warlord:

WTH. All benchmarks include 980ti, always. All pages. Stop it here, please. And no HH should never include an oc'ed version of any gpu. Because in terms of fairness, he should overclock all gpus in the list. That's impossible and two times the effort for him. His reviews are absolute complete.

Oh why people get triggered so easily these days. Did u look at every page before jumping into my post with this conclusion.? Here> https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_geforce_rtx_2060_strix_oc_review,31.html . Where did i question the fairness of HH's benchmarks? I take all HH's benches for granted. He proved his and his site's neutrality long time ago . But, that's not the point . I was just trying making a point here. . About oc'ed result being used in the benchmarks, well ,that's ur way of looking at it. But, try to look differently.. will ya? An rx580 can barely be overlocked 100mhz ~ 150mhz more from the freference stock on the core , having 10% oc headroom at best. On the otherhand, Gtx 980ti cards in general can be overclocked upto 23 to 25% on the core pretty easily. So, what do u think mate?

Anyway, @Hilbert Hagedoorn, I believe reviewers and particularly Guru3d as I care about the best, you should place a time limit in products aging. I do not find any reason for R9 series, including 3XX and Fury, but also GTX 9 series or earlier to be included anymore. 3-4years time is OK I think.

mohiuddin:

Oh why people get triggered so easily these days. Did u look at every page before jumping into my post with this conclusion.? Here> https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_geforce_rtx_2060_strix_oc_review,31.html . Where did i question the fairness of HH's benchmarks? I take all HH's benches for granted. He proved his and his site's neutrality long time ago . But, that's not the point . I was just trying making a point here. . About oc'ed result being used in the benchmarks, well ,that's ur way of looking at it. But, try to look differently.. will ya? An rx580 can barely be overlocked 100mhz ~ 150mhz more from the freference stock on the core , having 10% oc headroom at best. On the otherhand, Gtx 980ti cards in general can be overclocked upto 23 to 25% on the core pretty easily. So, what do u think mate?

He is right. We all know how 980ti performs stock or overclocked. There is no need for HH to do additional work just to prove your 980ti is still relevant.

warlord:

Anyway, @Hilbert Hagedoorn, I believe reviewers and particularly Guru3d as I care about the best, you should place a time limit in products aging. I do not find any reason for R9 series, including 3XX and Fury, but also GTX 9 series or earlier to be included anymore. 3-4years time is OK I think.

I would think people with older cards are those most likely to upgrade and therefore are most interested in seeing how new cards compare to their old.

Undying:

He is right. We all know how 980ti performs stock or overclocked. There is no need for HH to do additional work just to prove your 980ti is still relevant.

while yes, we do know how a 980ti performs there might be some games that like the 980ti more than others. I personally don't really care either way, wouldn't mind it included but on the other side, an overclocked 980ti roughly matches a 1080 so that's a good point of reference.

alanm:

I would think people with older cards are those most likely to upgrade and therefore are most interested in seeing how new cards compare to their old.

2 gens are more than enough in my humble opinion. The previous and the current one. You already know how the much older one performs in comparison to previous one. It is overloaded info. Also, 3-4 years is the maximum recommended period for a healthy upgrade without bottleneck.

alanm:

I would think people with older cards are those most likely to upgrade and therefore are most interested in seeing how new cards compare to their old.

Correct. But was just thinking about this. Most of those who bought a 980ti back in the day were clearly enthusiasts, they weren't budget cards. And those people would most likely have upgraded by now anyway. I say most, not all. Still, I wouldn't mind to see a 980ti in that gpu shootout, it's a single run of 3dmark so why not? But it's not going to add all that much, to be honest.

metagamer:

while yes, we do know how a 980ti performs there might be some games that like the 980ti more than others. I personally don't really care either way, wouldn't mind it included but on the other side, an overclocked 980ti roughly matches a 1080 so that's a good point of reference.

980ti not at 1080 level. Even if you clock it to 1500mhz it will be only fast as 1070ti at best.

You sure? My oced 980ti beat stock 1080 in benches back in the day. Either way, it's close enough for a point of reference.

warlord:

2 gens are more than enough in my humble opinion.

Agree .....Still funny how fast tec/time fly by......A 980ti is now a budget card....206x did that... I wonder if there will be a 2060ti?

airbud7:

Agree .....Still funny how fast tec/time fly by......A 980ti is now a budget card....206x did that... I wonder if there will be a 2060ti?

Probably not. 2060 is already too close to 2070, performance wise and price.

Also, RTX 2060 destroys GTX 980ti hard and they are both 6gb, one extra reason for reviewer to drop the whole GTX 9 series once for all it's useless.

warlord:

Anyway, @Hilbert Hagedoorn, I believe reviewers and particularly Guru3d as I care about the best, you should place a time limit in products aging. I do not find any reason for R9 series, including 3XX and Fury, but also GTX 9 series or earlier to be included anymore. 3-4years time is OK I think.

Again some one advocating for less data to be included in the benchmark section. Ridiculous. IMO the more the merrier. The older the card is that some has the more likely it is they consider upgrading it.

In Australia all the 2060's are priced at where the 2070's should be...... wtf.. these prices are so messed up.

DW75:

It is the same thing in Canada. The cards are all 500-550, and that is before tax. After tax, that is 560-620. That is just brutal for a cut down TU106, which is a low end chip. https://www.newegg.ca/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=rtx+2060&ignorear=0&N=-1&isNodeId=1

Where do you get that TU106 is a "low end" chip?

DW75:

XX106 is low end. XX104 is midrange. XX102 is high end. Nvidia has been ripping people off, and charging high end prices for midrange chips since the GTX 680.

The TU106 has the same number of Cuda cores as the GP104 in the 1070, plus it has RT cores and Tensor cores. Please stop paying any attention to the chip code Though this is the third largest die in the Turning line its still much more than a "low-end" GPU.

DW75:

XX106 is low end. XX104 is midrange. XX102 is high end. Nvidia has been ripping people off, and charging high end prices for midrange chips since the GTX 680.

Considering a card like the 2060 can perform near 1070 ti and even 1080 levels in some cases, I'd say that's not ripping anyone off.

Good performing card. The one possible neg would be the 6gb mem. A year or two this could be an issue in some games.

Embra:

Good performing card. The one possible neg would be the 6gb mem. A year or two this could be an issue in some games.

For 1080p I can't see this being an issue, but DLSS should help as well with this in the meantime.

warlord:

Anyway, @Hilbert Hagedoorn, I believe reviewers and particularly Guru3d as I care about the best, you should place a time limit in products aging. I do not find any reason for R9 series, including 3XX and Fury, but also GTX 9 series or earlier to be included anymore. 3-4years time is OK I think.

It is not about time limit. If you have decade of intel's CPUs with minimal improvements each generation, it is reasonable to show that there is very small reason to upgrade. Same goes for GPUs. Time is bad measurement tool for something considered "old" in technology. Once GPU is made obsolete by entry level GPU of current Generation, it may be removed from being tested with next generation. For example, GTX 1050 as entry level performance made quite a few older enthusiast level GPUs obsolete. Those are not needed in comparison with RTX 20X0 series. And that what falls under lowest of current generation is not needed in graphs once next generation pops in. = = = = But real question is: What is current entry-level? $350 RTX 2060 is not (due to its price tag). Is it GTX 1160? Or is there going to be GTX 1150? With example above, there are 8 cards in Witcher 3 benchmark under GTX 1050 which could be considered obsolete in RTX 20X0 generation. But if done by time, then manufacturer with greatest number of rebrands gets greatest coverage. = = = = That's why I consider reasonable to see last generation entry level GPU (baseline) and anything above it for comparison to current generation. (Have you seen GTX Titan there? I bet you see value in knowing its performance against R9-390X or GTX 1060/RTX 2060.)