MSI GeForce RTX 2070 GAMING Z Performance Review @ [H]

Now, this was a far more appropriate review with real retail oc cards compared to outdated founders editions of the 1080 etc. This review gave really good data. Very impressive.
 
DejaWiz said:
GTX 970 - $329
GTX 1070 - $379
RTX 2070 - $599

Smokin' crack lately, nVidia?

Thanks for putting in the time and effort for another amazing review, [H]!
Click to expand...

Well... the die size is 445mm^2 vs the Titan XP/1080ti 471mm^2. If it was just CUDA cores it’d be faster than the 1080ti.

Instead we have RTX features that we’re unable to use. :(

So value can increase over time if those features deliver but anyone with half a brain doesn’t bank on that.
 
Great article but in the comment section nobody want to mention the vega 64 and how overpriced and crappy that card is. Vega 64 was supposed to shine through Vulkan or DX12 or some magical fine wine drivers. some may even got fooled by these promises. I guess it's only cool if we trash Nvidia these days.
 
Last edited:
Nolan7689 said:
Too rich for my blood at the moment, and I’m staying reserved until I see what Vega 2 brings to the table aside from 7nm. Buzzwords are nice, performance is nicer though.
Click to expand...

Exactly. While theoretical performance for future features are nice, real performance is where my money goes every time. Ray Tracing and DLSS mean diddly and squat at present and for the next 6-12 months at least. Why on earth would I pay extra for hardware that's going to likely sit dormant for most of the card's life (and will certainly be depasse by the time those features become important), and remains to be seen how well it will perform with said features?
 
Nima84 said:
Nobody want to mention the vega 64 and how overpriced and crappy that card is. Vega 64 was supposed to shine through Vulkan or DX12 or some magical fine wine drivers. I guess it's only cool if we trash Nvidia these days.
Click to expand...
Did you read the article?
The last page explicitly calls out the Vega as being a bad choice these days.
 
I think that 100 dollars over the 1080 is too much for a gold award, DLSS could be the key factor of this card to give an 4k like experience, other than that i would skip it.
 
Dayaks said:
Well... the die size is 445mm^2 vs the Titan XP/1080ti 471mm^2. If it was just CUDA cores it’d be faster than the 1080ti.

Instead we have RTX features that we’re unable to use. :(

So value can increase over time if those features deliver but anyone with half a brain doesn’t bank on that.
Click to expand...

The biggest problem I have is when (if) ray tracing comes to fruition soon, the performance hit is going to drag these first-gen RTX cards through the mud, resulting in a huge loss on investment.

Nobody is going to want to pay the artificially inflated prices for a 30-50% hit in FPS, and that's also going to kill the used market values.
 
DejaWiz said:
The biggest problem I have is when (if) ray tracing comes to fruition soon, the performance hit is going to drag these first-gen RTX cards through the mud, resulting in a huge loss on investment.

Nobody is going to want to pay the artificially inflated prices for a 30-50% hit in FPS, and that's also going to kill the used market values.
Click to expand...
and take into account that the 2070 has 60% the ray tracing capabilities of the 2080Ti.. most demos were running on the Ti and there are rumors of it only being capable of 40fps/1080, so reduce the performance by almost half and you've got a nice 24FPS slideshow? gross.
 
Nima84 said:
My comment was about people criticizing only Nvidia in the comment section. the article was great at calling out Vega 64 as as being a bad choice.
Click to expand...
its an article discussing the new nVidia card, of course they are discussing nVidia. outside as a point of reference, trashing AMD is off topic for this discussion, IMO.

i liked this card, right until i realized they still asking me to drop $600 on a mid-tier GPU. hey nVidia, mining is over. none of us liked it the last year or two, we really don't like it now. the only reason some people stomached it then was it still provided a respectable bump in performance over the earlier cards. this provides some, but not nearly enough

AMD may not compete on the high end, but if they can make something respectable in the 250-400$ range, it might not matter.
 
ManofGod said:
How long have you been using the SLI Setup? Might be worth it but then again, you might be better keeping what you have, if the SLI portion has been used a lot. Nice review.
Click to expand...

Well, the cards arrive Weds. Friend upgraded to a 2080Ti SLI setup and shipped me his old cards as I am still on a gtx970. The 980Ti setup would be a huge upgrade over what I have currently and if benchmarks are to be believed should still be very decent to use today.
 
Thanks for the review guys! Glad you guys didnt sign the NDA, took a hit on the other reviews but got this one out of the gate before everyone else, good job! 2070 Looks to be the sweet spot in terms of performance. AMD put on a poor showing here, but the Strix has been shown to be a little hit or miss, Sapphire Nitro probably would have been a better matchup. Looking to see what max clocks look like on all cards in the future! Keep er up!
 
Nima84 said:
Nobody want to mention the vega 64 and how overpriced and crappy that card is. Vega 64 was supposed to shine through Vulkan or DX12 or some magical fine wine drivers. I guess it's only cool if we trash Nvidia these days.
Click to expand...

Says the person who clearly did not read the review. Just check the last page if you cannot be bothered to do anything else, you will then understand. This is a review of the 2070 and Kyle made a point about it and the Vega 64, you just have to be willing to read.

Or, as Kyle would put it, if only someone had said something https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/10/14/msi_geforce_rtx_2070_gaming_z_performance_review/12 about it. :D

Nima84 said:
My comment was about people criticizing only Nvidia in the comment section. the article was great at calling out Vega 64 as as being a bad choice.
Click to expand...

Ummm dude, Nvidia deserves to be called out in this comments section, considering the price and dormant features. That said, the review itself was quite good and Kyle got his World Exclusive review, good on him. :D
 
Last edited:
ManofGod said:
Says the person who clearly did not read the review. Just check the last page if you cannot be bothered to do anything else, you will then understand. This is a review of the 2070 and Kyle made a point about it and the Vega 64, you just have to be willing to read.

Or, as Kyle would put it, if only someone had said something https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/10/14/msi_geforce_rtx_2070_gaming_z_performance_review/12 about it. :D
Click to expand...
I just answered a similar comment before you. read my previous comment. I will edit my first comment to not cause anymore misunderstanding.
 
Vega isnt a bad GPU, overpriced in the market now for sure, but its a very capable card and the 56 flashed and overclocked is a great value id say at the $399 I paid. 2070 just trounced the 64 at $599, so we shall see what the answer is. Im guessing a price drop inbound for Vega. I hope this forces AMD to drop 7nm Vega to the consumer line of cards to regain some ground in the high-end market.
 
TangledThornz said:
This gives me some hope the 2060 will be a good card too.
Click to expand...

Of course it will be a good card, it will also be at nonsense prices, 350 - 400?

The review itself is very good and wouldn't disagree with the gold award for the performance, only for the pricing.

If only AMD can do something with Vega and Polaris and soon, GDDR6 on those and they would fly wouldn't they? (If you could get Vega to work with GDDR6 of course)
 
Looks like Nvidia is trying to go Apples route and charge you as much as they think they can, because "Nvidia".
 
The official embargo for the RTX 2070 expires Tuesday at 8am CDT. Since we are not held to NVIDIA's embargo we have a full RTX 2070 performance review for you today
Click to expand...

First, just gotta say I LOL'd way too hard at this. Very well played [H]!

A $600 price tag (if that's the actual price at launch) makes this a pretty attractive card. Looks like it's about as fast as a 1080Ti at around 17% average but nearly $150 cheaper. I'm not crazy about it having to be OC'd to near redline levels but MSI usually makes a pretty solid card so the components should hold up a good long time.

I've been waiting a while to upgrade but this one might be what I'm after. $800 is just more than I want to spend on a GPU but $600 would be OK, especially since I'm still at 1920x1080 this cars would be a powerhouse.

MBTP said:
I think that 100 dollars over the 1080 is too much for a gold award
Click to expand...

How about $150 less than a 1080 Ti but roughly the same performance?
 
Last edited:
SSimmons05 said:
Looks like Nvidia is trying to go Apples route and charge you as much as they think they can, because "Nvidia".
Click to expand...
Or... good business?
Why would they leave money on the table? The RTX 2070 is going to be the top show on the block for a while, no AMD competition. The results here show it being essentially the best 1440 GPU, with extra features. And don't forget e-peen value.

Don't blame Nvidia if AMD gpus suck and they are willing to capitalize. If we pay for the cards, they will make them.
 
I'm still not on board with the pricing. I thought I was nuts to buy the ASUS STRIX 1070 at $460 back in 02/17. But it was a nice upgrade over my 970 so I splurged. Now I'm looking at $600 minimum to get into nice 1440p territory.

I do wonder how DLSS will perform on this card, and how well it can establish itself. I have a feeling by the time DLSS is successful, the 30xx line will be here.

Thanks Kyle for the nice review, the graphs are always so easy to read and show a true picture, love them.

PS: How is WCCFTECH allowed to just copy parts of this review and put them up on their site?!
 
Last edited:
SSimmons05 said:
Looks like Nvidia is trying to go Apples route and charge you as much as they think they can, because "Nvidia".
Click to expand...

Nah, it's because they have no viable competition for this generation (yet), and are still trying to cash in on the small percentage of consumers being acclimated to (and opening their wallets for) the past price hikes of last-gen from the previous mining craze.
 
Combined with the small node improvements, increased die size, and architectural changes; performance was expected for me. I'm happy that I recently got a deal on the GTX 1080 for $360. I believe it will be worth it to wait for 7nm which is expected to bring large improvements coming next year.
 
Decent, though not impressive performance gains over the 1080 at around the same price point. Too bad it couldn't be a better value.

I would like to see power usage numbers, as 2080/2080Ti seems to need more wattage to run. Power consumption used to be all the rage, and if we have to increase our power bill to run this card over the 1080, that'd be nice to know going in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MBTP
like this
THRESHIN said:
Nice review, great work as always!

I'm still sitting on my old 24" Samsung 245bw that just won't die. I'm still happy with it so its hard to justify rreplacing it. Until it finally melts into a puddle of plastic, my old gtx 970 keeps on chuggin.
Click to expand...

lucky you.. mine died a terrible and slow death about 6 years ago..

MacLeod said:
First, just gotta say I LOL'd way too hard at this. Very well played [H]!

A $600 price tag (if that's the actual price at launch) makes this a pretty attractive card. Looks like it's about as fast as a 1080Ti at around 17% average but nearly $150 cheaper. I'm not crazy about it having to be OC'd to near redline levels but MSI usually makes a pretty solid card so the components should hold up a good long time.

I've been waiting a while to upgrade but this one might be what I'm after. $800 is just more than I want to spend on a GPU but $600 would be OK, especially since I'm still at 1920x1080 this cars would be a powerhouse.



How about $150 less than a 1080 Ti but roughly the same performance?
Click to expand...

cough in a special world it might but no the 1080ti still beats it for roughly the same price.

https://hardforum.com/threads/msi-g...performance-review-h.1969719/#post-1043883978
 
Yeah, it would have been nice to throw in the 1080 Ti to see a better picture, seeing that the 2070 did so well against a 1080.

Were you able to overclock the 2070 even further? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't see anything regarding overclocking.

How tall is this card? Is it a triple slot like most of the 2080Ti cards?
 
MrDeaf said:
Yeah, it would have been nice to throw in the 1080 Ti to see a better picture, seeing that the 2070 did so well against a 1080.

Were you able to overclock the 2070 even further? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't see anything regarding overclocking.

How tall is this card? Is it a triple slot like most of the 2080Ti cards?
Click to expand...

They might do an OC article later but I wouldn't expect much. These boards are voltage locked like the pascal ones so I'd expect similar results.
 
Trimlock said:
Excellent review, I agree that the big question is ray tracing performance. A publisher needs to hurry up and get something out.
Click to expand...

After seeing some of the small, very quickly done effects in BF5, I'm looking forward to ray tracing. It may be little things, and not a lot at once, but for the very first games that are coming out supporting it, I like it. I've always been a fan of eye candy. This is going to be the deciding factor. I'm going to need a new card, and I'm willing to pay a little more for good ray tracing effects in the games I play. Even if they are minor. As long as they don't drag down the frame rate too much.

I just want to see some competition and maybe some price drops (FE are typically $50-100 more than the other models, I believe).

$600? Maybe... $500? Yea, I could do that.
 
I'm glad to see it is out performing the 1080. Really the 2070 should be trading blows performance wise with a 1080ti to be a solid upgrade. I got a huge boost when I went to the 970, and another huge boost when I went to the 1070, it just doesn't feel that much of a generation on generation performance boost to go with a 2070. And that's not even considering the price disparity.
 
i'd like to see a direct comparison between the 2070 and the 2080/Ti models. then do a $per frame calc. the very high end 2070 here is still what.. half the price of the 2080ti.
 
Ur_Mom said:
After seeing some of the small, very quickly done effects in BF5, I'm looking forward to ray tracing. It may be little things, and not a lot at once, but for the very first games that are coming out supporting it, I like it. I've always been a fan of eye candy. This is going to be the deciding factor. I'm going to need a new card, and I'm willing to pay a little more for good ray tracing effects in the games I play. Even if they are minor. As long as they don't drag down the frame rate too much.

I just want to see some competition and maybe some price drops (FE are typically $50-100 more than the other models, I believe).

$600? Maybe... $500? Yea, I could do that.
Click to expand...

Well if you're buy a video card for eye candy you are... well... doing the right thing. And yes I think this effect could be awesome. I personally can't wait to see a truly functional in game mirror.
 
DejaWiz said:
GTX 970 - $329
GTX 1070 - $379
RTX 2070 - $599
Click to expand...

To me this seems like it should be priced at no more than $429. I first assumed that this is a sign that desktop gaming is leaving me behind; but now I am thinking this is a pricing blunder on nvidia's part. Instead of getting two sales of people buying new 2070's and 2080ti's, they are getting one and encouraging the rest to buy used:
  • second hand 1080's are available for $360
  • second hand 1080ti's are available for $560
 
Nima84 said:
My comment was about people criticizing only Nvidia in the comment section. the article was great at calling out Vega 64 as as being a bad choice.
Click to expand...

It's not a review of Vega. Those of us who saw the Vega 64 as a bad value from Day 1 (like I did) have already said our piece. No need to beat the dead horse any further.

This review confirms that the 2070 would be my next logical upgrade performance-wise based on my needs. Unfortunately, the cost really kills the price/performance ratio and prices it out of my league.
 
On the subject of Ray Tracing, buying the 2070 for that should be an obvious non-starter considering how awful the performance is on the flag-ship 2080 Ti.

I have no doubt that Ray Tracing will become much more prominent, but it's at least another generation away if not two.
 
Screenshot_20181015-114126_Google.jpg
 
DejaWiz said:
GTX 970 - $329
GTX 1070 - $379
RTX 2070 - $599

Smokin' crack lately, nVidia?

Thanks for putting in the time and effort for another amazing review, [H]!
Click to expand...

The MSRP for the GTX 1070 FE was 449, not 379, at launch.
 
Great review and I'm very happy you got it out before everyone else. Nvidia don't want to work with you? Screw em. Way to take care of business.

The card is in kind of a weird spot price wise. I think people who spend that much will probably spend a little more and get a 2080. If someone is looking for value for their dollar in that price range, I would think they would go with the 1080, especially since ray tracing is so early in development. Maybe when things settle down and prices settle down to what they are really going to sell for, but this isn't as big of a deal for me as the 2080 or 2080ti.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top