GTX1060 or GTX970

Swegallo63

Reputable
Jul 28, 2016
16
0
4,510
Hello Forum Users 😀

I'm building a PC very soon and was set with a GTX 970 (As it fit my budget perfectly). But I found out there is competition, with a $100 cheaper price tag. The GTX 1060, Judging by the Benchmarks and reviews this card is stacking up close to a 980 and Outrunning the 970 with a slim margin.

But it suffers from 500-600 less CUDA Cores the GTX 970. I intend record and play games such as CS:GO and the finish that off with rendering out my footage in Sony Vegas Pro 13. Which I know depends on the GPU.

So my question is should I Grab a 970 and have slightly slower framerates but Better rendering times? To hopefully go for a Dual SLI with it down the track.

Or should I lose out on the Rendering times and Grab better framerates? (Which means I would have to wait longer to get better cards in the future.)

So is the 1060 Worth it or Should I stick with the 970? Thank you!
 
Solution
Vegas Pro in general favors OCL to speed GPU rendering and even then, the best times can be achieved using the Main Concept AVC codec but it only supports GPU accel (rendering) with older cards (GTX 970 is NOT one of them).

Using the RX 480, I can render the Sony Red Car benchmark in 27 seconds with the XDCAM codec but file is larger than with other codecs. With the Asus GTX 1060, it takes 40 seconds.

If rendering speeds are of utmost importance then go w/AMD. Else, the GTX 1060 is awesome, runs cooler, uses less power and produces less heat and is quieter.

I'm currently doing a comparo video including these two as well as GTX 970 but will take some time to put up.


the 1060 is quite a bit faster than a 970, roughly 20% faster


also you cant compare cuda cores between different architectures 1 to 1

the 970 may have more, but they could be a lot slower
 




Is there any site that you know of the has some rendering benchmarks? Thanks if so is 1060 the better option?
 
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1771?vs=1743

Not only has some game benchmarks, but also some non-gaming benchmarks...which show the 1060 ahead of the 970.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_900_series

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_10_series

Obviously, the tweaking nVidia did to go from the Keplar to Pascal architecture paid off. Despite the "lower" CUDA core count you mentioned, the 1060 has better processing capability: 3,855 GFLOPS single-precision & 120 GFLOPS double-precision (vs. 3,494 & 109 for the 970). About the only area you might have to worry about is the memory bandwidth (192 GB/s for the 1060 vs. 196 "+28" for the 970).
 
your question should be GTX1060 or the RX480. the GTX970 should be out of the picture. so yer go for the GTX1060. it should be par or faster than the GTX980 and uses less power too and for the most part cheaper but it doesn't have sli support. which if you ask me. i never like the idea of 2 video card. too much software problem the update is always slow and sometime it doesn't even work for some games. so if anything go for the RX480 which will support crossfire (if you still want 2 video card) or go for the GTX1060. both are very powerful video card which should play everything today and even tomorrow.
 
Vegas Pro in general favors OCL to speed GPU rendering and even then, the best times can be achieved using the Main Concept AVC codec but it only supports GPU accel (rendering) with older cards (GTX 970 is NOT one of them).

Using the RX 480, I can render the Sony Red Car benchmark in 27 seconds with the XDCAM codec but file is larger than with other codecs. With the Asus GTX 1060, it takes 40 seconds.

If rendering speeds are of utmost importance then go w/AMD. Else, the GTX 1060 is awesome, runs cooler, uses less power and produces less heat and is quieter.

I'm currently doing a comparo video including these two as well as GTX 970 but will take some time to put up.
 
Solution