Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1060 Mini ITX 3G GeForce GTX 1060 6GB GDDR5 - graphics cards (Active, ATX, NVIDIA, GeForce GTX 1060, GDDR5, PCI Express x16 3.0) £211.22 @ Amazon - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HotUKDeals, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HotUKDeals app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
268

Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1060 Mini ITX 3G GeForce GTX 1060 6GB GDDR5 - graphics cards (Active, ATX, NVIDIA, GeForce GTX 1060, GDDR5, PCI Express x16 3.0) £211.22 @ Amazon

£211.22 @ Amazon
- Powered by GeForce® GTX 1060 - Integrated with 6GB GDDR5 192bit memory - 90mm cooler with 3D active fan - One-click Super Overclocking - 17cm Compact Card Size Custom-designed Co… Read More
dogzdangliz1 Avatar
5m, 2w agoFound 5 months, 2 weeks ago
- Powered by GeForce® GTX 1060

- Integrated with 6GB GDDR5 192bit memory

- 90mm cooler with 3D active fan

- One-click Super Overclocking

- 17cm Compact Card Size

Custom-designed Cooling System

Equipped with 2 pure copper heat-pipes and 90 mm unique-blade fan with 3D active functionality, and heat pipes direct touch technology, the cooler can dissipate heat effectively from the GPU while keeping the fan at lower speed and noise.

Cooling System-Fan

Unique Blade Fan Design

The airflow is spilt by the triangle fan edge, and guided smoothly through the 3D stripe curve on the fan surface, effectively enhancing the air flow by 23% over traditional fans.

3D Active Fan

The semi-passive fans will remain off when the GPU is under a set loading or temperature for low power gaming. It allows gamers to enjoy gameplay in complete silence when the system is running light or idle.

Cooling System- Heat Pipes

Composite heat-pipes

The composite heat-pipes combines both thermal conductivity and phase transition for efficiently managing the transfer of heat between two solid interfaces which increases 29% of cooling capacity.

Heat Pipe Direct Touch

The pure copper heat pipes are shaped to maximize the direct contact area to the GPU.

Compact Card Size

Measuring merely 17cm in length, the card, perfectly compatible for building most of the PCs from ATX to mini-ITX.

One-click Super overclocking

With a simple click on XTREME engine utility, gamers can easily tune the card to meet their various gaming requirements without any overclocking knowledge, while saving the hassle of manual adjustment.

Ultra Durable Graphic Components

Engineered with the highest-grade chokes and capacitors, this graphic card delivers outstanding performance and durable system lifespan.

Other Characteristics:

CUDA: Yes

CUDA cores: 1152

Colour of product: Black

Cooling type: Active

DVI-D ports quantity: 2

Data transfer rate: 8 Gbit/s

Depth: 169 mm

DirectX version: 12.0

Discrete graphics adapter memory: 6 GB

DisplayPort version: 1.4

DisplayPorts quantity: 1

Dual Link DVI: Yes

Form factor: ATX

Graphics adapter memory type: GDDR5

Graphics processor: GeForce GTX 1060

Graphics processor family: NVIDIA

HDMI ports quantity: 1

HDMI version: 2.0b

Height: 37 mm

Interface type: PCI Express x16 3.0

Maximum digital resolution: 7680 x 4320 pixels

Maximum displays per videocard: 4

Maximum resolution: 7680 x 4320 pixels

Memory bandwidth (max): 192 GB/s

Memory bus: 192 bit

Memory clock speed: 8008 MHz

Minimum system power supply: 400 W

NVIDIA G-SYNC: Yes

NVIDIA GameWorks VR: Yes

Number of slots: 2

OpenGL version: 4.5

Power consumption (typical): 120 W

Processor boost clock speed: 1708 MHz

Processor frequency: 1506 MHz

Supplementary power connectors: 1x 6-pin

Width: 131 mm

Windows operating systems supported: Yes

Likely to be an Error
- Axeboy
dogzdangliz1 Avatar
5m, 2w agoFound 5 months, 2 weeks ago
Options

All Comments

(52) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
#2
There is also this one which is oc for a few pounds more...

http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/nvidia-gtx-1060-6gb-oc-edition-gv-n1060ixoc-6gd-218-92-delivered-laptopsdirect-2565219

Edited By: booboy2 on Dec 10, 2016 13:34
#3
This or an RX 480 8GB?
#4
hotmep
This or an RX 480 8GB?
Personally I went 480 (and got for a lot less than this), but really just depends which you can get for the best price. This is still a good price.
#5
would this be worth the upgrade from a 4gb 680? or am i just better off saving of 1080?
#6
scholesy27
would this be worth the upgrade from a 4gb 680? or am i just better off saving of 1080?

It's much faster than a GTX 680, I would also consider the 1070 though it's double the price.
#7
Currently the best performance for price. This and the 480
#8
MBeeching
scholesy27
would this be worth the upgrade from a 4gb 680? or am i just better off saving of 1080?

It's much faster than a GTX 680, I would also consider the 1070 though it's double the price.


ok thank you i will keep that in mind
2 Likes #9
This seems to be the 3gb version guys

The product code is usually the most reliable part of the spec: GV-N1060IX-3GD

That's the 3gb model. I think Amazon have made a spec mistake.

edit: the picture also seems to be 3gb, check the bottom left

Also, I don't think Gigabyte do a non-overclocked version of this card in 6gb format, only 3gb

Edited By: Axeboy on Dec 10, 2016 15:10
#10
Axeboy
This seems to be the 3gb version guys
The product code is usually the most reliable part of the spec: GV-N1060IX-3GD
That's the 3gb model. I think Amazon have made a spec mistake.
edit: the picture also seems to be 3gb, check the bottom left
Also, I don't think Gigabyte do a non-overclocked version of this card in 6gb format, only 3gb
I think you are right mate, there is no 6gb version of this card that is not the oc version
I have the OC 6gb version, it is a very good card can push it quite far with an overclock and its not too loud

Edited By: donbarney on Dec 10, 2016 15:39
#11
3GB Ram
#12
Hmm doesn't Oculus need 2 HDMI?
#13
Currently the best performance for price. This and the 480
p this is good n all , but when you have the 1050ti going for slightly over half the price ?? (£120-130) Not quite in the same league I know, but £90 /£100 better? If you (could) sli two 1050ti you'd probably get better perf than 1x1060.. my 2$c
#14
Really depends on needs, the 6gb 1060 is about twice the performance of the 1050ti

Anyways, this isn't the 6gb, its the 3gb so don't buy it :)

Edited By: Axeboy on Dec 10, 2016 17:27
#15
Product name says 3GB but description says 6GB. Which is it?
#16
oos
#17
GwanGy
Currently the best performance for price. This and the 480
p this is good n all , but when you have the 1050ti going for slightly over half the price ?? (£120-130) Not quite in the same league I know, but £90 /£100 better? If you (could) sli two 1050ti you'd probably get better perf than 1x1060.. my 2$c

SLI is rubbish though and it's always the games that most need it that don't work with it or don't work well.

Don't SLI until you get to high end and can't do better without multiple cards anyway, it's a waste of time and money.
#18
CAL23
Product name says 3GB but description says 6GB. Which is it?


Read my post above, likely the description is incorrect, likely to be 3gb

So not a good deal if it is
1 Like #19
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
#20
Yet another dual slot supposedly mini ITX card unusable in the Shuttle SN78SH7 :(
#21
OOS
#22
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.

No it doesn't. Why do you think the pro's GPU is as fast as this?
#23
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.

Not true.The PS 4 Pro's GPU is similar to a £150 Radeon RX 470. And the CPU is about £50 worth of AMD FX chip, it's a terrible CPU.
#24
vulcanproject
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
No it doesn't. Why do you think the pro's GPU is as fast as this?
Raw power. Terraflops. Have a look then get back to me.
#25
dudedude
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
Not true.The PS 4 Pro's GPU is similar to a £150 Radeon RX 470. And the CPU is about £50 worth of AMD FX chip, it's a terrible CPU.
You just proved my point, here you get a GPU...not a cpu, no system ram, no tb hardrive.
#26
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
No it doesn't. Why do you think the pro's GPU is as fast as this?
Raw power. Terraflops. Have a look then get back to me.

Teraflops is a measure of raw floating point performance. Maths basically. Not of overall graphics performance comparing two totally different GPU architectures, Nvidia Pascal v AMD Polaris in this case.

A GTX1060 generally beats a desktop Radeon RX 480 on overall graphics performance, to the tune of 10-15 percent. PS4 Pro's GPU is based on it, but significantly downclocked (about 80 percent of the clock speed) and therefore slower than a RX 480.

So there you go.
#27
dudedude
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
Not true.The PS 4 Pro's GPU is similar to a £150 Radeon RX 470. And the CPU is about £50 worth of AMD FX chip, it's a terrible CPU.

I think £50 for that Jaguar CPU is generous.


smellyonion
dudedude
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
Not true.The PS 4 Pro's GPU is similar to a £150 Radeon RX 470. And the CPU is about £50 worth of AMD FX chip, it's a terrible CPU.
You just proved my point, here you get a GPU...not a cpu, no system ram, no tb hardrive.


No, you get a more powerful GPU for this. To put into a PC. Which will cost more than a PS4 Pro. Because it does ten times more things. It's a PC not a games console. This has nothing at all to do with games console. It's a PC graphics card to build a more powerful machine

Glad you managed to figure that out for yourself after obviously stumbling onto the wrong page.
#28
smellyonion
dudedude
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
Not true.The PS 4 Pro's GPU is similar to a £150 Radeon RX 470. And the CPU is about £50 worth of AMD FX chip, it's a terrible CPU.
You just proved my point, here you get a GPU...not a cpu, no system ram, no tb hardrive.

Uh, what?

£150 for a comparable GPU to the one in the PS 4 Pro

The PS 4 Pro costs £350

So not comparable in price.

So:
£150 for the GPU
£20 for 4gb RAM
£40 for the 1tb drive
£60 for an AMD 5350 and motherboard
£50 for Rosewill case + 400W PSU

Total: £320.

What was your point exactly?
#29
vulcanproject
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
No it doesn't. Why do you think the pro's GPU is as fast as this?
Raw power. Terraflops. Have a look then get back to me.
Teraflops is a measure of raw floating point performance. Maths basically. Not of overall graphics performance comparing two totally different GPU architectures, Nvidia Pascal v AMD Polaris in this case.
A GTX1060 generally beats a desktop Radeon RX 480 on overall graphics performance, to the tune of 10-15 percent. PS4 Pro's GPU is based on it, but significantly downclocked (about 80 percent of the clock speed) and therefore slower than a RX 480.
So there you go.
Errr, no.

Pro does not use direct x api. Gains will be better than any comparable card on the pro.
#30
dudedude
smellyonion
dudedude
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
Not true.The PS 4 Pro's GPU is similar to a £150 Radeon RX 470. And the CPU is about £50 worth of AMD FX chip, it's a terrible CPU.
You just proved my point, here you get a GPU...not a cpu, no system ram, no tb hardrive.
Uh, what?

£150 for a comparable GPU to the one in the PS 4 Pro

The PS 4 Pro costs £350

So not comparable in price.

So:
£150 for the GPU
£20 for 4gb RAM
£40 for the 1tb drive
£60 for an AMD 5350 and motherboard
£50 for Rosewill case + 400W PSU

Total: £320.

What was your point exactly?
No. Even with your underpricing. Please include your bluray drive, WiFi, Windows and it will still perform worse...
#31
vulcanproject
PS4 Pro's GPU is based on it, but significantly downclocked (about 80 percent of the clock speed) and therefore slower than a RX 480.

Right now the graphics market consists of:

RX 460 2GB £100 - terrible compared with the GTX 1050
RX 460 4GB £110 - the 4GB is not worth it compared with the extra speed of the 1050
GTX 1050 2GB £110
GTX 1050 TI (4GB) £130
RX 470 (4GB) £175 - even though it's not much slower than the RX480, the price difference is too small at the moment. It's been sold as low as £150 though, at which price it's a no-brainer.
RX 480 4GB £188 I tend to prefer the GTX 1060 3GB, because it's generally faster today, and lower power.
GTX 1060 (SE) 3GB £189
RX 480 8GB £200
GTX 1060 6GB £220
GTX 1070 £380
GTX 1080 £500

The PS4 is around the RX 470 level. Which means it's only mid-range with the likes of the GTX 1070, 1080, and soon 1080Ti far ahead.
#32
smellyonion
dudedude
smellyonion
dudedude
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
Not true.The PS 4 Pro's GPU is similar to a £150 Radeon RX 470. And the CPU is about £50 worth of AMD FX chip, it's a terrible CPU.
You just proved my point, here you get a GPU...not a cpu, no system ram, no tb hardrive.
Uh, what?
£150 for a comparable GPU to the one in the PS 4 Pro
The PS 4 Pro costs £350
So not comparable in price.
So:
£150 for the GPU
£20 for 4gb RAM
£40 for the 1tb drive
£60 for an AMD 5350 and motherboard
£50 for Rosewill case + 400W PSU
Total: £320.
What was your point exactly?
No. Even with your underpricing. Please include your bluray drive, WiFi, Windows and it will still perform worse...

blu-ray drive is a relic for Sony to sell overpriced games. PC uses Steam downloads. Wifi is not necessary but you can add it on the motherboard easily enough. Windows keys are around £5 on ebay.

You can build a much faster PC for the cost of a PS4 pro if you want to shop around. I5-2500k £50 on ebay for example.
#33
dudedude
vulcanproject
PS4 Pro's GPU is based on it, but significantly downclocked (about 80 percent of the clock speed) and therefore slower than a RX 480.
Right now the graphics market consists of:
RX 460 2GB £100 - terrible compared with the GTX 1050
RX 460 4GB £110 - the 4GB is not worth it compared with the extra speed of the 1050
GTX 1050 2GB £110
GTX 1050 TI (4GB) £130
RX 470 (4GB) £175 - even though it's not much slower than the RX480, the price difference is too small at the moment. It's been sold as low as £150 though, at which price it's a no-brainer.
RX 480 4GB £188 I tend to prefer the GTX 1060 3GB, because it's generally faster today, and lower power.
GTX 1060 (SE) 3GB £189
RX 480 8GB £200
GTX 1060 6GB £220
GTX 1070 £380
GTX 1080 £500
The PS4 is around the RX 470 level. Which means it's only mid-range with the likes of the GTX 1070, 1080, and soon 1080Ti far ahead.
Pro GPU is basically a slightly underclocked 480 rx since the pro features 36 compute units. Obviously, with no dx api and unified gddr5 memory pool for efficiency gains, it will perform very well.
#34
dudedude
smellyonion
dudedude
smellyonion
dudedude
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
Not true.The PS 4 Pro's GPU is similar to a £150 Radeon RX 470. And the CPU is about £50 worth of AMD FX chip, it's a terrible CPU.
You just proved my point, here you get a GPU...not a cpu, no system ram, no tb hardrive.
Uh, what?
£150 for a comparable GPU to the one in the PS 4 Pro
The PS 4 Pro costs £350
So not comparable in price.
So:
£150 for the GPU
£20 for 4gb RAM
£40 for the 1tb drive
£60 for an AMD 5350 and motherboard
£50 for Rosewill case + 400W PSU
Total: £320.
What was your point exactly?
No. Even with your underpricing. Please include your bluray drive, WiFi, Windows and it will still perform worse...
blu-ray drive is a relic for Sony to sell overpriced games. PC uses Steam downloads. Wifi is not necessary but you can add it on the motherboard easily enough. Windows keys are around £5 on ebay.
You can build a much faster PC for the cost of a PS4 pro if you want to shop around. I5-2500k £50 on ebay for example.
I get your point, again you're adding cost, losing reesaleabilty without physical media. Your equivalent price pc will not perform better than the pro, simple as. The Ps3 featured something like a 7800GTX yet it pumped out God of war, uncharted, last of us. Impossible on a PC with that card. The efficiency gains are immense.

Again, the pro features a card similar to those currently at £200 on the market.
#35
Not that its confirmed exactly to be a 480 spec, but its still 30% lower clocks. 30% is a lot.

Not that it matters, ps4 pro vs PC isn't really the right comparison anyways :)

Edited By: Axeboy on Dec 12, 2016 22:29
#36
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
No it doesn't. Why do you think the pro's GPU is as fast as this?
Raw power. Terraflops. Have a look then get back to me.
Teraflops is a measure of raw floating point performance. Maths basically. Not of overall graphics performance comparing two totally different GPU architectures, Nvidia Pascal v AMD Polaris in this case.
A GTX1060 generally beats a desktop Radeon RX 480 on overall graphics performance, to the tune of 10-15 percent. PS4 Pro's GPU is based on it, but significantly downclocked (about 80 percent of the clock speed) and therefore slower than a RX 480.
So there you go.
Errr, no.
Pro does not use direct x api. Gains will be better than any comparable card on the pro.

Pro's GPU isn't equal to a GTX1060 anyway I already told you that.

You said that Pro had the same power of this GPU and then quoted teraflops to back it up, nothing about what API the two platforms use. So I corrected you by saying no, Pro's GPU is not as fast as a GTX1060. It isn't.

Coding to the metal on consoles always helps their performance but Pro still won't be faster than a GTX1060 in a decent PC build.

I'll repeat, this isn't a thread for you to talk about a games console which is essentially built as a toy and limited to that. This is a GPU for a PC which can be used to do a ridiculous array of extra things, and in 18 months when you feel like even more GPU performance you can take this out, sell it and trade up for something twice as fast again should you so wish.
#37
vulcanproject
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
No it doesn't. Why do you think the pro's GPU is as fast as this?
Raw power. Terraflops. Have a look then get back to me.
Teraflops is a measure of raw floating point performance. Maths basically. Not of overall graphics performance comparing two totally different GPU architectures, Nvidia Pascal v AMD Polaris in this case.
A GTX1060 generally beats a desktop Radeon RX 480 on overall graphics performance, to the tune of 10-15 percent. PS4 Pro's GPU is based on it, but significantly downclocked (about 80 percent of the clock speed) and therefore slower than a RX 480.
So there you go.
Errr, no.
Pro does not use direct x api. Gains will be better than any comparable card on the pro.
Pro's GPU isn't equal to a GTX1060 anyway I already told you that.
You said that Pro had the same power of this GPU and then quoted teraflops to back it up, nothing about what API the two platforms use. So I corrected you by saying no, Pro's GPU is not as fast as a GTX1060. It isn't.
Coding to the metal on consoles always helps their performance but Pro still won't be faster than a GTX1060 in a decent PC build.
I'll repeat, this isn't a thread for you to talk about a games console which is essentially built as a toy and limited to that. This is a GPU for a PC which can be used to do a ridiculous array of extra things, and in 18 months when you feel like even more GPU performance you can take this out, sell it and trade up for something twice as fast again should you so wish.
Power can have various ways of measuring it.

In this case, I chose Teraflops and thats the end of it.

Wiki definition:
In computing, FLOPS or flops (an acronym for FLoating-point Operations Per Second) is a measure of computer performance, useful in fields of scientific calculations that make heavy use of floating-point calculations. For such cases it is a more accurate measure than the generic instructions per second.

I brought up api because you referred to how the 1060 beats the 480 in desktop benchmarks yet has lower objective perfomance (FLOPS). Therefore, I was referring to how poorly optimized AMD cards to Direct X, PS4 does not use Direct X as its language so will not have this bottleneck that AMD cards have on desktops.

Then, we havent begun to tallk about 3gb GDDR5 @ 192 gbps vs the pros 8gb GDDR @ 218gbps, the 1060p wont scale at larger resolutions like the pro.
#38
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
No it doesn't. Why do you think the pro's GPU is as fast as this?
Raw power. Terraflops. Have a look then get back to me.
Teraflops is a measure of raw floating point performance. Maths basically. Not of overall graphics performance comparing two totally different GPU architectures, Nvidia Pascal v AMD Polaris in this case.
A GTX1060 generally beats a desktop Radeon RX 480 on overall graphics performance, to the tune of 10-15 percent. PS4 Pro's GPU is based on it, but significantly downclocked (about 80 percent of the clock speed) and therefore slower than a RX 480.
So there you go.
Errr, no.
Pro does not use direct x api. Gains will be better than any comparable card on the pro.
Pro's GPU isn't equal to a GTX1060 anyway I already told you that.
You said that Pro had the same power of this GPU and then quoted teraflops to back it up, nothing about what API the two platforms use. So I corrected you by saying no, Pro's GPU is not as fast as a GTX1060. It isn't.
Coding to the metal on consoles always helps their performance but Pro still won't be faster than a GTX1060 in a decent PC build.
I'll repeat, this isn't a thread for you to talk about a games console which is essentially built as a toy and limited to that. This is a GPU for a PC which can be used to do a ridiculous array of extra things, and in 18 months when you feel like even more GPU performance you can take this out, sell it and trade up for something twice as fast again should you so wish.
Power can have various ways of measuring it.
In this case, I chose Teraflops and thats the end of it.
Wiki definition:
In computing, FLOPS or flops (an acronym for FLoating-point Operations Per Second) is a measure of computer performance, useful in fields of scientific calculations that make heavy use of floating-point calculations. For such cases it is a more accurate measure than the generic instructions per second.
I brought up api because you referred to how the 1060 beats the 480 in desktop benchmarks yet has lower objective perfomance (FLOPS). Therefore, I was referring to how poorly optimized AMD cards to Direct X, PS4 does not use Direct X as its language so will not have this bottleneck that AMD cards have on desktops.
Then, we havent begun to tallk about 3gb GDDR5 @ 192 gbps vs the pros 8gb GDDR @ 218gbps, the 1060p wont scale at larger resolutions like the pro.

I think you need to understand that measuring a GPU's performance in single precision FLOPS when it's application in the actual case you stated is to do graphics rendering is entirely pointless.

Which is what I outlined to you. If you buy a console to do very specific compute based scientific calculations then you might have a point.

You don't.

You also seem to fail to understand how memory allocation and bandwidth works. PS4 Pro still only has 5.5GB TOTAL usable memory, which has to be split video/system and it also has to share that bandwidth with the CPU and everything else. It still has major overheads. Whereas a PC graphics card has all that memory and bandwidth entirely for video, and the CPU has all it's own memory bandwidth and a bunch load of it's own lower latency memory superior for CPU performance. You are so far out on these points I can't even be bothered to correct the rest of your errors.

This is the only thing you need to know though:

GTX1060 has superior graphics rendering performance to PS4 Pro's GPU, end of story. Besides, PC has a few more than about 10 games that you can actually play 'at larger resolutions.' unlike PS4 Pro. It has nearly everything from the past 15 years :p
#39
vulcanproject
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
No it doesn't. Why do you think the pro's GPU is as fast as this?
Raw power. Terraflops. Have a look then get back to me.
Teraflops is a measure of raw floating point performance. Maths basically. Not of overall graphics performance comparing two totally different GPU architectures, Nvidia Pascal v AMD Polaris in this case.
A GTX1060 generally beats a desktop Radeon RX 480 on overall graphics performance, to the tune of 10-15 percent. PS4 Pro's GPU is based on it, but significantly downclocked (about 80 percent of the clock speed) and therefore slower than a RX 480.
So there you go.
Errr, no.
Pro does not use direct x api. Gains will be better than any comparable card on the pro.
Pro's GPU isn't equal to a GTX1060 anyway I already told you that.
You said that Pro had the same power of this GPU and then quoted teraflops to back it up, nothing about what API the two platforms use. So I corrected you by saying no, Pro's GPU is not as fast as a GTX1060. It isn't.
Coding to the metal on consoles always helps their performance but Pro still won't be faster than a GTX1060 in a decent PC build.
I'll repeat, this isn't a thread for you to talk about a games console which is essentially built as a toy and limited to that. This is a GPU for a PC which can be used to do a ridiculous array of extra things, and in 18 months when you feel like even more GPU performance you can take this out, sell it and trade up for something twice as fast again should you so wish.
Power can have various ways of measuring it.
In this case, I chose Teraflops and thats the end of it.
Wiki definition:
In computing, FLOPS or flops (an acronym for FLoating-point Operations Per Second) is a measure of computer performance, useful in fields of scientific calculations that make heavy use of floating-point calculations. For such cases it is a more accurate measure than the generic instructions per second.
I brought up api because you referred to how the 1060 beats the 480 in desktop benchmarks yet has lower objective perfomance (FLOPS). Therefore, I was referring to how poorly optimized AMD cards to Direct X, PS4 does not use Direct X as its language so will not have this bottleneck that AMD cards have on desktops.
Then, we havent begun to tallk about 3gb GDDR5 @ 192 gbps vs the pros 8gb GDDR @ 218gbps, the 1060p wont scale at larger resolutions like the pro.
I think you need to understand that measuring a GPU's performance in single precision FLOPS when it's application in the actual case you stated is to do graphics rendering is entirely pointless.
Which is what I outlined to you. If you buy a console to do very specific compute based scientific calculations then you might have a point.
You don't.
You also seem to fail to understand how memory allocation and bandwidth works. PS4 Pro still only has 5.5GB TOTAL usable memory, which has to be split video/system and it also has to share that bandwidth with the CPU and everything else. It still has major overheads. Whereas a PC graphics card has all that memory and bandwidth entirely for video, and the CPU has all it's own memory bandwidth and a bunch load of it's own lower latency memory superior for CPU performance. You are so far out on these points I can't even be bothered to correct the rest of your errors.
This is the only thing you need to know though:GTX1060 has superior graphics rendering performance to PS4 Pro's GPU, end of story. Besides, PC has a few more than about 10 games that you can actually play 'at larger resolutions.' unlike PS4 Pro. It has nearly everything from the past 15 years :p
You ignored my point about api. You admit consoles are coded to the metal yet ignore raw performance when in reality, the pro will use those flops. It will be able to utilise it that's the end of it.

Unified memory is a huge advantage, both cpu and GPU and manipulate the same memory pool as the same time. Things like physics, that require the superior calculations of the CPU can be written over the same memory live.Something no pc can do. Yes it's worse for non gaming applications but it's a console and for gaming, it is a far superior set up than separate ddr3 and gddr5. No transfer time when the GPU needs cpu work like the pc. Also, 5.5gb, is the amount reserved, just for games...almost double this card. System is side lined.

Edited By: smellyonion on Dec 13, 2016 15:36: .
#40
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
vulcanproject
smellyonion
This has the same power of the ps4 pro, interesting to think of it like this. Makes the pro amazing value for money.
No it doesn't. Why do you think the pro's GPU is as fast as this?
Raw power. Terraflops. Have a look then get back to me.
Teraflops is a measure of raw floating point performance. Maths basically. Not of overall graphics performance comparing two totally different GPU architectures, Nvidia Pascal v AMD Polaris in this case.
A GTX1060 generally beats a desktop Radeon RX 480 on overall graphics performance, to the tune of 10-15 percent. PS4 Pro's GPU is based on it, but significantly downclocked (about 80 percent of the clock speed) and therefore slower than a RX 480.
So there you go.
Errr, no.
Pro does not use direct x api. Gains will be better than any comparable card on the pro.
Pro's GPU isn't equal to a GTX1060 anyway I already told you that.
You said that Pro had the same power of this GPU and then quoted teraflops to back it up, nothing about what API the two platforms use. So I corrected you by saying no, Pro's GPU is not as fast as a GTX1060. It isn't.
Coding to the metal on consoles always helps their performance but Pro still won't be faster than a GTX1060 in a decent PC build.
I'll repeat, this isn't a thread for you to talk about a games console which is essentially built as a toy and limited to that. This is a GPU for a PC which can be used to do a ridiculous array of extra things, and in 18 months when you feel like even more GPU performance you can take this out, sell it and trade up for something twice as fast again should you so wish.
Power can have various ways of measuring it.
In this case, I chose Teraflops and thats the end of it.
Wiki definition:
In computing, FLOPS or flops (an acronym for FLoating-point Operations Per Second) is a measure of computer performance, useful in fields of scientific calculations that make heavy use of floating-point calculations. For such cases it is a more accurate measure than the generic instructions per second.
I brought up api because you referred to how the 1060 beats the 480 in desktop benchmarks yet has lower objective perfomance (FLOPS). Therefore, I was referring to how poorly optimized AMD cards to Direct X, PS4 does not use Direct X as its language so will not have this bottleneck that AMD cards have on desktops.
Then, we havent begun to tallk about 3gb GDDR5 @ 192 gbps vs the pros 8gb GDDR @ 218gbps, the 1060p wont scale at larger resolutions like the pro.
I think you need to understand that measuring a GPU's performance in single precision FLOPS when it's application in the actual case you stated is to do graphics rendering is entirely pointless.
Which is what I outlined to you. If you buy a console to do very specific compute based scientific calculations then you might have a point.
You don't.
You also seem to fail to understand how memory allocation and bandwidth works. PS4 Pro still only has 5.5GB TOTAL usable memory, which has to be split video/system and it also has to share that bandwidth with the CPU and everything else. It still has major overheads. Whereas a PC graphics card has all that memory and bandwidth entirely for video, and the CPU has all it's own memory bandwidth and a bunch load of it's own lower latency memory superior for CPU performance. You are so far out on these points I can't even be bothered to correct the rest of your errors.
This is the only thing you need to know though:GTX1060 has superior graphics rendering performance to PS4 Pro's GPU, end of story. Besides, PC has a few more than about 10 games that you can actually play 'at larger resolutions.' unlike PS4 Pro. It has nearly everything from the past 15 years :p
You ignored my point about api. You admit consoles are coded to the metal yet ignore raw performance when in reality, the pro will use those flops. It will be able to utilise it that's the end of it.
Unified memory is a huge advantage, both cpu and GPU and manipulate the same memory pool as the same time. Things like physics, that require the superior calculations of the CPU can be written over the same memory live.Something no pc can do. Yes it's worse for non gaming applications but it's a console and for gaming, it is a far superior set up than separate ddr3 and gddr5. No transfer time when the GPU needs cpu work like the pc.

Your initial comment was that PS4 Pro's GPU was as fast as this. It isn't. Not in raw graphics performance. Not even after we take into consideration something you only brought up when I corrected you the first time. Nice try though.

Even with better coding to the metal, PS4 Pro is STILL not as fast as this.

Unified memory in consoles exists because it's simple and cheap. Not because it is the best solution for ultimate performance. Not when you have to apportion it, share the memory AND the bandwidth between all aspects of the system. The idea that a single unified bank of memory is anything but a compromise to save money (and is somehow better than large split pools dedicated to their tasks) is hilarious.

Physics calculations done only on the CPU are so 2005. Most games have their own methods for physics but modern APIs can do most of it on the GPU because it is much better for that kind of thing, as GPUs are already hugely parallelised. Besides this, PC CPUs are so preposterously faster than PS4's CPU that memory is neither the point nor the bottleneck.

You really don't know what you are talking about do you? Please stop. Staahhhppp!

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!