As always we’ll also take a quick look at synthetic performance. While GTX 1060 is of course a cut down Pascal architecture part, how it has been cut down is interesting. Compared to GP104, GP106 has half the SMs and GPCs, but 3/4 the ROPs, which may prove to have an impact.

Synthetic: TessMark, Image Set 4, 64x Tessellation

Starting off with tessellation performance, we find the GTX 1060 coming in just behind the GTX 980, showing that NVIDIA’s performance estimates generally apply not only to games, but synthetic tests as well. But perhaps more interesting is the fact that the card is neck-and-neck with the Radeon RX 480. NVIDIA has traditionally enjoyed a sizable geometry performance lead over AMD cards, but it looks like those days have come to a close.

Up next, we have SteamVR’s Performance Test. While this test is based on the latest version of Valve’s Source engine, the test itself is purely synthetic, designed to test the suitability of systems for VR, making it our sole VR-focused test at this time. It should be noted that the results in this test are not linear, and furthermore the score is capped at 11. Of particular note, cards that fail to reach GTX 970/R9 290 levels fall off of a cliff rather quickly. So test results should be interpreted a little differently.

SteamVR Performance Test

As NVIDIA’s now entry-level VR card, GTX 1060 looks very good in the Steam VR test. A score of 7.9 Newells means that it’s comfortably above the 6.x range generally required, and it also means the GTX 1060 is comfortably ahead of the RX 480 in this scenario.

Finally, for looking at texel and pixel fillrate, we have the Beyond3D Test Suite. This test offers a slew of additional tests – many of which use behind the scenes or in our earlier architectural analysis – but for now we’ll stick to simple pixel and texel fillrates.

Synthetic: Beyond 3D Suite - Pixel Fillrate

Starting with the pixel fillrate, we can see the impact of GTX 1060’s slightly more unusual ROP and GPC arrangement when it’s compared to the GTX 980. At 54.8 GPixels/second, GTX 1060 trails GTX 980 significantly. The card not only has fewer ROPs, but it has half of the rasterizer throughput (32 pixels/clock) as GTX 980. As we’ve seen in our gaming benchmarks the real-world impact isn’t nearly as great as what happens under these synthetic tests, but it helps to explain why sometimes GTX 1060 is tied with GTX 980, and other times it’s several percent behind. If nothing else, at an architectural level this is what makes GTX 1060 a better 1080p card than a 1440p card.

Synthetic: Beyond 3D Suite - Texel Fillrate

As for texel throughput, things are right where we expect them. GTX 1060 is virtually tied with GTX 980, and while it’s ahead of RX 480 in the process, it’s not by a massive amount.

Compute Power, Temperature, & Noise


View All Comments

  • Flunk - Friday, August 5, 2016 - link

    It doesn't seem like any of the large tech sites were sampled GTX Titan Xs. All the reviews I've seen are from small sites, most of which I've never heard of before. Maybe they're just borrowing retail cards from owners. Reply
  • fanofanand - Friday, August 5, 2016 - link

    I read that Nvidia wasn't sampling Titan X's to any publications. It's possible that those smaller sites are run by hobbyists who bought the card themselves. Reply
  • jabbadap - Friday, August 5, 2016 - link

    Just wondering are you doing those great in depth HTPC oriented graphics card comparisons in future. Reply
  • HideOut - Friday, August 5, 2016 - link

    Or see review for the S7 since its just the same stuff. Reply
  • Psyside - Saturday, August 6, 2016 - link

    Please do NOT let Joshua Ho review ANY Samsung product anymore! Reply
  • fanofanand - Saturday, August 6, 2016 - link

    I agree with this, his reviews read like advertisement for Apple. Reply
  • rtho782 - Sunday, August 7, 2016 - link

    And the 960! We're missing the immediate predecessor to this for comparison... Reply
  • Ballist1x - Monday, August 15, 2016 - link

    What the review is missing is that the GTX 1060 is actually a replacement in pricepoint to the GTX 970 and therefore has only increased performance by 10-20% in the space of 2 years for the same price.

    The GTX 960 is a different price segment completely and therefore is not such a direct comaprison.
  • nathanddrews - Friday, August 5, 2016 - link

    Too bad the $249 MSRP models aren't available anywhere. This is essentially marketed as a 960 replacement, but priced like a 970 replacement IRL. Reply
  • Cygni - Friday, August 5, 2016 - link

    Cards at $249 have been in stock off and on with Newegg since launch. They may not be available right this exact second, but you shouldn't be waiting too long for stock at MSRP, as the article talks about. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now