Rumor: Nvidia has a 3GB GTX 1060 in the works with 1152 SPs

Now that AMD has released its Radeon RX 470 and Radeon RX 460, the ball is back in Nvidia's court, and some insider photos of a press briefing or similar event obtained by Chinese site IT House might give us some insight about how the green team will respond. If the leaked photos are correct, Nvidia will offer a purported "GTX 1060 3GB." This card doesn't  just lose half its RAM over the existing GTX 1060, though—the photo from the event shows that the card could have 1152 SPs, down from 1280 on the 6GB card. 

The full GP106 die on the GTX 1060 spreads its stream processors over 10 SM units, so the loss of 128 of those SPs most likely points to the disabling of one SM on the card (or the equivalent across multiple SMs). If Nvidia does take the world's smallest chainsaw to GP106, this 3GB card would likely lose some texturing capability, as well. IT House's source suggests the card's specs will otherwise be identical to the 6GB version's. We'll just have to wait and see what breaks cover when Nvidia's inevitable response arrives.

Comments closed
    • Chrispy_
    • 4 years ago

    If this rumor turns out to be true, it’s a new low for Nvidia intentionally trying to pass off a lower-grade, cheaper product with naming confusion.

    The vanilla GTX660 was a significant downgrade from the 660Ti. When previously the Ti moniker had been used solely for a mild factory overclock, the vanilla 660 was a completely different product missing something like 20% of the raw functional units, one third of it’s RAM and suffering from a split-width bus that caused major issues when using more than 1.5GB of VRAM.

    In this case, Nvidia is hoping people make the assumption that a GTX1060 3GB performs like the 6GB model, and that the 6GB is only for people with higher resolution monitors.

    • south side sammy
    • 4 years ago

    Let’s be honest. This is the card we know we never needed.

    • Tristan
    • 4 years ago

    Such card is bad choice. GP 106 have 256 bit memory controller (there are additional traces for memory on PCB), so they can easily make 1060 with 4GB and 256 bit, but it may be faster than 1060, so no.

      • torquer
      • 4 years ago

      “Such card is bad choice.” I feel like AMD could use this in their marketing somehow.

      • ImSpartacus
      • 4 years ago

      Doesn’t GP106 have a 192-bit wide bus? GP104 is the one with a 256-bit wide setup.

    • PrincipalSkinner
    • 4 years ago

    Ah, this is the GTX 1060 CE, the Crap Edition.

    • torquer
    • 4 years ago

    Hey remember when I commented on the review thread that I wondered how the 3GB version would stack up and a bunch of you threw tantrums and downvoted me into oblivion saying it would never happen?

      • southrncomfortjm
      • 4 years ago

      Stop bringing up the past.

      Now, let’s stay on topic and talk about the future and this great looking 3GB card which no one ever considered or even pondered.

        • torquer
        • 4 years ago

        legitimate lol

      • ImSpartacus
      • 4 years ago

      A lot of people in this community don’t understand the graphics market as well as they think they do (i still cringe at how often people thought Polaris would have a high end option months after official amd commentary otherwise).

      The 3gb rumor wasn’t a front runner on the rumor mill, but it was plausible and several folks pointed that out (not necessarily here).

      Honestly, very few “correct” rumors are worked out by only one person. There are a lot of smart folks out there that independently come to the same conclusions.

        • torquer
        • 4 years ago

        There are some things that are reasonable assumptions. To me, a 3GB variant seemed a no brainer. Easy way to cut costs slightly and squeeze into a lower price bracket. When you’re only spending $100-200 on a card, $30 might be a much bigger deal than if you’re spending $300+.

        Then again the community (not just at TR) is so wrapped up in their own self centered view of the tech world, anything that they didn’t anticipate, don’t personally use, don’t personally like, don’t personally understand, or don’t personally agree with is automatically the devil and has to be shouted down.

          • ImSpartacus
          • 4 years ago

          I’m pretty biased towards B3D. Those guys are just really smart and make some pretty cunning connections with stuff.

          Of course there are sometimes shills, but they manifest more as “AMD is going under because 14nm perf/W isn’t high enough” as opposed to “the 1060 makes the 480 look useless.” It’s a minor distinction, but there’s just that extra layer of thought & analysis that really elevates the whole conversation. I love lurking that shit.

      • tipoo
      • 4 years ago

      “I wonder how this compares to [card we haven’t seen]” wasn’t a question that could have an answer at that point, no one was saying a 3GB model was utterly impossible. We didn’t, for instance, know that some additional stream processors would be culled, like we do now.

        • torquer
        • 4 years ago

        HOW DARE ANYONE SPECULATE ABOUT EXTREMELY LIKELY UNRELEASED ANYTHING

      • Bauxite
      • 4 years ago

      I can’t hear you over the noise of my dual titan xps.

      But yes, more cut down card options are inevitable. Doing this lets you [s<]abuse market dominance[/s<] maximize yields during ramp up, then maximize margin and market share on the long haul. (just ask intel, they only really make a half dozen or so chips per design)

        • torquer
        • 4 years ago

        I haven’t had to buy anything less than a top model video card myself for a long time, but I can still appreciate the lower performing models for the plebes 🙂

    • ImSpartacus
    • 4 years ago

    Is anybody else kinda not happy about having multiple graphics cards marketed with the same name. Happens with the 480 and now the 1060. What’s wrong with 475 or 1055?

      • xeridea
      • 4 years ago

      The 480 it is just a memory amount difference, it is the same chip. This card is a cutdown chip though, which should give it a different name. Nvidia has historically been terribly confusing by releasing different cards with the same name. I remember a card with 3 different versions, but same name.

        • Concupiscence
        • 4 years ago

        Someone else suggested that it be called the 1050 Ti, and I’d sign off on that myself.

          • southrncomfortjm
          • 4 years ago

          I think they’d need a 1050 first before we start with the Ti.

            • Concupiscence
            • 4 years ago

            You’ve got me there.

            • southrncomfortjm
            • 4 years ago

            😉

        • RAGEPRO
        • 4 years ago

        RX 480 4GB does have slower RAM also. It makes a difference.

          • DPete27
          • 4 years ago

          [url=http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007709%20601203818%20600007787&IsNodeId=1&Description=RX%20480&bop=And&CompareItemList=48%7C14-202-225%5E14-202-225%2C14-150-771%5E14-150-771%2C14-202-222%5E14-202-222%2C14-131-693%5E14-131-693&percm=14-202-225%3A%24%24%24%24%24%24%24%3B14-150-771%3A%24%24%24%24%24%24%24%3B14-202-222%3A%24%24%24%24%24%24%24%3B14-131-693%3A%24%24%24%24%24%24%24<]three of the four 4GB RX480s on newegg[/url<] have 8000MHz VRAM just like the 8GB versions.

            • tay
            • 4 years ago

            How does it matter. There are no 4GB RX480s around.

            • DPete27
            • 4 years ago

            Do you work at newegg or another major e-tailer to know that they didn’t sell any 4GB RX480s, or are you just going off the observation that they’re not in stock?
            [url=http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&N=100007709%20601203818<]News flash,[/url<] it's not exactly easy to get your hands on a majority of the new GPUs, AMD or Nvidia. Production is starting to catch up to demand though.

        • ImSpartacus
        • 4 years ago

        The 8gb 480 also can have higher memory clocks. That’s probably due to 8Gbps gddr5 only showing up in 8Gb chips at the supplier level, so it might not be an intentional segmentation by amd.

        But the fact remains that there are two 480s. The differences are minor (especially relative to Nvidia’s shenanigans), but they cause a $40 spread, which is substantial in the near-$200 market.

        • Amien
        • 4 years ago

        I remember the GTX 260 had 190 and 216 SP variants. Pretty annoying 🙁

          • jihadjoe
          • 4 years ago

          They had different names though. The second model was called the GTX 260 Core 216.

      • f0d
      • 4 years ago
      • jihadjoe
      • 4 years ago

      1060 LE

    • geniekid
    • 4 years ago

    Surely it would make more sense to market this as a 1050?

      • DreadCthulhu
      • 4 years ago

      The 1050 will probably be weaker, lower end part. Now, marketing this as a 1050 Ti or a 1060 LE or SE would make sense.

      • Hattig
      • 4 years ago

      Yes, or 1050Ti at least as it is fairly close to the 1060. “1060 LE” even.

      However what Nvidia are doing is riding on the coat tails of the generally favourable 1060 reviews, and using the brand from that product to create another product that people will buy without realising it is something different. 10% slower to be exact (assuming clocks aren’t adjusted to minimise the difference).

      This is different from the 480 – the memory is the difference there, and the lower memory clock speed was noted on the launch material.

      This card may or may not be a good buy at $199 (although a 3GB card over $150 feels a bit weak in this generation), but it ain’t a 1060, that’s for sure.

      • Farting Bob
      • 4 years ago

      No, for marketing it makes sense to call it a 1060, because people will buy it thinking its the same apart from the memory.

        • southrncomfortjm
        • 4 years ago

        Just like people thought the 970 was actually a 4GB card. Oh wait, yeah, that cost Nvidia a pretty penny ($30 per card) considering the 970 was a really popular card.

    • sweatshopking
    • 4 years ago

    Have to be quite a bit cheaper for me to buy one. 3gb isn’t enough anymore for my 1337 gaming.

      • Theolendras
      • 4 years ago

      What a bastard resolution !

        • jessterman21
        • 4 years ago

        *creates custom resolution of 2377×1337 for ZETT-LEET downsampling*

          • the
          • 4 years ago

          *checks calculator*

          That is a 16:9 aspect ratio.

        • caconym
        • 4 years ago

        1337 x 420 x 69 FPS 4 lyfe

          • sweatshopking
          • 4 years ago

          I lolirl

      • Meadows
      • 4 years ago

      This card seems perfectly proportioned for 1080p gaming, although I’m not sure what monitor(s) you use.

      • chuckula
      • 4 years ago

      1337 games eh?

      I have no idea how the RAM configuration of a video card is helpful in [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tournament_(medieval)<]jousting[/url<] but I'll take your word for it.

      • Concupiscence
      • 4 years ago

      It’s the main reason I’m looking at replacing the Radeon 7970 in my gaming box before long… I’m already starting to feel the pinch.

      • tanker27
      • 4 years ago

      Just what exactly is 1337 gaming?

        • Meadows
        • 4 years ago

        It’s when you put on your baseball cap backwards, replace “nice” with “swag” in your vocabulary, drink Monster in front of schoolchildren, and play online shooters whereby in voice chat you enunciate just how many of your opponents’ mothers you have propositioned for intercourse.

          • tanker27
          • 4 years ago

          BWAHAHAHA. Sounds like the normal 12 yr old.

          • sweatshopking
          • 4 years ago

          YOU HAVE CAMERAS IN MY HOUSE OR WHAT?

            • Meadows
            • 4 years ago

            You wish I did, sweatshopking.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This