GeForce RTX 2060/2070/2080 Super Reviews

[Elfear]

I assume that AMD will need to cut Navi prices, but that was a given.

Hmm. Wonder if that was AMD's plan from the beginning. If they announced high prices from the get go knowing Nvidia had something in the pipeline to undercut Navi's launch, they could still do a price cut to where they originally thought Navi's price structure should be. Had they announced lower Navi prices at the paper launch, they might have seen even lower prices from Nvidia on the Super cards which would have hurt AMD's margins.

Probably giving AMD way too much credit here though and they're just going to have to suck up the undesired Navi price cuts.

 

[amenx]

No point in a 2060S. Its basically a 2070. If they just reduced 2070 price, it would be more marketable. Buyers would more easily go for a $399 2070 (a higher tier card, perception-wise) than 2060S. Dumb marketing move by Nvidia.

 

[Stuka87]

Clearly, this is what the Turing family should've been from the start, although I expected performance to be a tiny bit higher. The price is still too high obviously, but the 2060S and 2070S at least have a closer price/perf to the 2060.

Radeon 7 is now clearly obsolete for $700, although it was overpriced anyway. Even at $500, TPU and CB put it under the 2070S (techspot doesn't). I assume that AMD will EOL it in five days, or July 23rd at the latest. I assume that AMD will need to cut Navi prices, but that was a given.

Radeon 7 was never intended to purely be a gaming card. While it can be seen as expensive, for people that want a card with lots of memory and compute, its much cheaper than the alternative. The only card that can beat it from a compute standpoint is the 2080Ti, and its significantly more money.

EDIT: Fixed a typo

 

[Stuka87]

No point in a 2060S. Its basically a 2070. If they just reduced 2070 price, it would be more marketable. Buyers would more easily go for a $399 2070 (a higher tier card, perception-wise) than 2060S. Dumb marketing move by Nvidia.

I am thinking the 2060/2070/2080 are all EOL. Their price drop is only to get rid of stock.

 

[linkgoron]

No point in a 2060S. Its basically a 2070. If they just reduced 2070 price, it would be more marketable. Buyers would more easily go for a $399 2070 (a higher tier card, perception-wise) than 2060S. Dumb marketing move by Nvidia.

I disagree. Lowering the 2070's price would make it look like Nvidia is admitting that the 2070 was overpriced, especially the $599 FE edition. You would get tons of people whining that they feel cheated after a $200 price cut! Instead, Nvidia has "boosted" the original cards and you're getting better value for your money!

 

[Glo.]

I assume that AMD will need to cut Navi prices, but that was a given.

Based on what?

 

[Mopetar]

Based on what?

Wasn't the 5700XT shown as edging out the 2070 but for $450 instead of $500? Now it needs to compete against a card that's very nearly as good as a 2070 for $50 less and a card that's almost a 2080 for $50 more.

Sure there's still room for AMD to breathe in that range, but before you could at least argue that the value was better even though it might not be great in a broader sense. Now it seems to be inline with NVidia's offerings so why should anyone buy a 5700XT when you can get a similar value proposition for $50 in either direction.

Unless someone is an AMD fan, what reason would they have to buy a Radeon? Previously the clear answer was that you could get similar performance for less money, albeit at the cost of higher power consumption.

 

[guachi]

The fact that estimated performance doesn't make Navi a compelling purchase.

 

[Glo.]

Wasn't the 5700XT shown as edging out the 2070 but for $450 instead of $500? Now it needs to compete against a card that's very nearly as good as a 2070 for $50 less and a card that's almost a 2080 for $50 more.

Sure there's still room for AMD to breathe in that range, but before you could at least argue that the value was better even though it might not be great in a broader sense. Now it seems to be inline with NVidia's offerings so why should anyone buy a 5700XT when you can get a similar value proposition for $50 in either direction.

Unless someone is an AMD fan, what reason would they have to buy a Radeon? Previously the clear answer was that you could get similar performance for less money, albeit at the cost of higher power consumption.

What if RTX 5700 will be the same performance as RTX 2060S, and what if RX 5700 XT will be the same performance as RTX 2070S?

 

[guachi]

If it is then the AMD cards are better purchases. I think it'll be close but I don't think Navi will equal 2060S or 2070S.

We'll see Sunday, though.

 

[thigobr]

Maybe but you still get ray tracing with nVidia... Ok, not many games yet and it's the first HW iteration so performance sucks but still it's there.

The truth is I am not impressed with either side heheheh But I feel this is a small step in the right direction.

 

[Mopetar]

What if RTX 5700 will be the same performance as RTX 2060S, and what if RX 5700 XT will be the same performance as RTX 2070S?

When AMD announced it they showed it having ~7% better performance than a 2070 on average and considerably better in select titles.

We know how the 2060 Super and the 2070 Super stack up. The 2060 Super is essentially identical in performance to a 2070, and the 2070 Super lags the 2080 a little bit, but is essentially a 1080 Ti.

If you think it would come out as performing like a 2060 Super, then you'd believe that AMD cherry-picked the results for their comparison. If you think it would come out performing like a 2070 Super, then you'd believe that AMD was sandbagging. Which of those do you feel is more believable?

 

[tviceman]

Yep its still overpriced but atleast NAVI is now DOA like really DOA.Nobody will buy them for 450usd blower and 500usd AIB cards if they have 2070 performance(+-5%).2070S is only 8%slower than 2080.So AMD simply need reduce prices to 400usd for 5700xt and 330usd for 5700.

I think AMD will have a zero day price drop on Navi. $399 for the 5700 XT and $329 for the 5700.

 

[Glo.]

When AMD announced it they showed it having ~7% better performance than a 2070 on average and considerably better in select titles.

We know how the 2060 Super and the 2070 Super stack up. The 2060 Super is essentially identical in performance to a 2070, and the 2070 Super lags the 2080 a little bit, but is essentially a 1080 Ti.

If you think it would come out as performing like a 2060 Super, then you'd believe that AMD cherry-picked the results for their comparison. If you think it would come out performing like a 2070 Super, then you'd believe that AMD was sandbagging. Which of those do you feel is more believable?

I think people are getting way too much from demoed by AMD performance.

 

[tviceman]

When AMD announced it they showed it having ~7% better performance than a 2070 on average and considerably better in select titles.

We know how the 2060 Super and the 2070 Super stack up. The 2060 Super is essentially identical in performance to a 2070, and the 2070 Super lags the 2080 a little bit, but is essentially a 1080 Ti.

If you think it would come out as performing like a 2060 Super, then you'd believe that AMD cherry-picked the results for their comparison. If you think it would come out performing like a 2070 Super, then you'd believe that AMD was sandbagging. Which of those do you feel is more believable?

AMD has said 5700 XT is 15% faster on average than Vega 64. I believe that comparison is more accurate than their potential cherry picked benchmarks vs. the competition.

 

[Glo.]

Maybe but you still get ray tracing with nVidia... Ok, not many games yet and it's the first HW iteration so performance sucks but still it's there.

The truth is I am not impressed with either side heheheh But I feel this is a small step in the right direction.

What is the point of Ray Tracing on 2070S and 2060S if it ends up with lower performance? Its counter productive, still. The only GPU that makes sense at this point for RT is RTX 2080 Ti.

 

[Glo.]

I think AMD will have a zero day price drop on Navi. $399 for the 5700 XT and $329 for the 5700.

No, they won't.

 

[linkgoron]

Based on what?

Based on AMD's own benchmarks. The 5700XT will surely fall below the 2070S in performance, unless you believe that the 5700XT will be faster than the Radeon 7? 5700XT Is now dealing with a 2070 at 399 and almost a 2080 at 499.

 

[ubern00b]

So rather than give you full turing chips when RTX cards were released they knew they could segment them and release a higher performance sku when AMD released anything that came close to price and perf, as well as that they also knew AMD had nothing until Navi and proceeded to drive the mid range **60 cards upto the next tier pricewise, same with the 2070/80 and Ti which are now at unseen prices, and now the Super duper versions can fill that price bracket that didnt exist pre RTX yea, think I'll pass all the same.

 

[SPBHM]

So rather than give you full turing chips when RTX cards were released they knew they could segment them and release a higher performance sku when AMD released anything that came close to price and perf, as well as that they also knew AMD had nothing until Navi and proceeded to drive the mid range **60 cards upto the next tier pricewise, same with the 2070/80 and Ti which are now at unseen prices, and now the Super duper versions can fill that price bracket that didnt exist pre RTX yea, think I'll pass all the same.

2070 was the full chip, 2070 Super is using a cut down 2080 chip.
2060 Super is a less cut down than the 2060, but still using the same chip and not fully enabled.

 

[Phynaz]

Looks like we now have Nvidia's mid range 12nm GPU beating AMD's top end 7nm GPU.

 

[ubern00b]

2070 was the full chip, 2070 Super is using a cut down 2080 chip.
2060 Super is a less cut down than the 2060, but still using the same chip and not fully enabled.

ok, take out my mention of chips and replace it with performance if you like, they still initially released products they knew they could replace with a performance tier above at the same price that in itself not an issue well unless you bought a 2060/2070/2080 at full MSRP... but the fact they have continually pushed their tier level pricing up is just another kick in the teeth for consumers, we know when AMD have a full Navi product stack out they 2060 will come down $250 where it should have been priced in the first place and don't even get me started on the 1660 and Ti they should have been 2030/2050 parts at the relevant price points, the fact is you havent got any more $/perf with this next generation of GPU, they just increased the prices so if you want more perfromance your still going to pay more than last generation where it used to be the latest gen superseded the previous at the same price brackets

 

[Ranulf]

No 6gb wasn't proven to be a problem at all. Maybe after 3 years it would be a problem.

Ahh this old argument. It would matter less if we were back to the gtx 960 2gb vs 4gb or the 1060 6gb vs 4gb/8gb rx 480 at a $200-275 price point. But now we're talking about a bloody $350+ video card that some tout as a 1440p card (60hz anyway) and yet I would not gamble on that holding up for more than a year and now we see it hasn't really because the Super version of the 2060 is out after 6 months and $50 more expensive. At least it has 256bit bus and 8gb and acts like a 2070... for $400+.

Yay or something. If I want to play the upgrade every 1-2 years game, I might as well go big with the $600+ tier cards. Less likely to get boned on price/perf.

 

[crisium]

Better than we got last year, but the prices are still way out of historical whack.

Disappointed 2060S isn't going for $350 though. I wonder if that means 2060 will not be EOL and both will exist. I guess 2070S will just replace 2070, unless the latter just settles in at $450 for the between option.

 

[SteveGrabowski]

If these were what Turing was at launch, would the complaints still have been as pronounced? The 2070 Super now delivers > 60% more performance than the GTX 1070, and the 2060 Super is over 90% faster than the GTX 1060. $500 for >= 1080 TI performance and $400 for GTX 1080 + 10% performance back in October (or whenever it was released) would have been much easier to swallow. The power consumption sucks, though.

Nope, RTX 2060 Super at $400 looks pretty decent. I might pick one up this year to replace my dead 970.