[SOLVED] GTX 1060 3GB superclocked vs GTX 1650 4GB Super

ayoubiee

Commendable
Jan 10, 2018
76
3
1,535
0
So I have an gtx 1060 3gb running here but I want to upgrade. I saw that the gtx 1650 super is kinda cheap but is it worth it? will I see a big performance boost?

my system
ryzen 5 1500X
16bg 3000mhz
cooler master B600 600watt

Is my psu good enough for that card?
 
Wait, do you have a 1060, or 1030?

The 1030 is a pretty okay upgrade to the 1650 super, not huge but it's there
if you have a 1060 3gig it's the same as a 1650 super or atleast very similar.

And yes, the psu is good enough.
 

ayoubiee

Commendable
Jan 10, 2018
76
3
1,535
0
Wait, do you have a 1060, or 1030?

The 1030 is a pretty okay upgrade to the 1650 super, not huge but it's there
if you have a 1060 3gig it's the same as a 1650 super or atleast very similar.

And yes, the psu is good enough.
oops my bad hahah I was talking about the gtx 1060
 

ayoubiee

Commendable
Jan 10, 2018
76
3
1,535
0
The 1030 does not come in 3GB flavors, so OP must have a 3GB 1060. I agree that "upgrading" to a 1650S from there makes very little sense unless he desperately needs that extra 1GB.

To OP: wait for the RTX 3050/3050Ti next year. Those will be meaningful upgrades, though pricing may be steep compared to the 1650S.
so I wont see a performance boost if I went with a gtx 1650 super?
 
The lowest upgrade you should consider is an RTX 2060 Super, GTX 1660 TI or 1660 Super (slowest of the 3), if upgrading from a 1060 3GB. These cards would be around 70-120% faster then the 1060 3GB, depending on the game and which card you pick. I would suggest waiting for the RTX 3050 or 3060 to be reviewed and released. The RTX 3060 is rumored to be released in December.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
Save a little more, or wait for the new lower end cards to be released.
Those two are kind of two sides of the same coin: if you wait long enough and continue setting money aside, you end up having more money to spend on new entry-level GPUs.

I'm not too optimistic about pricing on 3050-level cards though: with Nvidia raising the price on the 3060 relative to the 2060, the 3050/4GB will likely land around $200 and the 3050Ti/6GB (a cut-down GA106/3060) is bound to get priced to fill the gap at around $300.
 
Those two are kind of two sides of the same coin: if you wait long enough and continue setting money aside, you end up having more money to spend on new entry-level GPUs.

I'm not too optimistic about pricing on 3050-level cards though: with Nvidia raising the price on the 3060 relative to the 2060, the 3050/4GB will likely land around $200 and the 3050Ti/6GB (a cut-down GA106/3060) is bound to get priced to fill the gap at around $300.
Though we know about a 3060 Ti, which will probably land at 400$.
Making the 3060 at either 350$ which was msrp, or 300$ which is what the 2060 costs now (It was lowered to combat AMD's rx 5600xt.)
So the 3060 at 300$, 3050 Ti at 250$, and 3050 at 200$.

They cannot leave the low 100-150$ market open. They're either gonna have a 3030, or replace the 16 series with a 26 series, though we have heard nothing about this yet.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
They cannot leave the low 100-150$ market open. They're either gonna have a 3030, or replace the 16 series with a 26 series, though we have heard nothing about this yet.
With next-gen IGPs bumping performance up quite a bit, $150 GPUs may not be viable for much longer unless we're talking something like a GT710 successor intended mainly for providing extra monitor outputs, then I can imagine a RT-less, tensor-less, 32bits GDDR6 GA108 for the GT3010.
 
With next-gen IGPs bumping performance up quite a bit, $150 GPUs may not be viable for much longer unless we're talking something like a GT710 successor intended mainly for providing extra monitor outputs, then I can imagine a RT-less, tensor-less, 32bits GDDR6 GA108 for the GT3010.
Maybe so, but, those better Igpus aren't here yet, so that might be applicable for the next gen, rtx 4000 series, which will have intel Xe breathing on it, and probably AMD working on RDNA for ryzen 6000.
Right now, that is not the case though.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
Maybe so, but, those better Igpus aren't here yet
They will be by the time a hypothetical RTX3030 based on a cut-down GA107 might be announced a couple of months after the RTX3050 launches. Also, if the supply situation with the RTX3070 and up persists, launches of lower-end parts will likely get delayed either explicitly or in effect by availability being nonexistent.
 
They will be by the time a hypothetical RTX3030 based on a cut-down GA107 might be announced a couple of months after the RTX3050 launches. Also, if the supply situation with the RTX3070 and up persists, launches of lower-end parts will likely get delayed either explicitly or in effect by availability being nonexistent.
Rumors suggest that intel 11th gen with Xe graphics will launch mid-late Q1, meaning probably around march.
I both doubt the perfomance of the igpu (which is rumored to be around 10% faster than vega 11) and the timing of any 3030 or 3050 launches, or atleast announcements being after january.
 
Rumors suggest that intel 11th gen with Xe graphics will launch mid-late Q1, meaning probably around march.
I both doubt the perfomance of the igpu (which is rumored to be around 10% faster than vega 11)
Xe is already out on Intel Tiger Lake laptops and at least on laptops, Xe beats Vega 11 by around 10-40% depending on the game, making it a much better "light gaming" option at least on mobile. Xe is likely going to be a better option for low end gaming on desktop over Ryzen APUs until AMD finally gets around to updating or replacing Vega. I'm actually considering getting a cheaper 12-13" 2 in 1 with Xe, to replace my old Dell Inspiron 11 3000 i3-4010U 2 in 1 that I bought used for $350 in 2015.
 
Xe is already out on Intel Tiger Lake laptops and at least on laptops, Xe beats Vega 11 by around 10-40% depending on the game, making it a much better "light gaming" option at least on mobile. Xe is likely going to be a better option for low end gaming on desktop over Ryzen APUs until AMD finally gets around to updating or replacing Vega. I'm actually considering getting a cheaper 12-13" 2 in 1 with Xe, to replace my old Dell Inspiron 11 3000 i3-4010U 2 in 1 that I bought used for $350 in 2015.
True, but it's still not even close to the 1650 super, being around 60-80% slower.
also, not sure where you saw 40% over Vega 11, but it's not that much better.
WIth this we know the 3050, and even the 3030 will be a couple time faster.
 
Last edited:
True, but it's still not even close to the 1650 super, being around 60-80% slower.
also, not sure where you saw 40% over Vega 11, but it's not that much better.
WIth this we know the 3050, and even the 3030 will be a couple time faster.
I got Vega 8 benchmarks mixed up when I was comparing Xe to Vega 11. The whole thing is such a mess with Intel's product naming, that I'm constantly getting things confused, so a lot of other benchmark data I saw is probably wrong too when comparing to older hardware. I'm trying to remember the articles I had seen with some benchmark data, but with the laptops plugged in and running full power, the Xe was something like up to 40% faster than Ryzen with Vega 8 on some games and only a bit faster or slower on others.

Looking over other resources showing graphics performance, it may be reasonable to infer that you will get the same or similar benchmark percentages on the lower tier mobile CPUs with Vega and Xe graphics. Honestly though, if you are going to spend extra for an i7u or Ryzen 7u for the iGPU, you may be better off getting a laptop with a lower tier CPU paired with dedicated Geforce MX350 or MX450 for 2020 laptops.

Also, I don't think we will see a GT 3030 anytime soon. If we do get a 3030, it could possibly be based on the mobile MX350 or a cut down MX450 covering the middle ground between the two. I mainly think this is more likely, because they would fit the low power usage of GT 1030 and be of similar TDP. The MX350 is based on the GTX 1050 and the MX450 is based on the GTX 1650. I doubt Nvidia would release the full MX450 as a GT 1030 replacement, because it would cut into sales of the GTX 1650, being only a bit slower, but using much less power. The GTX 1650 is currently the fastest GPU you can buy that is available in low profile and not requiring a PCIE power cable like the GTX 1650 Super.
 
I got Vega 8 benchmarks mixed up when I was comparing Xe to Vega 11. The whole thing is such a mess with Intel's product naming, that I'm constantly getting things confused, so a lot of other benchmark data I saw is probably wrong too when comparing to older hardware. I'm trying to remember the articles I had seen with some benchmark data, but with the laptops plugged in and running full power, the Xe was something like up to 40% faster than Ryzen with Vega 8 on some games and only a bit faster or slower on others.

Looking over other resources showing graphics performance, it may be reasonable to infer that you will get the same or similar benchmark percentages on the lower tier mobile CPUs with Vega and Xe graphics. Honestly though, if you are going to spend extra for an i7u or Ryzen 7u for the iGPU, you may be better off getting a laptop with a lower tier CPU paired with dedicated Geforce MX350 or MX450 for 2020 laptops.

Also, I don't think we will see a GT 3030 anytime soon. If we do get a 3030, it could possibly be based on the mobile MX350 or a cut down MX450 covering the middle ground between the two. I mainly think this is more likely, because they would fit the low power usage of GT 1030 and be of similar TDP. The MX350 is based on the GTX 1050 and the MX450 is based on the GTX 1650. I doubt Nvidia would release the full MX450 as a GT 1030 replacement, because it would cut into sales of the GTX 1650, being only a bit slower, but using much less power. The GTX 1650 is currently the fastest GPU you can buy that is available in low profile and not requiring a PCIE power cable like the GTX 1650 Super.
While the mx350 is based on the 1050, and the mx450 on the 1650, they are not even close to each other in performance.
Intel Xe is around the MX350, while vega 8 is close behind (also, up to is not a good metric. go with averages, which is around 10-15% between vega 11 and Xe)
What you suggested with going for a lower tiered gpu and an MX class gpu might have been okay around 2 years ago, nowadays, the Igpu on both intel and AMD is so fast it is getting close to descrete MX class gpus, with the Xe being around 20% slower than the MX450.
The 1650 is around 60-80% than the MX450.
so let's say the 3050 is around the 1660 super. Nvidia has plenty of headroom for a 3030, with a lower tier MX550 that would still beat Xe at a little lower than 1650.

To simplify:
3050 - 1660 super
3030 - 1650 super
MX550 - lower than 1650 by 10%.
Still a solid lineup, with no card stepping on the other, and still being a few light years better than Igpus.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS