Comments Locked


Back to Article

  • watzupken - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I think this could put AMD in a tight situation. Looking forward to a review to see how well it performs, i.e. if it can match a GTX 980.
  • ImSpartacus - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I believe it. Nvidia is pricing it higher than the 480, so it oughta perform better.

    Amd should be more afraid when Nvidia launches a sub-100w 1050 that nearly competes with their $200 at two thirds of the power consumption.
  • PeckingOrder - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    if there's enough of these cards at launch, AMD won't sell a single unit of the RX 480.

    GTX 1060 wins in everything - performance, power consumption, temps, it's not a motherboard killer, it's going to have stable drivers at launch as opposed to the RX 480 whose drivers will be USABLE 6 months from now on, a reasonable frame buffer (4 GB too little, 8 GB overkill), ...

    definitely worth the extra 10$
  • Remon - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    ...Nvidia fans will keep talking out of their ass.
  • cocochanel - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Boy, you seem to know everything about this card before anyone has even seen it, let alone review it properly.
  • jospoortvliet - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    For 25% more money you get 2gb extra storage and maybe 5-10% performance. I wouldn't wait 2-3 months until the 1060 is actually available at its MSRP...

    Or, for 10 dollar more you get 2gb less ram but 5-10% performance. That I would call a tie, IF availability is good.

    And as 4gb is a minimum these days a 3gn version is not a wise investment even if the price I close to 200 dollar...
  • PeckingOrder - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    for 10$ less you get

    - no WHQL drivers for the RX 480 available to this day
    - unstable drivers with no official drivers being available for Windows 8.1 as of now
    - a motherboard and PSU killer
    - much bigger DX11 overhead that'll make the performance delta much bigger for those who are not rocking the i7-6700k which most of the target market isn't
    - twice the power consumption
    - outrageous GPU and VRM temperatures in typical gaming loads, shortening the lifespan of the card
    - a terrible and loud blower cooler

    what a great deal, idd
  • djayjp - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    The biggest advantage will be its overclocking.
  • PeckingOrder - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Yep, AMD might as well declare bankruptcy now.
  • ImSpartacus - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Did you just reply to yourself?

    Dude, cmon...
  • Xanavi - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    You should declare moral bankruptcy.
  • Xanavi - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    My roommate just got the reference RX480. Blowing games out of the water, quietly, and stably with the CD drivers. AMD's biggest problem is people like you.
  • cocochanel - Saturday, July 9, 2016 - link

    It's not just that. All the people that are constantly whining about this card definitely have an agenda, and it's a simple one. To lower the sales. They have 5-6 sticking points and they keep throwing them in anyone's face no matter what. Here they are:
    1. Power consumption is horrible. It'll blow your PSU to pieces. Message or hint ? Don't buy it.
    2. Well, they did release a driver which solved the problem, but power consumption is still horrible. Message or hint ? Don't buy it.
    3. That 6-pin is an abomination. Hint here ? Don't buy it.
    4. There are not enough DX12 games at this moment, and the ones that are, well, they are half-assed jobs ( how games like Call of Duty Infinity Warfare or Battlefield 1 are half-assed it's not being explained ) Message here ? Don't buy it.
    5. The card is still out of spec. ( whatever that means ) Message here ? Don't buy it.
    6. It was build with cheap parts, that's why the price is so low. It's a piece of junk. Never mind the warranty that comes with the product. Message here ?
    Don't buy it.
    No matter what happens and no matter what everyone thinks, just don't buy it.
    The problem for Nvidia is this. With cards like RX480 performing so well in DX12 games and VR who is going to wait for months until the GTX 1060 shows up and who is going to spend $600-$900 on the GTX1070/1080 who are so hard to find ? Not too many, that's for sure.
    So what do they do ? Send the wrecking squad loose and hammer away at it until the damage is done. How low can you go ?
  • Cygni - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Dear Forum Warriors, nobody cares about your deep personally held prejudices about fuckin' GPU manufacturers. We also don't give a shit about your choice in consoles, or operating systems, or telephones. Go with christ my child, god bless.
  • JoeyJoJo123 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    +1, upvoted, liked, subscribed, retweeted, reblogged.
  • ruthan - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Christ.. bleh, that is solution.. I wish that all religious people in the world would be the GPU fanatics .. How beautiful world it would be.
  • doggface - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Thanks for saying what we all thought. +1
  • l1gold - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Well, to be really honest you got some valid points. However, Nvidia wouldn't had launched the 1060 until October and you would still have to wait till Nov - Dec to be able to buy it to a price point close to the MRSP whereas you can buy the Radeon 480 now for the MRSP, thanks to AMD Nvidia had to shoot in the foot with its 980 inventory stock having only 2 months to get rid of it.

    Additionally, there are no reviews yet, and you can't be really conviced about no drivers issue since Nvidia have had its fair amount of problems with drivers too.

    I got a 480 because I didn't wanted to pay premium prices for the performance of the 1080 (and even 1070) basically because Im not planning on playing 4K, like 90% of the rest of the people (at this point in time) and didn't wanted to wait for Nvidia's alternative, which is going to be a reality at least 2 months from now.

    You have to also be happy that there is an AMD which pushes Nvidia to be competitive with pricing and advance in technology. Nvidia could had easily sold the 1080 in the 1000 usd price range without any competition. I mean its cool that you are happy with your nvidia purchase and is almost normal, that people defend the things that they use (its a mind game your brain play with you), but there is no point on trash talking the competition, cuz they are the cause, your brand new 10xx card is at least affordable, you should be grateful with Amd.
  • vladx - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I seriously doubt RX 480 affected the release date of GTX 1060. What I'm sure it did affect is the MSRP price which would've been 299$ instead of being the Founders Edition price.
  • przemo_li - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    Sure... Its not like Nvidia ever waited like 6 months after release of 980/880/780 to follow up with 960/860/760 ;)

    Never. No. Really.

    Nvidia felt no pressure what so ever. ;)
  • Chaser - Saturday, July 9, 2016 - link

    Yeah Nvidia's marketing strategy is being ruled by AMD.
  • lev04 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    Either you are an nvidia fanboy or you really don't know much bout videocards!if you did not noticed,lately,for about 3-4 months at least, amd Drivers have been progressing very well,with performance and stability gains.
    As fot the motherboard and psu killer....just lol!!!you do know that you are talking about a card built on a 14nm process,do you?!no comment on that,it is useless to say anything.
    Dx11,maybe you know,is old now,many games are releasing dx12 support,see tomb raider,and amd gains very well in this respect,while nvidia loses or remains he same in many tests on think again m8.
    As for temps,they are perfecrly ok even on the stock cards.
    So in the end,as a consumer,forgive me if i can't see how 249usd are better for a 3gb and 192 memory bus width card than 239usd for a 8gb and 256 bus width one,given the actual benxhmarks!!!
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    lol...nice fanboy post.
  • JaegerLeo - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    And who said there's gonna be a 3 gb version?
  • K_Space - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Jaegers these rumours have been known for quite a while now, and they have proven -at least- partially true. 3Gb and 6Gb with a starting price of $250 (with likely $299 for the 6Gb).
    I suspect 6Gb version is what people will eye, and in fairness $300 is extremely reasonable for 980 performance in 2016. The real issue is: pascal cards @ MSRP have been non-existent since lunch, and in this target market, price plays a huge impact.
    TL;DR it's not as cut as dry as people make it to be.
  • K_Space - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I went back to see if I can find the wccftech article that came with the initial rumour, it has been updated to reflect a 6Gb/FE split rather than their initial 3Gb/6Gb split.
    More interestingly: has anyone seen this:

    Retail RX 480 4Gb actually have 8Gb and just need a flash. Might this explain's Ryan:" for whatever reason the RX 480 appears to be in short supply"
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Ryan already addressed that previously, the review samples had 8Gb, retail cards will not.
  • K_Space - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

  • jimbo2779 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    The 4gb card that wccftech bought had 8gb and was easily flashable to enable the full 8gb. Not a review card but a purchased retail unit.
  • vladx - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    There will be a 3GB card too soon, it's called GTX 1050.
  • Murloc - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    AMD can't be competitive power consumption, it has never been really. This is a sticking point for me, I hate noise.
  • andrewaggb - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Once the 1060 is available for $250 and in stock, assuming the 480 8gb is still $240 at that point, it does seem like a no-brainer to get the 1060. But we don't have benchmarks, no idea about availability, and the 480 is available today. There's also a 4GB 480 for $200 that's still a pretty good deal and should have enough ram for 1080p.
  • khimera2000 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Actually I've seen my video ram go above 4GB on certain titles when I go ultra on some settings at 1080. It's a Gtx 980ti. I think 6GB will become a new floor sooner than later. I would avoid the 4 GB cards since the price difference isn't that bad.
  • przemo_li - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link


    No brainer to pick GPU based solely on paper values. ;)

    I have some land to sell to You. With breath taking view (really)....
    What would You say for parcel near Albategnius, Moon?
  • prisonerX - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I love how Nvidia fanboys talk down the competition, so that Nvidia can gouge them even more than they do currently.
  • Wreckage - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    This will pretty much bankrupt AMD. All they have is the 480 right now. Given it's multiple problems and disappointing performance, they can't hope to make a profit. No well informed individual would chose a 480 over a 1060, especially with the recent powergate scandal.
  • Creig - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    "This will pretty much bankrupt AMD", blah, blah, blah. I wish I had a dollar for every time you've said that over the last 10 years. You keep saying it and yet AMD is still here putting out cards that real people can enjoy. Not just the 1% who can pull $100 bills out of their ass at will.

    If you like a good scandal, just keep your eyes on Nvidia. They've gotten pretty good at them lately. "Founders Edition" cards for $100 more that throttle after a few minutes of gameplay? Real quality there. LOL! And remember the 3.5GB + 0.5GB GTX 970? How about the woodscrews in, "This puppy here is Fermi"? And let's not forget bumpgate which cost Nvidia over $300,000,000 in repairs/returns.

    Yeah, it looks like Nvidia is the definite scandal leader in the GPU world.

    Keep on trolling, Wreckage/Prime1! :)
  • JoeyJoJo123 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Dude. Why are you going out of your way to defend a company's supposed honor, when they've done nothing to merit it? Wreckage here's trolling, but you whiteknighting AMD is just embarassing. Any company that makes mistakes needs to be shown what those mistakes are so that they can resolve them and move forward.
  • Remon - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Oh shut up, nvidia has done worse things than whatever AMD has done.
  • JoeyJoJo123 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    What's your point, though.

    I'm not defending any company here. Both AMD and nVidia clearly have done some wrong, but being a fanboy of either side and pointing the blame to the other side of being guilty of a greater evil doesn't help _anything_ here, it just attempts to shift the blame.

    Besides none of these types of comments really have anything to do with the topic at hand: GTX 1060.
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    He was addressing the original post in that sub-thread which declared "the end is nigh" for AMD. I get what you are saying and fanboyism is annoying at best, but his comments were not off-topic for the sub-thread. To make things worse, your comment literally adds zero to the discussion either. Pot calling the kettle black methinks?
  • JoeyJoJo123 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    >To make things worse, your comment literally adds zero to the discussion either. Pot calling the kettle black methinks?
    Says the kettle?

    My point is that there's no reason to argue with a fanboy's opinion. They can believe the end is nigh. People have been saying that about AMD/Intel/nVidia for over a decade. Fact of the matter is that they're still here, and they'll still be there tomorrow, so for the time being, I will at least point out the stupidity of counter-fanboying a fanboy and point the general discourse back to the topic at hand: GTX 1060.
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    When someone posts fanboy comments, others reply to put him or her in their place...that doesn't make the person replying a "defender" of bad business practices, although it may look like it...i recently built a very nice 6600k system and even with the knowledge of the power issue with the RX480, got an 8gb card anyway...I see a lot of talk about the 1060 but this video card isn't even available yet and we have no idea what it will perform like....also, nVidia is bucking their trend on releasing affordable video cards 4-6 months after their top tier cards...We can thank AMD for that.
  • tamalero - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link

    Irony, people coming with the "whiteknigithing" after they load their barrage against AMD.
    Yet somehow Nvidia is "flawless".
    I actually wonder if these guys are getting paid by the hour.
  • edzieba - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    ""Founders Edition" cards for $100 more that throttle after a few minutes of gameplay?"

    Boost Clocks are 'Boost' clocks rather than base clocks for a reason. You can't really criticize Nvidia for their cards performing exactly as specified.

    "And remember the 3.5GB + 0.5GB GTX 970? "

    You mean the ones that were range-topping price/performance when released with the issue undetected by anyone testing them for months, and suddenly the performance of everybony's card was remotely reduced through Magic once the minutiae of the memory subsystem's operation was published? Oh, wait...

    "And let's not forget bumpgate which cost Nvidia over $300,000,000 in repairs/returns."

    Both Nvidia and AMD have been caught out by unnotified solder chemistry changes (e.g.
  • tamalero - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link

    "page not found".

    and no.. Nvidia issues with the solder problems were everywhere. AMD didnt had nearly a tiny spec of what Nvidia was suffering.
    Worse when Nvidia told everyone it was the computer manufacturers fault until shit hit the fan and they were forced to accept THEIR solder technique was defective.
  • Communism - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    The AMD damage control brigade is hilarious.

    "You are only allowed to compare AMD AIB vs Nvidia Reference"

    "Nvidia marketing slides are always false and AMD marketing slides are the Vicar of Christ"
    Apparently that even extends to AMD rumors vs Nvidia marketing slides.

    "The Nvidia 1060 card that we (at the time of the post) have no benchmarks for will obviously be slower in every way compared to RX 480, to say otherwise is blasphemy and heresy"

    "GP106 SLI is required for my purchase and people shouldn't stand for it's lack (says various posters who have R9 290/x and/or Rx 480)"
    Ignoring the fact that AFR is cancer and that there are single GPUs more capable.

    "I can't figure out any problems with GTX 1070 yet, so lets make some up, facts be damned"

    "DX11 performance doesn't matter. Only the tiny minority of DX12 games matter, and only if they show favor to AMD, because any that don't are obviously not admissible on account of heresy"
    Nevermind the fact that anything outside of AAA has 0% chance of being a DX12 title for the next 5 years.

    "GP106 can't possibly beat RX 480, it would have to be a GP104 for that to be the case"

    "GTX 970 had some problems, therefore by the transitive property, GP106 1060 will have the identical or worse problems, because reasons"

    "Any stock limitation of Nvidia vs demand is sneaky dribbling of cards to the plebs and/or they have bad yields. Any stock limitation of AMD vs demand is off the charts demand, and for such an event to occur, the people must have eaten through zillions of cards already"

    "Any time we praise something RX 480 didn't eventually deliver, you should forget it. Any time we denigrate something about 1060 in a slanderous/libelous way that doesn't actually turn out to be true, you shouldn't be allowed to mention it. Dear consumer, do not believe your lying eyes."

    "AIBs won't price Nvidia cards at MSRP, but will definitely never violate MSRP for AMD cards because faith"

    "Nvidia matching AMD set price with a superior card = Nvidia raising prices for the market"

    "When leaks don't favor AMD, lie about them until they do"
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    When using quotations you should actually quote what people said.......Or as Ross Geller once said "You're doing it wrong Joe!"
  • FMinus - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Seriously tho, what has AMD done with the RX 480 that is so special? There was always a $199-250 card bracket that had cards on the similar performance. The RX 480 is just the "new" R9 380, so naturally it's priced how it is priced. I have no idea why people are praising AMD for releasing a card that they would release anyway. And now Nvidia will release this GTX 1060 at a similar price point.

    The difference between AMD and Nvidia right now is that AMD has nothing for people looking at something more beefy, except for 1-3 year old chips, whilst nvidia is building a complete lineup slowly but surly. We still have no idea when AMD will bring their high-end cards to the market, and for everyone who's waiting for those, there's nothing out.

    Frankly I'm an AMD guy, I like paying less for similar performance, that's why my past GPUs were, 5850, 6970, 7950 and 280x, and now I'm stuck with my 280x and nothing to buy from AMD. I wont buy a 480, because I want something that will last me at least 3-4 years without having the need to upgrade, and AMD has exactly nothing for me, nvidia on the other hand has 2 cards right now, which truthfully overpriced most of the time and in low supply, but at least I should be able to get them if I try real hard.

    That said, I wont buy anything right now, I'll wait and see until spring next year, if AMD managed to bring something out and if they're still in the low-end range at that point, nvidia will be already cheaper and readily available.
  • JoeyJoJo123 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    It's not incredibly special; it just pushes a near equivalent grade product (seen as the best price/performance ration of last gen) which used to be had for $300, down to potentially $200 if you're lucky (although most people which got this card had to opt for the 8GB VRAM version for $240 or more).

    It did push the market to get better quality at lower prices, and that's a good thing to have. Though, agreeably, this isn't a huge game-changer.
  • FMinus - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I would expect a new architecture and a new process to deliver better performance regardless, and considering this is a 232mm(sq) chip which is on the low end I also find the price quite fitting and and in Europe a bit pushing.

    Frankly, not succumbing to the AMD hype that was spread before the RX 480, I was still expecting that Polaris chip to at least go head to head with the 3 year old Hawaii XT, which would seem, at least to me, expected from a new chip build at 14nmFF and in 2016, but that was before detailed specs were announced.

    They castrated this 2304sp Polaris chip with 5 machetes not just one.
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    I don't know where you get your information from but AMD's high end cards ARe coming 4th quarter this year which is not too far out...the RX480 is definitely a card you could keep for 3-4 years...I don't know what gives you the impression it can't...I just finished building a new system in almost 7 years and was using onboard video because I wanted to buy one of the newer cards...I decided on the RX480 $240 you can't go wrong with that...and if you really want more performance or 4k gaming, you can add another one for a Crossfire setup that will still be 25% cheaper than a single nVidia 1080...unless you are looking for bleeding edge performance that only gives you high benchmarks, wait till November/December when AMD r9 490 cards come out and compare them to the 1080...but if you just want a good gaming card that will play all current games well, the RX480 is a great card.
  • tipoo - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    iirc they could still float for a number of quarters (~2 years I think?) on liquid funds if they stopped making a single dollar starting tomorrow. I hope for their sake the 480 still sells decently though.
  • Communism - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    US companies cannot fail as long as they can still sell bonds. Fed interest rates are at 0%, making investors chasing yield on junk bonds all over the place.
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    It will sell well and AMD's Zen architecture should vastly help them in the CPU market...they probably won't eclipse Intel or Nvidia but they will always be up there in competition and with cheaper prices.
  • euskalzabe - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    And we should all be very worried about this. A faltering or possibly destroyed AMD is bad news all around for everybody. If that happens, forget about decent generational improvements from Nvidia. It'll be the Intel situation all over again.
  • eddman - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    ... because AMD going bankrupt will benefit consumers. Wait, what?
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    re-read his comment again, I think you are missing what he said.
  • Big Poppa Pump - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    You're absolutely clueless. Do you even know who's supplying the GPUs for consoles?
  • iLLz - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    And yet AMD hasn't turned a profit in years, so what's your point? We all need AMD and nvidia to compete. We need that healthy competition between them, but let's face it, AMD mucked up the rx480 launch with under performing, out of spec card. How much longer can AMD not turn a profit? They surely don't have that much in the coffers to keep this up much longer. Here's to hoping Zen and Vega are hits and return AMD to glory and much needed market share.
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    The RX480 card is not mucked performs great and at a great price...only nVidia fanboys are creating the negativity around the power draw and a driver fix was already can't find a better card at $199 or $240 than the RX480...I agree AMD has been faltering for years...but they aren't going anywhere...and Zen/Vega will be great products as well.
  • Michael Bay - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    I love how AMD fanatics tout one-time deal as some kind of epic ongoing profit stream.
  • Meteor2 - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    Yeah... Except it is an on-going profit stream.

  • Chaser - Saturday, July 9, 2016 - link

    Yeah one midranged product. /golf clap
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    it could be a low end product...if it's generating revenue, who cares what the product is? Obviously it's selling right? Mid range to low end products make more profits for companies than high end products.
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    I knew about the power issue and bought one anyway :) Where's this 1060 card you keep talking about?
  • Bfree4me - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I'm very surprised Nvidia Did Not include the 980 and 970 in their preliminary comparisons of relative performance. Odd to market this as more powerful than a 980, then show us a 960. I think a buyer in the market for a $200 +/- card would be wise to wait a month or so. Amd and Nvidia will kill bugs and prices will level out by then. And if you can't wait, buy a known quantity in the 970 off Ebay.
  • Flunk - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Nvidia must be pretty confident that the Geforce GTX 1060 is going to be faster than the Radeon RX 480 if they're going to launch a 6GB version at $249 vs $239 for the 8GB RX 480.
  • ImSpartacus - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    It's fascinating. I think we're beyond that point where cards get compared based on vram capacities. Quite refreshing.
  • ddriver - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Not more fascinating than AT posting 2 "page" "article" absent any benchmarks whatsoever as an article rather than a pipeline story.

    Here are my 2 cents - the 1060 will be roughly equal to the 480 when put on equal grounds, faster in nv optimized (as in left unoptimized on radeons) titles, and marginally slower in dx12/vulkan titles, while being 30% more expensive and 30% power efficient (due to crippled FP64 transistor savings).
  • Cygni - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    You do understand that the performance is still under NDA right? There is nothing else AT can post.
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    finally a rational comment. It is very likely that 480 and 1060 will have similar performance, with a likely edge in most games going to the 1060. That's what it should look like given the pricing disparities. We won't know until they are actually released, but if an 8Gb 480 is $50 less than the 6Gb 1060, it would appear the 480 will be a better value.
  • Stuka87 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Except its actually launching at $299. It should be clear by now that any time a Founders Edition is offered, thats ALL that will be available until custom cards come out, and then the customer cards will cost basically the same as the reference card.
  • smilingcrow - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Nope, it's launching at $249 and $299 as both variants are available from day 1 not just the FE version.
  • Strunf - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    nVIDIA doesn't control the prices if people think that the custom cards are better than the FE then nothing will stop the retailers or anyone else from selling them at the same price... the GTX 1070/1080 was also supposed to be cheaper in custom and the reality is very different.

    I wonder if we should be mad at nVIDIA for the price of their FE or happy cause that's what holds the customs version prices from going even higher.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    There are several 1080s for $649 and under, heck EVGA has two that are under $620.
  • Peter2k - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Stated in the article that the 19th will be a hard launch (for the 1060)
    For founders nonsense and board partners as well
    And since partners will not be selling the founders edition (only available through Nvidia itself) means it will be custom solutions

    Can be all read in the article above
  • euskalzabe - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    VRAM isn't anything. The 1060 would not be able to push through the 8GB VRAM anyway with the 192bit bus. Putting 8GB on that card would essentially be a marketing gimmick and wasted electricity on your system. RX 480 has 8GB because it has a 256bit bus. It's simple math.
  • euskalzabe - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    EDIT: VRAM isn't everything. C'mon AT, edit function on comments please...
  • nandnandnand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    That jump from 6 GB to 8 GB will be meaningless to most. Even 4 GB would probably be good enough.
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    No, they will expect their customers to buy their card regardless...for the most part they are right.
  • DanNeely - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Looks like I was right when I called the $250/300 split as 6GB custom/founders edition cards and not 3/6GB versions. Assuming the 3GB variant is a real product I'm guessing it'll be released as the 950 in another month or two.
  • ImSpartacus - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Oh come on. Any reasonable person recognized this as a very possible scenario. This did not come out of left field. No one gets to be "right" on such an unsurprising thing.

    Now if the 1060 had 12 gbps gddr5x on a 128 bit bus and you predicted THAT, then that's different because people would be losing their minds with how unexpected that was.

    But when one of the handful of reasonable pre-relase rumors turns out to be correct? Oh boy.
  • DanNeely - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    it should've been the obvious scenario; but if you go back a few days you can find huge chunks of the commentariat gloating about how $300 for the 6GB card that was the source of the 15% faster slide from NVidia meant that $250 3gb card would probably be even slower and that as a result the RX480 was going to kill both models of the 1060.
  • bill4 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Day late and a dollar short Nvidia.already happy RX 480 owner here.

    Also, why so inefficient? Only 4.4 teraflops/192 bus/6GB for 120 watts? RX 480 has 5.8/256/8GB in only a little more watts.
  • ImSpartacus - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    "A little more"

    Yeah, about that...
  • shabby - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Tflops... really? Compare the rx480 5.8 tflops to the gxt1070 6.5 tflops and ask yourself why the rx480 is that much slower.
  • DanNeely - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Yup. The big question when AMD initially released price and TFlop numbers was why so cheap when it should be barely slower than the 1070. Then the actual benches came in and it was clearly nowhere near a 1070 in speed as the raw flops numbers would suggest.
  • tamalero - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link

    I wonder if the RX480 can do compute way way faster than the 10XX GTX arch.
    Reminds me about the whole Fermi vs the Kepler.
    Fermi was very good at compute and double precision shit.. Then kepler did the opposite, amazing gaming, way lower compute power.
  • CajunArson - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    "Also, why so inefficient? "

    Uh... what?
    The Rx 480 pulls so much power it violates the PCIe spec and AMD is having to issue a driver fix just to keep it from causing problems with budget motherboards and you think the GTX-1060 is "inefficient"?

    Just be thankful that Nvidia didn't let the reviews go live today or you would be regretting that statement.
  • Teknobug - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    ^ lol what the hell?
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    You seem to misunderstand the issue. It isn't that the card "pulls so much power it violates the PCIe spec", it's that the power delivery is asking for more from the PCIe source than it should be. This is an issue they supposedly will have a fix for today. The actual power usage isn't anything newsworthy, it's the amount of power it's pulling from the PCIe that is the problem.
  • Peter2k - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    And that's why AMD shouldn't have made such a mistake
    That misconception is going to stick around for a while

    Damn shame
  • vladx - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Yes and that a good example of why you should avoid AMD cards as much as possible. Or any AMD product for that matter.

    AMD QC is crap.
  • tamalero - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link

    It was fixed in 1 week.
    and no card were burned.

    Unlike the "fangate" drivers (that appeared in 3 different sets ) of Nvidia..
  • Chaser - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Yeah because the world was waiting on the highly anticipated, midrange AMD card to come out. Enjoy the crisis level driver power fixes. Meh.
  • Jumangi - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    tflops is a lame performance indicator, any intelligent PC enthusiast knows this...

    AMD has banked it all on the 480 and Nvidia already has an answer a few weeks later. Let's look at the STEAM hardware stars 6 months from now to see which card has the higher user base, by allot I expect.
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    "AMD has banked it all on the 480" What is your source for this statement? I haven't seen any other person with knowledge of the industry make such a claim, only Nvidia fanboys.
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    nice troll....AMD didn't bank it all on the RX480...their future lies in Zen and Vega.
  • euskalzabe - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    TFLOPS are not an indicative metric for gaming. Just saying.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    *cough* little more, you mean the 480 that draws 1080 levels of power?

    might want to brush up on what the word "little" means.
  • K_Space - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link
    You are right if you are referring to idle power however for load power the 8Gb RX 480 draws 231 versus 318 for the 1080 in FurMark (worst case scenario).
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    shhhhh, let the Nvidia trolls pat themselves on the back a bit longer before reality sets in.
  • Chaser - Saturday, July 9, 2016 - link

    And what would that be? One midrange GPU item while Nvidia releases an entire new gen line of extremely powerful and efficient GPUs? I don't think we want to see your reality.
  • eddman - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Not exactly as power hungry as 1080, but it comes very close in typical gaming scenario, and consumes more than 1070 in all load scenarios. Blu-ray and multi-monitor numbers are quite bad too.
  • K_Space - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Did you get the 4Gb or 8Gb version? If you got the 4Gb version, it migh actually be 8Gb:
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Looks like you are posting this over and over for unknown reasons, Ryan addressed this already. Review samples sent to magazines and websites all had 8Gb, retail consumer cards will not.
  • K_Space - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    fanofanand, I was't aware. This was posted twice and I've seen and thanked you for your original comment :)
  • jjj - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    They are getting extra greedy with the Founders Edition and the paper launch suggests that they are rushing it and supply will be very limited so might take a while before we see anything at 249$.
  • Chaitanya - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    This generation nvidia has gotten a lot greedy(compared to previous) overcharging like a blood sucking leech for refrence card.
  • euskalzabe - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    This is what happens with AMD can't compete. I hope Vega is an all-star product, because I'm tired of Nvidia overcharging.
  • Creig - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    There's a very simple way for people to stop the Nvidia overcharging. And that's to stop buying Nvidia cards at inflated prices. Yet people continue to buy high end video cards like they are a life vest to a drowning man. They HAVE to have the fastest, latest model. Now. RIGHT NOW! TAKE MY MONEY NVIDIA, DAMN YOU!!

    People want Nvidia to lower their video card prices? Stop buying them until Nvidia drops their prices. Very simple.

    But until that happens, the madness will continue because Nvidia knows that they can continue to make record profits off their customers.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Unless AMD releases a golden card that is suddenly competitive, enthusiasts will continue to buy nvidia because their high end cards were more competitive.
  • K_Space - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    That's not the issue TheinsanegamerN because the enthusiast market is a niche market, where performance/price ratio go out of the wall. The mainstream market is what matters and sadly Nvidia has raised the price in this breacket too.
  • Peter2k - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Nvidia makes a billion dollars revenue a year (though not all is through graphics cards of course)
    They must make something right

    They're good cards
    They'd be selling even more if they could meet demand

    It's on AMD to counter
    Not the customer to boycott Nvidia just because

    Many have been waiting long already
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    Well high end video card costs almost double the cost of a gaming console...yet, there's way more games available on the consoles...high end PC video card market seems only to exist for showing off purposes.
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    AMD R9 Fury cards were excellent cards...Nvidia's 980ti didn't blow away any of the AMD high end offerings...I'm pretty sure the same will hold true when Vega gets released...if a high end Vega card performs 10% slower than nVidia but costs less, it would be prudent to go Vega right?
  • ImSpartacus - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I think it's fine. It's just a tax on early adopters and pre-built system builders.

    No one else is going to bother with the founder's edition variants, surely not the Anandtech crowd that are building their own machines.
  • lazarpandar - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    >I think it's fine. It's just a tax on early adopters and pre-built system builders.

    You say this as if those aren't two groups that need defending. Some people don't know how to build a computer and implying that it doesn't matter that every company in the supply chain tack on their own extra fee to those people shows a huge lack of empathy.

    People outside of the "Anandtech crowd" matter just as much as we do.
  • K_Space - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    ^^ People outside of the "Anandtech crowd" matter just as much as we do.
    As much as i'd like to big the tech mag readers. People outside of AT/inserted your fav site acutally matter MORE than we do, I think the tech site readers may contribute what: 5-10%? if not less?
  • Peter2k - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Sadly it might be those people that heard word of mouth
    "RX480 kills computers because of power draw"
    I've seen quite some of those statements
    It's something AMD sure didn't need
  • eddman - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    It was blown out of proportion to some extent, but it still breaks standards. AMD is at fault here too. If they had known that 480 consumes this much power, they should've put an 8-pin or two 6-pin connectors on it.
  • Peter2k - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I down know why people are misreading
    To quote the article

    Unlike the GTX 1080/1070 launch, the 19th is a hard launch for both the GTX 1060FE and for partner custom cards

    FE sure is nonsense to me
    But no one has to for the 1060
    Same day for custom cards
  • cocochanel - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    It's not just GTX 1060. I know a guy here in Toronto working retail and he tells me both the GTX 1080 and GTX 1070 are in short supply. Low yields from the Taiwanese company that makes the GPU's are the likely culprit.
  • Peter2k - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Except it's written in the article above that it's a hard launch
    And since founders is only available through Nvidia
    Not from partners
    I'd think that would mean custom solutions on the 19th as well
  • crimson117 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Any guesses how many months it'll take before a 1060 is actually for sale at $249?

    nVidia pricing has been super frustrating this time around.
  • Eredu - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Never, the $299 will be the real price. None of the custom 1070/1080 cards ended up being cheaper than the Founder ones (over here at least). Maybe things change but I'm not holding my hopes up.
  • ImSpartacus - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Early days, demand is high. Price oughta be high as well.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    EVGA has two 1080's under $620, and there are several more under $650. Try again.
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    You mean the cards that are showing as "out of stock"? Keep trolling, the cheapest 1080 on Newegg is $886. The trolls are out in force today!
  • Peter2k - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    There was a time when AMD cards have been in such a high demand
    Though that was for mining
    So gamers had to pay over msrp as well
    Nothing new for team red or green really

    This time Nvidia just seems to have the more sought after product
  • coolbrys - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    How the heck is that a troll? It's selling faster than they can fill orders, period. I got one myself, an EVGA GTX 1080 for $620, from Newegg. If you can't find stock, that sucks, but you absolutely can get 1080s for under $700.
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    please give us a link to where these cards can be purchased.
  • Audiophizile - Saturday, July 9, 2016 - link

    I'm sorry you live somewhere where retailers gauge you.
  • Jumangi - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Supply and demand dude. It's called capitalism. If so many want an Nvidia card this soon they will pay a premium for it just like get the latest tech anywhere.

    That's life.
  • crimson117 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    It wasn't always this way.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Do you remember kepler's launch? This is the exact same thing as what happened back in 2012.
  • lazarpandar - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I think the implication here is that supply should be greater... I don't think anyone was looking for a shitty lesson in economics lol
  • euskalzabe - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I'd say late August at the earliest. If benchmarks are RX480 competitive, I'm planning on getting a 1060 by September - when I expect it to be available at $250.
  • ImSpartacus - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I'm slightly surprised that Nvidia is letting the $250-300 6gb 1060 compete with the $240 8gb 480.

    Historically, they have been very defensive about vram capacities in mid range parts. The 660 ti, 660 and 550 ti are the most recent examples.

    Good for Nvidia for ignoring that silly vram deficiency and worrying about honest engineering-minded configurations.
  • Laxaa - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I guess the lack of SLI-support is to buyers from getting 1080-levels of performance for a lower price(by buying two 1060s)
  • Laxaa - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    *to keep buyers from
  • A5 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I'm sure they have data saying very few people actually do that.

    Also, Multi-GPU is kinda crap in general, and basically doesn't work in DX12 right now.
  • Laxaa - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    True, but that doesn't stop them from including SLI in their high-end cards.

    But I guess that it comes down to cost. Why enable SLI when you can save a couple of cents.
  • bill4 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Also, why is Ryan claiming this card is 249 when comparing to real AMD pricing, when 1070/1080 both followed the pattern of Founders Edition pricing? Good luck finding any of those 399 1070's Ryan.

    Following that pattern 1060 will be 299. Not 249. A little weird cus I think Ryan knows better.

    Anyways this not coming until JUly 19 now, another delay, is rough. That's a lotta RX 480's selling in the meanwhile.
  • A5 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    The S in MSRP is very obvious when there is high demand.
  • CajunArson - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I paid $650 for my custom GTX-1080 and it's an absolute bargain compared to a $650 R9 Fury X.
  • CajunArson - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Oh, and it's overclocked out of the box with a custom cooler that barely registers noise under load (EVGA model).
  • Creig - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    So you're comparing the price : performance of the latest generation Nvidia card (14 nm) vs the previous generation Fury X (28 nm)? Doesn't work that way. Let's wait until AMD comes out with their own 14 nm flagship and then compare price : performance values. That would be a more accurate showdown.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Oh, so if we compare a 480 to a 970, suddenly it's fair?

    You compare current cards to last gen cards to judge how much better the new ones are. Why do so many people bring out this new "you cant compare 28 and 16nm" BS this gen?
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    The original commenter made the claim not to state how much better the new generation was, he made the comment that it was smarter for him today to pay $650 for a 1080 vs a Fury X (which he is correct about). Get off your high horse.
  • Yojimbo - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    He also said the RX 480 was $199/$239 (4GB/8GB) and where can you find it for those prices? For christ's sake, guys...
  • TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    because there are several 1080's that use the 599 MSRP as a base price.
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    You just can't buy any of them. I'll sell you a 2016 Ferrari for $10 today, except I won't sell it to you for $10 because I don't have any in stock. They can claim $599 all day long but if they aren't selling any at that price what is it worth?
  • Audiophizile - Saturday, July 9, 2016 - link

    Its called auto notify. They come in stock all the time you just have to be on top of your email. Every few days at least. I'll buy a $10 Ferrari off you in a few days when you get one in stock.
  • slickr - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    How is this turd compared to the RX 480? This TURD costs $300, the RX 480 costs $200, $240 for the 8GB version which is more future proof.

    Look I would have loved this card, would have LOVED it, if the 3GB version cost $200 and the 6GB version cost around $230, price competitive with the RX480, probably beats it by 10% in Nvidia sponsored games, about equal in DX12 titles, it would have been a great competitor, this is just another Nvidia overpriced TURD! Chances are with limited supply and custom made coolers this card is going to be selling more for $350.
  • A5 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Yeah, using "turd" as the 4th word in the comment. I'm sure to take this very seriously.
  • Jumangi - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    This "turd" will massively outsell the 480 in the long run just like the 960/970 did to their counterparts last gen.
  • euskalzabe - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Try again. The 6GB card is $249, not $300. RX480 is 970 equivalent, the 1060 is supposedly 980 equivalent, justifying the measly $9 increase. VRAM won't make a difference as the 192bit bus won't be able to use it.

    All of this is moot until 1060 benchmarks are out anyway. Don't speculate on how DX12 games may or may not perform.

    1060 won't sell around $350 as that's pretty much the price 1070 will cost - $379 - when initial prices come down. Stop trolling dude.
  • vladx - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Don't feed the troll.
  • R0H1T - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    200$ for the 8GB variant, with unlocked VRAM. The 1060 will be more efficient, slightly faster/slower depending on the title & DX12. It'll cost 300$ or more, especially outside the US, & has 2GB less VRAM. So in essence if you're not looking to save massive amounts of power, the 480 is the card to get this summer.
  • Yojimbo - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    No card can be bought for $200. I am not sure you can find many "4 GB" cards at all. 8 GB cards seem to be $300+. How long do you think AMD is going to be shipping 4GB cards with 8 GB of physical memory on them? It almost seems like a token move to officially hit a $199 price point that they aren't interested in hitting yet.
  • DexTsarII - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    sigh, people keep repeating this "all 480's have 8Gb on them" but that is simply not true. Ryan addressed this previously, only review samples had 8Gb, retail cards will not. As for R0H1T, the 8Gb cards are $230 not $200.
  • K_Space - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    " In a Reddit AMA, AMD claimed that graphics cards sent to reviewers were fashioned this way so that reviewers could test both 4GB and 8GB versions of the RX 480, switching between the two via a BIOS flash. It asserted this ability was "restricted to review samples," says TechPowerUp (TPU). However the 'reviewer only' statement appears to be inaccurate as TPU tested one of its retail bought 4GB RX 480 cards and concluded "retail 4GB RX 480 can be flashed to 8GB, and the modified card performs on par with the 8GB variant".
    The earlier posted link from wccftech also suggest that ALL early retail 4Gb were indeed 8Gb. The point is probably moot though given that 4Gb is no where to be seen, however it's useful tidbit for those who paid an early adpoter's fee.
  • dontcry1 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I'll spend more and buy the porsche(nvidia) over the chevy camaro(AMD). I'll certainly have better drivers as well..pun intended.
  • lazarpandar - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Car analogies are the bane of all tech discussion on the internet.
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I will take the Camaro and retire five years earlier. Enjoy that Porsche, I will enjoy the beach. :)
  • Michael Bay - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    >amd user
    >having anything to retire with

    Nice joke.
  • ScottSoapbox - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    "I’m sure we’ll find out more about their architectural decisions in time for the full review"

    I'm sure that's true Ryan, since we're still waiting on the 1080 full review...
  • R0H1T - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    At this point in time, I'm fairly certain there were a few that launched at or near that price point, the gouging is all retailers fault IMO. As for the current situation, after unlocking extra VRAM was revealed, it's clear that the retailers don't want to sell 8GB cards, 4GB officially, anywhere close to 200$ so the artificial scarcity & gouging is again not AMD's fault.

    For the latter part, I'd say that the actual sales of 1060 will determine whether AMD has to lower their price point; however I doubt they'd be forced in doing so anytime before the end of the year.
  • versesuvius - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Whatever the performance of this card is which is certainly going to be within + or - %5 of RX 480, with a TDP of 120 watts as compared to 150 for RX 480, one thing is also certain which is that AMD is not going to have the $200 VGA card market to itself for any period of time. That was the high point of AMD marketing strategy which while it clearly was aimed at hiding the fact that their Vega is six months behind 1080 even assuming that Vega is any match for 1080, still had some flare to it. So, this opportunity is blown away as usual.

    There are things that AMD can do (which AMD being AMD is certainly not going to do). Regardless, AMD can lower the prices of RX480 by 10% immediately. AMD can rush out the RX 480 x 2 at $350 (armed with their new driver! :) ), which is going to put a serious dent in the sales of 1080 and 1070. Given AMD's claims that some lower power draw cannot decrease the performance of RX 480, that card should be able to operate around a TDP of 200 watts which would be very good for its price and performance.
  • FMinus - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    the things that AMD should do, is take care of all their market not just a segment one, regardless if this segment is 80% of total. Frankly I'm happy for them if they rake in cash with the RX 400 series, but as a consumer, I'm pretty pissed that I'll have to wait another half a year to get a high-end card.

    And since I'm not a share holder, this move by AMD to completely ignore their high end customers for this long, makes me quite angry.
  • Audiophizile - Saturday, July 9, 2016 - link

    Agreed. I want competition in the market I belong to. That market is currently and will be controlled by nvidia for 6+ months. Sad times to like nice stuff.
  • tipoo - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    SMS and SMP seem like real game changers for VR, I'm shocked Polaris doesn't seem to have an answer to them.
  • fanofanand - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Considering nobody has experienced SMS and SMP, it's quite bold for you to consider them game changers with nothing similar or exclusive from AMD.
  • DrKlahn - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Let's look at things realistically. The AIB cards in the 1070/1080 cards have not been significantly cheaper than the FE cards (or cheaper period). I don't see that changing for the 1060. The 480 has not had any cases of killing a motherboard that I have found and we're talking about a ~40-50w difference vs. 1060. That won't be noticed on the electric bill nor will it result in a huge amount of heat comparatively. I'm guessing availability for the 1060 will be low considering that their higher margin parts still aren't able to meet demand. No way will a much lower margin part get wafer allocation over these. The rumors of it being a salvage part may solve that, but that would make it a costly long term mainstream proposition.

    Performance wise I expect them to trade blows. The AIB 480's with better power delivery and cooling may give that card a bit more headroom. But reference vs. FE I do expect them to be in the same ballpark. But I think the 1060 FE will be in short supply and likely be above MSRP for some time. The rushed launch just smacks of Nvidia's normal tactic of trying to rain on the competitors parade. It will probably keep the faithful mashing F5 trying to find one, but anyone even slightly impartial will probably still grab the less expensive and available 480.
  • cocochanel - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Finally, an intelligent comment !
  • eddman - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Do not presume to know what every single buyer thinks.

    I, personally, do like to have a less power consuming card in my computer. I have an old mainboard and I'd rather not put extra, non-standard pressure on it (although a custom 480 with two 6-pin connectors would solve this issue). Also, I have no air conditioning in my house, so a card with less wattage is preferable to me.

    I have no interest in the 4GB version of 480. The 8GB version is $240, just $10 below 1060. Obviously no 1060 can be bought for that amount for a while, but I can wait. 6GB will be more than enough at 1920x1080 for quite a while for me.

    Writing all that, the main factor would still be performance and we have no numbers yet, so there is no point in passing judgment yet.
  • DrKlahn - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    The founders edition, which is what will ship initially, is $60 more. And judging by the current market, there's really no compelling evidence to suggest the 1060 will see AIB be significantly cheaper. Nvidia gave the same forecast with their current chips and it has yet to be anywhere close to reality.

    There have been no cases of any motherboard damage and the 480 seems to be selling quite well. So if this was really an issue, we would start seeing reports. It would obviously be better if it was closer to the specs, but even the Tom's followup conclusion is that in reality it isn't likely to be an issue.

    The wattage delta will cause the room to heat up more, that's physics. Realistically with any sort of airflow it won't be a drastic difference. We're talking a couple low wattage bulbs worth of heat.

    Not passing any judgement performance wise. The 1060 could dominate the 480. But from what I'm seeing I don't expect that to happen. But that's simply my speculation. I do agree that performance will weigh heavily on which product shifts price point and volume sold.
  • eddman - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    The higher prices probably have to do with 1080/1070's high demand and low supply. A while later they will definitely arrive at their MSRP. This has happened in the past too.

    I don't care if there has been cases of damage or not. I'm not buying non-standard cards. I'd only consider a 480 with two 6-pin connectors, or a single 8-pin.

    Of course it's physics. I know how hot my room can or cannot get. Even a single extra 60 watt lamp is enough to make it hotter than it should be for me, let alone "a couple", which might end up to be the difference between the 1060 and 480. I don't want a card that consumes more for the same performance. Period.

    The point is that there are people who care about such stuff, which you dismissed.
  • eddman - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    *No editing function.

    Custom 1060s are supposed to launch at the same time. They would probably still cost more than $250 but that would change in time.
  • DrKlahn - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I didn't dismiss it. Just looking at the most common situation in which a ~40w difference is not likely to make any meaningful difference. Yours is not a common situation. There will always be outliers.

    Fine grab one of the upcoming 480 AIB's with an 8pin if you are worried. There's no evidence to suggest you would have any issues, but there are certainly products that will put you at ease. AMD is supposed to release a driver today to reallocate power routing to alleviate the concerns from the tech press. Their solution may also put you at ease with a reference card. Although I suspect you will buy a 1060 regardless.

    Yes as yields improve and supply increases I expect all Pascal cards to finally see price drops. But the immediate situation for the 1060 is likely to follow the 1070/1080. If it does the cheapest AIBs will likely be around $280 and I don't really expect them to go much less than $299.

    In the next few months I'm guessing the low supply issue with 1080 and 1070 will in all likelihood greatly impact the 1060. Nvidia has a contact with TSMC for X amount of wafers (they are not their only customers). As long as they are unable to meet demand for their high margin parts, they are not likely to allocate much to lower margin parts. That's simply business. The only other possibility is that the 1060 is a cut down 1070 and not its own die (which is rumored). That would give Nvidia a salvage part situation which would help short term availability, but be very bad for the long term affordability of the part (bad margin).

    I think the 1060 will be a good performing part. I think it will have limited availability for at least a few months. I think its main intent is to keep the faithful from jumping to the 480 even though it's likely to cost more and there will be a wait to get it. If it's performance is meaningfully better, Nvidia will probably be successful in swaying a lot of folks away from the 480.
  • eddman - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I agree with most of that, except this:

    "I think its main intent is to keep the faithful from jumping to the 480"

    If someone does not buy a 480 now, he/she is an nvidia faithful? A smart consumer would wait for the competition in order to have a better view of the products before making a decision.

    Yes, I might end up buying a 1060 in the end, but if pascal proves to be inherently deficient in DX12 titles going forward, I might go with 480, even though I don't like power inefficient cards. I don't care about VR at this point, so that's one thing off the 1060's pro list.

    Also, 480 seems to be in short supply too, so it's not like I can buy one now at the suggested $240 price anyway. AMD is more or less in the same situation.
  • eddman - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    *a custom 480 that is, with a better cooler and an 8-pin or 2x6-pin connectors.
  • DrKlahn - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    So you don't believe rushing this release, while releasing no meaningful figures, had anything to do with keeping people from going to their competitor? Nvidia has been paper launching or teasing specs for years to accomplish this exact goal. And to their credit, it does work. This is plainly an attempt to stop consumers from making a purchase and consider their product. I'm not saying that it isn't being a smart consumer to consider all angles. I'm saying there is a reason this was rushed and nebulous performance promises given. If the 1060 had kept to it's original release schedule there would certainly have been people on the fence grabbing a 480. This is obviously meant to combat that.

    Pascal in it's current form shows very little progress on handling Asynchronous tasks. In fact all evidence I see points to it being a mildly modified optical shrink of Maxwell. Which may or may not effect it in future titles. Nvidia has tremendous developer clout and will throw money to steer games to favor their architecture. So my gut tells me that asynchronous compute functions will be sidelined us much as they can be to hurt their competition and spotlight their products. For the consumer that will certainly stall progress and hurt the overall experience, but such is business. The red herring will be the consoles. If engines are ported between platforms and asynchronous compute can't be gutted easily Nvidia may be in a bad position. Time will tell.

    As far as today's titles that use DX12, the 480 is producing some good figures that I don't expect to see the 1060 match. If you look at linear scaling based on shader counts vs the 1070 (it has 67% of the shader capacity of the 1070), that puts the 1060 well below the 480 in the majority of Guru3D's DX12 titles (RotTR being the only one it should win). Which doesn't account for the memory bandwidth decrease of the 1060 which should decrease how well it scales some. DX11 in the same review using the same guess it is slightly faster or tied vs the 480. Again I expect the low memory bandwidth to hurt scaling more than the figure I'm basing these guesses off of.

    The 480 is an efficient card, it's simply not as efficient as it's competitor is likely to be (or Nvidia's currently released Pascal cards). That makes it inefficient by comparison, but a card that is approaching 390x/980 performance (and in some cases exceeding them) for ~150w is not inefficient. Nvidia will likely continue to have an edge going forward here, but again for folks with anything better than a decent 500w power supply and a normal room the differences aren't going to amount to anything tangible.

    Also Tom's Germany has tested the 16.7.1 driver and found that it does mitigate the PCI-E power concerns. Performance due to optimizations appears to have gone up as well (though this is just one source so far).
  • eddman - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Not saying that it wasn't nvidia's intention, it was, but IMO a lot of buyers would've still waited to see how 1060 would pan out, regardless. Not because they are all nvidia fans, but because some of them know better not to jump in immediately.

    That's why I'm waiting on more DX12 titles. The current DX12 games are mostly half-assed hack jobs. Pascal already performs better than Maxwell in DX12, so something IS different. Perhaps they've implemented a different method to tackle async in comparison with AMD. Need to wait a while longer I suppose.

    Of course inefficiency is a relative thing. There is no other way to determine it, and 480 is inefficient for the performance that it provides. It's obvious.

    Yes, I read the PCPerspective article. Good job on AMD's part to pull it off. If it was nvidia, they might've tried to bury the whole thing. It still doesn't fully stay within power standards. I would still go for an 8-pin or 2x6-pin variant.
  • DrKlahn - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    A lot less would have waited if the 1060 was still months away. This is a calculated move.

    Pascal performs better because it has more units and clockspeed to do the work. If you normalize the clock speed and the number of CUDA cores the scaling between it and Maxwell is very close. Yes there are small improvements even after normalization, but not anything that points to a major change. Don't get me wrong Pascal is fast at DX12, but it's a brute force approach.

    If you're worried about power post fix I can only conclude you have an agenda. The likelihood of it causing problems before was minimal and it's a pretty much a non-issue at this point. I could see waiting for an 8 pin connector and a better cooler for headroom, but to do so because of the power "issue" is nonsense at this point.

    No card exists in a vacuum and it is less efficient than its competitor. But again you would need a very specific case where a 120w card is going make any sort of tangible difference vs. a 150w one. For the vast majority it simply won't matter except maybe as a bragging point.
  • eddman - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I have an agenda simply because I don't want a card that breaks the 150W standard power barrier?! Maybe it's not an issue but I don't want it. That's just me. I stick to standards. Extra power connectors are there for a reason. Everyone else is free to do as they wish.

    I don't know what you mean by normalization exactly. Hardwarecanucks' separate performance summary charts show pascal is quite better than Maxwell in DX12.
    I don't know what method nvidia used, but it's there. How are you so sure it's just brute force? It could be the new preemption feature. Even if it's brute forcing, so what? It still does better than Maxwell. It isn't as fast as GCN in the DX12 titles that are out there so far, though.
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    If standards are that important to you, you should probably just buy ready made PCs....just about every person that builds a custom PC, tweaks it for performance one way or the other....even doing something as minor as changing memory timings puts it out of standard..adding a little clock speed to your CPU or video card puts it out of's pointless to even care this much about "standards" unless there was a genuine worry...there was a very little worry before AMDs fix but now after the fix, there literally no worry....a $49 PSU could take that load on the 6 pin with no issue.
  • cocochanel - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Wait no longer. Call of Duty Infinity Warfare is probably DX12 only since it features a lot of space combat and plenty of physics and lightning effects just like in Ashes of Singularity. Check out YouTube videos. Battlefield 1 has an option on the graphics settings for DX12 enabled and we know how good DICE was at adopting Mantle with huge performance improvements. Pascal is indeed an optical shrink of Maxwell and here is the best explanation posted by Mahigan as to why Maxwell and Pascal are so deficient in DX12:
    Read carefully and stop bashing AMD.
  • eddman - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Bashing? I haven't bashed AMD's DX12 performance anywhere.

    Pascal already performs better than Maxwell in DX12. Something is different. Not as fast as GCN still in current games. I will wait for more games to come out.
  • cocochanel - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    The link you have provided is for a glowing review of the GTX 1070. It's a very good card, at $649 here in Canada, it should be. In DX12 it's only 20% better than an RX 480, a card that costs half the price ( $310-$349 depending on which brand you care to buy ). Now, the GTX 1060 should be well below the GTX 1070 performance, otherwise who's going to buy the pricey one ? By that metric, the GTX 1060 will be a poor performer on DX12. As more developers dive into DX12 in the years ahead, the situation will only get worse since no amount of driver tweaking can address a hardware deficiency. You go ahead now and wait for more games and more tests. By next year, we should see a lot of GTX 1060 up for sale on Ebay. Nvidia fanboys who were dumb enough to buy them selling to other Nvidia fanboys. I've seen it before. Some things never change.
  • eddman - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    I posted that link to show that Pascal performs better than Maxwell in current DX12 titles, meaning they aren't the same, that's all. I did also mention that GCN still performs better in DX12 currently. Did you miss that part?

    Yes, I will wait. I'm not going to decide based on just a handful of DX12 games. I need to see more. Maybe games need to be optimized for Pascal's load-balancing and preemption features, I don't know, or maybe GCN would still keep its edge. It'll become clear soon enough and I can pick my choice. By then both 480 and 1060 should be readily available and at MSRP or even lower. There is nothing to lose.

    P.S. calling nvidia buyers and sellers "fanboys" makes you just as bad. You don't need to resort to such comments to make your point. There are a lot of people who buy cards regardless of their brand.
  • cocochanel - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    I'll take the "fanboy" comment back. Look, if the GTX 1060 performs as well as a GTX 1070 in DX12 titles, that's just fine with me. I'll buy one since, in effect I'm getting a $649 card for about half the price. What's not to like ?
  • vladx - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Same, I care a lot about power efficiency that's why I have no incandescent light bulbs in my house with LEDs. Also I'd rather reward a company that produces superior tech rather than a company that screws up at almost every launch and uses deceptive marketing while playing the victim card all day long.
  • LarsBars - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    lol @ the Nvidia slide with quotes from tech journals: "NandTech"
  • tspacie - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Bridgeless SLI? Has anyone confirmed that bridgeless SLI isn't supported? Removing the physical bridge connector is one thing, but removing support for SLI is another. Bridgeless used to be supported with a small perf loss vs using the bridge.
  • rocky12345 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Looks like a nice card but it is just a paper launch to make ripples in the pond to try to cut AMD sales down which shows Nvidia did not plan to release this card most likely until mid to end of august. I also would like to note that if it does have 48 ROP's this is a good thing and is also pretty much what AMD should have done with the RX 480 was to give it 48 ROP's which would have balanced it's performance out a lot in more games. I guess a 8 pin power plug would have been a good move as
  • NotLupus - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I look forward to reading Anandtech's review several weeks after other sites publish theirs...
  • topperdude - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    With the RX480 promoted as being capable of handling VR (how well, remains to be seen, but assume with driver updates that to be the case), AND because NVidia is claiming 980 level performance from the 1060, is it fair to assume the 1060 might also be able to handle VR - likely not as well as the 1080 or 1070?

    If not, could two GTX 1060s handle VR? I am guessing the answer might be closer to "remains to be seen" after the 19th once the benchmarks start rolling out (hopefully anandtech can include that in their list of testing ;-) ). I was an avid PC gamer in my teens and twenties but haven't done much for the past decade or so and am looking to get back into it but feel the 1070 and 1080 are more enthusiast-grade (performance and cost-wise) cards, especially if I don't continue long term. But would like to explore gaming, VR etc. So would like to start with a single 1060 and maybe move up to two 1060s if I get serious again so that's where I am coming from.

    Thanks for any thoughts/inputs.
  • warreo - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    One GTX 1060 will 100% be able to handle VR, no question about it. Min spec for Oculus and Vive is a GTX 970, and the 1060 will be closer to a 980 in performance, so roughly 15-20% faster than the minimum required for VR.
  • Peter2k - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    No SLI on the 1060 as far as anyone can see

    That aside
    They're bringing the 1080/1070 VR performance enhancements to the 1060 as well
    Could be good to have
    Depending on support
    But as stated in the article
    Seems like quite some engines gonna support that
    What's it called again
    Simutlainous multivitamin or something?
  • Peter2k - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Ahh autocorrect
  • topperdude - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    Too bad if the 1060 does not have SLI. Have there been other cards from NVidia where some cards (higher end) have SLI and others do not?

  • Casecutter - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Here's my thinking... If you're pay north of $250 to do 1080p (other than a 1080p G-Sync 144Hz panel) is like throwing good money after bad. So it really about 1440p and that's where we need to look at each and say it's not just Fps. It's about Frame Pacing, FpS by Percentile, Frame Variance on 1440p. And to that... that's where we should look for these to show true differences not by the so many canned reviews we get now a days.
  • Hxx - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    and here comes the RX 480 killer. I hope AMD reaped the benefits of being first to release cuz its not gonna last much longer.
  • D. Lister - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I was going to say, "can't wait for the review", but... *ahem*
  • K_Space - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Have anyone noticed how the 1060 PCI-E connector is waaay off the PCB? I've heard rumours that NV was aiming for bus powered only card and the 480 made them push the card further and then introduce the extra PCI-E connector (linked by a small cable which is solidered into the card for extra delivery). That would have been kick ass. I wonder if the partner cards will:
    a) not only be smaller but also b) be bus powered only.
  • brucek2 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    The "launch date" and "launch prince" rows of the initial summary table are largely fictitious. While I understand a tiny number of customers were able to purchase on those dates and at those prices, the reality is the vast majority were not. Continuing to report them as straight forward facts without explanation or footnote is rewarding the manufacturer for these customer-unfriendly marketing practices and encouraging them to repeat them in future product cycles.

    I'd encourage the tech press to choose a more realistic measure of availability and price and to give it the largest weight in your reports. (This applies to all products/manufacturers, nvidia is by far not the only one playing this game.)
  • Murloc - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    who cares about a few weeks?
  • brucek2 - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    Or a few dollars? Or a few % of performance? Hey why bother reporting anything accurately?

    The six week delay in ready availability of the 1080, as measured against the say 52 weeks until it is replaced by next year's model, is already more than 10% of that lifespan. This site spends lot of time and effort on smaller differences than that.
  • ruthan - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    We really need 3rd player on GPU market, Nvidia is so supreme, that could milk us to death. I will not buy worse AMD product only to keep AMD live 1 day more.

    Unless Zen would be miracle, they are done. They are between rock and hardplace - Intel on side and Nvidia on second..
  • vladx - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    Why would anyone enter a ongoing diminishing market? In 8-10 years all dGPU will be gone except a few high-end and enthusiast cards, everything below will be replaced by integrated cards that keep improving by leaps and bounds.
  • samer1970 - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    AMD are done ? lol wake up , The consoles market lone will keep them going ... They are making Nintendo , Playstation , Xbox hardware for 10 years to come
  • Michael Bay - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    AMD has nothing to do with "console market". They got a one-time deal with shared or outright transferred IP, for which they got a one-time payment, period.
    Should AMD completely disintegrate tomorrow, consoles will keep shipping.
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    Yeah AMD has been "done" for the last 6-7 years...yet they are still here somehow...SMH
  • vladx - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    It's clear now that the 3GB Pascal card will be the GTX 1050. Hopefully that means it will be half the price of GTX 1060 as well.
  • TallestJon96 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link

    I think the 1060 will probably be able to meet the 980, if not exceed it just a little. If you compare the 1070's teraflops and memory bandwidth to the titan X, you can get any idea about the pascal vs Maxwell efficiency difference:

    Titan X:
    6.144 Teraflops:
    336.5 gb/s
    88% performance of 1070 at 1080p:

    GTX 1070:
    5.78 teraflops
    256 gb/s
    100% performance:

    pascal is ~20% more efficient per teraflop
    pascal is ~50% more efficient per gb/s

    Now for the 1060 vs 980:

    4.61 teraflops
    224 gb/s

    3.97 tera flops
    192 gb/s:

    gtx 1060 "Translated" to maxwell terms:
    4.764 teraflops
    288 gb/s

    Put another way, the 1070 has 94% of the treaflops the titan x has, and 76% of the memory bandwidth, but the 1070 wins by just over 10%. The 1060 has 86% of the teraflops of the titan x, and 85% of the memory bandwidth, and it should beat the 980 by maybe 5%.

    And 6gb memory is certainly nice. Beats the 980, and ties the 980 ti, which I remind you was a $600 card 2 months ago.

    Really a reat card if nothing goes wrong and if it actually sells for $250. Really good for 1080p60, maybe overkill in a few games, almost enough for 1440p.
  • webdoctors - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    Great card, doesn't make sense to buy any card in the 200-300 price range until benchmarks are released next week and its up for sale. I need to replace my GTX660 and this seems perfect.

    Depending on the State taxes, its probably the same to buy an AMD card on Amazon and/or a NVIDIA card from NewEgg, as for me there's Amazon sales tax but no Newegg sales tax.
  • kenansadhu - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    I hope this means the new 1060M will be as fast as 980M, and will come out in sub $1000 notebooks.
  • sharath.naik - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    I would have said amd is in serous trouble here. As this card is better than rx480. But for one detail mentioned. No sli connector? What does that mean? No sli setip with this card?
  • Murloc - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    why would anyone do a SLI with this card?
    Just buy a 1070 or 1080 instead, avoid the multicard issues, and spare heat and power.
  • Audiophizile - Saturday, July 9, 2016 - link

    This. Multicard is garbage.
  • darkich - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link

    ate those FLOPS numbers single or double precision?
  • Audiophizile - Sunday, July 10, 2016 - link

    If this can beat a 480 in real world gaming AMD is in trouble. I'd like hope its dx12 and dx11 performance equal out to 480 or slightly above so we don't lose AMD as an option. If 1070 and 1080 cards are anything to go by we'll have AIB(better cooling) cards at $20 above msrp which would directly compete with 480 AIB. The shame is AMD not releasing cards to compete with the 1070/1080.
  • ACE76 - Monday, July 11, 2016 - link

    They are releasing cards to compete with the 1080/1070...end of the year with Vega...I'm glad they aren't releasing products at the same time.
  • techk1210 - Wednesday, August 3, 2016 - link

    seems very interesting card

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now