MSI Gaming GeForce GTX 1060 3GB GDDR5 192-bit VR Ready OC Graphics Card - Dual Fan, HDCP Support, DirectX 12 - Perfect for Gaming, Streaming & VR Experiences

Comparison on Ultra:When compared to the 980 Ti, it was around 40% slower all around.Doom ran at 40-48 FPS, Borderlands 2 90-100 FPS, BioShock Infinte 65-79FPS, Witcher 3 30-39FPS.980 Ti vs 1070:Using the same games and others the 980 Ti was 20% faster except in 4K it was 10-15% faster.Note: The 980 Ti vs my friends 1080, the 1080 was slower in every where else by 5% except on 4K where it was 15-20% faster than the 980 Ti. Both cards were unmodified unlike the YouTube videos where they received a huge discount for most streamers and a free card for other streamers. Not sure where they are getting these results at where the 1070 is faster? It's not. Also the 1080 used was a reference card while the other was an Asus so it's not technically a fair match but more of pointing out the hype since I myself was almost fooled into selling a perfectly fine card that wouldn't even see 4K on account that I just bout a 2K monitor since 4K is overpriced at the moment (circa 2015-2016).Pros:- It's the 970 GTX replacement, so if you loved that card you'll love this.- Less Watts than 980 Ti and 970.- Less heat than 1070 and 1080 cards which get hot under load like the 980 Ti or more depending on brand3GB good for Ultra maxed out everything 1080P, 2K 30FPS on AAA title games, 4K not possible on Ultra unless overclocked and heavily configured.- Faster than the PS4 Pro and any consoles out there for now. The Scropio has a modified mobile r9 or so and this card would be about 15% faster so if you were worried about that upgrade to the 1070 which max Tflops is way above the advertised 6 Tflops (max since the r9 mobile/integrated even overclocked can't reach that which is what the next console would have). Don't let the hype fool you like the last 2 consoles.- Blows the 1050 Ti out of the water. They should have not used the Ti since Ti usually means better but in this case it's not the usual 10% increase between cards but more of 50%. Which unacceptable to have the "Ti" title held to it. This card is way better for the money, a lot higher yield in investment or bang for your buck or however you want to look/calculate it. (for 2016)Cons:-NO SLI, read it before you buy it. NO SLI and say it aloud before you buy it. Seriously, by the time you post on amazon if it is sli compatible you could've Googled it.-Could have higher clock speeds or maybe 4GB would be better but the no SLI is big deal breaker.Looks whimpy compared to the 1080 or the beasty 980 Ti. Makes you wonder what the 1080 Ti would look like.-Other than that, no manufacturing errors or inconsistencies relating to the card that would make me swear up and down all over the internet. Card looks well built other than the MSI logo, for the price, good enough.Conclusion:This is a good entry level card since it will only be used for heavy rendering programs a laptop can't handle with dual screens with Chrome or other programs opened with numerous tasks and virus scanners on. Basically it would be a solid work computer for years to come(at year 5 the card becomes a norm and should be changed if processor throttling doesn't occur). By work I mean school since I'm an Engineer major. No SLI is big deal breaker for me and probably everyone else out there with most mobos having on average 3 to 4 SLI/Cross Fire options when the 1500+ builds are within budget. Would I SLI a daily used PC? Not unless I had to for power and noise constraints so I went with the 1060. It's quiet yet efficient and doesn't currently yield extreme temps at this price point.Would I game on it? Yes if I didn't have the 980 Ti or a 2K monitor. Am I suggesting getting a 980 Ti? No, they're over priced and for the same price or bit more I'd get a SC 1080 or the Ti next year. But if you're patient and smart, you can get a new one for the same price I did for less than the 1070. With the market flooded with the new cards I'd also not suggest selling the 980 Ti if you were going to board the hype train like I did it's the same as the 1080 in the areas you game in unless you have a 4K monitor and going under 60FPS is going to kill you then do it.Does it make it a bad card? Not at all. If you're on a budget at around 200 dollars and don't particular want your case running hot the 1060 3GB fits perfectly. Or if you're on budget build with an i5 under idk 1000 dollars, this card has a rate of return that still surpasses consoles by gaming standards and does more. It does 1080P flawlessly (above 130FPS vs consoles maybe 60 on the pro and 100ish on the project "s" since the new and current mobile architecture and the new one won't be this good) and held up decently in 2K. Better than the consoles out in 2016 can for the next 5 years to come. Handles VR at 1080P(Above 60 ultra), and the best part is you don't have to buy a whole new system to watch 4K since your computer can render, build and view 4K, but ultra is a whole different story and card. Probably has a good rate of return for the next 3 years before it becomes a norm for the none PC built spectrum at around 1000 dollars from Dell and HP trying to sell a prebuilt with a weak SSD and questionable parts. By then you could just sell the card and buy then. i5's and i7's won't throttle for 5 years when the same speeds slowly become the i3's "newer" architecture speeds clock and base MHz.Lastly, the equations I wrote and concluded on are based on the i5 and i7 builds with SSDs at 1500 range, or more if you include tax. If you maximize at the 500-1000 range and use this card, don't expect as high of a rate of return. Still higher than console by almost 5 folds in value and hours of operation, usability, but not accounting sitting on a couch using a Steam Link( or other companies that use Wi-Fi stream/ Ethernet to solve the whole couch ordeal about "how convenient" it is to own a 500-699 dollar outdated DVD player or Amazon Fire on steroids. Is it better than a console? Yes, if you can understand how to use Windows then you'll have the best gaming experience there is than potato quality VR the consoles are offering plus a Computer. Determining which is better is based on user input's and needs, and usually the younger kids tend to flock to the consoles and usually ruin the gaming experience. Also factor in which group of people you associate with have, and if it's Mircosoft based then PC is the next step, if not console it up. If multiplayer is your source of satisfaction between a standardized system vs combustibility and freedom. The choice is yours.