• 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.

RTX 2080 Super Review Thread

Soltype

Member
You should always get whats best value for you personally, but yeah, I can understand that line getting rather annoying after hearing it for over half a decade.

People want AMD to spend millions on R&D and release competitive CPU's and GPU's just so they can buy their Intel/Nvidia stuff a little cheaper because 'they've always bought Intel/Nvidia'. Many people don't even consider AMD an option because 'drivers' or whatever. Like, that's not how stuff works. People need to actually buy said competitive stuff for AMD to stay in the game. Either that or don't complain you're overpaying €300 for your extra 2fps in Overwatch.
I'm ready to upgrade and I have no clear cut upgrade path, there's nothing on AMD and Nvidia is crazy. Nvidia needs a wake up call, really hoping the 5900/5950 are the real deal.

Steve echoed what I said in his review, skip to 8:30.

 
Last edited:
I'm ready to upgrade and I have no clear cut upgrade path, there's nothing on AMD and Nvidia is crazy. Nvidia needs a wake up call, really hoping the 5900/5950 are the real deal.

Steve echoed what I said in his review.

It depends on your budget, and what you are currently running. If you are on a 1080Ti there is no point to uprade now. If you are not then wait for custom AIB 5700XTs and see then? They should be so close to 2070 S/2080 the $100-$300 difference would't be worth it. And Radeon Image Sharpening is amazing.

It makes DLSS look like a gimmick. And imo buying nVidia RTX thinking RT is a feature is just going to burn you in the long run. By the time there are enough games that support RT these cards wouldn't be able to manage acceptable frame rates anyway. And repeat after me..... "3 games in almost a year". And lol Young Blood is launching without RT, like probably 90% of the future games.
 
Last edited:

thelastword

Banned
The industry needs competition on the top end,but companies have to earn my money.If AMD has a product compelling enough, I will buy it, but I won't just hand my money over because it's not Nvidia.
Of course you shouldn't buy a card, just because it's not Nvidia, but AMD has many compelling GPU's in the past and they have some right now.....It may not be in the bracket you're looking for...….You mentioned you want something in the high end, but typically most cards sell at the $200-400 range, so AMD launched that first especially before the holidays, so they can move enough units to make a profit...….

High end guys have usually swore on Nvidia because they claimed the crown in the last few years.....However AMD has had the fastest card in the past and if we look at NAVI, it's fast enough where everybody and their grandma's know that bigger dies are coming...…..So they do have the DNA to take the top spot again...…..I guess from your post I deduced that you would be willing to buy wherever the best high end cards are....Yet I've seen too often that people talk about high end, which is about pushing high framerates and rez, but if AMD gives us a card which is superfast and does just that on the high end, they come back and say it does not have raytracing, which actually butchers the high rez and framerates they seek......I was just asking if you were one of those and if you favor RTX in a few games over raw performance....?

In essence, it is clear that AMD has faster NAvI cards coming that will take on , 2080 Super, 2080ti etc.....but they won't have RT in 3 games, because that is not viable yet...

So much of a market that it was discontinued like 5 months after release?

There's no market. Nobody gives a shit about Radeon 7.. and even less so now with Navi out. 🤷‍♂️
Tbf, AMD has not given an official statement confirming that...….Let's be honest, there are Radeon VII's readily available in the market still...…..However there are products placed on shelves with shorter shelf lives than others.....Turing is a brand new architecture and after 10 months they are already phasing out the 2070 and 2080...…..Vega was not new, AMD just placed it on 7nm, gave it lots of Vram and bandwidth and it's a content creators dream, better than $1200 and $2500 NV cards in that aspect, so there is a market, it's also the best Mining card out there atm...So we should not assume that there's no market outside of gaming, where even then, Radeon 7 is also a very good 4k card on the 2080's level or above in gaming, typical for Vega, once you undervolt and OC......

I don't think you should get a Radeon 7 now just for pure gaming, because AMD has some really fast beasts coming, that focuses on just gaming, but if you are a content creator or miner who games, Radeon 7 is a prized value at $679...….So yes there is a market...….

It depends on your budget, and what you are currently running. If you are on a 1080Ti there is no point to uprade now. If you are not then wait for custom AIB 5700XTs and see then? They should be so close to 2070 S/2080 the $100-$300 difference would't be worth it. And Radeon Image Sharpening is amazing.

It makes DLSS look like a gimmick. And imo buying nVidia RTX thinking RT is a feature is just going to burn you in the long run. By the time there are enough games that support RT these cards wouldn't be able to manage acceptable frame rates anyway. And repeat after me..... "3 games in almost 2 year". And lol Young Blood is launching without RT, like probably 90% of the future games.
Get outta here....Young Blood does not have RT at launch? I thought it just worked? Someone told me that every game coming out from here on out will have RTX...…..I can remember the same thing happened with SOTTR, lots of talk at CES, but the game did not launch with the feature....So out of the three RTX games that exists after 10 months, the only one which supported the feature at launch was Metro?...….I guess devs see how much traction RTX has and they are prioritizing the feature :messenger_smirking: …..
 

Bl@de

Member
I bought my custom 1080 Ti in May 2017 for 800€. Now I can buy a custom 2080 Super for the same price. Maybe 10-15% faster and 27% less VRAM ... After 2 years ... Amazing.

405e54536d69745e7b36a28076276ca627f69179184a2d63f5bc2fba5d8b0b5b.jpg
 

Ellery

Member
It is fascinating how Nvidia advertises the new SUPER cards Founders Edition at certain price points but I have never seen them available at all. Feels like a huge scam lol
 

888

Member
Is it worth ditching for the new AMD? My mate been telling me all about the new AMD and how it’s cheaper and better than all of this. Came to see what the real deal thinks

AMD is generally cheaper but usually falls lower on the benchmarks. Can’t say I’ve ever been fond of their driver suite. Then there is the other Nvidia features some care about like Ansel, Shadow Play etc being built in to the driver but then some hate GeForce Experience. its all a trade off.

Me personally I typically stick with Nvidia and just for the 2070 Super and it’s been crazy awesome compared to the 1070 for higher refresh rates and even some 4K 60 games.
 

Mista

Banned
AMD is generally cheaper but usually falls lower on the benchmarks. Can’t say I’ve ever been fond of their driver suite. Then there is the other Nvidia features some care about like Ansel, Shadow Play etc being built in to the driver but then some hate GeForce Experience. its all a trade off.

Me personally I typically stick with Nvidia and just for the 2070 Super and it’s been crazy awesome compared to the 1070 for higher refresh rates and even some 4K 60 games.
I was hoping you’re the one that’ll reply. Thank you friend, I’ll stick to Nvidia
 
  • Like
Reactions: 888

888

Member
I was hoping you’re the one that’ll reply. Thank you friend, I’ll stick to Nvidia

My only issue with Nvidia is pricing but that’s part of the Market. I may not really buy AMD anymore but I do like the competition they bring. Just wish they were getting the same results with the GPU as they are the CPUs.

Until they release something that really gets my interest I’ll stick with Nvidia when they are being competitive like they are with the 2060 and 2070 super. I think their hands were tied with the 2080 since they couldn’t get too close to the TI since it wasn’t getting a refresh.
 
Hooray monopolies!

AMD is killing it in the CPU game but their GPUs remain underwhelming.

I think this is a false narrative. Had a 3700x. Was incredibly disappointed to find it can't run the game I play 90% of the time because of an issue amd should have caught. Performance was much more consistent than my 7600k at 5ghz but framerates still don't compete on the high end with the 9700k/9900k. Returned because of said incompatibility with Destiny 2 for a 9700k and a vastly superior cooler. Only paid $60 more total and got 5-10% more performance. I'm happy.

Meanwhile, they've launched redundant products like the 3600x and 3800x to cash in. Intel is still king for pure gaming cpus at this very moment. Value-wise, 3600 may be king, (and 3700x, 3900x if you really need the multitasking ooomph) but for what I do, they still haven't topped Intel. Bought into the hype and was burned.

On the flip side, Navi which was getting tons of bad press prior to launch for running hotter/less energy efficient than we were originally led to believe, is actually the uncontested champ in frames per dollar, which is all I really care about.
 

lukilladog

Member
I think this is a false narrative. Had a 3700x. Was incredibly disappointed to find it can't run the game I play 90% of the time because of an issue amd should have caught. Performance was much more consistent than my 7600k at 5ghz but framerates still don't compete on the high end with the 9700k/9900k. Returned because of said incompatibility with Destiny 2 for a 9700k and a vastly superior cooler. Only paid $60 more total and got 5-10% more performance. I'm happy.

Meanwhile, they've launched redundant products like the 3600x and 3800x to cash in. Intel is still king for pure gaming cpus at this very moment. Value-wise, 3600 may be king, (and 3700x, 3900x if you really need the multitasking ooomph) but for what I do, they still haven't topped Intel. Bought into the hype and was burned.

On the flip side, Navi which was getting tons of bad press prior to launch for running hotter/less energy efficient than we were originally led to believe, is actually the uncontested champ in frames per dollar, which is all I really care about.

You seem to be generalizing from personal experience and a bug in a single game. Also, when frame rates are this close and this big, no one would be able to tell a difference in a blind test, so it seems very unfair to say that frame rates are not competitive:

 
Last edited:
You seem to be generalizing from personal experience and a bug in a single game. Also, when frame rates are this close and this big, no one would be able to tell a difference in a blind test, so it seems very unfair to say that frame rates are not competitive:


It's not generalizing from personal experience when it's happened to tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands?) that are trying to run Linux or destiny 2. It affects all Ryzen 3000 chips and the problem is still being troubleshooted more than 2 weeks later with no concrete date for a fix in sight.

And if the different isn't perceptible, why upgrade from a ryzen 2000 to a 3000? I've heard of the concept of diminishing returns but there is a difference even at 1440p and framerates well under 144hz--easily seen and appreciated by any semi-competitive or enthusiast gamer.

Why do you think Gamer's nexus still recommends the 9700k as their gaming cpu of choice?

Also, tech power up has been known to favor amd cpus because they rep 'value' over anything, and they don't measure. 1% lows which favors the 9700k in almost all cases. I don't have a horse in this race...I had not returned the 3700x when I bought and installed the 9700k, and at the time believed the fix would be in soon for my D2 problem. Even if it had been, I wouldn't have kept it, as I only game (no streaming, productivity). I just think that based on objective data, the 9700k is still the best bang for buck gaming cpu if you have more than $200 to spend
 
Last edited:

Se_7_eN

Member
Damn it!

I was really hopeful for this card, guess I will have to wait until the next release for my new build.

I am sad.
 

Spukc

always chasing the next thrill
It depends on your budget, and what you are currently running. If you are on a 1080Ti there is no point to uprade now. If you are not then wait for custom AIB 5700XTs and see then? They should be so close to 2070 S/2080 the $100-$300 difference would't be worth it. And Radeon Image Sharpening is amazing.

It makes DLSS look like a gimmick. And imo buying nVidia RTX thinking RT is a feature is just going to burn you in the long run. By the time there are enough games that support RT these cards wouldn't be able to manage acceptable frame rates anyway. And repeat after me..... "3 games in almost a year". And lol Young Blood is launching without RT, like probably 90% of the future games.
Are you selling us not to buy RTX cards or yourself?
 

Leonidas

Member
Damn it!

I was really hopeful for this card, guess I will have to wait until the next release for my new build.

I am sad.

What were you hoping for exactly? The specs were revealed with the other Super cards, 4.3% more cores at higher clock speeds. 6% improvement over the standard 2080 is about as good as anyone should have hoped for. It's the second fastest consumer GPU and fastest GPU at $699.
 

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
What were you hoping for exactly? The specs were revealed with the other Super cards, 4.3% more cores at higher clock speeds. 6% improvement over the standard 2080 is about as good as anyone should have hoped for. It's the second fastest consumer GPU and fastest GPU at $699.
Based on the previous Supers, 10% - 12% was a reasonable expectation. Most were hoping that it would shorten the gap between the vanilla 2080 and 2080 Ti. That didn't happen. That's why people are underwhelmed.

The best thing that can potentially come out is retailers offering some discounts on vanilla 2080. I wouldn't be surprised to see some vanilla 2080s sell for as low as $550. Maybe even lower.

Would it be worth selling my 2080 , taking that money(probably 600/650) and then upgrading to... a 2080 super and then OCing that?
No offense dude, but have you even bothered to read the comments in this thread or looked at a single review? If you had, it should be completely obvious that it would not be remotely close to worth it to do that.

Plus you're dreaming if you expect to get $600/$650 for a vanilla 2080. Nobody is going to offer that when they can get a brand new 2080 super for $699 OR they will likely get a vanilla 2080 for cheaper.
 
Last edited:

Leonidas

Member
Either way, the 2080 Super could have and should have been more.

Could have been, but the card still serves it's purpose, it's replacing 2080, faster and the same price(or $100 cheaper comparing FE). It's the fastest gaming GPU at $699 today, 15% faster than Radeon VII which launched only 5 months ago... would it have been better and more exciting if it was even faster or even more cheaper? Sure? But the same could be said about a lot of things...
 
Last edited:

lukilladog

Member
It's not generalizing from personal experience when it's happened to tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands?) that are trying to run Linux or destiny 2. It affects all Ryzen 3000 chips and the problem is still being troubleshooted more than 2 weeks later with no concrete date for a fix in sight.

And if the different isn't perceptible, why upgrade from a ryzen 2000 to a 3000? I've heard of the concept of diminishing returns but there is a difference even at 1440p and framerates well under 144hz--easily seen and appreciated by any semi-competitive or enthusiast gamer.

Why do you think Gamer's nexus still recommends the 9700k as their gaming cpu of choice?

Also, tech power up has been known to favor amd cpus because they rep 'value' over anything, and they don't measure. 1% lows which favors the 9700k in almost all cases. I don't have a horse in this race...I had not returned the 3700x when I bought and installed the 9700k, and at the time believed the fix would be in soon for my D2 problem. Even if it had been, I wouldn't have kept it, as I only game (no streaming, productivity). I just think that based on objective data, the 9700k is still the best bang for buck gaming cpu if you have more than $200 to spend

Ok, you are not generalizing from personal experience but from a bug that affects a small minority. I don´t know what´s the best bang for buck processor for gaming because I don´t even know the prices, other than AMD is more affordable, still you are not explaining why a difference of 5-10% in frame rates is not a competence, I gave my reason why it is and I can also add that most people plays at 60fps so both processors are pretty much a match for that.
 

manfestival

Member
No offense dude, but have you even bothered to read the comments in this thread or looked at a single review? If you had, it should be completely obvious that it would not be remotely close to worth it to do that.

Plus you're dreaming if you expect to get $600/$650 for a vanilla 2080. Nobody is going to offer that when they can get a brand new 2080 super for $699 OR they will likely get a vanilla 2080 for cheaper.
No need to be so intense. I have actually watched videos and reviews on it the performance of the 2080. Anyways it is just the third release of the 1080ti at the end of the day. Should I just OC my 2080 to get max performance? I have never OCed anything
 

SonGoku

Member
Would it be worth selling my 2080 , taking that money(probably 600/650) and then upgrading to... a 2080 super and then OCing that?
If you don't mind the hassle of selling and only lose $50, I'd say go for it, the upgrade is worth $50 at most.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 17706

Unconfirmed Member
I'm still just going to stick with my GTX 1080. Should've got a 1080 Ti in hindsight, but I didn't expect the RTX cards to be such an underwhelming upgrade. Oh well, maybe next year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

SonGoku

Member
One thing that triggers me is these youtubers pretending to be annoyed over getting a free $700 GPU. I mean comon imagine complaining about getting paid $700 to do a 10 minute video before even accounting ad revenue.
 

llien

Member
Just wish they were getting the same results with the GPU as they are the CPUs.
Navi is pretty much first gen Ryzen story, beats competition on both perf/$ AND perf/watt.

And surely people are free to opt for more expensive product with beloved sticker.
As of course corresponding pricing department reacts accordingly.

People actually stick with the brand in other markets as well, it's natural.

Nobody is at wrong here, peace and harmony.
 

Ovek

7Member7
After my PowerColor Red Devil 5700xt died on its fucking arse I decided to replace it with ROG Strix 2080 super as I got a really quite reasonable price in the UK.

I still think RTX ray tracing isn’t worth the performance hit. Other than that it’s a really nice card and shocker the gfx driver hasn’t managed to crash once.
 
Top Bottom