Official NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Announcement @ [H]

Status
Not open for further replies.
The cut GP106 GTX 1050 will probably have 3GB or 4GB ram. Why castrate a 1440p-capable card like this with less than 6GB ram? And like I said before, Nvidia can use a split memory plane like the GTX 660 did to put 4GB ram on a 192-bit bus, if they think 3GB won't sell in today's market.

The GTX 960 made more sense launching at 2/4GB, as it was mainly a 1080p card, but I think 6GB is good for 1440p today.
 
Pros: Better than/equivalent 980 performance that won't melt your motherboard.
Cons:
 
Line of thinking was get one now, down the road get a second one. He is a super cheap ass that tries to nickel and dime everything. Bastard made me go back to my car to get his change from lunch once, all $.06 of it.

People like this are often annoying but tend to be very good with money. But 6 cents? I guess it adds up.
 
I'll have to kindly disagree with that statement :)

You can kindly disagree all you want, you don't understand the first thing about how assets are cached.

That's why I really fucking hate the [H] for even mentioning "how much" VRAM a game uses without context. Many games will use as much as is available without providing any noticeable performance benefit.

The only time where you can actually see real analysis is when they do a comparison of 4GB versus 2GB r9 380, or 8GB versus 4GB 390 cards. IF you see a performance drop, then you've hit a memory wall.

But NUMBERS WITHOUT CONTEXT OR DIRECT COMPARISONS ARE JUST NUMBERS, and that's all VRAM peaks are to us. SHOW ME A GAME at 1440p where an 8GB card has no performance drop, but a 6GB card does, and we'll talk.
 
It's simply economics. They're charging what the market will bear. The market will correct itself if the price gets too high and Nvidia gets out of control. Some other company will see an opportunity to come into the market and sell an equivalent card for half the price if Nvidia really is gouging. Sure you can counter by saying that Intel has held the price of their Enthusiast products steady for several generations, but they haven't really increased performance much either.

At some point a company can no longer keep prices constant and continue to make significant advances to the product, especially if costs of the components to make it are going up.
The GTX 1080 is around 60% faster than the card it replaces: the GTX 980. The GTX 980 was around 50% faster than the card it replaced: the GTX 780. If it's true that the GTX 1060 is faster than the GTX 980, then that would mean it would be more than 70% faster than the card it replaces: the GTX 960.

How is that not a good increase in performance?
 
Is a 1060/480 seriously being considered a future-1440 card, let alone now? I'm pretty sure that [H] testing (non-overclocked) RX 480 was barely passable as a 1440 card.
 
Is a 1060/480 seriously being considered a future-1440 card, let alone now? I'm pretty sure that [H] testing (non-overclocked) RX 480 was barely passable as a 1440 card.

[H] is really picky about Ultra performance in everything when they review shit. Most users aren't. Also, Hitman is an outlier - most other games released this year perform much faster.

The RX 480 is a decent 1440p card. The GTX 1060 should be an even better one.

The 1070 ism the god of 1440p, but not necessary if you're not as-demanding a user.
 
Last edited:
No SLI.. The cluster fuck continues.

Welcome back AMD.
Realistically speaking, it probably doesn't matter in the long run. Early adopters seeking performance and willing to shell out the cash have no reason to bother with SLI on lower end cards. For the past few generations, it hasn't even made much sense to be 1-2 gens out and get a 2nd lower end card for SLI as it still put you behind the mid-level performance curve. If you're getting a 2nd card within the current generation later, you might as well buy the better card and sell the initial lower end card. That still doesn't even take into account that SLI doesn't always scale worth a damn depending on the games you're trying to play in the first place.

Sure, there are some corner cases where people have found an amazing deal or buy a 2nd card used as a massive discount, but is that a percentage of nvidia's customers for the lower end cards that is high enough to be worth bothering with? Their bean counters likely decided "no".
 
Line of thinking was get one now, down the road get a second one. He is a super cheap ass that tries to nickel and dime everything. Bastard made me go back to my car to get his change from lunch once, all $.06 of it.

Even if SLI were available on the 1060, he'd still be better off selling it and buying a 1080.

Single card >>>> SLI/CrossFire
 
Realistically speaking, it probably doesn't matter in the long run. Early adopters seeking performance and willing to shell out the cash have no reason to bother with SLI on lower end cards. For the past few generations, it hasn't even made much sense to be 1-2 gens out and get a 2nd lower end card for SLI as it still put you behind the mid-level performance curve. If you're getting a 2nd card within the current generation later, you might as well buy the better card and sell the initial lower end card. That still doesn't even take into account that SLI doesn't always scale worth a damn depending on the games you're trying to play in the first place.

Sure, there are some corner cases where people have found an amazing deal or buy a 2nd card used as a massive discount, but is that a percentage of nvidia's customers for the lower end cards that is high enough to be worth bothering with? Their bean counters likely decided "no".
I disagree. When I bought my SLI 660's they outperformed the 680 and was $100 cheaper. Plus I could hook up 2x the monitors. And have a card to play on when one of them Got RMA'd. That is a win-win in my book. Guess I'm just a fucking idiot.
 
[H] is really picky about Ultra performance in everything when they review shit. Most users aren't. Also, Hitman is an outlier - most other games released this year perform much faster.

The RX 480 is a decent 1440p card. The GTX 1060 should be an even better one.

Thank you for the reply. The wife just told me that she wants an ultra wide monitor so I thought the 480/1060 was off the table but your reply gives me hope that this territory of a card may still be a viable consideration for us.
 
[H] is really picky about Ultra performance in everything when they review shit. Most users aren't.

The RX 480 is a decent 1440p card. The GTX 1060 should be an even better one.
I wouldn't say they're picky about "Ultra;" they're just trying to maximize image quality at a given resolution. I'm sure people have no problem sacrificing image quality for framerate. I recall reading about someone who bought a 1070 just so they could play CS:GO at a constant 200+ FPS at 1024x768...
 
The RX 480 is a decent 1440p card. The GTX 1060 should be an even better one.
I completely agree. As long as you don't insist on all settings maxed and 60fps, the 480 and assumedly the 1060 will handle 1440 quite nicely.
 
Considering a 1080 was marketed as being roughly equivalent to 980 SLI (70% gain) why would you expect 2x 1060 (with marketed performance = 980) to suddenly gain an extra 50% performance on top of that?

Why else would they remove the SLI connector? SLI 1060 would cut into 1070 & 1080 sales.
 
Thank you for the reply. The wife just told me that she wants an ultra wide monitor so I thought the 480/1060 was off the table but your reply gives me hope that this territory of a card may still be a viable consideration for us.

But ultra-wide 1440p is still a heavy load, it's about 40% more pixels than 2560x1440. You'll probably still want at least a 1070 if you play anything recent. The 1060 will be 2560x1440p card, and no higher (unless all you play is older titles).

But if we're talking ultra-wide 2560x1080, then the 1060 will be more than enough!
 
I'll have to kindly disagree with that statement :)

I run 4K with 6GB. I look at speed vs capacity. If the gpu speed isn't enough to reach your desired fps, then you need a faster card. Most times, your gpu will run out of power before it hits the vram limit. If you're running the game at less than 60fps and the vram has hit the limit, it only means you need to turn down the settings. By keeping my settings to run above 60fps, my vram usage doesn't exceed 4GB or 5GB in certain games like GTA V. If I want higher details, I need faster cards to justify more vram.

The last card I've seen exceed it's vram capacity was the 5970 2GB.
 
I think this is set up nicely for the AIB RX480's to compare with the 1060. It really does seem like AMD purposely gimped their card to keep the AIB partners happy that their kit will sell over the reference model!

Also, the AIB costs should be more in line with the 1060's pricing as well.

Looking forward to the review(s)
 
bad news for AMD...
I know right. $300 for Founders Edition 1060. Take that $200 AMD cards.

7drHiqr.gif
 
Why are you guys so interested in SLI? If you ever have tried SLI or Crossfire, you know it is not worth it. SLI has to be supported by the game and the driver. As a result, new drivers or game updates can break SLI. Since not a lot of people use SLI, bug fixes take the back seat. If SLI isn't supported, the game may perform worse than if you just had a single card installed. Now that SLI/crossfile is going to be supported by the game through Vulkan/DX12 it is only going to be worse. As a developer, why should I bother supporting it? You can play my game either way. It may sound good that you can multigpu and get performance close to or better than ultra high end for cheaper, but it is not worth the hassle. Do yourselves a favor and pretend that multigpu configurations don't exist.
 
I run 4K with 6GB. I look at speed vs capacity. If the gpu speed isn't enough to reach your desired fps, then you need a faster card. Most times, your gpu will run out of power before it hits the vram limit. If you're running the game at less than 60fps and the vram has hit the limit, it only means you need to turn down the settings. By keeping my settings to run above 60fps, my vram usage doesn't exceed 4GB or 5GB in certain games like GTA V. If I want higher details, I need faster cards to justify more vram.

The last card I've seen exceed it's vram capacity was the 5970 2GB.

And even games like GTA V MASSIVELY overestimate their own self-imposed VRAM limits. I've seen many users on this forum who turned off the VRAM limits, and still got wonderful performance.

Those aggressive VRAM limits are only there for people who don't have lots of free system ram to cache assets.
 
Kyle is that card showing up as GP106 in GPU-Z ?
Rumors suggest the 1060 is really a GP104 but cut down again. But rumors are rumors. If true, a BIOS flash is all you'll need to get a 1070 out of it, if you win at silicon lottery.
 
Why are you guys so interested in SLI? If you ever have tried SLI or Crossfire, you know it is not worth it. SLI has to be supported by the game and the driver. As a result, new drivers or game updates can break SLI. Since not a lot of people use SLI, bug fixes take the back seat. If SLI isn't supported, the game may perform worse than if you just had a single card installed. Now that SLI/crossfile is going to be supported by the game through Vulkan/DX12 it is only going to be worse. As a developer, why should I bother supporting it? You can play my game either way. It may sound good that you can multigpu and get performance close to or better than ultra high end for cheaper, but it is not worth the hassle. Do yourselves a favor and pretend that multigpu configurations don't exist.

But....for a lot of people it does work, and work well. This is a backwards step for nVidia and for gamers generally IMO.

What next, the 1170 doesn't support SLI as it might eat into the 1180 sales etc, or SLi is only for the top end card?

I can guarantee if AMD said there was no Crossfire on the RX480 this forum would be up in arms.
 
Rumors suggest the 1060 is really a GP104 but cut down again. But rumors are rumors. If true, a BIOS flash is all you'll need to get a 1070 out of it, if you win at silicon lottery.

The card is already shown on some sites. Its not a GP104 chip.
 
Good price to performance with low power consumption. Lot's will jump on this one I bet
 
Would it? How many SLI GTX960 today?

With no purpose its better to save the cost.

Honestly, if my old board supported 8x/8x SLI (it only supports 8x/4x Crossfire....... urgh)

I would totally pick up another 960 4GB for around $100 used.
 
I disagree. When I bought my SLI 660's they outperformed the 680 and was $100 cheaper. Plus I could hook up 2x the monitors. And have a card to play on when one of them Got RMA'd. That is a win-win in my book. Guess I'm just a fucking idiot.

And you're an example of the corner case that I mentioned. You simply confirmed my point. In the games YOU played, your SLI'd 660's outperformed a 680, but that was not the case for every game, nor was everyone able to get a pair of 660's early into the product cycle for $100 less than a 680. It doesn't change that most people running single lower end gaming cards do not end up using SLI, and nvidia likely has numbers to confirm that.
 
And you're an example of the corner case that I mentioned. You simply confirmed my point. In the games YOU played, your SLI'd 660's outperformed a 680, but that was not the case for every game, nor was everyone able to get a pair of 660's early into the product cycle for $100 less than a 680. It doesn't change that most people running single lower end gaming cards do not end up using SLI, and nvidia likely has numbers to confirm that.
Well, to be fair, most people suck ;)....... I went to store. There were gtx 660 for $229 and gtx 680 for $499. Everyone was allowed in store.

I still think it is bullshit and no one can change my mind.
 
If I could get one with a blower fan for $250 I might bite to tide me over until I get something better. But not paying $300 for a 1060 FE.
Same here, it's the only way to go for a SFF.

Now let's take a look at what they say about the FE:

The GeForce GTX 1060 Founder’s Edition is crafted with premium materials and components, including a faceted die-cast aluminum body machine finished for strength and rigidity and a thermal solution designed to run cool and quiet. Like the GeForce GTX 1080 and GTX 1070 Founder’s Edition boards, a dual-FETs power supply is used to improve power efficiency, along with a low impedance power delivery network and custom voltage regulators.

What's in there that ASUS, eVGA and the like won't do?
  • faceted die-cast aluminum body machine finished for strength and rigidity
Once in place, what gives?

  • thermal solution designed to run cool and quiet
Same for everyone using a blower?

  • dual-FETs power supply is used to improve power efficiency
No idea here if other will use dual-FETs, could possibly make a difference for people wanting to push OC high?

  • low impedance power delivery network and custom voltage regulators
Should be similar to other solution...
 
All these comparisons to the RX480. If this card is faster than a GTX 980 then that is Fury/FuryX territory. Those cards are going for $400-$500. The entire top stack of AMD's lineup has been rendered irrelevant, and the mid-range is a tough sell.

Are even more drastic AMD price cuts on the way?
 
Facts: Paper launch (if AMD had done this you would've seen editorials and fanboys attacking them), less memory, no multigpu support (Nvidia's incompetence at implementing mGPU over PCI-E is very worrisome or depending how you see it, typical, as they'd rather nickel and dime their customers with $25-30+ SLI bridges), power connector will make modding a pain (may not matter much since custom boards will come later).

The rest will be weeks of shills making excuses for the aforementioned lack of Mgpu support and less memory (just read the thread they've already started). Timing wise AIBs should have custom RX 480s ready which will likely outperform it and deliver much better performance per dollar by the time the 1060 is actually physically available.

New and low post accounts from the nvidia focus (shill) group this is your cue.

P.S: Will be interesting to see if this card also suffers from the same problem with VR headsets as the 1070/1080 do.
Nvidia GTX 1080, 1070 Display Port Incompatible With Vive HMD (Updated)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top