RX 480 4gb vs GTX 1060 3gb

[NerdyCoder]

I wanna play GTA 5, Overwatch, and Call of duty infinite warfare on 1080p ultra settings 60fps. Which one performs better on those games? And is cuda necessary?

[lkarej]

IDK about you personally but I hate bad textures so I'd take the 4GB card any day, 3GB just isn't enough VRAM (I used to have a 780. Trust me, it runs out fast).

I mean that's just me tho.
To me fancy textures are more important than effects like AA and stuff.

[NerdyCoder]

1 minute ago, lkarej said:

IDK about you personally but I hate bad textures so I'd take the 4GB card any day, 3GB just isn't enough VRAM (I used to have a 780. Trust me, it runs out fast).

I mean that's just me tho.
To me fancy textures are more important than effects like AA and stuff.

I want to have fancy textures+AA. What should I get then?

 

[lkarej]

2 minutes ago, NerdyCoder said:

I want to have fancy textures+AA. What should I get then?

 

idk I just said I'd prefer the 4gb because I like textures.
It's not really a trade off, both could do nice textures + AA.
In GTA V tho 3gb is barely enough to have fancy textures in stuff. My old 780 couldn't handle it.

As far as COD and Overwatch go, both would suffice.
Just personally I'd go with the AMD card for the extra VRAM.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, NerdyCoder said:

I want to have fancy textures+AA. What should I get then?

 

A rx 480 4gb still beats the 3gb. That's why i picked it over 1060 3gb. I am very happy with the choice

[NerdyCoder]

5 minutes ago, deXxterlab97 said:

A rx 480 4gb still beats the 3gb. That's why i picked it over 1060 3gb. I am very happy with the choice

But it appears that the GTX 1060 beats RX 480 in GTA 5, and RX 480 beats GTX 1060 in COD. Also people say that Radeon releases their drives more lately than Nvidia. What should I get then?

[Guest]

1 minute ago, NerdyCoder said:

But it appears that the GTX 1060 beats RX 480 in GTA 5, and RX 480 beats GTX 1060 in COD. What should I get then?

Ah no. Don't use that bench. It's not accurate. I have seen it before. This video is better

 

[NerdyCoder]

I have another question. In South Korea, GTX 1060 3gb is more cheaper than the RX 470 2gb. Should I still go for the RX 480, or should I go with the more cheaper GTX 1060?

[Trevor87]

Both graphics cards perform the same if you don't take into account the V ram. But for newer titles I would go with the RX480.      

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, NerdyCoder said:

I have another question. In South Korea, GTX 1060 3gb is more cheaper than the RX 470 2gb. Should I still go for the RX 480, or should I go with the more cheaper GTX 1060?

A 480 still. 

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, NerdyCoder said:

I have another question. In South Korea, GTX 1060 3gb is more cheaper than the RX 470 2gb. Should I still go for the RX 480, or should I go with the more cheaper GTX 1060?

There is no 470 2GB, can you check prices again and inform us the exact amount (choose the cheapest aftermarket cooler).

[You_are_a_cunt]

1060 3 gig doesn't use the same chip as the 1060 6gb.

480 4 gig has the same chip as the 480 8 gig.

 

 

Get the 480

[NerdyCoder]

1 hour ago, FTL said:

There is no 470 2GB, can you check prices again and inform us the exact amount (choose the cheapest aftermarket cooler).

RX 470 just got cheaper today

Inno3d GTX 1060 3GB compact: 250,950 won

sapphire Radeon RX 470 4GB: 237,000 won

 

Does the RX 470 beat the GTX 1060 3gb?

 

 

[NerdyCoder]

Does the RX 470 beat the GTX 1060?

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, NerdyCoder said:

Does the RX 470 beat the GTX 1060?

No it doesn't,but the RX 480 4GB does.

[JoostinOnline]

You're going to get varying results, depending on which benchmarks you use and which games you play.  Passmark shows the 1060 3GB beating the RX 480 4GB by a significant amount.  Normally I'd say 3GB is more than enough, but if you're planning to play a horribly optimized game like Infinite Warfare on Ultra, you might need more.

 

Keep in mind that you can get a 1060 6GB one for not that much more money.

[Shoob]

24 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

You're going to get varying results, depending on which benchmarks you use and which games you play.  Passmark shows the 1060 3GB beating the RX 480 4GB by a significant amount.  Normally I'd say 3GB is more than enough, but if you're planning to play a horribly optimized game like Infinite Warfare on Ultra, you might need more.

 

Keep in mind that you can get a 1060 6GB one for not that much more money.

Passmark is not a valid comparison for gaming GPUs. 3GB is barely enough for most recent games with textures set to high and it's a bottleneck, since the frame times will skyrocket and the game will stutter. This is rarely shown on benchmarks, but it's crucial for a pleasant gaming experience.

 

@NerdyCoder Saving for a 8GB 480 or a 6GB 1060 is very much worth it if you want a GPU that'll last longer and is able to max out textures in recent games. If you are not able to extend your budget for those, the Sapphire RX 470 8GB Nitro+ is a good middle ground with plenty of VRAM (considering you said you like high quality textures and AA). It's the only 470 8GB, with the same VRAM as the 480 8GB, running at 2000 MHz, while the rest are 1750 or less.

[JoostinOnline]

I know Passmark isn't great for GPU's.  My point was that benchmarks will vary.

2 minutes ago, Pandalf said:

3GB is barely enough for most recent games with textures set to high and it's a bottleneck, since the frame times will skyrocket and the game will stutter.

 

People seriously exaggerate stuff like this.  I'm running games at high with 2GB of VRAM and no stuttering.  But like I said, there is a huge difference between high and ultra, especially on a game as poorly written as Infinite Warfare.

[Shoob]

15 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

People seriously exaggerate stuff like this.  I'm running games at high with 2GB of VRAM and no stuttering.  But like I said, there is a huge difference between high and ultra, especially on a game as poorly written as Infinite Warfare.

I don't think it's an exaggeration. My GPU has 3GB of VRAM, I haven't played all recent GPU intensive games, but I've experienced spikes in the frame time in games like Rise of the Tomb Raider, Far Cry Primal and Doom, because the VRAM is maxed out. The cut down GTX 1060 is considerably more powerful than my 280X, so the VRAM is the bottleneck there and it will cause issues in spite of the high framerates, unless the texture quality and AA are reduced.

[JoostinOnline]

20 minutes ago, Pandalf said:

I don't think it's an exaggeration. My GPU has 3GB of VRAM, I haven't played all recent GPU intensive games, but I've experienced spikes in the frame time in games like Rise of the Tomb Raider, Far Cry Primal and Doom, because the VRAM is maxed out. The cut down GTX 1060 is considerably more powerful than my 280X, so the VRAM is the bottleneck there and it will cause issues in spite of the high framerates, unless the texture quality and AA are reduced.

If the game isn't using all your VRAM, it's just wasting resources.

 

Btw, I always turn off AA (but keep texture quality at high) on modern games.  I run at 1080p, so there isn't really a point as far as I can tell.

[ZothOmmog]

1 hour ago, JoostinOnline said:

Keep in mind that you can get a 1060 6GB one for not that much more money.

Or a RX 480 8GB for literally 5 dollars more and 2 extra GB in VRAM.

[JoostinOnline]

1 minute ago, ZothOmmog said:

Or a RX 480 8GB for literally 5 dollars more and 2 extra GB in VRAM.

Yeah, I was just saying it's an option.

[ZothOmmog]

1 minute ago, JoostinOnline said:

Yeah, I was just saying it's an option.

Yeah no I was also just putting it out on the table, whether the OP listens, is hard to tell.

[GitGud]

Dont let the 3 GB amount on 1060 fool you, Pascal has pretty advanced memory compression making it almost right there up with how 4 gig RX 480 would perform.

[hconverse02]

If you can, save for an 8gb card, way more worth it.