Monday, August 29th 2016

MSI Intros GeForce GTX 1060 3GB OCV1 Graphics Card

MSI introduced its compact, cost-effective GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB OCV1 graphics card. Pictured below, the card features a compact design that makes it fit for SFF builds, and has the muscle for maxed out 1080p gaming. The card features a custom-design PCB that draws power from a single 6-pin PCIe power connector, to support factory-overclocked speeds of 1544 MHz core, 1759 MHz GPU Boost, and an untouched 8.00 GHz GDDR5-effective memory, against reference clocks of 1506/1709 MHz.

The custom-design cooling solution is a simple copper-core aluminium heatsink with radially-projecting fins, cooled by a single 80 mm fan. The card is 18.8 cm long. Based on the 16 nm GP106 silicon, the MSI GTX 1060 3 GB OCV1 features 1,152 CUDA cores, 72 TMUs, 48 ROPs, and 3 GB of GDDR5 memory across a 192-bit wide memory interface. MSI didn't reveal pricing, but we expect this card to be priced close to the $199 baseline NVIDIA set for this SKU.
Add your own comment

16 Comments on MSI Intros GeForce GTX 1060 3GB OCV1 Graphics Card

#1
Nobody99
GTX 1060 3GB is basically RX 470 and 480 killer.
Posted on Reply
#2
dj-electric
I cannot find 3GB of Vram attractive today in any way
Posted on Reply
#3
silentbogo
Dj-ElectriC, post: 3513287, member: 87186"
I cannot find 3GB of Vram attractive today in any way
1080p gaming? I think there are like 5 modern games at most that use more than 3GB VRAM in 1080p, and this is only with Ultra settings and AO enabled.
Some games are even quite playable at 1440p.
Posted on Reply
#4
ManofGod
Nobody99, post: 3513284, member: 165634"
GTX 1060 3GB is basically RX 470 and 480 killer.
I always thought that NVidia users were a murderous bunch. ;) I do think it will be competitive for a short time but, it will be far from a killer of the RX 470 and RX 480. The ram limitation on that card will be reached within a year if not sooner.
Posted on Reply
#5
medi01
Nobody99, post: 3513284, member: 165634"
GTX 1060 3GB is basically RX 470 and 480 killer.
Somehow crippled 1060 (less CUs, so it's rather 1050) with half RAM of 1060 will kill 480 and cheaper 470, which in AIB form happens to perform pretty close to 480.

Presented to you by creators of "much faster than 480", especially aimed at people who can comprehend only title of an article. Enjoy it, while you can (for a year or two, before we stop giving a fock about this product, cause we've rolled out new shiny product to please our shareholders)

/chuckle

PS
On a serious note, 470 is so close to 480 nVidia didn't see how to squeeze a product inbetween.
Posted on Reply
#6
rtwjunkie
PC Gaming Enthusiast
silentbogo, post: 3513313, member: 141875"
1080p gaming? I think there are like 5 modern games at most that use more than 3GB VRAM in 1080p, and this is only with Ultra settings and AO enabled.
Some games are even quite playable at 1440p.
Actually, no, Ultra isn't necessary at all to exceed 3GB at 1080p. I did it regularly on a GTX 980, and watched closely, with my pucker factor getting higher the closer the VRAM used rose to the 4GB limit of that card.

These 3GB 1060's will be relevant for about 6 months, before they get eclipsed by the better cards put out by their own NVIDIA and AMD while game requirements continue to rise.
Posted on Reply
#7
T4C Fantasy
CPU & GPU DB Maintainer
silentbogo, post: 3513313, member: 141875"
1080p gaming? I think there are like 5 modern games at most that use more than 3GB VRAM in 1080p, and this is only with Ultra settings and AO enabled.
Some games are even quite playable at 1440p.
GTA V requires at max settings 5GB of VRAM in 1080P
4GB with just Distance all the way up....
Posted on Reply
#8
Nordic
I don't use any game that would exceed 3gb anyways
Posted on Reply
#9
silentbogo
T4C Fantasy, post: 3513478, member: 105373"
GTA V requires at max settings 5GB of VRAM in 1080P
4GB with just Distance all the way up....
Once again:
silentbogo, post: 3513313, member: 141875"
I think there are like 5 modern games at most that use more than 3GB VRAM in 1080p
To be more specific: Shadow of Mordor (own it, didn't like it), GTA5(hate the whole series) and... I ran out of ideas already.

It can play DOOM, Rise of the Tomb Raider, Deus Ex: MD, Far Cry Primal, Witcher 3, The Division and tons of other recent games at 1080p Very High or Ultra without hitting the VRAM constraint.

Also, here's a nice short review, which even includes a side-by-side performance comparison between 3GB and 6GB versions at 1080p and 1440p resolutions.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-3gb-vs-6gb-review
Posted on Reply
#10
dj-electric
silentbogo, post: 3513503, member: 141875"
Once again:


To be more specific: Shadow of Mordor (own it, didn't like it), GTA5(hate the whole series) and... I ran out of ideas already.
You don't like those games, so... nobody should treat them as important i take it? yeah...

GPU Mem doesn't work in a linear way. The more you have, the more is chached. High amounts of video memory can help with stuttering and frame smoothness. If you take a game that usually consume 2GB on a 3GB card, most chances is that it will consume more on a 4GB card.

3GBs of memory for the most is just fine on 1080P. i don't like "just fine", i would prefer completely safe, As safe as the GTX 1060 6GB is.
Posted on Reply
#11
Joss
1060s need no more than a single fan, maybe double fan for extreme OCs (if they are possible) but triples are way overkill.
This card looks very nice, both technically and aesthetically, very balanced.
Posted on Reply
#12
GhostRyder
I don't see this card being attractive on that price point of a card mostly because of the 3gb limit. I can understand on the 150 and below market but at 200 its really necessary in this day and age with how ram usage has gone through the roof. I would rather get an RX 470/480 over this card, but then again I would pay the extra $50 for the GTX 1060 over all the other options.
Posted on Reply
#13
Nordic
GhostRyder, post: 3513644, member: 149328"
I don't see this card being attractive on that price point of a card mostly because of the 3gb limit. I can understand on the 150 and below market but at 200 its really necessary in this day and age with how ram usage has gone through the roof. I would rather get an RX 470/480 over this card, but then again I would pay the extra $50 for the GTX 1060 over all the other options.
I am actually considering this card. I specifically want a lower power card for my SFF system to better manage heat. I really only need about a 970's worth of performance. The 1060 3gb and the 480 4gb are both $199. The 1060 3gb uses less power. It looks like a win for me since no game I play uses >3gb of memory.
Posted on Reply
#14
$ReaPeR$
rtwjunkie, post: 3513420, member: 56774"
Actually, no, Ultra isn't necessary at all to exceed 3GB at 1080p. I did it regularly on a GTX 980, and watched closely, with my pucker factor getting higher the closer the VRAM used rose to the 4GB limit of that card.

These 3GB 1060's will be relevant for about 6 months, before they get eclipsed by the better cards put out by their own NVIDIA and AMD while game requirements continue to rise.
this.
Posted on Reply
#15
mac007
silentbogo, post: 3513503, member: 141875"
Once again:


To be more specific: Shadow of Mordor (own it, didn't like it), GTA5(hate the whole series) and... I ran out of ideas already.

It can play DOOM, Rise of the Tomb Raider, Deus Ex: MD, Far Cry Primal, Witcher 3, The Division and tons of other recent games at 1080p Very High or Ultra without hitting the VRAM constraint.

Also, here's a nice short review, which even includes a side-by-side performance comparison between 3GB and 6GB versions at 1080p and 1440p resolutions.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-3gb-vs-6gb-review
thanx for the link i was looking for this review for some time :)
Posted on Reply
#16
GhostRyder
james888, post: 3513646, member: 96457"
I am actually considering this card. I specifically want a lower power card for my SFF system to better manage heat. I really only need about a 970's worth of performance. The 1060 3gb and the 480 4gb are both $199. The 1060 3gb uses less power. It looks like a win for me since no game I play uses >3gb of memory.
Well its up to you on your choice, however just because some games don't at the moment does not mean others will in the future. Plenty of games I play range from 2.5gb used all the way to over 6gb just at 1440p (Albeit 144hz) but some games are very inefficient with memory management and its sometimes better to be prepared. If your looking for low power its obvious the 1060 is better, however that being said the power usage difference is minor in the grand scheme so its up to you whether that matters more. The GTX 1060 3gb drops quite farther in performance than I thought it would actually making it pretty much on par with the RX 480 variants. That means its either the 1gb of VRAM or the lower power usage (Not sure yet how OC will do comparing to the RX 480 overclocked).

Either way both are pretty decent cards though, I just prefer the extra VRAM.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment