• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hi Guest. We've rebooted and consolidated our Communities section, so be sure to check it out and subscribe to some threads. Thanks!

Review Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060/2070 Super Review Thread. New $399/$499 GPU King.

Remij

Member
Apr 23, 2009
2,216
210
835
Nice evasion. Guess we're done here.
I'm sparing you the need of having to chop my posts up into bits and quoting every sentence separately. I'm sparing myself and the other readers of this thread the scroll wheels of their mice, which certainly aren't equipped to handle multiple people posting the same way you do. I understand you're upset, likely because you spent 30min chopping my post up and responding to every separate point... but I'm not about to quote that mess and then do the same. Sorry. You don't agree with me? Cool. You act like you've posted some concrete evidence that proves what I said was wrong or something.. lol. Just open your eyes.. the hate towards Nvidia and how they've "ruined GPU prices forever" is palpable. Acting like the PC gaming world isn't waiting and hoping for AMD to come and save us from this terrible fate Nvidia has laid out for us!

Yea right. AMD fans have actually convinced themselves that AMD has it rough...and that's why they are unable to succeed. lmao.. they have ALL the goodwill. IF people are rough on AMD it's because despite all the goodwill they have, they never can follow through. That's a damn fact.

I'd gladly support AMD.. if they made another 9700pro caliber GPU. Except they haven't.. and they're essentially a generation behind Nvidia at this point. Until that day, I, much like most other people, will choose Nvidia.
 

Ascend

Member
Jul 23, 2018
632
498
290
I'm sparing you the need of having to chop my posts up into bits and quoting every sentence separately. I'm sparing myself and the other readers of this thread the scroll wheels of their mice, which certainly aren't equipped to handle multiple people posting the same way you do. I understand you're upset, likely because you spent 30min chopping my post up and responding to every separate point... but I'm not about to quote that mess and then do the same. Sorry.
I did it to make clear which part I was responding to, to avoid confusion and avoid misquotes and misunderstandings, which inevitably takes place with these kinds of discussions, sometimes deliberately. You don't have to chop it up like I do. I guess you really simply have no real answer and are using this as an excuse. Transparent, and not unexpected.

And hell yeah I'm upset. Because sheepish consumers keep drooling over overpriced expensive shit as if it's the end of the world if they maybe skip an overpriced green generation...

Leaving another thing here...

You don't agree with me? Cool. You act like you've posted some concrete evidence that proves what I said was wrong or something.. lol. Just open your eyes.. the hate towards Nvidia and how they've "ruined GPU prices forever" is palpable. Acting like the PC gaming world isn't waiting and hoping for AMD to come and save us from this terrible fate Nvidia has laid out for us!

Yea right. AMD fans have actually convinced themselves that AMD has it rough...and that's why they are unable to succeed. lmao.. they have ALL the goodwill. IF people are rough on AMD it's because despite all the goodwill they have, they never can follow through. That's a damn fact.

I'd gladly support AMD.. if they made another 9700pro caliber GPU. Except they haven't.. and they're essentially a generation behind Nvidia at this point. Until that day, I, much like most other people, will choose Nvidia.
B Bold That hate doesn't mean anything if they keep making more money every time, which obviously they are. That's what you fail to understand, and exactly what I said in my previous post, which you conveniently ignored. You base your opinion on gossip and what people rant about in forums, completely ignoring the mischaracterization of both brands in multiple occasions that actually costs one side money and gives money to the other. That is a fact that is happening, not some sort of delusional made up idea. Just look at the market share. Just look at the hardware survey on Steam. If the hate really is there towards nVidia, people would stop buying nVidia. But no, there is no real hate against nVidia. It's a temporary knee-jerk reaction which ultimately means nothing. No one says they'll stop buying either nVidia cards or graphics cards in general to send a message. Nope. Let's just get green again, cuz yeah... That's what we have and I feel the need to increase my E-peen. AMD on the other hand, if they have as much as a dust particle on the card, that is already a reason to go for nVidia instead. You cannot tell me this is not true. That is exactly how it goes, despite whatever amount people complain about nVidia.

And oh, until you can prove me wrong, the evidence I posted stands. I gave countless example, and we all know those multiple points I stated are true. The latest example I mentioned was that everyone bashed RTX when it came it. Expensive cards, huge performance loss, not worth going for. Now a year later, simply because AMD doesn't have it, suddenly RT is mandatory and AMD is lacking features... The hypocrisy is exasperating, and even worse, pointing this out is met with animosity or attempts at ridicule. A real shame that this is what the PC gaming community has come to. Group think to the next level.
Even you have just stated that AMD can never follow through, and right now there is already a bias against the Navi cards, based solely on that rumor and nothing else. Despite the leaks putting them as being $50 cheaper for 5 fps less, and somehow that still means Navi is dead on arrival. What a joke that is... I bet that if the roles were reversed, as in AMD having the RTX super cards and nVidia having the Navi cards, the choice would still be nVidia. Not because of anything substantial, but simply because of the brand name. It has happened a bunch of times in the past already, and that's how it goes. Tell me. Did people skip nVidia when only AMD had working Async compute? No. Did people skip nVidia when AMD clearly had superior DX12 performance? No. Did people skip nVidia when they named a card with cut down cores the same as the full chip? No. Did people skip nVidia when their drivers were killing cards? No. Did people skip nVidia when RTX cards were dying more often than normal? No.

So yeah... You've already proven you'll not gladly support AMD. Everyone says that, until they actually release a cheap card and end up buying the price-dropped nVidia cards instead. That's why the majority wants cheap AMD prices, and it's obvious AMD is not playing that game of being charity anymore, and we have the likes of you that buy nVidia no matter what, and keep supporting them despite their shady stuff, to thank for that.

I for one will not be buying any GPU at this point. I might get the 5700 if it gets below $300.
 
Last edited:

iHaunter

Member
Sep 6, 2015
818
87
310
Hmm think I can hold another year with my 1080Ti. RTX GPUs still can't handle 4k/60 on Ultra. Pretty impressive for price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Krappadizzle

Dice

Gold Member
Jun 6, 2004
35,498
1,149
2,015
All these videos show 1440p, which is what my 1070ti does fine. Call me when cards are running 4k/60 as standard.
 

Fictive

Member
Nov 10, 2013
588
165
395
I'm satisfied atm, and since I just stepped in I'm pretty much gonna be on the even numbered releases 4080ti (4k@120 with RT). That would be nuts...
 

thelastword

Member
Apr 7, 2006
8,522
2,588
1,380
Looks to be just a hair under the 1080 Ti
Yes, it's a bit below, but there are titles where the 1080ti still beats Turing badly, like Fortnite and some others......In essence, if you already have a 1080ti, there's no reason that you should splooge for Turing because the RT performance is not there. In essence, Turing's selling point is NOT a selling point. Nvidia has just convinced folk (or maybe not) to splooge cash on RTX, when it's just a 1080p tech demo at this point, with no big visual upgrade over the rasterized method....Hey, it's still hybrid with such bad performance and rez downgrades...…..Pay $700 for a 2080 says Nvidia, months later, man, AMD's RDNA is no slouch with only 40 CU's, pay $500 for about par 2080 performance then......So it should never be so expensive in the first place Nvidia and it should be even cheaper than the current $500...…..These guys have no HBM on these cards, 2080ti should be $600 at best...….

Depends on the game.... some games run better on it..... some don't.....
Yes, but the 1080ti is mostly ahead than not....

You're also losing 3GB of memory so that's something else to consider.
There are titles in that video where the extra ram reaps dividends.....Turing's 1% lows fall much lower....

Definitely... it's the ....biggest reason I still have my .....1080Ti.
I think everybody should hold unto their high end Pascal over Turing, the only card that's a real upgrade to that, is the 2080ti, but only if you have money to burn, because that cards only costs $400 to make....

Now, if you're currently in the market for a card and you want to upgrade your Rx 570, 580, 1060 and even 1070....I think the 5700 is a nice upgrade, as it even beats a 2060 S at a lower pricepoint...……...it beats Vega 56, 64, GTX 1080 too…….So it's nicely poised.......RT is a nonfactor in any card purchase ATM...…The market has said so...
 

Evilms

Member
Dec 16, 2018
780
1,767
380
They said it beat the 1080ti????



Let's not forget that it remains the 2070 Super FE, just wait for the custom versions which will be faster and driver updates more optimized against the 1080ti.

At the beginning it was the same with the GTX 1070 against the 980 Ti but with time the 1070 took over from the 980 Ti in every games.
 
Last edited:

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
2,242
1,725
540
Really?

When the RX 480 had a (non-)issue with power consumption through the PCI-E slot, it was a huge deal that made the card so-called dangerous and unreliable.
When the GTX 970 deliberately deceived nVidia customers regarding its usable memory size, it was still a great card to buy anyway.

When the GTX 970 had 3.5GB and was a competitor of the R9 390 with 8GB, the memory on the GTX 970 is fine.
When the R9 Fury X with 4GB was a competitor to the 980 Ti with 6GB, Fury X has too little VRAM.
(in before "Bbbbut 1440p!!!!")

When AMD had the superior product in terms of power consumption in the late 2000s, only the speed mattered.
When AMD had the best speed with the R9 290X release, their power consumption mattered.

When AMD had driver faults, those were a deal breaker.
When nVidia had drivers that killed their cards, they're still good enough to buy.

When AMD brought FreeSync, they were just copying nVidia and having an inferior version of G-sync.
When nVidia started supporting FreeSync, nVidia is great for doing so.

When nVidia brings out overpriced cards, they are justified in doing so because features, or speed.
When AMD brings out equivalently performing & priced cards (5700, 5700XT), they are overpriced because AMD can never be cheap enough.

When nVidia brought out RTX, everyone saw it as an overpriced gimmick.
When AMD releases cards less than a year later without ray tracing, suddenly everyone wants RTX.

And the list goes on and on. The sad thing is that the majority are not even aware that they are doing it. And when reporters, reviewers and tech enthusiasts fall into this category, it's a truly sad time for gamers. People see nVidia as the default without realizing it. At this point, AMD can bring a $400 card performing like a 2080Ti, and people will find some excuse not to buy it. Just like the RX570 is now cheaper than a 1050Ti and gets you two additional games, and yet, Steam is littered with 1050 Ti cards and barely any RX 570s to be seen. Just like the Vega 56 has been $300 for a long while and no one recommends it despite being the best value card in its price range. [sarcasm]All of this is rational consumers picking out the best options I presume? [/sarcasm]

The goal posts shift every time in favor of nVidia. It's nice and all what you said about nVidia being trashed, and that might be true, but nVidia never feels it in their wallets... AMD feels it constantly, even when they don't deserve it... THAT is the big difference. RTX was the first time nVidia felt anything in terms of sales within the last decade.

Kind of hard to do R&D when everyone buys the competition no matter what you do. I mean, look at right now. Everyone is dissing the 5700(XT) cards without reviews being out, and nVidia, the one that jacked up prices through the roof are once again being praised and getting a free pass for releasing something at the price they should have released them at in first place. How does that qualify as "nVidia getting shit for everything"? And this is yet another example of nVidia getting a free pass. A refresh is a refresh. But I guess we can't see it that way when we're biased to one side.

That was not what happened with RTX, but apparently that has already been forgotten. People have REALLY short memories it seems... It's like the price being $500 today, tomorrow releasing a card at $1000, and then dropping it to $750. Guess what. You're still being screwed because it's still $250 more expensive.

There's a great chance Navi will have something similar to the HD7000 series in terms of longevity, simply because it's a new architecture. No one in their right mind is really happy with AMD right now regarding anything above the Vega 56, although that might change with the 5700. We'll see. Anyone that buys under $300 would be crazy not to consider the Vega 56 or the RX 570.

Neither does it give nVidia fanboys a free pass, simply because everyone wants to buy nVidia at a certain point in time. And the vice versa is sadly not true... The nVidia fanboy talk DOES hurt AMD. To this day, there are people complaining about why AMD always has bad drivers despite it being proven that AMD drivers are more stable... And they have this reputation even though it's no longer true and hasn't been for years.

Lastly, leaving this here...

U are warping everything out of reality in order to fit your AMD crusade. It's hard to take you seriously.

970 never competed with 390x. the 3.5gb of v-ram nvidia was heavily slammed for it, but still made the GPU far better then any competitor had at the time. It was a 2080 ti for 300 bucks.

Fury x 4gb was terrible. It was doa when ti was announced. it also didn't help the performance was all over the place. Same goes for a 390x with 8gb, 4 extra gb is nice, but 290x chip made it far to weak to ever make use of it. The moment they announced it was rebrand nobody cared. If they did care they would already have a 290x and no reason to upgrade.

Terrible comparisons.

290x, sound was a disaster dude, it become even a internet meme. The heat with it and power consumption was very real. Also times change. IN 2000 performance mattered because that was what people aimed for in that time period. As every single FPS counted. In the 200 series period gpu's already had some solid overhead on games specially with consoles not going for the latest tech. Different time periods. Make no sense to even put them forwards.

AMD drivers are hot garbage. Anybody that says otherwise never used them. Sure Nvidia has there issue's with drivers but there drivers trump AMD drivers every single day. On support game wise and on fixes. Not comparable. Honestly people refusing to admit this make there entire argument a complete a utter joke. I used AMD and Nvidia both next towards eachother for years and frankly AMD drivers where always far more problematic while with nvidia stuff just works. And it leaves a sour taste in people's mouth whenever they pick the cards up. This is what damage's AMD the most.

Freesync was a disaster when it came out. The ranges where terrible, the support was terrible, the screens where complete shit in comparison towards gsync. Also no borderless window mode made it completely useless. It's after there revamp of freesync that it finally became competitive with gsync. Again late to the party with a tech that got outdone by gsync already from day one.

Nvidia support of freesync is indeed interesting, because it prevents people from floking towards AMD. Gsync still isn't able to be pushed on AMD which results in many people that bought gsync screens to stay on nvidia. How is this hard to understand for you.

Nvidia got slammed hard for there overpriced cards, nobody likes it. Sadly AMD isn't competing with them. They are far behind Nvidia. Because hardware is one thing with GPU's support is another.

AMD cards are only interesting if the cards perform far beyond what nvidia offers. Otherwise they are just price pressure cards. There is absolute no reason to ever pick AMD if it's close in price over Nvidia.

If you like or don't like RTX, it's something more that Nvidia offers and AMD not. Not having something isn't a win over having something. RTX will be added in future titles more and more and people that buy a gpu probably want the latest tech at this point.

When RTX first got announced, no game had it. It was pointless. Now multiple games have it, and things are starting to move forwards on it. Consoles will probably have some support on it also.

People buy Nvidia because there cards work, software support with AMD is a joke in comparison towards nvidia. Nobody is biashed. If tommorow AMD pushes out a new 9700 or 9800 pro people will buy it. Sadly they don't they give you 10% more performance for 10% less money. It's a joke.

That 5700 card should give you 1080 performance for 199 and people will buy it. It's just not worth to go with AMD jank if prices are to close.

I agree with you and the nvidia pricing. It's insane and anybody supporting those 2000 series cards honestly are killing there own hobby. Sadly AMD isn't helping here.

People buy nvidia, because they give you a supperior product on support and give you zero issue's later on in games. With AMD that's never the case.

The company needs a massive overhaul, and they need hire a metric ton more people that go actively out to developers to push solid support in there games for there cards on day one with there own features. Sadly that's not happening. They release hardware, sit on there arse and play the victim. Sorry i don't buy a card to have to google every game release on how to play it optimal or get rollercoaster performance with every patch / driver update.

That's the problem with AMD and that's also why nobody cares for them besides people that somehow have a hate boner for Nvidia. otherwise they would sit on Nvidia already for a while.

They should rebrand, and start to push out far more support towards there drivers then Nvidia does and clearly showcasing this. Every single game is Nvidia Nvidia Nvidia.

AMD name is indeed a joke at this point.

ps.

Could be hard to read as it's basically a reaction towards your post without quotes.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CurryPanda

DrCheese

Member
Jul 15, 2013
52
31
410
The crying in this thread is just stupid. If AMD actually competed with decent tech at the same time as Nvidia, or had a top line GPU that smoked whatever Nvidia had out at the time then gamers would flock to AMD. People aren't "loyal" to Nvidia, they just want the best they can get for their money at the time they are in the market. Right now, That's never AMD.
 

llien

Gold Member
Feb 1, 2017
6,253
3,512
720
AMD drivers are hot garbage.


The crying in this thread is just stupid. If AMD actually competed with decent tech at the same time as Nvidia, or had a top line GPU that smoked whatever Nvidia had out at the time then gamers would flock to AMD.
4xxx/5xxx series vs Fermi.
Athlon 64 vs P4 Prescott
570 vs 1050/1050Ti/1650

Anyhow, that is not how ANY market works, majority of buyers are not tech savvy regardless of what you sell to them, kitchein aids, GPUs or TVs.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ascend
Dec 14, 2008
32,722
664
1,080
Nothing I've seen from Nvidia or AMD has made me want to move from my 1080 Ti either. My plan to wait until Ampere in 2020 remains intact.
 

Ascend

Member
Jul 23, 2018
632
498
290
U are warping everything out of reality in order to fit your AMD crusade. It's hard to take you seriously.

970 never competed with 390x.
And here start the lies... I clearly said R9 390, NOT the R9 390X. And then you dare say that it's hard to take me seriously? If you want to argue, at least be honest, which obviously, you are not.

the 3.5gb of v-ram nvidia was heavily slammed for it, but still made the GPU far better then any competitor had at the time. It was a 2080 ti for 300 bucks.
Nope. The r9 390 was a much better deal. Power consumption was used as an excuse not to get it, just like there is always an irrelevant excuse. Quoting Techspot;

Out of the box the R9 390 was 7% faster than the GTX 970, producing on average 80 fps at 1080p and the margin only grew to 8% at 1440p. Overclocked the 390 enjoyed a performance boost of just 5% on average and this was seen at both tested resolutions. Meanwhile the GTX 970 did much better through overclocking, enjoying on average a 12% boost in performance. Surprisingly, however even with this massive boost the GTX 970 was only only able to match the 390 with both GPUs overclocked.

In fact, this is practically the exact same scenario that the 2070 Super and the 5700 XT are experiencing, except this time, the 2070 is the 390 equivalent, being slightly faster and more power hungry. A big difference here, is that the 5700 XT is cheaper, rather than them costing the same, and STILL no one is praising the 5700XT. Yeah... You're all extremely rational... :messenger_expressionless:

And there's this;


And before you say that's an exception, it's not anymore an exception than RT is currently in exception in games. Yeah. Keep yourself honest. If RT matters now, so did the memory back then, because the amount of games where they are an actual influence is extremely small.

Fury x 4gb was terrible. It was doa when ti was announced. it also didn't help the performance was all over the place. Same goes for a 390x with 8gb, 4 extra gb is nice, but 290x chip made it far to weak to ever make use of it. The moment they announced it was rebrand nobody cared. If they did care they would already have a 290x and no reason to upgrade.

Terrible comparisons.

290x, sound was a disaster dude, it become even a internet meme. The heat with it and power consumption was very real. Also times change. IN 2000 performance mattered because that was what people aimed for in that time period. As every single FPS counted. In the 200 series period gpu's already had some solid overhead on games specially with consoles not going for the latest tech. Different time periods. Make no sense to even put them forwards.
All those same issues didn't stop Fermi from selling, now did it?

AMD drivers are hot garbage. Anybody that says otherwise never used them. Sure Nvidia has there issue's with drivers but there drivers trump AMD drivers every single day. On support game wise and on fixes. Not comparable. Honestly people refusing to admit this make there entire argument a complete a utter joke. I used AMD and Nvidia both next towards eachother for years and frankly AMD drivers where always far more problematic while with nvidia stuff just works. And it leaves a sour taste in people's mouth whenever they pick the cards up. This is what damage's AMD the most.
Bullshit;


At bold part; Thanks for proving me right though.
The rest I'm not even gonna bother replying to.
 
Last edited:

Lupin3

Member
May 9, 2006
1,485
357
1,250
Visit site
Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's zero reason to get the 2060 Super if one could get the old vanilla 2070 for the same price, right?
 

JohnnyFootball

The Last of Us may be third person, but it is hardly third person.
Jan 20, 2014
9,611
3,030
800
Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's zero reason to get the 2060 Super if one could get the old vanilla 2070 for the same price, right?
Correct.

I am curious where you can get a 2070 for $399. That's a no brainer
 

Leonidas

"Ask me about computers"
Mar 6, 2007
1,970
1,446
1,495
Correct me if I'm wrong, but there's zero reason to get the 2060 Super if one could get the old vanilla 2070 for the same price, right?
Could be worth it if you want the game bundle (Super is bundled with Control and Wolfenstein Youngblood). You'll lose 4% performance but gain $90 value in games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CurryPanda

JohnnyFootball

The Last of Us may be third person, but it is hardly third person.
Jan 20, 2014
9,611
3,030
800
I'd get one right now at that price. Otherwise, I think I'm going to stick with my 1080 until next gen.
In that case stick with the 1080. The non-RTX performance is going to be similar and you’d be paying exclusively for preview level RTX.

Not remotely close to worth it. Keep the 1080.
 
Last edited:

Lupin3

Member
May 9, 2006
1,485
357
1,250
Visit site
Correct.

I am curious where you can get a 2070 for $399. That's a no brainer
I can't. I'm currently looking at the MSI Gaming X 2070 which is on sale in Sweden right now for closer to the equivalent of $580. The only price I have to go on right now for the 2060 Super over here is Asus Rog Strix Gaming for about a dollar less. Prices could change, of course, since they aren't for sale officially yet, but if they keep the same pricing for the gaming models (I'm only interested in Twin Frozr and such coolers) I'll just go for the 2070 then.
 

Evilms

Member
Dec 16, 2018
780
1,767
380
AIB RTX 2070 and 2060 Super Reviews










 
Last edited:

llien

Gold Member
Feb 1, 2017
6,253
3,512
720
So, AIBs:

+10% power consumption
+10% price
+3% performance



Perf/$

 
Last edited:

Damage Inc

Member
Nov 10, 2013
4,736
2,636
760
So, AIBs:

+10% power consumption
+10% price
+3% performance



Perf/$

The Strix I just read about is +6% which is ok but damn 90 dollar premium. I’ll probably still go with the Strix but still waiting for the 2080S reviews to drop.
 

Evilms

Member
Dec 16, 2018
780
1,767
380
The cards are easily overclocked and go up quite high.



The 2060S Palit match the RX 5700XT and the RTX 2070 FE easily.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CrustyBritches

llien

Gold Member
Feb 1, 2017
6,253
3,512
720
The Strix I just read about is +6% which is ok but damn 90 dollar premium. I’ll probably still go with the Strix but still waiting for the 2080S reviews to drop.
TPU has Strix at +6% (again +10% power consumption)

 

Ascend

Member
Jul 23, 2018
632
498
290
The Strix I just read about is +6% which is ok but damn 90 dollar premium. I’ll probably still go with the Strix but still waiting for the 2080S reviews to drop.
Yeah... The prices are way too high. $90 here... $80 there... The one that's $40 more barely has only a 3% improvement in performance over reference... Might as well buy reference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Damage Inc

thelastword

Member
Apr 7, 2006
8,522
2,588
1,380
So much noise for AIB's, but Nvidia already offer OC'd cards they call FE's, people who expected these AIB's to offer massive performance increases over that were always mis-informed......However, I've read in one of the Navi reviews that Super Cards do have some coil whine...…...
 

Damage Inc

Member
Nov 10, 2013
4,736
2,636
760
Yeah... The prices are way too high. $90 here... $80 there... The one that's $40 more barely has only a 3% improvement in performance over reference... Might as well buy reference.
Ive always gone with partner boards for better coolers vs the old blower style ref used to offer but now they aren’t doing that. This is the only time I’ve even considered doing a reference card. Still going to do a bit more research on them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Evilms

Remij

Member
Apr 23, 2009
2,216
210
835
New Nvidia drivers improve performance 12% on average VS previous GameReady drivers in The Division 2, Strange Brigade, and Metro Exodus.


Metro Exodus and The Division 2 Performance Optimizations
In each driver release we introduce performance improvements for the games you’re still playing, and those that are about to be released.
For our newest driver, NVIDIA’s expert engineers have cooked-up some particularly noteworthy optimizations that increase performance in Metro Exodus, Strange Brigade and The Division 2 by up to 12% on average compared to our previous driver, and by up to 16% on average compared to the GeForce RTX 20-Series launch driver released in August 2018:
  • In Metro Exodus, performance increases by up to 31% compared to our launch driver, with overall average improvements across all tested resolutions and GPUs of 14.6% compared to the launch driver, and 10.5% compared to our previous Game Ready Driver.
  • In Strange Brigade, performance increases by up to 13.7% compared to our launch driver, with overall average improvements of 9.2% compared to the launch driver and 7.7% compared to our previous Game Ready Driver.
  • In Tom Clancy’s The Division 2, performance increases by up to 11.3% compared to our launch driver, with overall average improvements of 6.7% compared to the launch driver and 3.6% compared to our previous Game Ready Driver.
 
Last edited:

JohnnyFootball

The Last of Us may be third person, but it is hardly third person.
Jan 20, 2014
9,611
3,030
800
New Nvidia drivers improve performance 12% on average VS previous GameReady drivers in The Division 2, Strange Brigade, and Metro Exodus.

I just hope these new drivers will enable Assassins Creed Origins to run. That game will simply not start. It didn't run on my 8700K and now it won't start on my 3900X
 

Remij

Member
Apr 23, 2009
2,216
210
835
I just hope these new drivers will enable Assassins Creed Origins to run. That game will simply not start. It didn't run on my 8700K and now it won't start on my 3900X
That's odd. It starts no problem on my machine.

How long has this been an issue for you?
 
Jul 29, 2013
1,453
1,781
825
Oregon, US
The cards are easily overclocked and go up quite high.

The 2060S Palit match the RX 5700XT and the RTX 2070 FE easily.
I saw Guru3d's review of the Palit, it seemed the best out of the bunch. They had 11% average performance increase across 4 games with oc to ~2GHz. My past cards all followed their results without voltage tweaking. The FE and Palit with oc get ~9700 Time Spy score, while the reference 5700 XT with oc gets ~9000. With my most anticipated games being Cyberpunk and DOOM Eternal, my gut and benchies for TW3 and Wolf II tell me to go with the Palit 2060S at $419 or under, otherwise just go for $399 2060S FE. 2060S has better performance than 2070 base in RTX, so I'm hoping DOOM Eternal has performance enough for 1080p/60fps/Ultra with RTX High/Ultra.

Probably pulling the trigger in early August in case the 5700 XT AiBs get pushed forward I want to see their pricing and performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Evilms

Evilms

Member
Dec 16, 2018
780
1,767
380
I saw Guru3d's review of the Palit, it seemed the best out of the bunch. They had 11% average performance increase across 4 games with oc to ~2GHz. My past cards all followed their results without voltage tweaking. The FE and Palit with oc get ~9700 Time Spy score, while the reference 5700 XT with oc gets ~9000. With my most anticipated games being Cyberpunk and DOOM Eternal, my gut and benchies for TW3 and Wolf II tell me to go with the Palit 2060S at $419 or under, otherwise just go for $399 2060S FE. 2060S has better performance than 2070 base in RTX, so I'm hoping DOOM Eternal has performance enough for 1080p/60fps/Ultra with RTX High/Ultra.

Probably pulling the trigger in early August in case the 5700 XT AiBs get pushed forward I want to see their pricing and performance.
The Palit Super JetStream 2060 Super looks excellent and is even quieter than the FE.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CrustyBritches
Jul 29, 2013
1,453
1,781
825
Oregon, US
The Palit Super JetStream 2060 Super looks excellent and is even quieter than the FE.
TPU showed the Palit 2060S getting 7% increase over 2060S FE and with overclock 13% increase over 2060S FE. Guru3d had 11% increase over 4 games, so a nice synthetic and real-world boost.

---
Looks like the FE has the USB-C connector, while the Palit Jetstream doesn't. Not a huge deal, but it could indicate same price point. I like the looks of both cards, so I'll just stick with whatever I can get at $399. I use a Core V21 case in horizontal mobo config and front window, so I won't see the backplate much. JetStream looks better, imo.


---
This is my case model with horizontal config. Not my pic, but same lighting and placement...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Evilms

BloodK1nG

Neo Member
Nov 19, 2018
4
0
90
arent the prices high simply because of increased RAM cost and demand from coins mining? i dont see how prices could go lower for next gen card.