GTX 960 vs 1050ti

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Sort by date Sort by votes
maxalge

maxalge

Champion
Ambassador
May 31, 2012
13,373
4
56,960


gtx 1060 or better to notice a difference

what you are trying to buy would be a sidegrade, no improvement
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
chopto45

chopto45

Prominent
Aug 30, 2017
8
0
510


UserBenchmark is a very unintelligent benchmark if you are comparing a GPU that already carries many more benchmarks made by users like the GTX 960, with one that has very few benchmarks in the database of that page as it is the GTX 1050 Ti.Userbenchmark is simply an average note equivalent to the number of users who test with their equipment, in this case having more test of the GTX 960, it is normal to leave with that is' 'faster' ', if you do not believe me, look at the gpu ranking of Userbenchmark, you will see how they place a normal HD 7970 above a R9 280X (which is a 7970 GHZ edition). And no, the GTX 1050 Ti is slightly better than a GTX 960. The GTX 1050 Ti is practically the same GTX 770 only with new architecture. As for the question of the user, it is better to change that GTX 960 for a 1060 of 6gb minimum or an RX 580 of 8gb .
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
P

pete_101

Splendid
Aug 2, 2014
2,988
129
23,890
I have to disagree with you, userbenchmark is one of the few places you can find "real world" comparisons. BTW the 960 currently has 82,171 benchmarks and the 1050ti has 42,700, I think that's more than enough to get a good idea of how it performs on average.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
chopto45

chopto45

Prominent
Aug 30, 2017
8
0
510


Of course, then I follow your logic, a normal HD 7970, is more powerful than a R9 280X (HD 7970 GHZ edition) as Userbenchmark puts it, or that a R7 260X is faster than a GTX 480, as they also put it there. according to you when it has already been proven in infinite Benchmark that the GTX 1050 Ti is faster than the GTX 960, you will continue believing in a site of shit (I feel the expression) that is still a PASSMark more.Ah! I almost forgot, did you know that the Userbenchmark also places the GTX 650 Ti Boost and the GTX 750 Ti, as slower than a R7 260X, when the reality is different ?.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
P

pete_101

Splendid
Aug 2, 2014
2,988
129
23,890
I stick by what I said, they are real world results from thousands of users, unlike a Passmark site that only looks at the theoretical numbers. Ok, they are not perfect, as they use the synthetic tests to rank the GPUs rather than pure gaming results, but the gaming results are often included too.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
chopto45

chopto45

Prominent
Aug 30, 2017
8
0
510


Keep saying what you want. But I can not allow people to misinform, saying that a previous generation gpu, is better than one with newer architecture, that consumes less energy and that, if that were not enough, has more performance. And yes, even if you deny it, userbenchmark is not very different from Passmark, passmark also bases its results on an average of results given by thousands of users, just like Userbenchmark does.

And this debate I think it is better to leave it up here. You said yourself that you continued to keep your word, well, but please do not misinform others based on a website in which according to her, a gtx 480 is worse than one R7 260X, and that's what I'm saying because I'm sure you've looked at the GTX 960 and 1050 Ti benchmarks in videos, Guru3D and Techpowerup, which are one of the most reliable sites where you should know who wins.

Goodbye and greetings.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom