[HN Gopher] Nvidia's RTX 5050 GPU starts at $249 with last-gen G...
___________________________________________________________________
Nvidia's RTX 5050 GPU starts at $249 with last-gen GDDR6 VRAM
Author : microsoftedging
Score : 43 points
Date : 2025-06-24 16:57 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theverge.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theverge.com)
| gs17 wrote:
| And it's 8GB of last-gen GDDR6 video memory, the exact same as
| the $249 RTX 3050 from three years ago (same number of CUDA cores
| too). Technically with inflation that's more per dollar, I guess,
| but that's not super appealing.
| bigyabai wrote:
| If you're using less memory, it kinda stands to reason that you
| can get more mileage out of less bandwidth. I'd be really upset
| if this was a 16gb or 24gb card, but we've been using GDDR6 for
| 8gb cards without issues for years now.
|
| I agree that it's not super appealing, but Team Green has to
| hit the low price points somehow. This feels more like a hedged
| bet against Intel trying to muscle their way back into the
| budget market.
| ryao wrote:
| AMD uses GDDR6 on their current generation cards:
|
| https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-
| rx-9070-xt.c422...
|
| Intel does too.
| pama wrote:
| The performance figure in the link clearly says that it it's a
| significant improvement to the 3050.
| cogman10 wrote:
| This is creative marketing from nVidia. Notice the "With DLSS
| 4".
|
| That's AI frame hallucination which the 5050 has.
|
| Without the DLSS, the numbers from independent reviewers has
| basically been exactly on par with the previous generations
| (about 10% increase in performance).
| sidewndr46 wrote:
| The charts are from the Verge, not exactly known for their
| integrity in regards to anything.
|
| It's also with DLSS on, so you could just as easily have the
| framerate be 100 FPS, 1000 FPS, or 10000 FPS. The GPU doesn't
| actually have to render the frame in that case, it just has
| to have a pixel buffer ready to offload to whatever hardware
| sends it over the link to the display. Apparently some people
| actually really like this, but it isn't rendering by any
| reasonable definition.
| pama wrote:
| Maybe this is the better link:
|
| https://www.nvidia.com/en-
| us/geforce/news/rtx-5050-desktop-g...
| colejohnson66 wrote:
| Why would anyone trust Nvidia to not stretch the truth,
| _especially_ with a press release? It 's been shown
| multiple times they inflate their numbers.
| cornstalks wrote:
| This is a better link:
| https://gamersnexus.net/gpus/nvidia-selling-lies-
| rtx-5070-fo...
|
| It's about the RTX 5070 but the criticisms still hold for
| the RTX 5050 since Nvidia is still doing the same
| shenanigans.
| theyinwhy wrote:
| Looking at 20 articles, they seem to be biased when it
| comes to AMD vs Nvidia.
| unaindz wrote:
| I don't follow everything but they give flak to AMD too,
| maybe in a different way.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| That's Nvidia's marketing slide and if you note the fine
| print they are tested at different settings. The RTX 5050 is
| using 4x frame gen which the 3050 isn't. Techpowerup has the
| RTX 5050 as being 20% faster than the 3050 give or take,
| which is certainly not enough to justify upgrading
| happycube wrote:
| This card might've been forgivable with 16GB or a $149 MSRP, so
| of course they didn't do either...
| ryao wrote:
| Why did I not see any complaints when AMD used GDDR6 on their
| current generation products:
|
| https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-rx-9070-xt.c422...
| unaindz wrote:
| Because they announced double the VRAM for the medium end
| card at around the same price. But there were complaints
| anyway.
| throitallaway wrote:
| Can't wait to buy one for $550.
| singhkays wrote:
| I know you're being facetious but such is the market atm. I put
| something together to track the absurdity of it all :)
|
| https://gpuisfine.singhkays.com
| mft_ wrote:
| It's insane. I've been tracking a few used 4090s on EU ebay
| this week, and the typical selling price is ~1950 EUR.
| singhkays wrote:
| huh..you might has well get a 5090 for that price. Seems
| like it's dipping below MSRP there -
| https://www.techpowerup.com/338256/nvidia-geforce-
| rtx-5090-b...
| mft_ wrote:
| Indeed; there are new 5090s from legit-looking sellers in
| eBay from around ~2300 EUR.
| Aurornis wrote:
| The emphasis on last-gen memory is misplaced. I don't care what
| memory technology is used as long as the performance is good for
| the price.
| seiferteric wrote:
| Ya, don't current gen Radeon cards use GDDR6 as well?
| ryao wrote:
| They do:
|
| https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/radeon-
| rx-9070-xt.c422...
| Night_Thastus wrote:
| It's complete garbage and not worth buying. It's so cut down it's
| nearly useless outside of web browsing and very light games. The
| price is also effectively lie, it's going to be hard to get it
| for less than $300. Once we get some proper 3rd party test data
| in I'd be shocked if it's 5% better than a 4050 in raster without
| the use of fake frames.
| jekwoooooe wrote:
| Why is there so much hate against fake frames? I know you can't
| tell the difference
| kllrnohj wrote:
| because you can tell the difference, they have quite a few
| artifacts, and they make latency worse which is especially
| problematic in the scenarios where you need the "performance"
| offered by fake frames. At this price point it's that last
| thing that's especially problematic. You may get 60fps in an
| fps counter with dlss 4, but it'll _feel_ like 15-20fps and
| not be very playable
| jamesgeck0 wrote:
| NVidia themselves have said that framegen shouldn't be used
| if the card isn't hitting 60 FPS to start with because of the
| latency it introduces. If the card is cut down enough that
| it's struggling to hit 60 FPS in games, enabling framegen
| will do more harm then good.
|
| You can feel additional latency easily in competitive FPS or
| high speed arcade racing games.
| unaindz wrote:
| You can feel less than 50-60 fps on a management game where
| you only interact with the UI and move the camera around,
| not game breaking but doesn't feel great. And I used to
| play far cry 3 and CSGO at ~25 fps, I'm used to lack of
| performance.
| Night_Thastus wrote:
| You absolutely can tell the difference. DLSS (upscale)
| visually is massively different in some games. Sometimes it
| works great, sometimes the result is very ugly. I've tested
| with several of my favorites.
|
| And generated frames are far worse than that. If you're
| running at a very high base framerate (100+) then they can
| look OK but the moment the frames get any further apart the
| visual quality starts to tank.
| orphea wrote:
| This is why: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44368785
|
| Fake frames are cool tech but they are horribly mismarketed,
| indistinguishable from scam.
| toast0 wrote:
| Fake frames have a big latency penalty, because you can't
| generate a frame between X and Y until you have Y. At the
| point that you have generated frame Y, however many frames
| you insert give you that much additional latency, beyond
| whatever your display adds.
|
| I guess I can see some utility in situations where latency is
| not a major factor, but IMHO, that pushes out most gaming.
| pitaj wrote:
| Agreed. Anybody buying this would be better off spending that
| money on a used card like a 2070 or 3060, and might even save a
| buck.
| jamesgeck0 wrote:
| Or an Intel Arc card. They aren't very high end, but they're
| competitive at MSRP and I suspect they'll demolish this in
| benchmarks.
| lvl155 wrote:
| Just buy AMD AI Max+ no?
| anonym29 wrote:
| Undoubtedly a better system, but the 395 variant with a full
| 128GB of (soldered on) RAM, you're looking at ~$2k for the
| system. Comparing that to a $250 dGPU (that arguably isn't even
| worth that) is a very "apples to oranges" comparison.
| Kon-Peki wrote:
| This is not going to go well:
|
| > x50-class GeForce GPUs are among the most popular in the world,
| second only to the x60-class on Steam. Their price point and
| power profile are especially popular:
|
| > For anyone upgrading an older x50-class system
|
| > Each GeForce RTX 5050 graphics card is powered by a single PCIe
| 8-pin cable, drawing a maximum of 130 Watts at stock speeds,
| making it great for systems with power supplies delivering as
| little as 550 Watts.
