Last time I checked, the RX580 was a tad faster than a GTX1060 (which I use, and find to be very nice at 1080P gaming/general use!); this $169 deal on the RX580 would be a truly excellent economical mid-range card, now that Nvidia seems stubbornly determined to make $350 the new 'mid range'...
bottom right of your post has some options for you. "update this" let's you edit the post. also buttons next to that. if you hover over them and one says "quick edit" and other says "full edit" either one let's you edit your post instead of making another one
...now that Nvidia seems stubbornly determined to make $350 the new 'mid range'...
Another way to consider it is that Nvidia shifted their product names for the RTX series, which makes the 2060 more a successor to the 1070. Looking at it that way, it's more a case of underwhelming performance gains from one generation to the next than an increase in price. The 2060 launched for a little less than the 1070 did back in 2016, and has some new hardware features that are as yet mostly unutilized, but on average, it tends to only be around 15-20% faster in current games, and has less VRAM which could potentially impact performance in the future. In all, those are pretty mediocre gains considering over 2 1/2 years have passed since the 1070 debuted.
There's another card that's supposed to be coming out very soon though, which should be a somewhat more direct successor to the 1060 6GB. The 1660 Ti will apparently lack the RTX features found in the new 20-series, and I suspect it's performance may fall a bit below that of a 1070. It should be a decent amount faster than an RX 580 or GTX 1060, but it remains to be seen how it will be priced. At $250 it could be a good value, though I suspect it may end up closer to $300, which depending on how it performs relative to a 1070 might not be so great.
And while AMD will have new mid-range cards coming eventually, there have recently been some rumors that they might have been pushed back to a fall release, rather than a summer release that many had been expecting. If that's the case, then Nvidia might not have much incentive to price their new cards all that competitively.
I think the old R9 290X and Vega give people a bad impression of all AMD cards. The Polaris based cards (RX 400 and RX 500 series) don't usually run that hot. Polaris is a great architecture who's only real fault is not scaling up past their top end RX 590's performance. Even though the architecture tops out at mid range, they aren't bad cards. They use a little more power than their NVidia competition, but you often get more performance for the price... when they are selling at MSRP and not being snatched up by every crypto miner under the sun... but now they are WELL below MSRP making them fantastic value. I run an MSI Armor RX 470 and I've seen 70C only under a full synthetic stress test. During gaming it stays in the 50s to 60s.