Question NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 REVIEWS, – Faster Than GTX 1070 Ti For $349 US

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Jun 8, 2003
14,081
107
126
#51
So here's my dilemma...I've been trying to replace an EVGA 760 SC for a HTPC/gaming PC. Was about to pull trigger on 1070 OC for about $335 (with Fortnite and MH), but this really complicates things. I have a 1080 in my main gaming rig, so I don't need top of the top for this one. Do I try to grab a 2060 now? Or go with the 1070 I was looking at? Or wait for 1160 details? The confusion is real.
If you will play BF5 and don't own it, buy the 2060.
I would wait for AIB makers to make 2060's and buy an Evga card or your favorite brand.
wait a month price gouging sucks .
 
Nov 7, 2018
45
25
51
#52
Gamers Nexus review is out, performance is in between Vega 64 and Vega 56, ie. basically a 1070 Ti. TBH pricing isn't too bad.
So long as the price they claim now is the actual price it will be sold.

Have everybody forgotten how the 2080 (Ti) launched already?

Who knows: perhaps this time there won't be any price increases ...
 

Qwertilot

Golden Member
Nov 28, 2013
1,409
37
106
#54
Don't get me wrong, this is objectively a great card in its own right; a real engineering accomplishment. But I have SERIOUS issue with the price creep we are seeing.
A good bit of that apparent price creep is caused by NV rejigging the names of everything. They had Titan, x80ti, x80, x70, x60.... as their gaming chips.

With the 2xxx stuff the Titan has gone off to be a compute/workstation only card, and everything else has moved down a slot in the names. In every way except its name the 2060 is obviously the 'same' chip as the 1070 - its the cut down medium size die, the TDP matches, the price more or less matches etc etc etc.

We'll presumably get something mainstream once the mountain of post crypto 1060's is gone :(

You are then obviously faced with the relatively minimal performance uptick for conventional games, which might one reason NV's marketing went about things this way round.
 

Triloby

Senior member
Mar 18, 2016
555
50
86
#55
Can't say that I'm "feeling it" for the 2060. It's good performance-wise, but the pricing still seems obnoxious.

Still don't see why they bothered putting in RT or Tensor cores for the 2060, even going by the latest patches and improvements for DXR in BF5. It may be playable, but BF5 is a fast-paced game where you won't be spending all day looking at the pretty reflections. No matter how good it looks, it just feels like wasted time and effort in putting all of that work in a game where it's not even a main feature to begin with.

 
Sep 9, 2017
64
13
41
#56
So here's my dilemma...I've been trying to replace an EVGA 760 SC for a HTPC/gaming PC. Was about to pull trigger on 1070 OC for about $335 (with Fortnite and MH), but this really complicates things. I have a 1080 in my main gaming rig, so I don't need top of the top for this one. Do I try to grab a 2060 now? Or go with the 1070 I was looking at? Or wait for 1160 details? The confusion is real.
Since you already have working cards in both rigs, my advice is to wait and see what AMD is gonna offer this year and how it's gonna affect pricing, then decide which card suits you best from either Brand.
 

Dribble

Golden Member
Aug 9, 2005
1,628
85
106
#57
I have to respectfully disagree, sure nvidia has invested more money each generation, and sure these dice are larger. But look at their margins, they are making more money than ever.
I fully realize that any company exists solely to make a profit, but this is not out of necessity, it is out of greed.
This sort of ethics stuff is silly, it's a publicly traded company beholden to it's shareholders, and exactly like all the other publicly traded companies it's job is to make the shareholders as much money as possible not offer customers low profit deals out of kindness.

Anyway we are talking about the same company who's share price has recently halved? So even if there was some mythical we are doing well so much charge less rule it still doesn't make any sense?
 

BigDaveX

Senior member
Jun 12, 2014
321
35
101
#58
Can't say that I'm "feeling it" for the 2060. It's good performance-wise, but the pricing still seems obnoxious.

Still don't see why they bothered putting in RT or Tensor cores for the 2060, even going by the latest patches and improvements for DXR in BF5. It may be playable, but BF5 is a fast-paced game where you won't be spending all day looking at the pretty reflections. No matter how good it looks, it just feels like wasted time and effort in putting all of that work in a game where it's not even a main feature to begin with.
It's the same die as the 2070 and 2080. Even if disabling the Tensor and RT units was possible, there'd be no point in going to all that trouble, and it'd only hurt the uptake of those technologies.
 
Jun 23, 2004
27,192
429
126
#59
My wild estimation for RTX.

This new 2xxx Gen, not 100% playable.
Next ver 3xxx Gen, finally playable.
Third ver 4xxx Gen, finally affordable and begins to go mainstream.

So... RTX use can be widespread by 2024! Assuming we do not want 8k HDR instead..... we cannot have both, right?
 

cytoSiN

Platinum Member
Jul 11, 2002
2,262
7
81
#60
Since you already have working cards in both rigs, my advice is to wait and see what AMD is gonna offer this year and how it's gonna affect pricing, then decide which card suits you best from either Brand.
Thanks. Not sure I'd say the 760 is "working." It's fine for Netflix and streaming movies off my server. But it struggles with modern games even at 1080. Shadow of the Tomb Raider, Shadow of War, even No Man's Sky. But I hear you, it's certainly not an emergency.
 

antihelten

Golden Member
Feb 2, 2012
1,736
6
106
#61
my math sucks, if the gtx1070ti was 100$ cheaper where would it be on this chart? 155?
181 (in this chart the 1070 Ti is priced at $400, not it's launch price of $450).

I would guess the rtx 2060 has the top raw performance on the price performance chart, correct?
nope, it would sit at roughly 160, and thus be beaten by both the RX 570 and RX 580 (and match the RX 470).

that makes it the best higher end card you can buy as far as price performance is concerned correct?
Neither the RX 570 or 580 are higher end cards, so yeah, that is pretty much correct.

But I think the thing people are disappointed with is how small the jump is. At 160 it is only about a 5% improvement in price/performance relative to it's predecessor the 1060, which launched 2.5 years ago

5% improvement in price/performance over 2.5 years (an average of about 2% per year) is absolutely not something to get excited about.
 
Last edited:

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
4,415
349
126
#62
Still don't see why they bothered putting in RT or Tensor cores for the 2060, even going by the latest patches and improvements for DXR in BF5. It may be playable, but BF5 is a fast-paced game where you won't be spending all day looking at the pretty reflections. No matter how good it looks, it just feels like wasted time and effort in putting all of that work in a game where it's not even a main feature to begin with.
At some point you need compatible hardware in order for developers to spend resources. The 2070 FE is $600, which means that only a tiny percentage of consumers would have RTX capable tech.

Even though the 2060 is (in my opinion) overpriced, NVidia will have a much easier time getting consumers to swallow that pill. This technology is an investment in the future, and if it withers on the vine now, it probably affects NVidia's plans for the next several years and potentially leaves them in a bad spot.
 

cytoSiN

Platinum Member
Jul 11, 2002
2,262
7
81
#63
At some point you need compatible hardware in order for developers to spend resources. The 2070 FE is $600, which means that only a tiny percentage of consumers would have RTX capable tech.

Even though the 2060 is (in my opinion) overpriced, NVidia will have a much easier time getting consumers to swallow that pill. This technology is an investment in the future, and if it withers on the vine now, it probably affects NVidia's plans for the next several years and potentially leaves them in a bad spot.
This makes sense, but assuming it's right, you'd think NVidia would consider a lower price to get more ppl bought into the tech. I find it hard to believe that they couldn't have done this for $300 and sold so many more units that they'd end up coming out ahead. But I obviously have no insight into their actual costs here.
 

corkyg

Elite Member | Peripherals
Super Moderator
Mar 4, 2000
27,149
39
106
#64
My edit was to change the first letter of the post from O to I.
 

Qwertilot

Golden Member
Nov 28, 2013
1,409
37
106
#65
What I’ve seen suggested here - and seems a priori logical - is that the initial chunk of this drive towards ray tracing will get a pay off via selling this stuff into render farms etc.

If that does hold up then the uses for gaming aren’t life and death just yet.
(Obviously if it never tastes off for games they’d remove it/do another specialised product line if the pro uses justified themselves.).
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
6,833
368
96
#66
I don't know about you guys, but I refuse to spend $350+ on a video card. These high prices of dGPUs is getting ridiculous. Looks like I will keep my 970 a bit longer or simply switch over to AMD in the future.
 

ub4ty

Senior member
Jun 21, 2017
749
321
96
#67
This sort of ethics stuff is silly, it's a publicly traded company beholden to it's shareholders, and exactly like all the other publicly traded companies it's job is to make the shareholders as much money as possible not offer customers low profit deals out of kindness.
This goes both ways... As a consumer, when you price gouge me, I will not only not purchase your products but I will remember your company the next time around, even when you cut prices because a competitor forced you to and I will forgo purchasing your product. No one is asking for low profit deals or kindess, there is a certain level of fairness and sanity all companies must act within if they hope to retain customers.

I'm not touching a single product from Nvidia until AMD delivers 7nm GPUs and I get to assess them both (Nvidia better have a 7nm product as well). I understand the power I have as a consumer and that ultimately comes down to me withholding my money from companies who try to ream my wallet. Obviously there's a fair and sane compromise from consumers and corporations. Intel is currently paying the price for having screwed me. I went full AMD. AMD won me over because they provided better value.

Anyway we are talking about the same company who's share price has recently halved? So even if there was some mythical we are doing well so much charge less rule it still doesn't make any sense?
Yeah, the honeymoon is over. I predicted this myopic greed would cost them in their main market, they would falter in the markets they're trying to expand in (mobile, auto, AI, data center), and they would try to push their whole stack into even high margin equivalents while further segmenting an already ridiculously segmented product offering. Also, crap coins are a joke. They made just about every misstep you could make. That gets your stock price cut in half. At this point, they have to decide if it should be cut in half again alongside their idiotic posture of insane prices which pisses off their main cash cow market because they sure as heck aren't going to get the growth numbers they projected in their expansion markets.

Just announced is that they cut out the jerk level idiocy with proprietary g-sync and will free up the capture card features they've kept prisoner on their GPUs for ages (yes pascal has the same crap and they artificially locked it down at the driver level)... People remember boneheaded stunts like this. This doesn't buy them any positive favors w/ me. If you notice the 2060 has 6Gb instead of 8Gb as if it would have been so hard to put the extra module on there.. Companies who pull stunts like this don't learn until their stock price gets cut in half, they lose significant shares of their primary market, and they have to fight for their customers again. They have a duty to shareholders? Cool, I have a duty to my wallet. May the best man win.
 

ub4ty

Senior member
Jun 21, 2017
749
321
96
#68
At some point you need compatible hardware in order for developers to spend resources. The 2070 FE is $600, which means that only a tiny percentage of consumers would have RTX capable tech.

Even though the 2060 is (in my opinion) overpriced, NVidia will have a much easier time getting consumers to swallow that pill. This technology is an investment in the future, and if it withers on the vine now, it probably affects NVidia's plans for the next several years and potentially leaves them in a bad spot.
At these price points, its going to wither on a vine as it already is.
With the lead they had and market share, they should have not price gouged to ensure adoption of a new feature-set which has questionable value. Instead, as all companies do at their peak, they arrogantly assume they can ram the margins higher on all of their product lines, shove a questionable feature down people's throats, and charge insane prices because well.. WE DUH BEST.

Word on the street is that they might not get the auto/embedded market due to these same shenanigans. That and there are tons of accelerator companies releasing products for AI (a field of basic ALUs). One of the dumbest and common mistakes a company makes at their peak is price gouge their primary market and take a dump on them while making the same arrogant pushes in yet to be proven markets. They fail on all fronts and the punishment is severe.

Stock price cut in half... By the end of this year, it will be clear they committed the same miscalculations as Intel to a T and they will be in a similar and awkward position.

Even when they could have redeemed themselves they couldn't help but take (2GB) off the 2060... Literally a template disease for publicly traded companies. Pascal will last well into 2020 because there's zero value present on these cards and there's absolutely nothing future proof about them with 7nm/PCIE 4.0 on the near horizon.
 
Mar 10, 2004
28,375
192
126
#69
A lot of people seem to live in a different world where you don't have to make a profit to stay afloat.
 

Bouowmx

Senior member
Nov 13, 2016
827
11
116
#70
How much of the die is used by RTX or tensor cores?
I'm curious to know.
Make what you will from the following: Die (assuming it is real size), and Block diagram.

Hard to distinguish RT (which appear per SM) and tensor cores (not mentioned in block diagram). Also, an unknown big feature among the L2 cache.
 

Triloby

Senior member
Mar 18, 2016
555
50
86
#71
At some point you need compatible hardware in order for developers to spend resources. The 2070 FE is $600, which means that only a tiny percentage of consumers would have RTX capable tech.

Even though the 2060 is (in my opinion) overpriced, NVidia will have a much easier time getting consumers to swallow that pill. This technology is an investment in the future, and if it withers on the vine now, it probably affects NVidia's plans for the next several years and potentially leaves them in a bad spot.
In my opinion, the ray tracing pill would've been easier to swallow if nVidia came out with actual RT-enabled games from the get go when they first launched the 2080 and 2080 Ti. They had nothing to show off when the first RTX cards were launched. Granted, that's changed with DLSS support now coming out for certain games, but you can easily count on one hand how many games even have ray-tracing to begin with. If nVidia is that serious about committing to delivering ray tracing to the general public in the future, then they should've done a better job with their first launches/impressions.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
4,415
349
126
#72
At these price points, its going to wither on a vine as it already is.
With the lead they had and market share, they should have not price gouged to ensure adoption of a new feature-set which has questionable value. Instead, as all companies do at their peak, they arrogantly assume they can ram the margins higher on all of their product lines, shove a questionable feature down people's throats, and charge insane prices because well.. WE DUH BEST.
Part of the problem is that NVidia hasn’t faced much competition in the last several years. AMD only had products aimed at the mainstream, and the crypto boom basically removes them from a large part of that market segment as is.

It’s very similar to the situation with Intel where we sat on four cores for so many years in a row. Even in nature you’ll find that animals only run as fast as necessary to escape whatever wants to eat them. A lack of competition breeds laziness and complacency.

Stock price cut in half...
In fairness this just wipes out the gains of the last year. It should have been clear that the stock was being heavily overvalued and would need to correct eventually. If it hadn’t bubbled as much, I don’t think it would have crashed as hard as it did.

AMD definitely has the ball in their court now that NVidia has committed and played their hand. If they can get a competitive Navi card out for $200 - $300 they stand to have a real winner on their hands since NVidia has no traditional mainstream cards right now.

If AMD doesn’t have anything to show than the choice comes down to buying the more expensive NVidia card or simply not upgrading.
 

ub4ty

Senior member
Jun 21, 2017
749
321
96
#73
A lot of people seem to live in a different world where you don't have to make a profit to stay afloat.
Alot of people live in the real world where obvious price gouging is obvious and unaffordable.For executives and those who support their insane price who live in la-la land, they figure this out when their products suddenly get no bid :
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...all-three-new-iphone-models-wsj-idUSKCN1NO0WG

There's profit and there's gouging (evident in insane profit margins).
Funny that some people who appeal to extremes can't tell the difference. It's fine, when products aren't being sold, it's obvious which of the two it is... That's the real world slamming into lala land thinking like a ton of bricks.
 
Mar 10, 2004
28,375
192
126
#74
I know what I need to buy, and what I don't need to buy.

No one* needs ray tracing capability on their video card, so what's all the fuss about?

You can buy great video cards without it.

*No regular home user. Obviously there are people who can use ray tracing.
 
Last edited:

Guru

Senior member
May 5, 2017
530
126
76
#75
It's actually much better than initial reports and benches showed. At $350(assuming those prices stay when it launches by board partners) it's a good card. Initial reports had it at about 40% faster performance and 40% higher price than the 1060 6gb, but this is actually about 50% faster performance for about 40% higher price, but comes with 1 free game as well.

It's a lot better value than when the GTX 1070 launched at $380. I essentially see this as a GTX 1070 replacement, it costs $30 less than what that card launched and its about 15-25% faster, it also comes with a free game.

Generally its 2-3% faster than the GTX 1070ti at 1080p and often times within 5% of the GTX 1080, now given the GTX 1080 mostly comes OC out of the box by board partners and you can push it even further by manual OC, getting additional 7-10% performance increase.

But yeah, its undercutting the GTX 1070ti, at $350 its much cheaper than a new GTX 1070ti and offers slightly more performance as well.

Now we see that it starts faltering at 1440p and the 1% low results are weaker generally than the 1070ti, this is obviously due to the 6GB of vram and narrower bus width, so it's a question if this memory combination will bottleneck the card often within the next year or two.

As of right now its priced out of the mainstream, this is NOT a mainstream card, and I don't see any reason to upgrade to it from a say GTX 1060 6GB, but if you are on a GTX 1050ti or weaker or say a GTX 960 or 970, and you have $350 it is a good upgrade.

Now again if you are on a RX 580 or 1060 or 1070, etc... there is ZERO reason to upgrade, it's too expensive for the performance increase it brings to make it a good upgrade value from those cards, but if you are looking to upgrade from Maxwell cards like the 960 or 970 its a decent choice.

One thing is for sure if AMD doesn't lower the prices of its Vega cards, they are not going to sell any. Again the Vega 56 would need to come down to around $350 to counter the RTX 2060 and this would make the Vega 56 about 3-5% slower for the same price. AMD is in a peculiar position with this as they would need to lower Vega 56 to $350, possible even lower to be able to compete and the Vega 64 to $400 in order to be a consideration.
 


ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS