Home » NVIDIA disappoints with the GTX 1630, it’s the worst low-end GPU

NVIDIA disappoints with the GTX 1630, it’s the worst low-end GPU

It was the key day and as such the rumors have fulfilled their mission to the point that even though the card has only been seen in China for now, we already have the first performance data and… They are not good at all. So much the climate with this GPU, which has already been described as the worst low-end GPU in history, NVIDIA nonsense that could only be surpassed by Intel and its ARC when they were launched on the market. It’s him performance of the GTX-1630.

To recap briefly and to give us an idea of ​​what we manipulate on our hands, the GTX-1630 It is the smallest of all NVIDIA graphics cards for sale and replaces the GTX 1030. It has a chip TU117 architecture-based Turing at 12nm with 512 shaders, 32 TMUs Yes 16 OR with 1 MB of L2. Their frequencies are 1740MHz based on and 1785 MHz boostwhile his GDDR6 VRAM webbing 12 Gbps with a size of 4 GB total for a bus 64 bit.

An absurd GPU that doesn’t even compete with the AMD RX 6400


It’s not that it’s slow as such, it’s that it’s below the GTX 1050 Ti at a higher price. The first data shows that NVIDIA’s work here to refresh the input range is nonsense in terms of price and performance, to show the following data.

As we see, the RX6400, the smallest of the AMD range, is more than 50% above and to top it off with a very similar consumption and a price almost to match. It is not even necessary to recall how harsh the reviews have been with this AMD GPU and even with its big sister, the RX6500XTso logic prevails that NVIDIA will be criticized everywhere, but there’s more to cut here.

The performance of the GTX 1630 is disastrous, was this GPU necessary?


NVIDIA’s nerve will reverberate like a steamroller. if the price MSRP it is hidden as such, the manufacturers have done the same to launch the GTX 1630 models at the price they consider. Since the $150 in China up to $199 in the United Statesthese appear to be the scales where the smallest of NVIDIA graphics will move.

Just stick with the 900 series, with the GTX 960 as the mid-range at a similar cost, or the GTX 970 for a bit more. Well, seeing the features we talked about and what’s to come with AMD APUs with RDNA 2 graphics cardjust like Intel with the new xedDoes it make sense to shoot yourself in the foot with such a caliber by NVIDIA?

As we discussed in another article, this release only meets NVIDIA’s need for a lower-to-mid price range with a gross profit margin, and most importantly, to the response from Intel and its ARC GPUs, especially the supposed desktop A730. It’s a double move to make more money (or try, we’ll see who buys it) and incidentally to fight with Intel where NVIDIA couldn’t until now. Users will dictate their sentence, but the reality is that this GPU was born dead for performance and price.

About the author


Add Comment

Click here to post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *