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

[mkmitch]

Certainly the fastest Pascal card to hit MSRP if true. I wonder if it's the Aero blower he's referring to though?

1060 can't be price gauged as hard as the others which are setting new performance standdards. Fastest card in the world for $700 will get people to bite. Titan X speeds at $450 will do the same. I doubt that many people are lining up for a $300 1060 though.

I don't think anyone is like "thank god I didn't spend $330 on a 970 nearly two years ago. My waiting is rewarded by saving $30 and getting ~15% more performance". $250 looks much more attractive relative to last gen... although even that is a steep 25% price increase to the 960's MSRP. Quite the inflation for 18 months. GTX 1050 vs RX 480 4GB will be an interesting battle for the $200 max crowd.

All he said was it is the partners card, Founders card will only be sold by Nvidia and in limited quantities.

 

[desura]

Doesn't it take till gen 2 of a die shrink to really get it down? I've been itching to replace my 750 for a while, but I might wait a little longer.

 

[Ranulf]

Premium cooling man! PREEEMIUM!

 

[Silverforce11]

Yeah but the alternative is RX 480, who's OC reports I've seen push it above 200W. That 1480mhz OC was hitting over 250W

If GP106 brings the efficiency GP104 brought, OC'ing results heavily favor NV. RX 480 is a pig when OC'ed. Hell, it's a pig stock and people are already telling each other to undervolt.

I don't think you understand why RX 480 owners are undervolting. It's not that power usage drops, it does. It actually results in a performance gain due to the default TDP limit.

Less power, higher performance.

This is why I raised the point earlier, compare where the RX 480 is now on TPU's chart for example. Add 3-4% while lowering power by 10-30W.

Or for AIBs, they will likely keep it 150W, but increase clocks without throttling, so +10% and suddenly it's GTX 980 performance in DX11 titles.

This is what the 1060 has to compete with, all the custom RX 480 due soon. Each of these custom cards would be sent to reviewers and there would be many rounds of media coverage/reviews.

People will see 120W vs 150W, similar performance in DX11, but the RX 480 beats the 1060 in DX12/Vulkan and has 8GB vs 6GB while being cheaper (until custom 1060s arrive at less than $299?).

Not as dire a situation for AMD & Polaris as some would think.

 

[rgallant]

What reason is there for AIB's or even retailers to sell their cards at the MSRP (Manufacturer Suggested Retail Price) when they know there is another card out there selling for the founders edition price. That's leaving money on the table, and these aren't your friends, they're businesses, both the retailers and Card Partners. If stocks are low I too expect the 3rd party cards to start at $299. I'd love to be wrong but I doubt I will be.

This dual pricing has really done a wallop on the public perception. Kudos to nVidia succesfully FE'ing the public.

every gtx1060 reviewer will quote the $249 cost that won't be for sale anywhere , while doing so with a $299.00 product.
lies and more lies imo

 

[Silverforce11]

every gtx1060 reviewer will quote the $249 cost that won't be for sale anywhere , while doing so with a $299.00 product.
lies and more lies imo

That's fine, you can tell instantly which review sites are shills.

The good ones will list both prices, sticking with facts.

 

[rgallant]

That's fine, you can tell instantly which review sites are shills.

The good ones will list both prices, sticking with facts.

Geforce GTX 1060 Thread: July 19th Launch/Reviews - faster than RX 480, 120W, $249

tested July 19 at a Stated cost of $299.00. gtx1060 FE
the card being tested has only one list price as tested not two
all I have to say as I'm not buying one .

 

[Silverforce11]

Geforce GTX 1060 Thread: July 19th Launch/Reviews - faster than RX 480, 120W, $249

tested July 19 at a Stated cost of $299.00. gtx1060 FE
the card being tested has only one list price as tested not two
all I have to say as I'm not buying one .

See, that's what I mean, thanks for proving my point.

Factual: 1060 6GB $249/$299.
Shilling: 1060 6GB $249.

 

[tviceman]

I don't think you understand why RX 480 owners are undervolting. It's not that power usage drops, it does. It actually results in a performance gain due to the default TDP limit.

Less power, higher performance.

This is why I raised the point earlier, compare where the RX 480 is now on TPU's chart for example. Add 3-4% while lowering power by 10-30W.

Or for AIBs, they will likely keep it 150W, but increase clocks without throttling, so +10% and suddenly it's GTX 980 performance in DX11 titles.

This is what the 1060 has to compete with, all the custom RX 480 due soon. Each of these custom cards would be sent to reviewers and there would be many rounds of media coverage/reviews.

People will see 120W vs 150W, similar performance in DX11, but the RX 480 beats the 1060 in DX12/Vulkan and has 8GB vs 6GB while being cheaper (until custom 1060s arrive at less than $299?).

Not as dire a situation for AMD & Polaris as some would think.

I'm thinking it's more likely going to be a tie at DX12, except Hitman, and the 1060 wins convincingly at just about everything else, plus has noticeably better power draw AND noticeably better overclocking. At $250-260, it's a better buy than the $240 8gb RX 480's, but not better than the $199 4gb version. At $300, it's obviously a bad buy.

 

[postmortemIA]

$250 GTX 1060 wins this contest hands down. Just look at existing nVidia vs AMD market share. nVidia used to cost much more, and still has way better market share. Once price is similar it will be no contest.

 

[Ketchup]

Wow, I never knew that AMD cards could be customized and improved upon and Nvidia cards couldn't, nor that people know the performance of certain cards before they are even released, nor that AMD could improve the performance of cards in driver updates but Nvidia can't!

Some pretty entertaining posts in this thread.

 

[Silverforce11]

I'm thinking it's more likely going to be a tie at DX12, except Hitman, and the 1060 wins convincingly at just about everything else, plus has noticeably better power draw AND noticeably better overclocking. At $250-260, it's a better buy than the $240 8gb RX 480's, but not better than the $199 4gb version. At $300, it's obviously a bad buy.

For the 1060 to win at everything else, it would have to be faster than a 980.

I'm not talking reference RX480 that throttles on stock voltages. I'm talking custom RX 480s that are out later this month. Do you think they will be worse than AMD's reference design?

That's why the most important thing will end up in how the custom 1060 and 480 are priced at.

 

[96Firebird]

Wow, I never knew that AMD cards could be customized and improved upon and Nvidia cards couldn't, nor that people know the performance of certain cards before they are even released, nor that AMD could improve the performance of cards in driver updates but Nvidia can't!

Some pretty entertaining posts in this thread.

I enjoy reading the "3-4% improvement from a driver that lowers power usage" for the RX 480, but in reality there was a minimal 1% performance gain in synthetics, no improvement in games.

 

[Silverforce11]

I enjoy reading the "3-4% improvement from a driver that lowers power usage" for the RX 480, but in reality there was a minimal 1% performance gain in synthetics, no improvement in games.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...ion-Concerns-Fixed-1671-Driver/Performance-Va

^ Performance did increase with 16.7.1 in games.

Also at Toms:

Blue line is 16.7.1 with default performance.

It clocks higher on average.

They actually lowered the vcore a tiny little bit.

My RX 480 sample has lower voltages for stages 4 to 6 after this driver.

Whether this has an effect or not in clock speeds will vary from sample to sample as some chips may throttle less (higher ASIC etc).

 

[96Firebird]

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...ion-Concerns-Fixed-1671-Driver/Performance-Va

^ Performance did increase with 16.7.1 in games.

404 performance increase not found, Guru3D didn't find any either...

 

[Silverforce11]

404 performance increase not found, Guru3D didn't find any either...

You can't read English?

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...ion-Concerns-Fixed-1671-Driver/Performance-Va

The average frame rate is actually highest with the new 16.7.1 driver WITHOUT compatibility mode enabled, giving credence to the notion that the driver offers some very slight performance tweaks as AMD stated.

You understand read a simple chart?

 

[guachi]

Freesync monitors are cheaper than Gsync monitors, right? That would seem to be a definite positive for Freesync.

I looked at some Acer monitors and found two with similar specifications except for GSync/Freesync. The GSync monitors were 30% more expensive, which in the case of the 34" screen was $300.

This makes, to me, the 480 a better choice over the 1060. Or, for that matter, over basically any nVidia card if adaptive sync is something that matters to you.

30% tax? No thanks. And I was seriously debating whether to get the 1060 or 480 in a few weeks.

 

[96Firebird]

You can't read English?

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...ion-Concerns-Fixed-1671-Driver/Performance-Va

You understand read a simple chart?

Surely you read the sentence before the one you quoted, right?

You’d be hard pressed to find any noticeable difference in performance in our Metro: Last Light performance results at 4K.

But wait! They tested another game too... Maybe we can find the 3-4% increase in performance there?!

The 16.7.1 driver without compatibility mode shows a slightly, barely measureable, improvement in performance.

Aw, shucks.

And your chart shows clockspeeds...

 

[guskline]

Good job by AMD

 

[Silverforce11]

Surely you read the sentence before the one you quoted, right?



But wait! They tested another game too... Maybe we can find the 3-4% increase in performance there?!



Aw, shucks.

And your chart shows clockspeeds...

Sure, 3% you would be hard pressed to notice the difference. But when charted, there it is, it's faster.

Deny all you want.

Ask yourself, why are you trying so hard to deny it when PCPER's own charts show it's faster and Tom's chart show the GPU running at a higher clock... why? You must know better than them. Heck, you must know better than me, who owns these cards and already found it to run at higher clocks on default settings.. :/

Now if you want to say, "3% is meh", I will agree.

 

[96Firebird]

Fear not! Guru3D has given us numbers!

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/radeon-rx-480-performance-benchmarks-with-16-7-1-driver.html

Yayyyyyyy, 3% found at unplayable 4K framerates. For relevant resolutions, however... :\

 

[nurturedhate]

Fear not! Guru3D has given us numbers!

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/radeon-rx-480-performance-benchmarks-with-16-7-1-driver.html

Yayyyyyyy, 3% found at unplayable 4K framerates. For relevant resolutions, however... :\

Still more than your "no improvement in games" statement isn't it....
Why are you trying so incredibly hard?

 

[darkswordsman17]

404 performance increase not found, Guru3D didn't find any either...

Fear not! Guru3D has given us numbers!

http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/radeon-rx-480-performance-benchmarks-with-16-7-1-driver.html

Yayyyyyyy, 3% found at unplayable 4K framerates. For relevant resolutions, however... :\

WhyTF is garbage posting like this allowed? I mean I know the video forum on here has a reputation for being a near P&N level cesspit, but seriously?

There's several very prominently pro-Nvidia posters who keep posting things and then literally defeating their own claims themselves. Its gotten to ridiculous levels.

 

[96Firebird]

Sorry you guys don't like posts with facts...?

If you'd rather stick to false claims, don't read my posts?

 

[Keysplayr]

See, that's what I mean, thanks for proving my point.

Factual: 1060 6GB $249/$299.
Shilling: 1060 6GB $249.

Kinda hard finding a 249.00 RX480 for under 300 as well.