RX480 vs GTX1060

[Brazo]

I am on the wind up a little bit so I will apologise. I know AMD are playing the long game and the 480 will probably overtake the 1069 in 2-3 years time. I just don't know how relevant either card will be by the time they catch up. No one is arguing about the 960 today.

 

[MyBrainz]

are driver updates really going to make that much a difference?

Also if the drivers unleash all this extra performance from the RX480 will it draw anymore power through the PCI-E slot?

AMD driver history speaks for itself.. and i cant see more power being used with better optimized drivers.

 

[h4rm0ny]

The 1060 3GB version is a definite 'no' for me. I've mentioned this in a couple of other threads but look at Doom Vulkan benchmarks on the 460 vs. the 380. The 380 is a significantly more powerful card (midrange vs. 460's bargain range) and beats it thoroughly in all cases except this one. Why does it lose in this instance? Because it runs out of RAM having 2GB vs. the 460's 4GB. Right now, Doom on Vulkan is the exception but I think over the next eighteen months, 4GB will become the baseline for mid-range performance. I'm actually fairly confident on that. Buying a new 3GB card at this point in time is a bad mistake.

With the 3GB 1060 taken out of consideration however, I think both are good and competitive with each other. The 1060 is a bit more powerful however, it also still costs more. It also (I think?) has SLi disabled meaning there's no easy upgrade path from it whereas the 480 still has that. I think mGPU is going to be a more common and better supported practice from here forward. (Caveat: some respectable forum posters disagree with me on that).

But most significantly, the 480 will give you Freesync support. That's a major plus over the 1060's Gsync support as I'm optomistic Gsync will lose out in the format wars. So I personally would recommend the 480 over the 1060. I think it has better prospects and is not much weaker.

 

[Bantu]

honestly.. just go for the cheapest card you can find that fits in the general performance bracket you need. RX480 and 1060 are the mid-range. You could get 10% better performance from one or the other, but at this level price should be the decider.

 

[danlightbulb]

honestly.. just go for the cheapest card you can find that fits in the general performance bracket you need. RX480 and 1060 are the mid-range. You could get 10% better performance from one or the other, but at this level price should be the decider.

The 'picks of the bunch' in both ranges are the same price.

EVGA 1060 SC - £259.99
Sapphire RX480 Nitro+ OC - £259.99 (Powercolor Red Devil also same price)

So I believe its fair to say that on a performance per pound basis the GTX1060 is currently winning, based on the various game benchmarks that have so far been released.

So on this basis, is whether or not you have freesync the deciding vote?

At what point does that stop? I.e are you better off with an RX480 and freesync or a GTX1070 with none?

 

[Bantu]

The 'picks of the bunch' in both ranges are the same price.

EVGA 1060 SC - £259.99
Sapphire RX480 Nitro+ OC - £259.99 (Powercolor Red Devil also same price)

So I believe its fair to say that on a performance per pound basis the GTX1060 is currently winning, based on the various game benchmarks that have so far been released.

So on this basis, is whether or not you have freesync the deciding vote?

At what point does that stop? I.e are you better off with an RX480 and freesync or a GTX1070 with none?

The rx480 and 1070 are completely different price and performance brackets though. That should never be a choice. If you want the performance you buy the 1070.

 

[danlightbulb]

It is a choice. Currently the RX480 is the fastest new gen AMD card if you wanted to stay with freesync. If you are willing to forego freesync (but can't afford gsnyc) then you can switch to the 1070 (and pay more of course).

Rather than focus on the 1070, I guess the question is how much performance gap do you need before you should abandon your freesync option?

 

[Bantu]

OK I see where you're getting at now. Sorry should have read the initial post more carefully.

In my opinion, the first decision that should be made is what level of performance you require from your card (not just right now, but for whatever your upgrade cycle is). If the RX480 satisfies this then that would be the winner. If not, then enter the next performance bracket (either with the AMD Fury/Nanos or with Nvidia 1070's).

Freesync and G-Sync are the icing on the cake once you know that the games will actually run at acceptable frame rates at the quality level you desire.

 

[Seanspeed]

AMD driver history speaks for itself.. and i cant see more power being used with better optimized drivers.

Really though, AMD always had more room for improvement.

If AMD have got their stuff together with drivers and Polaris runs more optimally out-the-box with DX11, then it's not going to see the same sort of gains that Hawaii cards saw over a period of several years.

Driver improvements aren't some magic thing that just keep getting better linearly forever so long as you keep bashing at the keyboard enough.

 

[imginy]

I like the sounds of the 1060 seems best card for me on my 1080p 60z screen because it has fast sync so would get rid of all the input lag vsync gives me without having to change screen.

 

[HardStyler3]

looking at this comparison the 1060 looks the better card..

the 1060 also comes in higher than the 970 which has still got me thinking on getting shot of my 970 and getting a 1060 till I have some spare cash.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1743?vs=1771

because its reference with 1150mhz clock customs hold 1300mhz+

custom vs custom is 5% or less difference in dx11

sad thing nobody sees this and only looks at ******** charts and think its always like that

 

[Blackjack Davy]

Major rumour:

Next generation ATI top end cards reported to be 25% faster than Pascal Titan X, retail price expected to be $600.

I'm taking bets on the Titan X still outselling it by 10:1 as its got a Green sticker on it doncha know?

For Freesync as long as the high range is more than 2.5 times the low range then there is no difference between freesync and gsync.

Saying that, sub 40fps is still sub 40fps in either solution. If you are framerate sensitive then you should try and keep your frame rate over 40 no matter what sync tech you have.

40-90 is where both sync techs work best.

My Acer XR34 Freesync is fine down to about 30fps below that you get stuttering due to missing frames presumably, still no tearing though.

I like the sounds of the 1060 seems best card for me on my 1080p 60z screen because it has fast sync so would get rid of all the input lag vsync gives me without having to change screen.

Fastsync only really performs its function when you have a very much higher framerate than the monitor can handle, since a 1060 is not much of an improvement performance wise over a 970 its unlikely you'll have that much of an overhead to start with.

 

[Bantu]

I think the Acer Freesync range is only down to 40Hz, so that may be part of the reason you're seeing that.

 

[niggyg]

Is there any point in the super clocked EVGA 1060 when you can buy the non SC version and push it yourself?

 

[imginy]

Fastsync only really performs its function when you have a very much higher framerate than the monitor can handle, since a 1060 is not much of an improvement performance wise over a 970 its unlikely you'll have that much of an overhead to start with.

I don't think it has to be very mucb higher, just higher than refresh rate which I always play higher than refresh rate anyway because I dont like the drops below 60.

I think for me at 1080p 60hz the 1060 and fast sync would be perfect but current pricing is crazy so would never buy. In a few generations the price has doubled from the 660.

 

[genericjim101]

Really though, AMD always had more room for improvement.

If AMD have got their stuff together with drivers and Polaris runs more optimally out-the-box with DX11, then it's not going to see the same sort of gains that Hawaii cards saw over a period of several years.

Driver improvements aren't some magic thing that just keep getting better linearly forever so long as you keep bashing at the keyboard enough.

I can't say I've ever believed the argument of AMD cards aging better.

Not anything worth a lack of day one drivers, hungry for power and less reliable partners.

 

[Poneros]

My ranking in terms of value is Devil 480 >> EVGA 1060 > Zotac 1060 >>>> Other 480/1060s.

 

[Ree]

i have owned both i ended up returning the sapphire 480 as the 90 degree heat on the reference card was a real put off for me and the whole pcie power thing as well to add to that the amd software kept crashing also.

My G1 1060 is the opposite when it comes to heat however iam having problems with the gigabyte extreme gaming software also as i cant change the led colour or even change the one click overclock on it since it was updated. done reinstall/went back to older version.. nothing works. googled it and found am not alone with this problem, guess i just need to wait on new update.

 

[southernorth]

My ranking in terms of value is Devil 480 >> EVGA 1060 > Zotac 1060 >>>> Other 480/1060s.

What gives the Devil the advantage, In your view? When factoring in current performance, warranty RMA etc. For me, EVGA trounces Power colour at least in that regard.

 

[adam98150]

I am on the wind up a little bit so I will apologise. I know AMD are playing the long game and the 480 will probably overtake the 1069 in 2-3 years time. I just don't know how relevant either card will be by the time they catch up. No one is arguing about the 960 today.

They won't. Both cards will be old tech by that point.