gtx 1060 3gb questions

[rookie.wanna.play]

hi guys! i'm new to this pc building thing and the vram confused me. should i buy the gtx 1060 3gb or the 1050ti 4gb variant? which card will last me longer? the games that i'm planning to play are PUBG Overwatch and gta 5. those kind of games and paired with r3 1200 or r5 1400.

[QuantumBit]

1060 6gb with a 1200

[R3ep3r]

9 hours ago, rookie.wanna.play said:

hi guys! i'm new to this pc building thing and the vram confused me. should i buy the gtx 1060 3gb or the 1050ti 4gb variant? which card will last me longer? the games that i'm planning to play are PUBG Overwatch and gta 5. those kind of games and paired with r3 1200 or r5 1400.

I'd recommend you wait a bit and gather more money and go with 1060 6gb and a R5 1500x.

[JoostinOnline]

People like to crap on the 3GB version, but there is only a 5-10% performance between them, assuming you're running both at playable settings. If you try to run them at settings where neither would get 60fps, then the 3GB version does much worse. If you can, then get the 6GB version though. 

 

The R5 1400 is good (and the 1200 is okay too), but make sure to pair it with 3200MHz RAM for the best performance. Make sure the motherboard supports that too. 

[Cookybiscuit]

6 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

but there is only a 5-10% performance between them

True up until you use up that frame buffer, at which point you have a paperweight instead of a GPU. The 1060 3GB is kind of a stupid purchase in my opinion, it's comparable to a 980Ti in speed but has a microscopic frame buffer. 3GB frame buffer if you're playing at 1440p with a card that powerful is just gimping your purchase. A 1060 in GTA5 for example will easily run it at 1440p on a mix of high/ultra with 2x MSAA, and will use more than 4GB of VRAM.

[AlTech]

9 hours ago, rookie.wanna.play said:

hi guys! i'm new to this pc building thing and the vram confused me. should i buy the gtx 1060 3gb or the 1050ti 4gb variant? which card will last me longer? the games that i'm planning to play are PUBG Overwatch and gta 5. those kind of games and paired with r3 1200 or r5 1400.

GTX 1060 6GB with an R3 1200

[JoostinOnline]

39 minutes ago, Cookybiscuit said:

True up until you use up that frame buffer, at which point you have a paperweight instead of a GPU. The 1060 3GB is kind of a stupid purchase in my opinion, it's comparable to a 980Ti in speed but has a microscopic frame buffer. 3GB frame buffer if you're playing at 1440p with a card that powerful is just gimping your purchase. A 1060 in GTA5 for example will easily run it at 1440p on a mix of high/ultra with 2x MSAA, and will use more than 4GB of VRAM.

You missed what I said about "playable settings". When you're at a present where the frame buffer is used up, both cards are getting dragged down. Take a look at this 1440p comparison. 

As you'll see, unless you're running settings where even the 6GB model can't keep 60fps, there is barely a difference. 

 

Also, running out of memory doesn't mean the card stops working. It just means some of the textures are compressed/decompressed as needed. That means more work for the GPU, but it doesn't make an enormous difference. 

[Cookybiscuit]

2 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

You missed what I said about "playable settings". When you're at a present where the frame buffer is used up, both cards are getting dragged down. Take a look at this 1440p comparison. 

As you'll see, unless you're running settings where even the 6GB model can't keep 60fps, there is barely a difference. 

 

PS: I think you'll find the GTA results interesting

All I'm seeing is a bunch of tests at 1440p where the 1060 is more than capable of producing playable framerates at high settings, and VRAM usage is above 3GB, just because the framerate is good doesn't mean it wouldn't be stuttery. Further, the main contributor to VRAM usage (independent of AA and resolution) is texture quality, I bet in a lot of these tests you could lower settings other than texture quality and get a much better experience. Personally unless I was on a 1080p monitor and sure that fact wasn't going to change for the duration I was keeping the card, I would never buy a 3GB 1060. 

 

I do see your point though, in most cases it doesn't make any sense to buy the higher-tier VRAM card as it would run out of steam settings-wise before you eat up the VRAM, but given how fast the 1060 is I don't think it's a particularly good choice.

 

I just launched GTA5 at 1440p 2x MSAA Ultra, like I said and it's using over 4GB on my system. Maybe though it uses some kind of pre-fetching system though, so it uses more if it knows you have more, I don't really know.

[Brett_Bst]

GTA 5 is rather demanding on the gpu and given the options I would go for the best card you can afford, I went for a gtx 1070 in mine which right now I do wish I just went all in and got the 1080 ti but at that time I was only playing at 1080p and the 1070 plays GTA on max very well, today I'm getting the delivery of my Acer Predator X34A and now I'm thinking of getting the 1080 ti to up the frame rate at max for the 100+ fps, like I say you buy the best card u can afford so the higher gtx 10 series higher ram models will be best, all comes down to 1: how much ur willing to pay and 2: how much u actually have to spend ? If for example u could wait a month and up the price to s 1070 then I would do that 

[rookie.wanna.play]

20 hours ago, R3ep3r said:

I'd recommend you wait a bit and gather more money and go with 1060 6gb and a R5 1500x.

ohh okay thanks

[rookie.wanna.play]

20 hours ago, JoostinOnline said:

People like to crap on the 3GB version, but there is only a 5-10% performance between them, assuming you're running both at playable settings. If you try to run them at settings where neither would get 60fps, then the 3GB version does much worse. If you can, then get the 6GB version though. 

 

The R5 1400 is good (and the 1200 is okay too), but make sure to pair it with 3200MHz RAM for the best performance. Make sure the motherboard supports that too. 

thanks man

[JoostinOnline]

16 hours ago, Cookybiscuit said:

All I'm seeing is a bunch of tests at 1440p where the 1060 is more than capable of producing playable framerates at high settings, and VRAM usage is above 3GB, just because the framerate is good doesn't mean it wouldn't be stuttery

That's exactly what it means.  What do you think causes stuttering if not an uneven framerate?  The highs and lows are pretty close together on the games, for both cards.

16 hours ago, Cookybiscuit said:

Personally unless I was on a 1080p monitor and sure that fact wasn't going to change for the duration I was keeping the card, I would never buy a 3GB 1060.

Do you see the bias here?  You've already assumed that the 3GB version won't work, and because of that benchmarks won't change your mind.

16 hours ago, Cookybiscuit said:

I just launched GTA5 at 1440p 2x MSAA Ultra, like I said and it's using over 4GB on my system. Maybe though it uses some kind of pre-fetching system though, so it uses more if it knows you have more, I don't really know.

As I said, if you have less than 4GB then it will just compress some of the stuff you aren't using, then decompress it later.  That means it adds some extra work, so framerates will be slightly slower.  It doesn't turn into a huge problem until you're like 2-3GB over, because then it's constantly having to manage memory usage.

 

The 6GB version is DEFINITELY better, but that's mostly due to the additional CUDA cores (10% more, if memory serves correctly), not the extra VRAM.  As long as we're talking about 1080p, I doubt the 6GB version would perform any better in most games if it had 50GB of VRAM.

[Cookybiscuit]

59 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

That's exactly what it means.  What do you think causes stuttering if not an uneven framerate?  The highs and lows are pretty close together on the games, for both cards.

Do you see the bias here?  You've already assumed that the 3GB version won't work, and because of that benchmarks won't change your mind.

As I said, if you have less than 4GB then it will just compress some of the stuff you aren't using, then decompress it later.  That means it adds some extra work, so framerates will be slightly slower.  It doesn't turn into a huge problem until you're like 2-3GB over, because then it's constantly having to manage memory usage.

 

The 6GB version is DEFINITELY better, but that's mostly due to the additional CUDA cores (10% more, if memory serves correctly), not the extra VRAM.  As long as we're talking about 1080p, I doubt the 6GB version would perform any better in most games if it had 50GB of VRAM.

Still not worth saving the peanuts in price difference between them in my opinion. At 1080p, sure it would probably be fine, at 1440p, I don't fancy it. You also don't mention that most of the tests were run using FXAA, which looks god-awful but does not consume any VRAM. A much more realistic usage scenario at 1440p would be 2x MSAA, or 4x MSAA at 1080p, at that point VRAM usage would increase accordingly in all of the tests. 

 

I guess it depends on what resolution OP is at, and if he plays any games that require silly amounts of VRAM, like modded Skyrim for example.

[Colexd]

id really suggest a 1060 6gb with a r3 1200 if you can

[JoostinOnline]

52 minutes ago, Cookybiscuit said:

Still not worth saving the peanuts in price difference between them in my opinion. At 1080p, sure it would probably be fine, at 1440p, I don't fancy it. You also don't mention that most of the tests were run using FXAA, which looks god-awful but does not consume any VRAM. A much more realistic usage scenario at 1440p would be 2x MSAA, or 4x MSAA at 1080p, at that point VRAM usage would increase accordingly in all of the tests. 

 

I guess it depends on what resolution OP is at, and if he plays any games that require silly amounts of VRAM, like modded Skyrim for example.

It's not a 1440p card.  It's designed for 1080p.  And even with MSAA running, the differences would have scaled.  You continue to act like a game will just stop running smoothly if all the VRAM is used.  You also ignored my first question.

[Cookybiscuit]

20 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

It's not a 1440p card.  It's designed for 1080p.  And even with MSAA running, the differences would have scaled.  You continue to act like a game will just stop running smoothly if all the VRAM is used.  You also ignored my first question.

1060 is more than capable at 1440p, the test you linked proved this. Something like a 1060 would also be totally fine at 4K too in the real world, not every game is ludicrously demanding, and not everyone cares that they'll have to knock the settings down from ultra to a mix of medium/high in some games. Running out of VRAM causes stuttering, you know this much, if or not it would bother someone is another thing.

 

I'm sorry but I just wouldn't be able to sleep at night with only 3GB of VRAM, it would make me uncomfortable.

[JoostinOnline]

14 minutes ago, Cookybiscuit said:

1060 is more than capable at 1440p, the test you linked proved this.

That doesn't mean it's targeted towards 1440p.

14 minutes ago, Cookybiscuit said:

Something like a 1060 would also be totally fine at 4K too in the real world,

Well at that point the 3GB version would do very bad.  1080p gaming will almost never push VRAM over 3GB, and it doesn't hurt it if it goes a ~1GB over, at 4K even a 6GB one will be struggling to meet VRAM requirements.  The 3GB one would have to compress everything, and performance would tank.  The 6GB one wouldn't do good either (because of lack of power, not the VRAM) though, so I don't think it matters.

 

14 minutes ago, Cookybiscuit said:

I'm sorry but I just wouldn't be able to sleep at night with only 3GB of VRAM, it would make me uncomfortable.

Meaning you don't understand how VRAM works.  Right now my computer is using all 16GB of my RAM.  If I removed one of the 8GB sticks it would make very little difference.  The extra RAM usage is just cached data, like with VRAM.

 

The lower CUDA core count is a legitimate reason to not get the 6GB one.  Having unnecessary VRAM isn't.  It's totally fine to not want a GPU, but you should know its actual strengths and weaknesses.

 

@rookie.wanna.play If you can get the 6GB version if you can.  Graphics card prices kind of suck right now.  Another option would be a used GTX 980, as they have almost identical performance and graphics cards almost never go bad.

[Cookybiscuit]

50 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

@rookie.wanna.play If you can get the 6GB version if you can. 

I thought as much :^)

[rookie.wanna.play]

5 hours ago, JoostinOnline said:

That doesn't mean it's targeted towards 1440p.

Well at that point the 3GB version would do very bad.  1080p gaming will almost never push VRAM over 3GB, and it doesn't hurt it if it goes a ~1GB over, at 4K even a 6GB one will be struggling to meet VRAM requirements.  The 3GB one would have to compress everything, and performance would tank.  The 6GB one wouldn't do good either (because of lack of power, not the VRAM) though, so I don't think it matters.

 

Meaning you don't understand how VRAM works.  Right now my computer is using all 16GB of my RAM.  If I removed one of the 8GB sticks it would make very little difference.  The extra RAM usage is just cached data, like with VRAM.

 

The lower CUDA core count is a legitimate reason to not get the 6GB one.  Having unnecessary VRAM isn't.  It's totally fine to not want a GPU, but you should know its actual strengths and weaknesses.

 

@rookie.wanna.play If you can get the 6GB version if you can.  Graphics card prices kind of suck right now.  Another option would be a used GTX 980, as they have almost identical performance and graphics cards almost never go bad.

Okay thanks man