Help me decide pls

[J0s3e]

Between 1060 3GB, EVGA SC ACX 2.0+ and EVGA FTW+ 970 ACX 2.0+

I just can't see how the 1060 outperforms maxed out 970, but benchmarks say so.
They are both at the same price (new), sure I could go for used 970 for about £170ish but I don't see the point if I can have the masterpiece ftw+ with a backplate for £199.99 new.

I game on 1080p, not planning to upgrade any time soon (144Hz BenQ monitor), rest of system will be i7 4770k (OC'd to about 4.2, will see what can I squeeze out of it), MSi z87M GAMING mobo, 8GB of ram, 450W 80+ Gold PSU.

Any input appreciated.

I could go for the 6GB version too, but don't really see any benefits over the 3GB (I play mainly CS:GO, BF1 beta, will play some W40k Eternal Crusade and may play some of my older games in a library. Basically, no AAA titles maxed out.)

Is it really worth going for the 1060, or will 970 do me good for the next 2 years?

 

[AlienALX]

3gb is not enough, neither is 4gb really. Either 1060 6gb or RX 480 8gb. Trust me, you will regret it if you buy a card that doesn't have enough memory.

And with the Hitman benchmark suggesting that even at 1080p, we might be hitting the three gig limit and seeing an additional hit to performance not caused by the reduced CUDA core count, we do have to wonder about the level of future-proofing this cut-down GTX 1060 has

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-3gb-vs-6gb-review

 

[shambles1980]

a 780ti is technically faster than a 970, but driver nerfs and archetectureal improvments does end up with the 970 being faster.. same is true for the 1060.
i would not upgrade from a 780 ti or a 970 to a 1060 though. its all about the same and the benifits wouldnt be worth the extra money as an upgrade,
However if i had no graphics ard or a older one like a 660. then i would buy the 1060 before a 970 UNLESS i planned on doing sli.

 

[J0s3e]

Thanks folks, 1060 6GB it is then..
I was so tempted to get the 970 FTW+, but the 1060 is probably a better choice with the low power draw, actually better performance and 6GB.

a 780ti is technically faster than a 970, but driver nerfs and archetectureal improvments does end up with the 970 being faster.. same is true for the 1060.
i would not upgrade from a 780 ti or a 970 to a 1060 though. its all about the same and the benifits wouldnt be worth the extra money as an upgrade,
However if i had no graphics ard or a older one like a 660. then i would buy the 1060 before a 970 UNLESS i planned on doing sli.

Do you think they actually hinder the performance via drivers on purpose? I just don't see a "lower spec" card beating higher spec card from previous generation, at least it was not the case with 760/670, 960/770 etc...

I guess times have changed. At the moment I have 670 and although it is enough for what I need it for, it is so damn LOUD in load I can't stand it.. Also I'll send over this PC for my brother so want to treat myself for what a good bro I am

 

[RobM]

personally I would got for an AMD since they do not work on obsolescence the way Nvidia does with newer driver making older cards perform worse. AMD on the other hand get better longer term

 

[J0s3e]

Sorry, but it has to be nVidia here, I've been this way for 15 years and still feel like I get stability, reliability and also drivers I am used to. Since my Geforce 4 MX 440 I haven't opted for Radeon (AMD) once.