• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

GTX 1060

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Videocardz said the boosting clock for the GTX1060 is 1.709GHZ and that link has it running at over 1.9GHZ - the aftermarket RX480 cards are meant to be run at 1.325GHZ or 1.35GHZ,so that means according to that link an aftermarket RX480 is still faster??
Click to expand...
If the boost clock is anything like my 1080 then it will jump around all over the place..

seeing the boost hit around 1900mhz without any overclocking is easily possible if the GPU is running cool enough..
 
To be fair the vast majority of the 970's early life it was regarded as a best buy of its time. Sadly things move on and yes AMD have had cards that better Nvidia's and yet have sold poorly. I so want for AMD to put out a 1080 beater for £450. Sadly it ain't Gunna happen.
 
Greebo said:
And it will still sell by the bucket loads because of just that. Look at the 970. AMD had a cheaper and faster card but the 970 is the best selling card of all time.
Click to expand...
I myself is only sticking to buying NVidia GPU's because I already have Two G-Sync monitors...

so that really rules buying any AMD GPU's out for me..
 
Last edited:
wellibob said:
To be fair the vast majority of the 970's early life it was regarded as a best buy of its time. Sadly things move on and yes AMD have had cards that better Nvidia's and yet have sold poorly. I so want for AMD to put out a 1080 beater for £450. Sadly it ain't Gunna happen.
Click to expand...

You're not the only one who would love to see such a card. If anything it would lower the prices. Just as you though, I don't see that happening.
 
chaparral said:
If the boost clock is anything like my 1080 then it will jump around all over the place..

seeing the boost hit around 1900mhz without any overclocking is easily possible if the GPU is running cool enough..
Click to expand...

The thing is though - like all Nvidia cards in recent years,the base boost clock is not really adhered too - so probably it is running a good 100MHZ past the purported 1.7GHZ base clockspeed. So a 1.35GHZ RX480 is 8.2% faster than a 1.8GHZ GTX1060??

Isn't 1.35GHZ what people think the Sapphire RX480 Nitro runs at??

I wonder if Nvidia did a quick test run on one of the reference RX480 cards which are known to throttle a bit when it comes to both clockspeeds and power - some reviews said the card was running under 1.2GHZ on average. So if an aftermarket RX480 can consistently boost without throttling and the GTX1060 relies on boosting higher to perform well,it might not be much in it. OFC,the GTX1060 will consume less power - this looks like it could be a GTX960 vs R9 380 rerun. OFC,the score could be just crap.
 
JediFragger said:
Half of a 1080 for less than half the price and a bigger than expected bus? Winner!!
Click to expand...

Emm,why are you making that as big deal?? My GTX660 had 192 bit bus too and the GTX680 had a 256 bit bus and the thing is the GTX660 had 62.5% of the shaders of a GTX680 and the GTX1060 only half the shaders. So it looks like the card will need to be clocked very high indeed.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Emm,why are you making that as big deal?? My GTX660 had 192 bit bus too and the GTX680 had a 256 bit bus and the thing is the GTX660 had 62.5% of the shaders of a GTX680 and the GTX1060 only half the shaders. So it looks like the card will need to be clocked very high indeed.
Click to expand...

Quite simply, because the 960 had a 128-bit bus! Glad they've increased the size of it, shouldn't hold it back :)

This is gonna kick the 480's ass, and if it price matches it then game over AMD! they'll sell these in the thousands and thousands :eek:
 
Hmm that 3dmark link, neither of those records are available on the search, the 480 score would be the highest, but only by 459 points so very much feasible, but the NVidia score is not searchable, well I couldn't find it anyway. But a tad underwhelming if it is what it says it is.
 
JediFragger said:
Quite simply, because the 960 had a 128-bit bus! Glad they've increased the size of it, shouldn't hold it back :)

This is gonna kick the 480's ass, and if it price matches it then game over AMD! they'll sell these in the thousands and thousands :eek:
Click to expand...

LMAO,hype train! The people hyping the card the most are the ones who would never buy one in real life. Its like the ones who hyped the RX480 and when the rest of us said it would be nowhere near it,were just ignored.

Its going to be the same with this card,but you will then hype the power consumption whilst running a high end rig.

I owned the GTX660(192 bit memory controller) and GTX960 - the hype train went on how they would be 10X better.

They were not - they traded blows with whatever AMD had,and the Nvidia cards consumed a bit less power. In the end,you fail to realise,the 4GB AIB RX480 cards will be under £200,and the 8GB ones around £250.

The GTX1060 3GB is going to be a hard sell against the RX480 4GB especially since Nvidia changed all the GTX960 models to 4GB ones.

Even if it fast,it will be like the 8800GT 256MB,which fell of a cliff in performance.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom