Why does Linus think so badly of RTX 2060?

[RTX2060Owner]

    Hey, i am new here!

    In this video, Linus heavily criticises the RTX 2060. He mocks it by saying it's a crap card for 4K and basically a waste of money.

    Why? I own it and it's a pretty good card, in my opinion. I game in 2560x1440p, and i am able to maintain very good FPS. I play RDR2 in a mixture of medium and high settings, and i am hitting 60-70 FPS.

    With lighter titles like Pillars of Eternity, CS:GO, Grim Dawn etc. i am hitting 100-165 FPS (my refresh rate) either at Ultra or on a mix of Medium and High. The Witcher 3 runs in 120-140 FPS with all post processing turned off + a mixture of high and Ultra.

    The 6 GB of RAM is not a problem. I would like additional 2 GB's, don't get me wrong, However, i have never felt like it's too little. RDR2 in 1440p takes about 4 GB of RAM.

    Why is Linus so critical of the card? Not everyone games in 4k.

   

 

 

[Radium_Angel]

Because he can afford to....

Most of us would kill for one right now, but LTT has a million cards laying about, so they can be picky about stuff. 

We can't.

[HanZie82]

"For 4K"

Thats the important part. Probably the card is to slow to do it properly.

So, fine for 1080 bad for 4K (since its a lot more pixels).

(2 073 600 for 1080p versus 8,294,400 for 4K)

[Eighjan]

6 minutes ago, RTX2060Owner said:

He mocks it by saying it's a crap card for 4K and basically a waste of money.

Realistically, a 2060 is best suited to 1440p, max... 2080ti may have been the better bet for 4K, but even then 4K was a major headache for a LOT of cards.

[IkeaGnome]

That video came out shortly after release. What you're seeing there is part of why the current shortage is such a big deal. Pascal to Turing wasn't a big enough gap to make it worth going to Pascal from Turing. Nvidia also marketed that as a 4k GPU. 

Are you using yours at 4K? If so, what are your frame rates like? 

[rice guru]

9 minutes ago, RTX2060Owner said:

    Hey, i am new here!

    In this video, Linus heavily criticises the RTX 2060. He mocks it by saying it's a crap card for 4K and basically a waste of money.

    Why? I own it and it's a pretty good card, in my opinion. I game in 2560x1440p, and i am able to maintain very good FPS. I play RDR2 in a mixture of medium and high settings, and i am hitting 60-70 FPS.

    The 6 GB of RAM is not a problem. I would like additional 2 GB's, don't get me wrong, However, i have never felt like it's too little. RDR2 in 1440p takes about 4 GB of RAM.

    Why is Linus so critical of the card? Not everyone games in 4k.

   

 

 

high price at launch compared to the 1060 at launch. not a great RAy tracing Card performance wise, relativelu low V RAM for 4k. even I wont use my 3070 for 4k. from what I remember foor the video he rips on its ability to use ray tracing as its really nota  good ray tracing card but overall a good improvement over last gen's 1070 in regards to raw non raytraced performance. especially with tech like DLSS behind it. there was also not gpu shortage and honestly its a even worse card now if we didnt have a shortage

[RTX2060Owner]

2 minutes ago, Eighjan said:

Realistically, a 2060 is best suited to 1440p, max... 2080ti may have been the better bet for 4K, but even then 4K was a major headache for a LOT of cards.

 

Sorry, i worded myself incorrectly. Yes, the 2060 is bad for 4K gaming with newer titles (unless you are fine with 30 FPS, then it's great). However, it's obviously not intended for that resolution at that price point. That's like comparing a laptop that's intended for office work to a gaming desktop

[Entropy.]

10 minutes ago, RTX2060Owner said:

   Hey, i am new here!

    In this video, Linus heavily criticises the RTX 2060. He mocks it by saying it's a crap card for 4K and basically a waste of money.

     Why? I own it and it's a pretty good card, in my opini

   

 

Edit sorry posted prematurely, wait!

1. Remember that this is from 2019

2. Performance for the price isn't impressive. Say compared to the $100 cheaper (talking about MSRP), 1660 Super, there's fairly minor performance gains. Or perhaps in comparison to the GTX 1070ti (which used to go for sub-$200 on the used market), performance was similar. Or, in comparison to the 5700xt which MSRP's for what... $60 more? The 5700xt had performance numbers that were in between the 2070 and 2070 Super. 

[Lurick]

Because it was marketed as a 4K capable card when it launched even though it's not?

[Jumballi]

He 

1 minute ago, RTX2060Owner said:

 

Sorry, i worded myself incorrectly. Yes, the 2060 is bad for 4K gaming with newer titles (unless you are fine with 30 FPS, then it's great). However, it's obviously not intended for that resolution at that price point. That's like comparing a laptop that's intended for office work to a gaming desktop

At the time the video launched, it was similar performance to a 1060 to 1070 depending on task, but cost $100-200 more, and then slapped on a feature that’s little to no performance at the tier it’s at.

[Lurick]

9 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

Because he can afford to....

Most of us would kill for one right now, but LTT has a million cards laying about, so they can be picky about stuff. 

We can't.

Yah, Linus should look forward in time 2 years and stop being so critical in the present to make us feel better when things aren't going well when the future becomes the present?

[rice guru]

1 minute ago, RTX2060Owner said:

 

Sorry, i worded myself incorrectly. Yes, the 2060 is bad for 4K gaming with newer titles (unless you are fine with 30 FPS, then it's great). However, it's obviously not intended for that resolution at that price point. That's like comparing a laptop that's intended for office work to a gaming desktop

I think the main issue was the fact that you had a huge price jump for a 60 series card for a feature that didn't really do well with the card which is ray tracing as that;s what it's main selling point was which was the cheapest way to access ray tracing. but the price and lack of performance on raytracing hindered it;s performance a ton. also consider this was before a lot of games that currently have dlss had dlss 

[Eighjan]

@RTX2060Owner - the context of the wording he used is key, like @Lurick said.

 

2nd gen RTX cards did come with a very "Ouch" premium, 'cos AMD had nothing better to offer... hence the pricing strategy of the 30-series...

 

[Jumballi]

1 minute ago, rice guru said:

I think the main issue was the fact that you had a huge price jump for a 60 series card for a feature that didn't really do well with the card which is ray tracing as that;s what it's main selling point was which was the cheapest way to access ray tracing. but the price and lack of performance on raytracing hindered it;s performance a ton. also consider this was before a lot of games that currently have dlss had dlss 

4k dlss is still pretty bad on the 2060, it couldn’t do 4k to begin with, but even 1440p with some ai upscaling is too much for it.

[rice guru]

1 minute ago, Jumballi said:

4k dlss is still pretty bad on the 2060, it couldn’t do 4k to begin with, but even 1440p with some ai upscaling is too much for it.

honestly not surprised. 

[Firewrath9]

6 minutes ago, Brok3n But who cares? said:

1. Remember that this is from 2019

2. Performance for the price isn't impressive. Say compared to the $100 cheaper (talking about MSRP), 1660 Super, there's fairly minor performance gains. Or perhaps in comparison to the GTX 1070ti (which used to go for sub-$200 on the used market), performance was similar. Or, in comparison to the 5700xt which MSRP's for what... $60 more? The 5700xt had performance numbers that were in between the 2070 and 2070 Super. 

this.
around the same time, i got a 1070 for literally $120. A good deal yes, but getting a 1070 ti for $200 was nothing crazy, which basically matched the RTX 2060 in games. Not to mention the RTX was useless, and spending the $100-150 more from a 1660 super gave you like 15% more performance.

[rice guru]

1 minute ago, Firewrath9 said:

i got a 1070 for literally $120.

fuck if I wish that was possible right now. 

 

2 minutes ago, Firewrath9 said:

ot to mention the RTX was useless

honestly kinda still is. 

[Firewrath9]

Just now, rice guru said:

fuck if I wish that was possible right now. 

hindsight is 20-20, i wish i bought doge 2 years ago lol

[rice guru]

Just now, Firewrath9 said:

hindsight is 20-20, i wish i bought doge 2 years ago lol

lol, glad I bought doge on the initial hype that was a nice $20 investment even though I misstimed my sale by a bit but at least I manage to cash outbefore the current crash but not the point of the post. honestly Ive been seeing a lot more posts like this elsewhere. even people prepped to buy 1050ti for msrp at launch 

[Zando_]

9 minutes ago, Jumballi said:

4k dlss is still pretty bad on the 2060, it couldn’t do 4k to begin with, but even 1440p with some ai upscaling is too much for it.

^^^ I have a 2060 Super, if you go for middling DLSS settings and tone down the RTX and some other settings, you can get stuff like Cyberpunk or Control playable at 4K. Something like the new Metro Exodus enhanced that uses RTX only lighting, you'll need to pretty aggressively drop settings to consistently get playable fps (usually around 40 or so for most games aside from faster paced shooters). The base 2060 would be even worse, so yeaaah I'm gonna call 4K on that a fat nope, unless you don't like crispy textures (lotta games will pull over 6GB VRAM at 4K) and are okay with DLSS on the performance preset (lowest internal resolution), which usually looks like shite. On DLSS 2.0 titles it can be better but it's still pretty meh IMO. 

[Mark Kaine]

4 hours ago, Lurick said:

Because it was marketed as a 4K capable card when it launched even though it's not?

Ya, ok, but an item shouldn't necessarily be judged by its marketing, that always comes of as a bit weird to me. Just mention that the marketing is a bit misleading, and then review *objectively* imo.

 

 

I know when I had my 1060 I would have loved to get a 2060, but they were really too expensive here - 400 euros! But, really all cards were too expensive here. I got my 1060 for 300 euros, which was a "bargain" lol.

 

 

My 3070 cost 700, thats actually more reasonable ironically,  imo. But 2060 a bad card at release ? Hell no.

 

 

[Jumballi]

9 hours ago, Zando Bob said:

^^^ I have a 2060 Super, if you go for middling DLSS settings and tone down the RTX and some other settings, you can get stuff like Cyberpunk or Control playable at 4K. Something like the new Metro Exodus enhanced that uses RTX only lighting, you'll need to pretty aggressively drop settings to consistently get playable fps (usually around 40 or so for most games aside from faster paced shooters). The base 2060 would be even worse, so yeaaah I'm gonna call 4K on that a fat nope, unless you don't like crispy textures (lotta games will pull over 6GB VRAM at 4K) and are okay with DLSS on the performance preset (lowest internal resolution), which usually looks like shite. On DLSS 2.0 titles it can be better but it's still pretty meh IMO. 

2060 super was a rebranded 2070, which has 2 gb more vram and a lot more everything else.

[thrasher_565]

9 hours ago, rice guru said:

fuck if I wish that was possible right now. 

 

honestly kinda still is. 

i almost got a water cooled gtx 1070 for $300 can...but i was trying to offer less and well some one els bought it now...dam that was when people were selling there gpus for the 30xx gpus...

Edited May 25, 2021 by thrasher_565

[Zando_]

9 hours ago, Jumballi said:

2060 super was a rebranded 2070, which has 2 gb more vram and a lot more everything else.

Yes. Thus:

18 hours ago, Zando Bob said:

I have a 2060 Super... The base 2060 would be even worse, so yeaaah I'm gonna call 4K on that a fat nope

 

[RTX2060Owner]

Guys i don't know why this conversation strayed to 4K.

 

I am obviously aware that my GPU is quite insufficient for 4K. And that's fine, because it wasn't meant for 4K. Nvidia may have marketed it as a 4K capable card, but anyone with a brain could tell it wasn't. I believe that the 2080ti averages 50 FPS in RDR2 on max settings, 4K. So naturally, a card with a -60 suffix isn't meant for that resolution.

 

I just wanted to say his reaction was definitely overblown. This is a really decent card for widescreen 1080p and 1440p. So he definitely went harsh on it. This isn't the most powerful card ever created, but it is more than capable if you don't play in 4K, and you don't mind occassionally turning off some settings, like shadows or reflections.

 

I would agree that the ray tracing capability is kind of useless. However, the card kind of makes up for it with DLSS.

 

I don't even know why you guys talk about 4k that much. Most games don't work all that well on 4k even with very good cards. It's still a niche resolution. According to the Steam hardware survey, some 3% are on 4k.