Nvidia's Kepler cards suddenly got much slower after Maxwell release. Have not seen similar on AMD.
Not if you look at frame times. The GTX 1060 3GB suffers a lot more from stuttering than even the RX 470 4GB. Check ComputerBase's RAM test.And had you read the article, you'd know they took that into account... The 3GB still outperforms the AMD MOST of the time, and costs less/same still... As for whether the future will make 3GB not as reliable - we won't really know until the future arrives... But the article said they didn't think it was likely.You do know that 1060 3GB is not the same as 1060 6GB in terms of performance and spec while rx 480 4gb has the same exact spec as rx 480 8gb except for the memory. There are times where 1060 3gb dips below to rx 470/ 970 performance.
Again.... Had you read the article, you'd know that Steve took this into account when writing his article. The 3gb 1060 is still 10% better on average and costs the same... It's a no-brainerNot if you look at frame times. The GTX 1060 3GB suffers a lot more from stuttering than even the RX 470 4GB. Check ComputerBase's RAM test.
New cards cost around $150 if they are discrete - minimum.... And Steve included that category in his article.... If you can't afford one, maybe you shouldn't be reading this?Top Picks For EVERY Budget: "...costs just $400.."; "...who can complain with the current $400 asking price?"; "as little as $1400!'; etc. I only see prices here that are the equivalent to the prices that MOST people pay for their entire PC's! The problem with this story is that the description far from meets anyone's definition of "every budget". With the average wage floating around $26K a year, these prices are luxury expenses that most average families just cannot afford. We are not all upper middle, nor upper crust, wage home page earners, so the articles title is just about as misleading as you could possibly get. If you ever get around to writing an article based on the home page teaser that leads here, let the rest of us average wage earners know. THAT would be a helpful article!
Not even a mention of the large price premium for a G-sync monitor making the GTX 1060 potentially poor value for money for anyone buying a screen in the life of the card?
When did a G-sync monitor become necessary to have a smooth, stutter and tear-free gaming experience? It's a gimmick for those who don't know how to tweak their system.Not even a mention of the large price premium for a G-sync monitor making the GTX 1060 potentially poor value for money for anyone buying a screen in the life of the card?
"Nvidia is losing market share to AMD"While on vacation I've entered computer shops in Barcelona and London and new cards from AMD were nowhere to be found.There is such a big demand so nobody even expects prices to be at MSRP level, so Steven is right about price brackets. It's true that GTX 1080 has no competition, but in my opinion GTX 1060 3GB does not even compare to RX470 8GB and besides power consumption, R9 Fury Nano is a way better option than GTX 1070 mini and the future will show that.After some reading, my conclusion is that the wave of Nvidia supporting articles was triggered by the fact that Nvidia is losing market share to AMD.
So you didn't read the article then? The RX480 8GB is considerably more expensive to the point it's not really in the same price bracket, Hence why they went with the 1060 3GB.WOW,
you hacks actually did it - you picked the 3GB 1050Ti over the 8GB RX 480 that is allready beating even the 1060 in next gen APIs.
Kudos, ive put you in the same category as TomsHardware now.
Pffffffffff
Are you commenting on the right article? Because THIS article's title is "The Best Graphics Cards".Top Picks For EVERY Budget: "...costs just $400.."; "...who can complain with the current $400 asking price?"; "as little as $1400!'; etc. I only see prices here that are the equivalent to the prices that MOST people pay for their entire PC's! The problem with this story is that the description far from meets anyone's definition of "every budget". With the average wage floating around $26K a year, these prices are luxury expenses that most average families just cannot afford. We are not all upper middle, nor upper crust, wage home page earners, so the articles title is just about as misleading as you could possibly get. If you ever get around to writing an article based on the home page teaser that leads here, let the rest of us average wage earners know. THAT would be a helpful article!
Love it! But you forgot two categories:Way to go guys. We reached page 3 as of now because some are not satisfied that most of the cards recommended as of prices and availability are nvidia.
So to summarize everything Hardreset's comments. Here it is. Please dont argue. This is based from availability, prices, driver support, futureproofing, power, heat, dx11, dx 12, architecture.
The Best Graphics Cards 2016: Hardreset's top picks for every budget
Best Overall Graphics Card:
RX 480 8GB
Best Performance For Your Money
RX 480 8GB
Best Mainstream GPU
RX 480 4/8GB
Best Budget
RX 480 4/8GB
Best HTPC/Compact Card
RX 480 4/8Gb
Best Mobile GPU(s)
RX 480 4/8Gb
See you guys later
OC'd 980 Ti as good as a 1080? NO- this is a myth by jealous 980 Ti owners. Here's a very legit and thorough test of them by overclockersclub, both overclocked (yes, the 1080 oc's too).Buy a used 980 Ti.
Overclock it.
Same or better than 1080 performance.
Still, 1080 removes the hassle and outputs far less heat and consumes less power for what it provides, so.. your choice. But the 1080 Ti is coming out in a few months.. 1080 buyers are going to be upset. I'm returning mine.
"The 480 is just as strong as the 1060"You have got to be kidding me lol.
The 480 is just as strong as the 1060 with more VRAM for less money. But honestly, the Fury Nitro's selling for $300 are the real price/perf kings right now.
AMD's GPU and CPU Market Share Reported to Fall Further in Q1-I didn't hijack anything. It's not my fault Nvidia fanboys don't like anything that is not promoting Nvidia.
Except that this article has given Nvidia the recommendation for every category except budget - and that's only because Nvidia's 1050 isn't out yet...
So benchmarks are not proving anything? That's OK for me but keep it that way.
They do... but as I said, only benchmarks using the SAME card on the SAME title(s) with DIFFERENT drivers will actually prove if a card has "gotten" slower... You'd think that would be common sense...
No, we don't need that kind of test. Try to explain why GTX 780 3GB is slower on some games than GTX 960 2GB? Difference on raw processing power is huge.
Because the 960 is a newer card, with newer technology in it... so newer titles will leverage newer cards better... duh... let's try the same 2 cards on an older title and see who wins... duh... the 780...
What we DO know is they BOTH cream the equivalent AMD card....
AMD is way to go as AMD represents future and Nvidia past. Article is made by Nvidia biased writer, that has been proven many times. Only Nv*****s diagree with that fact.
At the rate AMD is going, they might not have much of a future - they can't compete with Nvidia with their GPUs nor can they compete with Intel on the CPU side.... Don't get me wrong, I WANT them to succeed, as competition can only be good - but alas, unlike you, I look at reality and it doesn't look so bright for AMD.
And sorry HardReset, the only people who believe your "fact" are AMD fanboys who keep losing in the present, and hold out for a win in the future - which doesn't have to be proven...
AMD is failing? What a joke.
They are powering all three console mfg's into the future and their GPU card range is doing just fine.
Those links all lead to forums like this, so they don't carry any weight. If you have a link to a respected and legit tech site, like TECHSPOT, tom's hw or anandtech on the matter (NOT a forum), with benchmarks, I'll read it. Otherwise, it's just a conspiracy theory.Is there a source for this claim?
Google nvidia kepler drivers downgrade
Some good results:
https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/...epler-performance-in-favour-of-maxwell.57111/
http://www.overclock.net/t/1529108/are-nvidia-neglecting-kepler-optimization-since-maxwell-release
https://forums.geforce.com/default/...pler-gpus-performance-in-favor-of-maxwell-/1/
https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/2one2z/discussion_has_nvidia_forsaken_kepler_cards_has
To put that shortly: if GTX 780 is slower than GTX 960, then there's something VERY wrong on GTX 780 drivers.
Well, unless you're paying $150, you're getting a bad deal.... if you don't like facts, I guess this article isn't for you...I will take an AMD over nvidia anyday. Call me a fanboy but I would like another two graphic card makers in the mix
WOW,
you hacks actually did it - you picked the 3GB 1050Ti over the 8GB RX 480 that is allready beating even the 1060 in next gen APIs.
Kudos, ive put you in the same category as TomsHardware now.
Pffffffffff
Well, unless you're paying $150, you're getting a bad deal.... if you don't like facts, I guess this article isn't for you...
But yes, it would be great if there were a bunch of GPU (and CPU while we're at it) manufacturers, and they all churned out great products.... alas, the real world isn't as sunny a place
The point of the article is best choice for every budget. The choice of a 4GB card vs a 3GB card, where one has spikes and the other doesn't, the one that doesn't is the better choice. That means RX 470> GTX 1060 3GB.That wasn't the point of the article...
The GTX 1060 3GB is not a good choice period.It has already all been laid out, in the article, you clicked on, titled "The Best Graphics Cards 2016: TechSpot's top picks for every budget".
Red herring. That was not the point. The point is that the 3GB is memory limited even at high settings and causes spikes. The 4GB on the RX470/RX480 does not have this issue, and only starts having it to lesser extent and extremely demanding settings like Mirror's Edge Hyper settings.Cool Story Bro, Comparing a more expensive Graphics Card to a cheaper Card and you've come to the conclusion the more expensive one is better. Would you look at that...
Shows how much you paid attention to the article. Oh that's right. You didn't. The RX470 is also tested in Deus Ex MD. Here;I'm guessing you meant RX 480 not 470 since the article you linked to was exclusively about the 480? So you've again come to the conclusion the more expensive RX480 is slightly better than the 1060 3GB...
You only repeat yourself because you have nothing new to add to the table. All irrelevant repetitions that bypass the point of the issue.I mean... Come on... Do I need to repeat myself again?
The RX 470 4GB is a better choice than the GTX 1060 3GB. I can understand going for the GTX 1060 6GB over any RX 470 or RX 480, but the GTX 1060 3GB is not a card anyone should buy. But whatever.I did Enjoy thank you, It backed up the Article exactly how Steve put it. Once the RX480 drops in price, It'll take the Throne of "Best Budget GPU" but until then, the 1060 3GB is the better bang for buck.
Ooooh. And the GTX 1060 3GB is not at its limit? LOL you people are hilarious.... Even in the face of hard evidence you make up nonsense to justify supporting a card with a green brand on it. Only you can spin VRAM not being a limit to a GPU as a bad thing... Baffling...Edit: I just got some time to look over your link properly. What that actually display's is that the RX480 is at it's limit already since doubling the memory makes almost no difference at all. All those users in comment sections complaining "4GB of VRAM isn't enough" should take a look at your link, they'll soon realize that actually, the RX480 is too weak to use anymore.
Yes, but the RX480 is considerably more expensive, what part of the meaning of the word "Budget" are you not fully understanding? The RX480 costs more and is not in the price category of the 1060 3GB.The point of the article is best choice for every budget. The choice of a 4GB card vs a 3GB card, where one has spikes and the other doesn't, the one that doesn't is the better choice. That means RX 470> GTX 1060 3GB.
The GTX 1060 3GB is not a good choice period.
Ah, you are correct, I missed that, my bad. I am at work to be fair, just a little bored and wasn't fully concentrating.Shows how much you paid attention to the article. Oh that's right. You didn't. The RX470 is also tested in Deus Ex MD.
I haven't lied at all:Once again you people have been caught to be blatant liars. And people like you are the ones getting a bunch of likes. Disgusting.
I don't have anything new to add because there is nothing new to add. I had to repeat myself because of your inability to respond with anything relevant.You only repeat yourself because you have nothing new to add to the table. All irrelevant repetitions that bypass the point of the issue.
But it's not, the 1060 3GB beats the RX470 in pretty much all reviews I can could bother to Google. It even trades blows with the RX480 in certain games.The RX 470 4GB is a better choice than the GTX 1060 3GB. I can understand going for the GTX 1060 6GB over any RX 470 or RX 480, but the GTX 1060 3GB is not a card anyone should buy. But whatever.
I never said it wasn't? Let me check... Nope, definitely didn't say that...Ooooh. And the GTX 1060 3GB is not at its limit? LOL you people are hilarious....
How upset would you be right now if I was to tell you what GPU I was running a couple of years ago?Even in the face of hard evidence you make up nonsense to justify supporting a card with a green brand on it.
I didn't spin it as a bad thing, I was explaining to all those users on forums such as these that spout nonsense such as "IT DOESN'T HAVE MOAR VRAM! IT MUST BE CRAP!" that you have single handedly linked them all to a performance benchmark that proves it's complete rubbish and they might as well save the money and get the 4GB model. I guess AMD has the same train of thought as Nvidia had with it's older mobile GPU's. Just add more VRAM because higher number is better, right?Only you can spin VRAM not being a limit to a GPU as a bad thing... Baffling...