Palit GTX 1060 Super JetStream 6 GB

[newtekie1]

In this case, the Pro of such a card is the inclusion of a second HDMI port, not the presence of HDMI 2.0b.

Yes, but HDMI 2.0b and DP 1.4 are pros because there are still cards on the market that don't have those ports.

 

[bug]

Yes, but HDMI 2.0b and DP 1.4 are pros because there are still cards on the market that don't have those ports.

 

[gasolin]

I would have hoped for a dual slot one for the 1060 but nope, it's still triple slot heh.

The palit gtx 1060 dual is a 2 slot card

Much worse cooling (+7 ºC) yet more noise than MSI (+4 dBA). With a triple slot cooler (+~25% height). And more expansive. How can it fail so much.

Given a choice, why would anyone buy this?

EDIT: corrected height increase value.

I have the palit gtx 1060 dual and it stay under 75 degress doing gaming in a define r5 with low rpm noctua fans
(haven't figured out when it throttles) with a oc to 1620 mhz as the oced dual, surprised about the noise
since the palit gtx 1080 witch is a much faster card, is less noisy.

How is that possible? (even lower temps) even the very hot (chip) palit gtx 980 ti is 1 db more silent
and more cool, i know a gtx 1060 is as fast as a gtx 980 or 2xgt960 but still faster palit cards are more
silent and cooler

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Palit/GeForce_GTX_1080_GameRock/24.html

 

[gasolin]

A 1 slot cooler is only 33% less than a 1.5 slot cooler and considering the card takes 2.5 slots compared to the regular 2 slots, a 2 slot card is only 20% smaller. ;p

On a serious note. I have this cards smaller brother and it seems to perform the same. My temps hover around 70 C @ 85% fan speed where they just become audible, though I do have rather a lot of background noise as is.

What 85% the fans get noticeable at 60%, if you only can hear the fans at 85%
you must have a very noisy system

 

[ViperXTR]

The palit gtx 1060 dual is a 2 slot card

I meant the Super Jetstream hence the thread title

 

[medi01]

What am I missing here, guys, power consumption, Crisis 3, anandtech:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10540/the-geforce-gtx-1060-founders-edition-asus-strix-review/16

TPU

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Palit/GeForce_GTX_1060_Super_JetStream/21.html


Numbers are VASTLY different (same cards consume twice as much @anandtech... ok, it's total power consumption vs TPUs PCIe, but then, difference between cards should be BIGGER.
Yet on TPU 1060 consumes whopping 47 watts less than 480.
On Anandtech 36 watts less. (ignoring AIBs) of TOTAL power consumption (with PSU losses, which should have WIDENED the gap, not reduced it!)


Well... How come?
And by the way, it's not the first time there is a diff like that between 2 sites.

 

[gasolin]

What am I missing here, guys, power consumption, Crisis 3, anandtech:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10540/the-geforce-gtx-1060-founders-edition-asus-strix-review/16

TPU

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Palit/GeForce_GTX_1060_Super_JetStream/21.html


Numbers are VASTLY different (same cards consume twice as much @anandtech... ok, it's total power consumption vs TPUs PCIe, but then, difference between cards should be BIGGER.
Yet on TPU 1060 consumes whopping 47 watts less than 480.
On Anandtech 36 watts less. (ignoring AIBs) of TOTAL power consumption (with PSU losses, which should have WIDENED the gap, not reduced it!)


Well... How come?
And by the way, it's not the first time there is a diff like that between 2 sites.

You havn't have read what it's for

Total SYSTEM power consumption

Card only

Antech card i fe and asus strix

Techpower is fe and palit

All depends on what system they used

 

[medi01]

You don't have read

You don't seem to have read my post or you have failed to comprehend it.

 

[gasolin]

The system is different, if i play crysis 3 my system uses more power (hotter more noisy gpu) than trackmania turbo, since cysis 3 is more demading

 

[medi01]

The system is different

Jesus Christ, either read the post and understand what I"m saying or leave me alone please.

 

[Dethroy]

You don't seem to have read my post or you have failed to comprehend it.

But you are comparing a Palit vs an ASUS card... Apples and oranges

 

[medi01]

But you are comparing a Palit vs an ASUS card..

I'm comparing FE card to FE card.

 

[gasolin]

But you are comparing a Palit vs an ASUS card... Apples and oranges

Both reveiws use a stock fe card, crysis 3 just use more power, than som avarage gaming power consumption (techpowerup)

 

[Dethroy]

I'm comparing FE card to FE card.

Ok, but then it is 47W vs 37W. That tiny difference could easily be ascribed to different binning and the circumstances @gasolin was pointing out.

 

[gasolin]

I thing powertech is avarage power consumption from all games, where anatech is only an avarage power consumption when playing crysis 3

 

[medi01]

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

TPU (PCIe, i.e. GPU only)
1060 - 116w
480 - 163w, 1060 + 47w
1070 - 145w, 480 - 18w (consumes LESS than 480, unlike in anandtech's review)
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Palit/GeForce_GTX_1060_Super_JetStream/21.html

But that's not it. Anandtech's number is INFLATED by PSU not being 100% efficient.

Anandtech used this power supply:
http://www.corsair.com/en/ax1200i-d...-80-plus-platinum-certified-fully-modular-psu
Which claims to have 80%+ efficiency (note that PSU b. Taking that into account we get:

Anandtech (TPU)
480 = 1060 + 29.6w (+47w)
1070 = 480 + 4.8w (-18w)

So, at TPU reference 480 consumes 17.4 watt more than at anandtech.
And at TPU 1070FE consumes 22.8 watt less than at anandtech.
And no, I don't think it can be explained by "simple binning".

PS
In general, it would be cool if testers who think that PCIe measurements is a good idea (I think it's not because it's tricky to do it right) would also measure total system power consumption, because:
a) it's simpler to do it right
b) it is much easier to see what kind of PSU you actually need
c) it reveals other things... such as (possibly) higher CPU utilization

 

[Dethroy]

Source: http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/78...70-4gb-silent-1080p-60fps-gaming/index10.html &
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/msi_radeon_rx_470_gaming_x_8gb_review,5.html

AMD's new Polaris architecture is power efficient, but it doesn't even match what NVIDIA can offer with cards that are magnitudes faster - so we definitely have that to ponder. SAPPHIRE's Nitro Radeon RX 470 4GB consumes around 260W (the entire system), which isn't too bad, but it's worrying when the GeForce GTX 1070 consumes less power but offers close to twice the performance in all resolutions.

Read more: http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/78...70-4gb-silent-1080p-60fps-gaming/index11.html

 

[medi01]

Read more

And the point of that post was?
Left chart shows AIB card only.
Right chart shows 1070 consuming more than 480, contrary to TPUs findings.

 

[Dethroy]

And the point of that post was?
Left chart shows AIB card only.
Right chart shows 1070 consuming more than 480, contrary to TPUs findings.

You must be blind then. Or blinded by fanboyism. Take your pick.

 

[medi01]

You must be blind then. Or blinded by fanboyism. Take your pick.

Which kind of fanbois/blindness do you mean?
The one that prevented you from seing FE / Ref cards were compared, or a different one?
Sigh.

 

[Dethroy]

Which kind of fanbois/blindness do you mean?

Left chart shows AIB card only.

It clearly shows reference cards as well.

Right chart shows 1070 consuming more than 480, contrary to TPUs findings.

RX 480 8GB 166W vs GTX 1070 161W

The one that prevented you from seing FE / Ref cards were compared, or a different one?
Sigh.

Your earlier post wasn't very clear on what cards you were ref.