I seem to have it listed as DDR4 In my spec readout. I can assure you that the card uses GDDR6 Memory. I have also just heard from Palit that they decided to include the 6 pin in case of power spikes or instability. I will be putting this card through some more real world tests at some point soon.
@@danieladams7919 that's the problem, Nvidia and AMD can get away with charging anything they want for a certain GPU, even if it is a complete ripoff like the 1630 and 6500XT, and people will still buy it due to the current state of the market.
Between Nvidia releasing this abomination and the Intel A380 suffering from a particularly severe case of FineWine and not existing in the west, it looks like AMD somehow managed to win the "low-budget" battle by virtue of existing.
I am more impressed on how it handles a little bit worse than a 1050ti, Well done, NVIDIA. Jokes aside though, this card had so much potential, but NVIDIA decided to ruin it by giving it a 64-bit memory bus and less CUDA cores on the GPU core.
It's too expensive. But your right about potential. Imagine how good it would have been if it had just been given dlss. And the 6 pin is complete bogus lol.
I'd rather use Fermi or Kepler than that abomination, should have been at least 128 bit but lol nope. Business people just like government make some of the most ridiculous decisions sometimes.
It's amazing how awful this card is for the price. It's worse than the 1050ti that cost the same and has a matching TDP and also has the possibility to run without 6-pin power, a card that released in 2016. Six years ago you could've spent the same money and had a better experience. I think this might be the worst GPU release of all time.
Yeah, this card doesn't outperfrm a 1050Ti, but is more expensive than one... Looking on "sold items" on eBay UK, it's clear to see that the 1050Ti, an older card that beats this 1630 in performance, can be had for under £100. Also, note that the 1050Ti does not need a 6 pin power connector!
@@TheSpotify95 Since the crypto drop and a big wave of cards being resold, prices have been coming way down. I saw a GTX 1060 go for £60 today, 3GB version but still faster than the 1050 TI (and therefore 1630).
The 1650 is an amazing card, I used it to replace my aging 750ti. The thing about it though is that the card sits exactly right at the 75w power line, so, unless you get a version that has a power connector, you'll be missing performance every time the card hits the pcie power limit
Gotta love it when Nvidia releases a card comparable to an entry level card from 6 years ago. I'm curious to see how it holds up 2 or 3 years into the future
Usually when people say 30 series they are talking about the RTX 3000 line up of cards and not the 30 tier of cards like the 730, 1030, 1630. Apart from that confusion I this was an excellent video as always.
@@jubeh Yeah but 30 tier and 30 series are not the same thing, 30 tier is the class of card, like 730 and so on, whereas 30 series refers to stuff like the RTX 3050 and the like.
Main selling point of 1030 for me it being was it's low profile and not needing additional power. This is what made it great as plug and play upgrade for old corporate Dell/Hp workstation prebuilds. Both features lost by 1630.
An unfortunate miss from invidia. I imagine tho in a midtower dell optiplex with a sata to 6 pin adapter it would preform admirably. I wouldn't be worried about the adapter either since the card barely draws past 50 watts in normal use as mentioned in the video.
AIB do that only so they can charge more for low profile versions without need for six pin connector. Not a first time. But expect them to be even slower than this one, power limit will be around 50W because some OEM boards can give just that over PCIe (screw standards I guess)
Honestly they really need to have this at $70-80 USD otherwise people in the market for this thing would be better off saving a bit more for an RX 6500 or even 6600.
An RX 6500 can even be *cheaper* than a GTX 1630. BestBuy has the XFX QICK210 RX 6500 listed for $180, which is cheaper than a GTX 1630 directly from EVGA @ $200. I couldn’t find a 1630 listed for sale on any other website (retailer, AIB, or even an FE model from Nvidia), so suffice to say that demand is nonexistent.
@@andyhuang8010 a 1650 and 1050ti has lower MSRP it's not even funny anymore. Ofc those card wont go to MSRP anymore and will probably stay at the 180$ mark until they disappear
@@andyhuang8010 Not looking for a card for my rig, but considering the main target group for these cards, what is the limit to pair with a 6500 on PCIe3? Because that's the kind of machines the card will end up in. Ryzen 2000 & 3000 systems, older i5/i7, maybe some FX here or there. People looking to get better graphics for their APUs, etc... Basically all PCIe3 systems. At that point a used GTX 1060, GTX 1650, RX 570 or RX 5500 XT are available.
Abraham Chicken Lam, I wanna bring light to a better laptop GPU the GTX 1660 ti (Mobile of course) it is the most power efficient card on Passmark under power to performance
Pretty sure that I've seen a review from another RUclipsr about this, so kinda know what to expect. What I'm interested to know is whether your card has the 6 pin power connector or not. (edit: it DOES have one) After all, this card is no better than a GTX 1050Ti, so with the power connector requirement and the small 64-bit bus, you really might as well just pick up a used 1050Ti, and go from there.
I wanna bring light to a better laptop GPU the GTX 1660 ti (Mobile of course) it is the most power efficient card on Passmark under power to performance
one of the worst values for a low end GPU in the last years...even AMD's RX 6400 and 6500 smash this one in value and those are trash value by themselves
1:47 To be fair, DLSS support is massively, MASSIVELY less important now in a post AMD FSR 2.0 world, especially with how ridiculously easy it seems to be to mod the latter into games supporting the former.
@@TacticalPhoenixYT Lol this is a pile of utter Nvidia fanboy bullshit. The performance gains of DLSS 2.x & FSR 2.0 are EXTREMELY SIMILAR for the exact same lower input resolution. Don't confuse their various quality level names (i.e. "Quality", "Performance", etc...) with the actual input resolutions those tiers correlate to as they are NOT always the same across both upscalers! At least so far, Nvidia's tensor cores are mostly just worthless, wasted die area/transistors for exclusively gamers, regardless of whatever misleading BS they try to convince you of. There's a reason AMD only puts tensor/matrix accelerator units on their CDNA GPU's (yup, AMD's had equivalent tensor hardware for a WHIIIILE now. They just deliberately CHOOSE not to put it in RDNA). Those are the only products where it ACTUALLY makes sense. 🤷♂️
Genuinely not sure what purpose this card serves at the price point since there are plenty of cards especially on the used market that will perform much better for *the same price*. It doesn't even have the advantage of being low profile or not requiring a 6-pin to go in those old Optiplex builds like you could with the old 1030. Would imagine NVidia is going to have a hard time moving these.
I bet most of these will go to oem's NVidia loves moving their junk in bulk. they thought the crypto gravy train would keep going and they could pas these off at a premium.......
1650, which was already a bad value, came out for the same MSRP. 1650 super, which is around 70%faster, can be had for around 10 quid more than this... Nvidia just did the release right after the crypto crash for this price? Baaaad decision.
Makes my i5 3330 and 1050ti system look modern. Wonder what this holds for the future of budget graphics card. Nothing worth getting under 300$? Shame!
Not a lot of modern options other than perhaps a 2060 or if lucky a 1070/80 but personally I am getting away with an i7 3840qm pared with an mxm RX580 just fine.
I just saved a Quadro K620 from the ewaste pile at work. Sure, its 8 years old but it'll do just fine in my server. It is just about on par with this card.
@@teensuicide9103 I'm doubtful - most cards will tell you to power down and plug the external power in. If it would run without then it leads me to wonder why they'd go through the hassle of adding it at all
DLSS is hardware, and it's machine learning tensor cores. What your sentence is actually saying is, doesn't it make more sense to put lots of expensive tensor cores on a budget card . . . . .
It depends on your budget and what system you are putting it in, it also depends on what coutry you are in. In the US you can get an rx 6600 for around 250-300, don't go for rtx cards as they are still selling for a premium. Gtx 1070, 1070 ti, 1080, 1080 ti are all 250 or under to around 150. Don't bother with the gtx 16xx series as the 1070 is cheaper and faster. Under that you won't be getting much of an upgrade. Edit: should have said before but all of these prices are used off of ebay
I think honestly and rtx 3060 ti would be the sweet spot so long as you have a good cpu to not bottle neck it. It's performance at 1440p is acceptional and while it is power hungry (I think it draws 200w), I don't think that's far off the Rx 580s TDP. Budget is budget tho so any other option like an Rx 6600 or a 3050 will be great too.
Doesn't make sense to name a xx30 series card a GTX instead of a GT like the others. This only confuses the consumers to get tricked into buying a low end card as a gaming card.
@@SianaGearz That is true. But at the price a 1630 will run you as a LP GPU you might as well buy a 6400 XT. Plus you’ll get more driver support… wether or not AMD is the one releasing those drivers is kind of a toss up.
I really hope in the future NVIDIA won't be saturating the market with cards like this. Honestly it wasn't a card we asked for or needed. I get maybe they had left over silicon lying around, but I'm preaching to the choir at this point. It's also definitely not worth the price unless NVIDIA kills support for 900 and 1000 series GPUs (cause why buy a 1630 when you could get a 1060 6GB or 1070) then I would expect this card to be bought a lot more; which for all we know they are considering. Though I would be pretty angry if my 1080 ti lost driver support because they wanted to make a quick buck. PS: I love the cat
Same as PC builder anyways spam: I wanna bring light to a better laptop GPU the GTX 1660 ti (Mobile of course) it is the most power efficient card on Passmark under power to performance
Hello stranger: I wanna bring light to a better laptop GPU the GTX 1660 ti (Mobile of course) it is the most power efficient card on Passmark under power to performance
@@SlickOnTop It is ITX/Linux build ruclips.net/video/VHCXe_vTPr8/видео.html here you can find the cost to see if es good not forcing you just an interesting video plus on Nvidia laptops they tend to be proprietary Also fun fact: the Rx 6500 XT is more power efficient though not sure about it
As an enthusiast of the sub 75w market, the thing I never see addressed about the GTX 1630 is the RX 6400. At $10 more it trades blows with the GTX 1650, which the GTX 1630 is cut from. Nvidia just didn't price this card right, and my guess is they're trying to get rid of unsold or defective 1650 without cannibalizing their 3050 market at a minimal loss, because, as you rightly said, the 30 tier (vs 30 series, it kept confusing me every time you said 30 series when this is a 16 series 30 tier card) should be the realm of the $70-90 price bracket
With the RX 6400 it really depends. For example in RE village without FSR it performs around a GTX 1060, on Quality it goes past a 3050, on Balanced it comes close to a 3060, and with FSR in performance mode it's even faster. On the other hand it loses about half it's performance on PCIe3. And the RX 6400 is even weaker than the 6500, Some games, like Elden Ring, see barely any difference, even in 1440p, others, like Doom Eternal see a massive reduction, even on 1080p. But the 6400 is still faster than the 1630
This would be great if it was a sub 100 dollar card im sure it will get lower eventually but 150 dollars is not worth it honestly at that point just get a 1650 or the amd equivalent if u can find one for msrp that is
Just get a RX 6400 (a recent easily low profile card) or RX 6500 XT (better than integrated graphics and a "ok" gaming card [it's a bit of a stretch] ) they handle their situation of low bandwidth much better. And notice this is the only GTX card that's equivalent to the bandwidth limitations of those cards (PCI 4 though, but that shouldn't discount it), which is only helping market infinity cache really well. And keep in mind the majority of 1630 are Overclocked versions (needing the 8 pin), at higher prices, not likely a OEM will ever go for the base cards.
2/3 the performance of a 6400 for the price of a 6500 XT. Those two cards are hot garbage and this is noticeably worse. Impressive Nvidia... very impressive.
See, this isn't a GT1030 TDP though. The GT1030 still has the distinct advantage of a 30W TDP, whereas this has the 1050 issue of the "some BPO and some not" options, but in all cases targets that 75W TDP or higher. Honestly this card is atrocious value even in places where a good used market doesn't exist. It's a slap in the face of consumers and definitely a slap in the face of all of the power efficiency improvements we've made over the years. It would absolutely be doable to make a surprisingly-capable BPO card that would have been excellent value for money and provided a great option for systems without a beefy power supply. Such a shame. Ironically, Nvidia has just made the RX6400 look like much better value, because that card sits around 1050Ti / 1650 performance, is low profile and BPO, and has the exact same MSRP as the "GTX" 1630, or even lower depending. The EVGA model of this card is 200USD. Are they insane? You can pick up a 6500XT brand new for less money. Absolute fools.
Kinda weird how there are driver issues, as it's just a cut-down GTX 1650 G6. Like you said, the pricing of this is insane considering the very low performance.
I find this card genuinely insulting. Only a couple of years ago you would get a 1650 for the same frekkin price, nevermind the fact that performance since then has moved on and we're getting close to Lovelace's release. Even the 1030 was released before a new architecture was released.
Nvidia's strategy of only enabling DLSS on the high end cards really is backward. DLSS is a feature that is more useful the less powerful your GPU is, but for some reason they disable it on the cards that stand to benefit the most from it.
On the box it says Turing Shaders, to most people who have been keeping up this means they KNOW the card will probably not support any kind of ray tracing, so for it to not even have DLSS not to mention any RT features, it turns into a very shady marketing ploy.
There is no point in buying this when there are 1650 models with gddr6 that don't require a 6 pin connector and are way faster and come in low profile models
Case and point, a few days ago, I bought an EVGA GTX 1060 6Gb SSC for $130. That was less than the msrp for the gtx 1630, and the 1630 is handily beaten by the 1060, and the 1060 has 2Gb more vram, and a 192 bit memory bus.
The pricing is a bit out ccl had the card shown today for 192 which is 35 pounds more than a new in box 1050ti and only another 13 quid off buying a 1650 which destroys this and the 1050ti
Seems like this card is a bit of a scam. Too much power required, too much money required, no dlss? Compared to the last 30 series, it doesn't hold up.
@@takehirolol5962 tier above equivalency only (the historical way Nvidia did cards, though this is getting less and less true overtime), 1730 would be a 1650 in performance.
I don't know why does nobody understands this. The existsnce of this card has a very obvious reason. That is to create the Ladder of value-per-dollar. They make cards that aren't severely more expensive look amazing. Look at the rtx3050, looked like a very average deal for the price. Compared to this? Amazing. That's the gest.
A 64-bit memory bus? What is this, 2001? This is a deliberately hosed card and they have the nerve to charge that kind of money for it? What Linus Torvalds said about Nvidia...
It's such a bad release. They should've just rereleased the 1650 as 1630 or 1730, or even use one of their 3050 laptop dies for desktop xx30 cards. Even the rx 6400 performs better, even on pcie 3.0
I think Nvidia's current DLSS requires RTX hardware which is why you aren't seeing it on GTX cards. Leave it to AMD saving the day for an Nvida card. Anyways, I think this card was designed when we were still at the height of the gpu shortage and prices were much higher. It was rushed to market but then the marketplace had already changed.
Nvidia definitely needs to up their game if they want to stay in the budget market given that Amd is doing way better and intel desktop gpus are coming
If it's only peaking at the 60W mark, there's still a decent amount of room for overclocking here. Would be interesting to see what thsi card could do with another 10% on the clocks. Though, with the limited memory bus, overlocking the vram at all probably won't help much. Just a thought. Additionally. Would it be possible to add a game like V-Rising to your test suite? It's got a fair amount of regular players and it's pretty demanding for what it is. Even my 2080ti can't manage to it at 1440p with higher settings without dropping below 60fps.
I wanna bring light to a better laptop GPU the GTX 1660 ti (Mobile of course) it is the most power efficient card on Passmark under power to performance
I'm kinda sure the 7970 (~ R9 280x iirc?) should beat it on lower settings, but generally those older flagships lose more in comparsion with newer technologies at play. From what I recall Tessellation gave even some (back then) new GPUs massive FPS drops. Honestly, the card would have been good at 60-80€ and amazing with DLSS, it would still be somewhat plausible up to 100€, but it's silly beyond that IMO.
You can get a GTX 770 or 1050 for half the price, and still get the same performance. But if you want way better performance, you can get a RX6600. Or if you like Nvidia so much, you can get a GTX 1650 Super for almost the same price 😂 But AMD cards are a much better choice for performance. Yes they cost $50 more, but trust me, it’s a night and day difference.
I don't know why on earth Nvidia thought this would be a good idea. Why not just ramp up 1650 production and drop the RRP? I've got a 1650 in my ITX system and it doesn't get near the 75w TDP either and has significantly better performance. Nvidia took a huge step backwards here and it is basically a middle finger to the consumer.
This card reminds me of Nvidia's worst card the Vanta LT that only seen use in servers and ultra low end potatoes back in the late 90s and early 2000s.
It's market forces, and a two horse race, where the two CEO's are actually related to each other, from the same family. Add to that the trend for Nvidia "fans" to pay whatever was asked, even prices for inferior Nvidia cards were higher than their superior ATI/AMD competition, including paying £1000+ for the original "Titan", and you give the companies the green light to both work together to squeeze every last penny out of the consumers. Low end cards are not considered by gamers, at least in the big markets, and usually cost from £70-£110, depending on the model. Mid range, where most gamers buy, have historically been between £130-£270 (I'm not counting the GTX970 as a mid range card, which came in at £300). The high end, where very few people buy, was always between £300-£400. These prices were set, inflation adjusted, since the times of the Geforce 2 MX, Geforce 2 GTS and Geforce 2 Ultra. Or the R7 240, R9 270 and R9 290X. For examples... After the launch of the Titan, and the utter failure of PC gamers to recognize the far superior options AMD managed to create over the best part of an entire decade from judging of sales percentages of AMD/Nvidia counterparts, together with uninformed consumers swallowing hilariously biased reviews and articles from a corrupt tech press for years, we get where we are TODAY. The Titan was the beginning, but Nvidia did it again with the Titan X, costing a measly £1100 ... only to be beaten by the 980Ti just days after the very last Titan X was bought by morons. The 980Ti coming in at half the price of the Titan X. The GTX780Ti coming in at half the price of the original Titan. AMD was driven into the arms of the console manufacturers and who can blame them? And they began making much more profit from CPU's around the same time with Ryzen. Nvidia concocted more meaningless speil marketing with "RTX POWER", much like "PhysX Extensions", and their fanatical fanbase bought it "no matter what". You will have to wait a long time, until every last drop is squeezed and the manufacturers are forced to accpet lower profit margins from a disgruntled consumer base (but good luck with that with India and China now becoming wealthier) or wait for Intel or another 3rd party to join the race. Until then, be happy with your card. Chances are, if you bought it around 4-5 years ago and payed £300 or thereabouts, it will be as powerful as a £300 card is today.
I was hoping this to be more of an equivalent to the rx6400 and the 1030, where it’s a single slot, half height that has no additional power. Unfortunately it looks like there’s only half height, 2 slot versions
No DLSS is stupid. Could've saved this card but nope, nvidia being nvidia I suppose. This is the reason I'm a fan of AMD more now. FSR saved my 1050Ti from almost being unusable. No fuss getting it running too, unlike ngreedia who decided to lock DLSS to RT capable GPUs while it would've been more useful in older cards instead.
You can literally just buy a GTX 1650 or 1050 Ti and undervolt it to drop the power to 50W if you need low power consumption. They're selling for £60-£80 now on the used market, since the latest crypto crash flooding the used market with cards. Under no circumstances should anyone be buying the GTX 1630.
This card is about 1/2 the performance of the RX6400 from what I can see you can even get a low profile 6400 without a power plug just using PCI power so really pointless, also weirdly in UK RX 6500 seems cheaper than the 6400 so that would really crush the GTX 1630 and we thought AMD had released some really carp cards!!
people keep calling this a gt 1030 replacement and it is- if you have a psu with a 6 pin connector. wether someone dosent feel like changing the psu or its like my friends grandpas computer which has a funny shaped psu i cant drop this card in but i can put a 1030 in right out of the box
Power consumption should be something we focus on more : my main pc became a laptop recently, and i at least doubled my fps on most titles while now only using a 200W power supply ! This summer might be cooler than usual.
Just try to get 1-2 higher tiers of the GPU and underclock+undervolt. My underclocked 3060Ti at 140 watts is about 50% faster than a 3050 at 130 watts. Underclocked my CPU too, and whole PC uses slightly over 200w in games at most
@@Jbrimbelibap Somewhere around/over the Laptop 3070 has unbeatable efficiency (for Nvidia GPUs, excluding workstation ones at least). Because consumer GeForce cards start to use GDDR6X above the 3070 desktop, and they can use 100+ watts depending on the nunber of memory chips...
230 euros in greece from one major retailer... 30 euros more than the average price of a new gtx 1050ti and of course more than double the price of a gt 1030...
I don't understand why this card exists...the 1650 can also come in low profile, works without external power, fits in anything you could dream of... Why? It's literally a completely pointless card with what...$40 difference in price in most cases ?
I'm almost surprised by how "fine" it works. I mean, I was thinking you'd get some Rage 128 Pro level of rendering, but yet it managed to be almost not too bad, I'd say...
Incredible. A dedicated graphics card from Nvidia that is slower than AMDs (fastest) integrated graphics. I have a 6800H laptop, it's slightly faster, depending on the application
The GPU shortage appears to be at the end. There are 1660 supers available on eBay for a similar price. If you're on a budget then probably better off gambling on a used card.
Will you listen? TO SOMETHING SPAMMY BUT HOLY IN nature anyways I wanna bring light to a better laptop GPU the GTX 1660 ti (Mobile of course) it is the most power efficient card on Passmark under power to performance
Company gpu releases are weird Intel ARC released when the gpu market crashed, not when it was at its peak, where people then would rush to get a gpu Nvidia released the 1630 4 years after the 1650(and pricier at msrp) For what...?
Wow something thats weaker than a gtx 1050 ti. Why do they even bother making this crap if they cant even compare their older cards and try to improve/match preformance. Are they just lazy? Are they even trying anymore?
£180 for this? Who in their right mind would buy it? Even at half that price its far too much. Spend a bit more and get something that can do games decently. Just had a quick look on CEX and they have a 1660 for a few quid less that blows this thing out of the water, kicks it down the street and then points and laughs at it for 2 days. No idea what the hell Nvidia is thinking with this joke of a card.
If I do remember with that spec and features Nvidia offer . It seems similar or near to my current Radeon RX6400 low profile GPU. With minor adding features. Since it's new rDNA 2 architecture 6nm process
omg, watching these games in 1080p feels like there is Vaseline on my monitor. I know esport players like 1080p to squeeze 350 fps out of a game, but they are not playing games for enjoyment its a career to them but for my it needs to at least look good and hit 60ish fps minimum.
I seem to have it listed as DDR4 In my spec readout. I can assure you that the card uses GDDR6 Memory.
I have also just heard from Palit that they decided to include the 6 pin in case of power spikes or instability. I will be putting this card through some more real world tests at some point soon.
Good to know
@JiroPro waiting for ddr1
@@user-fe7bo5mm1o waiting for RDRAM
I was going to say. It couldn't possibly be THAT bad... but then again, Nvidia 🤣
Can you tell us the lottery numbers?
This thing should be like $89 max. The upward trend of the prices of low end graphics cards, from both AMD and Nvidia, is absolutely ridiculous.
They will not sell them at that price unless people are buying them. Don't buy them and prices will come down.
@@danieladams7919 that didn't really work these past few generations
@@danieladams7919 that's the problem, Nvidia and AMD can get away with charging anything they want for a certain GPU, even if it is a complete ripoff like the 1630 and 6500XT, and people will still buy it due to the current state of the market.
@@KingTurkeySub 6500xt can be found in similar price now. And it's 100% faster than this turd. Not saying that its an amazing card either mind you
@@abibirawa4119 yeah it's crazy how the 1630 makes the 6500XT look good
Having a 64 bit bus with GDDR6 memory is like having a sporty twin-turbo inline 6 with the exhausts the diameter of a HB pencil
It's like taking a Ferrari and installing a lawnmower engine in it.
Its like having a v8 and having only one cylinder fire
It’s like having any turbo’d engine run only at wastegate pressure
Its been typed wrongly as ddr4 but its gddr6 yeh ok
It's like having a F136S engine coupled to a old Chrysler 3 speed automatic: The engine wants to rev high, but the gears are so loooong and spaced out
Between Nvidia releasing this abomination and the Intel A380 suffering from a particularly severe case of FineWine and not existing in the west, it looks like AMD somehow managed to win the "low-budget" battle by virtue of existing.
They won by default basically lol. I'm hoping in the future we get better options then this but with how things are going I'm not too hopeful.
Well said
I'd still take a 1630 over a 6400, AMD's low end cards just don't have any form of encoder
@@hardrivethrutown buy a cheap used chip instead. still better than this garbage apparently... The rx 6400 needs to go back into a laptop
@@hardrivethrutown I'd just buy something like a used RX 470/80 or 570/80 over either tbh.
0:37
1050 performance
1030 consumption
1070 price
I am more impressed on how it handles a little bit worse than a 1050ti, Well done, NVIDIA. Jokes aside though, this card had so much potential, but NVIDIA decided to ruin it by giving it a 64-bit memory bus and less CUDA cores on the GPU core.
This card is worse than a 1050Ti and requires a 6 pin power connector... Plus, it's too expensive.
It's too expensive. But your right about potential. Imagine how good it would have been if it had just been given dlss. And the 6 pin is complete bogus lol.
I'd rather use Fermi or Kepler than that abomination, should have been at least 128 bit but lol nope. Business people just like government make some of the most ridiculous decisions sometimes.
More CUDA cores and wider bus would turn it into 1650 :D And it would cost more.
Makes me feel good for my 1050Ti hahahaha
It's amazing how awful this card is for the price. It's worse than the 1050ti that cost the same and has a matching TDP and also has the possibility to run without 6-pin power, a card that released in 2016. Six years ago you could've spent the same money and had a better experience.
I think this might be the worst GPU release of all time.
The worst modern gpu indeed.
The GT210 of the 2020s, that’s for sure.
(EDIT: On second thought, after seeing the 210 video - maybe it's closer to a 710 instead.)
The 1050 Ti used did cost less than 100 bucks a few years ago. This GPU doesn't reach below 150 on the used market. Self-parody, honestly.
This card makes the GTX 1650 seem like an amazing deal.
Yeah, this card doesn't outperfrm a 1050Ti, but is more expensive than one... Looking on "sold items" on eBay UK, it's clear to see that the 1050Ti, an older card that beats this 1630 in performance, can be had for under £100. Also, note that the 1050Ti does not need a 6 pin power connector!
As someone who is running that very card I can confirm it does but the card is still not a good deal lol. Hopefully price drops will fix that someday.
@@TheSpotify95 Not to mention the RX 570...
@@TheSpotify95 Since the crypto drop and a big wave of cards being resold, prices have been coming way down. I saw a GTX 1060 go for £60 today, 3GB version but still faster than the 1050 TI (and therefore 1630).
The 1650 is an amazing card, I used it to replace my aging 750ti. The thing about it though is that the card sits exactly right at the 75w power line, so, unless you get a version that has a power connector, you'll be missing performance every time the card hits the pcie power limit
Gotta love it when Nvidia releases a card comparable to an entry level card from 6 years ago. I'm curious to see how it holds up 2 or 3 years into the future
You buy it and then it immediately needs to be upgraded
Imagine being worse than a 1050ti and released in 2022
it holds up 0 years into the future
@@lasue7244 yeah I imagine tho it would be pretty awesome in a 2nd gen i7 dell optiplex.
@@loowick4074 we are in a very weird point in gpu history my friend. Glad the prices are finally dropping tho!
Usually when people say 30 series they are talking about the RTX 3000 line up of cards and not the 30 tier of cards like the 730, 1030, 1630. Apart from that confusion I this was an excellent video as always.
GT 1030 comparable to the Ryzen 5 5600G intergrated graphics
Perhaps “X30” would be a better shorthand?
same here, I was like "Wait" my 3060 ti does not have a 64 bit bus....
30 tier would be the right term though
@@jubeh Yeah but 30 tier and 30 series are not the same thing, 30 tier is the class of card, like 730 and so on, whereas 30 series refers to stuff like the RTX 3050 and the like.
Main selling point of 1030 for me it being was it's low profile and not needing additional power. This is what made it great as plug and play upgrade for old corporate Dell/Hp workstation prebuilds. Both features lost by 1630.
An unfortunate miss from invidia. I imagine tho in a midtower dell optiplex with a sata to 6 pin adapter it would preform admirably. I wouldn't be worried about the adapter either since the card barely draws past 50 watts in normal use as mentioned in the video.
AIB do that only so they can charge more for low profile versions without need for six pin connector. Not a first time.
But expect them to be even slower than this one, power limit will be around 50W because some OEM boards can give just that over PCIe (screw standards I guess)
@@ChroniclyBentPipe the old vida is out here comes the new invidia jokes aside unintentional pun you got yourself
theres a 1650 low profile
Exactly I find it hard to see how anyone would upgrade to this from a gt 1030.
i really thought it was a 75$ card seeing the performance... thats insane
i thought 60$
the names actually really fitting because you get the performance of a graphics card from when you were 16 years old but now you're 30
Honestly they really need to have this at $70-80 USD otherwise people in the market for this thing would be better off saving a bit more for an RX 6500 or even 6600.
people aho buy the 30serie aren't looking for better card, and lots of thise people exist
An RX 6500 can even be *cheaper* than a GTX 1630. BestBuy has the XFX QICK210 RX 6500 listed for $180, which is cheaper than a GTX 1630 directly from EVGA @ $200. I couldn’t find a 1630 listed for sale on any other website (retailer, AIB, or even an FE model from Nvidia), so suffice to say that demand is nonexistent.
@@andyhuang8010 a 1650 and 1050ti has lower MSRP it's not even funny anymore.
Ofc those card wont go to MSRP anymore and will probably stay at the 180$ mark until they disappear
@@andyhuang8010 Not looking for a card for my rig, but considering the main target group for these cards, what is the limit to pair with a 6500 on PCIe3? Because that's the kind of machines the card will end up in. Ryzen 2000 & 3000 systems, older i5/i7, maybe some FX here or there. People looking to get better graphics for their APUs, etc... Basically all PCIe3 systems. At that point a used GTX 1060, GTX 1650, RX 570 or RX 5500 XT are available.
I wanted to replace a 270x with this as I dont game and don't want a second hand card. I'm spending 150 on this though..
TLDR: Decent card but too expensive? Or perhaps, priced six months ago.
Abraham Chicken Lam, I wanna bring light to a better laptop GPU the GTX 1660 ti (Mobile of course) it is the most power efficient card on Passmark under power to performance
Pretty sure that I've seen a review from another RUclipsr about this, so kinda know what to expect. What I'm interested to know is whether your card has the 6 pin power connector or not. (edit: it DOES have one)
After all, this card is no better than a GTX 1050Ti, so with the power connector requirement and the small 64-bit bus, you really might as well just pick up a used 1050Ti, and go from there.
I wanna bring light to a better laptop GPU the GTX 1660 ti (Mobile of course) it is the most power efficient card on Passmark under power to performance
I can see manufacturers throwing out a card without extra power requirement. Something like 65W TDP and low profile should be possible.
one of the worst values for a low end GPU in the last years...even AMD's RX 6400 and 6500 smash this one in value and those are trash value by themselves
Nvidia always has to "one up" AMD, and in this case that meant releasing a bigger turd than the gimped 6500 and the 6400.
1:47 To be fair, DLSS support is massively, MASSIVELY less important now in a post AMD FSR 2.0 world, especially with how ridiculously easy it seems to be to mod the latter into games supporting the former.
Then again, dlss is still superior performance wise due to its utilization of tensor cores.
@@TacticalPhoenixYT Lol this is a pile of utter Nvidia fanboy bullshit. The performance gains of DLSS 2.x & FSR 2.0 are EXTREMELY SIMILAR for the exact same lower input resolution.
Don't confuse their various quality level names (i.e. "Quality", "Performance", etc...) with the actual input resolutions those tiers correlate to as they are NOT always the same across both upscalers!
At least so far, Nvidia's tensor cores are mostly just worthless, wasted die area/transistors for exclusively gamers, regardless of whatever misleading BS they try to convince you of. There's a reason AMD only puts tensor/matrix accelerator units on their CDNA GPU's (yup, AMD's had equivalent tensor hardware for a WHIIIILE now. They just deliberately CHOOSE not to put it in RDNA). Those are the only products where it ACTUALLY makes sense. 🤷♂️
@@TacticalPhoenixYTYes dlss is better no it's not that much better.
Genuinely not sure what purpose this card serves at the price point since there are plenty of cards especially on the used market that will perform much better for *the same price*. It doesn't even have the advantage of being low profile or not requiring a 6-pin to go in those old Optiplex builds like you could with the old 1030. Would imagine NVidia is going to have a hard time moving these.
I’m pretty sure this is nVidia repurposing their faulty GPU parts.This may be good on non-OEM SFF builds.
I bet most of these will go to oem's NVidia loves moving their junk in bulk. they thought the crypto gravy train would keep going and they could pas these off at a premium.......
Remember the 1010
I’d never touch this thing, especially when the RX 6400 is around $150
1650, which was already a bad value, came out for the same MSRP. 1650 super, which is around 70%faster, can be had for around 10 quid more than this... Nvidia just did the release right after the crypto crash for this price? Baaaad decision.
don't get fooled by this text me on telegram accounts
Makes my i5 3330 and 1050ti system look modern.
Wonder what this holds for the future of budget graphics card.
Nothing worth getting under 300$?
Shame!
Well here in Australia I can get a 2060 super for under 300
Inflation is a bitch. Everything else has went up 100%, so why not GPU's.
Not a lot of modern options other than perhaps a 2060 or if lucky a 1070/80 but personally I am getting away with an i7 3840qm pared with an mxm RX580 just fine.
The cheapest RTX 3050s are about 300EUR, so I guess that the USD price is similar.
@@captain1334 that ain't fair its priced higher here in the U.S
Well you have been getting the short end of the stick for existing
I just saved a Quadro K620 from the ewaste pile at work. Sure, its 8 years old but it'll do just fine in my server. It is just about on par with this card.
You saved it that is the most important thing you did
it has enough firepower to be useful. well done.
If it only pulls 75W max, why does it need a 6-pin? It makes it far less useful for SFF and office PC conversions.
It probably does work without plugging that in.
@@teensuicide9103 I'm doubtful - most cards will tell you to power down and plug the external power in. If it would run without then it leads me to wonder why they'd go through the hassle of adding it at all
Surely it makes more sense to have DLSS on those budget cards?
DLSS is hardware, and it's machine learning tensor cores. What your sentence is actually saying is, doesn't it make more sense to put lots of expensive tensor cores on a budget card . . . . .
Love videos like this. Helps with debating what to get to replace my RX580 while not breaking the bank.
This will definitely be a downgrade from your 580 IMO
A 1070 or RTX 3050 will give you 40% more performance. Depends on your CPU as well.
It depends on your budget and what system you are putting it in, it also depends on what coutry you are in. In the US you can get an rx 6600 for around 250-300, don't go for rtx cards as they are still selling for a premium. Gtx 1070, 1070 ti, 1080, 1080 ti are all 250 or under to around 150. Don't bother with the gtx 16xx series as the 1070 is cheaper and faster. Under that you won't be getting much of an upgrade.
Edit: should have said before but all of these prices are used off of ebay
What’s hilarious is even a RX 570 is a much bigger upgrade than… THIS
I think honestly and rtx 3060 ti would be the sweet spot so long as you have a good cpu to not bottle neck it. It's performance at 1440p is acceptional and while it is power hungry (I think it draws 200w), I don't think that's far off the Rx 580s TDP. Budget is budget tho so any other option like an Rx 6600 or a 3050 will be great too.
I got my sapphire rx 580 pulse for $220 Five years ago. I know it's not a great card but in comparison this is sad.
I'd be accepting that thing if it was called a GT1630 instead of a GTX - though the performance is bad regardless for today's standards
Doesn't make sense to name a xx30 series card a GTX instead of a GT like the others. This only confuses the consumers to get tricked into buying a low end card as a gaming card.
I have the feeling that is part of the reason why they did it
lmao just drop the gt/gtx cuz this isnt useful
GTX has nothing to do with anything like that anymore, it now just means that it's not a ray tracing card. RTX means it is ray tracing.
The GTX 970 is about 80$ used and is very similar but better.
It's also 160-180W. This is 75.
However the 970 is if memory serves faster than this, a lot faster. More 1650 territory.
@@SianaGearz That is true. But at the price a 1630 will run you as a LP GPU you might as well buy a 6400 XT. Plus you’ll get more driver support… wether or not AMD is the one releasing those drivers is kind of a toss up.
@@SianaGearz 1050 ti is 75w and its still better.
I really hope in the future NVIDIA won't be saturating the market with cards like this. Honestly it wasn't a card we asked for or needed. I get maybe they had left over silicon lying around, but I'm preaching to the choir at this point. It's also definitely not worth the price unless NVIDIA kills support for 900 and 1000 series GPUs (cause why buy a 1630 when you could get a 1060 6GB or 1070) then I would expect this card to be bought a lot more; which for all we know they are considering. Though I would be pretty angry if my 1080 ti lost driver support because they wanted to make a quick buck. PS: I love the cat
Same as PC builder anyways spam:
I wanna bring light to a better laptop GPU the GTX 1660 ti (Mobile of course) it is the most power efficient card on Passmark under power to performance
@@adrianafamilymember6427 The 1660 ti and super really are the best budget GPUs next to the 3050 and 3060 of course.
Not just a 1060, but also the 1650 / 1660 are there, making the 1630 doa
The RX 6400 trounces this card and provides ray tracing at lower resolutions for the same price.
Hello stranger:
I wanna bring light to a better laptop GPU the GTX 1660 ti (Mobile of course) it is the most power efficient card on Passmark under power to performance
@@adrianafamilymember6427 it also costs a lot more
@@SlickOnTop true that about $570-580 for the less SSD storage
The whole laptop of course
@@SlickOnTop It is ITX/Linux build ruclips.net/video/VHCXe_vTPr8/видео.html here you can find the cost to see if es good not forcing you just an interesting video plus on Nvidia laptops they tend to be proprietary
Also fun fact: the Rx 6500 XT is more power efficient though not sure about it
As an enthusiast of the sub 75w market, the thing I never see addressed about the GTX 1630 is the RX 6400. At $10 more it trades blows with the GTX 1650, which the GTX 1630 is cut from. Nvidia just didn't price this card right, and my guess is they're trying to get rid of unsold or defective 1650 without cannibalizing their 3050 market at a minimal loss, because, as you rightly said, the 30 tier (vs 30 series, it kept confusing me every time you said 30 series when this is a 16 series 30 tier card) should be the realm of the $70-90 price bracket
With the RX 6400 it really depends. For example in RE village without FSR it performs around a GTX 1060, on Quality it goes past a 3050, on Balanced it comes close to a 3060, and with FSR in performance mode it's even faster. On the other hand it loses about half it's performance on PCIe3.
And the RX 6400 is even weaker than the 6500, Some games, like Elden Ring, see barely any difference, even in 1440p, others, like Doom Eternal see a massive reduction, even on 1080p.
But the 6400 is still faster than the 1630
If this was a actual GT 1030 replacement price wise, it'd be fine. But for 150-180? nah man, im good
The new price is irrelevant. The price settles on the right price second hand.
This would be great if it was a sub 100 dollar card im sure it will get lower eventually but 150 dollars is not worth it honestly at that point just get a 1650 or the amd equivalent if u can find one for msrp that is
This is what Gamers Nexus call 'a waste of sand' ...
Just get a RX 6400 (a recent easily low profile card) or RX 6500 XT (better than integrated graphics and a "ok" gaming card [it's a bit of a stretch] ) they handle their situation of low bandwidth much better. And notice this is the only GTX card that's equivalent to the bandwidth limitations of those cards (PCI 4 though, but that shouldn't discount it), which is only helping market infinity cache really well. And keep in mind the majority of 1630 are Overclocked versions (needing the 8 pin), at higher prices, not likely a OEM will ever go for the base cards.
2/3 the performance of a 6400 for the price of a 6500 XT. Those two cards are hot garbage and this is noticeably worse. Impressive Nvidia... very impressive.
Should be a GT not a GTX, and half the price. They were late to the party with a over priced GPU.
See, this isn't a GT1030 TDP though. The GT1030 still has the distinct advantage of a 30W TDP, whereas this has the 1050 issue of the "some BPO and some not" options, but in all cases targets that 75W TDP or higher.
Honestly this card is atrocious value even in places where a good used market doesn't exist. It's a slap in the face of consumers and definitely a slap in the face of all of the power efficiency improvements we've made over the years. It would absolutely be doable to make a surprisingly-capable BPO card that would have been excellent value for money and provided a great option for systems without a beefy power supply. Such a shame.
Ironically, Nvidia has just made the RX6400 look like much better value, because that card sits around 1050Ti / 1650 performance, is low profile and BPO, and has the exact same MSRP as the "GTX" 1630, or even lower depending. The EVGA model of this card is 200USD. Are they insane? You can pick up a 6500XT brand new for less money. Absolute fools.
Kinda weird how there are driver issues, as it's just a cut-down GTX 1650 G6. Like you said, the pricing of this is insane considering the very low performance.
I find this card genuinely insulting. Only a couple of years ago you would get a 1650 for the same frekkin price, nevermind the fact that performance since then has moved on and we're getting close to Lovelace's release. Even the 1030 was released before a new architecture was released.
Love the cat! It really enhances the video.
Nvidia's strategy of only enabling DLSS on the high end cards really is backward. DLSS is a feature that is more useful the less powerful your GPU is, but for some reason they disable it on the cards that stand to benefit the most from it.
On the box it says Turing Shaders, to most people who have been keeping up this means they KNOW the card will probably not support any kind of ray tracing, so for it to not even have DLSS not to mention any RT features, it turns into a very shady marketing ploy.
Yep, it doesn't support DX12U, as opposed to 6400 or 6500 XT.
There is no point in buying this when there are 1650 models with gddr6 that don't require a 6 pin connector and are way faster and come in low profile models
Case and point, a few days ago, I bought an EVGA GTX 1060 6Gb SSC for $130. That was less than the msrp for the gtx 1630, and the 1630 is handily beaten by the 1060, and the 1060 has 2Gb more vram, and a 192 bit memory bus.
The pricing is a bit out ccl had the card shown today for 192 which is 35 pounds more than a new in box 1050ti and only another 13 quid off buying a 1650 which destroys this and the 1050ti
Seems like this card is a bit of a scam. Too much power required, too much money required, no dlss?
Compared to the last 30 series, it doesn't hold up.
I just keep getting happier and happier with my eye cand-- i mean 1070 Founders
So sad since this will most likely be the last GTX card
That is unless a 17 series comes around, which might or might not happen.
@@Foxlum Well, what more performce they can give?
@@takehirolol5962 tier above equivalency only (the historical way Nvidia did cards, though this is getting less and less true overtime), 1730 would be a 1650 in performance.
@@Foxlum That would not even be worth it for future titles...
@@takehirolol5962 That's Nvidia, the 16 series is the biggest mixed bag I've ever seen.
I don't know why does nobody understands this. The existsnce of this card has a very obvious reason.
That is to create the Ladder of value-per-dollar.
They make cards that aren't severely more expensive look amazing. Look at the rtx3050, looked like a very average deal for the price. Compared to this? Amazing. That's the gest.
A 64-bit memory bus? What is this, 2001?
This is a deliberately hosed card and they have the nerve to charge that kind of money for it? What Linus Torvalds said about Nvidia...
It's such a bad release. They should've just rereleased the 1650 as 1630 or 1730, or even use one of their 3050 laptop dies for desktop xx30 cards. Even the rx 6400 performs better, even on pcie 3.0
I think Nvidia's current DLSS requires RTX hardware which is why you aren't seeing it on GTX cards. Leave it to AMD saving the day for an Nvida card. Anyways, I think this card was designed when we were still at the height of the gpu shortage and prices were much higher. It was rushed to market but then the marketplace had already changed.
for 70-80$ ? ye, kinda see the point. Any other price? hell no! Even then i'd brave the used market rather than buying this.
this is Nvidia telling us to go and buy a used card instead.
Last time I was this early I ruined my relationship.
Nvidia definitely needs to up their game if they want to stay in the budget market given that Amd is doing way better and intel desktop gpus are coming
Intel is not looking 2 good at the moment
Intel gpus have got so many issues
This is what I call a "LoL! Ur PoOr" GPU. This should've been a 1610 card.
By 2025 they’ll have a nvidia will have a variant for every number between 1k and 2k
Nvidia: people's gonna swallow any shit on this shortage times
People: r u fkin kidding me?
If it's only peaking at the 60W mark, there's still a decent amount of room for overclocking here. Would be interesting to see what thsi card could do with another 10% on the clocks. Though, with the limited memory bus, overlocking the vram at all probably won't help much. Just a thought.
Additionally. Would it be possible to add a game like V-Rising to your test suite? It's got a fair amount of regular players and it's pretty demanding for what it is. Even my 2080ti can't manage to it at 1440p with higher settings without dropping below 60fps.
I wanna bring light to a better laptop GPU the GTX 1660 ti (Mobile of course) it is the most power efficient card on Passmark under power to performance
@@adrianafamilymember6427 Where can the power conscious buyer get one?
If it had dlss and new technology then I would understand the price. Not agree with price but understand
I'm kinda sure the 7970 (~ R9 280x iirc?) should beat it on lower settings, but generally those older flagships lose more in comparsion with newer technologies at play. From what I recall Tessellation gave even some (back then) new GPUs massive FPS drops.
Honestly, the card would have been good at 60-80€ and amazing with DLSS, it would still be somewhat plausible up to 100€, but it's silly beyond that IMO.
I think my s3 savage4 had a 64-bit memory bus and I think it was considered anemic even back then?
The 1650 was a perfectly fine low-spec/low-power 16 series card that performs decently in games, there is no need for this card to exist
It needs a 6-pin.
What was Nvidia thinking? Besides money, of course.
Hey, I don't mind a cheaply designed card, as long as it's got a price to match. If it's not saving me money, I'll just buy an earlier card used.
You can get a GTX 770 or 1050 for half the price, and still get the same performance. But if you want way better performance, you can get a RX6600. Or if you like Nvidia so much, you can get a GTX 1650 Super for almost the same price 😂 But AMD cards are a much better choice for performance. Yes they cost $50 more, but trust me, it’s a night and day difference.
I don’t understand how they can make this cost more than the 1650 when it was new
Pre-crypto crash pricing and product positioning, that's how.
I don't know why on earth Nvidia thought this would be a good idea. Why not just ramp up 1650 production and drop the RRP? I've got a 1650 in my ITX system and it doesn't get near the 75w TDP either and has significantly better performance. Nvidia took a huge step backwards here and it is basically a middle finger to the consumer.
Real peak of comedy graphics right here
Well it might be good if some ppl want 10 years old performance card brand new but still I would rather go with 1650
This card reminds me of Nvidia's worst card the Vanta LT that only seen use in servers and ultra low end potatoes back in the late 90s and early 2000s.
If they made any more compromises when designing the 1630, they'd have to have called it the GTX 1615.5
It's market forces, and a two horse race, where the two CEO's are actually related to each other, from the same family. Add to that the trend for Nvidia "fans" to pay whatever was asked, even prices for inferior Nvidia cards were higher than their superior ATI/AMD competition, including paying £1000+ for the original "Titan", and you give the companies the green light to both work together to squeeze every last penny out of the consumers.
Low end cards are not considered by gamers, at least in the big markets, and usually cost from £70-£110, depending on the model. Mid range, where most gamers buy, have historically been between £130-£270 (I'm not counting the GTX970 as a mid range card, which came in at £300). The high end, where very few people buy, was always between £300-£400. These prices were set, inflation adjusted, since the times of the Geforce 2 MX, Geforce 2 GTS and Geforce 2 Ultra. Or the R7 240, R9 270 and R9 290X. For examples...
After the launch of the Titan, and the utter failure of PC gamers to recognize the far superior options AMD managed to create over the best part of an entire decade from judging of sales percentages of AMD/Nvidia counterparts, together with uninformed consumers swallowing hilariously biased reviews and articles from a corrupt tech press for years, we get where we are TODAY.
The Titan was the beginning, but Nvidia did it again with the Titan X, costing a measly £1100 ... only to be beaten by the 980Ti just days after the very last Titan X was bought by morons. The 980Ti coming in at half the price of the Titan X. The GTX780Ti coming in at half the price of the original Titan.
AMD was driven into the arms of the console manufacturers and who can blame them? And they began making much more profit from CPU's around the same time with Ryzen. Nvidia concocted more meaningless speil marketing with "RTX POWER", much like "PhysX Extensions", and their fanatical fanbase bought it "no matter what".
You will have to wait a long time, until every last drop is squeezed and the manufacturers are forced to accpet lower profit margins from a disgruntled consumer base (but good luck with that with India and China now becoming wealthier) or wait for Intel or another 3rd party to join the race. Until then, be happy with your card. Chances are, if you bought it around 4-5 years ago and payed £300 or thereabouts, it will be as powerful as a £300 card is today.
I was hoping this to be more of an equivalent to the rx6400 and the 1030, where it’s a single slot, half height that has no additional power. Unfortunately it looks like there’s only half height, 2 slot versions
No DLSS is stupid. Could've saved this card but nope, nvidia being nvidia I suppose.
This is the reason I'm a fan of AMD more now. FSR saved my 1050Ti from almost being unusable. No fuss getting it running too, unlike ngreedia who decided to lock DLSS to RT capable GPUs while it would've been more useful in older cards instead.
You can literally just buy a GTX 1650 or 1050 Ti and undervolt it to drop the power to 50W if you need low power consumption. They're selling for £60-£80 now on the used market, since the latest crypto crash flooding the used market with cards. Under no circumstances should anyone be buying the GTX 1630.
This card is about 1/2 the performance of the RX6400 from what I can see you can even get a low profile 6400 without a power plug just using PCI power so really pointless, also weirdly in UK RX 6500 seems cheaper than the 6400 so that would really crush the GTX 1630 and we thought AMD had released some really carp cards!!
I know it's a mediocre card, but those B-roll shots of it hanging precariously close to that puddle of water give me anxiety.
I’ve had a 1660s for about a year now and I’m wanting an upgrade, hate to think how this will go down in about a year’s time and 4000 series.
people keep calling this a gt 1030 replacement and it is- if you have a psu with a 6 pin connector. wether someone dosent feel like changing the psu or its like my friends grandpas computer which has a funny shaped psu i cant drop this card in but i can put a 1030 in right out of the box
Power consumption should be something we focus on more : my main pc became a laptop recently, and i at least doubled my fps on most titles while now only using a 200W power supply ! This summer might be cooler than usual.
Just try to get 1-2 higher tiers of the GPU and underclock+undervolt. My underclocked 3060Ti at 140 watts is about 50% faster than a 3050 at 130 watts. Underclocked my CPU too, and whole PC uses slightly over 200w in games at most
@@RS-nq8xkMy config pulls about the same, since it's a laptop with a 200W power supply: 140W 3070 laptop
@@Jbrimbelibap Somewhere around/over the Laptop 3070 has unbeatable efficiency (for Nvidia GPUs, excluding workstation ones at least).
Because consumer GeForce cards start to use GDDR6X above the 3070 desktop, and they can use 100+ watts depending on the nunber of memory chips...
230 euros in greece from one major retailer... 30 euros more than the average price of a new gtx 1050ti and of course more than double the price of a gt 1030...
I don't understand why this card exists...the 1650 can also come in low profile, works without external power, fits in anything you could dream of... Why? It's literally a completely pointless card with what...$40 difference in price in most cases ?
I'm almost surprised by how "fine" it works. I mean, I was thinking you'd get some Rage 128 Pro level of rendering, but yet it managed to be almost not too bad, I'd say...
Incredible. A dedicated graphics card from Nvidia that is slower than AMDs (fastest) integrated graphics.
I have a 6800H laptop, it's slightly faster, depending on the application
The GPU shortage appears to be at the end. There are 1660 supers available on eBay for a similar price. If you're on a budget then probably better off gambling on a used card.
Will you listen? TO SOMETHING SPAMMY BUT HOLY IN nature anyways
I wanna bring light to a better laptop GPU the GTX 1660 ti (Mobile of course) it is the most power efficient card on Passmark under power to performance
Company gpu releases are weird
Intel ARC released when the gpu market crashed, not when it was at its peak, where people then would rush to get a gpu
Nvidia released the 1630 4 years after the 1650(and pricier at msrp)
For what...?
Wow....a little bit worse than the 1050Ti
Wow something thats weaker than a gtx 1050 ti. Why do they even bother making this crap if they cant even compare their older cards and try to improve/match preformance. Are they just lazy? Are they even trying anymore?
it's funny how my 1050 ti from 2016 does slightly better at almost everything
£180 for this? Who in their right mind would buy it? Even at half that price its far too much. Spend a bit more and get something that can do games decently. Just had a quick look on CEX and they have a 1660 for a few quid less that blows this thing out of the water, kicks it down the street and then points and laughs at it for 2 days. No idea what the hell Nvidia is thinking with this joke of a card.
If I do remember with that spec and features Nvidia offer . It seems similar or near to my current Radeon RX6400 low profile GPU. With minor adding features. Since it's new rDNA 2 architecture 6nm process
omg, watching these games in 1080p feels like there is Vaseline on my monitor.
I know esport players like 1080p to squeeze 350 fps out of a game, but they are not playing games for enjoyment its a career to them but for my it needs to at least look good and hit 60ish fps minimum.
Aww, Nova is so floofy! More cat updates please!
I’m still on my old GTX 960 because of this dumb shit. Gimme 1070 level performance for 159ish and I’ll bite.