add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

Comments (Continued)

  • 28 months ago
  • 0 points

I have provided with you several benchmarks of the 1050 playing gta V at the ultra preset at above 50fps. If you are saying that all of my benchmarks which are from several different sources are rigged then you just can't except the fact that a $100 gpu can do what a $200 gpu did a year and a half ago.

As to the first video it was made before the release of the ps4 pro and everything he said was based off what sony said. As to the second video. If you look at the texture quality you will see that all the games are running at higher settings on the 1050 then they are on the ps4 pro. And the fact that he capped the fps for either gpu at all is just stupid. In some games I have turned off vsync and my framerate shot up and the minimum fps was above what the max used to be. If you cap the fps at 30,60 or even, 120 you are running the benchmarks wrong if you are going for the framerate statistics.

  • 28 months ago
  • 1 point

I have provided with you several benchmarks of the 1050 playing gta V at the ultra preset at above 50fps. If you are saying that all of my benchmarks which are from several different sources are rigged then you just can't except the fact that a $100 gpu can do what a $200 gpu did a year and a half ago.

Its not just possible since running the game at ultra settings requires a lot more than 2GB of VRAM, at ultra/max without super sampling you are looking at around 4GB of VRAM usage and around 60FPS with a card like a GTX 970/R9 390/etc and things come to a halt fast once you start using system RAM as VRAM. The reason why the Pro can do this without problem is because it uses VRAM as RAM for the whole system. They are likely not using all ultra settings or something else similar. Also the GTX 1050 is not equal to a $200 GPU from 1 and half a year ago. The GTX 1050 is about on par with GTX 950 which was out done by the GTX 960 which was out done by the R9 380 which was out done by the R9 380X.

As to the first video it was made before the release of the ps4 pro and everything he said was based off what sony said.

Yes which is not just simply displaying a 1080P image on a 4K screen. Its more than that.

If you look at the texture quality you will see that all the games are running at higher settings on the 1050 then they are on the ps4 pro. And the fact that he capped the fps for either gpu at all is just stupid. In some games I have turned off vsync and my framerate shot up and the minimum fps was above what the max used to be. If you cap the fps at 30,60 or even, 120 you are running the benchmarks wrong if you are going for the framerate statistics.

Its not the best comparison but its light years better than Scattervolt one which had games running at 1080P on both screens but the Pro is often CPU bound so the extra GPU power can't be used often to get a higher FPS and that games need to be made to use the extra GPU power. Its up there with some of the worse "testing"/comparison made by a large channel, I would say its up there with LTT "ram speed" benchmark which was basically a GPU benchmark.

You can't really compare graphical settings that aren't on the extreme of each end due to youtube compression. The point was FPS and that the GTX 1050 had a lot of drops and that its not made to compete with the PS4 pro. Do you really think a $100 GPU with 2GB of VRAM can really handle games at resolutions past 1440P? There is a reason why basically zero benchmarks are out for the GTX 1050 at 1440P and 4K.

  • 28 months ago
  • 0 points

The 1050 is almost as powerful as the 960. A card that was almost $200 when it launched.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhSnk9QpdQc

When it comes to vram the fact that benchmarks show it does not hinder performance as much as you claim it does in gta v is just that, A fact. When it says ultra it means no AA or very little. They use the ultra preset. Yes if you start turning up AA your framerates will drop like a rock on jupiter, But if you don't have it on a 2gb card is enough.

When it comes to the ps4 pro idc how powerful the gpu is or how much the cpu is limiting it. The framerate given is the framerate given. You can't change the cpu on the ps4 pro so why does it matter? If it had a titan xp and the cpu still bottlenecked it, It would not matter since we are going by which one has the higher framerate.

When it comes to the youtube compression it does not matter when they are displaying both the 1050 and ps4 pro game at the same time. If you pause and look you will see higher texture detail on the 1050 then the ps4 pro. If they were both displayed at different times you may have an argument on this but the fact that they were both on screen at once and the 1050 one looked better proves it was running at higher settings. And the fact that in the first set of benchmarks the ps4 pro could not even play one of the games at 1080p means that it can't keep up.

  • 28 months ago
  • 1 point

The 1050 is almost as powerful as the 960. A card that was almost $200 when it launched.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhSnk9QpdQc

And its still is weaker it and a R9 380X and a R9 380.

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1050-vs-AMD-R9-380/3650vs3482

Even the GTX 1050 Ti loses to the 380X the majority of the time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnuDnncsy9w

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1050-vs-AMD-R9-380X/3650vs3532

When it comes to vram the fact that benchmarks show it does not hinder performance as much as you claim it does in gta v is just that, A fact. When it says ultra it means no AA or very little. They use the ultra preset. Yes if you start turning up AA your framerates will drop like a rock on jupiter, But if you don't have it on a 2gb card is enough.

GTA V requires ~2.5GB of VRAM for ultra without the advanced settings without MSAA and with everything cranked up it uses a whooping 9GB of VRAM. Scattervolt is lying out of his *** and then some when he claim it was running at max settings on a GTX 1050. 2GB of VRAM isn't close to enough to stop the game from coming to a grinding halt when you need to use 7GB of system RAM.

When it comes to the ps4 pro idc how powerful the gpu is or how much the cpu is limiting it. The framerate given is the framerate given. You can't change the cpu on the ps4 pro so why does it matter? If it had a titan xp and the cpu still bottlenecked it, It would not matter since we are going by which one has the higher framerate.

You should since its not the right way to test it out. You are basically testing the PS4 vs. a GTX 1050, not a Pro vs. a GTX 1050 since the extra power that the power offers is not being used up enough since the CPU is holding it back from reaching a higher FPS. You would want to run games at "4K"/4K to allow it to use the extra power it has. You have linked to zero benchmarks that actually tests the Pro performance s compared to a GPU while I have. Also back to a previous reply, do you really think a ~20% jump in GPU performance is enough to go to from 900P/1080P to ~1600P/4K? it has be a whole lot more than a small jump.

When it comes to the youtube compression it does not matter when they are displaying both the 1050 and ps4 pro game at the same time. If you pause and look you will see higher texture detail on the 1050 then the ps4 pro. If they were both displayed at different times you may have an argument on this but the fact that they were both on screen at once and the 1050 one looked better proves it was running at higher settings.

Honestly it all looks the same to me outside of FPS, I can't tell the RX 470, the Pro, and the GTX 1050 apart.

And the fact that in the first set of benchmarks the ps4 pro could not even play one of the games at 1080p means that it can't keep up.

It means the game was not designed to take advantage of the extra power of the Pro.

  • 28 months ago
  • 1 point

Well I can notice a difference in quality. It is obvious that the 1050 has higher texture quality then the ps4 pro and the 470 had even higher texture quality then the 1050. And in all of the benchmarks I have sent you regarding gta v they were run on ultra. The game is 4 years, Yes the pc port came 2 years later but it still uses the same engine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=678x96klUQE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyLGZV3dQ10

Both of these videos show similar framrates to the other ones I listed. And btw when gta V launched most people only had 2gb of ram.

When it comes to the ps4 pro playing games at 1440p, The reason people don't do as many 1050 benchamrks at 1440p instead of 1080p is because. 1. The 1050 is marketed as a 1080p card. 2. You cannot reduce the graphics quality on pc low enough to match consoles. If you could use the exact same settings on pc that you can on consoles then the 1050 could play all the games that ps4 pro does at 1440p. In the video with skyrim running at native 4k, The 1050 had much better texture quality and it was running on low.

  • 28 months ago
  • 1 point

You cannot reduce the graphics quality on pc low enough to match consoles.

You easily can, they aren't total potatoes. You would be right if we was talking about the last gen consoles but the current non upgraded ones are about on par with a GTX 750 Ti and the upgraded ones are somewhere below RX 470 territory.

And btw when gta V launched most people only had 2gb of ram.

But they was not playing it at max settings though...

Both of these videos show similar framrates to the other ones I listed.

They use different CPU's...Not how you want to compare FPS and once again its impossible to play GTA V on max settings on a GTX 1050.

If you could use the exact same settings on pc that you can on consoles then the 1050 could play all the games that ps4 pro does at 1440p. In the video with skyrim running at native 4k, The 1050 had much better texture quality and it was running on low.

If you had all the same optimization of course you could but no game is going to be optimized like that for a single PC. Staring at the screen the Pro actually has the better textures than the GTX 1050 and it appears about even with the RX 470 and it was medium, not low.

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube