GTX 1050 too much for Core2Quad rig, slight OC to 2.83Ghz, 8GB DDR2, SSD?

[VirtualLarry]

Currently, I have a couple of Core2Quad rigs that I fixed up, and then mothballed. I might sell them. (I'm kind of attached to them, though, I've had them so long, and they've always done well for me.)

I currently have a couple of 2GB GDDR5 R7 260X cards in them, which take a single PCI-E 6-pin power connector.

Would the GTX1050 2GB (looking at the Asus dual-fan model from Newegg on ebay for $104.99 FS), be an improvement? Enough to be worth it, when paired up with a Core2Quad?

Are there any people here that are currently running a GTX 1050 (or a higher GTX 10-series card), on a Core2Quad rig? Does the Core2Quad limit them too much?

Is the Core2Quad effectively around a Haswell i3, when it comes to gaming performance, or does "it depend"?

Thinking of games like GTA V, Witcher 3, and Crysis 3. Would a 2.83Ghz Core2Quad, with 8GB of DDR2, and a GTX 1050, be able to play these games at 1080P? Even on med or possibly low?

I've got some other cards too, some GTX 950 2GB GDDR5 (one PCI-E 6-pin), some R9 270X 2GB GDDR5 (two 6-pin), some HD 7950 3GB GDDR5 (two 6-pin), and some R7 250X 2GB DDR3 (one 6-pin).

Part of the problem is, the PSU in those two Core2Quad rigs only has a single PCI-E 6-pin power connector (Antec VP-450, around 4-5 years old).

I could replace the PSUs with some EVGA 500W/600W PSUs I have (new), but that would be extra work.

Would an R9 270X 2GB or HD 7950 3GB be overkill for a 2.83Ghz Core2Quad? I think that they probably would be.

Is the GTX 1050 faster or slower than the R9 270X and 7950 3GB?

I've got some Haswell G3258 OCed (4.0+Ghz) rigs, and some G4560 (3.5Ghz dual-core KBL w/HT, no OC) rigs, that could use dGPUs too.

Just trying to allocate my cards in such a way that they match up with the CPUs, and are saleable.

Was originally just going to buy a pair of GTX 1050 cards, now that they're $105 shipped for a dual-fan 2GB model, and put those with my G4560 rigs to sell, for $500-600, and leave the R7 260X 2GB GDDR5 cards in the Core2Quad rigs. And maybe, put the GTX 950 2GB GDDR5 cards back with the Haswell rigs. Unsure.

 

[thepaleobiker]

I found this video on youtube that seems to be comparing the C2Q performance against an i5 2500 CPU, and was generally close. The GPU wasnt a 1050 though....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Za0_DkzGL5w

Regards,
Vish

 

[tamz_msc]

I believe this is what you're looking for:

The bottleneck is obvious, but not a bad result for a 10 year old CPU.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Thanks for that video. If only I could get GTX 1050ti 4GB cards for $120.

I'm wondering what is the better value purchase to soup up my Core2Quad rigs, if I were to do this - the 1050, or 1050ti? Were they using a 1050, or 1050ti in the video?

Edit: He says "mini 1050".

 

[tamz_msc]

Thanks for that video. If only I could get GTX 1050ti 4GB cards for $120.

I'm wondering what is the better value purchase to soup up my Core2Quad rigs, if I were to do this - the 1050, or 1050ti? Were they using a 1050, or 1050ti in the video?

Edit: He says "mini 1050".

The performance that the GTX 1050 Ti offers overs the non-Ti isn't worth it in my opinion.

 

[Valantar]

I've used a Fury X in my Core2Quad (Q9450) PC since it launched. Works perfectly. During that time, I've pushed my OC from 3GHz to 3.2, then 3.5, which has of course brought improvements with it. But even at 3GHz, the CPU bottleneck wasn't too awful. At the time I looked into it (comparing with reviews and the like), I believe I saw a roughly 10% deficit compared to various far more modern review rigs. Not too bad at all. Can't remember what clock speed I was at back then, but I don't think it was 3.5.

I'd say go for it.

 

[AtenRa]

Im using a Core 2 Quad 9450 (for evaluation) currently at 3.36GHz with RX 480 8GB 1400MHz and i can tell you its a dog. There are some games that benefit from the RX 480 but there are others that are completely CPU limited (like Paladins). I believe an RX 460 should be the faster card to pair an oced C2Q but perhaps the GTX1050 (non ti) will be fine too but i wouldnt spend more than $100 for a GPU for that old CPU.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Thanks for the infos. I decided to hold off on upgrading the Core2Quad video cards just yet, pending how they perform with the R7 260X 2GB GDDR5 cards in Tekken 7 PC, I think.

I instead just bought a Sapphire Nitro RX 470 4GB card, for my overclocked i5-6400 @ 4.45Ghz rig, to play T7PC, hopefully it's enough, and you don't need a 1080 for that game. I hope that AMD isn't too dis-advantaged compared to Nvidia. Game is using UE4, is that NV-favored or AMD-favored? Or Neutral? (Not trying to start a fanboy war here though.)

Newegg has a MSI Gaming X 1060 3GB card for $199.99 that I could get too, to hedge my bets, so to speak, by buying both AMD and NV, and use whichever card that game likes best.

Don't suppose that I could play at locked 60FPS on my 4K UHD TV though, with either card?

 

[VirtualLarry]

Here's a good video, pairing up a Q6600 with a 1050 ti.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9Wu-4tIvK4

 

[escrow4]

3GB of vRAM will be a fat limitation for any future gaming so I'd pick up a 4GB RX over it anyday. Core 2's are a dog now though. They will bottleneck any modern AAA game from the past 2 years and dump a whole lot of heat and power whilst doing so. That vid doesn't show extended gameplay with the inevitable minimum FPS dips you get with slower CPUs.

 

[VirtualLarry]

3GB of vRAM will be a fat limitation for any future gaming so I'd pick up a 4GB RX over it anyday.

Well, I was thinking the same thing, so that's why I got the RX 470 4GB card for my personal rig. I question the need for 8GB, though, for 1080P. Probably not actually "necessary" for another year or two, probably two.

Core 2's are a dog now though. They will bottleneck any modern AAA game from the past 2 years and dump a whole lot of heat and power whilst doing so. That vid doesn't show extended gameplay with the inevitable minimum FPS dips you get with slower CPUs.

Well, obviously, the minimums will be lower than newer rigs, but if they're still playable, why not max out the dGPU while I can still maybe find a buyer for them?

 

[Valantar]

Im using a Core 2 Quad 9450 (for evaluation) currently at 3.36GHz with RX 480 8GB 1400MHz and i can tell you its a dog. There are some games that benefit from the RX 480 but there are others that are completely CPU limited (like Paladins). I believe an RX 460 should be the faster card to pair an oced C2Q but perhaps the GTX1050 (non ti) will be fine too but i wouldnt spend more than $100 for a GPU for that old CPU.

I guess that depends what games you play. I hadn't even heard of Paladins until now, but then again games like that are pretty much my worst nightmare. My C2Q9450@3.5GHz hovered around 80%-90% load on all cores when I played Rise of the Tomb Raider, and is pegged at a solid 100% in BF1. Still produces smooth and non-stuttery gameplay at 1440p with my Fury X, though. I guess your mileage may vary. Then again, multiplayer FPSes tend to be CPU intensive. And I shun those like the plague.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Anyways, those RX 470 4GB cards I was going to get, fell through.

So now, I'm wondering about buying some $99.99 FS GTX 1050 Asus dual-fan OC cards, off of Newegg on ebay (for the Q9300 rigs).

 

[NTMBK]

Those R7 260X cards are fine for a system that age. Don't sink more money into them.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I was watching some YouTube videos, there was one where someone upgraded a $10 PC with a Q6600 and a GTX 1050, and they were getting an ave (?) of 45 FPS on Ultra @ 1080P in FO4. (Maybe it was 720P?) with a GTX 1050.

Would an R7 260X 2GB even play FO4? (On a Q9300 rig?)

 

[Valantar]

Doubt it. What resolution will you be using them at? Depending on your games, I'd argue that hard CPU bottlenecks are few and far between. Soft bottlenecks pulling performance down are plentiful, but a better GPU will still perform better even on an old system. As said above, even with all four cores pegged at 100% load, I can play BF1 single player smoothly at 1440p on my Fury X + Q9450@3.5 (haven't tried MP, as, again, I can't stand most competitive shooters). As long as you can use the GPU for something else down the line (or the PCs have enough life left in them to not die in the next year) I'd say it's a worthwhile investment.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Ok, I just ordered several RX 470 4GB cards. (Third time I've tried this.) Newegg had an XFX model for $149.99 FS.

For those interested, they also had a PowerColor (crap, IMHO) RX 470 4GB card for $119.99 AR FS as a ShellShocker today.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Speaking of the Core2Quad rigs... there's the Legacy BIOS versus UEFI BIOS compatibility issues with modern video cards too.

Does anyone know, do most GTX 1050 cards work with Legacy BIOS implementations? I'm guessing that they do, judging by the number of "cheap upgrade for old PC" videos on YouTube involving GTX 1050 cards. I saw one video, though, where they tried to put an RX 470 into an old Athlon S939 rig, and it wouldn't work - incompatible, likely requiring a UEFI host BIOS.

 

[sm625]

Back when Core2Quad was a thing, I'm sure many people installed a GTX 580 into such systems. And that isnt far off from a 1050 ti.

 

[happy medium]

Back when Core2Quad was a thing, I'm sure many people installed a GTX 580 into such systems. And that isnt far off from a 1050 ti.

the 1050ti is ~35% faster + better overclocking+ 2.5x the vram vs the 580.
In the latest games a gtx1050ti is about = to a gtx780 and the gtx1050ti will overclock about 20% for 13% more performance..

A gtx1050/rx460 is good for a core 2 quad @~ 3.0+ @ 1080p
A gx1050ti/ r9 380 is good for a core 2 quad @~ 3.8+ @ 1080p
A gtx970/(rx 470) was too much for my core 2 quad @ 4.0 @ 1080p
I did the testing for the above..

A rx470 is ~40% faster than a 1050ti and is no good for core 2 quads.
That is a waste of money.

A core 2 quad @ 2.8 is slow, its only when you reach~ 3.4 ghz it really speeds up.
I have a q9550 @ 4.0, 8gb of ddr2 1066, with a 4gb gtx960(= a gtx1050ti), and I borrowed a gtx 970 (= to a rx 470) for testing.
I was going to buy a gtx970 for the core 2 rig and decided is was not worth it.

Larryy, throw your gtx950's in the core 2 quad rigs and call it a day.
Remember a gtx950=gtx1050 give or take a few %.
A gtx 950 is a great overclocker, should easily give you gtx1050ti speeds.

 

[Insomniator]

My question, outside the performance pairing question of a 1050ti and c2q is who would be the buyer? Someone that doesn't know the platform is 10 years old? Would you be selling the system for the price of the 1050ti + $20?

 

[poofyhairguy]

Ok, I just ordered several RX 470 4GB cards. (Third time I've tried this.) Newegg had an XFX model for $149.99 FS.

For those interested, they also had a PowerColor (crap, IMHO) RX 470 4GB card for $119.99 AR FS as a ShellShocker today.

I love my XFX 470. Have it OCed so it beats my reference 480.

 

[escrow4]

My question, outside the performance pairing question of a 1050ti and c2q is who would be the buyer? Someone that doesn't know the platform is 10 years old? Would you be selling the system for the price of the 1050ti + $20?

My question is why bother. I wouldn't be surprised if the Snapdragon 625 in my phone is as fast as ye olde Core 2.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I love my XFX 470. Have it OCed so it beats my reference 480.

This XFX model RX 470 4GB card, scores 60.0 FPS in Unigen Heaven Extreme preset. Pretty decent! 4K, however, is a bit more taxing.

Edit: This is interesting, but it's probably margin-of-error stuff.
On my i5-6400 BLCK OCed to 4.266Ghz, with the identical XFX RS RX 470 4GB card, I scored 60.0 FPS on the Unigine Heaven Benchmark.

On my G4560, and the same model card, I scored 60.7 FPS, using the automagically-installed Radeon Windows 10 64-bit drivers.

I manually installed the newest non-whql-win10-64bit-radeon-software-crimson-relive-17.3.3-mar16, am re-running the benchmark.

Wow, now 61.2 FPS, with newest drivers.

Edit: Discovered that my Windows Desktop Resolution setting on my G4560 was at 3840x2160 @ 30Hz. Fixed that back to 60Hz, and re-ran the Extreme preset benchmark, and got 61.1 FPS.

Edit: Just a clarification - my desktop is at 4K@60, but the "Extreme" preset for the benchmark, runs at 1600x900 windowed, I think. Don't want anyone thinking I can score 60FPS in Heaven @ 4K60, with max settings, with this card. I did do a max settings runs, it scored around 13FPS.

 

[Tom]

So along the same line of questions.. I have a nice older pc with a Q6600, I'm looking for a good used gpu to put in it for around $50.

The 1050, even used, seems a bit more than that so what lesser cards should I be looking at ?