• 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

The 480 needs those extra phases to deliver the extra power to its redlined failure of a chip lol. Perhaps you might have noticed it doesn't OC at all. The 1060 will OC quite nicely I'm sure, even with "only" half the phases. Because quality.
 
Orangey said:
The 480 needs those extra phases to deliver the extra power to its redlined failure of a chip lol. Perhaps you might have noticed it doesn't OC at all. The 1060 will OC quite nicely I'm sure, even with "only" half the phases. Because quality.
Click to expand...

Please submit evidence of 'at all'.

(p.s. I am actually completely with you on the 1060 doesn't need the extra phases, otherwise they would have been on there).
 
Last edited:
Dunno if you missed it but all the evidence points to the chip being underperformant on the new process and thus pushed way beyond where the clocks and volts should sit naturally (which is what Kyle from [H]ardOCP was talking about pre-launch) in order to meet some kind of semi-acceptable level but discarding the previous ppw claims. This is borne out by AIB models also having disappointing clocks and LN2 barely taking it to 1500.
 
480 was designed for the PS neo, AMD just pushed the clocks to max and dumped it hastily on the PC market. It's running way out of spec for what it is designed for hence the high power draw, high temps and poor OC.
 
Orangey said:
Dunno if you missed it but all the evidence points to the chip being underperformant on the new process and thus pushed way beyond where the clocks and volts should sit naturally (which is what Kyle from [H]ardOCP was talking about pre-launch) in order to meet some kind of semi-acceptable level but discarding the previous ppw claims. This is borne out by AIB models also having disappointing clocks and LN2 barely taking it to 1500.
Click to expand...

Without knowing the target frequency for the process that's a hard conclusion to reach.

The 1080 is not reacting hugely well to LN2 either past the max air clocks.

In the end the actual frequency matters little. The performance per £ and what extra performance you can get from overclocking matter more.
 
humbug said:
Look at the difference in power phase, the RX 480 is far better quality.

Its the 1060 that does look positively cheap.
Click to expand...

It also has room for 8GB but only uses 6GB :(

Clearly Nvidia wanting to maximise profits but to be fair the outer casing and appearance of the 1060 to many folk does look more expensive/fancier than the 480.
 
Orangey said:
Dunno if you missed it but all the evidence points to the chip being underperformant on the new process and thus pushed way beyond where the clocks and volts should sit naturally (which is what Kyle from [H]ardOCP was talking about pre-launch) in order to meet some kind of semi-acceptable level but discarding the previous ppw claims. This is borne out by AIB models also having disappointing clocks and LN2 barely taking it to 1500.
Click to expand...

Hyperbole much?

The frequency a part can attain is a larger part to do with its design and partly to do with the node.
 
Orangey said:
Dunno if you missed it but all the evidence points to the chip being underperformant on the new process and thus pushed way beyond where the clocks and volts should sit naturally (which is what Kyle from [H]ardOCP was talking about pre-launch) in order to meet some kind of semi-acceptable level but discarding the previous ppw claims. This is borne out by AIB models also having disappointing clocks and LN2 barely taking it to 1500.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if it were true. But saying it isn't able to overclock at all is a bit extreme. It seems to clock quite well from what I see, held back by bizarre design decisions from AMD. (Disclaimer: I am not an engineer, they are obviously wayyyy smarter than me!)
 
Quite well? It's less than 10%. To be considered a good OCer a card would need something like 30% OC at least, like the 5850.

If they had a high-performance process to make the chips on the power would not swing so wildly with so little frequency adjustment.
 
Last edited:
Orangey said:
Quite well? It's less than 10%. To be considered a good OCer a card would need something like 30% OC at least, like the 5850.

If they had a high-performance process to make the chips on the power would not swing so wildly with so little frequency adjustment.
Click to expand...

30% at least? are you trolling? the best Maxwell cards overclock by 30%.
 
Orangey said:
Quite well? It's less than 10%. To be considered a good OCer a card would need something like 30% OC at least, like the 5850.

If they had a high-performance process to make the chips on the power would not swing so wildly with so little frequency adjustment.
Click to expand...

I hope your former maths teacher isn't reading this, otherwise you might get to be the next one using the donkey hat...

1120 (base clock) -> 1350 (usually the maximum stable clock with reference model) is approximately a 20.5% increase.
 
Orangey said:
Dunno if you missed it but all the evidence points to the chip being underperformant on the new process and thus pushed way beyond where the clocks and volts should sit naturally (which is what Kyle from [H]ardOCP was talking about pre-launch) in order to meet some kind of semi-acceptable level but discarding the previous ppw claims. This is borne out by AIB models also having disappointing clocks and LN2 barely taking it to 1500.
Click to expand...

LMAO. Der8auer overclocked the ref 480 to 1500 on water and 1700 on LN2. Enio overclocked a ref 480 to 1520 on water. It is rumored that Powercolor Devil is 1400 boost while Sapphire Nitro is 1390 boost.
 
humbug said:
Look at the difference in power phase, the RX 480 is far better quality.

Its the 1060 that does look positively cheap.
Click to expand...

And the funny thing is... the 480 will be the actual cheaper card to buy, with more RAM to boot too. Nvidia's 'quality' conmponents in the founder's edition and all that. King of selling us less for more this gen.

Can't wait to see the inevitable moaning and groaning tomorrow come the actual release of the 1060. I've got the day off for it too. Place your bets folks: Asus Strix/MSI Gaming 1060 at 980 perf for over £300 and the same terrible overclocking as the bigger 1000 cards is my guess. Oh, and of course the reference version will have bad thermals like the rest.

Nvidia could stick a thorn in AMD's foot if they wanted to just by pricing the 1060 right... but we all know they won't. I miss the Maxwell days already... (though we have nice deals on Maxwell cards that make them better buys than current gen cards lol).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom