960 -> 1060 or 480 for Steam Streaming performance?

[Hate]

Currently running an i7-4790, 16GB and a GTX 960. This machine is our home server and 99% of the time play games streamed to my laptop over wired ethernet (no room to set up a gaming desk). I currently play things like BF1, Doom etc on 1080 lowest settings streamed. It's mostly alright, but despite steam telling me I've got good pings and 60fps, it doesn't feel as buttery smooth as I would expect.

I'm wanting to play the games on 1080 higher settings as the PC is connected to the main TV in the house (so occasionally I big screen it) but it's biggest use is steam streaming so that's my biggest requirement.

My budget is around £250 so what card do you guys recommend? I've been told that for streaming stick with nVidia but I'm not sure if the performance on the streaming side improves with the newer cards?

 

[peterhc]

1060 6gb over 480 all day long

 

[nutsnut]

8GB 480 is where my money would go.

 

[malachi]

8GB 480 is where my money would go.

This.

Has seen a advantage over the 1060 since the latest driver update.

 

[Apache14]

Tbh you can't go wrong either way really, both support GPU accelerated transcoding.

Personally I would go for either the MSI or the XFX (XXX or Black Edition) 8GB 480. Main reason for me would be the extra memory and that for the last few generations AMD cards get driver gains for longer.

 

[Rroff]

8GB 480 is where my money would go.

For normal gaming yes - however I believe that nVidia have the edge overall (when you factor in things like compatibility) for the OP's type of usage with home streaming though.

 

[akarypid]

Always look at recent reviews.

If you look at recent benchmakrs using latest drivers, the RX480 is the better and faster card, there is no doubt about it:

2016.12.29
AMD RX 480 vs GTX 1060 | Games of 2016 Showdown

2016.12.23
GTX 1060 vs RX 480 Frame Time Analysis - Tom Clancy's The Division DX11 and DX12

2016.12.15
Can the RX 480 Dethrone The GTX 1060? - Crimson ReLive Update - Hardware Unboxed

2016.12.05
GTX 1060 vs. RX 480 - An Updated Review - HardwareCanucks

It makes absolutely no sense to prefer a 1060 over a 480. The 480 is already faster in general (thanks to improved DX11 drivers) and will only keep pulling further and further ahead as more DX12 games arrive (it has a big advantage in DX12 which is growing). It also has more RAM which adds some future-proofing when using high-detail textures.

On a more comic note, AMD fans have a meme for it: FineWine technology

2016.12.29
FineWine Explanation by OzTalksHardware

 

[Rroff]

Always look at recent reviews.

It makes absolutely no sense to prefer a 1060 over a 480. The 480 is already faster in general (thanks to improved DX11 drivers) and will only keep pulling further and further ahead as more DX12 games arrive.

Might be worth taking into account the OP's requirements.

On a more comic note, AMD fans have a meme for it: FineWine technology

2016.12.29
FineWine Explanation by OzTalksHardware

Holy **** that is cringe worthy.

 

[akarypid]

Might be worth taking into account the OP's requirements.

I'll admit I have never streamed games over Steam, but I sort of assumed it's on top of whatever the graphics card does?

I must ask though, if it's about streaming quality, does Steam use the video card to encode it and what settings do you control? Can't you just use a better codec and increase the bitrate (even with your existing card)?

I know the 480 has AVC and HEVC support. Don't know if it works with Steam...

 

[akarypid]

Holy **** that is cringe worthy.

Yeah well, the truth about this is, AMD's drivers for DX11 used to run cards at like 70% potential and gradually they've improved them to 90% potential. This is all good, BUT it also means that there's only 10% left to go before they hit their ceiling.

On the other hand, apparently it's more than enough as most are now already equal/better than their Nvidia counterpart.

The other thing to note is that due to the common GCN core, improvements carry over. For example, in that video, it mentions that it took almost 3 years for the 290X to decisively beat the 780ti. Yet, the 480 launched close to the 1060 and surpassed it within 5 months. This is because the improvements of the past 3 years also benefited the 480. It's like it launched at 80% of its potential and got to 90% after a couple of driver updates.

