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

[HOOfan 1]

they're also ignoring the 200$ 480 & including the scarce 250$ 1060 in their perf/$ charts :thumbsdown:

From scanning newegg, amazon and NCIX, the $250 GTX 1060 seems to be about as plentiful as the $240 RX 480...which is to say, there are none...unless you want to go by the list price of the Out of Stock items.

 

[Ranulf]

<3 competition , pretty sure NVIDIA would have cheaped out on the 1060 more if it wasn't for the RX480. Let the dealing hunting commence :sneaky: or well the next few months ;p

They would have dragged out the 1070 sales for 3+ months like they did with the 970/960 cards.

 

[RussianSensation]

Its not the retailers. Its nv setting a msrp price so low they know no one except for a few showoff cases will be sold at that price.
Its intentionally and planned. And its working.
You sell the cards at 100 usd above the adverticed price.
Trick people into selecting a card and then when they cant find it at the price where they made their decision they will just pay the extra.

Its insane they can do it. I have no idea why reviewers dont call them out on it.
Imagine if apple did the same. Even loyal apple supporters would be angry.

Beats me even for such a strong brand. Wow. Textbook example of what a strong brand can do.

Then on top but connected is this paper launch with extreme few cards.

Bingo.

All the AMD vs. NV bickering has masked what continues to be an onslaught of NV price increases. If you want to look at it another way -- NV is manipulating GPU names and raising prices or artificially gimping x60 and x70 series.

GTX660 vs. GTX1060
=> GTX660 cost $190-210
=> GTX1060 costs $250-300
=> GTX660 had 2GB of VRAM just like the 670/680 did vs. GTX1060 that's VRAM gimped against their GTX1070/1080 siblings

- GTX680 was 38% faster than MSI Gaming 660 and 45% faster than the reference 660.

Now we get:

- GTX1080 is 55% faster than MSI Gaming 1060 and 60% (!) faster than a reference 1060. We are getting a double hit: pay more and get a card that's far inferior to what the x60 card used to be.

GTX1060 is really a GTX1050Ti, not a real x60 card. GTX1070 is a GTX660Ti not a real GTX670/970 successor because the gap between the x70 and x80 card hasn't been this large since probably GTX470 vs. 480. The only reason it looks good against GTX960 is because 960 was the worst x60 card since 8600GT/S. 960 only brought 11-15% more performance over the 760.

GTX1070 vs. GTX970 = effectively $80-$120 more expensive and is more gimped against the 1080 than 970 was against the 980. :thumbsdown:

The real tragedy here is that the GPU market is getting worse and worse and consumers don't care. Instead, they are actually happy to pay higher prices and gloat how NV makes more $$$ than AMD as if we as consumers should care. It's hilarious because when I see NV now approaching 60% GM, it shows how much I am getting ripped off as a consumer, not how amazing it is because during $349 GTX570/$499 580 days, NV's margins were in the 30-40% range!

Now NV is just following up with a $250-300 GTX660 successor but NOT only are they increasing the price another $60-110 over the 660, but the GTX1060 is more performance neutered against GTX1070/1080 than GTX660 was against GTX670/680.

RX 480 is like an HD7850 given 7850 launched with a $249 MSRP and RX 480 is a $199-239 card.

1080p
$210 MSI Gaming 660 was 23% faster than HD7850
$290 MSI Gaming 1060 is now only 11% faster than an RX 480

It's amazing how brand biased the market has become that NV can price GTX1060 at $250-300 and it's suddenly a good deal. GTX970 was a $330 card around launch!

This is not price gouging, it's rather proof that the vast majority of PC gamers are not technically savvy, do not know their GPU history, and will not vote with their wallet against rising GPU prices.

At this point, NV might as well push Volta GP104 2070 to $449-499 and move up the GTX 2060 to $300-349 level.

 

[Ranulf]

When was this?

Uhh, less than two years ago with just the 970 cards, nvidia wise. Goes back further though. Why are the 1060 cards inching up towards the $329-350 of the 970 cards? 1070s are $50-100 more than the 970s.

 

[realibrad]

Uhh, less than two years ago with just the 970 cards, nvidia wise. Goes back further though. Why are the 1060 cards inching up towards the $329-350 of the 970 cards? 1070s are $50-100 more than the 970s.

I remember getting my 9800gtx+ for that price.

 

[R0H1T]

It's amazing how brand biased the market has become that NV can price GTX1060 at $250-300 and it's suddenly a good deal. GTX970 was a $330 card around launch!

This is not price gouging, it's rather proof that the vast majority of PC gamers are not technically savvy, do not know their GPU history, and will not vote with their wallet against rising GPU prices.

At this point, NV might as well push Volta GP104 2070 to $449-499 and move up the GTX 2060 to $300-349 level.

You could just as easily say that even with the more than "well informed" users the Nvidia tax has become an acceptable norm & they're willing to pay more $ for less improvement over an equivalent AMD card, the 480/1060 being classic examples. This is not to say that Nvidia's efficiency lead doesn't play a role in it, for instance I do pay more heed to perf/W than most but perf/$ is still king for me, but at this point in time Nvidia has become the Apple of GPU world whilst AMD is relegated to an LG or HTC level.

 

[vissarix]

As expected once again nvidia delivered...contrary to overhyped underdelivered gpu by the competition.

Faster then a rx480, consumes 40watt less, runs cooler and have more oc headroom...i mean what else could you want more?

Yes you can argue that maybe the rx480 will be faster 3 years from now ( maybe!!!) But these are hopeless dreams, and to be fair after 3 years these gpu's will be garbage anyway...

 

[krumme]

The msi gaming 970 i bought a year ago was excactly same price as a msi gaming 1060 in stock today. My 970 could oc to 1500. Its a damn small difference oc vs oc and even stock vs stock. Hardly even noticiable when oc.

Its anecdotal but i am with rs on this. If it wasnt for the rising margins i would have thought it was tsmc wafer prices but as rs shows its not so.

Damn shame. Can hope gf can crank up production so prices will go down.

 

[Headfoot]

As expected once again nvidia delivered...contrary to overhyped underdelivered gpu by the competition.

Faster then a rx480, consumes 40watt less, runs cooler and have more oc headroom...i mean what else could you want more?

Yes you can argue that maybe the rx480 will be faster 3 years from now ( maybe!!!) But these are hopeless dreams, and to be fair after 3 years these gpu's will be garbage anyway...

Your response to their hype -- is your own hype? It's a bit faster, with a bit more headroom, with a bit less power consumption, for a bit more money. And if you're comparing to 8GB 480, with a bit less VRAM too. Very narrow price gap versus the 8GB version though.

 

[Enigmoid]

Bingo.

...
=> GTX660 had 2GB of VRAM just like the 670/680 did vs. GTX1060 that's VRAM gimped against their GTX1070/1080 siblings

...

You consider the 1060 Vram gimped?

 

[boozzer]

you guys read the review comparing 480 and 1060 in doom? 480 is 30% faster in vulkan/doom 1080p. if vulkan is widely use for games within the year, 1060 could become a gigantic lemon, just like 960.

 

[RussianSensation]

Uhh, less than two years ago with just the 970 cards, nvidia wise. Goes back further though. Why are the 1060 cards inching up towards the $329-350 of the 970 cards? 1070s are $50-100 more than the 970s.

Yup. Most people don't want to face/admit reality that NV went $249 GTX560Ti -> $499 GTX680 -> $699 GTX1080 and effectively everything else has increased in price. It's why NV's gross margins went from low 30% to almost 60% in the same period from 2010-2016.

This is what NV has done now:

GK106 $190-230 GTX660 => GP106 $250-300 GTX1060
^ 1060's performance standing is worse relative to the 1070/1080 than 660 was relative to 670/680

$300 GTX660Ti => $380-450 GTX1070
OR if in fairness, the 1070 is a bit closer to the 1080 than 660Ti was to the 680 but either way we slice it, it becomes $329 970 -> $380-450 1070.

$500 GTX680 => $600-700 GTX1080

GTX660Ti was 3rd card from the top during the Kepler Gen 1 and it cost $299. It was GK104, not GK106. NV's 3rd card from the top this generation is the GTX1060 but it's now just a GP106, not a cut-down GP104. That's why the performance delta between 1060 vs. 1080 is now massive. But NV went further by raising the price of the reference card all the way to $300, where the GK104 660Ti used to sit.

Unfortunately, we all know that NV actually jacked up the prices during the Kepler generation, which means we cannot even use Kepler as the right point of reference. This means it's much worse than it even seems.

GF104 $199 460/ (GF114) GTX560=>$380-450 GTX1070 predecessor (GP104)
GF114 $239 GTX560Ti => $600-700 GTX1080 predecessor (GP104)
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4344/nvidias-geforce-gtx-560-top-to-bottom-overclock

"GTX 560 Ti, in a nutshell, is a complete video card using the GF104 design; it is to GTX 460 what GTX 580 was to GTX 480."

===> GTX 1080 => GTX460 or 560Ti depends on how you want to look at it but it's the same lineage from the $200-250 price bracket!

What's GTX1060 then? It's GTS450 or GTX550Ti's predecessor (GF1x6)

Pulled straight from AT's GPU reviews of the past is proof that GTX1060 is a GTS1050 lineage card, blatantly marketing re-labelled as a GTX1060:

"Throughout the lifetime of the 400 series, NVIDIA launched 4 GPUs: GF100, GF104, GF106, and GF108. Launched in that respective order, they became the GTX 480, GTX 460, GTS 450, and GT 430.

GF106 GTS450 = $129 MSRP
"Now 2 months after that launch we&#8217;re going to find out if lightning strikes twice. Today NVIDIA is launching the next desktop video card in the 400 series: GTS 450 Powering it is their new Fermi family GPU &#8211; GF106 &#8211; the next in the line of successively smaller Fermi GPUs for cheaper products."

GF116 GTX550Ti (refresh of GF106) = $149 MSRP
"Thus after GTX 560 and the GF114 GPU in January, it&#8217;s time for the 3rd and final of the originally scaled down Fermi GPUs to be set loose: GF106. Reincarnated as GF116, it&#8217;s the fully enabled GPU that powers NVIDIA&#8217;s latest card, the GeForce GTX 550 Ti."

G(architecture)1x6 successor:

$129 GF106 GTS450 / $149 GF116 GTX550Ti Successor is = GP106 = $249-299 MSRP. :awe::biggrin: :whiste:


========
In summary, NV went from $129 GTS450 / $149 GTX550Ti and used fake marketing to relabel this card as a GTX1060 while raising the price to $249-299. It also means the $199-229 GTX460 (or $199-249 GTX 560/560Ti) became $380-450 GTX1070 and $600-700 GTX1080, respectively. :ninja: All of this happened in only 6 years.

 

[MrPickins]

So faster than the RX 480 in the majority of titles today, very close in AMD Gaming Evolved DX12 titles. 50% better perf/watt according to TPU, and superior perf/mm² using a less dense proccess as well. GTX 970 sales successor?

I notice you didn't mention the price difference.

 

[BeauCharles]

When the dust settles the RX 480 8GB and the GTX 1060 will be competing against each other much in the same way the GTX 960 4GB and R9 380 4GB have with the slight price advantage of AMD intact and the performance advantage more or less leveled. Never understood why everyone wets their pants about launch prices when they know full well that things calm down a few months down the road.

 

[Bacon1]

We used PresentMon for Vulkan and DX12.

https://github.com/GameTechDev/PresentMon

How are you re-created the FPS from the numbers given in the CSV?

 

[linkgoron]

As expected once again nvidia delivered...contrary to overhyped underdelivered gpu by the competition.

Faster then a rx480, consumes 40watt less, runs cooler and have more oc headroom...i mean what else could you want more?

Yes you can argue that maybe the rx480 will be faster 3 years from now ( maybe!!!) But these are hopeless dreams, and to be fair after 3 years these gpu's will be garbage anyway...

I think you can argue that the rx480 is already faster in todays dx12 games (and doom).

 

[zinfamous]

As expected once again nvidia delivered...contrary to overhyped underdelivered gpu by the competition.

Faster then a rx480, consumes 40watt less, runs cooler and have more oc headroom...i mean what else could you want more?

Yes you can argue that maybe the rx480 will be faster 3 years from now ( maybe!!!) But these are hopeless dreams, and to be fair after 3 years these gpu's will be garbage anyway...

are you actually reading the benchmarks and looking at the numbers?

none of what you say here is reflected in the reported data.

comparing DX12 and DX11 benches, it is basically a wash. 1060 slightly faster w/DX11 and 480 much faster than that difference in DX12.

what does this tell you? 480 is, basically, already faster. 1060 will be underperforming within 6 months and still probably be priced 20-30% higher.

bully for you if you like to make poor decisions on a weaker, more expensive card like that, though. the only way nVidia outperforms on games within the next 3 or so years is if Volta was actually designed with DX12 in mind, unlike the DOA Pascal. ...that is probably a big if, though.

 

[RussianSensation]

You consider the 1060 Vram gimped?

I know what you are trying to do with this comment (set it up that if I call 1060 VRAM gimped then how can I recommend the RX 480 4GB)? but that's not the point of my post at all. Leave the 480 out of it.

$190-230 GTX660 = closer in performance to the 670/680, has full VRAM of those cards
$250-300 GTX1060 = worse in performance to the 1070/1080, has less VRAM than their cards

I already typed out why that is. It's because GTX1060 is NOT a real x60 series card. It's a relabeling of the GTS450 GF106 / GTX550Ti GF116. What NV has done is taken a $129-149 level card and brought it up to $249-299 price levels. In order to make the GTX660Ti level card seem like a good value, they relabelled it as a GTX1070, and raised the price of the 1080 to $600-700, thus allowing the 1070 to look 'good' at $380-450. They would not have been able to relabel GTS1050 as a GTX1060 and call the GTX1070 as the real GTX1060Ti as that would have not allowed NV to charge as high prices for both of those cards. In order to raise the prices across tiers, they bumped up the marketing names. It's why GTX1060 is a GP106 not a cut-down GP104.

It's pretty easy to see NV's marketing BS over this generation.

GTX660Ti cost $299 and it outperformed the GTX580. Eerily familiar to the GTX1070 vs. Titan X?

GTX1060Ti should have cost $299 and it should have also outperformed the Titan X.

You bet it does! but now NV called it GTX1070 and raised the price to $380-450. The price increase from the $499 680 to a $599-699 1080 hides the fact that GTX1070 itself is also gimped and overpriced relative to the Kepler, nevermind Fermi generation where GTX1070 was nothing more than a GF104/114 GTX460/560 level card. Brilliant marketing and most of you fell for it since you are defending it.

$129-149 GTS450/GTX550Ti => $249-299 GTX1060 (marketing)
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Axle/GeForce_GTS_450_OC/

GF106 $129 GTS450 = 98%
GF104 $229 GTX460 = 152%

vs.

GP106 $249-299 GTX1060 = 97%
GP104 $599-699 GTX1080 = 163%

FACE the TRUTH and ADMIT IT: NV has more than doubled the prices of videocards in the last 6 years and manipulated the marketing names to hide this fact. The GPU-Z engineering names are the only thing left for tech savvy PC gamers to know the truth.

GTX1080 is really a GTX460/560Ti lineage/level card and Big Pascal is the true GTX1080.

Where do you think NV's doubling of gross margins came from in the same time period? From thin air?

Any objective and open-minded hardware user who reads my posts will see that NV's gross margins have skyrocketed and mimic exactly what's been happening with doubling of the prices in the same 2010-2016 time frame.

https://media.ycharts.com/charts/ff20bffe6ceb1ffe4423e6e26ec5896b.png

The fact that RX 480 is "insert any other reason" is irrelevant here. What's relevant here is that the GPU market is becoming more and more of a rip-off and you are all falling for it by defending it and not wanting to acknowledge what's happening in the industry.


===

And BTW, what I said about gamers could have bought a $250-275 R9 290 and skipped x60 NV next gen but instead they will pay $200 for a 960 and $200-250 for a 1060 to get marginally faster performance is also coming true. I called it in January 2015 when the $200 GTX960 vs. 250-270 R9 290 showdown started.

 

[Erenhardt]

14-15.1% performance gains from overclocking:

Founder's Edition

MSI Gaming X

3x as much as the reference version of the competitor (5.0%):

Orly?

Just by adjusting fan and power settings 480 gets as much improvement as 1060 from overclocking. Add OC on top of it, and 480 is better ocer than 1060.

What a sad state of nvidia overclocking has become after amazing ocing of maxwell. Pascal is a giant failure on the OC front. What a letdown...

 

[linkgoron]

In order to make the GTX660Ti level card seem like a good value, they relabelled it as a GTX1070, and raised the price of the 1080 to $600-700, thus allowing the 1070 to look 'good' at $380-450.

While I usually agree with you, the only reason the 1070 looks good at its current price is because it has no competition from AMD. As you're basically stating, nvidia's 660ti level card is outperforming everything AMD has to offer, until who knows when. Maybe 2017. If you want more performance, you only have one vendor.

 

[LTC8K6]

are you actually reading the benchmarks and looking at the numbers?

none of what you say here is reflected in the reported data.

comparing DX12 and DX11 benches, it is basically a wash. 1060 slightly faster w/DX11 and 480 much faster than that difference in DX12.

what does this tell you? 480 is, basically, already faster. 1060 will be underperforming within 6 months and still probably be priced 20-30% higher.

bully for you if you like to make poor decisions on a weaker, more expensive card like that, though. the only way nVidia outperforms on games within the next 3 or so years is if Volta was actually designed with DX12 in mind, unlike the DOA Pascal. ...that is probably a big if, though.

If the 1060 doesn't catch up with driver improvements, NV can always release a 1060Ti in 6 months, probably at the same launch price.

The board looks ready for an upgrade. :biggrin:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1060/images/front.jpg

People seem to adore the "Ti" designation.

There's going to be a lot of "settling" in the next months among all these cards, I think. What we see right now, is not where all the pieces will be later.

 

[Enigmoid]

Stop exaggerating the prices.

660 launched at $229.
1060 launches at $249.

 

[Erenhardt]

What is worth a notice is some reviewers using Doom in OGL not in Vulkan. I wonder if there was something in the reviewers guide on that matter

 

[zinfamous]

If the 1060 doesn't catch up with driver improvements, NV can always release a 1060Ti in 6 months, probably at the same launch price.

The board looks ready for an upgrade. :biggrin:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_1060/images/front.jpg

People seem to adore the "Ti" designation.

There's going to be a lot of "settling" in the next months among all these cards, I think. What we see right now, is not where all the pieces will be later.

Oh for sure. nVidia has a lot of headroom to fiddle with their release names and respond in kind as they stop supporting these cards within a year and charge premium prices for low-end and mainstream cards right now, just because they can.

I mean, I would if I could, too.

 

[crisium]

What is worth a notice is some reviewers using Doom in OGL not in Vulkan. I wonder if there was something in the reviewers guide on that matter

That, and some of them simply reuse old benchmarks on old drivers for the old cards. Why bother showing new developments in gaming if it means you have endure the struggle of rebenching? Guru3d is very guilty of this, for example. The consequence of laziness is readers get outdated and incomplete info.