GeForce GTX 1630: An Insult to Gamers In a recent video titled "GeForce GTX 1630, An Insult To Gamers," the channel Hardware Unboxed dives into the problematic launch of NVIDIA's newest entry-level GPU. Released amidst much anticipation, the GTX 1630 seems to have missed the mark, frustrating gamers looking for value in the budget segment. The video begins by providing context around the GTX 1630's release. This GPU is essentially a lower-spec version of the now outdated GTX 1650, which suffered from poor performance even at its launch in 2019. With specifications that seem more like a step back than a forward march in technology, including significantly fewer cores and a narrower memory bus, the GTX 1630 delivers disappointing results across various game tests.
Key Specifications and Performance Metrics
- CUDA Cores: The GTX 1630 boasts only 512 CUDA cores, a reduction of 42% compared to its predecessor.
- Memory Bandwidth: With a measly 64-bit memory bus and 4GB of GDDR6 memory, it offers only 96 GB/s of bandwidth—25% less than the GTX 1650.
- Price: Initial rumors suggested a price range around $50. However, it's expected to launch between $150 and $200, aligning it with GPUs that genuinely outperform it, like AMD’s RX 6400.
Game Benchmarks
Testing was performed on popular titles like
Assassin's Creed Valhalla and
Cyberpunk 2077, where the GTX 1630 struggled severely:
- In Valhalla, it achieved just 32 FPS on average, significantly trailing behind older models like the GTX 1050 Ti.
- Most games hovered around 35 FPS or less, with several unable to sustain playable frame rates.
The presenter particularly highlighted the fact that the GTX 1630's performance often lagged behind not only its direct predecessor but also well-established cards from 2016, such as the RX 570.
Value Proposition and Recommendations
The overall sentiment in the video is clear: the GTX 1630 is not worth its projected price tag. At around $150, it would yield a cost-per-frame ratio that is unacceptable in today's market, especially where options like the RX 6600 could be had for slightly over $300, offering significantly better performance. In summary, the GTX 1630 appears to be yet another misstep in NVIDIA's line of budget GPUs, leaving consumers better served looking for older models or AMD alternatives. With current market pressures, it’s suggested that users should turn to the used market—where considerably more powerful options like the GTX 1650 Super are available at similar or lower prices. If you're on the lookout for a budget GPU, the video strongly suggests avoiding the GTX 1630 unless it drops below $100. For those looking for better performance, AMD's offerings present a more viable solution in the current market landscape .