This for me makes things interesting for Vega and GCN5... If it's at 85% performance at launch day *and* has substantial improvements over Polaris to allow for 1500MHz clocks, then AMD might be able to fight the "ti" for the first time (I mean the 1080ti in this case), which will probably force Nvidia to release Volta (and proper DX12 support).

Let's see what each bring to the table...

 

[Rroff]

I'll admit I have never streamed games over Steam, but I sort of assumed it's on top of whatever the graphics card does?

I must ask though, if it's about streaming quality, does Steam use the video card to encode it and what settings do you control? Can't you just use a better codec and increase the bitrate (even with your existing card)?

I know the 480 has AVC and HEVC support. Don't know if it works with Steam...

Amongst other things Valve tend to work with nVidia much more than AMD for streaming - so historically AMD have been playing catchup when issues have arisen, etc. though that is something that could always change going forward - typically people who do a lot of steam streaming tend to recommend nVidia in this case, unless there is a significant performance delta, for the better compatibility.

which will probably force Nvidia to release Volta (and proper DX12 support).

Let's see what each bring to the table...

AMD doesn't really want to force nVidia to bring Volta to the table - though it would put a bit of a dent in nVidia's wallet if their hand was forced in that regard - what people are actually referring to when they say Volta isn't really designed for PC gaming but AMD simply has nothing to answer to it if it was forced to the table. In some ways I kind of want that to happen as I'm tired of nVidia drip feeding consumers at the consumer's expense.

 

[TheVoice]

It makes absolutely no sense to prefer a 1060 over a 480.

It does actually. The 1060 is cooler, uses less power and is more likely to be compatible with older motherboards.

 

[akarypid]

It does actually. The 1060 is cooler, uses less power and is more likely to be compatible with older motherboards.

It's not much cooler nor does it use much less power. The difference is less than 40W. It's almost unrealistic to have a PSU that is 35W below its max. And remember, it may consume less, but it's generally slower.

Also, all this has nothing to do with older motherboards. Why bring that up at all? There is no motherboard that will run a 1060 but will not run a 480. I dare you to name ONE.

The 1060 is plain worse. The only case you may want to prefer it is you are building a small form-factor and want something that will fit in your space-constraints. It's a trade-off: you give up on better performance in order to work with confined space. That's the only reason to prefer a 1060 over a 480.

 

[akarypid]

AMD doesn't really want to force nVidia to bring Volta to the table - though it would put a bit of a dent in nVidia's wallet if their hand was forced in that regard - what people are actually referring to when they say Volta isn't really designed for PC gaming but AMD simply has nothing to answer to it if it was forced to the table. In some ways I kind of want that to happen as I'm tired of nVidia drip feeding consumers at the consumer's expense.

Well, it won't be until Volta before we know where each really stands. Volta will likely sacrifice some efficiency in order to match the hardware-based scheduling that will allow them to compete in DX12/Vulkan. At the same time, Vega will supposedly address the slow clocks and allow AMD to go toward 1500MHz. At that point we'll have a clearer picture.

Right now, as more and more DX12 games come out the 1060 will lose even more ground to the 480 and it's likely the same will hold for the Vega counterparts of the 1070/1080.

Nvidia will have no option but to respond with Volta and I'm pretty sure they can push that out to market within 2017 if they need to.

 

[Rroff]

Well, it won't be until Volta before we know where each really stands. Volta will likely sacrifice some efficiency in order to match the hardware-based scheduling that will allow them to compete in DX12/Vulkan. At the same time, Vega will supposedly address the slow clocks and allow AMD to go toward 1500MHz. At that point we'll have a clearer picture.

Right now, as more and more DX12 games come out the 1060 will lose even more ground to the 480 and it's likely the same will hold over the 1070/1080 over their Vega counterparts.

Nvidia will have no option but to respond with Volta and I'm pretty sure they can push that out to market within 2017 if thy need to.

Most of the clock/power efficiency issues with Polaris were down to the relatively premature implementation of 14nm at GlobalFoundries - they are now using a much more matured version (unofficially termed "plus-plus"). nVidia have plenty of options without having to respond with Volta - they've been pretty much drip feeding Pascal so far.

 

[akarypid]

Most of the clock/power efficiency issues with Polaris were down to the relatively premature implementation of 14nm at GlobalFoundries - they are now using a much more matured version (unofficially termed "plus-plus"). nVidia have plenty of options without having to respond with Volta - they've been pretty much drip feeding Pascal so far.

This just in.

VEGA architecture preview @ CES

Looks like it's an early preview... We may indeed see Vega around June...

 

[Davedree]

It's not much cooler nor does it use much less power. The difference is less than 40W. It's almost unrealistic to have a PSU that is 35W below its max. And remember, it may consume less, but it's generally slower.

Also, all this has nothing to do with older motherboards. Why bring that up at all? There is no motherboard that will run a 1060 but will not run a 480. I dare you to name ONE.

The 1060 is plain worse. The only case you may want to prefer it is you are building a small form-factor and want something that will fit in your space-constraints. It's a trade-off: you give up on better performance in order to work with confined space. That's the only reason to prefer a 1060 over a 480.

Firstly I own a sapphire ref rx470 and I used it in my elite 110 htpc, I stripped the cooler off and used an aio cooler to keep it cool. Undervolted I was measurig a real 100-110w at 1266 mhz 50% limit at 1.08v, The problem with the rx470 or even rx480 in a small case is not the core temperature, but the amount of heat generated from the power mosfets that caused a significant amount of heat soak on the pcb. In a big case this isn't a problem. In the end I bought a gtx1060 and it holds 1950 out the box or 2114 when clocked. I've measured 110-130w and it doesn't suffer from pcb heat soak like the rx470. Sure an rx480 and a 1060 will both win or lose over each other dependent on games. But if you're saying you sacrifice performance then yes you are correct, but then a gtx1070 mini from zotac will use the same power or less than a heavily clocked rx480 and be 20-25fps ahead, the problem being it costs 380-410.

 

[humbug]

Holy **** that is cringe worthy.

Stop with the snobbery, he might not be as polished as the establishment but he's providing information, very useful information the establishment just don't. Good for him.

 

[Panos]

Currently running an i7-4790, 16GB and a GTX 960. This machine is our home server and 99% of the time play games streamed to my laptop over wired ethernet (no room to set up a gaming desk). I currently play things like BF1, Doom etc on 1080 lowest settings streamed. It's mostly alright, but despite steam telling me I've got good pings and 60fps, it doesn't feel as buttery smooth as I would expect.

I'm wanting to play the games on 1080 higher settings as the PC is connected to the main TV in the house (so occasionally I big screen it) but it's biggest use is steam streaming so that's my biggest requirement.

My budget is around £250 so what card do you guys recommend? I've been told that for streaming stick with nVidia but I'm not sure if the performance on the streaming side improves with the newer cards?

RX480 8GB

It does actually. The 1060 is cooler, uses less power and is more likely to be compatible with older motherboards.

LOL. Seriously? (yes sarcasm)

 

[Apache14]

It does actually. The 1060 is cooler, uses less power and is more likely to be compatible with older motherboards.

1) A good non reference 480 runs pretty cool and has some OC room on top. So really a non issue.

2) Depending on the 480 you get that will be about ~40-50w (under full load) more vs the 1060, unless you are very PSU limited that's also a non issue

3) Are there any motherboards that outright don't work with the 480 ? As far as i know that rumour sprouted from the 480 pulling to much power over the PCIE slot, this was fixed in drivers and doesn't affect non reference cards anyway.


The 1060 would be a great card and so would the 480. The deciding factor for the OP here would be compatibility in this case

My picks from both side would be (Seeing as the XFX Black Edition is out of stock)

(MSI RX 480 8GB : £269.99)
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/msi-...ddr5-pci-express-graphics-card-gx-32j-ms.html

(Palit GTX 1060 6GB : £269.99)
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pali...ddr5-pci-express-graphics-card-gx-03m-pl.html