NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Founders Edition Review @ [H]

[NKD]

Something which was trumpeted early on, but then later has been systematically neutered by Nvidia: is the potential flexibility of multi-gpu setups. A person might buy a 1060 right now. Because its perfect for them. or because its what they can afford. or whatever. But a year from now, they might find a good deal on another and wouldn't it be great if they could do that. At that point, who cares about performance scaling or games compatibility or well you shoulda just bought the $400 card a year ago... ...forget all of that. It used to be an option. I did it, once. Bought a couple of dell system pull 6800 PCI-E, to side-grade from my single 6800 AGP.

I agree with the last part. I have done that in the past. But I lost faith in dual gpu setups a while ago and I don't even bother about it. Its just never works the way I always hoped it would lol and the experience wasn't there for me. Mostly frustrating. I don't disagree with your suggestion because that is very tempting and I have done it before. But I think multigpu has sort of lost its interest other than benchmarking. I have seen more people suggest against it than for it. I myself has been victim of its frustrations lol.

 

[Sodapopjones]

Wow did I predict wrong, I was waiting for the 480 to get stomped, not so much lol.... Yeah, I don't see why you should throw away your money on a 1060 when the 480 is around.

 

[chenw]

I tried SLI in Maxwell, but I went from 570 pretty much straight to SLI 970.

I did try single 970, what convinced me to try SLI was actually ironic in the hindsight. I used DSR on a single 970 to test whether or not I'd get playable performance at 1440p in Wolfenstein. I was planning to get a PG278Q if I went via the SLI route, and New order was the newest game I had at the time that did not support SLI.

After going SLI, however, DSR got disabled lol, it wasn't until about several months ago that they finally fixed DSR with SLI and G-sync.

MFAA still doesn't work, and probably will never.

Hence I am going back to single GPU this time round. I didn't upgrade to 1070 because it is too close to my SLI 970's, and 1080 was too expensive for the upgrade. But I lost one 970 since I had to transplant it to another computer in the family that recently lost the 570 I had previously. 1070 has been calling out to me, but I think I am going to wait until at the very least 1080ti/Vega before making that decision. I want TW3 to run at 60fps min at 1440p with settings turned up to 11, just to get myself some breathing room for modding FO4, and I want TW2 & 3 as smooth sailing as possible, which 1080 currently cannot manage, it can manage 60fps average though, so I think 1080ti might just be enough.

 

[{NG}Fidel]

I agree with the last part. I have done that in the past. But I lost faith in dual gpu setups a while ago and I don't even bother about it. Its just never works the way I always hoped it would lol and the experience wasn't there for me. Mostly frustrating. I don't disagree with your suggestion because that is very tempting and I have done it before. But I think multigpu has sort of lost its interest other than benchmarking. I have seen more people suggest against it than for it. I myself has been victim of its frustrations lol.

The point is how much does it cost just to provide the damn option. And why, as a consumer, sacrifice that ability plus the vram plus the pref in New apis.

Side note, ima single got guy most the time. Every now and then i go overkill on mgpu though.

 

[heatlesssun]

think about it this way. No developers will go out of their way to add support for new API if it didn't benefit the experience to their customer at the very least. Vulkan is replacement of OPEN GL, or you can call it the new version of it. It is here to stay. To implement it so quick I think it must be a much better API and they see the benefit from it otherwise you wouldn't have vulkan support that quick after launch of doom. Believe it or not if they are seeing major benefits from this api and better game play experience there will be developers using it. There is no reason to leave it behind or they wouldn't bother adding vulkan support at all.

DOTA is going to support it too, I believe its already in beta.

I imagine shops that have been on OGL will go to Vulkan and those on DX 11 with go to 12. Of course DX 12 being Windows 10 only will temper that a bit but 12 will at least be an option in chunk of the major titles going forward.

 

[chameleoneel]

I agree with the last part. I have done that in the past. But I lost faith in dual gpu setups a while ago and I don't even bother about it. Its just never works the way I always hoped it would lol and the experience wasn't there for me. Mostly frustrating. I don't disagree with your suggestion because that is very tempting and I have done it before. But I think multigpu has sort of lost its interest other than benchmarking. I have seen more people suggest against it than for it. I myself has been victim of its frustrations lol.

I didn't care for SLI, either. Haven't been back to dual GPU, since. and those were early days! The options should still be there! I should be able to SLI GTX 750, if I want to!

 

[heatlesssun]

SLI is temperamental but when it works can deliver impressive results. I just don't think it's work it for these kinds of cards except maybe a cheap upgrade in the future. 2 480s at ~$500 can deliver some great performance some of the time and it's cheaper than a 1080 but still not as good overall. If DX12/Vulkan games show more consistent results mGPU might be a better deal.

 

[NKD]

I didn't care for SLI, either. Haven't been back to dual GPU, since. and those were early days! The options should still be there! I should be able to SLI GTX 750, if I want to!

True the option should be there but I think the only reason its not is because then review sites will be testing sli in these and presenting that as an option. Nvidia just doesn't want to hurt any sales what so ever on top end. They are making bank there so I think its a pure financial decision on their part at cost of consumers.

 

[DarkLegacy]

Wow did I predict wrong, I was waiting for the 480 to get stomped, not so much lol.... Yeah, I don't see why you should throw away your money on a 1060 when the 480 is around.

That looks to be the case but then again, a lot of sites are reporting different numbers than [H] is. So not sure what is going on atm. I've always put [H] reviews first though so we'll see if other reviews fall in line with what [H] is reporting. I have a lot more to read from the other sites

 

[heatlesssun]

They are making bank there so I think its a pure financial decision on their part at cost of consumers.

If there were lots of people running these kinds of cards in SLI then sure. But this probably is pretty small audience so I wouldn't go quite this far.

 

[NKD]

If there were lots of people running these kinds of cards in SLI then sure. But this probably is pretty small audience so I wouldn't go quite this far.

well 960 supported it so why not 1060. Its a pure marketing decision to be honest. There is no other reason to not allow sli than them being afraid of people picking up two of these and getting close to 1080 performance which it will. There are plenty of people that will fall for that. Plus what kyle above said. They may be leaving it up to developers and it saves them money as well.

 

[primetime]

If there were lots of people running these kinds of cards in SLI then sure. But this probably is pretty small audience so I wouldn't go quite this far.

it was a business decision for nvidia is my take on it. Makes people spend the extra on the 1070 in many cases and reinforces why i prefer red team.

 

[NKD]

it was a business decision for nvidia is my take on it. Makes people spend the extra on the 1070 in many cases and reinforces why i prefer red team.

hahaha good one.

 

[heatlesssun]

it was a business decision for nvidia is my take on it. Makes people spend the extra on the 1070 in many cases and reinforces why i prefer red team.

But the 1070 is cheaper than 2 1060s so I don't get this point. If you mean 1080 then ok, but the single card solution there will generally be superior all around anyway.

 

[jolli]

I don't think I would ever buy two mid-range cards on the hope that EMA pans out . . . and I'm the type of guy who has bought multiple dedicated PhysX cards over the years (i.e., a dummy).

 

[Trimlock]

With the development of Vulcan you'd have to wait for a game patch to enable EMA regardless. I doubt that useless bridge would help much.

 

[sirmonkey1985]

The point is how much does it cost just to provide the damn option. And why, as a consumer, sacrifice that ability plus the vram plus the pref in New apis.

Side note, ima single got guy most the time. Every now and then i go overkill on mgpu though.

don't expect the performance difference to be that big for long. AMD, Nvidia, Intel and a bunch of other companies are putting a lot of time and money into making vulkan successful. there needs to be another API option available besides directx and vulkan is the best chance we have of that happening. but yeah AMD had a head start and that was to be expected.

 

[Sodapopjones]

well 960 supported it so why not 1060. Its a pure marketing decision to be honest. There is no other reason to not allow sli than them being afraid of people picking up two of these and getting close to 1080 performance which it will. There are plenty of people that will fall for that. Plus what kyle above said. They may be leaving it up to developers and it saves them money as well.

Right, the theory that nVidia was moving away from mGPU due to its limitations seem to be further from the truth as time pans out. They want you buying their over-inflated product, not putting 2 products together that in theory are as good or better than their higher end offerings, and to touch on the "Well there's the 1070 that doesn't make sense" two of these are going to be superior in theory, if they were SLI'able to a 1070.

 

[DirtyB]

Noob question: how much money would the gtx1060 save me over a rx480 just due to power used?(@.13 per kw) $20 a year? Genuinely curious.

 

[Ocellaris]

Noob question: how much money would the gtx1060 save me over a rx480 just due to power used?(@.13 per kw) $20 a year? Genuinely curious.

If you presume there is a 40w difference in power usage, and you run the cards 24/7 for an entire year, it would save you about $7/year.

Since you probably aren't looking at running the cards 24/7 at full load, you can see the cost saving is very minimal.

 

[Lord Risky]

If you presume there is a 40w difference in power usage, and you run the cards 24/7 for an entire year, it would save you about $7/year.

Since you probably aren't looking at running the cards 24/7 at full load, you can see the cost saving is very minimal.

That's why I didn't get why so many people here were beating the "way more efficient" drum so hard. The annual power savings and difference in case heat generated are nearly negligible.

 

[Cmdrmonkey]

So was nVidia just flat out lying when they said this would beat a 980?

It looks like it doesn't even match a 980, and like the 980 is a lot faster at 1440p.

Are they expecting the 1060 to perform better with better drivers? Or were they just lying to try to keep people from rushing to buy RX 480s?

 

[Daniel_Chang]

That's why I didn't get why so many people here were beating the "way more efficient" drum so hard. The annual power savings and difference in case heat generated are nearly negligible.

It's just the way that things are. When Fermi was a power-sucking-whore, the AMD fans were beating the "power efficiency" drum.

 

[Trimlock]

That's why I didn't get why so many people here were beating the "way more efficient" drum so hard. The annual power savings and difference in case heat generated are nearly negligible.

Last few gens it made sense, not from a monetary standpoint but a heat generated one. You would need to upgrade cooling or deal with a warmer gaming space with the increased power usage.

Now the difference between the RX480 and 1060 is significant from a pure numerical standpoint but useless in real world application.

 

[Presbytier]

Tin foil hat time: nvidia actually believes mg

So was nVidia just flat out lying when they said this would beat a 980?

It looks like it doesn't even match a 980, and like the 980 is a lot faster at 1440p.

Are they expecting the 1060 to perform better with better drivers? Or were they just lying to try to keep people from rushing to buy RX 480s?

If you look at a wide range of reviews it hits and sometimes beats 980 performance especially at 1080p which is really what this card is good for. {H} uses a fairly small pool of games in comparison to some other reviewers. This is one of those things where you have to look at the broad number of reviews and then decide if you believe nvidia can improve dx12/vulkan performance over drivers, if so this is a better buy than a RX 480 (as long as it can be had for around MSRP).

 

[STrooperTK421]

Ok, can someone clear something up for me?

Looking at the previews of the 1060 vs. RX 480 we do see a large gap in the MAX FPS of games that have the Vulkan API (DOOM, etc.)... HOWEVER, looking at the average it seems that the 1060 still beats out the 480 (not by much) but some people are still going all frothy at the mouth about Vulkan / DX12 HUUURRRR AMD roxorz when it seems to me that the average playing experience is still in the 1060's favor.

Am I missing something here?

 

[kalston]

Ok, can someone clear something up for me?

Looking at the previews of the 1060 vs. RX 480 we do see a large gap in the MAX FPS of games that have the Vulkan API (DOOM, etc.)... HOWEVER, looking at the average it seems that the 1060 still beats out the 480 (not by much) but some people are still going all frothy at the mouth about Vulkan / DX12 HUUURRRR AMD roxorz when it seems to me that the average playing experience is still in the 1060's favor.

Am I missing something here?

No, you're right. It's a better card overall (especially in dx11/open-gl which is the majority of the games out there) and only $10 more at MSRP. With the super low power consumption that makes it a fantastic card. Look at the perf/$ and perf/watt on TPU, says it all.

 

[Dayaks]

Ok, can someone clear something up for me?

Looking at the previews of the 1060 vs. RX 480 we do see a large gap in the MAX FPS of games that have the Vulkan API (DOOM, etc.)... HOWEVER, looking at the average it seems that the 1060 still beats out the 480 (not by much) but some people are still going all frothy at the mouth about Vulkan / DX12 HUUURRRR AMD roxorz when it seems to me that the average playing experience is still in the 1060's favor.

Am I missing something here?

In reality they are negligible in both DX11 and DX12/Vulkan. For me it'd come down to game bundles or warranty. Something besides performance since to me performance is equal.

I love a good blow which makes me generally lean nVidia but AMDs seems fine at this wattage as well.

 

[STrooperTK421]

Neat, thanks kalston and Dayaks!

...now comes the fun part, and that is actually being able to get a 1060 that is in freaking stock and that isn't $300.

 

[Meeho]

Ok, can someone clear something up for me?

Looking at the previews of the 1060 vs. RX 480 we do see a large gap in the MAX FPS of games that have the Vulkan API (DOOM, etc.)... HOWEVER, looking at the average it seems that the 1060 still beats out the 480 (not by much) but some people are still going all frothy at the mouth about Vulkan / DX12 HUUURRRR AMD roxorz when it seems to me that the average playing experience is still in the 1060's favor.

Am I missing something here?

What are you talking about?

That's 25% and 31% higher average FPS, a huge difference.

 

[Shintai]

Ok, can someone clear something up for me?

Looking at the previews of the 1060 vs. RX 480 we do see a large gap in the MAX FPS of games that have the Vulkan API (DOOM, etc.)... HOWEVER, looking at the average it seems that the 1060 still beats out the 480 (not by much) but some people are still going all frothy at the mouth about Vulkan / DX12 HUUURRRR AMD roxorz when it seems to me that the average playing experience is still in the 1060's favor.

Am I missing something here?

Doom is at now optimized for AMD only. Nvidia is coming later, they are working on it. Reason is AMDs path uses GCN Shader Extentions while Nvidia and Intel(If there is a path yet) uses standard shaders. So it cant be used for compare at all until done.

 

[Dayaks]

What are you talking about?

That's 25% and 31% higher average FPS, a huge difference.

But how much is that inflated by ridiculous maximums? I personally put more weight into minimums, as my goal is locking a certain FPS with no drops. RX480 does well no doubt, but personally I think if they were side by side they would be about equal especially after I OC the 1060.

TBH I probably would go 480 this round. I can't think of a good reason not to.

 

[Meeho]

But how much is that inflated by ridiculous maximums?

Looking at the graph, the effect of max spikes is negligible.

 

[Dayaks]

Looking at the graph, the effect of max spikes is negligible.

Soooo I tried to ninja edit I'd go with an AIB 480. I like to throw AMD a bone where I can.

Not sure if I'd plan my purchases just on Vulkan. Given they are generally about equal otherwise you only have performance to gain on the AMD side.


By the way, what the hell with the pricing? 970ish performance at a 970 price? Whoa boy don't go too nuts there nVidia.

 

[Meeho]

I personally put more weight into minimums, as my goal is locking a certain FPS with no drops. RX480 does well no doubt, but personally I think if they were side by side they would be about equal especially after I OC the 1060.

Absolute minimums are meaningless if they occur in rare spikes, that's why graphs or percentile FPS are important.

Also:

DOOM was so smooth on all 3 cards, but I would say "more-so" on 480 with those high framerates, I can see why people like 100+Hz gaming, I was fraggin those demons left and right with not a care in the world, and let me tell ya, it was FUN.

There is a real life difference in gaming experience. The RX480 and its launch have many flaws but that is no reason to dismiss its advantages.

 

[Dayaks]

Absolute minimums are meaningless if they occur in rare spikes, that's why graphs or percentile FPS are important.

Also:

You gotta give me a good half hour to stop editing my shit posts. I agree with you. I looked again and deleted that part a few minutes ago.

 

[Meeho]

Not sure if I'd plan my purchases just on Vulkan. Given they are generally about equal otherwise you only have performance to gain on the AMD side.

Oh, definitely not based on one game only, but yeah, new APIs look promising for AMD to make up for some of their deficiencies.

 

[c3k]

Given the price points and performance numbers, I can't see why anyone would go 1060 instead of 480...unless they just prefer NVidia over AMD. Shrug. It's nice to have choices. (And, IF these cards ever get wide availability, $250 for this kind of graphics power is great, whichever one you choose.)

 

[Ieldra]

Spoiler

 

[kalston]

Given the price points and performance numbers, I can't see why anyone would go 1060 instead of 480...unless they just prefer NVidia over AMD. Shrug. It's nice to have choices. (And, IF these cards ever get wide availability, $250 for this kind of graphics power is great, whichever one you choose.)

Funny, I'd say the exact opposite. Faster (except Vulkan/dx12), lower tdp, overclocks well, only $10 more at MSRP (and it is available at this price this time around), quieter stock cooler...