1 00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:09,360 As much as it pains me to say it, this review of NVIDIA's RTX 5050 is probably 2 00:00:06,000 --> 00:00:11,200 the most important GPU review I will do 3 00:00:09,360 --> 00:00:15,920 this year. Because the bottom line is that for so many of you out there, 4 00:00:13,599 --> 00:00:19,600 whether you're building your own PC or getting it in the pre-built your 5 00:00:17,440 --> 00:00:24,880 grandmother got you for your birthday, this is the GPU you're going to use. 6 00:00:23,279 --> 00:00:29,840 There's nothing inherently wrong with that. Everybody has their own budget. 7 00:00:27,359 --> 00:00:34,800 It's just that when a better graphics card could be had for the same price or 8 00:00:32,079 --> 00:00:40,160 if there's a significant upgrade for a much less significant extra cost, it 9 00:00:37,040 --> 00:00:43,520 hurts me to see these boxes flying off 10 00:00:40,160 --> 00:00:46,079 the shelves instead despite my years of 11 00:00:43,520 --> 00:00:51,520 tactipping to the contrary. Which is why this time I am entrusting everyone else 12 00:00:49,440 --> 00:00:55,440 to persuade you. Maybe when you hear it from the people who actually have time 13 00:00:53,280 --> 00:01:01,600 to play video games after work, you'll believe us when we say stay away from 14 00:00:58,960 --> 00:01:07,680 this launch. Maybe they can also help me warn you about our sponsor sponsors. 15 00:01:05,119 --> 00:01:11,280 >> That was awful. Dbrand. They paid us to mention their protective ghost cases and 16 00:01:09,760 --> 00:01:14,560 prison screen protectors, which you can pick up using our link in the video 17 00:01:13,119 --> 00:01:21,680 description. What they didn't pay us to do is say that they're good. 18 00:01:18,640 --> 00:01:22,640 Okay, go ahead and continue the video by 19 00:01:21,680 --> 00:01:28,720 Dbrand. I guess >> let me start by pointing out that we're using a high-end test bench to evaluate 20 00:01:26,400 --> 00:01:32,960 what will likely be the most entry-level offering from NVIDIA this generation. 21 00:01:31,040 --> 00:01:36,479 This is done to alleviate any potential bottlenecks that may distort our 22 00:01:34,400 --> 00:01:42,320 results, but it's not exactly a realistic configuration. I mean, nobody 23 00:01:38,880 --> 00:01:46,240 is going to pair a $250 RTX5050 with a 24 00:01:42,320 --> 00:01:49,680 $450 Ryzen 7800 X3D or with fast, 25 00:01:46,240 --> 00:01:51,920 high-capacity DDR5 memory, or at least 26 00:01:49,680 --> 00:01:55,200 they shouldn't. Realistically, if you buy this card, your performance will be 27 00:01:53,360 --> 00:01:58,799 at least a little bit worse than what we're going to show you today. So, with 28 00:01:56,960 --> 00:02:03,759 that in mind, let's kick things off with gaming. This thing blows. And by that, I 29 00:02:01,520 --> 00:02:09,520 mean it trades blows with our RTX 4060 at 1080p. In Counterstrike 2, the RTX 30 00:02:07,280 --> 00:02:15,280 5050 is in the bottom four, beating out the two generation old 3060, but losing 31 00:02:12,480 --> 00:02:19,440 to last gen 4060. And we see that same behavior in Red Dead Redemption 2. On 32 00:02:17,599 --> 00:02:25,440 the other hand, The Last of Us Part One at 1080p is just kind of sad. The 12 gig 33 00:02:22,160 --> 00:02:27,520 RTX 3060 pushes the 5050 from the 34 00:02:25,440 --> 00:02:31,360 bottom. Probably because the 5050 only has 8 gigs of VRAM, whereas this game 35 00:02:29,440 --> 00:02:36,319 utilized over 9 gigs on cards that had the capacity. Sure, we're crushing the 36 00:02:33,760 --> 00:02:40,239 RTX 3050. There's no 4050. So, that's the most recent 50 class card. That's 37 00:02:38,560 --> 00:02:47,319 like congratulating yourself for beating your 8-year-old baby brother in a boxing 38 00:02:42,400 --> 00:02:47,319 match. Sorry, little buddy. No mercy. 39 00:02:47,599 --> 00:02:53,920 The 50/50 sometimes beats the 4060, but 40 00:02:50,800 --> 00:02:56,000 usually not by a lot. F124 is an extra 41 00:02:53,920 --> 00:03:02,319 frame the 1% lows and 10 more in the averages. And we see a similar uplift in 42 00:02:58,319 --> 00:03:04,879 Cyberpunk 2077. But what's this? The 43 00:03:02,319 --> 00:03:11,360 4060 wins once you enable ray tracing in both these games. Yep. The 5050 may have 44 00:03:08,000 --> 00:03:13,920 24th gen RT cores, but the whole package 45 00:03:11,360 --> 00:03:19,760 isn't enough to keep up with the 24 third gen RT cores in the 4060. 46 00:03:17,040 --> 00:03:24,800 Pathetic. If you thought 1080p was bad, well, check out 1440p. The 50/50 goes 47 00:03:22,640 --> 00:03:29,920 from trading blows to just blowing it against the 4060. It only wins in a 48 00:03:27,760 --> 00:03:34,879 single game, and that's Cyberpunk. Adding insult to injury, check out how 49 00:03:32,000 --> 00:03:40,799 good the 3060 12 gig looks by comparison across every single game we've tested. 50 00:03:38,000 --> 00:03:46,239 Our poor RTX 5050 is barely beating out a 60class card from two generations ago. 51 00:03:44,000 --> 00:03:52,640 And in VRAMm hungry games like The Last of Us Part One, the 5050 loses again. 52 00:03:50,239 --> 00:03:58,879 We'll talk more about pure value later, but even the 9060 XT and RTX 5060, 53 00:03:56,159 --> 00:04:04,080 despite only having 8 gigs of VRAM, destroy the 50/50 in our gaming tests, 54 00:04:02,400 --> 00:04:09,120 which is pretty bad, especially when you consider that a more futurep proof card 55 00:04:06,159 --> 00:04:14,560 like the Intel Arc B580 can now be found easily for around $260. 56 00:04:12,319 --> 00:04:18,479 And that comes with 12 gigs of VRAM. That will make it a safer bet as AAA 57 00:04:16,560 --> 00:04:22,720 game requirements creep up over the next few years, assuming Intel's GPU division 58 00:04:21,199 --> 00:04:27,440 still exists over the next few years. But hey, NVIDIA's frame gen can make up 59 00:04:24,960 --> 00:04:30,880 for the 5050's poor performance, right? Oh, hey, didn't see you there. You know, 60 00:04:29,440 --> 00:04:35,840 this isn't the most scientifically accurate test we've ever done, but here's some slow motion footage of 61 00:04:33,680 --> 00:04:40,000 Cyberpunk running on the RTX 5050 at 1080p. The mouse moves, then the game 62 00:04:37,919 --> 00:04:44,800 moves 27 frames of footage later, which indicates overall system latency of 27 63 00:04:42,800 --> 00:04:50,280 millisecond. Now, let's enable frame generation and crank it up to 4x 64 00:04:46,720 --> 00:04:50,280 alongside DAA. 65 00:04:53,600 --> 00:05:00,479 Our game is now running at around 200 FPS. Great, but notice the increased 66 00:04:58,320 --> 00:05:04,400 latency. It's pretty minor, and even in twitchy firstperson shooters, it could 67 00:05:02,320 --> 00:05:09,199 be imperceptible to many. Sounds like a decent trade-off, right? But our base 68 00:05:06,400 --> 00:05:13,360 frame rate was already a solid 98 frames per second. Frame generation is what we 69 00:05:11,280 --> 00:05:17,520 in the MTG community call a win more card. It only really works well if 70 00:05:15,520 --> 00:05:22,479 you're already in a good situation. Here, watch what happens if we have a 71 00:05:19,600 --> 00:05:27,919 low starting frame rate. At 1440p, our base frame rate averages around 63 FPS. 72 00:05:25,360 --> 00:05:32,240 Good, but nowhere near the almost 100 we just came from. Rendering natively, 73 00:05:29,759 --> 00:05:36,000 we're starting with the same 36 frames of latency that we saw at 1080p with 74 00:05:34,240 --> 00:05:41,199 frame gen set to four in the previous clip. So then what happens when we add 75 00:05:38,880 --> 00:05:45,840 frame gen at 1440p? You're looking at MFG3X where we're getting an additional 76 00:05:43,840 --> 00:05:49,600 12 frames of latency even though our total frames per second or higher. Can 77 00:05:47,680 --> 00:05:54,320 an average person feel it? Not necessarily. But some of you out there 78 00:05:52,000 --> 00:05:58,960 are going to be sensitive to it. Let's be clear, we don't hate frame 79 00:05:56,479 --> 00:06:02,880 generation. And to NVIDIA's credit, they continue to improve the tech with every 80 00:06:01,120 --> 00:06:08,639 single generation just like they did with DLSS. What we do hate is how NVIDIA 81 00:06:06,400 --> 00:06:12,560 uses these features to mislead consumers by posting unfair representations of 82 00:06:10,880 --> 00:06:18,120 video card performance, which is especially bad because not every game 83 00:06:14,479 --> 00:06:18,120 supports those features. 84 00:06:21,360 --> 00:06:27,759 Sure, you could use an inexpensive thirdparty tool like Lothless Scaling, 85 00:06:25,440 --> 00:06:31,520 but even with the bells and whistles, if you buy this card, you're getting 86 00:06:29,440 --> 00:06:34,880 fleeced. Unlike if you buy the new transparent screwdriver from 87 00:06:32,639 --> 00:06:39,280 ltstore.com, it's a clear winner when it comes to nifty tools. Let's talk price 88 00:06:37,600 --> 00:06:45,199 and value. Starting with some of our competitors, AMD's 9060 XT8 GB, which is 89 00:06:42,720 --> 00:06:53,039 at the top of our 1080p Geomine results, costs us $2.32 per frame. The B580, $242 90 00:06:50,080 --> 00:06:57,840 is very nice. Then we get to the 5050 at $265. 91 00:06:54,639 --> 00:07:00,720 But it gets worse. The RTX5060, 92 00:06:57,840 --> 00:07:06,160 which costs around $299, just 50 bucks more than the 50/50, beats the 50/50 in 93 00:07:03,599 --> 00:07:09,599 value at $2.52. These aren't massive swings in value 94 00:07:07,680 --> 00:07:13,919 when you're looking at averages, but it still shows what a terrible deal the 95 00:07:11,440 --> 00:07:18,400 50/50 is. A huge part of why you get such better value with the more 96 00:07:15,599 --> 00:07:23,599 expensive card is that for $50 more, you're getting literally 50% more 97 00:07:20,639 --> 00:07:27,520 hardware. The 5060 has 50% more CUDA cores, 50% more texture processing 98 00:07:25,759 --> 00:07:31,919 clusters, 50% more streaming multipprocessors, 50% more tensor cores, 99 00:07:29,919 --> 00:07:37,360 50% more RT cores, 50% more texture units, and 50% more ROP units than the 100 00:07:34,319 --> 00:07:41,039 5050. And while this card is on the same 101 00:07:37,360 --> 00:07:44,160 128 bit bus, it's using GDDR6 instead of 102 00:07:41,039 --> 00:07:46,240 seven. Why? Because NVIDIA says G6 is 103 00:07:44,160 --> 00:07:50,800 best for desktops and the more power efficient G7. Well, that's that's best 104 00:07:48,240 --> 00:07:54,560 for laptops. Cool. So, then why not put the superefficient stuff in the one card 105 00:07:52,880 --> 00:07:59,039 in the desktop lineup that might actually want an extra low TDP? I just I 106 00:07:57,280 --> 00:08:04,000 don't get it. I quit. I can't I just can't do it anymore. >> Productivity. If there's anything 107 00:08:01,759 --> 00:08:09,520 positive to say about the 50/50, it's that it blends pretty okay. Sure, it 108 00:08:06,639 --> 00:08:14,319 renders our scene slower than the 4060 and hardly faster than a 3060, but sub 2 109 00:08:12,479 --> 00:08:18,400 minutes ain't half bad. We see similar results in Puget Bench's Premiere Pro 110 00:08:16,000 --> 00:08:23,680 benchmark, where our 50/50 is clearly pulling ahead and only overshadowed by 111 00:08:20,479 --> 00:08:25,680 the 5060. The Arc B580 puts up a good 112 00:08:23,680 --> 00:08:30,639 fight both here and in Puget Bench's Photoshop benchmarks. But then that card 113 00:08:28,000 --> 00:08:35,440 gets a big fat DNF with Puget's Da Vinci Resolve test, allowing NVIDIA to get a 114 00:08:32,719 --> 00:08:39,919 couple of blurry W's. Despite NVIDIA's obsession with AI, they failed to make 115 00:08:37,440 --> 00:08:45,120 the 5050s AI performance anything but underwhelming. In Proon AI image 116 00:08:42,479 --> 00:08:49,680 generation, the 50/50 is barely beating the 3060 again. And in text generation, 117 00:08:47,760 --> 00:08:55,279 the 50/50 is nothing to write home about. See what we did there? My biggest 118 00:08:52,399 --> 00:09:00,640 takeaway here is how great the ARC B580 is. Look at how much it crushes even our 119 00:08:57,279 --> 00:09:04,240 5060. Just look at what extra VRAMm 120 00:09:00,640 --> 00:09:06,080 NVIDIA improper support AMD can do. If 121 00:09:04,240 --> 00:09:11,279 Intel can figure it out as the new kid showing up with open vinyl, nobody has a 122 00:09:08,480 --> 00:09:15,839 good excuse. In summary, the RTX 5050 only makes sense as a product designed 123 00:09:13,279 --> 00:09:19,760 to make the RTX 5060 look good. And if you saw that review, you know that it 124 00:09:17,680 --> 00:09:23,920 does not look good. We can't in good conscience recommend the 50/50. It flat 125 00:09:22,000 --> 00:09:27,360 out sucks. And there are so many options that we've mentioned in this video that 126 00:09:25,519 --> 00:09:30,320 exist and we'll have all of those linked in the video description for you to 127 00:09:28,720 --> 00:09:35,279 check out. There's a saying that there are no bad products, just bad prices. 128 00:09:32,720 --> 00:09:40,959 And in RTX50 series fashion, the price is bad. But, you know, if nobody buys it 129 00:09:39,279 --> 00:09:46,000 and it gets discounted to maybe like $200, 130 00:09:43,519 --> 00:09:48,399 maybe then I could finally segue to our sponsor, 131 00:09:46,800 --> 00:09:51,440 >> Dbrand. We all know that to prevent accidents, you should use proper 132 00:09:50,000 --> 00:09:55,600 protection. So, if you keep dropping stuff like me, consider protecting what 133 00:09:53,920 --> 00:09:59,920 is most likely your most precious possession, your phone with Dbrand. 134 00:09:57,760 --> 00:10:03,920 Their ghost cases are ultra durable, super scratch resistant, designed to 135 00:10:01,920 --> 00:10:07,200 never yellow, and they're grippy for a nice hand feel. Plus, if you add on one 136 00:10:05,600 --> 00:10:11,519 of their Prism screen protectors, you'll have 360° protection. They are stupid 137 00:10:09,680 --> 00:10:15,440 simple to apply, and the whole process, like some things in life, only last 138 00:10:13,519 --> 00:10:19,440 seconds. And also consider picking up a Glow Circuit skin to add a bit of style 139 00:10:17,600 --> 00:10:23,920 and illumination to your nighttime activities. Smash our link in the 140 00:10:21,120 --> 00:10:28,000 description. Oh, I get it. To learn more today, thanks for watching. If you like 141 00:10:25,760 --> 00:10:32,320 this video, go check out our 960 XT review. The 16 GB model is really the 142 00:10:30,399 --> 00:10:36,880 way to go, but if it's too far out of your price range, then a B580 or even an 143 00:10:34,160 --> 00:10:41,360 8 gig 960 XT would be better than garbage. Just dog.