Heres the end result assuming the realistic (IE: war goes nuclear) scenario:
50's: Clear NATO victory. Germany, and probably France, will suffer some nuclear hits. The US will recieve one hit at the most. Warsaw Pact will be annihilated.
Early 60's: Semi-Phyrric NATO victory. Europe will take it hard, Germany probably won't exist anymore, and the US will recieve a minimum of 30 hits. Enough to wreck their economy and kill tens of millions but not enough to cause severe mid and long-term damage to these nations (other then Germany). The Warsaw Pact is annihilated.
Late 60's: Very phyrric NATO victory. By this point the USSR's deliverable nuclear warhead production was beginning to pick-up off the ground and they were managing to perfect the miniaturization and production processes to produce long-range missiles in large numbers. Most of Europe will cease to be nations and the US will probably emerge initially intact (albeit under martial law), but is going to suffer serious medium and long-term problems. Warsaw Pact still gets eviscerated.
1970's: Mutual destruction of northern hemisphere civilization.
1980's: Mutual destruction of northern hemisphere civilization. Southern hemisphere nations will be struck regardless of alignment, but will survive intact.
A bit of explanation for that last statement. The USSR by the early and mid 80's had so many nuclear warheads (35,000 deliverable at the peak) that the level of overkill targetting NATO and the Pacific countries was getting rediculous even in the eye's of the Soviet Union... and that's even when you include the warheads targetted on China. So the USSR decided that, in the event of nuclear war, they were going to pump warheads into any NATO-aligned or even neutral southern hemisphere powers that had the possibility for major nation status after the war. Brazil, South Africa, multiple Middle Eastern nations, and so-on will suffer nasty knock back.
In any bizzaro scenario where the ASBs make people forget completely about nuclear weapons when the war starts, here is what happens.
50's Soviet victory in Germany and possibly France. The US was rearming, indeed, but the Eisenhower was focusing more on nuclear armaments then conventional weapons (one of the reasons we had to keep upgrading the Patton until the Abrams came along). The Red Army was also at the top of its game in Operational Art and could count on at least some degree of support from China. What happens next depends on Britain and the US reaction. If they sue for peace... well, Soviet victory. If they keep fighting, the Soviets will ultimately lose, but the casualties and property destruction will not look pretty even compared to World War 2.
Early 60's: Pretty much the same as above, albeit it will be rougher for the USSR initially.
Late 60's: USSR blasts its way across Europe easily enough, with the USSR embroiled in the Vietnam quagmire. Otherwise, same as above.
70's: USSR has an even easier time. This is mainly a result of the blowback of the Vietnam War really kicking in, but once NATO gets over the shock (and, assuming, keeps fighting), its going to be a really grinding stalemate (see below).
80's(pre-1986): Grinding attritional stalemate, basically WW1 in tanks. NATO has recovered from the Vietnam blowback but firepower has accelerated to such a degree that it will really come down too who will run out of some important piece of equipment first. The key by this point is the Atlantic. If the USSR can use the subs and land-based aircraft to shut-off the pipeline of reinforcements from the US, they'll take Germany and parts of France before NATO sues for peace. If not, the NATO will probably get all the way across Poland before exhaustion sets-in. In either case, the war will probably have slightly less casualties then the whole of the Eastern Front of WW2 (IE: a minimumm of 30 million) and last roughly a two or three months.
80's(post-1986): NATO victory. The amount of firepower, even in conventional terms on either side, has not changed, but the Red Army is suffering serious issues. Partly because of blowback from Afghanistan, partly because of the economic situation, and majorly from the growing internal dissent. The Soviet training regime is beginning to fail and troop morale (particularly in ethnic minorities) is going to fall, with the desertion and tactical incompetence that entails. In other words, it's still going to be violent and bloody, but won't last nearly as long or be bloody as pre-1989.