OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

Yeston GeForce GTX 1050TI review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£180VRAM:4 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):75 W

Yeston GeForce GTX 1050TI Review: Compare 117 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

Yeston GeForce GTX 1050TI
6.2/10

Overall score

Score
6.2/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 86% of models
Score components

40%

3.8

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.6, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

8.6

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 86% of graphics cards
7.2

Value for money

Value for money
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
Score components

70%

6.2

Overall score

30%

9.6

Price

â–¼Worse than 68%
3.8

Technical score

Technical score
3.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components

44%

2.0

Performance

24%

1.9

Memory

12%

8.5

Power

11%

7.1

Features

5%

8.9

Design

4%

5.5

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 95%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.6.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • yeston-geforce-gtx-1050ti
  • yeston-geforce-gtx-1050ti
  • yeston-geforce-gtx-1050ti
  • yeston-geforce-gtx-1050ti
  • yeston-geforce-gtx-1050ti
  • yeston-geforce-gtx-1050ti
  • yeston-geforce-gtx-1050ti
yeston-geforce-gtx-1050ti
yeston-geforce-gtx-1050ti
yeston-geforce-gtx-1050ti
yeston-geforce-gtx-1050ti
yeston-geforce-gtx-1050ti
yeston-geforce-gtx-1050ti
yeston-geforce-gtx-1050ti
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What owners say about the Yeston GeForce GTX 1050TI

Based on 198 owners sharing their experience in online comments

77%positive11%mixed12%negative

Owners value its capable, efficient gaming and lasting usefulness, while newer games often need reduced settings.

What owners dislike

  • Often needs lower settings, shadows turned down, or a frame-rate cap to play newer demanding games smoothly at 1080p.14
  • Struggles with the newest and most demanding games, often dropping to around 20 to 40 fps unless settings are cut heavily.13

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card Yeston GeForce GTX 1050TI

Technical score
Technical score
3.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components:

44%

2.0

Performance

24%

1.9

Memory

12%

8.5

Power

11%

7.1

Features

5%

8.9

Design

4%

5.5

Connectivity

3.8
Reviews score
7.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
Score components:

70%

6.2

Overall score

30%

9.6

Price

7.2
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
2,500 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 2,500 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 93.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.4% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
6,350 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 6,350 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 91.3% of graphics cards and equal to 0.3% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
2,659 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 2,659 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 92.6% of graphics cards and equal to 0.5% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
2.1 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 2.1 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 94% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
4 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 4 GB of VRAM, which is less than 87.7% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.4% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 68.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
112.1 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 112.1 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 93.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.8% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
7,008 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 7,008 MHz, which is slower than that of 89.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 17% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
3
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 3 displays, which is fewer than 91% of graphics cards and equal to 6.6% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
1
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 1 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 88.1% of graphics cards and equal to 8.7% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.4a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4a, which is more advanced than on 19.3% of graphics cards and equal to 46.3% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
8.1 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 8.1 Gbps, which is slower than on 65.3% of graphics cards and equal to 22.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
75 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 75 W, which is lower than that of 90.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.6% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
75 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 75 W under peak load, which is lower than 91.8% of graphics cards and equal to 2.3% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
300 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 300 W PSU, which is lower than that of 94% of graphics cards and equal to that of 5% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
75 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 75 W, which is lower than that of 91.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.2% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
75 W
Show more
Size
178x 120x 22 mm
Length
178 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 178 mm long, which is shorter than 93.2% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Height
100 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 100 mm tall, which is shorter than 90.9% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
359 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 359 g, which is lighter than 95.3% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of Graphics cards.
Show more

Yeston GeForce GTX 1050TI vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 65.1% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (75 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    75 W vs 215 W
  • 53.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (300 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    300 W vs 650 W
  • 104.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (178 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    178 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 25 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (100 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    100 mm vs 125 mm
  • 65.9% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (75 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    75 W vs 220 W
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • 2.89x cheaper
    Yeston GeForce GTX 1050TI is cheaper than the average graphics card (£180 vs £520).
    £180 vs £520
  • 2.89x cheaper
    Yeston GeForce GTX 1050TI is cheaper than the average graphics card (£180 vs £520).
    £180 vs £520
  • 0.1% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,752 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,752 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 55.1% smaller GPU die
    This graphics card has a lower GPU die size than the average graphics card (132 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    132 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • 65.1% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (75 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    75 W vs 215 W
  • 53.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (300 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    300 W vs 650 W
  • 65.9% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (75 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    75 W vs 220 W
  • 75% lower idle power draw
    This graphics card has a lower idle power draw than the average graphics card (3 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    3 W vs 12 W
  • 65.9% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (75 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    75 W vs 220 W
  • 104.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (178 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    178 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 25 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (100 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    100 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 64.6% lighter
    This graphics card is lighter than the average graphics card (359 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    359 g vs 1,014 g
  • 44.4% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,392 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,392 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 GB vs 12 GB
  • 34 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (6 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    6 vs 40
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 136 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (48 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    48 vs 184
  • 2.8x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (14 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    14 nm vs 5 nm
  • 82.3% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (66.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    66.82 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 3.2% worse value for money
    Yeston GeForce GTX 1050TI has worse value for money than the average graphics card (7.18 vs 7.4).
    7.18 vs 7.41
  • 44.4% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,392 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,392 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 34 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (6 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    6 vs 40
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 136 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (48 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    48 vs 184
  • 82.3% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (66.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    66.82 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 32.8% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,291 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,291 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 72.4% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (44.5 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    44.54 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 32 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    32 vs 64
  • 90.7% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (2.1 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    2.1 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 7 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2016 vs 2023).
    October 2016
    2016 vs 2023
  • 71.9% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (6,350 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    6,350 points vs 22,638 points
  • 83.1% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (2,500 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    2,500 points vs 14,779 points
  • 85.4% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.07 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 78% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (2,659 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    2,659 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 3,584 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (768 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    768 vs 4,352
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 GB vs 12 GB
  • 75% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (112.1 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    112.1 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 63.1% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (7,008 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    7,008 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • 95.8% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (1 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    1 MB vs 24 MB
  • 62.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (48 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    48 KB vs 128 KB
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 2.8x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (14 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    14 nm vs 5 nm
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • No FSR support
    This graphics card does not support FSR, the average graphics card does.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3 vs 4
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.5 vs 6.8).
    6.5 vs 6.8
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 85.6% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (3,300 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    3,300 million vs 22,900 million
  • 2 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    1 vs 3
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 1 fewer displays supported
    This graphics card supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (3 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    3 vs 4
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.0b vs 2.1a).
    2.0b vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (3 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    3 vs 6
  • 62.5% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Not graded

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Yeston GeForce GTX 1050TI

  • Efficient power consumption (requires no external 6-pin power connector)
  • Compact size fits easily into older or Small Form Factor (SFF) office PCs
  • Quiet operation thanks to specialized 9cm silent fan design
  • Capable of solid 1080p performance in esports titles (Fortnite, CS:GO)
  • Easy installation with plug-and-play support for standard NVIDIA drivers
  • Good build quality with a high-strength, lightweight air deflector

What customers don't like about Yeston GeForce GTX 1050TI

  • Outdated performance for modern AAA titles, often requiring 'Low' settings
  • Confusing marketing images sometimes show a 6-pin header that the 'GF' revision lacks
  • Limited 4GB VRAM is considered below the ideal minimum for 2025/2026 gaming
  • Lacks support for modern features like Ray Tracing or DLSS
  • Occasional reports of incomplete or opened retail packaging from some sellers

Verdict

The Yeston GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is a budget-friendly entry-level graphics card based on the 14nm Pascal architecture with 768 CUDA cores and 4GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus. It operates at a base clock of 1291 MHz and a boost clock of 1392 MHz, offering a 7 Gbps effective memory speed and a 75W TDP that eliminates the need for external power connectors. Key pros include its high power efficiency, compact size suitable for small form factor (SFF) builds, and reliable 1080p performance for casual or older titles. However, its main cons are its inability to support modern features like ray tracing or DLSS, and its limited performance in current-generation AAA games.

Compare Yeston GeForce GTX 1050TI with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Yeston GeForce GTX 1050TI and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found