
GeForce GTX 1060
Popular choices:

Radeon PRO W6400
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
- ✅+19.4% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅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.
- ❌260% higher power demand at 180W vs 50W.
Radeon PRO W6400
2022Why buy it
- ✅Costs $20 less on MSRP ($229 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 50W instead of 180W, a 130W reduction.
- ✅Measures 168mm instead of 173mm, a 5mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (8,428 vs 10,064).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
GeForce GTX 1060
2016Radeon PRO W6400
2022Why buy it
- ✅+19.4% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).
Why buy it
- ✅Costs $20 less on MSRP ($229 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 50W instead of 180W, a 130W reduction.
- ✅Measures 168mm instead of 173mm, a 5mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌260% higher power demand at 180W vs 50W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (8,428 vs 10,064).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce GTX 1060 better than Radeon PRO W6400?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does Radeon PRO W6400 make more sense than GeForce GTX 1060?
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 | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 117 FPS | 107 FPS |
| medium | 105 FPS | 95 FPS |
| high | 91 FPS | 81 FPS |
| ultra | 77 FPS | 67 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 103 FPS | 95 FPS |
| medium | 87 FPS | 80 FPS |
| high | 76 FPS | 67 FPS |
| ultra | 67 FPS | 56 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 55 FPS | 45 FPS |
| medium | 49 FPS | 42 FPS |
| high | 41 FPS | 31 FPS |
| ultra | 37 FPS | 28 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1060 | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 216 FPS | 165 FPS |
| medium | 181 FPS | 130 FPS |
| high | 148 FPS | 97 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 63 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 134 FPS | 108 FPS |
| medium | 107 FPS | 85 FPS |
| high | 87 FPS | 64 FPS |
| ultra | 68 FPS | 45 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 62 FPS | 56 FPS |
| medium | 51 FPS | 44 FPS |
| high | 49 FPS | 35 FPS |
| ultra | 41 FPS | 22 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1060 | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 453 FPS | 333 FPS |
| medium | 362 FPS | 292 FPS |
| high | 302 FPS | 212 FPS |
| ultra | 226 FPS | 173 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 340 FPS | 235 FPS |
| medium | 272 FPS | 211 FPS |
| high | 226 FPS | 158 FPS |
| ultra | 170 FPS | 123 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 226 FPS | 137 FPS |
| medium | 181 FPS | 124 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 85 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 56 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1060 | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 358 FPS | 285 FPS |
| medium | 302 FPS | 206 FPS |
| high | 260 FPS | 180 FPS |
| ultra | 226 FPS | 146 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 299 FPS | 210 FPS |
| medium | 254 FPS | 149 FPS |
| high | 208 FPS | 132 FPS |
| ultra | 170 FPS | 104 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 170 FPS | 105 FPS |
| medium | 133 FPS | 76 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 67 FPS |
| ultra | 102 FPS | 51 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1060 and Radeon PRO W6400

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.

Radeon PRO W6400
Radeon PRO W6400
The Radeon PRO W6400 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 19 2022. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2331 MHz to 2331 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,428 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1060 scores 10,064 versus the Radeon PRO W6400's 8,428 — the GeForce GTX 1060 leads by 19.4%. The GeForce GTX 1060 is built on Pascal while the Radeon PRO W6400 uses RDNA 2.0, both on 16 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 2,560 (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 768 (Radeon PRO W6400). Raw compute: 8.873 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 3.58 TFLOPS (Radeon PRO W6400). Boost clocks: 1733 MHz vs 2331 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 10,064+19% | 8,428 |
| Architecture | Pascal | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 16 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 2560+233% | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 8.873 TFLOPS+148% | 3.58 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1733 MHz | 2331 MHz+35% |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 160+233% | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 960 KB+275% | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 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 PRO W6400 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 PRO W6400 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1060 offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 192-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 1 MB (Radeon PRO W6400) — the GeForce GTX 1060 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB+50% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 192-bit | 256-bit+33% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 12.2 (Radeon PRO W6400). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.2+2% |
| Vulkan | 1.3+8% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6+2% |
| Max Displays | 4+100% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (Pascal) (GeForce GTX 1060) vs VCN 3.0 (Radeon PRO W6400). Decoder: NVDEC (Pascal) vs VCN 3.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC (GeForce GTX 1060) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (Radeon PRO W6400).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (Pascal) | VCN 3.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC (Pascal) | VCN 3.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1060 draws 180W versus the Radeon PRO W6400's 50W — a 113% difference. The Radeon PRO W6400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 400W (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 500W (Radeon PRO W6400). Power connectors: 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 173mm vs 168mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 180W | 50W-72% |
| Recommended PSU | 400W-20% | 500W |
| Power Connector | 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 173mm | 168mm |
| Height | 111mm | 69mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | — | 70°C |
| Perf/Watt | 55.9 | 168.6+202% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1060 launched at $249 MSRP, while the Radeon PRO W6400 launched at $229. The Radeon PRO W6400 costs 8% less ($20 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 40.4 (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 36.8 (Radeon PRO W6400) — the GeForce GTX 1060 offers 9.8% better value. The Radeon PRO W6400 is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2016).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Radeon PRO W6400 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $249 | $229-8% |
| Performance per Dollar | 40.4+10% | 36.8 |
| Codename | GP104 | Navi 24 |
| Release | May 27 2016 | January 19 2022 |
| Ranking | #137 | #308 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













