GTX 1060 vs RX 580 discussion, Expert advice needed?

[nottheaveragejoe]

Hello so this might be a little long post. The cards I am talking about here are both Gigabyte Auros cards. And I am also talking about the GTX 1060 9 GBPS version.

Prices are around the same...

To start things off I am listing the differences between these two cards. These are the ones that I am aware of,

1)GTX 1060 has a 192 bit memory bus and RX 580 has a 256 bit memory bus.
2)RX 580 is slightly better in Dx 12 titles.
3)Vram difference 6GB vs 8GB.
4)RX 580 consumes more power.

And I will list the reasons to buy gtx 1060.

1)Nvidia game works. I know gtx 1060's fps are little behind the RX 580. But I think game works like MFAA can compensate this little gap. Plus Nvidia contain fast sync, adapative vsync technologies.
2)I have never owned a gtx card in my life and I am sort of an enthusiasts when it come to computers. So I would like to have the experience of having one.
3)RX 580 is an overclocked 480 (as far as i am aware of) so I think there would be very little overclocking headroom left. So overclocked 1060 would beat a rx 580( i am not sure)?
4)I own a R9 270X and this card is very noising and comparatively runs hotter. And not having a way to force vsync is really a headache.
5)Cuda cores wil benefit in a little video editing.

Reasons to buy RX 580

1) Is slightly better than gtx 1060
2) Better performance in vulkan and dx12 based games.
3)256 bit memory bus give better performance.

I have read some stuff on the internet I would like some clearing on. So feel free to correct me here.
1)AMD driver support is better than Nvidia. Meaning nvidia is leaving their older cards with no support.
2) Right now rx 580 has the upper hand in dx12 but future nvidia updates would fix this.

My computer system,
i7 4790
8GB DDR3 RAM 1600mhz
Gigabyte H97 Gaming 3
CPU Water cooler
Seasonic g750 psu
1tb 7200rpm hard drive
Win10 pro
The resolution I game on is 1080p

*I would like to remind that I am not a fanboy, I dont give a crap which card wins. I just want the better product for the money I spend.

So what do you think? What should I buy?

Thank you very much for your time nice people. Have a good day

 

[Karadjgne]

Technically you can't compare amd to nvidia. The processing chip (gpu) works quite differently for the two types so memory buss and even exact memory size is kind of a moot point for the most part.
Things like Cuda cores are debatable as that's entirely dependent on the software used for editing. Sony Vegas works far better on Amd cards than it does on nvidia and really hasn't supported nvidia since the 500 series. Autocad does far better on nvidia cards, using Cuda cores far more effectively than what the amd cards can supply. So if productivity is a major factor, what works best with what brand should weigh heavily in the decision.
Amd cards use more power and produce more heat, this you know, so case airflow and psu size can be a factor.
Amd uses freesync technology, which is far cheaper on monitors than G-Sync and works almost the same, but physX is nvidia proprietary and works in concert with the gpu, Havoc is what amd uses to simulate physX and works entirely through the cpu, so that's a consideration if you use a lot of heavy physX titles as it'll be easier on the cpu overall.

There is no best. Both cards work great for 1080p and have no issues maxing out most games, including AAA titles, but this is also dependent on the game itself as some respond better to amd, some nvidia, it's almost a 50/50 split as to who wins, but the actual win is by @10fps or less, and really doesn't mean anything at all as long as minimum frames are above the monitor refresh. If in one game you get 90-150fps on Amd and 100-140fps on nvidia, it's still well beyond 60fps so the results are identical.

Overall figure on the Rx580 8gb being the same card as a gtx1060 6gb for 1080p/60Hz. It generally boils down to price, looks, and matches with things like software and monitors.

 

[nottheaveragejoe]

Technically you can't compare amd to nvidia. The processing chip (gpu) works quite differently for the two types so memory buss and even exact memory size is kind of a moot point for the most part.
Things like Cuda cores are debatable as that's entirely dependent on the software used for editing. Sony Vegas works far better on Amd cards than it does on nvidia and really hasn't supported nvidia since the 500 series. Autocad does far better on nvidia cards, using Cuda cores far more effectively than what the amd cards can supply. So if productivity is a major factor, what works best with what brand should weigh heavily in the decision.
Amd cards use more power and produce more heat, this you know, so case airflow and psu size can be a factor.
Amd uses freesync technology, which is far cheaper on monitors than G-Sync and works almost the same, but physX is nvidia proprietary and works in concert with the gpu, Havoc is what amd uses to simulate physX and works entirely through the cpu, so that's a consideration if you use a lot of heavy physX titles as it'll be easier on the cpu overall.

