GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER Launch Review Roundup

I'm not sure what people were expecting with this card. I guess it could have been 5% faster or so to make it more in line with the other Super cards, but it was never going to compete with the 2080 Ti.
 
Delicieuxz said:
I had the impression there would be a more appreciable performance improvement than that. For the most part, it looks negligible over the RTX 2080. I think those 2080 Super gains can be easily attained by basic overclocking a normal RTX 2080 without modifying the GPU's voltage.

Did Nvidia maybe gimp the planned Super performance gains after seeing AMD's RX 5000 series' performance?
Click to expand...

No gimping. Where did you think the performance would come from? The other Super cards got a nice boost in Core count something like 10-15% more cores, This one only got something like 5% more cores because that is the limit of Chip, every single core is enabled here. There is nothing else to extract from this chip.
 
MavericK said:
I'm not sure what people were expecting with this card. I guess it could have been 5% faster or so to make it more in line with the other Super cards, but it was never going to compete with the 2080 Ti.
Click to expand...

Put it this way: The RTX 2060s beats the 1080 with the same margins as the RTX 2080s does against the 1080ti.

The 2060s launched at $400 vs $500 of its older sibling while the 2080s launched at the same price.

Nothing Super about that.
 
Nightfire said:
Put it this way: The RTX 2060s beats the 1080 with the same margins as the RTX 2080s does against the 1080ti.

The 2060s launched at $400 vs $500 of its older sibling while the 2080s launched at the same price.

Nothing Super about that.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure saying the 1080 launched at $500 is really accurate - most of them were in the $700 range.

But otherwise I get your point.
 
Wouldn't a very modest overclock cover the deficit on the Regular 2080? So basically we are looking at a 2080 SSC with a tweak on the memory?
 
MavericK said:
I'm not sure saying the 1080 launched at $500 is really accurate - most of them were in the $700 range.

But otherwise I get your point.
Click to expand...

My low (in the EVGA lineup) 1080 SC was $680 a couple weeks after launch, with the FTW and the likes going for $700+. $500 certainly isn't accurate initially, it took quite some time (1080Ti launch) for them to finally settle down to 500 or so if I remember correctly.
 
Last edited:
Jim Kim said:
not super in any way, almost anti-super
Click to expand...

Yeah but, the crazy thing is, at least in store, Best Buy is still selling the exact same cards that I could have bought last September from them. No Supers and no 5700's in stock, no surprise.
 
What the hell is wrong with the 2080 TI? It has over 40% more cores than the 2080 super yet even at 4K it's on average only about 16% to 18% faster.
 
That's actually a good question - is there a bottleneck we're not aware of?
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
misterbobby said:
What the hell is wrong with the 2080 TI? It has over 40% more cores than the 2080 super yet even at 4K it's on average only about 16% to 18% faster.
Click to expand...

Boost clock. It's above 1800 on the 2080 Super and below 1600 on the 2080Ti.
 
Mav451 said:
That's actually a good question - is there a bottleneck we're not aware of?
Click to expand...

Nah, it has way lower boost clock - likely to keep power in check, and also to keep costs down on VRMs.

If it boosted as high as the 2080 Super, it would be 40% faster out of the box, but probably use closer to 400w.. So you have to do that manually.

See here, where this massively factory overclocked model gets just 10% higher performance by adding 40w to the TDP limit, and much more efficient VRMs

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asus-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-matrix/27.html

Adds 30w to power limit:

power-limit.png


And all you get is 10% higher performance at 300w. Getting the other 10% would require you to go to almost 350-400w.
 
Last edited:
Snowdog said:
Boost clock. It's above 1800 on the 2080 Super and below 1600 on the 2080Ti.
Click to expand...
No that is not it at all as you can go back and look at the 2080 TI reviews and see that most of them have an average boost clock in the 1800s and some of the aftermarket cards are in the 1900s. I'm even going back and looking at overclocked reviews from techpowerup and most of the 2080 TI cards overclock higher than the 2080 Super Cards. even with over clock though the difference is still well below 20% so something just doesn't add up as the 2080 TI just does not scale worth a damn.
 
misterbobby said:
No that is not it at all as you can go back and look at the 2080 TI reviews and see that most of them have an average boost clock in the 1800s and some of the aftermarket cards are in the 1900s. I'm even going back and looking at overclocked reviews from techpowerup and most of the 2080 TI cards overclock higher than the 2080 Super Cards. even with over clock though the difference is still well below 20% so something just doesn't add up as the 2080 TI just does not scale worth a damn.
Click to expand...

It could be utilization/overhead, eventually even embarrassingly parallel loads start to suffer from overhead and difficulty trying to keep all those units occupied. There are 4352 cores after all.
 
misterbobby said:
No that is not it at all as you can go back and look at the 2080 TI reviews and see that most of them have an average boost clock in the 1800s and some of the aftermarket cards are in the 1900s. I'm even going back and looking at overclocked reviews from techpowerup and most of the 2080 TI cards overclock higher than the 2080 Super Cards. even with over clock though the difference is still well below 20% so something just doesn't add up as the 2080 TI just does not scale worth a damn.
Click to expand...
It is almost like NVIDIA went for more "features" like real-time ray tracing this generation than raw power.

I suspect this is why reviewers keep joking that the regular RTX 2080 and RTX 2080 Super are refreshes of the GTX 1080 ti.
 
Well, if you were in the market for a RTX2080, you might as well get this one for a somewhat better value.
 
Azrak said:
This says it all. 2.5 years later, same price. 9% faster.
But, RTX!
Yeah. Hard pass.
Click to expand...

If you aren't a high-end video card buyer then I see your point. However, there isn't any other way to go if you are a high-end video card buyer. The 2080S is a better buy than a Vega VII that just came out this year as well.
 
On 2nd thoughts I'd rather have a 10% price cut than 10% performance increase.
 
AlphaQup said:
My low (in the EVGA lineup) 1080 SC was $680 a couple weeks after launch, with the FTW and the likes going for $700+. $500 certainly isn't accurate initially, it took quite some time (1080Ti launch) for them to finally settle down to 500 or so if I remember correctly.
Click to expand...


Meaning the value proposition of the 2080s over the 1080ti is even worse than that of the 2060s over the 1080.

The 2060s also kept the same frame buffer size with more bandwidth compared to its older cousin.
 
MavericK said:
The big problem for me is that most reviews haven't included the 1080 for a long time...even right after the 1080 Ti came out they pretty much stopped including it since that was sort of the "replacement" for the 1080. But that leaves me always wondering exactly how much faster a newer card is.

EDIT: I noticed that Anand's review actually has the 1080...nice!
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm in the same boat with my "aging" GTX 1080, but nothing has really motivated me to go buy a replacement yet -- although a "cheapo" custom 5700XT (or 2070 Super) in late Aug/early Sep. might tide me over for the time being ...
 
MavericK said:
The big problem for me is that most reviews haven't included the 1080 for a long time...even right after the 1080 Ti came out they pretty much stopped including it since that was sort of the "replacement" for the 1080. But that leaves me always wondering exactly how much faster a newer card is.

EDIT: I noticed that Anand's review actually has the 1080...nice!
Click to expand...

For me the only card that would bring a meaningful performance upgrade over my 1080 is the 2080 Ti. That means it’s a hard pass on the whole 20 series.

With cost per transistor still very high for 7nm it looks like nvidia will have to take a hit to margins for us to start seeing value again.
 
I've seen reports that these can be overclocked a pretty decent amount, to the tune of another +5-8% performance or so. Brings it more in line with the other Super cards, if true.
 
tungt88 said:
Yes, I'm in the same boat with my "aging" GTX 1080, but nothing has really motivated me to go buy a replacement yet -- although a "cheapo" custom 5700XT (or 2070 Super) in late Aug/early Sep. might tide me over for the time being ...
Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat. I am thinking about getting a 5700XT and then playing with sharpening to get decent framerates at 4k.
 
I just want something with more VRAM than my 1070 that actually looks worth spending money on.

The wait continues...
 
Domingo said:
If I owned a 1080Ti I'd simply wait for whatever the next major refresh is. I don't think this is the card that was even meant for that audience. This is more for someone that had a 1070 or something similar and doesn't want to drop a grand or more for a 2080Ti. It's not going to be all that amazing for RTX, but it's potent enough to do 4K/60 for the majority of titles. I also feel like the lost point is that this is like a 2080 but cheaper. It's better and cheaper. Not by a ton, but it's a no brainer which one to buy now. With some luck maybe it'll drive the normal 2080 prices down a little, too.
Click to expand...

What I should have done, TBH. I went to a 2080 last October, then traded it in for a VII a few months back. With the exception of 1-2 situations where 16GB Vram comes in handy, both were definitve side grades from my 1080 ti I got ~2 years ago -- a total and complete waste of cash.

The 5700 cards are really the only ones that have push the price/performance envelope in the past years at the top end.
 
After seeing the latest offerings from both Nvidia and AMD; my 1080 Ti continues to be one of the best, if not the best, hardware investments ever.

2.5 years since I got it and it still holds its own against similarly priced cards out now.
 
RamboZombie said:
well, no one said cheaper - the refered to the bang-for-the-buck factor..
Click to expand...

Same thing. If used had worse bang/buck no one would buy it. Used prices always have to fall to offer better value than new, so arguing that used has better value is pointless.
 
For RTX, 2070 Super appears to be the best value..... But I guess for $200 more that extra 10fps of the 2080 super might be worth it to some. Sure as hell note though...
 
The Nvidia side- grade with useless features to keep pricing high got old, so I guess now its a mini bump in the stack to keep prices high strategy. And they pretty much re-jacked up the " middle" I think.
 
Giving a $700 card in 2019 with a 256 bit bus is simply insulting.

This thing is so bandwidth starved:
2060->2080: 50% more gpu 50% more perf.
2060s->2080s: 50% more gpu 30% more perf.

Just cranking up the GDDR6 clocks will not help. There is always a performance degradation when you hit a certain threshold despite nice-on-paper theoretical bandwidth. Latency could be crazy high as well. And, not least of all, the extra 4 gb of vram would have been nice.
 
Nightfire said:
Giving a $700 card in 2019 with a 256 bit bus is simply insulting.

This thing is so bandwidth starved:
2060->2080: 50% more gpu 50% more perf.
2060s->2080s: 50% more gpu 30% more perf.

Just cranking up the GDDR6 clocks will not help. There is always a performance degradation when you hit a certain threshold despite nice-on-paper theoretical bandwidth. Latency could be crazy high as well. And, not least of all, the extra 4 gb of vram would have been nice.
Click to expand...

IF the RTX2080Super was bandwidth starved, increasing the bandwidth would help, duh!!! Nvidia is not as bandwidth limited as AMD since it started using all its compression technologies.

Only in Mining did bandwidth make a huge difference, but gaming wise it doesn't affect much, if at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top