Friday, July 1st 2016
NVIDIA to Launch GeForce GTX 1060 Next Week
NVIDIA has reportedly pulled the performance-segment GeForce GTX 1060, a possible competitor for the recently launched AMD Radeon RX 480, from its earlier reported Fall-2016 launch to early July. The card is expected to be officially launched on the 7th of July, 2016. Market availability is expected to follow a week later, on 14th July. This will be the third desktop graphics card based on NVIDIA's "Pascal" architecture, following the GTX 1080 and the GTX 1070.
The rumored (and derived) specifications of the GeForce GTX 1060 follow.
Sources:
BenLife.info, VideoCardz
- GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060
- ASIC: GP106-400-A1 and GP106-300-A1
- 16 nm FinFET process
- 120W TDP
- 1,280 CUDA cores, spread across 10 streaming multiprocessors
- 80 TMUs, 48 ROPs
- 192-bit GDDR5 memory interface
- 3 GB and 6 GB variants
- Up to 1.70 GHz GPU Boost frequency
- 8 Gbps memory, 192 GB/s memory bandwidth
109 Comments on NVIDIA to Launch GeForce GTX 1060 Next Week
ALL cards dropped and only ONE of those cards has the memory issue. Again this is showing how ALL cards perform worse over time compared to AMD cards over time. So these tables prove nothing related to the memory issue. I suggest you troll somewhere else.
2015 > 9% > 2016 > 6% > 3% loss
2015 > -2% > 2016 > -9% > 12% loss
2015 > 12% >2016 >6% = 6% loss
120%(+) more faster performance loss over another cards.
Take the 7970. It can tango with a 780 at times now, were as it was right on the edge of a 680 at launch. Now imagine if AMD had actually unscrewed their driver before then, and curb stomped the 680 back in 2012, instead of waiting until now to use their card at its full potential.
So the real question is, do you want the performance you bought now, or three years from now? Most of us vote now, not three years later.
And while everyone says nvidia is gimping, that would indicate that performance is dropping. It hasnt. My 770s are no slower today then they were when maxwell came out, and STILL play everything on the market with no issues outside of forza 6. people act like nvidia is destroying their older cards, when that is simply not the case. Nvidia simply stops optimizing for cards they no longer sell. AMD did the exact same thing, but worse. They just stopped driver support altogether for their old arch, something nvidia did not do (RIP 6000 series, while the 500 series from the same era are still getting updates). The only reason AMD still optimizes for GCN 1 is that they still sell GCN 1, and will for at least another year, since the mobile 400 series has plenty of rebrands left in it.
dont act like AMD is some driver god. They are not. They update because they didnt have a full line of new GPUs to sell, not because they are some benevolent company. The moment they have a full GPU line that isnt GCN based, optimizations for GCN will disappear.
If AMD makes it to that point without going bankrupt, of course.
And that while even in early stage they offer better perf/$.
Another point it how quickly NV obsoletes earlier gen cards.
Before acting like AMD drivers isn't good, ask ur self if nvidia ones much better ?
1.Nvidia support only 900/1k series, while AMD is still supporting HD7000 series.
2.FreeSync/CrossFire/OpenCL - Everything works with driver, Open source and doesn't request extra hardware cost or cost.
3.
Problem with drivers ? both companies has some small bugs.
Nvidia lunched their GPU with fan problem and some bug wiith dvi frequency.
I never said AMD had problems with their driver (although they certainly used to), I said they had tons of potential that took them years to actually use through driver updates. The 7970 should have outperformed the 680 at launch. It shouldnt have taken until now for GCN 1 to perform decently.
Nvidia supports as far back as the 500 series. Check their website. 368.69 is compatible with the 500 series, and appears at the latest driver, just like the 1080. The cutoff was the 400 series because they do not support DX11. Meanwhile, AMD dropped the DX11 compliant 6000 series last year. AMD stopped optimizing for the 6000 series back in 2012, just like nvidia did with the 700 series. The latest driver for the 6000 series from AMD's site is 15.7, with 16.2 being available as a beta driver.
People act like nvidia is terrible and AMD is saintly, but the truth is AMD's legacy support isnt as good, and while AMD gpus age better, nvidia GPUS work well when they are relevant, not two years later when replacements are already out.The 1060 will most likely SLI. Nvidia only cut dual SLI for anything under the x5x lineup.
As i think NVIDIA doesn't really want to kill AMD, like Intel did... in first few years that could be good plan, but performance over prev gen will dramatically drop without AMD, and after few years no one would rush to buy a new GPUs.Microsoft is "supporting" Windows 7 to.
and AMD is "supporting" HD5000 Series to
Legacy support isn't count.------------
A 1% deficit to 2% deficit (99fps to 98fps to a reference 100fps) would else lead to a 100% loss, which is clearly not right. it's less than 1% loss of performance: 1-(98/99). The reason it looks really bad is that the base deficit of the 970 starts at 2%.
Plus this was only a rumour nvidia gimped ALL older cards to give a boost in sales of their new ones and was proven wrong. So I highly doubt the source of your numbers.
www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480/26.htmlSometimes they do even lose perf in the same games.
But what's worse, they drop getting supported and get pathetic FPS in newer games, so that 960 looks impressive next to 780Ti.
That's what one can also mean by losing performance.Using 10 years old mainboard to spread FUD.
Priceless.
Facts:
RX480 8GB CF is NOT cheaper than a single GTX1070
RX480 CF does NOT beat a GTX 1080 not even a GTX 170 in MOST cases. (It does however in Ashes of the Singularity in 1080p, but whoever plays that game anyway it has about a 1000 mixed reviews on steam)
RX480 has AWEFUL perf/watt ratio expecially when overclocked.
Yes its cheap and it performs the same as a 970 which is 2 years old and on the same pricepoint in my country.
It deserves a slow clap.
Don't bring up old crap. Seriously, i'm out, there is no reasoning with you.
Nobody ever claimed 960's in SLI were faster than a 290x.
However AMD's slides showed 480 CF beating the 700$ gtx 1080 or am i wrong?
Unprovoked aggression looks... familiar.CF 480 does is roughly on 1070 level on games tested by TPU on average, much faster if non-CX-able games are skipped, roughly 1080 level (trades blows).
tpucdn.com/reviews/AMD/RX_480_CrossFire/images/perfrel_3840_2160.png
I've forgotten how all this is related to 1060.
I smell double standards....
Edit.
Do you remember ? AMD said in AOTS DX12.
Sad thing is, people probably will, despite RX 480 cards probably coming soon in AIB format.
THIS is purely a reaction to AMD (not as some have speculated the Maxwell price drops were- Those are purely to eliminate "last year's car models" from the car lot, so to speak.) . RX 480 however, has them worried about losing mid-tier market, so they quickly pull up by months a release. You only do that by cutting corners just to get a product out there. Don't color me surprised if these things are bug-ridden.
I won't be posting any more warnings.
Thank you!
My post mentions 1060. Edit me and TPU is getting rather like an Orwellian dystopian future. :p
All this release shows is that Nvidia were scared enough to push up the launch because they didn't want to lose the market segment. The same could be said when AMD announced they were pushing Vega's release up.
The thing that matters about the 1060 is going to be how it performs and where its priced. We can already assume they are not going to leave a huge gap between the GTX 1060 and GTX 1070 in price so its probably not going to be $200, more than likely at minimum $250. On top of that if we looks at specs, we can guess that since its half the GTX 1080 on the same general architecture its going to be about half the performance. Then we can factor in the lower memory bandwidth and take that into account that could result in it being slightly below half way on the GTX 1080. If we also assume the same clocks then this is a pretty decent guess on its performance. But even then, we can't guess exact so we need to wait and see some reviews.
We need to see its performance out in the real world before judging, then we can factor in how it performs. By the looks of it, if done right it could offer decent performance especially if it overclocks well which may put it above the RX 480 in that case until we see if aftermarket variants alleviate that.