Feedback

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Preview: Pascal with GP106

Author:
Manufacturer: NVIDIA

GP106 Preview

It’s probably not going to come as a surprise to anyone that reads the internet, but NVIDIA is officially taking the covers off its latest GeForce card in the Pascal family today, the GeForce GTX 1060. As the number scheme would suggest, this is a more budget-friendly version of NVIDIA’s latest architecture, lowering performance in line with expectations. The GP106-based GPU will still offer impressive specifications and capabilities and will probably push AMD’s new Radeon RX 480 to its limits.

View Full Size

Let’s take a quick look at the card’s details.

  GTX 1060 RX 480 R9 390 R9 380 GTX 980 GTX 970 GTX 960 R9 Nano GTX 1070
GPU GP106 Polaris 10 Grenada Tonga GM204 GM204 GM206 Fiji XT GP104
GPU Cores 1280 2304 2560 1792 2048 1664 1024 4096 1920
Rated Clock 1506 MHz 1120 MHz 1000 MHz 970 MHz 1126 MHz 1050 MHz 1126 MHz up to 1000 MHz 1506 MHz
Texture Units 80 (?) 144 160 112 128 104 64 256 120
ROP Units 48 (?) 32 64 32 64 56 32 64 64
Memory 6GB 4GB
8GB
8GB 4GB 4GB 4GB 2GB 4GB 8GB
Memory Clock 8000 MHz 7000 MHz
8000 MHz
6000 MHz 5700 MHz 7000 MHz 7000 MHz 7000 MHz 500 MHz 8000 MHz
Memory Interface 192-bit 256-bit 512-bit 256-bit 256-bit 256-bit 128-bit 4096-bit (HBM) 256-bit
Memory Bandwidth 192 GB/s 224 GB/s
256 GB/s
384 GB/s 182.4 GB/s 224 GB/s 196 GB/s 112 GB/s 512 GB/s 256 GB/s
TDP 120 watts 150 watts 275 watts 190 watts 165 watts 145 watts 120 watts 275 watts 150 watts
Peak Compute 3.85 TFLOPS 5.1 TFLOPS 5.1 TFLOPS 3.48 TFLOPS 4.61 TFLOPS 3.4 TFLOPS 2.3 TFLOPS 8.19 TFLOPS 5.7 TFLOPS
Transistor Count ? 5.7B 6.2B 5.0B 5.2B 5.2B 2.94B 8.9B 7.2B
Process Tech 16nm 14nm 28nm 28nm 28nm 28nm 28nm 28nm 16nm
MSRP (current) $249 $199 $299 $199 $379 $329 $279 $499 $379

The GeForce GTX 1060 will sport 1280 CUDA cores with a GPU Boost clock speed rated at 1.7 GHz. Though the card will be available in only 6GB varieties, the reference / Founders Edition will ship with 6GB of GDDR5 memory running at 8.0 GHz / 8 Gbps. With 1280 CUDA cores, the GP106 GPU is essentially one half of a GP104 in terms of compute capability. NVIDIA decided not to cut the memory interface in half though, instead going with a 192-bit design compared to the GP104 and its 256-bit option.

The rated GPU clock speeds paint an interesting picture for peak performance of the new card. At the rated boost clock speed, the GeForce GTX 1070 produces 6.46 TFLOPS of performance. The GTX 1060 by comparison will hit 4.35 TFLOPS, a 48% difference. The GTX 1080 offers nearly the same delta of performance above the GTX 1070; clearly NVIDIA has set the scale Pascal and product deviation.

NVIDIA wants us to compare the new GeForce GTX 1060 to the GeForce GTX 980 in gaming performance, but the peak theoretical performance results don’t really match up. The GeForce GTX 980 is rated at 4.61 TFLOPS at BASE clock speed, while the GTX 1060 doesn’t hit that number at its Boost clock. Obviously Pascal improves on performance with memory compression advancements, but the 192-bit memory bus is only able to run at 192 GB/s, compared to the 224 GB/s of the GTX 980. Obviously we’ll have to wait for performance result from our own testing to be sure, but it seems possible that NVIDIA’s performance claims might depend on technology like Simultaneous Multi-Projection and VR gaming to be validated.

Continue reading our preview of the new NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060!!

View Full Size

The GTX 1060 Founders Edition card has a TDP of just 120 watts and will have a single 6-pin power connection. With all the controversy and debate surrounding the Radeon RX 480 and its power delivery system, this is going to be looked at closer than ever. NVIDIA has set the TDP 30 watts lower than the 6-pin + PCI Express slot power is rated at, so this definitely gives them room for overclocking and slightly power target adjustment within those boundaries. In recent history as well, NVIDIA tends to be less aggressive on its power targets – I expect the GTX 1060 to fall well within the 120 watt level at stock settings. But we’ll know soon enough.

The starting MSRP for the GeForce GTX 1060 partner cards will be $249. The Founders Edition card, designed by NVIDIA and the one we were sent for our initial reviews, will cost $299 and will be available ONLY at NVIDIA.com. NVIDIA is listing this one as “limited edition” so I would assume that means we will not see the Founders Edition throughout the entirety of the life of the GTX 1060.

View Full Size

At $249, the GTX 1060 partner cards, available and shipping on July 19th, will compete very well with the 8GB variant of the Radeon RX 480, which at reference prices was only $10 less expensive. NVIDIA itself proclaims the GTX 1060 is “on average 15 percent faster and over 75 percent more power efficient than the closest competitive product” which obviously refers to aforementioned RX 480. (Claims to be tested by the 19th.)

The GTX 1060 Founders Edition has some unique traits. While the display output configuration is the now all-too-familiar combination of three DisplayPort, one HDMI and one DL DVI (which the RX 480 omitted), the PCB and cooler take an interesting form. The PCB is basically identical in size to that of the RX 480: 6.75-in (171.5mm) long. The blower style cooler extends past the PCB by another 3-in (76mm), making the Founders Edition 9.75-in (247.6mm) long.

View Full Size

The 6-pin power connection on the GTX 1060 Founders Edition seems only placed – rather than attached to the PCB direction, the 6-pin is put at the end of the cooler, meaning a cable exists inside the cooler to bring juice to the card itself. The reason for this is looks: the card looks more balanced and better in a windowed case with the 6-pin connection at the far end of the card rather than in the middle of it. It’s an interesting trade-off though, one that will make aftermarket coolers a bit more complex.

View Full Size

One interesting spot to see is the obviously missing or removed item from the back of the cooler. Three screw holes and a dip in the extruded metal suggest that something was planned for this spot or was on there but removed after production for some reason.

View Full Size

NVIDIA changed up the shroud on the cooler to help lower costs. The “window” area on the classic GeForce design is now just a black painted area and the design is tweaked slightly fewer, shallower polygonal angles. I’m still a fan of the design though and I think NVIDIA’s construction and build quality just “feel” better in the hand than the RX 480. Whether that matters to anyone installing this card into a gaming PC rather than putting it on a shelf is up for debate.

View Full Size

One thing that is missing from the GeForce GTX 1060 card? SLI bridge connection. There are none and the reason is simple: NVIDIA tells us that SLI is not going to be supported on the GeForce GTX 1060. Rumors have swirled since pictures first leaked that this meant NVIDIA was moving to a PCI Express based data transfer technology for the GTX 1060, similar to what AMD does with CrossFire on its entire lineup. That’s not the case, and would be crazy after the big push for a new SLI Bridge that NVIDIA made with the GTX 1080 launch. The GTX 1060, and we assume any future cards in this class, are not going to support multi-GPU technology.

The decision is kind of astounding to me, really. NVIDIA launched Pascal pushing 2-GPU SLI strongly and eventually ended up cutting out all higher count SLI configurations completely, in order to preserve the consumer experience of 2-Way SLI. Cutting out GTX 1060 owners from SLI because “that market doesn’t really utilize SLI” is just an excuse, not a reason. There is no substantial cost benefit to cutting validation testing for the GTX 1060 if you are continuing to run it for GTX 1080 and GTX 1070. There are plenty of consumers that love the idea of buying a ~$250 graphics card today and adding another down the line, potentially to scale to the performance of one of NVIDIA’s larger, more expensive graphics card. Even worse, you can actually see indentations and spacing on the PCB where SLI connections would have been inserted!

Performance Leaks

While we can’t report on performance of the GeForce GTX 1060, some leaks appeared on WCCFTech a few days ago and shed a little bit of light on what we MIGHT expect from the new mainstream version of the Pascal architecture.

View Full Size

View Full Size

Image source: WCCFTech.com

  • 3DMark Fire Strike Ultra Graphics Score

If these numbers hold up, it looks like the GTX 1060 is going to be 8.5% faster than the Radeon RX 480 and 17% faster than the GTX 970, at least in this single synthetic test. Based on these numbers though the GTX 980 maintains a 6.4% advantage, again bringing into question the claims of “GTX 980 performance” from NVIDIA.

What this does immediately do is put worry into the minds of AMD and buyers of the new Radeon RX 480. Will the GTX 1060 offer better performance and better efficiency for the same dollar amount?

Simultaneous Multi-Project Updates

NVIDIA provided a quick update on the status of Simultaneous Multi-Projection integration into software along with GTX 1060 information. If you missed the launch of SMP then you are depriving yourself of one of NVIDIA’s coolest new technologies that will drastically change how multi-monitor gaming and VR gaming are handled by the GPU.

View Full Size

According to NVIDIA, “Simultaneous Multi-Projection is being integrated into the world’s biggest game engines, Unreal Engine and Unity and there are more than 30 games are already in development, including Unreal Tournament, Poolnation VR, Everest VR, Obduction, Adr1ft and Raw Data.” That a compelling reason to buy into SMP and GeForce if you are a multi-monitor gamer or looking to invest in VR this year.

More to come

That’s all we know or can say about the GeForce GTX 1060 for now. Reviews and benchmarking will be available at a later time, or just long enough for some other outlets to leak it all to the web. I did promise that this summer would be one of the most exciting in recent memory for PC gaming; NVIDIA and AMD are surely making that the case. 


July 7, 2016 | 09:14 AM - Posted by Chaitanya (not verified)

Another crazy price hike along with early adopters tax for refrence cards.

July 7, 2016 | 04:23 PM - Posted by theBrayn

GTX 660 release price $230
GTX 760 release price $249
GTX 960 release price $199
GTX 1060 release price $249

Which of these looks like the outlier again?

July 7, 2016 | 07:30 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Those are reference prices.

The reference price for GTX 1060 is $299

July 11, 2016 | 10:32 AM - Posted by Stefem (not verified)

None of the are "reference prices" but all are MRSP so theBrayn's comparison is correct

July 7, 2016 | 11:13 PM - Posted by Chaitanya Shukla

Sure 760/660 came out at a higher price but then flagship GPU(atleast upto 600 series) was the x80 which would have meant that 660 was on par with where x70 sits in lineup today.

July 8, 2016 | 10:35 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

m neutral here all I want is 1000 FPS for like 50$. that been said i will always take 997 FPS for 50$ than actual 1000 FPS for 70$. as long AMD cards are in relative performance with Nvidia for 20-40% cheaper i think only careless fool who dont earn his own money or gets his money for free will buy nvidia. I went from GTX 670 to R9 390 will probably get 1070 because amd has no 1070 alike card out. I might contradict my self here but fact is if amd had 1070 alike card out or my choice would be rx480 or 1060 id probably go with rx480.

July 8, 2016 | 10:37 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

i stand corected here i think i saw fury x for 399$ that completely matches 1070

July 8, 2016 | 10:54 PM - Posted by John H (not verified)

A geforce 6800gt is enough for 1000 fps in quake 3...

July 12, 2016 | 08:47 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Where did you see AMD GPUs to have 20-40 percent better performance at the same price relative to Nvidia? normally Nvidia GPUs offer a few percentage better price to performance ratio in lower resolutions due to lower driver overhead and AMD GPUs offer a few percentage better performance because of higher bandwidth. although it is about to change with GTX1060. I think GTX1060 has more than enough bandwidth to compete with RX480 at higher resolutions.

July 10, 2016 | 03:11 PM - Posted by raffriff42 (not verified)

Founder's edition costs more because nvidia wants to funnel business to their customers - MSI, EVGA et al. Bloody decent of them I say, wot wot.

July 7, 2016 | 09:33 AM - Posted by SDBob (not verified)

Still can't find any 1070s at MSRP. Maybe the demand for these won't price them out of mainstream budgets.

July 7, 2016 | 09:34 AM - Posted by Alucard (not verified)

Damn.... $50 over the launch msrp of previous generations. $100 for founder's.

July 7, 2016 | 10:05 AM - Posted by daveloft

Yes $50 more. But it gets you 300% more VRAM, along with 71% more memory bandwidth (50% higher bit-rate and 12.5% higher memory speed), and 67% higher GPU performance (20% more cores and 30% higher clock speed). That's a huge upgrade. Well worth the price.

July 7, 2016 | 10:52 AM - Posted by flippityfloppit...

Apologist alert.

July 7, 2016 | 11:01 AM - Posted by Eric (not verified)

Each generation also brought performance jumps of their own though - it isn't like this is the first time a new generation was announced and it brought performance jumps.

July 7, 2016 | 12:58 PM - Posted by Chaitanya Shukla

What 300% VRAM increase? GTX 960 came with 2GB and 4GB version, so basically GTX 1060 only has 150% VRAM over 960.

July 7, 2016 | 12:29 PM - Posted by daveloft

My point being its a massive increase, not just a regular generational update.

July 7, 2016 | 04:29 PM - Posted by theBrayn

Realistically, there have only been 2 generations out of the past 5 where the x60 card was priced $199 at launch. There have also been 2 at $229 and 1 at $249.

July 7, 2016 | 09:46 AM - Posted by renz (not verified)

about SLI being dropped on 1060 i think i can agree on that decision. will 1060SLI able to reach 1080 performance? probably they can if the scaling is 100%. in the past we take two mid range gpu and SLI/CF them to get better performance than the fastest single card at a cheaper price. take GTX460SLI review for example:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_460_SLI/25.html

they cost less than a single 480 and yet 460SLI have at least 20% performance advantage compared to a single 480 if SLI are working properly.

now look at 960SLI review:

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_960_SLI/23.html

in TPU test even 970 still slightly better than a 960s pair. i dare to bet we will see something similar with 1060SLI

July 7, 2016 | 09:59 AM - Posted by taisserrootseasyaccount (not verified)

Keep in mind seeing as these are faster than the 970 and 970 sli beats the 1070.
2 of these in sli would beat or be close to equal a 1080. I guess Nvidia can't have that going on when 2 of these will be cheaper than a lot of 1080s

July 7, 2016 | 10:35 AM - Posted by renz (not verified)

and yet if you go forum when people asking about going multi gpu with this kind of cards they often being advised to take stronger single gpu. true 1080 is very expensive. but that is nothing new to nvidia fastest single card. 1060 could match 1080 performance if the scaling is perfect. but then try comparing this with 1070. 1070 could probably have 90% to exceeding 1060SLI performance depending on how well the scaling work. then try comparing the price between the two. in any case 1060SLI will be more expensive.

July 7, 2016 | 09:51 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

6GB? PS4 does have 8GB of fast memory. The fastest card in the garbage bin?
Let's see if Nvidia with they deep learning will outsmart average gamer again.

July 7, 2016 | 09:57 AM - Posted by renz (not verified)

and that 8GB need to be shared by everything. not just graphic.

July 7, 2016 | 10:11 AM - Posted by flop-it (not verified)

That's 6GB of GPU memory, not shared memory. Also the PS4 is only capable of about half the GFLOPS, 1804 compared to 3850 for this GTX 1060.

The PS4 is cheap for hardware, but it's not anything close to the performance of this card.

July 7, 2016 | 02:14 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

PS4 with its 8GB will be more consistent then Nvidia 1080 while processing dataset which is more then 6GB.

July 8, 2016 | 02:36 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Unfortunately, no it won't. The PS4 needs to share the 8GB for GPU and CPU and as we see with modern games like DOOM or Fallout 4, the code itself can take well over 4GB of RAM (finally!). So you're comparing a GPU that's over double the power of the PS4, that also has more RAM (consistently) at it's disposal.

On an PC with 8GB of system RAM that's not a problem at all and we're finally seeing some reason to equip more than 8GB as minimum. On the PS4/Xbone you're locked into sharing 8GB.

July 7, 2016 | 03:20 PM - Posted by arbiter

Amazing how dumb people can be when it comes to tech. Can't think they can be anymore of an idiot, but then they open their mouth and prove you wrong.

July 7, 2016 | 10:09 AM - Posted by taisserrootseasyaccount (not verified)

Seems like an OK card. The problem is the founders edition will push up the price. You won't find cards at $250 maybe even 9 months from now. Most likely, like the 1070 and 1080, you will get a in blower cards for $270 and maybe a galaxy ex oc or msi armour for $280-285. Then you will get some high oc cards from $285 and up. My only problem is if you OC this to get to 980 levels and above and get the 10% gains pascal has shown on average what would you do to the lifespan of this chip?

July 7, 2016 | 10:10 AM - Posted by Anon (not verified)

If the 6GB variant is really $249 MSRP then Nvidia just killed off the RX 480. The 1060 is faster, consumes way less energy and has the higher OC headroom. For almost the same price it is a no brainer.

July 7, 2016 | 11:02 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

except it wont be $249. There hasnt been one 1070 or 1080 sold anywhere near msrp

July 7, 2016 | 11:28 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

That isn't nVidia's doing.

July 7, 2016 | 12:02 PM - Posted by Ty (not verified)

The Founders Edition pricing is entirely nvidias doing, they list a lower msrp, release a stock card with a FE badge for more money, and the partner cards, often more powerful versions of the card are going to charge base cost for a stronger version of the card than the 50 dollar more expensive founders edition?

It inflates the prices across the board, we already see that with the 1070 and 1080, entry costs are much closer to FE pricing than base listed pricing.

July 7, 2016 | 09:35 PM - Posted by RSavage (not verified)

Because nvidia didnt invent founders edition tax price, right!

July 7, 2016 | 08:42 PM - Posted by Odin (not verified)

Well always early adopters run into supply issues. 3 months from now supply will have improved prices will have dropped and no one will care and then we talk about AMD Vega.

July 7, 2016 | 10:13 AM - Posted by lucas.B (not verified)

waiting for the full review!
At that price (if it's available) and if it's better than the rx480 I'm sold!
Interesting battle!
Bring it on! I need to change my old hd7970.

July 7, 2016 | 09:38 PM - Posted by RSavage (not verified)

Look at any nvidia cards faster when released and much slower compare to same AMD cards in 1-2 years. 20% performance difference, why I have no clue, but it always happened with every gen. since fermi vs GCN1st

July 7, 2016 | 10:14 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

RIP RX 480

July 8, 2016 | 04:09 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

> "RIP RX 480"

Go crawl back under whatever rock you crawled out from, nvidiot.

July 11, 2016 | 10:47 AM - Posted by Stefem (not verified)

The AMDement said... sorry but all are able to play at such an ignoble level

July 8, 2016 | 05:04 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

In time, yes. RX480 is available now and timing is everything to some.

July 7, 2016 | 10:16 AM - Posted by taisserrootseasyaccount (not verified)

But it makes a nice price ladder for the mainstream (not budget) market.
480 4gb to replace the 380 and 960 with slightly above 970 and at 390 performance.
480 4gb AIBs to replace some mid range oc 970s but at 380x price. 480 8gb reference comes in a at the upper limits of 380x pricing but with future proofing which I don't see the value of.
480 8gb AIBs with 980 performance being the next tier up having low end 970 and 390 prices.
1060 6gb AIBS with about 980 OC card performance replacing high end 970s and 390s.
Seems like a good time for the mainstream market

July 7, 2016 | 10:41 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

The RX 480 will go down in price much faster than any Nvidia SKUs. And keep your eye on that 14nm process node, it is newer than the 16nm process that Nvidia is using so there will be a lot more maturing of that 14nm process to come. So expect the RX 480(RX 490 likewise) to be able to be made more efficient, use less power, and have higher clock speeds as the 14nm process matures. There is also the matter of AMDs extra compute available for DX12/Vulkan and VR gaming where the gaming engines/games will make use of the RX 480's compute advantage to accelerate more of the games' non graphics compute on AMD's GPUs. Nvidia sill does not have its “Asynchronous compute” fully implemented in its GPUs' hardware. Let the benchmarking begin, with plenty of optimized DX12/Vulkan titles.

Nvidia GTX 1060 users do have some hope for being able to utilize more than one GTX 1060 in their PCs. And that Comes in the form of DX12/Vulkan Explicit multi-adaptor, that is if Nvidia does not put the kibosh on that usage. The OS/Graphics API makers need to force the GPU makers to support any OS/Graphics API multi-adaptor support, and No Explicit multi-adaptor support from any GPU maker should mean no certification to work under Any OS for the GPU maker's products that do not support Explicit multi-adaptor out of the box!

Do not forget the non gaming Graphics Software benchmarks Please, PCPer, on all these new Nvidia/AMD GPU SKUs. There are many in need of some non gaming graphics benchmarks using Blender 3D, Gimp Krita, and Photoshop, as well as the other graphics software packages.

July 7, 2016 | 10:51 AM - Posted by tatakai

I really hope people don't ignore dx12 when picking their card. Because this one might last even shorter than the 960 did. As the big dx12 games come out you aren't going to see the same relative performance you did months ago when all the benchmarks used dx11 and showed it slightly ahead. It will fall to where the 960 is relative to the 380.

July 7, 2016 | 11:29 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

How many games use DX12? How many use DX11? You get the idea.

DX12 is still a year or two away from maturing.

July 7, 2016 | 12:33 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Vulkan will be on more platforms than DX12, and that's where the development dollars will do. Vulkan will run on all the markets from mobile to mainframe/supercomputer. And Vulkan will have Valve's and the gaming industry's full support. Just look at all the ads for mobile games on TV, and see that Vulkan will have a much larger support base than DX12 could ever hope for. The Vulkan graphics API is that same no matter what device is using Vulkan, so games will run across all the device markets!

July 7, 2016 | 11:14 AM - Posted by Wait a second (not verified)

Wait a second, what cards will be launching on the 19th?

Fanboys' Edition in the official nVidia store or will actual AIB cards be available in retail on the launch day?

July 7, 2016 | 11:30 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Both launch at the same time.

July 7, 2016 | 11:21 AM - Posted by FUCK YOU RYAN (not verified)

FUCK YOU RYAN

YOU'RE A FUCKING NVIDIA SHILL

RADEON RX 480 OFFERS EVERY FUCKING THING YOU COULD WANT AT 199$

IT HAS DOUBLE THE CORES OF THE GIMPED GTX 1060

PROPER DX12 SUPPORT

DECENT PCB AND PREMIUM FEEL

AND YOU KEEP TRYING TO MAKE GTX 1060 WHICH WILL RETAIL FOR FUCKING 299$ SEEM MUCH BETTER THAN IT ACTUALLY IS

IT'S A FUCKING RETARDED CARD GIMPED TO ETERNITY FOR NVIDIA FANGAYS

KEEP TRYING TO OVERBLOW THE PCI-E POWER DRAW NON PROBLEM TOO, MOTHERFUCKER!!!!!!!

July 7, 2016 | 11:36 AM - Posted by Butthurt Beluga

I'm glad the team red side has found their own PCPer comment section mascot, the green team has had their mascot for many months now trolling every AMD-related comment section

July 7, 2016 | 12:21 PM - Posted by KingKookaluke (not verified)

Someone need their meds.

July 7, 2016 | 03:23 PM - Posted by arbiter

And a nap.

July 8, 2016 | 05:07 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

... and then even more meds.

July 7, 2016 | 12:42 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Gaming GIT alert, oh how gaming attracts the Lowest of the Lowest, with the highest foreheads and bushiest monobrows.
And don't forget the long ape like appendages with knuckles that drag on the ground! Oh how many generations of unholy procreation with one's sister does it take to produce the bog standard fanboy of the Green or Red variety! The horror, The Horror!

July 7, 2016 | 12:44 PM - Posted by Jeremy Hellstrom

He has come from the future!!! How are things on the 19th? 

Can you please share any of the benchmarks you saw now, so that we don't have to spend time making them in the first place?

Thanks!

July 7, 2016 | 02:30 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

*don't feed the trolls*

July 7, 2016 | 04:12 PM - Posted by pdjblum

Completely agree. He is not a troll. He is just being real. Love the passion.

July 7, 2016 | 04:40 PM - Posted by Ryan Shrout

Man, I love the internet.

July 7, 2016 | 09:52 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

LMAO, oh your tears are delicious......RIP AMD

July 7, 2016 | 11:35 AM - Posted by Butthurt Beluga

Seeing as the GTX 1070/1080 are still hardly available, I suspect that the GTX 1060 will also be a paper launch as well and won't be readily available for purchase for months.

July 7, 2016 | 11:49 AM - Posted by Shambles (not verified)

Judging by the fact that they're trying to pawn off a Fanboy Edition of this I also agree that it's just a tactic to hide the fact that they launched early and don't have much stock but don't want it to look like a paper launch.

If it clearly outclasses the 480 or had they priced it competitively I may be tempted to pick one up solely based on the fact I'll be trying to transition to linux gaming. I've had more nVidia cards than AMD/ATI in the past but nVidia has turned into a joke for consumers this past little while.

July 7, 2016 | 12:55 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Not yet, wait for the benchmarks(On DX12/Vulkan) before you jump on that bandwagon! Also the GTX 1060 has about half of the raw compute of the RX 480, and the VR games will make good use of AMD's raw compute for VR gaming. The GTX 1060 is not going to age well with the new DX12/Vulkan API optimized games coming online. Nvidia can not clock its way out of this one, and AMD's 14nm process node will improve with time. Expect the Nvidia folks to flog the DX11 benchmarks in an attempt to bait and switch the simple minded JOEs as that has always been Nvidia's marketing MO.

Expect more FE milking from Nvidia, and the retailers will always price Nvidia's SKUs much higher to separate the fools from their money!

We will see which GPUs have more usage/performance across all graphics/compute workloads, and not only Nvidia's limited gaming only focused consumer SKUs!

July 7, 2016 | 04:43 PM - Posted by theBrayn

I see GTX 1080 and 1070 in stock on multiple sites while the 480 is not in stock on any. Maybe you should recheck your facts?

July 7, 2016 | 11:47 AM - Posted by General Lee (not verified)

I wouldn't be surprised if the availability of this card was very poor after launch. Nvidia probably hurried the launch to counter RX 480 sales. And more than likely partner cards won't be anywhere near 249$ just like we don't have any 1080/1070 cards at their claimed MSRP.

It does look though that AMD's plans for Polaris haven't gone very well. Nvidia is executing their strategy very well, and now more than ever it looks like AMD is having serious trouble trying to compete. At the end of the day they just don't have the resources, and a few great minds they do have just isn't enough.

July 7, 2016 | 12:18 PM - Posted by CNote (not verified)

After seeing the fire strike ultra score earlier this week I overlooked my evga 970 and got a better graphics and combined score but half the physics score. I'd like to see how they did that.

July 7, 2016 | 03:07 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

The physics score in Firestrike is all about CPU cores. They probably used Intel's x99 platform.

July 7, 2016 | 03:09 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Nevermind, I see a 6700k in the picture. It's probably just highly overclocked. Still my point still stands about the physics score.

July 8, 2016 | 06:02 PM - Posted by CNote (not verified)

Makes sense since I've got a 2500k at 4.3.

July 7, 2016 | 01:46 PM - Posted by Keif (not verified)

I really dislike the Founders Edition shenanigans as it leaves a big question mark where the partner custom card prices will be.

You may find it note worthy that the 2GB MSI Gaming 960 was $219 on Newegg at launch; $20 above the $199 msrp. I know because I bought one. :)

July 7, 2016 | 02:48 PM - Posted by nobodyspecial (not verified)

Ryan,

Shouldn't the chart show $199/240 for 4GB/8GB 480's? You can't get a 8GB for under $240 at newegg.

July 7, 2016 | 03:26 PM - Posted by arbiter

Anyone with common sense won't get 4gb card less their most played and only game is something like minecraft.

July 8, 2016 | 08:20 PM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

With weak video cards 2 gbs is more than enough. Very little difference in benches for 950 2 GB vs 960 4gb

http://www.kitguru.net/components/ryan-martin/pny-gtx-950-2gb-and-gtx-96...

http://www.kitguru.net/components/ryan-martin/pny-gtx-950-2gb-and-gtx-96...

http://www.kitguru.net/components/ryan-martin/pny-gtx-950-2gb-and-gtx-96...

http://www.kitguru.net/components/ryan-martin/pny-gtx-950-2gb-and-gtx-96...

http://www.kitguru.net/components/ryan-martin/pny-gtx-950-2gb-and-gtx-96...

In my opinion 8gb on rx 480 is a waste of chips and or selling point on future proofing (con).

July 7, 2016 | 04:36 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

"If these numbers hold up, it looks like the GTX 1060 is going to be 8.5% faster than the REFERENCE Radeon RX 480...", which is likely to be ~10% slower than the OEM OC 480s.

So in other words, the $300 6GB 1060, should be ~ as fast as an $250 8GB OEM in DX11, but way slower in DX12/Vulkan.

Fixed your spin for you.

July 7, 2016 | 04:56 PM - Posted by Allyn Malventano

Are you trying to say that OEM OC 480s are going to get an 18.5% boost? That's impressive.

July 7, 2016 | 05:53 PM - Posted by pdjblum

Why do you feel the need to post this along with your sarcasm? What interest do you have? Sure seems as if you are not able to be objective, but rather defensive.

July 7, 2016 | 07:40 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

You haven't been here long. Allyn is PCPerspective Nvidias apologist.

July 8, 2016 | 01:13 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Basic arithmetic failure. He claimed equivalence (which would require an 8% boost, not 18%). The 10% boost comes from what the AIB may be able to provide. Let's call it optimistic and it's actually only 8% or a little lower. Then his statement still holds: equivalence** to the 1060 but with way better directx 12/vulcan* support. Not to mention AMD probably won't move this product to "Legacy Support" (i.e. no performance improvement with new drivers) before you know it, and basically the only advantage you'll probably have with the 1060 is power efficiency. May be the best choice for those with very narrow power requirements.

July 7, 2016 | 05:18 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

No, I'm saying the 1060 and OEM OC 480s should be just about identical in DX11, with the 1060 losing in DX12/Vulkan, and being more expensive.

Or are you suggesting the 1060 is going to be 18.5% faster than the reference 480 ?

July 7, 2016 | 05:45 PM - Posted by pdjblum

"What this does immediately do is put worry into the minds of AMD and buyers of the new Radeon RX 480. Will the GTX 1060 offer better performance and better efficiency for the same dollar amount?"

So you found another opportunity to manipulate people into not buying a 480 and striking a blow at AMD. You have now managed to completely eliminate any window AMD had to sell a few cards without a competitive product released as yet. Now you just have to release your 1060 review and you would have accomplished your goal. What the fuck is wrong with you? I now get how you seem to come off as if you are being fair and objective while completely being otherwise. Kudos to you.

Raja coming to do the interview with you at your office was total class. Nevertheless, you went out of your way to fuck him and all the brilliant and hard working people at AMD.

July 7, 2016 | 06:34 PM - Posted by Ryan Shrout

I managed to eliminate the window AMD had? It's like I have made stock hard to get, or I built the power delivery on the card or I planned the release timing of the GTX 1060.

RYAN SHROUT LORDS OVER THE PC HARDWARE ECOSYSTEM. </booming voice>

July 7, 2016 | 07:01 PM - Posted by pdjblum

You know the influence you have and should use it in a responsible and unbiased manner. Putting that gratuitous comment I quoted in this post was completely unnecessary and biased at best. Notwithstanding the 1060, the 480 at its price point is a wonderful card and will not disappoint or result in regret. The non-reference cards are shaping up to be absolutely terrific. I would recommend this card to anyone looking to built a killer value system or needing a great card for an affordable price. The 480 will only get better with time as the 14nm matures and as more games are written for directx 12 and vulcan. Your comment had no place in that post.

July 7, 2016 | 07:27 PM - Posted by Jeremy Hellstrom

July 7, 2016 | 07:34 PM - Posted by pdjblum

Jeremy, this is below you. But I guess you feel the need to defend your unethical boss out of cowardice. Waiting for the rest of you to chime in. Guess I must be striking a nerve by speaking the truth.

July 7, 2016 | 09:56 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Oh, your tears are the best!

July 11, 2016 | 01:22 PM - Posted by Paul EFT (not verified)

Good God, man. Lighten up.

July 8, 2016 | 07:41 PM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

LOL. Good one Jeremy.

July 7, 2016 | 09:31 PM - Posted by V.M (not verified)

This is a little insane. From the video all I gathered is that the 1060 might be a little bit more powerful than the 480, but Ryan is still waiting to get final performance benchmarks to really validate it.

But if its under a 10% performance difference, I would still the AMD over Nvidia. With Vulkan and DX12 emphasising more GPU Compute, you will literally get a free performance boost with AMD cards in the long run than an Nvidia card.

Also, based on some research I saw AdoredTV managed to pull, it seems as Nvidia recycles its older gpu core in newer products they seem to nerf overall performance even though the same gpu in an older card gave better performance to encourage people to buy newer higher end cards.

**Disclosure I buy whatever is the best bang for my buck. In the past that was a Radeon 4850 and 7850, currently on a GTX 670M and GTX 970 and right now waiting on a 8gb RX 480 to become available at the 240 usd pricepoint**

July 11, 2016 | 11:03 AM - Posted by Stefem (not verified)

AdoredTV... no need to add more...

How you can even compare to the benchmarking work done at PCPer?

July 8, 2016 | 08:09 PM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

Good one. Yeah Ryan. Get with the program you have to lie to the AMD fanboys so they don't get butt hurt over it.

July 8, 2016 | 10:57 PM - Posted by John H (not verified)

I've got to say. PCPer did a hell of a job engineering the 1060 down to the transistor for nvidia - great job!

July 11, 2016 | 12:28 PM - Posted by Jeremy Hellstrom

Why did you think we picked up that 3D printer!

July 7, 2016 | 06:42 PM - Posted by Pongo (not verified)

How could a review site screw AMD? Lots of places are displaying leaks and most of us here are generally interested in new tech.

We haven't even seen partner 480's yet. Just think of what it could do with some extra juice to play with and different cooling.

I think AMD's quick response to PCIe power draw shows their customer focus. That was partly mainlined by PCper.

If current Nvidia availability and pricing is a gauge, AMD still have time to play with.

July 7, 2016 | 06:58 PM - Posted by pdjblum

"How could a review site screw AMD?"

Aren't review sites by definition there to help their readers make informed buying decision? So I would say the answer is by duping or misleading people into making the wrong buying decisions. I am so glad AMD was held accountable for their negligence or unethical intent and forced to act, but unlike Toms, Ryan and Allyn, in their passive aggressive way, made it seem much worse than it was. Ryan emphasized that despite the fix it was still out of spec. Considering what they learned from the mobo makers, I don't think they needed to harp on this point.

July 8, 2016 | 08:06 PM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

Maybe a $400-$500 motherboard should be standard operating equipment for a budget $200-$300 card along with a beefier power supply for AMD cards. How would this be cheaper by any stretch?

Maybe MSRP should include a TCTO (total cost to own) quote as well.

The pocket change an Nvidia generally costs more than a comparable AMD card is well worth it in less electricity used as well as having features worth paying for.

AMD cards don't hold their value too well as they always get heavily discounted in the months after launch. Sometimes Nvidias hold their price for a year or more. Why would you buy AMD card at launch knowing these will be a lot cheaper in a few months? Enough said.

July 7, 2016 | 08:31 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Nvidia gimped this card to much and priced it too high.
PCB pictures clearly show 256bit bus.
Hopefully it indicates that 1060Ti is on its way.

July 8, 2016 | 02:40 AM - Posted by qwekqwek

Founder's Edition price is too high, not worth it in my opinion. Might as well get an RX 480 or the board partner 1060 (IF it stays at MSRP).

July 8, 2016 | 10:33 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

im neutral here all I want is 1000 FPS for like 50$. that been said i will always take 997 FPS for 50$ than actual 1000 FPS for 70$. as long AMD cards are in relative performance with Nvidia for 20-40% cheaper i think only careless fool who dont earn his own money or gets his money for free will buy nvidia. I went from GTX 670 to R9 390 will probably get 1070 because amd has no 1070 alike card out. I might contradict my self here but fact is if amd had 1070 alike card out or my choice would be rx480 or 1060 id probably go with rx480.

July 8, 2016 | 03:32 PM - Posted by Kahlan (not verified)

I think that there is great need for Ranking system of PC review sites and their authors. And if there was such a system, I'm 99% sure that Ryan, Allyn and Co will receive 10/10 for Nvidia fanboyism and 0.1/10 for objectivity.
Such a waste of good review for personal preferences. Hope you guys received some gifts from the green folks such as free bonds, GTX 1060 or discount lunch tickets at Nvidia HQ.:D

July 8, 2016 | 07:56 PM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

Let the trolling begin. By dx12 being better for AMD, it's better now plus AMD is desperately cornering the market in dx12 games and optimizing it their way.

But Rise of Tomb Raider has broken dx12 because AMD cards don't win like they should. When Nvidia snags a few dx12 exclusives we'll talk again.

The only true indicator of dx12 is all non allied games without AMD or Nvidia logo. Until you win those when they come out, it's too early to crown a champ.

About Asynchronous compute it isn't the free performance you think it is. Look at the chart if you dare. Wow look at the wattage of the "free" async performance. Who knew wattage would increase? Surely AMD isn't still marketing it as "free" performance. Surely Microsoft isn't only touting efficiency of dx 12 by showing only CPU wattage drop without showing how much wattage of GPU increases. LOL I guess that's how marketing spins everything.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/ashes-of-the-singularity-beta-async-comput...
In my opinion asynchronous compute isn't as useful on PCs as it is with the consoles. The weaker your components the more it improves or is it just smoke and mirrors. If both cards get 5 fps jump from async and one gets 25 fps before and the other 50 fps before. Nice 20% jump for lower card. 10% jump for higher card. It's all relative. Same increase but bigger jump.

July 10, 2016 | 01:20 PM - Posted by Anonymous Currently disgusted NVidia owner (not verified)

No SLI no buy.

Nvidia is a bunch of gready bastards. 2x1060 >= 1080 for over $100 cheaper this is why there is no SLI. Who do these fools think they are fooling by removing SLI. In order to truly compete with AMD they would have to lower their high end prices $100.

The reason x60 series owners don't use SLI is because of Nvidia's artificial price structure that makes SLI only cost effective on top two product offerings. Since they had to compete with the RX 480 they had to make this card better than their original plan. To compensate and protect their 1080 SLI disappeared.

This card may be faster than a RX 480 but you can still crossfire the RX 480 and you cannot touch the price/performance with ANY NVidia offering.

July 10, 2016 | 08:28 PM - Posted by Anonymous Nvidia User (not verified)

Challenge accepted any Nvidia offering OK. Take a look here.

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_value.html

I see Nvidia's 950 and 750ti at top over a 270/370.

Where is Rx 480? It's currently 15th. 1070 with it's expensive tag is 11th. When price deflates on 1070 the ratio will be even higher.

I've never really liked price/performance ratio because an extremely low priced card will win even if it's 3 years old or more. You always pay a higher premium for new stuff and older stuff is heavily discounted.

A true measure is to always list a card for it's MSRP. That way even when a card is charged above or below due to demand, it is where the manufacturer intended it's value to be. It's a poor indicator of card worth otherwise.

Vega when it comes is going to be a poor value when compared to 2 Rx 480's too. All high end cards are.

July 12, 2016 | 10:13 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

The 1060 is going to get murdered in DX12/Vulkan by the OEM custom 480s, and every new game is going to have DX12/Vulkan support.

R.I.P. 1060, it's a dead duck already. A DX11 card in a DX12/Vulkan world. And it's going to suck donkey balls at DX12/Vulkan. Just like Maxwell.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.