• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

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

Page 86 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Sweepr said:
In real life AMD's overhyped advantage in DX12 is in the single digits, and that includes their Gaming Evolved titles (more like tech demos). Even custom RX 480 is slower overall than stock clocks GTX 1060 6GB - using an extra 80W and with less OCing headroom on top. I know it's hard to accept but GTX 1060 GB is the better card for most.
Click to expand...
That review does not have amd performance driver.
OCing matters? LOL. 1060 overclocks no better than 480. Minuscule. And it is not guaranteed. Not sure why would you even mention it. It is nowhere close to the legendary HD7850 and HD7950, or even less impressive gtx980ti.
And the extra 80watts are made back when you start crpyto-miner when going to toilet.
 
guachi said:
With a Gsync monitor being $150-300 more than an equivalent Freesync monitor, the $/performance metric for a 1060 vs. 480 is awful.

And, for me, *sync is a must. The 1060 was never an option.
Click to expand...

Well said. For many users a Rx 480 + 1080p freesync monitor is the only choice as Gsync tax is quite heavy. The fact is GTX 1060 is 5-10% faster on avg in DX11 titles. Rx 480 is roughly 5-7% faster than GTX 1060 in DX12 titles. If you add Doom Vulkan that perf lead is 8-10%.

http://www.golem.de/news/geforce-gt...ingen-direct3d-12-und-vulkan-1607-122214.html
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...iews/73040-nvidia-gtx-1060-6gb-review-21.html
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016...x_1060_founders_edition_review/4#.V63_zfkrLmE

Half a dozen high profile AAA DX12 titles are launching between now and the end of 2016 (4 of which are Gaming Evolved titles). Deux Ex Mankind Divided, Battlefield 1, Watch Dogs 2, Civilization 6, Gears of War 4, Forza Horizon 3. This list is going to get even bigger in 2017. AMD Rx 480 is looking the better card for any user who wants to keep his GPU for more than 2 years. We have seen this in the past where Nvidia cards start off each generation strong but are then overtaken by the AMD competitors and then thrashed badly. HD 7970 vs GTX 680, R9 290X vs GTX 780 Ti. We also saw pathetic DX12 performance from GTX 970 / GTX 980 and the R9 390/R9 390X thrashing them. With GPUOpen we are now seeing console level optimizations like shader intrinsics in AAA titles like Doom. This trend is only bound to accelerate as developers bring more of the console optimizations onto PC without much extra effort.
 
AMD fans seem to be forgetting about VR. That's where gaming is going in the future, and Nvidia is looking much better there. So for people that want to keep their cards for more than two years the VR argument is just as valid as the DX 12 argument.

In other words, nobody here knows how suitable these cards will be for gaming 2+ years from now.
 
Phynaz said:
AMD fans seem to be forgetting about VR. That's where gaming is going in the future, and Nvidia is looking much better there. So for people that want to keep their cards for more than two years the VR argument is just as valid as the DX 12 argument.

In other words, nobody here knows how suitable these cards will be for gaming 2+ years from now.
Click to expand...

Until we see vr take off it's nothing more than a gimmick. I bought into nvidia 3d vision when it was out and where is it now? I will say I even enjoyed it. I was one of the very few. The 480 being better in dx12 is better selling point. Tbh though the 1060 is faster so I'm sure it isn't even much behind in dx12. I personally can say I think the 480 Is a better buy for me. If someone says the 1060 works better for them I wouldn't disagree. Its really splitting hairs at this point and anyone defending either side of the 480 vs 1060 too vehemently then I'd suggest taking a step back and take a deep breath.
 
Phynaz said:
AMD fans seem to be forgetting about VR. That's where gaming is going in the future, and Nvidia is looking much better there. So for people that want to keep their cards for more than two years the VR argument is just as valid as the DX 12 argument.

In other words, nobody here knows how suitable these cards will be for gaming 2+ years from now.
Click to expand...

Actual quality VR games will be vulkan and DX12 because they will be able to produce higher FPS and lower frame times because of features like Async Compute. Those are games that AMD does better in. So you are right, VR future looks good for AMD.
 
Bacon1 said:
Actual quality VR games will be vulkan and DX12 because they will be able to produce higher FPS and lower frame times because of features like Async Compute. Those are games that AMD does better in. So you are right, VR future looks good for AMD.
Click to expand...

Pascal can do asynchronous compute and see performance gains from it.
 
Bacon1 said:
Actual quality VR games will be vulkan and DX12 because they will be able to produce higher FPS and lower frame times because of features like Async Compute. Those are games that AMD does better in. So you are right, VR future looks good for AMD.
Click to expand...

Zoom...point goes over your head.

You can't predict the future any better than anyone else. Just look for posts by fjodor, he thought he could predict the future too. His embarrassment became so great he doesn't post here any longer.
 
If you overclock your 1060 @ 1080p it will beat a overclocked 480 in every benchmark, in every game. direct X 11 or 12. It will also win every benchmark except Hitman @ 1440p.
Buy a 1060 for 259$ and overclock it. That makes it the best value in it class.
And uses less power which will give off less heat in your case.
Much better VR performance to boot.
Funny the overclocked 980 is even faster.

If the 1060 is running 100fps+ in Doom in OGL @ 1080p, why use Vulcan?
Is there something I'm missing?


main-summary-OC-chart.jpg
 
Last edited:
happy medium said:
IS the 3gb model slower or just less Vram?
That's a good price drop.
Click to expand...

It is going to be slower with one SM cluster disabled and half the vRAM of the regular 1060. Say goodbye to ultra textures with this card. Overall the 4GB RX480 at around 200-something is the clear choice here as we are seeing 3GB cards choke in newer titles that dump textures into vRAM.
 
DamZe said:
It is going to be slower with one SM cluster disabled and half the vRAM of the regular 1060. Say goodbye to ultra textures with this card. Overall the 4GB RX480 at around 200-something is the clear choice here as we are seeing 3GB cards choke in newer titles that dump textures into vRAM.
Click to expand...

I dont think anyone would say hello to Ultra textures if there were no noticeable difference or minimal difference in image quality for the performance hit it costs. 3GB, 4GB 6GB or whatever. Still a sweet 1080p card.
 
Keysplayr said:
I dont think anyone would say hello to Ultra textures if there were no noticeable difference or minimal difference in image quality for the performance hit it costs. 3GB, 4GB 6GB or whatever. Still a sweet 1080p card.
Click to expand...

Textures were just an arbitrary example. GTA5 wants more than 3GB with all the nice effects enabled, and so will more future titles. 3GB is not enough in 2016 for a card in the 200 dollar range. They couldn't be this stupid, and that is why I think that they probably can't put 4GB on it due to some restriction by removing the SM cluster, perhaps something similiar to what happened with the last 0.5GB on the 970 due to it being a cut down GM104.
 
happy medium said:
If you overclock your 1060 @ 1080p it will beat a overclocked 480 in every benchmark, in every game. direct X 11 or 12. It will also win every benchmark except Hitman @ 1440p.
Buy a 1060 for 259$ and overclock it. That makes it the best value in it class.
And uses less power which will give off less heat in your case.
Much better VR performance to boot.
Funny the overclocked 980 is even faster.

If the 1060 is running 100fps+ in Doom in OGL @ 1080p, why use Vulcan?
Is there something I'm missing?
Click to expand...

Well those results do not match up at all with what I'm getting, even at stock and I'm at default xeon haswell.
 
DamZe said:
It is going to be slower with one SM cluster disabled and half the vRAM of the regular 1060. Say goodbye to ultra textures with this card. Overall the 4GB RX480 at around 200-something is the clear choice here as we are seeing 3GB cards choke in newer titles that dump textures into vRAM.
Click to expand...
A $200 480 would be a clear choice if it was available.
 
And yet people are having talking points and discussions based around fantasy land msrp numbers that don't exist for all practical purposes. This is not limited just to AMD either.
 
DamZe said:
Textures were just an arbitrary example. GTA5 wants more than 3GB with all the nice effects enabled, and so will more future titles. 3GB is not enough in 2016 for a card in the 200 dollar range. They couldn't be this stupid, and that is why I think that they probably can't put 4GB on it due to some restriction by removing the SM cluster, perhaps something similiar to what happened with the last 0.5GB on the 970 due to it being a cut down GM104.
Click to expand...
At what res? And, can anyone tell the difference? Got any pics? sources? etc.?
 
Keysplayr said:
At what res? And, can anyone tell the difference? Got any pics? sources? etc.?
Click to expand...

dude GTA V is showing 4GB itself being insufficient at 1080p for the highest settings There are quite a few games now where 4GB itself is borderline sufficient at 1080p. Less than that is just a shortsighted buy.

http://techreport.com/review/30473/amd-radeon-rx-470-graphics-card-reviewed/3

"The somewhat furrier frame-time graph for the RX 470 versus the RX 480 in GTA V is one case where we might be observing the difference that 8GB of memory makes on the beefier Polaris card, as well. With GTA V's "extended distance scaling" maxed, the RX 470, the R9 380X, and the GTX 960 all appear to be swapping data in from main memory often, while the RX 480 appears to be able to keep all the assets it needs in its pool of GDDR5. I'm guessing that keeping that data local has a noticeable impact on smoothness and performance."

If a gamer is on a very strict budget then I would recommend Rx 480 4GB at USD 199 or Rx 470 4GB (if available at USD 179) otherwise I would say Rx 480 8GB and GTX 1060 6GB at USD 250-USD 270 are the best options for anybody who keeps the GPU for 2+ years.
 
raghu78 said:
dude GTA V is showing 4GB itself being insufficient at 1080p for the highest settings There are quite a few games now where 4GB itself is borderline sufficient at 1080p. Less than that is just a shortsighted buy.

http://techreport.com/review/30473/amd-radeon-rx-470-graphics-card-reviewed/3

"The somewhat furrier frame-time graph for the RX 470 versus the RX 480 in GTA V is one case where we might be observing the difference that 8GB of memory makes on the beefier Polaris card, as well. With GTA V's "extended distance scaling" maxed, the RX 470, the R9 380X, and the GTX 960 all appear to be swapping data in from main memory often, while the RX 480 appears to be able to keep all the assets it needs in its pool of GDDR5. I'm guessing that keeping that data local has a noticeable impact on smoothness and performance."

If a gamer is on a very strict budget then I would recommend Rx 480 4GB at USD 199 or Rx 470 4GB (if available at USD 179) otherwise I would say Rx 480 8GB and GTX 1060 6GB at USD 250-USD 270 are the best options for anybody who keeps the GPU for 2+ years.
Click to expand...

I don't know how much success we will have in persuading an NVidia Focus Group member on why an NVidia 3GB card in the 200$ price range in this day and age is a very foolish proposition, perhaps we needn't even try.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top