That review does not have amd performance driver.In real life AMD's overhyped advantage in DX12 is in the single digits, and that includes their Gaming Evolved titles (more like tech demos). Even custom RX 480 is slower overall than stock clocks GTX 1060 6GB - using an extra 80W and with less OCing headroom on top. I know it's hard to accept but GTX 1060 GB is the better card for most.
Good thing I wasn't drinking anything.And the extra 80watts are made back when you start crpyto-miner when going to toilet.
The 1060 are paying for themselves under Linux, so free on a perf/$ metric makes it interesting.
With a Gsync monitor being $150-300 more than an equivalent Freesync monitor, the $/performance metric for a 1060 vs. 480 is awful.
And, for me, *sync is a must. The 1060 was never an option.
AMD fans seem to be forgetting about VR. That's where gaming is going in the future, and Nvidia is looking much better there. So for people that want to keep their cards for more than two years the VR argument is just as valid as the DX 12 argument.
In other words, nobody here knows how suitable these cards will be for gaming 2+ years from now.
In other words, nobody here knows how suitable these cards will be for gaming 2+ years from now.
AMD fans seem to be forgetting about VR. That's where gaming is going in the future, and Nvidia is looking much better there. So for people that want to keep their cards for more than two years the VR argument is just as valid as the DX 12 argument.
In other words, nobody here knows how suitable these cards will be for gaming 2+ years from now.
Actual quality VR games will be vulkan and DX12 because they will be able to produce higher FPS and lower frame times because of features like Async Compute. Those are games that AMD does better in. So you are right, VR future looks good for AMD.
Actual quality VR games will be vulkan and DX12 because they will be able to produce higher FPS and lower frame times because of features like Async Compute. Those are games that AMD does better in. So you are right, VR future looks good for AMD.
That's where gaming is going in the future, and Nvidia is looking much better there.
You can't predict the future any better than anyone else
3GB model listed at 80% the price of custom GTX 1060 6GB in China. MSRP is 3/4 the price of the faster sibling according to ITHome. Below $200 in US?
IS the 3gb model slower or just less Vram?
That's a good price drop.
It is going to be slower with one SM cluster disabled and half the vRAM of the regular 1060. Say goodbye to ultra textures with this card. Overall the 4GB RX480 at around 200-something is the clear choice here as we are seeing 3GB cards choke in newer titles that dump textures into vRAM.
I dont think anyone would say hello to Ultra textures if there were no noticeable difference or minimal difference in image quality for the performance hit it costs. 3GB, 4GB 6GB or whatever. Still a sweet 1080p card.
If you overclock your 1060 @ 1080p it will beat a overclocked 480 in every benchmark, in every game. direct X 11 or 12. It will also win every benchmark except Hitman @ 1440p.
Buy a 1060 for 259$ and overclock it. That makes it the best value in it class.
And uses less power which will give off less heat in your case.
Much better VR performance to boot.
Funny the overclocked 980 is even faster.
If the 1060 is running 100fps+ in Doom in OGL @ 1080p, why use Vulcan?
Is there something I'm missing?
A $200 480 would be a clear choice if it was available.It is going to be slower with one SM cluster disabled and half the vRAM of the regular 1060. Say goodbye to ultra textures with this card. Overall the 4GB RX480 at around 200-something is the clear choice here as we are seeing 3GB cards choke in newer titles that dump textures into vRAM.
A $200 480 would be a clear choice if it was available.
At what res? And, can anyone tell the difference? Got any pics? sources? etc.?Textures were just an arbitrary example. GTA5 wants more than 3GB with all the nice effects enabled, and so will more future titles. 3GB is not enough in 2016 for a card in the 200 dollar range. They couldn't be this stupid, and that is why I think that they probably can't put 4GB on it due to some restriction by removing the SM cluster, perhaps something similiar to what happened with the last 0.5GB on the 970 due to it being a cut down GM104.
At what res? And, can anyone tell the difference? Got any pics? sources? etc.?
dude GTA V is showing 4GB itself being insufficient at 1080p for the highest settings There are quite a few games now where 4GB itself is borderline sufficient at 1080p. Less than that is just a shortsighted buy.
http://techreport.com/review/30473/amd-radeon-rx-470-graphics-card-reviewed/3
"The somewhat furrier frame-time graph for the RX 470 versus the RX 480 in GTA V is one case where we might be observing the difference that 8GB of memory makes on the beefier Polaris card, as well. With GTA V's "extended distance scaling" maxed, the RX 470, the R9 380X, and the GTX 960 all appear to be swapping data in from main memory often, while the RX 480 appears to be able to keep all the assets it needs in its pool of GDDR5. I'm guessing that keeping that data local has a noticeable impact on smoothness and performance."
If a gamer is on a very strict budget then I would recommend Rx 480 4GB at USD 199 or Rx 470 4GB (if available at USD 179) otherwise I would say Rx 480 8GB and GTX 1060 6GB at USD 250-USD 270 are the best options for anybody who keeps the GPU for 2+ years.