Which new Video card do you think offers the best performance per dollar?

[cbn]

For AMD and Nvidia?

My premlinary research indicates the RX 470 beats the RX 480 by just a bit (re: 2048 Sp with 4GB @ $189.99 is somewhat better than 2304 Sp with 4GB @ $229.99)

Likewise the GTX 1060 6GB beats the GTX 1070 by a small amount as well. (1280 CUDA cores with 6GB at $249.99 is only somewhat better than 1920 CUDA cores with 8GB at $399.99)

With that mentioned, an outlier I found was GTX 1060 3GB which at $189.99 offers 90% of the CUDA cores (1152 vs. 1280) as the GTX 1060 6GB at 75% of the price ($189.99/$249.99= 75%).....but the VRAM is only 3GB.

RX 470 4GB @ $189.99 vs GTX 1060 3GB at $189.99....what is the opinion here?

P.S. If you want to throw in last generation New cards into the comparison please feel free to do so. In fact, I very much welcome this.

 

[Bacon1]

Are you asking what is the best card for you to buy @ $190 price point or how the cards stack up in general?

 

[happy medium]

gtx 1060 3gb vs 470....

easy win for the 1060.
http://www.hardwareunboxed.com/

 

[Headfoot]

In comparing cards where VRAM is a concern, testing without frametime analysis is basically worthless as that is where you detect the problems

 

[cbn]

Are you asking what is the best card for you to buy @ $190 price point or how the cards stack up in general?

Actually, I just want to know what card(s) have the best performance per dollar.

For example, I just checked the Newegg prices on the RX460 cards and noticed for $99 AR they only have 896 Sp and 2GB VRAM. So compared to RX 470 with 2048sp and 4GB VRAM @ $189.99 (without needing rebate) these would have a lower performance per dollar.

Also, I am interested to find out how the old generation 28nm cards (still being sold at Newegg) stack up.

 

[AtenRa]

I will say the 4GB RX 470 is currently one of the best in perf/$.

 

[cbn]

In comparing cards where VRAM is a concern, testing without frametime analysis is basically worthless as that is where you detect the problems

Yes, frame time analysis is very important to me as I am also looking for a best value CPU that would work well ( without stuttering) for whatever video card comes out to be the "Sweet spot" in performance per dollar.

 

[happy medium]

frame times look fine...your not gonna have much stuttering at 1080p,for any of the best value cards. 1060 3gb is the fastest card overall for the money if you were buying today. And if you overclock its a no brainer.

next best is the 470.

I think there is a gtx1070 at jet.com for 358$ ,that would be the best high end value. And again if you overclock ,its by far the best value.



https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wVM0Nb5crMM

 

[DAPUNISHER]

In comparing cards where VRAM is a concern, testing without frametime analysis is basically worthless as that is where you detect the problems

Agreed. Game play experience is all that matters. And frame times can point out when that is negatively impacted. I also give more weight to results, when it is done during actual gameplay and not canned or short custom tests.

IMO you can grab the 1050ti/1060 3GB or 470 4GB and have snagged a price performance leader. Power, heat, games you play and plan to play, are all consideration that make one or the other marginally better. Heck, even having a preferred vendor like EVGA or Sapphire can influence choice.

 

[IllogicalGlory]

According to Techpowerup, it's the 1060 across every resolution, with the RX 470 and the R9 Fury coming in second and third for 1440p and 4K. At 1080p it's the 950 in the number 3 spot.

 

[Rifter]

id probably go 470 if planning on a long term 3+ year solution as AMD cards age better over time, and get more improvements through drivers over time. or a 1060 if this is a short 1-2 year solution.

 

[cbn]

According to Techpowerup, it's the 1060 across every resolution, with the RX 470 and the R9 Fury coming in second and third for 1440p and 4K. At 1080p it's the 950 in the number 3 spot.

I found the review:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X_3_GB/28.html

(Keep in mind the MSI GTX 1060 Gaming X 3GB was valued at $240....so on the high side for GTX 1060 3GB)

 

[Bacon1]

I found the review:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X_3_GB/28.html

(Keep in mind the MSI GTX 1060 Gaming X 3GB was valued at $240....so on the high side for GTX 1060 3GB)

The Fury price in those is also probably closer to $400 and not the $300 they've been selling at for a while now.

For the $200 price point though either 470 or 1060 will do good. 3GB of ram is already having issues in games though so you'll need to turn down settings sooner.

 

[96Firebird]

Radeon R9 Fury - $310

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X_3_GB/

 

[Erithan13]

I find it basically impossible to recommend the 3GB 1060 because on the Vram limitation. Anyone looking at that card would be well advised to save up for a little bit longer and grab the 6GB version. You gain a tremendous amount of benefit for not a lot of money - you will enjoy that 6GB long after the extra cost has been forgotten about. Conversely, those who have got the 3GB 1060 with any intention of playing future games, is very likely to find themselves turning down settings etc and having a much inferior experience, for which the money saved vs the 6GB version will be cold comfort.

The same applies to the 4GB vs 8GB 470/80 - I don't think the 8GB is ever going to prove much of a benefit vs the 6GB 1060, but I can guarantee the 8GB versions will be powering their way through the benchmarks for a good time to come while the 4GB cards languish and stutter. I wouldn't say there is never a reason to buy the 3GB 1060 or 4GB 470/80 - genuine budget constraints, intended for older games, OK with compromising on settings or the like. But the limitations of the vram need to be taken into very close consideration given how little extra the 6/8GB cards can be found for.

 

[IllogicalGlory]

The Fury price in those is also probably closer to $400 and not the $300 they've been selling at for a while now.

For the $200 price point though either 470 or 1060 will do good. 3GB of ram is already having issues in games though so you'll need to turn down settings sooner.

The Fury is at $310 according to TPU. Although at the time of posting, the Nitro is available for $290 up front!

The hierarchy from the review posted by cbn are the same, but I was looking at the latest review: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1070_Gaming_Z/28.html

 

[SPBHM]

the 1060 3GB looks the best perf/$ for 1080P on most games, but it struggles if you push settings to much (like "extreme textures" or higher res), still if you are worried about vram with it, it's impossible not be worried about the 4GB on the other similarly priced cards... so it starts forcing you towards the cards with more vram, which are significantly more expensive, and perform the same on most cases... so it's not very simple.... but the 1060 6GB is also around the best perf/$ out there anyway, and without vram being much of a problem... so overall I think a 1060 6GB with OC is probably the best today.

 

[Bacon1]

The Fury is at $310 according to TPU. Although at the time of posting, the Nitro is available for $290 up front!

The hierarchy from the review posted by cbn are the same, but I was looking at the latest review: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1070_Gaming_Z/28.html

Nice thanks, looks like they updated it this month, last I saw in August it was still $530.

 

[cbn]

the 1060 3GB looks the best perf/$ for 1080P on most games, but it struggles if you push settings to much (like "extreme textures" or higher res), still if you are worried about vram with it, it's impossible not be worried about the 4GB on the other similarly priced cards... so it starts forcing you towards the cards with more vram, which are significantly more expensive, and perform the same on most cases... so it's not very simple.... but the 1060 6GB is also around the best perf/$ out there anyway, and without vram being much of a problem... so overall I think a 1060 6GB with OC is probably the best today.

Here are the charts for relative performance:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X_3_GB/26.html

So according to this review the GTX 1060 3GB is actually doing better than RX 470 4GB at higher resolutions as well, which is a bit surprising to me given the difference in VRAM. However, as mentioned earlier in the thread another factor we need to consider is frame time variance.

 

[Thinker_145]

I am certain in the long term either the RX 480 8 GB or GTX 1070 will turn out to be the best value of all the current cards. Of course if the 1070 turns out to be a great long term card then so will the 1060 6GB most probably. Will depend if 6 vs 8 GB ever becomes a big deal.

Sent from my HTC One M9

 

[nathanddrews]

I think you'll regret not having more VRAM now (depending on the specific title) and more in the future (VRAM demands won't decrease). It might be worth allocating a bit more savings or couple more hours of your paycheck to a 6GB 1060 or 8GB 480.

I also see 8GB R9 390 cards show up on Craigslist between 180-200.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Azix]

Do this. decide in october. If the 1060 is faster in battlefield 1, civ 6, gears of war, forza horizon and whatever else is coming then with dx12, get that. if not, get the 470. It would be silly to buy a slower 2016+ card with less VRAM potentially for more money based on 2013-2015 games.

There should be other dx11 only games like mafia 3 and titan fall 2 to watch.

 

[MongGrel]

I wouldn't upgrade to anything with only 3Gb of VRam these days. But my old card has that all ready.

Just my thoughts.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Here are the charts for relative performance:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X_3_GB/26.html

So according to this review the GTX 1060 3GB is actually doing better than RX 470 4GB at higher resolutions as well, which is a bit surprising to me given the difference in VRAM. However, as mentioned earlier in the thread another factor we need to consider is frame time variance.

Doesnt matter what the data shows. Seems a lot of posters want to condemn the 3gb 1060 no matter what, and base a buying decsion more on projected future performance than they do in hard data, while ignoring the price difference. Plus this has been argued ad nauseum in 3 or 4 other threads.

In any case, I think the all of these cards are a good value, each with some strength and some weaknesses. Obviously the 6gb 1060 and 8gb 480 are the best choice, but none of the cards are the total junk that was continually perpetrated in previous threads. Personally, I think if any of these new generation of cards is a terrible buy, it is the 460 in either 2 or 4 gb flavors, unless one absolutely has to have a card without a six pin.

 

[Gikaseixas]

In this day and age where GTX 960 had 4GB and Nvidia stopped the 2GB variant production, we shouldn’t have to purchase a higher performing GPU with lower memory, specially knowing that DX12 games will require more memory. 470 4GB offers 33% more but even 4GB will not cut it IMO. GTX 1060 6GB and 470/480 8GB will distance themselves even more from those memory starved GPUs in the next year.


We have many examples of how cards such as 7970, 280x, GTX 780, GTX 780TI and GTX 970 suffer in some of the latest titles, where 290 4GB, GTX 980 or vanilla Fury still put out respectable performance. So, 3GB is only good for older games or MOBA games and shouldn’t be recommended to users wanting to keep their cards for more than a couple of years.