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 54  

post #531 of 735
$299 MSRP is not above $280? We must be in the twilight zone.
post #532 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111 View Post

If the cards had the same performance and same electricity consumption. Efficiency is 1.

E.g 120 watts divided by 120 watts divided by the equal performance would act as a modifier of 1.

However if one card uses 30 less wants. That means one card is 25 percent more efficient.

Even. 150 divided by 120.

1.25 I.e 25 percent more efficient. However of this card also performs 15 percent better while consuming 25 percent better it acts as a modifier.

I.e 1.15. IF IT performed the same this modifier would be 1 but since it's performs 15 percent better, this becomes 1.15.

There for to get the efficiency you have to multiply both numbers.

1.25 * 1.15 = efficiency.

1) No. If the the max amount of usage is 150 watts that is our constant max. The 1060 is 20% more efficient. Dividing 150 by 120 does NOT give you the percentage!! Everyone is making the same mistake

I and the calculator cant make this anymore simple -> http://www.geteasysolution.com/120-is-what-percent-of-150

1A) Finding 15% of something doesnt happen with 1.15 and especially cant be done with an arbitrary multiplier of 1. No wonder why this whole thing is so messed up.

1B) So we are saying "IF" it performed the same we would add this modifier of "1". Yet they dont perform the same, nor do they use the same amount of power in these tests. So this modifier of "1" is being added A) without having defined parameters and B) is admittedly being used incorrectly. Because that is being added in "IF" they perform the same. They dont. SO why is it being used?

2) Secondly, you have to have a stable, constant, and sensible way to equate power-consumption to speed/performance. We dont have that. Not even close. Heres a perfect example. A Lotus Elise consumes less power than a Shelby Mustang. Which one is faster? Power consumption is a totally different factor with no real way to equate it to the performance. None of the tests done make any sense at all.

Btw, since posting this yesterday I showed it to an electrical engineer/avionics guy from Sikorsky Aircraft. He's familiar with gaming computers. Took one look at the graph and said "Thats totally wrong".
post #533 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by EightDee8D View Post

Probably w3. tongue.gif

w3= Witcher 3?

GTX 780 Ti would be around 280X performance wink.gif
post #534 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by poii View Post

GTX 780 Ti would be around 280X performance wink.gif

0/10 meme
post #535 of 735
Just seen this from PCPer:
Ryzen FT05
(19 items)
 
 
Barbed Define S
(22 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 7 1700 @ 4ghz 1.416v Gigabyte X370 K7 Evga 1070 Superclocked Black Edition 8GB Gskill 16Gb 3200C14 Silver/Black (F4-3200C14D-1... 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB Western Digital Red 3TB EK Supremacy EVO Full Nickel AM4 XSPC RS360 Radiator 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Liang 10W DDC w/ EK Top Scythe Gentle Typhoon 1850rpm x3 @ 900rpm Windows 7 64bit Benq XL2420T 1080p120 with Lightboost 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky One w/ Chery Brown shwitches and White ke... be quiet! Pure Power 9 600W (spare) Silverstone FT05 Black w/ Window Zowie FK1 
Mouse PadAudioAudio
Razer Destructor Matrix Mini-I with Behringer Truth B3031A Activ... Audio Technica AD700's w/ Modmic powered by an ... 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4790k Gigabyte H97N-Wifi EVGA GeForce GTX 1070 SC GAMING ACX 3.0 Black E... Corsair Veangance 1600c9 16gb 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Samsung 850 EVO 3TB WD Red Corsair H55 Ek Vardar F4-120ER Black x3 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Benq XL2420T Ducky One Cherry MX Brown Silverstone450w sfx 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Ncase M1 V1 #0594 Zowie FK1 Razer Destructor V1 Audio Technica AD700 
AudioAudio
Behringer Truth B3031A 8in Active monitors Matrix Mini-i 
  hide details  
Ryzen FT05
(19 items)
 
 
Barbed Define S
(22 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 7 1700 @ 4ghz 1.416v Gigabyte X370 K7 Evga 1070 Superclocked Black Edition 8GB Gskill 16Gb 3200C14 Silver/Black (F4-3200C14D-1... 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Samsung 850 Evo 500GB Western Digital Red 3TB EK Supremacy EVO Full Nickel AM4 XSPC RS360 Radiator 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Liang 10W DDC w/ EK Top Scythe Gentle Typhoon 1850rpm x3 @ 900rpm Windows 7 64bit Benq XL2420T 1080p120 with Lightboost 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky One w/ Chery Brown shwitches and White ke... be quiet! Pure Power 9 600W (spare) Silverstone FT05 Black w/ Window Zowie FK1 
Mouse PadAudioAudio
Razer Destructor Matrix Mini-I with Behringer Truth B3031A Activ... Audio Technica AD700's w/ Modmic powered by an ... 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4790k Gigabyte H97N-Wifi EVGA GeForce GTX 1070 SC GAMING ACX 3.0 Black E... Corsair Veangance 1600c9 16gb 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Samsung 850 EVO 3TB WD Red Corsair H55 Ek Vardar F4-120ER Black x3 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 Benq XL2420T Ducky One Cherry MX Brown Silverstone450w sfx 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Ncase M1 V1 #0594 Zowie FK1 Razer Destructor V1 Audio Technica AD700 
AudioAudio
Behringer Truth B3031A 8in Active monitors Matrix Mini-i 
  hide details  
post #536 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by VeritronX View Post

Just seen this from PCPer:

They got a card early, probably the first with a video out.

Must be a reward for bringing the AMD PCIE problem to light devil.gif
post #537 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMatthewStewart View Post

1) No. If the the max amount of usage is 150 watts that is our constant max. The 1060 is 20% more efficient. Dividing 150 by 120 does NOT give you the percentage!! Everyone is making the same mistake

I and the calculator cant make this anymore simple -> http://www.geteasysolution.com/120-is-what-percent-of-150

1A) Finding 15% of something doesnt happen with 1.15 and especially cant be done with an arbitrary multiplier of 1. No wonder why this whole thing is so messed up.

1B) So we are saying "IF" it performed the same we would add this modifier of "1". Yet they dont perform the same, nor do they use the same amount of power in these tests. So this modifier of "1" is being added A) without having defined parameters and B) is admittedly being used incorrectly. Because that is being added in "IF" they perform the same. They dont. SO why is it being used?

2) Secondly, you have to have a stable, constant, and sensible way to equate power-consumption to speed/performance. We dont have that. Not even close. Heres a perfect example. A Lotus Elise consumes less power than a Shelby Mustang. Which one is faster? Power consumption i
Code:
s a totally different factor with no real way to equate it to the performance. None of the tests done make any sense at all.

Btw, since posting this yesterday I showed it to an electrical engineer/avionics guy from Sikorsky Aircraft. He's familiar with gaming computers. Took one look at the graph and said "Thats totally wrong".

No it depends on how your phrasing it.

Your phrasing it on what percentage of 120 is 150 a portion of. This is 80 percent. 100-80 = 20%.

However if you phrase it differently, e.g how much larger is 150 than 120. You get 25%

i.e the rx480 uses 25 percent more power than a gtx 1060 i.e 1.25x 120 = 150watts

or the 1060 uses 20% less power than a rx480. (100-20)* 150 = 120 watts

2. Your second example is flawed. Your adding multiple variables which screw up that example. Not hard metric numbers which is all we need for performance per watt. All we need for performance per watt is performance and power consumption.

It more equivalent example with cars is how much better is the power to rate ratio of the lotus compared to the mustang, which is much more similar to performance per watt.

performance = HP in this case. So lets says the lotus has 200hp while the mustang has 300hp. The weight of the lotus is 1800pounds and the mustang is 3500 pounds(this is equivalent to our power consumption).

The lotus elise hp to pounds ratio is 0.11111Hp/pound or 200hp/1800pounds while the mustangs is 0.085714 hp/pound or 300hp/3500pounds

How much higher is the power to weight ratio of the elise vs the mustang. This is done by dividing the two numbers.

0.111111/0.085714. It is 30 percent higher.

So how much higher is the performance per watt of the gtx 1060 vs the rx 480?

If the gtx 1060 has 115% of the performance of the rx 480 we basically have all the information we need if we have the power to determine both the performance per watt and how much better one is compared to the other.

115performance/120 watt = 0.95833333 performance/watt for 1060

100performance/150watts = 0.66666666 performance/watt for rx480

0.95833333/0.66666666= 1.43750000 or 43.75 percent higher performance per watt.

The performance metric is arbitrary e.g we could switch this to FPS and as long as it's 15% larger we get the same ratio difference.

345 fps / 120 watts = 2.875

300 fps / 150 watts = 2.000

2.875 / 2.000 = 1.43750000
Edited by tajoh111 - 7/7/16 at 2:10pm
post #538 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMatthewStewart View Post

Dividing 150 by 120 does NOT give you the percentage!!

Yes it does. It shows that 150 is 25% more than 120.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMatthewStewart View Post

1A) Finding 15% of something doesnt happen with 1.15 and especially cant be done with an arbitrary multiplier of 1.

There is no arbitrary multiplier. The RX 480 is the baseline. Everything the RX 480 is = 1 in a graph like this. This is a very common way to compare things.

If the RX 480 is 1 and the 1060 is 1.15 on the performance bar of the graph, that means NVIDIA is saying the 1060 is 15% faster.

If the RX 480 is 1 and the 1060 is ~1.44 on the efficiency portion of the graph, and we know that efficiency is the difference in work done per unit of power, then dividing ~1.44 by 1.15 gives us ~1.25, which is quite clearly derived from the differences in TDP mentioned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMatthewStewart View Post

1B) So we are saying "IF" it performed the same we would add this modifier of "1". Yet they dont perform the same, nor do they use the same amount of power in these tests. So this modifier of "1" is being added A) without having defined parameters and B) is admittedly being used incorrectly. Because that is being added in "IF" they perform the same. They dont. SO why is it being used?

I have no idea where you are getting this "modifier of 1" stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMatthewStewart View Post

2) Secondly, you have to have a stable, constant, and sensible way to equate power-consumption to speed/performance. We dont have that. Not even close. Heres a perfect example. A Lotus Elise consumes less power than a Shelby Mustang. Which one is faster? Power consumption is a totally different factor with no real way to equate it to the performance. None of the tests done make any sense at all.

You are making things needlessly complex. The graph and the TDP figure mentioned contain more than enough information to plug in any variable needed to account for anything mentioned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DMatthewStewart View Post

Btw, since posting this yesterday I showed it to an electrical engineer/avionics guy from Sikorsky Aircraft. He's familiar with gaming computers. Took one look at the graph and said "Thats totally wrong".

Your acquaintance is mistaken.

There is nothing wrong with the graph and it only takes 3rd grade math to verify this.

NVIDIA is saying the 1060 will use 25% less power and be 15% faster. This is where that efficiency (work done for a give unit of energy) figure is coming from.
Edited by Blameless - 7/7/16 at 3:08pm
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.2/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.175/1.15v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) Gigabyte AORUS GTX 1080 Ti (F3P) @ 2025/1485, 1... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-12-12-28-T1, 1.34v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.06) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Noctua NH-D15 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Sapphire Fury Nitro OC+ @ 1053/500, 1.225vGPU/1... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
Primary
(15 items)
 
Secondary
(13 items)
 
In progress
(10 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
5820K @ 4.2/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.175/1.15v Gigabyte X99 SOC Champion (F22n) Gigabyte AORUS GTX 1080 Ti (F3P) @ 2025/1485, 1... 4x4GiB Crucial @ 2667, 12-12-12-28-T1, 1.34v 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Plextor M6e 128GB (fw 1.06) M.2 (PCI-E 2.0 2x) 2x Crucial M4 256GB 4x WD Scorpio Black 500GB Noctua NH-D15 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 BenQ BL3200PT Filco Majestouch Tenkeyless (MX Brown) Corsair RM1000x 
CaseMouseAudio
Fractal Design Define R4 Logitech G402 Realtek ALC1150 + M-Audio AV40 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5670 @ 4.4/3.2GHz core/uncore, 1.36 vcore, 1.2... Gigabyte X58A-UD5 r2.0 w/FF3mod10 BIOS Sapphire Fury Nitro OC+ @ 1053/500, 1.225vGPU/1... 2x Samsung MV-3V4G3D/US @ 2000, 10-11-11-30-T1,... 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
1x Crucial BLT4G3D1608ET3LX0 @ 2000, 10-11-11-3... OCZ (Toshiba) Trion 150 120GB Hyundai Sapphire 120GB 3x Hitachi Deskstar 7k1000.C 1TB 
CoolingOSPowerCase
Noctua NH-D14 Windows 7 Pro x64 SP1 Antec TP-750 Fractal Design R5 
Audio
ASUS Xonar DS 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-6800K @ 4.3/3.5GHz core/uncore, 1.36/1.2v ASRock X99 OC Formula (P3.10) GTX 780 (temporary) 4x4GiB Crucial DDR4-2400 @ 11-13-12-28-T2, 1.33v 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Intel 600p 256GB NVMe 2x HGST Travelstar 7k1000 1TB Corsair H55 (temporary) Windows Server 2016 Datacenter 
PowerCase
Seasonic SS-860XP2 Corsair Carbide Air 540 
  hide details  
post #539 of 735
Whats a better buy waiting for the 1060 or grabbing a used EVGA SSC 970 for 200? It has 1.5 years of warranty left on it.
Aura Sync
(9 items)
 
HTPC
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 8700k Rog Strix z370-F Asus Strix 1080ti Gskill Trident-z RGB 3000  
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Samsung 960 evo 1tb Deepcool Captain 240ex RGB Dell S2417DG EVGA 750 G3 
Case
Fractal Design Meshify C 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Pentium G4560 Asrock H110M-ITX PNY GT 1030 4GB Team Dark 2400  
Hard DriveMonitorKeyboardCase
PNY CS900 240gb SSD Vizio Smartcast E55 Logitech K400 Inwin BP655.300 
Audio
Vizio 3.1 Soundbar 
  hide details  
Aura Sync
(9 items)
 
HTPC
(9 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7 8700k Rog Strix z370-F Asus Strix 1080ti Gskill Trident-z RGB 3000  
Hard DriveCoolingMonitorPower
Samsung 960 evo 1tb Deepcool Captain 240ex RGB Dell S2417DG EVGA 750 G3 
Case
Fractal Design Meshify C 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Pentium G4560 Asrock H110M-ITX PNY GT 1030 4GB Team Dark 2400  
Hard DriveMonitorKeyboardCase
PNY CS900 240gb SSD Vizio Smartcast E55 Logitech K400 Inwin BP655.300 
Audio
Vizio 3.1 Soundbar 
  hide details  
post #540 of 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotty99 View Post

Whats a better buy waiting for the 1060 or grabbing a used EVGA SSC 970 for 200? It has 1.5 years of warranty left on it.

Buy an open box RX 480 4GB for cheap after people return all the ones they cannot unlock to 8GB. tongue.gif
The New Recruit
(17 items)
 
An Old Soldier
(20 items)
 
Big Mama
(23 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-3570K@4.2 P8Z68-V GEN3 MSI GTX 1070 Gaming X 8G 16 GB CORSAIR Vengeance 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin ... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
OCZ Vertex 3 120 Gb WD Caviar Black 1TB WD Caviar Blue 1TB ASUS 24X DVD Burner - Bulk 24X DVD+R 8X DVD+RW ... 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Cooler Master 212 EVO Windows 10 BenQ XL2730Z Maxkeyboard Nighthawk x9 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
NZXT Hale82 750w  Corsair Carbide 400R Logitech G502 Proteus Core HIEN SOFT L Japan black | SAMURAI gaming mouse ... 
AudioAudioAudioOther
Creative SB X-Fi Titanium HD Pc 363d Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 BT epson wf 3540 
  hide details  
The New Recruit
(17 items)
 
An Old Soldier
(20 items)
 
Big Mama
(23 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-3570K@4.2 P8Z68-V GEN3 MSI GTX 1070 Gaming X 8G 16 GB CORSAIR Vengeance 16GB (4 x 4GB) 240-Pin ... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
OCZ Vertex 3 120 Gb WD Caviar Black 1TB WD Caviar Blue 1TB ASUS 24X DVD Burner - Bulk 24X DVD+R 8X DVD+RW ... 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Cooler Master 212 EVO Windows 10 BenQ XL2730Z Maxkeyboard Nighthawk x9 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
NZXT Hale82 750w  Corsair Carbide 400R Logitech G502 Proteus Core HIEN SOFT L Japan black | SAMURAI gaming mouse ... 
AudioAudioAudioOther
Creative SB X-Fi Titanium HD Pc 363d Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 BT epson wf 3540 
  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