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

[Bryf50]

Feel free to cherry-pick your favorite AMD Gaming Evolved titles - that doesn't change the fact that according to the majority of reviews out there GTX 1060 is faster overall, more power efficient, generally has an edge in terms overclocking headroom, launched shortly after Polaris 10 ('several months advantage to market = lie') and was available starting day 1 at MSRP with custom cards in stock. Despite all the FUD, it is a much better gaming card than the disappointing RX 480. Meanwhile NVIDIA has zero competition above $250 and a full lineup of FinFET mobile chips out (GP107 coming soon).

When my companies GPU is faster than yours it's because it's better. When your companies GPU is faster than mine it's because the game was optimized for it. It's a weak argument no matter which "side" you're on.

 

[Sweepr]

According to ComputerBase the Nitro 480, Asus Strix 480 and Red Devil 480 are all faster than the 1060 FE (by 3%). So I'm not sure how "it is a much better gaming card" is true. Even the after market MSI is only 3% faster than the Nitro+. This is all in DX11, without any DX12 benchmarks.

Any $249 custom card at stock (same as FE) is 13.6% faster than reference RX 480 according to TechPowerUp. Custom vs custom is closer but the 1060 overclocks better (8.6% vs 15.1%), draws significantly less power (especially when pushed to its limits) and is easier to find at MSRP - all of which make it a better card in my view. Feel free to disagree.

 

[Sweepr]

When my companies GPU is faster than yours it's because it's better. When your companies GPU is faster than mine it's because the game was optimized for it. It's a weak argument no matter which "side" you're on.

I am aware of the hundreds of DX12 benchmark results already posted here (mostly Gaming Evolved titles), if you want to play only/mostly these games look somewhere else - buy an AMD card. Still doesn't change the fact that dozens of reviews put the GTX 1060 ahead overall. The reason is simple, people didn't stop playing the DX11, OpenGL, DX12 titles where NVIDIA does better - and they probably won't anytime soon. On top of that you get the more efficient card and plenty of custom options readily available.

 

[swilli89]

Any $249 custom card at stock (same as FE) is 13.6% faster than reference RX 480 according to TechPowerUp. Custom is custom is closer but the 1060 overclocks better (8.6% vs 15.1%, draws significantly less power (especially when pushed to its limits) and is easier to find at MSRP - all of which make it a better card in my view. Feel free to disagree.

TPU has easily the most nvidia biased game suite, but you already know this. Also way to pick a graph highlighting a custom 1060 but only includes an OEM 480.

The whole point is that its arguable, it DEPENDS ON THE GAME. Yet your thread states matter of fact performance and TDP (which varies based on Custom design). Your bias is very strong, and I don't think someone like you should be choosing thread titles.

How about we back it down to the old sane practice of just calling it the "1060 owners thread, or 1060 megathread?"

 

[Sweepr]

TPU has easily the most nvidia biased game suite, but you already know this. Also way to pick a graph highlighting a custom 1060 but only includes an OEM 480.

ComputerBase has easily the most pro-AMD results out there, but you already knew this. Custom OCed RX 480 is still worse than stock GTX 1060:

Power hog next to GP106 as well:

https://tpucdn.com/reviews/MSI/RX_480_Gaming_X/images/power_average.png

 

[swilli89]

ComputerBase has easily the most pro-AMD results out there, but you already knew this. Custom OCed RX 480 is still worse than stock GTX 1060:

Power hog next to GP106 as well:

https://tpucdn.com/reviews/MSI/RX_480_Gaming_X/images/power_average.png

Funny more people would rather buy a 480 especially given all of your "data".

 

[Bacon1]

ComputerBase has easily the most pro-AMD results out there, but you already knew this.

I'm surprised you can say that with a straight face, considering it consists of Anno 2205 which is more Nvidia friendly than even project cars.

Others are COD BO 3, Witcher 3, FO 4 and Farcry Primal.

The difference?

They actually test inside a case and do warm up and not just 5 minute benchmarks before the cards heat up and downclock like TPU.

They also spend the time to test DX12 or DX11 depending on what is faster for that card, just like normal people would do.

 

[Sweepr]

I'm surprised you can say that with a straight face, considering it consists of Anno 2205 which is more Nvidia friendly than even project cars.

Others are COD BO 3, Witcher 3, FO 4 and Farcry Primal.

The difference?

They actually test inside a case and do warm up and not just 5 minute benchmarks before the cards heat up and downclock like TPU.

They also spend the time to test DX12 or DX11 depending on what is faster for that card, just like normal people would do.

Their power consumption results are completely out of touch with reality. Reference RX 480 drawing less power than MSI Gaming X GTX 1060 while the latter is 42W more efficient in TPU's review and 31W @ Guru3D, just to mention one example. And they usually do a much better job fine tuning the Radeon cards in their reviews in terms of overclocking/settings. Also their gaming results more often than not contradict other websites.

 

[swilli89]

Their power consumption results are completely out of touch with reality. Reference RX 480 drawing less power than MSI Gaming X GTX 1060 while the latter is 42W more efficient according to TPU, just to mention one example. And they usually do a much better job fine tuning the Radeon cards in their reviews in terms of overclocking/settings. Also their gaming results more often than not contradict other websites.

Please don't make claims about a widely accepted and trusted website. Computerbase has always reviewed with integrity and for you to claim otherwise without any data is crazy. For your love of TechPowerUp I will just leave this here.

https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/would-you-buy-gtx-1060-or-rx-480.224303/page-5

Seems out of over 20,000 votes the TPU community prefers the 480 by almost 40%!

 

[Sweepr]

Seems out of over 20,000 votes the TPU community prefers the 480 by almost 40%!

Come back when you have any concrete evidence that it sells more than GTX 1060. Personally I don't own any stock from these companies, so I couldn't care less about the outcome, maybe that's not your case though.

 

[swilli89]

Come back when you have any concrete evidence that it sells more than GTX 1060. Personally I don't own any stock from these companies, so I couldn't care less about the outcome, maybe that's not your case though.

Which begs the question, why do you do all the things that you do? Just randomly really dislike a giant corporation?

And I just gave you a bit of concrete data sampled from over twenty thousand people. What more can you ask for?

You're the very first to post negative news concerning AMD and any positive news for Nvidia/Intel. This shows that you're not so much pro-nvidia or pro-Intel, its that your anti-AMD. You in one motion posted the thread about Zen's benchmarks scores and at the same time have posted several times in that very thread about how off the numbers are. What is the point of that?

You can attempt your thinly veiled attack against me for owning stock. Obviously you only know that because I'm honest. I own several positions in the semiconductor market and so I follow the industry as a whole. But again the question is begged, why exactly do you feel a personal vendetta against a corporation if you have zero skin in the game?

 

[Bacon1]

Their power consumption results are completely out of touch with reality. Reference RX 480 drawing less power than MSI Gaming X GTX 1060 while the latter is 42W more efficient in TPU's review and 31W @ Guru3D, just to mention one example. And they usually do a much better job fine tuning the Radeon cards in their reviews in terms of overclocking/settings. Also their gaming results more often than not contradict other websites.

Or maybe its because Nvidia cards cause more CPU usage / power overall since they relay on software solutions vs hardware. Look at reviews that show CPU usage in games like Witcher 3. AMD cards end up using less CPU overall, which means while the GPU might be using more power, the system is using similar power as the CPU is pulling down more.

Also the game being tested can heavily influence the power usage as well, as shown by computerbase but don't think TPU shows usage from multiple games.

 

[Sweepr]

And I just gave you a bit of concrete data sampled from over twenty thousand people. What more can you ask for?

Actual sales data, do you have any? Online polls are hardly relevant, and I'm pretty sure both of them sold way more than 20.000+. Come on swilli89, I expect something better from someone who owns several positions in the semicondutor industry.

 

[Bacon1]

Actual sales data, do you have any? Online polls are hardly relevant, and I'm pretty sure both of them sold way more than the 20.000+. Come on swilli89, I expect something better from someone who owns several positions in the semicondutor industry.

Where is your sales data?

Why is it even relevant? Worse products sell for more money constantly due to better marketing in all industries, having high sales doesn't mean you are better, only that your marketing and name brand recognition is.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Actual sales data, do you have any? Online polls are hardly relevant, and I'm pretty sure both of them sold way more than the 20.000+. Come on swilli89, I expect something better from someone who owns several positions in the semicondutor industry.

He's talking from a public opinion point of view not from a marketing or salesperson. See the difference? No sales being mentioned while you insist as if that makes your point more valid.

Sent from my HUAWEI MT7-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Sweepr]

Or maybe its because Nvidia cards cause more CPU usage / power overall since they relay on software solutions vs hardware. Look at reviews that show CPU usage in games like Witcher 3. AMD cards end up using less CPU overall, which means while the GPU might be using more power, the system is using similar power as the CPU is pulling down more.

That's an interesting guess but even if true I seriously doubt it would make up for >30-40W difference, especially in Anno 2205 (the game they always test). Wouldn't it favor NVIDIA in these situations due to less CPU overhead? More data would be appreciated, you didn't provide any to support your claim.

 

[Sweepr]

Where is your sales data?

Why is it even relevant? Worse products sell for more money constantly due to better marketing in all industries, having high sales doesn't mean you are better, only that your marketing and name brand recognition is.

It is relevant because he is suggesting it is the more popular card, based on this forum poll.

He's talking from a public opinion point of view not from a marketing or salesperson. See the difference? No sales being mentioned while you insist as if that makes your point more valid.

Sent from my HUAWEI MT7-L09 using Tapatalk

That's funny because posting forum poll results and pretending this reflects how everyone sees this match (GTX 1060 vs RX 480) sounds a lot like marketing or salesperson. Maybe not in your definition (color me surprised).

 

[zentan]

All the recent TPU reviews give clear edge overall to gtx 1060 6GB vs rx 480 8GB, be it reference vs reference or custom OC models vs custom OC models.

Even in the pic attached some posts before(taken from CB), there's one custom gtx 1060 and it beats all custom rx 480s present in the test. So overall it is not unfair on the part of Sweepr to call it faster than rx 480.
One more thing that goes in gtx 1060s favour is people pairing it with weaker and more-midrange sort of CPUs,where the lesser CPU overhead with many dx11 games for Nvidia cards would give it advantage over it's counterpart,a point which easily ignored.
But still a good custom rx480 is not a bad card at all and in some scenarios a better card. Who knows it might close the gap more or even outrun gtx 1060 in future(3months? 6 months? a year? or two?)
Mind you we are not even talking of power-draw and OC-ing performance gains.
Arguments can be made in either of the card's favour, be it "future is dx12 and AMD does better there than in dx11" or "gtx 1060 is faster at present and has better OC-performance".
Anyway by going for either of rx 480 8GB or 1060 6GB it doesn't matter that much really at present, neither of the cards are that bad that one has to give justification for it's purchase.

 

[Bacon1]

More data would be appreciated, you didn't provide any to support your claim.

Your quote was nicer before the edit.

Look at other places that do full system power tests, not just GPU tests.

See a 35 watt difference, same as computerbase, which test 4 games usually btw. Anno, ROTTR, SW:BF and XCom 2.

https://www.computerbase.de/2016-07/geforce-gtx-1060-test/6/

Wattage used changes very quickly depending on the voltage / power settings. Its simple to underclock 480s and lower their power while increasing FPS. Plenty of people on the forums did so, so it makes sense that a custom one with a lower power setting can heavily reduce it like the powercolor devil they tested. They even show how much power each setting uses.

https://www.computerbase.de/2016-07/powercolor-radeon-rx-480-red-devil-test/5/

30% more power usage for 9% FPS gain from Silent -> OC mode. They tweaked it (? "alt") to use 18% more power for 6% more FPS. Silent mode is 10% more efficient than the stock.

 

[Sweepr]

Look at other places that do full system power tests, not just GPU tests.
See a 35 watt difference, same as computerbase, which test 4 games usually btw. Anno, ROTTR, SW:BF and XCom 2.

https://www.computerbase.de/2016-07/geforce-gtx-1060-test/6/

35W is exactly what you would expect given the TDP of reference RX 480 and GTX 1060 FE.

So I checked other reviews with system power consumption data, and it tells the same story as TPU and Guru3D, the custom GTX 1060 is using >30-40W less power. CB as usual comes up with the an outlier favouring one particular brand.

http://www.eteknix.com/msi-gtx-1060-gaming-x-graphics-card-review/11/

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/94663-msi-geforce-gtx-1060-gaming-x/?page=11

Wattage used changes very quickly depending on the voltage / power settings. Its simple to underclock 480s and lower their power while increasing FPS. Plenty of people on the forums did so, so it makes sense that a custom one with a lower power setting can heavily reduce it like the powercolor devil they tested. They even show how much power each setting uses.

https://www.computerbase.de/2016-07/powercolor-radeon-rx-480-red-devil-test/5/

There's plenty of underclocking/undervolting potential with Pascal as well, yet for some reason they did not test it:

 

[Bacon1]

You keep using custom 1060 vs stock 480. I already showed that custom 480 are both faster and use less power which reduces the power usage.

There's plenty of underclocking/undervolting potential with Pascal as well, yet for some reason they did not test it

Funny you'd complain about that, when doing the exact same thing in all of your posts.

 

[Sweepr]

You keep using custom 1060 vs stock 480. I already showed that custom 480 are both faster and use less power which reduces the power usage.

The GTX 1060 Gaming X vs reference RX 480 comparison was only meant to showcase how far from reality some CB results are (Radeon system draws less power there), despite the fact that a few users take what this website posts as gospel.

Funny you'd complain about that, when doing the exact same thing in all of your posts.

I just posted undervolting/underclocking curves for both cards above, funny that you ignored this.

 

[96Firebird]

Man, people are very upset that the GTX 1060 is faster than the RX 480.

Get over it guys.

 

[Bacon1]

The GTX 1060 Gaming X vs reference RX 480 comparison was only meant to showcase how far from reality some CB results are (Radeon system draws less power there), despite the fact that a few users take what this website posts as gospel.

Except the reviews from Computerbase show the similar power levels as you are showing. It depends on the game how much the difference is. They also show how you can lower the voltage but keep the same performance on the 480.

I already gave all the details here: http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=thread...rx-480-120w-249.2478605/page-96#post-38436031

Feel free to read it this time.

 

[Sweepr]

Except the reviews from Computerbase show the similar power levels as you are showing. It depends on the game how much the difference is.

According to CB the reference RX 480 system draws less power, while TPU / Guru3D / eTeknix / Hexus show 30-40W+ less for the MSI Gaming X (either system power consumption or estimated TDP). Sorry but different games don't explain this, and that's only one example of their inconsistencies.

They also show how you can lower the voltage but keep the same performance on the 480.

I already gave all the details here: http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=thread...rx-480-120w-249.2478605/page-96#post-38436031

Feel free to read it this time.

I did, and I also gave you Tom's Hardware results for both cards above. GTX 1060 is also capable of underclocking/undervolting (~85% the performance at nearly half the power). Did CB test it, like they did with the RX 480?