• 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.

RTX2060?

Angel_Rex

Angel_Rex

Angel_Rex

Associate
Joined
8 Dec 2004
Posts
878
Location
Brighton - East Sussex
Ok, forget the name. Look at the performance.

Am I missing something? This thing is basically the (back in the day bang for buck) GTX970, all be it £40 more. Yet I've seen hardly any posts anywhere on it?

It's quicker than a vega 56, 1070, 1070ti, vega 64 and 1080 when overclocked (for the most part).

It runs cooler and in my opinion is a no brainer over the 2070?

So, wassup? Any negatives? (Aside from the poor naming - inferring that it's a 1060 replacement).
 
When overclocked the Vega 56/64/1080 are all faster and come with 8gb Vram as does the 1070/ti. From what i have seen the 2060 sometimes suffers in the lows. I would take a Vega 56 over it any day and just unlock the extra power with a few clicks. In the main peoples problem with the 2060 is the 6gb of Vram which is not enough for the money. The RTX features of the 2060 are pretty much useless as well.
 
Agreed, forget RTX, they shouldnt have put that in TBH.

I hear 6GB VRAM - but after reading that I wasn't too bothered - https://www.techspot.com/article/1785-nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-vram-enough/

I see the Vega 64 is £400 and the 1080 is £500 if you can even find it. The 2070FE is clocked higher than AIB and is £550 odd. 2070 AIB are £450, making it £120 more? So OC a 2060 @ £329 to a 2070 AIB level to me seems a good call.

I've not played with a VEGA 56, so couldn't comment but at £300 if it runs cooler and overclocks better, you're talking the same speed between a 2060 OC & OC 56.

I'm not trolling here, genuinely interested as everyone seems to be bashing them!

VRAM1.png
 
Last edited:
Some games at 1080p are bordering on needing 6gb Vram. It's hard to recommend the 2060 at £300 due to this. It's certainly pretty fast but could be hindered very soon so a Vega 56 makes more sense. I think it's peoples principals as well as we have had 8gb cards in this price section for around 4 years now. The 1060 was cheaper and had 6gb so people would be wanting more in there minds as well.
 
TheRealDeal said:
Some games at 1080p are bordering on needing 6gb Vram. It's hard to recommend the 2060 at £300 due to this. It's certainly pretty fast but could be hindered very soon so a Vega 56 makes more sense. I think it's peoples principals as well as we have had 8gb cards in this price section for around 4 years now. The 1060 was cheaper and had 6gb so people would be wanting more in there minds as well.
Click to expand...

So, are the tech spot result wrong?
 
Why isn't it more loved?

Vega 56 is currently cheaper, as fast or faster (if you are prepared to put on the work), has more memory and comes with 3 games.

6GB might be enough, but I have been at the wrong end of the stick with 4GB in the past and the games were unplayable, I rather wouldn't risk it.
 
Angel_Rex said:
So, are the tech spot result wrong?
Click to expand...

They're basing it on right now and on that basis they're largely right. Although I think there's some evidence it drops out at 4k in the latest AC game

How long do you plan on keeping the card and resolution do you see yourself gaming at in the next 2-3-4 years. If you think you'll stay at 1080p you'll probably be set. If you're going to game at 1440p then your minimums will drop down to a stutter as texture sizes increase. In which case you may wish you went for the 8gb 'slower' card

This is a good example of 4gb cards failing at 1440p today. Well in 2 years time that will probably be 6gb cards

 
All good points! I opted for the 2060 (as fast and cooler). I game at 1440 medium settings in fast paced games, so I'm not bothered by eye candy as such. Apex and pubg I'm getting 144fps - I was planning on the card lasting 2 years - overclocked it to the stock 2070 speed.
 
Hi there

Consumers are put of by 6Gb of VRAM, right or wrong its a major stumbling point for many consumers. As such people feel it may not be so future proof due to the VRAM limitation.
There are games out now which utilise more than 6GB VRAM, the next phase of consoles will no doubt have 8GB of VRAM or more and as most games are ports that could also pose an issue.

Also the cheaper 2060's have poor coolers and to be frank look cheap, the better cooled solutions are north of £350.

As such many consumers will look at the options and the Sapphire Vega 56 Pulse is not only under £300, it has 8GB VRAM, AMD are also known for continuously extracting more performance from their products and once under volt a Vega 56 runs reasonably quiet and is knocking on the door at Vega 64 performance.

Both are fantastic cards, but its fair to say, particular for OcUK customers that Vega 56 is the peoples favourite and the three FREE games are a real sweetener to the deal.

If it was my own personal money I'd personally spend as such:
Under £150 - RX 570
Under £200 - RX 580
Under £250 - RX 590
Under £300 - Vega 56
Under £400 - Vega 64
Under £500 - RTX 2070
Under £650 - RTX 2080
Under £800 - Vega 7
Under £1000 - RTX 2080 Ti


AMD is incredibly strong in the sub £400 price bracket due to Vega.
 
I'm currently looking at a replacement for my excellent 480. I'm swinging between a Vega 56 and a 2060, and right now the 2060 seems like an easier choice. From reading reviews round the web, it looks like some Vega cards need tweaking before they can perform reliably even out of the box - which isn't really acceptable for a consumer product. That seems to be limited to reference models (like the MSI Air Boost) but I'm not sure.

Now I'm not trashing Vega, because I know a lot of people are happy with them and I might purchase one (I'd rather stay all AMD in my rig), but the 2060 does seem like the easier option for gaming right now. GamersNexus sums it up as thus in their 2060 review:

  • At $350, for someone who wants to open a box and use the product, the RTX 2060 is a good choice and stronger than NVIDIA’s previous positioning, but its pricing structure and naming scheme have again migrated north.
  • At $350, for someone who enjoys tweaking and overclocking, the RX Vega 56 cards get our firm recommendation. We recently pushed Vega 56 to RTX 2070 performance and had a blast doing it. Our version of this was completely impractical (in that it may kill the card faster than otherwise), but it’s the most fun we’ve had OCing a card in recent launches. For the folks who care less about straight gaming performance and care more about enthusiast tweaking, Vega 56 takes an easy victory. NVIDIA is simply too locked-down to win in this category.
Click to expand...

https://www.gamersnexus.net/hwrevie...-founders-edition-review-benchmark-vs-vega-56

My goal is great performance from day one; any possibility of tweaking later on is more of a bonus. Still, the prices keep dropping on the Vega 56 and the 2060 remains static....

If anyone has a link to a really easy Vega 56 overclocking/undervolting tutorial that would be fab.
 
Last edited:
I would have gone vega7 or 2080 if I had the money!

I bought from OCUK and always do, so either way you got my money

Its annoying that the Vega cards were horrifically expensive and only just being binned off now at a lower price.

The heat and power draw of vega doesn't bother me, but I saw one post asking the extra electricity cost over two years of vega Vs Nvidia.

My gtx970 from OCUK was bought in 2014 and I've only just upgraded now. I recon it will last a good 3 years and sensible settings

That hardware box also did a review of the 2060 and said he would take it over the Vega 56 but not at £300, it then comes to personal preference.

Thanks for the info and replies, it's interesting to see the general consensus. Will be interested to see what Navi brings!


As for the cooler, the zotac keeps it at 66c full load after 3 hours of gaming.
 
Last edited:
Gibbo said:
Hi there

Consumers are put of by 6Gb of VRAM, right or wrong its a major stumbling point for many consumers. As such people feel it may not be so future proof due to the VRAM limitation.
There are games out now which utilise more than 6GB VRAM, the next phase of consoles will no doubt have 8GB of VRAM or more and as most games are ports that could also pose an issue.

Also the cheaper 2060's have poor coolers and to be frank look cheap, the better cooled solutions are north of £350.

As such many consumers will look at the options and the Sapphire Vega 56 Pulse is not only under £300, it has 8GB VRAM, AMD are also known for continuously extracting more performance from their products and once under volt a Vega 56 runs reasonably quiet and is knocking on the door at Vega 64 performance.

Both are fantastic cards, but its fair to say, particular for OcUK customers that Vega 56 is the peoples favourite and the three FREE games are a real sweetener to the deal.

If it was my own personal money I'd personally spend as such:
Under £150 - RX 570
Under £200 - RX 580
Under £250 - RX 590
Under £300 - Vega 56
Under £400 - Vega 64
Under £500 - RTX 2070
Under £650 - RTX 2080
Under £800 - Vega 7
Under £1000 - RTX 2080 Ti


AMD is incredibly strong in the sub £400 price bracket due to Vega.
Click to expand...

How is this reflective in sales, ie under £400 what percent of Sales are AMD hitting for you?
 
TheRealDeal said:
Some games at 1080p are bordering on needing 6gb Vram.\
Click to expand...


No, some games allocate more VRAm and don;t bother gargabge collecting if there is enough VRAm available.

As problem multiple times, the 2060 runs out of grunt a long way before it runs out of VRAM.
 
Gibbo said:
Hi there

Consumers are put of by 6Gb of VRAM, right or wrong its a major stumbling point for many consumers. As such people feel it may not be so future proof due to the VRAM limitation.
There are games out now which utilise more than 6GB VRAM, the next phase of consoles will no doubt have 8GB of VRAM or more and as most games are ports that could also pose an issue.

Also the cheaper 2060's have poor coolers and to be frank look cheap, the better cooled solutions are north of £350.

As such many consumers will look at the options and the Sapphire Vega 56 Pulse is not only under £300, it has 8GB VRAM, AMD are also known for continuously extracting more performance from their products and once under volt a Vega 56 runs reasonably quiet and is knocking on the door at Vega 64 performance.

Both are fantastic cards, but its fair to say, particular for OcUK customers that Vega 56 is the peoples favourite and the three FREE games are a real sweetener to the deal.

If it was my own personal money I'd personally spend as such:
Under £150 - RX 570
Under £200 - RX 580
Under £250 - RX 590
Under £300 - Vega 56
Under £400 - Vega 64
Under £500 - RTX 2070
Under £650 - RTX 2080
Under £800 - Vega 7
Under £1000 - RTX 2080 Ti


AMD is incredibly strong in the sub £400 price bracket due to Vega.
Click to expand...
+1
 
From a business perspective I understand that. EOL product, push it out now before Navi later in the year. There are far fewer Vega's available now, heck the price will probably creep back up to £330 in the coming months, then cut again around Navi in October.

Unless you game at Ultra settings and need that extra Vram, I don't see how at medium settings two identical speed cards (one with 6gb and one with 8gb) would be that different. When things slow down - like my gtx970 did - Pubg medium settings were 70-80fps. Now its 170fps all medium. If my GTX970 had 8gb ram, not the silly 3.5gb it had, I wouldn't see a massive improvement. If I tweaked a Vega 56 and ran the same settings - I don't think it would be faster just because of the vram - at the same settings. Sure when it kicks into higher textures they are needed!

As long as everyone is happy, that's great. I'm pleased we still have AMD for the competition and can't wait to see what navi brings!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom