# NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB



## W1zzard (Jul 19, 2016)

Today, NVIDIA released the GeForce GTX 1060, which is designed to combat AMD's Radeon RX 480. It looks like NVIDIA has won this fight since the GTX 1060 brings GTX 980 performance levels to the table while being much more power efficient than the RX 480 - all at a price point of $249 to $299.

*Show full review*


----------



## PP Mguire (Jul 19, 2016)

Higher performance, more efficient, but not worth the extra cost over the RX480 IMO.


----------



## proxuser (Jul 19, 2016)

Its worth extra cost over rx480 in my eyes. Less power consuption and has more performance. 
But i'll stay with my MSI GTX 980 which is great card too and i can play every game with it..


----------



## Nokiron (Jul 19, 2016)

PP Mguire said:


> Higher performance, more efficient, but not worth the extra cost over the RX480 IMO.


The curious thing about this though, where I live the third-party cards cost just as much as a reference RX 480.


----------



## ZeroFM (Jul 19, 2016)

proxuser said:


> Its worth extra cost over rx480 in my eyes. Less power consuption and has more performance.
> But i'll stay with my MSI GTX 980 which is great card too and i can play every game with it..


look at ref cards oc profile 480 vs 1060 different in battlefield 3 is 26%


----------



## PP Mguire (Jul 19, 2016)

proxuser said:


> Its worth extra cost over rx480 in my eyes. Less power consuption and has more performance.
> But i'll stay with my MSI GTX 980 which is great card too and i can play every game with it..


Few watts and a few FPS for 50-100 in USD. Nah. As somebody in the US if I was in the market for a card in this bracket I'd buy a 4GB 480 and flash it.

Edit: Actually given the cost and used hardware availability in my area I'd take a used 980 instead.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Jul 19, 2016)

PP Mguire said:


> Higher performance, more efficient, but not worth the extra cost over the RX480 IMO.



Yep exactly what I expected.  For 25% more money you trade 2GB of VRAM for only 7% more performance.  (Yes it is $299, not $249.  Sorry babies)


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

Hmm. . . $90-100 more over the 4 gb 480. That's quite a big difference in price. My interest is in how the 4gb 480 performs in comparison as I can't imagine that extra 2gb does much for the card in 1080 or 1440.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Jul 19, 2016)

proxuser said:


> Its worth extra cost over rx480 in my eyes. Less power consuption and has more performance.
> But i'll stay with my MSI GTX 980 which is great card too and i can play every game with it..



Extra power consumption?   What so you can save a quarter every year? 

Frankly the only time power consumption has ever mattered is the 480 vs 5870.  It was not worth DOUBLE the power usage for only 20% more performance.


Otherwise there is no reason to care.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Jul 19, 2016)

silkstone said:


> Hmm. . . $90-100 more over the 4 gb 480. That's quite a big difference in price. My interest is in how the 4gb 480 performs in comparison as I can't imagine that extra 2gb does much for the card in 1080 or 1440.



Another very valid point.  4GB is quite enough... 3GB wouldn't be though.


----------



## NDown (Jul 19, 2016)

Card is bretty gud

I hope one can actually buy this though, for some reason i have a feeling this card will meet the same fate as 1070/1080 in terms of availability

I've been looking for the 1070 in the last 5 days in my local retailer and none of them have it in stock


----------



## Captain_Tom (Jul 19, 2016)

Honestly this reminds me of the 290X vs 780 Ti.  People start hollering about a a measly 7% performance win that will turn into -20% within a year.


----------



## PerfectWave (Jul 19, 2016)

tbh in this review there are no games that make shine RX480 like DOOM with vulkan ecc...


----------



## dyonoctis (Jul 19, 2016)

The appeal of the 1060 really depend of your location. In France the 4gb 480 is nowhere to be found, the cheapest 480 is a ref design at 249 € (from sapphire), asus is selling their custom at 279 €, msi at 269 €.  The cheapest GTX 1060 atm is at 289 € and it's a custom design from evga. Knowing Asus and Msi, their custom RX 480 are going to cost more than some GTX 1060 in France (Asus 1060 strix is 90€ pricier than evga 1060). Nvidia price here are surprisingly agressive , even the press were surprised.


----------



## Lionheart (Jul 19, 2016)

What a fantastic card! Now it all comes down too is actual retail price & depending where you live.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 19, 2016)

Seems like a very good card.  I guess my only complaint is I don't see this cooler as "Premium" compared to its other two counterparts even with the metal design.  But that's just my opinion.

Still though, seems to be a very nice performing card with a solid design.


----------



## Shatun_Bear (Jul 19, 2016)

Shame this review and subsequent score only really applies to you folks in the US. I'm looking at the prices here and weighing them up with performance and this doesn't look so good. The 480 Nitro+, clocked at 1340Mhz and priced at £250 in the UK is hard to beat and there may be more gains from overclocking the 480 than there is the 1060 (1400Mhz 480 v 2000Mhz 1060 will be very interesting).

Given the $300 price for this FE reviewed here, I don't know how this scores a *9.5* and the $240  480 *9.2*. You'd think with a $60 premium they would be at least about the same.


----------



## PerfectWave (Jul 19, 2016)

already out of stock i guess they had only one XD


----------



## ddferrari (Jul 19, 2016)

The Gigabyte GTX 1060 Windforce OC is for sale and in stock right now on Newegg for $249.99

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...6-Index-_-DesktopGraphicsCards-_-14125879-S0B

EDIT: Already sold out, but was still $250. They'll be back...



Shatun_Bear said:


> Shame this review and subsequent score only really applies to you folks in the US. I'm looking at the prices here and weighing them up with performance and this doesn't look so good. The 480 Nitro+, clocked at 1340Mhz and priced at £250 in the UK is hard to beat and there may be more gains from overclocking the 480 than there is the 1060 (1400Mhz 480 v 2000Mhz 1060 will be very interesting).
> 
> Given the $300 price for this FE reviewed here, I don't know how this scores a *9.5* and the $240 *9.2*. You'd think with a $60 premium they would be at least about the same.



Why? It's faster than the RX 480 and way more power efficient. And no one is forcing you to buy the FE edition. Gigabyte already has an OC'd version on Newegg for $250, so now the difference is $10- which will be returned to you in the form of a lower energy bill over a few months, and will continue those savings for the life of the card..



Captain_Tom said:


> Yep exactly what I expected.  For 25% more money you trade 2GB of VRAM for only 7% more performance.  (Yes it is $299, not $249.  Sorry babies)



Sorry "babe"- it's $249.99 and in stock right now on Newegg. EDIT: Already sold out, but it still was had for $250 by the lucky early birds and will be again when back in stock.


----------



## Recus (Jul 19, 2016)

ddferrari said:


> The Gigabyte GTX 1060 Windforce OC is for sale and in stock right now on Newegg for $249.99
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...6-Index-_-DesktopGraphicsCards-_-14125879-S0B



Still RX 480 is $100 cheaper. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202221&cm_re=rx_480-_-14-202-221-_-Product


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

ddferrari said:


> The Gigabyte GTX 1060 Windforce OC is for sale and in stock right now on Newegg for $249.99
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...6-Index-_-DesktopGraphicsCards-_-14125879-S0B



Currently sold out, but definitely worthy of consideration. $50 more for 7% more performance and less power is not all that bad.
I wonder if the 480 would catch up once there are more DX12 games out.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Jul 19, 2016)

ddferrari said:


> Sorry "babe"- it's $249.99 and in stock right now on Newegg. EDIT: Already sold out, but it still was had for $250 by the lucky early birds and will be again when back in stock.



lol no it isn't (Btw "Baby" is the singular version of "Babies").  This is the paper launch of the July 7th paper launch.  It will REALLY launch next week once nvidia is done making the first 10 cards that will sell out immediately (Again because they could only make 10).



silkstone said:


> Currently sold out, but definitely worthy of consideration. $50 more for 7% more performance and less power is not all that bad.
> I wonder if the 480 would catch up once there are more DX12 games out.



Again lol that is a terrible value proposition.  Just like $700 for the 780 Ti (Which everyone with a brain knew would lose 20% performance within half a year due to Nvidia's fruit-aging architectures.

For some reason no 1060 is popping up for me on Newegg.  Not sure how some people found that link...


----------



## ddferrari (Jul 19, 2016)

silkstone said:


> Currently sold out, but definitely worthy of consideration. $50 more for 7% more performance and less power is not all that bad.
> I wonder if the 480 would catch up once there are more DX12 games out.


Well the price difference is open to interpretation: It's $50 more than the 4GB 480; $10 more than the 8GB. I think at 1080p (which is what most people will pair these cards with), I'd forego the 2GB of extra vram and take the flat out performance and power efficiency increase.


----------



## okidna (Jul 19, 2016)

ddferrari said:


> The Gigabyte GTX 1060 Windforce OC is for sale and in stock right now on Newegg for $249.99
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...6-Index-_-DesktopGraphicsCards-_-14125879-S0B
> 
> EDIT: Already sold out, but was still $250. They'll be back...



MSI, ASUS, Zotac, EVGA, PNY custom cards also available for $249.99.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4127965&cm_re=gtx_1060-_-14-127-965-_-Product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4126115&cm_re=gtx_1060-_-14-126-115-_-Product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4487260&cm_re=gtx_1060-_-14-487-260-_-Product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4133631&cm_re=gtx_1060-_-14-133-631-_-Product

All sold out btw.


----------



## MakeDeluxe (Jul 19, 2016)

The cheapest GTX1060 I've found is 300€ and that is with MSI's custom cooler while the cheapest RX 480 is 280€ with the reference cooler. Hope the 3rd party coolers for the 480 are worth the wait!


----------



## ddferrari (Jul 19, 2016)

Captain_Tom said:


> Again lol that is a terrible value proposition.  Just like $700 for the 780 Ti (Which everyone with a brain knew would lose 20% performance within half a year due to Nvidia's fruit-aging architectures.
> 
> For some reason no 1060 is popping up for me on Newegg.  Not sure how some people found that link...


It just sold out. As for the price difference, see my other post. No one has to buy the FE edition.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 19, 2016)

ddferrari said:


> Sorry "babe"- it's $249.99 and in stock right now on Newegg. EDIT: Already sold out, but it still was had for $250 by the lucky early birds and will be again when back in stock.


https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/videocards/nvidia/gtx1060/

you want to run that by me again? 
on the egg I see:
Asus 309$ and 329$
MSI sold out 299$, 279$
Zotac sold out 279$
Gigabyte sold out 289$
EVGA sold out 249$ (good on them)

but there is no 249 ones in stock, or 259, 269, 279, 289, or 299.
Only 300$+ cards are still in stock and likely won't be for long.


----------



## proxuser (Jul 19, 2016)

consider if they are same price in germany. which one would you choose ?
and tbh i use still my 1080p 144hz monitor which has no dp.


----------



## Shatun_Bear (Jul 19, 2016)

ddferrari said:


> Why? It's faster than the RX 480 and way more power efficient. And no one is forcing you to buy the FE edition. Gigabyte already has an OC'd version on Newegg for $250, so now the difference is $10- *which will be returned to you in the form of a lower energy bill over a few months, and will continue those savings for the life of the card*..



Please don't post nonsense. 30W saving whilst gaming is not going to save you anything significant over a 'few months'. Maybe, what, 15 pence at most or 30 cents.

Anyway I can understand a little why 1060 scored higher as it's quieter and cooler but costs $60 more.

And like I said, I'm sure the deals in the US are compelling but in Europe or the UK you won't be able to pick up a *customer cooler + PCB* 1060 for £250.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

yogurt_21 said:


> https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/videocards/nvidia/gtx1060/
> 
> you want to run that by me again?
> on the egg I see:
> ...



If they do eventually come in stock for $250, then that may be a game changer. Still a $50 premium over the 480, but for the extra ram and performance you could justify spending that extra $50. I'm still wondering as to the DX12 performance of these cards, but as there are few DX12 games out right now, it makes no difference if you are purchasing today.


----------



## ddferrari (Jul 19, 2016)

Captain_Tom said:


> lol no it isn't (Btw "Baby" is the singular version of "Babies").  This is the paper launch of the July 7th paper launch.  It will REALLY launch next week once nvidia is done making the first 10 cards that will sell out immediately (Again because they could only make 10).


Being a grammar nazi doesn't make you sound any smarter. And there were probably a few thousand cards sold on Newegg this morning, not "10". Glass-half-empty sorta guy, eh?


----------



## okidna (Jul 19, 2016)

Shatun_Bear said:


> .... but in Europe or the UK *you won't be able to pick up a customer cooler + PCB 1060 for £250.*



Well, guess what? I can : 

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/gain...ddr5-pci-express-graphics-card-gx-20b-gw.html
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/inno...ddr5-pci-express-graphics-card-gx-06b-in.html
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pali...ddr5-pci-express-graphics-card-gx-03k-pl.html
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/msi-...ddr5-pci-express-graphics-card-gx-32s-ms.html
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/kfa2...ddr5-pci-express-graphics-card-gx-095-kf.html
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/zota...ddr5-pci-express-graphics-card-gx-106-zt.html


----------



## Shatun_Bear (Jul 19, 2016)

okidna said:


> MSI, ASUS, Zotac, EVGA, PNY custom cards also *available for $249.99*.
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4127965&cm_re=gtx_1060-_-14-127-965-_-Product
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...4126115&cm_re=gtx_1060-_-14-126-115-_-Product
> ...



Lol funny juxtaposition right there.

So they've not 'available' if they are sold out are they? We'll have to wait and see if they have ample stock of these $250 cards. Seems more like a chimera to me tbh.


----------



## ddferrari (Jul 19, 2016)

Shatun_Bear said:


> Please don't post nonsense. 30W saving whilst gaming is not going to save you anything significant over a 'few months'. Maybe, what, 15 pence at most or 30 cents.
> 
> Anyway I can understand a little why 1060 scored higher as it's quieter and cooler but costs $60 more.
> 
> And like I said, I'm sure the deals in the US are compelling but in Europe or the UK you won't be able to pick up a *customer cooler + PCB* 1060 for £250.


Math isn't your strong point, mate. 30W x 10 hours/week is more than a few pence. That $50 more also gets you 50% more vram ($250 1060 vs $200 4GB 480), so your not really comparing apples to apples here.


----------



## ddferrari (Jul 19, 2016)

Recus said:


> Still RX 480 is $100 cheaper. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202221&cm_re=rx_480-_-14-202-221-_-Product


Really? The 480 is down to $149?



yogurt_21 said:


> https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/videocards/nvidia/gtx1060/
> 
> you want to run that by me again?
> on the egg I see:
> ...


An hour ago, you could have snagged one for $249. The early bird gets the worm.



Captain_Tom said:


> Extra power consumption?   What so you can save a quarter every year?
> 
> Frankly the only time power consumption has ever mattered is the 480 vs 5870.  It was not worth DOUBLE the power usage for only 20% more performance.
> 
> ...


Well by your math, the double power usage would only add up to two quarters. I can afford that, if only it were true.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 19, 2016)

ddferrari said:


> Well by your math, the double power usage would only add up to two quarters. I can afford that, if only it were true.


Dude, stop triple/quadruple posting.  There is an edit button, use it...



yogurt_21 said:


> https://www.nowinstock.net/computers/videocards/nvidia/gtx1060/
> 
> you want to run that by me again?
> on the egg I see:
> ...


Had the same problem and I have been watching.  They either sold out immediately or they have not been added to the stock yet.  Oh well, either way I think it will still turn into a waiting game no matter what.


----------



## ddferrari (Jul 19, 2016)

Captain_Tom said:


> Another very valid point.  4GB is quite enough... 3GB wouldn't be though.


They used to say no one would ever need more than a 50GB hard drive too. And there are a few games already out that use more than 4GB vram at 1440p.


----------



## efikkan (Jul 19, 2016)

Availability in Norway is good (better than RX 480), several versions in stock at MSRP, and costs 1% more than RX 480.


----------



## ddferrari (Jul 19, 2016)

GhostRyder said:


> Dude, stop triple/quadruple posting.  There is an edit button, use it...
> 
> 
> Had the same problem and I have been watching.  They either sold out immediately or they have not been added to the stock yet.  Oh well, either way I think it will still turn into a waiting game no matter what.


You forgot to say "please".


----------



## lanlagger (Jul 19, 2016)

there goes my plan to sell my used gtx 980 for 300 Eur (tough many there are still full of insertions at 350 Eur )


----------



## Frick (Jul 19, 2016)

A quick look tells me this will cost exactly the same as the RX 480 in Sweden. Which sucks. Unless the AIB 480s, and especially the 4GB variants, will be like 500SEK (about €50ish) cheaper than they are now.

EDIT And honestly, where the fudge are the 480s?


----------



## redeye (Jul 19, 2016)

ddferrari said:


> Math isn't your strong point, mate. 30W x 10 hours/week is more than a few pence. That $60 more also gets you 50% more vram ($250 1060 vs $200 4GB 480), so your not really comparing apples to apples here.



"Power" is sold in KW/H.... A thousand watts used in an hour.  30W in an hour would require 33.3 hours to use a KW/H.
so 30W x 10 hours/week is 0.3 KW/H so that means 3.33 weeks to use a kilowatt.  Here in ontario, the peak rate for electricity is 18.8 cents a kw/h. (Or 9.9 at night) even if we increase it to account for VAT (36 cents) it is only Approximately 12 cents a week... Or 25 cents if you have an air-conditioner...

BTW Germany and Denmark have an electricity rate that approaches my estimate... Many european countries are alot less (amost half)


----------



## btarunr (Jul 19, 2016)

@ddferrari Don't double-post (consecutively post). Use the multi-quote button.


----------



## Shatun_Bear (Jul 19, 2016)

ddferrari said:


> Math isn't your strong point, mate. 30W x 10 hours/week is more than a few pence. That $60 more also gets you 50% more vram ($250 1060 vs $200 4GB 480), so your not really comparing apples to apples here.



Don't be dumb, we're talking about a 30W difference whilst _gaming_ or do you game 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? You're not the sharpest tool in the box if you think you're going to be saving money because of the power consumption. That's just lol.


----------



## snakefist (Jul 19, 2016)

Is seems we'll have an interesting summer! 

Firstly, I'm mid-range buyer (1080p, ultra setting not needed).

From my point of view, a lot is still to be revealed, such as:
- 4gb 480x vs 8gb version - the performance difference might be minuscule
- GDDR5X for all cards - and how well version with lower amount of faster memory perform in real life, of course, minding the cost
- 3gb 1060 vs 6gb
- all the combinations of

300$ is generally more than I typically pay for GPU. 6 or 8gb of GDDR5 is probably overkill for non-ultra 1080p. Faster memory might be worth it, then again might be not. 

I'm genuinely looking forward the test with 8 variants of cards (low/high and slow/fast memory), with prices. Of course, 470 might still be interesting - on that matter, why EVERY game is tested on (nearly) maxed settings? Often, difference isn't noticeable but more expensive card can carry 60+ framerate, and cheaper is, say ~50. Does this justify (say) 100$ difference? If the player doesn't select ultra, and enjoys 'high' at which both GPUs are 80-100?


----------



## UnversedXI (Jul 19, 2016)

okidna said:


> Well, guess what? I can :
> 
> https://www.overclockers.co.uk/gain...ddr5-pci-express-graphics-card-gx-20b-gw.html
> https://www.overclockers.co.uk/inno...ddr5-pci-express-graphics-card-gx-06b-in.html
> ...



Mmmmm.. I still feel like I got a better deal by getting a 4GB 480 for £175 on launch day


----------



## ensabrenoir (Jul 19, 2016)

Recus said:


> Still RX 480 is $100 cheaper. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202221&cm_re=rx_480-_-14-202-221-_-Product



.....thats only $10....unless your outside of the US and got those extra shaft taxes or something. 

So this card literally is the new 970.... I expected the 1070 to be the new 970 but it priced much like the old 670( I loved that card paid $480 for it). Really sucks this thing dont have sli but from a business stand point ....I get it overclocked sli -2 of these would prob touch a 1080.  With DX12 games there is a way to still sli through software though.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jul 19, 2016)

Prices here seem 370 euro on average.
Also non is available for purchase atm...but yeah guess this is that potentially artificial scarcity for more profit...


----------



## okidna (Jul 19, 2016)

It doesn't perform that well against RX 480 in DirectX 12 games & Vulkan game : http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/07/19/nvidia_geforce_gtx_1060_founders_edition_review



ZoneDymo said:


> Prices here seem 370 euro on average and that is not just for the founders edition.
> Also non is available for purchase atm



Wait, you can find 1060 FE on a non-NVIDIA Store website? As far as I know the FE won't be available outside NVIDIA official store.


----------



## HD64G (Jul 19, 2016)

PerfectWave said:


> tbh in this review there are no games that make shine RX480 like DOOM with vulkan ecc...


Along with Hitman running in DX11. I hope Hitman and Wrhammer TW are of the games W1z will include in his gamelist for reviews soon. At least RoTR is already tested in DX12.

Great reveiw as always W1z! Although some of the conclusion points aren't close to my opinions but no big deal.

And some notes on the results:

New Crimson driver for 480 upped its competitiveness by a  considerable amount as it came closer to 980 (from -10% @1080P to -6%) and it is just 2% below 390X. Who remembers how many laughed at anyone sayong 480 will be close to 390X/480 performance?

For this duel (480 vs 1080) prices will determine the winner. Let's see how are they going to end in EU, especially for custom ones.


----------



## PerfectWave (Jul 19, 2016)

TBH all game that are benched are very old


----------



## refillable (Jul 19, 2016)

I really hope that the $250 cards are going to sell for $250 in the future (Unlike the 1070). $250 seems a very good match to the RX 480 (Can't say the same for $300). I think of it this way. Anno 2205 (Nvidia), AC: Syndicate (Nvidia), BF4 (Nvidia), COD: Black Ops 3 (AMD), WoW: D (Nvidia) are way too inconsistent and I think these games need replacements. Fallout 4 (Nvidia) and Rise of the Tomb Raider (Nvidia) can go on this list as well but I think results on new cards are pretty consistent. The summary might have been different if those 5 games are replaced, favouring the 480. Anyways, I'm not going to buy the reference RX 480 or 1060, I will wait how things develop and see how prices are going to be like. The 4GB 480 is 7% slower and is $50 less (hopefully echoes with the AIB versions), with more power requirements and lesser gap in higher resolutions this is going to be pretty tough.

DX 12 games should be added as well... They should be nice.


----------



## ironwolf (Jul 19, 2016)

Now my head hurts.  Benchmarks and comparisons/conclusions of this vs. the 480 and 980 are all over the place, based on multiple sites.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

ironwolf said:


> Now my head hurts.  Benchmarks and comparisons/conclusions of this vs. the 480 and 980 are all over the place, based on multiple sites.



I think the general conscientious is that the 1060 performs 5-10% better in DX11 and the 480 performs much better in DX12/Vulkan. Because there are very few games that utilize the new APIs, it means the 1060 is the smarter choice (assuming similar price) if you upgrade quite regularly. Otherwise, the 480 is still in the game.


----------



## zAAm (Jul 19, 2016)

Nokiron said:


> The curious thing about this though, where I live the third-party cards cost just as much as a reference RX 480.



Similar experience. The third-party GTX1060 (~$375) will be priced essentially the same as the third-party RX480 (~$369). At this price the RX480 will be a hard sell, at least here in South Africa.


----------



## rougal (Jul 19, 2016)

If compared directly to RX480, this card is a tad better some games, has a significantly lower power draw even when OC'd and definitely has better OC capability. But at the price range asked and with no SLI (cant buy 1 now, buy 1 later) is a real heavy downside for me. 

On the other hand 1 of My friends is very pissed since just had his 970 for only 2 1/2 month and this card has a better overall perfomance/price.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 19, 2016)

etayorius said:


> Only site in the world with no DX12/Vulkan benchmarks.


Actually, he is testing DX 12 in Rise of the Tomb Raider.

Its going to come down to price, its $250 vs $200 as the base prices for both so that is going to be where people who are looking at that range look.  7% average is what the difference is (Without Vulkan Doom) so its going to come down what people want to pay and if they want that bit extra plus the overclocking which is far better on the GTX 1060 (Unless those aftermarket RX 480's actually do up its potential).

Either way, good card, good performance!


----------



## wolf (Jul 19, 2016)

Love the hardcore fans sticking by the RX480, stick to your guns!!

Personally I'd easily take the extra performance, overclock-ability, build quality, noise and heat over an RX480 in a snap. Espeically given a custom RX480 and custom 1060 will end up within ~$50 of eachother. 

It's a no brainer...

But no, insert meaningless async compute GCN prowess statement here!

At least they have DOOM+Vulkan, hold onto it tight 

I love me some competition, I love to see AMD hitting back and staying relevant, but really, all said and done, they're still ~1 generation behind, at the very minimum when comparing perf/watt.

I can see a lot of people being happy RX480 customers, and good for you, but there will be MANY (more than likely more) happy GTX1060 customers, and good for them too.

GTX980 class perf for under $300? everyone here is a winner.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jul 19, 2016)

okidna said:


> It doesn't perform that well against RX 480 in DirectX 12 games & Vulkan game : http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016/07/19/nvidia_geforce_gtx_1060_founders_edition_review
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, you can find 1060 FE on a non-NVIDIA Store website? As far as I know the FE won't be available outside NVIDIA official store.




You are correct sir, non are the founders edition, I did mostly just a quick glance at the prices and the cards often had no picture, my bad.


----------



## ShurikN (Jul 19, 2016)

GhostRyder said:


> Actually, he is testing DX 12 in Rise of the Tomb Raider.


Rise of the Tomb Raider is an awful attempt at DX12. Its shouldn't be considered that in the slightest.


----------



## acperience7 (Jul 19, 2016)

Wow this card is pretty awesome. Good job NVidia. Can't wait to see what the AIB companies do with this.


----------



## PerfectWave (Jul 19, 2016)

well @wolf after seeing your spec raid 0 with 4 ssd i realize that you understand everything about pc XD. RX480 is much future proof then 1060. almost all old radeon now kick ass with DX12 enabled


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

wolf said:


> Love the hardcore fans sticking by the RX480, stick to your guns!!
> 
> Personally I'd easily take the extra performance, overclock-ability, build quality, noise and heat over an RX480 in a snap. Espeically given a custom RX480 and custom 1060 will end up within ~$50 of eachother.
> 
> ...



At ~7% overall DX11 performance difference @1080, it's far from a no-brainer. I think that these two cards compete pretty well and each has points in their favour. Good times for consumers, I agree.


----------



## steen (Jul 19, 2016)

ShurikN said:


> Rise of the Tomb Raider is an awful attempt at DX12. Its shouldn't be considered that in the slightest.



It's kosher to use ROTR for DX12 cred but Hitman DX12 is buggy cos the reviewer's guide says so...


----------



## rubenclavs (Jul 19, 2016)

I wonder how much Nvidia pays this website every time they launch a GPU.


----------



## zAAm (Jul 19, 2016)

rubenclavs said:


> I wonder how much Nvidia pays this website every time they launch a GPU.



Sigh...


----------



## rubenclavs (Jul 19, 2016)

zAAm said:


> Sigh...



Sigh?

1060 at $299 = +7% performance
480 at $239 = -7% performance

And they are recommending this a great buy? Hahahaha techpowerup is a joke. Read other review sites and compare.

I agree the after market is a great buy but not this FE edition on this review. The MSI one is good.


----------



## Shatun_Bear (Jul 19, 2016)

wolf said:


> Love the hardcore fans sticking by the RX480, stick to your guns!!
> 
> *Personally I'd easily take the extra performance, overclock-ability*, build quality, noise and heat over an RX480 in a snap. Espeically given a custom RX480 and custom 1060 will end up within ~$50 of eachother.
> 
> perf/watt.






rougal said:


> If compared directly to RX480, this card is a tad better some games, has a significantly lower power draw even when OC'd *and definitely has better OC capability*. But at the price range asked and with no SLI (cant buy 1 now, buy 1 later) is a real heavy downside for me.
> 
> On the other hand 1 of My friends is very pissed since just had his 970 for only 2 1/2 month and this card has a better overall perfomance/price.



If you are talking reference, sure.

If we look at custom, we don't know yet how a, say, 1400Mhz boost clock 480 does versus a 2000Mhz boost clock 1060. I'm guessing you can get to 1400 on the 480s as the ASUS and Sapphire Nitro come with 1340 boost clocks.[/QUOTE]


----------



## rubenclavs (Jul 19, 2016)

Shatun_Bear said:


> If you are talking reference, sure.
> 
> If we look at custom, we don't know yet how a, say, 1400Mhz boost clock 480 does versus a 2000Mhz boost clock 1060. I'm guessing you can get to 1400 on the 480s as the ASUS and Sapphire Nitro come with 1340 boost clocks.



Of courese reference, this review is the FE edition. Right?

IF you can do 2kMhz on the 1060 LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## GhostRyder (Jul 19, 2016)

rubenclavs said:


> Sigh?
> 
> 1060 at $299 = +7% performance
> 480 at $239 = -7% performance
> ...


There is something your not taking into account, the GTX 1060 overclocks on its stock design just fine where as the RX 480 does not.  To top if off there is also better consumption and a cooler running card.  Wiz ain't biased, its just a fact that on a stock to stock comparison, the price is made up for by the fact it does more on its stock design than the RX 480 hence the higher score.



ShurikN said:


> Rise of the Tomb Raider is an awful attempt at DX12. Its shouldn't be considered that in the slightest.


Yea, but still its there even if its not a great example.  Was just pointing it out, not that its a great example or anything.


----------



## dlgh7 (Jul 19, 2016)

It appears when the Vulkan API is used the RX480 destroys the GTX 1060. It also appears in games that use DirectX 12 in a proper manner that the RX480 does better as well. For instance in DX11 vs DX12 neither the RX480 or GTX 1060 show any gains except for like 1fps on Rise of the Tomb Raider. 

AMD has seemed to have an edge with DX12 for some reason. Seeing as Microsoft is now using DX12 on the Xbox One, which uses AMD hardware, and that they are pushing a large majority of games from Xbox One to PC it seems DX12 could keep being a big advantage for AMD when it is properly utilized. From testing from certain games we can definitely see that there is a difference in how DX12 is implemented. Rise of the Tomb Raider seems to not utilize it in any meaningful way. 

Going forward it will be interesting to see if Nvidia can come up with better DX12 support. Not sure if it is a hardware support issue or if it is a software issue perhaps someone else can shine light on it.


----------



## rubenclavs (Jul 19, 2016)

@GhostRyder  Yeah reference vs reference, I agree the FE edition is built well but with that price, he should not be so biased.

And also I checked the MSI hahahaha it is at 289!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah newegg and other sites are selling it at 249, but beware, it is only for day 1. Take my words.


----------



## rubenclavs (Jul 19, 2016)

I doubt they have 100s of stocks sold.


----------



## Casecutter (Jul 19, 2016)

Well Nvidia appear to hit some good numbers, and at this point if you can get a nice AIB custom for something like $260-270 it is a sensible outlay, if the goal is 1440p, definitely a good place.  That said if we at some point see RX 480 customs at $250 and less, for 1440p use I feel looking forward it has merits.  For anyone hanging at 1080p paying more than $250 is not of value (unless you are already G-Sync 144Hz), you can do excellent for $200-220 for Custom 4Gb RX 480.  All this boils down to where you intend to maintain resolution, titles, and wallet. I just don't find value in adding 30% if it's only about 1080p gaming.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

GhostRyder said:


> Wiz ain't biased, its just a fact that on a stock to stock comparison, the price is made up for by the fact it does more on its stock design than the RX 480 hence the higher score.



I agree that Wizz ain't biased, but at stock vs. stock (ref vs. ref) there is a $100 difference too.


----------



## eddman (Jul 19, 2016)

Absolutely no point in buying the FE edition. No sane person should. On the other hand, the $249 MSRP for non-FE variants is quite reasonable, given its performance and some other characteristics.

The problem is that even though there are some 1060s listed at $249 MSRP, like the basic EVGA 1060, they will be in a very short supply/high demand situation, which means that for the first month or two (maybe longer) the cards will probably sell at a range of $270-300. I suppose it'd be wiser for budget conscious buyers to wait a while before jumping in.

One point that is still not exactly clear is the DX12 performance situation. It's kind of hard to draw a clear picture from the handful of titles that are out there at the moment. 1060 wins in tomb raider, loses badly in hitman (which is kind of expected given that it's slower in DX11 too), and sort of ties in AoS and TW:WH. Perhaps when battlefield 1 and deus ex arrive we might have a better understanding.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 19, 2016)

rubenclavs said:


> I wonder how much Nvidia pays this website every time they launch a GPU.



You know where the door is.  Please don't let me hit you with it when you leave.

As for availability and pricing in the UK.


----------



## Frick (Jul 19, 2016)

eddman said:


> Absolutely no point in buying the FE edition. No sane person should. On the other hand, the $249 MSRP for non-FE variants is quite reasonable, given its performance and some other characteristics.



FE is definitely the new "reference". I've not seen a single GTX 1080/1070 at the lower price yet, they're all around FE levels.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 19, 2016)

silkstone said:


> I agree that Wizz ain't biased, but at stock vs. stock (ref vs. ref) there is a $100 difference too.


60$ based on the cards he reviewed. He was never sent a 4GB variant and when he bought one, it turned out to be an 8GB card with half the memory disabled. So we're still waiting on actual 4GB cards to launch.


That being said 60$ is like 4 games on steam sale or 1 AAA title at full price. So there is that.

I agree the 4GB 480 offers the better bang for the buck. But a few lucky people got their 1060's at the actual msrp of 249 before they sold out. I doubt any of them regret it now or will ever in the future. Good on the manufacturers for not gouging as much with this round.


----------



## nem.. (Jul 19, 2016)

visual quality worst in nvidia old tricks get back.


----------



## dwade (Jul 19, 2016)

Edit: NM. GTX 1060 gets beaten by stock 480 in DX12 & Vulkan games. DX11 is irrelevant now, and many upcoming games support DX12. No point buying a new GPU based on DX11.

Source: HARDOCP


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

yogurt_21 said:


> 60$ based on the cards he reviewed. He was never sent a 4GB variant and when he bought one, it turned out to be an 8GB card with half the memory disabled. So we're still waiting on actual 4GB cards to launch.
> 
> 
> That being said 60$ is like 4 games on steam sale or 1 AAA title at full price. So there is that.
> ...



$60 still makes a difference to a lot of people and from the reviews I've seen the 8gb and 4gb 480 are essentially the same at resolutions that matter.


----------



## dlgh7 (Jul 19, 2016)

dwade said:


> GTX 1060 goes for $249.99 guys. I bought one from Newegg. This isn't the same 1070/1080 fiasco anymore. RX480 just got its butt kicked.



Not really if you visit some sites that reviewed games using Vulkan or where properly programmed for DX12 it showed the GTX 1060 getting burned. AMD has had an upper hand for DX12 for a while and seeing as Microsoft is pushing DX12 really hard and most of the biggest games coming out in the future are using it, it is going to be interesting to see if DX12 continues to favor AMD. Now some games like Rise of the Tomb Raider use DX12 but don't seem to be fully utilizing it and some of those games do favor Nvidia, but one review I read of this card on DX11 vs DX12 of Rise of the Tomb Raider only showed a 1fps difference increase moving from DX11 to DX12 which really shows how little DX12 is being utilized in Rise of the Tomb Raider.


----------



## Captain_Tom (Jul 19, 2016)

yogurt_21 said:


> 60$ based on the cards he reviewed. He was never sent a 4GB variant and when he bought one, it turned out to be an 8GB card with half the memory disabled. So we're still waiting on actual 4GB cards to launch.
> 
> 
> That being said 60$ is like 4 games on steam sale or 1 AAA title at full price. So there is that.
> ...



Haha look at Doom!   That is the future of Nvidia's products.   BF1 will support DX12 and the 1060 will be as strong or more likely weaker than the cheaper 480!


----------



## xkm1948 (Jul 19, 2016)

So only one DX12 title? No DOOM with  Vulkan? No other DX12 titles?  A whole lot of DX11 titles.  I am skeptical of this review.


----------



## nem.. (Jul 19, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> So only one DX12 title? No DOOM with  Vulkan? No other DX12 titles?  A whole lot of DX11 titles.  I am skeptical of this review.


im not surprized this review are biased just see the 970 always over th rx480 , just be logic this is not the reality.


----------



## terroralpha (Jul 19, 2016)

no doom benches?

i understand that benching older cards all over for openGL vs vulkan is a pain, but you guys didn't have to retest all the cards. just the gtx 10xx series and rx480 would have been fine. plus maybe a gtx 970 and 390.

BF3, crysis 3 and black ops are a total waste of time to bench. no one really plays those anymore and the results fall in line with other dx11 titles anyway


----------



## okidna (Jul 19, 2016)

AMD marketing seems to hit the nail in the head, now everybody wants to play DOOM and Total War : Warhammer!!


----------



## xkm1948 (Jul 19, 2016)

NVidia's official guide for 1060 review. Just leaving it here.

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


----------



## silkstone (Jul 19, 2016)

okidna said:


> AMD marketing seems to hit the nail in the head, now everybody wants to play DOOM and Total War : Warhammer!!



I do want to play TWW, but the fps on those kind of games matters little to me. I'm more interested in how the latest Deus Ex will perform.


----------



## PerfectWave (Jul 19, 2016)

"http://videocardz.com/62138/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-reviewers-guide-leaked" at final page they tested AMD cards with old 16.6.2 drivers.... seriously XD


----------



## Shatun_Bear (Jul 19, 2016)

okidna said:


> AMD marketing seems to hit the nail in the head, now everybody wants to play DOOM and Total War : Warhammer!!



What a load of nonsense. How about its because these are the latest big PC releases, no? I'd rather see benches of these games than ancient stuff like BF3 or Bioshock: Infinite (in another review).


----------



## terroralpha (Jul 19, 2016)

okidna said:


> AMD marketing seems to hit the nail in the head, now everybody wants to play DOOM and Total War : Warhammer!!



it's not just about playing doom you stupid, blind fangirl. this is about buying for the future. DX11 was great while it lasted, but its' days are over. RX480 is almost as fast as a GTX 1070 in doom running on vulkan but has better texture quality. THAT'S the problem. and since both major consoles run AMD hardware and will be running new games on vulkan, and since 99% of PC releases are just supped up console ports, you can bet your ass that any game that nvidia doesn't pay for will run on vulkan on PC as well

personally, i have no interest in buying a 1060, or even a 1070 or 1080, since i have a super fast 980 ti. but i will be upgrading in the future to something like a 1080 ti or the successor of the fury x. if nvidia doesn't stop with the suckage, i will be switching teams.


----------



## $ReaPeR$ (Jul 19, 2016)

the only one worth buying here in Greece is the asus turbo one which will be available August 16th, the cheapest 480 is available July 21. dont know about the quality of the asus turbo edition though..


----------



## okidna (Jul 19, 2016)

Shatun_Bear said:


> What a load of nonsense. How about its because these are the latest big PC releases, no? I'd rather see benches of these games than ancient stuff like BF3 or Bioshock: Infinite (in another review).



It's not a nonsense at all. Let me explain this to you because I wrote that mainly from my own experience...

I don't have those 2 specific titles because it's expensive and because I don't even like most of FPS game (especially a "jumpy"/scary/in-your-face kind of FPS game ) or Total War game BUT since reading on how DX12 and Vulkan improve these 2 games I'm super curious to test both games and comparing my 2 different cards in those game using many APIs (DX12, DX11, and Vulkan on Doom) to the point that I went to my friend house to test my cards because he has DOOM on his Steam account (no time to wait because of crappy bandwidth to download the demo if you ask "why don't you just download the demo?"). 

That's why  wrote that, AMD marketing and development push on DirectX 12/Mantle/Vulkan is beginning to bear a fruit and that's good for them and for us.



terroralpha said:


> it's not just about playing doom you stupid, blind fangirl..



Thank you, but I'm sure I'm a man and not blind (only myopia).
And yes I think I'm not that bright because it takes me more than 3 years (still ongoing ) to finish my doctorate dissertation.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 19, 2016)

Frick said:


> FE is definitely the new "reference". I've not seen a single GTX 1080/1070 at the lower price yet, they're all around FE levels.


Surprisingly eh.
Go Nvidias marketing and pr team ,they truly are the men ,they could sell Ryan Reynolds as the next Spider-Man I swear.


----------



## Frick (Jul 19, 2016)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Surprisingly eh.
> Go Nvidias marketing and pr team ,they truly are the men ,they could sell Ryan Reynolds as the next Spider-Man I swear.



The only problem there is age. He tackled Deadpool really well.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 19, 2016)

Frick said:


> The only problem there is age. He tackled Deadpool really well.


Wrong guy imho totally wrong ,deadpool is the only job he Didnt f up.


----------



## Tsukiyomi91 (Jul 19, 2016)

annnnnddd we have disgruntled folks (forumers mind u) who have not owned the 1060 FE & bashes it like AMD has no 2morrow... for $50 or so more over the RX480 8GB model. Eating less than 130W on max took me by surprise, considering this is a mid-range Pascal chip, a GP106. AMD has gotten it's ass whooped again by Nvidia. BTW, FE variants of the 1060 over here is selling at around MYR1500 with tax, which is quite acceptable & it's going to be a recommended card for rigs around MYR4k & above without skimping out on the good stuff. Non-FE version is sitting exactly where the GTX760 was at few years ago: sub-$250 range.


----------



## ensabrenoir (Jul 19, 2016)

.....yes direct x 12 will soon be all the thing but for now...how many x12 games do we have that people want?    All this .....this is the future thing reminds me of something else Amd did for the "future" that was obsolete by the time the actual "future" got here.(there may still be a patch!!!!)   By the time X 12 titles are common both companies will have newer architectures out. Both companies take different paths to the same end.....(gsync / freesync)  I  remember the same argument for Amd's advantage over Nvdia in gpu mining too.  We all see the relevance of that now.   When its time (something new/different always popping up) Nvdia will have an answer(maybe a patch ).  ....Oh yeah a rant won't be a rant without a car analogy....hybrid and electric cars are and will be the future....but as for now.......


----------



## CounterSpell (Jul 19, 2016)

ensabrenoir said:


> View attachment 77066
> 
> .....yes direct x 12 will soon be all the thing but for now...how many x12 games do we have that people want?    All this .....this is the future thing reminds me of something else Amd did for the "future" that was obsolete by the time the actual "future" got here.(there may still be a patch!!!!)   By the time X 12 titles are common both companies will have newer architectures out. Both companies take different paths to the same end.....(gsync / freesync)  I  remember the same argument for Amd's advantage over Nvdia in gpu mining too.  We all see the relevance of that now.   When its time (something new/different always popping up) Nvdia will have an answer(maybe a patch ).  ....Oh yeah a rant won't be a rant without a car analogy....hybrid and electric cars are and will be the future....but as for now.......



finally someone reasonable here


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 19, 2016)

Man that's a lot of performance out of such a little chip, and it sips power too!

Impressive stuff!


----------



## dlgh7 (Jul 19, 2016)

ensabrenoir said:


> View attachment 77066
> 
> .....yes direct x 12 will soon be all the thing but for now...how many x12 games do we have that people want?    All this .....this is the future thing reminds me of something else Amd did for the "future" that was obsolete by the time the actual "future" got here.(there may still be a patch!!!!)   By the time X 12 titles are common both companies will have newer architectures out. Both companies take different paths to the same end.....(gsync / freesync)  I  remember the same argument for Amd's advantage over Nvdia in gpu mining too.  We all see the relevance of that now.   When its time (something new/different always popping up) Nvdia will have an answer(maybe a patch ).  ....Oh yeah a rant won't be a rant without a car analogy....hybrid and electric cars are and will be the future....but as for now.......



even though Nvidia was better than AMD the previous generation I believe they still showed better in DX12. It appears to be a hardware issue for DX12. 

To me when purchasing something it is not just important what it can do now but what it can do in the future. Windows is clearly pushing away from all previous versions of DX, which makes sense because it enables more for less power if utilized correctly. So for $200-$300 which card will last longer? It seems like to me an 8GB RX480 could last longer or be useful even in an upgrade situation for a secondary gaming pc than a GTX 1060 might. Not only that but you can't SLI a 1060 but can crossfire a RX480. So if budget allowed you could upgrade later to a second RX480. 

To me I just don't see the 1060 being as useful long term. I say that as an Nvidia user who's primary GPU at the moment is an Asus Strix GTX 970.


----------



## PerfectWave (Jul 19, 2016)

as for now tesla is an electric car that goes as fast as 260 km/h XD


----------



## xkm1948 (Jul 19, 2016)

Just noticed another thing:

All AMD cards except RX480 used Crimson 16.4.2 Beta

Isn't that a bit outdated driver for AMD? Nvidia cards got three separate driver treatments: one for 1070/1080, one for 1060 and one for everything else.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 19, 2016)

ensabrenoir said:


> View attachment 77066
> 
> .....yes direct x 12 will soon be all the thing but for now...how many x12 games do we have that people want?    All this .....this is the future thing reminds me of something else Amd did for the "future" that was obsolete by the time the actual "future" got here.(there may still be a patch!!!!)   By the time X 12 titles are common both companies will have newer architectures out. Both companies take different paths to the same end.....(gsync / freesync)  I  remember the same argument for Amd's advantage over Nvdia in gpu mining too.  We all see the relevance of that now.   When its time (something new/different always popping up) Nvdia will have an answer(maybe a patch ).  ....Oh yeah a rant won't be a rant without a car analogy....hybrid and electric cars are and will be the future....but as for now.......


So do you think this card will also work with the latest tv trend Vesa varysync ,and might you have some clue why nvidia fitted the latest high end video output standards without actually bothering to certify them at that level , or maybe your up to speed with their lossy compression tech.
You do like tesselation I bet ,something you might not had heard of if Amd hadn't rocked that boat years in advance.
This is a good card for a good majority of gamers no doubt but nvidia are having eyes out v build cost yet again , more for less yet again , and yet again they are clocking the snot out of it.
Personally I wish POWER Vrwould have a go at a big Gpu with raytracing ,it would likely be shit or average on crisis but some New shit might get made by Devs instead of the yearly rubbish we get , just my opinion obv.
And Amd got 2xRx480 sale here JUST because of their compute efficiency for a retail card and I'm not alone.


----------



## jabbadap (Jul 19, 2016)

Frick said:


> FE is definitely the new "reference". I've not seen a single GTX 1080/1070 at the lower price yet, they're all around FE levels.



Well EVGA shop has most of gtx1080 lower than FE, and they go on/out off stock quite instant. 

1070 $ "379 mrsp" is crap, I think atleast in Europe AIB:s are trying to sell gtx980tis at the same time...

1060 is well at least now close to nvidia's mrsp from many manufacturers(279€ european mrsp), so hope is $249 is really that(FEs are only sold from nvidia webshop anyway). Though can't really help thinking that who will buy these cards, gtx970 was ~300€ from the beginning and this or RX 480 won't be much cheaper or higher performance. If it would replaced gtx 960 or R9-380@199€ then it would have been instant buy, but now we got ~gtx970 performance with ~gtx970 price.


----------



## HD64G (Jul 19, 2016)

As for the hype prior to 1060 launch and reviews: Where is the +15% on the 480 some leaks from nVidia showed?


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 19, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> Just noticed another thing:
> 
> All AMD cards except RX480 used Crimson 16.4.2 Beta
> 
> Isn't that a bit outdated driver for AMD? Nvidia cards got three separate driver treatments: one for 1070/1080, one for 1060 and one for everything else.



Why don't you PM @W1zzard and ask him privately what his secret agenda is?  Instead of laying out the standard conspiracy crap that TPU is a shadowy Nvidia biased organisation.  You do know as well as that AMD also have review guides for reviewers to follow?  As for the guide - not that much amiss and also - doesn't tally up with TPU game selection - TPU has some off, some on.

Drivers?  I'm on 368.81 - so TPU has used older Nvidia drivers too... OMFG.  What is your point?


----------



## jabbadap (Jul 19, 2016)

xkm1948 said:


> Just noticed another thing:
> 
> All AMD cards except RX480 used Crimson 16.4.2 Beta
> 
> Isn't that a bit outdated driver for AMD? Nvidia cards got three separate driver treatments: one for 1070/1080, one for 1060 and one for everything else.



Same question on every tpus graphics card review, when new card comes out ...

W1zzard rebench all the games with all the reference cards he posses(well not all but recent anyway), you can't except he doing it for every freaking graphics card review. And new games will/might be added and some removed when he will rebench all the cards again next time.


----------



## ensabrenoir (Jul 19, 2016)

dlgh7 said:


> even though Nvidia was better than AMD the previous generation I believe they still showed better in DX12. It appears to be a hardware issue for DX12.
> 
> To me when purchasing something it is not just important what it can do now but what it can do in the future. Windows is clearly pushing away from all previous versions of DX, which makes sense because it enables more for less power if utilized correctly. So for $200-$300 which card will last longer? It seems like to me an 8GB RX480 could last longer or be useful even in an upgrade situation for a secondary gaming pc than a GTX 1060 might. Not only that but you can't SLI a 1060 but can crossfire a RX480. So if budget allowed you could upgrade later to a second RX480.
> 
> To me I just don't see the 1060 being as useful long term. I say that as an Nvidia user who's primary GPU at the moment is an Asus Strix GTX 970.



 Nvdia is truely an evil genius. I wonder how much of this card was a long term plan and how much was a cut down  response to Amd's price point.  Either way ...I still believe their making a sizable profit.  With dev support and d.X12 you can still sli(through the pcie lanes) these cards in  MDA mode.  Which....if nvdia did'nt restrict it would put these card in  or potentially above 1080's territory. There is a reason why nvdia aint  directly following Amd path  in asynchronous computing.  Probably as usual they got their own thing cooking.  In America, on new egg( in my weekly email)  you see these cards at $249.99 and up...of course all sold out by now.  Gpu longevity?  We need to do a poll...how long do you keep a gpu..... I typically sell and upgrade/ side grade/ trade/im bored today so im all over the place.


----------



## CounterSpell (Jul 19, 2016)

ensabrenoir said:


> I wonder how much of this card was a long term plan and how much was a cut down response to Amd's price point. Either way ...I still believe their making a sizable profit.


wel... thats capitalism...


----------



## W1zzard (Jul 19, 2016)

jabbadap said:


> W1zzard rebench all the games with all the reference cards he posses(well not all but recent anyway), you can't except he doing it for every freaking graphics card review. And new games will/might be added and some removed when he will rebench all the cards again next time.


that. I would love to do a full rebench but there is so many cards to review right now I can't find two weeks to stop reviewing


----------



## dlgh7 (Jul 19, 2016)

ensabrenoir said:


> Nvdia is truely an evil genius. I wonder how much of this card was a long term plan and how much was a cut down  response to Amd's price point.  Either way ...I still believe their making a sizable profit.  With dev support and d.X12 you can still sli(through the pcie lanes) these cards in  MDA mode.  Which....if nvdia did'nt restrict it would put these card in  or potentially above 1080's territory. There is a reason why nvdia aint  directly following Amd path  in asynchronous computing.  Probably as usual they got their own thing cooking.  In America, on new egg( in my weekly email)  you see these cards at $249.99 and up...of course all sold out by now.  Gpu longevity?  We need to do a poll...how long do you keep a gpu..... I typically sell and upgrade/ side grade/ trade/im bored today so im all over the place.



I used to upgrade my pc more often. I have found though that as I have gotten older and don't have as much time to game that it doesn't pay to upgrade unless I really need to. Thinking I will probably skip this generation of GPU's at this point and jump with the next release mainly because of the VRAM on the GTX 970 only being 4GB and I want to upgrade to a 34" 3440x1440 ultrawide and really am looking to upgrade once we can get a more consistent ultrawide over 60hz that is a hair bit cheaper than what we have available at the moment. Plus most of them still have a bit to much corner light bleeding for my liking as I have a smaller model and have seen a bunch of the other ones in person. Most of my games I play don't really need that powerful of a GPU but it is definitely nice to have the horsepower when needed. Plus I am kind of curious to see what ZEN can do for AMD and see if it would be worth considering switching platforms. I am skeptical but I like competition and like seeing what others are doing. AMD has been pretty stagnant so eager to see them more competitive in CPU and GPU arenas as not only does it give us more choices but can drive down prices or spark innovation.


----------



## Thuban (Jul 19, 2016)

Wizz,

If you compare the reference 1060/1070/1080 versus custom boards. They seem to come with different desktop (i.e. idle) clocks.

e.g.

Ref 1060
*Desktop* 139 MHz 203 MHz 0.625 V

MSI 1060
*Desktop* 253 MHz 101 MHz 0.625 V

Same with 1070/1080.

e.g.

Ref 1080
*Desktop* 139 MHz 101 MHz 0.625 V

Asus 1080
*Desktop* 329 MHz 101 MHz 0.625 V

Maxwell wasn't like that.

Ref 980 ti
*Desktop* 135 MHz 203 MHz 0.86 V

MSI 980 ti
*Desktop* 135 MHz 203 MHz 0.875 V

Exactly the same ^. What's up with Pascal, in your opinion?


----------



## efikkan (Jul 19, 2016)

The BS about the "Founders edition" being the price comparison needs to end. Everyone can see there are cards available at MSRP as promised.


----------



## QuintoBlanco (Jul 19, 2016)

Captain_Tom said:


> Extra power consumption?   What so you can save a quarter every year?
> 
> Frankly the only time power consumption has ever mattered is the 480 vs 5870.  It was not worth DOUBLE the power usage for only 20% more performance.
> 
> ...



Less power means the potential for less heat and less noise. And more choice when it comes to choosing a PSU.

Not important for everybody, but important to me. A small GTX 1060 is going to be great in my secondary gaming system, which is going to be small and low noise. And quite a few people have put GTX 750 and 950 in systems with a modest PSU, unless the PSU is really under powered, the GTX 1060 is going to be a major upgrade.


----------



## SpAwNtoHell (Jul 19, 2016)

Captain_Tom said:


> Another very valid point.  4GB is quite enough... 3GB wouldn't be though.


 pretty true but... with a mention not in every game are a few out that go over the 6gb vram usage at 1080p in my case was rise of tomb rider... i gived this example as i tested myself.... so seems vram gets used more lately...


----------



## sergionography (Jul 19, 2016)

Solid card but very unfair comparison in my opinion, i hate how its being compared to the rx480 when its price bracket is a whole different class on its own. 200-229usd rx480 vs 249-299usd 1060?


----------



## ShurikN (Jul 19, 2016)

sergionography said:


> Solid card but very unfair comparison in my opinion, i hate how its being compared to the rx480 when its price bracket is a whole different class on its own. 200-229usd rx480 vs 249-299usd 1060?


Good luck finding those 480s for $200


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jul 19, 2016)

sergionography said:


> Solid card but very unfair comparison in my opinion, i hate how its being compared to the rx480 when its price bracket is a whole different class on its own. 200-229usd rx480 vs 249-299usd 1060?


there's like 4 current gen cards that have been released. They are comparing the most relevant. AMD decided to keep the Fury X as their highend and focus on efficiency. That leaves quite a bit of room between comparisons

On the mid end you have the 480 vs the 1060 which while different in pricing are only 7% apart in performance then you hit the 1070 and 1080 which are ~20-40% faster than the Fury X. This is as fair as we can be for current gen comparisons. 

at any rate price/perf aren't AMD's issue with the 480. Its the power/heat arena that the 1060 is really beating it at.


----------



## sanadanosa (Jul 20, 2016)

The custom cards price is actually higher than the founder edition here in Indonesia.
I think the founder edition marketing scheme is a big failure.


----------



## xorbe (Jul 20, 2016)

sanadanosa said:


> The custom card prices actually higher than the founder edition here in Indonesia.
> I think the founder edition marketing scheme is a big failure.



Pretty sure nv sees that as a huge success lol ...


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jul 20, 2016)

xorbe said:


> Pretty sure nv sees that as a huge success lol ...



The 1060 is no doubt cheaper to manufacturer too, double whammy of pain right there.


----------



## ViperXTR (Jul 20, 2016)

sergionography said:


> Solid card but very unfair comparison in my opinion, i hate how its being compared to the rx480 when its price bracket is a whole different class on its own. 200-229usd rx480 vs 249-299usd 1060?


Sadly, i cannot find a 200USD RX 480 here, every RX 480 here in our region now is close and beyond 300 USD, and ironically the newly landed GTX 1060 by Zotac (AMP!) costs just the same as the RX 480 (reference cooler) this invalidates the price/perf ratio in my region, now im afraid to imagine what the custom RX 480s here would cost, specially ASUS and MSI brands since they are usually the most expensive here


----------



## wolf (Jul 20, 2016)

dlgh7 said:


> snip...  when the Vulkan API is used .... DirectX 12 in a proper manner .





ShurikN said:


> Rise of the Tomb Raider is an awful attempt at DX12. Its shouldn't be considered that in the slightest.



So it's all about new API's yet we pick and choose which we like to argue for an architecture? mmm..



PerfectWave said:


> well @wolf after seeing your spec raid 0 with 4 ssd i realize that you understand everything about pc XD. RX480 is much future proof then 1060. almost all old radeon now kick ass with DX12 enabled



Your first statement is... well... at least you tried? clutching at straws tho.

As for buying a mid-range card today and using the "future proof" argument... The top end cards are the ones that will last the longest, not the mid range ones.

By the time the majority of games tested in reviews use these 'new gen" API's the two cards in question here will be obsoleted by at least one generation. This is if we're talking about high-to-maximum in game settings, 1080-1440p. All we have to compare is the here and now, all these "but it will shine in the future" comments are a pretty average argument for them. A card might last you 3 years of good gameplay, at a stretch 5 if you're willing to sacrifice a lot of eye candy. By then the price/performance landscape will be completely different all over again.

Generally if you game a hec of a lot, the best sort of value (I find) is in a high end card once every ~2 gens, or a upper/midrange card every generation, to enjoy the games in the here and now.

i'd love to revisit this thread in 2-3 years and see how well an RX480 / GTX1060 performs in the games that are the latest and greatest, my guess is nobody will care.


----------



## ViperXTR (Jul 20, 2016)

Are there no new drivers released? 1060 using the release drivers of 1080 and 1070? I would have expected some new ones like they did before for support of new hardware but it seems that the initial pascal drivers already contain it.


----------



## Camm (Jul 20, 2016)

This card might possibly be the worst purchase you could do at the moment. No doubt it has the performance advantage over the RX480.... in DX11. In every DX12 & Vulkan title I've seen benchmarked, the 1060 is about 20% slower than the 480. Considering the 480 runs pretty well much every DX11 title comfortably at 1080p, and pretty well much every AAA game being released this year will be DX12\Vulkan, I see no reason why you would buy a 1060 over a 480. There's a reason why Nvidia reviewer kits only had DX11 and usually Gameworks titles in it, as quite simply, the 480 is going to age a lot better, where as people on 1060's would be looking for upgrades by the start of next year.


----------



## Nima (Jul 20, 2016)

Camm said:


> This card might possibly be the worst purchase you could do at the moment. No doubt it has the performance advantage over the RX480.... in DX11. In every DX12 & Vulkan title I've seen benchmarked, the 1060 is about 20% slower than the 480. Considering the 480 runs pretty well much every DX11 title comfortably at 1080p, and pretty well much every AAA game being released this year will be DX12\Vulkan, I see no reason why you would buy a 1060 over a 480. There's a reason why Nvidia reviewer kits only had DX11 and usually Gameworks titles in it, as quite simply, the 480 is going to age a lot better, where as people on 1060's would be looking for upgrades by the start of next year.



In reviews I've seen GTX 1060 is on par with RX 480 in Ashes of singularity and TWW (both AMD sponsored), in Rise of the tomb raider(with latest patch) 20% faster, in Hitman 10% slower and in doom(Vulkan) 20% slower. So it seems like they are on par in new APIs but GTX 1060 is cooler, quieter and more efficient, plus many custom 1060s are selling for just 250$(just 10$ more than reference 480).


----------



## Captain Fantastic (Jul 20, 2016)

Well, I ordered a non-reference card from Amazon for $279.00 today.  Which is cheaper than I can find any RX 480s in stock for.

Nice review, btw.

/edit - the kudos for the review.


----------



## ensabrenoir (Jul 20, 2016)

Camm said:


> the 480 is going to age a lot better, where as people on 1060's would be looking for upgrades by the start of next year.



....the only business that wants to only sell you something once is the funeral homes.


----------



## Tsukiyomi91 (Jul 20, 2016)

yada yada yada... how many DX12/Vulkan bounded games are out there? I can even count them with my eyes closed FFS... over here in Malaysia, aftermarket versions of the RX480 4GB made under ASUS & MSI are selling way more expensive than Zotac's newly released GTX1060 AMP Edition. for the same price as a 8GB reference RX480, the GTX1060 non-FE is a more worthy investment in the long run IMO. Won't need to worry about it turning into a box of heated element.


----------



## dlgh7 (Jul 20, 2016)

wolf said:


> So it's all about new API's yet we pick and choose which we like to argue for an architecture? mmm..
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No because Rise of Tomb Raider only gains 1FPS on the 1060 and the RX480 when using DX12 over DX11. If you know how DX12 works you know that shouldn't be the case. So it is a case of DX12 not being utilized.

Nvidia has struggled with DX12 implementation. Not sure why but it kind of irks me as an Nvidia user. But the whole Vram issue with the GTX 970 kind of irked me as well. Nvidia does get away with a bunch of crap because they are sitting in the number one spot and pretty much dominate. And just for clarity my main tablet is an Nvidia Shield tablet, my set top box is an Nvidia Shield Box, and my gpu is a GTX 970. So I am clearly pretty invested into Nvidia.

There is no reason a mid range GPU shouldn't be able to stay relevant, especially considering mid range has jumped to the $250-$400 range. I think my last AMD (ATI) card was an X800 XL that I paid like $179 for from zipzoomfly back in the day right after release (I don't remember how but that was a killer deal on the card at the time think it might have been in a brown box maybe), I think it was a Powercolor and that thing rocked in my main system for a long time and really the only reason it had to be changed out was because of some of the API's being used in games like Bioshock. But back then was able to play it thanks to some modders work arounds because the card was powerful enough to play the game just didn't support the API's at an architecture level. I have read that Nvidia supports most of all the DX12 instructions but actually not all of them. Though I never read if that changed or not with the release of the 1080, 1070, or 1060.

Most of the time I buy midrange because it is the best bang for buck. High end usually doesn't pay off because the dollar per performance isn't justified. They are always the best cards but you pay way more per dollar for each fps.

DX12 seems to be here to stay. Granted with even ultrawides we have already seen in at CES higher res screens that are like 5K I believe for ultrawide and the media companies don't plan on doing most of their broadcast updates until 8K is released as they don't want to upgrade so close after upgrading to 1080P. Granted if you play at 1080 or even 1440 you have probably been pretty content with the graphics card you had previously if you invested in a decent one. The only reason I am considering upgrading is because I want to move to higher res ultrawide and also like something with at least 8GB of Vram. Biggest mistake Nvidia had with the GTX 970 was the 4GB that didn't even run at full speed for the full 4GB.


----------



## Tsukiyomi91 (Jul 20, 2016)

@dlgh7 the GTX970, by most for me is a 50/50 thing, but it still performs decently on most games at 1080p.


----------



## chinmi (Jul 20, 2016)

PP Mguire said:


> Higher performance, more efficient, but not worth the extra cost over the RX480 IMO.


uses 50w less power while gaming
5 degree cooler while gaming
gpu is 6% more overclockable 
memory is 5% more overclockable
better driver support
phsyx support

and it's nvidia...

so yeah... it worth every penny to get this card then the rx480 !


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 20, 2016)

dlgh7 said:


> No because Rise of Tomb Raider only gains 1FPS on the 1060 and the RX480 when using DX12 over DX11. If you know how DX12 works you know that shouldn't be the case. So it is a case of DX12 not being utilized.
> 
> Nvidia has struggled with DX12 implementation. Not sure why but it kind of irks me as an Nvidia user. But the whole Vram issue with the GTX 970 kind of irked me as well. Nvidia does get away with a bunch of crap because they are sitting in the number one spot and pretty much dominate. And just for clarity my main tablet is an Nvidia Shield tablet, my set top box is an Nvidia Shield Box, and my gpu is a GTX 970. So I am clearly pretty invested into Nvidia.
> 
> ...



You're in that crowd that doesn't understand DX12 and business. I don't mean that offensively, I mean it as a person who sees the difference between business and design.
You can't say that RotTR doesn't use DX12 properly, anymore than you can Hitman does. DX12 uses various methods to run and it uses those methods depending on the development. I posted a link in another thread, way back where the Hitman devs allowed the AMD guys to code Async to the gunnels, to get the most out of AMD hardware. They knew doing that (with AMD'S proprietary ACE's) would hamper Nvidia.
Likewise, Nvidia had more involvement with RotTR.
The curve ball is AotS, where the 1060 compares favourably to the 480.

Nvidia dropped compute hardware after Fermi to focus on efficiency. It's ironic that way back then, the heavy compute prowess was often questioned by reviewers as not being necessary for gaming. It was as if Nvidia had brought HPC to the desktop.
AMD plugged on with compute (that's why it has way more hardware and higher power draw than Nvidia equivalent) and moved to implement Mantle to utilise it's GCN.
AMD played the very long game and it's finally coming to bear fruit but the first trees are only just appearing. DX11 is still around. In fact go back a year and plenty of folks of a certain persuasion insisted DX12 would be the major force and in most games by now.
Nvidia competes competently without the compute hardware by using refined speed, rather than hardware grunt. Moreover, that hardware still hinders DX11 utilisation so forward looking isn't so great when DX12 isn't the standard model.

Finally, revisiting devs. It doesn't matter who has what benefits, when AMD or Nvidia get involved in a game, rest assured it won't generally suit the other side.


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jul 20, 2016)

chinmi said:


> uses 50w less power while gaming
> 5 degree cooler while gaming
> gpu is 6% more overclockable
> memory is 5% more overclockable
> ...



Better driver support hahaha oh where have you been lately?
Physx support... oh man... yeah thats totally a selling point...some floating orbs in a handful of games, rousing endorsement that fo sho...
Its Nvidia...yeah I would sooner say thats a negative then anything else.
5 degrees cooler..yeah..k.

On the rest sure, although overclockablility is such a weird thing to praise a card for, I dont even know why we have it to begin with.
Why not push a card to its very limits out of the box? why do we (the consumer) have to do that? if a card in general is very overclockable.. does that not mean the factory specs are just too low?


----------



## PP Mguire (Jul 20, 2016)

PhysX plugin for 3DS and Maya are bomb though.


----------



## ShurikN (Jul 20, 2016)

wolf said:


> So it's all about new API's yet we pick and choose which we like to argue for an architecture? mmm..


Both 1060 and RX480 gain almost zero benefits going from DX11 to 12. Mmm...

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2016...x_1060_founders_edition_review/6#.V49eD5RuI0O


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

ZoneDymo said:


> On the rest sure, although overclockablility is such a weird thing to praise a card for, I dont even know why we have it to begin with.
> Why not push a card to its very limits out of the box? why do we (the consumer) have to do that? if a card in general is very overclockable.. does that not mean the factory specs are just too low?



Factory overclocks often leave a lot on the table, but not always as some chips cannot get much higher without instability.
Part of that is warranty long life concerns, but the other part is to allow enthusiasts the experience of discovering how far their cards can go.


----------



## Tsukiyomi91 (Jul 20, 2016)

long story short IMO, Nvidia is good on the software front with not so stellar hardware while AMD wins outright in terms of raw firepower but brought down by not-so-polished software. If what @ShurikN says that there's little or no gains of using DX12 on both camps is true, means both camps has it's pros & cons in DX12. The only thing left to look at is the developers as they are the deciding factor. Hopefully next year's list of DX12 powered games will put this Polaris vs Pascal debate to rest, which I think isn't going to stop until one of them says they had enough.


----------



## ShurikN (Jul 20, 2016)

Tsukiyomi91 said:


> long story short IMO, Nvidia is good on the software front with not so stellar hardware while AMD wins outright in terms of raw firepower but brought down by not-so-polished software. If what @ShurikN says that there's little or no gains of using DX12 on both camps is true, means both camps has it's pros & cons in DX12. The only thing left to look at is the developers as they are the deciding factor. Hopefully next year's list of DX12 powered games will put this Polaris vs Pascal debate to rest, which I think isn't going to stop until one of them says they had enough.


ive said that only for RotTR, other games show fps boosts for both amd and nv. Thats why I stated that TR is a bad example of DX12 benchmark because it's not doing what the api is supppsed to


----------



## Nokiron (Jul 20, 2016)

ZoneDymo said:


> Physx support... oh man... yeah thats totally a selling point...some floating orbs in a handful of games, rousing endorsement that fo sho...


Just a sidenote on this. Almost every game that uses Gameworks is using PhysX/FleX in some form. They do not usually require a GPU for it though.



ShurikN said:


> ive said that only for RotTR, other games show fps boosts for both amd and nv. Thats why I stated that TR is a bad example of DX12 benchmark because it's not doing what the api is supppsed to


What are they supposed to do then, since you apperantly know that?

The same thing could be said against a lot of games that uses DX 11 "because they don't perform". That's not how it works.


----------



## ShurikN (Jul 20, 2016)

Nokiron said:


> What are they supposed to do then, since you apperantly know that?
> 
> The same thing could be said against a lot of games that uses DX 11 "because they don't perform". That's not how it works.


Rise of the TR has both 11 and 12, so you can compare two apis and come to a conclusion that the are almost no benefits (on ALL cards). Unlike DX11 only game where you don't have anything to compare it to.


----------



## Nokiron (Jul 20, 2016)

ShurikN said:


> Rise of the TR has both 11 and 12, so you can compare two apis and come to a conclusion that the are almost no benefits (on ALL cards). Unlike DX11 only game where you don't have anything to compare it to.


Does that automatically make it a bad example? Asynchronous compute is not the be-all end-all of DirectX 12, there is more to it than that.

Im not sure I agree with you on that one, AMD got quite the performance increase with the latest patch. Especially the average framerate.
http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/...e_tomb_raider_directx_12_performance_update/5

There is a lot of quite interesting information in 3Dmarks latest press release regarding the debacle about async and how it works.
http://www.futuremark.com/pressreleases/a-closer-look-at-asynchronous-compute-in-3dmark-time-spy


----------



## ZoneDymo (Jul 20, 2016)

Ungari said:


> Factory overclocks often leave a lot on the table, but not always as some chips cannot get much higher without instability.
> Part of that is warranty long life concerns, but the other part is to allow enthusiasts the experience of discovering how far their cards can go.



Non of this answer my questions though.
If factory overclocks leave a lot on the table....then why dont they just push the clocks further?
Some chips cannot do it? ok...leave those lower then, I realize there is a problem with pricing if one card runs faster then the other, but if all cards consistently can be bumped 10% in an area, then why does it not get that speed to begin with?
Long life concerns, so does the more expensive EVGA FTW edition cards that are clocked higher last less long then the standard cards? If so do we know how significantly less?
The experience of discovering, so thats it then?, we all just want to needlessly tinker when that factory could do that for us really?



Nokiron said:


> Just a sidenote on this. Almost every game that uses Gameworks is using PhysX/FleX in some form. They do not usually require a GPU for it though.



aka my point still stands.


----------



## okidna (Jul 20, 2016)

ShurikN said:


> Rise of the TR has both 11 and 12, so you can compare two apis and come to a conclusion that the are almost no benefits (on ALL cards). Unlike DX11 only game where you don't have anything to compare it to.



The DirectX12 implementation in RotTR seems to benefit more on lower end system and in the graphically-heavy area of the game.
Here's my benchmark result running my GTX 970 with FX 6300 at stock clock (slow CPU + mainstream GPU) :

DX11 :



Spoiler: dx11










DX12 :



Spoiler: DX12









On the first and second benchmark scene, the performance gain is not big but it's still noticeably smoother when running DX12 because of better min and avg FPS, BUT look at the heaviest benchmark scene (3rd scene, Geothermal Valley), the improvement on minimum FPS is huge, almost twice from before, and the average FPS also improved a lot on this 3rd scene. With DX12 I also notice the much smoother and fluid gameplay when playing the game, FPS dips is a lot less compared to DX11 version.

So why reviewer didn't notice this? Because most of them test the game with high end CPU, their CPU is fast enough to handle the game so they won't really see the performance improvement.

I found that ComputerBase did a review with several CPUs (2 graphs from the bottom), and their results are similar to mine, performance gain is much more noticeable on a heavier scene (Soviet-Anlage/Soviet Installation is heavier than Basislager/Siberian Wilderness) AND also more noticeable on low end CPUS (i3 4330 and FX 6300).


----------



## Ungari (Jul 20, 2016)

ZoneDymo said:


> Non of this answer my questions though.
> If factory overclocks leave a lot on the table....then why dont they just push the clocks further?
> Some chips cannot do it? ok...leave those lower then, I realize there is a problem with pricing if one card runs faster then the other, but if all cards consistently can be bumped 10% in an area, then why does it not get that speed to begin with?
> Long life concerns, so does the more expensive EVGA FTW edition cards that are clocked higher last less long then the standard cards? If so do we know how significantly less?
> ...



Using your example of EVGA FTW, the chips are sorted to be stable at that factory OC, while many of them are not capable of even 50Mhz more. This was true of even the Classified chips. These cards are only warrantied to run at the factory overclocks, with no promise of any further overhead. It's not as you say, usual or consistent to have a 10% increase manually, especially if the card is already factory OC'd. 
The life of an overclocked chip that is OC varies due to the silicon quality. In the case of CPUs, the expected longevity of those chips are projected on stock speeds, which is why often a manual OC voids the warranty.
The experience of discovering is the fun part of the Silicon Lottery, as some chips will manually OC much further than others, while some hardly at all. It is a thrill to win the Lottery and get an _uber_ chip that is stable as super high clock speeds.


----------



## Mtom (Jul 21, 2016)

wrong thread


----------



## ensabrenoir (Jul 22, 2016)

....I figured as much.... 1060 sli beats a 1080...... in Ashes so far....










I expect more reviewers will be exploring Dx12 potential to combine any two cards as more game support arrives or nvdia/amd blocks it......


----------



## xorbe (Jul 22, 2016)

There's that SLI thread here on TPU that allows SLI of different nv cards.  Wonder if the same technique would work on 1060.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 22, 2016)

I don't get how the review says that the boost clock is from 1911 to 2101, but GPU-Z shows 1709/1938 MHz.

I'm trying to use this as i guide for overclocking my card, but I'm missing something. It's been so long since I had an Nvidia GPU.


----------



## jabbadap (Jul 22, 2016)

silkstone said:


> I don't get how the review says that the boost clock is from 1911 to 2101, but GPU-Z shows 1709/1938 MHz.
> 
> I'm trying to use this as i guide for overclocking my card, but I'm missing something. It's been so long since I had an Nvidia GPU.



Card bios has base clock, boost clock(quaranteed) and maximum boost clock(will boost up-to if temperature and powerlimit allows). That Gpu-z shows that quaranteed boost clock, while card will boost to it's maximum allowed boost clock defined by bios. If I remember correctly real current GPU clock should be shown on sensors tab of gpu-z or i.e. afterburner overlay.


----------



## HD64G (Jul 23, 2016)

If Hitman DX12, Warhammer DX12 and Doom 2016 in Vulcan were included in the gamelist tested, using some results from not badly famed review sites, I can get that GTX1060 is 7,4% faster on average than reference RX480. Now it is 11,5 faster. Just a number in the mix of the discussion about the review. @W1zzard is doing a great job all these years providing us with objective results and he is doing most work than every other reveiwer out there testing all those games with updated drivers most of the time. I hope he finds the time to include some games utilising the new APIs in order to give us all a perspective of the near future in gaming for anyone willing to buy a GPU for the next 2-3 years.

*UPDATED* as in my calculations a game had wrong numbers and not the @W1zzard 's review ones.


----------



## wolf (May 14, 2021)

wolf said:


> I can see a lot of people being happy RX480 customers, and good for you, but there will be MANY (more than likely more) happy GTX1060 customers, and good for them too





wolf said:


> i'd love to revisit this thread in 2-3 years and see how well an RX480 / GTX1060 performs in the games that are the latest and greatest, my guess is nobody will care.


Looking through old reviews and threads and found these comments, one certainly aged well, GTX1060 being so incredibly popular to this day. But I think the RX480 has clawed performance back against the GTX1060 ... a few % maybe? In wiz's most recent review I can only see a GTX1060 slightly losing to an RX580 overall, 480 vs 1060 seems neck and neck?

However, I was wrong on nobody cares! The demand for a 4xx/5xx cards to mine on is crazy that's for sure (just saw a RX580 8gb for sale for $700 AUD! ~$540 USD), and in a world where anything sub $350 USD that's moderately current for gaming either doesn't exist yet, isn't available or is massively overpriced... people are probably pretty happy with any RX470+/570+ or GTX1060+


----------



## AsRock (May 14, 2021)

wolf said:


> Looking through old reviews and threads and found these comments, one certainly aged well, GTX1060 being so incredibly popular to this day. But I think the RX480 has clawed performance back against the GTX1060 ... a few % maybe? In wiz's most recent review I can only see a GTX1060 slightly losing to an RX580 overall, 480 vs 1060 seems neck and neck?
> 
> However, I was wrong on nobody cares! The demand for a 4xx/5xx cards to mine on is crazy that's for sure (just saw a RX580 8gb for sale for $700 AUD! ~$540 USD), and in a world where anything sub $350 USD that's moderately current for gaming either doesn't exist yet, isn't available or is massively overpriced... people are probably pretty happy with any RX470+/570+ or GTX1060+


I guess it depends on what your doing ?.



			Steam Hardware & Software Survey


----------



## wolf (May 14, 2021)

AsRock said:


> I guess it depends on what your doing ?.
> 
> 
> 
> Steam Hardware & Software Survey


Yeah 1060 is still crazy popular. I guess gaming 1060, gaming OR mining 480? People are just happy to have something that's very capable in the 1080p60 space in 2021...


----------

