KFA2 GeForce GTX 1060 OC 3 GB £160.79 Sold by powercentral and Fulfilled by 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
-66

KFA2 GeForce GTX 1060 OC 3 GB £160.79 Sold by powercentral and Fulfilled by Amazon

£160.79 @ Amazon
I'm not too familar with this brand but seems to be the cheapest GTX 1060? Read More
ganon Avatar
3m, 2w agoFound 3 months, 2 weeks ago
I'm not too familar with this brand but seems to be the cheapest GTX 1060?
ganon Avatar
3m, 2w agoFound 3 months, 2 weeks ago
Options

All Comments

(14) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
1 Like #1
I would be wary of buying from this seller in Poland. Especially as they usually sell dog stuff.
1 Like #2
With the prices of 480s now, a 3gb 1060 is expensive at anything over £140 imo.
#3
Dont know about the product or the seller but its fulfilled by Amazon so no problem there
#4
thelagmonster
With the prices of 480s now, a 3gb 1060 is expensive at anything over £140 imo.


Seriously, where are you getting 480's for less than £140?
#5
dazz71
thelagmonster
With the prices of 480s now, a 3gb 1060 is expensive at anything over £140 imo.
Seriously, where are you getting 480's for less than £140?

I've seen 4GB 480s for £155 recently, they're at £160 now here:

http://www.awd-it.co.uk/asus-radeon-dual-rx-480-gddr5-4gb-oc-vr-gaming-graphics-card.html

Given how much the 480 outperforms the 3GB 1060, I wouldn't go near one unless it was at least £20 cheaper. Personal opinion, of course.
1 Like #6
thelagmonster
dazz71
thelagmonster
With the prices of 480s now, a 3gb 1060 is expensive at anything over £140 imo.
Seriously, where are you getting 480's for less than £140?
I've seen 4GB 480s for £155 recently, they're at £160 now here:http://www.awd-it.co.uk/asus-radeon-dual-rx-480-gddr5-4gb-oc-vr-gaming-graphics-card.html
Given how much the 480 outperforms the 3GB 1060, I wouldn't go near one unless it was at least £20 cheaper. Personal opinion, of course.

You're joking, right?

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X_3_GB/26.html

The 1060, stock, is in a dead heat with the 480 8 GB model, and ahead of the 4 GB model. (4GB model performs about 3% slower than the 8 GB).

So, you may want to re-review your comparisons and read a few more reviews, considering you are not correct about your statement above.
#7
This is tempting. Great price.
#8
thelagmonster
dazz71
thelagmonster
With the prices of 480s now, a 3gb 1060 is expensive at anything over £140 imo.
Seriously, where are you getting 480's for less than £140?

I've seen 4GB 480s for £155 recently, they're at £160 now here:

http://www.awd-it.co.uk/asus-radeon-dual-rx-480-gddr5-4gb-oc-vr-gaming-graphics-card.html

Given how much the 480 outperforms the 3GB 1060, I wouldn't go near one unless it was at least £20 cheaper. Personal opinion, of course.


Ahh, got ya. Yep, I've seen that one. Personally in waiting for the MSI ArmoUr version to drop below £150 before I bite the bullet.
#9
Nate1492
thelagmonster
dazz71
thelagmonster
With the prices of 480s now, a 3gb 1060 is expensive at anything over £140 imo.
Seriously, where are you getting 480's for less than £140?
I've seen 4GB 480s for £155 recently, they're at £160 now here:http://www.awd-it.co.uk/asus-radeon-dual-rx-480-gddr5-4gb-oc-vr-gaming-graphics-card.html
Given how much the 480 outperforms the 3GB 1060, I wouldn't go near one unless it was at least £20 cheaper. Personal opinion, of course.
You're joking, right?https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X_3_GB/26.html
The 1060, stock, is in a dead heat with the 480 8 GB model, and ahead of the 4 GB model. (4GB model performs about 3% slower than the 8 GB).
So, you may want to re-review your comparisons and read a few more reviews, considering you are not correct about your statement above.

Nice try. Rather than quoting reviews from launch, have a look at how the cards perform now.

And the gap widens even further when you look at DX12 (which most games are now supporting). Add in the fact that 3GB of VRAM is already becoming limiting, the only way someone would pick a 3GB 1060 is if they've got an unreasonable bias against AMD.
#10
thelagmonster
Nate1492
thelagmonster
dazz71
thelagmonster
With the prices of 480s now, a 3gb 1060 is expensive at anything over £140 imo.
Seriously, where are you getting 480's for less than £140?
I've seen 4GB 480s for £155 recently, they're at £160 now here:http://www.awd-it.co.uk/asus-radeon-dual-rx-480-gddr5-4gb-oc-vr-gaming-graphics-card.html
Given how much the 480 outperforms the 3GB 1060, I wouldn't go near one unless it was at least £20 cheaper. Personal opinion, of course.
You're joking, right?https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X_3_GB/26.html
The 1060, stock, is in a dead heat with the 480 8 GB model, and ahead of the 4 GB model. (4GB model performs about 3% slower than the 8 GB).
So, you may want to re-review your comparisons and read a few more reviews, considering you are not correct about your statement above.
Nice try. Rather than quoting reviews from launch, have a look at how the cards perform now.
And the gap widens even further when you look at DX12 (which most games are now supporting). Add in the fact that 3GB of VRAM is already becoming limiting, the only way someone would pick a 3GB 1060 is if they've got an unreasonable bias against AMD.

So, you make bold statements and don't back them up and say "just google it"? Get off it, find a review that shows a 'wide gap'. Even in DX12, the 1060 wins about half the time.

And there is strong progress in dx12 for NVIDIA. They've focused on it and it will be part of their next few sets of drivers.
#11
Nate1492
thelagmonster
Nate1492
thelagmonster
dazz71
thelagmonster
With the prices of 480s now, a 3gb 1060 is expensive at anything over £140 imo.
Seriously, where are you getting 480's for less than £140?
I've seen 4GB 480s for £155 recently, they're at £160 now here:http://www.awd-it.co.uk/asus-radeon-dual-rx-480-gddr5-4gb-oc-vr-gaming-graphics-card.html
Given how much the 480 outperforms the 3GB 1060, I wouldn't go near one unless it was at least £20 cheaper. Personal opinion, of course.
You're joking, right?https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X_3_GB/26.html
The 1060, stock, is in a dead heat with the 480 8 GB model, and ahead of the 4 GB model. (4GB model performs about 3% slower than the 8 GB).
So, you may want to re-review your comparisons and read a few more reviews, considering you are not correct about your statement above.
Nice try. Rather than quoting reviews from launch, have a look at how the cards perform now.
And the gap widens even further when you look at DX12 (which most games are now supporting). Add in the fact that 3GB of VRAM is already becoming limiting, the only way someone would pick a 3GB 1060 is if they've got an unreasonable bias against AMD.
So, you make bold statements and don't back them up and say "just google it"? Get off it, find a review that shows a 'wide gap'. Even in DX12, the 1060 wins about half the time.
And there is strong progress in dx12 for NVIDIA. They've focused on it and it will be part of their next few sets of drivers.
Please show me where I said there was a 'wide gap'. IIRC, I qualified my statements with "Personal opinion, of course". Instead of jumping down someone's throat for suggesting a non-nVidia card, perhaps you should take the time to actually read what they write.

Although somewhat amusingly, shortly after this 'deal' came up (and I think the heat score is quite telling) some more 480 deals came up that were even better. Just saying.
#12
thelagmonster
Nate1492
thelagmonster
Nate1492
thelagmonster
dazz71
thelagmonster
With the prices of 480s now, a 3gb 1060 is expensive at anything over £140 imo.
Seriously, where are you getting 480's for less than £140?
I've seen 4GB 480s for £155 recently, they're at £160 now here:http://www.awd-it.co.uk/asus-radeon-dual-rx-480-gddr5-4gb-oc-vr-gaming-graphics-card.html
Given how much the 480 outperforms the 3GB 1060, I wouldn't go near one unless it was at least £20 cheaper. Personal opinion, of course.
You're joking, right?https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X_3_GB/26.html
The 1060, stock, is in a dead heat with the 480 8 GB model, and ahead of the 4 GB model. (4GB model performs about 3% slower than the 8 GB).
So, you may want to re-review your comparisons and read a few more reviews, considering you are not correct about your statement above.
Nice try. Rather than quoting reviews from launch, have a look at how the cards perform now.
And the gap widens even further when you look at DX12 (which most games are now supporting). Add in the fact that 3GB of VRAM is already becoming limiting, the only way someone would pick a 3GB 1060 is if they've got an unreasonable bias against AMD.
So, you make bold statements and don't back them up and say "just google it"? Get off it, find a review that shows a 'wide gap'. Even in DX12, the 1060 wins about half the time.
And there is strong progress in dx12 for NVIDIA. They've focused on it and it will be part of their next few sets of drivers.
Please show me where I said there was a 'wide gap'. IIRC, I qualified my statements with "Personal opinion, of course". Instead of jumping down someone's throat for suggesting a non-nVidia card, perhaps you should take the time to actually read what they write.
Although somewhat amusingly, shortly after this 'deal' came up (and I think the heat score is quite telling) some more 480 deals came up that were even better. Just saying.

