# MSI GeForce GTX 1060 Gaming X 6 GB



## W1zzard (Jul 19, 2016)

MSI's GeForce GTX 1060 Gaming X comes with a large dual-fan thermal solution that's incredibly quiet and stops the fans in idle and light gaming. The card is overclocked out of the box as well without sacrificing any of the marvellous power efficiency NVIDIA's Pascal provides.

*Show full review*


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 19, 2016)

So, it is cheaper than the FE.  However, as I predicted, FE price has made MSRP a pipe dream.  I seriously hope no one actually hoped for that.

$60 more than the RX 480 is ALOT of money for the same card segment.

It looks like a great card however.  It trounces the RX 480 at most games on 1080p.  I didn't expect that.

Thanks for the review!


----------



## Dammeron (Jul 19, 2016)

The PCB size is laughable. So much empty space. It's so absurdly huge it should be counted among the drawbacks...


----------



## Rowsol (Jul 19, 2016)

Why isn't the 4gb rx 480 on the price/perf charts?


----------



## Ungari (Jul 19, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> It trounces the RX 480 at most games on 1080p. I didn't expect that.



That's because something is very wrong with the RX 480 benchmarks, especially in games like Rise Of The Tomb Raider and Crysis 3.
We shall see when we compare other reviews, but for now I call Bravo Sierra.


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 19, 2016)

Rowsol said:


> Why isn't the 4gb rx 480 on the price/perf charts?


RX480 4 GB doesn't exist in the market anymore it seems


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

I thought that there was an alternate bios to restrict the review cards to 4gb?

I'm assuming that the 4gb card will be available soon?


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 19, 2016)

Good looking card, MSI delivers again on a nice aftermarket card.  Overall seems like the GTX 1060 is an excellent card.  also it over locks to pretty much the exact same levels as the other 2 Pascal cards.


----------



## ShurikN (Jul 19, 2016)

So there is already a custom 1060, yet we haven't got a single custom RX 480 out. What the fuck AMD... It's like they want to fail. And I'm not talkin about performance, OC and power consumption. I'm talking reference vs reference, where the NV card is a lot quieter and colder.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 19, 2016)

are these results backwards?


----------



## okidna (Jul 19, 2016)

Mussels said:


> are these results backwards?



I think it's driver limitation or protection for "power viruses" a.k.a. FurMark, etc. You can see similar behavior with RX 480 and newer NVIDIA cards.

FurMark will draw less or similar power compared to typical gaming power draw.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 19, 2016)

well when maximum is anything but the highest recorded number, it brings into question the validity/usefulness of the test.


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 19, 2016)

Mussels said:


> well when maximum is anything but the highest recorded number, it brings into question the validity/usefulness of the test.


Peak gaming has spikes that go above and below the power limit. Our test equipment measures faster than the board power limiter, which means it can catch spikes before they get cut off by the power limit circuitry.
With Furmark the card is always in power limit, so there is no chance of any spikes.


----------



## Caring1 (Jul 19, 2016)

Mussels said:


> well when maximum is anything but the highest recorded number, it brings into question the validity/usefulness of the test.


It looks fine to me, maximum is more an average, while peak accounts for spikes
Pity they still have a DVI connection, as it would be neater without and allow better cooling too.


----------



## ZeppMan217 (Jul 19, 2016)

Any chance of seeing Vulkan Doom in the test list?


----------



## rruff (Jul 19, 2016)

This is one reason I'd pick the 1060 over the 480 even if it was $50 more:

Idle power: 5W vs 15W
Multi-monitor: 6W vs 40W
BluRay: 6W vs 39W
Gaming: 116W vs 163W

Electric consumption alone will be >$20/yr difference for my use. And resale will probably be higher on the 1060. *In the end it's actually cheaper.*

Plus looking at the FE and comparing it to the 480 reference card, the FE OCs 14% and the 480 5%, which added to the 8% performance deficit at reference clocks gives *a 17% performance difference. *Not trivial.

Maybe in the future the 480 will make gains with better drivers and Vulkan and DX12 implementation, but the 1060 has a substantial lead.



rtwjunkie said:


> So, it is cheaper than the FE.  However, as I predicted, FE price has made MSRP a pipe dream.  I seriously hope no one actually hoped for that.



Gigabyte card is $249 at newegg: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...6-Index-_-DesktopGraphicsCards-_-14125879-S0B


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

rruff said:


> This is one reason I'd pick the 1060 over the 480 even if it was $50 more:
> 
> Idle power: 5W vs 15W
> Multi-monitor: 6W vs 40W
> ...



You'd have to be gaming 6-7 hours a day, every day of the year for that to add up. Not unheard of, but damn, that's a lot of gaming.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jul 19, 2016)

I'm impressed with this card. It basically trashes away anything AMD has right now, while being faster than last generation's 980 GTX. Amazing.


----------



## Foxiol (Jul 19, 2016)

Now just for the reference guys...in Spain the Gigabyte G1 and MSI version cost what a GTX970 (Asus Strix in my case) less than a year back, 369€ each version. And there is an EVGA version which is the cheapest one that costs 309€ (small factor too compared to the others, single fan). 

And again for the reference the RX480 in Spain costs 269€. 

They are murdering us here with the prices for Nvidia cards. It can't be that what should be a mid end GPU now costs as much as a what a mid-high end card like a GTX970 back in the day. (still 970's are being sold for 300+€)

They are charging us this much because of the performance or just because taxes went absurdly higher from one year to another? 

Really pissed with what is happening here. (Yet I don't need to upgrade since I still play at 1080p...Going to skip 10XX series for sure)


----------



## john_ (Jul 19, 2016)

Pity. 

*Hitman was run in DX11* while other sites used DX12.
*No Doom* numbers.

I have said in the past that Nvidia created two different price points. Founders Edition, which is the REAL MSRP and a fake MSRP that it is just the price they expect sites to use in their price/performance charts.A price that will become a reality weeks or even months after this review. But, by then, other cards will also be cheaper.

*Unfortunately TPU is happy to swallow Nvidia's marketing, to follow Nvidia's rules* in this one and put a "pipe dream" as correctly was called, in it's charts, to make GTX 1060 look better compared to the RX 480. On the other hand @W1zzard is happy to find an excuse and remove the 4GB RX 480 version.


----------



## eddman (Jul 19, 2016)

@W1zzard Any chance you might review the short evga 1060s?


----------



## rruff (Jul 19, 2016)

silkstone said:


> You'd have to be gaming 6-7 hours a day, every day of the year for that to add up. Not unheard of, but damn, that's a lot of gaming.



Nope. There is $10/yr just at idle. My computer is always on because it's always doing something. Watch a couple hours of video a day (use a projector for movies so multi), game 1 hour or so, it adds up. If it was only while gaming it would be trivial for me.


----------



## Caring1 (Jul 19, 2016)

john_ said:


> I have said in the past that Nvidia created two different price points. Founders Edition, which is the REAL MSRP and a fake MSRP that it is just the price they expect sites to use in their price/performance charts.A price that will become a reality weeks or even months after this review. But, by then, other cards will also be cheaper.
> 
> *Unfortunately TPU is happy to swallow Nvidia's marketing, to follow Nvidia's rules* in this one and put a "pipe dream" as correctly was called, in it's charts, to make GTX 1060 look better compared to the RX 480.


I agree with the part I have quoted, as for the 4Gb version of the RX480, i believe it is no longer available so it would be pointless including it in charts.


----------



## trog100 (Jul 19, 2016)

it seems the 1060 is on a par with a 980 and 480 on a par with a 970.. there was a huge price difference between 980 and 970 cards.. not such a huge one between the 1060 and 480 cards.. 

sad to say but this puts the nvidia offering out in front of the amd offering.. the only way amd can win is a super cheap 4 gig 480.. which as wizzard says dosnt seem to exist.. 

trog


----------



## deemon (Jul 19, 2016)

So where is *DOOM *(Vulkan) benchmark? *AotS *DX12? *Hitman *DX12? *Total War: Warhammer* DX12?


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

rruff said:


> Nope. There is $10/yr just at idle. My computer is always on because it's always doing something. Watch a couple hours of video a day (use a projector for movies so multi), game 1 hour or so, it adds up. If it was only while gaming it would be trivial for me.



Multi or single monitor?

Are you accounting for when the monitors go to sleep?

You have to be using a multi-monitor setup for about 8 hours a day (active monitors) for that to add up to $20/yr. And hell, if you use a projector to watch movies, you have other power concerns, surely?

I'm not dismissing your concerns. I use multi-monitor for an average of 6 hrs a day. Hell, i wouldn't be surprised if my setup cost an extra $10 a month. I'm just dubious that it will affect the average consumer.


----------



## N3M3515 (Jul 19, 2016)

deemon said:


> So where is *DOOM *(Vulkan) benchmark? *AotS *DX12? *Hitman *DX12? *Total War: Warhammer* DX12?


This.

And nobody pointing out the fact that this thing costs $40 more than stock for a 2% increase in perf?
Well i guess it's the cooler...


----------



## mrthanhnguyen (Jul 19, 2016)

deemon said:


> So where is *DOOM *(Vulkan) benchmark? *AotS *DX12? *Hitman *DX12? *Total War: Warhammer* DX12?



Doom OpenGL 1060 wins, Vulkan rx480 wins. Aots dx12, they are on par, 1 fps difference. Hitman dx 12, the rx480 wins. Total War, 1060 wins.


----------



## Dimi (Jul 19, 2016)

Well according to the Palit 1060 review on Guru3D the 1060 beats the RX480 in the latest Time Spy benchmark in DX12 and Asynchronous Compute by about 8-9%. 

Also the fact that you can order these AFTERMARKET 1060's (angry fists at AMD) on newegg for 249$ i'd say this card beats the AMD rival.


----------



## john_ (Jul 19, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> I agree with the part I have quoted, as for the 4Gb version of the RX480, i believe it is no longer available so it would be pointless including it in charts.


Yes it is
Radeon RX 480 | OVERCLOCKERS UK
And in US probably there are as much available as $249 GTX 1060s.
Also in performance per dollar you will also find for example Kepler cards. Did you noticed @W1zzard feeling the need to remove those cards because they are not sold anymore?



mrthanhnguyen said:


> Doom OpenGL 1060 wins, Vulkan rx480 wins. Aots dx12, they are on par, 1 fps difference. Hitman dx 12, the rx480 wins. Total War, 1060 wins.



Doom OpenGL is NOT an option for cards that support Vulkan. No one will run the game with OpenGl if the Vulkan option is there to choose.
In Total War RX 480 wins






GeForce GTX 1060 Review - DX12: Total War: WARHAMMER


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jul 19, 2016)

silkstone said:


> Multi or single monitor?
> 
> Are you accounting for when the monitors go to sleep?
> 
> ...



Ultimately what he is just saying is that the GTX1060 would be a better investment from the looks of things now.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 19, 2016)

Dimi said:


> Also the fact that you can order these AFTERMARKET 1060's (angry fists at AMD) on newegg for 249$ i'd say this card beats the AMD rival.



Since we're in the MSI AFTERMARKET thread, which part of $289 did you miss? 

So far, one non-FE card is $249, which is still more than RX 480.  And don't discount the $329 STRIX version, which is ludicrous.


----------



## john_ (Jul 19, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> Since we're in the MSI AFTERMARKET thread, which part of $289 did you miss?
> 
> So far, one non-FE card is $249, which is still more than RX 480.  And don't discount the $329 STRIX version, which is ludicrous.


That Gigabyte is not available. I wonder if it ever was. Maybe 10 pieces that ended in NewEgg's employees' hands, one second before the card become available online.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

ZoneDymo said:


> Ultimately what he is just saying is that the GTX1060 would be a better investment from the looks of things now.



I think that the edge where DX12 is concerned, not that it matters today. For a lot of people the final price is going to be the biggest factor, and I wouldn't consider ~40 watts a deal-breaker unless I were super power-conscious.


----------



## john_ (Jul 19, 2016)

Well, Doom numbers are fun


----------



## birdie (Jul 19, 2016)

IMO the card is decent but slightly overpriced but then I understand why NVIDIA didn't go with lower prices - they don't really compete with the RX 480. Also I do not understand at all why NVIDIA decided to go without SLI this time. Are they preparing the GTX 1060 Ti? But it doesn't make any sense - the GTX 1060 is a full chip.

<rant on>
I wonder how on Earth WCCFTech AMD cancer spreads everywhere. Could God please limit it to WCCFTech? Currently there are barely two native DX12 titles (AoS is more a tech demo than a game), why the #### are you hellbent on seeing them here?

Secondly, "if your GPU supports OpenGL and Vulkan you _must_ run Vulkan" - why _must_?? if NVIDIA's OpenGL implementation in this game is miles better than AMD's, so only AMD chips gain substantially from using Vulkan which was modeled after Mantle which was created after the GCN architecture.

Do you know any other graphics API which was modeled after NVIDIA's previous GPU archs? You don't? So, why is all this madness with async compute/Vulkan/DX12 going on unabated on WCCFTech/Overclockers.uk/etc. etc. etc.?

You don't buy a GPU to run future yet to be developed games.
You don't buy a GPU thinking its new drivers will provide a substantially increased performance - it rarely happens and if it does, gains are minimal.
You should understand that most game developers develop games with the most popular GPUs in mind - at the moment it seems like you must be mad to ignore millions of GTX860/970, soon to be followed by GTX1060/1070.

You buy a GPU to have a desired FPS in currently released games for ####'s sake.
</rant off>


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 19, 2016)

It's a little bit funny to watch people crying.

Dry your tears - it's better in AotS (and it doesn't even do Async)


----------



## nickbaldwin86 (Jul 19, 2016)

Just think if you could SLi this... the performance would be amazing! for $500


----------



## john_ (Jul 19, 2016)

birdie said:


> IMO the card is decent but slightly overpriced but then I understand why NVIDIA didn't go with lower prices - they don't really compete with the RX 480. Also I do not understand at all why NVIDIA decided to go without SLI this time. Are they preparing the GTX 1060 Ti? But it doesn't make any sense - the GTX 1060 is a full chip.
> 
> <rant on>
> I wonder how on Earth WCCFTech AMD cancer spreads everywhere. Could God please limit it to WCCFTech? Currently there are barely two native DX12 titles (AoS is more a tech demo than a game), why the #### are you hellbent on seeing them here?
> ...



GTX 1060 doesn't have SLI because

1) Nvidia doesn't want to see GTX 1080 sales dropping with people choosing two 1060 for much less
2) If it doesn't have enough GPUs from TSMC Nvidia does have one more reason to limit, in a way, 1060 cards to 1 per person.

About that cancer thing. In a forum you will also read opinions you don't like. The alternative is the forum at geforce.com I guess.

About APIs. When Nvidia was first with DX10 GPUs no one was saying that this was unfair to ATI. Everyone was saying that ATI was late. If Nvidia is late in supporting some DX12 features, it's not unfair to comment about it. And when you have two APIs and the one is more modern and performs better you choose it. If you have two parallel roads, one dirt road and one asphalt road, you will go from the asphalt road. Yes Nvidia cards are like 4x4 and can run on dirt road as fast as on the asphalt road, still the logic says to take the asphalt road.

The madness about async and newer APIs is that they offer better performance and it's also about moving forward. And based on Steam survey people DO move forward.



You are wrong in your last part of your post. You don't buy a card to just play games today. People don't usually change their graphics cards every 6 months. That's why in those last years we are keep reading again and again about how the PC market is shrinking. So before INVESTING $200-$800, you should also consider how much time your investment will be returning it's value to you.

And the most popular GPUs right now are the Intel iGPUs.

Anyway, no reason to start a debate. Let's just say that we disagree if you think that I am wrong.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

I agree with your points on current games and driver (though you didn't mention price), but not this.



birdie said:


> You should understand that most game developers develop games with the most popular GPUs in mind - at the moment it seems like you must be mad to ignore millions of GTX860/970, soon to be followed by GTX1060/1070.



Aren't there a fair few games developed initially for the PS/Xbox that utilize AMD hardware?


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 19, 2016)

I was also going to post...

"ah ha hha haa ha hah ha ha ha h ahhaha haa haa haaah haa"

But felt it wouldn't help the atmosphere in here.


----------



## dwade (Jul 19, 2016)

Moar games in the test please! Total War: Warhammer and moar DX12 titles to see how the GTX 1060 fares against the RX 480. DX12 is now and the future!


----------



## overlord (Jul 19, 2016)

birdie said:


> IMO the card is decent but slightly overpriced but then I understand why NVIDIA didn't go with lower prices - they don't really compete with the RX 480. Also I do not understand at all why NVIDIA decided to go without SLI this time. Are they preparing the GTX 1060 Ti? But it doesn't make any sense - the GTX 1060 is a full chip.
> 
> <rant on>
> I wonder how on Earth WCCFTech AMD cancer spreads everywhere. Could God please limit it to WCCFTech? Currently there are barely two native DX12 titles (AoS is more a tech demo than a game), why the #### are you hellbent on seeing them here?
> ...


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 19, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> I was also going to post...
> 
> "ah ha hha haa ha hah ha ha ha h ahhaha haa haa haaah haa"
> 
> But felt it wouldn't help the atmosphere in here.



Have you signed up today to be the resident Troll? 

Seriously, I don't see anything wrong with the atmosphere.  I'm upset because I wish I had not been right when I said the MSRP would be an NVIDIA fiction.  Other than that I think most people are impressed with it, even those that don't want it. 

Unless I'm reading it all wrong...


----------



## YouToo (Jul 19, 2016)

Really nice review! Having a low budget the 1060 seems to be the best bang for the buck at the moment. I wonder how MSI's basic version "6GT OC" compares to this one, being ~$82 cheaper than the "Gaming X" in my country. I know it doesn't have a backplate and the fans look cheaper but still, such a price difference.


----------



## birdie (Jul 19, 2016)

john_ said:


> The madness about async and newer APIs is that they offer better performance and it's also about moving forward.



I have yet to see those _magical_ games which run significantly better with async and newer APIs. GTX 1060 is on par with RX 480 in AoS. In Doom AMD GPUs run faster with Vulkan, because AMD's OpenGL implementation is not of a very good quality. I have yet to see any DX12/Vulkan games which offer a substantially improved graphics over DX11/OpenGL 4.5 games. In some games DX12 was an afterthought so those games run better without it.

I'm not against DX12/async computer/etc. I'm against the idiots who base their purchasing decisions based on the other idiots' _opinions_ about the things they do _not_ understand at all. Among all the readers of WCCFtech/TPU there is barely a handful of people who understand these things fully but they usually choose to remain silent.

DX12/Vulkan games are hellishly difficult to develop and debug (it's like going from Java to assembler), yet most people are under the impression that DX12 is the only way forward. It's not. In the years to come most games will be based on DX11/DX9/OpenGL. Also proper DX12 games need to be written from scratch, not ported. Also DX12 doesn't bring increased performance in all cases by default.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 19, 2016)

birdie said:


> DX12/Vulkan games are hellishly difficult to develop and debug (it's like going from Java to assembler), yet most people are under the impression that DX12 is the only way forward. It's not. In the years to come most games will be based on DX11/DX9/OpenGL. Also proper DX12 games need to be written from scratch, not ported. Also DX12 doesn't bring increased performance in all cases by default.



I have to agree with this.  I don't know why so many people assume DX12 is all we will see going forward.  DX11 games will equal or outnumber for awhile.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 19, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> Have you signed up today to be the resident Troll?
> 
> Seriously, I don't see anything wrong with the atmosphere.  I'm upset because I wish I had not been right when I said the MSRP would be an NVIDIA fiction.  Other than that I think most people are impressed with it, even those that don't want it.
> 
> Unless I'm reading it all wrong...



I'm standing in for @Fluffmeister.  

But seriously, it's amusing to see people falling over themselves to find faults with a card that plays the vast majority of today's games at a great level at a good price.  It's great it's the same price in the UK as the RX 480 and it's great it overclocks highly as well - in some cases close to stock 980ti... eh, hold on... That was the hype about the RX480.  

TBH, I have no interest in these cards (or overpriced 1080's).  I need AMD's Vega top chip to be the dogs bollocks.  Otherwise I'll be getting bottom banged by Nvidia's GP102 pricing.


----------



## Legacy-ZA (Jul 19, 2016)

Great card, really. AMD, I hate to say it, but you have to step up your game.


----------



## mrthanhnguyen (Jul 19, 2016)

Remember we can use dx11 in dx12 game. And with my perfect eyes, I don't see any graphic quality difference between dx11 and dx12.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 19, 2016)

Woah, these cards are great, better than I thought.

I can see why team red is in maximum damage control!


----------



## Sempron Guy (Jul 19, 2016)

the game has just begun







what's +19% of a 480 again? and that's just on 1330mhz (constant) boost


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 19, 2016)

Not sure why anyone is talking about a launch retail price, in my experience in the UK at least,  they rarely if ever reflect what the price will settle at a couple of months after launch, retailers see the interest as an opportunity to milk the consumer, prices settle, why not make the cost difference comparisons then, at which time there maybe some more mature drivers to try too so some might stop clutching at straws because one card betters the other in most games, in drivers alone I have seen 15-20% performance improvements on a card over about 2 or 3 driver releases in the past, that of course could easily apply to the 1060 and/or the 480.


----------



## john_ (Jul 19, 2016)

Legacy-ZA said:


> Great card, really. AMD, I hate to say it, but you have to step up your game.


They did. They offered great value in $200-$250 price point. Thanks to that Nvidia had to rush GTX 1060 1-2 months earlier into the market. 

What more does someone need from AMD? 50% extra performance at %50 lower price, with double the memory and half the power consumption?


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jul 19, 2016)

Jesus my 780 looks slow after this. God i need an upgrade. Next month needs to come sooner!


----------



## mrthanhnguyen (Jul 19, 2016)

Sempron Guy said:


> the game has just begun
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Why only 2 games? RX480 is faster than gtx 1060 in only 3 or 4 games? How many games we have on the market now? 10 games?


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 19, 2016)

Tatty_One said:


> Not sure why anyone is talking about a launch retail price, in my experience in the UK at least,  they rarely if ever reflect what the price will settle at a couple of months after launch, retailers see the interest as an opportunity to milk the consumer, prices settle, why not make the cost difference comparisons then, at which time there maybe some more mature drivers to try too so some might stop clutching at straws because one card betters the other in most games, in drivers alone I have seen 15-20% performance improvements on a card over about 2 or 3 driver releases in the past, that of course could easily apply to the 1060 and/or the 480.



Stop speaking sense you old codger.  People don't want sense - they want sensationalism!

I'm just happy we have a middle ground with both brands and with the custom cards, everyone in that price bracket has an excellent choice.  Everyone can stop complaining.  Except those at the high end because AMD's absence up there is wallet sapping.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Jul 19, 2016)

Did AMD sold many 480 custom or any yet, because from now on things will get nasty. Actually I expected a higher price for the 1060, (I don't take into acount the FE) a better card on every metric compared to the 480 but it's clear Nvidia does not want to leave any breathing space for the red team. This MSI is a bit expensive but there are already custom cards available at $250, 10 $ more than the 480 reference. Actually this card is shaping up to be the best deal in a long while from any point of view.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 19, 2016)

john_ said:


> They did. They offered great value in $200-$250 price point. Thanks to that Nvidia had to rush GTX 1060 1-2 months earlier into the market.
> 
> What more does someone need from AMD? 50% extra performance at %50 lower price, with double the memory and half the power consumption?



Really, no one can complain or point fingers.  Both sides middle bracket of cards are more than enough performance for awhile.  It's almost overkill in this segment, performance-wise.


----------



## rruff (Jul 19, 2016)

silkstone said:


> Are you accounting for when the monitors go to sleep?



Does the idle power drop when that happens?



> And hell, if you use a projector to watch movies, you have other power concerns, surely?



Yes, I do have other power concerns for sure. I always factor in utility cost when I buy stuff though. Maybe I'm overestimating the difference in cards particularly if the power drops even lower when the monitor sleeps, but it isn't as simple as it is with some appliances. Note that the figures in the test are at the card, and you need to add in PSU efficiency, which won't be that good when it's drawing ~50W from the wall.



Tatty_One said:


> Not sure why anyone is talking about a launch retail price, in my experience in the UK at least,  they rarely if ever reflect what the price will settle at a couple of months after launch.



I agree, it's irrelevant. Performance and perceived value will set the real prices. And when the late Nov deals (in the US) come in you'll be able to get either for well under $200.

What this indicates to me is that Nvidia is pretty aggressive about retaining their market share dominance. AMDs margins are surely smaller on the 480 already and they will need to squeeze them tighter still. The competition is great for consumers.

One thing I'm curious about is if Nvidia is going to launch a competitor to the 460 anytime soon, or will the 750 Ti and 950 be it? I haven't heard any rumors about it. Nvidia will have powerful Pascal gaming notebook cards, but nothing below the 1060/(50?) desktop level. Low end gaming and laptops might actually be AMD's niche for awhile.


----------



## dj-electric (Jul 19, 2016)

I like when things are practical






this is not practical. This is higher for no good reason. EVGA shows how easy it is to cool a GTX 1060 and stay small.
MSI should've at least go with a normal height PCB if they make it longer.

I get it, this size is being used to make GTX 1070s with full components, but this just hurts.


----------



## birdie (Jul 19, 2016)

It's amazing that people in NVIDIA's sub Reddit are actually quite decent, don't throw sh*t at AMD and actually praise AMD for creating viable competition in the GPU market.

Now go visit WCCFTech or AMD's sub Reddit and realize what nasty creatures are AMD fans.


----------



## dj-electric (Jul 19, 2016)

Fanboy wars online on GPUs have been around since 3DFX days.
Its best to ignore and move on.


----------



## overlord (Jul 19, 2016)

Fluffmeister said:


> Woah, these cards are great, better than I thought.
> 
> I can see why team red is in maximum damage control!


Lol http://m.hardocp.com/article/2016/0..._1060_founders_edition_review/10#.V46ZtMvTXqB


----------



## dj-electric (Jul 19, 2016)

FE GTX 1060 shouldn't even be concidered, as it is purely and quite literally overpriced.
Why would anyone get one, when he can* pay 250$ and get a better card*.


----------



## deemon (Jul 19, 2016)

birdie said:


> I wonder how on Earth WCCFTech AMD cancer spreads everywhere. Could God please limit it to WCCFTech? Currently there are barely two native DX12 titles (AoS is more a tech demo than a game), why the #### are you hellbent on seeing them here?



Yes. Tech demo of the DX12 true potential in RTS games, whatever they may be... millions of AI controlled critters roaming around.



birdie said:


> Secondly, "if your GPU supports OpenGL and Vulkan you _must_ run Vulkan" - why _must_?? if NVIDIA's OpenGL implementation in this game is miles better than AMD's, so only AMD chips gain substantially from using Vulkan which was modeled after Mantle which was created after the GCN architecture.



Because Vulkan works better! On all platforms, not just AMD.



birdie said:


> Do you know any other graphics API which was modeled after NVIDIA's previous GPU archs? You don't? So, why is all this madness with async compute/Vulkan/DX12 going on unabated on WCCFTech/Overclockers.uk/etc. etc. etc.?



HairWorks. PhysX. Some mad tessallation bullshit in different games...and don't even start with G-Sync bullshit. I mean it's fine to have it, but denying your customers the ability to use VESA standardized FreeSync just because ... you have your own propritery bullshit is just BAD for consumers. It's like nvidia decided it will not use HDMI or DP but some some NVIDIA-port from now on and you can only use displays with NVIDIA-port with NVIDIA GPU-s ... come on 











birdie said:


> You should understand that most game developers develop games with the most popular GPUs in mind - at the moment it seems like you must be mad to ignore millions of GTX860/970, soon to be followed by GTX1060/1070.



Welcome to the console world. 100% of current gen and also current gen refresh (Scorpio and Neo) consoles are AMD (same GCN stuff we have on PC)... wise developers develope game once. It is wiser right now to optimize your game for AMD if you plan any console launch also for it. Also wise developers develope in Vulkan, because reasons... any platform (win, linux/android, console, apple), any GPU (also including the mobile GPU's like Apple and Qualcomm and ARM stuff).


----------



## birdie (Jul 19, 2016)

deemon said:


> Yes. Tech demo of the DX12 true potential in RTS games, whatever they may be... millions of AI controlled critters roaming around.


Clearly you know nil about DX12 and async compute. Perhaps you even think that async compute and async shaders are the same thing. And maybe you think DX12 is used to calculate AI. In short, you're clueless.



deemon said:


> HairWorks. PhysX. Some mad tessallation bullshit in different games...


HairWorks doesn't underlie any GPU standard - it just uses a lot of tesselation which worked better on Maxwell/Kepler than on competing at the time AMD GPUs so NVIDIA was falsely accused of rigging the results. Somehow when AMD cooperates with game developers it's called "new tech at which NVIDIA sucks". Tesselation in the RX 480 works much better, the card shows comparable results even with HairWorks turned on and no one rings a bell anymore. Strange, isn't it. PhysX is used in few and between games which are not even present in this review. Go back to WCCFTech - you'll find literally thousands of likeminded people there.



deemon said:


> Because Vulkan works better! On all platforms, not just AMD.


Vulkan is an API. It cannot work better. Hardware might be designed better. Besides, how do you know it works better? Code a single triangle demo in OpenGL and Vulkan - both will show the same 100K FPS. So what?



deemon said:


> Welcome to the console world. 100% of current gen and also current gen refresh (Scorpio and Neo) consoles are AMD (same GCN stuff we have on PC)... wise developers develope game once.


AMD fans always believe in future drivers optimizations, future technologies, future this and that. In time, when the said things get implemented on a wide scale, it turns out that the current gen GPUs are simply not capable and you need new hardware to take advantage of new features.

Could you please stop trolling, spamming and flaming and discuss the article instead? You can discuss the advantages of your RX 480/Fury (X) at WCCFTech or AMD's subReddit.

Now, back to the article: I'm a little disappointed with the GTX 1060. Theoretically it must be at least 1708MHz/1178MHz*4.4t/2.94 = 2.16 times faster than the GTX 960 but it's not. This is a very superficial comparison, but still it looks like the Pascal architecture is not much different than the Maswell arch.


----------



## john_ (Jul 19, 2016)

birdie said:


> It's amazing that people in NVIDIA's sub Reddit are actually quite decent, don't throw sh*t at AMD and actually praise AMD for creating viable competition in the GPU market.
> 
> Now go visit WCCFTech or AMD's sub Reddit and realize what nasty creatures are AMD fans.


When you are sitting on a 75% market share and you feel that the company you prefer is having the upper hand, it's completely logical to be more calm in your posting and your reactions. Let the others shouting, smile and ignore them. If things where changing, the reaction you see would completely turn the other way around.

The same happens with team fans, voters of political parties etc. where those supporting the smaller team ending always in the 2nd place or those supporting the political party that haven't seen an election win for many years, will usually have a more strong reaction.

It's just human and it is completely wrong to imply or even just think that a piece of hardware is enough to differentiate people in categories, one of them being "nasty creatures".


----------



## birdie (Jul 20, 2016)

Nasty 'cause you have to be missing something inside your skull to even associate yourself with some imaginary entity like a graphics company. People naively believe that if you're an AMD/NVIDIA fan, you automatically become a better creature. What a load of nonsense.

I've had both NVIDIA and AMD cards (always based on price/performance/acoustics and almost nothing else) under the hood and I've never vouched for any company or reviled the other. It's extremely stupid and mean.

I'm a fan of progress and technology. I don't give a damn who stands behind them as long as they are there. I equally commend NVIDIA and AMD, and I root for AMD even more ('cause it's an underdog), but I have the decency to admit that currently Pascal has turned out to be a better product in general than Polaris from any point of view (aside from maybe three to four games in total where AMD shines).

I've just noticed that some AMD redditors are sane people. That's nice.


----------



## mastrdrver (Jul 20, 2016)

As for the last sentence in the conclusion, I think it doesn't put @Wizzard in good light to say that. I do disagree with him on that last sentence, but I think it does more harm to the article than it helps, but that's my opinion. I'm concerned that some will latch onto that last part as "proof" that Wiz is a nVidia shill. I think it would bring a darkness to his reviews that are unneeded.



Caring1 said:


> I agree with the part I have quoted, as for the 4Gb version of the RX480, i believe it is no longer available so it would be pointless including it in charts.



Except there are 3 listings on Newegg. Sure they're out of stock but so are the 8GB models too (in the US as of this post).


----------



## ViperXTR (Jul 20, 2016)

john_ said:


> Well, Doom numbers are fun


Huh, didn't know Doom can go beyond the 200FPS cap, is that Vulkan only unlock?


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 20, 2016)

ViperXTR said:


> Huh, didn't know Doom can go beyond the 200FPS cap, is that Vulkan only unlock?



It's a good question, but apparently HardOCP is considered a very very friendly site to Nvidia, so those numbers are very fun indeed.

I guess equally arguing that those numbers are an unplayable mess for those meanies at Nv is hard too, overall.... good bless Kyle or Vulkan or something.


----------



## N3M3515 (Jul 20, 2016)

Caring1 said:


> I agree with the part I have quoted, as for the 4Gb version of the RX480, i believe it is no longer available so it would be pointless including it in charts.



http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/gigabyte-adds-radeon-rx-480-g1-gaming-graphics-cards.html


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 20, 2016)

john_ said:


> GTX 1060 doesn't have SLI because
> 
> 1) Nvidia doesn't want to see GTX 1080 sales dropping with people choosing two 1060 for much less
> 2) If it doesn't have enough GPUs from TSMC Nvidia does have one more reason to limit, in a way, 1060 cards to 1 per person.
> ...


Whats this...Logic???  Yea the new API's are something we really need to have more focus on because they are starting to come into play.  Doubt they will be anything big before next year but its worth mentioning especially since more AAA games are coming with them implemented.


birdie said:


> It's amazing that people in NVIDIA's sub Reddit are actually quite decent, don't throw sh*t at AMD and actually praise AMD for creating viable competition in the GPU market.
> 
> Now go visit WCCFTech or AMD's sub Reddit and realize what nasty creatures are AMD fans.


Uhh, hate to be the bearer of bad news but they both are just as bad.  Heck just read the GTX 1060's and the RX 480 threads alone on this forum just to see that there is no one side of people form either doing all the problems.  There is no such thing as one side causing more issues than the other.



john_ said:


> They did. They offered great value in $200-$250 price point. Thanks to that Nvidia had to rush GTX 1060 1-2 months earlier into the market.
> 
> What more does someone need from AMD? 50% extra performance at %50 lower price, with double the memory and half the power consumption?


It could cure cancer, you would still get the same reactions from people LOL.

Fact is they both have their pros and cons.  There are more cons on the AMD side but it comes in at a much cheaper base price.  The Nvidia card has much better overclocking and better stock performance but you end up paying more for it.  Its up to you how you spend your money so vote either way with your wallets and buy what makes you happy.  If you have to spend your time putting others down for what they spend their money on than you have issues.


----------



## Caring1 (Jul 20, 2016)

N3M3515 said:


> http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/gigabyte-adds-radeon-rx-480-g1-gaming-graphics-cards.html


And i'm sure they will sell well in AMERICA, which apparently is the centre of the world and only place that matters.


----------



## Melvis (Jul 20, 2016)

Good card, performance is exactly where I expected it to be (around the GTX 980) but for $200 LESS, going to sell well this 1060 me thinks


----------



## medi01 (Jul 20, 2016)

Prima.Vera said:


> I'm impressed with this card. It basically trashes away anything AMD has right now, while being faster than last generation's 980 GTX. Amazing.


Amazing hyperbole.

Power consumption is the only noticeable part, but OCed perf doesn't impress and performance is rather within "trading blows" region. (with only 7% AMD will likely catch up rather soon, as it happened with 290, driver bump that was released after TPU review promised 3% perf increase)

Oh, and that not even counting things such as: *DOOM *(Vulkan) *AotS *DX12 *Hitman *DX12 *Total War: Warhammer* DX12 (not part of the review)

Nevertheless, I think AMD should keep RX 480 at about 20-30 Euro lower price, currently ref 480 costs as AIB Palit card (279) in DE, that's simply too much and interesting only if you are after adaptive sync and don't want to pay extra $ for nvidia vendor lock-in.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 20, 2016)

medi01 said:


> Amazing hyperbole.
> 
> Power consumption is the only noticeable part, but OCed perf doesn't impress and performance is rather within "trading blows" region. (with only 7% AMD will likely catch up rather soon, as it happened with 290, driver bump that was released after TPU review promised 3% perf increase)
> 
> ...



*Vulkan* supported games (4 of them, sort of)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_Vulkan_support

As for *AotS* (some other sites have the RX480 ahead by a few fps, so it's swings an roundabouts on that one)







Both are good cards, very good cards.  Everyone wins.


----------



## ViperXTR (Jul 20, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> *Vulkan* supported games (4 of them, sort of)
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_Vulkan_support
> 
> ...


What the hell happened to that 960?


----------



## medi01 (Jul 20, 2016)

john_ said:


> Pity.
> 
> *Hitman was run in DX11* while other sites used DX12.
> *No Doom* numbers..



Welp:
http://videocardz.com/62138/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-reviewers-guide-leaked



the54thvoid said:


> *Vulkan* supported games (4 of them, sort of)


What about them?


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 20, 2016)

medi01 said:


> Welp:
> http://videocardz.com/62138/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-reviewers-guide-leaked
> 
> 
> What about them?



Does anything in that reviewers guide leak surprise you?  If it does you're a couple of transistors short of a Fiji.

And the Vulkan thing?  Don't be so naive.  Multiple posts about Doom Vulkan (which RX 480 would win) not being present yet Vulkan has the support of 4 games (one of which is more of a synthetic).  DX11 is more relevant than Vulkan and it's less important to showcase an API that has got infinitely less traction that DX12. 

The whole point is,  it's very illuminating that

(A) People got very hyped over RX480 and it delivered the performance AMD said it would, although the stock version is noisy and wasn't as power efficient as everyone was led to believe.
(B) I saw arguably far less hype over the GTX1060 yet it delivers above where a lot of folk thought it would with a better acoustic and better perf/watt.  The caveat being, the FE version (which is silly). 
(C) The GTX1060 can be bought (at least in the UK) from AIB's for the same price as  RX480, with equivalent performance, far better efficiency and so far, excellent acoustics.

So it means lots of AMD supporters need to snipe and whine about it.  No Vulkan Doom, No DX12 Hitman (but we do have DX12 RotTR), etc etc.  It seems the AMD side never stops moaning even when AMD have delivered the card they said they would and I'm sure the AIB cards will be fantastic. 

But still, you moan... non stop.  Forever.  AMD delivered a great little card (the AIB's will make it what it was meant to be).  Nvidia have now delivered a great little card (the AIB's will make it better).  There is nothing to moan about.  If you don't like TPU reviews - go elsewhere, find a site that suits your bias or better still, find many sites - get an aggregate score and make a valid, empirical choice - that's what I do.  Relying on one site for a 100% viewpoint is always foolish.  What if you don't play any games in TPU's game list?  Go find it elsewhere to make that judgement call.  But don't criticise TPU for using the games it's used for ages.  Or is @W1zzard supposed to use games that suit the card he's reviewing and change suites all the time?

And FTR, DX12 is buggy.  Other sites wont use RoTR in DX12, other sites wont bench A, B or C for similar reasons.  Maybe people are too dumb to actually go and do a meta-analysis of reviews to make up their mind and just sit on their arse here moaning because the review doesn't suit them.  If a bench is missing go and find it and post the link in the review pages (like I've done for AotS, even with a caveat stating it goes both ways).

People need to stop moaning about a graphics company in such a bitter way.  Make it a constructive criticism (why AMD needs to make a superior top end GPU to combat NVidia pricing) or why we need Zen to be a good performer to bring some reality back to Intel.  Or why there should be a gaming developers ToS that helps consumers not be shafted by excessive use of proprietary software (or at least be allowed to switch it off).

Less bitter, more positivity.  Damn - I need to to go to work.

And finally, is it not good the GTX1060 can be bought for the same price as an RX480?


----------



## john_ (Jul 20, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> Does anything in that reviewers guide leak surprise you?  If it does you're a couple of transistors short of a Fiji.
> 
> And the Vulkan thing?  Don't be so naive.  Multiple posts about Doom Vulkan (which RX 480 would win) not being present yet Vulkan has the support of 4 games (one of which is more of a synthetic).  DX11 is more relevant than Vulkan and it's less important to showcase an API that has got infinitely less traction that DX12.
> 
> ...



Totally logical your post, but also a very easy post when the situation we are today suits someone or doesn't bother someone.

I already gave this example, but I will repeat it.

People who, for example, support the team or a political party that has the victory secured, will always be more calm, always look to talk more reasonably, always call the others to stop moaning, or stop wearing a tinfoil hat, never really find anything wrong in how things are. It is just normal behavior when things are just great as they are.

If things change, three things are possible. People who where asking from others to stop moaning, will keep asking from others to stop moaning and accept that things change. They are the minority. People who where asking others to stop moaning will start moaning even louder because now they don't like the new situation. They are the majority. People who where asking others to stop moaning, will just change camp and keep asking others to stop moaning. They are plenty.

I am not going to write more. In a Greek forum a conversation about this could be easier for me, but not here. Philosophical matters of this type can lead to huge posts, so I will just stop here. But personally, I am willing to step into someone else's shoes and try to look at things from his perspective, instead of asking him to stop winning and moaning and go elsewhere.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 20, 2016)

So in effect what you are saying is because it annoys you then you act annoyed?  Does self control not play a part?  I only ask because there are absolutely loads of posts, subjects and members in here that annoy the hell out of me (at times), I just apply some self control in the way I react, if you don't then that's because you choose to react the way you do.  How we deal with adversity and behave accordingly is the very substance of what makes us, but hey, I am old and therefore old fashioned with what many would say is a very outdated viewpoint so I apologise for that, not trying to throw my beliefs at anyone.


----------



## john_ (Jul 20, 2016)

Tatty_One said:


> So in effect what you are saying is because it annoys you then you act annoyed?  Does self control not play a part?  I only ask because there are absolutely loads of posts, subjects and members in here that annoy the hell out of me (at times), I just apply some self control in the way I react, if you don't then that's because you choose to react the way you do.  How we deal with adversity and behave accordingly is the very substance of what makes us, but hey, I am old and therefore old fashioned with what many would say is a very outdated viewpoint so I apologise for that, not trying to throw my beliefs at anyone.


The worst thing about a moderator's job is to keep reading every post it is done in the categories he is supervising. It would have been nice if people where posting like happy little bots, giving plenty of traffic to the site, while not annoying the moderators by being annoying human beings. Am I right? 

Also the biggest disadvantage for the moderator is that he doesn't have the option to start reacting or posting like a typical member. Simple members look at the moderator like he is a person of power(ban hammer). But the reality is that the moderator doesn't have the same freedom of speech. He have to be more careful. Having self control is part of the job.

Anyway let's make it simpler for the moderator. I was blocked from the Vulkan thread because someone dropped in to explain to AMD users how poor people they are, maybe the moderator should also block me from this thread because others think that people who have AMD hardware are nasty creatures, whining people, or people with no self control.


----------



## bogda (Jul 20, 2016)

W1zzard said:


> RX480 4 GB doesn't exist in the market anymore it seems


GTX 1060 for 250$ does not exist on the market either. I bet there is better chance of RX480 4GB for 200$ appearing than GTX1060 for 250$.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 20, 2016)

bogda said:


> GTX 1060 for 250$ does not exist on the market either. I bet there is better chance of RX480 4GB for 200$ appearing than GTX1060 for 250$.



As someone pointed out to me yesterday, there are a few $250 1060's, though they are of the smaller variety, single fan. They would be great in some smaller systems.


----------



## basco (Jul 20, 2016)

maybe sometimes a little thank you sir wizzard for your review would not hurt!


----------



## Tatty_One (Jul 20, 2016)

john_ said:


> The worst thing about a moderator's job is to keep reading every post it is done in the categories he is supervising. It would have been nice if people where posting like happy little bots, giving plenty of traffic to the site, while not annoying the moderators by being annoying human beings. Am I right?
> 
> Also the biggest disadvantage for the moderator is that he doesn't have the option to start reacting or posting like a typical member. Simple members look at the moderator like he is a person of power(ban hammer). But the reality is that the moderator doesn't have the same freedom of speech. He have to be more careful. Having self control is part of the job.
> 
> Anyway let's make it simpler for the moderator. I was blocked from the Vulkan thread because someone dropped in to explain to AMD users how poor people they are, maybe the moderator should also block me from this thread because others think that people who have AMD hardware are nasty creatures, whining people, or people with no self control.



Firstly....... You were stopped from posting in the Vulcan thread because you were trolling it to the point that you almost took it over, your rhetoric was repetitive and critically had started to become destructive (in my opinion).  Secondly, Moderators on this site have freedom of speech and are at liberty to say what they think, BUT the same applies to them and any other member ..... providing they don't cross the line, it is one of the only reasons I do it here, for me the community is all important, I could not care less personally about site traffic and quite often some contentious material increases site traffic.  Thirdly,  I agree that self control is part of the job, however it is not a resource limited to a moderator, we can all access and exercise it if and when we choose and that was my original point, if it gets to the point a member chooses not to apply self control and restraint, I may have to step in and exercise it for them, which relates to my first point in this paragraph.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

W1zzard said:


> RX480 4 GB doesn't exist in the market anymore it seems



Do you have a source for this? 
I still saw 4GB reference card for sale in the store, and I'm sure of the many that were were purchased some will be resold in the used market.


----------



## john_ (Jul 20, 2016)

Tatty_One said:


> Firstly....... You were stopped from posting in the Vulcan thread because you were trolling it to the point that you almost took it over, your rhetoric was repetitive and critically had started to become destructive (in my opinion).  Secondly, Moderators on this site have freedom of speech and are at liberty to say what they think, BUT the same applies to them and any other member ..... providing they don't cross the line, it is one of the only reasons I do it here, for me the community is all important, I could not care less personally about site traffic and quite often some contentious material increases site traffic.  Thirdly,  I agree that self control is part of the job, however it is not a resource limited to a moderator, we can all access and exercise it if and when we choose and that was my original point, if it gets to the point a member chooses not to apply self control and restraint, I may have to step in and exercise it for them, which relates to my first point in this paragraph.


I was not trolling, but anyway. It doesn't matter. If there is a limit of one post/page before it looks like you are monopolizing the topic, that's something I didn't knew. Also when you support an opinion that it is a minority, even if you only do one post, you can get quoted by 2-3 persons. If you decide to answer, it might look like monopolizing the topic, but that will be wrong. You are sitting in a table with 5 others with a different opinion, all 5 ask you a, usually, not so different question to show you that you are wrong. You give 5 answers in response. Are you monopolizing the conversation? Are you becoming repetitive if the questions asked are similar and so the answers you are giving are also similar?  Are you destroying the conversation?

Anyway, this can go long way. Let's stop it here.


----------



## basco (Jul 20, 2016)

http://geizhals.eu/?cat=gra16_512&xf=132_4096~1440_RX+480&sort=p
first 4 are 4gb but not really available and between 4+8gb too less money difference for my taste


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> Do you have a source for this?
> I still saw 4GB reference card for sale in the store, and I'm sure of the many that were were purchased some will be resold in the used market.


So I talked to a few people and it looks like 4 GB is coming back at some point in the future, in a true 4 GB variant. When and how many, no idea. Right now you pretty much can't buy any that's why it's not included. If it comes back it will be included of course.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

W1zzard said:


> So I talked to a few people and it looks like 4 GB is coming back at some point in the future, in a true 4 GB variant. When and how many, no idea. Right now you pretty much can't buy any that's why it's not included. If it comes back it will be included of course.



If this is the case, then you should have added these to the graph as this information is still relevant.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 20, 2016)

rruff said:


> Does the idle power drop when that happens?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah. The power draw goes way down (~0 W?) when screens go to sleep.

I do use my dual screen a lot. At least 4-6 hrs a day, more when my wife uses the PC as well. So I actually do need to factor that into my decision. Thanks for opening my eyes to that, I was assuming it would work out to much less in my usage situation, though I assume I am not typical.

For me, saving 30 W or so, for 4 hours a day, x 365 x $0.2 = $12 a year. Not insignificant, if I am planning on using the card for at least 2 years.

Funnily enough, the 1060 seems to be falling $50 below the cost of a 480 where I am, so the decision may be made for me. I have just got to wait for availability and the AIBs.

I think if prices were as they are in the US, I would opt for the 480 and make a small gamble on the future of DX12/Vulcan.

Edit - Scrub that last bit. Prices are all over the place. the only place I can find availability, the Gigabyte 1060 is $50 more than the reference 8gb 480. This is going to be a painful wait. (1060 = $360 USD)


----------



## rruff (Jul 20, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> I saw arguably far less hype over the GTX1060 yet it delivers above where a lot of folk thought it would with a better acoustic and better perf/watt.



OCs a lot better also. At least comparing the reference models.

Amazes me what people get hung up on. *These two are in the same ballpark across the board.* The market will set the real prices. I think the 1060 has a performance edge even long term (ie DX12 and Vulcan), since in TPU's accumulated benches it enjoys a 17% lead after OC. But if anyone disagrees that's fine. Buy the one you want.

The more interesting thing to me is if AMD will be clawing back some market share, make a profit, and offer some real competition against Nvidia across the board. That would be great for us. When I compare this generation vs the last, I'm not seeing a big win for AMD. Or even a little one. The 480 is a fine card, but so was the 380. *Nvidia is actually in a better position with 1060 vs 480, than they were with 960 vs 380.* I have a feeling this will be the case when AMD introduces their high end cards as well. Bottom line being that AMD will continue to have a tough time making profit and gaining market. They need some real winners, and hope that Nvidia stumbles.



silkstone said:


> Edit - Scrub that last bit. Prices are all over the place. the only place I can find availability, the Gigabyte 1060 is $50 more than the reference 8gb 480. This is going to be a painful wait. (1060 = $360 USD)



Ya, once the "new card" frenzy is over the market will set reasonable prices. The great thing for us is that there is serious competition and the FPS/$ is a good boost from last year!


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

rruff said:


> The more interesting thing to me is if AMD will be clawing back some market share, make a profit, and offer some real competition against Nvidia across the board. That would be great for us. When I compare this generation vs the last, I'm not seeing a big win for AMD. Or even a little one. The 480 is a fine card, but so was the 380. *Nvidia is actually in a better position with 1060 vs 480, than they were with 960 vs 380.* I have a feeling this will be the case when AMD introduces their high end cards as well. Bottom line being that AMD will continue to have a tough time making profit and gaining market. They need some real winners, and hope that Nvidia stumbles.
> 
> Ya, once the "new card" frenzy is over the market will set reasonable prices. The great thing for us is that there is serious competition and the FPS/$ is a good boost from last year!



Given the price differences, even if all AMD cards are less performing than Nvidia's, based on Polaris alone I think AMD will have high sales due to the value proposition with their lower costs and pricing.


----------



## rruff (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> Given the price differences, even if all AMD cards are less performing than Nvidia's, based on Polaris alone I think AMD will have high sales due to the value proposition with their lower costs and pricing.



Question is, why did AMD lose so much market share and has that reason been reversed? AMD had a slight FPS/$ edge through the whole time their market share dropped. I'm talking actual prices of cards on the market, not MSRP. Where they lost was primarily FPS/W (which often translates into enough actual $ to exceed the price difference) and failing to compete at the flagship level. This generation looks the same so far. I don't know how it will work out in the end, but it doesn't look that great for AMD so far.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

rruff said:


> Question is, why did AMD lose so much market share and has that reason been reversed? AMD had a slight FPS/$ edge through the whole time their market share dropped. I'm talking actual prices of cards on the market, not MSRP. Where they lost was primarily FPS/W (which often translates into enough actual $ to exceed the price difference) and failing to compete at the flagship level. This generation looks the same so far. I don't know how it will work out in the end, but it doesn't look that great for AMD so far.



Much of it has to do with the _Monkey See, Monkey Do_ popularity that Nvidia has enjoyed, as well as the proprietary GameWorks used by many games.
Thermals have been much improved with AMD now, and that used to be a concern to many buyers.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> Much of it has to do with the _Monkey See, Monkey Do_ popularity that Nvidia has enjoyed, as well as the proprietary GameWorks used by many games.
> Thermals have been much improved with AMD now, and that used to be a concern to many buyers.



For me it was Monkey See, Monkey buy the fastest card available at time (980ti with a monstrous 20% above reference).

I don't mind being a monkey.  Just like the GTX 1080 owners who now have the fastest single gpu card on the planet.  Rather be a monkey than a bottom feeder.


----------



## N3M3515 (Jul 20, 2016)

the54thvoid said:


> For me it was Monkey See, Monkey buy the fastest card available at time (980ti with a monstrous 20% above reference).
> 
> I don't mind being a monkey.  Just like the GTX 1080 owners who now have the fastest single gpu card on the planet.  Rather be a monkey than a bottom feeder.



I think he is not reffering to you, but other people who blindly buy products based on "brand popularity" instead of bang for buck (or in your case, absolute best performance).
It's like in my country the majorityof people buy nvidia just because is nvidia and don't know anything else. Even in the nvidia product costs more and performs the same. They see nvidia brand as superior in quality to amd for "reasons". They have never had an amd graphic card and talk bs of amd.
I do not know to this day what is that so called superiority in quality. As a matter of fact i've had equal number of each brand (8 and 8) and had more problems with nvidia...

In the case of this card, it performs better BUT costs more, so people with 250 - 290 will buy 1060 and people with 200 - 230 will buy RX480.
On the power comsumption topic: i consider that important when talking about a card that consumes 321w vs 191w (290x - gtx980), but 160w vs 120w? that is so low i don't even care.

All in all this is a great card, for people with a 250 - 290 budget, that is.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

N3M3515 said:


> I think he is not reffering to you, but other people who blindly buy products based on "brand popularity" instead of bang for buck (or in your case, absolute best performance).
> It's like in my country the majorityof people buy nvidia just because is nvidia and don't know anything else. Even in the nvidia product costs more and performs the same. They see nvidia brand as superior in quality to amd for "reasons". They have never had an amd graphic card and talk bs of amd.



That is exactly what I meant!

@the54thvoid I was not calling you a monkey but I remarking on the way many people today make purchasing decisions based purely on popularity.


----------



## Assimilator (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> Much of it has to do with the _Monkey See, Monkey Do_ popularity that Nvidia has enjoyed, as well as the proprietary GameWorks used by many games.
> Thermals have been much improved with AMD now, and that used to be a concern to many buyers.



I think you'll find that in most countries, it simply boils down to pricing. For example, here in South Africa we can get custom design GTX 1060s for *less* than reference design RX 480s. I have no f**king idea *why* this is, but the fact of the matter is that if I had to pick between those two cards, there's only really 1 logical choice.

It's sad because back around the time of the Radeon 5000 series, the prices here were much closer to what they should be, which is why I went with AMD reference 5850 and then 6950 (unlocked to 6970). But since then the prices have effectively made NVIDIA the only game in town unless you're a die-hard AMD loyalist.

I don't know why AMD cards are so much more expensive here (and from comments in various videocard review threads, in other countries as well) but I feel it's something AMD should investigate. Someone is being greedy, and that is costing AMD sales.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

Assimilator said:


> I think you'll find that in most countries, it simply boils down to pricing. For example, here in South Africa we can get custom design GTX 1060s for *less* than reference design RX 480s. I have no f**king idea *why* this is, but the fact of the matter is that if I had to pick between those two cards, there's only really 1 logical choice.
> 
> It's sad because back around the time of the Radeon 5000 series, the prices here were much closer to what they should be, which is why I went with AMD reference 5850 and then 6950 (unlocked to 6970). But since then the prices have effectively made NVIDIA the only game in town unless you're a die-hard AMD loyalist.
> 
> I don't know why AMD cards are so much more expensive here (and from comments in various videocard review threads, in other countries as well) but I feel it's something AMD should investigate. Someone is being greedy, and that is costing AMD sales.



Since Nvidia has been known in the past to spread_ baksheesh_, I suspect that palms are being greased in these countries.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 20, 2016)

bogda said:


> GTX 1060 for 250$ does not exist on the market either. I bet there is better chance of RX480 4GB for 200$ appearing than GTX1060 for 250$.



$249 stock clock EVGA single fan mini card
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01IPVSGEC/?tag=tec06d-20

$249 superclock (after $10 MIR, check EVGA website)
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01IPVSLTC/?tag=tec06d-20


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> That is exactly what I meant!
> 
> @the54thvoid I was not calling you a monkey but I remarking on the way many people today make purchasing decisions based purely on popularity.



Well, on balance, I am appalled at how expensive the GTX1080 is so despite its performance boost over my card, I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole. Even on principle.
I keep saying it but I really want AMD to come out with cannons firing on Vega but I have a bad feeling the GTX1080ti will be faster, even in DX12. There is after all only so much compute hardware you can throw into a chip before it melts with power draw.


----------



## Assimilator (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> Since Nvidia has been known in the past to spread_ baksheesh_, I suspect that palms are being greased in these countries.



[citation needed]


----------



## Dukenukemx (Jul 20, 2016)

Any reason why your Rise of the Tomb Raider results are different than HardOCPs?  Did you update RotTR with the latest Async Compute update?  The RX 480 fairs better in their test than in yours.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

Dukenukemx said:


> Any reason why your Rise of the Tomb Raider results are different than HardOCPs? Did you update RotTR with the latest Async Compute update? The RX 480 fairs better in their test than in yours.



This is typical, as many reviewers are beholden to Team Green's Greenbacks.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 21, 2016)

Ungari said:


> This is typical, as many reviewers are beholden to Team Green's Greenbacks.



^Source and citations, please?  Otherwise it is mere hyperbolic speculation.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 21, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> ^Source and citations, please?  Otherwise it is mere hyperbolic speculation.



http://semiaccurate.com/2013/10/05/much-nvidia-pay-origin-pc-drop-amd/


----------



## okidna (Jul 21, 2016)

Dukenukemx said:


> Any reason why your Rise of the Tomb Raider results are different than HardOCPs?  Did you update RotTR with the latest Async Compute update?  The RX 480 fairs better in their test than in yours.



High Settings @ HardOCP (with only textures at Very High) VS Very High Settings @ TechPowerUP ("All games are set to their highest quality setting unless indicated otherwise.")
*AND*
if you ever played RotTR you will know that FPS numbers are highly variable from area to area (there's area which much more graphically-heavy than other areas) and since both reviews did not state what kind of benchmark (is it the built-in benchmark? what area used for benchmarking? etc.) used to obtain those numbers, in my opinion, we cannot directly compare the results.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 21, 2016)

okidna said:


> RotTR you will know that FPS numbers are highly variable from area to area (there's area which much more graphically-heavy than other areas)



This is where those with an agenda will pick those areas that best show performance from the card.


----------



## Dukenukemx (Jul 21, 2016)

okidna said:


> High Settings @ HardOCP (with only textures at Very High) VS Very High Settings @ TechPowerUP ("All games are set to their highest quality setting unless indicated otherwise.")
> *AND*
> if you ever played RotTR you will know that FPS numbers are highly variable from area to area (there's area which much more graphically-heavy than other areas) and since both reviews did not state what kind of benchmark (is it the built-in benchmark? what area used for benchmarking? etc.) used to obtain those numbers, in my opinion, we cannot directly compare the results.


I would think that Very High Settings would be in favor of AMD rather Nvidia, since 1440p is more in favor of AMD than 1080p.  But did TechPowerUp update their RotTR with the Async Compute patch?  Doom Vulkan was noticeably missing as well as Hitman DX12.  I know they said Hitman DX12 isn't stable, but not stable for tests or not stable cause reasons?


----------



## okidna (Jul 21, 2016)

Dukenukemx said:


> I would think that Very High Settings would be in favor of AMD rather Nvidia, since 1440p is more in favor of AMD than 1080p.



Again, we're comparing 2 different results from 2 different reviewers without knowing the 2nd most important variable (the first most will be game graphical settings) on this benchmark : what scene/area is used for benchmarking by each reviewer?



> But did TechPowerUp update their RotTR with the Async Compute patch?  Doom Vulkan was noticeably missing as well as Hitman DX12.  I know they said Hitman DX12 isn't stable, but not stable for tests or not stable cause reasons?



You have to ask W1zzard about this. 
And as for Hitman, reading a couple of threads in their Steam discussions, it seems to me that the DX12 performance & stability issues isn't 100% fixed.

http://steamcommunity.com/app/236870/discussions/0/359543951706487184/
http://steamcommunity.com/app/236870/discussions/0/366298942109173435/
http://steamcommunity.com/app/236870/discussions/0/359543951707036422/
http://steamcommunity.com/app/236870/discussions/0/359543951710206192/
http://steamcommunity.com/app/236870/discussions/0/359543951705760375/


----------



## xorbe (Jul 21, 2016)

[H] recently changed their methodology to one that I approve of.  They don't blindly use max settings.  They use a common set of settings, same for both cards, that allow playable frame rates for both, because in the end, that's what people want.  People DON'T want to know that at 4K ultra, that it runs at 15.2 fps, because nobody uses such a setting.  One of my main complaints around here ...


----------



## Ralfies (Jul 21, 2016)

xorbe said:


> [H] recently changed their methodology to one that I approve of.  They don't blindly use max settings.  They use a common set of settings, same for both cards, that allow playable frame rates for both, because in the end, that's what people want.  People DON'T want to know that at 4K ultra, that it runs at 15.2 fps, because nobody uses such a setting.  One of my main complaints around here ...



Using the same settings for all cards makes comparisons easier. W1zzard cannot bench his huge assortment of cards with different settings for each review. I don't think there's one right way to bench, so we're lucky to have many sites with different methodologies. 

This isn't directed at you, xorbe, but it seems lately all W1z gets for his hard work is grief from members. We could all stand to be a little more appreciative. 

Thanks for the great reviews, @W1zzard!


----------



## rruff (Jul 21, 2016)

Ralfies said:


> Thanks for the great reviews, @W1zzard!



I sure as hell appreciate his work! Hope he realizes the bitching is a tiny minority. Can't make everyone happy...


----------



## Assimilator (Jul 21, 2016)

Ungari said:


> http://semiaccurate.com/2013/10/05/much-nvidia-pay-origin-pc-drop-amd/



Ah yes, good ol' Charlie. Even the name of his site is semi-accurate, a more appropriate moniker would be "ConsistentlyWrong". Everything he publishes is anti-Intel and anti-NVIDIA rumours disguised as news articles, with sources who are always unnamed to "protect" them. Recently he claimed GP106 doesn't even exist, two weeks later and the card has hit retail availability and not a peep from him.

The most amazing thing for me is that there are actually suckers who are willing to pay Charlie good money for his particular brand of bulls**t. Me personally, I'd rather do something more useful with my money, like set it on fire.

tl;dr if you use SemiAccurate as a news source, I'm going to point and laugh at you, and I'll be completely justified.



Dukenukemx said:


> I know they said Hitman DX12 isn't stable, but not stable for tests or not stable cause reasons?



Hitman DX12 is, to put it politely, a s**t-show. There was a frontpage article on TPU a while back about how the game would immediately crash when launched in DX12 mode when the second episode was released. And as the poster above me has noted, there are still issues.

A lot of people who think DX12 is a magic bullet for performance and multi-GPU are going to be sorely disappointed. It may be faster, but it's a helluva lot more tricky to get right than DX11 ever was.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 21, 2016)

Assimilator said:


> tl;dr if you use SemiAccurate as a news source, I'm going to point and laugh at you, and I'll be completely justified.



Unfortunately, after Google sanitized Nvidia in the search engine this is all that came up.
There used to be many articles covering this and other scandals involving paid reviews.
The latest story suggesting impropriety was with the leakage of the Nvidia Reviewer's Guide where benchmark guidelines were distributed to sample reviewers that played to Pascal's strengths, and minimized it's weaknesses.


----------



## Assimilator (Jul 21, 2016)

Ungari said:


> The latest story suggesting impropriety was with the leakage of the Nvidia Reviewer's Guide where benchmark guidelines were distributed to sample reviewers that played to Pascal's strengths, and minimized it's weaknesses.



Because of course AMD doesn't do the same.


----------



## okidna (Jul 21, 2016)

Ungari said:


> The latest story suggesting impropriety was with the leakage of the Nvidia Reviewer's Guide where benchmark guidelines were distributed to sample reviewers that played to Pascal's strengths, and minimized it's weaknesses.



Every reviewer's guide are like that, cherry picked benchmark and tailored settings so it shows the product strength, not weaknesses. Other example : 
Fury-X reviewer's guide : http://videocardz.com/56728/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-reviewers-guide

Both AMD and NVIDIA are profit oriented company, as far as I know there is NO profit oriented company who want their weaknesses exploited especially in their own confidential document (in this case, reviewer's guide). You won't find AMD praising NVIDIA's lower power requirement and you won't find NVIDIA praising AMD's DirectX 12 performance. They're trying to show their strength, to promote and sell their own products not to praise competitor products.

At the end of the day, for us end user, reviewer's guide means jackshit. As long as there's reputable and trusted reviewers (or tech savvy/enthusiast users) every lies or marketing stunt in reviewer's guide can be proven wrong, and also if the real world performance does not satisfy the user, the product simply won't sell.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 21, 2016)

okidna said:


> As long as there's reputable and trusted reviewers (or tech savvy/enthusiast users) every lies or marketing stunt in reviewer's guide can be proven wrong,



That is the problem.
The latest reviews from many popular tech sites, including this one; have skewed their tests in favor of Team Green to the point where one must question their integrity.
This video shows how many sites failed to use DX12 and Vulkan in their testing, and used games that favored Nvidia:


----------



## Assimilator (Jul 21, 2016)

Ungari said:


> This video shows how many sites failed to use DX12 and Vulkan in their testing, and used games that favored Nvidia:



Sites aren't using DX12 and Vulkan *because there are literally half a dozen games that use those APIs*. In other words, DX12 and Vulkan are insignificant at this point in time, and probably will continue to be so for the next year or more. (I note that you fail to mention 3DMark TimeSpy, which coincidentally happens to show that Pascal does just fine in DX12/async. I guess NVIDIA must've bribed FutureMark too, it seems like they're bribing every man and their dog.)

And I guess RotTR DX12 and AotS are now "favouring NVIDIA" because they no longer show performance advantages for AMD cards. I love how AMD fans are happy to tout the benefits of DX12 games when they show AMD cards winning, but then immediately switch sides and claim the same games are biased or irrelevant when NVIDIA wins. Cognitive dissonance anyone?


----------



## okidna (Jul 21, 2016)

Ungari said:


> That is the problem.
> The latest reviews from many popular tech sites, including this one; have skewed their tests in favor of Team Green to the point where one must question their integrity.
> This video shows how many sites failed to use DX12 and Vulkan in their testing, and used games that favored Nvidia:



He made a good recap and good point (many sites missing DX12 games and a Vulkan game) on the video, but one thing that hit me when watching the video is when he said that he "don't really understand many of the game choice in the benchmark suit" when the video shows Tom's HW result.
Putting aside Tom's HW review quality I think I know  what game choice that he "don't understand". Yes, the infamous Project CARS, nobody hates and complaint on PCARS more than AMD and its users


----------



## Ungari (Jul 21, 2016)

Assimilator said:


> Sites aren't using DX12 and Vulkan *because there are literally half a dozen games that use those APIs*.



This does not mean that these APIs should be ignored from reviews, and because this is the future of gaming consumers need to know these facts in order to make an informed purchase.
Any reviewer that does not test for DX12 and Vulkan is negligent, and it looks like they are skewing the conclusions toward Pascal.
@okidna 
Project Cars is an objectionable choice because everyone knows that game engine just does not work at all with AMD, and so it makes Nvidia cards look uber.  I wont even get into the allegations of Nvidia paying that developer to hamstring AMD cards.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 21, 2016)

Ungari said:


> The latest reviews from many popular tech sites, including this one; have skewed their tests in favor of Team Green to the point where one must question their integrity



If that's how you feel, then why are you not hanging out at one of the sites that NVIDIA supposedly did NOT pay for?  Why are you still here saying the respected @W1zzard is a paid NVIDIA hack?


----------



## Ungari (Jul 21, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> If that's how you feel, then why are you not hanging out at one of the sites that NVIDIA supposedly did NOT pay for? Why are you still here saying the respected @W1zzard is a paid NVIDIA hack?



I emphatically disagree with the testing used in these reviews, and notice that these reviewers did their bidding and followed Nvidia's Review Testing guidelines.
However, I cannot say for certain that they all took _baksheesh_, only that they knowingly and willfully and used tests that gave a false contrast between Pascal and Polaris.

Why are you not outraged that these cards were not tested using the DX12 and Vulkan APIs, and that the 4GB RX480 was not shown in the Dollar Per Frame analysis where it clearly is the best performance for the cost?


----------



## birdie (Jul 21, 2016)

Ungari said:


> I emphatically disagree with the testing used in these reviews, and notice that these reviewers did their bidding and followed Nvidia's Review Testing guidelines.
> However, I cannot say for certain that they all took _baksheesh_, only that they knowingly and willfully and used tests that gave a false contrast between Pascal and Polaris.
> 
> Why are you not outraged that these cards were not tested using the DX12 and Vulkan APIs, and that the 4GB RX480 was not shown in the Dollar Per Frame analysis where it clearly is the best performance for the cost?



If you dislike the reviews posted here so much why don't you go to other tech sites which did "proper" (read catered to AMD) reviews? W1zzard includes perhaps the widest selection of games on the whole internet, so in fact, his review is the _most unbiased _because it's the most valuable for a gamer out there. While your pro-AMD websites test the games you want the way you want and what's the net result? You delude yourself into believing in AMD's superiority when the sad reality differs from your delusions (unless of course you solely play the games which favour GCN).


----------



## Ungari (Jul 21, 2016)

birdie said:


> If you dislike the reviews posted here so much why don't you go to other tech sites which did "proper" (read catered to AMD) reviews? W1zzard includes perhaps the widest selection of games on the whole internet, so in fact, his review is the _most unbiased _because it's the most valuable for a gamer out there. While your pro-AMD websites test the games you want the way you want and what's the net result? You delude yourself into believing in AMD's superiority when the sad reality differs from your delusions (unless of course you solely play the games which favour GCN).



First of all, I do not go to "pro-AMD websites". I don't even know of any such sites.
I'm not your typical AMD Fanboi, as I have been critical of both Teams for years. However, this year is different. 
This year is where we can see AMD taking a leadership role in the innovation of new technology that will have an impact on gaming in the near future.
From the moment I first started reading this site regularly, I noticed a problem with Wizzard's reviews of the 1080, where he did not use the Factory OC preset in the benchmarks.
This was on an Nvidia product!


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jul 21, 2016)

Ungari said:


> From the moment I first started reading this site regularly, I noticed a problem with Wizzard's reviews of the 1080, where he did not use the Factory OC preset in the benchmarks.



Actually, W1zzard was one of only two reviewers that realized MSI, not NVIDIA duped them, and took appropriate action.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 21, 2016)

rtwjunkie said:


> Actually, W1zzard was one of only two reviewers that realized MSI, not NVIDIA duped them, and took appropriate action.



MSI and ASUS did not dupe anyone.
Reviewers like Wizzard weren't using the OC Factory Preset Mode in their benchmarks, which is what a prospective buyer needs to see to make an informed purchasing decision; and so they shipped the cards using this mode.
There is nothing deceptive here, as this factory OC, and the Quiet presets, are the main features of these cards.
The entire "tested the card out of the box" argument makes no sense for a card that has multiple preset clocks.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 21, 2016)

Some of us don't like it install the bloatware needed to select the other mode, so however the card defaults is what we get.


----------



## Ungari (Jul 21, 2016)

xorbe said:


> Some of us don't like it install the bloatware needed to select the other mode, so however the card defaults is what we get.



Anyone who would buy this card and not either use the factory presets, or not manually OC it, has bought the wrong card.
Might as well get a reference board with the AIB cooler and save the difference in price.

Here are the comparative Vulkan and DX12 API benchmarks that were neglected by too many reviewers:


----------



## rruff (Jul 22, 2016)

Ungari said:


> Here are the comparative Vulkan and DX12 API benchmarks that were neglected by too many reviewers



Stock clocks, 480 wins 6 out of 10. But the 480 is near the limit while the 1060 will typically add ~15% over reference even with the crappy FE. Plus didn't someone post a comment from Doom developers earlier that their Vulcan implementation was specifically designed for AMD, and that they could tweak it for better Nvidia performance in the future?


----------



## Night (Aug 15, 2016)

Top notch GPU from MSI as usual, I wonder how this GPU would compare to Gigabyte's 1060 G1 GAMING. G1 seems to be somewhat cheaper in my region.


----------



## i7Baby (Jan 20, 2017)

I think the prices should be checked again to come up with the performance per dollar info.

And I'm wondering if latest drivers were used, how much the performance figures would change.


----------



## Mussels (Jan 20, 2017)

Night said:


> Top notch GPU from MSI as usual, I wonder how this GPU would compare to Gigabyte's 1060 G1 GAMING. G1 seems to be somewhat cheaper in my region.



all the 10x0 G1 cards have fan rattling issues, not very popular here on TPU


----------

