Official NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Announcement @ [H]

[noko]

Noko that's apples and oranges. NVidia didn't remove SLI from the high end, as you say in your example. I think SLI totally belongs on the 1070 and 1080 product points, because it might make sense to SLI those cards. A 1060 though... I just can't see any circumstance where that's a good idea. Not that people haven't been trying to nickle-and-dime SLI setups out of mid-low end cards before, but its kind of dumb and impatient to waste money like that.

You do know not all folks think the way you do. Being smart in performance/$ if SLI is an option, either earlier or later is up to the individual to decide what is best. Buying a 1080 now is not cheap, buying one 1060 now and 6 months or later when you have more change for $200 and getting near the same performance can be an option if it was an option. Of course there are trade offs but that is a matter of choice. Choices are a good thing if they allow folks ways to an end or goal.

I bought a single 1070, if more games support EMA, DX 12 is going to be DX 12 and I can pick up another 1070 for $200 - hell why not? That is a clear possibility. Or if I go 4K/5K on this rig, SLI/EMA gives me that option. Buying a Titan or 1080 could cost way more with less performance overall. Just some thoughts.

 

[flenser]

You do know not all folks think the way you do.

Yea, I know. That's why most people are broke, in debt, have no savings. *edit* insert snarky smile here since I'm being intentionally, well, snarky *end edit*
I chased low-mid-end upgrades that "made sense", to the tune of $15,000 one year. Spent my entire disposable income on stupid upgradable mid-end parts and at the end of the year I still had a mid-end gaming rig that cost me over 3 times what a brand new truly high-end rig would have cost if I hadn't been so impatient. Then I did my taxes, figured out what a stupid dumb thing I had done, and I've been cured ever since LOL. I spent the next 10 years upgrading more patiently and *always* had a high end gaming rig that could run *anything*, and it sure as heck didn't involve putting low or mid end cards in SLI or spending $15k/year either. At worst, I had to play a brand new game at "high" for a few months until I could actually afford the hardware necessary to bump the settings back up not only for that one game, but for the next game release 6 months later too, without ever needing to SLI an impatiently purchased low-end video card.

Those people also call me a fool for buying a pricey phone and keeping it 2-3 years, as they wave their brand new POS $99 whatever at me, conveniently leaving out that its their 3rd phone that year. At the end of the day, I get about the same experience/enjoyment out of it maybe a day later than they do, but I can also pay cold hard cash for EVEYRTHING 'cause I didn't throw all my money away chasing the low end products out of an inability to postpone purchases until I could afford what I really wanted/needed.

But... yea, I get you. Some people don't think the way I do. Those people are broke, and I'm glad NVidia is throwing a value tidbit at folks like me for a change instead of making me pay $20 (or whatever) for SLI hardware I'll never use, on a product that doesn't really need it in the first place.

Still, I am eagerly awaiting benchmarks since I think it'll be important to see the 1060 competently match/beat the 980. Know what might be even more interesting? If a rumored 1050 is a rebranded 970 or 980 and SLI is preserved, while still selling for less than the 1060. That would lead to all sorts of enthusiast and upgrade options even if nobody hacks drivers to turn an old 980 into the mythical 1050 I've invented in my brain haha.

 

[Lord Risky]

If anything, the 1060 needs SLI support just because the direct competition (RX 480) offers Xfire. 2x 1060/480 will make for a very powerful 1440p max game play option. Not having SLI as an option for the 1060 will be one less reason to buy it over the 480. Just my .02 cents......

 

[flenser]

I bought a single 1070, if more games support EMA, DX 12 is going to be DX 12 and I can pick up another 1070 for $200 - hell why not? That is a clear possibility. Or if I go 4K/5K on this rig, SLI/EMA gives me that option. Buying a Titan or 1080 could cost way more with less performance overall. Just some thoughts.

Again, you're talking the 1070. I agree there is very likely a compelling reason to put a 1070 in SLI for performance and to extend its useful lifespan. 1070 is in my opinion a high end product (not "ultra high" or whatever you might call the top product), and also is not an unfeasible financial reach above a 1060 for anyone who has the patience to finish pooping before they start wiping.

 

[flenser]

If anything, the 1060 needs SLI support just because the direct competition (RX 480) offers Xfire. 2x 1060/480 will make for a very powerful 1440p max game play option. Not having SLI as an option for the 1060 will be one less reason to buy it over the 480. Just my .02 cents......

I'd rather NVidia duplicate more compelling features from their competitors, not features that just add cost without actually adding value to a lot of people who might buy that level of card. And by "a lot of people", I mean me. Just being honest

 

[chenw]

You are probably right, but SLI is still a nice option for those on a budget and/or people that just like to max out their hardware configs (i.e. die-hard Raid 0 fans, even with SSD's).

True for the first, the latter would not bother with mid-ranged GPU if their purpose is to 'max out' their hardware (Titan P, or at least 1080ti, would be their choice).

You do know not all folks think the way you do. Being smart in performance/$ if SLI is an option, either earlier or later is up to the individual to decide what is best. Buying a 1080 now is not cheap, buying one 1060 now and 6 months or later when you have more change for $200 and getting near the same performance can be an option if it was an option. Of course there are trade offs but that is a matter of choice. Choices are a good thing if they allow folks ways to an end or goal.

I bought a single 1070, if more games support EMA, DX 12 is going to be DX 12 and I can pick up another 1070 for $200 - hell why not? That is a clear possibility. Or if I go 4K/5K on this rig, SLI/EMA gives me that option. Buying a Titan or 1080 could cost way more with less performance overall. Just some thoughts.

Again, you're talking the 1070. I agree there is very likely a compelling reason to put a 1070 in SLI for performance and to extend its useful lifespan. 1070 is in my opinion a high end product (not "ultra high" or whatever you might call the top product), and also is not an unfeasible financial reach above a 1060 for anyone who has the patience to finish pooping before they start wiping.

Exactly my thinking. 1070 is a MUCH more compelling card to do an SLI over a single 1080, than SLI'ing 1060 over a single 1080. I think the X60 SLI instead of X80 boat has sailed since Maxwell, when 960 was almost exactly half of a 980 in terms of the actual chip.

 

[Lord Risky]

1070 is a MUCH more compelling card to do an SLI over a single 1080, than SLI'ing 1060 over a single 1080.

Ah, that is our disconnect. I want to SLI/Xfire a 1060/480 to max out 1440p gaming, NOT to compete with a single 1070 or 1080. Those of us on a budget can buy one 1060/480 now and enjoy maxed out 1080p gameplay. Then, in a month or two buy another card to enjoy maxed out 1440p gameplay.

 

[noko]

Ah, that is our disconnect. I want to SLI/Xfire a 1060/480 to max out 1440p gaming, NOT to compete with a single 1070 or 1080. Those of us on a budget can buy one 1060/480 now and enjoy maxed out 1080p gameplay. Then, in a month or two buy another card to enjoy maxed out 1440p gameplay.

Yes plus have an option to pick up one when a great deal happens - no hurry there. It is not like spending $250 twice, more like $250 and $199 or less when needed.

The 1060 not having SLI capability just limits some options. It is still 6gb which also limits SLI ability in the future as well but currently not. EMA may make this a mute point in the end which if widely used will make SLI/CFX obsolete except for older games (which some will want to play at higher resolutions etc.).

 

[chenw]

Aha, that's where my disconnect happens.

My decision to go SLI 970 was in a similar time frame, in exactly the same way. I initially bought a single 970 to go with a 1080p screen, but my decision to go SLI 970 with 1440p screen is based off a COMPLETELY different route.

I bought 970 instead of 980 because the price and performance difference between the two was too great for me to even justify 980. Even with the 970 VRAMgate, my opinion with the 980 still hasn't changed (IE, if 970 is going to have issues at 3.5GB mark, 980 cannot possibly be that much further away from being VRAM starved itself). So my thinking was, to go at least for 1 970, then decide whether or not I would stick to 1080p (which would be the end of the upgrade), or go 1440p (I was tempted by PG278Q). In fact, I thought so lowly of the 980 that I even guessed 980ti would be better for the money than 980.

nVidia happened to give me the best tool: DSR. I used that to test the most demanding game that I know do NOT support SLI: Wolfenstein - New Order. Once I found the performance to be acceptable at that setting, I went ahead with going SLI 970 and the Swift.

If 970 didn't support SLI (much like 1060 is right now), then that road would have been shut for me, that much we can agree on, we are stuck on that one card.

But it was the minimum performance (IE single GPU) that sold me, not the average. SLI support, as we all know, was, is, and probably will continue to be spotty. We have no idea how EMA is going to pan out in the future, it could be AMAZING (I hope it is!), or it could be just a pipe dream. I'd rather be on a more powerful single card.

But again, that's me, I put experience first, cost as an afterthought (not much time to spend money would be an accurate way to put it).


However,I will say that this is made in the context that my GPU prices is not affected by similar price cuts in the US when new GPUs are released, IE I got no 980 discounts when 980ti was released. In fact, we go to the point where unless its final stock clearance, we don't do discounts. 980ti still is at its original price here, despite being heavily discounted everywhere else (making 980ti actively a poor purchase for anything but those who are looking to SLI). I have NO idea why. 295x was heavily discounted several weeks after Maxwell was released, but we didn't get that similar discount until several days BEFORE it went OOS, over half a year later. I'd imagine that, if I was in the US, I would have made an extremely different train of though.

EDIT: corrected some MAJOR formatting fails

 

[flenser]

Yes plus have an option to pick up one when a great deal happens - no hurry there. It is not like spending $250 twice, more like $250 and $199 or less when needed.

I don't think so. He said $250 now and another in "a month or two". No way the 1060 prices will come down 20% to $199 or less, in a month or two. If you're aiming at 1440p gaming, wait just a bit to begin with and spend $400 on a 1070 instead of $500 on 2 1060s, then pick up some real SLI gains when the 1070 sees its first real price drop as supply catches up to demand, and its second price drop when AMD comes up with their next gen refresh. That would be faster for longer, and from reading the 1070 reviews, the gameplay would be great both before and after adding a second 1070.

I dunno. I figure if you're gonna do something, do it right or you're gonna waste a lot of time/money chasing ghosts. Of course, I'm a master of delayed gratification, so I always drive a really nice paid for high performance car, have a nice expensive phone, had a high end gaming computer that did everything I wanted (until my hobby became raising kids instead of gaming), and it was all cash at half the price of the crummy mid-end "upgrades" I tried before.

The downside is the crushing realization that all my friends who are in debt get their stuff a month or two earlier than I do by using credit for things they'll already be dissatisfied with right about the time I'm really enjoying the hell out of my better paid-for stuff. Oh the suffering.

snark snark. I admit it.

I freely admit to impatience to see the 1060 reviews. My ancient computer built out of what used to be fairly good parts (not quite what is in my sig block anymore) might actually perish this year just from old age so I'm keeping a parts list in mind for my next tech refresh. The 1060 or 1070 are both in the general price/performance range I'd want, so how well the 1060 performs compared to the rest of the market might matter a lot to me, which is why I jumped into this comment thread in the first place. And of course to weigh in on the lack of SLI...

 

[flenser]

I thought about going with a 970 and later SLI to avoid a total system refresh. Instead we added another kid to the family. I tell you what, 3 kids is more expensive than tri-SLI but the 3D and VR immersion is inescapable

SLI 970 makes sense to me. SLI 960... maybe but... no. 970 or bust. You gotta be damn serious to put 980/TI/1080 into SLI, completely different idea than buying a 960 or 1060 and maybe going SLI after upgrading your monitor. pfft. Get the 1070 and go SLI a year or two later, not a month or two later.

*edit* Unless the 1060 actually is a surprise and has too much performance. Nvidia has done that before too, accidentally releasing a mid end card with what is probably too much performance, at a price that makes it totally reasonable to immediately go SLI. I think they learned that lesson the hard way before though and I wouldn't expect it this time.

 

[Presbytier]

Well I remember when 3dfx cards where all AIBs. Each AIB would compete against each other, promote and market to their segments looking to gain even further traction. Then 3dfx thought they could make more money by building their own video cards, all to them selves and make all the profits. They bought STB which killed a number of smaller card makers using 3dfx chips. Of course other mistakes happen as well. Nvidia going into card production, sells and store is competing against the other card makers, making their share smaller. What goes along with that is less influence from a multitude of fronts. So the Feeble Edition higher price may help prevent something similar in the past, if Nvidia start to cut prices they would drive out of business AIBs or push them towards AMD.

Just look at the AMD AIBs in just the RX 480, you have a rich variety of choices for which video card best suited for what you want. Now just think you only have one choice (a.k.a 3dfx STB edition). With all the different flavors of the RX 480 the likelihood is you will reach a much bigger buying audience. Each AIB promoting, pushing and marketing their cards figuring out the different market segments. The F- - - Edition card limits somewhat the AIBs I do believe in max price, plus pushing for a MSRP that Nvidia specifies but does not follow nor has an option to buy at the price they set for their own card! Here Nvidia states, "the MSRP is $579" but we will sell our version for $699 - doesn't matter what you call it - it is still manufactured by Nvidia.

Now this being done at a lower price point with the 1060, the mainstream market. Is Nvidia telling the buying public our cards are better then anything the AIBs can give you hence the higher price? And telling the AIBs hey you need to sell at MSRP we set which we will not follow? I see a bigger backlash for Nvidia on this and do wonder what the different AIBs think about this new Nvidia higher price strategy for their line.

Nvidia has been making and selling cards for awhile now, the only difference here is the big markup which from my understanding was to help AIB partners not feel threatened as the FE editions would be priced out of competition.

 

[flenser]

I forget the name/number of the card that was such a marketing disaster for NVidia at the time... They released an "upgrade" version of a mid-end card with a lower clocked gpu and double but slightly slower ram, that ended up basically having the same amount of ram as their high end card and a slightly improved version of the GPU in their mid end card. But they'd improved the manufacturing process so much that if the card manufacturer used good ram chips, you could OC the bajeezus out of it and get true high end performance for under half the price. That was the only time I ever stood in line at 3am for a black Friday sale, and I got one of those suckers for about 1/4 the cost of the equivalent high-end card it could match in most games. That was a really unique situation though. I'm sure Kyle and the H crew will tell us if the 1060 is anything like that.

 

[flenser]

I think people are making a mistake equating the 970 with the 1060 at this point, and that could be tripping people up when they think about lack of SLI on the 1060. Was 960 SLI really a thing for a lot of people? I'm thinking the 1070 is the more appropriate comparison to the 970 on the product line for single-card and SLI users alike. When the Ti refresh happens, 1070 SLI might turn out to be an even better idea and everyone with a 1060 that really really needs to push more pixels will be kicking themselves for not going with a 1070 to begin with, instead of wishing they had a 1060 SLI option.

 

[noko]

I forget the name/number of the card that was such a marketing disaster for NVidia at the time... They released an "upgrade" version of a mid-end card with a lower clocked gpu and double but slightly slower ram, that ended up basically having the same amount of ram as their high end card and a slightly improved version of the GPU in their mid end card. But they'd improved the manufacturing process so much that if the card manufacturer used good ram chips, you could OC the bajeezus out of it and get true high end performance for under half the price. That was the only time I ever stood in line at 3am for a black Friday sale, and I got one of those suckers for about 1/4 the cost of the equivalent high-end card it could match in most games. That was a really unique situation though. I'm sure Kyle and the H crew will tell us if the 1060 is anything like that.

GF3 Ti200 $199, GF3 Ti500 $399. Same GPU, memory etc.
Lol, yep I stood in line at BestBuy on Black Friday and nabbed the last GF3 Ti200 for $99! and it clocked faster than a GF3 Ti500 after I changed out the cooler for it. Those were the days man.

 

[flenser]

GF3 Ti200 $199, GF3 Ti500 $399. Same GPU, memory etc.
Lol, yep I stood in line at BestBuy on Black Friday and nabbed the last GF3 Ti200 for $99! and it clocked faster than a GF3 Ti500 after I changed out the cooler for it. Those were the days man.

Oh yea that was it! I probably got mine during the same sale since I also bought at best buy LOL. I left the crummy stock cooler on it for a year and when the fan died, the replacement cooler let me bump gpu clocks another couple percent and keep using it. I think I was playing only combat flightsims at the time that played really wel on lower spec cards and the extra ram let me use a bit more anti-aliasing too, so that card lasted until AGP went away.

Back when 128mb on a mid-end card was supposedly worthless. It sure was useful for adding a bit more anti-aliasing in flight sims without overloading the AGP bus or sacrificing texture quality to get there.

 

[flenser]

And the HardOCP review...

- Gainward 128MB Ti200

With the potential to overclock to Ti 500 speeds, you are basically getting a Ti 500 card with 128MB DDR RAM! If that doesn't fall into the enthusiast/best bang for your buck category, I don't know what does!

 

[noko]

The 480 and 1060 are milestone cards in sort of fashion that happens once every 3-5 years. In this case 5 years or so due to how slow the node change happened and the next one hopefully won't be as long for the duration. I think most review sites will not even noticed the significance for this step and do a normal rather poor review vice seeing into the future a little. This also corresponds to a shift in the gaming industry to DX 12 as well. So this is like an Olympic event that happens once in awhile. The cards also incorporates HDMI 2.0b, DP 1.4 which are very significant. In support of that is the video decoders and encoders it has or has not. All very big milestones that would probably need more then one review to compare decently. Then to top it off, VR support and who is going to actually run these two cards using a Vive or Rift? To see if they are good enough for current generation VR? I think many will miss the opportunity or fail to sense the milestone at this point. Too bad AMD was not also at the high end/Enthusiast level at this time.

The number of people that will go out of there way to get information from the reviews will probably be unmatched for awhile.

 

[flenser]

I'm not close to a typical gamer anymore but I do know that I'll care a lot more about VR when I can slap up a few cameras in my house and wirelessly use something like hololens in any area set up with the correct sensors. VR is cool but I was a USAF fighter pilot for 20 years, so plain-old VR that doesn't interact with the real world like some of the really neat MIT surface/hololens demos just doesn't have much attraction for me yet. Someday I'm sure...

 

[NKD]

The 480 and 1060 are milestone cards in sort of fashion that happens once every 3-5 years. In this case 5 years or so due to how slow the node change happened and the next one hopefully won't be as long for the duration. I think most review sites will not even noticed the significance for this step and do a normal rather poor review vice seeing into the future a little. This also corresponds to a shift in the gaming industry to DX 12 as well. So this is like an Olympic event that happens once in awhile. The cards also incorporates HDMI 2.0b, DP 1.4 which are very significant. In support of that is the video decoders and encoders it has or has not. All very big milestones that would probably need more then one review to compare decently. Then to top it off, VR support and who is going to actually run these two cards using a Vive or Rift? To see if they are good enough for current generation VR? I think many will miss the opportunity or fail to sense the milestone at this point. Too bad AMD was not also at the high end/Enthusiast level at this time.

The number of people that will go out of there way to get information from the reviews will probably be unmatched for awhile.

I think as more and more dx12 games come out the cards we will see if rx480 is better or 1060. Now if they are similar performance to one another we will probably see RX480 surpass 1060 that is what usually happens in most dx12 games. The RAW horse power of the 1080 makes up for it. I think dx12 might help amd with vega and squeezing every bit of performance from the shaders.

 

[chenw]

That's what's slightly worrying. nVidia has so far proven they have the Raw power sorted, it's just the DX12 support they are lacking, preventing it from being utilised fully. But, going by my guesstimate, Volta would correct most of that.

AMD on the other hand has 1 generation remaining to catch up in Raw power, if they don't/can't manage it by the time Volta drops, I am not sure what would happen after that...

Hopefully, Vega would be a surprise. Hopefully.

 

[motqalden]

I have 2 560ti 448 core GPU's in action. one is in my wife's computer and the other is in mine. I realize I'm an edge case but lack of sli is a big problem for me. When i upgrade next it will be one video card likely. My wife would likely get the new GPU and i would get SLI. I can handle the finicky nature and setting tuning required and she needs something that just works easily. My daughter is currently running 2x GTX260 216 core. They are ruining my upgrade path.
Seriously though this is the card I was waiting for and its looking like it will be the X60 replacement that i have been waiting for a long time.

Sli has almost always helped in the games that i play.

Why? Most of this forum couldn't give a single shit about a $200 GPU, much less using multiples of them. Welcome to [H]. Shit Kyle even said that they rarely review cards in the $200 range because those reviews get shit views compared to the high end stuff, because few people here actually care about it. The only reason a $200 GPU is getting any traction here right now is because all the people mourning how sad it is that this is the best AMD can muster these days, and to watch the train wreck when the 1060 shits all over AMD's best effort because we're a bunch of assholes and we love a good train wreck here.

I don't know why you presume to know everyone in the forum. Some of us come to read the reviews for the top end card to see how the bottom end will play out. I may not spend a ton of money on hardware, but i always buy the sweet spot that will last me for 4+ years and i will always dream about the big tur People don't line up to watch videos of 4 cylinder engines, they want to see the big , fast exotic ones, but guess what they buy what makes sense. I will read both reviews but those of you that are buying the 1070 or 1080 are less likely to watch / read reviews of the 1060. I agree with someone else that 1060 VS 8GB 480 is a loss for amd. If i went 480 this gen it would be the 4GB card when they finally come available. I don't really have a brand loyalty despite my past purchases, but when i have been in the market for a card nvidia has had something with slightly better performance or compatibility in my price bracket.

BTW my 560Ti 448 cores can still play play GTA5 at some pretty good graphical setting and average 45-50 FPS.
This is not a personal attack in any way but some of us are pretty [H] and we will happily spend less than $300 on a GPU.

 

[NKD]

That's what's slightly worrying. nVidia has so far proven they have the Raw power sorted, it's just the DX12 support they are lacking, preventing it from being utilised fully. But, going by my guesstimate, Volta would correct most of that.

AMD on the other hand has 1 generation remaining to catch up in Raw power, if they don't/can't manage it by the time Volta drops, I am not sure what would happen after that...

Hopefully, Vega would be a surprise. Hopefully.

Yea got a 1080 will be delivered monday. So for me and a single monitor. OC'ed gtx 1080 should cover me for a bit even in a dx12 situation. I built my first system after 6 years and when I do usually go for the best that will last me a bit, for last few I was using a little nano all in one gigabyte brix pc. Decided to finally build me a rig.

Graphics card is something I can upgrade at will. Sell my 1080 if I want in 6-8 months for 500 and add another 200 or so and upgrade. That part is easy. But I might not touch it for another 2 years or so.

 

[Slyr7.62]

Upgrading to this from a GTX 460/560/660 etc is gonna be bitch'n.

 

[Scottw]

I had a fanless 9600 GT for the longest time and used it in two or three component upgrades. The thing was good enough for the few games I played. I finally put together an i7-6700 system and gifted my i3-3220 system to family (minus the gpu, they don't anything more than integrated). I'm kind of surprised how decent the integrated graphics are in this i7.

I'm looking forward to seeing if the RX 480 or GTX 1060 comes out on top of my desired feature list. Actually, I'm considering a RX 470 as well, but it's pretty much non-existent so far besides the one mention by AMD.

1. Price. I was hoping to get something under $200, but $250-ish is alright if the card is worth it as a longer term upgrade. I have my doubts the 1060 will have any versions at $250 for a while. I'm thinking some of the 3rd party 480s will be around $250 and should come out soon-ish.
2. Efficiency (had wanted around ~100 watt TDP). I was pretty disappointed by the actual power use numbers on load for the reference 480, though given some user testing at undervolting, I might be able to underclock and undervolt a bit to get closer to the efficiency I want. I'm thinking mature drivers will make a big difference with the 480. The 1060 seems like it might be quite a bit better in this regard. We will see.
3. Silent or very quiet. That will probably mean a multi-fan 3rd party card. I'm not opposed to underclocking a bit to get it really quiet without having to go to the extreme of modding the card's cooling solution.
4. Performance per dollar.

 

[xorbe]

Upgrading to this from a GTX 460/560/660 etc is gonna be bitch'n.

I bet the same idea applies to upgrading from 760/960 also! All those cards didn't change much in performance notably.

 

[noko]

I had a fanless 9600 GT for the longest time and used it in two or three component upgrades. The thing was good enough for the few games I played. I finally put together an i7-6700 system and gifted my i3-3220 system to family (minus the gpu, they don't anything more than integrated). I'm kind of surprised how decent the integrated graphics are in this i7.

I'm looking forward to seeing if the RX 480 or GTX 1060 comes out on top of my desired feature list. Actually, I'm considering a RX 470 as well, but it's pretty much non-existent so far besides the one mention by AMD.

1. Price. I was hoping to get something under $200, but $250-ish is alright if the card is worth it as a longer term upgrade. I have my doubts the 1060 will have any versions at $250 for a while. I'm thinking some of the 3rd party 480s will be around $250 and should come out soon-ish.
2. Efficiency (had wanted around ~100 watt TDP). I was pretty disappointed by the actual power use numbers on load for the reference 480, though given some user testing at undervolting, I might be able to underclock and undervolt a bit to get closer to the efficiency I want. I'm thinking mature drivers will make a big difference with the 480. The 1060 seems like it might be quite a bit better in this regard. We will see.
3. Silent or very quiet. That will probably mean a multi-fan 3rd party card. I'm not opposed to underclocking a bit to get it really quiet without having to go to the extreme of modding the card's cooling solution.
4. Performance per dollar.

Your other option is to wait for the 470 and the 1050 and see what they bring to the table. They should be less than $200. If you want the lower power card the 1060, which supposedly the AIBs will be immediately available from my understanding is the way to go. I do understand 120w and 150w (remember the 480 you can use compatibility mode which reduces the power to 150w) can make a difference in a case for cooling. The $199 RX 480 4gb version gets you on the price you want - not sure if you can grab one of the 4gb versions now which can be unlocked to 8gb - probably a one time short event. If 4GB is enough for you maybe doable.

 

[PGHammer]

IIRC, Intel did make a go at the dGPU market with Project Larrabee, and the ashes of that project became the Xeon Phi PPU.

Actually, it was pre-Larrabee - with the Intel740 and Intel752 (a joint project with Chips and Technologies and Lockheed Martin). ATI (then still a separate company) killed Intel in terms of both performance and volume - first with Rage II+ and then Radeon.

Just the smug satisfaction of having it before others.

And if you are under pressure to get a build done, that (in and of itself) could be enough to drive the choice; that could be said of those that have chosen RX 480 to date (with GTX 1070 out of price spec or unavailable and GTX 1060 just plain unavailable).

 

[heatlesssun]

And if you are under pressure to get a build done, that (in and of itself) could be enough to drive the choice; that could be said of those that have chosen RX 480 to date (with GTX 1070 out of price spec or unavailable and GTX 1060 just plain unavailable).

I think some people believe that every time new hardware comes out, the same people are just constantly upgrading. There are cycles to this. Plenty of people will buy something, hold onto for years and then when the stuff gets too old to meet the need, they upgrade. I think this particular period was one of those natural upgrade cycles. AMD, nVidia and Intel all had major launches of new products within a month. That many new products coming out almost simultaneously was certain to get a good number of people who hadn't upgraded for a while on the bandwagon. This was my personal case. Broadwell-E and the 1080 basically became available at the same time and I hadn't upgraded in 4 years.

 

[PGHammer]

I had a fanless 9600 GT for the longest time and used it in two or three component upgrades. The thing was good enough for the few games I played. I finally put together an i7-6700 system and gifted my i3-3220 system to family (minus the gpu, they don't anything more than integrated). I'm kind of surprised how decent the integrated graphics are in this i7.

I'm looking forward to seeing if the RX 480 or GTX 1060 comes out on top of my desired feature list. Actually, I'm considering a RX 470 as well, but it's pretty much non-existent so far besides the one mention by AMD.

1. Price. I was hoping to get something under $200, but $250-ish is alright if the card is worth it as a longer term upgrade. I have my doubts the 1060 will have any versions at $250 for a while. I'm thinking some of the 3rd party 480s will be around $250 and should come out soon-ish.
2. Efficiency (had wanted around ~100 watt TDP). I was pretty disappointed by the actual power use numbers on load for the reference 480, though given some user testing at undervolting, I might be able to underclock and undervolt a bit to get closer to the efficiency I want. I'm thinking mature drivers will make a big difference with the 480. The 1060 seems like it might be quite a bit better in this regard. We will see.
3. Silent or very quiet. That will probably mean a multi-fan 3rd party card. I'm not opposed to underclocking a bit to get it really quiet without having to go to the extreme of modding the card's cooling solution.
4. Performance per dollar.

1A. If 4K is a down-the-road consideration, it's not JUST RX480 and GTX 1060, but even GTX 1070 (not necessarily FE) are all still in the mix (for example, ASUS STRIX, MSI GAMING X, MSI GTX 1070 AERO). We don't even know if GTX 1060 can even do 4K at all - let alone with the wide range of games that GTX 1070 is known to be able to - the range with merely GTX 1070 is so wide is that the only games it doesn't support 4K in are those that don't support 4K at all.

2A. Is that 100W TDP a hard-and-fast number? If it is, then RX 480 doesn't merit consideration at all - and, to be honest, neither does GTX 1070 (both have a taller TDP than that). GTX 1060, GTX 960 2GB, GTX 950, and GTX 750/Ti are your only options at that low a TDP.
3A. That is why the STRIX and MSI cards are in the running in my own shortlist (though silence is not a primary consideration, it certainly is not a minus - and I'd like to preserve my current level of silence with the increased performance metrics if doable, and STRIX and FROZR have consistently shown that it's doable without blowing up the budget).
4A. Of the GTX 1070 models in the shortlist, the MSI GTX 1070 AERO has the best performance-per-dollar metric (it also has the lowest price); it also has the greatest local availability. In fact, GTX 1070 availability is horrible for right now - in general; only RX 480 availability is worse. (Lower pricing means exactly squat if you can't buy it.) For all the good the lower price of RX480 is doing, it might as well be made of Unobtanium. mATX motherboard in ATX case gives me greater thermal headroom (though I didn't go that way for that reason; I went mATX - despite the ATX case, to accomodate my larger handspan maneuvering around in there). If GTX 1060 can't do 4K at all, then it may well get struck from consideration (despite the low price and 1080p chops); I don't plan on staying at 1080p forever.

 

[Slyr7.62]

I bet the same idea applies to upgrading from 760/960 also! All those cards didn't change much in performance notably.

For sure. The 660/ti was a big step from the 460 and the 760 from a 560. If I had at least a 960 or 770 I probabyly wouldn't upgrade.
Now I'm upgrading through so many generations likely to the 1060 since it seems like a good value and price in general.

Others are mentioning a future 1050. I bet it'll be around $180 give or take. The performance hopefully will be like the 1000 series in relation to older cards.


heatlesssun is mentioning the timing of these newer cards for those who havent upgraded in some time.
I concur. The 1000 series is performing well enough at a good enough price to possibly change my mind of buyng a used gtx 970 or similar.

 

[scojer]

I think some people believe that every time new hardware comes out, the same people are just constantly upgrading. There are cycles to this. Plenty of people will buy something, hold onto for years and then when the stuff gets too old to meet the need, they upgrade. I think this particular period was one of those natural upgrade cycles. .

This is my case as well. I have a gtx 570, a phenom ii x4 955, and 8gb of ddr2 ram...

i almost upgraded last year, but I was still able to play games just fine. I got Soma this year and couldn't enjoy it @ 1080. Same with Doom. So that is why I'm upgrading finally. Video card first, then the rest after that. I'm still waiting to see AMD's next offering to see if it is competitive with intel.

 

[Ieldra]

Some early AotS benchmarks (on par with RX480 )

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Rumors, Part 5: Full specs, 2.0 GHz Overclocking | VideoCardz.com

 

[Mav451]

Yeah figured the 80 TMU and 48 ROPs made more sense than that odd 106 TMU figure we saw a few days ago lol.

 

[Ieldra]

Yeah figured the 80 TMU and 48 ROPs made more sense than that odd 106 TMU figure we saw a few days ago lol.

8/SM makes sense eh, they should fire whoever comes up with the BS rumors Usually very half-assed efforts

How do you even get 106 xD 104 at least would make a little tiny bit more sense

 

[Putz]

no SLI on this sucks, wonder if they are protecting 19070/80 sales, maybe 3rd party cards will add it

 

[pcgeekesq]

no SLI on this sucks, wonder if they are protecting 19070/80 sales, maybe 3rd party cards will add it

The 1060 uses a different chip. If the chip doesn't have the SLI bus or the package doesn't bring it out, 3rd party card vendors can't do much about that.

You need to understand that with modern GPUs, 3rd party vendors are limited in what they can do. In the hardware, they can differentiate themselves by the amount and speed of the GPU's RAM (usually), the number and kinds of outputs they support, the circuits providing power to the chip, the cooling solution, and then tertiary functions like LED lighting, fan controllers, and sensors. And of course they can provide software. But a primary function of the GPU itself, like SLI, they can only provide if the GPU chip provides it. The 1060's chip probably doesn't, because eliminating it can save NVidia money at both the die and package level.

If you really care, forgo eating out or buying snacks for a while, or put off buying a couple of AAA games, and you can upgrade to the GTX 1070. I think the $120 difference isn't that big a deal for most people building their own gaming PCs.

 

[Mav451]

Well so far, the cheapest 1070 we've seen is $399 - so really $150 difference.

I'm waiting to see if non-reference availability is that much better on 1060, compared to 1070/1080.

 

[pcgeekesq]

Well so far, the cheapest 1070 we've seen is $399 - so really $150 difference.

True, but you won't be surprised if the 1060s also are not available at MSRP for some time after launch, will you?
For people with modest GPU needs but a tight power/thermal budget, they may be the ne plus ultra of 2016 GPUs.
And that may include PC OEMs: high demand from that sector may keep supplies tight for DIYers.

 

[jbc029]

This is my case as well. I have a gtx 570, a phenom ii x4 955, and 8gb of ddr2 ram...

i almost upgraded last year, but I was still able to play games just fine. I got Soma this year and couldn't enjoy it @ 1080. Same with Doom. So that is why I'm upgrading finally. Video card first, then the rest after that. I'm still waiting to see AMD's next offering to see if it is competitive with intel.

I applaud your restraint, sir. You're in for a magical experience when you do finally pull that trigger, whatever you get.