Review: MSI GeForce RTX 2060 Gaming Z (6G)

Undying

2019-01-15 14:48

Nice review and nice looking card. If you get you hands on Aorus 2060 extreme please do a review HH, thanks. Gaming Z should be top tier but even so 380€ is really steep.

#5627720

Loophole35

2019-01-15 14:52

That now famous MSI tax. Great card however.

#5627732

mrbull3tproof

2019-01-15 15:12

So besides juuuust slightly lower noise level it has same temps and performance as (probably) much cheaper Palit version.

#5627737

Loophole35

2019-01-15 15:17

mrbull3tproof:

So besides juuuust slightly lower noise level it has same temps and performance as (probably) much cheaper Palit version.

Yeah and lets not forget how good the reference cooler is on this card.

#5627772

tunejunky

2019-01-15 16:24

this looks to be a winner but c'mon expecting RT performance from this is a bad joke. however this is a solid performer otherwise. the cooler on MSI cards are worth the "tax" and if you're going to put it into a loop just get the "aero" where you're not paying for the twin frozr. and if you can pay for the better clocks of the gaming x, cool.

#5627781

Loophole35

2019-01-15 16:34

tunejunky:

this looks to be a winner but c'mon expecting RT performance from this is a bad joke. however this is a solid performer otherwise. the cooler on MSI cards are worth the "tax" and if you're going to put it into a loop just get the "aero" where you're not paying for the twin frozr. and if you can pay for the better clocks of the gaming x, cool.

This card though doesn't seem to need the additional cooling headroom however. https://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=articles&action=file&id=47150 https://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=articles&action=file&id=47155 that's the FE you can get from Nvidia at MSRP right now.

#5627789

tunejunky

2019-01-15 16:39

yeah, still puzzled (and aib makers miffed) at Nvidia's direct sales. i will say, for what it's worth - the FE of the RTX cards are the best made and "feeling" cards i've ever seen from Nvidia. idk if that makes them worth buying, but if i had one i'd like the quality of manufacture.

#5627899

BReal85

2019-01-15 20:18

ASUS Dual costs $395, Strix is $415. Let me have a guess.

#5627960

FrostNixon

2019-01-15 23:19

As much as I want to support AMDA I don't feel like they can reach the performance of 2060 for this price with the next release. Not to mention it won't be anywhere in the next 6 months ..

#5627973

metagamer

2019-01-15 23:43

Amazing, this thing pretty much matches a 1080 at a very competitive card.

#5628018

sykozis

2019-01-16 02:43

GTX2060 is going for $350 to $415 USD.... If prices hold, I'll probably be picking one up in the summer since NVidia has decided to support adaptive-sync.... Like FrostNixon, I don't see Navi touching the performance at a similar price.

#5628027

quantum hacker

2019-01-16 03:25

NIce, but should be $250 max since it can barely do 4K/60fps just like the 1080. This performance IS low-end now. You guys holding onto 1080-1440p (phone resolutions) are like the 800x600/1024x768 holdouts when 1080p became a thing. Better to just move on and accept that 4k is the new standard for the forseeable future and stop wasting time and money with anything less. If you haven't bought into 4k yet and are contemplating a new build... save your money till you can enter the 4k realm and save yourself from having to do yet another upgrade relatively soon when all the kiddies are playing 4k in their bedrooms and you're jealous that console players have a higher res than you.

#5628030

sykozis

2019-01-16 03:53

quantum hacker:

NIce, but should be $250 max since it can barely do 4K/60fps just like the 1080. This performance IS low-end now. You guys holding onto 1080-1440p (phone resolutions) are like the 800x600/1024x768 holdouts when 1080p became a thing. Better to just move on and accept that 4k is the new standard for the forseeable future and stop wasting time and money with anything less. If you haven't bought into 4k yet and are contemplating a new build... save your money till you can enter the 4k realm and save yourself from having to do yet another upgrade relatively soon when all the kiddies are playing 4k in their bedrooms and you're jealous that console players have a higher res than you.

4K is far from being the "new standard"....lol When mid-range graphics cards can run at 4K with 60fps minimum at reasonable settings, it might become mainstream. As of now, 1080 dominates the mainstream and will continue to for at least the next few years.

#5628032

Loophole35

2019-01-16 03:58

quantum hacker:

NIce, but should be $250 max since it can barely do 4K/60fps just like the 1080. This performance IS low-end now. You guys holding onto 1080-1440p (phone resolutions) are like the 800x600/1024x768 holdouts when 1080p became a thing. Better to just move on and accept that 4k is the new standard for the forseeable future and stop wasting time and money with anything less. If you haven't bought into 4k yet and are contemplating a new build... save your money till you can enter the 4k realm and save yourself from having to do yet another upgrade relatively soon when all the kiddies are playing 4k in their bedrooms and you're jealous that console players have a higher res than you.

60Hz lol what a noob. 144Hz or nothing. Refresh rate > resolution any day. (Within reason I’m not playing sub 1920x1080)

#5628033

quantum hacker

2019-01-16 04:00

Loophole35:

60Hz lol what a noob. 144Hz or nothing. Refresh rate > resolution any day. (Within reason I’m not playing sub 1920x1080)

Fools. First. Yes, 4k is standard despite you not owning it because you continuing to fund overpriced nvidia low end performance cards and panel manufacturers who continue to milk 2000's level tech. Don't you get that phone's have been doing 1440p for years and 4k monitors have been out for nearly a decade already!?! All new TVs now are f**king 4K. Second. OF COURSE 60HZ IS LOW AND THIS CARD CAN NOT DO IT at 4K CONSISTENTLY. DEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

#5628034

sykozis

2019-01-16 04:07

Why would anyone waste money on 4K when you could just go 8K?

#5628037

Loophole35

2019-01-16 04:15

I have two 4K panels at my house and both do full 4:4:4 chroma yet I still find myself going back to my QHD 144Hz G-sync display.

#5628038

Cyberdyne

2019-01-16 04:36

According to Digital Foundry, using High textures in BF5 gets you around 70 FPS with ray tracing. Seems the horse power is there actually, despite what people keep saying. But BF5 has issues with VRAM management with ray tracing on, and 6 GB gets tapped out.

#5628149

Robbo9999

2019-01-16 09:59

Cyberdyne:

According to Digital Foundry, using High textures in BF5 gets you around 70 FPS with ray tracing. Seems the horse power is there actually, despite what people keep saying. But BF5 has issues with VRAM management with ray tracing on, and 6 GB gets tapped out.

Yep, I saw this too (Ultra textures lowers the fps), this is added support to my thinking that the RTX 2060 with only 6GB VRAM isn't really a card to last much beyond yr 2020 - or in other words until NVidia release their next gen of cards on 7nm process shrink...I just see this card as a stop gap to last until that point.

#5628184

Fox2232

2019-01-16 12:22

FrostNixon:

As much as I want to support AMDA I don't feel like they can reach the performance of 2060 for this price with the next release. Not to mention it won't be anywhere in the next 6 months ..

Question is: "What AMD has in between RX-590 and Radeon 7?" "And what do you expect they'll do about this situation within next 6 months?"

Cyberdyne:

According to Digital Foundry, using High textures in BF5 gets you around 70 FPS with ray tracing. Seems the horse power is there actually, despite what people keep saying. But BF5 has issues with VRAM management with ray tracing on, and 6 GB gets tapped out.

It is not issue of capacity. It is issue of bandwidth. And issue of processing those larger textures by GPU. In case total VRAM capacity would be issue, fps would drop drastically and stutter-fest would be noticeable even for lemur.