[Eurogamer] GTX 1060: 3 GB vs 6 GB

[Mondozei]

Article here.

This is the visual summary:

 

[USER8000]

Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 3GB - the Digital Foundry verdict

Going back to our GTX 1080 review, we were pleasantly surprised to see how well the old GTX 780 Ti held up on our modern benchmarking suite bearing in mind its 3GB of VRAM. The new GTX 1060 3GB has the same amount of memory but an additional two generation's worth of memory compression optimisations - the end result is that three gigs is indeed enough for top-tier 1080p60 gameplay - as long as you stay away from memory hogs like MSAA (which tends to kill frame-rate) along with 'HQ/HD' texture packs and extreme resolution texture options. By and large, the visual impact of these options at 1080p is rather limited anyway - generally speaking, they're designed for 4K screens.


That said, as good as Nvidia's compression technology is, it is lossless in nature, meaning that its effectiveness won't just change on a title by title basis, but at a per-scene level too, according to the content. And with the Hitman benchmark suggesting that even at 1080p, we might be hitting the three gig limit and seeing an additional hit to performance not caused by the reduced CUDA core count, we do have to wonder about the level of future-proofing this cut-down GTX 1060 has. The visual improvement found in super high resolution texture packs may be limited, but we certainly wouldn't want to drop down to medium quality artwork on future titles in order to sustain the expected level of performance.

In the here and now, the three gig GTX 1060 is a good card with excellent performance at its £189/$199 price-point, but its VRAM allocation may well hit its limits more quickly than the four gigs found in the RX 470/480. None of the new wave of sub-£200/$200 graphics cards should be entirely ruled out, and this pared back GTX 1060 still packs plenty of punch - but investing just a little extra in the GTX 1060 6GB would be our recommendation. With certain six gig versions retailing under the initial suggested price-point, grabbing the more capable model needn't break the bank.

They recommend getting the GTX1060 6GB.

 

[Jaskalas]

3GB is not going to let you max settings in the next 2-4 years.
Hitman already shows off the issue, which apparently matters more in DX12 games.

 

[antihelten]

3GB is not going to let you max settings in the next 2-4 years.

1152 CUDA cores running at 1.7 GHz isn't going to let you max settings in the next 2-4 years either.

 

[Erenhardt]

They could use proper AA...

1152 CUDA cores running at 1.7 GHz isn't going to let you max settings in the next 2-4 years either.

Maxing texture quality has very little impact on performance - that is if you have enough VRAM to support it. Otherwise it is chopfest.

 

[USER8000]

1152 CUDA cores running at 1.7 GHz isn't going to let you max settings in the next 2-4 years either.

The VRAM limits will be more an issue though. History has shown us this with these PR edition cards which look good short term but over time don't do so good. Examples include:
1.)8800GTS 320MB vs 8800GTS 640MB
2.)8800GT 256MB vs 8800GT 512MB
3.)GTX460 768MB vs GTX460 1GB
4.)HD6950 1GB vs HD6950 2GB
5.)HD7850 1GB vs HD7850 2GB

There might be a few others I missed,but people should get the gist.

This is why Digital Foundry and Guru3D said to just buy the GTX1060 6GB instead.

 

[fuccboi]

RIP NVIDIA - With AMD you always have to look towards future, they don't necessarily have a good future telling account but as long as you truly believe that this time this is it, you won't regret going AMD. Sure, AMD had to go +100% Vram over one generation unlike Nvidia's +50% while the next gen consoles keep the same amount of memory, but you have to believe in their vision, that it'll be justified. Future games boiz, future games. The Future with AMD.

 

[USER8000]

Tell that to all the people who bought some of the cards I mentioned in my previous posts - I still remember the 9600GT 512MB with 64 shaders destroying the 112 shader 8800GT 256MB in games. Some of us who have been gamers and enthusiasts for a while,remember VRAM limited cards being an issue.

All the people who recommended the VRAM limited cards,quietly just kept quiet of course once the cards hit the VRAM wall!

People are naive - do they think AMD and Nvidia are that dumb to make sure nobody wants to buy a GTX1060 6GB or RX480 8GB anymore?? That is their entire £200 to £300 range gone - so apparently they want zero sales in the most important enthusiast segment. Actually on planet reality the 3GB and 4GB cards they sell are gimped enough so people will upgrade quicker so they get more money.

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch especially when it comes to graphics cards.

 

[Erenhardt]

I had 320MB 8800GTS and was smoked by cheap 512MB/1024MB cards soon after I got it. It had a lot of core power, but VRAM quickly spoiled the fun.

 

[rgallant]

RIP NVIDIA - With AMD you always have to look towards future, they don't necessarily have a good future telling account but as long as you truly believe that this time this is it, you won't regret going AMD. Sure, AMD had to go +100% Vram over one generation unlike Nvidia's +50% while the next gen consoles keep the same amount of memory, but you have to believe in their vision, that it'll be justified. Future games boiz, future games. The Future with AMD.

I believe
with 2 x 780 3gb [$580 x 2 CND +2 x blocks + 13% tax]
btw because of nv neffing of the vram they lost out on me paying +++ for 2 x 780Ti's 3gb at the time.

 

[DamZe]

nVIDIA had no right to spoil the 1060 name by releasing this lesser version. The 1060 is one of best price/performance cards nVIDIA has ever released, thanks to AMD’s RX480. They should have just cut out 3 SM clusters for a total of 896 shaders and left it with the 3GB framebuffer, voila the GTX1050 is born.

 

[rgallant]

Very high textures are not recommended for cards with 4GB and under, but we decided to test it any way. Here you're seeing a stress point where the four gig AMD card sustains performance, while the three gig 1060 stutters, then tanks.

LOL

 

[railven]

I wonder if it's the lack of anything to compete with GTX 1070/1080, but this forum has really focused hard on GTX 1060/RX 480 performance. These are cards I recommend to friends nilly-willy to just fit their budget.

People buying at these price bracket's aren't even focusing on "maxing" anything out. I don't get why the focus is suddenly for realms these products were never meant to participate/compete in?

TL;DR:
Is anyone really recommending a GTX 1060/RX 480 to anyone to "max out" games and actually expect it to continue to "max out" games in 2-3 years?

 

[DamZe]

I wonder if it's the lack of anything to compete with GTX 1070/1080, but this forum has really focused hard on GTX 1060/RX 480 performance. These are cards I recommend to friends nilly-willy to just fit their budget.

People buying at these price bracket's aren't even focusing on "maxing" anything out. I don't get why the focus is suddenly for realms these products were never meant to participate/compete in?

TL;DR:
Is anyone really recommending a GTX 1060/RX 480 to anyone to "max out" games and actually expect it to continue to "max out" games in 2-3 years?

Your assumptions are flawed. People who don't care for graphical fidelity use onboard graphics solutions to play Minecraft @15FPS. The 200-250$ price bracket has always been about getting the price/performance right, for 1080p the RX480/GTX1060 are excellent cards and are meant to appeal to the 80%+ of the discrete GPU market. They should be able to enjoy higher settings in future titles while maintaining a smooth framerate, because most people spending <300$ for a graphics card, don't upgrade on a yearly basis, these cards are aimed at them. Developers will always cater to the lowest denominator (consoles) making the RX480 and GTX 1060 6GB great options for the 1080p/60FPS demography.

 

[Erenhardt]

PC games have different settings you can tweak.

Different settings have different impact on visuals

Different settings have different impact on performance

performance/visuals ratio is not fixed for all settings.

Test your 1080 with ultra, high, medium and low textures, and be blown away by the visual degradation.

Then look at fps and be blow away by the lack of speedboost from lowered settings.

 

[Vesku]

I wonder if it's the lack of anything to compete with GTX 1070/1080, but this forum has really focused hard on GTX 1060/RX 480 performance. These are cards I recommend to friends nilly-willy to just fit their budget.

People buying at these price bracket's aren't even focusing on "maxing" anything out. I don't get why the focus is suddenly for realms these products were never meant to participate/compete in?

TL;DR:
Is anyone really recommending a GTX 1060/RX 480 to anyone to "max out" games and actually expect it to continue to "max out" games in 2-3 years?

Texture detail is nearly free GPU perf-wise just takes more vram. So why not recommend the card with more vram if the extra cost is minimal?

 

[fuccboi]

Many of these cards are running out of breath in the current games on 1080p(<60fps) already, you may need to lower 1 or 2 settings on the GTX 1060 3gb in some games but you will have to lower way more than that on the Rx 470 4gb anyway, and +4GB are an absolute waste on such a slow cards, ultra textures in a few games aren't worth the extra money, higher fps has much more value. There's no future proofing that, you ain't maxing out anything anyway on these in the future.

 

[Thinker_145]

The VRAM limits will be more an issue though. History has shown us this with these PR edition cards which look good short term but over time don't do so good. Examples include:
1.)8800GTS 320MB vs 8800GTS 640MB
2.)8800GT 256MB vs 8800GT 512MB
3.)GTX460 768MB vs GTX460 1GB
4.)HD6950 1GB vs HD6950 2GB
5.)HD7850 1GB vs HD7850 2GB

There might be a few others I missed,but people should get the gist.

This is why Digital Foundry and Guru3D said to just buy the GTX1060 6GB instead.

This.

 

[railven]

Texture detail is nearly free GPU perf-wise just takes more vram. So why not recommend the card with more vram if the extra cost is minimal?

My post was more so this place is focusing a lot of energy arguing mainstream cards. I find that rather odd.

EDIT:

Your assumptions are flawed. People who don't care for graphical fidelity use onboard graphics solutions to play Minecraft @15FPS. The 200-250$ price bracket has always been about getting the price/performance right, for 1080p the RX480/GTX1060 are excellent cards and are meant to appeal to the 80%+ of the discrete GPU market. They should be able to enjoy higher settings in future titles while maintaining a smooth framerate, because most people spending <300$ for a graphics card, don't upgrade on a yearly basis, these cards are aimed at them. Developers will always cater to the lowest denominator (consoles) making the RX480 and GTX 1060 6GB great options for the 1080p/60FPS demography.

What assumption? I only made the observation that this forum is focusing a lot of arguing/posts on mainstream cards. I don't even think the HD 7870 had as many threads/posts dedicated to it.

Even your post supports my observation. I made no arguments.

 

[fuccboi]

This.

25%(4gb vs 3gb) vs 50% difference (or +33% vs +100%), and there just was a big generational leap as well. I think the new price/performance king will be just fine throughout his effective lifetime.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I wonder if it's the lack of anything to compete with GTX 1070/1080, but this forum has really focused hard on GTX 1060/RX 480 performance. These are cards I recommend to friends nilly-willy to just fit their budget.

People buying at these price bracket's aren't even focusing on "maxing" anything out. I don't get why the focus is suddenly for realms these products were never meant to participate/compete in?

TL;DR:
Is anyone really recommending a GTX 1060/RX 480 to anyone to "max out" games and actually expect it to continue to "max out" games in 2-3 years?

Yea, I agree. Problem with the 3gb 1060 is really the price. At least on newegg the cheapest I found was 199.00. If it were 170.00 or maybe even 180.00 it would be a good purchase. These are mid range cards, and I agree, it is not realistic to expect to play every game at max settings, nor to expect the card to perform well for more than a year, or maybe two at the max. The 3gb 1060 will require more compromises though, and needs to be cheaper to account for that.

Edit: I did not look at 480 prices, but the 6gb 1060 prices are absurd for some of the AIB models, approaching the price of a 1070.

 

[SPBHM]

Yea, I agree. Problem with the 3gb 1060 is really the price. At least on newegg the cheapest I found was 199.00. If it were 170.00 or maybe even 180.00 it would be a good purchase. These are mid range cards, and I agree, it is not realistic to expect to play every game at max settings, nor to expect the card to perform well for more than a year, or maybe two at the max. The 3gb 1060 will require more compromises though, and needs to be cheaper to account for that.

Edit: I did not look at 480 prices, but the 6gb 1060 prices are absurd for some of the AIB models, approaching the price of a 1070.

is it? I think that's the main strength right now, should be the best perf/$
you can actually buy one for $199 at newegg, remember how hyped the 480 $199 launch was? remember how hyped the power efficiency was?
well for the most part the 1060 3GB is faster right now, more efficient and you can actually buy it at $199...

 

[escrow4]

3GB vRAM is junk in 2016. Mankind Divided swallows over 5GB and occasionally over 7GB off my 1070. If you need to drop the settings way lower to adjust for that - why not buy a console? And those Ultra textures are very very nice - you can clearly see labels and brands in game.

 

[frozentundra123456]

is it? I think that's the main strength right now, should be the best perf/$
you can actually buy one for $199 at newegg, remember how hyped the 480 $199 launch was? remember how hyped the power efficiency was?
well for the most part the 1060 3GB is faster right now, more efficient and you can actually buy it at $199...

TBH, I wouldnt buy any of the cards now. I would wait till the prices settle down.

 

[mohit9206]

I wonder between 1050 4GB($180) and 1060 3GB($200) which card would the forum members recommend?Don't say RX470.Just between these two,assuming 1050 being 25% slower but has 25% more vram.