KFA2 GeForce GT 1030 EXOC White Pictured, Detailed

[Raevenlord]

AIB partner for NVIDIA KFA2 is renowned for the design (often polarizing) of its graphics cards, and the company seems to carry white quite close to its heart (something I don't have a problem with, actually.) Now, the company has seemingly confirmed incoming retail availability of NVIDIA's leaked GT 1030 graphics cards, with an EXOC edition of the card in question.

The EXOC white edition by KFA2 is factory overclocked out of the box, and the packaging confirms its a 2GB GDDR5 model with 64-bit memory bus. According to the source, El Chapuzas Informatico, this card is equipped with a 16nm GP108 GPU with 384 CUDA cores (not the 512 we previously reported.) This makes sense, however, as this means NVIDIA can easily carve a GT 1040 SKU from the supposed 512 CUDA-cores base design of the GP108 chip. The base clock for the KFA2 GT 1030 EXOC is 1252 MHz, with a 1506 MHz boost clock. This card is expected to go on sale for around 80€ ($87 direct conversion, but more likely a $69 price-tag.)



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[john_]

This card is expected to go on sale for around 80€ ($87 direct conversion, but more likely a $69 price-tag.)

I wouldn't bet on that. Nvidia always charges more, so it doesn't look like the cheap option. Considering that GT 1030 will be more power efficient and faster than RX 550, I don't see a reason for Nvidia to sell it cheap. But, it would be nice if it does come at so low price. $79 is the best case scenario in my opinion.

I bypassed most text of the article "knowing" that GT 1030 will have a 128bit data bus and 512 CUDA cores. With 64bit bus and only 384 CUDA cores it could be as cheap as $69. A nice replacement for that mess that GT 730 is(mess=multiple and different models).

 

[P4-630]

as this means AMD can easily carve a GT 1040 SKU from the supposed 512 CUDA-cores base design of the GP108 chip.

AMD?

 

[Vayra86]

That fan header placement though. How to make something that looks OK, look absolutely cheap. The half sleeving of the cable finishes the job for me, screaming AVOID.

 

[alucasa]

So, is 1040 coming? I suppose that thing with double memory bandwidth could be called 1040.

 

[jabbadap]

Uhm, that 64bit bus will cripple that thingy like hell. Well at least it is white.

It have similar amount of fp32 TFlops as RX 550 have(which is not fast card either), so should be more performant by knowing nvidia's better FPS/TFlops. But that low memory bus will even the odds between the two.

 

[chaosmassive]

this is 2017, why the hell 64 bit card still exist anyway?

 

[BiggieShady]

AMD?

@Raevenlord you heard the man, this is not toms hardware, we like our articles to make sense

 

[Raevenlord]

AMD?

@Raevenlord you heard the man, this is not toms hardware, we like our articles to make sense

But but I wanted to show my true colors... They shone through...

Brain fart. Sorry, dear readers...

 

[Frick]

I really want to see how this performs. I wish someone would review these cards properly; usually you just find lackluster reviews and MOBA testing and youtubers with even less money than sense.

 

[P4-630]

Perhaps a good upgrade for my nephews GT620?

 

[T4C Fantasy]

Perhaps a good upgrade for my nephews GT620?

well that would be a huge upgrade even still xD

 

[rruff]

this is 2017, why the hell 64 bit card still exist anyway?

Uhm, that 64bit bus will cripple that thingy like hell.

It has 50% of the cores of the 1050 Ti and 50% of the bus.
It has 30% of the cores of the 1060 and 33% of the bus.
It has 20% of the cores of the 1070 and 25% of the bus.
It has 15% of the cores of the 1080 and 25% of the bus.

Do you still think a 64bit memory bus is a problem?

 

[rruff]

I really want to see how this performs.

If 750 Ti= 1, then:

GTX 1030= .85
RX 550= 1.00
GTX 1040= 1.10
RX 560= 1.3
GTX 1050=1.5
GTX 1050 Ti= 1.7

 

[Prima.Vera]

this is 2017, why the hell 64 bit card still exist anyway?

Agree. They should make them run on AGP port too, since the performance is there...
My last 64 bit card was an S3 Virge GX ))) That was exactly 20 years ago

 

[john_]

They are still selling G210 and HD6450.

64bit is fine for so low end cards as long as they have GDDR5 memory. The problem is with cxards using DDR3 memory. Especially Nvidia puts no restrictions on the memory the manufacturer will use in those low cost cards. My Gigabyte GT 620 came with 600MHz DDR3 instead of the 900MHz described on Nvidia's site. Another model I have seen when i bought the GT620, I think it was a Palit, had 533MHz DDR3 memory. We are talking about single digit bandwidth here.
In case you ask why I bought it. I bought 5 and gave to friends too. When a shop puts a price tag of 10 euros instead of the typical 30, you don't ask about the memory speed.

 

[jabbadap]

It has 50% of the cores of the 1050 Ti and 50% of the bus.
It has 30% of the cores of the 1060 and 33% of the bus.
It has 20% of the cores of the 1070 and 25% of the bus.
It has 15% of the cores of the 1080 and 25% of the bus.

Do you still think a 64bit memory bus is a problem?

Yes I do 64bit will cripple this thing or could we say is bottle necking whole card. Gtx750-nonti has 128bit bus, if this thing would have too they would be in similar performance(maybe few percent faster by pascal superior color compression). And it's not just the bus, it's the used memory speed too.

If 750 Ti= 1, then:

GTX 1030= .85
RX 550= 1.00
GTX 1040= 1.10
RX 560= 1.3
GTX 1050=1.5
GTX 1050 Ti= 1.7

You might think again the placement of that RX 550, it has fewer shaders than gtx750ti(512 vs 640) and the clocks are the same. Knowing nvidia has better perf/Flops ratio so it will loose even 512 shader gtx750(hint. tom's hardware reviewed one and it was much slower than good'ol bonaire R7 260x).

 

[rruff]

Yes I do 64bit will cripple this thing or could we say is bottle necking whole card. Gtx750-nonti has 128bit bus, if this thing would have too they would be in similar performance(maybe few percent faster by pascal superior color compression). And it's not just the bus, it's the used memory speed too.

Doesn't it make more sense to compare to other Pascals? The memory bus to shader ratio is fine compared to other Pascals, and memory speed indeed does matter (it will be higher than the 750), and compression does too.

You might think again the placement of that RX 550, it has fewer shaders than gtx750ti(512 vs 640) and the clocks are the same. Knowing nvidia has better perf/Flops ratio so it will loose even 512 shader gtx750(hint. tom's hardware reviewed one and it was much slower than good'ol bonaire R7 260x).

The 550 may be a little slower than a 750 Ti. Depends on which games you play and how they are configured. I said they'd be about the same based on this synthetic benchmark: http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-750-Ti-vs-AMD-RX-550/2187vs3925

 

[PLAfiller]

64bit is fine for so low end cards as long as they have GDDR5 memory.

Exactly. 64 bit + DDR5 equals about 40 Gb/s bandwith which is enough for games like LoL ( on medium), CS:GO, Starcraft 2 ( 2v2, 3v3, I think 4v4 is a bit too much here) and other light grind/MOBA/point-and-click etc. titles. However, I'd rather see this combo on a GT1040. On AMD side, there is nothing in the LP segment since Sapphire R7 250 LP. I am hoping they will release something this year.

 

[jabbadap]

Doesn't it make more sense to compare to other Pascals? The memory bus to shader ratio is fine compared to other Pascals, and memory speed indeed does matter (it will be higher than the 750), and compression does too.

The 550 may be a little slower than a 750 Ti. Depends on which games you play and how they are configured. I said they'd be about the same based on this synthetic benchmark: http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-750-Ti-vs-AMD-RX-550/2187vs3925

Arch point of view they are pretty similar(perf/TFlops are pretty much equal between the two). By Nvidia's own words Pascal's Delta color compression will equal 1.2x better effective memory bandwidth compared to Maxwell. GTX750 has bandwidth of 80GB/sec and this one has 6Gbps*64bit/8=48GB/sec so 48GB/sec*1.2=57.6GB/sec -> fall a little bit short. Fp32 would be a bit harder to compute(marketed boost clocks are meaningless for both), a high clock estimation would be gtx750:2*512*1.2=1.23TFlops, GT1030:2*384*1.8=1.38TFlops and gtx750ti:2*1.2*640=1.54TFlops. So pure single precision compute power(what matters for gamers), it's fits quite good in between those two maxwells. Then of course there couple of unknowns which will affect performance(rops and tmu count). All in all I have to little bit soften my estimation, it will be on par or few percent faster than gtx750 after all. On par because of lower memory bandwidth but faster because of compute power and higher vram amount. But gtx750ti is out of reach.

Some arbitrary synthetic benchmark is quite pointless, I rather look at how cards fare on some game reviews.

Spoiler: i.e. some arbitrary GXT750ti vs RX550 youtube review