Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 66 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,086 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)

This is something we haven’t seen before. NVidia has taken a relatively successful card, the GT 1030, and has implanted DDR4 in place of GDDR5. It’s actually getting system memory on it, which is a tremendous downgrade. The memory bandwidth reduction is several-fold, dropping from 48GB/s to about 16GB/s with DDR4, but the part that’s truly wrong is that they used the same product name.

The GT 1030 has always been an interesting product, and that’s only true because of the mining boom and GPU scarcity issues of earlier this year. Typically, the GT 1030 – or similarly ultra-low-end cards – would not get our recommendation, as a GTX 1050 or RX 550 would make more sense and be close in price. Earlier this year, even GTX 1050s and RX 550s had evaporated, leaving only overpriced GT 1030 GDDR5 cards (that we were somewhat OK with recommending). Fortunately, performance was decent. Was. Before the DDR4 surgery.

It’s time to benchmark the GT 1030 versus the GT 1030 Bad Edition, which ships with DDR4 instead of GDDR5, but has the same name as the original product. In a previous rant, we railed against these choices because it misleads consumers – whether intentionally or unintentionally – into purchasing a product that doesn’t reflect the benchmarks. If someone looks up GT 1030 benchmarks, they’ll find our GDDR5 version tests, and those results are wildly different from the similarly priced GT 1030 DDR4 card’s performance. On average, particularly on Newegg, there is about a $10 difference between the two cards.



The GT 1030 with DDR4 is one of the most egregious missteps we’ve seen when it comes to product marketing. NVidia has made a lot of great products in the past year – and we’ve even recommended the GT 1030 GDDR5 card in some instances, which is rare for us – but the DDR4 version under the same name was a mistake.
https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwrevie...1030-gddr5-benchmark-worst-graphics-card-2018


No comment.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,559 Posts
Why do companies do this? I remember buying a AMD 7750 that came with DDR3 instead of GDDR5 with no proper warning, and it was significantly worse. It came in at the same price too.


The worst part was newegg was going to charge me $60 to return it since they emailed me some game code for some no-name game they bundled with it. That was only a $100 card at launch, so I ended up getting screwed really hard.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,192 Posts
Big fan of the memory bandwidth there. It's nearly half as fast as my Kaveri APU. In fact, it's almost faster than my Chromebook and my iPhone!
 

·
Otherworlder
Joined
·
7,517 Posts
rather than gaming benchmarks, i'd like to see performance in compute workloads, considering that some compute workloads doesn't access the VRAM much.
 

·
Jedi Knight
Joined
·
671 Posts
GPP had a simple goal - ensuring that gamers know what they are buying and can make a clear choice.
:rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,086 Posts
Discussion Starter #6 (Edited)
Why do companies do this? I remember buying a AMD 7750 that came with DDR3 instead of GDDR5 with no proper warning, and it was significantly worse. It came in at the same price too.


The worst part was newegg was going to charge me $60 to return it since they emailed me some game code for some no-name game they bundled with it. That was only a $100 card at launch, so I ended up getting screwed really hard.
For same reason there is a dual core mobile Core i7 with "U" added as a trade mark. Those who buy this don't understand things like: cores, DDR3, GDDR5. Some will say that since it works than what's the problem.
 

·
Robotic Chemist
Joined
·
3,010 Posts
Why not call it a 1020? 1025?

Since it is probably to milk recommendations from those like Gamers Nexus to sell an inferior product this is just as annoying and dishonest as it is every time someone does this. I wish marketing has better ethical limits. :(
 

·
Not a linux lobbyist
Joined
·
2,403 Posts
rather than gaming benchmarks, i'd like to see performance in compute workloads, considering that some compute workloads doesn't access the VRAM much.
That is a good point. I have a pciex1 passive gt730 (gk208 version) with 1GB ddr3, and it holds its own, relative to the amount of cores it has, against my daughters (used to be mine) 780tis in that octane benchmark.

It also keeps up with sli 1080tis for the PhysX part in the few games that actually can make use of a dedicated card.
And it isn't that bad at 4k desktop and web browsing at 4:2:0 color when I was flashing different microcodes to my bios and had to use it to boot since my old mobo defaults to legacy bios and my 1080tis over plx demand uefi.

The DDR4 version probably was not meant for gaming use, but decent for other stuff.

Would have been good to label it as such.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,299 Posts
They should've name it as a 1020 to differentiate between the two products
1030 / 384 core / 48 GB/s base clock ~1200mhz
Titan Xp / 3840 core / 547 GB/s base clock at 1.14x higher ( 547 ~ 1.14x higher clock )
If scaled to 2100mhz, you'd need about 818 to max out the card
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,192 Posts
is this even legal
I can sell you a PC with a Threadripper 1950X with 2x8GB DDR4-1866, and I can sell you a PC with 4x4GB DDR4-2667. They are both Threadripper 1950X PCs and they both have the same 16GB of memory.

A GT 1030's name isn't protected by federal law. A GT 1030 is some graphics card Nvidia is selling. What does it mean? I dunno. It's pretty arbitrary. Read the specs sheet.
 

·
Joined
·
2,327 Posts
Nvidia just can't get enough roasting these days. Is their motto "any PR is good PR"?
 

·
Otherworlder
Joined
·
7,517 Posts
Nvidia just can't get enough roasting these days. Is their motto "any PR is good PR"?
that used to be AMD's motto, and it seems quite infectious. :p
 

·
Waiting for 7nm EUV
Joined
·
11,521 Posts
The performance of this DDR4 equipped version is so off from the original version that it doesn't even deserve the "GT" moniker. It should be called G 1020.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,011 Posts
The performance of this DDR4 equipped version is so off from the original version that it doesn't even deserve the "GT" moniker. It should be called G 1020.
There is used to be a moniker, which was GS.

This card should be called GS 1030. However that mean they have to lower the price which they dont want.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
8,804 Posts
This has got to be the biggest absurdity I've seen from the industry in a while. The performance delta is so large, it's basically a scam.

Yes, the "DDR4" part may be on the box, but how is the general user supposed to deduce from that distinction that the card they're buying is not even remotely close to the performer the first version is?
 

·
Overclocker
Joined
·
11,636 Posts
Why do companies do this?
Because it's profitable to them. They use cheaper memory on a crappy product because they think the average shmo will not notice anyway. What's worse they do this all the time with higher level products as well not only these entry level. 970 L2 ROPs and RAM scam, 660Ti? And many other.

They want to sell more of the cards but have limited GDDR5 so they use something else or it's cheaper to use something else. Keeping the same name means people who even look up performance numbers see the "good stuff" but when they receive the product and test it they will be unpleasantly surprised. That's why it pays off to always check the specific item code from manufacturer and demand it from the shop so that you know and can check what you're buying.
 

·
What should be here ?
Joined
·
5,733 Posts

·
Not a linux lobbyist
Joined
·
2,403 Posts
Still not as bad as the Fermi GT 730. Speaking of the comparably market placed GT 730, after three years, anyone use this for gaming? It's better than HD4600 and worse than Iris 6200. An igpu substitution with better desktop display options, heat and power gets moved off the cpu package, system memory gets freed up a bit. But gaming? Maybe if you have no igpu.

Yeah, it should have a GS or something that still , but that still might not be clear to someone with no interest in graphics card performance because they expect a graphic cards should give them a better picture when they are browsing the web on their low specd system and little more. Which a lousy gaming bottom end Pascal will do just fine.

Anyone who goes after a 1030 for gaming may just as well be going after a https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA6ZP3R86467 -hd 4350. Same arguments apply so they should stop selling those at 1030 GDDR5 prices too.

This seem like a bunch of manufactured fuss.
 
1 - 20 of 66 Posts
Top