There is no best. Both cards work great for 1080p and have no issues maxing out most games, including AAA titles, but this is also dependent on the game itself as some respond better to amd, some nvidia, it's almost a 50/50 split as to who wins, but the actual win is by @10fps or less, and really doesn't mean anything at all as long as minimum frames are above the monitor refresh. If in one game you get 90-150fps on Amd and 100-140fps on nvidia, it's still well beyond 60fps so the results are identical.

Overall figure on the Rx580 8gb being the same card as a gtx1060 6gb for 1080p/60Hz. It generally boils down to price, looks, and matches with things like software and monitors.

First thank you very much for the reply. I am happy to find some knowledgeable about this stuff. Freesync, nah I dont want it. Fast sync or adaptive sync would do it. I think you can help me with the following questions as well,

1) The only thing which kept me back from buying gtx 1060 is the 192 bit memory bus thing. So I am thinking it doesnt's matter? Most folks on the internet keeps accentuating this fact and thus says rx 580 wins.

2)About vram... I think 6GB would do it for next few years. Eventhough rx 580 has 8gb I don't think It has the capability to handle all 8gbs? Correct me here if i am wrong.

3) Does the oc potential give an edge to the gtx 1060?

What you think of this stuff I heard?

1)AMD driver support is better than Nvidia. Meaning nvidia is leaving their older cards with no support.
2) Right now rx 580 has the upper hand in dx12 but future nvidia updates would fix this.

edit: Its premiere I use for editing.

 

[Karadjgne]

1) the 2 brands do things a little different to get the same results. Nvidia uses less actual bandwidth but packs more into it, so can easily use a 192bit buss. This happened with the advent of the Maxwell cards, prior to them, it was all about bigger and faster. AMD just hasn't deviated from that and uses the memory buss less efficiently so needs the 256bit. But the results are the same, both well capable of well over 60fps minimums in the vast majority of games.
2) vram has been iffy and mostly just a selling point for years. Nvidia tried it with lower power cards adding vram and coming out with 4Gb versions that simply didn't have the power in a single card to come close to needing that much.

3) OC versions of amd cards are usually pretty close to the max of what the card itself is capable of, but in gaming terms, user OC doesn't do all that much. You might add 10-15fps on the top end, but again that's far over monitor limits, so is absolutely useless. You might see 5-7fps on minimum fps, which can help in some games, but with the power both cards can potentially provide, you'd still get no benefit for most games.
As one mod states, OC is a state of mind not a bunch of numbers. But yes, the nvidia cards can OC to greater extent over factory settings, but that's only because the factory settings are lower than the potential of the cards. Generally. You can usually get diddly for user OC on an Evga FTW as those settings are so close to max, for example.

1) difference of opinion. Historically nvidia has had far superior drivers. But nvidias core drivers are all the same for all its cards. The differences are game optimizations, bios updates etc. As for older cards, think. Back in the day, the gtx770 was a great card, only surpassed by the 780/780ti. Sli support has gone downhill in a handbasket with the power of the 1070/1080/1080ti, the 1060 doesn't even have sli option. So what's to support? The 770 is very dated now and ppl have moved on. And the drivers haven't changed. Just a few updates for win10 compatability and some minor game optimizations since the 770 can't handle the newest games too well, has limited vram at 3Gb so doesn't do well at higher resolutions and there's not much sli support being coded into the games, and almost none in DX12 as that's a mgpu platform (supposedly). So older cards are becoming moot. Who would buy a used 770 when a new 1050ti is not only slightly stronger, but cheaper?
2) who can say? There isn't a game I can think of that's pure DX12 with no DX11 option, and even a GT 720 is DX12 capable. As is, DX12 is severely under utilized and until the game devs really start using it, I'm guessing nvidia just doesn't want to sink a bunch of cash into fixing something that's not broke. Yet. DX11 is the current standard, DX12 is native only for win10, so until ppl stop using DX11 through win7 etc nvidia will still hold an edge there.

You say you want the best. There isn't one. Both cards are equitable. Team green has its drawbacks, but so does team red. Both have advantages in some areas. Both are more than capable of covering your needs.

Find out what premier uses better, and buy that one.