Don't you need 6-pin connector on 1650 anyway? 75W is theoretically provided by the slot, but it is combined on all PCIe voltages, and if the card wants almost all of it on 12V to convert to whatever CPU and memory need, the slot is not going to be enough.
You don't want to get into the situation AMD got into awhile back with "75W" cards blowing out PCIe slots.
I think this 100W rating and the associated 12v connector is wisely erring on the side of caution. It sucks for business PC's where the PCIe aux connector is often missing, but that isn't the target market for this card. Besides, you can always convert a Molex if need be.
my how folks forget...Nvidia was many many many times in the past well beyond pci-sig limits..NOT JUST AMD
for fudge sakes.
Nvidia wants to throw stones and enforce consumers to do the same...
@$#@#$@ the only real ones "as of late" that have stayed within or close to limits Nv wise was SOME not ALL from 750 to last 2 gens...main reason why IMHO is because they decide that instead of putting better capacitors and such (as they should, seeing the price they pretty much will ask for..heavy handed to their AIB as well) is due to fancy extra chips, software etc...not directly because of "superior design methodology"
yes was "bad" on AMD as they did it, no excuses for that....however...again not all that long ago, direct from Nvidia "mouth" here use these often times very very flaky dual molex to pci-e connector...do some research Nvidia is NOT as "saint" as they want everyone to believe...
FAR FROM IT
x1000 generation they did VERY good at keeping power in check (@#$ with design to make sure of it, not the full truth, with them never is, likely never will be) x2000 .... nuff said, have performance to back it up, sure, but power went up quite a bit especially on the RTX based ones.
I digress.
just cause it is written on the box "TDP 75w" or whatever, does NOT always mean it will not or cannot go well past it (in some cases) ... x1000 x2000 are among their "best" in decades, if not ever to not blow past their own ratings.......
AMD needs to do more to ensure same thing, absolutely, careful whom you "thrown stones at" or likely your wasting stones on those whom they should have been thrown at (and hard) instead of a "rare" problem.....
I mean, I think I'd trust even the smallest Dell SFF PSU to be able to handle the extra 25W coursing through that SATA power to 6-pin adapter you'd need in there.
If an extra 25W is what fries your machine, you were probably SOL before you should have ever considered performance.
If not for games, then they still have the old 1650 for the spreadsheet warriors?
True: a SATA connection can happily give more than 25W on 12V, I think it's more like 60W. If you didn't overclock it (not sure it would be even allowed to OC that fair with how the power limits are these days) it'd be fine. I just hope, that we can get Half-height (LP) versions of the card. You can quite easily put the 6-pin on the back of teh card and it'd fit nicely in some slim m-ATX cases that a lot of Dell desktops come in. With 128-bit memory, you only need 4 chips, so that can allow smaller PCBs, but the TU116 silicon is a fair bit larger than the TU117, so IDK.
I agree. Most PC's with 300-watt PSU's will run this card fine. Probably even 250-watt PSU's.
The platform power of most iGPU business PC's is around 100W under FULL load, which is why I find it amazing they often still have 220-watt and 250-watt PSU's. Business PC's used to have PSU's as low as 120-watts but more typically 150-watt and 180-watt. Since those power output ratings are increasingly hard to come by in the OEM channel, I think most systems have 250-watt PSU's because they are the most economical to purchase at scale as nobody is making anything less than that.
~65-watt TDP (around 80-watt TDP-up) for an i5-9400 ~20-watt for motherboard, RAM and components (minus USB accessories) ~5-watt for SSD ~10-watt for power conversion loses running a >200-watt PSU under 50% load.
Yeah -I'd love to see a fully enabled TU117 (1024 SP) and sticking to the 75W budget. The most powerful possible card without an external power connector. That's the saving grace of the vanilla GTX 1650; you get half-height cards with that chip. I'm chomping at the bit for more powerformance in LP form factor. :V
The difference is, AMD will offer 8GB versions of the 5500. Most people are quick to attack me for saying 8GB is worth it on cards like these, but you only have to go over 4GB to find that out.
It will matter at higher resolutions as the textures are larger. But that doesn't matter to a GPU as underpowered as this. These won't run much more than Warcraft 3 (a 15 year old game) at 4K playable. It'll look pretty but it just won't run well.
But it depends on the game. I'm sure DOTA would run at 4K on a weak card, and the additional memory would help.
If this card was $149, and teh original GTX 1650 gets a cut to $109 or something, this would be absolutely awesome. As it stands, I can't really say I'd get behind a 4GB-only card being offered for more than 150 bucks, so I guess we'll have to see. I'd have liked this card to have 192-bits, 6GB and GDDR5 instead. With 8Gbps you could have the same bandwidth - but more importantly, the 6GB of VRAM. That said, at 149, it'd probably put the 1660 series into question; as giving it that extra 64 bits of memory bus would bring the pixel pipe count up to 48, and since this little guy already has almost all of the 1660 vanilla's shaders... Oh well, I can dream.
I absolutely love the prospect of the RX 570 8GB, less than 150 bucks in many places, this card is the people's champion. I hope the RX 5500 can actually be worth it over it.
I think this card at $150 is a death knell to AMD in this segment. But I doubt nVidia will do it because they're greedy fucks. Just watch it'll be like $190.
I find it very strange they will have 4 TU116 gpu's yet only the one TU117 , there is definitely a gap in the product stack for a 1650ti with 1024 cuda cores with either gddr5x or lower clocked gddr6 and hopefully still a 75w TDP
Reese ended the call and sighed. The 'boyfriend' comment was a long-running inside joke that had exhausted its humor sometime within its first month. Charlie still thought it was cute to say so she never stopped referring to Skylar as Reese's boyfriend (or sometimes his 'other girlfriend'), using it really in an endearing way rather than injuriously. Reese hadn't bothered to object to the terms in years, taking it as a compliment of their close friendship. He was a pretty secure guy. https://salegabriel.com/ His mind going back to his Skylar's situation, he called his heartbroken best friend and conversed with him as he raced to Reese's house. Skylar, his voice quavering from lamentation, told him what happened and expressed his feelings. His now ex-girlfriend, Catherine, had been cheating on him for months (at least), and when Skylar found out, he was hurt but had eventually forgiven her.
She never stopped having sex with the other guy though, and had no intention to. Eventually, Skylar tried to work it out by (reluctantly) suggesting an open relationship, defying Reese's advice and swallowing what little pride he still had with Catherine. Even though Catherine had accepted Skylar's proposal, she forbade him from dating other girls. Skylar, being so in love with her, stayed faithful while she openly had sex with the other guy, not even trying to hide it for the sake of common decency. Finally, Cat broke it off suddenly and without giving a reason. https://thelivenudecam.com Reese listened to his friend vent his heart until he arrived. Opening the door, Reese saw Skylar's crystalline blue eyes sparkling with tears, his full, rose colored lips quivering. Skylar fell into his best friend's broad chest as soon as the door opened and Reese received him and held him tightly in his large, strong arms.
"It's gonna be okay, bro. That bitch didn't deserve you at all. You were way too good to for her, man. Way too good. You know how many girls would love to have a guy like you? All of 'em." Reese tried to console Skylar as he closed the door and walked him to the couch with his arm around his relatively small and slightly less muscular shoulders.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
21 Comments
Back to Article
PeachNCream - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Not bad, but its a pity about the 100W TDP.hojnikb - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Yeah, if this was a 75W card, it would be awesome :)peevee - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Don't you need 6-pin connector on 1650 anyway? 75W is theoretically provided by the slot, but it is combined on all PCIe voltages, and if the card wants almost all of it on 12V to convert to whatever CPU and memory need, the slot is not going to be enough.mirei - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
The fact is half of the 1650 cards on the market don't have 6-pin connector slot.You can just browse Newegg or Amazon to verify if you don't believe.
AshlayW - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
No. Many GTX 1650 models are available with no extermal power connectors.Samus - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
You don't want to get into the situation AMD got into awhile back with "75W" cards blowing out PCIe slots.I think this 100W rating and the associated 12v connector is wisely erring on the side of caution. It sucks for business PC's where the PCIe aux connector is often missing, but that isn't the target market for this card. Besides, you can always convert a Molex if need be.
Dragonstongue - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
my how folks forget...Nvidia was many many many times in the past well beyond pci-sig limits..NOT JUST AMDfor fudge sakes.
Nvidia wants to throw stones and enforce consumers to do the same...
@$#@#$@ the only real ones "as of late" that have stayed within or close to limits Nv wise was SOME not ALL from 750 to last 2 gens...main reason why IMHO is because they decide that instead of putting better capacitors and such (as they should, seeing the price they pretty much will ask for..heavy handed to their AIB as well) is due to fancy extra chips, software etc...not directly because of "superior design methodology"
yes was "bad" on AMD as they did it, no excuses for that....however...again not all that long ago, direct from Nvidia "mouth" here use these often times very very flaky dual molex to pci-e connector...do some research Nvidia is NOT as "saint" as they want everyone to believe...
FAR FROM IT
x1000 generation they did VERY good at keeping power in check (@#$ with design to make sure of it, not the full truth, with them never is, likely never will be)
x2000 .... nuff said, have performance to back it up, sure, but power went up quite a bit especially on the RTX based ones.
I digress.
just cause it is written on the box "TDP 75w" or whatever, does NOT always mean it will not or cannot go well past it (in some cases) ... x1000 x2000 are among their "best" in decades, if not ever to not blow past their own ratings.......
AMD needs to do more to ensure same thing, absolutely, careful whom you "thrown stones at" or likely your wasting stones on those whom they should have been thrown at (and hard) instead of a "rare" problem.....
xrror - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
I mean, I think I'd trust even the smallest Dell SFF PSU to be able to handle the extra 25W coursing through that SATA power to 6-pin adapter you'd need in there.If an extra 25W is what fries your machine, you were probably SOL before you should have ever considered performance.
If not for games, then they still have the old 1650 for the spreadsheet warriors?
AshlayW - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
True: a SATA connection can happily give more than 25W on 12V, I think it's more like 60W. If you didn't overclock it (not sure it would be even allowed to OC that fair with how the power limits are these days) it'd be fine. I just hope, that we can get Half-height (LP) versions of the card. You can quite easily put the 6-pin on the back of teh card and it'd fit nicely in some slim m-ATX cases that a lot of Dell desktops come in. With 128-bit memory, you only need 4 chips, so that can allow smaller PCBs, but the TU116 silicon is a fair bit larger than the TU117, so IDK.Make it happen Nvidia (board partners)!
Samus - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
I agree. Most PC's with 300-watt PSU's will run this card fine. Probably even 250-watt PSU's.The platform power of most iGPU business PC's is around 100W under FULL load, which is why I find it amazing they often still have 220-watt and 250-watt PSU's. Business PC's used to have PSU's as low as 120-watts but more typically 150-watt and 180-watt. Since those power output ratings are increasingly hard to come by in the OEM channel, I think most systems have 250-watt PSU's because they are the most economical to purchase at scale as nobody is making anything less than that.
~65-watt TDP (around 80-watt TDP-up) for an i5-9400
~20-watt for motherboard, RAM and components (minus USB accessories)
~5-watt for SSD
~10-watt for power conversion loses running a >200-watt PSU under 50% load.
peevee - Thursday, October 31, 2019 - link
Intel's TDPs are fake.AshlayW - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Yeah -I'd love to see a fully enabled TU117 (1024 SP) and sticking to the 75W budget. The most powerful possible card without an external power connector. That's the saving grace of the vanilla GTX 1650; you get half-height cards with that chip. I'm chomping at the bit for more powerformance in LP form factor. :VAshlayW - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
"Powerformance" - looks like I messed up my words there. I mean "performance" xDpeevee - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
Looks like an excellent card for 2k screens.Cellar Door - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
AMD showed 50% perf increase over the 1650 and here we have nvidia almost matching this with the 1650S.Midrange market is heating up for the holiday rush.
AshlayW - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
The difference is, AMD will offer 8GB versions of the 5500. Most people are quick to attack me for saying 8GB is worth it on cards like these, but you only have to go over 4GB to find that out.Samus - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
It will matter at higher resolutions as the textures are larger. But that doesn't matter to a GPU as underpowered as this. These won't run much more than Warcraft 3 (a 15 year old game) at 4K playable. It'll look pretty but it just won't run well.But it depends on the game. I'm sure DOTA would run at 4K on a weak card, and the additional memory would help.
AshlayW - Tuesday, October 29, 2019 - link
If this card was $149, and teh original GTX 1650 gets a cut to $109 or something, this would be absolutely awesome. As it stands, I can't really say I'd get behind a 4GB-only card being offered for more than 150 bucks, so I guess we'll have to see. I'd have liked this card to have 192-bits, 6GB and GDDR5 instead. With 8Gbps you could have the same bandwidth - but more importantly, the 6GB of VRAM. That said, at 149, it'd probably put the 1660 series into question; as giving it that extra 64 bits of memory bus would bring the pixel pipe count up to 48, and since this little guy already has almost all of the 1660 vanilla's shaders... Oh well, I can dream.I absolutely love the prospect of the RX 570 8GB, less than 150 bucks in many places, this card is the people's champion. I hope the RX 5500 can actually be worth it over it.
Samus - Wednesday, October 30, 2019 - link
I think this card at $150 is a death knell to AMD in this segment. But I doubt nVidia will do it because they're greedy fucks. Just watch it'll be like $190.GobbledyGeek - Friday, November 1, 2019 - link
I find it very strange they will have 4 TU116 gpu's yet only the one TU117 , there is definitely a gap in the product stack for a 1650ti with 1024 cuda cores with either gddr5x or lower clocked gddr6 and hopefully still a 75w TDPbafezuto - Saturday, August 8, 2020 - link
Reese ended the call and sighed. The 'boyfriend' comment was a long-running inside joke that had exhausted its humor sometime within its first month. Charlie still thought it was cute to say so she never stopped referring to Skylar as Reese's boyfriend (or sometimes his 'other girlfriend'), using it really in an endearing way rather than injuriously. Reese hadn't bothered to object to the terms in years, taking it as a compliment of their close friendship. He was a pretty secure guy.https://salegabriel.com/
His mind going back to his Skylar's situation, he called his heartbroken best friend and conversed with him as he raced to Reese's house. Skylar, his voice quavering from lamentation, told him what happened and expressed his feelings. His now ex-girlfriend, Catherine, had been cheating on him for months (at least), and when Skylar found out, he was hurt but had eventually forgiven her.
She never stopped having sex with the other guy though, and had no intention to. Eventually, Skylar tried to work it out by (reluctantly) suggesting an open relationship, defying Reese's advice and swallowing what little pride he still had with Catherine. Even though Catherine had accepted Skylar's proposal, she forbade him from dating other girls. Skylar, being so in love with her, stayed faithful while she openly had sex with the other guy, not even trying to hide it for the sake of common decency. Finally, Cat broke it off suddenly and without giving a reason.
https://thelivenudecam.com
Reese listened to his friend vent his heart until he arrived. Opening the door, Reese saw Skylar's crystalline blue eyes sparkling with tears, his full, rose colored lips quivering. Skylar fell into his best friend's broad chest as soon as the door opened and Reese received him and held him tightly in his large, strong arms.
"It's gonna be okay, bro. That bitch didn't deserve you at all. You were way too good to for her, man. Way too good. You know how many girls would love to have a guy like you? All of 'em." Reese tried to console Skylar as he closed the door and walked him to the couch with his arm around his relatively small and slightly less muscular shoulders.