Nvidia Says GeForce GTX 1060 Will Outperform GTX 980, Founders Edition Will Cost $299

[IInuyasha74]

Any word on when the laptop versions of these cards come out?

Not yet, but that will be interesting to see.

 

[Arch Angel]

20 more dollars with 980+ performance instead of -970.. AMD JUST GOT SMASHED AGAIN!

 

[n0ns3ns3]

I don't see how anyone is surprised with the claims and pricing of this card. My predictions were 100%, a tad-wee-bit better performance than the GTX 980 for $250-$300. I don't think that custom cards are going to be selling for $250. We finally have supply catching up with the 1070, and new custom cards still cost far more money than MSRP. I will expect above $300 for custom cards at first since our 1070s are above $400.

Hopefully I'm not the only one realizing Nvidia's tactics. They are upping price/performance of their cards, but they are also upping price. GTX 960 was a much cheaper card. The GTX 700 to 900 series was a much bigger jump in price/performance than the GTX 900 series to 1000. Plus the 900 series decreased power consumption but it is the same for Pascal.

How can people not realize already that:

GTX 1080 greater than 980Ti
GTX 1070 = 980Ti
GTX 1060 = 980

You bet the 1050 will = the 970. If you never realized, the performance gap between the 950 and 960 is very small; so is the gap between the 970 and 980. In this same way, the performance gap between the 1060 and 1070 will be the most significant jump again.

I'm just saying, though, this is not at all a blow to the RX 480. Cards are priced according to their performance.

What scares me is next year the GTX 1160 may be $350. The 1170 May be $500. Nvidia will make everything seem all pretty by increasing price/performance yet people seem to forget they are increasing the price.

Not entirely correct.
There are already announced 1070 cards below 400$ MSRP (Gigabyte for example).
I've got mine for 439 - EVGA's official pricing for the SC.
And as the supply will catch up, partners will ship more affordable cards at +-380$. there is no reason for them to make "simple" cards now since they can put the limited supply of GPUs in more expensive "higher tier" designs.
Same will go for the 1060. 250-300 range is sensitive to every dollar, so we will see most of the cards priced at around 250-270. Making 300$ 1060 will be risky since there is a 80$ jump to the "simple" 1070 that offers much more performance.

 

[clee1013]

Let the wars begin.
RIP AMD

Not sure why "RIP AMD".

AMD's 480 runs almost as fast and is around $100 cheaper.

What? No it isn't. The 8 GB RX 480 is only about $10 less expensive than OEM GTX 1060.

OEM GTX 1060 is FE version = $299 ( this is what nvidia listed for their reference card) so $299-$229 (this is actual msrp listing for reference 8gb rx480)= $10?

 

[IInuyasha74]

Let the wars begin.
RIP AMD

Not sure why "RIP AMD".

AMD's 480 runs almost as fast and is around $100 cheaper.

What? No it isn't. The 8 GB RX 480 is only about $10 less expensive than OEM GTX 1060.

OEM GTX 1060 is FE version = $299 ( this is what nvidia listed for their reference card) so $299-$229 (this is actual msrp listing for reference 8gb rx480)= $10?

What Nvidia directly told every reputable Tech News site in the world is that the Founder's Edition will be $299, and OEM cards from third-party board designers will be $249. This is just $10 more than the MSRP for 8 GB RX 480 GPUs, which are listed at $240 by AMD. There were several rumor sites that said the 8 GB AMD RX 480 would be $229, all of which were wrong.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-480-polaris-10,4616.html

 

[Onus]

Since there are GTX950 models with no PCIe power cables (I have one), I'd like to see if nVidia puts out a GTX1050 that doesn't need one either, and what its performance will be.
Maybe a board partner can fix the RX480, and its price can settle where it belongs, otherwise it looks like this round will go to nVidia.
That's kind of a shame; I was impressed when the GTX750Ti leapfrogged the HD7750, and was hoping AMD would similarly hop over the GTX750Ti, but I'm not optimistic right now.

 

[InvalidError]

What scares me is next year the GTX 1160 may be $350. The 1170 May be $500. Nvidia will make everything seem all pretty by increasing price/performance yet people seem to forget they are increasing the price.

A 10-20% increase in price for over 60% more performance is fair enough. What bothers me the most personally is what that spells out for the sub-$200 market: if the GTX1060 sells for $250+, the GTX1050 will probably be $200+. Will Nvidia release a GTX1040 with performance similar to a GTX960 to accommodate the ~$150 price point or give up on serving GPUs below $200?

 

[Brian_R170]

I was considering the RX480, but the 1060 appears to offer both better performance and lower power consumption. It's worth it to me even with a $60 premium at launch. I will wait for some reviews before I choose, though.

 

[Marius Cirsta]

OK so maybe the word launch wasn't used but why didn't we get any reviews of the card if they're launching it so soon. Yes AMD announced their cards quite some time ago but I was expecting a launch from nVidia today. They announced the this card quite some time ago so today was what, I for one didn't get it.
I really disagree with you on the open source Linux drivers, they don't really offer the performance of the binary ones but they're getting rather good and since I don't do Linux gaming the open source ones are fine for me.
Call me a fanboy but I do appreciate AMD providing open source drivers for Linux rather then relying on others to do it like nVidia with Nouveau.
Maybe you're OK with the nVidia blobs but I'm not ( and I'm not the only one )

Nvidia never announced this card till today. Leaks and rumors - that what you've read.
AMD's NDA was lifted on the product launch day. So no reviews were available before that. Only leaks and rumors.
As for the binary/open source drivers - I couldn't care less as a consumer. There are tons of proprietary tech that i'm not happy about, but it's up to owner to decide what to do with it. At least Nvidia do provide a decent support for their products. I'm long past Gentoo build. I want things just work today. A computer is a tool. And my interest in any platform is full usability. Once SteamOS will have enough titles, I'll go back to linux as my main OS.

I don't like binay blobs because they lack flexibility. They always have to be ported to the latest kernel, X and Mesa ( btw NV frequently drops older cards from their latest Linux binaries ), there's no way to patch or fix them and they don't usually allow for the lastest features when these are added ( like Wayland ).
I've been very happy with how the AMD open source driver for my HD5670 worked these years and I've no intention to switch to the NV blob which although it worked seemed to be more of a pain in the ass. Maybe having an open source driver just makes me feel better I dunno but I'll take that over nVidia's closed source stuff anyday.
I'm also not the only one to think like this because some guys actually reversed engineered the nVidia stuff and we now have Nouveau . It's not about compiling yourself like in Gentoo it's about the elegance of the solution and stuff like that ...
Btw if you don't care and just want something that works you can just use Windows or OS X which actually do the job too. I'm using Linux over these for the same reason I want an open source driver and not some binary shit ( no matter how good it is ).
When and if nVidia will provide an open source Linux driver I'll happily buy their cards but till then no thanks. What AMD offers is just fine for me and I have no reason to get an nVidia card.

 

[megajynx]

This has been a very exciting year for the GPU market! I guess the next question is where the 1050 (GTX? Ti?) will land in contrast to the 480 and 1060, and what AMD's next reveal will be. Going to guess that the 1050 will sandwich the 480 between the 1060. Another note: stock boost at 1.7Ghz? Insane.

 

[TechyInAZ]

What scares me is next year the GTX 1160 may be $350. The 1170 May be $500. Nvidia will make everything seem all pretty by increasing price/performance yet people seem to forget they are increasing the price.

A 10-20% increase in price for over 60% more performance is fair enough. What bothers me the most personally is what that spells out for the sub-$200 market: if the GTX1060 sells for $250+, the GTX1050 will probably be $200+. Will Nvidia release a GTX1040 with performance similar to a GTX960 to accommodate the ~$150 price point or give up on serving GPUs below $200?

If this is true, then AMD will pretty much own the sub $200 market which in my opinion is a good thing for the time being.

 

[cmi86]

Now lets see if it actually comes at the prices nvidia stated, it always seems that their stuff hits shelves more expensive than what they promised and the prices never really come down much.

 

[cmi86]

Also people need to stop saying the RX-480 is on par with a 970.. The $239 bone stock reference RX-480 @ roughly ~1200mhz trades blows with a $329 factory OC 970 which is nearly 980 performance on its own. So reference to reference the RX-480 smashes the GTX-970. I fully expect to see AIB 480's in the 1350-1450 range surpassing 980 performance with room still for user OC. I'm not saying it will beat the 1060 because we havent seen the 1060 or AIB 480's but people need to be realistic about the 480's performance instead of downplaying it for their own brand loyalties.

 

[chemy]

Right now I don't totally trust in Nvidia even when I love their cards, but it's weird the way they do things, I know AMD has a huge advantage in the market with the consoles market and other stuff, even with the fact AMD produce more than CPUs and GPUs, but I think nVidia should try to be more for the gamers/consumers than the investors.

 

[n0ns3ns3]

Also people need to stop saying the RX-480 is on par with a 970.. The $239 bone stock reference RX-480 @ roughly ~1200mhz trades blows with a $329 factory OC 970 which is nearly 980 performance on its own. So reference to reference the RX-480 smashes the GTX-970. I fully expect to see AIB 480's in the 1350-1450 range surpassing 980 performance with room still for user OC. I'm not saying it will beat the 1060 because we havent seen the 1060 or AIB 480's but people need to be realistic about the 480's performance instead of downplaying it for their own brand loyalties.

1250 MHz brand new and shiny 480 trades blows with stock 1100MHz 3 years old card. What an amazing achievement. BTW, the 970 was on amazon for 240 (some asus strix model) last week.
Which can overclock to 1500MHZ and is more power efficient despite 2 times larger transistors (28nm vs 14nm).
So relax, no one with normal means have succeeded to go far byond 1400MHz on 480. Even with water cooling.
So you can expect that pink unicorns will piss the rainbows over AMD, but reality is harsh my dear fanboy.
And numbers do not lie. You can check the AMD sales. Most people shopping for video cards are not complete idiots.
OC there are few idiots that keeping some sort of sales for AMD in GPU and CPU arenas .

 

[turkey3_scratch]

What scares me is next year the GTX 1160 may be $350. The 1170 May be $500. Nvidia will make everything seem all pretty by increasing price/performance yet people seem to forget they are increasing the price.

A 10-20% increase in price for over 60% more performance is fair enough. What bothers me the most personally is what that spells out for the sub-$200 market: if the GTX1060 sells for $250+, the GTX1050 will probably be $200+. Will Nvidia release a GTX1040 with performance similar to a GTX960 to accommodate the ~$150 price point or give up on serving GPUs below $200?

That's what concerns me the most, the price increasing is leaving out the lower budget sector. Nvidia didn't even go below the GTX 950 for the 900 series. The 700 series went all the way down to a 710 even. Who knows, what if we don't end up seeing a GTX 1050? It's a possibility that they may try to make more money by completely leaving the budget sector alone so people who want to buy Nvidia have to jump up to the next level of performance.

Which, frankly, is very disappointing because the necessity to own a high-end GPU these days is really going downwards. Our GPUs are becoming more powerful at a faster rate than our games are demanding. For instance, in the past people used to talk about how well high-end GPUs would handle 1080p. Now they're not even benchmarking 1080p, they are benchmarking 4K now for high-end GPUs. If the trend continues, it won't go any further than 8K since it will make no difference to the human eye anyway (and 8K is probably a solid 10 years down the line).

Most all GPUs, even low-end ones, can max out 720p. In the past when 480p was still a thing, long ago, high-end GPUs were benchmarked for 720p. I think we are gradually reaching that point where even low-end GPUs will max out 1080p fine, and 5 years down the line out low-end GPUs will probably handle 4K more than enough, and really only a $150 GPU will be necessary, and $600 GPUs for the elite gamers only who want 200FPS.

 

[n0ns3ns3]

That's what concerns me the most, the price increasing is leaving out the lower budget sector. Nvidia didn't even go below the GTX 950 for the 900 series. The 700 series went all the way down to a 710 even. Who knows, what if we don't end up seeing a GTX 1050? It's a possibility that they may try to make more money by completely leaving the budget sector alone so people who want to buy Nvidia have to jump up to the next level of performance.

Which, frankly, is very disappointing because the necessity to own a high-end GPU these days is really going downwards. Our GPUs are becoming more powerful at a faster rate than our games are demanding. For instance, in the past people used to talk about how well high-end GPUs would handle 1080p. Now they're not even benchmarking 1080p, they are benchmarking 4K now for high-end GPUs. If the trend continues, it won't go any further than 8K since it will make no difference to the human eye anyway (and 8K is probably a solid 10 years down the line).

Most all GPUs, even low-end ones, can max out 720p. In the past when 480p was still a thing, long ago, high-end GPUs were benchmarked for 720p. I think we are gradually reaching that point where even low-end GPUs will max out 1080p fine, and 5 years down the line out low-end GPUs will probably handle 4K more than enough, and really only a $150 GPU will be necessary, and $600 GPUs for the elite gamers only who want 200FPS.

that because iGPUs have reached the level where there is no place left for nvidia's x10, x40 cards.
And they didn't went below 950 because there was a 750ti for under 100$. Same will happen here. the older parts will fulfill the lowest market needs.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

That's what concerns me the most, the price increasing is leaving out the lower budget sector. Nvidia didn't even go below the GTX 950 for the 900 series. The 700 series went all the way down to a 710 even. Who knows, what if we don't end up seeing a GTX 1050? It's a possibility that they may try to make more money by completely leaving the budget sector alone so people who want to buy Nvidia have to jump up to the next level of performance.

Which, frankly, is very disappointing because the necessity to own a high-end GPU these days is really going downwards. Our GPUs are becoming more powerful at a faster rate than our games are demanding. For instance, in the past people used to talk about how well high-end GPUs would handle 1080p. Now they're not even benchmarking 1080p, they are benchmarking 4K now for high-end GPUs. If the trend continues, it won't go any further than 8K since it will make no difference to the human eye anyway (and 8K is probably a solid 10 years down the line).

Most all GPUs, even low-end ones, can max out 720p. In the past when 480p was still a thing, long ago, high-end GPUs were benchmarked for 720p. I think we are gradually reaching that point where even low-end GPUs will max out 1080p fine, and 5 years down the line out low-end GPUs will probably handle 4K more than enough, and really only a $150 GPU will be necessary, and $600 GPUs for the elite gamers only who want 200FPS.

that because iGPUs have reached the level where there is no place left for nvidia's x10, x40 cards.
And they didn't went below 950 because there was a 750ti for under 100$. Same will happen here. the older parts will fulfill the lowest market needs.

Well if they would improve their x10 and x40 cards they would easily beat iGPUs. They haven't been updated for 3 years.

 

[n0ns3ns3]

Improve to what level ? why to go that far if they simply sell an old model for ~100$ ?
the x10 and x40 are pointless. They were made not for gaming, but for HTPCs or better output options.
There is no need for this today. iGPU is more effective and efficient solution here. So why to invest in development of that low end when you can sell older cards instead. Remember, 28nm fabs are still there ... TSCM selling their capacities very cheap compared to 16nm. And when there will be enough capacities on 16nm, nvidia will sell you 1050 for 100$ since it will be much cheaper to produce by than for few reasons.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

Improve to what level ? why to go that far if they simply sell an old model for ~100$ ?
the x10 and x40 are pointless. They were made not for gaming, but for HTPCs or better output options.
There is no need for this today. iGPU is more effective and efficient solution here. So why to invest in development of that low end when you can sell older cards instead. Remember, 28nm fabs are still there ... TSCM selling their capacities very cheap compared to 16nm. And when there will be enough capacities on 16nm, nvidia will sell you 1050 for 100$ since it will be much cheaper to produce by than for few reasons.

Then why did they make the GT 740 in the first place?

 

[n0ns3ns3]

they tried and failed. it is does not pay off to make those 50$ cards. think about BOM, transportation, sales margins. than add an R&D resources.
So nvidia will make a few cents from every card in best case. It just does not worth the effort. They have to battle with this:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9960/intel-for-mainstream-gamers-our-igps-are-equivalent-to-discrete-gpus
And iGPUs are in advantage - they do not need vram, pcb, other components. It's just a few transistors added to a CPU - very cost effective. both intel and AMD pushed out nvidia from that market with offering this iGPUs

 

[Aspiring techie]

So this won't kill the RX 480 like the rumors said. Still, the only thing keeping it from mauling it is price.

Why is Nvidia jacking up the prices on all their skus this generation? Is it because manufacturing costs are up or because they want to milk their temporary sovereignty for all its worth?

 

[n0ns3ns3]

So this won't kill the RX 480 like the rumors said. Still, the only thing keeping it from mauling it is price.

Why is Nvidia jacking up the prices on all their skus this generation? Is it because manufacturing costs are up or because they want to milk their temporary sovereignty for all its worth?

Because they can that's how "free" market works.
and they are and will be competitive in the long run. AMD is the beaten boy each time.

 

[InvalidError]

Nvidia didn't even go below the GTX 950 for the 900 series. The 700 series went all the way down to a 710 even.

There is a GTX940: that's probably what the GTX750 would have been called if Nvidia hadn't decided to market their entry-level Maxwell chip as a 700-series GPU to avoid making their other GPUs seem outdated before the 950-980 launched.

 

[turkey3_scratch]

Nvidia didn't even go below the GTX 950 for the 900 series. The 700 series went all the way down to a 710 even.

There is a GTX940: that's probably what the GTX750 would have been called if Nvidia hadn't decided to market their entry-level Maxwell chip as a 700-series GPU to avoid making their other GPUs seem outdated before the 950-980 launched.

Not a GTX 940 for consumer purchase, though. Only OEM machines I suppose.