Is this card overshadowed by the RX 480?

No but in 2 years it will be.

by then you'll want to upgrade your card anyway

I think what he's talking about is that RX 480 has more memory and better DX12/Vulkan performance. Both features are not really required today but might be far more important few years later.

There will be newer better cards a few years later making current shit obsolete. Especially if they start putting hardware HVEC support and other features on new cards.

gigabyte "windforce / g1 / whatever they call it now" this generation on the "midrange" cards are horseshit.

there is a reason why its one of the cheapest.

they pretty much took the reference design, DOWNGRADED the the vrm's and slapped their cooler on it.

take a look at for example:
youtube.com/watch?v=zdYzPEK9A30

to see the breakdown of the g1 480. the reference 480 actually has better quality vrm's over gigabytes shitty g1.

and taking a look at steam hardware survey where the vast majority of users own cards that cost $250 or less and vast majority own cards that are already close to being five years old.

yeah stop this meme. they may be able to afford $1,200 but that's for the entire computer, not just one or two parts. most people don't and are not going to upgrade their shit every year or two and most people are poor when it comes to budgets.

>mfw my Galax EXOC 1060 was cheaper than any 480 I could find

Get a Fury instead. You can get them cheaper than a 1060 or RX 480 (at least here in Germany).
4 GB HBM is enough for 1080p / 1440p gaming, and the Fury card is faster than both the 1060 and RX 480.

nvidia cards age like milk

if you're gonna cheap out on your GPU then go AMD

KEK NO THEY DON'T. YOU RETARDS RELY ON CHERRYPICKED BENCHMARKS.

Are you from Europe?

GALAX and PALIT cards are manufactured there, meanwhile AMD has to import everything from the US and that makes costs higher.

>PALIT
Their Jetstream cards are GOAT

can confirm

what a beast

i have a RX 470. ran bf1 beta maxed at 60-80 fps lul. Cred Forums is dummies.

I recently bought an MSI GTX 1060 3GB.

Holy fuck this card is great for getting me 144fps+ in any game with settings on low. I haven't tested any singleplayer titles where I ramp up the settings yet, but I can safely say it will be a shit ton better than my old 580.

And this card is SO FUCKING QUIET! The fans don't even spin if it's under 60c (which it has been the entire time I've had it...) so it makes no noise.

Literally literally means figuratively according to the Webster dictionary

Was that much cheaper than the 6GB variant? Seems like a waste.

About $40-60. How is it a waste if I'm gaming on 1080p?

>Imaging the butthurt if Vegas or GTX1160 were to suddenly drop performance onto the market another magical 80%+ in performance over the current RX480 or GTX 1060 like the GTX 1060 did with the GTX 960?

This is probably the only reason i want to skip this generation if possible, and maybe the next one. Seeing that Vega 10/11 will jump to 16/32 Gb HBM2 in 1 or 2 years (and nvidia will too if amd don't choke), i fear it will happen like back then in 2006 where if you got a 7900GT/X1900XT just 2 years later the GTX260/HD4870 beat the living shit out of them with over 150% performance gain and the gpu was crap for the money you spend on it, up the point they only supported directx 9c/opengl2.0 and got stuck forever to win XP date games (hardware limited like the SSE4.2/POPCNT shit on core2 cpu and amd dx12 drivers).

>mfw forever waiting

You're essentially buying a crippled card that's not going to hold up as long.

What AIBs would you recommend this generation then?

Also, is there a significant difference between factory overclocked versions made by the same manufacturer?
Sapphire makes a nitro+ that is oc'd to 1342mhz, and one that is around 1000-something mhz

What the fuck are you talking about? 3GB is fine for 1080p considering most ultra textures are just uncompressed garbage that add nothing of real value.

Additionally, my GTX 580 held up fine for over 4 years, pretty sure this 1060 will last at least 2..

I know that feel. I went from the 660 ti to 1060 6GB and the largest difference is how quiet and cooler it is.

The thing about the 3gb version is that they didn't just gimp the vram.
The 3gb version also has less cores, meaning it is less powerful than the 6GB version even in tasks that require under 3gb of vram.

The gtx1060 3gb actually loses to the rx480 overall, so if you aren't going to get the 1060 6gb, you should just get the rx480 4gb at that price point imo.

unless you're grabbing a stock reference model, its worth picking up a preoverlocked AIB version. the price difference between stock clocked AIB design (not reference) versions and overclocked versions are not that much. at least here in the US.

the sapphire nitro+ 8gb 480 1342mhz version and 1306mhz are great values. here in the US they're in the middle of the road price wise and offer a great value for the performance, cooling, and features.

asus strix, regardless of series this generation, is premium priced. doesn't matter if its the 460, 470, 480 or the 1060, 1070, or 1080 version, they're all priced well above msrp and other AIB offerings. last i saw the strix 1060 was $330 over its $250 msrp. though 480 wise the strix 480 does offer the best PCB design on the market in terms of quality and performance.

and unlike the 1060 version, the 480 version does offer the rgb on the backplate.

youtube.com/watch?v=W3QDevWleVY

its truly overkill

xfx black gtr version is another good one as well but also priced as a premium. its more competitive with sapphire than the asus in terms of pcb quality. a lot of people jizz over msi but msi is really just a reference pcb with their cooler slapped to it. but its also close to msrp price than the other options.

i went with the strix myself but if i had a more limited budget i would of went with the sapphire nitro+ 8gb 1306mhz. perfect middle ground in terms of quality, performance, and the stock speed it ships with and price.

The 480 will fry your mobo, it isn't even today proof lmao

None of the current generation is very future proof.

2016 was supposed to be the year of insane HBM cards, and all we got were garbage GDDR5 cards, either weak and pathetic (RX 470 and below), stupidly overpriced (1080) or retardedly overpriced (Titan X 2).

I kinda blame AMD here for not putting out a stopgap 384b chip or holding the gooks' feet to the fire for not getting HBM2 out on time, giving Nvidia a monopoly in the >=$300 price bracket.

I actually was using a 7950 until this year, it was still playing most games just fine at high settings or even better.

Nope.

These cards are the same price where I live so that's a no brainer.

>VRM A SHIT
Those fets can still do 180A (instead of 240A (?) of the reference card), the 8-pin pcie power cable on the other hand that is supplying the juice to that part of the card is going to start melting at 50A. A fucking non-issue senpai

Why did you upgrade? You were playing most games just fine at high settings.

I got a 1440p 144hz monitor so i wanted substantially more performance.

Or rather even the 470. 3GB 1060 is pretty pointless I think.

>560 Ti died last month
>was good enough for the games I was playing
>running integrated
>now want to play games
>everything new in video cards is overpriced

I wish this had happened 6 months from now.

RX 480 is a good card for the price though.

So is the 1060 3GB actually.

RX 470 and 6gb 1060 are better.

3GB seems like a bad idea for future proofing.

What also sucks is I feel like I might need to upgrade my whole computer. I'm running a 2500K, is that still good enough for high end gaming?

Ended up buying that, because Nitro RX 480s were out of stock. A good purchase imo. Solid upgrade from my HD7850 at least.

I didn't mention the 1060 6GB because I assumed $250 was too much for him. But IDK his budget.

>3GB seems like a bad idea for future proofing.
That's what people like to say but it's almost never true because VRAM usually isn't the bottleneck for cards that are weak to begin with. But just go with the RX 470 or 480 if that's a concern.

>I'm running a 2500K, is that still good enough for high end gaming?
That's definitely still enough. the 2500k is starting to age but it's still going to be a few years until it matters.

>2500K
Meh, 6600K is what, 15% better?

VRAM is not the only difference between 3gb 1060 and the 6gb model. It's pretty close to fraud using the same name for both given how neutered the 3gb model is

that's because battlefield have been an amd shill game for years

>vram listed in a tiny corner so most people won't see it
Nvidia really wants to screw people over don't they?

The VRAM is one thing, calling it a 1060 still when it's a cut die is enormously more disingenuous.

>1060 is superior in dx11 they said
>witcher 3
>16.9.1 drivers come
>480 surpassed oced 1060
>470 ties with founders 1060
Didn't take long.

No it doesn't literally mean figuratively.
But 'literally' can be used to mean 'figuratively', symbolically.

>This is probably the only reason i want to skip this generation if possible
You did well, looks like Pascal will be the new Kepler once Volta releases. Waiting sucks, though.

just went from a evga 750 ti ftw to the card in the op

the GP106 is clearly a weaker piece of hardware than the Polaris 10 on paper, and there frankly never should have been a competition except for AMD deficit on the software side.

do they even have a DX12 driver that doesn't have awful stuttering for DX:MD yet?

Gigabyte is overshadowed by everything. It's cheap plastic trash.

Nice meme, updated ex dee

Just get a rx460 then, its only 100$

I've got an XFX rx 480 in my pc, and my housemate has an ANUS 1060 in his. There's very little difference in performance between them. He'll get a couple extra fps in most titles, but my card seems to have better colours.

