![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
OutOfPhase
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 11, 2005
- Messages
- 5,752
My experience is that when I get it to two choices, whenever I pick the lesser (but cheaper) I end up wishing I had gotten the upscale version almost immediately.
Skip a meal out or two, and get something which will make you not second guess yourself as relentlessly.
Skip a meal out or two, and get something which will make you not second guess yourself as relentlessly.
+1 all the way, though I am thoroughly happy with the RX470 that I chose over the 1060.
See Choose A Video Card - PCPartPicker
I'd also get a 6GB. But perhaps the Gigabyte - Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1060 6GB WINDFORCE OC 6G Video Card (GV-N1060WF2OC-6GD) - PCPartPicker - $250
Review (Reddit) -
I'd also get a 6GB. But perhaps the Gigabyte - Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1060 6GB WINDFORCE OC 6G Video Card (GV-N1060WF2OC-6GD) - PCPartPicker - $250
Review (Reddit) -
Just go with whichever aftermarket model of the GTX 1060 6GB card that is the cheapest. Go with anything from EVGA, ASUS, MSI, Gigabyte, or even Zotac or PNY. I would avoid reference model cards (heat and noise) and the 3GB model (VRAM running out with max settings).
skeeder
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2004
- Messages
- 1,315
I got the Asus dual model. Very nice card. It's currently around $280.
The 6gb is a no brainer. One my rig with wolf stein new order, it uses 2800mb of VRAM and that's not even 1080p!
I'd look at the gigabyte, or the evga 1060sc model. Both are the $250 price.
The 6gb is a no brainer. One my rig with wolf stein new order, it uses 2800mb of VRAM and that's not even 1080p!
I'd look at the gigabyte, or the evga 1060sc model. Both are the $250 price.
skeeder
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2004
- Messages
- 1,315
Remember these cards automatically boost based on thermals and power. My Asus routinely hits 2000mhz on the core.
noobferguson
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2013
- Messages
- 463
I think this is why I automatically associate in my mind new card purchases with ramen for that week's meals.
skeeder
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2004
- Messages
- 1,315
Congrats on the card. Let us know how you like it.
Roberto Lequeux
n00b
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2016
- Messages
- 3
3GB is a very good idea, 3GB a bad move
1060 is a beast. worth the money and the PNY look elegance too.
skeeder
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2004
- Messages
- 1,315
Just a heads up, even though it only has a 6pin (that is a reference PCB), it will probably overclock really well. Without changing the power settings I've overclocked the boost on my card to about 100mhz (2100 mhz total) and the RAM (Still going up, ran out of time) was boosting to 8358mhz. My Asus is 6pin, and these are the settings I got to last night before I called it a night, it was hitting 72C on full load.
Hell, I don't remember overclocking EVER being this easy. (last time I did it it was a 8800GTS, but still)
HubDoubleDub
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2014
- Messages
- 78
Wait for the 1080 ti and go ham! 
arthur_tuxedo
Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2003
- Messages
- 558
Everyone says that, and everyone is wrong. There hasn't been a single review that has shown more than the 10% difference in performance you would expect from the difference in shader count, even in traditionally RAM-hungry games. Given the advances in compression techniques over last gen, it seems like 3 GB in the 1060 is effectively equal to the 4 GB in the 980.
Sure it's nice to have 6, but for such a massive increase in price? 260 vs 200 is a completely different category, yet performance remains in the same ballpark. If your budget allows for the 6 GB, go ahead, but the 3 GB 1060 is a great deal and doesn't deserve the dismissive attitude that it gets.
skeeder
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2004
- Messages
- 1,315
My battlefield 4 game, which I play TDM (so not the large maps) are already using on average 2.8GB of VRAM.
Pretty much 3GB isn't a smart idea unless you have a very tight budget.
Pretty much 3GB isn't a smart idea unless you have a very tight budget.
Honestly at this point I do not feel comfortable with anything less than 6GB VRam, let alone 3GB. If I were buying a GPU now I wouldn't go less than 8GB; 3GB would be completely out of the question for me no matter what resolution I play at.
Bromeister
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2016
- Messages
- 175
If you are at the 3GB pricepoint youre better off with an RX 480 4GB. For 1060 6GB my preferred choice would be the evga 1060 SSC.
I have the EVGA 1060 SSC, pretty nice card but I would definitely buy the MSI gaming over it. No backplate on the EVGA either.
Bromeister
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2016
- Messages
- 175
EVGA may release a backplate which would put them at the same price. How's msi's customer service?
arthur_tuxedo
Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2003
- Messages
- 558
And yet the difference between the two 1060 versions remains narrower than the price gap. Sure, you might have to turn down a setting or two, especially with next year's games, but why is it considered normal and expected to lower a couple of settings on a less expensive card due to a lower clock speed or fewer shaders but absolutely unforgivable when it's because of less VRAM?
MSI is next in line customer service wise. Very good. Also, the warranty is serialized which means its transferable to a new owner. They also support heatsink removal.
skeeder
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2004
- Messages
- 1,315
Part of the reason is the 1060 3GB has less CUDA cores and RU...its a stripped down version of the 6GB model masquerading as something it simply isn't.
Thats why it has received such criticism.
arthur_tuxedo
Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2003
- Messages
- 558
I'll never understand why people care about stuff like this. To me, what matters is:
1) Price
2) Performance
3) Nothing else
The 1060 3 GB represents a value proposition that's miles better than a used 970 or 980 and handily beats the RX 480 4 GB in almost every game, yet is universally dismissed because 3 GB "isn't enough" for modern games from a philosophical standpoint, even though the performance in modern games shows that it clearly is.
1) Price
2) Performance
3) Nothing else
The 1060 3 GB represents a value proposition that's miles better than a used 970 or 980 and handily beats the RX 480 4 GB in almost every game, yet is universally dismissed because 3 GB "isn't enough" for modern games from a philosophical standpoint, even though the performance in modern games shows that it clearly is.
Chapeau
Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2016
- Messages
- 753
6GB for sure!
The practical real world price difference is pretty low. That's like skipping a lunch or dinner out once at some point during the several years that you'll own the card...
For me - the brand doesn't matter all that much. At the point where you're sending something back for RMA your day has been ruined anyway right...
The practical real world price difference is pretty low. That's like skipping a lunch or dinner out once at some point during the several years that you'll own the card...
For me - the brand doesn't matter all that much. At the point where you're sending something back for RMA your day has been ruined anyway right...
skeeder
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2004
- Messages
- 1,315
Have you looked at videos online? the 3GB model shows micro-stuttering NOT FOUND on the 4GB 980, 3.5GB 970 or the 480/470 series.
3GB isn't enough memory today--especially if you rob it of its bus speed giving it only a 192 bit bus. If it had been a 256 bit it may not have microstutter since it could unload and reload textures into the VRAM quicker.
Last night I played Wolfenstein TNWO, I hit 4096MB of VRAM @ 1680x1050 (of course this is at ULTRA). So...no...3GB isn't enough today if your wanting for ultra/high textures. If that card was priced more around $150, I wouldn't have an issue with it, but it isn't THAT much more to get a RX480/470 or even the 1060 6GB which is much more future "proof" than a 3GB model.
If $200 is your hard limit your better off with an used 970/980.
My 2 cents.
arthur_tuxedo
Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2003
- Messages
- 558
Micro-stuttering is/was an issue with SLI / Crossfire. What you're describing is plain old stuttering from needing to swap out textures. It only occurs in a few games, and even then turning down a couple of settings slightly will fix it. You'll still be running higher settings than a 970, btw. In fact, with Pascal's more efficient compression techniques, 3 GB on the 1060 is effectively MORE memory than 3.5 on the 970. The 1060 is superior in every way and can be had brand new with factory warranty for the same price as a used 970, yet people still recommend the objectively inferior card because "OMG not having enough memory is the WORST THING EVER!" The enthusiast community has lost our collective minds when it comes to VRAM.
Why are you so triggered about one person recommending a GTX 970/980 instead? Plus, if we're "enthusiasts" then why would we settle for less with the 3GB card opposed to the bigger and better 6GB card? This is Hardforum after all...
Anyway...most people are recommending getting the 6GB version of the GTX 1060 over the 3GB version which entirely makes sense. There are some games already surpassing 3GB VRam at 1080p and will continue increasing over the next couple years which is usually how long most "enthusiasts" keep a video card. I'd rather spend an extra $30-$40 to have peace of mind of not having to worry about VRam for the duration I have the card.
arthur_tuxedo
Gawd
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2003
- Messages
- 558
Because there's a massive price difference and the 1060 3G is a much better value than a used 970 or 980.
It's more like $60 from what I've seen, but even $40 represents a different price tier, and in past generations was the difference between a normal and Ti or X card with bigger performance gaps than the one between the 1060 6G and 3G.
If $200 is your budget, the 1060 3G is a great value, yet every reviewer and the entire enthusiast community ignores it out of a misguided feeling that a memory bottleneck makes a card unacceptable when no one bats an eye at bigger drops in performance for any other reason. It's illogical and represents bad advice.
I have EVGA GeForce GTX 1060 SC GAMING. This is a fantastic card. It's super quiet, cool, efficient and pretty.
EVGA GeForce GTX 1060 SC GAMING
If I were you I would get MSI.
EVGA GeForce GTX 1060 SC GAMING
If I were you I would get MSI.
So what you're saying is that you're right and every reviewer and the entire enthusiast crowd are the ones who are wrong? Okay.....
skeeder
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2004
- Messages
- 1,315
Actually most reviews I've seen on Youtube don't indicate the 1060 3GB is a bad deal. It doesn't beat the 6GB version, but it can match it with some overclocking on most titles.
If I was, say, on a budget and focused on 1080P gaming only, its a great card for that, but if you play your cards right a 6GB might come around for $239 (which is the lowest I've seen, a gigabyte). I don't feel that it represents the best 'value' in the current market.
FedericoUY
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2016
- Messages
- 154
This cards are no sli capable right?
That is correct but may work with EMA.