RX 480 vs GTX 1060 for 1440p gaming? Some thoughts.

[Morgan MLGman]

So I wanted to share some of my thoughts and hear what you guys have to say. I watched this video from DigitalFoundry comparing the RX 480 and the GTX 1060 at 1440p resolution in multiple games along the GTX 970 and 980 and I just felt like sharing this.

 

Now let me start with saying that let's agree on one thing first: We all know this benchmark is legit and that Digital Foundry doesn't fuck around, they provide consistent, trustworthy results and there's always very little to question in their videos.

 

Benchmarks: (I highly advise you listen carefully and watch to the end)

 

I started watching it out of boredom, but after a while I got really interested in how little in fact the difference between the two is.

 

They compared eight games and here are the results:

 

1. The Division: The cards perform basically the same

2. The Witcher 3: GTX 1060 is around 3FPS faster

3. Rise of the Tomb Raider: Clear win for the 1060, it's around 10FPS faster on average in the "DX12" mode, aka DX 11.2

4. Ashes of the Singularity: I wouldn't call it a real game, more of a test bench for DX12 capabilities, RX 480 wins here in DX12

5. Far Cry: Primal: GTX 1060 is again, around 3FPS faster on average

6. Hitman: Now I don't know why they benched this game, probably wanted to show DX12 performance, but the RX 480 wins by around 5-6FPS depending on the location

7. Assassins Creed Unity: GTX 1060 leading by around 3FPS once again

8. Crysis 3: Second significant win for the 1060, it's around 7FPS faster on average

 

Now I asked the question to myself, what is a better buy for 1440p gaming?

 

Considering that RX 480:

- Is cheaper (at least looking at the MSRP)

- Performs better in low-level APIs such as DX12 and Vulkan, noticeably better

- The difference between the two at 1440p is not that significant even in DX11 titles, as in majority of them the 1060 was only 3FPS faster on average. Though there are titles where the difference is more significant. Still, for a card that's cheaper to perform almost the same even in some of the titles is impressive if you ask me.

- Has 2GB of VRAM more (Talking about the 8GB version, obviously)

- GTX 1060 only has a 192-bit bus width, which might be a limiting factor in some cases, especially higher-resolution ones

- AMD has a history of improving their drivers over the course of time and their cards enjoy better longevity in terms of performance improvements and driver support (It's only an assumption made because of what happened to 290X vs 780Ti and the rest of Hawaii vs Kepler + older cards, but it still is a legitimate argument to consider imo)

- And the last, and imho the most important thing. The RX 480 can be Crossfired, whereas the GTX 1060 has no SLI support, this is painful imho, very painful. Why? Because those new-gen cards are power efficient. They don't generate a lot of heat and don't draw a lot of power and can be crossfired even on 550-650W PSUs without any issues, this makes dual-GPU setups much more attractive, especially if you consider that adding another 480 in two years for example will not cost you a lot of money.

 

So in conclusion, I think the RX 480 is a better 1440p buy overall, having in mind everything that I said above. Now don't get me wrong, the GTX 1060 IS a better card, no doubt about that. That doesn't necessarily make it a better buy though.

 

Important notes:

- The CPU used in the benchmarks is an OC'd i7-6700K, which reduces CPU overhead to minimum, the RX 480 would fall behind by more if it was paired a slower CPU.

- At 1080p, the GTX 1060 is a better buy though (provided you've got the money), as the difference is bigger at that resolution in favor of the 1060.

- Please, don't use ShadowPlay as an argument to buy the 1060, AMD has its own video encoder that got improved even further in the GCN 4 architecture AFAIK and their ShadowPlay counterpart has just as small of a performance impact as ShadowPlay. The only thing ShadowPlay is better at is the UI, as it's clearer and easier to set up, though all you need is like 5 more minutes to set up the AMD's counterpart which is just as good after you do that.

- I tried to be as objective and unbiased as possible and I think I succeeded in that regard, I mentioned pros and cons of both and did it fairly.

EDIT: - I forgot to factor overclocking, the GTX 1060 has more overclocking headroom over the 480, so it would pull ahead more when both are overclocked. Though you've got to remember that not everyone overclocks and there's also a factor of sillicon lottery.

 

Let me know what you guys think, I'd like to hear some thoughts, maybe I'm wrong, this is just the conclusion that I came to, @i_build_nanosuits @App4that @don_svetlio I'd like you guys to read that too, as it's always a pleasure to discuss tech with you

 

Cheers and have a good read! Hope I didn't make too many annoying mistakes, English is not my native language.

[i_build_nanosuits]

4 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

 

 

Let me know what you guys think, I'd like to hear some thoughts, maybe I'm wrong, this is just the conclusion that I came to, @i_build_nanosuits @App4that @don_svetlio I'd like you guys to read that too, as it's always a pleasure to discuss tech with you.

 

 

what i think?

they took the GTX 1060...plugged it in...and ran the benchmarks..

they forgot to OVERCLOCK THE CARD...and the GTX 1060 has an easy 15 to 25% overclocking headroom...where do you think it would stack-up if they'd overclocked it?! ...knowing the the RX 480 overclock shit all...like +3% or something...+50mhz...whatever...the GTX 1060 can do +250mhz all day long...even the reference boards.

yeah...that put's it to rest...the GTX 1060 is a better, faster card...plain and simple...end of the story.

[byalexandr]

because memes

[Morgan MLGman]

@i_build_nanosuits The post is edited to mention that, I completely forgot about overclocking. Remember though that not everyone overclocks and not every chip overclocks well. Though +50mhz is an exaggeration, reviewers got the STRIX and Nitro 480s to 1400mhz for testing. This is almost +150mhz over the reference boost clock.

[HKZeroFive]

4 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

@i_build_nanosuits @App4that @don_svetlio I'd like you guys to read that too, as it's always a pleasure to discuss tech with you

This can't be good

[i_build_nanosuits]

4 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

@i_build_nanosuits The post is edited to mention that, I completely forgot about overclocking. Remember though that not everyone overclocks and not every chip overclocks well.

if you're not overclocking it's another story...but overclocking these days is so simple...you raise the power target a little bit...ask +300mhz to the VRAM and ask +250mhz on the core and boom...it's over

Also, the GTX 1060 runs cooler and is more efficient...especially if you ''try'' to overclock on the RX 480...and even aftermarket cards overclock like crap on the 480 joker productions had the sapphire nitro and couldn't even reach the clocks he reached on his crap reference card he had. so yeah!

[Energycore]

I mean, the RX 480 has more memory bandwidth and that should account to something.

 

And I've seen 1400MHz 480s on air I dunno why people aren't hitting that mark. Protip: Don't use Wattman, use some other tool.

[Morgan MLGman]

4 minutes ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

if you're not overclocking it's another story...but overclocking these days is so simple...you raise the power target a little bit...ask +300mhz to the VRAM and ask +250mhz on the core and boom...it's over

Also, the GTX 1060 runs cooler and is more efficient...especially if you ''try'' to overclock on the RX 480...and even aftermarket cards overclock like crap on the 480 joker productions had the sapphire nitro and couldn't even reach the clocks he reached on it's crap reference card he had. so yeah!

Though my point overall still stands, imho the small difference between the two factoring what I mentioned (price difference, low-level APIs (though they're at a very early stage atm), more VRAM, and most important the option to crossfire) make the 480 a better buy imho, but only for 1440p, as at 1080p the 1060 pulls out ahead significantly over the 480 and it's a whole different story. Also, that is only factoring that the 480 is cheaper, we all know prices are all over right now and in some countries the 480 is actually more expensive! (idk why )

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 minute ago, Energycore said:

I mean, the RX 480 has more memory bandwidth and that should account to something.

 

And I've seen 1400MHz 480s on air I dunno why people aren't hitting that mark. Protip: Don't use Wattman, use some other tool.

i still think it's fair to say that the little pascal chip still has significantly more overclocking headroom than that already agressively clocked RX 480...so even if you'd overclock both...the gap between the two would still be more significant than it is in the DF video...i'm 100% convinced on that.

[i_build_nanosuits]

Just now, Morgan MLGman said:

Though my point overall still stands, imho the small difference between the two factoring what I mentioned (price difference, low-level APIs (though they're at a very early stage atm), more VRAM, and most important the option to crossfire) make the 480 a better buy imho, but only for 1440p, as at 1080p the 1060 pulls out ahead significantly over the 480 and it's a whole different story. Also, that is only factoring that the 480 is cheaper, we all know prices are all over right now and in some countries the 480 is actually more expensive! (idk why )

i think 6GB of GDDR5 at 8000mhz stock is MORE THAN ENOUGH for a GPU of this caliber...even for 1440p...i can run all maxed out settings on my 1450mhz GTX 980ti which is a MUCH more powerful card than this 1060 and i played ALL the graphically demanding titles even the ones known to be vram hungry and NOT ONCE did the 6GB of video memory came into play..NOT ONCE

[Energycore]

Just now, i_build_nanosuits said:

i still think it's fair to say that the little pascal chip still has significantly more overclocking headroom than that already agressively clocked RX 480...so even if you'd overclock both...the gap between the two would still be more significant than it is in the DF video...i'm 100% convinced on that.

You're probably right. There's the DOOM performance as well, for anyone who cares about DOOM / Linux + Vulkan

[Morgan MLGman]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

i think 6GB of GDDR5 at 8000mhz stock is MORE THAN ENOUGH for a GPU of this caliber...even for 1440p...i can run all maxed out settings on my 1450mhz GTX 980ti which is a MUCH more powerful card than this 1060 and i played ALL the graphically demanding titles even the ones known to be vram hungry and NOT ONCE did the 6GB of video memory came into play..NOT ONCE

True, at 1080p 4GB is still enough for example for like 95% of the games on Ultra, for the last 5% you just drop the Texture Quality from Ultra to High and it's barely noticeable imho

 

Though considering that games might use more VRAM in the future especially if you're looking to crossfire two cards, 8GB might get in handy, and whether it's significant or not, it is an advantage of the 480

[Morgan MLGman]

4 minutes ago, Energycore said:

You're probably right. There's the DOOM performance as well, for anyone who cares about DOOM / Linux + Vulkan

Vulkan won't make an impact imho. I think it'll just die, sooner or later in favor of the DX12.

[i_build_nanosuits]

1 minute ago, Morgan MLGman said:

True, at 1080p 4GB is still enough for example for like 95% of the games on Ultra, for the last 5% you just drop the Texture Quality from Ultra to High and it's barely noticeable imho

 

Though considering that games might use more VRAM in the future especially if you're looking to crossfire two cards, 8GB might get in handy, and whether it's significant or not, it is an advantage of the 480

i wouldn't recommend crossfire for GPU's of this caliber anyways...it's better to just sell it online and buy a more powerful card down the road anyways...

BUT, if you ALSO need a new gaming monitor...THEN AMD has a point...Gsync monitors are EXPENSIVE where as freesync options are priced much better...THIS imho is something to consider for ''higher-end'' budget gamers that wan't a GOOD gaming experience without micro-stuttering and screen-tearing...THAT's a valid point to defend...IMHO everything else doesn't hold-up.

[Morgan MLGman]

1 minute ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

i wouldn't recommend crossfire for GPU's of this caliber anyways...it's better to just sell it online and buy a more powerful card down the road anyways...

BUT, if you ALSO need a new gaming monitor...THEN AMD has a point...Gsync monitor are EXPENSIVE where as freesync options are priced much better...THIS imho is something to consider for ''higher-end'' budget gamers that wan't a GOOD gaming experience without micro-stuttering and screen-tearing...THAT's a valid point to defend...IMHO everything else is doesn't hold.

This is debatable though imo, look at it that way:

The card is 230$ right now (MSRP). 230$ is something that a mid-ranged gamer can throw at his new graphics card, just around that price point. He can't throw 500$ at once, but if he can get a used 480 in two years for say, 150$, he's got quite a powerful system in there.

 

What's more, look how many people SLI'd GTX 970s and GTX 980s after they launched and nobody had a problem with that. I'd even pick 480 Crossfire over 980 SLI due to VRAM limitations. The 480 performs above the 970 and has over twice the VRAM, this isn't THAT bad for going a dual-GPU setup.

Of course if you've got 500$, you should just get a GTX 1070 as a single card is a better solution, but if you assume that someone bought an RX 480, then after two years threw in another one for 150$ (used), then I don't think you'd beat bang/buck ratio with that. Not everyone wants a dual-GPU setup and that's fine, but some people would surely do that, and having that option available is still an argument going for the 480.

 

Nvidia killed SLI option for the 1060 not because it's too low-end to be worth it, but because it could affect the 1070 and even the 1080 sales big time. But mostly 1070s.

[i_build_nanosuits]

24 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Important notes:

- The CPU used in the benchmarks is an OC'd i7-6700K, which reduces CPU overhead to minimum, the RX 480 would fall behind by more if it was paired a slower CPU.

 

^^ i would like to point out that THIS POINT is also VERY important to consider...since people buying these more ''mid-range'' cards will usually not go out and spend 500$ for the core i7-6700K and a Z170 motherboard...they will most likely pair those cards with a core i5...maybe one that is a couple years old...or the i5-6400/6500 which as we all know are no power house and fall way short of this overclocked core i7-6700K they used for benchmarking...and AMD's drivers will degrade performance a lot on these ''balanced price/parts'' system that we see comonly used with cards of this caliber.

[App4that]

I actually had to put together a build for someone today with a 800us budget. Gave them a 1060. Why? When you actually go to buy one like I did today they both cost 249us. And brothers I was down to the penny to get it done  With them both the same price I had to consider the user, a kid who plays GTA V. The 1060 is flat out better in GTA. So I bought them the EVGA SC. 

 

If if they had said they were looking towards Battlefield 1, I would have put a Nitro in it. 

 

We we get so caught up in tit for tat we forget the human element. That there is no card that's better. It really put things in perspective how luck we are that everyone has a card for 249us that's best for them.

[Energycore]

21 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

Vulkan won't make an impact imho. I think it'll just die, sooner or later in favor of the DX12.

I hope it doesn't, I'd like to be able to boycot Microsoft just like EA and Ubisoft

[Energycore]

1 minute ago, App4that said:

I actually had to put together a build for someone today with a 800us budget. Gave them a 1060. Why? When you actually go to buy one like I did today they both cost 249us. And brothers I was down to the penny to get it done  With them both the same price I had to consider the user, a kid who plays GTA V. The 1060 is flat out better in GTA. So I bought them the EVGA SC. 

 

If if they had said they were looking towards Battlefield 1, I would have put a Nitro in it. 

 

We we get so caught up in tit for tat we forget the human element. That there is no card that's better. It really put things in perspective how luck we are that everyone has a card for 249us that's best for them.

This so much

[xAcid9]

This is my opinion as Malaysian. Right now I take the 1060 over 480.

 

AMD Malaysia really went bonkers with the pricing, I can get 1060 Mini cheaper than a reference 480 and Palit Dual cost only $30 extra while perform much better and consume lower. I can get the card even cheaper from coupon rebate and no AMD card to be found online. 

 

But of course we have shit Asus 1060 Strix that cost $510... PALIT 1070 Jetstream cost $495 and $440 after discount. 

[Flavortown2k16]

Wouldnt it make more sense to get 1070, if you allready spend alot of money for 1440p monitor? But from those 2 i would pick 1060 for the perf increase(oc) to squeeze max fps from that card in higher res monitors. 480 wouldnt be bad choice either, but for the love of god, if you can spend top dollar on 1440p, just get 1070.

[don_svetlio]

Ah hell no, not going down this rabbit hole

[Morgan MLGman]

4 hours ago, Flavortown2k16 said:

Wouldnt it make more sense to get 1070, if you allready spend alot of money for 1440p monitor? But from those 2 i would pick 1060 for the perf increase(oc) to squeeze max fps from that card in higher res monitors. 480 wouldnt be bad choice either, but for the love of god, if you can spend top dollar on 1440p, just get 1070.

Hmmm, 1440p is getting more and more common these days, that is probably why Digital Foundry did those benchmarks at 1440p in the first place.

 

7 hours ago, App4that said:

I actually had to put together a build for someone today with a 800us budget. Gave them a 1060. Why? When you actually go to buy one like I did today they both cost 249us. And brothers I was down to the penny to get it done  With them both the same price I had to consider the user, a kid who plays GTA V. The 1060 is flat out better in GTA. So I bought them the EVGA SC. 

 

If if they had said they were looking towards Battlefield 1, I would have put a Nitro in it. 

 

We we get so caught up in tit for tat we forget the human element. That there is no card that's better. It really put things in perspective how luck we are that everyone has a card for 249us that's best for them.

That's a valid point, it does depend on a game, as always. Though prices vary, here in Poland the GTX 1060 is 50$ more expensive than the RX 480 (cheapest vs the cheapest), and costs exactly the same as a 390X. Not really worth it imho.

 

6 hours ago, xAcid9 said:

This is my opinion as Malaysian. Right now I take the 1060 over 480.

 

AMD Malaysia really went bonkers with the pricing, I can get 1060 Mini cheaper than a reference 480 and Palit Dual cost only $30 extra while perform much better and consume lower. I can get the card even cheaper from coupon rebate and no AMD card to be found online. 

 

But of course we have shit Asus 1060 Strix that cost $510... PALIT 1070 Jetstream cost $495 and $440 after discount. 

Prices are all over right now, this is all based on the fact that the cards would be at their MSRP, read above, prices in Poland are vastly different atm

[i_build_nanosuits]

8 hours ago, Morgan MLGman said:

The card is 230$ right now (MSRP). 230$ is something that a mid-ranged gamer can throw at his new graphics card, just around that price point. He can't throw 500$ at once, but if he can get a used 480 in two years for say, 150$, he's got quite a powerful system in there.

 

but if you assume that someone bought an RX 480, then after two years threw in another one for 150$ (used), then I don't think you'd beat bang/buck ratio with that. Not everyone wants a dual-GPU setup and that's fine, but some people would surely do that, and having that option available is still an argument going for the 480.

 

Nvidia killed SLI option for the 1060 not because it's too low-end to be worth it, but because it could affect the 1070 and even the 1080 sales big time. But mostly 1070s.

i was reading through this a little again this morning and something i forgot to talk about when in comes to crosffire and RX 480...

it's true that the GTX 1060 doesn't support SLI and it's sad...and the RX 480 does and it's a positive regardless.

That said...just like the CPU that people on budget for mid-range cards will not likely go out and buy the most powerful etc etc...they probably won't blow more money on the rig to support crossfire down the road...i think it's fair to say that even though a slew of motherboard technicaly support crossfire, only premium Z series chipset boards support it at pcie 3.0 X8/X8...most of the less expensive boards that have CFX support will do it at X4 speeds and this is not enough for an RX 480 in crossfire...i remember a while ago seeing an arcticle where they've tested the HD7970 in crossfire on a low end board like that vs i think a Z77 motherboard, and in some games it was a loss of only 1 to 2 FPS...but in some other titles it was up to almost 10FPS...with an HD7970...it can only be even more noticeable on a RX 480...

 

So, you need the expensive motherboard, you also need a nicer powersupply...idealy something with 650W+...with a good reputation...a gold rated PSU perhaps...again not something people on budget will usually buy...they tend to go with lower wattage lower quality PSU...you also need a nice case with good ventilation, probably a couple extra fans...

 

A lot of rambling to say that even though the RX 480 does support crossfire, i think in most people's builds it will not be an option unless they go out and spend more money and design system to support it from the get go, or it'll mean upgrading other stuff to accomodate for CFX.

 

But the possibility at least with the card is there, and the nvidia card doesn't have it which is trully sad cause a 6GB card like that and being as efficient as it is would have been a perfect candidate for SLI...and it's probably why nvidia decided not to put an SLI finger on it

 

EDIT: here is the arcticle i was talking about...you can clearly see in some games the HD7970 at X4 was already limited...in old games...up to 14% in Dirt 3...and those are old games, and the RX 480 has a lot more under the hood...so if you see anyone on the forum asking if he should crossfire...make sure he own a board that can do X8/X8

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5458/the-radeon-hd-7970-reprise-pcie-bandwidth-overclocking-and-msaa

'' DiRT3’s minimum framerates look even worse, dropping by 19%... but it’s clear that in the wrong situation only having 4GB/sec of PCIe bandwidth can bottleneck a 7970. ''

 

[Morgan MLGman]

2 hours ago, i_build_nanosuits said:

i was reading through this a little again this morning and something i forgot to talk about when in comes to crosffire and RX 480...

it's true that the GTX 1060 doesn't support SLI and it's sad...and the RX 480 does and it's a positive regardless.

That said...just like the CPU that people on budget for mid-range cards will not likely go out and buy the most powerful etc etc...they probably won't blow more money on the rig to support crossfire down the road...i think it's fair to say that even though a slew of motherboard technicaly support crossfire, only premium Z series chipset boards support it at pcie 3.0 X8/X8...most of the less expensive boards that have CFX support will do it at X4 speeds and this is not enough for an RX 480 in crossfire...i remember a while ago seeing an arcticle where they've tested the HD7970 in crossfire on a low end board like that vs i think a Z77 motherboard, and in some games it was a loss of only 1 to 2 FPS...but in some other titles it was up to almost 10FPS...with an HD7970...it can only be even more noticeable on a RX 480...

 

So, you need the expensive motherboard, you also need a nicer powersupply...idealy something with 650W+...with a good reputation...a gold rated PSU perhaps...again not something people on budget will usually buy...they tend to go with lower wattage lower quality PSU...you also need a nice case with good ventilation, probably a couple extra fans...

 

A lot of rambling to say that even though the RX 480 does support crossfire, i think in most people's builds it will not be an option unless they go out and spend more money and design system to support it from the get go, or it'll mean upgrading other stuff to accomodate for CFX.

 

But the possibility at least with the card is there, and the nvidia card doesn't have it which is trully sad cause a 6GB card like that and being as efficient as it is would have been a perfect candidate for SLI...and it's probably why nvidia decided not to put an SLI finger on it

 

EDIT: here is the arcticle i was talking about...you can clearly see in some games the HD7970 at X4 was already limited...in old games...up to 14% in Dirt 3...and those are old games, and the RX 480 has a lot more under the hood...so if you see anyone on the forum asking if he should crossfire...make sure he own a board that can do X8/X8

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5458/the-radeon-hd-7970-reprise-pcie-bandwidth-overclocking-and-msaa

'' DiRT3’s minimum framerates look even worse, dropping by 19%... but it’s clear that in the wrong situation only having 4GB/sec of PCIe bandwidth can bottleneck a 7970. ''

 

This is what I look at when someone talks about PCI-E scaling:

 

 

Fury X is a bandwidth-demanding card due to HBM being fast af, and the only real difference is if you go below PCI-E 2.0 x8. Yes, crossfire can work with PCI-E 2.0 x4, but it is not recommended. I don't think that crossfire-capable motherboards are expensive. SLI capable ones yes, but not the Xfire ones as MANY more boards support Crossfire over SLI.

Even the lower-end ones.

 

Offtopic: I was reading some stuff today and got curious, what is the benefit of GDDR5X in the GTX 1080? I mean, the memory bandwidth is around the same as I have on my 290X (around 320-330GB/s), wasn't the "X" variant of GDDR5 supposed to be significantly faster? What benefit does it bring?