1060 - 10%+ faster in DX11
480 - 10%+ faster in DX12/Vulkan
1060 - No chance for SLI
480 - Free-sync at minimum about $100 cheaper
480 isn't too challenged in the big picture, but I'd imagine most people just buy whatever has the bigger numbers. 4GB 480s are still going to sell very well though
Also accounted for overclocking potential? I rather saw numbers above 14% in favor of the GTX 1060.
In terms of Price to Performance the RX 480 will still win... at least in the US.
In Germany on the other hand it looks a bit different:
Custom GTX 1060 boards start at 279€
RX 480 starts at 269€ (ignoring outlier)
Also I'm still rather leaning towards GSync, QoS is better (higher variable range, frame doubling at low FPS) and now supports the game running in window mode and as I adopted earlier when Free-Sync wasn't around already that's what I've gone with...
So you already walked into the trap...
Also if a 1060 with 6GB can be compared to a card with more memory, the same right has to be granted to the 4GB RX 480. And suddenly we are at 229,-.
They added low frame rate compensation a little ways back to free-sync
Far as the range goes, that's entirely dependent on the free-sync display in question
not sure on windowed mode.
Do you even need to ask? 1060 = $300... At the moment at least...
480 = 199/239...
XFX is already rumored to release 480 aftermarket OC for 239, Sapphire is releasing for 249, and we have better performance in future games, so why would i buy 1060?...
Joker put it best. He went to Microcenter, bought 480 for 239... He went to microcenter, there were no 1060, he ordered from Nvidia website, payed 350... For 5-6% overall performance? 6 months and 2 driver updates and it is gone...
LG 24MP68VQ-P is 24" 1080p 75Hz IPS Freesync monitor for $180...
I think it's interesting that everyone is in a tizzy over this whole SLI crap with the 1060. At best it would be 80% the 1080.
it has a narrower memory bus, it's only GDDR5 not 5X, and it ultimately isn't that great.
In the long run, SLI isn't going to mean much, as DX12 and Vulkan have functions that remove the need for SLI all together.
where is the issue?
Mostly it's just kinda of pointless to remove a feature that probably didn't take them much time or money to implement
it's also slightly faster than a 1080 going by this test from Gamers Nexus, in the one game where you can use 2 1060s together.
Just because you put "SLI" doesn't mean it's SLI. Here's the main difference.
SLI uses the Memory of only one card. this setup uses the memory of both cards.
So, having 12GBs GDDR5 at what? 1506Mhz? for both cards out performed the 1080? He didn't really show the clock speed of the 1060s. He states the 1080 was without an overclock.
Their core clock is 1506Mhz. That being said, two 6GB 1060s have the exact number of CUDA cores as the 1080.
So, no this isn't how the cards would work/perform in SLI. It does cost a bit more to include that function.
It is not about the SLI performance or whatever. It is that they deliberately went out of their way to remove it.
I don't care about SLI... Nor CF... But then again... Nvidia marketing slide...
This is entry level VR card, so SLI makes sense. Well, not anymore.
I'm fine with that. Again, i don't care about CF either, but this is a selling point, and they already have a few of those gone. DX12, Vulkan, Gsync, Price, FU edition, Availability, Cooler, now SLI...
Well, the 1060 is the replacement of the 970 right now. And I have seen a few of people with dual 970s. So no, not a lot of people are into that kind of lower tier SLI but a few are. And even in a year or two DX11 games will be played. So it is legit to point that out.
But I think we agree that it is way more interesting that the 480 is pretty much on par with the 1060 and 980 when new APIs are used. For that price! And a lot of reviewers flat out fail to show that.
The problem with Nvidia is that they don't do long-term support through drivers (one of the reasons people think they "nerf" performance which is true in a way i suppose).
AMD on the other hand has proven time and time again that their long-term support is amazing to the point that their cards can sometimes beat Nvidia cards that were launched a tier higher (in the low end cards... a 380 is not going to be beating a 980 or 980Ti obviously).
I'm looking for a new gpu so I've been considering both of these cards.
So I waited for reviews and now neither is in stock at MSRP. Maybe i know which one's "better" but can't have either. LOL
Hopefully I can find one in the next couple of weeks. Really would like to play NMS on launch day.
The sand in the 480 is much better then the sand in the 1060
What is that?
Also you probably want to hold out for the custom RX 480s.
3rd party 480s should be coming very soon. These might even be a bit cheaper than the reference edition.
In truth both of them seem to have the same cost to performance ratio. Pretty much equal value to buy at the moment. It is all about whether you believe Vulkan will make a difference in the near future or not.
GTX1060 is faster arround the board then a RX480.
The only interesting tests i have seen is the RX480 winning in Doom 4 on Vulkan.
But thats pretty much it, the GTX1060 is pretty much the winner in terms of overall performance at the moment.
Atleast as far as US pricing is concerned.
EU pricing is kinda a diffrent story.
Also on DX12....
Uhm yes in rise of the tombraider it is indeed.
Not by much but indeed its still faster there as well.
The only thing that annoys me is the pricing.
Faster clocked ones in the Netherlands go all the way up to €400,-.
Thats the most expensive GTX x60 card ever.
This card supposed to be a card for budget gamers.
Which according to US pricing it is.
But for Europe its not.