• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Urgent advice before I commit and send my money.

Chris.

Chris.

Chris.

Associate
Joined
3 Oct 2010
Posts
477
I have £7-800 to spend on a GPU in my budget, im torn between the Vega 7, the 2080 super, or possibly something a little more budget in the new Navi architecture.

I also want something sleek and not over the top, similar to a founders edition type reference card, black with subtle or no lighting. I suppose the Vega silver wouldn't look too bad. The rest of the build will be Jet black in a H700i and cable mod carbon cables so want this to blend in.

What would you guys go for, why, thank you all in advance for the advice.

Quite like the look of ZT-T20820F-10P, but there may be a better priced or more powerful card im missing with the same aesthetic.

Rest of the build will be X470-3800x-8pack 3200 DDR4 (probably will settle for the 3700 though as I cant see the point in spending the TDP for such little gains).

Want to place the order this evening before I change my mind (I'm a guilty spender!)
 
Forgot to say.

Casual gamer, mild content creation via creative cloud and have a 4K monitor. Would like as much detail at 4K as possible in Gaming.
 
Well I'd go for a 2070S and save a few bob for the next upgrade, but I have a GSync panel so I'm locked in.

I don't think the extra few fps the 2080S has over the 2070S is worth the extra outlay.
 
I should mention actually I have a freesync monitor! Forgot that too hence why AMD is in the running.

I currently have an RX480 in my old rig.

How do people rate the Navi offering, the price point and specs suggest they are in a lower league than the RTX but the footage of live tests shows it seems to keep up well?
 
Kelt said:
Well I'd go for a 2070S and save a few bob for the next upgrade, but I have a GSync panel so I'm locked in.

I don't think the extra few fps the 2080S has over the 2070S is worth the extra outlay.
Click to expand...

Have to agree. 2070S, save money and put it towards your next upgrade at the beginning of 2021. (God that seems a long way away!)

Or just go 2080ti for £949 and be happy for 2 years or more.

5700XT and save your money then?!
 
Chris. said:
I should mention actually I have a freesync monitor! Forgot that too hence why AMD is in the running.

I currently have an RX480 in my old rig.

How do people rate the Navi offering, the price point and specs suggest they are in a lower league than the RTX but the footage of live tests shows it seems to keep up well?
Click to expand...

Well if your panel isn't Gsync compatible then you should go for an AMD product I would have thought, as mentioned, the 5700XT.
 
Having agonised over the current gen NV cards (g-sync/Nvidiot here) I will say that the difference between the 2070s and 2080s while not significant MAY be significant to YOU and your eyes depending how sensitive they are as the 5-6fps difference at 4k for a few AAA games at high/ultra is the difference between 54-55fps and 60fps.

So while the above sentiments about value for performance hold true for the 2070S, especially at 4k it is only just a 4k (remember it's a fraction behind a 1080Ti which while getting close was not a defacto 4k card that everyone wanted/needed) with some potential detail sacrifice in the settings.

Or put another way it's a 4K card in the literall NOW, with little to no breathing room for incrementally tougher titles, whatever/whenever they may be.

The 2080S however sits more comfortably as 4K card beating the 1080Ti by 10-15%. It also has very fast memory that can be OC'd to 18Gb/s which may prove useful at higher resolutions.

Overclock the core and it almost (though not truly quite) nips on the heels of the 2080Ti.

Food for thought, FWIW i'd get the 2080S with your above requirements and budget.
 
Last edited:
3t3P said:
Having agonised over the current gen NV cards (g-sync/Nvidiot here) I will say that the difference between the 2070s and 2080s while not significant MAY be significant to YOU and you eyes as the 5-6fps difference at 4k for a few AAA games at high/ultra is the difference between 54fps and 60fps.

So while the above sentiments about value for performance hold true for the 2070S, especially at 4k it is only just a 4k with detail sacrifice.

The 2080S however site more comfortably as 4K card beating the 1080Ti by 10-15%. It also has very fast memory that can be OC'd to 18Gb/s which may prove useful at higher resolutions.

Food for thought, FWIW i'd get the 2080S with your above requirements and budget.
Click to expand...

Will I miss Freesync?

Although saying this im stuck at Freesync 1 and the monitor isn't the best (UE590) so may be an upgrade on the cards at some point.

Im watching benchmarking with the 5700XT and its suprising me to be honest. And it definitely fits my brief re the looks.

So I suppose its now 2080S vs Saving a bit, and keeping freesync with the 5700XT
 
If you're asking the question will you miss Freesync then the answer likely is yes.

I've been done with screen tearing for years. To go back to that mess i'd pull my eyes out!

4K is not a res I believe in, I frequently spout my enthusiasm for 21:9 aspect ratio monitors as being far more immersive AND easier to drive.
 
3t3P said:
If you're asking the question will you miss Freesync then the answer likely is yes.

I've been done with screen tearing for years. To go back to that mess i'd pull my eyes out!

4K is not a res I believe in, I frequently spout my enthusiasm for 21:9 aspect ratio monitors as being far more immersive AND easier to drive.
Click to expand...
Love my 21:9 1440p. I'd never go back to 16:9
 
sideways14a said:
If you have a gsync screen go nvidia, if you have a freesync screen then AMD.
There is not much difference between a 2070s, 5700xt and a 2080.
Click to expand...

Vega 7 avg 1400mhz core boost *750, mem16384mb 1000mhz hbm2 streamx3840
650-700
5700xt core 1650-1770/1905-2010 mem 8192mb@14000m 2560 stream proc gddr6
450-550
2080s-boost @ approx 1845, mem8192@15550 gddr6 cuda cores 3072
600-800
2070s boost appr1815, mem8192@14000c cudax2560 gddr6
500-600

Some notes ive been taking while shopping.

There really isnt a big difference, just the price. If its between the comparable price ranges the 5700XT seems to trump the 2070.
If I compare it to the 2080, the price of my three choices which are the 750-800 mark aren't really justifying the memory boost. The additional cores and some of the additional functionality sound great but to be honest they haven't been taken on by the industry just yet.

Its going to have to be 5700XT. Thanks guys for all the prompt advice. Think Im going to order the rest of the rig and have it running on the 480 for a short while until the specs of some of the new partner cards come out as the new ASUS matt black one looks nice. If it has decent specs at that price ill jump at it.
 
Chris. said:
Will I miss Freesync?

Although saying this im stuck at Freesync 1 and the monitor isn't the best (UE590) so may be an upgrade on the cards at some point.

Im watching benchmarking with the 5700XT and its suprising me to be honest. And it definitely fits my brief re the looks.

So I suppose its now 2080S vs Saving a bit, and keeping freesync with the 5700XT
Click to expand...

i have both 5700XT and a 2070super and both of them are able to enable freesync on my eizo monitor. nvidia updated the drivers months back to allow freesync on their cards.

would personally buy a red devil and pocket the change until the next wave of cards hits next year.
 
Chris. said:
I have £7-800 to spend on a GPU in my budget, im torn between the Vega 7, the 2080 super, or possibly something a little more budget in the new Navi architecture.

I also want something sleek and not over the top, similar to a founders edition type reference card, black with subtle or no lighting. I suppose the Vega silver wouldn't look too bad. The rest of the build will be Jet black in a H700i and cable mod carbon cables so want this to blend in.

What would you guys go for, why, thank you all in advance for the advice.

Quite like the look of ZT-T20820F-10P, but there may be a better priced or more powerful card im missing with the same aesthetic.

Rest of the build will be X470-3800x-8pack 3200 DDR4 (probably will settle for the 3700 though as I cant see the point in spending the TDP for such little gains).

Want to place the order this evening before I change my mind (I'm a guilty spender!)
Click to expand...


The MSI 5700xt Gaming X sounds like a decent option with no thrills & it's well under budget, I wouldn't touch a Vega VII now we are moving on from GCN, I sold mine several weeks back & went for a slightly slower 5700XT Red Devil to play around with. From Nvidia your budget would allow for a 2070s or 2080 which is faster & adds Ray Tracing to the options, Personally I'd look at the Zotac range as you get a full 5 year warranty if you register the card with Zotac not long after purchase.

EDIT: I just had a quick look at your reference code & yes I'd look at getting that as AMD have nothing to compete with it so my two choices would be the Zotac as the faster top money option or a 5700XT like the MSI Gaming X which offers the aesthetics you want as the budget choice.
 
Last edited:
3t3P said:
4K is not a res I believe in, I frequently spout my enthusiasm for 21:9 aspect ratio monitors as being far more immersive AND easier to drive.
Click to expand...
Except 16:9 fills much more of your visual space than a 21:9 (assuming same total cm2 area). 16:9 is much more immersive than 21:9 if the same size overall.

Why do you think 16:9 was developed? Because it is the closest to the view we see (or at least focus on) with our vision.

Yet another has been sold a 21:9 marketing lie.
 
beany_bot said:
Except 16:9 fills much more of your visual space than a 21:9 (assuming same total cm2 area). 16:9 is much more immersive than 21:9 if the same size overall.

Why do you think 16:9 was developed? Because it is the closest to the view we see (or at least focus on) with our vision.

Yet another has been sold a 21:9 marketing lie.
Click to expand...
When I first got my UW monitor running I tried a racing game and literally felt sucked into the game like I had a VR headset on. Ive never felt that with any 16:9 monitor I've owned.

Even if you were right a out the theory of 16:9 being what we see it's not what I and others as humans FEEL when using UW. That's all that matters

Have you actually tried it?
 
Last edited:
3t3P said:
When I first got my UW monitor running I tried a raving game and literally felt sucked into the game like I had a VR headset on. Ive never felt that with any 16:9 monitor I've owned.

Even if you were right a out the theory of 16:9 being what we see it's not what I and others as humans FEEL when using UW. That's all that matters

Have you actually tried it?
Click to expand...
Yes, I had one (sold it later to a friend). It's fine, better than a monitor of the same height (which is what 99% of people go from) so obviously people think its better.
But it's not as immersive as a 16:9 of similar screen real estate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom