance, but to repeat what I said earlier, there will be non-gaming uses that could use a product like this.