Nvidia takes wraps off GeForce GTX 1060 graphics card

[nobodyspecial]

8GB radeon 480 is not $200. Expect partner cards from $250-275, right in line with being a bit above current pricing for 8GB 480's.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007709%20601203818&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=30
lowest price at newegg is $240 for 8GB 480, so $250-275 for a winner is fine especially if it overclocks decently on partner cards.

256bit bus would be a waste of money on this card. It's pretty much chopped in half from 1080, so who in their right mind would be expecting anything above 1080P here? 20fps? No thanks. Bandwidth for what the tflops seem to indicate is more than enough given pascal's compression crap etc. Good that they went 6GB and not 4. Not many games will go over 6gb at 1080P, and a setting adjustment will fix that if it happens in some game.

[watercooled]

I could be wrong, but doesn't the chip shape show quite clearly that it's not a GP104 like Charlie is suggesting? Also 12 days isn't exactly a month!

Ughhhh brain fart - I thought we were still in June!!

My thinking was maybe the GP104 is pin-compatible and they used the same PCB for testing with that?

[kalniel]

256bit bus would be a waste of money on this card. It's pretty much chopped in half from 1080, so who in their right mind would be expecting anything above 1080P here? 20fps? No thanks.

We'll see. With that beefy (much more than half a 1080) ROP/TMU system I think 1440p performance may be a lot more reasonable than 20fps.

[TREX_HUNTER]

Unless early cards use a cut down GP104 instead of a GP106?? Nvidia did this with the GTX660 - there was both a GK104 and GK106 version.

I think I see what you're saying - press get GP106 cards (as pictured), early buyers however get GP104 until enough GP106 are made? Wonder which is preferable?

Hmmmm, You mean the other way round? NV is struggling with GP104 supply at the moment so i doubt they would sacrifice premium die for the 1060. I think Cat-the-fifth and as highlighted in that semiaccurate article ring more likely: GP104 flavour for press and GP106 for the masses.

[kalniel]

Hmmmm, You mean the other way round? NV is struggling with GP104 supply at the moment so i doubt they would sacrifice premium die for the 1060. I think Cat-the-fifth and as highlighted in that semiaccurate article ring more likely: GP104 flavour for press and GP106 for the masses.

The press ones are definitely GP106 - you can see it in the shape of the chip. GP106 is new so perhaps harder to bring to market/accelerate. Cut GP104 shouldn't be a problem unless your yields are so good you can put all the chips into 1070/1080 so you don't have any discarded ones for 1060.

[HalloweenJack]

ouch @ £300 for this - ALL FE cards are the baseline for cost - 1070/1080 start at the FE prices and go upwards!

[watercooled]

Yeah a shortage of 3/4 or full dies for 1070/1080 doesn't negate the possibility aren't a lot left over for 1/2 die 1060 depending on defect density. However a 1/2 die is a heck of a cut and unless yields are catastrophic I doubt it's a viable long-term plan, bearing in mind the 1060 is likely a much higher volume card. Whether or not they'd do it as a short-term thing while trying to ramp up the GP106 is another matter.

[Spud1]

So, still no support for DisplayPort adaptive sync? Another mid-range from nVidia only of interest to those who'd bought into the G-sync walled garden then.

I'd be surprised if we ever see support for Freesync/Adaptive sync in it's current form - aside from the fact Nvidia is currently making a decent chunk of cash out of G-Sync, Freesync/AS is limited in it's appeal due to the current refresh rate limitations on most implementations - something that G-Sync doesn't suffer from. We may see some movement on that if/when freesync monitors start supporting variable rates at the higher end - but the current limitations of 90 on most (and 120 on the top end ones, with tweaking) are a problem imo. Even then, since AMD are unlikely to be able to support G-Sync, there is little incentive for Nvidia to support the competing tech.

What is more likely is that Nvidia will be able to reduce the price/licence of G-sync which should bring the monitor prices closer together. I've just bought myself an Acer Predator XB271HU so I am a little biased admittedly, but there was a nearly £200 price premium for G-sync over a Freesync equivalent. They really need to get the prices down to remain competitive imo, I very nearly didn't buy one as a result as it was galling.

Of course the ideal would be that both AMD and Nvidia support both technologies, but thats even less likely than the UK staying in the EU

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I'd be surprised if we ever see support for Freesync/Adaptive sync in it's current form - aside from the fact Nvidia is currently making a decent chunk of cash out of G-Sync, Freesync/AS is limited in it's appeal due to the current refresh rate limitations on most implementations - something that G-Sync doesn't suffer from. We may see some movement on that if/when freesync monitors start supporting variable rates at the higher end - but the current limitations of 90 on most (and 120 on the top end ones, with tweaking) are a problem imo. Even then, since AMD are unlikely to be able to support G-Sync, there is little incentive for Nvidia to support the competing tech.

What is more likely is that Nvidia will be able to reduce the price/licence of G-sync which should bring the monitor prices closer together. I've just bought myself an Acer Predator XB271HU so I am a little biased admittedly, but there was a nearly £200 price premium for G-sync over a Freesync equivalent. They really need to get the prices down to remain competitive imo, I very nearly didn't buy one as a result as it was galling.

Of course the ideal would be that both AMD and Nvidia support both technologies, but thats even less likely than the UK staying in the EU

Apart from the fact GSync is massively more expensive - I know far more normal gamers interested in FreeSync than GSync. The only people I know who are interested in GSync are hardware enthusiasts who spend loads on monitors.

There are far more FreeSync monitors under £300.

Thats the thing - I don't know anybody who would spend £300+ on a single monitor. Heck,I just spent £240 on a UP2516D since I am into photography and that is more than most people I know.

This is what you have to realise,you spent £200 more for a GSync monitor - once AMD gets Vega out,that will be like comparing a £250 Nvidia card with a £450 AMD card?

Even at £100 more,you can buy a faster AMD card for the same price. That is like the difference between a £150 Nvidia card and a £250 AMD one. That would be a GTX960 against an AIB RX480 for instance!!

Having a GTX960 4GB myself,even an R9 390 is significantly faster,and any perceived advantages of GSync will not make up the difference.

[Spud1]

Right now yes - and with 60hz monitors you'd be crazy to spend the extra on G-Sync.

When talking about 1440p screens with 144hz or higher, and when 4k screens with more than 60hz become available..it becomes a different question. You either spend a lot of money to build a PC that can keep to 144FPS without significant drops at 1440/4k, spend a few hundred on a G-Sync panel to mitigate it, or go freesync and accept lower refresh rates.

Yes, the majority of people will take the latter option - after all we are all well used to 60hz screens and tearing has become so common that we ignore it, and I agree that at current prices G-Sync is not worth it unless you either want the best of the best, or have the money spare. None of this is in incentive for Nvidia to support Freesync though imo. They have the better of the two technologies, and can charge for it.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The issue is that the FreeSync monitors cost almost the same as the non-FreeSync versions. It does not matter if GSync might be superior in some aspects,the average gamer can get FreeSync easier and that by extension means more people will start to consider getting an AMD card instead.

[Spud1]

Very true - can't argue with that for the average gamer

It does annoy me that Vendor lock-in now applies to monitors. I accept I am part of the problem since i've invested in it now, but it's still frustrating!

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Well it could be worse - prices are going up so you have bought at probably a good time. I bought my UP2516D right now since my main reason for a new monitor is for photography and the sudden £100 dip in price,meant I might as well get one now. Would have loved it to support FreeSync but my estimation is that as the newer scalers become more common we should start to see more and more cheaper monitors under £200.

[Spud1]

Yep I got a good deal on it and it will last me another 5-6 years at least I would expect, but the price has shot back up again. I know we're getting OT, but we are starting to feel it in the UK now..a colleague of mine has been building a parts list for a few months now and has finally settled on a final list - it came to £607 last week, but today the cheapest price (buying from multiple vendors, excluding postage) is £661. Thats a huge jump up in price.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Pound is crashing - best to do the build now. Amazon also do interest free credit now.

[scaryjim]

... You either spend a lot of money to build a PC that can keep to 144FPS without significant drops at 1440/4k, spend a few hundred on a G-Sync panel to mitigate it, or go freesync and accept lower refresh rates. ...

Or buy an ASUS MG278Q which handles freesync over a range of 40Hz - 144Hz?
http://www.ebuyer.com/725889-asus-mg...monitor-mg278q
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/monito...esync-monitor/

The hexus review is almost a year old. So Freesync across ranges up to 144Hz is nothing new. Disappointing that there aren't more monitors with the full range (and support down to AMD's 9Hz lower limit)? Sure. But the choice isn't G-Sync or lower maximum refresh rates. It's just a question of finding the right monitor. It also turns out that in December AMD introduced a low frame rate compensation feature for when framerates do drop out of the freesync range, which PCPer reckoned was functional if rough around the edges. At which point I'm struggling to see why freesync isn't an option at 144Hz...

EDIT:

Took a little time, but I've managed to find an IPS 2560x1440 freesync monitor with a 40-144Hz freesync rang etoo - the Acer XF270HU. Should tick all the boxes and comes in at > £100 cheaper than the Predator. As CAT said, that can buy you quite a big difference in GPU performance...