Monday, August 15th 2016

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB Equipped with Fewer CUDA Cores

Aug 15th, 2016 00:39 Discuss (55 Comments)

NVIDIA's upcoming GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB is a little more than a variant of last month's GTX 1060 with half the memory. The SKU is positioned to compete with the Radeon RX 480 4 GB, at a price-point close to $200, and is expected to feature fewer CUDA cores. NVIDIA could even have a crack at $199. While the 6 GB variant launched last month features 1,280 CUDA cores spread across 10 streaming multiprocessors (SM), the 3 GB variant will feature 1,152 CUDA cores across 9 SM. This could also lower the TMU count from 80 to 72. The clock speeds appear to be unchanged, with the GPU core being clocked at 1506 MHz, with 1709 MHz GPU Boost, and 8 GHz (GDDR5-effective) memory, churning up 192 GB/s of memory bandwidth.

Sources: WCCFTech, ITHome

Add your own comment

55 Comments on NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB Equipped with Fewer CUDA Cores

Naito

Nvidia's naming schemes never make sense. Normally they use some sort of suffix/prefix to denote a variant - this one just says '3GB'. An end-user could easily assume that the only difference between this and the GTX 1060 6GB is the memory capacity and end up with a lesser GPU.

Supercrit

NaitoNvidia's naming schemes never make sense. Normally they use some sort of suffix/prefix to denote a variant - this one just says '3GB'. An end-user could easily assume that the only difference between this and the GTX 1060 6GB is the memory capacity and end up with a lesser GPU.

Some proposed names:
GTX 1060 SE
GTX 1060 MINUS
GTX 1060 Eco

RejZoR

NVIDIA doing NVIDIA thing again. Why I'm not even surprised. First GTX 970 with 3.5 GB and now GTX 1060 3GB which is not actually GTX 1060, but they'll name it the same anyway, because who will notice the difference anyway, right, you silly noobs. RX480 has 1GB more VRAM and a full fat RX480 core. Differences in VRAM clocks are permissible, because that doesn't denote the core and the card name itself. But fiddling with core and calling it the same is a crappy practice. Shame on you NVIDIA.

Chaitanya

And yet this gimped overpriced crap will sell like hot cakes.

TheLostSwede

News Editor

SupercritGTX 1060 SE

SE = Special Edition
That's too good for this card, it should be an LE or Light Edition or something similarly offputting

ZoneDymo

TheLostSwedeSE = Special Edition
That's too good for this card, it should be an LE or Light Edition or something similarly offputting

In this case it will work because it will stand for Shit Edition ;)

ZeppMan217

ChaitanyaAnd yet this gimped overpriced crap will sell like hot cakes.

Well, it's probably still faster/colder/less power hungry than a 4GB RX 480. It's a nasty thing that Nvidia's doing but AMD's stuff is just not up to snuff.

hojnikb

RejZoRNVIDIA doing NVIDIA thing again. Why I'm not even surprised. First GTX 970 with 3.5 GB and now GTX 1060 3GB which is not actually GTX 1060, but they'll name it the same anyway, because who will notice the difference anyway, right, you silly noobs. RX480 has 1GB more VRAM and a full fat RX480 core. Differences in VRAM clocks are permissible, because that doesn't denote the core and the card name itself. But fiddling with core and calling it the same is a crappy practice. Shame on you NVIDIA.

Just fyi, both companies do that actually. Just look at the mobile chips. One model can have like 3 different configuration of shaders or even cores.

FYFI13

TheLostSwedeSE = Special Edition
That's too good for this card, it should be an LE or Light Edition or something similarly offputting

SE - Slow Edition
or
LE - Lame Edition

ZoneDymoIn this case it will work because it will stand for Shit Edition ;)

I'd say it'll be equal to RX 480, in terms of performance and price.

#10

john_

Also GeForce GT 630 | Specifications | GeForce

#11

Prima.Vera

FYFI13SE - Slow Edition
or
LE - Lame Edition

I'd say it'll be equal to RX 480, in terms of performance and price.

It will be more expensive because of Physx, GameWorks and other nGreedia proprietary crap

#12

ensabrenoir

.........yikes Nvdia ain't giving Amd a break on anything....... Nvdia gots No Chill mode......

#13

ViperXTR

Uh so this is not the GTX 1050? Or GTX 1050 be 128bit and 2GB instead?

#14

FYFI13

Prima.VeraIt will be more expensive because of Physx, GameWorks and other nGreedia proprietary crap

This article says MSRP should be ~200USD which is exactly same as RX 480.

#15

Assimilator

NaitoNvidia's naming schemes never make sense. Normally they use some sort of suffix/prefix to denote a variant - this one just says '3GB'. An end-user could easily assume that the only difference between this and the GTX 1060 6GB is the memory capacity and end up with a lesser GPU.

Or - or - the prospective buyer could do their homework before they purchase.

Revolutionary concept, I know.

#16

chaosmassive

..and dont even try to launch reference version as founder edition
you milked enough already from 1080 to 1060 '6GB version'

#17

jabbadap

Yeah would be quite stupid to name it simply gtx 1060. Maybe they add suffix SE like they did with gtx460 and gtx560. Or maybe they just call it 3GB edition...

#18

Darksword

MSRP = $219
AIB Makers = ~ $239
Consumer Demand pushes price to $269

Nothing ever changes.

#19

FreedomEclipse

~Technological Technocrat~

I cuda believe Nvidia are doing this.

#20

XiGMAKiD

And this is the 1060 that (hopefully) could match RX480 street price with roughly the same performance as RX480 but with lower wattage and temp.

#21

Bansaku

Seriously, why wasn't this the 1050 Ti? It's not gimped enough to be a 1050, and certainly calling it a 1060 is just plain wrong. Me thinks nVidia is pulling yet another fast one on consumers, because they are nVidia and their fan-base will gobble it up!

#22

Tatty_Two

Gone Fishing

DarkswordMSRP = $219
AIB Makers = ~ $239
Consumer Demand pushes price to $269

Nothing ever changes.

Whilst you are quite possibly right, they won't sell many at that price because based on these specs I doubt that this 1060 will match the 480, even if it does (just) the lesser memory will put many off.

#23

rtwjunkie

PC Gaming Enthusiast

NaitoNvidia's naming schemes never make sense. Normally they use some sort of suffix/prefix to denote a variant - this one just says '3GB'. An end-user could easily assume that the only difference between this and the GTX 1060 6GB is the memory capacity and end up with a lesser GPU.

They are "banking" (literally :D) on sheep users thinking exactly that way!

#24

64K

It's a bit deceptive to simply call this a 1060 3 GB. It does give the impression that the only difference between the 6 GB version and this one is the amount of VRAM.

I guess Nvidia can still claim that even this 1060 3GB gives a performance increase over the Maxwell 960 which had a base clock of 1127 MHz with 1024 shaders and 2GB Vram and a 128 bit bus and also had a $200 MSRP.

There's still plenty of room in the Pascal stack for a 1050 for maybe around $150.

#25

Ruru

S.T.A.R.S.

TheLostSwedeSE = Special Edition
That's too good for this card, it should be an LE or Light Edition or something similarly offputting

At least 9800SE wasn't special... unless softmodded to Pro :)

SE is almost always the cut-down variant of the "real" card.

ChaitanyaAnd yet this gimped overpriced crap will sell like hot cakes.

Ehh.... Titan X is 1350eur and had cut down shaders from the full GP102? :laugh:

Add your own comment

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB Equipped with Fewer CUDA Cores

55 Comments on NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB Equipped with Fewer CUDA Cores

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB Equipped with Fewer CUDA Cores

Related News

55 Comments on NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3GB Equipped with Fewer CUDA Cores

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts