Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1050 3 GB OC is first out of the gate

Most American gerbils are returning to their regularly-scheduled grind this morning after a three-day weekend spent grilling, but over in Taiwan, Gigabyte's web team spent some time crafting a product page for the company's first GeForce GTX 1050 card with 3 GB of memory. This particular card is the first third-party product we've seen materialize since Nvidia's extremely quiet GTX 1050 3 GB launch last week. Gigabyte's new card has base and boost clocks that exceed Nvidia's reference specs for base and boost clocks in gaming and OC mode, though the 7 GT/s memory speed and narrow 96-bit bus stick to the reference plan.

Gigabyte clocks its newest entry-level GeForce GTX 1050 OC 3GB card at a 1417-MHz in base speed in gaming mode and 1442 MHz in OC mode. Those core clocks  could rise to a 1556 MHz boost range in gaming mode and 1582 MHz when OC mode is active, although Pascal chips' GPU Boost 3.0 smarts tend to push custom-cooled cards like this even further. For reference, Nvidia's reference spec calls for a 1392 MHz base clock and 1582 MHz when thermal and power conditions allow.

Gigabyte's card has one HDMI 2.0 port, one DisplayPort 1.4 output, and a dual-link DVI-D connector. The HDMI port is good for a 4096×2160 display at 60 Hz and the DisplayPort has enough bandwidth for a 7680×4320 monitor at the same refresh rate.

The card and its “Windforce 2X” dual-fan cooler measure 1.4″ thick (3.6 cm), 7.5″ long (19.1 cm), and 4.4″ wide (11.1 cm). The GeForce GTX 1050's TDP is just 75 W, so Gigabyte's simple aluminum casting should be plenty to keep the chips cool despite the lack of any heat pipes, vapor chambers, or other such thermal magicks.

Nvidia has been pretty coy about this third addition to the GTX 1050 family, but the card should provide a decent 1920×1080 e-sports gaming experience and enough onboard memory to meet the green graphics team's system requirements for 4K Netflix streaming. We hope the card has the same array of 32 ROPs as the other two desktop GTX 1050 variants and not the 16 units from the mobile GTX 1050, but the company's marketing team hasn't been forthcoming with that particular detail.

Gigabyte didn't provide any pricing or availability information, but we'd expect the GTX 1050 3G OC to land soon. Retail pricing should land somewhere between the company's $140-$158 flock of GeForce GTX 1050 2 GB cards and its cluster of $200-220 GeForce GTX 1050 Ti boards.

Comments closed
    • albundy
    • 2 years ago

    what a total ripoff from ngreedia!!! l budget low end card for over $100? laughable at best.

    • xrror
    • 2 years ago

    The fact that this SKU even exists sums up just how messed up the GPU market is from the crypto-madness.

    In years past, the GTX 1050 parts would have been the forgotten “don’t buy those” cards that basically people who didn’t know better bought (no offense to them). To see new SKUs of 1050 that cut it down even further, and actually have those as activly advertised Retail products (not some hidden OEM-only penny pincher SKU) just… have we really come to this?

    The 1070 non-Ti should have been in the $250-$300 range now, and a 1060 6GB maybe $230 ish?

    And before the crypto folks jump on me for being a gamer n00b who should have “shut up and started mining” I just want to congratulate them on retarding progress on VR headsets and PC gaming in general about 5 years. For some of us this hobby is about fun and enjoyment, and not just about the money.

      • Airmantharp
      • 2 years ago

      A counterpoint is that the GTX1050 is actually plenty good for a great number of games at 1080p 60Hz.

    • PrincipalSkinner
    • 2 years ago

    Was there ever a more boring period in the GPU market?

    • Chrispy_
    • 2 years ago

    New for 2018: A GTX 1050 for the same price as a GTX 1060 was in 2016 🙁

    • mczak
    • 2 years ago

    The ROP count is very highly unlikely to be 16 or 32 as mentioned in the article, it is almost guaranteed to be 24 (don’t forget it has a 96bit memory interface, and ROPs are tied to that).

      • Chrispy_
      • 2 years ago

      I’d still like someone to confirm if this is GP107 or GP106.

      If they’re using GP107 with 3GB, I wonder if they’re doing the asymetrical memory bandwidth thing they had to do with the 1GB 550Ti and the 2GB 660Ti; That caused all kind of edge-case weirdness and was a headache for both game-devs and the Nvidia drivers team because the power-of-two VRAM chip sizes didn’t match up with the memory controller, so they juggled different density chips with different memory bandwidth depending on which portion of the VRAM was accessed.

      It was like the overblown GTX970 3.5GB issue, but far more serious.

        • stefem
        • 2 years ago

        Looks to be GP106 based, they just disabled half of the memory controller and end up with a 96bit bus width

          • Chrispy_
          • 2 years ago

          That was my first hunch when the card was announced, do you have a source or are you just guessing like I was?

            • stefem
            • 2 years ago

            They told me so but it’s not a primary source so I’m not willing to swear to it, that’s why I said it looks so

    • ozzuneoj
    • 2 years ago

    The 1050 2GB used to go for $80-$90 on sale… A year ago.

    For the thousandth time, these prices are awful.

    • DragonDaddyBear
    • 2 years ago

    So, does this thing support PlayReady 3.0? It should, right? It’s a 10-series with 3+ GB of VRAM. While micro segmentation is annoying, this might be a cheaper way into PlayReady content on Window.

    Edit: My reading skills fail me. It looks like it does.

    • WanderingSojourner
    • 2 years ago

    I don’t know about anyone else, but it’s hard to feel excited about yet another variant of the 10-series coming to market. The design is coming up on two years old. In combination with the absurd prices that gamers have had to endure earlier, I would think most people would want to wait it out until the next gen arrives. I guess the e-sports or mining consumers still have enough demand for Gigabyte to release this?

      • Kretschmer
      • 2 years ago

      The 11XX series is likely to launch at the high end first, so gamers may have to wait a long time for low-end silicon. I could easily see buyers grabbing one of these now to get their gaming in over the summer.

      I’m pleasantly surprised by how well my laptop’s 1050Ti MaxQ runs 1080P games (it’s thermally constrained and might operate closer to a desktop 1050 than 1050Ti). Users of 60Hz 1080P screens could do worse. It’s just a shame that these are selling north of $100…

      • euricog
      • 2 years ago

      Why would they sell/promote new tech when they can still milk us with outdated tech for much more than it should cost?

        • WanderingSojourner
        • 2 years ago

        Right now, I’d say that AMD is our only hope for pushing Nvidia to release new tech. People need GPUs for their computers, so the demand is always going to be present. AMD can’t supply enough GPUs, so Nvidia still has plenty of customers. (And that’s not even getting into the performance parity discussion.) Essentially, we need a Ryzen revolution in the GPU space to get things to change.

        There might be a slight (albeit almost impossible) chance that this mining glut could work in our favor. If miners decide to recoup their money by selling their GPUs, the market could reduce the demand for new cards such that Nvidia would most likely release their next gen in order to keep their profits up. Granted, there seems to be quite a controversy over 2nd hand cards, so there might not be enough of the population keen on using up the supply of extra cards.

          • stefem
          • 2 years ago

          And who’s our only hope to push AMD to release new tech? 😉
          Jokes aside, no one was able to supply enough GPUs in the last year and the Ryzen reference is out of place, NVIDIA isn’t selling a 300mm² chip with a crap cooler for 2000$, they are selling a 600mm² chip with 8GB of cutting edge RAM, a PCB with power delivery and a great cooler for 700$ (or a 800mm² chip with 12GB of cutting edge RAM, a PCB with power delivery and a great cooler for 3000$)

        • Chz
        • 2 years ago

        They’ve hardly pushed it to Tesla levels. G80,G84,G86,G92,G94,G96,G98…
        It’s slightly worrying because there is a similar history there – G80 utterly destroyed whatever ATI had at the time. They rested on their laurels and ATI came back and destroyed re-spun Tesla quite handily in turn.

          • stefem
          • 2 years ago

          You named the complete lineup of 2 GPU series as if each model were a minor improvement after the previous one (like Intel) which does not correspond to reality, NVIDIA didn’t rest on their laurels (its winning strategy from the beginning has been to continuously push forward actually, that way they won against 3DFX and ATi/AMD) I actually didn’t remember a single occasion they did and AMD didn’t destroy anything, performance wise their HD4000 series was just on par with NVIDIA’s 200 series while having a lower filtering quality and being practically unusable for GPGPU usage.

            • Chz
            • 2 years ago

            G8x and G9x *ARE* the same cores, respun again and again until they had to give away GTS250s at fraction of what they wanted to charge.

            GT200, which what you’re prattling about, is indeed a significant update. But then I never mentioned it, did I?

            • stefem
            • 2 years ago

            G8x and G9x chip aren’t the same, G9x in addition to being produced with a new node it had PCIe 2.0 support, improved color and z-buffer compression, an improved video processor and added support for atomic ops which was big upgrade for HPC. With G92 they were able to cut the price as it was smaller than G80, had a narrower memory bus and required smaller coolers, the GTS 250 was a low end card from its inception, I honestly doubt they were hoping to charge more.

            True, you didn’t specifically mentioned GT200 but then of what were you talking about? G92 cards was available 9 moths before the first HD4000 card came out and by that time GT200 was already available. So what did AMD destroyed in your mind? an old GPU which where already an evolution of an even older design?

        • stefem
        • 2 years ago

        It’s AIB and mainly reseller who inflate prices, not NVIDIA (or AMD)

    • unclesharkey
    • 2 years ago

    The price of some higher end cards have come down but these low to mid range cards are still way to much $$

      • Kretschmer
      • 2 years ago

      My 1080Ti was cheaper in May(?) 2017 than it would have been in May 2018. That’s just sad. Get in the game, AMD (and get out of the mine)!

        • kvndoom
        • 2 years ago

        If AMD can’t make a GPU that is better all around than Nvidia’s best, but knows it can sell every GPU it fabs to the mining crowd, why even bother?

        Of course that’s living for the moment, which will bite them hard when/if the mining fad crashes and burns and they can’t compete in gaming.

          • K-L-Waster
          • 2 years ago

          Sell cards to miners now, and use the proceeds to develop the next gen.

          • Kretschmer
          • 2 years ago

          I worry that developers will ignore AMD by the time mining dies down (if it dies down). If AMD cards get less optimization and tuning, it will lower their brand perception.

            • unclesharkey
            • 2 years ago

            I am just worried that we may never see reasonable prices on GPUs again. Used to be that when other cards were released prices dropped. Now even old cards from 5 years ago are over priced. When will the madness end.

            • dragontamer5788
            • 2 years ago

            [url<]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_too_shall_pass[/url<] Price fluctuations happens all the time. Taiwan floods destroy HDD prices for years. DDR4 price fixing causes issues a decade ago, etc. etc. The original GPU crisis was back in BTC's 2nd or 3rd bubble, before BTC ASICs were a thing and when BTC hit (omfg) $1000 or so. GPUs went crazy back then too and the subsequent crash damaged AMD and NVidia. To the point that AMD and NVidia refused to create more cards during [b<]this[/b<] cryptocurrency bubble. So instead, prices remained high. AMD / NVidia just don't want to risk it all on the cryptocurrency nuts again.

            • Chrispy_
            • 2 years ago

            I think AMD will be fine; The console gaming market is both bigger and more lucrative than the PC gaming sector so devs optimise their products to run on the all-AMD console market segment first.

            If it weren’t for Nvidia’s dodgy gameworks schemes and unethical provision of free development tools that use proprietary nvidia-optimised black-boxes in their code, Nvidia wouldn’t even get much of a look in from devs these days. Nvidia’s marketing game to devs and publishers is very strong.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This