Let me get this straight...We waited 3 years for Nvidia to give us a card that uses the same amount of power to generate the same number of frames at the same price the 1660 Ti cost when it was new...three years ago.
The 3050 is such an amazing product. Almost as good as the RTX 4k series in general. 🤡 The worst part isn't even the garbage Nvidia is selling for ludicrious prices, it's the consumers buying into this shit without thinking twice.
Actually, the 1660 Ti launched at $280 USD and was available at that price. The 3050 launched at $350 and as far as I know has never actually gotten down to that price new. So the new card costs 25%+ more(a lot more when cryto was still a thing) due to the DLSS and RT tax, neither of which is a person likely to use at it's target resolution of 1080P(RT because performance will suck with this class of graphics card, and DLSS because upscaling sucks below 1440P). Edit:Never mind. I was confused. The 3050 was supposed to launch at $250 and afaik still hasn't gotten down there. So the launch price is cheaper. However, the 1660 Super is like 5% slower than the 1660 Ti and launched at $230 with immediate availablilty(so cheaper than the 3050 and only slightly slower). And of course one can get something like a RX 6600 for even cheaper which will perform better. Or a 66X0 XT for not too much more which will perform a lot better. Heck, there's even Intel's ARC A750 and A770 available in this price class that can stomp the 3050.
No, it uses even more power, so it's a worse product overall to me. I live in a country with insane power costs, so I'm one of the few who that is important to. I'm still running my 1650 super, since it's still one of the best cards when looking at performance per watt and overall wattage used. Still waiting for a new graphics card that can use the same amount of power and give me more frames, I've stopped holding my breath for it.
Let's not forget that even though the old card doesn't have DLSS we can still use FSR thanks to AMD. So in the end the only advantage i saw from the 3050 is the lower temperatures although that doesn't mean much with the consumption being similar unless you are in a hot room and your PC is making your room even hotter.
@@pathway4582 what’s wrong with the 4K series ? Yes it went up in price but the price to performance % increase is the same. With modern inflation we expected these prices. I’m just more disappointed at the fact that a 1660ti keeps up with a 3050. I thought the 30 series dominates previous gens at every tier but it seems not
I upgraded from a 1660Ti to a 2080Ti and the 1660Ti impressed me a lot when I got it but the 2080Ti has been a constant disappointment even though it's way more powerful
i love the gtx 1660s/ti cards, very strong for its price and availability in my country. I have the 1660 super and it's really good and definitely enough for me.
@@mr_wildschwein I also love my 1660 super and even lets me play resident evil 4 remake at 90fps on low. Which was surprising to me because that game uses quite a bit of VRAM
@@user--710 resident evil 4 does not actually use that much vram as it seems, it just allocates almost all the memory when it is available. For example the game runs just as good on rtx 3080 as on rx 6800xt but on 3080 its using 9,8GB and on 6800xt 15GB
The cards you show off aren't just for the financially well off. I love the budget Gpu's and hardware that you bring light to with your platform. Well done. Love your content!
@@Arxgxmi agree here. TAA that many people call "native" looks terrible in a lot of games and DLSS just fixes it while adding some performance on top. Games that have DLSS looking not so good can be easily fixed with dll swap (which is almost impossible with fsr though).
@@Arxgxmi Dlss is fucking shit, i dont want to pay more to lower my resolution, it looks like shit especially on 1080p Also, the 1660 ti has fsr so still if you really need that shit you can use that.
I was actually considering getting a 3050 in the marketplace but I think I'll stick with my 1660 Ti for just a bit longer. The price gap is waaaaaay too high for the narrow performance gap. Practically double where I live 😂 EDIT: Just had to clarify that 3050s where I live cost a helluva lot more than 1660 Tis abroad. People over here go gaga over ANY GPU with "RTX" on the box. It's insane. EDIT 2: Okay, this one's on me. I failed to mention that I upgraded from an RX 570 that I got back in 2018~2019. I just wanted DirectX 12_1 and a GDDR6 GPU on my PCIE 3 motherboard without paying more than what I used to build my PC. I'm not upgrading for another 2 to 3 years or so. I will say though that my next upgrade will be around a B550, hopefully a Ryzen 7 CPU and a 6600/6700. I'm just getting as much use as I can out of my current build.
@@ristekostadinov2820 I got mine for $143, the only 3050 I can find in the used market right now is around $215. I saw a brand new one at a mall for around $357. I got lucky with my 1660 Ti. The seller took pretty good care of it.
Try to find a 2070 Super. Its performance is close to that of the 3060 Ti so it'll be a huge upgrade from a 1660 Ti. I managed to get one for around 200 USD.
Wow I was genuinely considering upgrading some time in the future from my 1660ti to something like a 3000 series but I wasn’t expecting these close comparisons at all. Im sticking with this card for a bit longer ig
I love that this channel is still grounded in the reality that most of live in. I bet that only a small percentage of your audience can afford, or will find value in a 4090 and a 13900K or 7800X3D. They’re amazing, but the majority of us are most likely still in the market for much more affordable cards, and it’s a lot more interesting when you can watch cards compete, and actually afford to buy them lol.
Wow-this continues to bode well for the old Steam survey king-the GTX 1060, especially the 6GB variant. With proper adjustments to settings (and expectations), older cards seem to be remaining more and more relevant these days!
the bad part is with games going in the direction there going with huge vram needs these older cards will be done for in a couple of years atleast in newer AAA Games when i get paid im upgrading from a 2070 super to a 3060 Ti or a 3070 Ti for right now ill get great performance but like i said in a couple years with the low vram i think even those cards will struggle with only 8 gigs
@@davidfrazier6308 yeah don't waste your money going for 3060ti. My wife got me one in 2021 for fathers day. Bless her she doesn't have a clue about tech just knew it was newer then the 2070s I had. Was still super grateful tho It was a side grade at best. Ended up getting a 3070ti in May 2022>3090 December 2022 £560 then the 4070ti this month. Was still super grateful tho. Just look around for bargains. I got a 4070ti from facebook marketplace a few weeks back for £400. Another side grade but sold the 3090 for £675 so my wallet was happy. Don't waste your money like me. My 3070ti is still boxed under my desk LOL.
Whats really interesting to me is how cool the 3050 runs, 20 degrees cooler across the board. Seems like a really OCable card with temps like that which might give it a good edge.
I am very impressed with how the 1660 Ti was neck and neck with the 3050. I just purchased a 1660 Ti from ebay identical to that one to use with a i7-7700 and after watching your review it looks like I chose just the right card. Thank you for another brilliant comparison video.
I *strongly* advise investing in some cheap thick thermal pads for that Dell 1660 Ti so the VRAM can made *some* contact with the cooler. Gamer's Nexus teardown of the Dell 1660 Super (same cooler), and the VRAM got really hot in their tests. I would expect the silicon to degrade and die sooner on those cards if precaution isn't taken. You can also remove or modify the plastic shroud to improve thermals as well. AFIK, OEMs like Lenovo and Acer use the same crappy design. However, HP has a different cooler (on the 1660, 1660 Super, and 1660 Ti) with copper heatpipes, and they actually put thermal pads on the VRAM.
I've got a Dell 1660 Super card, and that was the first thing I did. But now that you mention it, in his video from a couple of days ago, he mentioned that this card works fine sometimes, and not others. It makes me wonder if it is a memory issue, specifically the memory that isn't making contact with the heatsink.
I have both, GTX 1660 TI and RTX 3050. The cards are very close in terms of performance with a small advantage for the RTX 3050 on motherboards with PCIe gen 4.0. On PCIe gen 3 motherboards the situation is a little different. The GTX 1660 TI is a PCIe 3.0 x16 and 192 bits video card. Like the RX 6600, the RTX 3050 only has 8 PCIe lanes and on PCIe gen 3 motherboards it will only have half PCIe bandwidth of the GTX 1660 TI. This half PCIe bandwidth will cause stuttering in more demanding games like The Last of Us Part I.
In my corner of the world(the Philippines), the RTX 3050 is nearly twice the price of the GTX 1660 super/ti. In fact, it's more expensive than a RX 6600 XT. It's crazy how expensive RTX gpus are here.
Yep, Nvidia gimmicky marketing make us all suffer. Sad for SEA customer like us because distributor just can set price whatever they like ignoring msrp
I've been using my 1660Ti laptop for almost 3 and a half years, still no problems running anything I throw at it (I don't tend to play the newest AAA games tho), that paired with my 1080p 144Hz monitor feels amazing, I doubt I'll update any time soon :)
The laptop version of 1660 ti is better than the 3050 as the laptop 3050 has only 4gb of vram and in some games the performance drops way below that of 1660ti once those 4gb are exceeded.
@@mihkus 1070 came out in 2016 and runs games just fine still. It can also be found extremely cheap in most places nowadays compared to the other two cards. The 1070 used to be neck & neck with these two cards. The only reason I can see it being slower nowadays is Nvidia intentionally not supporting the card.
I bought my 1660ti new when it came out in 2019 and so far I will be keeping it for sure, just changed the thermal pads and paste recently.. I am planning on updating it when 1440p high refresh rate monitors and a decent GPU to run it are at a better price... So far I don't feel the need to make that jump yet ...great video thanks 😊
If you get a cheap 1660 Super or Ti of the triple fan variety, you're in for some cool and fairly capable 1080p gaming. I've tried 5 different 1660 super cards when I had a mining rig, and I wanted to see how well they fared temperature wise and performance. Sadly most of the dual fans and single fan varieties are noisy and runs quite hot, but they do deliver a steady performance. Crazy to see how cheap they are now compared to when mining on eth was a thing, I paid close to 400 euro per card, now they sell for 100-150.
@@tj3495 yes it does work but it's not very good , with the quality setting you get worse performance than native for a slightly worse looking image with more artefacts. Xess on intel cards though is pretty good , better than fsr in some aspects even
I've been running a GTX 1660-S with my Ryzen 5 2nd gen since late 2019. I play most games at 2K resolution with medium to high settings. The 1660-S/Ti is an absolute gem as far as price to performance and it'll take a lot for me to want to upgrade. Good work with the video, feel like this really high lights the staying power of the 16-Series cards.
Surprised the 1660 ti ran such similar performance numbers while running 20 degrees hotter. Wonder what it would do if it had a better cooling solution.
Kinda sad that it was 5 years ago I'm guessing the 1660ti came out.... 5 years later they are still releasing shitty expensive junk..... Holding everything back for next gen games
if possible just wait until the 7700 (xt) amd cards to release to make that decision. if its not what you need or like, the 6700xt will be there and, more than likely, further discounted.
@@ERMMM420 The 7800xt and below are being delayed, presumably because amd is trying to implement hardware fixes on navi 32 before releasing gpus based on those dies.
Over here its a joke Rtx 3050 is 11500 And the rx 6600 xt is like 17500 Not worth it honestly I got the 3050 Not worth it to pay 6k more for like 15-20 more fps
@@ERMMM420 yes I had my mouse cursor over a 6700xt almost puling the trigger a day ago but when 7700xt appears the price of the previous one probably will drop even more, Maibe I keep my 5500xt 8g until that time, but I have to change the motherboard and power sorce that’s the problem
86 degrees on 1660 ti at 2:51 hotspot shoud be around 90+ most of the time while the power consumption of 3050 is a bit higher thus I would not consider getting this single fan version of 1660. Anyway 1660 holds up really well against a new gen budget.
Yeah, the problem is getting someone to actually *do* those tasks and compile them in a visible outlet. Non-gaming benchmarks are non-existent on RU-vid. I don't mind RGinHD not doing them, since Brit Steve is solely focused on gaming, but outside of LTT's brief mentions and some specialty channels like EposVox, most graphics card reviews boil down to "can it play da game?" It sucks that then they'll rip into features missing, but never bother to mention or test them in other reviews. I hardly do anything practical with my GPU outside of video encoding, but it's nice to get a full picture. Also, don't the RTX cards have a feature that drop like one or two 0's from a matrix if they're there? Saw it in a Tom's Hardware piece, and the results were interesting.
@@EbonySaints I do understand that this channel has "gaming" in the title 😉, but I thought it was worth mentioning. It also doesn't help that gameplay footage is more visually compelling than rendering a video or running an AI process.
I wouldn't worry about ray tracing in this class of card but DLSS seems like a super useful tech in a lower tier card. Might keep that 3050 giving a decent experience in AAA games for longer into the future.
It's good as a tech demo I guess. I got annoyed back in 2011 because I bought a GTX560ti 1GB , The vram was fine apparently until it wasn't... Then I made the same mistake with a GTX970 3.5+0.5GB and it looks like I've messed up again with a 3070ti 8GB. I swear my next card is going to be AMD and have a ton of Vram.
@@Jasontvnd9 Im having similar feelings in the VRAM department. As in, it's a huge advantage of the red team that they offer more VRAM. Intel offers a bunch for the price also. Would/will be great to have a real third option in a gen or 3.
Just got a 1660Ti for $110 used. It shreds everything medium settings 1440p. It’s perfect for a htpc! I tend to prefer games with medium-high settings, a lot of “ultra” setting create noise and artifacts imo. Wish more reviewers would review hardware with mixed settings that provide performance and visual fidelity. 1660Ti is paired with a R5 3600
Asus 1660ti phoenix OC dual ball bearing ... 1st gpu in my 1st pc Now rocking tuf rtx 3060ti Awesome card and the best numbered card ever 1660ti just has a ring to it
I actually bought a 1660Ti last year, but had to return it, because I had problems with it on my (then) intel system. I'm glad that I did, because now the prices of cards have dropped to the point when I'm going to be upgrading to I think a Rx 6800 16GB. Quite the upgrade from the 1660Ti I almost had lol
it might be worth to keep in mind that the 3050 runs in about all cases roughly 20°C cooler, which can be andthing from neglectable to absolutely needed depending on ur living conditions etc
yes, this is a big factor for me. i don't like my pc parts running hot because that's the number one cause of components degrading and shorter lifespan. i live in a hot country and i don't have air conditioning where the pc sits so the temp is a big thing to consider.
yeah i thought that was the most conspicuous difference between the cards. having said that, my 1660ti never exceeds 69 celcius ever under torture - but that's a twin-fan card. still, good to know the 3050's clearly the better choice in space-limited or airflow-limited builds.
Ah I used to have a 1660TI, powerful card, although I always hated it because I had choppyness issues in games.....turns out games just all run differently, and that's just normal. Got a RTX 3070Ti now, and a completely different system too, still do have choppyness in games, but because I run at 144hz and higher framerate, I can ignore it mostly.
Choppyness, if you mean stutters with this term, is because of too small VRAM size. Once it's filled up it will spill to system RAM and this causes the stutters. It just takes too long store/fetch
@@MrFWStoner yeah it could be the issue ( and it is in a few games ) but in my experience with a 3070 it rarely is , if you check vram usage at 1440p it rarely exceeds 8gb especially if you're not using ray tracing and use dlss quality , but you still get shader compliation stutters or when a game is loading an area and stuff like that , so while it's generally smooth there are optimization issues Also stutters are caused by the cpu as well and probably even more so than the gpu in recent games
@@MrFWStoner yes they are enabled , currently i have a 5700x . My experience in games in generally smooth with this combo aside from badly optimized games like callisto protocol and the last of us which still offer a decent experience but they have really weird cpu limits , although when i had an i5 9400 it was more stuttery even when the game wasn't really cpu limited
Noticing, the 1660ti temps are around 83°c on the hogwarts legacy (havent checked others), i wonder if it would perform better with a better cooler, because the gpus like to boost if there is thermal headroom
Yeah, also GTX 1660 Super was 220€ here, good GTX 1060 successor. I still have a GTX 1060 6GB, I think I will keep it at least 2 more years, maybe until it turns 10 years old. Still enough for my games (FH5, GTA V, older NFS), but maybe it is time to upgrade when GTA 6 is released.
no way Nvidia is actually going to go through with that... It would be reputation suicide... I hope they drop doing a 4050 and just put out super versions of the 40 series with a usable amount of VRAM...
@@KanakaBhaswaraPrabhata They both will. They're the same GPU, the difference is the mobile one has altered clock speeds and TDP. Both the desktop and mobile 4050 have 6 gigs of VRAM. That's why I said it's no mistake. The entire Ada product stack was leaked months ago.
I have an RTX 3050 laptop and I run cyberpunk with an average of medium settings, all raytracing on with rt lighting on medium, dlss performance at 1080p 30fps.
Interesting results there. I would personally go with the 1660 Ti (even though it has less VRAM) because it is significantly cheaper for similar results to a 3050. And if Cyberpunk and Hogwarts can be played at 1080p medium, you don't need FSR (or DLSS) just yet.
yep the extra money for the 3050's vram is almost useless unless you like to play sub 60fps target. as anything that would use more than 6gb of vram is not something either card is playing at 60fps or more avg frames.The whole panic on Vram usage is really for the bleeding edge with ray tracing at 4k settings. The ram usage on the other hand man was hogwarts eating that up at over 16gb used.
I've used this card exactly for 3 years, from 2020 and I've got a sweet spot for it, being my first ever card. Very solid, ran a lot of games at high settings and got above 60 fps.
The real question is, does Ray Tracing have any future, or are other features catching up on it, to make this technique obsolete? That is my real question. Personally I have the GTX1660 Super. Is that better or less than the TI version? Anyway. I was pretty much blown away by my graphics card when I started RE Village,. When I was walking around the house and seeing all these insane textures and detail in the environment, I was like, who needs an almost $2000 graphics card when it already looks this realistic and awesome? In addition, we have the fact that many game developers optimize their games very poorly, which negates the power, and therefore the value of most graphics cards. I therefore believe that if everyone had a high-end card, most game developers would become even lazier and optimize their games even worse. Even in these days when having a 1660 is the average, you still see a lot off games being released that struggle to run at decent settings and frame rates on these 1660 cards.
I've posted about this potential issue many times, but at the moment it seems to be something tech channels just aren't looking into. I suppose that's not surprising since it's probably hard to tell whether poor coding is due to lack of skill among the devs or deliberate policy. True though, raster techniques keep improving. Have a look at the recent video by bluedrake42 concerning a game still in development called Unrecord, it will blow your mind. My gripe with RT effects is that they fool gamers into thinking the game is therefore better even though the end product often has little functional immersion to justify the supposedly impressive visuals. Or to put it another way, I don't care how realistic water may look in a game, it's surely more important that it's actually wet and can behave as such, with all consequent relevant properties. Same for fire, smoke, mud, etc. This notion applies more generally, a door that can't be open isn't a door (eg. baked textures), a tap that can't be turned on and off isn't a tap, and so on. Functional immersion can delight and surprise the player, giving depth and life to a game world; it's partly why Duke Nukem was so loved back in the day, little things in the game which behaved as their visual appearance implied, such as getting cans out of vending machines, using a phone booth, flushing a toilet, etc., with good sound effects to match. As visual realism increases, I believe the jarring effect of an object that cannot be used or behave as its appearance would suggest will just all the more annoying. This is why there are some games which are not that high up the realism scale, but they have a lot of functional immersion and are thus far more interesting and fun to play, such as Subnautica, The Forest, The Solus Project, etc. Ideally, visual realism and functional immersion should go hand in hand, with the right balance providing a continual sense of progression and achievement as the game unfolds. Subnautica does this especially well. An example though of a game which implemented this poorly is Elite Dangerous, it became very broad in scope but extremely shallow in terns of functional immersion that made any sense. An irony of al this is that there are therefore dozens of older games that have a great deal of gameplay depth which do not require even a modern midrange card to run well, something like a 1060 6GB will handle them just fine. RDR2 is one of the few games I've played that has a decent degree of functional immersion while also providing excellent visuals, but it's not without its flaws, especially a predictable encounter engine and the use of an existence bubble which can sometimes spoil object interaction a little, but overall it's done pretty well, and it's the first game I've played in years which gave me any sense of desiring something better than my 1080 Ti just so that I could bump up the visuals some more. Having said that, I'll likely only play through RDR2 once, whereas I've played Subnautica several times (including the sequel). Not sure about Super vs. Ti, but search for both with Anandtech GPU bench included in the search, should bring up the relevant AT database page where you can directly compare the two. There's an excellent old article about this subject called, "Reflections on Cyberspace Development", by Simon Birrell. I'll try posting the article URL in a followup post after this, not sure if it will work since YT tends not to like web refs now.
Still using GTX1660ti. It is a good card for 1080p. Just too bad it doesn't have DLSS. Otherwise, I can use it a bit longer for demanding games. Quite a bargain now to get it in used market.
Man. I've had the 1660Ti since August 2019. It was my first gaming PC, and this was my first GPU. I have to say, it did a job. That card basically ran everything at 1080p60. Some games could handle Ultra quality, although most could hit consistent 60fps at medium settings (such as Red Dead Redemption 2 or Assassin's Creed Origins). Overall, in 2023, it's still a decent card, as long as you aren't trying to play modern games on it. I think at this point, 45fps is realistic for modern games at 1080p on the card at high/medium settings. Low isn't even worth the toggle, looks like shit most of the time. I'm finally upgrading to a 3070Ti. Should be at least double the speed but we'll see. I was struggling to get a consistent 60fps with Spiderman Remastered at 1080p in the overworld and battles were like 30-40fps so I was like fuck it I'm gonna need to upgrade now if I want to play the modern games in my Steam library. 1660Ti is a very good card for 1080p60 gaming for games that released up until 2019. Games released after 2020 and beyond, the card will struggle imo, medium settings at 1080p at best maybe depending on the optimisation.
Love my 1660-Ti. Eventually I'll get something that can do all the modern RTX stuff (not a 3050!) but every time I say "should I?" I think "nah, this card is still good for another year...".
Nice comparison,good job like always RandomGhD.1070,1660ti and the 3050 are about the same performance level, still relevant for 1080p gaming with some adjustments here and there :)
i replaced my 1660 ti in janurary, but i was happily playing Cyberpunk on 2k on medium settings, i was able to play on ultra settings too but i prefered the higher frames of the medium. it lasted me a long solid while, a card i remember fondly
Wait what? Interesting, i remember back when I heard that gtx cards would be getting rt support, although I don’t know how long that’s taken to add as I’ve gotten more distracted by other things in life than the computer industry
With such close results do wonder how the 1660ti would compare if ran same boost clock as 3050 also wonder if the 8x connection of the 3050 would be noticeable in pci-e 3.0 or older systems compared to 16x connection of the 1660ti
My GTX 1660 6gb (overclocked) performs similarly to these 2 cards.. what?? Anyways, I run my GTX 1660 6gb with an i7 4770 and 32gb of ram. It runs most games very smoothly and over 60fps. I also run VR on it all of the time, and my cpu is holding it back. So overall, it's still an amazing card in 2023. I picked mine up for $85 used on eBay, a great small upgrade from my 1650 super single fan, which was absolutely dying when playing VR.
If you increase the Graphics Presets all the way upto the Max you will see that the difference between their performance will also drop to the extent of only 4-5% on average I guess.
@RandomGaminginHD Are you planning to do another Intel Arc card revisit any time soon? There's been some major improvements in the drivers again as per the latest Beta, and CyberPunk just got official XeSS 1.1 support :O
Im not really sure why there isnt more demanding gameplay shown here. If im playing HGL, i wanna be sure that my 1660 will hold up should i decide to buy one when i start casting spells or getting into combat in other games
I have a 1660 Super and get 60-90fps at 1080p, high settings on most modern games, and a consistent 120fps in basically all older ones. I dont need much else 🤷🏻♂️
would be an intresting test im not sure if this class of gpu could saturate a x8 pcie 3.0 slot.but maybe theres a few fps there and it would close the gap? But man the 6400xt amd thought was a good idea to put out with only 4 lanes... on a budget card likely to be put in pcie 3 builds
Bought the card 4 years ago, completed over 100 games during those years. Honestly, new GPUs are tempting. But considering the 9400f, 550 W and 4 years old motherboard that I have at the moment, a non-bottleneck upgrade would cost me the same as buying new cpu. Beside that, look at the graphic of AAA games, small detail improvement for costly upgrade.
"Can it keep up?" .... the answer to that is always the same: it depends on what you're running, and at what settings. The majority of games out there really don't need anything THIS powerful, and if you're concerned about price, turn shadows and ray tracing down some. Yeah yeah everybody likes to worship ray tracing, but to be quite honest... once you get past the "oooo" and "ahhh" of loading into an area in a game, and actually start _playing_ the game, you are probably not going to notice it much. People _say_ they do, but they're deceived. Up until earlier this year, I used a 1050ti and it was fine. I put a 3050 in the PC I built back in January, but that was mainly because I had lost the Silicon Lottery with my 1050ti, kept having weird random crashes in a few games (that persisted through not one, but *two* fresh OS installs!), and ever since I built this new machine, I don't get the crashes anymore. If you're concerned with budget and price, there's absolutely nothing wrong with older cards, especially if you're willing to go down to 1440p or better yet, 1080p. I gamed at 1080p for the longest time until I got a 1440p native display and sometimes I still run games at 1080p for various reasons. If you go down to 1080p, _many_ cards, even as far back as the 1050ti, can handle many games on the market if you don't mind turning a few features down a little (and assuming you're not running poorly optimized crap that was just released a month ago, like CP2077 when it first came out). In closing, this isn't the early 2000s anymore where games being released won't run on 6 month old hardware. This isn't the 2000s where the next line of hardware is 30, 40, 50% more performance. We're getting to a plateau where the % gains in performance are getting smaller and smaller, and the newest equipment is getting more and more expensive. This also means that games can run on old hardware, sometimes up to 3-5 years old, and Indie/Small publisher games are on the rise and becoming far more prevalent. There's more Hollow Knights being released and fewer CP2077s, and even the large studios are making games that will run on older hardware and aren't trying to push the bar anymore because gamedev for that sort of thing is getting prohibitively expensive and it ends up being too much of a risk.
Got lucky and able to snag a new 3050 at $248 back in July 2022. It was a not-bad pick when paired with my older i3-6100. Passed the 3050 to my little bro when I bought a whole new setup earlier this year 👌🏽👌🏽
hey bro, I love your vids (been a subscriber for many years) I just watched the video of the fastest APU (5700G) how about if you can, do a video of the fastest older APUs and Core i7 running games that were released back in their time not modern ones (they wouldn't even start of course) ex: as the first APUs are from 2011, so, testing games from 2011/2010 to compare how well they ran with newest models
Buying an old gen GPU is like jumping into a time machine that keeps you stuck in the game visuals of 5-7 years ago. Five years ago, a 1660 Ti was relevant for games that were already graphically outdated due to the time spent on their development. Today, it means that you are still playing with 5+ year old graphics quality because you are forced to reduce the graphics quality for the sake of performance. I can understand players who cannot afford to buy something modern, but I cannot understand people deliberately saving money to live in the past.
Considering inflation, the RTX 3050 GPU would be a good deal for $200 US. The fact that it has ability to use Video super resolution also a nice bonus.
biggest issue with the 3050 at 200 us used is it lands in the same price as 2060 and 2060 supers depending on the deals. which are both cards above the 3050.
I hate to ask because I'm not that kind of viewer (I think making demands of a RU-vidr is crass) but I would love to see a comparison between the 4070 and the 3080. I'm sure some other (biased as hell, untrustworthy) RU-vid channels might have done a comparison, but I don't trust 90% of tech RU-vidrs, especially because most of them are likely sponsored by Nvidia's 40 series AIB manufacturers, and wouldn't tell the truth.
Your choice If the 3050 is way more expensive in your country then the 1660 is worth it But if you were looking to upgrade then the 3050 is a terrible choice Go for the 3060ti if you are looking for a high upgrade
I have a Acer OEM 1660ti in my Travel Mini ITX PC Put a Cpu Cooler on it and flashed a Bios with slightly higher Powerlimit With undervolt Curve it can clock up to 2100mhz and more than +1000mhz on the Memory Are you sure your clocks arent Limited by Powerlimt here?Because you could easily have higher Clocks with like 0.900v/1900-2000mhz at least
Take into account inflation and its a different story. The 1660ti was about £260 at launch in 2019. That's £290 in 2022 and £310 in 2023. Possibly more. The 3050 has never been available in the uk at a decent price so to hell with it. At £230 it should have been a good card; 2gb more vram, modern architecture and newer capabilities at a lower cost but nvida have keep production low to keep prices high.
