SoNic67 What would be the application? Any PC that has that drastic power issues is a SFF for office or HTPC. None of them need the extra processing power that this card adds, so it won't be a good buy there.

You clearly don't spend much time on SFF forums - there are quite a few people trying to squeeze as much power as possible into tiny boxes with PicoPSUs or similar plug-in DC-DC PSUs, which often have low sustained power limits. The most popular is likely the HDPlex 160, which can sustain 160W and 200W peaks - perfectly fine for a slot-powered GPU and a 65W CPU, but nothing more.Then again, I've shoehorned my RX 570 into an old Optiplex 990 SFF, which has a proprietary 240W PSU, and it runs perfectly fine alongside its (95W TDP, ~80W according to HWMonitor) i5-2400. The highest power draw I've seen at the wall is 265W, which with the PSU's abysmal efficiency rating of "65% mean" translates to less than 200W internally. Too much for the HDPlex 160, but still not much. I could probably blow up that PSU if I ran Prime95 and FurMark, though.As for performance, I didn't spot that @londiste had the clock speeds listed further up in this thread, which makes the calculation in my previous post a bit off. Updated, but of course purely theoretical:GTX 1050 Ti = 100+16,7% shaders = 116,7+ ~5% arch improvements = 122,5+ (1485/1665Mhz base/boost clock vs. 1290/1392 for the 1050 Ti - let's go with boost clocks and call that) 19,6% clock speed increase = 146,5%But then there's the memory bandwidth wrench thrown in the works, which only has a 14% increase, meaning this ismore bottlenecked by memory than the 1050 Ti, even if we're generous and say improved compression boosts that to 25% better effective bandwidth. My completely pulled-out-of-my-a** estimate (given that calculating the effect of a memory bottleneck takes far more than simple math, and will vary between applications) then lands us at about a 30% improvement over the Ti, smack-dab in the middle of it and the RX 570.