News Use other 2060 thread please.

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jun 8, 2003
13,987
42
126
#76
Don't see the RTX 2060 as a good value. It offers about 40% performance gains over the GTX 1060 6GB for about 40% higher price. Essentially you are not getting any improved performance price for price.

And again the RTX 2070 trades blows with the GTX 1080, the biggest advantage being in Vulkan games, and slightly better DX12 performance across the board, so essentially -2%-5% performance depending on the gpu model, game, etc...

So the RTX 2060 is trading blows with the 1070ti, but in certain games it performs as a GTX 1070. I suspect this is because of the significantly cutdown ROP count and 6GB of vram at 192bits.

So essentially 25% up to 40% faster than a GTX 1060 6GB, generally on par with the GTX 1070ti, but in some games it performs as a 1070.

Hopefully the GTX 1160 will offer better value. That card should be $250 and offer 30% faster performance than the GTX 1060 6GB to be better in terms on the GTX 1060 6GB, but even that would be bad value in terms of upgrade from a GTX 1060, as 25-30% performance increase for the same price is not that big of a jump.

I'm not planning to "upgrade" this generation anyways, I always skip one generation, because there is never good value in upgrading like for like every generation. The generation after Turning would actually bring in the value upgrade path and with 7nm I fully expect the GTX/RTX 3060 to be at least 50% faster than the GTX 1060 6gb for $250. Hopefully something closer to 60% performance increase.

And I really hope AMD brings something good to the table, if they can release mainstream range gpu's around July on 7nm and price them very competitively, I will definately be upgrading with an AMD card.
funny the gtx 1060 is one of the better valued cards and has the same performance for dollar than the rtx 2060, and we get DLSS and ray tracing on top of that.

And it does not trade blows with a gtx 1070ti it beats it 85% of the time ,beats a 1070 in every game and even bests a gtx 1080 3 times and gets even faster in 1440p.
https://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce...eliver-60-fps-with-rtx-dlss-enabled-on-1080p/
performance-per-dollar_1920-1080.png
 
Last edited:

Thunder 57

Senior member
Aug 19, 2007
577
16
116
#77
Price vs performance it's about = to a gtx1060 at $245. It's at least 30% faster than a gtx1060.
That's not great, but good in my eyes.
Compared to the gtx1070ti at $450 , it has much better price performance.
Its only a bit slower than a gtx1080 which was at least $600 at release and still at least $525 now.

And it seems to handle Ray tracing @1080p fairly good at 60fps.

I'll hold my opinion for 2 or 3 week's until we actually see real world gaming reviews and prices.

I'm sure as per usual prices will be inflated for the first month after release.

We shall see.
But a 1070ti doesn't cost $450 now. I care about what it costs to buy things when I actually, you know, buy them.

Its in the videocardz article posted all ready.

Edit.
https://videocardz.com/79505/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-pricing-and-performance-leaked

Quote.
One more thing to note is that with RTX on Ultra at 1080p, the card scores 58 FPS while with Medium preset, it scores 66 FPS.
https://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce...eliver-60-fps-with-rtx-dlss-enabled-on-1080p/

Going by the benchmarks, it beats a 1070ti in 13 games and a gtx1080 in 3 games. A small overclock should give you gtx1080 performance.

I don't see how Vega 64 performance for $349 at 160 watts is bad.
It seems it performs like a, 7nm Vega 64 for $350.
If AMD had a card like that people would be saying its the next 9800pro.
You just said you will wait 2-3 weeks until we have real reviews and prices, then you state these rumors as if they were facts.

And no, nobody would be calling this the next 9800 Pro, that's nonsense. The 9800 Pro was better in every way than the competition while also using a single slot.

...Compare this to the RX 590, and you would be surprised, that AMD is somehow the good guy in all this. This card should be about 40% faster than an RX 590 for 25% more money. It should also be slightly faster than a RX Vega 56 and very close to a Vega 64.
The 590 is a poor value. It has been since day one.

People are already crapping on this card but are willing to recommend Vega 64 at 400 dollars with the terrible stock cooler shows we are not at a point of balance anymore but heavily biased...
I stopped there because your bias got to be too much. Show me where anyone has recommended a Vega 64 with a stock cooler? Vega 64 uses too much power and Vega 56 is priced basically the same as 64, so neither are a great option right now. If I could get a decent Vega 56 for $350 that would be a different story.

I forgot to add that I would be interested in this 2060 if it were not for the 6GB RAM. I see that limiting its useful lifespan at least at higher resolutions.
 
Last edited:

mohit9206

Senior member
Jul 2, 2013
981
41
116
#78
I think we should wait until the announcement before arguing about the pricing or performance. As for me i just recently bought a 1050ti so am good for the next 3 to 4 years.
 
Aug 25, 2001
42,469
236
126
#79
I think we should wait until the announcement before arguing about the pricing or performance. As for me i just recently bought a 1050ti so am good for the next 3 to 4 years.
Maybe @ 1080P30, four years from now? Currently, a 1050ti is barely, sort of, maybe, a 1080P60 (Med?) card, in the newest AAA games.

I would probably have gone with a RX 570 8GB myself (and I did, although I've bought some GTX 1050-series cards too, for various builds, usually, where additional power connectors aren't available. But when they are, RX 570/580 all the way.)
 

mohit9206

Senior member
Jul 2, 2013
981
41
116
#80
Maybe @ 1080P30, four years from now? Currently, a 1050ti is barely, sort of, maybe, a 1080P60 (Med?) card, in the newest AAA games.

I would probably have gone with a RX 570 8GB myself (and I did, although I've bought some GTX 1050-series cards too, for various builds, usually, where additional power connectors aren't available. But when they are, RX 570/580 all the way.)
Well i play at 1600 by 900, and im fine even with medium settings. Also its a used mining card so i hope it actually lasts that long.
 
Aug 14, 2000
21,350
91
106
#81
Rtx 2060 msrp $349 and is faster than all of these cards and can do Ray tracing at 1080p @ 60fps.
No it can't. Even an overclocked 2070 can't do that.

As an aside, I think it's cute how you list RTX/DLSS as "features". The reality is the 2060 is overpriced for what it is, just like the rest of the Turding line.
 
Jun 8, 2003
13,987
42
126
#82
No it can't. Even an overclocked 2070 can't do that.

As an aside, I think it's cute how you list RTX/DLSS as "features". The reality is the 2060 is overpriced for what it is, just like the rest of the Turding line.
but yet it has the same price to performance ratio than a gtx 1060 or rx 480.
mabe you should read the benchmarks before you start trolling.
 

Thunder 57

Senior member
Aug 19, 2007
577
16
116
#83
but yet it has the same price to performance ratio than a gtx 1060 or rx 480.
mabe you should read the benchmarks before you start trolling.
I thought you were waiting for reviews? Here's what I think; If the performance will be similar to a 1070Ti than the 1070Ti will be better in the long run because of the extra VRAM. Games already want 4GB+ so that would make the 3/4GB cards a poor choice and the 6GB ones may not last as long as previous generations.

Memory bandwidth could swing the argument in some cases, but lower bandwidth is better than no more memory every time.
 

arandomguy

Senior member
Sep 3, 2013
454
9
116
#84
The other factor to consider is that Turing has more architectural and feature changes (beyond RTX) than Maxwell->Pascal, more like Kepler->Maxwell.

If going by the leaked benchmarks the trend of future games is to lean more towards BF1/Wolfenstein II as the type of workload thrown at GPUs than that would favor future comparisons for Turing.

What will be interesting also is to see what information AMD reveals for Navi. If they to for instance place an emphasis on things like more concurrent/async execution or things like variable precision this would be a stronger indicator that future games will more heavily leverage such things.

If 2020 consoles do another memory jump to 16GB+ yet still target closer to 1080p resolution then it's quite likely that either VRAM (6 or 8) could shortly fall as to what would be considered mainstream. However until then memory requirements are likely at a relative plateau point much like end of cycle last gen barring things like resolution increases.
 

Head1985

Golden Member
Jul 8, 2014
1,552
13
126
#85
but yet it has the same price to performance ratio than a gtx 1060 or rx 480.
mabe you should read the benchmarks before you start trolling.
Yes same price/perf as 2.5 year old tech GTX1060.Thats pretty bad.And those benchmarks are just NV marketing BS numbers.Remember 2080 vs 1080TI?2080 was like 15-20% faster yet when comparing AIB vs AIB both have same performace.
https://videocardz.com/77983/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-and-rtx-2080-official-performance-unveiled
1440p_2080_1080Ti.jpg

btw you and everyone else defending 350USD price should watch this
 

Attachments

SPBHM

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2012
4,730
17
106
#86
the whole problem is still lack of competition, the 590 was released at $280 not even 2 months ago, in this context the 2060 might be great value if it performs like a 1070 ti + offers some RT effects in some games for 30% more money

so unless AMD surprise us with "Vega II" or Navi or something that can compete with the 2060 for less, it will be a huge success
 

ozzy702

Senior member
Nov 1, 2011
776
104
136
#87
With 570 4gb cards going for $125 new, 580 8gb cards going for $150 new, and the glut of used AMD and NVIDIA gpus... anything under GTX 1080 speed will simply not sell. This isn't going to change anytime soon either, we'll see used GPU prices continue to drop over 2019.

AMD and NVIDIA will have to bring seriously more performance to the table at the same price points as Pascal if they expect to sell cards. Realistically the only two RTX GPUs that should exist at the moment are the 2080 and the 2080TI and even those are premature releases.

The RTX 2070 and below should all be refreshed Pascal GPUs on 12nm at significantly lower price points.
 
Last edited:

mohit9206

Senior member
Jul 2, 2013
981
41
116
#88
With 570 4gb cards going for $125 new, 580 8gb cards going for $150 new, and the glut of used AMD and NVIDIA gpus... anything under GTX 1080 speed will simply not sell. This isn't going to change anytime soon either, we'll see used GPU prices continue to drop over 2019.

AMD and NVIDIA will have to bring seriously more performance to the table at the same price points as Pascal if they expect to sell cards. Realistically the only two RTX GPUs that should exist at the moment are the 2080 and the 2080TI and even those are premature releases.

The RTX 2070 and below should all be refreshed Pascal GPUs on 12nm at significantly lower price points.
It will sell. Not because Nvidia fanboys blah blah but because last gen cards will always have its own target market who will buy those discounted cards because they seek the best value while the new cards offering worse price/perf will also sell because they will target different group looking for newest shiny stuff. Last gen cards being heavily discounted have historically never stopped new cards from selling.
 

ozzy702

Senior member
Nov 1, 2011
776
104
136
#89
It will sell. Not because Nvidia fanboys blah blah but because last gen cards will always have its own target market who will buy those discounted cards because they seek the best value while the new cards offering worse price/perf will also sell because they will target different group looking for newest shiny stuff. Last gen cards being heavily discounted have historically never stopped new cards from selling.
You're missing the whole used GPU market where we have millions upon millions of used cards for sale. This hasn't happened since around when the AMD 290 was released and BTC miners were dumping cards, but that was a drop in the bucket compared to now.

1080s and 1080TIs can be found dirt cheap and that means competition with the 2060 and 2070 gpus.
 

mohit9206

Senior member
Jul 2, 2013
981
41
116
#90
You're missing the whole used GPU market where we have millions upon millions of used cards for sale. This hasn't happened since around when the AMD 290 was released and BTC miners were dumping cards, but that was a drop in the bucket compared to now.

1080s and 1080TIs can be found dirt cheap and that means competition with the 2060 and 2070 gpus.
But both still target different types of buyers. Turing cards are still selling well despite an excess inventory for older gen cards because people who want to buy the newest stuff will buy the newest stuff.
 

ozzy702

Senior member
Nov 1, 2011
776
104
136
#91
But both still target different types of buyers. Turing cards are still selling well despite an excess inventory for older gen cards because people who want to buy the newest stuff will buy the newest stuff.
Sure they will sell, but their sales numbers will be impacted heavily. Anyone that's paying attention knows that the 2000 series is a bad buy.
 

Qwertilot

Golden Member
Nov 28, 2013
1,349
24
106
#92
With the best alternative being to buy some of their pay mining boom excess stock of 10xx cards!
 
Jun 8, 2003
13,987
42
126
#93
With the best alternative being to buy some of their pay mining boom excess stock of 10xx cards!
What about the AMD line vegs 56 or 64? You could always pick up a slower vega 56 for about $375 or Mabe the 2% faster vega 64 for $145 more than the 2060. Hey there is the excellent price performance 590 thats 10% faster than a 580 for 30% more money. Lots of other choices close to the performance of the 2060.
And you won't have to use DLSS or ray tracing because its not even an option.
 

sontin

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2011
3,091
11
91
#94
btw you and everyone else defending 350USD price should watch this
What a nonsense video. This guy hasnt heard of inflation and how hard tech companies are fighting for employees. But then he can still buy a RX590 for $289 (thats $40 higher than the RX480).
Sure, you get the same exact product from two years ago but at least it isnt from nVidia. So looks like a real winner.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
4,293
245
126
#95
What a nonsense video. This guy hasnt heard of inflation and how hard tech companies are fighting for employees. But then he can still buy a RX590 for $289 (thats $40 higher than the RX480).
Sure, you get the same exact product from two years ago but at least it isnt from nVidia. So looks like a real winner.
I don't think inflation is a good argument considering that historically, tech has come down in cost quite considerably. The average cost of a computer has fallen dramatically over the years despite the fact that they've grown increasingly more powerful over that time as well. Even at the top end, this holds true. You can look at the entry price for an Apple laptop around 2000 and see that today you can buy something vastly more powerful (relatively as well as absolutely) for under half the cost.

Furthermore, if you look at the inflation rate since 2010, it's only about 15%, which doesn't come close to the increases that we've seen. It isn't as though NVidia is scraping by with razor thin margins either. If you graph those out, they've also increased. I don't fault them for that at all, but even if they have to pay employees more due to the competitiveness of the market, it isn't outstripping revenue increases.

Just because AMD wants to release a product with terrible value as well doesn't absolve NVidia. No one else is spending my money, so if a 2XXX card is a good value for them, that's their choice, but at the same time you can't expect me or anyone else to participate in their distorted view of the world.
 

sontin

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2011
3,091
11
91
#96
But those products are not cutting edge. You can build cheap PCs with ARM SoCs. But those wont deliver 1080p/60FPS in the latest games.

Building huge GPUs with resonable power consumption gets harder and harder. This process increases the cost of the product (aka inflation). If people dont see value in it the bubble will just burst.
But this will be the ending of advancement in a timely manner. Look at AMD: Polaris will be on the market for three years...
 

coercitiv

Platinum Member
Jan 24, 2014
2,962
254
136
#97
Building huge GPUs with resonable power consumption gets harder and harder. This process increases the cost of the product (aka inflation). If people dont see value in it the bubble will just burst.
Kids, wanna see something neat? A magic trick like none other? Production costs are rising, r&d expenditure increases every year, chips are bigger and harder to make, inflation is merciless on costs, yet Nvidia's margins go up every year! If only it were more than an illusion, if only the bubble weren't about to burst.

 

SpaceBeer

Senior member
Apr 2, 2016
280
2
71
#98
Well, nVidia's chips were quite smaller than AMD's for the same price range. I mean GP104 is 50% smaller than Vega 10, GDDR5(X) is/was at least 2 times cheaper than HBM2, and yet they have same price/perf ratio. And now, they are going to sell RTX 2060 at the same price as GTX 1070, so I'm quite sure their margins will be lower on that one. Sure production cost might be (probably is) lower than 2 years ago, but GDDR6 is more expensive for sure
 

sontin

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2011
3,091
11
91
#99
Kids, wanna see something neat? A magic trick like none other? Production costs are rising, r&d expenditure increases every year, chips are bigger and harder to make, inflation is merciless on costs, yet Nvidia's margins go up every year! If only it were more than an illusion, if only the bubble weren't about to burst.
They are spending much more money for R&D.
Q3 2011: $204 millions
Q3 2015: $340 millions
Q3 2019: $605 millions

They have tripled their investment.

And margins are going up because nVidia has invented new markets for their products. The whole Datacenter business is now as big as the company was 8 years ago.

So yes, that is inflation. Higher cost to develop and produce something will always have a huge impact.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
4,293
245
126
They have tripled their investment.

And margins are going up because nVidia has invented new markets for their products. The whole Datacenter business is now as big as the company was 8 years ago.

So yes, that is inflation. Higher cost to develop and produce something will always have a huge impact.
None of that matters. You can invest ten times as much money, but if revenue is twenty times higher, margins will increase. If margins are increasing it indicates that company is making more profit for the whatever dollar value of goods they're selling.

Similarly, investing it new markets doesn't guarantee higher margins either, unless the products you're selling in those new markets have higher margins themselves. Generally you'd expect margins to fall when entering a new market as it takes time for the initial investments to pay off, but this isn't necessarily true.

The price increases on NVidia GPUs have vastly outstripped inflation. If you look at the GTX 480 from 2010 it initially sold for $500, as compared to a 2080 where the Founder's Edition is $800. Both are similarly sized chips.

We can make a similar comparison with AMD over that time comparing the 6870 to the recently released 590 since those chips are similar sized and use a similar (40nm vs 12nm) process. The cost for the NVidia GPU increased 1.6 times, whereas the cost for the AMD CPU increased 1.16 times by comparison. An online inflation calculator shows that a dollar in 2010 is worth $1.16 in 2019.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


ASK THE COMMUNITY