Geforce GTX 1060 Thread: faster than RX 480, 120W, $249

[Sweepr]

When's the last time Nvidia claimed a product was faster, with it then only being a tiny bit faster (i.e. less than the 5-10% I mentioned earlier)?

Irrelevant. Doesn't mean all products they claim to be faster need to be >5-10% faster.

And why would you be happy with Nvidia not living up to their promises? That honestly seems like a bit of a defeatist attitude to me.

Because it's a 4.4 TFLOPs VGA based on a 1280 SPs die half a size of GM204 targeting $249+. Only matching GTX 980 or a tiny bit faster would already be a technical accomplishment.

 

[dark zero]

Scores are very similar to the first that were leaked: www.techpowerup.com/223920/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-3dmark-firestrike-performance-revealed

Perhaps the card can boost to these speeds for short periods of time.

Isn't that worse? I mean... seems that OC headroom is not that high than expecting. Even the 480 despite the failure of the chip has better OC potential if is well OCed. Maybe AIBs will solve this mystery at all.

 

[96Firebird]

If review sites use custom 970s, especially like they did for the RX 480 reviews, it would look very unfair to the more expensive 1060.

Which review sites used aftermarket 970s in the RX 480 reviews that weren't downclocked to reference speeds?

 

[Flapdrol1337]

Which review sites used aftermarket 970s in the RX 480 reviews that weren't downclocked to reference speeds?

Nobody downclocks to reference speeds.

Doesn't matter imo, 9/10 cards sold to people that look at tests are aftermarket.

Only thing bad about it is powerconsumption figures are skewed.

 

[96Firebird]

I believe most do...

But it's well known 970 didn't have a reference model (besides the one that Best Buy sold, which I doubt was sent to review sites).

 

[VulgarDisplay]

After 1060 release drivers come out it will be faster than gtx980 and then in a another month when Maxwell performance drops off a cliff due to horrible driver support the gtx1060 will be faster yet.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

 

[hsjj3]

I now fear, is the $249 price point referring to the AIB 3GB cards, like the one Zotac has outed? If so, then the GTX 1060 would be DOA. I cannot imagine Nvidia doing so. $250 (realistically, $270-280) should correspond to the 6GB price point right?

 

[hsjj3]

Just to share. The GTX 960 is "weaker" than a GTX 770 in raw terms. At launch it was slower in the games that were out then. Ever since though, in later games like TW3, ROTRR, Hitman and QB, GTX 960 has a commanding lead over the GTX 770 and in some cases even bests the GTX 780.

I don't believe this is "driver gimping" going on. Just games that leverage the latest architectures well.

 

[redzo]

I now fear, is the $249 price point referring to the AIB 3GB cards, like the one Zotac has outed? If so, then the GTX 1060 would be DOA. I cannot imagine Nvidia doing so. $250 (realistically, $270-280) should correspond to the 6GB price point right?

The announcement is about the 6GB version. So it's starting at 250$ aib.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10474/nvidia-announces-geforce-gtx-1060-july-19
Maybe it was abandoned. I don't think that the 3GB version stands a chance against a 200$+ 4GB rx480. 3GB is too low no matter how fast the 1060 turns out.

 

[Sweepr]

I now fear, is the $249 price point referring to the AIB 3GB cards, like the one Zotac has outed?

No, $249+ is for the 6GB model.

Non-public version of the card suggested retail prices starting at $ 249, while the public version of the GTX 1060 Founders Edition is priced at $ 299 , note that this is the price of 6GB version, Release 3GB price temporarily unclear.

http://news.mydrivers.com/1/490/490595.htm

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 reference and custom models would be available readily on 19th July for prices starting at $249 US. The card will also be available in 3 GB variants which will ship for an even lower price point. We will have more info on the card along with a custom model round up in a few days.

http://www.wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-final-specifications/#ixzz4E1RMYm1S

 

[hsjj3]

The announcement is about the 6GB version. So it's starting at 250$ aib.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10474/nvidia-announces-geforce-gtx-1060-july-19
Maybe it was abandoned. I don't think that the 3GB version stands a chance against a 200$+ 4GB rx480. 3GB is too low no matter how fast the 1060 turns out.

3GB can still work if price at $200 or $220 even. It should be aimed almost exclusively at the eSports community. You get all the power of the GTX 1060, but do away with 3GB of VRAM that wouldn't have been of much use to you and save some $30 to $50 in the process. Sounds like a good enough deal.

But for a "proper" gamer who plays open-world games, yeah then 3GB just wouldn't cut it anymore. It's borderline really with little future proofing (assuming we talk about High textures here, not ultra).

 

[Keysplayr]

After 1060 release drivers come out it will be faster than gtx980 and then in a another month when Maxwell performance drops off a cliff due to horrible driver support the gtx1060 will be faster yet.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

Ah. You don't know that will happen. No mater what you say, you just don't.
Kepler is still a capable gaming gen. It just didn't have the legs Tahiti and Hawaii had.

I know its chic to think and say that because Kepler ran out of steam that all subsequent generations will do the same. Guess what.. GCN will run out of legs at some point as well. We may have already seen the beginnings of that.

 

[krumme]

Probably the exact opposite reason you are not.

Faster is faster to us. (whoever you think "you guys" are)

And faster to you has to be a certain percentage faster, I.E. >5%
to be considered faster.

