What's interesting to me is that the survey indicates that people's average gaming performance has not increased in something like a decade. The 970, 1060 and 1650 are very close in performance. Which should tell anyone that it's not because people are happy with that level of performance and need nothing more, but rather Nvidia has decided a fixed cost for that level of performance and that's all most people can justify spending on a gpu.
tbh the base 1650 model is 10% worst than 1060 6gb, but if you look at vram, about 30% of the users have a 8gb+ card, wich is a indication that actually most users have at least a 3050 class card
They are actually the same. That's crazy just looked up benchmarks. Also, does that include laptops? The 1650 has been the bottom of the line workable laptops for a while that can account for some too. 1080 60 might just be enough as well.
@@JoeWayne84 1080p 60 fps is what I was saying. Sorry for not using measurements. I was saying that resolution and frame rate might of just been enough so gamers never upgraded..
Personally, I think people should stop buying those cards entirely and just buy consoles. If all you can afford is a 970like performance (which isn’t terrible), I doubt they can afford decent CPUs as well which means they’ll likely be running the same games that can be bought on consoles with a worse overall experience. The newest games are chewing up last Gen GPUs like a piece of take 5, and I’m not just referring to 6600XTs/3060s, but even cards higher up the stack are aging like milk. They run old games fine, but why buy a new gpu for old games? Why not just buy an old gpu that runs that specific game the way that you want? Do you know why most people don’t do that? Most people don’t build their own PCs, and end up dropping their entire savings on a $600 “high end gaming pc” with the same 7-8 year old 1060 6GB performance. Steam HW survey says it all. People complain about this, complain about that, but never educate themselves on what they’re buying, nor really know why they’re buying it outside of it being called a “gaming pc”, and they want to play pc games. $500 will get you a console that will give you an upper mid-range pc experience with RT and all! On PC, you’re not getting RT, even at 1080p with good frame rates without FSR/DLSS, but enabling either of those at 1080p turn all games from whatever genre they are into pixel counting, blocky madness which completely defeats the purpose of RT and any high settings that were enabled. I don’t really think the issue is money for most people running those cards, I think it’s a combination of ignorance of pc hardware, and deceitful marketing from cornball corporations that want as much money as they can get with as little effort as possible in most areas of the hardware that they heavily advertise. I’d be willing to be the selling point of the next generation of nvidia cards will be “wow look at how fast cyberpunk runs at 4k!1!1!1!”. 3 months later a new game on a new engine drops, and people become so confused and confounded by how poorly the games run that they’d rather just bash the game devs over questioning their purchasing decisions.
@@chrisoverton2759 you basically are blaming Cyber punk being a shitty made game on your entire point haha. PC gaming is far superior to console. The only game that runs like shit I know of is Cyber punk and who cares that was a garbage game anyway that I never even cared to play…as far as raytracing… it’s fucking sweet for single player games and works great I got a 3090 though but I games on my 2080ti with it before that and I was fine using dlss for a single player game it looked amazing on my 4k oled 60” tv. I got a Xbox though for my kids to play with in living room and I play some party or multiplayer games with them consoles have there place to … but I’d way rather have my PC setup with a 240hz monitor and a 4K tv for doing everything ….
I think part of the reason games are getting more demanding is because they're no longer being designed for the PS4 or XBX1, next gen consoles offer roughly RTX 2070-2080 level of performance, instead of the GTX 1060 levels the old ones offered. There's not as much of an incentive for devs to optimize.
Tbh they don't really perform like 2070s/2080, they perform closer to a 1080/2060 except with 16GB GDDR6 memory, it only seems like the the PS5 and Xbox Series X run similar to 2070s/2080 because those consoles aren't actually running native 4k @ 120hz, they are actually running 1440p @ 120hz and are being upscaled to 4k so while the display out is native 4k 120hz the consoles themselves aren't. Dev's should know this and should be making games to run ideally on a 1080/2060.. but as you said they are trying to aim for 2070s/2080 performance numbers and aren't incentivized to optimize which is hurting the little guys
@@socialfreak6900 That's true, they probably reach 2070/2080 levels of performance but in reality that's just because of all the optimizations consoles get.
I can’t wait for 2025 when the gt 1030 is the most popular gpu. Really don’t understand why Nvidia is jacking gpu prices Sky high when it’s obvious that their intended buyers haven’t been buying them for years.
@copiuum music I’ve always hated the 1030 simply because the K2200 is better, assuming you don’t need low profile, and costs far less, and has double the vram. It’s just a bad product compared to the lesser known Nvidia offerings.
The last time Nvidia done the consumers a turn was in the Super era. The 1650S cost a tenner more than a 1650 and the 1660S and 2060S cost 50 Quid more than their base versions. I bought the 2060S and it still is holding up well for me 3 years later at 1080P.
Most of it has to do with laptop with 1650 they were cheap during covid and you couldn't buy 3050 laptop around $650ish (IdeaPad gaming 3,GF63 thin)until recently at the time it was decent value
Great video! Just got a 980, which is similar to a 1650 performance wise, and honestly, I am very happy with it. It plays all my favourite games at "good enough" framerates that it defiantly, for me, justifies the upgrade from the 1050ti, which was my previous card..
Enjoy it! From my testing, depending on the game the 980 can be up to 20% faster than a 1650 (but also a little slower in games that aren't optimised for Maxwell)
Honestly, I would suggest a RX 6600 instead of the 980. The 980 is around the same as a RX 580, you only had a 50% upgrade from a 1050 Ti. A RX 6600 would be a 130% upgrade from a 1050 Ti, while a RX 6600XT 150%. I understand if this was not within your budget.
When I got my RX 570 8GB, the 1650 cost 30% more and the 1650 Super was 100% more. Sure, the 570 lacks 12_1 support, but after some overclocking and BIOS-modding, mine scores 14300 in Fire Strike, way more than the 1650. Don't really give a damn about any of the current 12_1 titles and apparently the 570 can run them with VKD3D on Linux. I continue to be baffled by why so many people just buy Nvidia without even considering AMD. In my country, AMD has always been better value for money and still is.
Radeon drivers tend to be a bit more temperamental, and NVidia's mindshare has always been greater, not to mention they are usually first to market with cutting edge features (G-Sync, RT etc.). I've used both, but now that I'm spending my own money my PC is full AMD (CPU+GPU). They are far better value, but only if you know what you're doing (The average person doesn't even try any tweaking and AMD can definitely be more reliant on that for optimal performance)
Well, you kinda give yourself the answer. Either buying a 570 and haveing to tinker and fix around or just buying a 1650 and "Plug and Play". Gues what the casual user, who just wants to game, is going to buy. ... well that or a console. Also who gives a shit about firestrike. Its commonly known that synthetic benchmarks say little to nothing about actual ingame performance. That is probably something the casual knows, cause even most popular tech channels like Linus Tech Tipps is saying that you should not trust benchmark tools.
@@BE3R-LF94 Have had no issues at all with drivers. AMD drivers being bad is sort of a myth these days. I had an HD 5750 back in 2012 that had quite a few driver issues but my RX 570 has now been rock-solid for 3 years, before and after all the tweaking and overclocking. As for G-Sync and RT, I simply don't care at this point. I just use V-Sync on my 60Hz monitor and I'm happy with it. I don't care for RT in its current form where it looks almost the same as traditional raster rendering while having a huge FPS cost. Nvidia's marketing has zero effect on me. I look at FPS/$ and AMD always wins.
@@MeowMeowMeowMeowMeowMeowMeowww A 570 even without any tweaking is faster than even the GDDR6 1650. It uses more power, sure, but it is overall faster and the 8GB VRAM version is more likely to run future titles at playable framerates. Firestrike is actually a good benchmark and that's why a lot of tech reviewers use it. No benchmark is perfect, for sure, but FireStrike is basically like a tech demo that measures your FPS and comes up with a score. As far as benchmarks go, it's pretty accurate.
You cannot run any Open GL programs with an RX 570 without a massive performance lose that makes the GTX 1650 run circles around it. Almost every emulator will benefit from Nvidias great open GL performance. Reshade for example, a shading program you can use on almost any game or emulator has far superior performance on Nvidia GPUs too. There’s a whole list of reasons why Nvidia charges a premium. It’s not always about sheer performance if you don’t have the compilers and drivers to back it up. Amd does better with allowing the user to tweak the GPUs, and generally the performance in big triple AAA titles will be better on the dollar [If it’s on console]. When the RX series first launched there was a massive issue of overdrawing the PCIE slots power, sometimes both destroying the slot and the card. This was obviously fixed, but some people don’t like buying into beta. Also as an early adopter of Ryzen I had the pleasure of watching my vrms pop and CPU die on a month old system [auto voltage would spike to 1.8V]. First Gen Ryzen had some serious early adopters Tax. If you’re building a budget system now, the RX 570 would be a better buy now since all the miners released them onto the used market.
