Expected from a 960 owner lolits not a winner till the fat lady sings.
Than rx480 > 1060, on performance. just like 380 > 960.
Unless 1060 is really held back by a bandwidth or ROP choice, I suspect Nvidia will target clocks for it that put it close to the same favorable light to 980 as the 1070 is to the Titan X.
Nvidia is glowing with delight every time a review states how the 1070 at $379* beats the $999 Titan X. They targeted the clockrates deliberately to give it a ~3-10% lead.
I'm going with a 1060 to be ~5% faster than a 980. They want it not just barely beating the $330 970. They want to advertise how it beats the $550 launch GTX 980 for half or less than half the price.
*Product not yet reviewed by any website.
Unless 1060 is really held back by a bandwidth or ROP choice, I suspect Nvidia will target clocks for it that put it close to the same favorable light to 980 as the 1070 is to the Titan X.
Nvidia is glowing with delight every time a review states how the 1070 at $379* beats the $999 Titan X. They targeted the clockrates deliberately to give it a ~3-10% lead.
I'm going with a 1060 to be ~5% faster than a 980. They want it not just barely beating the $330 970. They want to advertise how it beats the $550 launch GTX 980 for half or less than half the price.
*Product not yet reviewed by any website.
The rumors of having half the cores as GP104 but 3/4 the bus width and ROP's doesn't make sense unless GP104 is ROP performance limited and it is cheaper long term for Nvidia to build a bigger chip with a wider bus to use GDDR5 instead of G5X.
So it's either a rearranged GPC cluster to get 1536 cores with a 192 bit bus, or its 1280 cores with a 128-bit bus.
GP106 has a 256bit interface.
I dont think this is about bandwidth and more about the size of the memory. 3GB is not enough anymore.
6 GB is plenty for 1080 which is where this card should be marketed. I doubt that they'll sell a 3 GB version at all.
6 GB is plenty for 1080 which is where this card should be marketed. I doubt that they'll sell a 3 GB version at all.
I'm going with a 1060 to be ~5% faster than a 980.
That's going to be tough if it only has 1280 cores. It's also likely to be slower than the 480 although it would be in the ballpark.
They already have GP106 for the Drive module right? Or was that GP107?
unless it has FreeSync support I don't see a point in a 1060 when you have rx480 @ around $200.
uninformed masses sure..Well, the masses prefer NV more, that's their brand power.
If both GPU are identical in performance and other metrics, AMD needs to be cheaper to sell. Or rather, NV can price theirs higher.
The 960 vs 380 situation was not good for the 380 because its more power hungry, so NV sold the slower card for the same price and it outsold the 380 by a huge factor.
However, this time around, I think perf/w will be pretty close. Maybe NV will be more aggressive with their pricing, which is a win for gamers all round.
uninformed masses sure..
yeah, and they you have clueless reviewers like the Jayz2cents and it's no wonder..They are the majority. Forum warriors are a very small population.
If AMD wants to regain marketshare, they have to deliver superior performance & perf/w at a similar price, or, massively better perf/$.
I'd hope so. I'm fine with 4GB lingering in the $200 and under market for another couple years, but 3GB is not gonna cut it anymore at all.
I don't think the 1060 will have a 3 GB option (unless it's some OEM only card that's not even branded as a 1060 that was going to the scrap heap otherwise), but both Nvidia and AMD will have >3 GB cards. There are some people who only really play games like LoL that aren't very graphically demanding, so a 3 GB card that can run off bus power is a great deal for that part of the market.