|
| The 1050, 2050 and 3050 were all bus-powered cards. I doubt 95%
| these systems even have the cable coming from their power supply.
| Imagine all the poor saps that excitedly swap out their old card
| for this, and... nothing works.
|
| Source link: https://www.nvidia.com/en-
| us/geforce/news/rtx-5050-desktop-g...
| LorenDB wrote:
| Hey, at least it's not the infamous 12-pin connector.
|
| (Full disclosure, I have a 9070 XT with a 12-pin connector. No
| fires yet, though.)
| Kon-Peki wrote:
| Well, maybe a molex-to-8pin-PCIe cable comes in the box!
| reginald78 wrote:
| To bolster this, after the 750ti the 50 products have had
| pretty lame price to performance compared to the next step up,
| but have remained quite popular. Most people seem to argue that
| the lack of additional power is their main advantage and why
| they are popular.
|
| I personally think people remember being happy with the 750ti
| and just keep buying those cards.
| toast0 wrote:
| I've got at 1650 Super; it's not bus-powered either. I think
| it's got a 6-pin, but often you can plug a 6-pin into an 8-pin
| board and it'll just run a lower current limit (this might not
| be accurate --- a lot of internet comments say 8 pin boards
| will detect a 6-pin connector and refuse to work). A whole lot
| of modern computing gets ~ 90% of the performance with 50% of
| the power; so if using a 6-pin lead drops power to 50%, you
| would still get most of it.
|
| I've got a ~ 2006 380W power supply hanging out near my desk
| and it's got a 6-pin pci-e cable; I really don't think people
| won't have at least that, certainly not 95% of systems with a
| pci-e x16 slot.
| neepi wrote:
| Just bought a 16Gb 5060 Ti for twice that. I don't feel
| disappointed.
| happycube wrote:
| Yeah, moreso since that's the highest nvidia card this gen
| available with a sane power connector.
| sidewndr46 wrote:
| 12VHPWR has to be one of the weirdest industry decisions I've
| seen in a while. So far I thought I had been able to avoid
| it, but recently bought a power supply that uses it on the
| modular cable connector.
|
| But it isn't really that uncommon either, I had a suzuki
| motorcycle that used a connector with 15 amp pins to handle
| 30 amps of current on one pin. I eventually concluded the
| only reason that connector was in the harness was to ease
| assembly and just cut it out entirely and soldered the
| junction together.
| neepi wrote:
| Oh yeah totally agree with that one. I hate Molex connectors
| but the new one is just stupid.
| LorenDB wrote:
| I can't believe that nobody has yet mentioned the Intel Arc
| Battlemage B580. Same $250 MSRP (which has inflated, but every
| other GPU is inflated too, and the 5050 will probably inflate as
| well), but has 12 GB of VRAM and bats just below a 4060 Ti 16
| GB[0].
|
| [0]: https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html
| jamesgeck0 wrote:
| I've been pretty happy with my Arc A770 LE (16 GB). The drivers
| were rough at launch, but they've gotten much better, and at
| the time it was the best performance $350 could buy.
| prossercj wrote:
| How is it for gaming? Had any compatibility issues?
| KronisLV wrote:
| I had both an A580 (not an A770, but at least something
| from that generation) and then later a B580, at one point
| even both in the same computer, side by side, when I wanted
| to use one for games and the other for encoding:
|
| https://blog.kronis.dev/blog/what-is-ruining-dual-gpu-
| setups
|
| https://blog.kronis.dev/blog/more-pc-shenanigans-my-setup-
| un...
|
| https://blog.kronis.dev/blog/two-intel-arc-gpus-in-one-pc-
| wo...
|
| When paired with a worse CPU like a Ryzen 5 4500, the
| experience won't always be good (despite no monitoring
| software actually showing that the CPU is a bottleneck).
|
| When paired with a better CPU (I got a Ryzen 7 5800X to
| replace it, eventually with an AIO cause the temperatures
| were too high under full load anyways), either of them are
| pretty okay.
|
| In a single GPU setup either of them run most games okay,
| not that many compatibility or stability issues, even in
| older indie titles, though I've had some like STALCRAFT: X
| complain about running on an integrated GPU (Intel being
| detected as such). Most software also works, unless you
| want to run LLMs locally, where Nvidia will have more of an
| advantage and you'd go off the beaten path. Most annoying
| I've had were some stability issues near the launch of each
| card, for example running the B580 with their Boost
| functionality on in their graphics software sometimes
| crashed in Delta Force, no longer seems to be an issue.
|
| Temperature and power draw seem fine. Their XeSS upscaling
| is actually really good (I use it on top of native
| resolution in War Thunder as fancy AA), their frame
| generation feels like it has more latency than FSR but also
| better quality, might be subjective, but it's not even
| supported in that many games in the first place. Their
| video encoders are pretty nice, but sometimes get
| overloaded in intensive games instead of prioritizing the
| encoding over game framerate (which is stupid). Video
| editing software like DaVinci Resolve also seems okay.
|
| The games that run badly are typically Unreal Engine 5
| titles, such as S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 and The Forever Winter,
| where they use expensive rendering techniques and to get at
| least 30 FPS you have to turn the graphics way down, to the
| point where the games still run like crap and end up
| looking worse than something from 5 years ago. Those were
| even worse on the A series cards, but with the B series
| ones become at least barely playable.
|
| In a dual GPU setup, nothing works that well, neither in
| Windows 11, nor Windows 10, neither with the A580 + B580,
| nor my old RX 580 + B580: system instability, some games
| ignoring the Intel GPU preference being set when an AMD one
| is available, low framerates when a video is playing on a
| secondary monitor (I have 4 in total), the inability to
| play games on the B580 and do encoding on the A580 due to
| either just OBS or also the hardware not having proper
| support for that (e.g. can't pick which GPU to do encode
| on, like you can with Nvidia ones, my attempts at patching
| OBS to do that failed, couldn't get a video frame from one
| GPU to the other). I moved back to running just the B580 in
| my PC.
|
| For MSRP, I'd say that the Intel Arc B580 is actually a
| good option, perhaps better than all A series cards. But
| the more expensive it gets, the more attractive
| alternatives from AMD and Nvidia become. Personally
| wouldn't get an A770 unless needed the VRAM or the price
| was really good.
| some_random wrote:
| I have to assume things are better to some degree but last I
| looked at Intel's offering the support was still unacceptably
| bad. That said, I really hope they can get things to a good
| state because there needs to be more competition at this price
| point.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| The support is still worse, but you're getting a big discount
| on the hardware by comparison. So it kinda evens out at this
| price point where you're deciding between either having every
| game run badly or most, but not all, games running decently
| speed_spread wrote:
| For such insanity, it should be labeled the RTX 5150
| gunalx wrote:
| The 50 line is the new gt-30 tier.
| dunno7456 wrote:
| It will take Nvidia 10 years to release the firmware for PMU and
| then they will cancel it because it's "too old". Just like the
| they did with pascal, P520 and other perfectly working hardware
| that are barely usable to this day.
| drcongo wrote:
| I'm still waiting for my DGX Spark. Starting to wonder if Nvidia
| have hired Musk for their PR to promise things they'll never
| deliver.
| yrcyrc wrote:
| Not following much hardware news. What can I do with this or the
| Intel Arc? Play games? Run AI workload? Genuine question
| LorenDB wrote:
| Both. AI is dependent on available VRAM, so the B580 will run
| some larger models than the 5050.
| eighthourblink wrote:
| Coming from a 2060 Super, would this be a good upgrade? I dont
| really play newer high demand games, but i do enjoy my emulation.
| Currently on 2060 super and dont really have any issues with
| emulation.Ryzen 5 3600X / linux (of course :))
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-06-24 23:01 UTC)