NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB versus AMD Radeon R7 260X
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB and AMD Radeon R7 260X pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire, Technologies. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 9 mois plus tard
- Environ 71% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1709 MHz versus 1000 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 136.7 GTexel / s versus 61.6 GTexel / s
- Environ 43% de pipelines plus haut: 1280 versus 896
- 2.2x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 4,375 gflops versus 1,971 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 16 nm versus 28 nm
- Environ 50% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 6 GB versus 4 GB
- 3.2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 10079 versus 3192
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 747 versus 523
- 2.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 119.148 versus 43.745
- Environ 71% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1373.562 versus 804.436
- 2.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 8.694 versus 3.673
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 454.799 versus 221.539
- 3.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12442 versus 3845
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3691 versus 3485
- 3.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12442 versus 3845
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3691 versus 3485
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 19 July 2016 versus 8 October 2013 |
Vitesse augmenté | 1709 MHz versus 1000 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 136.7 GTexel / s versus 61.6 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1280 versus 896 |
Performance á point flottant | 4,375 gflops versus 1,971 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 16 nm versus 28 nm |
Taille de mémore maximale | 6 GB versus 4 GB |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 10079 versus 3192 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 747 versus 523 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 119.148 versus 43.745 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1373.562 versus 804.436 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.694 versus 3.673 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 454.799 versus 221.539 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12442 versus 3845 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3691 versus 3485 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12442 versus 3845 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3691 versus 3485 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 260X
- Environ 4% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 115 Watt versus 120 Watt
- 2.9x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 64.088 versus 21.766
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 versus 3340
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 versus 3340
- Environ 63% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1481 versus 907
Caractéristiques | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 115 Watt versus 120 Watt |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 64.088 versus 21.766 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3340 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3340 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1481 versus 907 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 260X
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
Nom | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB | AMD Radeon R7 260X |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 10079 | 3192 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 747 | 523 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 35369 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 119.148 | 43.745 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1373.562 | 804.436 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.694 | 3.673 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.766 | 64.088 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 454.799 | 221.539 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12442 | 3845 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3691 | 3485 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3340 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12442 | 3845 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3691 | 3485 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3340 | 3358 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 907 | 1481 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB | AMD Radeon R7 260X | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Pascal | GCN 2.0 |
Nom de code | GP106 | Bonaire |
Date de sortie | 19 July 2016 | 8 October 2013 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $299 | $139 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 356 | 614 |
Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
Conception | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
Prix maintenant | $239 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 17.15 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1709 MHz | 1000 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1506 MHz | |
Performance á point flottant | 4,375 gflops | 1,971 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 16 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 1280 | 896 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 136.7 GTexel / s | 61.6 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt | 115 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 4,400 million | 2,080 million |
Stream Processors | 896 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
Eyefinity | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Longeur | 250 mm | 170 mm |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin | 1 x 6-pin |
Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 6 GB | 4 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 192.2 GB / s | 104 GB/s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 192 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 8008 MHz | |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync |