Please subscribe, I want to make more videos and that motivates me the most. It is free and really helps. P.S. Sorry for the not so great game capture quality, my capture card is old and has bitrate issues. I will get a new one soon.
If you can and as it appears to be about the same price the arc A580/A750 or with the same memory the A380 although at £99 it should technically be in a different price group? Good video though. For your video editing then the arc cards all have AV1 encoding which apparently perform well beyond anything else in the price range and could be a possible budget option for you.
Honestly...I want one. I know statistically it's weaker than a lot of cards, but its low power draw and the fact it trounces the 1650 have me very excited to build an M-ATX/M-ITX Series S-style gaming rig
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat for one thing, it only draws power from the PCI slot, and doesn't require an external connector. Also there will be low profile variants. Also it's my money and I can waste it on dumb crap if I want to
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat It doesn't though - the 6600 uses close to 150W of power. This 3050 is special that it doesn't need power from the PSU cables there's also a fanless model aswell - so complete silence. I wonder if someone made a review of that AIB model yet?
@@ArtyomExplainsEng and that's the point behind my question, let me explain. During the pandemic some of us started gaming at home, many people used low cost video cards in business class HP and Dell computers. In my case as part of my company tech cycle I had 65 HP PC's with 16gb i7 computers being retired. Many were given to employees some trashed. I brought many home and repurposed them for friends to use as low cost (free) gaming PC's, all they needed was a video card. We all remember how sky high GPU's became during that time. For the most part I would install a 1650 or similar card and that was enough to play. Given the option of providing a family of modest means an option to play modern games at a that doesn't break the bank. GPU's in the 70 watt power range shouldn't be compared against GPU's with the benefit of greater power levels. In car performance terms what you're doing here is comparing a MINI Cooper to BMW M3. It's an unfair comparison. Best you compare based on the specific use case and power levels. Better to compare a MINI Cooper to a Honda Civic for example. Nevertheless great video and I admire your effort here. Keep up the good work.
@@kispumel I hear ya but it's not exactly a like for like comparison since the underlying architectures and use cases are different. The A2000 is a professional workstation class card optimized for business uses such as CAD or similar graphics. But nevertheless I wouldn't mind seeing them compared in a head to head competition as well. Good catch my friend.
@@FSX239 The underlying architecture is exactly the same, both the ampere architecture from Nvidia. AD106 /AD104 dies from that generation. Many people grabbed the A2000 already because yes, primarly it if for prosumers, however it is brilliant in gaming, and in gaming performance between the 3050 8gb and the 3060. Not unusal it was you could grab the 6gb version around ~200-220 usd mark several month ago.
It would slay the budget market at that price point and be a killer buy. At $160, it's better than an A380 or a 6400, but those cards are $40 and $20 cheaper on average respectively, with occasional price drops by another $20. They also have some saving graces that justify their existence, such as being an encoding champ for the former and being the only readily available sslp card for the latter. And at $160 you're butting up against the A580, A750 and RX6600. The first is usually $20 more for way more performance and the latter two can usually be found with occasional dips to below $200. I think it's a little too large and power hungry to be called a 3030, but a 3040 would probably work naming wise. Then again, it's Nvidia, so anything resembling a sane name or price is anathema.
@@EbonySaints Agree with pretty much every word you said. And yes, tech companies are notoriously bad with naming their products, but Nvidia is on another level of nonsensical.
@@EbonySaints This card is definitely in a weird spot where if you're looking at ultra budget gaming performance, you'd stray to a card like a 2048SP rx580 or a used 1060 which can be found for much cheaper at the same price. But when looking at a decent encoding GPU, you'd look at intel offerings for AV1. If you've got a bit more budget, like you mentionned an rx6600 would blow miles past this iteration of the 3050. Imo this seems like the only good spot this GPU has is for Low profile builds, the 4060 was cool but needed an 8pin connector which was really dissapointing for ultra budget gamers, the 3050 offers the best gaming performance at a reasonnable price for a GPU under 75W.
Even if its not utilizing the full VRAM it will use all memory chips because that's how you achieve more bandwidth, so the added memory usage will call for more energy. Also the 8GB 3050 has higher clocks AND more CUDA which again will call for more energy.
Lucky_noob has made a video of UV 3050, literally consume only 60 - 70 watt of power using galax or colorfull maybe i forget, they have 2 fan and white all around could be galax so basically 3050 can be push to 70 watt with a little performance loss but 3050 6Gb still okay i guess if they price it right just put it at xx50 class card price range make it a successor of 1650 better yet let 4050 6Gb do it it's even better
I was surprised by how well the 3060 12GB performed in the comparison. I own this model and knew it was a great card but I also own a 3090 so I wasn't expecting the performance gap to be so wide.
yeah in my country 6600 have almost the same price as 3050 6gb, 3050 6gb should be price at 1650 price or lower closer to A380, that would be undisputed king in the class
@@GewelReal A2000 (and A4000 Ada) shows what nvidia really capable of with those respective nodes. but it is not something they like to give regular consumer just as yet.
@@GewelReal not really it around 1650 super to 1660 vanilla teritory, so might be a little behind A2000, but the price is night and day this is a good successor of 1650 ddr5 just the price isn't right, price it closer to A380, it would literally kill any AMD offer in this class
What a joke of a card, NVIDIA just released a GTX 1060 6 GB but the RTX edition. A GPU like this should not be more than $130. That's the max anyone would be willing to pay for 6 GB in 2024.
even if nvidia or AMD give the chip for free no AIB will want to sell their card below $150 anymore. that's why GTX1630 end up having the price of $150 before despite similar performance can be had for similar price back in 2016. if anything the sub $200 become more and more unrealistic for AIB. that's why AMD said their cheapest RDNA3 card will be $260 RX7600XT. nvidia with their $300 RTX 4060. if AMD or nvidia want to launch new GPU for the sub $200 market it will be from last gen stuff. or they will just let existing older gen GPU to fill it like AMD has done with RX6600.
Is actually good card for people like me with old pc that dont have 6 or 8pin connectors.I have 1050ti and would be good card to last me atleast 2 years till more money for new pc
Those naming is marketing issue. Throughout nvidia history those x40 and below card has always being seen as a bad card for gaming. Same reason when AMD refused to call further cut down chip of their card as xx30 before. Also this card use 70w only. This is true successor to 1650 non super that also use similar power. Personally i'm more interested to see performance improvement over 1650.
thats what im saying. eversince the nvidia get to 1000 series, there is no more denominator lower than xx50. thats just simply it. its their new naming convention system. and they are must abide to their own system.
great video, thank you. Yes, the 8gb version delivers 25% more in raw FPS, but it draws almost twice the power compared to the 6gb. I am actually quite excited about this release as it gets all its power from the board. I think this card will end up in plenty of discarded office systems, since the low profile RTX 4060 needs a PSU and is amost 300 euro here in Europe, the A2000 is also 250/300 euro (used) and the RX 6400 is PCIE 4 x 4, which still is the dumbest decision ever, as it's basically a budget GPU that cannot be used in budget systems - truly retarded product. TLDR, I like this card
Gonna make a second PC with my spare rtx 3050 8gb. Solid card for eSport,indie,emulator,Sport games. Heck even old AAA ones. I'm not powering up a 4080 just to run prince of persia game. Edit: I only need os storage, and rams(perfect to replace my old ones) to build a second pc.
@@arenzricodexd4409 no it is slower than 3050 8Gb, but have ridiculous OC potential that make it close to 3050 with only 75 watt of power that's insane
@@arenzricodexd4409 I have an A2000 and I am tempted to sell it and get one of these instead. The A2000 has some issues of its own, the 4 mini-DP is annoying as you can't ever hope to get audio out of it. In addition the blower style fan is not very good, and to my ears it's too loud. I also suspect it's not cooling it so well, and the A2000 is just too expensive. I got it for a good price locally but seeing what they go for now. I could sell it for almost double what I bought it for. At least this card would have native HDMI, and I suspect more longevity as the A2000 cards to me look like cards that are not long for this world, especially considering most of us who bought them used, bought them off miners.
Thank you for confirming 😃🙏🏻 Can you please make a follow up video with some fan speed testing? I would love some info on how long it stays passive and at what rate the fan gradually speeds up. The fans could be temperature controlled or voltage controlled. Do you know what they use for this card? 😃
So we are shifting from didn't even mention to barely mention. Nice. I say it is mentioned in just the right amount. Watch the video first before posting such comments next time. There is also a second video where I test it against rx 6500 xt. Watch it to find something else to blame me for.
Not so bad if you depend on solar power and batteries (off the grid). Gaming laptops tend be expensive, noisy, and are actually less efficient in regards to performance per watt.
Card should have been 150 bucks max as it offers gtx 1060 performance, slightly better due to being more recent tech and can use dlss for slight future proofing. In europe, where i live, this card is going for around 215€ currently, at that price point i can get something much better... The 8gb model is around 235€ and it's also a bad purchase with that price tag, a 3060 costs 300€, or a rx 7600 which also goes for 300€. Seems like a no brainer honestly. If they made this under 150 bucks at all times, it would have been worth it for some people. A RX 6600 8gb costs 220€ currently which is the best performance:value offer i have for budget builds, and offers an increase of around 70% to performance. Sure the only good factor this 3050 has going is power usage. But that still is a poor excuse for the price it has. Also lets not forget that 8700g apu offers performance that at times trades blows with a gtx 1060 6gb (depends on specs, someone running a 1060 should be running older hardware, which means the 8700g will get better results, if the 1060 is paired with a more recent cpu, the 1060 wins easily, this is not even considering ram impact...). This apu makes this card irrelevant when it comes to power consumption, which means, the only relevant thing left would be DLSS. But then again FSR exists, so.... 8700g costs 370€ currently where i live. This is not the best performance for money invested but it means you spend less money on power consumption at the cost of of some small performance loss. If ryzen 9700g follows the same pattern, then we can expect another increase in performance, which would most likely leave both the gtx 1060 6gb and rtx 3050 6gb behind in the dust, outperforming both by a small margin, while consuming less power.
Yeah, I'd buy it at $150. 8700G is too expensive for the performance. 780M is still 1650 level on average, only matching the 1060 in select titles. 8600G makes more sense but still needs to get cheaper like the 5600G did to be a great buy.
Depends on which GTX 16 series were talking about. I'm pretty sure 1660 Ti/Super is faster than this and wondering how much DLSS helps to surpass them at native. And how about 1660 Ti/Super + FSR vs this + DLSS
@ulfricstormcloak7142 A better architecture regardless and Direct X 12 Ultimate support which means a longer support to many games and future titles if you're into budget cards and dont want to buy something high end or mid range if you're a casual gamer and arent playing competitive games, in the end of the day the GTX series has come to an end and will be retired and become unsupported sooner or later for budget gamers.
It's a card that has no use for those who do not buy budget cards for sure, but it's a good one for those who prefer to stick to budget builds and not interested to pay more than $200 on a graphic card.
We bought my son a HP computer with a Ryzen 3 4300g a couple years ago on black Friday for $350. He's outgrown the on-board graphics. I picked up a MSI rtx 3050 6g OC for $169 and now he's playing games 1080p at well over 100fps. This GPU is the perfect budget solution for us.
For those who don't know, the 1650 4gb Low Profile models sell for around $170-250 and is usually out of stock wherever you look because it's the only option to upgrade an old Dell/HP/Lenovo. The RX 6400 has no encoder and handles its 4gb VRAM much worse. This is a huge improvement on anything currently available. It will definitely sell because this + an old dell etc would be a solid gaming PC for around $300 - much cheaper than if you'd be looking to build a PC around an RX 6600 or similarly priced GPU.
can't dissagree 3050 is a good upgrade for 1650, but 1650 is too mighty even AMD fail to top it off 6400 and 6500XT is such a joke make 1650 look like a king 6400 power consumption still extremely good
WTF?! i'm reading a lot of people saying "this cost the same and goes better". You all are completely ignoring a big segment of prebuilt and/or the power saving matter. 70W for a dGPU with this performance is really good. That said, naming could be better for sure, and price 139 max. TDP is the good thing of this card.
The rtx 3050 6gb uses 85% less power than the RTX 3050 8GB but only has 25% less performance. If you look it at fps to power ratio. The rtx 3050 6GB is not so bad as you tought. RTX 3050 6 GB uses more or less to 125% less power that the rtx 3060 and yet only 75% slower. If you dont have a good psu or cant afford a good psu. You can get the RTX 3050 and use medium settings most games and get either 60fps avg or close to 60fps average and still have multiple upscaling options like DLSS, FSR and XESS. If they named the card the RTX 3040 rather than RTX 3050 it would sell better and would still be a good product for its use case.
The 3050 is massively crippled, especially for the VRAM, keep in mind that the VRAM bandwidth of the 3050 6GB is about the same as the VRAM bandwidth of the AIB version of the old Nvidia GTX 660 (a 12 year old entry level gaming card), and from the reviews of the GTX 760, it benefited a good amount from a VRAM overclock. As crippled as the GPU of the RTX 3050 6GB is, the the VRAM bandwidth is likely significantly holding the card back. The lack of adequate VRAM is also a major issue, since Nvidia also crippled the PCIe interface of the card thus limiting how much shared memory it can use before it encounters major performance drops. In terms of VRAM spillover to system RAM, on a PCIe 4.0 card at x16 speeds, you can often actively use around 1-1.5GB of shared memory and only experience gradual performance drops, up to around a 15-20% performance drop, then as you go beyond around 1.5GB, performance drops become more rapid and you start to get massive frame time variations that ruin the gaming experience. With PCIe 3.0 at X16 speeds (same ad PCIe 4.0 X8), after around 500MB of shared memory use, and you get major performance hits. For example, the RTX 3070 suffers around a 20% performance hit on the pre-patch version of hogwarts legacy when the hame hits around 9-9.5GB of VRAM use, then at around 10-11GB, you getr major performance issues. They eventually patched the game to stop loading additional textures once the VRAM was filled, thus avoiding the performance issues, but if you have the launch version, it would become unplayable after a few minutes as more and more assets had to be loaded in. If the card were to be limited to PCIe 3.0 speeds (same as 4.0 X8), the performance would fall apart with as little as 500MB used. While ideally, you don't want a game actively using any shared memory, at the budget end where a compromised experience is expected, if they had kept a 4.0 x16 interface, then that 6GB card, would have been like having a 7.5GB card if you were okay with a 15-20% performance hit.
you can't compare bandwidth of newer cards with older card directly because improvements are being made from gen to gen. 750Ti (128bit)for example have significant less bandwidth than GTX480 (384 bit) and yet it did not hamper 750Ti performance to perform as fast as GTX480.
@@arenzricodexd4409 While many improvements are made, there is no workaround for tasks that need a lot of raw bandwidth, such as working with large textures and other large assets. In those cases, things like increases in L2 cache and various other advancements, end up having no benefit for those specific areas. Most of the advancements have been based on improving compute performance, where where non-memory hard computation can get a decent boost. The issue is that for many visually impressive games, the throughput of the VRAM becomes extremely important. For example, on the RTX 4070 Super, a VRAM overclock improves frame rates in most new games, as well as with frame interpolation in AI video frame interpolation tasks, e.g., if using something like DAIN.
The 3050 wasn't cripped :/ The reduced boost clock and one less VRAM chip reduced the overral power draw, making this the best low profile option to date. The RX6400 and "sorta" the Intel A380 were the best options since the 1650 was scaled to hell. If anything this GPU would do completely fine for light weight games, or medium quality settings for more AAA titles.
I have an HP Pavillion gaming PC that came with a 1650 GTX. They only make up to 500W PSUs for my PC, their way of making it non upgradeable. But if I plug the 3050 6gb into the slot it will work. And it's much better than the 1650 that came with it. I have an I5 10400, so it's plenty for the card.
Same PC as me but mine came with a 1650 Super. Planning on maybe buying a 3050 6gb for the extra 2gb VRAM and it's only 70w. Will fit right into my 310w system.
@@Raptor1867 I make mindless videos about lolcows. A 1 hour video used to take 30 minutes, now it's 18 or so with the 3050. Significant upgrade for me. I have fiber and it streams games great. DLSS is nice to have as well.
Its really sad hiw low end gpus are theres really no big improvments in the last 4 years we are stilll stuck in the same 1660 kind of performance and its even lower sometimes Even the 8gb 3050 is weaker then the 2060 its really a big joke.
Homie, on that cyber punk bench you can definantly play with 40 - 50 fps fine lol. You dont need to "turn down the graphics settings 😂 . Anything below 30fps is when gameplay experience starts to get compromised. 60 fps is optimal but it isnt a game breaking experience if its not reached
those with OEM prebuilt that only have 220w-300w PSU. 3050 6GB is direct successor to 1650 since nvidia no longer made those TU117 chip. the fact that nvidia still make a successor for 1650 shows that there is a market for this kind of GPU. other than that nvidia simply milking the market rather than going all out giving consumer the better card. with some adjustment it is very possible for nvidia to configure AD107 chip to only use 70w and make it perform like RX6600.
They should make a single slot LP version and adjust the price vs the RX 6400 and the Arc 380. Otherwise, this card will die faster than the GTX 1630 and that's quite a low bar.
you know what, we didnt had 30power version for a while (since gt1030), just name it RTX 3030 :))) But what, guess what, if you want a low power system, combine this card with any i3- 8th gen or above, you will have a somewhat usable pc that doesnt use much electricity. (ofc if this card price would be ok that i dont know, i just checked, its starts from 169USD , it should be smt like 119USD) Imagine tho that RX580-8 is on the same performance level as this card, and you can literally able to get an RX580-8 for 50euro, even for 30-40if it has been mined something.
The main feature is lack of external power and the simple fact you can't get that performance out of any card for that price + no external power but yeah its really annoying how they keep trying to trick consumers.
You also have to consider that the 6GB is just 170 USD. Meanwhile, the 8GB is 249 USD. So, it's 20% less performance for 50% of the price. That's some good FPS per dollar right there.
If NVIDIA rereleased the old 3050 for the price of the new one not even changing anything just the price I guarantee they would get less hate for this card.
if it was released at 125$ it would be a nice GPU and with no power conector is nice for those who have crappy PSU, but at that price for a bit more you have a rx 6600 wich is clearly faster.
@@arenzricodexd4409 yeah probably not, but if you release something at 180$ at lesst make it good, with the Rx 6600 still in stock this GPU is horrible in price/performance.
as I can see, this RTX 3050 6gb its for emergency upgrade for older GTX user such as 1050ti or 1050 or more I'm might buying these GPU for Emergency upgrade 💀 I'm still stuck at 1050Ti
I thought this would've been like the mobile rtx 3050 6gb. That one has upto a 95w TDP and 2560 cores. Turns out this desktop variant has just 75w TDP and 2304 cores. Pretty lame. Mobile and desktop versions should've been the same. Even the 75w mobile 3050 6gb is roughly on par with the 3050ti 95w mobile (same specs as desktop 3050 but with half vram).
eversince the nvidia get into the 1xxx GTX eras, nvidia has been leaving behind the ~40 class GPU. this is why you barely ever heard of a GTX 1040. so, they technically CANT make a 3040. its not in their convention. they could have add some designation to the cutdown version of the 3050 thats true, such as for example RTX 3050 U or 3050 D like the cutdown version of those chinese 4090D. but basically to put simply, they cant release things under the name xx40. the lowest denominator in their cards line up goes only down to xx50.
its better than the A2000. making it the second best 75w card behind the RTX A4000 ada sff. it sounds like a good deal to me considering the a2000 is 3x more expensive
does anyone even pay attention bout the power consumption?? for a ppl who doesnt care bout the power consumption yes this is a bad GPU, the reason why theyy cant put more power on it bcz it doesnt need more power pin, it runs on 70watt man. this gpu is create for a ppl who want to build PC with a low budget and low power consumption but still have a decent performance. 400 watt PSU can run this GPU without anyy issue, compare to the 8gb when u play a game it will consume bout 120-160 watt. i guess u guyys hate nvidia. btw if u consider the electricity bill for each country is different, this gpu is GREAT for some ppl in that country
Please subscribe, I want to make more videos and that motivates me the most. It is free and really helps.
P.S. Sorry for the not so great game capture quality, my capture card is old and has bitrate issues. I will get a new one soon.
Thank you for your hard work though I really appreciate it ❤
Why dont you compare this card with its predecessor, the 1650?
@@Euathlus1985 did not have it, I am a small channel. I will make a seperate video with 1650 and rx 6500.
If you can and as it appears to be about the same price the arc A580/A750 or with the same memory the A380 although at £99 it should technically be in a different price group? Good video though. For your video editing then the arc cards all have AV1 encoding which apparently perform well beyond anything else in the price range and could be a possible budget option for you.
Would be great if you managed to get RTX 3060 8GB and GTX 1660 Ti/Super on this comparison too besides the Arc A750 and RX 7600/6650 🙏
Honestly...I want one. I know statistically it's weaker than a lot of cards, but its low power draw and the fact it trounces the 1650 have me very excited to build an M-ATX/M-ITX Series S-style gaming rig
Why the F are making this super obviuos mistake ? A rx6600 is slightly more expensive, much more powerful, and has good power efficiency as well.
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat for one thing, it only draws power from the PCI slot, and doesn't require an external connector. Also there will be low profile variants. Also it's my money and I can waste it on dumb crap if I want to
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat It doesn't though - the 6600 uses close to 150W of power. This 3050 is special that it doesn't need power from the PSU cables there's also a fanless model aswell - so complete silence. I wonder if someone made a review of that AIB model yet?
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombatbecause not everyone wants a big fat obnoxious pc
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombatcry in corner kid
I'd like to see a review of this card vs other 70 watt cards that don't require external power.
It would probably win. I really wish I had a a380 + rx6500 for this review
@@ArtyomExplainsEng and that's the point behind my question, let me explain.
During the pandemic some of us started gaming at home, many people used low cost video cards in business class HP and Dell computers. In my case as part of my company tech cycle I had 65 HP PC's with 16gb i7 computers being retired. Many were given to employees some trashed. I brought many home and repurposed them for friends to use as low cost (free) gaming PC's, all they needed was a video card. We all remember how sky high GPU's became during that time. For the most part I would install a 1650 or similar card and that was enough to play.
Given the option of providing a family of modest means an option to play modern games at a that doesn't break the bank.
GPU's in the 70 watt power range shouldn't be compared against GPU's with the benefit of greater power levels. In car performance terms what you're doing here is comparing a MINI Cooper to BMW M3. It's an unfair comparison.
Best you compare based on the specific use case and power levels.
Better to compare a MINI Cooper to a Honda Civic for example.
Nevertheless great video and I admire your effort here.
Keep up the good work.
A2000. That one eats this for breakfast. Also 70W. And having 192bit bus instead of 96, also you can grab it with 12gb of vram.
@@kispumel I hear ya but it's not exactly a like for like comparison since the underlying architectures and use cases are different. The A2000 is a professional workstation class card optimized for business uses such as CAD or similar graphics.
But nevertheless I wouldn't mind seeing them compared in a head to head competition as well.
Good catch my friend.
@@FSX239 The underlying architecture is exactly the same, both the ampere architecture from Nvidia.
AD106 /AD104 dies from that generation. Many people grabbed the A2000 already because yes, primarly it if for prosumers, however it is brilliant in gaming, and in gaming performance between the 3050 8gb and the 3060. Not unusal it was you could grab the 6gb version around ~200-220 usd mark several month ago.
This GPU could be perfect if it was called RTX 3030, starting at 119$
It would slay the budget market at that price point and be a killer buy. At $160, it's better than an A380 or a 6400, but those cards are $40 and $20 cheaper on average respectively, with occasional price drops by another $20. They also have some saving graces that justify their existence, such as being an encoding champ for the former and being the only readily available sslp card for the latter. And at $160 you're butting up against the A580, A750 and RX6600. The first is usually $20 more for way more performance and the latter two can usually be found with occasional dips to below $200.
I think it's a little too large and power hungry to be called a 3030, but a 3040 would probably work naming wise. Then again, it's Nvidia, so anything resembling a sane name or price is anathema.
@@EbonySaints Agree with pretty much every word you said. And yes, tech companies are notoriously bad with naming their products, but Nvidia is on another level of nonsensical.
@@EbonySaints This card is definitely in a weird spot where if you're looking at ultra budget gaming performance, you'd stray to a card like a 2048SP rx580 or a used 1060 which can be found for much cheaper at the same price. But when looking at a decent encoding GPU, you'd look at intel offerings for AV1. If you've got a bit more budget, like you mentionned an rx6600 would blow miles past this iteration of the 3050. Imo this seems like the only good spot this GPU has is for Low profile builds, the 4060 was cool but needed an 8pin connector which was really dissapointing for ultra budget gamers, the 3050 offers the best gaming performance at a reasonnable price for a GPU under 75W.
Honestly I think that’s a good idea lower the price of this one and name it differently then rerelease the original 3050 for this ones price tag.
You’ll be lucky if the 5030 (rumored real GPU) has 6GB.
If you look carefully the 6gb ver is actually a little optimized cuz the 6gb ver is using 70w while 8gb ver is using more than 120w for 20 extra fps
Even if its not utilizing the full VRAM it will use all memory chips because that's how you achieve more bandwidth, so the added memory usage will call for more energy. Also the 8GB 3050 has higher clocks AND more CUDA which again will call for more energy.
Lucky_noob has made a video of UV 3050, literally consume only 60 - 70 watt of power using galax or colorfull maybe i forget, they have 2 fan and white all around could be galax
so basically 3050 can be push to 70 watt with a little performance loss
but 3050 6Gb still okay i guess if they price it right just put it at xx50 class card price range make it a successor of 1650
better yet let 4050 6Gb do it it's even better
I was surprised by how well the 3060 12GB performed in the comparison. I own this model and knew it was a great card but I also own a 3090 so I wasn't expecting the performance gap to be so wide.
This comes down to lower clocks and nothing more.
Glad your channel popped up in recommendations. Helpful when buying a budget GPU.
Rx 6600 is best value
This card is a beast.
...but it's double the tdp.
But it isn't, you can't just slot that in an older system and fire it up, you'll need a new PSU.
yeah in my country 6600 have almost the same price as 3050 6gb,
3050 6gb should be price at 1650 price or lower closer to A380, that would be undisputed king in the class
@@FilthEffect PSUs are super cheap, so it isn't really an issue.
Im mostly curious how it compared to other none external power cards.
slightly faster than 1650
RTX A2000 eats it alive
@@GewelReal A2000 (and A4000 Ada) shows what nvidia really capable of with those respective nodes. but it is not something they like to give regular consumer just as yet.
@@GewelRealyeah but if then if we include the price, then comparing the 3050 6Gb to A2000 is kinda braindead.
@@GewelReal not really it around 1650 super to 1660 vanilla teritory, so might be a little behind A2000, but the price is night and day
this is a good successor of 1650 ddr5 just the price isn't right, price it closer to A380, it would literally kill any AMD offer in this class
What a joke of a card, NVIDIA just released a GTX 1060 6 GB but the RTX edition. A GPU like this should not be more than $130. That's the max anyone would be willing to pay for 6 GB in 2024.
even if nvidia or AMD give the chip for free no AIB will want to sell their card below $150 anymore. that's why GTX1630 end up having the price of $150 before despite similar performance can be had for similar price back in 2016. if anything the sub $200 become more and more unrealistic for AIB. that's why AMD said their cheapest RDNA3 card will be $260 RX7600XT. nvidia with their $300 RTX 4060. if AMD or nvidia want to launch new GPU for the sub $200 market it will be from last gen stuff. or they will just let existing older gen GPU to fill it like AMD has done with RX6600.
Just get 2nd hand GTX 1660/Super/Ti for ~100$ 2nd hand
@@GewelReal At least you get DLSS with this GPU so that's something.
@@laszlozsurka8991dlss in 1080p, LMAO 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Is actually good card for people like me with old pc that dont have 6 or 8pin connectors.I have 1050ti and would be good card to last me atleast 2 years till more money for new pc
Bought the 3050 8gb when it released for 500$, learned a lot from this mistake.
Should have got a 4090
Holy sh!t you were quite literally robbed.
😂😂😂😂
its not funny its sad.@@abdulkarimsaleh
got 150$ for bnew🤣
Please compare gtx 1650 or super with this card even the rx 6500xt
Coming in 1-2 days
1650 Super needs extra power via pci-e
3050 is better than both
@@VxYxR. from the numbers it looks around the same level. maybe better, but not by much.
@@flushfire comparing the original 3050 it's much better
Would this be a good upgrade over my current GtX 1050ti?
Those naming is marketing issue. Throughout nvidia history those x40 and below card has always being seen as a bad card for gaming. Same reason when AMD refused to call further cut down chip of their card as xx30 before.
Also this card use 70w only. This is true successor to 1650 non super that also use similar power. Personally i'm more interested to see performance improvement over 1650.
You got it right, i can't understand people comparing it to rx6600 and 1660ti...
thats what im saying. eversince the nvidia get to 1000 series, there is no more denominator lower than xx50. thats just simply it. its their new naming convention system. and they are must abide to their own system.
3:59 how do you get fps avg 69 medium set and no dlls?
mine, ultra set and no dlss arround 80-86fps.
my build 5500, 3050 8gb and 8gb ram
Dlss/fsr in enabled by default in cbpk2077 on all settings, unless you specifically go to settings and disable it. You should check your settings.
great video, thank you. Yes, the 8gb version delivers 25% more in raw FPS, but it draws almost twice the power compared to the 6gb. I am actually quite excited about this release as it gets all its power from the board. I think this card will end up in plenty of discarded office systems, since the low profile RTX 4060 needs a PSU and is amost 300 euro here in Europe, the A2000 is also 250/300 euro (used) and the RX 6400 is PCIE 4 x 4, which still is the dumbest decision ever, as it's basically a budget GPU that cannot be used in budget systems - truly retarded product. TLDR, I like this card
Gonna make a second PC with my spare rtx 3050 8gb. Solid card for eSport,indie,emulator,Sport games. Heck even old AAA ones. I'm not powering up a 4080 just to run prince of persia game.
Edit: I only need os storage, and rams(perfect to replace my old ones) to build a second pc.
It will be a good home theater pc card that can do RTX video upscaling and will work on just about any psu.
Would be interesting to see how this competes with the A2000.
A2000 eats it
the A2000 is as fast as regular RTX 3050 8GB. it has been tested before by many.
@@arenzricodexd4409 no it is slower than 3050 8Gb, but have ridiculous OC potential that make it close to 3050 with only 75 watt of power that's insane
@@antonirizki961 techpowerup did a review for A2000 gaming performance. Performance wise it was less than 5% slower than 3050 8GB
@@arenzricodexd4409 I have an A2000 and I am tempted to sell it and get one of these instead. The A2000 has some issues of its own, the 4 mini-DP is annoying as you can't ever hope to get audio out of it. In addition the blower style fan is not very good, and to my ears it's too loud. I also suspect it's not cooling it so well, and the A2000 is just too expensive. I got it for a good price locally but seeing what they go for now. I could sell it for almost double what I bought it for. At least this card would have native HDMI, and I suspect more longevity as the A2000 cards to me look like cards that are not long for this world, especially considering most of us who bought them used, bought them off miners.
Thanks for the review 😃🙏🏻 What is the fan noise like? Is the gigabyte cooler good and is it really semi passive? 🤔
Semi passive confirmed, a would call it quiet-ish.
Thank you for confirming 😃🙏🏻 Can you please make a follow up video with some fan speed testing?
I would love some info on how long it stays passive and at what rate the fan gradually speeds up.
The fans could be temperature controlled or voltage controlled.
Do you know what they use for this card?
😃
You didn't even mention the main point of this gpu. It's POWER DRAW. Not to mention it's been powered by the PCI-E alone.
So 01:11 is a joke to you? And the power draw in the benchmarks? lol
@@ArtyomExplainsEng You barely even mention it.
So we are shifting from didn't even mention to barely mention. Nice. I say it is mentioned in just the right amount. Watch the video first before posting such comments next time. There is also a second video where I test it against rx 6500 xt. Watch it to find something else to blame me for.
This one should be compared with the integrated gpus of ryzen 8000 series CPU 💀
It'll perform better. The 780M is decent but it's still just 1650 level.
I was excited about the passive model from Palit, but dislike the new design of the heatsink. (in term of asthetics)
cool review, thanks for the video, it was nice to watch :)
Will this card work with a pci 3.0 slot ? Sounds like a great upgrade for a business class pc with 10th gen I7
It will. I noticed no performance degradation, but I only tested assassin's creed
Finally, Nvidia brings back the xx30 series again. It's the rtx 3030 😅
UK seller is offering £169, I want the Kalmx version myself, tempting anyway.
Not so bad if you depend on solar power and batteries (off the grid). Gaming laptops tend be expensive, noisy, and are actually less efficient in regards to performance per watt.
Card should have been 150 bucks max as it offers gtx 1060 performance, slightly better due to being more recent tech and can use dlss for slight future proofing. In europe, where i live, this card is going for around 215€ currently, at that price point i can get something much better... The 8gb model is around 235€ and it's also a bad purchase with that price tag, a 3060 costs 300€, or a rx 7600 which also goes for 300€. Seems like a no brainer honestly.
If they made this under 150 bucks at all times, it would have been worth it for some people.
A RX 6600 8gb costs 220€ currently which is the best performance:value offer i have for budget builds, and offers an increase of around 70% to performance. Sure the only good factor this 3050 has going is power usage. But that still is a poor excuse for the price it has.
Also lets not forget that 8700g apu offers performance that at times trades blows with a gtx 1060 6gb (depends on specs, someone running a 1060 should be running older hardware, which means the 8700g will get better results, if the 1060 is paired with a more recent cpu, the 1060 wins easily, this is not even considering ram impact...). This apu makes this card irrelevant when it comes to power consumption, which means, the only relevant thing left would be DLSS. But then again FSR exists, so.... 8700g costs 370€ currently where i live. This is not the best performance for money invested but it means you spend less money on power consumption at the cost of of some small performance loss. If ryzen 9700g follows the same pattern, then we can expect another increase in performance, which would most likely leave both the gtx 1060 6gb and rtx 3050 6gb behind in the dust, outperforming both by a small margin, while consuming less power.
Yeah, I'd buy it at $150. 8700G is too expensive for the performance. 780M is still 1650 level on average, only matching the 1060 in select titles. 8600G makes more sense but still needs to get cheaper like the 5600G did to be a great buy.
Well that's definitely an upgrade from a GTX 16 series card, that's for sure. At least the DLSS gives it the credit.
Depends on which GTX 16 series were talking about. I'm pretty sure 1660 Ti/Super is faster than this and wondering how much DLSS helps to surpass them at native. And how about 1660 Ti/Super + FSR vs this + DLSS
To add to ^ according to TechPowerUp, it sits between GTX 1650 and 1650 Super and 25-32% slower than GTX 1660 Super/Ti
@ulfricstormcloak7142 A better architecture regardless and Direct X 12 Ultimate support which means a longer support to many games and future titles if you're into budget cards and dont want to buy something high end or mid range if you're a casual gamer and arent playing competitive games, in the end of the day the GTX series has come to an end and will be retired and become unsupported sooner or later for budget gamers.
It's a card that has no use for those who do not buy budget cards for sure, but it's a good one for those who prefer to stick to budget builds and not interested to pay more than $200 on a graphic card.
Aside from Vram it is more of a GTX 1650 Super, because the GTX 1660 matches the RTX 3050 8gb sometimes and 10percent slower on average.
70w 1060 6gb?
The good old RT 3030
We bought my son a HP computer with a Ryzen 3 4300g a couple years ago on black Friday for $350. He's outgrown the on-board graphics. I picked up a MSI rtx 3050 6g OC for $169 and now he's playing games 1080p at well over 100fps. This GPU is the perfect budget solution for us.
Wouldn't say it's perfect but it's not a terrible terrible choice.
Was considering going to one too, but got a rtx 2070 instead.
It really is a great budget GPU.
Idk what people expect, 12GB of vram at $300?
For those who don't know, the 1650 4gb Low Profile models sell for around $170-250 and is usually out of stock wherever you look because it's the only option to upgrade an old Dell/HP/Lenovo. The RX 6400 has no encoder and handles its 4gb VRAM much worse. This is a huge improvement on anything currently available. It will definitely sell because this + an old dell etc would be a solid gaming PC for around $300 - much cheaper than if you'd be looking to build a PC around an RX 6600 or similarly priced GPU.
can't dissagree 3050 is a good upgrade for 1650, but 1650 is too mighty even AMD fail to top it off
6400 and 6500XT is such a joke make 1650 look like a king
6400 power consumption still extremely good
Yes! Finally! A affordable RT gpu!!
Better to just buy a 1080 ti for around 200
Neither this GPU is going to give you RT, nor it is good value. Absolute trash.
@DragonOfTheMortalKombat it's meant for small builds that don't need pcie cables to power it and low power consumption card.
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat but, but, it's RTG! It must have RT!!!!
@@DragonOfTheMortalKombat not really, it's a good 1650 successor, just price it at 130-140 please
The only reason you should buy a 6gb 3050 is if you're planning on buying the low profile one for an ultra mini PC build. It's 180 on amazon rn.
It doesn't look THAT bad
But it should be $120 max
Buy Chinese unknown brand if you want bnew GPU for less than $120. like rx580 only cost $70 bnew. This card cost $160 cheapest.
WTF?! i'm reading a lot of people saying "this cost the same and goes better". You all are completely ignoring a big segment of prebuilt and/or the power saving matter. 70W for a dGPU with this performance is really good. That said, naming could be better for sure, and price 139 max.
TDP is the good thing of this card.
Only time I would buy this is second hand when the price is down for an budget office machine build.
better than a 1050 ti?
The rtx 3050 6gb uses 85% less power than the RTX 3050 8GB but only has 25% less performance. If you look it at fps to power ratio. The rtx 3050 6GB is not so bad as you tought. RTX 3050 6 GB uses more or less to 125% less power that the rtx 3060 and yet only 75% slower. If you dont have a good psu or cant afford a good psu. You can get the RTX 3050 and use medium settings most games and get either 60fps avg or close to 60fps average and still have multiple upscaling options like DLSS, FSR and XESS. If they named the card the RTX 3040 rather than RTX 3050 it would sell better and would still be a good product for its use case.
The 3050 is massively crippled, especially for the VRAM, keep in mind that the VRAM bandwidth of the 3050 6GB is about the same as the VRAM bandwidth of the AIB version of the old Nvidia GTX 660 (a 12 year old entry level gaming card), and from the reviews of the GTX 760, it benefited a good amount from a VRAM overclock. As crippled as the GPU of the RTX 3050 6GB is, the the VRAM bandwidth is likely significantly holding the card back.
The lack of adequate VRAM is also a major issue, since Nvidia also crippled the PCIe interface of the card thus limiting how much shared memory it can use before it encounters major performance drops.
In terms of VRAM spillover to system RAM, on a PCIe 4.0 card at x16 speeds, you can often actively use around 1-1.5GB of shared memory and only experience gradual performance drops, up to around a 15-20% performance drop, then as you go beyond around 1.5GB, performance drops become more rapid and you start to get massive frame time variations that ruin the gaming experience.
With PCIe 3.0 at X16 speeds (same ad PCIe 4.0 X8), after around 500MB of shared memory use, and you get major performance hits.
For example, the RTX 3070 suffers around a 20% performance hit on the pre-patch version of hogwarts legacy when the hame hits around 9-9.5GB of VRAM use, then at around 10-11GB, you getr major performance issues. They eventually patched the game to stop loading additional textures once the VRAM was filled, thus avoiding the performance issues, but if you have the launch version, it would become unplayable after a few minutes as more and more assets had to be loaded in. If the card were to be limited to PCIe 3.0 speeds (same as 4.0 X8), the performance would fall apart with as little as 500MB used.
While ideally, you don't want a game actively using any shared memory, at the budget end where a compromised experience is expected, if they had kept a 4.0 x16 interface, then that 6GB card, would have been like having a 7.5GB card if you were okay with a 15-20% performance hit.
you can't compare bandwidth of newer cards with older card directly because improvements are being made from gen to gen. 750Ti (128bit)for example have significant less bandwidth than GTX480 (384 bit) and yet it did not hamper 750Ti performance to perform as fast as GTX480.
@@arenzricodexd4409 While many improvements are made, there is no workaround for tasks that need a lot of raw bandwidth, such as working with large textures and other large assets. In those cases, things like increases in L2 cache and various other advancements, end up having no benefit for those specific areas.
Most of the advancements have been based on improving compute performance, where where non-memory hard computation can get a decent boost. The issue is that for many visually impressive games, the throughput of the VRAM becomes extremely important.
For example, on the RTX 4070 Super, a VRAM overclock improves frame rates in most new games, as well as with frame interpolation in AI video frame interpolation tasks, e.g., if using something like DAIN.
The 3050 wasn't cripped :/
The reduced boost clock and one less VRAM chip reduced the overral power draw, making this the best low profile option to date. The RX6400 and "sorta" the Intel A380 were the best options since the 1650 was scaled to hell.
If anything this GPU would do completely fine for light weight games, or medium quality settings for more AAA titles.
but it is too much expansive in my country 221.49$ (295,000₩)
I'm excited for the KalmX version of this.
I will buy it. It has no power connector? 😅
yes thats why i bought it. i just need something better than gtx 1050ti
This for elden ring at 1080p and 60fps
Congratulations Nvidia have now released a competitor to the arc A380
At this point, 50 series cards should just be for budget gaming laptops.
honestly this card is still needed, just price it like how intel price A380 then 3050 6 gb will be very interesting
Maybe this is rtx 3050 laptop version, similar tdp
As said in the video, not a bad card, just a bad name. We'll see what the true pricing ends up as.
I have an HP Pavillion gaming PC that came with a 1650 GTX. They only make up to 500W PSUs for my PC, their way of making it non upgradeable. But if I plug the 3050 6gb into the slot it will work. And it's much better than the 1650 that came with it. I have an I5 10400, so it's plenty for the card.
Same PC as me but mine came with a 1650 Super. Planning on maybe buying a 3050 6gb for the extra 2gb VRAM and it's only 70w. Will fit right into my 310w system.
@@Raptor1867 I make mindless videos about lolcows. A 1 hour video used to take 30 minutes, now it's 18 or so with the 3050. Significant upgrade for me. I have fiber and it streams games great. DLSS is nice to have as well.
Its really sad hiw low end gpus are theres really no big improvments in the last 4 years we are stilll stuck in the same 1660 kind of performance and its even lower sometimes
Even the 8gb 3050 is weaker then the 2060 its really a big joke.
Wait, are you really Artyom?
Artyom is a typical slavic name, so why can't I be Artyom? :D
@@ArtyomExplainsEng Ha, Westerner here. The only other Artyom I know is living it up in the sun with Anna and a slight dose of radiation poisoning! 😄
@@joby602 Yeah, that game really popularized the name :)
Love this card in my PC that only has a 500 watt PS!! Is why I got it plays great don't believe the hype
U should have compared it to gtx 1650 with the pricing
thx for English edition
Homie, on that cyber punk bench you can definantly play with 40 - 50 fps fine lol. You dont need to "turn down the graphics settings 😂 . Anything below 30fps is when gameplay experience starts to get compromised. 60 fps is optimal but it isnt a game breaking experience if its not reached
40-50 fps experience is not enjoyable for me. I did pay cyberpunk at 40-60 fps for a long time, it was playable but, but sudden 40 fps dips sucked.
@@ArtyomExplainsEng i intentionally set to 50 fps on most games I play. Guess everyone is different
@@R3APER50 You want FPS to match your screen refresh rate for optimal experience.
I think the new 3050 6gb is good for one thing, a SFF build with low power requirements. For that, it’s an amazing card for what we get.
Aside from Vram it is more of a GTX 1650 Super, because the GTX 1660 matches the RTX 3050 8gb sometimes and 10percent slower on average.
You deserve more subscribers
The goal is 1k subs at this point.
Who buys this when the RX 6600 costs almost the same and according to techpowerup is 69% faster.
those with OEM prebuilt that only have 220w-300w PSU. 3050 6GB is direct successor to 1650 since nvidia no longer made those TU117 chip. the fact that nvidia still make a successor for 1650 shows that there is a market for this kind of GPU. other than that nvidia simply milking the market rather than going all out giving consumer the better card. with some adjustment it is very possible for nvidia to configure AD107 chip to only use 70w and make it perform like RX6600.
You'd be surprised. Lots of people have the 3050 8gb compared to the 6600, even when the latter is both cheaper and faster.
They should make a single slot LP version and adjust the price vs the RX 6400 and the Arc 380. Otherwise, this card will die faster than the GTX 1630 and that's quite a low bar.
you know what, we didnt had 30power version for a while (since gt1030), just name it RTX 3030 :)))
But what, guess what, if you want a low power system, combine this card with any i3- 8th gen or above, you will have a somewhat usable pc that doesnt use much electricity. (ofc if this card price would be ok that i dont know, i just checked, its starts from 169USD , it should be smt like 119USD)
Imagine tho that RX580-8 is on the same performance level as this card, and you can literally able to get an RX580-8 for 50euro, even for 30-40if it has been mined something.
2 words :
seventy watt
The main feature is lack of external power and the simple fact you can't get that performance out of any card for that price + no external power but yeah its really annoying how they keep trying to trick consumers.
No, this is the GT 3030.
For the right price that new 3050 will surely keep a lot of optiplex ofice desktop alive
This card are fine but for 100$ price maybe
You also have to consider that the 6GB is just 170 USD. Meanwhile, the 8GB is 249 USD. So, it's 20% less performance for 50% of the price. That's some good FPS per dollar right there.
Uhm actually it 32% the price range 🤓☝️, but ye u got the points.
Why would anyone bother with a 6GB(!) version of the RTX 3050 when the 8GB version is now under $200?
If NVIDIA rereleased the old 3050 for the price of the new one not even changing anything just the price I guarantee they would get less hate for this card.
if it was released at 125$ it would be a nice GPU and with no power conector is nice for those who have crappy PSU, but at that price for a bit more you have a rx 6600 wich is clearly faster.
for official MSRP you will not going to see any new GPU to be priced below $150 mark anymore.
@@arenzricodexd4409 yeah probably not, but if you release something at 180$ at lesst make it good, with the Rx 6600 still in stock this GPU is horrible in price/performance.
Yea, Just buy a 1080, a 2060 or a 6600 for that pice
If it is under $ 170 then I think it better than GTX 1650 so yeah I would buy.
as I can see, this RTX 3050 6gb its for emergency upgrade for older GTX user such as 1050ti or 1050 or more
I'm might buying these GPU for Emergency upgrade 💀
I'm still stuck at 1050Ti
Its hidden gtx 1060 6gb only
I thought this would've been like the mobile rtx 3050 6gb. That one has upto a 95w TDP and 2560 cores. Turns out this desktop variant has just 75w TDP and 2304 cores. Pretty lame. Mobile and desktop versions should've been the same. Even the 75w mobile 3050 6gb is roughly on par with the 3050ti 95w mobile (same specs as desktop 3050 but with half vram).
The 96-bit bus is a joke lmao
This gpu is great for a budget builder like me only using a generic gpu with no power pin connector 😂
eversince the nvidia get into the 1xxx GTX eras, nvidia has been leaving behind the ~40 class GPU. this is why you barely ever heard of a GTX 1040. so, they technically CANT make a 3040. its not in their convention. they could have add some designation to the cutdown version of the 3050 thats true, such as for example RTX 3050 U or 3050 D like the cutdown version of those chinese 4090D. but basically to put simply, they cant release things under the name xx40. the lowest denominator in their cards line up goes only down to xx50.
Same thing was with 1060 3gb \ 1060 6gb
6gb version had more poverful gpu, so its 1060 ti
The 1650, but with more vram.
Jokes aside, this is what it may as well be
When I saw the cuda cores and the clock speeds I was like I'm sure this will perform like an Rx 580 or 1650 super
And yeah pretty much that
nvidia really is dirty not just calling this a 3030 or 3040
This card is okay but its price should be about 100-140$ and should be named 3040.
1060 6gb vs 3050 6gb
who win?
Both lose 😂
SHOULD BE 3040 MODEL BY PARTS ALLONE ON BOARD
Yessss! I can finally play all the games I like at 30fps! 90-120 fps on my 3060ti was getting boring.
they can finally make a good sff card
its better than the A2000. making it the second best 75w card behind the RTX A4000 ada sff. it sounds like a good deal to me considering the a2000 is 3x more expensive
the A2000 is as fast as RTX 3050 8GB at 70w. this card will be slower than 3050 8GB.
@@arenzricodexd4409 still 2-3x cheaper. The benchmarks i looked at had the 3050 6gb faster than the a2000
@@arenzricodexd4409 no 3050 8gb is faster than A2000
I will buy this card in 2029 for 29 dollars and pair it with my 2014 PC, it's new gtx 1060 3 gb.
the 8gb rtx3050 is so close to the 8gb rtx3060
This channel needs more recognizes
Getting even 1k subs is hard...
lol in canada 6600 costs 10 less than this 6gb 3050 (239 vs 250)
does anyone even pay attention bout the power consumption?? for a ppl who doesnt care bout the power consumption yes this is a bad GPU, the reason why theyy cant put more power on it bcz it doesnt need more power pin, it runs on 70watt man. this gpu is create for a ppl who want to build PC with a low budget and low power consumption but still have a decent performance. 400 watt PSU can run this GPU without anyy issue, compare to the 8gb when u play a game it will consume bout 120-160 watt. i guess u guyys hate nvidia. btw if u consider the electricity bill for each country is different, this gpu is GREAT for some ppl in that country
As said in the video - not a bad product, just a scummy naming.
@@ArtyomExplainsEng yyes. mybe theyy should put another name for it
at this point just buy a rx 580.
I not even only 80 bucks used, but also same performance.
Eu comprei essa placa estou surtando 😭😭😭😭😭😭
Why?
@@ArtyomExplainsEng me falaram que essa placa é horrivel
so its basically a gtx 1060 6GB but with better ray tracing and DLSS... this is very embarrassing from NVIDIA
it's a good 1650 successor too bad the price is not good
RTX 3050 6GB should be called the RTX 2050/3030/3040
RTX 3060 8GB should be called the RTX 3050 Ti
NVIDIA is just shitting at product names
Hear me out gtx 2660. That's what this should have been called
Not a bad product, but bad price