Nvidia confusing customers is spot on as always. On the laptop side of things, you can get a GTX 1650 with 1024 cores. If it’s not a max-q it’s a good 10-20% faster than a non OC’D Desktop. At stock they both have very similar clock speeds if it’s the full 50w version.
I see 3 reasons why the most popular GPU is steadily downgrading: - More people are playing, which means more casual players who probably don't care for performance much - Most people play low maintenance titles most of the time. When I meet up online with friends we do Gartic Phone, TFT, Fall Guys or Ultimate Chicken Horse so a 1650 is enough - The economics aren't super favourable at the moment, and it's probably not going to get better any time soon. I can see why the tendency is to cheap out where you can I think it's more important to talk about the small, cheap and efficient GPUs because that's what devs are using to make decisions at the end of the day. So thank you for talking about it.
I'm more surprised the 6k series from amd isn't taking off, in the USA they are really great pricing right now with $230~ being a 6600 and after that $50 increments gives you roughly another tier of strength. 1650 being top is weird to me cause the 1650S isn't much more expensive and is much better, that card (while budget) is quite decent. I do feel it's 4gb of vram will prove to be an issue. Speaking of how much vram limitations did you look at for this card considering it's also a 4gb?
It has to do with availability. The 16xx series cards are all on the same die, so the 1650 probably represents common imperfections that disqualified a lot of chips from becoming a 1660 or 1650 Super
@@emptyshirt except for the fact that the 1650 Super, 1660, 1660 Super, and 1660Ti all use the TU116 GPU while the 1630, 1650, and mobile-only 1650Ti all use the smaller TU117 GPU.
@@SSJfraz Sure you can. I had a 1650 super in my Dell Optiplex 790. It seems that you're referring to SFF systems, but there are many minitower prebuilts that can fit full size GPU's. Also, it doesn't say anywhere on the steam hardware list which specific PC's are being used. Just core totals. So I have no ideal what the hell you're talking about there.
At the end of the day, the budget GPUs are always the most popular. People buy these because they get the job done and then some, and that's all they need. I myself bought a 3050 for that very reason. Many people seem to fall for the trap that you have to have the best specs to qualify as a "real" PC gamer nowadays, but it really couldn't be any further from the truth.
Nice informative video, for one somewhat glad that GPU's like the GTX 1060 still hold game developer's marketing interests when designing their games, as it allows the chance for gamers with lower end GPU's a taste of gaming, while letting newer and higher grade GPU's to produce visible, more impressive graphics in produced games !
I noticed how overclocking the memory by 500mhz also really helps this card, i cant oc anymore because of power limit, its running of pcie power only lol. Overclocking the core doesnt do anything tho, this card probably has a memory bottleneck then lol, or maybe its the power limit, does ocing the memory use less power or smth
Definitely could put in this way where the 1650 peak is caused by older generation of cards, especially the 1060 getting replaced by newer ones, spread across several different models, most prominently the RTX 2060, RTX 3050 (worrisome) and RTX 3060 family. That might be the remaining past relic of the previous mining crash in 2017/2018 where people opt for and held onto the cheapest play-able GPU they can find.
I been using the 1650 GDDR6 model since it's about 10-15% faster than OG GDDR5 model it's not bad honestly amount of the hate 1650 has got. If you do plan on getting 1650 please avoid GDDR5 version
I'm using sapphire Rx580 8GB paired with Ryzen 3600x with 16GB DDR4. I'm very happy with this card. My card still gives me smooth gameplay 60FPS sync in 1080p in all major games.
1650 is so popular in the survey because of the mobile variants also. Technically the 3060 should be in that spot but they split it up between the laptop 3060 and desktop
3060 laptop and desktop use a different variant of the same GPU; the mobile 3060 has more CUDA cores. The only difference between the desktop and mobile 1650 is TDP and thus clock speeds.
i no enjoi but i proud four you try the best your branes. this is amazing four try but i no enjoi execushin u making. but u good man four make best effort and speaking the british and make the tube. if u make four video four hindi maybe i enjoi more
I cant say its whats going on here. But "halos" with upscalers seems to be caused by Depth of field and motion blur being hard to get right. Turning those off entirely when possible can resolve the halos
Also don't forget that 1650s in laptops also count towards this, because the steam survey doesn't differentiate between them. The 1650 Ti, which is only in laptops is 1.3%, so it can be, that the 1060 is still more popular. But about the gpu. I build computers as a sidehustle, I built around 60 computers in the past 7 years. My go-to card was the rx 580, which has around the same performace as the 1650, but during the pandemic and the shortage, the Rx 580 became much more expensive, in my county, the 4gb rx 580 was almost twice as expensive, leaving me (and probably a lot) people using the 1650. For decent 1080p, this is the lowest performance I can recommend.
I agree, most of my friend's laptop including my brother as GTX1650 Card in their laptops and none of them are 'gamers' they dont even understand if 1650 is good or bad, they think its great becuz they have a discrete GPU which majority laptops dont have! So, I can agree with you in desktop Class GTX 1060 might still be @ Number 1 spot! 🤔
Just using 1650 vs 1060 and 1060 vs 980 at their respective launches, the 1650 should deliver around 79% of the performance of the 980. The 970 is around 85-87% of the performance of the 980. The 1650 has the advantage of a more modern architecture, so it should do better in modern games with better optimized drivers. The 1650 should easily be dealing 80-90% of the performance of the 980, and even eclipse it in a select few games that favor the Turing microarchitecture. Thus, the 1650 should be roughly tied with the 970, losing in older games and winning in more modern ones.
I just bought 1660 super (used) last month as the price drops here in the philippines. I just upgrade from my last gpu. Can’t buy much more powerful gpu due to tight budget. So far im happy with the 1660 super😊
Great Vid! I just did some benchmarking myself with a 1660.. Witcher 3 dx12 with FSR... Nah dawg.. just use the dx11 version, you can't RT anyway.. It runs so much better it's crazy!
Going from a GT 710 to GTX 1650 is a huge !! But I now owning GTX 1650 with i5-10400f for 3 years, now it's time to get a RTX 3060Ti (now very affordable), with i7-12700k. Also going to get 32GB (16+16) from 16GB (8+8)
I built a killer system in Dec. 2021. 5800x, 32gb ram, gen 4 NVME, etc., etc.. And I put in a 1650 because graphics card prices were crazy at the time! I paid around 300 for it. The slightly higher end cards were crazy, and the flagships were insane. Now, a year and a half later, I haven't replaced it. Because it does everything I want with zero lag. Do I get 300 fps in the newest games? Nah. But, I've had zero lag or skipping in any game I play, and I get 60+ fps in any game I play. My monitor is only 1080 x 60. So, no need for any more. I'll upgrade one day, but for now, no need.
The GTX 1050 launched for $110, and the GTX 1050 Ti for $140. The GTX 1650 could've been a pretty competent entry level card had it launched around $110 like the previous 50 class card. But instead it launched for $150, at a time when the 3 year old RX 570 was cheaper and faster, and these days it sells for closer to $160-$190. It's only selling point remains the fact that there are models that have no PCIe power connector, but at current prices you can make a damn good case for jumping up to the RTX A2000 instead (often sells for $250-$280).
The 1050 Ti was $150 in the US IIRC, but Etherium came in 2017 and all got the RX 470, the best deal under $200. Then the 1050 Ti survived Etherium but at insane prices, even more than $250.
The older 950 was 160, and the 750/750Ti 120/150 respectively. Considering historical pricing, the 1650 at 150 makes sense. The 1650 Super also came in at 160 and that card was faster than the 1060. While the 470 and 570 were interesting cards against the 1050s and 1650s, they were barely profitable and required auxiliary power connectors. $100 570s were an absolute steal though. For modern cards get RX 6600/XT or maybe 6500XT 8GB. If you can get the A2000 for sub-300, maybe get that, but for sub 75w GPUs it probably makes sense to wait for Lovelace.
Worse part is that at least the jump from the 970 to the 1060 was an upgrade and at the time was the more sensible GPU to buy price to performance wise, the jump from a 1060 to 1650 is actually a downgrade and I'm willing to bet most people who bought a 1650 payed more for it than the people who bought the 970 back in the day.
The 1060 6GB was a good offering at the time. Similar to the 3060 12GB being the most reasonable offering recently. The next reasonable card will be the 7060 24GB. I do however have a GTX 1650 and GTX 1060 which I gave to the kids. They are fine for what they play..
