GTX 1060 vs. RX 480?

File: download (2).jpg (4KB, 200x144px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 200x144px

POOLARIS

>>56196412
480?since those are not the only games you are gonna play in the future

>>56196412
who cares they're not expensive and ull probably want to upgrade after 2-4 years

>>56196455
Well yeah but I still like to come back to old games/keep playing them quite often, and also it seems like the additional performance is bigger on NVIDIA's side. And due to things like Vulkan being biased or whatever etc. (and not all new games using DX12 for a while presumably), couldn't some of the newer games end up performing better with NVIDIA cards too?

>>56196496
True. I just want to be sure (well, to a certain degree, anyway).

1060 is a good card. if you want to be a jew and you're only playing at 1080p you can get a 970 and OC it for roughly equal performance as well, you can probably save $50-100 this way.

>>56196532
sure but since you wont buy another gfx card 480 will server you better for the next 10 years

>>56196412
480 will be more futureproof than the 1060, if recent trends are anything to go by. Whether or not it will overtake 1060 in DX11 games is up in the air. We saw Southern Islands slowly creep up and overtake Kepler though, so it's not impossible.

>>56196532
>And due to things like Vulkan being biased
Vulkan is not biased. It's completely open to both AMD and Nvidia (in spite of Nvidia trying market Vulkan performance in DOOM with the 1080). It's just AMD invested more into newer APIs.

>>56196597
>Vulkan is not biased.
Sorry, I was just kind of spouting what I had heard thinking it would make some sense or something. I guess what I mean is some games may not use the VULKAN thingy. Not saying it's biased or bad or anything. Well I did say that, but I definitely take it back.

>>56196573
Hmm. Well let's say I upgrade in 3-4 years. Then DX11 games will be a bit more relevant, right? And those DX11 games are getting better performance with NVIDIA ATM and those where the performance differs significantly probably will in the future, I take it.

>>56197013
wat?

File: hirescnc95.png (272KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 1024x768px

>>56196412

i went with the 480 nitro+ because if history repeats itself like it did with my 290x, the 480 will perform 25-30% better in a few months and that will make up for that.

Also that chart is weird, tested against my friends 1060, (we have almoast the exact rig) his card wasnt that much faster in BF4,

i think he got like 5 fps more than i did, both cards clocked to the teeth

>>56196412
Ask yourself this

Are you going to Windows 10?
>Rx poo in loo
Are you sticking with Windows 7 with limited vulkan games released and DX11 majority?
>Nvijew

You can always upgrade 3 years from now, Personally Im going for 1060 cause Im sticking with Win 7

>>56196412
1060 and overclock it. it'll easily make up for that small 10% difference.

the 480 can't overclock at all.

>>56196412
Get 1060 then. AIBp versions are cheaper, so it's also nice
It's not alike all Dx12 title work better on 480. You're going to play these games not, with 480 you're going to wait for Dx12 to take off.

>>56196412
If you are willing to pay more money then yes

>>56197029
Sorry I'm confusing. What I mean is: Let's say I only keep the GPU that I choose to buy now for 4 years. Then current DX11 performance will be a bit more relevant, is what I mean. Also because games that I'm interested in ATM are in large majority DX11 ones, and keeping the card for a shorter amount of time means my current interests would be more relevant. Maybe I'm making too big of a deal out of this.

>>56197060
I plan to stick to Windows 8.1 (64-bit, Pro) for gaming, at least for a while longer. I'll probably stick with it for as long as it makes sense to do so.

>>56197096
>You're going to play these games not, with 480 you're going to wait for Dx12 to take off.
That's what I'm thinking, and it's not like the specific games I'm into will transform into DX12 games either (probably). I guess the thing is what if I start playing lots of DX12 games, but I guess I just doubt DX12 games will be the majority of what I play any time very soon.

>>56197116
Their prices are not that far apart in the store I'm looking at.

>>56196412
>560ti
>$200
>1060 not even ti
>$550
how is this acceptable?
do you faggots not care about price to performance ratios?
just buy a card from 2010 for 80 bucks and enjoy being able to play any of your games without selling a limb.

>>56197232
http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-560-Ti-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1060/2180vs3639
>+212%
...?

>>56197204
If you're sticking with 8,1, 1060 is the obvious choice, there are like 2 Vulkan games planned with 1 released + 1 tech demo in a wrapper. It also works better for games you want to play. Check other store prices, there might be a chance 480 is cheaper in your region, if not, go with 1060.

People arguing for 480 expect another Kepler\GCN, but AMD already played their cards, DX12 is there with Windows 10, you aren't going to use. No real breakthrough is expected. But you get what you pay for upfront with 1060. 480 is more of a promise of a better future.

>>56197319
Well, reading this, now I feel a bit stupid sticking with Windows 8.1. Then again, Windows 10 is just too much botnet for me. At least it feels that way, regardless of the actual botnet level. Not sure if I can justify not adjusting to it though.

>>56197060

why? Vulkan still applies.

Either way, going with the 1060 isnt a good choice,

either get the 1070 (cheapest you can find is just as good as the expensive ones btw) or get the 480.

the 1060 is a shit choice

>>56197527
>the 1060 is a shit choice
Why? It's currently performing better in a lot of games.

Do you intend to use it for a long time?
>480

You'll change it in a year or two?
>1060

>>56198201
In maybe 3-4 years? But I typically don't play brand-new games.

>>56196455
in 2 years both cards will be to slow to play dx12 games and you will need to buy new one unless you want to play at mid settings

>>56196556
you know gtx 1060 can oc as well? i oced mine to 2025mhz/ 4482mhz memory and get at least 5 fps more than stock. Also 6gb > 3.5gb

at least i can mod shit out of fallout 4 and skyrim

>>56196412
I don't like a single game in that chart

>>56199074
because you are fucking weeaboo

>>56199399
I fucking hate anime

File: 1469234333835.png (667KB, 3882x2171px) Image search: [Google]

667KB, 3882x2171px

>>56199074
>MINECRAFT!

>>56199649
sad times we live in, not a single good games

>>56199074
Well I do.

>>56197030
the chart shows percentages, not fps

File: 1470838552732.jpg (119KB, 540x960px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 540x960px

>>56196597
>480 will be more futureproof

This is the thing though with AMD that gets to me, it's always "wait and see, it'll show it's true power in the future, just you wait". It's always a fucking waiting game with AMD.