[SOLVED] Advice GPU - between GTX1050ti vs GTX1660 vs RX-6500xt

[k@rt]

I want to get a new GPU for and older PC I am giving to my flat-mate for around €300.

Atm there's a GTX 1050Ti for a little over €200, or the 1660 for around €380 OR... there is the RX 6500 XT for around the €250.

The Radeon RX 6500 XT card seems quite a bit better than the 1050Ti and not far off the GTX 1660 performance.

Thing is, I'm on my fourth PC and I've NEVER had a Radeon card, I am a little wary, but it seems like the by far the best performance/price relationship.

Does anyone have any advice or opinions on these options/choices? Or any alternatives?

The rest of the PC is :
Mobo : Gigabyte Z68X-UD4-B3
Processor : i7 2600k
RAM : 16Gb
It's an old PC but I've taken care of it and it seems in good condition.

My flat-mate doesn't play heavy 3D games like BF or COD, but they do like indie platformer type games and retro type like Crash or Oddworld, so I want something that can handle most 2.5D or 3D "cartoony" games.

Any advice would be fantastic... I'm really out the loop since I got my last PC which was just before the RTX cards were released. Crypto mining has absolutely messed with the market and I feel a bit lost atm.

Thanks ALL!!

 

[Lutfij]

What GPU is your friend's PC on? Make and model of your PSU and it's age? I don't see any reason going above a GTX1050Ti since your platform would need a refresh in order to get what you're spending on the GPU. On a side note, people have had issues with dropping an UEFI GPU into a platform as old as yours and ones who lack an UEFI BIOS motherboard.

 

[Third-Eye]

I want to get a new GPU for and older PC I am giving to my flat-mate for around €300.

Atm there's a GTX 1050Ti for a little over €200, or the 1660 for around €380 OR... there is the RX 6500 XT for around the €250.

The Radeon RX 6500 XT card seems quite a bit better than the 1050Ti and not far off the GTX 1660 performance.

Thing is, I'm on my fourth PC and I've NEVER had a Radeon card, I am a little wary, but it seems like the by far the best performance/price relationship.

Does anyone have any advice or opinions on these options/choices? Or any alternatives?

The rest of the PC is :
Mobo : Gigabyte Z68X-UD4-B3
Processor : i7 2600k
RAM : 16Gb
It's an old PC but I've taken care of it and it seems in good condition.

My flat-mate doesn't play heavy 3D games like BF or COD, but they do like indie platformer type games and retro type like Crash or Oddworld, so I want something that can handle most 2.5D or 3D "cartoony" games.

Any advice would be fantastic... I'm really out the loop since I got my last PC which was just before the RTX cards were released. Crypto mining has absolutely messed with the market and I feel a bit lost atm.

Thanks ALL!!

The 6500 XT wil perform really terribly on such an old system because of it's x4 PCIe lane limit and the system being limited to PCIe 2.0. Being limited to just 4 PCIe lanes means that on the PCIe 2.0 slot the card will likely run worse than the 1050ti, because you are effectively only able to use around 1/4 the total bandwidth of a PCIe 4.0 x4 slot or 1/16th the total bandwidth of a PCIe x16 slot.

The only system the 6500 XT makes sense in is one with PCIe 4.0 slots for full bandwidth or PCIe 3.0 at minimum. If you can find one for the same price as the 6500 XT, get a GTX 1650, 1650 Super or 1060 6GB as they would be better options than either the 1050ti or 6500XT when using an i7 2600k. The actual FPS highs may be much higher with the 6500 XT, but the FPS lows will make it horrible for gaming.

To be honest, even the 1650/Super are not great options for even 1080p gaming these days. Look over this review of bandwidth limitations and see if it helps you decide what to buy. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6500-xt-pci-express-scaling/

 

[k@rt]

What GPU is your friend's PC on? Make and model of your PSU and it's age? I don't see any reason going above a GTX1050Ti since your platform would need a refresh in order to get what you're spending on the GPU. On a side note, people have had issues with dropping an UEFI GPU into a platform as old as yours and ones who lack an UEFI BIOS motherboard.

Thanks for the reply.

The specs I gave above is what the GPU is fitting in with :

Mobo : Z68X-UD4-B3* https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/GA-Z68X-UD4-B3-rev-10#ov
CPU : i7 2600K
RAM : 16Gb @ 1333Hz

*The mobo ran Touch bios out the box but it is capable of running UEFI, I am not sure I ever bothered flashing it to that, I'd have to go and check but I think it's running the R10 bios version.

The PC is pretty old but it was pretty much the best you could buy without spending ludicrous money at the time. I think I ran my 1080Ti on the same PC machine for a month or so before buying my latest PC. It is currently running a 710 which was a <Mod Edit> card I bought simply so I could use the PC for a few weeks while saving for the 1080.

I know it isn't worth buying anything better than the options I suggested, but I think the rest of the system won't bottleneck the cards I mentioned that much.

 

[k@rt]

The 6500 XT wil perform really terribly on such an old system because of it's x4 PCIe lane limit and the system being limited to PCIe 2.0. Being limited to just 4 PCIe lanes means that on the PCIe 2.0 slot the card will likely run worse than the 1050ti, because you are effectively only able to use around 1/4 the total bandwidth of a PCIe 4.0 x4 slot or 1/16th the total bandwidth of a PCIe x16 slot.

The only system the 6500 XT makes sense in is one with PCIe 4.0 slots for full bandwidth or PCIe 3.0 at minimum. If you can find one for the same price as the 6500 XT, get a GTX 1650, 1650 Super or 1060 6GB as they would be better options than either the 1050ti or 6500XT when using an i7 2600k. The actual FPS highs may be much higher with the 6500 XT, but the FPS lows will make it horrible for gaming.

To be honest, even the 1650/Super are not great options for even 1080p gaming these days. Look over this review of bandwidth limitations and see if it helps you decide what to buy. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-radeon-rx-6500-xt-pci-express-scaling/

This is great info - thank you very much! I didn't realize the PCI-e generation would make that much difference to the cards performance.

I checked Amazon and they do have a few GTX 1650 cards for about €250, so a little bit more than the GTX1050ti but not much. From what you said it sounds like the GTX 1650 is probably my best option between the two atm. Like I said in my OP it's not for running very graphically intensive games like BF etc... more just for 2.5D indie platformers and things like that.

Thanks again for great advice!

 

[cryoburner]

If one were considering the used market, a GTX 970 might be a viable option, though those cards would have been manufactured over 5 years ago, and will have no warranty, so it could potentially be a bit risky.

Performance-wise, a 970 is roughly on-par with a 1060 3GB, or over 40% faster than a 1050 Ti, and you can likely find them used for less than what a 1050 Ti costs currently. The 6500 XT would be a bit faster still, but as was mentioned, it's not likely a good fit for a PCIe 2.0 motherboard. And while the 1660 is faster still, €380 seems rather expensive for a card in that performance range. GPU prices seem to be back on the way down, but I would expect it to be months before they get back to something relatively close to their MSRPs, and even that isn't guaranteed.

A 1650 might not be bad if you can find one for a semi-reasonable price, and those should also perform roughly in the GTX 970 / 1060 3GB range, and a decent amount ahead of a 1050 Ti. Be aware that there are both GDDR5 and GDDR6 versions of that card, with the GDDR6 versions being slightly faster, by a little over 5% or so. It's not a big difference, but might be relevant if you are comparing two similar-priced cards.

This is great info - thank you very much! I didn't realize the PCI-e generation would make that much difference to the cards performance.

Usually it doesn't, if a card is wired for a full x16 interface, like most are. The 6500 XT is only wired for x4 though, with only a quarter of the PCIe lanes available, which might be alright on a brand new PCIe 4.0 motherboard, but can cause some performance issues on 3.0 since each lane gets only half the bandwidth, which should become significantly worse on a 2.0 board, with the bandwidth getting halved again.

 

[k@rt]

If one were considering the used market, a GTX 970 might be a viable option, though those cards would have been manufactured over 5 years ago, and will have no warranty, so it could potentially be a bit risky.

Performance-wise, a 970 is roughly on-par with a 1060 3GB, or over 40% faster than a 1050 Ti, and you can likely find them used for less than what a 1050 Ti costs currently. The 6500 XT would be a bit faster still, but as was mentioned, it's not likely a good fit for a PCIe 2.0 motherboard. And while the 1660 is faster still, €380 seems rather expensive for a card in that performance range. GPU prices seem to be back on the way down, but I would expect it to be months before they get back to something relatively close to their MSRPs, and even that isn't guaranteed.

A 1650 might not be bad if you can find one for a semi-reasonable price, and those should also perform roughly in the GTX 970 / 1060 3GB range, and a decent amount ahead of a 1050 Ti. Be aware that there are both GDDR5 and GDDR6 versions of that card, with the GDDR6 versions being slightly faster, by a little over 5% or so. It's not a big difference, but might be relevant if you are comparing two similar-priced cards.


Usually it doesn't, if a card is wired for a full x16 interface, like most are. The 6500 XT is only wired for x4 though, with only a quarter of the PCIe lanes available, which might be alright on a brand new PCIe 4.0 motherboard, but can cause some performance issues on 3.0 since each lane gets only half the bandwidth, which should become significantly worse on a 2.0 board, with the bandwidth getting halved again.

Thanks!! I checked prices. The GTX 970, GTX 1050ti and GTX 1650 (all with around 4Gb ram) are ALL very similar prices on Amazon, there was one of each for €240 which is a perfect price point for me. However there is a real price jump for the GTX 1060 you mentioned so I am a little confused by that bit. All the 1050ti were DDR5 but the 1650 seemed to have both DDR5 and DDR6. However from what you've said, and looking at benchmark sites, the GTX 970 actually seems like the best option, although it does use DDR3 it's said to still out perform the 1050ti and the 1650. I didn't rly think to look at 970s b/c I assumed simply the age would mean it wouldn't keep up. But maybe it is the best option here, especially as the system is a bit older too. If it's the same price maybe I should just go for the 970?

I'll take a better look tomorrow when I am a bit more awake. Getting kinda tired now.

Thanks again for the info, much appreciated!!

 

[Third-Eye]

Thanks!! I checked prices. The GTX 970, GTX 1050ti and GTX 1650 (all with around 4Gb ram) are ALL very similar prices on Amazon, there was one of each for €240 which is a perfect price point for me. However there is a real price jump for the GTX 1060 you mentioned so I am a little confused by that bit. All the 1050ti were DDR5 but the 1650 seemed to have both DDR5 and DDR6. However from what you've said, and looking at benchmark sites, the GTX 970 actually seems like the best option, although it does use DDR3 it's said to still out perform the 1050ti and the 1650. I didn't rly think to look at 970s b/c I assumed simply the age would mean it wouldn't keep up. But maybe it is the best option here, especially as the system is a bit older too. If it's the same price maybe I should just go for the 970?

I'll take a better look tomorrow when I am a bit more awake. Getting kinda tired now.

Thanks again for the info, much appreciated!!

I wouldn't recommend getting a used the GTX 970 unless it's much cheaper than the GTX 1650. Somewhere around $150 USD or €130-140 would be a good starting point for a used GTX 970. While the GTX 970 is faster than the GTX 1650 by around 10%, it very likely won't have a warranty with it being so old. The GTX 970 also has weird issues with the 4GB of vram so it runs slower once you go past 3.5GB, although that probably won't be a real issue since it will perform kind of bad on titles that would be able to push the vram past 3.5GB at 1080p.

There is also the lower end Intel ARC series GPUs coming sometime in the next 2-3 months if waiting is an option. The lowest end desktop version should be somewhere around GTX 1650 to 1650 Super performance and could be as cheap or cheaper than the GTX 1650.

 

[k@rt]

I wouldn't recommend getting a used the GTX 970 unless it's much cheaper than the GTX 1650. Somewhere around $150 USD or €130-140 would be a good starting point for a used GTX 970. While the GTX 970 is faster than the GTX 1650 by around 10%, it very likely won't have a warranty with it being so old. The GTX 970 also has weird issues with the 4GB of vram so it runs slower once you go past 3.5GB, although that probably won't be a real issue since it will perform kind of bad on titles that would be able to push the vram past 3.5GB at 1080p.

There is also the lower end Intel ARC series GPUs coming sometime in the next 2-3 months if waiting is an option. The lowest end desktop version should be somewhere around GTX 1650 to 1650 Super performance and could be as cheap or cheaper than the GTX 1650.

I wouldn't get a second hard card normally tbh, but there is one on amazon for the same price as the 1650

MSI GTX 970 €240 : https://amzn.to/3jnpmHe (second hand)
GTX 1650 OC DDR6 €258 : https://amzn.to/3uvhbza
GTX 1650 SC DDR5 €244 : https://amzn.to/3uuxpZl

There's also a 1050Ti

MSI GTX 1050 TI €209 : https://amzn.to/3jnpZAA

It really seems to me the best choice would be between the first two, the 970 and 1650 OC. But I AM very wary of a second hand card, even from a decent seller. It seems to me it would probably be better (and safer) to go for the 1650 OC DDR6 - the performance is very close to the 970 AND I imagine the OC and DDR6 probably puts it closer than a regular 1650. Like you say it will probably have a better warranty too. If I get the 1650 I assume paying the extra €14 for the DDR6 OC edition is probably worth it?

Thanks again for taking the time to advise me... the GPU market is an effing disaster atm - I can't wait until the crypto mining bubble bursts.

 

[Third-Eye]

I wouldn't get a second hard card normally tbh, but there is one on amazon for the same price as the 1650

MSI GTX 970 €240 : https://amzn.to/3jnpmHe (second hand)
GTX 1650 OC DDR6 €258 : https://amzn.to/3uvhbza
GTX 1650 SC DDR5 €244 : https://amzn.to/3uuxpZl

There's also a 1050Ti

MSI GTX 1050 TI €209 : https://amzn.to/3jnpZAA

It really seems to me the best choice would be between the first two, the 970 and 1650 OC. But I AM very wary of a second hand card, even from a decent seller. It seems to me it would probably be better (and safer) to go for the 1650 OC DDR6 - the performance is very close to the 970 AND I imagine the OC and DDR6 probably puts it closer than a regular 1650. Like you say it will probably have a better warranty too. If I get the 1650 I assume paying the extra €14 for the DDR6 OC edition is probably worth it?

Thanks again for taking the time to advise me... the GPU market is an effing disaster atm - I can't wait until the crypto mining bubble bursts.

The GTX 1650 GDDR6 version will be very close to a GTX 970 and if i remember correctly, it can even beat it in many games, especially when it goes past 3.5GB vram usage. The GDDR5 version is 7-10% slower than a GTX 970 and sometimes even more.

 

[Tac 25]

I want to get a new GPU for and older PC I am giving to my flat-mate for around €300.

Atm there's a GTX 1050Ti for a little over €200, or the 1660 for around €380 OR... there is the RX 6500 XT for around the €250.

Does anyone have any advice or opinions on these options/choices? Or any alternatives?

The rest of the PC is :
Mobo : Gigabyte Z68X-UD4-B3
Processor : i7 2600k
RAM : 16Gb
It's an old PC but I've taken care of it and it seems in good condition.

My flat-mate doesn't play heavy 3D games like BF or COD, but they do like indie platformer type games and retro type like Crash or Oddworld, so I want something that can handle most 2.5D or 3D "cartoony" games.

in my sig, budget gaming pc you can see an i7-2600k paired with a 1050ti. Has been performing well for me for a few years now. If a 1650 is available then you can get that, but if there is only a 1050ti - then it would be fine too.

 

[logainofhades]

If the PSU is good enough, this might be a great deal, on an RX 570. I wouldn't buy a 1660, for 380. That is RTX 3050 and the even faster RX 6600 territory.

PCPartPicker Part List

Video Card: XFX Radeon RX 570 4 GB RS XXX Video Card (€172.42 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Video Card: XFX Radeon RX 6600 8 GB Speedster SWFT 210 Video Card (€383.00 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Video Card: Zotac GeForce RTX 3050 8GB 8 GB GAMING Twin Edge OC Video Card (€375.90 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Total: €931.32
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2022-04-11 17:55 CEST+0200

 

[k@rt]

If the PSU is good enough, this might be a great deal, on an RX 570. I wouldn't buy a 1660, for 380. That is RTX 3050 and the even faster RX 6600 territory.

PCPartPicker Part List

Video Card: XFX Radeon RX 570 4 GB RS XXX Video Card (€172.42 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Video Card: XFX Radeon RX 6600 8 GB Speedster SWFT 210 Video Card (€383.00 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Video Card: Zotac GeForce RTX 3050 8GB 8 GB GAMING Twin Edge OC Video Card (€375.90 @ Amazon Deutschland)
Total: €931.32
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2022-04-11 17:55 CEST+0200

I was told by someone else the Radeon cards may have problems running on the older PCI-e 2.0 slots. There's no way I will spend €380 on a 1660 for this PC, nor the RTX 3050, but the 1650 OC DDR6 looks like quite a reasonable choice to go with PCI-e 2.0 and an i7 2600k, it's only €257.

 

[k@rt]

in my sig, budget gaming pc you can see an i7-2600k paired with a 1050ti. Has been performing well for me for a few years now. If a 1650 is available then you can get that, but if there is only a 1050ti - then it would be fine too.

Well I have the choice of both, and there is a DDR6 1650 version available for €257 which is a little more but benchmark say it outperforms the 1050ti by about 17%. So seems like a good choice to me.

 

[k@rt]

The GTX 1650 GDDR6 version will be very close to a GTX 970 and if i remember correctly, it can even beat it in many games, especially when it goes past 3.5GB vram usage. The GDDR5 version is 7-10% slower than a GTX 970 and sometimes even more.

The DDR6 OC version of the 1650 seems like a best choice to me. It's perfectly in my price range, isn't far of a 970 and beats out the 1050ti. I know it's not a super high end card but it isn't expected to be running Battlefield or games like that. It's really to get smooth gameplay on some of the more graphically complex indie titles that exist now.

Thanks again for all the help. I think I am going to go for the 1650.

 

[logainofhades]

I was told by someone else the Radeon cards may have problems running on the older PCI-e 2.0 slots. There's no way I will spend €380 on a 1660 for this PC, nor the RTX 3050, but the 1650 OC DDR6 looks like quite a reasonable choice to go with PCI-e 2.0 and an i7 2600k, it's only €257.

That is only for cards like the 6500xt, that have an x4 interface. The RX 570 is a full x16 interface.

 

[k@rt]

That is only for cards like the 6500xt, that have an x4 interface. The RX 570 is a full x16 interface.

Tyvm for the clarification, I know nothing about Radeon cards. However I could only find one RX 570 and it was an extra €50 over the 1650... there's basically nothing out there, it's all the RX 6--- XT series. I've always chosen Nvidia cards over Radeon and honestly this stupid stuff with x4 interfaces just puts me off even more. It's very hard to find this info on most sales pages and I wonder how many people have bought these cards without realizing they are only PCI-e 4.0 compatible. Maybe it allows them to squeeze out a little extra performance, but if it's not clearly communicated to consumers it is, imo, pretty deceptive.

 

[logainofhades]

The RX 570 is faster than the 1650. Also, PCI-E is backwards compatible. The only reason 4.0 matters at all, again, is for those with x4 interfaces, like the 6500xt.

 

[Third-Eye]

The RX 570 is faster than the 1650. Also, PCI-E is backwards compatible. The only reason 4.0 matters at all, again, is for those with x4 interfaces, like the 6500xt.

The RX 570 may be faster, but you still have the problem of either finding one new, so it has a warranty (if they're even available to the OP) or being forced to buy it used, which has the same issue as the GTX 970 and 1060 with it not having a warranty. Also the performance difference between the GTX 1650 GDDR6 and the RX 570 is not as bad as that chart would suggest since I'm pretty sure it's comparing the GDDR5 version to the RX 570. There are titles that just outright run better on AMD cards and the majority of games run almost as fast on the GTX 1650 GDDR6 version as the RX 570 and should expect at least 1-10% (11-20% for AMD favored titles) performance difference depending on the game.

Edit - I should also say that those performance percentages are like comparing 55fps vs 60fps or maybe 80 vs 95fps for an AMD favored titles.

 

[k@rt]

The RX 570 may be faster, but you still have the problem of either finding one new, so it has a warranty (if they're even available to the OP) or being forced to buy it used, which has the same issue as the GTX 970 and 1060 with it not having a warranty. Also the performance difference between the GTX 1650 GDDR6 and the RX 570 is not as bad as that chart would suggest since I'm pretty sure it's comparing the GDDR5 version to the RX 570. There are titles that just outright run better on AMD cards and the majority of games run almost as fast on the GTX 1650 GDDR6 version as the RX 570 and should expect at least 1-10% (11-20% for AMD favored titles) performance difference depending on the game.

Edit - I should also say that those performance percentages are like comparing 55fps vs 60fps or maybe 80 vs 95fps for an AMD favored titled.

You're correct, it is VERY hard to find RX 570s - new ones seem quite a bit more expensive than the 1650 and second hand I rly am not keen on. I don't know how reliable it is but userbenchmark only rates it very slightly above the 1650 - imo not really enough for the extra price and hassle.

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-RX-570-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1650/3924vs4039

 

[k@rt]

I just wanted to say a big THANK YOU to everyone who gave their time to replying to my question and giving me advice. I bit the bullet and ordered an ASUS 1650 OC DDR6 today. The advice everyone gave was extremely helpful, especially concerning the RX 6500 XT not working well on older PCI-e slots - this is something I would have never known or thought to check.

So, thanks again ALL... love you guys, love this forum. You're the best!

 

[cryoburner]

Yeah, given those prices, a 1650 was probably the best choice. I only mentioned the 970 because at least in the US, it's possible to find them for significantly less than a 1650 on the used market. I wouldn't consider paying a similar price for a used 970 as a new 1650, as it's not worth giving up the warranty coverage and better energy-efficiency / lower heat output compared to that newer card. And it's a similar situation with the Radeon RX 570 at this point, though at least those should be somewhat newer than a 970.