For the record, we've both had problems with drivers. Not sure what he's using, but I'm currently stable on 16.8.2

Less than that, try about 5%

Gigabyte midrange cards have always been shit. Even upper-range cards have endless amounts of problems.

>Getting cucked by nvidia twice
wew lad

>just bought gigabyte's 1060

Welp.

So only Sapphire & MSI are available in my country for rx480. MSI goes for $5 cheaper and from what I've seen on reviews it runs a bit cooler than Sapphire's Nitro.

In games you won't really feel a difference between a 2500K and a 6600K because in todays games your GPU matters much more than your CPU.

...I'm still using a 650 ti. Then again I haven't bought a new game in a couple of years. Nothing new really entertaining to me at the moment. Hell I just went back and played through Heroes of Might and Magic 2 for nostalgia.

Still running a Sapphire HD 7870 GHz Edition and want to get a RX 480 8GB but most 1060 6GB models are cheaper here. Welp...

...

It's very competitive with the 1060, and any minor losses it has in DX11 are more than made up for by it's reduced MSRP. It has gains in DX12 but by the time DX12 becomes both common and well implemented there will be better cards out there, so once again trying to future-proof is not the smart move.

The fact is the 480 and the 1060 are neck-and-neck, but what really pushes it out ahead is that by buying it you are NOT rewarding Nvidia for its terrible business practices. I'm saying this as someone who's bought Nvidia 3 times in a row.

290x is high end
270x is irrelevant in 2016

>reduced MSRP
Literally a lie, a ton of countries have cheaper 6gb 1060s than any 480s (save for the ones with the shitty reference cooler).

>fury

These are like 450$+ in the US, am I missing something or was there a particular model you were referring to?

That's why I specifically said MSRP. Obviously the reality is the price tags have been all over the place this generation. Where I live the reference models are actually both exactly the same price. But the MSRP for the 480 is supposed to be $50 USD below the 1060, and if where you live the 480s are that much cheaper, then it's a no-brainer. Obviously if you can get a 1060 for cheaper then go for it, but know that you'll have to live with the same guilt that I do for continuing to support Nvidia.

...

>These are like 450$+ in the US

Fury Nitro (the best model on the market) is $290 on Newegg right now.

newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202186

Being that they are both from a new architecture for the first time in like 6 years or something and 8gb is more than enough ram for future proofing and they are both much stronger than consoles will be for a while I'll say they are definetly future proof for the next 5 years if you don't mind sticking with 1080p

I did too. I bought the cheap shitty $250 one.

How much better will the performance be on a good 1060? 5%? 10%? Doesn't really matter.

From my limited experience it seems the twin fan MSI cards are some of the coldest running. I'd say go for it if the price are so close.

I'm also a sucker for the stupid dragon logo.

>ANUS 1060

ah I got it confused with the FuryX or whatever the fuck, ive been out of the loop with anything released in the last 2-3 years.

270x works very well even today.

Thank god I saw this thread. I was going to get the 3gb 1060.
So now I'm going to get 4gb 470.
Did I do good.

The Fury X is the full version of the chip and ~5% faster. You can often unlock some of the missing cores on the air cooled Furys though. Some lucky people even get all 4096 running, but 3840 is much more common (up from 3584 by default).

There's also the R9 Nano, which uses the full 4096-core chip, but is hampered by a tiny cooler and aggressive power efficiency features.

yep, try overclocking

This, if you're anywhere in Europe, order a 300 € Fury from Cuckmany.

Only if you drop settings down a couple notches.
It's got less than half the performance of the RX480

I'm really shit with determining what hardware compliments with itself.
For instance, I have a (very) budget PC, I'm pretty pleased with how it came out.
750TI, Athlon 760k, 8G ddr3, and some am2 gigabyte mobo for like $50, got away with all of it for ~$500.
Now, I'm thinking about getting a 480, but I'm not sure how much my archaic cpu is going to hold me back. I know it needs an upgrade as well, but I don't know what I should look at to be in a good place here.
I must say though, for a GPU and CPU under $250, I think I got off okay. Probably would have been better off scrapyarding though.

Tl;dr What cpu get to compliment 480 or 1060

yeah but that's beside the point. they actually took the reference model and DOWNGRADED parts on it, while slapping their cooler on it and selling it at a higher price than reference msrp.

i guess at least it has better cooling than reference but that's about it.

i5 6400 or 6500 if on budget.

6600k if you can up the budget

i7 6700k or i7 6800 x99 if you don't have a budget.

stay away from i3's. we're entering a new world order and quads are minimum.

I have a 750ti and an even worse athlon ii cpu.
My advice would be wait and see the zen/kabylake cpus since you are changing motherboards.
Seeing the newest cpus gives you more options between AM4 and lga1151.
By then the dust should have settled with this generation of mid-range cards and you can pick up a nice multicore cpu + rx480 + ddr4 ram and not worry about a significant change in compatibility for a few years.

Not only that, it's a fucking hot card. Runs at 80C normally, and if you overclock it, it comes close to 90C.

Sounds good anons. Didn't really want to replace the motherboard, as this $250 purchase is looking a lot more along the lines of ~$600

The issue with your current setup is that you have a very dated chipset, fm2 (x4 760k is fm2 not am2).
This severely limits which CPUs you could use without a motherboard replacement.
Unless your motherboard supports fm2/fm2+, there is little room for you to upgrade, and even then, there is only so far you can go on an outdated chipset.

If your motherboard happens to support fm2+/fm2, you could consider the fm2+ cpus such as the x4 860k, but that is barely an upgrade either.

Seriously, 2016 is a bit too late for fm2.
Especially for $500, sorry.

>I don't want to believe.

>Is this card overshadowed by the RX 480?

No. The 480 is overshadowed by the 1060. Even the gimped 3gb 1060 shits on the 480.

youtube.com/watch?v=wVM0Nb5crMM

The ONLY people who are unironically shilling the 480 are fanboys with buyers remorse and people employed by AMD. The only reason to get an rx4xx card is if you're dirt poor and need to buy the slightly cheaper 470 instead of a 1060.

>5% difference stock versus stock
>11% stock 480 versus fastest factory overclocked 1060
>overshadowed
>shits on

Is your dignity really worth ten cents a post?

>only 11% more performance in cherrypicked scenarios for the same price!

so, which one are you, a fanboy suffering from buyers remorse or a paid shill?

Picked up my 480 8GB for $215. Learn how to shop

I think it's a psychological thing.
If you buy the GTX 1060, you pay for a "midrange" card at $250, as there are better cards - GTX 1070 and GTX 1080.
However, if you submit to the AMD camp, a $250 RX 480 is the best and newest card. You just got yourself the "best and the newest" at $250 (by mentally blocking out the Nvidia cards, of course)

you don't need to mentally block anything. the fact that you aren't supporting the shittier company is enough to justify going with AMD.
also nvidia are now the ones with shit driver support, and don't you'll have to log into facebook just to get your drivers by the end of the year :^)
www.youtube.com/watchv=aIbSeMcsOqA
www.youtube.com/watchv=FVb25eomcrI

I'd like to support AMD but sadly Nvidia has better software support beyond gaming.

>the fact that you aren't supporting the shittier company is enough to justify going with AMD.

i don't care about morality. i only care about the performance of my GPU. i don't really give a shit if some african died mining rare earth metals that went into it.

>i only care about the performance of my GPU
and AMD is hardly behind nvidia in most benchmarks. if you honestly don't care about AMD performing better than nvidia in DX12 benchmarks, then realize that's how most AMD owners feel, they don't care about your 2% better performance in DX11 games.
nvidia has had WAY more driver issues in the last year than AMD has.

>check prices on online stores
>compare prices to local brick&mortar
>buy it from the cheaper place
Something I'm missing?
Perhaps a website you'd shill for?

shitty thing about the 1060 is that you cant SLI them, its only single card capable. unlike the 480.

>sli for midrange card
>sli instead of a single highend card
How about no? I have a 480 but am not deluded enough to fall for the 480×2=1080 marketing.
I am well aware that 480×2=960 and the 960 is shit so don't buy two 480s for sli.

>I am well aware that 480×2=960 and the 960 is shit so don't buy two 480s for sli.
another uneducated nvidiot sharing his opinion.
do everyone a favor and fuck off back to Cred Forums.
3dmark.com/fs/10174246
3dmark.com/fs/9031496

>nvidiot
Why would I buy a 480 if that were true?
>benchmark tests equate directly to real game performance
>every game supports SLI
Please stop embarrassing yourself.

>keeps referring to crossfire as SLI
i wonder who could be behind this falseflag post!
and after just checking crossfire 480s can perform as well as a 1080 in games, just not in a majority which is fine.

>even the GTX 1080 will be showing it's age.
Nigga wut?

>Just think of it this way, who is still rocking 660
[spoiler]pls no bully[/spoiler]

>which is fine
For you maybe.

Also, crossfire is just the amd equivalent of sli. Why are you focusing so much on semantics to cover your tracks?

Lowering settings is hardly the end of the world. If you're the kind of person who wants Ultra settings at Ultra HD you're already running a $2-3K graphics card set up and replacing it every year.

What makes the RX 480 future proof imo is kind of like the 7950. It will continue to perform adequately for years after release, while the competition descends into unplayable garbage.

Just look at the R9 290x versus the 780Ti in todays games versus games from when those cards came out.

DX12 is only going to exacerbate the trend from the last few years. AMD cards of yesteryear will gain significant performance over their nvidia counterparts long before their performance becomes so unsatisfactory that people really need to upgrade.

why would you want to sli a $200 card? two weaker cards have always been worse than one good high end card.

AMD GCN cards are aging like wine

you said 2 480s perform as well as a single 960. think about what you yourself have said and then tie the noose. there's nothing i fucking hate more than reading misinformation.

It was a joke you sperg, could you stop?
Here, allow me to explain the joke to you.
480×2=960

480
×2
___
960

960 also happens to be the name of another gpu.
Now go away.

Spoken like a truly normal, average person that doesn't go fucking crazy and fanboy over something as meaningless as the device they use to play games.

I mean, it's none of his concern. Not like if he doesn't get the card, africans everywhere will be released to live the luxurious life of sitting in mud huts. If the material trade weren't to exist, they'd probably just move on to some other gold mine for menial pay.

Or just starve to death.

It's exploitation, sure, but better than nothing.

...

I'm building a machine for a buddy and so while I wait for the case I have it all together on the table and wow, the MSI RX480 is great. Fans don't turn on until the GPU is above 60c, it sits at about 40c with general usage, and it tears through every game while making basically no noise. Sometimes during cut scenes or certain maps on Doom it stops the fans!
I'm thoroughly impressed. I have not got the temps above 65c and that was using Furmark!

There are much more important changes to Vulkan and DX12 than previous versions of OpenGL and DX9/10/11, though.

...

I actually want to get an RX 480 because I want to go for a Freesync 1080p 144hz monitor to go along with the purchase.

I see little reason in paying $50 extra for a 1060 6GB + $100 more on a comparable Gsync 1080p 144hz monitor. Gsync has a significant price premium over freesync monitors.

the vast majority play Dota 2 and CSGO and don't give a fuck about future proofing because their games won't suddenly jump in requirements

I've bought an RX 480 simply because of the progress AMD has been making with drivers, especially on Linux, if you run the 4.7 kernel it will work very well.

Team nJewdia

...

...

...

...

...

...

Pick your battles wisely user.

...

...

images.lmgtfy.com/?q=dogs

I like where this thread is heading

images.lmgtfy.com/?q=even more dogs

...

...

...

...

...

...

>synthetic benchmarks

Because that's what we're using our GPUs for, right?

techpowerup.com/226025/amd-gives-away-deus-ex-mankind-divided-with-select-amd-fx-processors

>buy game
>get free cpu
ok

...

...

still have my 560 from about 3-4 years ago.

No idea if it's going to work in my new build though, if it doesn't i"m ordering on amazon with xtra speedy shipping a new GPU.

Problem is, I have no idea which one.

No matter how many times I refresh... dog-bro doesn't come back. :(

...

I'll never forget you.

...

future proof as in better dx12 support and aging better due to bigger memory yes its something amd constantly does
on the other hand at 3 years max you wont be able to play a game on high settings without compromises..

>nvidia
it lacks hardware async, subpar dx12 and vulkan implementation and is sure candidate for outdated driver support.
At least games today are mostly DX11 with shitty DX12 implementation, by t he time DX12 really rolls out, nvidia has already outed a new one and the pascal and below series are gimped

Do you guys even own 2500k?
My 2500k chokes in deus ex and tomb raider

It might choke only because the game is programmed like garbage.

>My 2500k chokes in deus ex and tomb raider
Wow your RAM and GPU must suck
gamestar.de/spiele/rise-of-the-tomb-raider/artikel/tomb_raider_rise_of_the_tomb_raider_systemanforderungen_und_voraussetzungen,51197,3242822,fazit.html
gamestar.de/spiele/deus-ex-mankind-divided/artikel/deus_ex_mankind_divided,52180,3301526,fazit.html