6970 vs 1050TI

[manolaren]

Hi. I use my pc for gaming and i have a 6970 2GB. I can buy from a friend a 1050TI 4GB for ~100 euros. Do you thing its a good upgrade for the money or not? Should i buy it or pass? Thank you.

*I play mostly fps and sport games (Overwatch, CoD, PES2018, NBA2K18 etc) always at 1920x1080.

 

[Barty1884]

The 1050TI is a pretty decent step up (while not groundbreaking IMO), is much more modern, so has 'better' support (although the 6970s are still pretty well supported themselves) and consumes about 175W LESS power.

Really depends on the titles you play, the resolution(s) you play at and the balance of your hardware.

On a strict card vs card though, 100EUR for a 1050TI is a pretty solid deal.

 

[ko888]

Is the 45% increase in performance of the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti over the Radeon HD 6970 worth €100 to you?

A new GeForce GTX 1050 Ti would cost you around €200. If the card is in good condition it may be worth it.

 

[King_V]

Is the 45% increase in performance of the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti over the Radeon HD 6970 ...

That's a pretty steep number, where did you get it from? It sounds like a synthetic benchmark number.

I mean, the 1050Ti most definitely is more efficient AND a better performer, but in gaming, I wouldn't expect to see 45% higher frame rates.

Or, if using the hierarchy charts, it's 2 tiers higher. That's within the "might not see noticeable differences" range.

At 100 euros, though, in good condition, and from a friend, I'd say worth it.

 

[Barty1884]

Relative performance puts a 1050TI about 40% "faster" than a 950, which itself is a bit better (~10%?) than a 6970.... so the 45% as a general statement is probably pretty close to accurate.

Agreed though, in gaming, you're not likely to see +45% in FPS..... but I'd reasonably expect somewhere in the 10-20% gains range. The added VRAM may well see greater results in some titles with higher VRAM requirements too.

 

[taplikechicken]

Relative performance puts a 1050TI about 40% "faster" than a 950, which itself is a bit better (~10%?) than a 6970.... so the 45% as a general statement is probably pretty close to accurate.

Agreed though, in gaming, you're not likely to see +45% in FPS..... but I'd reasonably expect somewhere in the 10-20% gains range. The added VRAM may well see greater results in some titles with higher VRAM requirements too.

100-71 != 40%.

Do you even math bro?

 

[King_V]

Actually, Barty is correct, mathematically.

100 - 71 = 29.

29 ÷ 71 ≈ 40.85

So, 100 is about a 41% increase over 71.

However, when doing the math in reverse, 71 is 29% less than 100.

 

[Barty1884]

100-71 != 40%.

Do you even math bro?

Yes, 'bro'. Fairly well actually, thanks for asking..

While 100 - 71 = 29, that calculation has no bearing on what was being discussed here.

What you'd be looking to calculate would be:
100÷71% = 140.845%
ie +41% (roughly) relative performance.

Given I was also using a 950 as a reference, that's about 10% faster than the 6970.
That puts the 6970 (roughly) 71 ÷ 110% = 64.5454*

So the 1050TI would be:
100 ÷ 64.5454% = 154.929%
OR +55% (approx) relative performance.

Please do not bump 6 month old, solved threads.
Especially for the sole purpose of attempting a poorly thought out insult.
Especially, especially, when it appears you signed up for the sole intent of posting that attempt at a retort.