Who is right here, technically? The people saying it's faster even if it's a smidge? Or the people saying it has to be >5% faster to really be considered faster?

Who's argument would hold up in court if it had to?

Well thats pretty easy. Your argument would loose. Its false marketing. A load of nonsense doesn't change faster means faster and not similar. Exceptions and corner cases just shows its wrong.

And that's also why NVdIa have adjusted the PR. To be on the safe side.
Ofcource 1060 might end up faster. Then it's just fine. And ofcource nobody bring such minor stuff to court btw.

Try to look at it this way.
Its the same as amd saying 480 is faster than 390. Now imagine 2 persons defending such crap for so long. Lol.

 

[Keysplayr]

Well thats pretty easy. Your argument would loose. Its false marketing. A load of nonsense doesn't change faster means faster and not similar. Exceptions and corner cases just shows its wrong.

And that's also why NVdIa have adjusted the PR. To be on the safe side.
Ofcource 1060 might end up faster. Then it's just fine. And ofcource nobody bring such minor stuff to court btw.

Try to look at it this way.
Its the same as amd saying 480 is faster than 390. Now imagine 2 persons defending such crap for so long. Lol.

Just wow.....

 

[JustMe21]

More GTX 1060 leaks.

http://videocardz.com/62086/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-rumors-part-5-full-specs-2-0-ghz-overclocking


Best Compubench Results

GTX 1060
https://compubench.com/device.jsp?b...GB&did=36085769&D=NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB

RX 480
https://compubench.com/device.jsp?b...Radeon+(TM)+RX+480+Graphics&testgroup=overall

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Ah. You don't know that will happen. No mater what you say, you just don't.
Kepler is still a capable gaming gen. It just didn't have the legs Tahiti and Hawaii had.

I know its chic to think and say that because Kepler ran out of steam that all subsequent generations will do the same. Guess what.. GCN will run out of legs at some point as well. We may have already seen the beginnings of that.

The issue that nvidia needs to be tackling is perception. Perception is reality to consumers. Amd has been struggling with driver perception for the last 10 years even though their issues were no worse than those for nvidia drivers since the 5870 launched.

So now that two generations of nvidia cards gpus have tanked hard long term compared to the competition they need to do something to prove this perception wrong or face wearing the stigma associated with it for 10 years. If pascal suffers the same issue they could definitely see some unhappy consumers switching allegiances.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

 

[PhonakV30]

oh Much Faster than RX 480!! , Don't tell me it's fake.Well , It's disappointed.it can't GTX 980.

 

[hsjj3]

Just saw the AOTS benchmarks. Seem to show both the GTX 1060 and RX 480 almost around even. So that should mean the GTX 1060 is fair bit faster then when we get down to business in DX11 games?

Also, considering Nvidia's terrible DX12+Async performance, can we expect devs to target DX11 for Nvidia and DX12 for AMD, especially since visually DX12 doesn't seem to offer anything more compared to DX11?

 

[Shivansps]

3GB is DUMB, you just need to check how the 2GB GTX770 fares today, its nearly at the same level of a 270X, and thats because of VRAM. Same thing gona happen to 3GB soon.

 

[Keysplayr]

The issue that nvidia needs to be tackling is perception. Perception is reality to consumers. Amd has been struggling with driver perception for the last 10 years even though their issues were no worse than those for nvidia drivers since the 5870 launched.

So now that two generations of nvidia cards gpus have tanked hard long term compared to the competition they need to do something to prove this perception wrong or face wearing the stigma associated with it for 10 years. If pascal suffers the same issue they could definitely see some unhappy consumers switching allegiances.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

Oh so now its 2 generations is it?
OK buddy.

 

[Keysplayr]

3GB is DUMB, you just need to check how the 2GB GTX770 fares today, its nearly at the same level of a 270X, and thats because of VRAM. Same thing gona happen to 3GB soon.

Would probably be fine at 1080p and also depends on how good Nvidias compression algorithms are. They've been pretty darn good.

 

[mohit9206]

3GB is DUMB, you just need to check how the 2GB GTX770 fares today, its nearly at the same level of a 270X, and thats because of VRAM. Same thing gona happen to 3GB soon.

Maybe 3gb model will be sold as GTX 1050 with lower clock speeds and less ROPs, texture units and Cuda cores for $199.
In that case 3gb should be sufficient for 1080p gaming.

 

[PhonakV30]

I don't know it's true or not.

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/9202637/fs/9188962#

 

[Sweepr]

There is a GP106-based Geforce GTX 1050 / 1050 Ti in the works. Laptop version is 4GB GDDR5 128-bit. Desktop is rumoured to be 960-1024 SPs, 32 ROPs, 128-bit GDDR5, priced at 1399 RMB (4GB) and 999 RMB (2GB). Geforce GTX 1060 6GB AIB is 1999 RMB.

I don't know it's true or not.

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/9202637/fs/9188962#

It is true that stock RX 480 8GB's 3DMark score at stock is lower than the leaked GTX 1060 results so far, only 3 weeks after its launch, for an extra $10+, at lower TDP.

 

[Shivansps]

Would probably be fine at 1080p and also depends on how good Nvidias compression algorithms are. They've been pretty darn good.

Just look at this

270X vs GTX770, thats what happen when you run out of VRAM, even at 1080P.