Gigabyte Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 Ti OC 4GB £139.98 @ Ebuyer (Amazon Price Match OOS till 11th Dec) - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
1360Expired

Gigabyte Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 Ti OC 4GB £139.98 @ Ebuyer (Amazon Price Match OOS till 11th Dec)

£139.98 @ Ebuyer
Powered by GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4GB GDDR5 Support up to 8K display @60Hz Amazon price match - Amazon Link Out of stock till Dec 11th (thanks LeeA & ajavaid92) Read More
davidncrowley Avatar
7m, 2w agoFound 7 months, 2 weeks ago
Powered by GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
4GB GDDR5
Support up to 8K display @60Hz

Amazon price match - Amazon Link

Out of stock till Dec 11th (thanks LeeA & ajavaid92)
More From Ebuyer:
×
Get the Hottest Deals Daily
Stay informed. Once a day, we'll send you the deals our members voted as the best.
Failed
davidncrowley Avatar
7m, 2w agoFound 7 months, 2 weeks ago
Options

Top Comments

(2)
46 Likes
eiamhere69
BetaRomeo
neblogai
romeospadre
neblogai
romeospadre
This price seems to be average price for this card. cant see the deal unless I am missing some thing? Custom PC recommends the Geforce 1060 3GB as a mid priced card (gold award) if that helps anyone although its priced at £200 ish
It is really wrong to recommend a 3GB card for most people. There are already multiple games where image quality is reduced, or frame times become unequal because of only 3GB, making GTX1060 3GB a glass cannon in 2016, not even talking about games of 2017-18.
I'd go with the reviews of Custom PC magazine the 3GB out performed ATI cards with more ram. December issue has benchmarking for the card. I think the 1060 also will support VR where the 1050 won't. Thinking for reasons of future proofing
But did they test properly? Most websites check just average frame rate, which is not enough, as it does not reveal performance in full. Did they test GTX1060 3GB at Doom Vulkan, did they check image quality in Gears of War 4, stuttering in Forza Horizon 3, much lower minimum fps in Mordor, Mirrors Edge, etc.? It is like a difference between having a car with an engine running smoothly, vs a car that is almost as fast but often stutters and loses power for parts of a second. Similar speed, but very different pleasure to drive.
It's also worth noting that Nvidia has far superior memory compression to AMD. The 3GB 1060 shouldn't be much more memory-constrained than a 4GB 470/480. They'll both be bumping their heads on their VRAM limits at roughly the same time (I give it a year - but nobody knows the future, of course ;)). If you want more future-proof than a 3GB 1060, you're looking at the 8GB 470/480 (or the 6GB 1060).
(Not sure if it's a technical error on my end, but your comment seems to cut off before your links to the reputable sites that tested the 3GB 1060 "properly"..?)
Not really how it works, but anyway.
I can assure you that this it is how it works. My dissertation was on 3D rasterisation - I am quite literally qualified to comment on this. :{

If you don't have four years to spare for an Honours Degree, you might still be able to get your head around the numbers (although I don't hold out much hope for you). Here, this came up first in a Google search, and shows the differences in practice rather than theory. Plenty more here, too.

eiamhere69
There is also the speculation that Nvidia have poorer quality images, whether this is due to sly underhanded tactics like using lesser quality textures, or simply due to over compression. Maybe its just bugs, who knows
Yikes... this comment makes my head hurt. If you have evidence to support this "speculation", please do share - I'd be very interested to read it myself. But if you're correct, and it's pure speculation with nothing to back it up, what the hell was the point of sharing something so insubstantial? There's been speculation that AMD uses child labour, for example, but it would be ludicrous to go around spreading that rumour on sites discussing graphics cards without any evidence.

Unless... are you referring to the 3DMark incident in 2003?!?! oO Both NVIDIA and ATi were accused - and guilty - there! But that's hardly "speculation", of course. X)
7 Likes
My son has just asked for a GTX1070 for Christmas, I didn't know video cards went that pricey. Glad he didnt ask for a 1080. Gulp

All Comments

(182) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
1 Like #1
Amazon has price matched, though out of stock until December 11th.
1 Like #2
damn, how is the 1050 this cheap already :)
#3
LeeA
Amazon has price matched, though out of stock until December 11th.
I can only find this price on Amazon?
2 Likes #4
davidncrowley
LeeA
Amazon has price matched, though out of stock until December 11th.
I can only find this price on Amazon?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B01MEHGRMS/?tag=ho01f-21&th=1
1 Like #5
Used Flubit and managed to get the Gigabyte 1050Ti D5 mini last week for 134.87 with free delivery.
2 Likes #6
Just checked with Flubit on this card and its 132.56 incl delivery
2 Likes #7
argt7
damn, how is the 1050 this cheap already :)

Because it is the base model.
7 Likes #8
My son has just asked for a GTX1070 for Christmas, I didn't know video cards went that pricey. Glad he didnt ask for a 1080. Gulp
2 Likes #9
because the 980ti is better
#10
I suppose why this interests me anyway is that the 1050 TIs are the lowest 'VR-capable' Nvidia cards of this generation
#11
davidncrowley
I suppose why this interests me anyway is that the 1050 TIs are the lowest 'VR-capable' Nvidia cards of this generation

Looking at a cheapish build so something like this -http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/gigabyte-ga-990x-gaming-sli-socket-am3-atx-motherboard-109-98-ebuyer-free-8gb-ddr3-2567024 + this deal
#12
Anyone running this on a vive headset ?! Got a vive for my lad for Xmas but will be running it off my gaming rig with a 10m active HDMI cable but really need to build a new mini itx rig for it.

Edited By: Panda221 on Dec 06, 2016 12:07: .
#13
This price seems to be average price for this card. cant see the deal unless I am missing some thing? Custom PC recommends the Geforce 1060 3GB as a mid priced card (gold award) if that helps anyone although its priced at £200 ish
#14
ajavaid92
davidncrowley
LeeA
Amazon has price matched, though out of stock until December 11th.
I can only find this price on Amazon?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B01MEHGRMS/?tag=ho01f-21&th=1

That is a 1050 and NOT a 1050 Ti
2 Likes #15
wild_quinine
ajavaid92
davidncrowley
LeeA
Amazon has price matched, though out of stock until December 11th.
I can only find this price on Amazon?
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B01MEHGRMS/?tag=ho01f-21&th=1
That is a 1050 and NOT a 1050 Ti

it's a 1050 Ti
as i understand 1050 only has 2GB so if it comes with 4GB then it's the Ti version
#16
Does the RAM make a huge difference on graphics card these days? I see most people recommending 6GB at minimum these days if you want to play latest games. This I guess will be good enough on medium-high settings on most games?
#17
romeospadre
This price seems to be average price for this card. cant see the deal unless I am missing some thing? Custom PC recommends the Geforce 1060 3GB as a mid priced card (gold award) if that helps anyone although its priced at £200 ish

It is really wrong to recommend a 3GB card for most people. There are already multiple games where image quality is reduced, or frame times become unequal because of only 3GB, making GTX1060 3GB a glass cannon in 2016, not even talking about games of 2017-18.
4 Likes #18
kiish
Does the RAM make a huge difference on graphics card these days? I see most people recommending 6GB at minimum these days if you want to play latest games. This I guess will be good enough on medium-high settings on most games?

4GB is perfectly fine for GTX1050Ti. It is a 1080p resolution card, meant for 'high' quality settings - for such settings 4GB is definitely enough for any game. Actually, RX470 is much faster than this card and not much more expensive, making it a better deal- but at a strictly 139 pound price- GTX1050Ti 4GB is well balanced, power efficient and great.
#19
neblogai
romeospadre
This price seems to be average price for this card. cant see the deal unless I am missing some thing? Custom PC recommends the Geforce 1060 3GB as a mid priced card (gold award) if that helps anyone although its priced at £200 ish

It is really wrong to recommend a 3GB card for most people. There are already multiple games where image quality is reduced, or frame times become unequal because of only 3GB, making GTX1060 3GB a glass cannon in 2016, not even talking about games of 2017-18.


I'd go with the reviews of Custom PC magazine the 3GB out performed ATI cards with more ram. December issue has benchmarking for the card. I think the 1060 also will support VR where the 1050 won't. Thinking for reasons of future proofing
#20
Would this card be a good upgrade from a gtx 960?
#21
LukeStone
Would this card be a good upgrade from a gtx 960?
Basic Comparison here
#22
LukeStone
Would this card be a good upgrade from a gtx 960?

Not really tbh, for significant gains I wouldn't even say the 1060 would be enough. I'd be looking at 1070/80 in your case. Depends what you're looking for as I'm sure a 960 is fine for most 1080p gaming. If you are looking at 4K/VR then that's a different story.

Edited By: PsychONeill on Dec 06, 2016 13:09
#23
If you're after something with a bit more power check the Amazon Warehouse, some very decent deals to be had. I'm using a Gigabyte 980Ti that I bought for £155 from there.
1 Like #24
ebuyer customer support non existent - dont do it!
#25
romeospadre
neblogai
romeospadre
This price seems to be average price for this card. cant see the deal unless I am missing some thing? Custom PC recommends the Geforce 1060 3GB as a mid priced card (gold award) if that helps anyone although its priced at £200 ish
It is really wrong to recommend a 3GB card for most people. There are already multiple games where image quality is reduced, or frame times become unequal because of only 3GB, making GTX1060 3GB a glass cannon in 2016, not even talking about games of 2017-18.
I'd go with the reviews of Custom PC magazine the 3GB out performed ATI cards with more ram. December issue has benchmarking for the card. I think the 1060 also will support VR where the 1050 won't. Thinking for reasons of future proofing

But did they test properly? Most websites check just average frame rate, which is not enough, as it does not reveal performance in full. Did they test GTX1060 3GB at Doom Vulkan, did they check image quality in Gears of War 4, stuttering in Forza Horizon 3, much lower minimum fps in Mordor, Mirrors Edge, etc.? It is like a difference between having a car with an engine running smoothly, vs a car that is almost as fast but often stutters and loses power for parts of a second. Similar speed, but very different pleasure to drive.
1 Like #26
neblogai
romeospadre
neblogai
romeospadre
This price seems to be average price for this card. cant see the deal unless I am missing some thing? Custom PC recommends the Geforce 1060 3GB as a mid priced card (gold award) if that helps anyone although its priced at £200 ish
It is really wrong to recommend a 3GB card for most people. There are already multiple games where image quality is reduced, or frame times become unequal because of only 3GB, making GTX1060 3GB a glass cannon in 2016, not even talking about games of 2017-18.
I'd go with the reviews of Custom PC magazine the 3GB out performed ATI cards with more ram. December issue has benchmarking for the card. I think the 1060 also will support VR where the 1050 won't. Thinking for reasons of future proofing
But did they test properly? Most websites check just average frame rate, which is not enough, as it does not reveal performance in full. Did they test GTX1060 3GB at Doom Vulkan, did they check image quality in Gears of War 4, stuttering in Forza Horizon 3, much lower minimum fps in Mordor, Mirrors Edge, etc.? It is like a difference between having a car with an engine running smoothly, vs a car that is almost as fast but often stutters and loses power for parts of a second. Similar speed, but very different pleasure to drive.
It's also worth noting that Nvidia has far superior memory compression to AMD. The 3GB 1060 shouldn't be much more memory-constrained than a 4GB 470/480. They'll both be bumping their heads on their VRAM limits at roughly the same time (I give it a year - but nobody knows the future, of course ;)). If you want more future-proof than a 3GB 1060, you're looking at the 8GB 470/480 (or the 6GB 1060).

(Not sure if it's a technical error on my end, but your comment seems to cut off before your links to the reputable sites that tested the 3GB 1060 "properly"..?)
#27
I use my GPU mainly for Premiere Pro, where I know that CUDA cores are important.. but my lowly GTX 660 has 960 cores, apparently, compared to the 1050 Ti's 768. Excuse my ignorance, but does this mean that I'm better off with the 660 in this respect?
1 Like #28
BetaRomeo
neblogai
romeospadre
neblogai
romeospadre
This price seems to be average price for this card. cant see the deal unless I am missing some thing? Custom PC recommends the Geforce 1060 3GB as a mid priced card (gold award) if that helps anyone although its priced at £200 ish
It is really wrong to recommend a 3GB card for most people. There are already multiple games where image quality is reduced, or frame times become unequal because of only 3GB, making GTX1060 3GB a glass cannon in 2016, not even talking about games of 2017-18.
I'd go with the reviews of Custom PC magazine the 3GB out performed ATI cards with more ram. December issue has benchmarking for the card. I think the 1060 also will support VR where the 1050 won't. Thinking for reasons of future proofing
But did they test properly? Most websites check just average frame rate, which is not enough, as it does not reveal performance in full. Did they test GTX1060 3GB at Doom Vulkan, did they check image quality in Gears of War 4, stuttering in Forza Horizon 3, much lower minimum fps in Mordor, Mirrors Edge, etc.? It is like a difference between having a car with an engine running smoothly, vs a car that is almost as fast but often stutters and loses power for parts of a second. Similar speed, but very different pleasure to drive.
It's also worth noting that Nvidia has far superior memory compression to AMD. The 3GB 1060 shouldn't be much more memory-constrained than a 4GB 470/480. They'll both be bumping their heads on their VRAM limits at roughly the same time (I give it a year - but nobody knows the future, of course ;)). If you want more future-proof than a 3GB 1060, you're looking at the 8GB 470/480 (or the 6GB 1060).
(Not sure if it's a technical error on my end, but your comment seems to cut off before your links to the reputable sites that tested the 3GB 1060 "properly"..?)
Not really how it works, but anyway.

There is also the speculation that Nvidia have poorer quality images, whether this is due to sly underhanded tactics like using lesser quality textures, or simply due to over compression. Maybe its just bugs, who knows

Edited By: eiamhere69 on Dec 06, 2016 13:54
1 Like #29
schnide
I use my GPU mainly for Premiere Pro, where I know that CUDA cores are important.. but my lowly GTX 660 has 960 cores, apparently, compared to the 1050 Ti's 768. Excuse my ignorance, but does this mean that I'm better off with the 660 in this respect?

what sort of performance increase are you looking for?
2 Likes #30
Completely agree with neblogai. You can say "spend a bit more to get much more performance" until the cows come home, but in this case, if you can afford another £10 and have the power supply to cope, the recent AMD RX 470 deals at £149.99 provide a better buy in terms of £/fps (looks like approx. 20 - 25% overall improvement in many cases).
46 Likes #31
eiamhere69
BetaRomeo
neblogai
romeospadre
neblogai
romeospadre
This price seems to be average price for this card. cant see the deal unless I am missing some thing? Custom PC recommends the Geforce 1060 3GB as a mid priced card (gold award) if that helps anyone although its priced at £200 ish
It is really wrong to recommend a 3GB card for most people. There are already multiple games where image quality is reduced, or frame times become unequal because of only 3GB, making GTX1060 3GB a glass cannon in 2016, not even talking about games of 2017-18.
I'd go with the reviews of Custom PC magazine the 3GB out performed ATI cards with more ram. December issue has benchmarking for the card. I think the 1060 also will support VR where the 1050 won't. Thinking for reasons of future proofing
But did they test properly? Most websites check just average frame rate, which is not enough, as it does not reveal performance in full. Did they test GTX1060 3GB at Doom Vulkan, did they check image quality in Gears of War 4, stuttering in Forza Horizon 3, much lower minimum fps in Mordor, Mirrors Edge, etc.? It is like a difference between having a car with an engine running smoothly, vs a car that is almost as fast but often stutters and loses power for parts of a second. Similar speed, but very different pleasure to drive.
It's also worth noting that Nvidia has far superior memory compression to AMD. The 3GB 1060 shouldn't be much more memory-constrained than a 4GB 470/480. They'll both be bumping their heads on their VRAM limits at roughly the same time (I give it a year - but nobody knows the future, of course ;)). If you want more future-proof than a 3GB 1060, you're looking at the 8GB 470/480 (or the 6GB 1060).
(Not sure if it's a technical error on my end, but your comment seems to cut off before your links to the reputable sites that tested the 3GB 1060 "properly"..?)
Not really how it works, but anyway.
I can assure you that this it is how it works. My dissertation was on 3D rasterisation - I am quite literally qualified to comment on this. :{

If you don't have four years to spare for an Honours Degree, you might still be able to get your head around the numbers (although I don't hold out much hope for you). Here, this came up first in a Google search, and shows the differences in practice rather than theory. Plenty more here, too.

eiamhere69
There is also the speculation that Nvidia have poorer quality images, whether this is due to sly underhanded tactics like using lesser quality textures, or simply due to over compression. Maybe its just bugs, who knows
Yikes... this comment makes my head hurt. If you have evidence to support this "speculation", please do share - I'd be very interested to read it myself. But if you're correct, and it's pure speculation with nothing to back it up, what the hell was the point of sharing something so insubstantial? There's been speculation that AMD uses child labour, for example, but it would be ludicrous to go around spreading that rumour on sites discussing graphics cards without any evidence.

Unless... are you referring to the 3DMark incident in 2003?!?! oO Both NVIDIA and ATi were accused - and guilty - there! But that's hardly "speculation", of course. X)
2 Likes #32
BetaRomeo
It's also worth noting that Nvidia has far superior memory compression to AMD. The 3GB 1060 shouldn't be much more memory-constrained than a 4GB 470/480. They'll both be bumping their heads on their VRAM limits at roughly the same time (I give it a year - but nobody knows the future, of course ;)). If you want more future-proof than a 3GB 1060, you're looking at the 8GB 470/480 (or the 6GB 1060).
(Not sure if it's a technical error on my end, but your comment seems to cut off before your links to the reputable sites that tested the 3GB 1060 "properly"..?)

From what I've seen, nVidia Pascal cards are about 10% efficient in memory use, as in 3GB nVidia Pascal~=3.3GB on AMD Polaris. And yes, 4GB AMD cards are also quite close to the limit. I guess it depends on software: some game developers might optimize games for 4GB VRAM- amount which is already popular for 2 GPU generations. Some might put VRAM limiters, which lower texture quality for lower VRAM use. Others will not care, use a lot of VRAM on Ultra settings and leave it to the user to drop game settings. And e-sports will probably still use 2-3GB at most. I can only guess which way most of the market will go.
#33
neblogai
BetaRomeo
It's also worth noting that Nvidia has far superior memory compression to AMD. The 3GB 1060 shouldn't be much more memory-constrained than a 4GB 470/480. They'll both be bumping their heads on their VRAM limits at roughly the same time (I give it a year - but nobody knows the future, of course ;)). If you want more future-proof than a 3GB 1060, you're looking at the 8GB 470/480 (or the 6GB 1060).
(Not sure if it's a technical error on my end, but your comment seems to cut off before your links to the reputable sites that tested the 3GB 1060 "properly"..?)
From what I've seen, nVidia Pascal cards are about 10% efficient in memory use, as in 3GB nVidia Pascal~=3.3GB on AMD Polaris.
Ooh, interesting - I haven't had any hard Pascal / Polaris numbers yet. Pascal's supposed to be a bump over Maxwell, which was eating Hawaii for breakfast, but I was suspicious of Polaris's alleged boost as they seem very focused on 8GB for their mid-tier cards. Have you been testing them yourself, or do you have a source?
#34
Gold Feet
schnide
I use my GPU mainly for Premiere Pro, where I know that CUDA cores are important.. but my lowly GTX 660 has 960 cores, apparently, compared to the 1050 Ti's 768. Excuse my ignorance, but does this mean that I'm better off with the 660 in this respect?
what sort of performance increase are you looking for?

I'm not sure how to answer that exactly, at least in a measured way! But I'll try.

I rendered an hour long video in 45 minutes the other day. If I could get that down to 20 I'd be pretty happy. Plus, smoother instant playback when I'm editing would be good, especially when I have a few effects on clips.

I don't ever use it for gaming, if that's relevant.
3 Likes #35
davidncrowley
LukeStone
Would this card be a good upgrade from a gtx 960?
Basic Comparison here

Please stop using GPU boss, it is terrible.

Look here: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/GTX_1050_Ti_G1_Gaming/8.html this page onwards should give you a fair idea of how it stacks up to the GTX 960.

Basically the 1050Ti is generally about 18% faster than a GTX 960. So probably not worth it unless you think you can get a decent price for your 960 on eBay.

Edited By: ollie87 on Dec 06, 2016 15:27: More detail
1 Like #36
BetaRomeo
Ooh, interesting - I haven't had any hard Pascal / Polaris numbers yet. Pascal's supposed to be a bump over Maxwell, which was eating Hawaii for breakfast, but I was suspicious of Polaris's alleged boost as they seem very focused on 8GB for their mid-tier cards. Have you been testing them yourself, or do you have a source?

I have not tested, nor have I any single source- it is just my observation made from reading performance reviews of latest games with VRAM usage numbers in them. It would be great if someone (->Anandtech) made a proper review.
#37
How is this GPU compared to 780Ti would anyone recommend the leap right now?
2 Likes #38
It's important to note that one of the most compelling features of the 1050 (and 1050 Ti) is many of these cards don't usually require upgraded PSUs. They're very frugal with power, so they can generally be used in normal pre-built systems. They don't require an additional power cable plugged directly into the card.

(There are some exceptions as you can get 1050-based cards that require additional power, and you can get pre-builts that are so close to the edge on power consumption/power supply that there isn't enough power to spare.)

For lots of people, this is a great upgrade that will allow them to ascend into the glorious PC master race. A decent PC from the last couple of years, with one of these cards slotted into it, will leave any current gen console choking in the dust.
1 Like #39
cameronnicolson
How is this GPU compared to 780Ti would anyone recommend the leap right now?

GTX 780Ti is faster than a GTX 970 by a small margin, the GTX 1050Ti is slower than a GTX 970 by a fairly large margin.

So it'd probably be a downgrade for you.

Edited By: ollie87 on Dec 06, 2016 15:20
3 Likes #40
Nexy
It's important to note that one of the most compelling features of the 1050 (and 1050 Ti) is many of these cards don't usually require upgraded PSUs. They're very frugal with power, so they can generally be used in normal pre-built systems. They don't require an additional power cable plugged directly into the card.
(There are some exceptions as you can get 1050-based cards that require additional power, and you can get pre-builts that are so close to the edge on power consumption/power supply that there isn't enough power to spare.)
For lots of people, this is a great upgrade that will allow them to ascend into the glorious PC master race. A decent PC from the last couple of years, with one of these cards slotted into it, will leave any current gen console choking in the dust.

For a glorious master race, its members seem awfully insecure most of the time.

;)

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!