Synthetics

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
POST A COMMENT

184 Comments

View All Comments

  • osxandwindows - Friday, August 05, 2016 - link

    Finally!.
    A timely review from anandtech.
    Reply
  • osxandwindows - Friday, August 05, 2016 - link

    Now, where is the HTC10 review, the new titan, and the note 7? Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Friday, August 05, 2016 - link

    HTC 10: In progress (Josh is nearly done)
    Titan X Pascal: We weren't sampled
    Note7: No comment
    Reply
  • ddriver - Friday, August 05, 2016 - link

    "Titan X Pascal: We weren't sampled"

    What do you expect? They send units to be reviewed for publicity, which requires the unit be reviewed immediately after it is received, and the review published the moment NDA expires. But if it takes you months after the official release to review stuff - why bother sending you samples? Keep on sloth gear and you might end up having to purchase all the hardware you want to review...
    Reply
  • ddriver - Friday, August 05, 2016 - link

    And please don't go with the "but we go in depth" stuff - there is nothing preventing you from publishing detailed stuff later on. Because otherwise you are implying some absurdity like "we're too good for timely reviews" which is plain out silly. Reply
  • zepi - Friday, August 05, 2016 - link

    I'm happy to read average results from techpowerup, guru3d on whatever random site I happen to find my way to.

    I come to Anandtech to find out WHY the cards perform the way they do, not to answer the question of HOW they perform.
    Reply
  • ddriver - Friday, August 05, 2016 - link

    Sure, because it is all about you happiness... Reply
  • mmrezaie - Friday, August 05, 2016 - link

    Well mine too. I do not care about others shallow reviews. I like how Anandtech goes deep about these reviews. Maybe it is a niche portion of visitors, but AT is being famous because of these reviews. Reply
  • Fnnoobee - Friday, August 05, 2016 - link

    Deep in reviews? They're not even doing they're test on the latest AMD Crimson drivers, 16.7.3, or even 16.7.2, which released almost a month ago. Yeah, real deep testing there. /s Reply
  • mkaibear - Friday, August 05, 2016 - link

    Ah, the irony of ddriver complaining that anandtech doesn't make him happy, then telling zepi off for pointing out anandtech makes him happy... Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now