GTX 1060 for ETS2

[Marcus]

Hello everyone
I have the aforementioned GPU in my hands. Is able to run the game in full hd with all the settings to max? Includind 400%?
Thanks

[Hypertext Eye]

Not with 400% scaling, if you want 60fps. With 100% scaling it will be close. Turn down some mirror settings and it will be fine. For me "mirror draw distance" causes the biggest fps drops.

Also you didn't mention which GTX 1060 you have. There are two different ones (3GB and 6GB) and there is more difference between them than just the memory capacity, the 6GB one does perform better.

[Marcus]

Yes sorry. Mine is the 3GB one. Before I had the 760 and the increase in performance with the new 1060 is really miserable. Maybe a CPU more modern than my i5 2400 could help me?
Thanks for answer!

[leroy brown]

I had a GTX780GHZ which died a few months ago and have just replaced it with a 1060 6GB, i am running ETS2 at 4k with the graphics at high/ultra and it sits on 40fps+, running an AMD8320 cpu if that helps. i've found the 1060 a bit better than the 780 on a few games except arma where i've lost about 10fps.

[Marcus]

Yes, for what I know 6 GB is better if you play at 4K. But if you said that the 1060 is better than your old 780, why I found only a slight if not almost no improvement from my previous 760 to this new 1060?
The 3 GB one is so worse than the 6 GB? If so, I threw my money ...
P.S. AMD8320 is better than my i5 2400?

[max954]

I have a gtx1060 6gb and i play with every setting on ultra except scaling (300%) and msaa deactivated and i get 60 fps in 1080p. Keep in mind i am talking about base game with expansions ( east, scandinavia and france). Your 3gb gpu should be enough to play ets on max, i suggest you to not use msaa because it's fairly heavy to run and does not improve graphic quality so much

[Hypertext Eye]

Originally posted by Marcus:

Maybe a CPU more modern than my i5 2400 could help me?

No, your CPU is ok unless you're trying to get really high framerates (much, much higher than 60). But there should have been a noticeable difference between your old 760 and your new 1060.

Originally posted by Marcus:

Yes, for what I know 6 GB is better if you play at 4K. But if you said that the 1060 is better than your old 780, why I found only a slight if not almost no improvement from my previous 760 to this new 1060?
The 3 GB one is so worse than the 6 GB? If so, I threw my money ...

It's not just 4K, the 6GB one will outperform the 3GB at any resolution. As I said, the 6GB one is better beyond just the memory spec, but it's not a big difference. You didn't waste money. That would be like saying "I bought a 1060 instead of a 1070, so I threw my money away." The 6GB version has slightly better specs with a slightly higher cost. That's all.

Originally posted by Marcus:

P.S. AMD8320 is better than my i5 2400?

I don't think so.

[Jackrabbit_V6/ RSProduxx]

yes, the 3GB version is significantly weaker than the 6GB... It´s just slightly better than the 780 if i remember right... that´s why i went for an AMD this time, because in my budget range the RX470 was the best bang for the buck after kicking my GTX660 out... Everything from Nvidia in my pricerange would not have been enough of an improvement to justify the price, plus i´d have needed a new PSU, which i didnt with the RX...

[Marcus]

Thank you all for your answers and suggestions. I will do some tests and I will let you know how it goes!

[apophis37]

if u have a i5 2400 u might wanna look at your motherboard aswell. That CPU is pretty old, so i'm guessin so is the rest of your PC. Every part of a PC is important to increase performance, including things like the casing (enough cooling, enough power feed etc). I had a 760 myself wich died half a year ago. I bought the 1050 ti oc 4gig wich was very nice on my wallet and increased my performance twofold. (i got i5 4570 CPU)

[Hypertext Eye]

Originally posted by apophis37:

That CPU is pretty old

It is still plenty good enough for this game.

[apophis37]

Originally posted by Hypertext Eye:

Originally posted by apophis37:

That CPU is pretty old

It is still plenty good enough for this game.

Ye, not saying its not. But he might wanna check if his motherboard is up to the job with a modern 3d card etc.

[Hypertext Eye]

Originally posted by apophis37:

Originally posted by Hypertext Eye:

It is still plenty good enough for this game.

Ye, not saying its not. But he might wanna check if his motherboard is up to the job with a modern 3d card etc.

Any Sandy Bridge motherboard will have at least one PCIe 2.0 x16 slot, which is more than sufficient for a GTX 1060.

[max954]

Pascal gpus requires a pcie 3.0 x16 slot (https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2862/geforce-gtx-1060-6-gb)

[Chester]

You know what they need to do?

They need to make PC parts and upgrade paths alot simpler, it would help consumers aswell as game developers get the right PC and specs, and save alot of messing around.

I run an i7 4770k 3.5 CPU and a GTX 970 4gb GFX card with 100% scaling and all settings ultra/high, and it struggles occasionally, mostly in towns where it dips down to ~40fps.

ETS2 seems pretty hit and miss with what will run it flawlessly and what will struggle.

[Hypertext Eye]

Originally posted by Imperial5tr1k3:

Pascal gpus requires a pcie 3.0 x16 slot (https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2862/geforce-gtx-1060-6-gb)

You're misinterpreting that page. It's not a requirement.
The only difference between 3.0 and 2.0 is bandwidth, and a GTX 1060 will not benefit from the extra bandwidth that 3.0 has.

In general, with PCIe you're fine if you only go back one generation. For example, a 2.0 card would be fine in a 1.0 slot, but a 3.0 card would not be (probably).