Geforce GTX 1060 Thread: faster than RX 480, 120W, $249

[Thala]

I can't believe that it's now "common wisdom" that AMD's architecture will be better across all DX12 games based on a very limited sampling of titles.

Let's wait for more big-name titles to hit before jumping to conclusions?

Why not? Sample size is at least known and evidence as far is, that Nvidia is falling behind. Its not that we cannot revise our conclusion, once future evidence proves us wrong. In addition our current technical background tells us, that NVidias architecture would have to preempt a gfx task in order to run a compute task, which puts it already at disadvantage.

I mean, people already jumping to conclusions based on completely unknown set of samples, like for instance the thread creator, which already claims win for GTX1060 against RX480.

 

[Sweepr]

I mean, people already jumping to conclusions based on completely unknown set of samples, like for instance the leaked slides posted by VideoCardz, which already claims win for GTX1060 against RX480.

Fixed that for you. Next time try to stick to the facts instead of going personal on every instance.


Warned for trolling
Markfw900

 

[Abwx]

Fixed that for you. Next time try to stick to the facts instead of going personal on every instance.

Provide us facts that prove this :

GTX1060.....faster than RX 480

Or is a random slide a fact for you..?.

 

[Erenhardt]

Fixed that for you. Next time try to stick to the facts instead of going personal on every instance.

No, next time learn to use quotes.
In the first post clearly you clearly said:

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 features 1280 CUDA cores, faster than GTX 980 and RX 480

Your own words.

 

[coercitiv]

Your own words.

Can we go over this already? It's one thing to ask for better formatting of OPs posts and thread titles, and quite a different thing to continue bringing this up in the same thread. Ultimately, when people have such different opinions on how information is to be presented, it is much more productive to ask for moderation rather than insist, escalate and end up thrashing threads.

 

[Jaydip]

If anyone believes that 1060 will be slower than 480 are kidding themselves, NV will never introduce something slower to cannibalize 480 sales.

 

[Sweepr]

We can not yet confirm, but in the next few days, you should expect extensive test this model. Since the technical details still are confidential, as well as performance results, you have to believe our word for it Some few days probably waiting for a surprise, because NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060, probably also introduce Founders Edition.

Non-reference design has not yet had the opportunity to see, as long as the producers just waiting for the sample, so their debut is a matter of several days up to two weeks.

Here are some more technical pictures of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 reference-design board, which reveals quite a few features about the card. The biggest revelation is that the card completely lacks SLI bridge fingers. We wonder if NVIDIA has innovated a bridge-less SLI for this card, although we find it unlikely given the amount of efforts the company put into marketing the SLI HB bridge, and the reason SLI needs a bridge in the first place. Meanwhile, the Radeon RX 480 supports 4-way CrossFireX.

Next up, the PCB is shorter than the card itself, and NVIDIA's unique new reference-cooler makes the card about 50% longer than its PCB. NVIDIA listened to feedback about shorter PCBs pushing power connectors towards the middle of the cards; and innovated a unique design, in which the card's sole 6-pin PCIe power connector is located where you want it (towards the end), and internal high-current wires are soldered to the PCB. Neato? Think again. What if you want to change the cooler, or maybe use a water-block? Prepare to deal with six insulated wires sticking out of somewhere in the PCB, and running into that PCIe power receptacle. The rear PCB shot also seems to confirm the 192-bit memory bus, given how some memory chip pads are blanked out by lacking SMT components needed by the memory chip.

PurePC confirms earlier leaks by publishing first pictures of GeForce GTX 1060 Founders Edition review sample. That said GeForce GTX 1060 is confirmed to feature single 6-pin power connector and short PCB labeled as PG410 (so it also confirms it’s Pascal GP106).

Meanwhile first European shop lists ASUS STRIX GTX 1060 in two versions. Actually the information provided by the retailer is quite messy. While manufacturer code clearly sais 6GB, they still list them as 8GB models. Also the prices are definitely not of GTX 1060. There are two variants, one if factory-overclocked:

ASUS STRIX-GTX1060-O6G-GAMING (90YV09Q0-M0NA00)
ASUS STRIX-GTX1060-6G-GAMING(90YV09Q1-M0NA00)

www.purepc.pl/karty_graficzne/nvidia_geforce_gtx_1060_zapowiedz_testu_na_purepc_i_zdjecia
www.techpowerup.com/223883/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-doesnt-support-sli-reference-pcb-difficult-to-mod (English)
http://videocardz.com/61826/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-rumors-part-2

No, next time learn to use quotes.
In the first post clearly you clearly said:

Your own words.

Wrong. VideoCardz's word, possibly NVIDIA's if the slides are real. Feel free to rant about their claims if reviews show something different in 3 days.

 

[PhonakV30]

you won't be able to mount any cooler on GTX 1060's PCB.Power Connector is out of PCB!

 

[Azix]

NDA done on the 7th right? we'll know soon. IMO I think nvidia can make it look faster, like the 960 was such a great buy. drivers, review guidelines

 

[Sweepr]

Saw this on Baidu:

July 10 release!
Units Shading: 1280
TMUs: 80
ROPs: 48 ----------------
Pixel Fillrate: 72.3 GPixel/S

In comparison:
GTX980 pixel fillrate: 72.1 GPixel/s
RX480 pixel fillrate: 35.8 GPixel / s

Performance is equal to the public (reference) version of GTX980

 

[crisium]

That doesn't quite make sense. Wouldn't that mean the 48 ROPs are only clocked 33% higher than the 980's 64 ROPs? It should need more than a 33% clockrate advantage to match a 980 - try closer to 60% which is how many more CUDA Cores the 980 has.

 

[Jaydip]

Not allowing this card to SLI is beyond stupid imo, I like NV but this is getting ridiculous.

 

[linkgoron]

Saw this on Baidu:

That would put it at ~1.5ghz base clock with 48 rops.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Not allowing this card to SLI is beyond stupid imo, I like NV but this is getting ridiculous.

Why? Better to get a single 1080 than 2x 1060s in SLI.

 

[StrangerGuy]

That would put it at ~1.5ghz base clock with 48 rops.

According to the TPU's overall 1080p performance chart on their RX480 review, and if the IPC of 1070 and 1060 is the same like the 970 and 960 did, that's only going to put 1060 @ 1.5GHz only 90% relative to the RX480, not the 110% of the 980. I really doubt 48 vs 32 ROPs is going to matter at this resolution.

Either the 1060 boost clock is hefty or Pascal doesn't scale well at high core counts.

 

[crisium]

That would put it at ~1.5ghz base clock with 48 rops.

Ah, yes these are just theoretical pixel fillrate from the base clock speeds and not indicative of actual gaming. They are using 1120MHz for the 480, 1126MHz for the 980, and ~1506MHz for the 960.

Not from actual boost clocks then since reference 980s usually only hit the low 1200s on average, and the FE 1060 should get more of a boost here (perhaps close to 1800MHz?) and actually have more pixel fillrate.

 

[Jaydip]

Why? Better to get a single 1080 than 2x 1060s in SLI.

Price bro, two 1060s should be faster and cheaper than 1080.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Price bro, two 1060s should be faster and cheaper than 1080.

Not in games that don't support SLI. 1060 SLI will be much, much slower in such games. The extra $100 to guarantee good performance across the board is worth it, at least to me.

 

[NTMBK]

Price bro, two 1060s should be faster and cheaper than 1080.

Yeah, but SLI/Crossfire performance is a complete mess. Tons of games don't support it, and frametime consistency is all over the shop. And you are likely to be VRAM limited.

Just buy a single GPU.

 

[Jaydip]

Not in games that don't support SLI. 1060 SLI will be much, much slower in such games. The extra $100 to guarantee good performance across the board is worth it, at least to me.

Valid point but the option should be there, it should be left to the consumer what they prefer.

 

[Jaydip]

Yeah, but SLI/Crossfire performance is a complete mess. Tons of games don't support it, and frametime consistency is all over the shop. And you are likely to be VRAM limited.

Just buy a single GPU.

The problem is no card not even the 1080 or the 1080Ti will be able to max all games, so just buying a single card is not going to always work out too. I believe it should be left to the consumers what they prefer because in the past sometimes it was a wiser option.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Valid point but the option should be there, it should be left to the consumer what they prefer.

I think that if we've learned anything from Apple, it's that sometimes it's better to "control" the user experience to some degree to minimize problems.

 

[sontin]

That would put it at ~1.5ghz base clock with 48 rops.

Pixel fillrate is limited by the number of GPCs.
GP106 will only have 2 and each of them is capable of 16 pixels per clock.
So pixel fillrate ist 54.4 GPixel/S.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Sad, no benchmarks even out yet, and AMD fans are already pre-preemptively trying to discredit them.

 

[positivedoppler]

Yeah, but SLI/Crossfire performance is a complete mess. Tons of games don't support it, and frametime consistency is all over the shop. And you are likely to be VRAM limited.

Just buy a single GPU.

Isn't SLI and Crossfire soon to be pointless because DX12 allows you to run multiple gpus mix and match?