Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [VC]GTX 1060 specifications leaked - faster than RX 480
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[VC]GTX 1060 specifications leaked - faster than RX 480 - Page 37  

post #361 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic1337 View Post

why would it needs to be OCed just because you put it under water?
i've seen CPU+GPU loops on ITX builds that are ran on stock, they're practical because a single loop saves a lot of space and runs much more cooler.

Fair enough but that's a pretty small market right there, I don't really see a problem with cheaping out on a cheap card. They need a model to compete directly with the reference 480.

Maybe the 6GB 1060 will be a bit more premium?
Edited by Waitng4realGPU - 7/4/16 at 11:44pm
post #362 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waitng4realGPU View Post

Fair enough but that's a pretty small market right there, I don't really see a problem with cheaping out on a cheap card. They need a model to compete directly with the reference 480.

Maybe the 6GB 1060 will be a bit more premium?

GPU water cooling in general is a small market by itself.

and if GTX1060 3GB will end up at a price of $250, then its obviously not a match for RX480 8GB $250 but RX480 4GB $200 instead.
with GTX1060 being one tier more expensive than RX480, it doesn't matter if its faster or better, its a tier above RX480 in price.
as such, only GTX1050 can directly compete against RX480 since they'd be at the same price bracket.
much like GTX960 is higher tier than GTX950 despite only being $40 more expensive.


depends, if they could showcase a good performance and its adequately equipped with proper parts (decent VRM and no overheating issues) then they could make it a premium product.
Edited by epic1337 - 7/5/16 at 12:03am
post #363 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iscaria View Post

People are calling this the 480 killer, but I just don't see it. If the slide is to be believed then the stock 1060 offers 10% more performance than the stock 480. Okay, but we've already seen how poorly the 1080 and 1070 overclock and the miminal gains to be had from doing so. We pretty much know the AIB 480s can make the jump from 1266 to 1500+ clock speeds. So OC vs OC the 480 is going to win everytime. So, not much of a killer :/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jq47qmwcus8

There's a good chance the rx 480's 24/7 overclocks are in the 1400 range even with partner cards.

The card in the above video was super overvolted, his cards had a hard mod applied, put a water cooler on and was aided by a world class overclocker and he reached 1500 and he was pushing 260+ watts. Not 24/7 clocks. 1500 mhz wasn't stable and he had to dial it down to 1480. This is a 17% overclock.

If a 1060 reaches the same clocks as a 1080, which it should since small dies clock better and it starts at 1700, if 2100mhz is reached, that's a 23.5% overclock.

Plus he concludes 1480 is not 24/7 and this is with water. So as a result, with partner cards, expect 1400, 1450 if your lucky. Do not hype up cards if there is evidence in the present, that those expectations won't be met.
Edited by tajoh111 - 7/5/16 at 12:15am
post #364 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jq47qmwcus8

There's a good chance the rx 480's 24/7 overclocks are in the 1400 range even with partner cards.

The card in the above video was super overvolted, his cards had a hard mod applied, put a water cooler on and was aided by a world class overclocker and he reached 1500 and he was pushing 260+ watts. Not 24/7 clocks. 1500 mhz wasn't stable and he had to dial it down to 1480. This is a 17% overclock.

If a 1060 reaches the same clocks as a 1080, which it should since small dies clock better and it starts at 1700, if 2100mhz is reached, that's a 23.5% overclock.

Plus he concludes 1480 is not 24/7 and this is with water. So as a result, with partner cards, expect 1400, 1450 if your lucky. Do not hype up cards if there is evidence in the present, that those expecations won't be met.

The graphics score is also only 500 points off a 1500mhz GTX 980.

So expect a 1400mhz+ 480 to match a reference 980.

Overclocking doesn't seem to scale as well on Pascal either judging by reviews, and judging by that video. So a 23.5% OC'd (which of course is not guaranteed as we see with the 1070/1080 only hitting 2000+ sometimes) 1060 could gain less than a 15% OC'd 480.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Radeon-Grafikkarte-255597/Specials/RX-480-Test-1199839/2/
Edited by Waitng4realGPU - 7/5/16 at 12:01am
post #365 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

Do not hype up cards if there is evidence in the present, that those expecations won't be met.
People never learn, specially from red team.

Speculation is another thing, but idiots usually take something from a speculation of someone and hype it to the moon as if that's true fact or something. that's why we have so many disappointed people crying on rx480's launch. and apparently there's still some fire left ... tongue.gif
post #366 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jq47qmwcus8

There's a good chance the rx 480's 24/7 overclocks are in the 1400 range even with partner cards.

The card in the above video was super overvolted, his cards had a hard mod applied, put a water cooler on and was aided by a world class overclocker and he reached 1500 and he was pushing 260+ watts. Not 24/7 clocks. 1500 mhz wasn't stable and he had to dial it down to 1480. This is a 17% overclock.

If a 1060 reaches the same clocks as a 1080, which it should since small dies clock better and it starts at 1700, if 2100mhz is reached, that's a 23.5% overclock.

Plus he concludes 1480 is not 24/7 and this is with water. So as a result, with partner cards, expect 1400, 1450 if your lucky. Do not hype up cards if there is evidence in the present, that those expecations won't be met.

My only problem with these conservative clocks is that it doesn't line up with the clockspeed gains that are to be received from going to 14nm from 28nm. If it only clocks to 1400-1450MHz there is a serious problem with AMD's 14nm card here. As 14nm explicitly states 40-50% improvement in clockspeed compared to 28nm:



We know AMD is able to bin up to 1050MHz with their last gen cards. So you use that as a baseline number to figure out where a 14nm card would end up with 40-50% improvement in clockspeed.

So that would put us at 1470MHz to 1575MHz.

Now we know these 14nm and 16nm processes are capable of offering their clockspeed promises because here is what 16nm has to say about clockspeed improvements:



Also 40% improvement in clockspeed. And as we see with Pascal 1080, 1070, and now 1060 NVIDIA indefinitely has increased their clockspeeds by at least 40% compared to previous gen. As a matter a fact they were able to go over 40% in the end as we can see with 2200MHz clockspeeds provided by Pascal.

So basically if the 480 or any future AMD products cannot clock high, it is a problem with the 14nm process that they are using and perhaps it is because it is not as mature as 16nm is. In that 16nm was able to immediately provide the clockspeed advantage as promised and shown by NVIDIA with Pascal. Whereas we are still waiting around to see where 14nm will end up, because the 480 reference was so power limited.
Edited by BiG StroOnZ - 7/5/16 at 12:33am
post #367 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waitng4realGPU View Post

The graphics score is also only 500 points off a 1500mhz GTX 980.

So expect a 1400mhz+ 480 to match a reference 980.

Overclocking doesn't seem to scale as well on Pascal either judging by reviews, and judging by that video. So a 23.5% OC'd (which of course is not guaranteed as we see with the 1070/1080 only hitting 2000+ sometimes) 1060 could gain less than a 15% OC'd 480.

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/AMD-Radeon-Grafikkarte-255597/Specials/RX-480-Test-1199839/2/

He reduced the tessellation work load which boasts scores by 10-15% if you watch the video.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiG StroOnZ View Post

My only problem with these conservative clocks is that it doesn't line up with the clockspeed gains that are to be received from going to 14nm from 28nm. If it only clocks to 1400-1450MHz there is a serious problem with AMD's 14nm card here. As 14nm explicitly states 40-50% improvement in clockspeed compared to 28nm:



We know AMD is able to bin up to 1050MHz with their last gen cards. So you use that as a baseline number to figure out where a 14nm card would end up with 40-50% improvement in clockspeed.

So that would put us at 1470MHz to 1575MHz.

Now we know these 14nm and 16nm processes are capable of offering their clockspeed promises because here is what 16nm has to say about clockspeed improvements:



Also 40% improvement in clockspeed. And as we see with Pascal 1080, 1070, and now 1060 NVIDIA indefinitely has increased their clockspeeds by at least 40% compared to previous gen. As a matter a fact they were able to go over 40% in the end as we can see with 2200MHz clockspeeds provided by Pascal.

So basically if the 480 or any future AMD products cannot clock high, it is a problem with the 14nm process that they are using and perhaps it is because it is not as mature as 16nm is. In that 16nm was able to immediately provide the clockspeed advantage as promised and shown by NVIDIA with Pascal. Whereas we are still waiting around to see where 14nm will end up, because the 480 reference was so power limited.

It might not necessarily be a nodal one.

I posted this well over a month ago and it's another on of my predictions coming true.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1599440/geforce-nvidia-gtx-1080-1070-unveiled/2100#post_25155828


LN2 is useless as far as showing max usable overclocks will be on a paticularly node, but they do gives some indication of how well an architecture will overclock on a more advance node. Look at the gtx 280ln(980mhz) vs overclocked gtx 480/580(980mhz h20) for example and now the gtx 980ln2 clocks vs what the 1080 does. The gtx 980/980 ti could get to 2300 on a very good ln2 bench run. 2200 are a more normal result. This could very well mirror what we get for the overclocks of the gtx 1080.

What I suspect is what 14nm finfet will show is AMD needs a big redesign to use get bigger clocks because with every new iteration of GCN where they add more functionality, the worse the clocks get. GCN 1.0 could get to 1800mhz on ln2. GCN 1.3 or fiji, even those it is made on a better process only gets to 1450mhz on ln2. GCN is just not an architecture designed to go as fast as maxwell. The cores are smaller and the pipelines are shorter but as a result, they can put more cores.

Basically GCN as an architecture just doesn't clock high. Even under ln2, fiji which is the variant most similar to the one in Polaris only overclocks to 1.45ghz under LN2. What does Maxwell overclock to with ln2? 2.2 ghz. Notice a pattern here? This is with the same node, but look at the clock advantage maxwell has over GCN 1.3.

GCN was was never going to overclock that high, even with the aid of tsmc. Fanboys are just looking for a scapegoat so they can put their hopes on the next GCN derivative.

The problem with GCN and why it will never catch Polaris or maxwell in performance per watt or mm2 is deep down it is just GCN.

What AMD has been doing is they have been ricing their GCN architecture out. Adding mods, turbo's, air intakes and exhausts, but what they really need is a new car to win the race. GCN is an architecture that has aged well, but we won't get big changes until their truly big next gen architecture.
Edited by tajoh111 - 7/5/16 at 12:38am
post #368 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

He reduced the tessellation work load which boasts scores by 10-15% if you watch the video.
It might not necessarily be a nodal one.

I used the first test results as my example because that was before he did those tweaks. There was two different firestrike scores displayed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

Also 40% improvement in clockspeed. And as we see with Pascal 1080, 1070, and now 1060 NVIDIA indefinitely has increased their clockspeeds by at least 40% compared to previous gen. As a matter a fact they were able to go over 40% in the end as we can see with 2200MHz clockspeeds provided by Pascal.

Well some Pascal chips are only getting to around 2000mhz, whilst other very lucky chips are getting to 2150mhz (both on air)

That's a fair range right there but generally speaking yes Pascal is seeing better gains in clock speeds with the node shrink.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

The problem with GCN and why it will never catch Polaris or maxwell in performance per watt or mm2 is deep down it is just GCN.

Agreed.

When all is said and done I'd still buy an AIB 480 that will go to 1400mhz and higher if lucky. (If reasonably priced)
Edited by Waitng4realGPU - 7/5/16 at 12:46am
post #369 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

I posted this well over a month ago and it's another on of my predictions coming true.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1599440/geforce-nvidia-gtx-1080-1070-unveiled/2100#post_25155828

LN2 is useless as far as showing max usable overclocks will be on a paticularly node, but they do gives some indication of how well an architecture will overclock on a more advance node. Look at the gtx 280ln(980mhz) vs overclocked gtx 480/580(980mhz h20) for example and now the gtx 980ln2 clocks vs what the 1080 does. The gtx 980/980 ti could get to 2300 on a very good ln2 bench run. 2200 are a more normal result. This could very well mirror what we get for the overclocks of the gtx 1080.

What I suspect is what 14nm finfet will show is AMD needs a big redesign to use get bigger clocks because with every new iteration of GCN where they add more functionality, the worse the clocks get. GCN 1.0 could get to 1800mhz on ln2. GCN 1.3 or fiji, even those it is made on a better process only gets to 1450mhz on ln2. GCN is just not an architecture designed to go as fast as maxwell. The cores are smaller and the pipelines are shorter but as a result, they can put more cores.

Basically GCN as an architecture just doesn't clock high. Even under ln2, fiji which is the variant most similar to the one in Polaris only overclocks to 1.45ghz under LN2. What does Maxwell overclock to with ln2? 2.2 ghz. Notice a pattern here? This is with the same node, but look at the clock advantage maxwell has over GCN 1.3.

GCN was was never going to overclock that high, even with the aid of tsmc. Fanboys are just looking for a scapegoat so they can put their hopes on the next GCN derivative.

The problem with GCN and why it will never catch Polaris or maxwell in performance per watt or mm2 is deep down it is just GCN.

What AMD has been doing is they have been ricing their GCN architecture out. Adding mods, turbo's, air intakes and exhausts, but what they really need is a new car to win the race. GCN is an architecture that has aged well, but we won't get big changes until their truly big next gen architecture.

Just because GCN can't clock high on 28nm doesn't mean it wouldn't be able to clock high on 14nm. If anything, it should be able to allow them to clock higher because their power savings are giving them more to play with core voltage. Why it is true GCN never really clocked well, this wasn't always true as demonstrated with your GCN 1.0 example. Their smaller cards tend to clock pretty well. And Polaris is indeed a smaller card...

I wouldn't just ignore the facts that I presented you and shrug it off as, "Oh, well GCN doesn't clock well, so even though 14nm promises clockspeed improvements by up to 50% compared to previous gen, I'm going to ignore this fact because GCN doesn't clock that well on 28nm"
Edited by BiG StroOnZ - 7/5/16 at 1:13am
post #370 of 735
Quote:
Just because GNC can't clock high on 28nm doesn't mean it wouldn't be able to clock high on 14nm.
but 1400+ on air is still high for GCN
The Green Beast
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3770K @ 4500 Mhz ASRock Z77 Pro3 Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming Crucial Ballistix 2x8GB DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SSD Crucial M550 500GB SSD Samsung 850 Evo 1TB HDD Seagate 7200rpm 3TB Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO; Xilence X5 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit Acer Predator XB271HU 27" IPS Gsync 1440p 165Hz CM Storm QuickFire XT Cherry Red 800W modular 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Black Logitech G900 Chaos Spectrum SteelSeries QcK+ 4mm SK Gaming Realtek On-board 
  hide details  
The Green Beast
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 3770K @ 4500 Mhz ASRock Z77 Pro3 Gigabyte GTX 1080 G1 Gaming Crucial Ballistix 2x8GB DDR3-1600 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
SSD Crucial M550 500GB SSD Samsung 850 Evo 1TB HDD Seagate 7200rpm 3TB Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO; Xilence X5 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Pro 64-bit Acer Predator XB271HU 27" IPS Gsync 1440p 165Hz CM Storm QuickFire XT Cherry Red 800W modular 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Black Logitech G900 Chaos Spectrum SteelSeries QcK+ 4mm SK Gaming Realtek On-board 
  hide details  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [VC]GTX 1060 specifications leaked - faster than RX 480