"And the gap widens even further"

I don't know how you can interpret that, especially as it's just a straight up unsourced, unbacked, claim. Find something that shows a 'gap that widens' and not something like a 1% change.

When you say there is a gap, you *mean* there is a gap, not that AMD have caught up a bit, or pushed slightly ahead.

You made a claim there is a 20 quid performance gap. Go. Show that.
#13
Nate1492
thelagmonster
Nate1492
thelagmonster
Nate1492
thelagmonster
dazz71
thelagmonster
With the prices of 480s now, a 3gb 1060 is expensive at anything over £140 imo.
Seriously, where are you getting 480's for less than £140?
I've seen 4GB 480s for £155 recently, they're at £160 now here:http://www.awd-it.co.uk/asus-radeon-dual-rx-480-gddr5-4gb-oc-vr-gaming-graphics-card.html
Given how much the 480 outperforms the 3GB 1060, I wouldn't go near one unless it was at least £20 cheaper. Personal opinion, of course.
You're joking, right?https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X_3_GB/26.html
The 1060, stock, is in a dead heat with the 480 8 GB model, and ahead of the 4 GB model. (4GB model performs about 3% slower than the 8 GB).
So, you may want to re-review your comparisons and read a few more reviews, considering you are not correct about your statement above.
Nice try. Rather than quoting reviews from launch, have a look at how the cards perform now.
And the gap widens even further when you look at DX12 (which most games are now supporting). Add in the fact that 3GB of VRAM is already becoming limiting, the only way someone would pick a 3GB 1060 is if they've got an unreasonable bias against AMD.
So, you make bold statements and don't back them up and say "just google it"? Get off it, find a review that shows a 'wide gap'. Even in DX12, the 1060 wins about half the time.
And there is strong progress in dx12 for NVIDIA. They've focused on it and it will be part of their next few sets of drivers.
Please show me where I said there was a 'wide gap'. IIRC, I qualified my statements with "Personal opinion, of course". Instead of jumping down someone's throat for suggesting a non-nVidia card, perhaps you should take the time to actually read what they write.
Although somewhat amusingly, shortly after this 'deal' came up (and I think the heat score is quite telling) some more 480 deals came up that were even better. Just saying.
"And the gap widens even further"

I don't know how you can interpret that, especially as it's just a straight up unsourced, unbacked, claim. Find something that shows a 'gap that widens' and not something like a 1% change.

When you say there is a gap, you *mean* there is a gap, not that AMD have caught up a bit, or pushed slightly ahead.

You made a claim there is a 20 quid performance gap. Go. Show that.
Against my better judgement, because I wasn't aware stating an opinion required evidence, I'm going to spend the 20 seconds of effort on Google it required to give you the evidence required:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/73945-gtx-1060-vs-rx-480-updated-review-23.html

This shows that the RX480 has pulled up to equal performance vs the 6GB 1060 in DX11, and is now beating it by an average of more than 5% in DX12. Given the 6GB 1060 was priced at roughly £30 more than the 3GB, and general opinion was that it was worth the extra, I think this demonstrates the value gap I highlighted. And AMD is widening that gap all the time, as evidenced by the gains seen thus far.

I'm not sure why my post upset you so much. Perhaps you bought a 3GB 1060 and dislike the validity of your purchase being questioned. But was all this really necessary, given you have access to Google just as I do?
#14
thelagmonster
Nate1492
thelagmonster
Nate1492
thelagmonster
Nate1492
thelagmonster
dazz71
thelagmonster
With the prices of 480s now, a 3gb 1060 is expensive at anything over £140 imo.
Seriously, where are you getting 480's for less than £140?
I've seen 4GB 480s for £155 recently, they're at £160 now here:http://www.awd-it.co.uk/asus-radeon-dual-rx-480-gddr5-4gb-oc-vr-gaming-graphics-card.html
Given how much the 480 outperforms the 3GB 1060, I wouldn't go near one unless it was at least £20 cheaper. Personal opinion, of course.
You're joking, right?https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Gaming_X_3_GB/26.html
The 1060, stock, is in a dead heat with the 480 8 GB model, and ahead of the 4 GB model. (4GB model performs about 3% slower than the 8 GB).
So, you may want to re-review your comparisons and read a few more reviews, considering you are not correct about your statement above.
Nice try. Rather than quoting reviews from launch, have a look at how the cards perform now.
And the gap widens even further when you look at DX12 (which most games are now supporting). Add in the fact that 3GB of VRAM is already becoming limiting, the only way someone would pick a 3GB 1060 is if they've got an unreasonable bias against AMD.
So, you make bold statements and don't back them up and say "just google it"? Get off it, find a review that shows a 'wide gap'. Even in DX12, the 1060 wins about half the time.
And there is strong progress in dx12 for NVIDIA. They've focused on it and it will be part of their next few sets of drivers.
Please show me where I said there was a 'wide gap'. IIRC, I qualified my statements with "Personal opinion, of course". Instead of jumping down someone's throat for suggesting a non-nVidia card, perhaps you should take the time to actually read what they write.
Although somewhat amusingly, shortly after this 'deal' came up (and I think the heat score is quite telling) some more 480 deals came up that were even better. Just saying.
"And the gap widens even further"
I don't know how you can interpret that, especially as it's just a straight up unsourced, unbacked, claim. Find something that shows a 'gap that widens' and not something like a 1% change.
When you say there is a gap, you *mean* there is a gap, not that AMD have caught up a bit, or pushed slightly ahead.
You made a claim there is a 20 quid performance gap. Go. Show that.
Against my better judgement, because I wasn't aware stating an opinion required evidence, I'm going to spend the 20 seconds of effort on Google it required to give you the evidence required:http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/73945-gtx-1060-vs-rx-480-updated-review-23.html
This shows that the RX480 has pulled up to equal performance vs the 6GB 1060 in DX11, and is now beating it by an average of more than 5% in DX12. Given the 6GB 1060 was priced at roughly £30 more than the 3GB, and general opinion was that it was worth the extra, I think this demonstrates the value gap I highlighted. And AMD is widening that gap all the time, as evidenced by the gains seen thus far.
I'm not sure why my post upset you so much. Perhaps you bought a 3GB 1060 and dislike the validity of your purchase being questioned. But was all this really necessary, given you have access to Google just as I do?

Upset? Nothing about your post upset me, I don't know why you assumed I was upset.

Here's a review that's from the 21st of Feb that shows the 1060 galloping over the 480 in a round of 21 games. Hardware Canucks chose to review 5 titles. I mean, 21... 5... 21.. 5.... You get the picture, right? Oh, and all 5 of the titles by Hardware Canucks are included in that 21.

Surely, you can see that giving the title of "DX12 performance crown" or "Equal DX11 Performance" to the 480 based on 5 games is almost telling a straight lie, right?

This isn't the first time Hardware Canucks has drawn terrible conclusions. They also did an article about driver optimization improvements for AMD, but they used an entirely different set of drivers to compare the drivers...

A final thing that you should *seriously* consider is this: https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_Armor/33.html

The 1060 is an absolute beast of an OCer. Check out those results. 16.5% overclock from reference's top OC. The 480 just falls behind whenever OC'ing is talked about.

Again, you have *not* highlighted any value gap, at best you have shown there is no value gap, and at best, I've shown the opposite.

I have access to google, yet, not every understanding is complete without reading and comprehension.

EDIT: I just noticed, yet again, Hardware Canucks have changed their set of games tested between two comparison reviews.

Here is their first review: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/73040-nvidia-gtx-1060-6gb-review.html

BF1 wasn't included and ROTR was. Swapping out BF1 for ROTR would *easily* sway the results exaclty as much as you saw.

Take a look, ROTR is 22% faster on the 1060gb. BF1, the 1060 is only 3% faster.

That's 19% difference in one game selected, when you are only using 12 games total, that's 2% difference *right there*.

In their first review, they included 20 games. In their second 're-review' they cut it to 12 games.



Edited By: Nate1492 on Mar 09, 2017 01:30: Clarity.

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!