Nvidia cards at this low a price are absolutely terrible value, its actually amazing how AMD does alot more at comparable prices in this current market. Especially even while more limited in its PCI lanes, and memory bus width across both the 6400 and 6500XT, (and even the 6600 but that's a different performance and price bracket) with only the 1630 matching both limitations with (iirc) PCI 3 x8 (equivalent to PCI 4 x4) and 64-bit bus. Nvidia released this at a extremally bad time, with this card being terrible even worse than what the 6500 XT and later 6400 were considered.<br><br>Considering the only thing your missing out on is video encoding, which is a very poor sacrifice to just get Nvidia plus its higher cost. (overclocked models of the 1630 will likely be the most popular manufactured versions of the card, so don't expect many regular cheaper stock clock models.) <br><br>It should be known relatively modern CPUs (6-8 year ish range) can handle video encoding workloads, and that shouldn't be discounted. And considering you can go for Intel and get a CPU and get a iGPU with it, 720p is definitely possible to run real-time for a CPU, iGPU or not.,(reply>), ​@Kenos a new 1660 Super is the relative equivalent card, even being near the original MSRP (market price, not its intended MSRP) of a new 1070. That describes alot of whats wrong with Nvidia's market (not Nvidia itself persay) you either get used or old enough to become normally priced or fund the price of a single decent new card.  <br><br>Unfortunately a 1070 will have a extremally limited span of support these coming years, and the 1660 S is a poor replacement of it. Its not that Used is bad, just buying any GPU nowadays is a nuanced mess of your needs, what you want to risk, and specifications, and Nvidia did a poor job at pulling back price increases of its own cards, even technically encouraging it to continue. <br><br>The 1630 is a collimation of that problem, too high to be worth it and barely even a replacement than a quite middling card from years ago. Technically yes its better supported but its market is a mess of forced market inflation. <br><br>AMD on the other hand has played for a longer term game, and has gotten the reward of having the better hand of low end cards that are cheap while new. Not several years in the future, but that would only make these cards cheaper to boot.<br><br>I'd only hope a new cards get back to at least a quarter of a whole PC build in price. (AMD is taking a lead overall) But im seeing turbulence in other places of the PC market which is making me worry.<br><br>(as a aside the RX 6500 XT, performance wise can match a 1070, (overclocking closer to it is actually easy and it would still be underwattage) though yes is more often under it by either a small or more major amount),(reply>), NVIDIA beats amd in budget out on used cards (the 1070 is 20 bucks cheaper than the 1630 and iirc better than 6400)