GeForce GTX 1060 vs Radeon 880M

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

2016

Why buy it

✅165.1% more average FPS across 47 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 40.4 vs 0 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).

Trade-offs

❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌1100% higher power demand at 180W vs 15W.

Radeon 880M

2024

Why buy it

✅More future proof: RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 15W instead of 180W, a 165W reduction.
✅More future proof: RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1060 across 47 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 40.4 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $249 MSRP).

GeForce GTX 1060

2016

Radeon 880M

2024

Why buy it

✅165.1% more average FPS across 47 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 40.4 vs 0 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).

Why buy it

✅More future proof: RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 15W instead of 180W, a 165W reduction.
✅More future proof: RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌1100% higher power demand at 180W vs 15W.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1060 across 47 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 40.4 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $249 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 1060 better than Radeon 880M?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1060 is clearly the better overall GPU here. GeForce GTX 1060 averages 165.1% more FPS across 47 tracked games in our benchmark data. You are also looking at 10,064 vs 7,729 in G3D Mark. On top of that, GeForce GTX 1060 is a 2016 card with no meaningful modern upscaling stack, while Radeon 880M is a 2024 model from an older generation with FSR upscaling. So this is not really a tight same-tier comparison. It is more a modern card against an older, weaker alternative.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Radeon 880M is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2024 generation instead of 2016, better upscaling support with FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack, and a 4nm process instead of 16nm. That broader feature stack should age better as more games lean on modern upscaling and frame-generation support.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?

GeForce GTX 1060 is the smarter buy today, but it is not as lopsided as a simple winner label makes it sound. GeForce GTX 1060 is priced in an unclear MSRP range at $249 MSRP versus an unclear MSRP, and you are getting 165.1% more estimated average FPS across 47 tracked games in our benchmark data and 30.2% higher G3D Mark. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 100+%. Radeon 880M is the newer 2024 card, so it still has a real case if you care more about newer architecture, lower power draw (15W vs 180W), and future-proofing than about squeezing out the strongest gaming value today.

When does Radeon 880M make more sense than GeForce GTX 1060?

Yes. Radeon 880M is still an excellent gaming GPU in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. It makes more sense if your priority is newer architecture, lower power draw (15W vs 180W), future-proofing, and staying closer to an unclear MSRP more than squeezing out the extra headroom of GeForce GTX 1060. The trade-off is that GeForce GTX 1060 currently gives you 30.2% higher G3D Mark and 165.1% more estimated average FPS across 47 tracked games in our benchmark data. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 100+%.

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.

GeForce GTX 1060 Benchmark Check

Radeon 880M Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1060	Radeon 880M
1080p
low	117 FPS	46 FPS
medium	105 FPS	30 FPS
high	91 FPS	22 FPS
ultra	77 FPS	12 FPS
1440p
low	103 FPS	32 FPS
medium	87 FPS	19 FPS
high	76 FPS	11 FPS
ultra	67 FPS	6 FPS
4K
low	55 FPS	12 FPS
medium	49 FPS	8 FPS
high	41 FPS	5 FPS
ultra	37 FPS	3 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1060 Open Radeon 880M

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1060	Radeon 880M
1080p
low	216 FPS	109 FPS
medium	181 FPS	76 FPS
high	148 FPS	51 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	36 FPS
1440p
low	134 FPS	78 FPS
medium	107 FPS	50 FPS
high	87 FPS	36 FPS
ultra	68 FPS	26 FPS
4K
low	62 FPS	33 FPS
medium	51 FPS	24 FPS
high	49 FPS	19 FPS
ultra	41 FPS	13 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1060 Open Radeon 880M

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1060	Radeon 880M
1080p
low	453 FPS	310 FPS
medium	362 FPS	272 FPS
high	302 FPS	205 FPS
ultra	226 FPS	168 FPS
1440p
low	340 FPS	227 FPS
medium	272 FPS	205 FPS
high	226 FPS	157 FPS
ultra	170 FPS	125 FPS
4K
low	226 FPS	135 FPS
medium	181 FPS	121 FPS
high	151 FPS	82 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	57 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1060 Open Radeon 880M

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1060	Radeon 880M
1080p
low	358 FPS	159 FPS
medium	302 FPS	125 FPS
high	260 FPS	105 FPS
ultra	226 FPS	82 FPS
1440p
low	299 FPS	112 FPS
medium	254 FPS	90 FPS
high	208 FPS	77 FPS
ultra	170 FPS	60 FPS
4K
low	170 FPS	66 FPS
medium	133 FPS	53 FPS
high	123 FPS	42 FPS
ultra	102 FPS	31 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1060 Open Radeon 880M

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1060 and Radeon 880M

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.

Radeon 880M

The Radeon 880M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in July 15 2024. It features the RDNA 3.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 400 MHz to 2900 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,729 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1060 scores 10,064 versus the Radeon 880M's 7,729 — the GeForce GTX 1060 leads by 30.2%. The GeForce GTX 1060 is built on Pascal while the Radeon 880M uses RDNA 3.5, both on 16 nm vs 4 nm. Shader units: 2,560 (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 768 (Radeon 880M). Raw compute: 8.873 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 4.454 TFLOPS (Radeon 880M). Boost clocks: 1733 MHz vs 2900 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1060	Radeon 880M
G3D Mark Score	10,064+30%	7,729
Architecture	Pascal	RDNA 3.5
Process Node	16 nm	4 nm
Shading Units	2560+233%	768
Compute (TFLOPS)	8.873 TFLOPS+99%	4.454 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1733 MHz	2900 MHz+67%
ROPs	64+300%	16
TMUs	160+233%	48
L1 Cache	960 KB+650%	128 KB
L2 Cache	2 MB	2 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 Radeon 880M relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1060	Radeon 880M
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1060 comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon 880M has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1060 offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 192-bit vs System.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1060	Radeon 880M
VRAM Capacity	6 GB+50%	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	Shared
Memory Bandwidth	192 GB/s	System
Bus Width	192-bit	System
L2 Cache	2 MB	2 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 12.2 (Radeon 880M). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1060	Radeon 880M
DirectX	12	12.2+2%
Vulkan	1.3	1.4+8%
OpenGL	4.5	4.6+2%
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (Pascal) (GeForce GTX 1060) vs VCN 4.5 (Radeon 880M). Decoder: NVDEC (Pascal) vs VCN 4.5. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC (GeForce GTX 1060) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Radeon 880M).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1060	Radeon 880M
Encoder	NVENC (Pascal)	VCN 4.5
Decoder	NVDEC (Pascal)	VCN 4.5
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1060 draws 180W versus the Radeon 880M's 15W — a 169.2% difference. The Radeon 880M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 400W (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 350W (Radeon 880M). Power connectors: 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 173mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots.