Geforceã‚â® Gtx 1060 Windforce Oc 6g Overclocking Review
MSI GeForce GTX 1060 6GT OC Product showcase
The MSI GTX 1060 6GT OC is not office of GAMING or ARMOR serial. Information technology'south a a new product line aiming at those who want the latest graphics menu, but practise not necessarily need all the fancy features other models tin offer.
The 6G TOC is currently the cheapest GeForce 10 Series model from MSI (with MSRP at 250 USD). Since Founders Edition is at present more expensive and express in terms where y'all can buy it, add-in-board partners had the choice either to create something similar to Founders Edition, but using cheaper materials, or go completely different way, past designing pretty much the whole graphics card from the scratch.
MSI's 6GT OC is one of such cards, it has custom dual-fan cooling solution, custom PCB with 4+2 phase pattern and custom I/O bracket with non-standard display connectors.
Yous can detach the cooler from the board past removing 4 screws. The heat sink is fastened to the shroud with another four screws. Information technology takes nearly ane minute to have the whole card autonomously.
I don't actually remember the concluding fourth dimension I saw a graphics card with merely one oestrus piping:
MSI GeForce GTX 1060 6GT OC Specifications
Compared to Founders Edition, nosotros have slightly higher clocks (+38/+50 MHz) on the GPU. This card likewise has less display connectors than reference design.
| MSI GeForce GTX 1060 6G TOC Specifications | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSI GTX 1060 6GT OC | NVIDIA GTX 1060 FE | AMD RX 480 | HIS R9 390X IceQX2 | |
| GPU | 16nm FF GP106 | 14nm FF Polaris 10 | 28nm Grenada XT | |
| Unified Cores | 1280 | 2304 | 2816 | |
| Base Clock | 1544 MHz | 1506 MHz | 1120 MHz | – |
| Boost Clock | 1759 MHz | 1709 MHz | 1266 MHz | 1070 MHz |
| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz | 2000 MHz | 1500 MHz | |
| Retentiveness Configuration | 6GB GDDR5 | 8GB GDDR5 | 8GB GDDR5 | |
| Memory Bus Width | 192-bit | 256-chip | 512-bit | |
| Cooler | Dual-slot, Dual-fan | Dual-slot, Single-fan | Dual-slot, Sinle-Fan | Dual-slot-Dual-Fan |
| Display Outputs | 1x DisplayPort 1x HDMI 1x DVI-D | 3x DisplayPort 1x HDMI 1x DVI-D | 3x DisplayPort 1x HDMI | 1x DisplayPort 1x HDMI 2x DVI |
| TDP/TBP | 120W | 120W | 150W | 275W |
| Ability Connectors | 1x 6-pivot | 1x vi-pin | 1x six-pin | 1x six-pivot, 1x 8pin |
Overclocking
You lot may be wondering why overclocking section is included at the very beginning of this mini-review. Overclocking was actually one of the very first things I tested with this card. That's because I decided to run all tests with both default and with maximum clocks. I recollect this is the best manner to determine the truthful potential of this carte du jour.
Afterwards many efforts to notice the most stable clocks, this is what I came upwards with:
But by increasing power limit and temperature limit we become rid of frequency throttling, which tin can be observed in Fire Strike Stress test later well-nigh 4 minutes. We managed to add 175 MHz to the GPU clock, this was the absolute limit of this carte. As for the retentivity, let me remind you that this model has no heat spreaders over memory. It is therefore non recommended to overclock retention. Withal just for the testing purpose I tried few settings and +200 MHz appeared to be the virtually stable choice.
It's worth goose egg that at that place were no artifacts at whatsoever clock speed I tested, neither GPU or memory. The GPU driver simply stops working, which leads me to believe that we are striking a hidden bulwark that is neither caused by temperature or power limitations. I guess our sample only did not want to go whatever faster.
Such overclocking volition give you clock speeds varying from 2113 to 2100 MHz. Judging from FS Stress Test we get stable 2100 MHz. Please note we are using Afterburner'south automatic fan command, which makes card quite noisy.
Stability and thermal testing
GeForce graphics cards featuring GPU Boost iii.0 are all showing the same behavior in constructed tests. After 3-5 minutes boost clock drops to lower value. So in this role you will learn what is the maximum stable clock in few tests.
The beginning affair I tested was the fan speed. This was done for the purpose of overclocking, to meet what is the maximum fan speed I could tolerate when playing. My room is not really suitable for noise testing, equally ambient noise is relatively high (~38 dB). That said you can't tell you the exact dissonance level at idle country. It is however lower than what other parts in the arrangement can generate.
| Fan testing | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| fifty% | 60% | 70% | 80% | ninety% | 100% | |
| Fan Speed (RPM) | 1520 | 1830 | 2130 | 2440 | 2730 | 3000 |
| GPU Temperature (C) | 76 | 72 | 69 | 66 | 65 | 63 |
| Racket ~20cm (dB) | 46 | 49 | 53 | 57 | 61 | 65 |
| Racket ~100cm (dB) | 39 | 39 | 42 | 44 | 47 | 51 |
The fan has a maximum speed of 3000 RPM. Out-of-the-box experience is rather positive, fan speed never exceeded 1900 RPM, which is withal relatively tranquility. For overclocking I would recommend 2100+ RPM (~70%), merely the acoustic experience volition not be only as skilful. Of course zippo is stopping yous from using aftermarket coolers, and in fact I believe this card is perfect for such purpose (but don't forget to buy memory head spreaders!). For our overclocking testing nosotros were using Afterburner'due south born fan command, this results in fan speed at around up to 74%.
| Thermal testing | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Idle | Burn down Strike Stress Exam | Fire Strike Stress Exam PP/TL Max | Furmark | Division Benchmark (Stock) | Partitioning Benchmark (Overclocking) | |
| GPU Temperature (C) | 28 | lxx | 72 | seventy | 69 | 76 |
| Fan Speed (RPM) | 1495 | 1805 | 1830 | 1800 | 1760 | 1870 |
| Stable Clock Speed (MHz) | 177 | 1898 | 1911 | 1670 | 1934 | 2100.five |
| Retentiveness Clock (MHz) | 203 | 2003 | 2003 | 2003 | 2003 | 2100.9 |
Furmark test at stock (default fan profile):
Furmark test with overclocking (Afterburner'south automatic fan control):
Burn Strike Stress Test Stock (left) / Overclocking (right):
Testing platform
| Component | Model | Provided by |
|---|---|---|
| CPU | Intel Cadre i7 6800K @ 4200 MHz | |
| Motherboard | ASUS X99-A II | |
| Retentivity | Thousand.Skill Trident Z DDR4 3200 MHz xvi-18-eighteen-38-2N | G.SKILL |
| Brandish | Yamakasi Catleap Q270 | |
| SSD | Samsung 950 Pro M.2 | |
| PSU | OCZ 850W ZX | |
| GPU | MSI GeForce GTX 1060 6G TOC (GeForce 368.81) | MSI |
| HIS Radeon R9 390X IceQ X2 OC (Cherry-red 16.seven.ii) | HIS |
Functioning
| Performance metrics | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSI GTX 1060 6G TOC (Stock) | MSI GTX 1060 6G TOC (OC) | HIS R9 390X IceQX2 | MSI GTX 1060/ HIS R9 390X | MSI GTX 1060 (OC)/(Stock) | |
| Synthetic performance | |||||
| 3DMark Burn Strike (1920×1080, GPU Score) | 13300 | 14232 | 13111 | 101% | 107% |
| 3DMark Burn down Strike Extreme (2560×1440, GPU Score) | 6262 | 6722 | 5945 | 105% | 107% |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Ultra (3840×2160, GPU Score) | 3025 | 3260 | 2975 | 102% | 108% |
| 3DMark Time Spy (2560×1440, GPU Score, Async On) | 4132 | 4456 | 4048 | 102% | 108% |
| 3DMark Time Spy (2560×1440, GPU Score, Async Off) | 3964 | 4287 | 3563 | 111% | 108% |
| 3DMark 11 Performance (1280×720) | 17590 | 19007 | 18888 | 93% | 108% |
| 3DMark 11 Extreme (1920×1080) | 5551 | 6020 | 4705 | 118% | 108% |
| Ashes of Singularity (CRAZY 2560×1440, DirectX 12) | xxx.5 | 32.7 | 35.8 | 85% | 107% |
| Unigine Valley (Extreme Hard disk, FPS) | 65.ix | 69.viii | 63.0 | 105% | 106% |
| Gaming operation | |||||
| Rise of the Tomb Raider (Very Loftier Settings) | |||||
| (1920×1080, DirectX11) | 79.68 | 86.30 | 65.75 | 121% | 108% |
| (2560×1440, DirectX11) | 55.00 | 58.84 | 46.93 | 117% | 107% |
| (1920×1080, DirectX12) | 79.97 | 85.19 | 75.95 | 105% | 107% |
| (2560×1440, DirectX12) | 53.28 | 57.64 | 51.26 | 104% | 108% |
| Hitman 2016 (Maximum Preset) | |||||
| (1920×1080, DirectX11) | 77.29 | 83.17 | 81.53 | 90% | 108% |
| (2560×1440, DirectX11) | 58.93 | 63.17 | 64.65 | 91% | 107% |
| (1920×1080, DirectX12) | 75.49 | 80.54 | 83.lxx | 90% | 107% |
| (2560×1440, DirectX12) | 57.47 | 61.46 | 66.43 | 87% | 107% |
| The Division (Ultra Preset) | |||||
| (1920×1080, DirectX11) | 61.60 | 64.80 | 56.40 | 109% | 105% |
| (2560×1440, DirectX11) | 43.30 | 49.50 | 44.xx | 98% | 114% |
| Rainbow Six Siege (Ultra Preset) | |||||
| (1920×1080, DirectX11) | 95.20 | 102.20 | xc.80 | 105% | 107% |
| (2560×1440, DirectX11) | 63.00 | 69.lxxx | sixty.70 | 104% | 111% |
| One thousand Theft Auto 5 (Very High Preset) | |||||
| (1920×1080, DirectX11) | 133.forty | 139.00 | 118.20 | 107% | 104% |
| (2560×1440, DirectX11) | xc.threescore | 98.00 | 85.00 | 107% | 108% |
| Metro Last Calorie-free (Very High, Tessellation High, Physx Off) | |||||
| (1920×1080, DirectX11) | 87.00 | 98.00 | 87.00 | 113% | 107% |
| (2560×1440, DirectX11) | 62.00 | 66.00 | 58.00 | 113% | 108% |
| Talos Principle (Ultra Preset, 4x MSAA) | |||||
| (1920×1080, DirectX11) | 99.60 | 106.60 | 109.20 | 91% | 107% |
| (2560×1440, DirectX11) | 69.lxxx | 75.40 | 79.ninety | 87% | 108% |
| (1920×1080, Vulkan) | 89.20 | 98.30 | 69.10 | 129% | 110% |
| (2560×1440, Vulkan) | 61.70 | 67.70 | 42.50 | 145% | 110% |
Starting with constructed performance, we go very close results betwixt GTX 1060 and 390X.
Meanwhile MSI'southward 6GT OC lost the battle against 390X in 3DMark11 Functioning and Ashes of Singularity.
When it comes to gaming experience I chose few titles that I recollect are quite popular. In the latest Tomb Raider GTX 1060 offers much better performance in DX11 and FullHD, but one time we enable DX12 and increase resolution to 1440p, the departure between GTX1060 and 390X becomes really pocket-size.
In Hitman 2016, GTX 1060 is losing in all tests, be information technology DX11 or DX12. However, past increasing clock speeds we can get about the aforementioned framerate as 390X.
In Division MSI 6G TOC was ameliorate at Full Hard disk drive, just at 1440P information technology was marginally slower than 390X.
In GTA5, Rainbow 6 Siege and Metro Last Light MSI'south carte du jour was faster past few percent.
The terminal title I tested was Talos Principle. Originally I planned to test Doom, simply due to lack of time I chose something with congenital-in benchmark. The results were quite foreign. GTX 1060 has worse operation in DX11, while beingness faster in Vulkan. And then completely the reverse of what I expected (judging from Doom's Vulkan implementation). However this game is nonetheless in beta, so I'm guessing those figures may change when Vulkan gets full implementation in Talos.
My overall impression is positive. As you might have noticed I generally test games at highest preset settings. The Sectionalisation was the simply example where nosotros didn't get threescore FPS in Ultra preset. What this ways is that if you own 60 Hz monitor and you apply Five-Sync, then this card should be more than than enough for y'all.
Source: https://videocardz.com/review/msi-geforce-gtx-1060-6gt-oc
0 Response to "Geforceã‚â® Gtx 1060 Windforce Oc 6g Overclocking Review"
Postar um comentário