I know, dumb question but...

[Mark Kaine]

I'm seriously thinking about getting a 2070 super (new) instead of playing the waiting game for 3070... 

 

Is that in any way a good idea in your opinion? 

 

My reasons are as follows:

 

- I don't have much money, the 2070s would cost around 500 bucks *and* I wouldn't need a new psu either (got a 500w bequiet rn) 

 

- 3070 will probably be hot as hell, use more power and I'd *most likely* would need a new psu for another ~100 bucks (~650w)

 

- I play mostly AAA games at 1080p on a 60Hz monitor and I don't really plan on buying a new monitor any time soon and if then probably 1080p (or maybe 1440p) gsync so I feel the power of a 3070 would go mostly waste. 

 

- I don't really care for "rtx shenanigans" at all and would probably turn them off

 

- I could get the 2070s right now (gaming x model)

 

Thoughts? 

 

 

[Oswin]

i'd rather wait for the benchmarks to see how much power the 3070 actually uses, besides the 650 watt recommendation was based on a system with a 10900k, a 3600 doesnt consume as much power.

[KingTdiGGiTTy]

Now that we know when it is coming the waiting game won't be so difficult.

[flashiling]

2 minutes ago, KingTdiGGiTTy said:

Now that we know when it is coming the waiting game won't be so difficult.

waiting didn't seem to be the main issue for OP, but budget.

[KingTdiGGiTTy]

1 minute ago, flashiling said:

waiting didn't seem to be the main issue for OP, but budget.

Aren't they the same price? 

Also, if you don't really care for RTX and you wanna save a buck a 2070 is a bit OP for 1080p 60 is most cases.

A 1660 ti or super could be a better option. Or a Radeon 5700 for 1080p.

My friend has a 5700xt setupp with a 144hz 1440p monitor with freesync and he usually sits around 100fps.

[flashiling]

1 minute ago, KingTdiGGiTTy said:

Aren't they the same price? 

Also, if you don't really care for RTX and you wanna save a buck a 2070 is a bit OP for 1080p 60 is most cases.

A 1660 ti or super could be a better option. Or a Radeon 5700 for 1080p.

My friend has a 5700xt setupp with a 144hz 1440p monitor with freesync and he usually sits around 100fps.

a 1660ti is worse than a 2070super,

why downgrade his gpu

[Stahlmann]

1 minute ago, flashiling said:

a 1660ti is worse than a 2070super,

why downgrade his gpu

It makes sense, he didn't buy it yet. And for 1080p 60Hz he doesn't need a 2070 Super... A 1660 Super will completely suffice for that.

[marbled]

I'm no expert but I think you'd have to consider how fast you need a new graphics card - the odds are very good that there'll be a 3060/3050 model by January next year at least, which would be cheaper than a 2070 super but give you equal/better performance. That would future proof you for a faster refresh rate monitor or 1440p gaming, I believe.

 

Alternatively, if you're only looking for 60 FPS at 1080p, and don't care about ray tracing then arguably something like a 5600XT would more than meet your needs if you wanted something today for less than £300

[Mark Kaine]

Also keep in mind I have a pretty low end first gen Ryzen board - it would probably work but is also kinda an unknown factor if it would be fit for a power hungry monster card... 

 

 

I was honestly dead set on getting a 3000 card before the reveal, but I was definitely expecting same power consumption than previous gen (8nm huh, huh) and also more Vram... These 3000 cards even if I don't doubt their pure TF (compute) power become more and more disappointing the more I think about it... 

 

 

21 minutes ago, Oswin said:

i'd rather wait for the benchmarks to see how much power the 3070 actually uses, besides the 650 watt recommendation was based on a system with a 10900k, a 3600 doesnt consume as much power.

That seems like a good advice - though knowing my country (Germany) the 2000 cards will soon explode in prices (new 1070 cards go for €500+ as a reference) and as such waiting for too long might not be a good idea.

 

I'd also like some headroom with the psu,  it's already cutting it real close with the 2070s, imo!? 

[KingTdiGGiTTy]

1 minute ago, flashiling said:

a 1660ti is worse than a 2070super,

why downgrade his gpu

they don't have a 2070 yet, and if they want to play games at 1080p 60hz, without RTX enabled theres no reason to get a card that powerful.

They could also go for an AMD card right now instead of buying nvidia turing.

1 minute ago, marbled said:

Alternatively, if you're only looking for 60 FPS at 1080p, and don't care about ray tracing then arguably something like a 5600XT would more than meet your needs if you wanted something today for less than £300

What they said^

[flashiling]

7 minutes ago, Stahlmann98 said:

It makes sense, he didn't buy it yet

 

5 minutes ago, KingTdiGGiTTy said:

they don't have a 2070 yet

my bad misread it

[Mark Kaine]

2 minutes ago, marbled said:

I'm no expert but I think you'd have to consider how fast you need a new graphics card - the odds are very good that there'll be a 3060/3050 model by January next year at least, which would be cheaper than a 2070 super but give you equal/better performance. That would future proof you for a faster refresh rate monitor or 1440p gaming, I believe.

 

Alternatively, if you're only looking for 60 FPS at 1080p, and don't care about ray tracing then arguably something like a 5600XT would more than meet your needs if you wanted something today for less than £300

Already said I play mostly AAA games,  a 2060s would maybe be ok,  2070s would be much more future proof however. 

 

And a 3060/50 sounds like a good idea at first too,   but that's even more waiting and since NV apparently likes to cheap out on Vram probably not even an option, need 8gigs or more minimum. 

 

[Stahlmann]

Just now, Mark Kaine said:

Already said I play mostly AAA games,  a 2060s would maybe be ok,  2070s would be much more future proof however. 

 

And a 3060/50 sounds like a good idea at first too,   but that's even more waiting and since NV apparently likes to cheap out on Vram probably not even an option, need 8gigs or more minimum. 

 

If you're set to spend 500$ on a GPU i'd say just wait 1 more month and buy the 3070. If you're talking about future proofing and then buying a 2 year old GPU, you're doing it wrong.

[Oswin]

15 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

I'd also like some headroom with the psu,  it's already cutting it real close with the 2070s, imo!? 

i doubt your current system will consume anywhere near 400 watts even with at the worst case scenario with a 2070s

 

 

Edited September 4, 2020 by Oswin

[Mark Kaine]

8 minutes ago, KingTdiGGiTTy said:

theres no reason to get a card that powerful.

There definitely is, I play very demanding games, the more power the better... 

 

I'm not denying a 3070 would make a lot more sense objectively and be more future proof,  it's really a mix of budget / not wanting to wait another 1-3 months why I'm considering a 2070s...

 

 

So yeah, there's definitely good arguments to just wait for the 3070 too... Oof. 

 

 

[marbled]

5 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

Already said I play mostly AAA games,  a 2060s would maybe be ok,  2070s would be much more future proof however. 

 

And a 3060/50 sounds like a good idea at first too,   but that's even more waiting and since NV apparently likes to cheap out on Vram probably not even an option, need 8gigs or more minimum. 

 

Just to flag, from the reviews I've read a 5600XT can hit 60fps+ at max settings in pretty much any modern AAA title- 

https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/reviews/amd-radeon-rx_5600_xt/2

 

So I don't quite follow your concern there, but obviously, to each their own and all that!

[KingTdiGGiTTy]

Just now, Mark Kaine said:

There definitely is, I play very demanding games, the more power the better... 

I thought that, once.

I bought a Vega 56 off ebay for $200 awhile ago, it was a pretty good deal. But I play games at 1080p 60hz, so i could've saved $100 and bought a 580. 

If a 3070 is actually close in performance to a 2080ti it'll be more of a 4k 60 type of card.

[Mark Kaine]

1 minute ago, KingTdiGGiTTy said:

I thought that, once.

I bought a Vega 56 off ebay for $200 awhile ago, it was a pretty good deal. But I play games at 1080p 60hz, so i could've saved $100 and bought a 580. 

If a 3070 is actually close in performance to a 2080ti it'll be more of a 4k 60 type of card.

And yet it'll probably struggle with MHW:IB at *max* settings / 1080p 

 

(this is not a joke,  it's pretty much a given, max volumetric lighting is mega fps killer in that game - and not necessary either tbh,  low or medium is fine,  just an example why more power = better) 

 

Also guys, the options are 

2070s

3070

 

 

There's no A no M and no D in those words...  

 

 

[KingTdiGGiTTy]

2 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

Also guys, the options are 

2070s

3070

 

 

There's no A no M and no D in those words...  

 

I really can't recommend going with a 2070, now that the 3070 has a release schedule and it'll be the same price. Buying a used 2070 might make sense to save a buck. I digress.

If you don't want ray tracing, why are you so set on cards that feature ray tracing? 

[Omikse]

It seems to me he has already made up his mind on the 2070. Out of all the advise that has been given, he is still leaning towards the 2070. I personally have been saving for a few months now for the 3080. Based on the rumors, I thought I was going to have to spend 900 usd on it. But it came in lower than that so now all I have to do is save for the tax price of it. Like you I have a motherboard that was made for 1st gen Ryzen which I had a R5 1600 but now I am at R5 3600. I planned early and have a good enough power supply to be future proofed from 99% of upgrades. I am going to wait for the reviews to see how it all stacks up but I still think I am getting the 3080. The only thing to consider now is from whom (MSI, Gigabyte, ASUS, EVGA, or Zotac)

[Mark Kaine]

3 minutes ago, KingTdiGGiTTy said:

If you don't want ray tracing, why are you so set on cards that feature ray tracing? 

That's simple. 

 

I don't want to play with dynamic resolution anymore full stop. And I know I need something in the ballpark of 1080ti / 2070s / 3070 with minimum 8G Vram,  and I also know AMD has huge issues with the games I'm playing, so why should I even consider those... I don't care for RT,  sure, but I need the power anyways. 

 

 

I mean it's really difficult, a 3070 would be objectively much better,  but possibly cost ~200-300 bucks more *realistically* (good AIBs ain't cheap,   possibly new psu / mobo...) 

 

A very good 2070s would cost ~500, be done with and *most likely* will be good for1080p *60* for the vast majority of games, even for the next 2-3 years possibly / hopefully ?? 

 

 

^ I mean that's kinda my point,  2070s is the lowest card possible but would it be good for a couple of years... Nobody probably knows!  (though I'm not good at estimating that myself tbh,  so that's why I'm asking) 

 

 

 

 

[Mark Kaine]

4 minutes ago, Omikse said:

personally have been saving for a few months now for the 3080. Based on the rumors, I thought I was going to have to spend 900 usd on it

That's a good point,  I was expecting it to be higher priced too,  but if it was more than 700 for a 3070 level card I would have gone for a 2070 anyway lol, because I couldn't have afforded a 700+ card simply... 

 

So in a way I'm very happy the new cards are priced "reasonable" as it means last gen cards most likely won't see price hikes as what happened when the 20xx cards released. 

[MedicGarou]

2 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

I mean it's really difficult, a 3070 would be objectively much better,  but possibly cost ~200-300 bucks more *realistically* (good AIBs ain't cheap,   possibly new psu / mobo...) 

I would agree and put an "At least" 300 More because anywhere you can get one for the first few weeks/months will be marking the price up to astronomical amounts.. just look at Newegg for example on cards with a list price of XXX and see that they are being sold for 2- 3 times more than that.  I will be honest I have a 2070 super now that I am using to play COD MW at 1440 p and I turn ray tracing off in multiplayer as it makes some action (like when someone throws a Molotov) go from 115 fps down to 15 albeit only in select spots of the map.  If money is an issue I don't think you will go wrong with a 2070 super honestly. In the future when you upgrade to a 1440p monitor it will still be more than useful 

 

[Omikse]

3 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

That's a good point,  I was expecting it to be higher priced too,  but if it was more than 700 for a 3070 level card I would have gone for a 2070 anyway lol, because I couldn't have afforded a 700+ card simply... 

 

So in a way I'm very happy the new cards are priced "reasonable" as it means last gen cards most likely won't see price hikes as what happened when the 20xx cards released. 

So to say this, and by all means I am no expert on the matter, if you are in a hurry and need a card, then buy the 2070 you may be looking at. But if you can wait a little long, gives you more time to save some more money, then I say wait for the 3070. You might be surprised and happy then.

[MedicGarou]

4 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

personally have been saving for a few months now for the 3080. Based on the rumors, I thought I was going to have to spend 900 usd on it

I was totally set on getting an RTX 3090 when I was reading all of the leaks so I have ~$2000 set aside. Now that I see the 3080 is going to be such a monster at a realistic $900 street price for an Asus ROG Strix I'm thinking of upgrading my 9700 k to an AMD CPU and mobo so I can take advantage of the PCIE 4.0