Just looking for some advice as I was a little shocked to find out the 1050ti only has bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s but the 560 TI although it's got much less video ram has got bandwidth of 152.0 GB/s so is it going to be a significant upgrade over the 560 TI or should I wait another month and save some more money and get a 1060 6GB graphics card instead?? I just want to future proof my pc graphically for as long as I can but if the 1050 TI is a worthwhile upgrade over the 560 TI I might consider it, it's just worrying that I'm told it's a better card but the bandwidth is significantly less on the 1050 TI
No specific experience of either, but according in theory I'd say the 1050Ti could give you about an 80% boost, and a 6Gb 1060 a noticeable boost over that. I'd say if you can wait then do so and get a 6GB 1060. Disclaimer: I hate the 'Maybe I should buy the next model up?' dilemma and usually solve it by buying whatever is top of the range at the time. Terrible value for money!
It has less bandwidth on paper, but the GTX 9 and 10 series use their bandwidth much more effectively. Ultimately, with modern games, you'll be far more limited by the 560's tiny frame-buffer than the 1050's bandwidth. Given current 1060 pricing, it's not an insignificant jump now from the 1050 Ti... Unless you find a good deal (sub £200) on a 3GB version, which is a good middle-ground. You could also get the 1050 Ti now, wait a few months for the pricing/availability to stabilise, sell the Ti for £100~ and probably still be better off than buying a 1060 now!
Upgraded house mates 560 Ti 1.2 Gig to a 1050 Ti 4 Gig and the jump in performance is amazing, if I ever get around to it and can afford it whilst I want a 1060 trying to find one at a reasonable price is difficult I will probably grab a 1050 Ti as others have said they are quite the pocket rocket for the money
Thanks for the replies, and my monitor displays at 1680x1050 as it's not a relatively new one, it's a Viewsonic VA2226W so i'd say no to your question as it's not 1080p
Also what exactly is the difference between this one on Scan Palit GeForce GTX 1050 Ti StormX 4GB GDDR5 Graphics Card, 768 Core, 1290MHz GPU, 1392MHz Boost And this one MSI GeForce GTX 1050 Ti GAMING X 4GB GDDR5 Graphics Card, 768 Core, 1354MHz GPU, 1468MHz Boost I can see the MSI one has a slightly higher GPU and Memory speed but the Palit one is £127.99 and the MSI one is £169.99 so there's a £42 price difference, is that really justified as £169.99 seems a bit too expensive for a 1050 Ti bearing in mind there's only a 64mhz difference in memory speed and only a 76mhz difference in the GPU speed so surely such a small increase in power isn't worth an extra £42 as it won't make a massive difference to the FPS will it. Plus £127.99 is pretty much my limit this month anyway and that seems like a fair price for a 1050 Ti where as £169.99 seems a bit steep and the most expensive 1050 Ti is £172.99... Just curious as well as some of them say they need a power cable from the psu but most reviews say they get all the power they need from the PCI-E slot so why do some need extra power? Is it just a gimmick and they don't really need it?
The MSI has a much better dual fan cooler. http://www.ebuyer.com/769733-asus-n...1050-ti-4gb-oc-graphics-card-ex-gtx1050ti-o4g I think I would get that one. In the middle with price, but so much better than that Palit.
When you say so much better, in what sense? It does look better than the Palit one but even the Asus one is almost £17 more expensive and do you really get anymore than just a few FPS extra considering it's not much faster than the Palit one, I guess what i'm saying is it seems like a waste of £17 on the face of it.
If you have limited room in your case then the Palit card will be fine, if thats not an issue then the bigger card with the dual fans would be the better bet as mentioned above
For what its worth. My secondary rig (currently my primary) uses a 1050 Ti to game with and I am finding it perfectly fine for 1080p gaming. Sure I dont have all my settings maxed out but it performs fine for me. Regards,
Cooler, quieter, pre overclocked from the factory etc. Oh, and a better warranty too, Palit are the worst.
No space isn't an issue, it just seems that paying an extra £17 is pointless as both cards are the same give or take a few megahertz which is highly unlikely to make much difference at all in the games FPS, obviously if there was an extra 10 FPS extra across the board then maybe it would be worth it but I don't think there will be. I've had a Palit card in the past and actually didn't have any problems with it, but like I said to Behemoth, it just seems that paying an extra £17 is pointless as both cards are the same give or take a few megahertz which is highly unlikely to make much difference at all in the games FPS
I would get the cheapest 4GB card you can, personally. Even the passively cooled ones will boost to 1700Mhz+, any actively cooled one will do 1800Mhz+, the only difference will be slightly higher temperatures than the top priced versions - and even then, it'll still probably run cooler than any GPU you've had in the past. I only got the Strix version because I managed to get it under £145 inc. postage. Spending an extra £20-40 on a decent cooler for a £300+ high end graphics card that can use the extra cooling potential makes sense, on an entry level card that runs cool and barely uses any power over the PCI-E slot it's false economy.
Gotta think Wakka's on the right line here - the 1050Ti is so power efficient that springing for a better cooler seems like massive overkill. That said, it's not like there are any better GPU's available for purchase with that extra money right now!
£17 gets you an awful lot more than you realise. Palit offer a standard 2yr warranty. Asus give three. https://www.asus.com/us/support/article/677/ You pays your money....
Would you get a £20 extended warranty on a £20 card? Only if the rate of failure is something like 1/6, which seems mighty high...
Looks like i've got to wait for it to be back in stock anyway as it's been overdue at scan since 29th June