AMD RX 560 4gb or GTX 1050 SC 2gb

[TheFafnir]

I could really use some help selecting a video card for my budget pc build. Right now i am in between two choices the RX 560 4GB with a clock speed of 1.18 or the GTX 1050 SC 2GB clock speed 1.42. They are both really close prices and im not really trying to blast games. They two highest games im trying to run with this build is GTA V or Overwatch. I would really appreciate just some help on which card i should get. Here is the link to my entire build for reference https://pcpartpicker.com/list/92MQCy and let me know if you see anything weird with it.

[Flavortown2k16]

Imo spend more and get 1050ti instead, but out of those two 560 is the better choice

[TheFafnir]

Why do you say that? They are both at basically the same price.

[mariushm]

Clock speed doesn't matter much.  Memory size does matter.

 

GTX 1050 may be slightly faster in some games but if you're gaming at 1080p or some resolution close to that (like 1680x1050 for example), the lack of video card memory will really affect some games. GTA in particular will like more memory on the video card.

 

So for these reasons, I'd say go with the RX 560 even though it may not give you the highest fps in games, the 4 GB of memory will be better long term.

 

If you can find some more $$, maybe try going for a GTX 1060 3GB.

 

Actually, hold on a few minutes while i check your partpicker list and i may give you some more suggestions for a more balanced build

 

 

[GER_T4IGA]

4 minutes ago, Flavortown2k16 said:

Imo spend more and get 1050ti instead, but out of those two 560 is the better choice

That's exactly what I was thinking too

[GER_T4IGA]

3 minutes ago, mariushm said:

you can find some more $$, maybe try going for a GTX 1060 3GB.

Uhm nooo! A 3GB card, especially when as powerful as the 1060 will be severely choked by its low memory size. In terms of image quality a 1050 Hi might be superior. 

If you have the money for a 3GD 106L you have it for a 6GB so don't be stupid and save/spend a little more. 

[WhiteBoard2005]

17 minutes ago, Flavortown2k16 said:

Imo spend more and get 1050ti instead, but out of those two 560 is the better choice

He’s on a budget for a reason

 

[TheFafnir]

But what is clock speed anyway do it really matter that much? I could try to go for a 1050 ti my price range is 700 so I have 50 dollars to work with but I don't know that much about graphics cards. What is VRAM and what is clock speed

[TVwazhere]

2 minutes ago, TheFafnir said:

But what is clock speed anyway do it really matter that much? I could try to go for a 1050 ti my price range is 700 so I have 50 dollars to work with but I don't know that much about graphics cards. What is VRAM and what is clock speed

Clock speeds aernt as comparable between the cards, similar to how you cant compare how many CUDA cores the nvidia card has to the Stream Processes of AMD GPU's. The best way to compare them is benchmarks. 

Essentially though, clock speed is the speed as which the card will be able to render images. 

 

VRAM is Video RAM, basically like regular RAM for your computer, but for the GPU, which is faster and allows for better access for things like textures, renders and effects that might be needed quickly 

 

 

[TheFafnir]

So which one is essentially more importand overall to a gpu 

[mariushm]

Here's a build without video card :  https://pcpartpicker.com/list/RHPWnn

 

 

PCPartPicker part list: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/RHPWnn
Price breakdown by merchant: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/RHPWnn/by_merchant/

CPU: AMD - Ryzen 3 1200 3.1GHz Quad-Core Processor  ($99.99 @ Amazon)
Motherboard: ASRock - AB350M Micro ATX AM4 Motherboard  ($59.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill - Ripjaws V Series 8GB (1 x 8GB) DDR4-2800 Memory  ($99.89 @ OutletPC)
Storage: ADATA - XPG SX6000 128GB M.2-2280 Solid State Drive  ($49.99 @ Newegg Marketplace)
Storage: Western Digital - Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive  ($46.69 @ OutletPC)
Case: Corsair - SPEC-01 RED ATX Mid Tower Case  ($39.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: SeaSonic - EVO Edition 620W 80+ Bronze Certified Fully-Modular ATX Power Supply  ($39.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $436.53
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
 

This includes a 20$ mail-in rebate on the power supply and 10$ rebate on the case (you can choose something else.

 

Let me explain my choices.

 

CPU:  You went with Ryzen 3 1300x which is basically Ryzen 3 1200 with higher default frequencies (3.5 Ghz vs 3.1 Ghz default clock speeds). Otherwise, it's same thing, same 4 cores, 4 threads. All these Ryzen 3 processors are super easy to overclock and you're pretty much guaranteed to get 3.7 Ghz or more on ALL cores of your Ryzen 3 1200 and it's as simple as going in BIOS to change a setting.

These Ryzen quad core processors don't use a lot of power (Ryzen 3 1200 uses less than 40w) so even when overclocked it will barely reach 50-60w, so the stock cooler will still be quite enough for these processors. You can save save 20$ here super easy.

 

MB: For a processor that barely uses 40-60w you don't need a super high end motherboard. The above Asrock will work perfectly with a quad core and will overclock your CPU easily. Some may complain and say it's not good for overclocking because it's 6 phase VRM (the circuit which converts 12v from power supply to power the CPU) but really that would only matter if you'd have a Ryzen 7 processor. It's perfect for Ryzen 3 and Ryzen 5 processors.

So you're saving another 10-15$ here.  The only downside for this motherboard is that it only has 2 memory slots so if you think you're gonna want to have 16 GB of memory in total, you'd have to use a single stick of memory for now, and buy one more when prices are better.

 

Memory: Yes, Ryzen likes super fast memory, but from around 2800 Mhz and up, the jumps in performance are much smaller compared to the jumps from 2400 to 2666 and from 2666 to something higher. 

Because the motherboard I chose has only two memory slots, I chose to use only ONE memory stick for now, leaving you the choice to buy a second one at a later time to have a total of 16 GB of memory.  Yes, there will be a very small performance loss because you won't run memory in dual channel mode, but you're saving a lot of money from multiple places (15$ off mb, 10-20$ off memory, 10-15$ off cpu) which will allow you to get a better video card and that would mean overall you'd still get higher fps compared to your original build.

So i went with 2800 Mhz 8 GB stick, because that's what pc partpicker had to offer. You may find slightly better deals but this should be good enough.

 

Storage: I chose that ADATA m.2 SSD because it's cheap and has more capacity than your choice and it comes in M.2 format which the motherboard has a slot for, and it runs at pci-e x2 which gives you higher speeds compared to a SATA drive. So perfect for a boot drive.

 

For mechanical drive, after you decide on your video card, you can choose to pay 10$ more for a 2 TB hard drive (I'd suggest WD Blue 7200rpm), it should be worth it. 

 

PSU: The power supply is overkill for your computer at 620w, because your system barely uses 200w with a video card, but it's a good rebate making the power supply 40$. These Seasonic power supplies even though they're based on old designs, are much better built quality and use higher quality components inside compared to the cheap EVGA power supplies, and they have longer warranties.

 

 

So now the video card.

 

VRAM is the amount of video memory that's on the video card. More is better.  For 1080p gaming, 3 GB is becoming a limitation but for a couple more years it should be still enough. In some games, you may have to go and lower the graphics quality from "ultra" to "high" or from "high" to "medium"

So 4 GB would be best, but 3 GB would be good enough for now. 2 GB is really too low these days and you shouldn't buy such cards anymore.

 

The frequency of the processor on the video card doesn't matter as much because this processor is made out of hundreds of cores which do calculations differently.

An AMD card may run at lower frequency but achieve same performance with the nVidia card because it has more "cores" doing work compared to the nVidia card. And, even when two cards have the same number of cores and run at similar frequencies, some card may be better in some game because the cores compute things differently, and one card may be more efficient at some calculations compared to the other, in the end producing more frames per second.

 

You would have to look at reviews for video cards and see how a video card compares to another model. FOr this, I'd suggest http://techpowerup.com

 - they review and bechmark cards in multiple games and you see in the results charts with where the reviewed card is positioned compared to other cards

 

For example, here's the performance summary for a GTX 1050ti , you can replace there RX 460 with RX 560 (RX560 is basically a slightly faster RX460) : https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Palit/GeForce_GTX_1050_Ti_KalmX/30.html

 

So see if you'd save enough money with my suggestions to go for a GTX 1050ti 4 GB or a GTX1060 3 GB ... keep in mind that a video card it's harder to upgrade, while you could easily add more memory or upgrade the cpu and sell the current one easily on eBay

 

[4960X]

The RX 560 is better than the 1050 in most games. I'd get the rx 560 if possible but the 1050 Ti is better than the rx 560.

 

http://www.relaxedtech.com/reviews/amd/radeon-rx-560/3

[TheFafnir]

Thank you so much now one last question to mariushm. Does the original motherboard I chose have a m.2 slot for a ssd boot drive?

 

[mariushm]

Yes, it does.

In fact, pretty much all AM4 motherboards should have a M.2 slot because the AM4 processors have a dedicated pci-e x4 connection just for m.2 drives, so it would be silly not to put the connector on the motherboard when it requires nothing else to implement it.

 

Some motherboards may accept only NVME m.2 SSD drives in that slot , but most motherboards should accept either NVME or SATA SSD drives in that m.2 slot.

The one I linked to is NVME and capable of pci-e x2 speeds, and that one advertises up to 1000 MB/s read speeds and around 700 MB/s write speeds (SATA drives go up to only around 550 MB/s)

 

[i_build_nanosuits]

29 minutes ago, 4960X said:

The RX 560 is better than the 1050 in most games. I'd get the rx 560 if possible but the 1050 Ti is better than the rx 560.

 

http://www.relaxedtech.com/reviews/amd/radeon-rx-560/3

humm...i don't know this website and the test conditions for this review but i must say it's very different from the rest of the web where the GTX 1050 is noticeably faster than the RX 560 across the board...i don't know.

[Tom Cat]

The 1050 ti 

[4960X]

On 1/15/2018 at 10:00 AM, i_build_nanosuits said:

humm...i don't know this website and the test conditions for this review but i must say it's very different from the rest of the web where the GTX 1050 is noticeably faster than the RX 560 across the board...i don't know.

Not true. the GTX 1050 and RX 560 perform equally the same but the RX 560 is slightly faster. You might be confusing it with the GTX 1050 Ti which is much faster than the RX 560.

[i_build_nanosuits]

14 minutes ago, 4960X said:

Not true. the GTX 1050 and RX 560 perform equally the same but the RX 560 is slightly faster. You might be confusing it with the GTX 1050 Ti which is much faster than the RX 560.

ohhh right i was mistaken with the RX 460 which had fewer stream processors active and therefore was noticeably slower than the 1050...especially with early drivers.

The RX 560 now has all the streaming processors actives on there and the drivers are mature and therefore it's slightly faster than the GTX 1050 overall...my bad.