MSI GeForce GTX 1060 OC 6GB - £209.98 @ Novatech - 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
526

MSI GeForce GTX 1060 OC 6GB - £209.98 @ Novatech

£209.98 @ Novatech
GTX 1060 6GB, one of the lowest prices I've seen for an aftermarket card. Free delivery option available Read More
phenooo Avatar
4m, 2w agoFound 4 months, 2 weeks ago
GTX 1060 6GB, one of the lowest prices I've seen for an aftermarket card. Free delivery option available
More From Novatech:
phenooo Avatar
4m, 2w agoFound 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Options

Top Comments

(2)
12 Likes

Nurse! He's out of bed again!
5 Likes
Uncommon.Sense
vulcanproject
fishmaster
vulcanproject
hatton420
Still think the RX 480 8GB is the better deal.
Nvidia have better drivers and better features. More stable in my experience with the likes of Wattman and AMD update headaches. If you have a less than stellar CPU Nvidia are also particularly better, they have less CPU overhead which can make a big difference in slower systems.
Even if RX 480 was slightly cheaper than this and slightly faster I would pick Nvidia for the above reasons. AMD would have to make a much better card to make me prefer them.
It used to be the case where a lesser CPU would bottleneck AMD cards but AMD have massively improved their Direct X 11 draw call in late 2016. https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/51qr80/amd_dx11_api_overhead_1691_vs_1683/
So this is no longer an issue.
Only last week Digital Foundry pointed out and demonstrated it was still an issue when testing lower powered CPU- the newly launched G4560 with these precise cards, the 1060 and RX 480.
Infinite warfare was chosen as it was a DX11 title with fairly high CPU demands.
Needless to say the RX 480 crashed and burned on the test because of the driver overhead. Nothing has much changed in other words.
Here's a quote from the digital foundry review you mentioned about the 4560.
Similarly, Infinite Warfare ran beautifully with everything bar shadows maxed. Star Wars Battlefront? Even in huge multiplayer games, 1080p60 at ultra was no problem. However, a 64-player Battlefield 1 game shows the Pentium consistently maxed across all four threads, and while performance was mostly locked at 1080p60 on the required ultra settings, drops beneath the threshold were evident in heavier scenes.
Care to point out where there show this issue?

That test you are specifically referring to was run with an Nvidia card, the GTX1060.

If you want proof of AMD's well known and still existing DX11 driver overhead for lower end CPU performance then:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-aP0JqJkJ0&t=6m56s

Enjoy.

In some cases the drops are utterly brutal against the GTX1060.
https://anonimag.es/i/Brutal8be74.png

All Comments

(113) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
#1
Very good price for the 6GB model - good find (and don't forget 3.5% cashback from TCB).
1 Like #2
But will it play Minecraft on maxed out settings?
1 Like #3
Still think the RX 480 8GB is the better deal.

Edited By: hatton420 on Feb 08, 2017 06:35
#4
but will it run crysis ?
#5
hatton420
Still think the RX 480 8GB is the better deal.
Yes and no. Depends what you want. The reference design rx480 are appalling. A decent custom design at this price would indeed be a better buy across the board.
1 Like #7
Typical. Waited ages and finally bit the bullet less than 2 weeks ago from Amazon and now it's even cheaper.
12 Likes #8

Nurse! He's out of bed again!
#9
A1M
Typical. Waited ages and finally bit the bullet less than 2 weeks ago from Amazon and now it's even cheaper.


Contact Amazon customer care and they will refund the difference :)
3 Likes #10
hatton420
Still think the RX 480 8GB is the better deal.

Nvidia have better drivers and better features. More stable in my experience with the likes of Wattman and AMD update headaches. If you have a less than stellar CPU Nvidia are also particularly better, they have less CPU overhead which can make a big difference in slower systems.

Even if RX 480 was slightly cheaper than this and slightly faster I would pick Nvidia for the above reasons. AMD would have to make a much better card to make me prefer them.
#11
vwdan
A1M
Typical. Waited ages and finally bit the bullet less than 2 weeks ago from Amazon and now it's even cheaper.
Contact Amazon customer care and they will refund the difference :)

They don't do that anymore. I tried with a laptop which had its price drop by £80 the day after. They refused, so I returned it.
#12
Thanks for posting, finally took the plunge and ordered one of these for my first ever build!
#13
Will this be a Good upgrade from a 670? I'm not a hardcore gamer so can't justify much more than this
1 Like #14
vulcanproject
hatton420
Still think the RX 480 8GB is the better deal.
Nvidia have better drivers and better features. More stable in my experience with the likes of Wattman and AMD update headaches. If you have a less than stellar CPU Nvidia are also particularly better, they have less CPU overhead which can make a big difference in slower systems.
Even if RX 480 was slightly cheaper than this and slightly faster I would pick Nvidia for the above reasons. AMD would have to make a much better card to make me prefer them.

It used to be the case where a lesser CPU would bottleneck AMD cards but AMD have massively improved their Direct X 11 draw call in late 2016.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/51qr80/amd_dx11_api_overhead_1691_vs_1683/

So this is no longer an issue.
#15
This or the RX480 msi?
I am currently running a 3570k oc to 4.4 ghz with a EVGA GTX 760?
#16
We should see a nice price drop on all the 10 series cards now, if the rumoured pascal refresh is true.

EDIT: Ordered, thanks a lot OP! Have some heat!

Edited By: Nellster on Feb 08, 2017 09:19: edit
#17
fishmaster
vulcanproject
hatton420
Still think the RX 480 8GB is the better deal.
Nvidia have better drivers and better features. More stable in my experience with the likes of Wattman and AMD update headaches. If you have a less than stellar CPU Nvidia are also particularly better, they have less CPU overhead which can make a big difference in slower systems.
Even if RX 480 was slightly cheaper than this and slightly faster I would pick Nvidia for the above reasons. AMD would have to make a much better card to make me prefer them.
It used to be the case where a lesser CPU would bottleneck AMD cards but AMD have massively improved their Direct X 11 draw call in late 2016. https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/51qr80/amd_dx11_api_overhead_1691_vs_1683/
So this is no longer an issue.

I wouldn't believe it without seeing some benchmarks.

Even your theoretical results show only a 1 FPS gain in single threaded FPS.

So yeah, I don't believe AMD has fixed their CPU bottleneck, and your link doesn't convince me.

Also, note, they lost FPS in both DX 12 and DX 11 multi threaded performance.
#18
jamieisking
This or the RX480 msi?
I am currently running a 3570k oc to 4.4 ghz with a EVGA GTX 760?

If you need to buy now, get the 1060 6gb. If you can wait 2 months for the new offerings, do that.
1 Like #19
fishmaster
vulcanproject
hatton420
Still think the RX 480 8GB is the better deal.
Nvidia have better drivers and better features. More stable in my experience with the likes of Wattman and AMD update headaches. If you have a less than stellar CPU Nvidia are also particularly better, they have less CPU overhead which can make a big difference in slower systems.
Even if RX 480 was slightly cheaper than this and slightly faster I would pick Nvidia for the above reasons. AMD would have to make a much better card to make me prefer them.
It used to be the case where a lesser CPU would bottleneck AMD cards but AMD have massively improved their Direct X 11 draw call in late 2016. https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/51qr80/amd_dx11_api_overhead_1691_vs_1683/
So this is no longer an issue.

Only last week Digital Foundry pointed out and demonstrated it was still an issue when testing lower powered CPU- the newly launched G4560 with these precise cards, the 1060 and RX 480.

Infinite warfare was chosen as it was a DX11 title with fairly high CPU demands.

Needless to say the RX 480 crashed and burned on the test because of the driver overhead. Nothing has much changed in other words. Bear in mind this is a CPU that is brand new to January 2017, and also often faster than a stock 2500k (depending on memory configuration).

A great many people do not have CPU performance better than this.
#20
vulcanproject
fishmaster
vulcanproject
hatton420
Still think the RX 480 8GB is the better deal.
Nvidia have better drivers and better features. More stable in my experience with the likes of Wattman and AMD update headaches. If you have a less than stellar CPU Nvidia are also particularly better, they have less CPU overhead which can make a big difference in slower systems.
Even if RX 480 was slightly cheaper than this and slightly faster I would pick Nvidia for the above reasons. AMD would have to make a much better card to make me prefer them.
It used to be the case where a lesser CPU would bottleneck AMD cards but AMD have massively improved their Direct X 11 draw call in late 2016. https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/51qr80/amd_dx11_api_overhead_1691_vs_1683/
So this is no longer an issue.
Only last week Digital Foundry pointed out and demonstrated it was still an issue when testing lower powered CPU- the newly launched G4560 with these precise cards, the 1060 and RX 480.
Infinite warfare was chosen as it was a DX11 title with fairly high CPU demands.
Needless to say the RX 480 crashed and burned on the test because of the driver overhead. Nothing has much changed in other words.

Here's a quote from the digital foundry review you mentioned about the 4560.

Similarly, Infinite Warfare ran beautifully with everything bar shadows maxed. Star Wars Battlefront? Even in huge multiplayer games, 1080p60 at ultra was no problem. However, a 64-player Battlefield 1 game shows the Pentium consistently maxed across all four threads, and while performance was mostly locked at 1080p60 on the required ultra settings, drops beneath the threshold were evident in heavier scenes.

Care to point out where there show this issue?
5 Likes #21
Uncommon.Sense
vulcanproject
fishmaster
vulcanproject
hatton420
Still think the RX 480 8GB is the better deal.
Nvidia have better drivers and better features. More stable in my experience with the likes of Wattman and AMD update headaches. If you have a less than stellar CPU Nvidia are also particularly better, they have less CPU overhead which can make a big difference in slower systems.
Even if RX 480 was slightly cheaper than this and slightly faster I would pick Nvidia for the above reasons. AMD would have to make a much better card to make me prefer them.
It used to be the case where a lesser CPU would bottleneck AMD cards but AMD have massively improved their Direct X 11 draw call in late 2016. https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/51qr80/amd_dx11_api_overhead_1691_vs_1683/
So this is no longer an issue.
Only last week Digital Foundry pointed out and demonstrated it was still an issue when testing lower powered CPU- the newly launched G4560 with these precise cards, the 1060 and RX 480.
Infinite warfare was chosen as it was a DX11 title with fairly high CPU demands.
Needless to say the RX 480 crashed and burned on the test because of the driver overhead. Nothing has much changed in other words.
Here's a quote from the digital foundry review you mentioned about the 4560.
Similarly, Infinite Warfare ran beautifully with everything bar shadows maxed. Star Wars Battlefront? Even in huge multiplayer games, 1080p60 at ultra was no problem. However, a 64-player Battlefield 1 game shows the Pentium consistently maxed across all four threads, and while performance was mostly locked at 1080p60 on the required ultra settings, drops beneath the threshold were evident in heavier scenes.
Care to point out where there show this issue?

That test you are specifically referring to was run with an Nvidia card, the GTX1060.

If you want proof of AMD's well known and still existing DX11 driver overhead for lower end CPU performance then:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-aP0JqJkJ0&t=6m56s

Enjoy.

In some cases the drops are utterly brutal against the GTX1060.
https://anonimag.es/i/Brutal8be74.png
#22
sooo tempted but must resist oO
#23
This is a great price for the card, the AMD 480 8gb is also a cracking card and can be got for around this price point.

If you go red or green in this price point you will get a good card either way.

The main thing that is often overlooked is the monitor, if you don't have the funds for a gsync monitor, AMD is the best choice here with FREEsync.
#24
vulcanproject
Uncommon.Sense
vulcanproject
fishmaster
vulcanproject
hatton420
Still think the RX 480 8GB is the better deal.
Nvidia have better drivers and better features. More stable in my experience with the likes of Wattman and AMD update headaches. If you have a less than stellar CPU Nvidia are also particularly better, they have less CPU overhead which can make a big difference in slower systems.

Thakns for posting that, very interesting.
Even if RX 480 was slightly cheaper than this and slightly faster I would pick Nvidia for the above reasons. AMD would have to make a much better card to make me prefer them.
It used to be the case where a lesser CPU would bottleneck AMD cards but AMD have massively improved their Direct X 11 draw call in late 2016. https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/51qr80/amd_dx11_api_overhead_1691_vs_1683/
So this is no longer an issue.
Only last week Digital Foundry pointed out and demonstrated it was still an issue when testing lower powered CPU- the newly launched G4560 with these precise cards, the 1060 and RX 480.
Infinite warfare was chosen as it was a DX11 title with fairly high CPU demands.
Needless to say the RX 480 crashed and burned on the test because of the driver overhead. Nothing has much changed in other words.
Here's a quote from the digital foundry review you mentioned about the 4560.
Similarly, Infinite Warfare ran beautifully with everything bar shadows maxed. Star Wars Battlefront? Even in huge multiplayer games, 1080p60 at ultra was no problem. However, a 64-player Battlefield 1 game shows the Pentium consistently maxed across all four threads, and while performance was mostly locked at 1080p60 on the required ultra settings, drops beneath the threshold were evident in heavier scenes.
Care to point out where there show this issue?
That test you are specifically referring to was run with an Nvidia card, the GTX1060.
If you want proof of AMD's well known and still existing DX11 driver overhead for lower end CPU performance then:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-aP0JqJkJ0&t=6m56s
Enjoy.
In some cases the drops are utterly brutal against the GTX1060. https://anonimag.es/i/Brutal8be74.png
#25
vulcanproject
Uncommon.Sense
vulcanproject
fishmaster
vulcanproject
hatton420
Still think the RX 480 8GB is the better deal.
Nvidia have better drivers and better features. More stable in my experience with the likes of Wattman and AMD update headaches. If you have a less than stellar CPU Nvidia are also particularly better, they have less CPU overhead which can make a big difference in slower systems.
Even if RX 480 was slightly cheaper than this and slightly faster I would pick Nvidia for the above reasons. AMD would have to make a much better card to make me prefer them.
It used to be the case where a lesser CPU would bottleneck AMD cards but AMD have massively improved their Direct X 11 draw call in late 2016. https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/51qr80/amd_dx11_api_overhead_1691_vs_1683/
So this is no longer an issue.
Only last week Digital Foundry pointed out and demonstrated it was still an issue when testing lower powered CPU- the newly launched G4560 with these precise cards, the 1060 and RX 480.
Infinite warfare was chosen as it was a DX11 title with fairly high CPU demands.
Needless to say the RX 480 crashed and burned on the test because of the driver overhead. Nothing has much changed in other words.
Here's a quote from the digital foundry review you mentioned about the 4560.
Similarly, Infinite Warfare ran beautifully with everything bar shadows maxed. Star Wars Battlefront? Even in huge multiplayer games, 1080p60 at ultra was no problem. However, a 64-player Battlefield 1 game shows the Pentium consistently maxed across all four threads, and while performance was mostly locked at 1080p60 on the required ultra settings, drops beneath the threshold were evident in heavier scenes.
Care to point out where there show this issue?
That test you are specifically referring to was run with an Nvidia card, the GTX1060.
If you want proof of AMD's well known and still existing DX11 driver overhead for lower end CPU performance then:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-aP0JqJkJ0&t=6m56s
Enjoy.
In some cases the drops are utterly brutal against the GTX1060. https://anonimag.es/i/Brutal8be74.png

Fair point, and it would seem that Infinite Warfare is one of the few exceptions going on the comments further into the video.

Personally, I would say that people on this much of a budget are much less likely to upgrade sooner, and as such should be looking forwards not backwards, and a heck of a lot of 2017 titles this year are going to be DX12 compared with last, and the tables will have turned meaning that the Nvidia DX12 performance will be where the DX11 is for AMD cards now.
#26
chapchap
Nurse! He's out of bed again!
Lol the reference RX480 is noisy. However if you want no screen tearing with less input lag then a freesync monitor is typically over £100 less than the Gsync equivalent, so then you'd pick the RX480 over the 1060. If you're not bothered then Nvidia is the way to go for similar cash.


Edited By: Anonknowmouse on Feb 08, 2017 11:17
1 Like #27
poison3k
This is a great price for the card, the AMD 480 8gb is also a cracking card and can be got for around this price point.
If you go red or green in this price point you will get a good card either way.
The main thing that is often overlooked is the monitor, if you don't have the funds for a gsync monitor, AMD is the best choice here with FREEsync.
Honestly that's the main thing you should consider before anything else. Both cards will trade blows most of the time. But if you're got a freesync monitor this card is pointless, bit like if you're buying one of those RX 480s with a G-Sync monitor. The premium you're paying on some of those monitors are a fair bit sometimes.
#28
Uncommon.Sense
vulcanproject
Uncommon.Sense
vulcanproject
fishmaster
vulcanproject
hatton420
Still think the RX 480 8GB is the better deal.
Nvidia have better drivers and better features. More stable in my experience with the likes of Wattman and AMD update headaches. If you have a less than stellar CPU Nvidia are also particularly better, they have less CPU overhead which can make a big difference in slower systems.
Even if RX 480 was slightly cheaper than this and slightly faster I would pick Nvidia for the above reasons. AMD would have to make a much better card to make me prefer them.
It used to be the case where a lesser CPU would bottleneck AMD cards but AMD have massively improved their Direct X 11 draw call in late 2016. https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/51qr80/amd_dx11_api_overhead_1691_vs_1683/
So this is no longer an issue.
Only last week Digital Foundry pointed out and demonstrated it was still an issue when testing lower powered CPU- the newly launched G4560 with these precise cards, the 1060 and RX 480.
Infinite warfare was chosen as it was a DX11 title with fairly high CPU demands.
Needless to say the RX 480 crashed and burned on the test because of the driver overhead. Nothing has much changed in other words.
Here's a quote from the digital foundry review you mentioned about the 4560.
Similarly, Infinite Warfare ran beautifully with everything bar shadows maxed. Star Wars Battlefront? Even in huge multiplayer games, 1080p60 at ultra was no problem. However, a 64-player Battlefield 1 game shows the Pentium consistently maxed across all four threads, and while performance was mostly locked at 1080p60 on the required ultra settings, drops beneath the threshold were evident in heavier scenes.
Care to point out where there show this issue?
That test you are specifically referring to was run with an Nvidia card, the GTX1060.
If you want proof of AMD's well known and still existing DX11 driver overhead for lower end CPU performance then:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-aP0JqJkJ0&t=6m56s
Enjoy.
In some cases the drops are utterly brutal against the GTX1060. https://anonimag.es/i/Brutal8be74.png
Fair point, and it would seem that Infinite Warfare is one of the few exceptions going on the comments further into the video.
Personally, I would say that people on this much of a budget are much less likely to upgrade sooner, and as such should be looking forwards not backwards, and a heck of a lot of 2017 titles this year are going to be DX12 compared with last, and the tables will have turned meaning that the Nvidia DX12 performance will be where the DX11 is for AMD cards now.

It is well documented on several DX11 titles and unfortunately, usually very popular ones. Infinite warfare isn't alone, but it uses an engine from a massively popular game series. DX11 remains the API path of the vast majority of recent and modern titles most play.

While I agree that eventually if you upgrade the rest of your platform in its entirety and still keep the card then the Radeon might have a small performance edge at that point if we discount overclocking. But I didn't just say performance originally either as the sole valid reason for picking a card. Nvidia still has better driver support and features IMO.

It just appears a much larger majority of people gaming on weaker systems that would see a much larger performance benefit from choosing an Nvidia card.

In short Nvidia have always had more consistent performance. Ultimate performance averages then with a fast CPU the GTX1060 is probably 5 percent slower, but that is pretty much all it'll be and largely negligible to actually gameplay.

Whereas in circumstances somewhat likely to occur (you don't have a powerful CPU and you play DX11 games on it) the Radeon can be catastrophically slower. So much so that it seriously affects your gameplay.

This isn't often discussed because AMD won't want people to know about it but also because even cheap cards are always tested with £400 processors on sites and so you never see it. But I know it's a major issue for many people, the ones without high end gear. Which is basically 95 per cent of people when you see the hardware surveys lol
#29
vulcanproject
Uncommon.Sense
vulcanproject
fishmaster
vulcanproject
hatton420
Still think the RX 480 8GB is the better deal.
Nvidia have better drivers and better features. More stable in my experience with the likes of Wattman and AMD update headaches. If you have a less than stellar CPU Nvidia are also particularly better, they have less CPU overhead which can make a big difference in slower systems.
Even if RX 480 was slightly cheaper than this and slightly faster I would pick Nvidia for the above reasons. AMD would have to make a much better card to make me prefer them.
It used to be the case where a lesser CPU would bottleneck AMD cards but AMD have massively improved their Direct X 11 draw call in late 2016. https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/51qr80/amd_dx11_api_overhead_1691_vs_1683/
So this is no longer an issue.
Only last week Digital Foundry pointed out and demonstrated it was still an issue when testing lower powered CPU- the newly launched G4560 with these precise cards, the 1060 and RX 480.
Infinite warfare was chosen as it was a DX11 title with fairly high CPU demands.
Needless to say the RX 480 crashed and burned on the test because of the driver overhead. Nothing has much changed in other words.
Here's a quote from the digital foundry review you mentioned about the 4560.
Similarly, Infinite Warfare ran beautifully with everything bar shadows maxed. Star Wars Battlefront? Even in huge multiplayer games, 1080p60 at ultra was no problem. However, a 64-player Battlefield 1 game shows the Pentium consistently maxed across all four threads, and while performance was mostly locked at 1080p60 on the required ultra settings, drops beneath the threshold were evident in heavier scenes.
Care to point out where there show this issue?
That test you are specifically referring to was run with an Nvidia card, the GTX1060.
If you want proof of AMD's well known and still existing DX11 driver overhead for lower end CPU performance then:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-aP0JqJkJ0&t=6m56s
Enjoy.
In some cases the drops are utterly brutal against the GTX1060. https://anonimag.es/i/Brutal8be74.png

What's the context though? If the games are powered by Nvidia they will have a bias. I'd need to check out some comparisons for games not powered by Nvidia, maybe they are in that video. I'm not biased I don't care as long as there's healthy competition I'll choose whichever is the best. Anyway if more games favour the GTX 1060 then it's a sensible choice, as DX12 titles are few and far between.
#30
this is a superb deal for the brand of card that it is i advise anyone trying to upgrade to purchase one before it runs out quick you wont be disappointed hell i wouldv bought one myself but already having a 1060 3gb (i cudnt miss out on the offer as it was £160 from ebay brand new) which i havent even used yet and still sealed i think its just absurd for me to buy the same card but with 3gb extra on the ram, not to mention the rx 480 powercolor i bought a couple weeks ago too so i have a handful of cards already ...dammit shouldv waited to get this instead.

Edited By: BigP50000 on Feb 08, 2017 11:45
#31
BigP50000
this is a superb deal for the brand of card that it is i advise anyone trying to upgrade to purchase one before it runs out quick you wont be disappointed hell i wouldv bought one myself but already having a 1060 3gb (i cudnt miss out on the offer as it was £160 from ebay brand new) which i havent even used yet and still sealed i think its just absurd for me to buy the same card but with 3gb extra on the ram, not to mention the rx 480 powercolor i bought a couple weeks ago too so i have a handful of cards already ...dammit shouldv waited to get this instead.

It's not the same card every GTX 1060 3GB has less cores and texture units than a GTX 1060 6GB as well as less VRAM.

1,152 cores, down from 1,280 and 72 texture units, down from 80. Nvidia have a cheek to call the GTX 1060 3GB a GTX 1060, but they already have a GTX 1050Ti so I'm not sure what naming convention they could use.
#32
Thanks OP! Saw your post on the deal I posted and managed to Cancel it. This is alot cheaper but I have had nightmares with MSI (recently my Laptop). How good are these cards?
#33
fishmaster
BigP50000
this is a superb deal for the brand of card that it is i advise anyone trying to upgrade to purchase one before it runs out quick you wont be disappointed hell i wouldv bought one myself but already having a 1060 3gb (i cudnt miss out on the offer as it was £160 from ebay brand new) which i havent even used yet and still sealed i think its just absurd for me to buy the same card but with 3gb extra on the ram, not to mention the rx 480 powercolor i bought a couple weeks ago too so i have a handful of cards already ...dammit shouldv waited to get this instead.
It's not the same card every GTX 1060 3GB has less cores and texture units than a GTX 1060 6GB as well as less VRAM.
1,152 cores, down from 1,280 and 72 texture units, down from 80. Nvidia have a cheek to call the GTX 1060 3GB a GTX 1060, but they already have a GTX 1050Ti so I'm not sure what naming convention they could use.

yes im aware of that too but still like you mentioned the gtx 1050ti i have one of those too :/ so im planning on waiting on a better price regarding the gtx 1080 and if not ill just wait until the volta architecture but it was told that we shouldnt expect it to arrive in 2017 so with that in mind ill just see what amd has to offer with their vega cards if they plan to release it this year
#34
darthvader666uk
Thanks OP! Saw your post on the deal I posted and managed to Cancel it. This is alot cheaper but I have had nightmares with MSI (recently my Laptop). How good are these cards?


https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/MSI/GTX_1060_OC/

https://videocardz.com/review/msi-geforce-gtx-1060-6gt-oc

Just some links that I thought would help
#35
mind you novetech rarely put out a bargain like this thumbs up to them for this one
#36
I've got the 3gb version of this card, a word of warning, it's bloody loud all the time. Even when idling on the desktop the fans run at 50% and there is no way to reduce that. If you use your PC for anything other than gaming or are someone like me who's botherd about noise I'd say don't get this card.

I'm really happy with the performance of mine, but the noise is a right PITA.
#37
fishmaster
BigP50000
this is a superb deal for the brand of card that it is i advise anyone trying to upgrade to purchase one before it runs out quick you wont be disappointed hell i wouldv bought one myself but already having a 1060 3gb (i cudnt miss out on the offer as it was £160 from ebay brand new) which i havent even used yet and still sealed i think its just absurd for me to buy the same card but with 3gb extra on the ram, not to mention the rx 480 powercolor i bought a couple weeks ago too so i have a handful of cards already ...dammit shouldv waited to get this instead.
It's not the same card every GTX 1060 3GB has less cores and texture units than a GTX 1060 6GB as well as less VRAM.
1,152 cores, down from 1,280 and 72 texture units, down from 80. Nvidia have a cheek to call the GTX 1060 3GB a GTX 1060, but they already have a GTX 1050Ti so I'm not sure what naming convention they could use.

They used to use LE for the gimped versions, maybe they should bring it back.
#38
Fiendmish
I've got the 3gb version of this card, a word of warning, it's bloody loud all the time. Even when idling on the desktop the fans run at 50% and there is no way to reduce that. If you use your PC for anything other than gaming or are someone like me who's botherd about noise I'd say don't get this card.

I'm really happy with the performance of mine, but the noise is a right PITA.


is that so? any others out there claiming the same issues about what you just mentioned? or is it just your card?

Edited By: BigP50000 on Feb 08, 2017 12:50
#39
if it was excluding the tax :p id buy this already
#40
ryshaz
But will it play Minecraft on maxed out settings?
no

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!