
GeForce GTX 1060
Popular choices:

Quadro CX
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
GeForce GTX 1060
2016Why buy it
- ✅+962.7% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Costs $1,750 less on MSRP ($249 MSRP vs $1,999 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 8431.7% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 40.4 vs 0.5 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs $1,999 MSRP).
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅Less risky long-term buy than Quadro CX: it remains the more sensible modern option while Quadro CX is already obsolete for modern gaming.
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌20% higher power demand at 180W vs 150W.
Quadro CX
2008Why buy it
- ✅Draws 150W instead of 180W, a 30W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (947 vs 10,064).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2008-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌702.8% HIGHER MSRP$1,999 MSRPvs$249 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.5 vs 40.4 G3D/$ ($1,999 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
GeForce GTX 1060
2016Quadro CX
2008Why buy it
- ✅+962.7% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Costs $1,750 less on MSRP ($249 MSRP vs $1,999 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 8431.7% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 40.4 vs 0.5 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs $1,999 MSRP).
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅Less risky long-term buy than Quadro CX: it remains the more sensible modern option while Quadro CX is already obsolete for modern gaming.
Why buy it
- ✅Draws 150W instead of 180W, a 30W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌20% higher power demand at 180W vs 150W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (947 vs 10,064).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2008-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌702.8% HIGHER MSRP$1,999 MSRPvs$249 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.5 vs 40.4 G3D/$ ($1,999 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce GTX 1060 better than Quadro CX?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Quadro CX still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
Games Benchmarks
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 117 FPS | 13 FPS |
| medium | 105 FPS | 9 FPS |
| high | 91 FPS | 6 FPS |
| ultra | 77 FPS | 3 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 103 FPS | 9 FPS |
| medium | 87 FPS | 5 FPS |
| high | 76 FPS | 2 FPS |
| ultra | 67 FPS | 1 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 55 FPS | 4 FPS |
| medium | 49 FPS | 2 FPS |
| high | 41 FPS | 1 FPS |
| ultra | 37 FPS | 1 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 216 FPS | 30 FPS |
| medium | 181 FPS | 14 FPS |
| high | 148 FPS | 10 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 7 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 134 FPS | 16 FPS |
| medium | 107 FPS | 7 FPS |
| high | 87 FPS | 5 FPS |
| ultra | 68 FPS | 4 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 62 FPS | 5 FPS |
| medium | 51 FPS | 3 FPS |
| high | 49 FPS | 2 FPS |
| ultra | 41 FPS | 2 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 453 FPS | 43 FPS |
| medium | 362 FPS | 34 FPS |
| high | 302 FPS | 28 FPS |
| ultra | 226 FPS | 21 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 340 FPS | 32 FPS |
| medium | 272 FPS | 26 FPS |
| high | 226 FPS | 21 FPS |
| ultra | 170 FPS | 16 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 226 FPS | 21 FPS |
| medium | 181 FPS | 17 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 14 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 11 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 358 FPS | 43 FPS |
| medium | 302 FPS | 34 FPS |
| high | 260 FPS | 28 FPS |
| ultra | 226 FPS | 21 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 299 FPS | 8 FPS |
| medium | 254 FPS | 6 FPS |
| high | 208 FPS | 5 FPS |
| ultra | 170 FPS | 4 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 170 FPS | 5 FPS |
| medium | 133 FPS | 4 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 3 FPS |
| ultra | 102 FPS | 3 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1060 and Quadro CX

GeForce GTX 1060
GeForce GTX 1060
The GeForce GTX 1060 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 27 2016. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1607 MHz to 1733 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 180W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,064 points. Launch price was $599.

Quadro CX
Quadro CX
The Quadro CX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 602 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 947 points. Launch price was $1,999.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1060 scores 10,064 versus the Quadro CX's 947 — the GeForce GTX 1060 leads by 962.7%. The GeForce GTX 1060 is built on Pascal while the Quadro CX uses Tesla 2.0, both on 16 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 2,560 (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 192 (Quadro CX). Raw compute: 8.873 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 0.4623 TFLOPS (Quadro CX).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 10,064+963% | 947 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 16 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 2560+1233% | 192 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 8.873 TFLOPS+1819% | 0.4623 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64+167% | 24 |
| TMUs | 160+150% | 64 |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+953% | 0.19 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce GTX 1060 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Quadro CX relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1060 comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro CX has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1060 offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 192-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 0.19 MB (Quadro CX) — the GeForce GTX 1060 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB+50% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 192-bit+200% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+953% | 0.19 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 11.1 (10_0) (Quadro CX). Vulkan: 1.3 vs N/A. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12+8% | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | N/A |
| OpenGL | 4.5+36% | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 4+100% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (Pascal) (GeForce GTX 1060) vs None (Quadro CX). Decoder: NVDEC (Pascal) vs PureVideo HD. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC (GeForce GTX 1060) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro CX).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (Pascal) | None |
| Decoder | NVDEC (Pascal) | PureVideo HD |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1060 draws 180W versus the Quadro CX's 150W — a 18.2% difference. The Quadro CX is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 400W (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 350W (Quadro CX). Power connectors: 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 173mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 180W | 150W-17% |
| Recommended PSU | 400W | 350W-13% |
| Power Connector | 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 173mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 55.9+787% | 6.3 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1060 launched at $249 MSRP, while the Quadro CX launched at $1999. The GeForce GTX 1060 costs 87.5% less ($1750 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 40.4 (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 0.5 (Quadro CX) — the GeForce GTX 1060 offers 7980% better value. The GeForce GTX 1060 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2008).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro CX |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $249-88% | $1999 |
| Performance per Dollar | 40.4+7980% | 0.5 |
| Codename | GP104 | GT200B |
| Release | May 27 2016 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #137 | #901 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













