Bumps the 60 series up by 100$...about <30$<? than an >= performing 1070/ti. Not an actual 60 series replacement. Not much of a value add. I question the 6 vs 8GB, and the RTX portion seems pointless.
They don't really want to sell them. They just want to get rid of the 1060 mining cards that have been piling up. And also have and answer to AMD if they announce Navi.
This is why availability is initially limited to OEM systems. Since they launched the 2080(ti) and the 2070 already and it's not on 7nm they have enough defective dies for the ABI launches, but they deliberately choose not launch them until old inventory is cleared.
I was expecting 399 so 349 is still a great price point as it also comes with a free rtx title. Along with the gsync certified monitors, nvidia is really out to right midrange gaming value for the masses.
A cent over $250 is not midrange gaming by any stretch of the imagination. So no, Nvidia has basically killed off it's brand as viable the average gamer. Virtually no performance increase over the equally priced 1070 means the 2060 is no longer a midrange card.
The 1070 is only equally prices because it's EOL. It was more expensive before. So even if you don't like RTX and you would have bought a 1070 before, then the 2060 is still a better option now.
As far as what is midrange and what is not, that's up to the market to decide, not one person's declaration. Keep in mind that the 970 launched at $330 and dominated the market.
In any case, I think the 20 series will see price cuts sooner than NVIDIA cards usually do because of a fall in RAM prices and the fact that NVIDIA wants to price the cards high so as to not push down the prices of their glut of 1060s and 1050s. But it also has to be kept in mind that RTX features are a big part of the 20 series. They take up a lot of die space and took up a lot of R&D cost. If one isn't interested in RTX then of course one is not going to see very much value in the series.
Doesn't change the fact that $350 is not midrange by any stretch of the (Nvidia shill's) imagination. Whether X is a better choice than Y also does not change this. Also dominating the market with a specific model does not suddenly make it midrange. It makes it middle of Nvidia's range, not midrange.
Historically, if you bought a card, say $350-$400, wait 2 years, you save up another $350-$400, you get a really nice upgrade. 670 -> 970 -> 1070 were nice. What do we get today? Spend $350-$400 get a 1070 wait 2 years, save up another $350-$400 you get 2GB less RAM. Thanks nvidia.
I think at launch, the 1070TI was $449, this is the same perf for $349. So there's definitely some savings, and you get more features. Maybe the name could be changed, or get a new name for the cards in the 200-300 range.
$399 is VEGA 64/1080 territory ATM. Which RTX title? The ones that are all 30$ if that now? Still not much of a value add. It's cut down RT will make that useless, and the 6GB will hamper it compared to a 1070/Ti. The 60 series has gone up in price again, so I don't see the midrange value. DLSS may be valuable but I want to see 8GB at least at that price.
If same die as 2070, then 445 mm2 paired with 6GB GDDR vs 1070 TI at 314mm2 paired with 8GB. They are taking a risk ,large die when the software for new features is not there but they can afford it since AMD's Vega is even costlier. Can AMD rush 7nm Vega and Navi since TSMC can ramp 7nm sooner than GloFo?
Vega 20 has already been in production, but it is an enterprise chip, so its not gonna be getting cheap enough to do anything about Nvidia's RTX prices. We don't know about Navi (rumors say it could launch in a few days at AMD's CES keynote, availability I think is probably at least 2-3 months out though), but I think its a safe bet that it'll beat Nvidia's 7nm offerings to market (I don't expect Nvidia 7nm til the end of the year and think it'll be Volta situation where it'll be just for Enterprise at first; not really based on anything just my own hunch).
Why wouldn't you just buy a 1070 Ti? Clearly the price/perf champion at the moment. NVIDIA is just ruining the market with their newer cards. "Let's just bump the prices a bunch, people'll buy 'em anyway"... And they're right..
I'd say wait at least to see what AMD does, rumors have said they'll announce or maybe even launch Navi during their keynote in a few days, and that it should offer ~1080GTX/Vega 64 performance for $249.
But ignoring that, the 1070/Ti would be about the best options if the price is right (~$300?)
I'm not so sure that people are or will. Definitely could use Navi info and hopefully it is sooner than later and lives up to the rumors, even if you're wanting an RTX card as it should help get Nvidia's prices to become more reasonable.
I believe AMD has said it is a new architecture, distinct from GCN. I don't know that means all that much since I'm sure its built on their previous stuff like all their GPUs have been, but it seems to indicate that it won't be locked to the same ratios that GCN was.
I don't think its expecting miracles to get that level of performance. With the 7nm shrink, it should be able to easily match Vega 64's rasterization throughput, by equal or more stream processors, and equal or higher clock speeds. Memory bandwidth should be reasonably close as well since GDDR6 will nearly or will double Polaris memory clock rates on equal bus, so 400-500GB/s bandwidth should definitely be possible (Vega 64 had ~480GB/s bandwidth).
I wouldn't base things too much on AMD's history. We'll find out in a couple of days, but there's been quite a bit of rumors though that AMD is going to have Navi out 1H (supposedly they even wanted to have it out in Q1). I'm not basing buying decisions on it, but I'm expecting Zen 2 based Ryzen and Navi will launch end of Q1/start of Q2.
Because you won't be able to find any 1070 Tis to buy. And the 1070 Ti is only cheaper now because of the RTX series. Most people won't pay as much for the 1070 Ti as the 2060 because they put value in the RTX features and newer architecture so if NVIDIA wants to sell very many 1070 Tis at all they have to sell them for less.
NVIDIA hasn't bumped the price per performance, they have lowered it. They just haven't lowered it as much as you want. And your perception most likely comes from you putting very little value into RTX.
Well there's plenty of gtx1070ti where I live. But the price for them is starting from 449€. RTX 2060 FE is 385€ from Nvidia web shop, so probably in that ball bark when it really has stock on local shops.
So all in all gtx1070ti is a bad buy right now here and will probably end for sales as soon as RTX 2060 is in stock.
Because they aren't making GP-104's any more. The 1070 Ti's you see for sale now are the tail end of the old production run. When they're gone, they're gone, and there won't be any more coming.
I feel like Nvidia is trying to just move its tiny cores into the mid-range price segment. Probably a lot better profitability on those rather than cut down large chips for a high volume segment. Especially if yields are good and they are having to artificially neuter the chips.
Because it has RTX cores. So you get them for free.. Besides it's only the "same price" as the 1070 Ti because NVIDIA and their partners cut the price of the 1070 Ti in preparation for the release of the 2060.
I think an affordable graphics card costs $130.
Obviously the RTX 2060 does not occupy the same market segment as the 960 did. As far as your comparison, though, this $349 is a founder's price. I think it would be better to compare it to 1060 prices of at least $270, maybe up to $300.
In this Turing generation, nVidia moved up a tier for the pricing while keeping the performance on the same level: 2080ti=2080 performance wise but costs like a titan 2080=2070 2070=2060....etc We really need AMD to bring some sense to the GPU market.
"All told then, the value proposition argument for the RTX 2060 looks to be very similar to the rest of the RTX 20 series: NVIDIA is betting consumers will be willing to pay a premium for the Turing architecture’s next-generation features"
Well, the value proposition is still better than what was available before Turing arrived. I mean if NVIDIA releases Turing and stops making Pascal then what has been lost? From that point of view one is simply getting RT and Tensor cores for free, plus a small boost in performance and/or small reduction in price. Obviously it's not enough to make a Pascal owner upgrade at the moment, but that isn't what NVIDIA is looking for. It is supposed to make Maxwell and earlier owners who never upgraded during the crypto boom to upgrade now. It'll be interesting to see how well the RTX 2060 sells, because it should be at a reasonable enough price point to get a good volume if people really are interested in the RT and Tensor core features at the moment.
Eventually GDDR6 prices will come down and NVIDIA's Pascal cards will sell through and NVIDIA might reduce the prices a little. Then some time later AMD will release Navi and NVIDIA will decrease the prices more. By the time NVIDIA releases their next gen. architecture the RTX 2060 will probably be much closer to the Pascal x60 prices.
The 2060 is shaping up to be a poor value but this is NOTHING like a re-release/rebadge/whatever you want to call it. This is a Turing chip with all of the features that come with Turing.
That would be the ray tracing that is abysmally slow on a 2080 now featured in a significantly slower 2060. Yeah, that Turing feature. It's cutting edge stuff akin to the the 3D-deceleration features of the S3 ViRGE video cards of two decades ago.
RTX2060 is already struggling with Raytracing performance and the only other currently implemented feature — DLSS — only works at 4K which is again too much for the 2060.
Everything I've read about Turing so far makes me assume that it was designed to be fabbed using a smaller process for better performance, lower costs and lower power consumption.
Yup, this is how it looks. Except the 1070 has 2GB more memory, more ROPs and higher clocks. And this is a 3 year old card. Facepalm level here is Epic.
"game consoles are shipping with 8 to 12GB of VRAM" That's not entirely true. Or does a Ryzen APU with 16GB of DDR4 RAM on the motherboard have 16GB VRAM? As you know, the consoles employ a unified RAM architecture, so the included 8 or 12GB are not dedicated just as VRAM but serve other purposes as well. I personally don't know the breakdown of RAM vs VRAM usage in current gaming titles, but I doubt it is 0:anything. :D So PC system RAM should count towards console RAM as well, making the 6GB vs 8/12GB number seem less of a discrepancy. :)
I hope you will show video RAM usage in your tests, because there doesn't seem to be a lot of data out there. The stuff that I found in written form shows VRAM usage in 1440p and 4k being less than 3GB and hardly any difference between 4GB and 8GB variants of cards like 290X 390X. I remember a Digital Foundry video where they showed VRAM usage of different resolutions with Tomb Raider but I haven't found the video again. But iirc it didn't even use 6GB VRAM at the extreme settings where it was unplayable anyway due to lacking rendering resources. Most current cards that are available with different RAM configurations are also different in their clockspeeds or core counts (see 1060, RX580 and more), so there is no easy apples to apples comparison to be made. :)
Don't you go using logic and reason on us. Consoles have 8GB of VRAM, full stop! If you don't like it, come at me bro! I'll be hiding behind my middle-of-the-page auto-play video advertising content. Hah!
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
45 Comments
Back to Article
Manch - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Bumps the 60 series up by 100$...about <30$<? than an >= performing 1070/ti. Not an actual 60 series replacement. Not much of a value add. I question the 6 vs 8GB, and the RTX portion seems pointless.Still Ill wait for numbers.
sgeocla - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
They don't really want to sell them. They just want to get rid of the 1060 mining cards that have been piling up. And also have and answer to AMD if they announce Navi.This is why availability is initially limited to OEM systems. Since they launched the 2080(ti) and the 2070 already and it's not on 7nm they have enough defective dies for the ABI launches, but they deliberately choose not launch them until old inventory is cleared.
rtho782 - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Table error: 1070 has a 256bit memory bus.uefi - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
I was expecting 399 so 349 is still a great price point as it also comes with a free rtx title. Along with the gsync certified monitors, nvidia is really out to right midrange gaming value for the masses.SaturnusDK - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
A cent over $250 is not midrange gaming by any stretch of the imagination. So no, Nvidia has basically killed off it's brand as viable the average gamer. Virtually no performance increase over the equally priced 1070 means the 2060 is no longer a midrange card.Yojimbo - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
The 1070 is only equally prices because it's EOL. It was more expensive before. So even if you don't like RTX and you would have bought a 1070 before, then the 2060 is still a better option now.As far as what is midrange and what is not, that's up to the market to decide, not one person's declaration. Keep in mind that the 970 launched at $330 and dominated the market.
In any case, I think the 20 series will see price cuts sooner than NVIDIA cards usually do because of a fall in RAM prices and the fact that NVIDIA wants to price the cards high so as to not push down the prices of their glut of 1060s and 1050s. But it also has to be kept in mind that RTX features are a big part of the 20 series. They take up a lot of die space and took up a lot of R&D cost. If one isn't interested in RTX then of course one is not going to see very much value in the series.
close - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Doesn't change the fact that $350 is not midrange by any stretch of the (Nvidia shill's) imagination. Whether X is a better choice than Y also does not change this. Also dominating the market with a specific model does not suddenly make it midrange. It makes it middle of Nvidia's range, not midrange.notashill - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
The 1070's MSRP was $379 when it launched 2 and a half years ago.Byte - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Historically, if you bought a card, say $350-$400, wait 2 years, you save up another $350-$400, you get a really nice upgrade. 670 -> 970 -> 1070 were nice. What do we get today? Spend $350-$400 get a 1070 wait 2 years, save up another $350-$400 you get 2GB less RAM. Thanks nvidia.webdoctors - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
I think at launch, the 1070TI was $449, this is the same perf for $349. So there's definitely some savings, and you get more features. Maybe the name could be changed, or get a new name for the cards in the 200-300 range.Manch - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
$399 is VEGA 64/1080 territory ATM. Which RTX title? The ones that are all 30$ if that now? Still not much of a value add. It's cut down RT will make that useless, and the 6GB will hamper it compared to a 1070/Ti. The 60 series has gone up in price again, so I don't see the midrange value. DLSS may be valuable but I want to see 8GB at least at that price.jjj - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
If same die as 2070, then 445 mm2 paired with 6GB GDDR vs 1070 TI at 314mm2 paired with 8GB.They are taking a risk ,large die when the software for new features is not there but they can afford it since AMD's Vega is even costlier. Can AMD rush 7nm Vega and Navi since TSMC can ramp 7nm sooner than GloFo?
darkswordsman17 - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Vega 20 has already been in production, but it is an enterprise chip, so its not gonna be getting cheap enough to do anything about Nvidia's RTX prices. We don't know about Navi (rumors say it could launch in a few days at AMD's CES keynote, availability I think is probably at least 2-3 months out though), but I think its a safe bet that it'll beat Nvidia's 7nm offerings to market (I don't expect Nvidia 7nm til the end of the year and think it'll be Volta situation where it'll be just for Enterprise at first; not really based on anything just my own hunch).Er, GF killed their 7nm.
piroroadkill - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Why wouldn't you just buy a 1070 Ti? Clearly the price/perf champion at the moment. NVIDIA is just ruining the market with their newer cards. "Let's just bump the prices a bunch, people'll buy 'em anyway"... And they're right..darkswordsman17 - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
I'd say wait at least to see what AMD does, rumors have said they'll announce or maybe even launch Navi during their keynote in a few days, and that it should offer ~1080GTX/Vega 64 performance for $249.But ignoring that, the 1070/Ti would be about the best options if the price is right (~$300?)
I'm not so sure that people are or will. Definitely could use Navi info and hopefully it is sooner than later and lives up to the rumors, even if you're wanting an RTX card as it should help get Nvidia's prices to become more reasonable.
StevoLincolnite - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Navi is just an iterative update to Graphics Core Next. Don't expect miracles.Will be interesting to see if AMD FINALLY gets Draw Stream Binning Rasterization happening though...
Yojimbo - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Navi should be able to approach 2060 performance without using HBM2, so it will allow AMD to compete on price/performance in that segment.darkswordsman17 - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
I believe AMD has said it is a new architecture, distinct from GCN. I don't know that means all that much since I'm sure its built on their previous stuff like all their GPUs have been, but it seems to indicate that it won't be locked to the same ratios that GCN was.I don't think its expecting miracles to get that level of performance. With the 7nm shrink, it should be able to easily match Vega 64's rasterization throughput, by equal or more stream processors, and equal or higher clock speeds. Memory bandwidth should be reasonably close as well since GDDR6 will nearly or will double Polaris memory clock rates on equal bus, so 400-500GB/s bandwidth should definitely be possible (Vega 64 had ~480GB/s bandwidth).
Yojimbo - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
I wouldn't expect Navi before late quarter 3 or early quarter 4, judging by AMD's history.darkswordsman17 - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
I wouldn't base things too much on AMD's history. We'll find out in a couple of days, but there's been quite a bit of rumors though that AMD is going to have Navi out 1H (supposedly they even wanted to have it out in Q1). I'm not basing buying decisions on it, but I'm expecting Zen 2 based Ryzen and Navi will launch end of Q1/start of Q2.Yojimbo - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Because you won't be able to find any 1070 Tis to buy. And the 1070 Ti is only cheaper now because of the RTX series. Most people won't pay as much for the 1070 Ti as the 2060 because they put value in the RTX features and newer architecture so if NVIDIA wants to sell very many 1070 Tis at all they have to sell them for less.NVIDIA hasn't bumped the price per performance, they have lowered it. They just haven't lowered it as much as you want. And your perception most likely comes from you putting very little value into RTX.
jabbadap - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Well there's plenty of gtx1070ti where I live. But the price for them is starting from 449€. RTX 2060 FE is 385€ from Nvidia web shop, so probably in that ball bark when it really has stock on local shops.So all in all gtx1070ti is a bad buy right now here and will probably end for sales as soon as RTX 2060 is in stock.
DanNeely - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Because they aren't making GP-104's any more. The 1070 Ti's you see for sale now are the tail end of the old production run. When they're gone, they're gone, and there won't be any more coming.stanleyipkiss - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
So you're telling me this 2060 has 1070 (Ti?) performance for exactly the same price? So why release it then?GTX 960: $199
GTX 1060: $249
RTX 2060: $349
So I guess the "affordable" graphics cards will be the 2030 ?
SaturnusDK - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Seems the only midrange cards Nvidia intends to have are 2030/2050. 2060 certainly moved the 2060 well out of the midrange card range.Midwayman - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
I feel like Nvidia is trying to just move its tiny cores into the mid-range price segment. Probably a lot better profitability on those rather than cut down large chips for a high volume segment. Especially if yields are good and they are having to artificially neuter the chips.Yojimbo - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Because it has RTX cores. So you get them for free.. Besides it's only the "same price" as the 1070 Ti because NVIDIA and their partners cut the price of the 1070 Ti in preparation for the release of the 2060.I think an affordable graphics card costs $130.
Obviously the RTX 2060 does not occupy the same market segment as the 960 did. As far as your comparison, though, this $349 is a founder's price. I think it would be better to compare it to 1060 prices of at least $270, maybe up to $300.
PeachNCream - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
How is someone getting something for free that they're purchasing for money?Xex360 - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
In this Turing generation, nVidia moved up a tier for the pricing while keeping the performance on the same level:2080ti=2080 performance wise but costs like a titan
2080=2070
2070=2060....etc
We really need AMD to bring some sense to the GPU market.
SaturnusDK - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
You probably meant 1080ti = 2080 etcYojimbo - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Except they added ray tracing and tensor cores. That's where the die space and R&D money went to.cmdrdredd - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Ray Tracing is too much of a performance hitHollyDOL - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Ray tracing is a very huge thing. But at these costs, nV itself is aiming it to the oblivion :-(Yojimbo - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
"All told then, the value proposition argument for the RTX 2060 looks to be very similar to the rest of the RTX 20 series: NVIDIA is betting consumers will be willing to pay a premium for the Turing architecture’s next-generation features"Well, the value proposition is still better than what was available before Turing arrived. I mean if NVIDIA releases Turing and stops making Pascal then what has been lost? From that point of view one is simply getting RT and Tensor cores for free, plus a small boost in performance and/or small reduction in price. Obviously it's not enough to make a Pascal owner upgrade at the moment, but that isn't what NVIDIA is looking for. It is supposed to make Maxwell and earlier owners who never upgraded during the crypto boom to upgrade now. It'll be interesting to see how well the RTX 2060 sells, because it should be at a reasonable enough price point to get a good volume if people really are interested in the RT and Tensor core features at the moment.
Eventually GDDR6 prices will come down and NVIDIA's Pascal cards will sell through and NVIDIA might reduce the prices a little. Then some time later AMD will release Navi and NVIDIA will decrease the prices more. By the time NVIDIA releases their next gen. architecture the RTX 2060 will probably be much closer to the Pascal x60 prices.
soltys - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
So they basically "re-released" 2.5 year old card (1070) with faster ram and the rest equal or worse.jordanclock - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
The 2060 is shaping up to be a poor value but this is NOTHING like a re-release/rebadge/whatever you want to call it. This is a Turing chip with all of the features that come with Turing.flexy - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Name these amazing features? You mean the magic "RTX", the amazing ray tracing which kills FPS in games? You mean that?PeachNCream - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
That would be the ray tracing that is abysmally slow on a 2080 now featured in a significantly slower 2060. Yeah, that Turing feature. It's cutting edge stuff akin to the the 3D-deceleration features of the S3 ViRGE video cards of two decades ago.ydeer - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
RTX2060 is already struggling with Raytracing performance and the only other currently implemented feature — DLSS — only works at 4K which is again too much for the 2060.Everything I've read about Turing so far makes me assume that it was designed to be fabbed using a smaller process for better performance, lower costs and lower power consumption.
flexy - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Yup, this is how it looks. Except the 1070 has 2GB more memory, more ROPs and higher clocks. And this is a 3 year old card. Facepalm level here is Epic.flexy - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
"Congratulation" to Nvidia to yet another absolutely pointless card.Tell me: Why should someone get this and not a GTX1070?
Death666Angel - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
"game consoles are shipping with 8 to 12GB of VRAM" That's not entirely true. Or does a Ryzen APU with 16GB of DDR4 RAM on the motherboard have 16GB VRAM? As you know, the consoles employ a unified RAM architecture, so the included 8 or 12GB are not dedicated just as VRAM but serve other purposes as well. I personally don't know the breakdown of RAM vs VRAM usage in current gaming titles, but I doubt it is 0:anything. :D So PC system RAM should count towards console RAM as well, making the 6GB vs 8/12GB number seem less of a discrepancy. :)Death666Angel - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
I hope you will show video RAM usage in your tests, because there doesn't seem to be a lot of data out there. The stuff that I found in written form shows VRAM usage in 1440p and 4k being less than 3GB and hardly any difference between 4GB and 8GB variants of cards like 290X 390X. I remember a Digital Foundry video where they showed VRAM usage of different resolutions with Tomb Raider but I haven't found the video again. But iirc it didn't even use 6GB VRAM at the extreme settings where it was unplayable anyway due to lacking rendering resources. Most current cards that are available with different RAM configurations are also different in their clockspeeds or core counts (see 1060, RX580 and more), so there is no easy apples to apples comparison to be made. :)PeachNCream - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Don't you go using logic and reason on us. Consoles have 8GB of VRAM, full stop! If you don't like it, come at me bro! I'll be hiding behind my middle-of-the-page auto-play video advertising content. Hah!prateekprakash - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Maybe AIB partners should offer a custom rtx 2060 with 12gb vram by using 2gb gddr6 chips, that may be helpful down the road...