While it seems like the experience is declining, newer games run better on newer architecture. Forza 5 is a prime example of this. I think if youre after a low-mid setting for fps fraps or mobas this is a lot of bang for your buck. I end up recommending this to people that might not get discrete graphics otherwise, or someone that wants to do emulation, but as you said AMD has pulled ahead a bit in the price range. There are a ton of these on the market, so im sure there are some deals to be had to pick one up on sale or secondhand.
The experience is declining because people are getting less for their budget on the market as they used to. And the reason 1650 has become a popular card, Is because during all the madness this thing was selling at a decent price (decent in respective of everything else) in range of budget gamers.. And continued to drop as time went on despite everything else stagnating or going up further. It's a downgrade for sure in the budget world to what you could get for that money, But times have changed and this is where we are.
5600xt owner here, currently paired with a Xeon e3 1230 v3 and planning to jump onto an am4 system similar to your testing one as the ryzen 5 5600 is quite cheap right now. So pretty excited to see the video featuring it.
@Alfa Proto depends on what price you can get 12th gen. B660 motherboards are still expensive compared to AM4, so AM4 is cheaper and still almost as powerful. I3 12100f performs similarly to r5 5500, and they both cost the same. But am4 mbos are cheaper, so am4 is better value if you're going for i3 12100f. But if you're going i5 12th level, that's where intel gets really competitive!
@@DiamondDepthYT And AM4 is already obsolete, and AM5 non-X3D chips are obsolete too. Dude, the fact that i3 12th or even the 13th gen outperforms up to R7 5700X just shows how dated the AM4. It also throws the misconception that 4c/8t is not enough, since i3 10th gen shows that it is still viable. It only needs a very high IPC for 3A gaming only. And normally, you aren't even gaming 3A games more than 10 hours, you are likely to be doing esports or just surf web, and it's 2023, a lot of stuff are offloaded to more dedicated SIP, like QS and NVENC.
@@AlfaPro1337 Hardly, The i3 as stated by DiamondDepthYT is up against the r5 5500 which is significantly slower than the 5600. The i5 with just P cores are just slightly better than the 5600x, which is pretty much negligible when pairing with anything slower than a 6800xt. In my case not only the 12100f is only 10€ cheaper than the 5600 (140€), but I'm literally able to get a deal on a good Rog Strix b550-A mobo (135€) that can easily support higher end parts in the future, while I need 50€ more for a slightly worse 1700 mobo (incidentally a similar Strix A on the 1700 socket is 100€ more ). In the case of the i5 12400f (195€) I could get the 5700x with just 10€ more, and by the time I need to drop 300€ alone for a dead platform cpu (12600kf and 5800x3d) to pair it with a last gen midrange gpu it's definitely ridiculous. Especially since I'm planning to spend just 375€ for a platform upgrade (mobo+cpu+ram+nvme) and reusing the rest (psu, cooler, case and gpu). In a few years I could still get a 5800x3d for 200€ or less, while I doubt the same could be said for the i7 and especially the i9.
@@GLDragon93 Not really, since Evil Su decided to copy-paste Intel/Nvida strategy and naming schemes, the i3 is competing against the R3. Dude, there are benchmarks that shows that i5 12th and 13th completely can go up up against a 5800X, in productivity and gaming. No wonder, you're going with the overpriced, overhyped and poor customer support from ASUS. I would rather go with Gigabyte or MSI. Plus, did you know that you could have US$100 on a decent A520 chipset that could still support 5800X? Heck, X570 is even a better choice since you're wasting almost US$50 for the same tier board. Unlike Intel, AMD's B-series chipset from 1st gen Ryzen has been the most useless chipset. VRM design, etc, IS NOT part of the chipset, you can blame the board vendors for designing poor VRM design. It's a bit hypocrite to worry about US$50 difference, when you are already add/sub everywhere, at that rate, you should just go high-end and a new build. Plus, adding a used CPU down the road is more of waste of money when compared to buying a new platform. No, Platform Upgrade means (mobo+cpu), however, since we are transitioning to DDR5, it's (+ram), depending on the instances. Storage has nothing to do with platform. And in a few years, newer APU would smoke the 5800X3D, and it's already a fact! I mean, 10th gen i3 and newer are basically souped up, high IPC i7 Kaby Lake and totally beats it by a huge margin! Given that AMD has no good engineers and newer Zen architecture will have a lot of ++++++++++, what happens if Intel's newer i5 totally (fictional 16th gen) beats the 5800X3D for much lower price? You wouldn't even wanna buy a dated, power hungry CPU, on an AM4 platform! That's because unlike Intel, AMD has NO FABS, NOTHING. Intel either have to discontinue the production of high-end parts in order to make way for newer high-end parts, or waste fab space. AMD has just a paper contract, and could do more than Intel.
1650 is the new 1030 : D I think is a good option buy that now, and save money until December, to buy a RTX 30X0. That graphics cost more than twice this card... or even triplicate the price. Besides: health, rent and emergencies come first, always. Dont spend money only becouse you have it ... Maybe tomorrow you will screw it : (
In many developing countries where AMD has little to no market share, all PC components are double or even triple the price it would be in countries like USA and UK, and salaries just aren't high, people are going to go for the most affordable things to suit their pocket and that's where the GTX1650 excels, because people can go and buy an old office PC(sometimes get it as a gift) slap in a 1650 and then they can game away, i most places, it's not about what gives you the most performance, it's about what works, what's available and where can it cut costs.
I can confirm this due to taxes on luxuries 4090 cost like 1700 dollars to put that in perspective the average salary for a person is 100-200 dollars so yeah you don’t have a lot of options.
I was thinking about that GPU, but GDDR6 variant. But honestly, idk. Maybe I should go for 1660 Super as its price in my country dropped from around 400 to somewhere like 310 euros
RX 5600 XT big it up, I got my first ever game with a stable 59fps (TV 1080p) no frame dips, no stutter, just smooth as... SotTR at ultra DX12. Tbf it had me stumped to start the benchmark was dipping to 28 with low settings, the next day after a restart to DX12 and FidelityFX on (I still don't get that) at 1080p no OC. It's awesome to see a stunning game on the I7 3770. I think my issue with BL3 was with BL3 stuttering all the time. Kudos for the inspiration and the indirect encouragement to pull the trigger on a new GPU, so happy.👍🍺
Why u would get a ENTIRE new pc, ur pc is upgradable, you can change all of the motherboard, but if you are saying that the motherboard cant support newer cpus or gpus, then get a new motherboard.
Just bought a MSI prestige 1650 laptop 💻 & it works for my needs. I'm not a heavy PC gamer & I'll always prefer game consoles over PC's but I wanted to get into it so that I can have more options to play games.
I have an alternative viewpoint on why the 1650 is so popular I don't think it's because gamers are spending less, I think it's due to the popularity of esports titles, many gamers mainly game in console but might want to play some esports titles like CSGO, Dota 2, League of legends, valorant, etc. All the PC exclusive esports games So they find an old PC that has the CPU horsepower needed for these games but not the GPU horsepower, so the 1650 is an easy drop in upgrade that will allow them to play these games Edit: Also to further support this, nearly 30% of gamers have 8GBs of VRAM, something only high end GPUs have, the lowest end GPU to have 8 GBs of vram is the 3060 8GB and I don't think anyone will try and argue that a 3060 is low end or budget
Except for the fact that the 3050, a lower-end graphics card than the 3060, has 8GB of VRAM. The older 2060 Super and 1070 also had 8GB of vram. On AMD’s side of things, the RX 470, 570, 480, 580, and 590 all had 8GB of vram. The newer 5500XT also had 8GB of vram. The 6500XT even has an 8GB variant.
Its probably due to them not selling any one of those and buying them at different times at different prices. For example if the brought the 1630 100 6 months ago, the 1050ti 100 a year ago and the 1650 now they would sell it similar prices. Honestly why would you buy a 1050ti now? I Bought it early 2017 for lower the price than it is now. It makes no sense.
I am even thinking of contacting a relative for a favor in the US. Since Newegg does not ship to freighter forwarders, the RX 6800 from Asrock is priced at $479. This is good price for a RX 5700XT upgrade I bought in 2019 at $440. Yes, I know that we had the Malware and Mining, but this price...
It’s the fact that people are using office PCs to play games. The fact that companies have down nasty stuff like putting in proprietary PSUs instead of traditional power supplies is why there is a market for the 1650.
Your channel is criminally underrated I really like it when I see very high quality video on budget and older graphics cards playing today's titles, and that helps a lot people on a lower budget, which processor and graphics card to get the biggest problem is youtube is bloated with this high end pc builds that most ppl cant afford soo my friend is building a new pc with in mind on what games he plays and the best bang for buck gpu that he will still have some space to play games on higer settings if he wants is the rx580 8g 2048sp wich i hope one day i would see on this channel
Really interesting concept. I got my son a 1080ti i7 8700k gumtree deal last Xmas and wondering if should sell the GPU and get a 5700xt or 3060 as might hold up better in dx12 games coming out now. That would be a good video! Good luck with the great channel!
I should be mentioned that the RX 6400 is a compromised card, it's mere 4 lanes of PCIE gen 4 are a real problem on PCIE gen 2 systems, and it lacks a video encoder. Its a fine card if you won't stream and your system isn't really old.
My lenovo laptop I bought early last year has an i5-10300h and a 1650 ti laptop (same performance as desktop gtx 1650 (non super)). Runs all the games I play but recently upgraded to a desktop with an R5 2600x and 980 fe.
For extreme small builds with one slot GPUs there is a Yeston GTX1650 that do the job pretty well... There is not much going on in the single slot market for gamers (there is a GTX1070 but tis quite expansive and hard to find, and IMHO that's a shame because compact gaming rigs can be really nice for small apartments or power consumption !
Is that an actual picture of the hardware? I see two different sets of RAM. You can't turn on XMP that way (unless I'm mistaken). Was the machine manually set to 3600? If not does it say 2666MHz in task manager? Very curious.
You actually can, but if one set has lesser timings than the other sometimes it can fail to boot. Both my sets are DDR4-4000 CL19 with slightly different subtimings, and only one set can do 3600 CL16/19/19/38, but they can both run at 16/20/20/39 just fine.
Thanks for the video, still rocking my 1650 bought during Xmas 2020. Would you be willing to make a video with these same games on a rtx a2000? That's the card I'm looking to use next (though I've only seen the 6gb tested, not the 12 gb model)
I'd like to know if a large portion of the 1650s were the low profile versions that got slapped into surplus Dell/HP/Lenovo recycler PCs - and re-sold as a "gaming pc". In a total moment of disbelief I actually thought the following: Thank goodness Intel is trying to make a reasonably priced alternative... My vision is still a little blurry... :D Now, if we can just get a decent LP vid card that I can put into a modern spec HTPC I want to build.
Yo dawg so i just play games on low settings to avoid any stutters or performance issues shi so can the gtx 1650 run the modern games on low settings with 60+ fps?
Other than 2-3 titles probably yes. But if you are interested in this card then be careful about memory and get the GDDR6 version. That performs up to 10% better on average than this GDDR5 version. There is also the matter of 6-pin power connector. Some of this cards have one and some don't. Normally the card is 75W so it can run from the motherboard alone without needing extra power. But if you plan to try getting even more performance out of it by overclocking then the ones with 6-pin connectors will allow to push them much more since they can get more power from your PSU.
i like to think that the decline of tiers for these cards is due to more people getting into the hobby with something cheap like the 1650, but thats just hopeful thinking
This is really skewed by the fact that internet cafes use these cards so they get counted in the surveys sweveral times per PC. The RX 6400 has made the GTX 1650 obsolete by being 23% faster and $45 cheaper.
heh bought a 1660super for my gf about a year ago, closer to 2, for 230 pounds. for what she plays, that thing's gorgeous. it's vsync'ed to 75. no heat, no noise, no effort. a beaut.
RTX A2000 is the king of sff upgrading currently. Not cheap as the used 1650 unfortunatly. And steam userbase is not really representative of the PC gaming players. Most of those steam accounts are PC bangs in China and Korea and south east Asia, or the Brazilian and eastern European DOTA2 and CSGO enthusiasts.
In my country RX 5600 XT and RX 5700 XT cost less than 1650s and 1660s the "Apple people" mentality of status/trend chasing baffles me. Please, do your research!
Good video, but why mention stuff no one cares about. The hogwarts legacy and atomic heart sales show that online drama shouldnt spoil or sway people way or another. Not to mention I feel as if that survey is missing a lot of people. I have a 3090 and have never been asked to take it.
Upbeat music, Superb Editing, beautiful voice and Dva ;3. Awesome video as always! congratz on 20k!, hope you keep on improving and keep those creative flow going!
What people need to appreciate is that while inflation and the cost of living has increased considerably since 2015, wages have not grown to match. The crypto boom and global health concerns further confounded the constraints on gamers' budgets. Even the lowly 1650 was selling for well above MSRP.
If I was looking to upgrade from a 1650 which gpu’s should I’ve looking at and lies on Fortnite I be running it at 100 fps custom settings between high and medium
You can get much better value for money buying an AMD card or even an Intel card. This holds true for almost all price tiers except the very top like the rtx 4090 and maybe the 4080. 1650 is JUNK and the fact that so many gamers were brainwashed into buying it gives me an existential crisis.
Most of the GTX 1650 in survey comes from laptops and the thing is that Mobile GTX 1650 is good in the price range compared to the desktop version which is costly and gets almost as same perfomance as desktop ones only 3 to 5 fps difference in most games with just 50w while desktop runs in 60w
Its not that gamers trust the 1650 the most, its just what people can afford.
It's mostly because the huge majority of affordable gaming laptops uses the GTX 1650...
@@ismaelsoto9507 yes (yes)
Plus there's hardly any alternative that are decent (6500XT is a bit too expensive with a few too many drawbacks)
150$ for that POS 🤪
If 1650 replaces the 1060, you know how bad the GPU market is.
What's interesting to me is that the survey indicates that people's average gaming performance has not increased in something like a decade. The 970, 1060 and 1650 are very close in performance. Which should tell anyone that it's not because people are happy with that level of performance and need nothing more, but rather Nvidia has decided a fixed cost for that level of performance and that's all most people can justify spending on a gpu.
tbh the base 1650 model is 10% worst than 1060 6gb, but if you look at vram, about 30% of the users have a 8gb+ card, wich is a indication that actually most users have at least a 3050 class card
They are actually the same. That's crazy just looked up benchmarks.
Also, does that include laptops? The 1650 has been the bottom of the line workable laptops for a while that can account for some too.
1080 60 might just be enough as well.
@@JoeWayne84 1080p 60 fps is what I was saying. Sorry for not using measurements. I was saying that resolution and frame rate might of just been enough so gamers never upgraded..
Personally, I think people should stop buying those cards entirely and just buy consoles. If all you can afford is a 970like performance (which isn’t terrible), I doubt they can afford decent CPUs as well which means they’ll likely be running the same games that can be bought on consoles with a worse overall experience. The newest games are chewing up last Gen GPUs like a piece of take 5, and I’m not just referring to 6600XTs/3060s, but even cards higher up the stack are aging like milk. They run old games fine, but why buy a new gpu for old games? Why not just buy an old gpu that runs that specific game the way that you want?
Do you know why most people don’t do that? Most people don’t build their own PCs, and end up dropping their entire savings on a $600 “high end gaming pc” with the same 7-8 year old 1060 6GB performance. Steam HW survey says it all. People complain about this, complain about that, but never educate themselves on what they’re buying, nor really know why they’re buying it outside of it being called a “gaming pc”, and they want to play pc games. $500 will get you a console that will give you an upper mid-range pc experience with RT and all! On PC, you’re not getting RT, even at 1080p with good frame rates without FSR/DLSS, but enabling either of those at 1080p turn all games from whatever genre they are into pixel counting, blocky madness which completely defeats the purpose of RT and any high settings that were enabled. I don’t really think the issue is money for most people running those cards, I think it’s a combination of ignorance of pc hardware, and deceitful marketing from cornball corporations that want as much money as they can get with as little effort as possible in most areas of the hardware that they heavily advertise.
I’d be willing to be the selling point of the next generation of nvidia cards will be “wow look at how fast cyberpunk runs at 4k!1!1!1!”. 3 months later a new game on a new engine drops, and people become so confused and confounded by how poorly the games run that they’d rather just bash the game devs over questioning their purchasing decisions.
@@chrisoverton2759 you basically are blaming Cyber punk being a shitty made game on your entire point haha.
PC gaming is far superior to console.
The only game that runs like shit I know of is Cyber punk and who cares that was a garbage game anyway that I never even cared to play…as far as raytracing… it’s fucking sweet for single player games and works great I got a 3090 though but I games on my 2080ti with it before that and I was fine using dlss for a single player game it looked amazing on my 4k oled 60” tv.
I got a Xbox though for my kids to play with in living room and I play some party or multiplayer games with them consoles have there place to … but I’d way rather have my PC setup with a 240hz monitor and a 4K tv for doing everything ….
He knew what he was doing with the thumbnail
I didn't even notice lol, I just watch his vids a lot
@Gamerloaders & Co. yes
Lol I didn't notice at first
_"Enjoy some Robussy with a Nivida(TM) GTX 1650!"_
Lmao
I think part of the reason games are getting more demanding is because they're no longer being designed for the PS4 or XBX1, next gen consoles offer roughly RTX 2070-2080 level of performance, instead of the GTX 1060 levels the old ones offered. There's not as much of an incentive for devs to optimize.
1060 is about the PS4 Pro and One X performance level, base Ps4 and One are about GTX 660ti level of performance.
Thats objectively wrong. Every big release is still on ps4. Most games are being built on that then scaled up.
Tbh they don't really perform like 2070s/2080, they perform closer to a 1080/2060 except with 16GB GDDR6 memory, it only seems like the the PS5 and Xbox Series X run similar to 2070s/2080 because those consoles aren't actually running native 4k @ 120hz, they are actually running 1440p @ 120hz and are being upscaled to 4k so while the display out is native 4k 120hz the consoles themselves aren't.
Dev's should know this and should be making games to run ideally on a 1080/2060.. but as you said they are trying to aim for 2070s/2080 performance numbers and aren't incentivized to optimize which is hurting the little guys
@@socialfreak6900 That's true, they probably reach 2070/2080 levels of performance but in reality that's just because of all the optimizations consoles get.
@@lexion8152 It's still on the PS4, but devs don't really care about it anymore. They're focused on the PS5 and Xbox series X.
I can’t wait for 2025 when the gt 1030 is the most popular gpu.
Really don’t understand why Nvidia is jacking gpu prices Sky high when it’s obvious that their intended buyers haven’t been buying them for years.
@copiuum music I’ve always hated the 1030 simply because the K2200 is better, assuming you don’t need low profile, and costs far less, and has double the vram. It’s just a bad product compared to the lesser known Nvidia offerings.
@copiuum music I've got the low profile silent GT 1030.. its special.
When mid range is 400+, no wonder people drop one tier.
Wallet don't expand as fast as company greed.
The last time Nvidia done the consumers a turn was in the Super era. The 1650S cost a tenner more than a 1650 and the 1660S and 2060S cost 50 Quid more than their base versions. I bought the 2060S and it still is holding up well for me 3 years later at 1080P.
Can you Americanize this comment for me?
@@commondirtbagz7130
Cheeseburger cheeseburger cheeseburger guns. American enough?
@@darthwiizius ah, thank you 🙏
@@darthwiizius although if you’re gonna make it American better make it a double cheeseburger
@@commondirtbagz7130
Ah yes, I shouldn't have selected the healthy option, not American that.
Most of it has to do with laptop with 1650 they were cheap during covid and you couldn't buy 3050 laptop around $650ish (IdeaPad gaming 3,GF63 thin)until recently at the time it was decent value
1650 seems like it would be great for eSports, with that and the price I get why it's popular
The problem is that i dont want and dont like esports 🥲
dont buy it@@naipigidi
Great video! Just got a 980, which is similar to a 1650 performance wise, and honestly, I am very happy with it. It plays all my favourite games at "good enough" framerates that it defiantly, for me, justifies the upgrade from the 1050ti, which was my previous card..
Enjoy it! From my testing, depending on the game the 980 can be up to 20% faster than a 1650 (but also a little slower in games that aren't optimised for Maxwell)
you mean 1650 Super
non-Super 1650 is pretty slow
@@IcebergTech Thank You! I too noticed that games that aren't optimized for Maxwell, such as halo infinite, just run better on the 1650.
Why even "upgrade" for such a small gain. Kinda waste of money unless it was for free
Honestly, I would suggest a RX 6600 instead of the 980. The 980 is around the same as a RX 580, you only had a 50% upgrade from a 1050 Ti.
A RX 6600 would be a 130% upgrade from a 1050 Ti, while a RX 6600XT 150%. I understand if this was not within your budget.
Great to see your sub count i9s climbing steadily! been here since mid 2022 and its criminal how little subs for how high your video production is
Used a 750ti for a number of years. I picked up this card last November and it does its job nicely for me.
When I got my RX 570 8GB, the 1650 cost 30% more and the 1650 Super was 100% more. Sure, the 570 lacks 12_1 support, but after some overclocking and BIOS-modding, mine scores 14300 in Fire Strike, way more than the 1650. Don't really give a damn about any of the current 12_1 titles and apparently the 570 can run them with VKD3D on Linux. I continue to be baffled by why so many people just buy Nvidia without even considering AMD. In my country, AMD has always been better value for money and still is.
Radeon drivers tend to be a bit more temperamental, and NVidia's mindshare has always been greater, not to mention they are usually first to market with cutting edge features (G-Sync, RT etc.). I've used both, but now that I'm spending my own money my PC is full AMD (CPU+GPU). They are far better value, but only if you know what you're doing (The average person doesn't even try any tweaking and AMD can definitely be more reliant on that for optimal performance)
Well, you kinda give yourself the answer. Either buying a 570 and haveing to tinker and fix around or just buying a 1650 and "Plug and Play". Gues what the casual user, who just wants to game, is going to buy. ... well that or a console.
Also who gives a shit about firestrike. Its commonly known that synthetic benchmarks say little to nothing about actual ingame performance.
That is probably something the casual knows, cause even most popular tech channels like Linus Tech Tipps is saying that you should not trust benchmark tools.
@@BE3R-LF94 Have had no issues at all with drivers. AMD drivers being bad is sort of a myth these days. I had an HD 5750 back in 2012 that had quite a few driver issues but my RX 570 has now been rock-solid for 3 years, before and after all the tweaking and overclocking. As for G-Sync and RT, I simply don't care at this point. I just use V-Sync on my 60Hz monitor and I'm happy with it. I don't care for RT in its current form where it looks almost the same as traditional raster rendering while having a huge FPS cost. Nvidia's marketing has zero effect on me. I look at FPS/$ and AMD always wins.
@@MeowMeowMeowMeowMeowMeowMeowww A 570 even without any tweaking is faster than even the GDDR6 1650. It uses more power, sure, but it is overall faster and the 8GB VRAM version is more likely to run future titles at playable framerates. Firestrike is actually a good benchmark and that's why a lot of tech reviewers use it. No benchmark is perfect, for sure, but FireStrike is basically like a tech demo that measures your FPS and comes up with a score. As far as benchmarks go, it's pretty accurate.
You cannot run any Open GL programs with an RX 570 without a massive performance lose that makes the GTX 1650 run circles around it. Almost every emulator will benefit from Nvidias great open GL performance. Reshade for example, a shading program you can use on almost any game or emulator has far superior performance on Nvidia GPUs too. There’s a whole list of reasons why Nvidia charges a premium. It’s not always about sheer performance if you don’t have the compilers and drivers to back it up. Amd does better with allowing the user to tweak the GPUs, and generally the performance in big triple AAA titles will be better on the dollar [If it’s on console]. When the RX series first launched there was a massive issue of overdrawing the PCIE slots power, sometimes both destroying the slot and the card. This was obviously fixed, but some people don’t like buying into beta. Also as an early adopter of Ryzen I had the pleasure of watching my vrms pop and CPU die on a month old system [auto voltage would spike to 1.8V]. First Gen Ryzen had some serious early adopters Tax. If you’re building a budget system now, the RX 570 would be a better buy now since all the miners released them onto the used market.
Nvidia confusing customers is spot on as always. On the laptop side of things, you can get a GTX 1650 with 1024 cores. If it’s not a max-q it’s a good 10-20% faster than a non OC’D Desktop. At stock they both have very similar clock speeds if it’s the full 50w version.
I see 3 reasons why the most popular GPU is steadily downgrading:
- More people are playing, which means more casual players who probably don't care for performance much
- Most people play low maintenance titles most of the time. When I meet up online with friends we do Gartic Phone, TFT, Fall Guys or Ultimate Chicken Horse so a 1650 is enough
- The economics aren't super favourable at the moment, and it's probably not going to get better any time soon. I can see why the tendency is to cheap out where you can
I think it's more important to talk about the small, cheap and efficient GPUs because that's what devs are using to make decisions at the end of the day. So thank you for talking about it.
Yeah i just feel like gaming (hardcore) isn't worth the time anymore. But i would still keep my rtx 2060
I'm more surprised the 6k series from amd isn't taking off, in the USA they are really great pricing right now with $230~ being a 6600 and after that $50 increments gives you roughly another tier of strength.
1650 being top is weird to me cause the 1650S isn't much more expensive and is much better, that card (while budget) is quite decent. I do feel it's 4gb of vram will prove to be an issue.
Speaking of how much vram limitations did you look at for this card considering it's also a 4gb?
It has to do with availability. The 16xx series cards are all on the same die, so the 1650 probably represents common imperfections that disqualified a lot of chips from becoming a 1660 or 1650 Super
I'm surprised that the RTX 2060 hasnt exceeded the popularity it should of garnered.
@@emptyshirt except for the fact that the 1650 Super, 1660, 1660 Super, and 1660Ti all use the TU116 GPU while the 1630, 1650, and mobile-only 1650Ti all use the smaller TU117 GPU.
@@dex6316 that makes sense.
The 1650 Super was only 10-20 more at launch, and performs about 50% better.
Yes, but you can't stick the 1650S in an old generation office PC, which many steam users are using.
@@SSJfraz Sure you can. I had a 1650 super in my Dell Optiplex 790. It seems that you're referring to SFF systems, but there are many minitower prebuilts that can fit full size GPU's.
Also, it doesn't say anywhere on the steam hardware list which specific PC's are being used. Just core totals. So I have no ideal what the hell you're talking about there.
This is precisely why LowSpecGamer completely changed his choice of video topic.
Yep, he gave up
At the end of the day, the budget GPUs are always the most popular. People buy these because they get the job done and then some, and that's all they need. I myself bought a 3050 for that very reason. Many people seem to fall for the trap that you have to have the best specs to qualify as a "real" PC gamer nowadays, but it really couldn't be any further from the truth.
Nice informative video, for one somewhat glad that GPU's like the GTX 1060 still hold game developer's marketing interests when designing their games, as it allows the chance for gamers with lower end GPU's a taste of gaming, while letting newer and higher grade GPU's to produce visible, more impressive graphics in produced games !
Why in the benchmarks of RandomGamingHD the GTX 1650 perform better?
I'm using one in my Plex server for hardware transcoding. It's way overkill for that, but I had a spare one, and why let it go to waste?
I noticed how overclocking the memory by 500mhz also really helps this card, i cant oc anymore because of power limit, its running of pcie power only lol.
Overclocking the core doesnt do anything tho, this card probably has a memory bottleneck then lol, or maybe its the power limit, does ocing the memory use less power or smth
Definitely could put in this way where the 1650 peak is caused by older generation of cards, especially the 1060 getting replaced by newer ones, spread across several different models, most prominently the RTX 2060, RTX 3050 (worrisome) and RTX 3060 family. That might be the remaining past relic of the previous mining crash in 2017/2018 where people opt for and held onto the cheapest play-able GPU they can find.
I been using the 1650 GDDR6 model since it's about 10-15% faster than OG GDDR5 model it's not bad honestly amount of the hate 1650 has got.
If you do plan on getting 1650 please avoid GDDR5 version
I'm using sapphire Rx580 8GB paired with Ryzen 3600x with 16GB DDR4. I'm very happy with this card. My card still gives me smooth gameplay 60FPS sync in 1080p in all major games.
fsr quality is your friend even on my steam deck games are playable because of fsr
1650 is so popular in the survey because of the mobile variants also. Technically the 3060 should be in that spot but they split it up between the laptop 3060 and desktop
3060 laptop and desktop use a different variant of the same GPU; the mobile 3060 has more CUDA cores. The only difference between the desktop and mobile 1650 is TDP and thus clock speeds.
i no enjoi but i proud four you try the best your branes. this is amazing four try but i no enjoi execushin u making. but u good man four make best effort and speaking the british and make the tube. if u make four video four hindi maybe i enjoi more
आप इस बारे में क्या आनंद लेते हैं? ब्रिटेन ने हमारे देश का उपनिवेश किया। इसके लिए उन्हें माफी मांगने की जरूरत है।
@@RashakantBhattachana long time four this
I cant say its whats going on here. But "halos" with upscalers seems to be caused by Depth of field and motion blur being hard to get right. Turning those off entirely when possible can resolve the halos
Also don't forget that 1650s in laptops also count towards this, because the steam survey doesn't differentiate between them. The 1650 Ti, which is only in laptops is 1.3%, so it can be, that the 1060 is still more popular.
But about the gpu. I build computers as a sidehustle, I built around 60 computers in the past 7 years. My go-to card was the rx 580, which has around the same performace as the 1650, but during the pandemic and the shortage, the Rx 580 became much more expensive, in my county, the 4gb rx 580 was almost twice as expensive, leaving me (and probably a lot) people using the 1650. For decent 1080p, this is the lowest performance I can recommend.
I agree, most of my friend's laptop including my brother as GTX1650 Card in their laptops and none of them are 'gamers'
they dont even understand if 1650 is good or bad, they think its great becuz they have a discrete GPU
which majority laptops dont have!
So, I can agree with you in desktop Class GTX 1060 might still be @ Number 1 spot! 🤔
pr the 1660ti for desktop is safe bet
just sold my steam deck for a 1650 laptop is it worth it i have a 2060 super on my pc
Good video. Perhaps do a "gtx 1650 vs 970" video as a follow up as a performance comparison/Steam charts.
Kinda the same, maybe the 1650 will get better due to newer architecture and support for modern games.
Just using 1650 vs 1060 and 1060 vs 980 at their respective launches, the 1650 should deliver around 79% of the performance of the 980. The 970 is around 85-87% of the performance of the 980. The 1650 has the advantage of a more modern architecture, so it should do better in modern games with better optimized drivers. The 1650 should easily be dealing 80-90% of the performance of the 980, and even eclipse it in a select few games that favor the Turing microarchitecture. Thus, the 1650 should be roughly tied with the 970, losing in older games and winning in more modern ones.
I have a 1660 S paired with a i7-9700 that I got in a prebuilt from my brother as a gift.
I just bought 1660 super (used) last month as the price drops here in the philippines. I just upgrade from my last gpu. Can’t buy much more powerful gpu due to tight budget. So far im happy with the 1660 super😊
It "get's the job done". The main reason it struggles so bad on the most modern titles is due to criminally bad optimisation.
Great Vid! I just did some benchmarking myself with a 1660.. Witcher 3 dx12 with FSR... Nah dawg.. just use the dx11 version, you can't RT anyway.. It runs so much better it's crazy!
Going from a GT 710 to GTX 1650 is a huge !!
But I now owning GTX 1650 with i5-10400f for 3 years, now it's time to get a RTX 3060Ti (now very affordable), with i7-12700k. Also going to get 32GB (16+16) from 16GB (8+8)
I built a killer system in Dec. 2021. 5800x, 32gb ram, gen 4 NVME, etc., etc.. And I put in a 1650 because graphics card prices were crazy at the time! I paid around 300 for it. The slightly higher end cards were crazy, and the flagships were insane. Now, a year and a half later, I haven't replaced it. Because it does everything I want with zero lag. Do I get 300 fps in the newest games? Nah. But, I've had zero lag or skipping in any game I play, and I get 60+ fps in any game I play. My monitor is only 1080 x 60. So, no need for any more. I'll upgrade one day, but for now, no need.
It's paying more for getting less
nVidia has record high profits for a good reason people, let's wake up finally!
The GTX 1050 launched for $110, and the GTX 1050 Ti for $140. The GTX 1650 could've been a pretty competent entry level card had it launched around $110 like the previous 50 class card. But instead it launched for $150, at a time when the 3 year old RX 570 was cheaper and faster, and these days it sells for closer to $160-$190. It's only selling point remains the fact that there are models that have no PCIe power connector, but at current prices you can make a damn good case for jumping up to the RTX A2000 instead (often sells for $250-$280).
The 1050 Ti was $150 in the US IIRC, but Etherium came in 2017 and all got the RX 470, the best deal under $200. Then the 1050 Ti survived Etherium but at insane prices, even more than $250.
The older 950 was 160, and the 750/750Ti 120/150 respectively. Considering historical pricing, the 1650 at 150 makes sense. The 1650 Super also came in at 160 and that card was faster than the 1060. While the 470 and 570 were interesting cards against the 1050s and 1650s, they were barely profitable and required auxiliary power connectors. $100 570s were an absolute steal though. For modern cards get RX 6600/XT or maybe 6500XT 8GB. If you can get the A2000 for sub-300, maybe get that, but for sub 75w GPUs it probably makes sense to wait for Lovelace.
Worse part is that at least the jump from the 970 to the 1060 was an upgrade and at the time was the more sensible GPU to buy price to performance wise, the jump from a 1060 to 1650 is actually a downgrade and I'm willing to bet most people who bought a 1650 payed more for it than the people who bought the 970 back in the day.
The 1060 6GB was a good offering at the time.
Similar to the 3060 12GB being the most reasonable offering recently.
The next reasonable card will be the 7060 24GB.
I do however have a GTX 1650 and GTX 1060 which I gave to the kids.
They are fine for what they play..
While it seems like the experience is declining, newer games run better on newer architecture. Forza 5 is a prime example of this. I think if youre after a low-mid setting for fps fraps or mobas this is a lot of bang for your buck. I end up recommending this to people that might not get discrete graphics otherwise, or someone that wants to do emulation, but as you said AMD has pulled ahead a bit in the price range. There are a ton of these on the market, so im sure there are some deals to be had to pick one up on sale or secondhand.
The experience is declining because people are getting less for their budget on the market as they used to. And the reason 1650 has become a popular card, Is because during all the madness this thing was selling at a decent price (decent in respective of everything else) in range of budget gamers.. And continued to drop as time went on despite everything else stagnating or going up further. It's a downgrade for sure in the budget world to what you could get for that money, But times have changed and this is where we are.
Hope you are warming the people you suggest this card for that there is a GDDR5 and GDDR6.
That is performance on the table there.
5600xt owner here, currently paired with a Xeon e3 1230 v3 and planning to jump onto an am4 system similar to your testing one as the ryzen 5 5600 is quite cheap right now. So pretty excited to see the video featuring it.
And 12th gen i3 or i5 beats the AM4 R5.
@Alfa Proto depends on what price you can get 12th gen. B660 motherboards are still expensive compared to AM4, so AM4 is cheaper and still almost as powerful.
I3 12100f performs similarly to r5 5500, and they both cost the same. But am4 mbos are cheaper, so am4 is better value if you're going for i3 12100f. But if you're going i5 12th level, that's where intel gets really competitive!
@@DiamondDepthYT And AM4 is already obsolete, and AM5 non-X3D chips are obsolete too.
Dude, the fact that i3 12th or even the 13th gen outperforms up to R7 5700X just shows how dated the AM4.
It also throws the misconception that 4c/8t is not enough, since i3 10th gen shows that it is still viable. It only needs a very high IPC for 3A gaming only.
And normally, you aren't even gaming 3A games more than 10 hours, you are likely to be doing esports or just surf web, and it's 2023, a lot of stuff are offloaded to more dedicated SIP, like QS and NVENC.
@@AlfaPro1337 Hardly, The i3 as stated by DiamondDepthYT is up against the r5 5500 which is significantly slower than the 5600. The i5 with just P cores are just slightly better than the 5600x, which is pretty much negligible when pairing with anything slower than a 6800xt.
In my case not only the 12100f is only 10€ cheaper than the 5600 (140€), but I'm literally able to get a deal on a good Rog Strix b550-A mobo (135€) that can easily support higher end parts in the future, while I need 50€ more for a slightly worse 1700 mobo (incidentally a similar Strix A on the 1700 socket is 100€ more ). In the case of the i5 12400f (195€) I could get the 5700x with just 10€ more, and by the time I need to drop 300€ alone for a dead platform cpu (12600kf and 5800x3d) to pair it with a last gen midrange gpu it's definitely ridiculous.
Especially since I'm planning to spend just 375€ for a platform upgrade (mobo+cpu+ram+nvme) and reusing the rest (psu, cooler, case and gpu). In a few years I could still get a 5800x3d for 200€ or less, while I doubt the same could be said for the i7 and especially the i9.
@@GLDragon93 Not really, since Evil Su decided to copy-paste Intel/Nvida strategy and naming schemes, the i3 is competing against the R3.
Dude, there are benchmarks that shows that i5 12th and 13th completely can go up up against a 5800X, in productivity and gaming.
No wonder, you're going with the overpriced, overhyped and poor customer support from ASUS. I would rather go with Gigabyte or MSI. Plus, did you know that you could have US$100 on a decent A520 chipset that could still support 5800X? Heck, X570 is even a better choice since you're wasting almost US$50 for the same tier board. Unlike Intel, AMD's B-series chipset from 1st gen Ryzen has been the most useless chipset. VRM design, etc, IS NOT part of the chipset, you can blame the board vendors for designing poor VRM design.
It's a bit hypocrite to worry about US$50 difference, when you are already add/sub everywhere, at that rate, you should just go high-end and a new build. Plus, adding a used CPU down the road is more of waste of money when compared to buying a new platform.
No, Platform Upgrade means (mobo+cpu), however, since we are transitioning to DDR5, it's (+ram), depending on the instances. Storage has nothing to do with platform. And in a few years, newer APU would smoke the 5800X3D, and it's already a fact! I mean, 10th gen i3 and newer are basically souped up, high IPC i7 Kaby Lake and totally beats it by a huge margin!
Given that AMD has no good engineers and newer Zen architecture will have a lot of ++++++++++, what happens if Intel's newer i5 totally (fictional 16th gen) beats the 5800X3D for much lower price? You wouldn't even wanna buy a dated, power hungry CPU, on an AM4 platform!
That's because unlike Intel, AMD has NO FABS, NOTHING. Intel either have to discontinue the production of high-end parts in order to make way for newer high-end parts, or waste fab space. AMD has just a paper contract, and could do more than Intel.
Pretty cool new list of games for the test - cheers 👍
1650 is the new 1030 : D
I think is a good option buy that now, and save money until December, to buy a RTX 30X0. That graphics cost more than twice this card... or even triplicate the price.
Besides: health, rent and emergencies come first, always. Dont spend money only becouse you have it ... Maybe tomorrow you will screw it : (
dont forget the old cards bought a 2060 super for $190 still a beast of. a card
In many developing countries where AMD has little to no market share, all PC components are double or even triple the price it would be in countries like USA and UK, and salaries just aren't high, people are going to go for the most affordable things to suit their pocket and that's where the GTX1650 excels, because people can go and buy an old office PC(sometimes get it as a gift) slap in a 1650 and then they can game away, i most places, it's not about what gives you the most performance, it's about what works, what's available and where can it cut costs.
I can confirm this due to taxes on luxuries 4090 cost like 1700 dollars to put that in perspective the average salary for a person is 100-200 dollars so yeah you don’t have a lot of options.
Also the 3060 costs 366 dollars. And your salary is on average 200 dollars so 1650 is a very appealing option.
parents: he wants a geepy-you you know the puter.. how much!! - walks out with 1650 - happy as a clam
GTX 1650 is still good if you optimize new games to 60 fps best settings.
I was thinking about that GPU, but GDDR6 variant. But honestly, idk. Maybe I should go for 1660 Super as its price in my country dropped from around 400 to somewhere like 310 euros
check out for 3060 i saw it for like 340 euro the 12gb and 310 for the 8gb. although the 1650 ddr6 is ok card with low power consumption.
RX 5600 XT big it up, I got my first ever game with a stable 59fps (TV 1080p) no frame dips, no stutter, just smooth as... SotTR at ultra DX12. Tbf it had me stumped to start the benchmark was dipping to 28 with low settings, the next day after a restart to DX12 and FidelityFX on (I still don't get that) at 1080p no OC. It's awesome to see a stunning game on the I7 3770. I think my issue with BL3 was with BL3 stuttering all the time. Kudos for the inspiration and the indirect encouragement to pull the trigger on a new GPU, so happy.👍🍺
I'm still rocking my 1060. Probably won't upgrade until 5000 series and next and cards. So I'll get an entirely new pc
Why u would get a ENTIRE new pc, ur pc is upgradable, you can change all of the motherboard, but if you are saying that the motherboard cant support newer cpus or gpus, then get a new motherboard.
Just bought a MSI prestige 1650 laptop 💻 & it works for my needs. I'm not a heavy PC gamer & I'll always prefer game consoles over PC's but I wanted to get into it so that I can have more options to play games.
3600x cpu and a Rx580 GPU is a great 1080p combo and I've recommended all my friends who got into pc gaming to go that route. cheap and effective!
I have an alternative viewpoint on why the 1650 is so popular
I don't think it's because gamers are spending less, I think it's due to the popularity of esports titles, many gamers mainly game in console but might want to play some esports titles like CSGO, Dota 2, League of legends, valorant, etc. All the PC exclusive esports games
So they find an old PC that has the CPU horsepower needed for these games but not the GPU horsepower, so the 1650 is an easy drop in upgrade that will allow them to play these games
Edit: Also to further support this, nearly 30% of gamers have 8GBs of VRAM, something only high end GPUs have, the lowest end GPU to have 8 GBs of vram is the 3060 8GB and I don't think anyone will try and argue that a 3060 is low end or budget
Except for the fact that the 3050, a lower-end graphics card than the 3060, has 8GB of VRAM. The older 2060 Super and 1070 also had 8GB of vram. On AMD’s side of things, the RX 470, 570, 480, 580, and 590 all had 8GB of vram. The newer 5500XT also had 8GB of vram. The 6500XT even has an 8GB variant.
It helps that indie games has been rising a lot in the last decade.
So performance on lower requirements are almost guaranteed.
My GPU is the 1650 and I love it. I'm perfectly fine with 900p low
🤔 its strange, here at Microcenter the 1050ti 1630 1650 are all the same price
MrSammy, good to see you here as well. Darn I was in the US last year at New York, but I didn't go to a Microcenter 🤣🤣🤣
Its probably due to them not selling any one of those and buying them at different times at different prices. For example if the brought the 1630 100 6 months ago, the 1050ti 100 a year ago and the 1650 now they would sell it similar prices. Honestly why would you buy a 1050ti now? I Bought it early 2017 for lower the price than it is now. It makes no sense.
I am even thinking of contacting a relative for a favor in the US. Since Newegg does not ship to freighter forwarders, the RX 6800 from Asrock is priced at $479. This is good price for a RX 5700XT upgrade I bought in 2019 at $440.
Yes, I know that we had the Malware and Mining, but this price...
It’s the fact that people are using office PCs to play games. The fact that companies have down nasty stuff like putting in proprietary PSUs instead of traditional power supplies is why there is a market for the 1650.
Your channel is criminally underrated I really like it when I see very high quality video on budget and older graphics cards playing today's titles, and that helps a lot people on a lower budget, which processor and graphics card to get the biggest problem is youtube is bloated with this high end pc builds that most ppl cant afford soo my friend is building a new pc with in mind on what games he plays and the best bang for buck gpu that he will still have some space to play games on higer settings if he wants is the rx580 8g 2048sp wich i hope one day i would see on this channel
Really interesting concept. I got my son a 1080ti i7 8700k gumtree deal last Xmas and wondering if should sell the GPU and get a 5700xt or 3060 as might hold up better in dx12 games coming out now. That would be a good video! Good luck with the great channel!
Thanks! My RX 5700XT video is coming in the next few weeks. The 1080Ti is coming but might be a little while longer!
I should be mentioned that the RX 6400 is a compromised card, it's mere 4 lanes of PCIE gen 4 are a real problem on PCIE gen 2 systems, and it lacks a video encoder. Its a fine card if you won't stream and your system isn't really old.
Congrats on 20k subscribers!
My lenovo laptop I bought early last year has an i5-10300h and a 1650 ti laptop (same performance as desktop gtx 1650 (non super)). Runs all the games I play but recently upgraded to a desktop with an R5 2600x and 980 fe.
For extreme small builds with one slot GPUs there is a Yeston GTX1650 that do the job pretty well... There is not much going on in the single slot market for gamers (there is a GTX1070 but tis quite expansive and hard to find, and IMHO that's a shame because compact gaming rigs can be really nice for small apartments or power consumption !
Is that an actual picture of the hardware? I see two different sets of RAM. You can't turn on XMP that way (unless I'm mistaken). Was the machine manually set to 3600? If not does it say 2666MHz in task manager? Very curious.
You actually can, but if one set has lesser timings than the other sometimes it can fail to boot. Both my sets are DDR4-4000 CL19 with slightly different subtimings, and only one set can do 3600 CL16/19/19/38, but they can both run at 16/20/20/39 just fine.
I have an EVGA 1080 To and am very happy that it can still hang in modern titles at 1440p high-ultra
I'm still using a gtx 970. What's the track names in this video I know the band is backing tracks.
Good videos as always.
Thanks for the video, still rocking my 1650 bought during Xmas 2020. Would you be willing to make a video with these same games on a rtx a2000? That's the card I'm looking to use next (though I've only seen the 6gb tested, not the 12 gb model)
I'd love to, it's on my list of cards to look at in 2023 but I haven't got one yet. Keep an eye open!
@@IcebergTech 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼 dude thanks, keep up the great work
i think its time for nvidia to re release this card and take away half of its vram and say "yeah, thats enough for 1080p ultra nowadays!"
Hi @IcebergTech and everyone else!
ps: are you going to take a look at the AISURIX rx 5500?
Hi!
The RX 5500 isn't on my shopping list right now, but I'll think about it. I covered the XT last year though!
Where is ''The Doc Will See You Now'' music :(
I'm trying out different themes for different subjects, so the CPU reviews will have different tracks to the GPU reviews
Just pirate the games from the devs you find troubling.
I'd like to know if a large portion of the 1650s were the low profile versions that got slapped into surplus Dell/HP/Lenovo recycler PCs - and re-sold as a "gaming pc". In a total moment of disbelief I actually thought the following: Thank goodness Intel is trying to make a reasonably priced alternative... My vision is still a little blurry... :D Now, if we can just get a decent LP vid card that I can put into a modern spec HTPC I want to build.
Can you make a video on the Rtx A2000
is this footage overclocked?
Does the laptop variant support hdr in external monitor?
Yo dawg so i just play games on low settings to avoid any stutters or performance issues shi so can the gtx 1650 run the modern games on low settings with 60+ fps?
Other than 2-3 titles probably yes. But if you are interested in this card then be careful about memory and get the GDDR6 version. That performs up to 10% better on average than this GDDR5 version.
There is also the matter of 6-pin power connector. Some of this cards have one and some don't.
Normally the card is 75W so it can run from the motherboard alone without needing extra power.
But if you plan to try getting even more performance out of it by overclocking then the ones with 6-pin connectors will allow to push them much more since they can get more power from your PSU.
i like to think that the decline of tiers for these cards is due to more people getting into the hobby with something cheap like the 1650, but thats just hopeful thinking
Availability too.
1650 has been readily available in good supply for many years even in the crypto pandemic.
It's what most people could get.
dont forget about South Asia rise in Internet cafe. they need a cheap, efficience and work great with E sport titles.
@@ChinitHeng Yes, like the Chinese 1060 5 GB variant.
if you look to the vram in the survey it is actually 30%+ with a 8gb or more card, so it would put most players in around 3050+ performance
@@ChinitHeng esports suck, these games are dying as i speak.
They are being replaced by aaa and indie games.
It's actually surprises me that 1650 hold up to this day. If you pair this gpu with *well optimized* game it will ran really really well.
This is really skewed by the fact that internet cafes use these cards so they get counted in the surveys sweveral times per PC.
The RX 6400 has made the GTX 1650 obsolete by being 23% faster and $45 cheaper.
heh bought a 1660super for my gf about a year ago, closer to 2, for 230 pounds. for what she plays, that thing's gorgeous.
it's vsync'ed to 75. no heat, no noise, no effort. a beaut.
RTX A2000 is the king of sff upgrading currently. Not cheap as the used 1650 unfortunatly.
And steam userbase is not really representative of the PC gaming players. Most of those steam accounts are PC bangs in China and Korea and south east Asia, or the Brazilian and eastern European DOTA2 and CSGO enthusiasts.
In my country RX 5600 XT and RX 5700 XT cost less than 1650s and 1660s the "Apple people" mentality of status/trend chasing baffles me. Please, do your research!
Good video, but why mention stuff no one cares about. The hogwarts legacy and atomic heart sales show that online drama shouldnt spoil or sway people way or another. Not to mention I feel as if that survey is missing a lot of people. I have a 3090 and have never been asked to take it.
You got me bittin my tongue after that "rule 34 characters" line at the overwatch part HAHWAH that caught me offguard 🤣
Was wondering if anyone caught that 😁
This is GDDR5 or GDDR6?
i have mine 1650 sc
clocked to 2050mhz
and 4950mhz in memory
so im trying to play better i have 16gb ram and a nvidia 1050ti should i get the 1650 or is it not much of a upgrade
try a 2060 super used
Upbeat music, Superb Editing, beautiful voice and Dva ;3. Awesome video as always! congratz on 20k!, hope you keep on improving and keep those creative flow going!
What people need to appreciate is that while inflation and the cost of living has increased considerably since 2015, wages have not grown to match. The crypto boom and global health concerns further confounded the constraints on gamers' budgets. Even the lowly 1650 was selling for well above MSRP.
I think it’s due to the laptop market I believe the survey doesn’t differentiate between desktop and laptop 1650.
Can you test the e5 2698 v3 in fortnite performance mode to see how it performs
It's funny that Intel and AMD are providing more value to this card at this point than nvidia, via XeSS and FSR2 lol
Its not the new "favorite" its the only "practical" choice casual users can afford.
If I was looking to upgrade from a 1650 which gpu’s should I’ve looking at and lies on Fortnite I be running it at 100 fps custom settings between high and medium
You can get much better value for money buying an AMD card or even an Intel card. This holds true for almost all price tiers except the very top like the rtx 4090 and maybe the 4080. 1650 is JUNK and the fact that so many gamers were brainwashed into buying it gives me an existential crisis.
This card is still the top card on Steam 5 months later.
Hey man! The 2060 took the new spot! Cool idea for a new vid maybe!?
Its ashame that the ppl buy this and not a 1650 super which is like 10$ more or same price even, also most of these 1650 come from prebuilts
Most of the GTX 1650 in survey comes from laptops and the thing is that Mobile GTX 1650 is good in the price range compared to the desktop version which is costly and gets almost as same perfomance as desktop ones only 3 to 5 fps difference in most games with just 50w while desktop runs in 60w
I don't understand how this card seems like it holds up to my 3080