NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Founders Edition Review @ [H]

Shintai said:
1060 already OCs to above 2Ghz in reviews. Factory OCs just makes it even worse for the 480, the fastest factory OC for 480 is what since the 480 is already pushed to its limits. And home OC is a no brainer in favour of 1060.
Click to expand...

Would you rather have better over all performance or a better overclock? I don't know why people keep on harping on this point?
 
pcgeekesq said:
You can never be too paranoid on the Internet, because complete strangers will screw with you for the lulz if you give them the chance.
Click to expand...

I guess you are right. but I just don't hand out my credit card, my email and address well you can't really avoid that anymore. Once it goes to banks its shared left and right. I was just asking to pay you money haha, its all good.
 
Bowman15 said:
Would you rather have better over all performance or a better overclock? I don't know why people keep on harping on this point?
Click to expand...

Well its lucky with the 1060. You can get better OC, better performance and better perf/watt. And you dont have to use 40W idle with multi monitors either or playing a bluray ;)
 
Exactly... I dont think shintai understands this properly.

The 1060's already boost over 1800 out the box, so there is little performance gain to be had when it reaches 2050ish on oc.

The rederence 480s throttle around 1250, but should run steady at 1400+ on aib. I think there is more room for gain on that situation compared to 1060 oc gains
 
Why are people posting canned benchmarks? All you need to do is re-read Brents detailed, unbiased, real world review. So the 1060 isnt the $239 holy grail of the nerd kingdom!... the 480 wasn't either, its just better at some DX12 games and kicks ass using Vulkan... and has CF, its not a big deal.
 
It could be that data collection via GFE played a part in the decision to axe SLI for that price segment.
 
sleepybp said:
Exactly... I dont think shintai understands this properly.

The 1060's already boost over 1800 out the box, so there is little performance gain to be had when it reaches 2050ish on oc.

The rederence 480s throttle around 1250, butnahould run steady at 1400+ on aib. I think there is more room for gain on that situation compared to 1060 oc gains
Click to expand...

This is true, the 1400+ MHz AIB 480 might make it on par or a bit faster than 1060 stock overall. AIB vs AIB it will be a lot murkier but then the price also creeps up to the point where it's not worth it for a lower end card when you can make the jump to 1070. Unfortunately this is where AMD falters really badly as they have no answer for 1070/1080.
 
NKD said:
you really need a loud speaker to tell you how much better vulkan is than open gl? Why do you need to have open gl results when both cards are being tested with the future API? lol There are plenty of tests comparing open gl vs vulkan. Vulkan doens't hurt nvidia cards its just that amd cards gain much more than nvidia. so its a fair game. Plus if you don't like it read other reviews, [H] actually tests game play experience not just benches. So you know what the cards will do over a certain period of gaming.
Click to expand...

They tested Rise of the Tomb Raider

in both DX11 and DX12 modes FOR REFERENCE POINTS.

You'd think it would be that easy to do Vulkan and OpenGL to add some additional REFERENCE POINTS to the Doom test, but obviously I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about.

This is NOT EVEN HALF a review if we don't even have four full sets of games benchmarked. Most previous reviews from[H] had at least 6 games, so they are slipping.
 
Last edited:
Shintai said:
Well its lucky with the 1060. You can get better OC, better performance and better perf/watt. And you dont have to use 40W idle with multi monitors either or playing a bluray ;)
Click to expand...

I don't care what performance per watt is at idle. I care what the overall performance is...if a 480 beats a 1060 who gives a shit how high it can OC or visa vera...:rolleyes:
 
sleepybp said:
Once the aib 480s come out and oc it will equal the 1060 oc in dx11 and crush 1060 in future dx12/vulcan. And be cheaper than 1060 with more memory @8gb.

480 will oc to 1400 but 1060 is already near max bc it already boosts over 1800 stock out of the box
Click to expand...

$10 cheaper, and 40-50 Watts more power...

The real question going forward is how many games have DX12 support, if DX12 actually gives better performance than DX11, if any game other than DOOM will use Vulcan..

I guess if we knew those answers.. we'd all be making millions on the stock market already :)
 
sleepybp said:
Exactly... I dont think shintai understands this properly.

The 1060's already boost over 1800 out the box, so there is little performance gain to be had when it reaches 2050ish on oc.

The rederence 480s throttle around 1250, but should run steady at 1400+ on aib. I think there is more room for gain on that situation compared to 1060 oc gains
Click to expand...

Since you claim the 480 will do better, the percentage must be better. And that's excluding that we know the 1060 scales better up than the 480 in terms of resolution, aka memory bandwidth. But you forgot to do the math.

1266->1400=10.6%
1800->2050=13.9%

See?
 
Shintai said:
Well its lucky with the 1060. You can get better OC, better performance and better perf/watt. And you dont have to use 40W idle with multi monitors either or playing a bluray ;)
Click to expand...

You know that OC over 2ghz really depends on game right? I have a 1080 in most games it goes from 2050 to 1950's when it starts getting crushed with games that push it. So its a hit and miss. That is why no one is overclocking these out of the box to 2ghz because it is hard to sustain that boost clocks and all staying in the 1800's max. 1900-2000 is most realistic. But with the RX 480 it is about sustaining the boost clock. Asus is reporting already 15% gains with 1330 OC that just means that it is sustaining 1330 rather than being in the low 1200s in games that push the power limit and temps. If AIB cards can sustain 1400 with little overclocking that will be a major boost for rx 480s
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
Nobu said:
Probably the settings they used, though I can't make much sense of them...what does all this mean, exactly:
Click to expand...

Beat me to it. :) Was going to say it probably was down to the fact that they didn't actually use Vulcan. Just throwing that out there.
 
Yes 5150 joker, i agree.
Neither 1060 nor 480 are worth 300 dollars.anything near 300 and 1070 is a must buy @ msrp though ;) around 400 or 380 dollars
 
In terms of DX12 and Vulkan. Can we have it tested on equal terms and not with AMD sponsored titles mainly? ;)
 
NKD said:
If AIB cards can sustain 1400 with little overclocking that will be a major boost for rx 480s
Click to expand...

At what price though? What if those AIB cards are $270-$300? Would it still be worth getting? Because I'd rather save another $100 and grab a base line 1070 that is much faster.

I look at it like this:

A hardcore value budget buyer that can't break much past the $200 mark, the stock 480 is the best value and will stay there unless NVIDIA slashes prices.

If someone has that extra $50, the Gigabyte Windforce for $249 is a great buy and better than the 8 GB RX 480.

AIB vs AIB: If price reaches $290+, neither is worth it IMO and the consumer is better off saving a little more for a 1070 which destroys both cards.

Overall though I think the 6 GB $250 1060 is the best value card on the market right now.
 
pcgeekesq said:
The ASUS ROG STRIX GTX 970 is at the moment running at 45C in my 26C room. In a CM Haf XB Evo, which is very close to being an open case.
Click to expand...

You do know that tells you nothing about its heat output and that there will be zero difference in the amount the 1060 will heat up your room and case?
 
Karlman said:
$10 cheaper, and 40-50 Watts more power...

The real question going forward is how many games have DX12 support, if DX12 actually gives better performance than DX11, if any game other than DOOM will use Vulcan..

I guess if we knew those answers.. we'd all be making millions on the stock market already :)
Click to expand...

bunch of games coming out with dx12 late this year and next. Vulkan is essentially the new open gl. So the games moving forward should use vulkan as it is better for games. Remember if a developer is making games for console they will use the API that is going to squeeze every bit of performance so since all of them are using AMD hardware is the reason you are seeing async shaders being used and vulkan being implemented so fast in doom. its good for gaming.
 
Vulkan isn't going anywhere. Its all about DX12 in that regard.
 
Regarding the DOOM Vulkan results, here's what the reviewer at Tom's Hardware had to report:


Quote:
"ID said, that they optimzed the render path ONLY for AMD yet and that the Nvidia implemention will follow later. How we can test a half-done game without the optimized driver?

Currently asynchronous compute is only supported on AMD GPUs and requires DOOM Vulkan supported drivers to run. We are working with NVIDIA to enable asynchronous compute in Vulkan on NVIDIA GPUs. We hope to have an update soon.
Click to expand...

Any question? All current tests are useless ;)"
 
5150Joker said:
This is true, the 1400+ MHz AIB 480 might make it on par or a bit faster than 1060 stock overall. AIB vs AIB it will be a lot murkier but then the price also creeps up to the point where it's not worth it for a lower end card when you can make the jump to 1070. Unfortunately this is where AMD falters really badly as they have no answer for 1070/1080.
Click to expand...

are you like really smoking something? Rx 480 at stock boost clocks is keeping up with 1060 and beats it in dx 12 with the 1060 boosting up to 1850 average almost. So I am scratching my head here that you are saying 1400+ will be on par with stock 1060? WTF?
 
Shintai said:
Vulkan isn't going anywhere. Its all about DX12 in that regard.
Click to expand...

Yeah Vulkan is going to be just like OpenGL, hardly used at all. DX 12 will be in the drivers seat for Windows PC gaming and we'll have to see how well Pascal's improved pre-emption holds up vs AMD's dedicated async compute. I'm guessing it's going to depend on how much $$$ AMD/NVIDIA throw at developers to optimize for their GPUs.
 
I'm not too interested in DX12 or Vulkan yet. None of the games that support it are of any real interest to me. Need to wait and see how bigger games implement it.
 
pcgeekesq said:
Regarding me buying an SUS ROG STRIX 1060:

1) It was $329, that $349 was a typo I have now fixed.
2) I wanted it for the lower power dissipation and the ability to drive four of my five monitors. The new card ill sit three slots away from my ROG STRIX GTX 1080.
The GTX 1080 is what drives my 4K G-Sync display for games. And pretty well too.

So point is, I don't care about gaming performance on the GTX 1060. But I'm not aware of any other card that can drive two 1440p displays and two 1080p displays at as low a power dissipation as the GTX 1060 can. My current GTX 970 certainly doesn't.
Click to expand...

Why not have 2 other cheaper & low power <$100 gpus that each output dual 1440p? surely they exist.

I built a machine for a friend who did stock trading almost 10 years ago, and I simply found him a motherboard with 4 PCI-E slots and used 3 cheap gpus to connect 6 supplemental LCDs. His primary two LCDs were connected to his faster $250 gpu.
 
Yes i am aware of the % changes in clockspeeds on oc vs oc, but in benchmarks so far it appears 480 is scaling better with oc than pascal
 
skiddierow said:
It could be that data collection via GFE played a part in the decision to axe SLI for that price segment.
Click to expand...
Well then shit. I should have actually installed their crap instead of forgoing it when I had 4 different x60 SLI setups. Now they'll never know why I'm displeased with the card
 
NKD said:
are you like really smoking something? Rx 480 at stock boost clocks is keeping up with 1060 and beats it in dx 12 with the 1060 boosting up to 1850 average almost. So I am scratching my head here that you are saying 1400+ will be on par with stock 1060? WTF?
Click to expand...

The RX 480 loses to the 1060 overall and with only a handful of DX 12 games on the market, no sane person would draw a conclusion about that yet, maybe in 1-2 years when there's a lot more games that utilize DX 12. And yeah the stock 1060 also OCs or did you forget that? Hence the 1400 MHz 480 will basically be on par with a 1060 stock card as every review is showing it can reach 2 GHz. Now keep in mind I'm saying stock CARD and not CLOCKS as the two are very different. The stock RX 480 is a piss poor overclocker that runs incredibly hot and more importantly, needs a special driver not to break PCI-E power limits so you have to tilt towards AIB for that comparison.
 
Last edited:
NKD said:
bunch of games coming out with dx12 late this year and next. Vulkan is essentially the new open gl. So the games moving forward should use vulkan as it is better for games. Remember if a developer is making games for console they will use the API that is going to squeeze every bit of performance so since all of them are using AMD hardware is the reason you are seeing async shaders being used and vulkan being implemented so fast in doom. its good for gaming.
Click to expand...

Doom is the only OpenGL supporting game I can recall in the last few years.. I was actually surprised when I read they added Vulcan, that it didn't support DX11/12 at all.. as far as I know neither console uses OpenGL either.. so imho Vulcan has an uphill battle.

And for DX12, I'm still waiting for it to reliably give better performance across games, compared to DX11.. so far we have ~3-4 games that support DX12 now, that didn't support it at launch, got worse performance in DX12 when first added, and finally now are getting the same or better? performance in DX12 vs DX11.. (hard to tell since the latest review only compared DX11/DX12 in a single game).
 
17seconds said:
Regarding the DOOM Vulkan results, here's what the reviewer at Tom's Hardware had to report:


Quote:
"ID said, that they optimzed the render path ONLY for AMD yet and that the Nvidia implemention will follow later. How we can test a half-done game without the optimized driver?



Any question? All current tests are useless ;)"
Click to expand...

Exactly :)
 
5150Joker said:
The RX 480 loses to the 1060 overall and with only a handful of DX 12 games on the market, no sane person would draw a conclusion about that yet, maybe in 1-2 years when there's a lot more games that utilize DX 12. And yeah the stock 1060 also OCs or did you forget that? Hence the 1400 MHz 480 will basically be on par with a 1060 stock as every review is showing it can reach 2 GHz.
Click to expand...

You should really read up. Plenty of DX12 games coming out in the second half of the year. Some AAA games in fact.
 
Could we get a 4k performance review on the card? I have a 980 and am interested in getting heat/power draw down. With the additional memory, I was hopeful that I might get improved 4k performance from the 1060 vs the 980, but there is no information on that here, though it looks as if it might be a mixed bag. It does seem possible the 1060 might fair better vs the 980 at higher resolutions.

Also, I'm surprised we don't see more 4k reviews in general. This is increasingly relevant, even for the lower end cards. Not all the games we play are the latest games with nightmare mode enabled. I constantly pick up slightly older games on steam which run just fine with maximum (or close to maximum) graphics on the 980, and I'm always very interested in updated cards that are more 4k friendly than what I'm currently running.

Please do include more 4k (especially for current cards like the 1060/1070/1080, current coverage is spotty at best.
 
Just a reminder for those who keep mentioning the GTX 1070:

GTX 1060 = MSRP $249
GTX 1070 = MSRP $379
 
Bowman15 said:
You should really read up. Plenty of DX12 games coming out in the second half of the year. Some AAA games in fact.
Click to expand...

Like I said, in 1-2 years when there's a lot more DX 12 games can we start approaching a conclusion on which card does DX 12 better. Right now DX 12 is in it's infancy and DX 11 is still the market driver.
 
17seconds said:
Regarding the DOOM Vulkan results, here's what the reviewer at Tom's Hardware had to report:


Quote:
"ID said, that they optimzed the render path ONLY for AMD yet and that the Nvidia implemention will follow later. How we can test a half-done game without the optimized driver?



Any question? All current tests are useless ;)"
Click to expand...


I was wondering the same thing.
 
J Macker said:
Why not have 2 other cheaper & low power <$100 gpus that each output dual 1440p? surely they exist.
Click to expand...
I am not aware of any such GPUs than can match the GTX 1060's low total power dissipation, but I cannot say I spent a lot of time looking. :)
 
Bowman15 said:
Then I'd definitely get a 480...any higher model and I'd go 1070 or 1080.
Click to expand...

Vulkan will stay and dx12 isn't going anywhere either. AMD got microsoft to push async support and now since games are console first it really means that developers are kind of pushed to use async to squeeze another 10-15% or so whatever they can get to make the experience more smoother. No one would give a fuck about async if amd wasn't being used in consoles. ROTR even came out with async support recently but in the old days no one bothered, for once consoles are driving pc gaming to a better experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top