The best price v performance GPU out of these four

[medi01]

he's in Australia

No, he's from Ohio, USA.

GPU scarcity in Australia is surprising though, but they still seem to have some stuff.

 

[cucker tarlson]

No, he's from Ohio, USA.

GPU scarcity in Australia is surprising though, but they still seem to have some stuff.

then why the hell is he asking for $500 AUD card

the OP !!!!!!

Jesus H. Christ!

and what does eur price have to do with Ohio anyway ?

 

[64K]

An RTX 2060 is a good card for 1080p. If you want 120Hz or 144Hz gaming then not so good.

 

[Deleted member 67555]

I'm on a 1070ti right now and it struggles at 2560x1440 at stock speeds (1680)...I wouldn't recommend it or anything slower at this point...
Can't remember what I'm OC'd at but it boosts to 2107Ghz and it just keeps up with 2560x1440.. Just... And I have to thin some stuff down to high settings.

1080p 144hz is even doubtful.

 

[trog100]

No. Plenty of games can run ultra settings at 60 fps with mid-range gpus and 1080p (isnt it odd that is the predominant class of card being sold and most common resolution?).

A fools game is incessantly overbuying to neuter your cards, not running ultra settings at 1080p (w/e res).

Sure, they dont need to be set there, but we didnt buy a PC to have it look like a console either.

i am happy with an average fps of 75 -ish... i turn down my "ultra" desktop machine to give me this in games and run a 75 fps frame rate cap to get a constant 75 fps.. no ups or downs with no highs and lows..

with my 1070 or 1060 powered laptop machines i have both i may have to turn down the settings to get my desired constant 75 fps with no highs or lows..

in truth without doing still image side by side comparisons i really cant tell the difference between high very high and ultra settings in most games..

and as i have often said i buy stuff cos i can not because i need .. he he

and i still recon a 1070 is good card.. good enough for everything 1080 and with a few tweaks most things 1440..

looking like a console aint really got a lot to do with it.. tis a good line of argument though.. he he

as for RTX on lower powered cards.. its a waste of space with no sound reasons for paying extra money for it..

trog

 

[EarthDog]

i am happy with an average fps of 75 -ish... i turn down my "ultra" desktop machine to give me this in games and run a 75 fps frame rate cap to get a constant 75 fps.. no ups or downs with no highs and lows..

with my 1070 or 1060 powered laptop machines i habe both i may have to turn down the settings to get my desired constant 75 fps with no highs or lows..

in truth without doing still image side by side comparisons i really cant tell the difference between high very high and ultra settings in most games..

and as i have often said i buy stuff cos i can not because i need .. he he

and i still recon a 1070 is good card.. good enough for everything 1080 and with a few tweaks most things 1440..

looking like a console aint really got a lot to do with it.. tis a good line of argument though.. he he

as for RTX on lower powered cards.. its a waste of space with no sound reasons for paying extra money for it..

trog

Cool story.

I would imagine that users would think it is more silly to overspend and turn down settings when the rig is more than capable of producing the FPS needed with the settings on how the devs intended it to be (ultra). You are lucky you can do that, but you are, clearly, not part of the norm and many look at that choice and..............its just not for them.

I could care less about RTX. That really has little to do with the overall talking point that both AMD and NVIDIA mid-range cards can run Ultra settings at 1080p and reach that 60 FPS average in most titles (depends on the card and what we are calling mid-range too). Your assertion that ultra is for ultra cards is patently false considering the facts.

 

[64K]

The 2060 is a good card for 1080p.

 

[Vayra86]

i am happy with an average fps of 75 -ish... i turn down my "ultra" desktop machine to give me this in games and run a 75 fps frame rate cap to get a constant 75 fps.. no ups or downs with no highs and lows..

with my 1070 or 1060 powered laptop machines i have both i may have to turn down the settings to get my desired constant 75 fps with no highs or lows..

in truth without doing still image side by side comparisons i really cant tell the difference between high very high and ultra settings in most games..

and as i have often said i buy stuff cos i can not because i need .. he he

and i still recon a 1070 is good card.. good enough for everything 1080 and with a few tweaks most things 1440..

looking like a console aint really got a lot to do with it.. tis a good line of argument though.. he he

as for RTX on lower powered cards.. its a waste of space with no sound reasons for paying extra money for it..

trog

I feel like I'm back in 2014 right about now. Entertainment value ++ but other than that...

 

[EarthDog]

The 2060 is a good card for 1080p.
View attachment 123928

That shows...nothing. haha

I mean I get your point, but that doesn't show us shit. We need FPS at that resolution to see if it is hitting 60 FPS, not how it performs on average with other cards.

 

[bug]

An RTX 2060 is a good card for 1080p. If you want 120Hz or 144Hz gaming then not so good.

Yeah, resolution vs refresh rates is a bitch these days.
If you stick to 60fps, the 2060 is enough to play many titles in 4k with minimal IQ compromise. But as you have noted, go for 120Hz and suddenly the same 2060 is only good for FHD.

That shows...nothing. haha

I mean I get your point, but that doesn't show us shit. We need FPS at that resolution to see if it is hitting 60 FPS, not how it performs on average with other cards.

I have raised the issue of unplayable games before. I feel they shouldn't be a part of the overall performance graphs and maybe a second graph/page of game and resolutions a card can't handle could be added.
But I guess it's hard to draw the line when several cards are involved.

Back to the 2060FE, it doesn't break 60fps in many titles when maxxed out, but in many of them manages 40-50fps which leads me to believe it can get into playable territory with a little bit of tinkering.

 

[64K]

That shows...nothing. haha

I mean I get your point, but that doesn't show us shit. We need FPS at that resolution to see if it is hitting 60 FPS, not how it performs on average with other cards.

Well, it doesn't show us anything more than the average frame rate. That's true.

 

[EarthDog]

Well, it doesn't show us anything more than the average frame rate. That's true.

The average FPS was the talking point here, not relative performance between cards (which is what you showed us).

Back to the 2060FE, it doesn't break 60fps in many titles when maxxed out, but in many of them manages 40-50fps which leads me to believe it can get into playable territory with a little bit of tinkering.

No.

Please take a look at what 64K should have posted.

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Founders Edition 6 GB Review

NVIDIA's GeForce RTX 2060 doesn't seem cheap at $349, but this new card has enough steam to beat AMD's RX Vega lineup at better pricing and with much better power/heat/noise. Actually, the RTX 2060 obsoletes much of NVIDIA's GeForce 10 Pascal stack, too.

www.techpowerup.com

One title is 60 FPS. The other 20+ are way over that mark.


Anyway... done here on this slight tangent... I think its clear there are mid-range cards which can run AAA titles at 60 FPS average 1080p ultra (not maxed out, that can be different as on some games there are heavier options than ultra).

 

[trog100]

Cool story.

I would imagine that users would think it is more silly to overspend and turn down settings when the rig is more than capable of producing the FPS needed with the settings on how the devs intended it to be (ultra). You are lucky you can do that, but you are, clearly, not part of the norm and many look at that choice and..............its just not for them.

I could care less about RTX. That really has little to do with the overall talking point that both AMD and NVIDIA mid-range cards can run Ultra settings at 1080p and reach that 60 FPS average in most titles (depends on the card and what we are calling mid-range too). Your assertion that ultra is for ultra cards is patently false considering the facts.

quite a few games have a "normal" setting... some call it medium.. now we have high very high and ultra.. given a basic understanding of the English language.. ultra and normal dont mean the same.. utra aint f-cking normal it means extreme.. i stick to my definitions.. ultra settings should be for ultra hardware..

one game i can think of uses the term "crazy" for its highest settings..

crazy is as crazy does..

trog

 

[EarthDog]

quite a few games have a "normal" setting... some call it medium.. now we have high very high and ultra.. given a basic understanding of the English language.. ultra and normal dont mean the same.. utra aint f-cking normal it means extreme.. i stick to my definitions.. ultra settings should be for ultra hardware..

one game i can think of uses the term "crazy" for its highest settings..

crazy is as crazy does..

trog

Respectfully, I could care less how you choose to define it from what reality may be. That isn't the issue here. I don't care if you call it the highest default setting potato... it is what it is...

Again, Ultra settings (whatever the highest canned setting is).... a mid-range card can handle that as I linked earlier. Lick your wounds and move on.

 

[John Naylor]

GTX 1070 G1 OC $335 (Pre-owned)
GTX 1070 ti $460 (Pre-owned)
GTX 1660ti $410
RTX 2060 (475)

At your resolution (1080p), prepared a spreadsheet on straight performance versus dollars spent based upon TPU testing and rankings and accounting for the potential OC of each card. Some caveats involved.

1. The relative value of a card is much different for a used card versus a new card with regard to warrantee, efficiency, etc ... so it's unfair to compare the two value wise.

2. I don't know which brand / model cards are listed ... some cards are better performance, better fps, better cooling, lower noice, different efficiencies. For the sake of concictency and to insure a review of the same model existed for all 4, I used the MSI Gaming series cards

Overall Score = Summary Ranking of Reference Card in Latest TPU Review for 1660 Ti
Overclock = MSI Gaming X FPS Overclocked / Reference Card FPS
Price = OPs Listed Price
Relative Value = Score x Overclok x 1000 / Price

3. Used cards:

The used MSI 1070 Gaming had a relative ranking of 95.00% overclocked 10 %, a price of $335 which resulted in a relative value of 3.130
The used MSI 1070 Ti Gaming had a relative ranking of 109.00% overclocked 16 %, a price of $460 which resulted in a relative value of 2.757

4. Used cards:

The new MSI 1660 Ti Gaming had a relative ranking of 95.00% overclocked 16 %, a price of $410 which resulted in a relative value of 2.696
The new MSI 2060 Gaming had a relative ranking of 113.00% overclocked 12 %, a price of $475 which resulted in a relative value of 2.670

5. While the 1070 is the "value leader", given it's age (released June, 2016... 3 years ago) ... i wouldn't "go there". With the value of the other 3 being so close... the 2060 seems an easy choice.

File attached

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

you can get a vega 64 or 56 for that money , new, I would get that or wait for navi and get that. <opinion done and out

 

[Arctic]

you can get a vega 64 or 56 for that money , new, I would get that or wait for navi and get that. <opinion done and out

Not in Australia. I just checked and couldn't even find a Vega 64 in stock. Even if they were in stock, the cheapest was 749 AUD. Way over his budget.

Cheapest Vega 56 I could find in stock costs 627 AUD and comes with a blower cooler. Also quite a lot over 500 AUD.

MSI / Micro-Star RADEON RX VEGA 56 AIR BOOST 8G OC MSI RX Vega 56 8G ...

www.eyo.com.au

 

[Dovah88]

Get the latest chipset drivers from your motherboard manufacturers website, likely the ones on the disc are quite a bit out of date. Same with gpu etc, Windows 10 has a propensity to install drivers as well unless you change the setting yourself: control panel> system and security> system>advanced system settings>hardware> device installation settings.

Also check device manager to make sure there's no devices without driver installed, usually down by an exclamation mark in a triangle.

Monitor your cpu speed during gaming, the 7700k should be boosting up to 4.5ghz, check your ram speed and timings are correct for their rated speed, usually you just enable xmp in the bios. Both of these you can check using cpuz, or monitor in game usage with gpuz or msi afterburner. And just make sure there's nothing else running in the background using the CPU while your gaming.

If you're having the same issues that you had with single channel ram on your old system, you need to check if you installed your new ram in the correct slots for dual channel on your new motherboard(it will be in the mb manual). If you did install the ram in the correct slots, see below.

1. Did you do a clean install of windows after changing all those components? Changing out a motherboard & not clean installing windows can cause all sorts of problems from of driver conflicts.

2. After/if you clean install windows, go to the motherboard manufacturer's website and download the latest chipset driver and install it.

3. If both of those don't solve your issue, go back to the motherboard manufacturer's website and grab the newest bios update and update your bios.

You've put a rather small HSF on a notoriously hot CPU, and you also only indicate one exhaust fan.

The boost speed is only under load, not in BIOS. Should be 4.2 in BIOS.

For an intel part, unsure what other volts are needed besides Vcore.

Navi series will be announced at E3 in 2 weeks time, if its good, it can force NV to reduce prices on 2070 and below.

Announced in 3 weeks, availability when? For a rumored midrange set of cards that supposedly cost as much as rtx cards?

Good idea to wait if the OP has the time...I wouldn't hold my breath though.

This.

The other options are either old or offer far too little for what they do at this point in time. RTX 2060 or bust - and note that it only offers 59.3 FPS averages. Ubisofts' open world games are just like that, there is lots of dynamic LoD and drawing going on and its optimized around 60 FPS; most other games will be doing fár better than that. As always, you should base a GPU purchase off a wide suite of games/benches.

running everything fully maxed out is a fools game.. ultra settings should be for ultra hardware..

if you aint got ultra hardware ultra settings aint for you.. at least not in a sane world.. reviewers always use them for conformity but they aint compulsory..

trog

then why the hell is he asking for $500 AUD card

the OP !!!!!!

Jesus H. Christ!

and what does eur price have to do with Ohio anyway ?

Alright, I've finally managed to read through all the posts , they're all appreciated. And to answer some questions and clarification.

I'm based in Australia, not in Ohio as some have suggested. Because of this, GPU prices are really premium out this way (A brand new 1070 is still
$500-$650) as an example.

I'm looking to play Odyssey at Ultra settings @1080p 60hz (along with some older games like DA and Rome 2), not necessarily 'maxed out'. But I'd also be happy to go with a mix of 'very high' to 'ultra settings.' I'm currently running off my CPU as a video display. Off course nothing has been played and it has just been used for research and study.

My current set-up (CPU, ram motherboard) check my system specs for clarification; should be good enough for this? I initially built it that way, and now only need a gpu.
I'm more than happy to bide my time and wait if these new cards will reduce the price of current nvidia models. I'm currently in no rush but would like to eventually have my pc running off the gpu and buying a card which would enable me to play when required.

Full models of the cards:

Gigabyte nVidia GeForce RTX 2060 OC 6GB GDDR6
GIGABYTE GTX1070 G1 Gaming
Gigabyte Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti GAMING OC 6GB GDDR6
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1070TI OC GAMING 8GB

 

[londiste]

Go for RTX2060.

Edit:
Oh, as the next post says, stay away from that particular model.
Gigabyte tends to be problematic at the cheaper end, mainly because the coolers suck.
Reportedly there might be a newer revision of that RTX2060 with a better one but I would not count on that.
GTX 1660Ti cooler seems to be OK though and at least it has 3 fans and slightly lower power consumption going for it.

 

[Chomiq]

Gigabyte nVidia GeForce RTX 2060 OC 6GB GDDR6

F that card mate, multiple users on this forum reported thermal issues with card reaching upwards of 84C (i.e. throttling) while gaming and extremely loud fans.

 

[mstenholm]

F that card mate, multiple users on this forum reported thermal issues with card reaching upwards of 84C (i.e. throttling) while gaming and extremely loud fans.

Yes that GPU does not have the best rep around here. If GB is the only (economical) option then I would wait until
1) I have enough to buy a MSI Ventus 2060 or similar next best from one of the other players
2) Check out what the competition will bring to the marked. None of the current offing is for reasons stated above an option.

 

[bug]

Yes that GPU does not have the best rep around here. If GB is the only (economical) option then I would wait until
1) I have enough to buy a MSI Ventus 2060 or similar next best from one of the other players
2) Check out what the competition will bring to the marked. None of the current offing is for reasons stated above an option.

I believe you mean "that particular card". The GPU itself is fine.
I was looking to get a 2060 myself earlier this year and the MSI Ventus was on my shortlist, that's a fine card.

 

[mstenholm]

I believe you mean "that particular card". The GPU itself is fine.
I was looking to get a 2060 myself earlier this year and the MSI Ventus was on my shortlist, that's a fine card.

The chip is fine, yes.

 

[trog100]

how about 8 or 6 gigs of memory.. does anybody put a value on that.. ??

trog

 

[EarthDog]

how about 8 or 6 gigs of memory.. does anybody put a value on that.. ??

Where it needs value maybe... which is 2560x1440/4K UHD resolutions... otherwise, that is plenty for years to come on 1080p (where in the first post of the thread, the OP says he games at).