Sabrent Rocket 1TB NVMe SSD review
Resident Evil 3: PC graphics performance benchmark review
Palit GeForce GTX 1650 KalmX review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - March 2020
Deepcool Gamer Storm Macube 310P review
NVIDIA Shield Android TV 2019 review
Fractal Design ERA ITX chassis review
Gigabyte TRX40 Aorus Master review
XFX Radeon RX 5600 XT THICC 2 review
Cougar Blazer review
MSI GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER GAMING X review
Posted by: on: 11/22/2019 07:29 PM [
11 comment(s) ]
MSI released their GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER GAMING X, a product with a more than capable cooler as well being factory tweaked. The SUPER edition card comes with 12 Gbps GDDR6 graphics memory, however, has only got 4GB of it.
Read article
Advertisement
Tagged as:
msi
pages 1 2 3
Loophole35
Senior Member
Posts: 9554
Senior Member
Posts: 9554
Posted on: 11/22/2019 07:52 PM
Just forget the non-super exists. The super cards are what the standard ones should have been. this card is $10 more than the regular 1650 and is ~20% faster.
If anything I applaud Nvidia for the super line-up due to the much better $/performance over the standard Turning line-up. Guess they didn't want to just sit there and watch the sales figures continue to stagnate.
Nvidia's product roster is such a mess. Bad Nvidia, stop it.
Just forget the non-super exists. The super cards are what the standard ones should have been. this card is $10 more than the regular 1650 and is ~20% faster.
If anything I applaud Nvidia for the super line-up due to the much better $/performance over the standard Turning line-up. Guess they didn't want to just sit there and watch the sales figures continue to stagnate.
buhehe
Senior Member
Posts: 205
Senior Member
Posts: 205
Posted on: 11/22/2019 09:05 PM
Just forget the non-super exists. The super cards are what the standard ones should have been. this card is $10 more than the regular 1650 and is ~20% faster.
If anything I applaud Nvidia for the super line-up due to the much better $/performance over the standard Turning line-up. Guess they didn't want to just sit there and watch the sales figures continue to stagnate.
The products themselves are not bad... but boy this line is confusing.
1xxx products being released after 2xxx went out
Ti and Super are redundant - they both mean "kinda better"
Super cards being released with performance identical to existing products (see 1660 Ti and 1660 Super)
IMHO they should have stuck to the same generation - not borrowing numbers from the previous one.
Especially the midrange is confusing - where you transition from 1660 Ti (or, well... Super) to 2060.
Sure, the big difference between gen 10 / 16 and 20 is RTX. Might as well just say "GTX 2050, RTX 2060".
Besides, who is ever going to use RTX on a 2060? But that's another matter.
Between gen 16 and 20 there are currently 12 concurrent models, some of which are slowly being replaced by the Super versions but are still around.
Just forget the non-super exists. The super cards are what the standard ones should have been. this card is $10 more than the regular 1650 and is ~20% faster.
If anything I applaud Nvidia for the super line-up due to the much better $/performance over the standard Turning line-up. Guess they didn't want to just sit there and watch the sales figures continue to stagnate.
The products themselves are not bad... but boy this line is confusing.
1xxx products being released after 2xxx went out
Ti and Super are redundant - they both mean "kinda better"
Super cards being released with performance identical to existing products (see 1660 Ti and 1660 Super)
IMHO they should have stuck to the same generation - not borrowing numbers from the previous one.
Especially the midrange is confusing - where you transition from 1660 Ti (or, well... Super) to 2060.
Sure, the big difference between gen 10 / 16 and 20 is RTX. Might as well just say "GTX 2050, RTX 2060".
Besides, who is ever going to use RTX on a 2060? But that's another matter.
Between gen 16 and 20 there are currently 12 concurrent models, some of which are slowly being replaced by the Super versions but are still around.
Kool64
Senior Member
Posts: 551
Senior Member
Posts: 551
Posted on: 11/22/2019 11:25 PM
Ok so if this lands in the 150-160$ range that’s actually pretty impressive considering how close it is to the 1660 or the last get 1070.
Ok so if this lands in the 150-160$ range that’s actually pretty impressive considering how close it is to the 1660 or the last get 1070.
Loophole35
Senior Member
Posts: 9554
Senior Member
Posts: 9554
Posted on: 11/23/2019 01:11 AM
Building a 1080p rig with less than $550 is really easy now and you can do it with a clear upgrade path. I totally expect the 5500/xt to be around this same price/performance area.
on the naming thing. I don’t find it confusing in the least. No 16xx card is faster than a 20xx card so no toes are stepped on there. I for one have always called my card by it’s number designation (6950, 7970, 670, 780, 1070, 1080ti see what I mean) so the knowing the 20xx cards have the RT cores and the 16xx cards don’t is easy. Now the ti/super I get the issue there but as always I implore consumers to research their purchases.
BTW who do I have to talk to at Nvidia to get the ULTRA monicker to make a comeback?
Building a 1080p rig with less than $550 is really easy now and you can do it with a clear upgrade path. I totally expect the 5500/xt to be around this same price/performance area.
on the naming thing. I don’t find it confusing in the least. No 16xx card is faster than a 20xx card so no toes are stepped on there. I for one have always called my card by it’s number designation (6950, 7970, 670, 780, 1070, 1080ti see what I mean) so the knowing the 20xx cards have the RT cores and the 16xx cards don’t is easy. Now the ti/super I get the issue there but as always I implore consumers to research their purchases.
BTW who do I have to talk to at Nvidia to get the ULTRA monicker to make a comeback?
pages 1 2 3
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 205
Nvidia's product roster is such a mess. Bad Nvidia, stop it.