# So GTX 1060 is the best price/perf card it seems?



## Recon-UK (Jul 8, 2016)

http://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/2016/07/nvidia-gtx-1060-specs-price-release-date/

As much as the RX 480 is a great card for the price, it can't touch the 1060 at least not in my opinion.
You do get more features with this GPU, you get 6GB Vram standard.
Lower power consumption, and a substantial speed increase over the RX 480 whilst being only 10 dollars more than the 8GB RX 480 variant.

GTX 980 performance for 250 dollars looks to be a real winner.


----------



## MagnyCours (Jul 8, 2016)

It'd be best to wait for reviewers to post the performance figures of the card before jumping to conclusions (looks like the NDA for reviews will be lifted at the 19th) and i also have my doubts on AIBs selling custom cards at the $250 MSRP. I have a feeling most'll carry a $20-30 price premium at least.


----------



## Recon-UK (Jul 8, 2016)

MagnyCours said:


> It'd be best to wait for reviewers to post the performance figures of the card before jumping to conclusions (looks like the NDA for reviews will be lifted at the 19th) and i also have my doubts on AIBs selling custom cards at the $250 MSRP. I have a feeling most'll carry a $20-30 price premium at least.



I do agree, however we are looking at reference vs reference here, RX 480 has no AIB cards yet, i'm sure those will cost a fair amount more than reference too.


----------



## MagnyCours (Jul 8, 2016)

I thought the reference card would be priced at $300? Or are you referring to reference boards sold by AIBs like the EVGA GTX 1080 ACX 3.0 (reference board with EVGA's ACX 3.0 cooler) and not the Founder's Edition?


----------



## Recon-UK (Jul 8, 2016)

MagnyCours said:


> I thought the reference card would be priced at $300? Or are you referring to reference boards sold by AIBs like the EVGA GTX 1080 (reference board with EVGA's ACX 3.0 cooler) and not the Founder's Edition?



No, i was agreeing to your statement, but you mentioned the GTX 1060 AIB's will cost more, well yeah... the RX 480 AIB's will too, so it ends up back at square one.


----------



## Frick (Jul 8, 2016)

No one knows the answer to the question and you know it. Aren't there enough hype threads?

I want to see how the lower end cards perform. 1050/1040(maybe even 1030) and 470/460.


----------



## Caring1 (Jul 8, 2016)

The only advantage I can see is the possible lower power consumption.
No SLI connections, possibly the same Pascal overclocking limits and driver issues are things I see as a negative.


----------



## Recon-UK (Jul 8, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> The only advantage I can see is the possible lower power consumption.
> No SLI connections, possibly the same Pascal overclocking limits and driver issues are things I see as a negative.



Ughhh don't talk to me about Nvidia's driver issues... they have a lot lately :/


----------



## RejZoR (Jul 8, 2016)

Recon-UK said:


> http://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/2016/07/nvidia-gtx-1060-specs-price-release-date/
> 
> As much as the RX 480 is a great card for the price, it can't touch the 1060 at least not in my opinion.
> You do get more features with this GPU, you get 6GB Vram standard.
> ...



So, how are all the GTX 1070 and GTX 1080 with aftermarket coolers going for cheaper than Founders Editions?


----------



## silkstone (Jul 8, 2016)

Reviews will be out soon, then we can see. I'm looking forward to the latest mid-range offerings from both companies as I really need to replace my power-hungry crossfire setup with something that performs at the same level without needing the electricity of a small power station.


----------



## rougal (Jul 8, 2016)

silkstone said:


> Reviews will be out soon, then we can see. I'm looking forward to the latest mid-range offerings from both companies as I really need to replace my power-hungry crossfire setup with something that performs at the same level without needing the electricity of a small power station.



Same here.. If this is better priced and perfoms on par with rx480 i might just get this baby... been so long since I upgraded.. gonna be my last upgrade on my old obsolete 1080p setup.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 8, 2016)

Frick said:


> I want to see how the lower end cards perform. 1050/1040(maybe even 1030) and 470/460.



Shhhh!  Talk like that'll get your TPU party card taken away...


----------



## vega22 (Jul 8, 2016)

i think the way they cut the chips up will hurt the 1050 in the same way the 970 was.

but price will be what defines this, and i can't see these selling for under £300. not the ones people want to buy with good coolers and 0 rpm idle and that. if that is the case then the 480 will still be top of the priceref ratio.


----------



## KemoKa (Jul 8, 2016)

If the other cards are anything to go by, the 1060 will have stock shortages, will have a high overclocking capacity but poor clock scaling, and will be priced above the optimistic MSRP, especially for the aftermarket coolers (because that's up to the board manufacturers). As far as I've seen, Pascal suffers to a lesser extent the same sort of performance drops from using Async, so I'm still not convinced that they actually have a hardware scheduler. Also, the fact that they got rid of the SLI bridge on the 1060 is really, really disturbing. Seems that Nvidia is trying to lock down the capability for multi-GPU setups on lower-end cards. Probably because at the price point they're advertising, two 1060s would beat their more expensive cards. But that's a real shame because the stock 480 is biting the heels of the MSI Lightning 290X, which is one of the fastest Hawaii XT cards ever made. Two of them in crossfire apparently beats out an R9 295X2.

I'm not actually that sure if it will beat out the 480, given that the 960 is not quite as fast as the Tahiti/Tonga XT cards.

Also seems to me that Nvidia was desperate to get the 1060 out as fast as they possibly could, because historically they've waited half a year to release their lower-end cards. We'll see though.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 8, 2016)

I don't see how we can make any proclamation as to the best price to performance ratio card yet.  The 1060 has not been reviewed yet, and if manufacturers of AIB cards price their cards close to the FE price of the 1060, then the $249 goes out the window.  Then, no matter how it perform,s it doesn't win the price/performance card. 

So...wait for reviews and actual releases before this can be decided.


----------



## RejZoR (Jul 8, 2016)

Bottom line, if someone is looking for GTX 980 performance but at lower wattage, then I guess GTX 1060 is a good option. It's still half the price of what GTX 980 was just half a year ago. I was a bit forgiving about async for GTX 9xx series, but bragging about best GPU ever to be produced (Pascal) and then (still) not have async compute available, that's just lazy. Especially since AMD has been doing it to smaller extent since HD7000 series like frigging 4 years ago...


----------



## Ungari (Jul 8, 2016)

Recon-UK said:


> No, i was agreeing to your statement, but you mentioned the GTX 1060 AIB's will cost more, well yeah... the RX 480 AIB's will too, so it ends up back at square one.



Actually the RX 480 NITRO is supposed to be only $10 more than the reference card.
With the Founders Edition card scheme, I see the 1060 going over $300 for custom boards..


----------



## RejZoR (Jul 8, 2016)

Well, getting to know VRM circuitry on reference RX480, they don't really have to redesign reference boards. They are powerful enough as it is. They just need better cooling and modified power distribution. And that's it.


----------



## KemoKa (Jul 8, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> Well, getting to know VRM circuitry on reference RX480, they don't really have to redesign reference boards. They are powerful enough as it is. They just need better cooling and modified power distribution. And that's it.


They solved the power draw problem through the drivers, and it was confirmed to work. Now if it needs more power it'll pull it directly from the power supply rather than the motherboard. 

But agreed, if the power delivery is anything like it is on the Fury cards, you could slap a better cooler on the reference board and be totally fine. I would imagine that's what EKWB and others are working on cranking out right as we speak. 

On the subject of performance, I'd take the claims of GTX 980 levels of performance with a massive grain of salt. The 960 could not beat the 780, not by a long shot. The 1080 was said to have more performance than two 980s in SLI, which was an absolute pipe dream. If it beats the 980 in anything, it will be a new title, it will be an Nvidia title, and it will be with a driver that slashes the performance of the 980. With the performance levels of the 1070 and 1080, that's what they will have to do to pull that kind of thing off.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 8, 2016)

It has been conjectured that SLI was disabled on these cards as two 1060's will match the 1080 for only $600.


----------



## RejZoR (Jul 8, 2016)

Well, that's exactly what AMD allowed people to do with RX480.


----------



## Dethroy (Jul 8, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> Well, that's exactly what AMD allowed people to do with RX480.


Because AMD has nothing else to offer at the moment that could compete with the 1080. Nvidia on the other hand does ...


----------



## trog100 (Jul 8, 2016)

disabling or not having SLI on the 1060 cards simply gives the AMD 480 an additional advantage.. CF problems or not a couple of cheap 480 cards looks a good alternative to me to the (over priced) higher end Nvidia offering.. more so if they come up with a dual gpu card based on the 480 chip..

trog


----------



## JrRacinFan (Jul 8, 2016)

Offload my 950, which serves me well, or stick to it 1080p gaming  .... decisions decisions ....


----------



## rruff (Jul 8, 2016)

Recon-UK said:


> ...you mentioned the GTX 1060 AIB's will cost more, well yeah... the RX 480 AIB's will too, so it ends up back at square one.



Square one of pointlessness. 

AMD and Nvidia cards will always be competitive on cost, performance, features, etc... at least once the early adopter frenzy dissipates. It is like a law of nature in competitive markets. If the 1060 is clearly faster, then 480s will be cheaper. 

Forget MSRP. It's meaningless. The market will set the price, and there will be very good deals (<$200) on both in a few months. Wait. Or just pay the premium.


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Jul 8, 2016)

trog100 said:


> disabling or not having SLI on the 1060 cards simply gives the AMD 480 an additional advantage.. CF problems or not a couple of cheap 480 cards looks a good alternative to me to the (over priced) higher end Nvidia offering.. more so if they come up with a dual gpu card based on the 480 chip..
> 
> trog


i second that. also the 490 is supposed to be a dual chip card. there were some leaks.
http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-490-dual-gpu/



JrRacinFan said:


> Offload my 950, which serves me well, or stick to it 1080p gaming  .... decisions decisions ....


i would wait if i were you. let the dust clear out and then decide.


----------



## JrRacinFan (Jul 8, 2016)

$ReaPeR$ said:


> i would wait if i were you. let the dust clear out and then decide.


Kind of leaning towards that too. PLus it will let me move over to a newer arch base, saving up some. Z170 is tempting but this 860 gets me along just fine ...


----------



## Intervention (Jul 8, 2016)

Recon-UK said:


> http://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/2016/07/nvidia-gtx-1060-specs-price-release-date/
> 
> As much as the RX 480 is a great card for the price, it can't touch the 1060 at least not in my opinion.
> You do get more features with this GPU, you get 6GB Vram standard.
> ...


Yes, the GTX 1060 seems to be a good deal if you are not into the multi gpu setup. 2 RX 480's at $200 each will compete with a GTX 1070 and GTX 1080. I like the idea of being able to crossfire 2x $200 gpu's and getting high end frame rates for a lot less money, specially at 4K resolutions. Although multi gpu setups are not ideal, it still provides a great option for those of us looking for a great aesthetic look and upgradability. Cheers!


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Jul 8, 2016)

JrRacinFan said:


> Kind of leaning towards that too. PLus it will let me move over to a newer arch base, saving up some. Z170 is tempting but this 860 gets me along just fine ...


based on your system specs you seem like a price/perf guy, so yes, you should wait. you managed to wait untill now, whats 3-4 more monts.. 
you could also end up with a cheap 980ti if you dont mind the generation thing.

ps. how is that 860 handling things?


----------



## EdInk (Jul 8, 2016)

RX480 5.2billion transistors same TDP as GTX1070 with 7.2billion trannies....GCN seems to be the weak link here, not very efficient...RX480 already lacks here imo.


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Jul 8, 2016)

Harry Palms said:


> Yes, the GTX 1060 seems to be a good deal if you are not into the multi gpu setup. 2 RX 480's at $200 each will compete with a GTX 1070 and GTX 1080. I like the idea of being able to crossfire 2x $200 gpu's and getting high end frame rates for a lot less money, specially at 4K resolutions. Although multi gpu setups are not ideal, it still provides a great option for those of us looking for a great aesthetic look and upgradability. Cheers!


hopefully dx12 will make sli/cf a viable option for everyone. that would be a game-changer imo.


----------



## Intervention (Jul 8, 2016)

$ReaPeR$ said:


> hopefully dx12 will make sli/cf a viable option for everyone. that would be a game-changer imo.


I would be nice to see Nvidia cards running along side AMD cards  For sure!


----------



## xorbe (Jul 9, 2016)

Ungari said:


> It has been conjectured that SLI was disabled on these cards as two 1060's will match the 1080 for only $600.



4-way support dropped to 2-way, and 2-way support dropped to 1-way ... pretty straight forward cost reductions ...


----------



## RejZoR (Jul 9, 2016)

xorbe said:


> 4-way support dropped to 2-way, and 2-way support dropped to 1-way ... pretty straight forward cost reductions ...



It's not a cost reduction if you are then forced to make huge super fast GPU. Designing those is expensive and making those is even more expensive because less of them fit on a wafer in factory. It's why AMD is chasing multi-GPU solutions by default now and Navi should be the first such full attempt at it. Fitting several smaller chips on a single board while having great scaling with minimal software/driver interference is the future. They can fit hundreds of smaller GPU's on a single wafer in factory, they can spread out heat production so it's not so centralized on a final product and end result are way cheaper graphic cards with basically same performance. Want a faster card? Just stack more GPU's on it. It'll one day become that simple. But we aren't quite there yet and I think DX12 has to become a norm like DX11 is today. It has to be in every game and then we will see that. So far, things are moving rather slowly thanks to bad Windows 10 adoption (thanks to shitty Microsoft policies).


----------



## Frick (Jul 9, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> So far, things are moving rather slowly thanks to bad Windows 10 adoption (thanks to shitty Microsoft policies).



I wouldn't say slow. MS themselves says it's faster than how fast Win7 was adopted. Close to 300m users now.


----------



## sutyi (Jul 9, 2016)

I would wait for the reviews before drawing any conclusions. I still have my concerns about the DX12 capabilities of Pascal...


----------



## HD64G (Jul 9, 2016)

rougal said:


> Same here.. If this is better priced and perfoms on par with rx480 i might just get this baby... been so long since I upgraded.. gonna be my last upgrade on my old obsolete 1080p setup.


Just an estimation: 1060 will be less powerful than custom RX480s and even a bit more expensive as well. Only pro for it will be its lower power consumption which tbh isn't a problem to cover when it's <200W nowadays. 290X vs 970 had a big diff in this factor indeed and nVidia milked 970s price. Now it will be no brain to get the most FPS/$ GPU no matter which it is. especially in this budget price lvl.


----------



## Caring1 (Jul 9, 2016)

Frick said:


> I wouldn't say slow. MS themselves says it's faster than how fast Win7 was adopted. Close to 300m users now.


Off topic, but how many Win 7 users were forced to adopt that O.S.?


----------



## Frick (Jul 9, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> Off topic, but how many Win 7 users were forced to adopt that O.S.?



No one's forced to anything, IMO, it's just that people don't read things. They just click around randomly until whatever it is they are seeing dissapears. One could argue MS should know that by know, and that is maybe what they do.


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Jul 9, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> Off topic, but how many Win 7 users were forced to adopt that O.S.?


millions!!!!!!!! muahahahahaha (M$ exec rubbing his hands)  



Frick said:


> No one's forced to anything, IMO, it's just that people don't read things. They just click around randomly until whatever it is they are seeing dissapears. One could argue MS should know that by know, and that is maybe what they do.


the truth is somewhere in the middle from what i have seen. i build pc's for a living and from my personal experience i can tell you that yes, ms doesnt force you to upgrade BUT they make it very difficult (for the average user) not to upgrade.


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Jul 9, 2016)

HD64G said:


> Just an estimation: 1060 will be less powerful than custom RX480s and even a bit more expensive as well. Only pro for it will be its lower power consumption which tbh isn't a problem to cover when it's <200W nowadays. 290X vs 970 had a big diff in this factor indeed and nVidia milked 970s price. Now it will be no brain to get the most FPS/$ GPU no matter which it is. especially in this budget price lvl.


i dont think the 1060 will be less powerful than the 480, but i also dont think that it will be much more powerful, imo their difference will be in the 5-10% max on average. they are pretty well balanced these 2 cards when you take into account everything including power consumption (which people will take into account). the price will be the crucial factor, and on that front imo the 480 will be the better choice overall. there is also the lack of hw async for the 1060, but i dont think that for the next 1-2 years this will be a major issue.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 9, 2016)

$ReaPeR$ said:


> the price will be the crucial factor, and on that front imo the 480 will be the better choice overall. there is also the lack of hw async for the 1060, but i dont think that for the next 1-2 years this will be a major issue.



Yes, the lack of DX12 and Vulkan content has been a factor, as this is where Polaris architecture pushes these cards into the higher tier performance, where the RX 480 outshines even the GTX 980.
If there were some popular games that used the new APIs, you would see gamers having a stark comparison from which to make a choice to purchase these new cards.


----------



## sutyi (Jul 9, 2016)

$ReaPeR$ said:


> i dont think the 1060 will be less powerful than the 480, but i also dont think that it will be much more powerful, imo their difference will be in the 5-10% max on average. they are pretty well balanced these 2 cards when you take into account everything including power consumption (which people will take into account). the price will be the crucial factor, and on that front imo the 480 will be the better choice overall. there is also the lack of hw async for the 1060, but i dont think that for the next 1-2 years this will be a major issue.



To be honest Pascal only seems as a polished Maxwell on a smaller node. That is great for clocks and effiency, but might get lackluster in terms of longetivity due to the lack of support for advanced features.

DX12 and Vulkan are getting pretty good traction on the road that Mantle paved for them earlier. Also as more and more advanced features of these APIs will be used in the near future with (so far) console exclusive technologies getting ported over to the PC as well, the performance "balance" of current times might be tipped to the Red end of the scale.

Don't get me wrong I'm not visioning NV3x _(GeForce FX)_ kind of a performance failage, but I have my concerns if I'm buying something the will hopefully provide me with 1080p gaming for the next 2 years maybe.


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Jul 9, 2016)

sutyi said:


> To be honest Pascal only seems as a polished Maxwell on a smaller node. That is great for clocks and effiency, but might get lackluster in terms of longetivity due to the lack of support for advanced features.
> 
> DX12 and Vulkan are getting pretty good traction on the road that Mantle paved for them earlier. Also as more and more advanced features of these APIs will be used in the near future with (so far) console exclusive technologies getting ported over to the PC as well, the performance "balance" of current times might be tipped to the Red end of the scale.
> 
> Don't get me wrong I'm not visioning NV3x _(GeForce FX)_ kind of a performance failage, but I have my concerns if I'm buying something the will hopefully provide me with 1080p gaming for the next 2 years maybe.


indeed! dx12 will be good for everyone though (maybe not for the overpricing habbit of nvidia), but overall i think that it will be good for them too because i think that it will ultimately expand the potential market. i imagine a world where an intel/amd igp and two amd+nvidia gpus working in tandem to give the best possible performance to the gamer. that would be nice imo  and very cheap potentially while offering huge performance gains.


----------



## BoyGenius (Jul 15, 2016)

Recon-UK said:


> http://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/2016/07/nvidia-gtx-1060-specs-price-release-date/
> 
> As much as the RX 480 is a great card for the price, it can't touch the 1060 at least not in my opinion.
> You do get more features with this GPU, you get 6GB Vram standard.
> ...



Those cards will not going to be available at $250. You can expect $300 or more as currently going with 1070 etc.
Also don't take performance figure provided by nvidia against RX 480 for granted. See the video below


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 15, 2016)

BoyGenius said:


> Those cards will not going to be available at $250. You can expect $300 or more as currently going with 1070 etc.
> Also don't take performance figure provided by nvidia against RX 480 for granted. See the video below


Looking around the WebS its looking like this is ,as chalie D says ,not really a Gp106 I mean look up the gtx 1050 rumours and it looks like that's a real p106 and this is a heavily cut P104 plus nvidia apparently pulled the Gp106-300 out of the 1060 lineup to make it a 1050, all hearsay of course but interesting none the less ,well we will see how supply racks up and then hopefully how benches go, still think I chose wisely I am at near Gtx1080 @4k performance for less cash and miles more folding powers then pascal has muhahaha.


----------



## tabascosauz (Jul 15, 2016)

BoyGenius said:


> Those cards will not going to be available at $250. You can expect $300 or more as currently going with 1070 etc.
> Also don't take performance figure provided by nvidia against RX 480 for granted. See the video below



I don't see anything in that video that refutes Nvidia's numbers for the lead over the RX 480. The GTX 1060 maintains a comfortable (*not *_insignificant_, *not *_substantial_, but _comfortable_) lead over the RX 480, even in DX12 titles. Also, the title of the video is ridiculous; you either have leaked numbers, or you have official numbers. You can't have both. A leaked slide with Nvidia's logo on it is still leaked and not official until confirmed by an announcement by Nvidia itself.

There continues to be reference to the "RX 480's custom cards will be faster than GTX 1060", except RX 480 AIB cards are nowhere to be seen, only "pictured", yet the first custom cards for GTX 1060 have already been announced. I'm not one to go around trumpeting the superiority of Nvidia, but these are the facts.

I'm not expecting $250, nor am I expecting $300 or more. I am expecting whatever the market decides is the "right price". For those such as myself who run tight mITX builds, every bit of power consumption savings counts because every extra watt translates into heat (and from the temperature numbers off AMD's own RX 480 cooler, it doesn't look too pleasant for a card that's only supposed to be 150W TDP). If the best that AMD can offer me is a Sapphire 6-inch RX 480 that might or might not even be released, then damn right the GTX 1060 will be the better choice, what with Zotac's short card already announced, EVGA's coming up and Asus' DCM card most likely round the corner.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 15, 2016)

Recon-UK said:


> RX 480 is a great card for the price,


----------



## BoyGenius (Jul 16, 2016)

tabascosauz said:


> I don't see anything in that video that refutes Nvidia's numbers for the lead over the RX 480. The GTX 1060 maintains a comfortable (*not *_insignificant_, *not *_substantial_, but _comfortable_) lead over the RX 480, even in DX12 titles. Also, the title of the video is ridiculous; you either have leaked numbers, or you have official numbers. You can't have both. A leaked slide with Nvidia's logo on it is still leaked and not official until confirmed by an announcement by Nvidia itself.
> 
> There continues to be reference to the "RX 480's custom cards will be faster than GTX 1060", except RX 480 AIB cards are nowhere to be seen, only "pictured", yet the first custom cards for GTX 1060 have already been announced. I'm not one to go around trumpeting the superiority of Nvidia, but these are the facts.
> 
> I'm not expecting $250, nor am I expecting $300 or more. I am expecting whatever the market decides is the "right price". For those such as myself who run tight mITX builds, every bit of power consumption savings counts because every extra watt translates into heat (and from the temperature numbers off AMD's own RX 480 cooler, it doesn't look too pleasant for a card that's only supposed to be 150W TDP). If the best that AMD can offer me is a Sapphire 6-inch RX 480 that might or might not even be released, then damn right the GTX 1060 will be the better choice, what with Zotac's short card already announced, EVGA's coming up and Asus' DCM card most likely round the corner.


I posted the video so you can see that actual AMD RX480 results tend to differ from what is shown in those leak (can't comment on legitimacy of that). There was some 5-7% difference on RX 480 results to that slide.
Better to wait for TPU review and comparison & by that time we can really tell how much GTX 1060 will cost to us then a comparison can be made.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 16, 2016)

BoyGenius said:


> Better to wait for TPU review and comparison & by that time we can really tell how much GTX 1060 will cost to us then a comparison can be made.



Completely agree! People put too much faith in the numbers that BOTH red and green HQ put out.  Frequently they are very overstated, or applicable in one situation.

Wait for reviews before making any pronouncements.


----------



## ViperXTR (Jul 19, 2016)

Local price here indicates that the GTX 1060 will be a little cheaper than the RX 480 o_0


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

Can you give numbers?
I'm still waiting for the price announcement later today


----------



## Intervention (Jul 19, 2016)

Recon-UK said:


> http://arstechnica.co.uk/gadgets/2016/07/nvidia-gtx-1060-specs-price-release-date/
> 
> As much as the RX 480 is a great card for the price, it can't touch the 1060 at least not in my opinion.
> You do get more features with this GPU, you get 6GB Vram standard.
> ...


No sli support. Nvidia wants you to drop 600 bucks on theyre better offerings.


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 19, 2016)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> still think I chose wisely I am at near Gtx1080 @4k performance for less cash and miles more folding powers then pascal has muhahaha.



With a few drawbacks, heat and power usage....


----------



## Onibi (Jul 19, 2016)

NDA lifts in 2 hours D: i hope this card isnt a let down. Time cant go sooner


----------



## ViperXTR (Jul 19, 2016)

silkstone said:


> Can you give numbers?
> I'm still waiting for the price announcement later today


Inital pricing is around 300 USD for the Zotac AMP! though it could still change, RX 480 reference costs around 310+ USD here


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 19, 2016)

P4-630 said:


> With a few drawbacks, heat and power usage....


Heat ,its doing what its designed to so no worries,as for power ,well have to see since you can't sli a 1060 it would have to fold like a bastard and I've got doubts, but I get what you're saying even if it is based on your perspective and not mine.
Plus if used right ie vulkan you're just wrong and I buy for the games that are coming, out as the performance in present games is fine.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 19, 2016)

It would be a mistake to make any judgements about the RX 480 based on the initial benchmarks.
I think given the new Vulkan benchmarks on the reference cards, and with nothing but better performance to come from the custom PCBs, plus the coming driver optimizations,; we shall see the better results for RX 480.
The RX 480 was close to GTX 1070 in Vulkan games, so the GTX 1060 is going to struggle to keep up except in older games where raw clock speed favors Pascal.


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 19, 2016)

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X/
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1060/


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

pfff. . . 7% faster than a 480 at ~145-150% the price.

Have to love the overclocking headroom and power consumption, but the cost puts it out of my budget.

If it were just a $50 difference, then it would compete in the lower-mid range category. However, at $290-$300 compared to $200 then it's just not worth it.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 19, 2016)

silkstone said:


> pfff. . . 7% faster than a 480 at ~140-150% the price.
> 
> Have to love the overclocking headroom and power consumption, but the cost puts it out of my budget.



I agree with you.  W1zzard seems to feel the extra cost (which is substantial) is worth it.  This from his MSI 1060 review: "Compared to Radeon RX 480, you get everything improved at the cost of $60, which means 10% worse price-performance, something that I'd go for any day."

I feel $60 more for something in the same card segment definitely makes it NOT the best price-performance king.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> I agree with you.  W1zzard seems to feel the extra cost (which is substantial) is worth it.  This from his MSI 1060 review: "Compared to Radeon RX 480, you get everything improved at the cost of $60, which means 10% worse price-performance, something that I'd go for any day."



Yeah. If it were a choice between a 8gb 480 and a 6gb 1060, then the $50 price difference may be worth it.

However, for people that game at 1080 (or even 1440) that extra memory won't count for much. If you game above that, then you need to be looking at other cards anyway so it's really the 4gb 480 you need to consider.

I am just sorely hoping that AIB's roughly stick to the $200 price point of the 4gb 480.

Edit - Also, why isn't the 4gb 480 on the price/$ charts?


----------



## Ungari (Jul 19, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> I agree with you.  W1zzard seems to feel the extra cost (which is substantial) is worth it.  This from his MSI 1060 review: "Compared to Radeon RX 480, you get everything improved at the cost of $60, which means 10% worse price-performance, something that I'd go for any day."
> 
> I feel $60 more for something in the same card segment definitely makes it NOT the best price-performance king.



Even if I pretend the benchmarks aren't skewed, spending an additional $60 for a few more frames doesn't really make sense for someone budgeting with in the $200-$300 price range.
If $289 is no problem, you should go more money and look for the 1070 to drop in price, or wait for the RX 490 in the next higher tier.


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 19, 2016)

In my country:



 

Asus GTX1060 Strix at 399 Euros....


----------



## TRWOV (Jul 19, 2016)

On the 1080p field that these cards are supposed to bout they're pretty much even in price/performance so it will come down to the price you can get each for at your specific location. For me that means the RX 480 wins. For others the 1060 will be the smartest buy.


----------



## dyonoctis (Jul 19, 2016)

In France the cheapest RX 480 is selling at 249€ (ref design) the cheapest GTX 1060 actually available is at 284 € (custom design from evga). The like of Asus are selling ref design RX 480 at 279 €. The french press were surprised by the low price of the the GTX 1060 in the country.


----------



## JalleR (Jul 19, 2016)

Here in DK the price for a 1060 6GB is the same as Rx480 8GB Reference, so i guess it will be the 1060 that get the Best value sticker.


----------



## Agility (Jul 19, 2016)

Yes, good for it. But hell no for future proofing. I still don't understand why did Nvidia decided to remove SLI on this. Can't they just let go of their 980Ti series?


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 19, 2016)

Agility said:


> Can't they just let go of their 980Ti series?



You have to have a replacement model.  It will still be months for the Pascal 1080Ti to fill that slot.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 19, 2016)

Oh look, I found an exorbitant 1060 price on Newegg  :
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&N=100007709 601205646

$329 for the ASUS ROG STRIX edition.


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 19, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> Oh look, I found an exorbitant 1060 price on Newegg  :
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&N=100007709 601205646
> 
> $329 for the ASUS ROG STRIX edition.



Well, thats better than the 399 Euros they ask in my country!


----------



## kurosagi01 (Jul 19, 2016)

Performs similarly to GTX980 non ti and cost the same as the GTX970 at the time seems like a good value for money to me.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

kurosagi01 said:


> Performs similarly to GTX980 non ti and cost the same as the GTX970 at the time seems like a good value for money to me.



If prices here are comparable to the 480, then i'll likely go for this offering. I'm seeing a $50 difference between the 8gb 480 and 1060 at the moment. Not awful, but not chump change.

I wonder how this would have been priced absent of the 480 release.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 19, 2016)

silkstone said:


> I wonder how this would have been priced absent of the 480 release.


Seeing NVIDIA's recent hubris, without the RX 480, these likely would have been a further $50 more expensive. Just because.


----------



## Nergal (Jul 19, 2016)

Could someone link me pricing of 249$ ?
I recall some people been 100% sure it would be that at launch


----------



## Ungari (Jul 19, 2016)

NGreedia has shifted the price pressure to compete on the Board Partners while still getting their $300.


----------



## kurosagi01 (Jul 19, 2016)

MSI GTX1060 £244 Pre-order price from Scan in the Uk,i recall paying £279 for my Asus GTX970 ACX 2.0 Edition,so to me i think its a good price,but i wouldn't be upgrading my GTX970 anytime soon just because i don't play enough PC games nowadays and if i was to upgrade i would probably get GTX1070 as a more worthwhile upgrade path.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> Seeing NVIDIA's recent hubris, without the RX 480, these likely would have been a further $50 more expensive. Just because.



I really wouldn't be surprised. I still might go for the 480 because it wipes the floor in DX12 games and my next card will likely have to last for 3+ years. I'll let my wallet decide and go for the cheapest offering I can get.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 19, 2016)

I actually waiting for the Sapphire Nitro RX 480, because it's just within my budget. 
Regardless of the 5-8 fps differences, another $50+ Tax is not worthwhile for me, even if I knew that Pascal could handle Vulkan, DX12.


----------



## TRWOV (Jul 19, 2016)

Nvidia partners are just going to price their cards slightly below the FE and say that theirs are better value because of the factory OC and coolers... which is true but that price strategy pretty much guarantees that the $249 cards will be rare as an unicorn. Not saying that there won't be $249 cards just that most will be priced $270-300 IMO. 

Of course RX480 AIB designs will also have a price increase but you can always count on Sapphire, Powercolor, Diamond and Visiontek to have a budget option around.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 19, 2016)

RX 480 looks like it is competitive with GTX 1060 in DX11.  Of course RX 480 spanks the GTX 1060 in DX12/Vulkan.  So buyers have to ask themselves a question: are you buying the card to play the games of today or the games of tomorrow?


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 19, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> are you buying the card to play the games of today or the games of tomorrow?



Well the best answer for any real gamer is: BOTH! 

That, in my book, makes the 480 the better buy, even disregarding price.  Reason?  It is perfectly playable DX11 in most games at 1080p, and will do better at DX12.  And not all future games will be DX12.  Bottom line: RX 480 is the best all-arounder in my book.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 19, 2016)

4GB 480 has the best of the current gen. the 1060 is 7-8% faster at 1080p while costing 25% more. 

but of course the 1060 at 249$ does have better price/performance compared with the 8GB 480 which reviews show offers no more performance than the 4GB model while costing 40$ more. 

So bang for the buck at 1080p goes to 
1. 4GB RX480 @ 199$
2. GTX 1060 @ 249$
3. 8GB RX 480 @ 239$

then according to w1z's reviews it goes
4. GTX 950
5. R9 290
6. R9 380
7. R9 280X
8. R9 390
9. GTX 1060 FE @ 299$
10. GTX 970

So you can see why nvidia wanted more cards in this area. 3 NV cards vs 5 AMD.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 19, 2016)

The $200-300 segment is on fire this generation.  $199 RX 480 and $249 1060 seem to offer a lot of bang for buck.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 19, 2016)

yogurt_21 said:


> 4GB 480 has the best of the current gen. the 1060 is 7-8% faster at 1080p while costing 25% more.
> 
> but of course the 1060 at 249$ does have better price/performance compared with the 8GB 480 which reviews show offers no more performance than the 4GB model while costing 40$ more.
> 
> ...





xorbe said:


> The $200-300 segment is on fire this generation.  $199 RX 480 and $249 1060 seem to offer a lot of bang for buck.



LMAO: Come on guys...where is this mythical $249 unicorn?  You've not paid attention today?


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jul 19, 2016)

oh well i am glad i have a 1070 ... even if the 1st one i planed to get was out of stock day one ... and got a raise in price from 509chf to 559chf (daf*ck? +50chf on launch day over pre-reservation ) the other one is a less sexy (aka no backplate) but she was cheaper and quite good for the price paid (well ... almost paid ...) MSI really know how to do good cards on each segment and prices. 

when i see the prices of the 1060 ... i am not surprised : greedy retailer and manufacturer ... 




rtwjunkie said:


> LMAO: Come on guys...where is this mythical $249 unicorn?  You've not paid atrention today?


YAY for logic and observation


----------



## Ungari (Jul 19, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> You've not paid atrention today?



I was paying _atrention._


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jul 19, 2016)

Ungari said:


> I was paying _atrention._


not on the names in @rtwjunkie 's post tho  

edit ... "atrention".... oh!


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 19, 2016)

Ungari said:


> I was paying _atrention._


Lol, already corrected. I'm on phone, which sucks.


----------



## RejZoR (Jul 19, 2016)

As things stand, if you're someone who mostly plays older/current games, GTX 1060 is a better option. If you play current games and want to have a more future proof card for DX12 and Vulkan, then go with RX 480. It's basically as simple as that.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 19, 2016)

I see a 1060 mini at EVGA for $249, just not in stock yet.  I might grab that, and a 4GB RX 480.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 19, 2016)

xorbe said:


> I see a 1060 mini at EVGA for $249, just not in stock yet.  I might grab that, and a 4GB RX 480.



Covering both bases!


----------



## JalleR (Jul 19, 2016)

OK but where can I buy 199 and 229$ Rx480 and if it could be near EU that would be nice...  

BTW. no Real DX12 or Vulcan games will be launched tomorrow anyways....


----------



## xorbe (Jul 19, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> Covering both bases!



Yeah I play the more expensive version of "gotta catch them all" ...


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 19, 2016)

So basically if you're on windows 10 you might be better off with the RX480.
I'm staying on windows 8.1, satisfied running DX11 games on my nvidia card


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 19, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> LMAO: Come on guys...where is this mythical $249 unicorn?  You've not paid attention today?


FAIL

I get we never saw the 1070 or 1080 hit it, but the 1060 did. They sold out quickly but they did. Which is no different than the RX 480 at launch where the 199$ 4GB and the 239$ 8GB model sold out fast but hit msrp.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133631&ignorebbr=1
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487260&ignorebbr=1
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814500402&ignorebbr=1


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 19, 2016)

yogurt_21 said:


> FAIL
> 
> I get we never saw the 1070 or 1080 hit it, but the 1060 did. They sold out quickly but they did. Which is no different than the RX 480 at launch where the 199$ 4GB and the 239$ 8GB model sold out fast but hit msrp.
> 
> ...



OK, so NVIDIA deception.  I would say no one, including you thought that $249 price point on a mini-card would be how they met the $249 MSRP.  Certainly not on the full-fledged more powerful cards in each manufacturer's lineup.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 19, 2016)

You are correct. I was confident it would go the other way and ASUS did launch a 330$ version, they just also launched a 249$ version too (likely under heavy pressure from NV) Time will tell how many that actually launched at that price but it was at least present. slight improvement lol.


----------



## rruff (Jul 19, 2016)

xorbe said:


> The $200-300 segment is on fire this generation.  $199 RX 480 and $249 1060 seem to offer a lot of bang for buck.



FPS/$ will get even better with the $150 cut and downclocked 470 and 1050. And still very powerful for 1080p.


----------



## erocker (Jul 19, 2016)

Id just buy the 4gb 480 if I was looking for a card in this segment.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jul 20, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> OK, so NVIDIA deception.  I would say no one, including you thought that $249 price point on a mini-card would be how they met the $249 MSRP.  Certainly not on the full-fledged more powerful cards in each manufacturer's lineup.


don't despair ... they are out of stock and in pre-reservation ... they might get a raise in price once in stock, ahah ... let say .... +50 to +100 (joking  well ... it's nvidia ... who knows ... )


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jul 20, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> Lol, already corrected. I'm on phone, which sucks.


_Insert obligatory laughter here._

Phones make the best typos.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

Does it really matter at the moment what the pricing is?
I live in Jersey and the Microcenter, PC Richards, and other electronics stores didn't recieve a single card to sell.
It would seem that this is yet another Paper Launch with no stocks, even the custom cards seem to have no inventory ready to sell.


----------



## Nergal (Jul 20, 2016)

try to get a 1060GTX at 249,99!

something tells me that perhaps in the future this will be regarded as one of the lowest amount produced GPUs in the last few decennium
are real collecters item; only 1000 ever made 

Calling that a "Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price" is hoghwash; seems like a few brands were pressured to prouce these so NV wouldn´t be called a liar ?


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 20, 2016)

Stealing sales already, the TAM is improving... everyone should be happy. /hehe


----------



## AsRock (Jul 20, 2016)

Nergal said:


> try to get a 1060GTX at 249,99!
> 
> something tells me that perhaps in the future this will be regarded as one of the lowest amount produced GPUs in the last few decennium
> are real collecters item; only 1000 ever made
> ...



Not to hard to get one for $250, there is a few on newegg, question is if you would buy that brand.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 20, 2016)

Where I can get them here (near-zero availability) the 1060 is $300 US and the 8gb 480 is $325-375. It makes very little sense and is likely the local retailers price gouging


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> Does it really matter at the moment what the pricing is?
> I live in Jersey and the Microcenter, PC Richards, and other electronics stores didn't recieve a single card to sell.
> It would seem that this is yet another Paper Launch with no stocks, even the custom cards seem to have no inventory ready to sell.



Not a paper launch in UK. OcUK had quite a few brands up yesterday, starting at £249 for those in stock.


----------



## JalleR (Jul 20, 2016)

Multi card is possible with 1060 you just needs a game that supports DX12 and explicit multi-GPU, http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2519-gtx-1060-sli-benchmark-in-ashes-multi-gpu

and if Nvidia Wanted to support SLI they could just make a driver that supports it, but but i guess it would be bad for their 1070-1080 business

Price here in DK: 1060 6gb 328$, 1070 552$, 1080 865$ and RX480 328$


----------



## ViperXTR (Jul 20, 2016)

I guess we are already lucky here to see GTX 1060 and RX 480 with 300 USD price and below


----------



## FireFox (Jul 20, 2016)




----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 20, 2016)

Knoxx29 said:


> View attachment 77105



Amazon?  Who buys gfx cards from Amazon?


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 20, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> Amazon?  Who buys gfx cards from Amazon?



If the price is right?
Not in this case though


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jul 20, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> Not a paper launch in UK. OcUK had quite a few brands up yesterday, starting at £249 for those in stock.


249£ --- soooo : 325.96$ instead of 249$ right? 

well if we are at listing price range in the place we live, for me : Switzerland 

cheapest: Zotac Mini: 295chf = 297.67$ near "msrp" ... tho availability : zero (only one etailer/retailer have it and not in stock ... also suspecting a price rise once in stock) 

highest: Asus Strix: 452.65chf = 458.31$ (more common price for the 1060 here if in stock ... the rest is between 320 and 390chf, ~324-394$) 



ViperXTR said:


> I guess we are already lucky here to see GTX 1060 and RX 480 with 300 USD price and below


yep totally ... 297.67 is under 300 (2.33 is a real bargain  ) 

for the 480 well 265chf the cheapest 8gb (268.31$) that's a little better but only reference model listed tho, so ... the best perf price card is .... in the end ... the 480 yep ...


----------



## Tomgang (Jul 20, 2016)

so gtx 1060 have no sli support = no gpu upgrade for me this time Around. I where Else ready to try gtx 1060 sli but nvidia ruined that. Thanks nvidia for making cards more exspensive and for dropping sli  

Gtx 1070 is to exspensive for sli for me this time Around, may be when they drop in price on the used marked il go pascal. And one card is more or less not faster than two gtx 970.

Right now im keeping my two gtx 970. Going to the red team no? RX 480 is not Much faster than a gtx 970.

This is how i feel nvidia treading us thats like sli setup


----------



## FireFox (Jul 20, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> Amazon?  Who buys gfx cards from Amazon?


Many people do it.



P4-630 said:


> If the price is right?
> Not in this case though


Just for fun I called amazon and they confirmed me that the price is right


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 20, 2016)

Knoxx29 said:


> Just for fun I called amazon and they confirmed me that the price is right



Thats really absurd! They are waiting for people who have no clue about videocards and the prices.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 20, 2016)

At $300 it's not a good deal.  GTX 970 has been $250 several times.  1060 is ~15% faster, but $300 would make it 20% more expensive.  At $250 basically it's a touch faster and 2.5GB more than GTX 970.  Not an impressive rate of progress really.  Attempting to move 960 class buyers into the x70 price segment.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jul 20, 2016)

xorbe said:


> GTX 970 has been $250 several times


nope ... at last not where i am ... lowest 970 price throughout the disponibility frame was 394.93$ (390chf, and 2nd hand price was fixed around 350-70 chf ) actuall prices might be lower  for 2nd hand (well i see some 980 for 270chf start price 350 direct buy nonetheless )  



Tomgang said:


> so gtx 1060 have no sli support = no gpu upgrade for me this time Around. I where Else ready to try gtx 1060 sli but nvidia ruined that. Thanks nvidia for making cards more exspensive and for dropping sli
> 
> Gtx 1070 is to exspensive for sli for me this time Around, may be when they drop in price on the used marked il go pascal. And one card is more or less not faster than two gtx 970.
> 
> ...


well judging a 970 SLI is 90% whereas a 1070 stock is 97% and a decently clocked custom is 100% (i.e.: EVGA 1070 SC review, talking only for 1080p ofc ) ... and as a 970 SLI would cost me 654.73$ if i take the cheapest decently clocked custom available, over  my actual 1070 at 537.17$ i gladly take a single card 8gb over 2x4gb (3.5gb for the nitpicker like me ) and SLI usual issues (not mentioning the power consumption also )

1060 can SLI well ... MDA or LDA type (aka: what the 290 introduced 1st and also what DX12 could bring ... but hey ... we talk about DX12  ) tho ... the only X60 i did buy were, a 460 as my 1st upgrade when i joined TPU and a 760 for a friend.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 20, 2016)

P4-630 said:


> Thats really absurd! They are waiting for people who have no clue about videocards and the prices.


Are Zotac that good


----------



## GreiverBlade (Jul 20, 2016)

Knoxx29 said:


> Are Zotac that good
> View attachment 77106


could you please put those pics in "thumbnail" version, thanks ... sorry to say that but i find that annoying.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 20, 2016)

GreiverBlade said:


> could you please put those pics in "thumbnail" version, thanks ... sorry to say that but i find that annoying.


Done.


----------



## ratirt (Jul 20, 2016)

Well been reading what you guys talk about. 1060 what price what performance. Still we don't know what the performance will be for 1060 but it's obvious that it's purpose is to match the RX480 perf and price or at least get's close in both ends. We just have to wait for the card to be released. maybe there will be 1050 or lower models. Who knows what AMD will do. Maybe they will release RX490 or RX495 ? as for the price range for 1060 I'm sure it will cost more than rx480. In terms of performance I have no idea. But if we put to consideration that the 1060 will be based on the same core as 1070 but maybe lower stream processors or cuda cores and  lower frequency than I think the price wont go down that much for the card comparing to 1070. It is same production process same parts but lower spec.  Unless Nvidia has some totally new card and different that it will be released. Which I honestly doubt. And if the price for 1060 will be much lower than 1070 then I'd guess that 1070 is much overpriced not mentioning 1080. Maybe NVIDIA is using the lack of AMD top model card on the market giving ridiculous pricing.


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 20, 2016)

ratirt said:


> Still we don't know what the performance will be for 1060



https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X/
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1060/

Where have you been?


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

Tomgang said:


> so gtx 1060 have no sli support = no gpu upgrade for me this time Around. I where Else ready to try gtx 1060 sli but nvidia ruined that. Thanks nvidia for making cards more exspensive and for dropping sli
> 
> Gtx 1070 is to exspensive for sli for me this time Around, may be when they drop in price on the used marked il go pascal. And one card is more or less not faster than two gtx 970.
> 
> ...



Wait for RX 490!


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

P4-630 said:


> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X/
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1060/
> 
> Where have you been?



Still waiting for more reviews, the disparity between 1060 and RX 480 is more than other reviewers so far.
Also, the lack of 480 4GB bench comparisons are disturbing as the price difference shows even more value per dollar than the 1060.


----------



## fourletterfame (Jul 20, 2016)

At least the smaller die size means they're pulling more usable asics per wafer, for a rush job there seems to be a decent availability of 1060s. There are already partner cards all over the place and not sold out, either points to lots of stock or slow sales figures. Compared to the 480 which is three weeks out from launch, still no AIBs and the reference cards are perpetually out of stock, this is going to be a messy summer for both sides.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

fourletterfame said:


> At least the smaller die size means they're pulling more usable asics per wafer, for a rush job there seems to be a decent availability of 1060s. There are already partner cards all over the place and not sold out, either points to lots of stock or slow sales figures..



But the dirty little secret is that the partner cards have no stock available either, which suggests there aren't enough chips out of the pipeline. This is a Paper Launch again.


----------



## fourletterfame (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> But the dirty little secret is that the partner cards have no stock available either, which suggests there aren't enough chips out of the pipeline. This is a Paper Launch again.



Cursory glance shows two of the fifteen release aibs in stock on newegg. We will see how it progresses throughout the week, and whether stock comes in and is maintained.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 20, 2016)

Tomgang said:


> Thanks nvidia for making cards more exspensive and for dropping sli


Quality means more $$$$$
SLI? 
This time i will pass, a nice 1080 would be more than enough


----------



## fourletterfame (Jul 20, 2016)

Knoxx29 said:


> Quality means more $$$$$
> SLI?
> This time i will pass, a nice 1080 would be more than enough



Die size on the cards is down 20-30%, that means more gpus per wafer, and more profit per gpu assuming they get decent yields. All signs point to it costing them less to make the cards overall. 1060 should be dirt cheap given how many you can fit on a wafer. Increasing the price doesn't really fit with any of that.


----------



## ratirt (Jul 20, 2016)

P4-630 said:


> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X/
> https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1060/
> 
> Where have you been?


Well here all the time.  Yeah I have missed that I admit. It's not as fast as RX480 so I guess my prediction was right that NVIDIA wanted to match the performance RX480 with its 1060 to reach for mid range market of video cards. I would like to see the final pricing for the card.  The range put on the web page you linked is over 50$ and still more than RX480.



Ungari said:


> Wait for RX 490!


Maybe AMD will eventually release something like RX490 with better performance  I'd like that  More stuff then better.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 20, 2016)

ratirt said:


> AMD


Wow what a big step, going from Nvidia to AMD

Am i been sarcastict?


----------



## R00kie (Jul 20, 2016)

Knoxx29 said:


> Are Zotac that good
> View attachment 77106


I'll take 3.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 20, 2016)

gdallsk said:


> I'll take 3.


You will take 3 because 1 it's not powerful enough


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> Wait for RX 490!


most at this point expect that to be a Fury X rebrand. So no need to wait, you can overpay for that card right now.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

yogurt_21 said:


> most at this point expect that to be a Fury X rebrand. So no need to wait, you can overpay for that card right now.



Most?
I haven't seen that rumor,---link?


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 20, 2016)

Wait, just wait aaand wait another year to upgrade.... LOL


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 20, 2016)

you'd have to hit up reddit to get on the latest, alot of the 490 rumors came out prior to the 460 and 470 announcements. We do know that aside from the 480 there were only going to be 2 other finfet gpu's this year. Then they annouce two lower end cards. We also know that the 490 is likely to be released in 2016 so it won't be a vega card. 

Some have taken this as a sign that this will mirror the AMD 4000 series where the 4870 and 4850 came out and didn't quite knock your socks off, then they released the dual gpu 4970. 
as is the case here
http://wccftech.com/amd-rx-490-mystery-4k-gaming-gpu-listed-sapphire/

while their reddit threads are many, most of the responses are rebuttals of it being a dual gpu card.
Also some have claimed the 490 is vega, but timing and naming doesn't support that. Vega is expected to bear the RX 5xx naming scheme.

Others have seen the small timeline and how dual RX 480's still can't compete with the 1080 as a sign that amd will just stick with fury and rebrand so they can put more effort into vega. 

so maybe "most" was overstated, but truly I would not expect anything spectacular. Expect Vega to be the next time amd tries to be competitive.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

yogurt_21 said:


> Others have seen the small timeline and how dual RX 480's still can't compete with the 1080



I don't know what benchmarks you were looking at but RX 480 has similar or better performance to a single GTX 1080 according to what I've read.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> I don't know what benchmarks you were looking at but RX 480 has similar or better performance to a single GTX 1080 according to what I've read.






You should read a little bit more:

*Are two RX 480s faster than a single GTX 1080?*

I love a good PR stunt or outlandish claim as much as the next guy. You know the type—where a company decides that the best way to tell people about a new product is to slaughter a few goats and serve fake entrails up to guests or to declare that a certain developer is going to make you his bitch. Imagine my delight, then, when AMD's Raja Koduri took to the stage during the unveiling of the RX 480 to say that, with two of them in Crossfire, they were faster than Nvidia's GTX 1080 _and_ would cost far less. Everyone was intrigued.

Here's the thing about making bold claims involving competitor products, though: you'd better be damn sure those claims stand up under scrutiny. Sooner or later, someone will actually test it.
With the RX 480 in shops and the initial batch of press reviews near universally declaring it an excellent graphics card for the budget-minded gamer (something I agreed with too), it's time to put AMD's bold claims to the test. Are two AMD RX 480s faster than a GTX 1080?

In a word: no. In fact, they're not even faster than a GTX 1070 in many games. To be fair to AMD, though, the company only ever said that two RX 480s were faster than a GTX 1080 in one game, under specific settings. So let's start with that one.

According to a Reddit AMA with AMD's Robert Hallock, AMD ran version 1.12.19928 of the game _Ashes of the Singularity_ under DirectX 12 at 1080p and multi-GPU enabled with crazy settings, 8X MSAA enabled, and v-sync off during its benchmark. Hallock also detailed the system specs, which included an Intel i7 5930K, 32GB of 2400Mhz DDR4 memory, and Windows 10 64-bit.

The result? According to AMD, _Ashes of the Singularity_ ran at 62.5FPS on the AMD cards and 58.7FPS on the GTX 1080.

While I can't replicate the exact same setup as AMD during its testing—I have a newer version of the RX 480 driver, for instance—I can get pretty close. The Ars UK test system just so happens to be based on a 5930K processor with 32GB of DDR4 memory. I even have access to the same Nvidia beta driver. With that in mind, I ran the benchmarks on the GTX 1080 several times using both the old driver and the new driver, the latter to better represent the experience consumers have with the Nvidia card right now.

The result on the Ars UK rig? 55.2FPS to the dual RX 480s and 57.2 to the GTX 1080. So it's close—very close. But no matter how much I tried, I couldn't get the dual RX 480 setup close to the 62.5FPS figure that AMD quoted during its stage presentation. Weirdly with the newer Nvidia driver, its score actually _goes down_, this time to 54.9FPS. It effectively matches the frame rate of the RX 480.

Either way, while buying two RX 480s and running them together in a very specific setup might get you close to GTX 1080 performance, they're aren't _faster_.

*How does dual RX 480s fare in other tests?*
Widening out the dual RX 480 tests to include Crossfire in other games and benchmarks throws up some interesting results. Again, to be clear, AMD never claimed that two RX 480s would be faster than a GTX 1080 in anything other than _Ashes of the Singularity_, but it is interesting to see Crossfire performance nonetheless. In 3DMark, for instance, the dual 480s are five percent slower than a single GTX 1080, the gap shrinking slightly to just over two percent at 4K. In _Metro Last Light_, the RX 480s are 17 percent slower than a GTX 1080 at 1080p, with the gap shrinking to around five percent at 4K.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

I meant to say that RX 480 in Crossfire was equivalent or better performance to a single GTX 1080.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> I meant to say that RX 480 in Crossfire was equivalent or better performance to a single GTX 1080.


I edited my post, read once againg


----------



## JalleR (Jul 20, 2016)

That's fine, BUT when it comes to Real life gaming the right now in 75% of all Games CF is NOT working properly, but I'm sure when DK12/Vulcan is more used this this percentage will fall.


----------



## Caring1 (Jul 20, 2016)

JalleR said:


> That's fine, BUT when it comes to Real life gaming the right now in 75% of all Games CF is NOT working properly, but I'm sure when DK12/Vulcan is more used this this percentage will fall.


SLI for the GTX 1060 is 100% not working


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> SLI for the GTX 1060 is 100% not working



I just saw an interesting test with 1060x2 using the PCI lanes in DX12 to pseudo-SLI them.
They beat the single 1080 easily in everything.


----------



## JalleR (Jul 20, 2016)

Yes I posted that earlier so 100% not working is not correct.....


----------



## FYFI13 (Jul 20, 2016)

yogurt_21 said:


> Some have taken this as a sign that this will mirror the AMD 4000 series where the 4870 and 4850 came out and didn't quite knock your socks off, then they released the *dual gpu 4970*.


Wasn't it a HD4870x2?  I will never forget that one as it was loudest thing i ever owned in my life, including hoovers


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 20, 2016)

FYFI13 said:


> Wasn't it a HD4870x2?  I will never forget that one as it was loudest thing i ever owned in my life, including hoovers


my bad. 5970 was the first without the X2. lol


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

@Knoxx29 

Those benchmarks are so different from what I've seen, that I have to call Bravo Sierra on the tester.
This suggests the work of a paid shill.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> @Knoxx29
> 
> Those benchmarks are so different from what I've seen, that I have to call Bravo Sierra on the tester.
> This suggests the work of a paid shill.



Anything that doesn't suit your narrative is 'shill'.


----------



## JalleR (Jul 20, 2016)

just look at the TPU test they say it all...


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 20, 2016)

Even TPU's non-schill 480 CF test shows it cant beat a 1080. The 1070 bested them a number of times

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480_CrossFire/


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> Those benchmarks are so different from what I've seen



Hungari, can you post some links to the "so different" benchmarks you have seen?


----------



## FireFox (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> Those benchmarks are so different from what I've seen,


Of course are differents because those that you saw were the wrong one


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> Anything that doesn't suit your narrative is 'shill'.



Actually, anything that doesn't suit my narrative is _shrill._



P4-630 said:


> Hungari, can you post some links to the "so different" benchmarks you have seen?


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 20, 2016)

? in that review he notices negative scaling in some games, bad scaling, and general stuttering. He goes on to say that he doesn't recommend crossfire or SLI over single card solutions. 

That's different from the other reviews how?


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

yogurt_21 said:


> ? in that review he notices negative scaling in some games, bad scaling, and general stuttering. He goes on to say that he doesn't recommend crossfire or SLI over single card solutions.
> 
> That's different from the other reviews how?



Not recommending SLI/Crossfire is pretty standard now as it has limited support in games, and yes there are games that the AMD architecture does poorly in.
The difference is in the amount of variance between the benchmarks, which are often inflated by shills on the behalf of Team Green.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 21, 2016)

So my PSU is failing and need I a new one. I noticed a local retailer gives a $25 discount on Andyson PSUs when pre-ordering a Palit 1060.

I went ahead and made the plunge. $280 for the Palit GTX 1060 dual + $120 for a Titanium 700W PSU seems like pretty good value.

I would definitely have gone for a 480 if the price wasn't $330 USD for a reference design, but I think the 1060 will make me happy.


----------



## ratirt (Jul 21, 2016)

i'd go for one card instead of 2 in wither SLI or Xfire. Poor game support for those. Going back to the subject. NVIDIA has realesed 1080 and 1070 as a top notch cards while AMD has released RX 480 as a mid range card for decent price. I can bet they got some serious reason for that and i think there will be a 490 release this year. It's different approach from NVIDIA. AMD save best for later  and i'm not talking about vega. there's definitely going to be something like 490 or other kin d like that. They want to save some aces up their sleeves for a bit longer. hit when the opportunity and right time comes. From what I've read AMD is pretty confident in their technology. Besides what US USERS suits best. Competition  and that's been great with the new gear both companies are releasing


----------



## Ungari (Jul 21, 2016)

The RX 490 will likely be the single best sweet spot in upper-middle to lower high market.
I discount the rumors of another Dual GPU card, I think 490 will be a surprise low end Vega.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 21, 2016)

ratirt said:


> AMD save best for later


Because you think that AMD will make a better card than the 1080?
Silly AMD's fansboys still dreaming that AMD could be a step ahead?

It will be quite the opposite, Nvidia will be always 2/3 steps ahead and when they think that they are getting closer Nvidia is already once again a few steps ahead.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 21, 2016)

Knoxx29 said:


> Because you think that AMD will make a better card than the 1080?
> Silly AMD's fansboys still dreaming that AMD could be a step ahead?



They don't even have to beat the 1080, just come close enough with performance at a much lower price and give future compatibility for Vulkan and DX12 APIs to be a success.
Even Team Green fanbois will be happier when NGreedia is constantly being forced to lower it's price structure to stay competitive.


----------



## FireFox (Jul 21, 2016)

Ungari said:


> They don't even have to beat the 1080


They dont have just for the simple reason that they cant.



Ungari said:


> just come close enough with performance


You and your obsession, if it is close enough with performance why people still prefer to buy the 1080 over the 480?

WAKE UP WAKE UP
THIS IS PLANET EARTH

Accept the The Ugly Truth, this is a war that AMD will never win.


----------



## RejZoR (Jul 21, 2016)

AMD cards are simply more future proof. Remember, people who buy these $200-250 don't buy new ones every year or so like we do. And for them, superior DX12 and Vulkan support can be something worth considering. Seeing massive gains in everything DX12 and Vulkan available now means games will provide the same in the future. Can you say the same for GTX 1060 ? For these people, what NVIDIA will offer with GTX 2000 series is irrelevant as they won't be around to give any F about it. At least not the same customers that is. There will be new ones that skipped current generation (and possibly 2 more back).


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 21, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> AMD cards are simply more future proof. Remember, people who buy these $200-250 don't buy new ones every year or so like we do. And for them, superior DX12 and Vulkan support can be something worth considering. Seeing massive gains in everything DX12 and Vulkan available now means games will provide the same in the future. Can you say the same for GTX 1060 ? For these people, what NVIDIA will offer with GTX 2000 series is irrelevant as they won't be around to give any F about it. At least not the same customers that is. There will be new ones that skipped current generation (and possibly 2 more back).




I wish I could get a 480 in the UK for that price, I may just get one in pounds sterling for that figure, if I could I might even be tempted to crossfire them.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 21, 2016)

Knoxx29 said:


> You and your obsession, if it is close enough with performance why people still prefer to buy the 1080 over the 480?



The RX 480 is not in the same performance tier as the GTX 1080. They do not share the same market price point, so these are completely different customers.
About a 18 months ago I almost pulled the trigger on a GTX 980 Classified for around $650-$700. While I'm glad I didn't go through with it, I am now no longer in the $700 price range.
I'm looking at the RX 480 because I have never seen so much offered at this low a price. I will start with a single card and perhaps later buy another for Crossfire as the game I have most hours in supports multi-GPUs.
However, if i was still at the $700 price point I probably would be waiting to see Vega as the whole Founders Edition price scheme burns me. Pascal is nothing more than Maxwell 3.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 21, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> Remember, people who buy these $200-250 don't buy new ones every year or so like we do



At $200-$250 we can now afford to buy a new card next year, and the year after too!


----------



## RejZoR (Jul 21, 2016)

Tatty_One said:


> I wish I could get a 480 in the UK for that price, I may just get one in pounds sterling for that figure, if I could I might even be tempted to crossfire them.



Well, the Europe and our VAT and all that crap...


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 21, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> Well, the Europe and our VAT and all that crap...


And I suppose Brexit Pound plummeting


----------



## Nergal (Jul 21, 2016)

AMD confident? Waiting to hit the sweet spot?
Confident perhaps in their mid to high-range.
But as I understand it(from what I have seen commented); AMD most of the time don´t time things well; nor release as efficiently as they could/should.

And the time AMD does get it right; NVIDIA just pulls something off the shelve they already had R&D´d and readied to be produced immediatly.
I am amazed that NV pulled this fast release off; this clearly reeks of release-fixing on their part; but that´s another story.

To be revelant to what´s being said on topic; the 1060 is NOT the "best price/perf card"
NV chose money over plunging a knife in AMD. (not that they want AMD gone)
As such, I reckon the Rx480 4GB is the best price/perf card, by a decent lead

Still deciding if I will go with the 8GB, or the 4GB and then get a VEGA when they become available


----------



## FireFox (Jul 22, 2016)

Nergal said:


> not that they want AMD gone


Of course Nvidia don't want their toy
 (AMD ) gone otherwise they don't have who to play with


----------



## silkstone (Jul 23, 2016)

I got my 1060 yesterday.

Overall, I'm not overwhelmed. I was expecting much better performance than my 280X+7870XT crossfire, especially as the second card on my crossfire setup was running at x4.

The scores on the 1060 are only slightly improved (10 368 vs. 9 512 in Firestrike), but the power savings an low heat output are really good.

It's pretty shitty that there is no SLI capability. SLI would give any system using one, awesome upgrade potential and I'm also a little annoyed with the lack of analog signal as I'll have to shell out an extra $15 for a DP>VGA adapter 

If I had the choice between a 480 and 1060, I think I would have gone the 480 route with a plan to crossfire a year later when I get a bigger screen


----------



## ratirt (Jul 25, 2016)

silkstone said:


> I got my 1060 yesterday.
> 
> Overall, I'm not overwhelmed. I was expecting much better performance than my 280X+7870XT crossfire, especially as the second card on my crossfire setup was running at x4.
> 
> ...


You had a choice. Why didn't you go 480 instead? With 1060 you can still go SLI. I mean dx12 gives an opportunity to use dual GPU's but the list of games supporting dx12 is not big at the moment.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 25, 2016)

ratirt said:


> You had a choice. Why didn't you go 480 instead? With 1060 you can still go SLI. I mean dx12 gives an opportunity to use dual GPU's but the list of games supporting dx12 is not big at the moment.



Not really. The 480 worked out to be $60 more expensive overall and so out of my budget.

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy with the 1060, but it seems more like a sideways step from what I was using (280X CF). I never had much of a problem with crossfire outside of some games that didn't scale well, but the power consumption and heat output were insane!

I'd be much happier with it if I knew I could upgrade simply by adding another card, but I'm not holding my breath for good DX12 multi-gpu implementation.

The 480 having crossfire capability will be a deciding factor for some people as despite the 10% or so lower performance, you only need to spend a little more to get a 1070-1080 level of performance


----------



## hertz9753 (Jul 25, 2016)

The GTX 1060 doesn't support SLI.


----------



## ratirt (Jul 25, 2016)

Well cash is always a problem when buying Vide cards. I'm waiting to see what will come out with both AMD and NVIDIA. wanna make a good choice and not rush to buy anything now. RX 480 is tempting for me but honestly i'd expect a bit more from the card. 1060 as you said is good. all the new cards are good but I really wanna see what's going to show up on the market soon. Do be honest I bought my 670 3 weeks ago or so to switch from my old 460 so that I have some fps boost in games. That will give me a chance to play games with decent performance while waiting for new cards. really exited about it though. I got to say that i'm happy with my 670 so if you have 1060 I'm sure you will do just fine


----------



## Assimilator (Jul 25, 2016)

silkstone said:


> I got my 1060 yesterday.
> 
> Overall, I'm not overwhelmed. I was expecting much better performance than my 280X+7870XT crossfire, especially as the second card on my crossfire setup was running at x4.
> 
> ...



Why are you complaining that the card doesn't have SLI and analog output? Did you (a) not do the research before buying, or (b) just complaining for the sake of complaining?

And seriously, you still have an analog monitor? You should've dumped that long before you bought a graphics card that doesn't support it. I mean yeah, I get it still works, but so does steam power.


----------



## hertz9753 (Jul 25, 2016)

Assimilator said:


> Why are you complaining that the card doesn't have SLI and analog output? Did you (a) not do the research before buying, or (b) just complaining for the sake of complaining?
> 
> And seriously, you still have an analog monitor? You should've dumped that long before you bought a graphics card that doesn't support it. I mean yeah, I get it still works, but so does steam power.



Maybe that member meant DVI.  Don't be so quick to jump on a fellow member, give them a chance to explain.  Some people can't get the best things where they live.

Don't ask what I have and it is not in my specs.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 25, 2016)

Assimilator said:


> Why are you complaining that the card doesn't have SLI and analog output? Did you (a) not do the research before buying, or (b) just complaining for the sake of complaining?
> 
> And seriously, you still have an analog monitor? You should've dumped that long before you bought a graphics card that doesn't support it. I mean yeah, I get it still works, but so does steam power.



Pointing out the negative side of something isn't complaining, especially when I also point out the positive and say that overall I'm happy, just not overwhelmed.

Nor am I saying the 480 is better than the 1060 or Vice-versa, I'm just discussing things that may affect people's decision whether to upgrade or not. 

If I were in the US and had a choice between a 480@$200 and a 1060@$250, I may have chosen differently as I think the 480 would give a slightly better price/performance ratio though the 1060 is certainly a stronger card.

My old VGA monitor is my second screen. No need to upgrade it as it does what I need it do. My main display is a 23" IPS with better connectors. Lack of analog is only an annoyance, nothing more. The 480 also lacks analog afaik.


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 25, 2016)

silkstone said:


> The 480 also lacks analog afaik



Yeah thats right, all new card from now on seem to only supports DVI-D IF they have a DVI connector at all...


----------



## AlienIsGOD (Jul 25, 2016)

silkstone said:


> Pointing out the negative side of something isn't complaining, especially when I also point out the positive and say that overall I'm happy, just not overwhelmed.
> 
> Nor am I saying the 480 is better than the 1060 or Vice-versa, I'm just discussing things that may affect people's decision whether to upgrade or not.
> 
> ...


yup, 3 DP and 1 HDMI


----------



## FireFox (Jul 25, 2016)

hertz9753 said:


> Maybe that member meant DVI. Don't be so quick to jump on a fellow member, give them a chance to explain. Some people can't get the best things where they live.


+1


----------



## terroralpha (Jul 25, 2016)

Ungari said:


> @Knoxx29
> 
> Those benchmarks are so different from what I've seen, that I have to call Bravo Sierra on the tester.
> This suggests the work of a paid shill.



do you guys smell that? i smell... butt hurt.

his GTX 1080 result, 62FPS @1440p with ultra settings is the same number that others (like hardware unboxed) were getting. as for the RX480, i've seen numbers range from 60 to 66 FPS. might have to do with heat issues reducing the boost clock due to two very power hungry cards sitting next to each other and reducing. i had this problem with GTX 470s and HD 6970s.

in any case, even if the RX480 CF did manage to squeak out an extra 2 FPS, i still wouldn't use it. i have grown to hate multi GPU set ups. especially crossfire. the microstutter drives me crazy. i'll spend whatever money i have to so that I can actually enjoy the games i'm playing. below is an image that illustrated my point perfectly. i don't understand how people put up with this crap...


----------



## Flogger23m (Jul 27, 2016)

Almost_ two years_ after the GTX 970 we get the 1060:

- $80 cheaper
- similar performance, give or take
- only 2GB more of VRAM

Not a good value at all really. Best option is to spend $450-470 to get a 1070, but now we're in an entirely different price range compare to the GTX 970 at launch. The mid range this generation is absolutely terrible, from both Nvidia and AMD. We need a good performing card at around $250, much like the HD 6950.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 27, 2016)

If you consider than the 4GB 960 started at $250, then the 1060 seems like a stellar deal.  I think it's "price compression" for the entry gaming cards.  But, I also see the 970 angle -- basically $80 less, lower wattage, bit more vram.

From the top down, compared to past ... you can see the price creep.  Sort of how Civic DX disappeared, LX and EX held the price line, and then new EX-L/EX-T upped the pricing overall.

$500 480 - TiXP $1200
$350 470 - 1080 $600-720
$170 460 - 1070 $400-450
$130 450 - 1060 $250-300


----------



## Flogger23m (Jul 27, 2016)

Its a decent card if you haven't upgraded in years, but a bit slow otherwise. My GTX 970 is starting to show its age in newer titles and can't max some games out at 1080 with 60 frame rates (Rise of the Tomb Raider ect.). Which means the 1060 will have the same shortcomings. And keep in mind they're doing the Founders Edition nonsense with it to, so realistically, you're probably going to have to fork over $280-90 for a decent cooler going by current newegg prices. I paid $350 for my GTX 970, MSI 4G Gaming. A higher end model. Getting similar for a 1060 is $290 at the moment. Considering that, the price gap is even closer; $60.

For late 2016, at $280-90, I don't think the 1060 has the performance it needs. The higher end models need to be closer to $220 IMO. Performance wise it is more on par with a GTX 560/660, yet commands the price of a 560ti/660ti.


----------



## swirl09 (Aug 3, 2016)

I've had a few days to play around with an EVGA SC model and I love it! It's nice and small, very cool, and is handling 1080p nicely indeed!

Comparing it to a 2 year old 970 is understandable. But, while it's not a big jump in performance, it is closer to a 980 (the 1060 model I got for £259 beats it in every way). The lack of SLI doesn't annoy me personally, and I'm sure nvidia left it off for 1 simple reason, it would kill the 1080 and actually in scenarios where scaling was strong it would be trading blows with a Titan x, so of course they don't want that. But, I never liked SLI and this card is only for a side rig anyway. 

It's my new fav card atm.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 6, 2016)

silkstone said:


> Pointing out the negative side of something isn't complaining, especially when I also point out the positive and say that overall I'm happy, just not overwhelmed.
> 
> Nor am I saying the 480 is better than the 1060 or Vice-versa, I'm just discussing things that may affect people's decision whether to upgrade or not.
> 
> ...


Slowly being phased out. Im using a Dp to vga adapter on my monitor


----------



## medi01 (Aug 8, 2016)

Recon-UK said:


> however we are looking at reference vs reference here



At announced price levels:

470 (4Gb, 179$) > 480 (4Gb, 199$) > 1060 (249$) > 480 (8Gb, 239$) > 1070 (379$) > 1060 (Fools Edition, 299$)


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 8, 2016)

medi01 said:


> At announced price levels:
> 
> 470 (4Gb, 179$) > 480 (4Gb, 199$) > 1060 (249$) > 480 (8Gb, 239$) > 1070 (379$) > 1060 (Fools Edition, 299$)



This graph shows how and to what extent the price/perf of x60 is always total and utter junk.

Stay away from Nvidia's x60 - either opt for the 'ti' x50 if you want bang for buck, or move up to x70. It's always been that way...


----------



## the54thvoid (Aug 8, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> This graph shows how and to what extent the price/perf of x60 is always total and utter junk.



Umm, it's sandwiched between the 4GB and 8GB 470's and 480's.  Also depends what game suite was used for that graph. You could look at Nvidia-centric titles and it would be better or AMD-centric and be worse.
I find it better to avoid looking at perf/dollar and instead look at your own budget/requirements and choose a card that fits that.
Can't wait to see how Deus Ex affects each vendor.


----------



## Recon-UK (Aug 8, 2016)

terroralpha said:


> do you guys smell that? i smell... butt hurt.
> 
> his GTX 1080 result, 62FPS @1440p with ultra settings is the same number that others (like hardware unboxed) were getting. as for the RX480, i've seen numbers range from 60 to 66 FPS. might have to do with heat issues reducing the boost clock due to two very power hungry cards sitting next to each other and reducing. i had this problem with *GTX 470s and HD 6970s*.
> 
> in any case, even if the RX480 CF did manage to squeak out an extra 2 FPS, i still wouldn't use it. i have grown to hate multi GPU set ups. especially crossfire. the microstutter drives me crazy. i'll spend whatever money i have to so that I can actually enjoy the games i'm playing. below is an image that illustrated my point perfectly. i don't understand how people put up with this crap...






Except GTX 470 and 6970 don't boost, they have a fixed 3D clock.


----------



## medi01 (Aug 8, 2016)

EdInk said:


> 5.2billion transistors same TDP



Anandtech (total power consumption, measured at power socket)
1060 - 264w
480 - 301w, 1060 + 37w
1070 - 307w, 480 + 6w
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10540/the-geforce-gtx-1060-founders-edition-asus-strix-review/16

That differs a lot from what others measure. Diff to what TPU is posting is 17w for 480 and 1070 also consumes 32w less at TPU than at Anandtech, for some reason.


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 8, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> Umm, it's sandwiched between the 4GB and 8GB 470's and 480's.  Also depends what game suite was used for that graph. You could look at Nvidia-centric titles and it would be better or AMD-centric and be worse.
> I find it better to avoid looking at perf/dollar and instead look at your own budget/requirements and choose a card that fits that.
> Can't wait to see how Deus Ex affects each vendor.



Eh... how are you reading that chart?  Everything from 1070 on down is the worst price/perf (highest dollar per FPS), and the x60's along with the currently vastly overpriced 1070 are leading that pack. AMD places an (ancient) 390 in there and all other offerings are much better perf/dollar. Also I don't see a 1060 for sale at 249 bucks, do you?


----------



## the54thvoid (Aug 8, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> Eh... how are you reading that chart?  Everything from 1070 on down is the worst price/perf (highest dollar per FPS), and the x60's along with the currently vastly overpriced 1070 are leading that pack. AMD places an (ancient) 390 in there and all other offerings are much better perf/dollar. Also I don't see a 1060 for sale at 249 bucks, do you?



Ah, apologies. I thought you meant 1060. To be fair, if we're discussing current gen, why even consider a 960.


----------



## Recon-UK (Aug 8, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> Ah, apologies. I thought you meant 1060. To be fair, if we're discussing current gen, *why even consider a 960*.



It get's mauled by a stock 670 so that should say enough.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Aug 8, 2016)

Recon-UK said:


> It get's mauled by a stock 670 so that should say enough.



Are you sure you want to stick with that story?  W1zzard's reviews show different.


----------



## Recon-UK (Aug 8, 2016)

Granted different games used.


----------



## hertz9753 (Aug 8, 2016)

The GTX 670 is the tarded older brother of the GTX 770.


----------



## Recon-UK (Aug 8, 2016)

hertz9753 said:


> The GTX 670 is the tarded older brother of the GTX 770.



Blame NVIDIA they thought it was a good idea to put a card so close to it's flagship at such a lower price. Unlike the 500 series where a GTX 580 was clearly ahead of even the last gen 480 which is the same card with lesser CUDA cores.

Overclocked a 670 will match a 770, 1200mhz and higher though the 670 starts to pull ahead, maintaining 1300mhz is difficult though on my standard reference cooler, I will be cooling it better soon.
I will be getting a GTX 1070 BTW as I plan to use 1440P in the future, i'm not down for 4K any time soon.


----------



## 64K (Aug 8, 2016)

hertz9753 said:


> The GTX 670 is the tarded older brother of the GTX 770.



The 770 is a refresh of the 680. Clocked a little higher.


----------



## hertz9753 (Aug 8, 2016)

Don't confuse the 670 with the 680 which is the same card as the GTX 770 and less tarded.


----------



## AlienIsGOD (Aug 8, 2016)

hertz9753 said:


> The GTX 670 is the tarded older brother of the GTX 770.



remember that a 770 is basically a rebranded 680 with GPU Boost 2.0 and higher mem clocks


----------



## Recon-UK (Aug 8, 2016)




----------



## rtwjunkie (Aug 8, 2016)

W1z shows stock Battlefield 4 shows 50.3 vs 48.8, both stock.  Hardly a mauling. Bioshock Infinite is base game's built in benchmark versus Burial at Sea in vid.  Crysis 3 shows on both within 5 fps.  The only "mauling" being done is by Crysis 3 on BOTH cards.  Far Cry 3 in Vid and Far Cry 4 on TPU the 960 wins on both counts. Both vid and W1z show the 960 getting in an actual "mauling" on the 670 in Metro: Last Light, a game that is very hard on GPU's.  Inexplicably, the vid and W1z show complete opposite results in Watch Dogs, each showing a different one 5fps ahead., which is yet another same game tested on both. 

Even your video summary shows a 100 to 98.9.  so....where is the mauling by the 670?


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 8, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> Ah, apologies. I thought you meant 1060. To be fair, if we're discussing current gen, why even consider a 960.



I never would. But the striking thing shown in that chart, and all other relative performance charts, is that the Nvidia x60's fall off much faster than they should. The 960 wasn't even a good bargain when it just came out - it got preceded by a 770 that went for less on 2nd hand market at the time yet performed better, and AMD also had lower priced, better performers at the time.


----------



## Recon-UK (Aug 8, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> W1z shows stock Battlefield 4 shows 50.3 vs 48.8, both stock.  Hardly a mauling. Bioshock Infinite is base game's built in benchmark versus Burial at Sea in vid.  Crysis 3 shows on both within 5 fps.  The only "mauling" being done is by Crysis 3 on BOTH cards.  Far Cry 3 in Vid and Far Cry 4 on TPU the 960 wins on both counts. Both vid and W1z show the 960 getting in an actual "mauling" on the 670 in Metro: Last Light, a game that is very hard on GPU's.  Inexplicably, the vid and W1z show complete opposite results in Watch Dogs, each showing a different one 5fps ahead., which is yet another same game tested on both.
> 
> Even your video summary shows a 100 to 98.9.  so....where is the mauling by the 670?



Original post.

Vayra86 said: ↑
Eh... how are you reading that chart? Everything from 1070 on down is the worst price/perf (highest dollar per FPS), and the x60's along with the currently vastly overpriced 1070 are leading that pack. AMD places an (ancient) 390 in there and all other offerings are much better perf/dollar. Also I don't see a 1060 for sale at 249 bucks, do you?
Click to expand...

Ah, apologies. I thought you meant 1060. To be fair, if we're discussing current gen, why even consider a 960.




They were talking about performance for the money, a 670 mauls the 960 there.


----------



## 64K (Aug 8, 2016)

hertz9753 said:


> The GTX 670 is the tarded older brother of the GTX 770.





hertz9753 said:


> Don't confuse the 670 with the 680 which is the same card as the GTX 770 and less tarded.



I'm not confusing the two. The 770 was a refresh of the 680 with higher clocks. The 670 didn't get a refresh. Nvidia complicated the naming scheme that was in place by introducing a mid range 680 with the "8" in it which used to mean high end. The 780/780 Ti were the true high end Keplers. That left Nvidia no choice than to name the refreshed 680 a 770.

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/362/geforce-gtx-670

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/342/geforce-gtx-680

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/1856/geforce-gtx-770


----------



## Vayra86 (Aug 8, 2016)

64K said:


> Nvidia complicated the naming scheme that was in place by introducing a mid range 680 with the "8" in it which used to mean high end. The 780/780 Ti were the true high end Keplers. That left Nvidia no choice than to name the refreshed 680 a 770.



Enter the GTX 1080.... on GP104 

The real bottom line of my post was that the x60's have real trouble a year after release, because they are always hamstrung cards in one way or another - shaders, or most of the time, in terms of mem bandwidth. Thát is the reason 960 falls off faster than it should, and the reason that 670, 680 and 770 keep their relative performance quite well across several years because they don't employ asymmetric memory buses and all that other cool stuff - the same cool stuff we saw in Fermi, Kepler, and Maxwell ported the trickery to the 970 - another card that is falling off right now, faster than it should. These are also the cards you would really not want to put in SLI.

So the irony: Nvidia now releases the 1060, and drops the SLI option on that - it's the first Nvidia move in Pascal that is actually helpful to customers because they can stay clear of stutter heaven.


----------



## xorbe (Aug 8, 2016)

RX 470, RX 480, 1060, any of them are fine cards for the typical single card 1080p user.

I wish we could quantify how many SLI users there are for 660 / 760 / 960 cards, because I suspect that loss of SLI for 1060 is being overblown.  (Though I detest when options are removed.)


----------



## GhostRyder (Aug 8, 2016)

64K said:


> I'm not confusing the two. The 770 was a refresh of the 680 with higher clocks. The 670 didn't get a refresh. Nvidia complicated the naming scheme that was in place by introducing a mid range 680 with the "8" in it which used to mean high end. The 780/780 Ti were the true high end Keplers. That left Nvidia no choice than to name the refreshed 680 a 770.
> 
> https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/362/geforce-gtx-670
> 
> ...


Technically, the GTX 670 did get a GTX 7XX series release except only in the OEM market.  It was called the GTX 760ti.



xorbe said:


> RX 470, RX 480, 1060, any of them are fine cards for the typical single card 1080p user.
> 
> I wish we could quantify how many SLI users there are for 660 / 760 / 960 cards, because I suspect that loss of SLI for 1060 is being overblown.  (Though I detest when options are removed.)


You would be surprised to see how many people actually end up doubling up down the road.  Most people will buy the higher option if they had the money to begin with but some just wait down the line for a sale or some extra money and buy a second one.  Saw at least a few friends at LAN parties with pairs of GTX 760's and HD 7870's.  Though I doubt its an Earth shattering problem as in reality its still a minority and personally does not bother me one bit as I believe a single strong card is better than multiple weak cards.  The only issue I have is the huge price gap between the GTX 1060 and GTX 1070 with the option gone makes it quite a hard choice.


----------



## 64K (Aug 8, 2016)

GhostRyder said:


> Technically, the GTX 670 did get a GTX 7XX series release except only in the OEM market.  It was called the GTX 760ti.



Live and learn. Thanks man. I never heard of the 760 Ti until now.


----------



## GhostRyder (Aug 8, 2016)

64K said:


> Live and learn. Thanks man. I never heard of the 760 Ti until now.


I only knew about it because of an article awhile back mentioning it until I finally saw one.  I have only ever seen 1 in real life and it came in a Alienware slim system that a friend purchased to go to LAN parties.  Its exactly the same as the GTX 670 in every aspect that I saw including specs, PCB, and reference cooler.  They basically (I am guessing) had an influx of the GTX 670 (Or maybe still defective chips) and just re-branded it for OEM's.


----------



## hertz9753 (Aug 9, 2016)

I also had quite few GTX 660 Ti's.  I think the only person on this website that has seen more NVIDIA cards than me is W1zzard.

The asking price for the GTX 1060 is around the same as a used GTX 980 and the gaming performance is better at 1080P.

I still have a GTX 980 Ti in my daily rig and many other GTX 9xx cards.  I would love to test a GTX 1060 but the price still seems to high because I also have a GTX 980 SC that folds 24/7 @ 1553.

The GTX 1060 is a good card that is still over priced with supply issues on many websites around the world.


----------

