Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
sturdypencil

GTX 1050 ti Review Squad

Recommended Posts

My build:

fx 6300 (Im poor)

8gb gddr3

Gtx 1050 ti

 

Recently I purchased the new GTX 1050 ti on its release date hoping to improve my gaming experiences, I've been really impressed on how it performs on squad considering my cpu is lacking the power. I have been testing and optimizing the card and its very hard to adjust because the different maps affect the way it runs. I can get a steady 40 fps on a good amount of maps on epic settings but some maps my cpu really held this card back. I join some games and receive a poor amount of fps like 30 fps on high but its still playable. Considering how much  fps I used to run this game on I'm happy with my purchase and would suggest the gpu to anyone needing a small cheap upgrade but willing to not hit 60 fps all the time.

 

Peace out

Ask any questions you want!

Edited by sturdypencil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so you know your CPU is what will get you the performance in squad, GPU will help alot if you want to increase in resolutions, but CPU is practically running the game atm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, sturdypencil said:

fx 6300 (Im poor)

(...)

 I'm happy with my purchase and would suggest the gpu to anyone needing a small cheap upgrade but willing to not hit 60 fps all the time.

 

 

5 hours ago, Catindabox said:

Just so you know your CPU is what will get you the performance in squad, GPU will help alot if you want to increase in resolutions, but CPU is practically running the game atm.

 

You really want to kill him, don't you ? :D:D the poor guy saved money for years for his upgrade, bought the GPU that changes his life and you answer him "ok, your upgrade is good but in fact you should have changed your CPU instead" > go for another 2 years saving money to buy it :D

 

I know this wasn't your purpose but its the first thing that came to my mind, sorry :)

 

PS : I know what "being poor" means... I've some experience of it...

PS2 : and TY for the review sturdy, as I'm thinking about changing my rig soon too

Edited by Nightstalker21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Future releases of the engine will make sure AMD processors will have all their cores ~70-80%. Currently, the unreal engine hasn't fully adapted DX12 and Vulkan is missing totally so the cores are not being used. These new APIs will certainly help.

Edited by shiv1990

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got the GTX 1050 TI myself, haven't had the chance to play Squad in awhile but I'm looking forward to it now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/10/2016 at 2:12 AM, shiv1990 said:

Future releases of the engine will make sure AMD processors will have all their cores ~70-80%. Currently, the unreal engine hasn't fully adapted DX12 and Vulkan is missing totally so the cores are not being used. These new APIs will certainly help.

 

No the big issue is AMDs terrible audio decoder. Once the UE4 audio rewrite is done there should hopefully be some gains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, RC007 said:

I just got the GTX 1050 TI myself, haven't had the chance to play Squad in awhile but I'm looking forward to it now!

Tell me what kind of FPS your getting. It would be nice to compare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm experiencing about the same FPS as you with my card. I'm running the game on high (no AA), 1920x1080 resolution, and with an old i5 processor. Average is probably around 32 FPS playing on the 80 player servers. Overall, I'm happy with this card since it can handle most new games at 1080p.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, RC007 said:

Estoy experimentando sobre el mismo FPS como usted con mi tarjeta. Estoy corriendo el juego en alta (sin AA), una resolución de 1920x1080, y con un procesador i5 de edad. Promedio es probablemente alrededor de 32 FPS jugar en los servidores jugador 80. En general, estoy feliz con esta tarjeta, ya que puede manejar la mayoría de los nuevos juegos a 1080p.

 

 

I with a gtx 970 msi I run epic graphics of 40 players down I think there is the problem. From 50 players up they start to lower the fps in a sting and it does not change for more that you modify the graphs in options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm waiting on my motherboard to come in the mail in the next day or two. I'm excited to build an i5-6600K/GTX 1050 (non-TI) with 8 GB DDR4

I thought I had enough for an i7-6700K and GTX 1060 3GB but then I switched the price from US to CAD and had to pay 13% HST on top of that (thanks Ontario..)

 

So while it cost me nearly a grand and I feel a wee bit ripped off, I can't wait to take a sledgehammer to my athlon 860K and R7 260X in the parking lot.

I'm just hoping I'll never drop below 60 FPS even just on med-high settings (while recording, ideally)

 

PC Build (all the parts came in the mail except for the motherboard, lol)

Corsair Carbide Spec-01
Gigabyte Gaming 3 Z170X LGA 1151 (heroes of the storm edition, mostly bought this for the O/C and onboard sound)
Intel i5-6600K (AMD has absolutely notoriously bad performance in just about every game I play)
EVGA single fan GTX 1050 (I could get the TI because I only had a 1000 and this ran me 990 after shipping, but I got Redout for free so w/e)
2x4GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 (first ram I'll own with proper heat-spreaders. I couldn't afford 2x8 or 2x16 GB so I went for 8 GB Dual Channel)

"Refurbished" Corsair H100i GTX (hoping it still comes with thermal paste and no problems)

I'm using the PSU of my current machine, EVGA NEX650W and the fans which are some Noctua something or other but they aren't static pressure fans (which means whoever build this was a complete retard since he had these in push/pull on a small but thick Zoltam or w/e AIO)

 

I've yet to find a solid bench for this but from what I've found online the 1050 TI runs about 10 FPS higher than the non-TI.
The i5-6600K doesn't have hyper-threading but afaik it shouldn't hurt my performance (just my minimum FPS in things like GTA 5 or other multi-threaded stuff)
 

No part of this build is particularly good, but without a solid bench I'm fairly confident I can keep a solid 60 FPS on high settings with super-sampling (since AA is broken) on my 1680x1050 monitor.

 

My only peeve is that if I would've bought this a year or two ago, I'd have gotten twice the value of my money. This computer is laughably cheap for US residents, costing them like 5 or 600 bucks.

Edited by Arduras

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/22/2016 at 7:38 PM, RC007 said:

I'm experiencing about the same FPS as you with my card. I'm running the game on high (no AA), 1920x1080 resolution, and with an old i5 processor. Average is probably around 32 FPS playing on the 80 player servers. Overall, I'm happy with this card since it can handle most new games at 1080p.

 I recommend joining a 60 man server. It brings my FPS up to 50 at good times.

On 1/17/2017 at 5:55 PM, Arduras said:

I'm waiting on my motherboard to come in the mail in the next day or two. I'm excited to build an i5-6600K/GTX 1050 (non-TI) with 8 GB DDR4

I thought I had enough for an i7-6700K and GTX 1060 3GB but then I switched the price from US to CAD and had to pay 13% HST on top of that (thanks Ontario..)

 

So while it cost me nearly a grand and I feel a wee bit ripped off, I can't wait to take a sledgehammer to my athlon 860K and R7 260X in the parking lot.

I'm just hoping I'll never drop below 60 FPS even just on med-high settings (while recording, ideally)

 

PC Build (all the parts came in the mail except for the motherboard, lol)

Corsair Carbide Spec-01
Gigabyte Gaming 3 Z170X LGA 1151 (heroes of the storm edition, mostly bought this for the O/C and onboard sound)
Intel i5-6600K (AMD has absolutely notoriously bad performance in just about every game I play)
EVGA single fan GTX 1050 (I could get the TI because I only had a 1000 and this ran me 990 after shipping, but I got Redout for free so w/e)
2x4GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 (first ram I'll own with proper heat-spreaders. I couldn't afford 2x8 or 2x16 GB so I went for 8 GB Dual Channel)

"Refurbished" Corsair H100i GTX (hoping it still comes with thermal paste and no problems)

I'm using the PSU of my current machine, EVGA NEX650W and the fans which are some Noctua something or other but they aren't static pressure fans (which means whoever build this was a complete retard since he had these in push/pull on a small but thick Zoltam or w/e AIO)

 

I've yet to find a solid bench for this but from what I've found online the 1050 TI runs about 10 FPS higher than the non-TI.
The i5-6600K doesn't have hyper-threading but afaik it shouldn't hurt my performance (just my minimum FPS in things like GTA 5 or other multi-threaded stuff)
 

No part of this build is particularly good, but without a solid bench I'm fairly confident I can keep a solid 60 FPS on high settings with super-sampling (since AA is broken) on my 1680x1050 monitor.

 

My only peeve is that if I would've bought this a year or two ago, I'd have gotten twice the value of my money. This computer is laughably cheap for US residents, costing them like 5 or 600 bucks.

Yo your build sounds dope! I hope you can run the game smoothly :) I experience the same problems living in Canada, parts can be hundreds of dollars more in Canadian currency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was chomping at the bit to upgrade my 980ti to then 1080ti as soon as it's released BUT from all the testing I've done recently in Squad I don't think I'll bother until Squad starts maxxing out my 980ti. Instead I did a bit of learning and overclocked my i7-4790k to 4.6GHz to start with, with some more learning and testing and maybe a different CPU cooler I could probably easily get 4.8GHz stable. This 'should' have a greater performance impact with the current version of Squad than a new GPU would, and it'll cost almost nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweet. I get 60 FPS with medium effects, shadows, low foliage, high view distance. I can go higher but it depends on the pop and if there's a lot of fighting near me. These settings keep me fairly consistently around 60 except for the CROW/BTR zoom. For some reason the zoom immediately drops 15 FPS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking of FPS, at 1440p with all Epic (no AA, use ReShade instead) I can get dips as low as 40fps on most maps in heavy engagements BUT I bought a G-Sync monitor recently which makes these FPS dips almost un noticeable.

I've found Squad in its current state is a difficult beast to tame but for now I think I've nailed it with my hardware, buying a better GPU would probably almost do nothing to improve my current performance. I was actually struggling for 60fps at only 1080p a couple of weeks ago but now with a slight CPU overclock and a different monitor I'm happily playing in 1440p with a smooth 40-100+fps without actually changing any hardware inside my PC. Just goes to show that new CPU's and GPU's aren't always the best options to improve the gameplay experience.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2017 at 1:44 PM, RipGroove said:

Talking of FPS, at 1440p with all Epic (no AA, use ReShade instead) I can get dips as low as 40fps on most maps in heavy engagements BUT I bought a G-Sync monitor recently which makes these FPS dips almost un noticeable.

I've found Squad in its current state is a difficult beast to tame but for now I think I've nailed it with my hardware, buying a better GPU would probably almost do nothing to improve my current performance. I was actually struggling for 60fps at only 1080p a couple of weeks ago but now with a slight CPU overclock and a different monitor I'm happily playing in 1440p with a smooth 40-100+fps without actually changing any hardware inside my PC. Just goes to show that new CPU's and GPU's aren't always the best options to improve the gameplay experience.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Im gonna focus on my CPU soon thats whats really holding me back.

On 1/22/2017 at 1:34 PM, Arduras said:

Sweet. I get 60 FPS with medium effects, shadows, low foliage, high view distance. I can go higher but it depends on the pop and if there's a lot of fighting near me. These settings keep me fairly consistently around 60 except for the CROW/BTR zoom. For some reason the zoom immediately drops 15 FPS.

That's awesome, Hopefully some day Ill get a CPU like you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/16/2016 at 7:42 AM, DoctorKamikaze said:

 

No the big issue is AMDs terrible audio decoder. Once the UE4 audio rewrite is done there should hopefully be some gains.

That's the only issue that OWI has mentioned. Pc enthusiasts already understand the issue is unreal 4 having terrible cpu utilization. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yea, it's a bit of a shame but most engines/games don't utilize CPU's well. Older games were better for this since they had little to work with. Now they teach/work as though every computer is an abundance resources (comparatively it is) and treat optimization as though it's not worth their time until people freak about it.

 

OWI is already a shine example of people willing to put their dream on pause and make it run more efficiently.

Edited by Arduras

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/28/2017 at 4:35 PM, Rexolaboy said:

That's the only issue that OWI has mentioned. Pc enthusiasts already understand the issue is unreal 4 having terrible cpu utilization. 

 

Yep. Feeling my FPS drop (or watching it if I have a counter on) and knowing its because a BTR is firing, an explosion going off, or a.50 cal blasting is not a great feeling. But here's to hoping it will get better! Come on Epic!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Arduras said:

yea, it's a bit of a shame but most engines/games don't utilize CPU's well. Older games were better for this since they had little to work with. Now they teach/work as though every computer is an abundance resources (comparatively it is) and treat optimization as though it's not worth their time until people freak about it.

 

It's understandable that people know the buzzwords but not the deeper realities of things like "multi threading" and "optimization", but when you mention games and engines not utilizing CPUs well, there are actually some very good reasons why, and it's not down to lazy programmers or cutting corners, it's about the reality of how computation works. Here are some simplified resources that should broaden your understanding :)

 

http://blackhole12.blogspot.jp/2012/05/multithreading-problems-in-game-design.html
http://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/81003/how-to-explain-why-multi-threading-is-difficult
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/571766/why-dont-large-programs-such-as-games-use-loads-of-different-threads

 

For the stackexchange/overflow ones, read some of the higher upvoted answers, they explain it quite well. I'm not saying that it is impossible to parallelize some aspects of game code, but there are some inter-dependencies that simply require sequential computation, which unfortunately doesn't mesh with multi-threading.

Edited by Psyrus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Psyrus said:

 

It's understandable that people know the buzzwords but not the deeper realities of things like "multi threading" and "optimization", but when you mention games and engines not utilizing CPUs well, there are actually some very good reasons why, and it's not down to lazy programmers or cutting corners, it's about the reality of how computation works. Here are some simplified resources that should broaden your understanding :)

 

http://blackhole12.blogspot.jp/2012/05/multithreading-problems-in-game-design.html
http://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/81003/how-to-explain-why-multi-threading-is-difficult
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/571766/why-dont-large-programs-such-as-games-use-loads-of-different-threads

 

For the stackexchange/overflow ones, read some of the higher upvoted answers, they explain it quite well. I'm not saying that it is impossible to parallelize some aspects of game code, but there are some inter-dependencies that simply require sequential computation, which unfortunately doesn't mesh with multi-threading.

Interesting back in 2012 how multithreading was seen as cumbersome and difficult. Now look at cellphone operating systems...it can be done and if you ask me, needs to be done. Single threaded works loads rely off of brute force from a cpu, which cpus seem to be coming to a halt in improvements lately. Unreal 4 was being touted as the game engine of the future, good luck if it can't use an 8 core cpu because that is standard NOW. No more dual core cpus at a bazillion megahertz, how about an arm cpu that can be powered by a hamster wheel. Epic needs to get their stuff together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Rexolaboy said:

[...] Single threaded works loads rely off of brute force from a cpu, which cpus seem to be coming to a halt in improvements lately. Unreal 4 was being touted as the game engine of the future, good luck if it can't use an 8 core cpu because that is standard NOW. No more dual core cpus at a bazillion megahertz,... [...]

Mhm. But you do realise that AMD changed its vision and strategy. The new zen generation is focussing on improving the IPC. (And not more cores.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rexolaboy said:

Interesting back in 2012 how multithreading was seen as cumbersome and difficult. Now look at cellphone operating systems

 

Computer-Guy-Facepalm.jpg

 

No one is implying that multithreading applications isn't possible or is even difficult. I swear I wonder if people even read the things I link to...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh, plenty of games utilise multi threading perfectly fine, it's just that Epic seemed to not give a **** about it when lying the groundwork for UE4. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2017 at 9:55 PM, Arduras said:

PC Build (all the parts came in the mail except for the motherboard, lol)

Corsair Carbide Spec-01
Gigabyte Gaming 3 Z170X LGA 1151 (heroes of the storm edition, mostly bought this for the O/C and onboard sound)
Intel i5-6600K (AMD has absolutely notoriously bad performance in just about every game I play)
EVGA single fan GTX 1050 (I could get the TI because I only had a 1000 and this ran me 990 after shipping, but I got Redout for free so w/e)
2x4GB Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 (first ram I'll own with proper heat-spreaders. I couldn't afford 2x8 or 2x16 GB so I went for 8 GB Dual Channel)

"Refurbished" Corsair H100i GTX (hoping it still comes with thermal paste and no problems)

You'll be fine for 60fps on full servers with that CPU in 1080p. At worse you can overclock it to drive more FPS for the dip's.

You may have to run a mix of graphical settings to keep it nice on the 1050, but that really is no big deal.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/1/2017 at 0:02 PM, Shoshin said:

You'll be fine for 60fps on full servers with that CPU in 1080p. At worse you can overclock it to drive more FPS for the dip's.

You may have to run a mix of graphical settings to keep it nice on the 1050, but that really is no big deal.

 

Yea, running low foliage/shadows, medium or high view distance (typically high lately I think) and medium effects, occasionally I try SMAA but it doesn't seem to make much of a difference. Everything's a pixelated mess and I can't spot for shit past ~100m since it all sort of blends together in a bad way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×