http://videocardz.com/61753/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-specifications-leaked-faster-than-rx-480
THANK YOU BASED NVIDIA
>you bought a $500 card that gets seriously outperformed by this year's budget cards
>>55359647
>budget
>$300
>budget
>>55359623
And its gonna cost 170$ more, so cool for nvidiots
>>55359623
>nvidia chart with bars that don't start at zero
every fucking time
Isnt this the same site that said the RX480 would have 980 performance?
Guess they realized how much they pissed people off so now they jumped to the 1060 having 980 performance
>>55359665
Non reference versions of the rx 480 with decent cooling are going to cost more than $200/$240 anyways. The gtx 1060 won't cost *that* much more than the rx 480 and it'll outperform it.
>performance
not even an asterisk to specify what benchmark that is
>graph starts at 0.8
cheeky
>only 15% faster in whatever benchmark they cherrypicked
meh
>>55359695
a reference gtx 1060 will most likely be $379 with aftermarket being around 420-30 so again good for nvidiots
That chart is fucking priceless.
>>55359623
>1.15
wow
>>55359751
Reference cards cost more than aftermarket for Nvidia this generation though. Nvidia likes to charge an "Apple Tax", but there's no way it'll cost as much as a 1070 when they can capitalize on the failure of the rx 480 (it literally only competes on price kek).
>>55359623
So it will have about GTX980 performance.
My guess: It will be ~$300, since that would fit in with their price of the 1070/1080. Also it would make this card $50 more expensive than the RX480.
Bad times for AMD. Just when they had a chance to gain a larger market share.
>>55359647
>sugar is sweet
>water is wet
>salt is salty
>old graphics cards get outperformed by cheaper new models
Any other wisdom you wish to impart?
>>55359915
OP is a fag
>>55359988
Ah, how could I forget?
15% performance in cherry picked benchmarks for
No async compute
Less cram
Higher price
Driver gimping
No performance increase after launch
>>55359623
Lol fucking shills
http://rbt.asia/g/?task=search2&search_text=THANK+YOU+BASED+NVIDIA&search_op=op
How much does a GTX 1060 cost?
>~300 shillings
>>55359623
at least use the correct chart if you're going to shill.
>NVIDIA
[--------------------------------------------------------------------------------] 60.1 fps
>AMD
[-] 60 fps
literally this
>>55360269
based/10
Thank you Nvidia for saving us from the RX 480
>>55359623
I will buy 10 of those
>>55359623
that's actually good performance compared to last gen 1060. i'll be recommending this over a 1070/480 to my buddy now since he was on a budget but desperately wanted shadowplay but amd's competitor is pretty crap and the 1070 is stupidly over budget.
>>55359664
Are you poor or something? lmao
>>55361023
last gen 960*
>>55359623
>>55361056
AYYMD GETS 0 FPS ANYWAY SINCE IT FRIES YOUR PCIe SLOT
>>55359623
>Unitless comparisons
Holy fuck, just wait until benchmarks come out. Never trust marketing shit.
I think AMD just gave up and went full retard with this good VR stuff and power efficiency.
>>55361150
it's not even good at vr though
>>55361262
>doesn't say overclock amount
0/10.
>>55361320
Read the article. It was maxed out at over 1.3ghz
>>55361262
Equal/better than the recommended 970
Is this graph legit?
>>55359623
This is bar none the greatest chart I have ever seen. Thank you so much videocardz, for without you I would never have known such beauty.
>>55359623
Wow almost twice as power for $200. Based nvidia.
If whoever made that chart reads this , I hope you get a deep incurable blood cancer.
>>55361099
yeah this seems like the most nvidia chart
>>55359751
>a reference gtx 1060 will most likely be $379 with aftermarket being around 420-30 so again good for nvidiots
No, because thats how much GTX 1070's cost.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125871
>>55361476
it is lol
nvidias marketing team at it again
>>55361970
AMDShills in damage control mode.
There's a reason why Nvidia decided to announce/release the cards earlier. They realised that the 480 is a piece of shit and their 1060 is gonna smash it.
>people will pay $300 for a 192-bit card in 2016
holy kek, Nvidia must be laughing their asses off
>>55361986
the only thing it smashes is your wallet when you're paying for a rebadged 980ti lmao
>>55361986
Nvidia is spooked by the 480
>>55361999
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IghcowGhRBc
>AMD finally catches up to the 9xx series
>nvidia responds with early releasing their 10xx without proper drivers which make them the new housefire brand
where were you when novidia finally sunk into the abyss?
>>55362014
what lmao. If that was the case, they wouldn't have decided to release it earlier. Makes 0 sense, mate.
>>55362010
It's not gonna have 980ti performance, you donkey. It's probably gonna be a bit better than a 980 + more efficient (not sure if you know waht that word means, considering you use AMD).
>>55362054
>not sure if you know waht that word means
considering the 480 has a lower tdp than the 980 i'm gonna say yeah i do. what about you?
>>55362054
>i don't know how market presence works: the post
the only reason people buy nvidia is because they think AMD is inherently shittier. with finfet that's all gone so they would lose a shitload of sales.
>>55362081
> comparing a 2 year old card to a new one
> not realising that the 1060/70/80 shit on everything AMD has performance and efficiency wise.
980 has a TDP of 165... So essentially what the 480 uses anyway? Or even less than that? DAMN
>>55361147
This.
>> hey guys my 1060 has 1.15 performance!! What no way my 480 only has 1 performance..
>>55359623
the only way the 1060 would win is by being 100w, being as fast if not a little faster than the RX480, and come in at $200 for the 8gb version.
>>55362106
>the only reason people buy nvidia is because they think AMD is inherently shittier
Because it is and has been for the past generations.
> i don't know how market presence works: the post
Not realising there is a big downside to a market presence when your product falls far behind the competitors.
>>55362131
again, with finfet that is all gone. same nanometer size, same tdp, and so forth. just because nvidia might have cards that are one 1 watt lower means shit when it's double the price. you're gonna have to do better than that if you want your sheep herd to still follow you lol.
>>55359623
This graph is top kek
>no example of performance
baseline 1.0 rx480
1060 at 1.1 BTFO
It's probably made by the same Nvidia marketing guy as the chart that said the 1080 was 2.5x the performance of a 980 Ti.
>TFW 10% faster in witcher 3 and the division
>192 bit with 3 gigs of RAM
>far less bandwidth than the 480, even when factoring in color compression
>AMD BTFO
>>55362156
TFW if it mean great performance I would buy a 500w TDP graphics card
Most enthusiasts don't give a single fuck about power consumption if it means moar powah. Mid-range consumers only know enough to get memed on by marketing
Low-range consumers (the biggest demographics) know literally nothing about it, buying a 250w PSU, 30$ mobo, 300$ CPU and a last-generation card along with RAZR branded condoms
MFW mind share is literally all that matters and AMD will never do good even with better technology
Power consumption is a non-issue, unless your GPU is full throttle 8-10 hours a day.
And I don't mean just in use, I mean full throttle 100%.
>15% better
>maybe 4gb
>300$ maybe 400€ europe
Rip nvidiots
>>55361036
>wasting money on unnecessary hardware
>>55362726
Nvidia doesn't fuck up reference pricing here. The 970 was always cheaper than the 390 here. I think there was a couple of months were there were cheap deals for the 390 but now it's back to normal and the 970 is like £25 cheaper.
>>55360294
underrated post
>>55361262
My 970 scored 6.8
Shits equal with a 2+ year old card and not at all the game changer AMD tries to make it out to be.
AMD
>Mine goes up to 10
Nvidia
>Mine goes up to 11
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMSV4OteqBE
>>55363019
Someone posted their 970 score on /v/ and it was 8.5 score. It was a regular aftermarket once.
>>55363129
Yeah, my computer is far from spectacular. I just downloaded and did a test to see how much bullhype it is.
>>55362253
>he doesn't use razr-branded condoms
>>55359623
>x-axis starts at 0.8
>TypicalNvidiaGraph.jpg
>>55363254
Do they work like other razer products? Namely fall apart in five minutes leaving yourself feeling screwed?
>>55362253
>TFW if it mean great performance I would buy a 500w TDP graphics card
this, nvidiots use all excuses they can for muh efficiency. Seriously what kind of shithole 3rd world country do you live in where you can't afford an extra 10kWh in a year.
>>55363496
Power draw didn't matter when fermi was a nuclear inferno - the second Nvidia gained a power effeciency lead it suddenly became the most important part of a gpu.
>>55363496
Funny, because in 3rd world countries where power usage matters AMD cost more than Nvidia.
>>55363528
Ironic isn't it, if there were cards that were affordable and had great performance that required 3 8 pin adapters to power the whole thing I'd still go for it.
>>55361986
>AMDShills in damage control mode.
How the fuck is pointing out that nVidia won't charge as much for the 1060 as they already charge for the 1070 somehow damage control? Fucking retard.
>>55362114
>accuses someone else of not knowing what efficiency means because they use AMD
>gets pointed out that the AMD 480 has better efficiency
>muh 2 years, muh other cards
Kek cry harder.
>>55359623
>that chart
>>55364170
28nm vs 14nm. At least let Nvidia throw out their entry tier 16nm before you make a fool of yourself.
>>55359623
>paper specs
>no price point
>no perf/$
>>55362067
fixed
>>55364225
>muh 28nm vs 14nm
Again, keep bringing up excuses for nVidia's efficiency being worse.
>>55364277
You're really struggling to understand how a smaller node by its very nature uses less power, aren't you?
>>55360269
fucking kek
>>55364277
AMD's 28nm process was much worse efficiency wise, at least compare apples to apples Poojeet
>>55364286
No, I'm trying to figure out why I should give a shit. It's not my fault nVidia can't afford a node shrink.
>>55364308
>tfw only ever use AMD cards
>tfw AMD shills are this fucking stupid
worst marketing staff in business
>>55364337
>no counter-points
>resort to insults
>everyone who doesn't agree with me is a shill
The computer I'm typing from uses a GTX 670, but whatever.
>>55364265
>>55364308
Explain to me why the 480 doesn't perform as well as the 1070 then, since they are both rated at 150w, yet Nvidia uses a node that consumes slightly more power.
AMD FANS BTFO
>>55364363
What is there to counter? Nvidia HAD a node shrink this generation
>>55364308
Are you retarded? The rx 480 consumes as much power as a gtx 1070, which is much more powerful. Nvidia is more efficient this generation.
>>55364367
Ayy lmao
480 has more TFLOPs so in a couple years the drivers will make it faster
>>55364371
You're very clever. Use it as your wallpaper for your next post in the desktop thread.
>>55364385
Don't forget that you get a boost on the 480 simply by upping the power envelope on it, no clocks needed. They literally starved it to get to barely break power specs.
So what the hell does the bottom axis represent? Performance? Rating out of 10? Good Boy Points?
>>55364408
32 ROPs.
I'm sure it'll be a decent buttcoin budget miner for people who want to make back what it cost in a year or two though.
>>55364415
Did that hit a nerve?
>>55364378
Ok and they didn't shrink as much as AMD. Tough luck. If you lose your legs I run faster than you. The sentence "you're only faster than me because I have no legs" may be true, but that doesn't change anything.
Now cue the "something something bad analogy".
>>55364441
Did being told to go back to your desktop thread make your anus flush?
>>55363567
You blew it
>>55364498
>le epic "you_blew_it.jpg" maymay comeback xD
Wow you sure told me.
Fuck i dunno if i should snag the 1070 or something from the 900 series to hold me over till the 1080ti comes out.
I'm finally building a new PC now that i have the funds (I currently have a 560ti) so i desperately need an upgrade.
>>55364443
Yet somehow it's much more efficient anyway
AMD needs to cut GloFo loose if they ever want to be relevant again
>>55364480
I see manchildren get mad very easily
>>55364550
>Tell people to go back to /v/
>post epic /v/ memes
>>55364582
Are you still here? lmao
>>55364523
Just get the 1060 once it comes out. The rumored/leaked launch is still July, and it'll be able to handle games at 1440p or 4k with medium details and other settings turned down until you get a better card. It will probably hold its resale value better than a 900 series card for when the 1080ti comes out and you want to sell it.
>>55364607
Yeah, I was waiting to give you one last (you) before bed.
>>55364633
What if I want more?
>they think the 1060 needs to be faster to win
All it needs to do is not wreak havoc on someones motherboard and it wins
>Nvidia just wants to bankrupt AMD
AMD needs help
>nvidia 1080 price: $700
>RX 480s crossfire price: $400
>>55364701
>Ashes of the Singularity
>crossfire house fires
poor b8
>>55364701
>amd test settings
>crossfire
>ashes of singularity
>crossfire
>>55364718
>>55364758
>Crossfire still costs $300 less
>>55364800
And will destroy your motherboard have you been paying any attention?
>>55364828
>I am shilling again
>>55364701
>>55364828
According to Nvicucks maybe
>>55364858
>Assuming 10% speed is worth a 40% price increase
>>55364921
But for the same price, you can get a gtx 1070 which has little bit less performance, but none of the drawbacks of dual GPU systems.
Where can I still get the 4gb version of this? It seems to be sold out everywhere on newegg and amazon...
Doesn't even look legit. Wait for announcement/release.
>>55364962
I'm sure some scabs can hook you up for $350 a pop on amazon/ebay.
>rx 480 gets 60 fps
>gtx 1060 gets 72 fps
wew
>>55359623
I took around 20 dx11 (DX11!!) benchmarks where the rx480 and 1070 were both present. The rx480 is averaging 68% performance of the 1070. If this 1,15x performance claim is true then the 1060 will be 78% performance of the 1070.
However I think this is hard to achieve because:
* 1060 will not have frequency over 1070 (look the previous cards nvidia has released and compare)
* it has 1280 cores, this is 66% of the 1070
* it is a 196bit card, the rx480 is 256bits and so is the 1070
The performance difference between 960 and 970 was:
* 960 was 66% of 970 (average benchmarks) (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-960,4038-12.html)
* 960 had 62% of 970 core count
I can make the following assumptions:
* 1060 will have very very similar performance compared to rx480
* 1060 will probably have around 65% - 70% performance of the 1070
* rx480 will do better in higher resolutions due to better bandwidth
* since Pascal is almost the same as Maxwell architecturally then lowering the core count will scale in performance like on Maxwell
Also note that I didn't include any dx12 titles when calculating the average. If nvidia wants to compete with the 1060 it has to crank up the clocks. This will be a desperate move if they do so. They can show their card to be "better" this way but they also will kill all the overclocking capabilities and make it less efficient.
>>55359623
What I fear the most of this is it's future proofness. No async compute is a huge turn off...
>>55365175
>* 1060 will not have frequency over 1070 (look the previous cards nvidia has released and compare)
wow the first bullet point is already wrong. the 1060 has a 1.7ghz boost so it would be 1.6ghz stock. that's either the same or above the stock frequency of the 1070.
opinion discarded.
>>55365233
No it will not. If the card comes out and it will have higher clock for some reason then this was only and ONLY because they want to compete against the rx480.
https://youtu.be/cVVJPbFRDEc?t=3m39s
>>55365313
Thank you AMD
>>55365276
>official slides leak saying >1.7ghz boost
>"n-no it's not"
>i-it's all a lie
>why are nvidia making a better product reee
kys
>>55359623
"leaked"
>>55365399
yeah right
http://www.pcgamer.com/nvidia-gtx-1080/
>oh look, 9 tflops
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_10_series
>oh look, 8.2 tflops
yeah these slides are so accurate
>>55361999
>People will keep screaming bits like they're selling a video game console in 1993
>>55365618
>yeah these slides are so accurate
yeah they are. at least you understand now.
1060 confirmed to be a BEAST. all hail nvidia.
>people are still falling for the AMD meme
Team green 1060 2016
>>55365155
That's literally difference between playing on high or ultra details.
wtf is wrong with AMD
https://community.amd.com/thread/202410
>I ran into a problem after upgrading my rig with an RX 480 today. Everything was working great but then after a 7-hour straight gaming session with Witcher 3 Blood and Wine (which by the way is AMAZING) I got artifacting and then everything went black and the sound cut out. I reboot my PC several times, but nothing would come up. After looking up the error code on the motherboard, I found that it was "No VGA present" so at first I thought the card was dead and I put back in my 750 ti, but it too would not work with the same error code. So I put the RX 480 in the second PCI-E slot and now everything is working just fine. After everything was A-OK I tried slot 1 again and it failed again, so now I'm in slot 2. I did a Google search to see about this problem and I found several articles about the RX 480 overdrawing power on the PCI-E slot. HOWEVER, I'm not sure I'm ready to pin this issue on that yet, hence why I'm posting. I feel like having the card for just a day and only having a 7-hour gaming session is too soon to cause failure. What do you guys think? Maybe it's just a coincidence? I'm no expert on power draw or what overdrawing would actually do to a slot or even the motherboard as a whole. I also feel like if it was due to overdrawing of power that the whole south-bridge would get messed up and then the second PCI-E slot wouldn't work either, but it does work. I could be wrong in thinking that, though. Anyway, thoughts?
>I have this exact same issue, totally killed my 990FX from MSI. The issue is that it destroyed all 3 of my x16 slots, and I have nothing to test my other slots. I think the cpu still works, but in all honesty, without any video out I have no idea.
>>55364623
Yeah that seems like the best course of action. Ill just get everything else and hope i snag a 1060 before they sell out at release.
Here's to hoping the 1080ti is out sooner rather than later
>>55366692
This whole thread is comedy gold. People advocating for AMD should be gunned down.
t. Former 280x owner.
>>55359623
>nvidia
lol
>>55366692
>overclocked card
>old mobo
>pcie slot fries
Whew, it's almost as if overclocking can cause damage..
>>55366692
It's totally spikes and not constant overdraw that fucks up motherboards, right?
Better to have an old 3.5 than having to buy a new motherboard.
someone set up a general.
meanwhile, at last someone who seems to know the fuck he's talking about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qG2e-v94L4M
>>55367404
he sounds pretty cool
>buying amd in 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lTGk0R12gs
>>55366920
Fuck off back to funnyjunk retard
>>55366920
Meanwhile in the real world
>Every other card on the market gets overclocked
>None of them fry motherboard
>None of them take 125 watts from the PCI-E lane
>All of them are PCI-E certified
>The only one that fucks up your entire system is the 480
Fucking moron
>>55367759
>>55367783
>>55367809
Not an argument
>>55367836
>4.4 TFLOPS 1060
>5.8 TFLOPS RX 480
Explain how 1060 can possibly be faster?
>>55367861
Teraflops really have nothing to do with in game performance, it's equivalent to the retards that think the scorpio will bring 4k gaming to consoles just because it is 6 teraflops. 480 will still beat the 1060 though.
>>55359623
install gentoo
>>55367836
>>55367861
There's more to outputting a picture than just crunch numbers. TFlops is a measure of crunching floating point numbers, nothing more.
>>55366692
He's not the only one having issues
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhjC_8ai7QA
>>55359623
>tfw going nvidia since the 480 literally kills your motherboard
Feels good to be in the green team
>>55359623
jesus christ nvdia™ graphs
>>55365175
>* 1060 will not have frequency over 1070 (look the previous cards nvidia has released and compare)
doesn't really matter since AIBs will clock them higher and OCing is easy as fuck and should always be done for the free 10-20% extra performance.
it really only has to be same performance with the huge perf/watt advantage nvidia now has to be a resounding success. AMD has no competiton now unless they want to tank prices.
>>55365175
>* since Pascal is almost the same as Maxwell architecturally then lowering the core count will scale in performance like on Maxwell
except for the huge leap in perf/watt?
if anything it's AMD who released a shitty rehashed architecture this generation. complete disappointment from both sides imo, but for different reasons:
>nvidia released a product that only gives a marginal improvement for a huge price
>amd released a product that isn't even better than nvidia's last gen and kills motherboards
>>55359623
>arbitrary y values
nvidia is the apple of graphs
>>55361023
Plays.tv works fine. Just as good as Shadowplay. Stop shilling.
