RTX 3070 vs RTX 2080 ti

[EJOE]

Hello, I'm looking on the used market for GPUs. I found the RTX 3070 for around $350 and the RTX 2080ti for around $230. Would anyone here spend the extra money for the RTX 3070?

[RONOTHAN##]

That 2080 Ti is one hell of a deal, getting into the "too good to be true" category given what I've seen. The main advantage of the 3070 is a few Nvidia features and better RT performance, if you don't really care that much about them the 2080 Ti will be perfectly fine, arguably better since there are a lot of games where you need more VRAM.. 

Edited April 3, 2023 by RONOTHAN##

[WereCat]

If it's not broken get the 2080ti it's basically a 3070 with more VRAM

[EJOE]

1 minute ago, WereCat said:

If it's not broken get the 2080ti it's basically a 3070 with more VRAM

 

5 minutes ago, RONOTHAN## said:

That 2080 Ti is one hell of a deal, getting into the "too good to be true" category given what I've seen. The main advantage of the 3070 is a few Nvidia features and better RT performance, if you don't really care that much about them the 2080 Ti will be perfectly fine. 

I will keep this in mind. Thanks!

 

Which one would you get if they were at the same price?

[RONOTHAN##]

17 minutes ago, EJOE said:

 

I will keep this in mind. Thanks!

 

Which one would you get if they were at the same price?

I'd probably be getting the 2080 Ti, the extra VRAM is starting to become necessary for new AAA games (The Last Of Us Part 1, for instance), but both are good options. 

[WereCat]

17 minutes ago, EJOE said:

 

I will keep this in mind. Thanks!

 

Which one would you get if they were at the same price?

If they were both at $230 I would get the 2080ti if they were both $350 I would look for an RX 6700 XT /  6750 XT instead.

But if you need NVIDIA then it really depends. In theory the 3070 should last longer (functionally) as it's newer but the extra VRAM on 2080ti can be handy especially with the new games that are a huge VRAM hog and 8GB may not cut it... (very rare cases as of yet). And if the 2080ti is one of the good models with robust power delivery it will likely last for a very long time (if the other components were kept in check temp wise).

[jaslion]

42 minutes ago, EJOE said:

 

I will keep this in mind. Thanks!

 

Which one would you get if they were at the same price?

2080ti still because that 8gb of vram is simply not enough. It's already maxed.

 

However you are getting very close to 6700xt territory then.

[Agall]

55 minutes ago, EJOE said:

Hello, I'm looking on the used market for GPUs. I found the RTX 3070 for around $350 and the RTX 2080ti for around $230. Would anyone here spend the extra money for the RTX 3070?

8GB of VRAM isn't the greatest, I'd choose the 2080ti for that alone especially if its cheaper. Just make sure the source is reliable on any used part.

[Agall]

22 minutes ago, WereCat said:

If they were both at $230 I would get the 2080ti if they were both $350 I would look for an RX 6700 XT /  6750 XT instead.

But if you need NVIDIA then it really depends. In theory the 3070 should last longer (functionally) as it's newer but the extra VRAM on 2080ti can be handy especially with the new games that are a huge VRAM hog and 8GB may not cut it... (very rare cases as of yet). And if the 2080ti is one of the good models with robust power delivery it will likely last for a very long time (if the other components were kept in check temp wise).

I can't think of any specific advantage RTX 3000 has over RTX 2000, unlike RTX 4000's DLSS3.

[porina]

I actually switched from a 2080 Ti to 3070 about two years ago. The main benefit of the 3070 for me was that it supports G-Sync Compatible over HDMI (for TV use), which 20 series does not.

 

3070 is also more power efficient. Maybe not so much in gaming, but its throughput and efficiency for compute is way higher.

 

As others have touched upon, for gaming VRAM quantity is becoming more of a concern. That would be the only maybe swinging me back to 2080 Ti as every other aspect 3070 is better. Performance between them is very similar if not VRAM limited.

[Agall]

Just now, porina said:

I actually switched from a 2080 Ti to 3070 about two years ago. The main benefit of the 3070 for me was that it supports G-Sync Compatible over HDMI (for TV use), which 20 series does not.

 

3070 is also more power efficient. Maybe not so much in gaming, but its throughput and efficiency for compute is way higher.

 

As others have touched upon, for gaming VRAM quantity is becoming more of a concern. That would be the only maybe swinging me back to 2080 Ti as every other aspect 3070 is better. Performance between them is very similar if not VRAM limited.

Ewh G-sync over HDMI?

 

Give me DisplayPort or give me death, been that way since 2014 when I first started rocking G-sync.

[porina]

Just now, Agall said:

Ewh G-sync over HDMI?

 

Give me DisplayPort or give me death, been that way since 2014 when I first started rocking G-sync.

I got on the native G-Sync train in 2017 and am still using that monitor right now as I type this. Most TVs do not have DP, so G-Sync Compatible over HDMI is a thing. In practice it works fine with my 55" OLED.

 

In a quick search I found two large "gaming monitors" that have DP. One is a 55" VA panel with FreeSync. Another is 48" OLED with G-Sync Compatible, think it is just a gaming variation of the LG OLED TVs. So I guess you can get TVs with DP if you really want it, but your choice will be severely limited compared to using HDMI.

[Agall]

1 minute ago, porina said:

I got on the native G-Sync train in 2017 and am still using that monitor right now as I type this. Most TVs do not have DP, so G-Sync Compatible over HDMI is a thing. In practice it works fine with my 55" OLED.

 

In a quick search I found two large "gaming monitors" that have DP. One is a 55" VA panel with FreeSync. Another is 48" OLED with G-Sync Compatible, think it is just a gaming variation of the LG OLED TVs. So I guess you can get TVs with DP if you really want it, but your choice will be severely limited compared to using HDMI.

Those are probably all the BFG (big format gaming) displays Nvidia marketed a while back. I've just had nothing but issues gaming on HDMI every time I've tried, whether its input latency or just other various issues.

 

G-sync unfortunately was always built around DP, even back when I started with the Asus VG248QE specific DIY kit Nvidia sold back then before retail models were out.

[porina]

6 minutes ago, Agall said:

I've just had nothing but issues gaming on HDMI every time I've tried, whether its input latency or just other various issues.

Biggest thing I have found is you need a good cable to go to a good display. "ultra high speed certified" cable for 4k120. Cheap out on the cable and you get random dropouts or just doesn't work. Latency might be down to the display itself or bad settings on either end. G-Sync in any version helps a lot with latency.

[Ebony Falcon]

2080ti with a balling oc, like 2070mhz core and 8000mhz memory with 330w and up power limit will get u 3080fe stock performance ish give it take a few percent depending on the game depends on the modle of the card tho 

Plus the extra vram is nice 

[Sir Beregond]

1 hour ago, Agall said:

Ewh G-sync over HDMI?

 

Give me DisplayPort or give me death, been that way since 2014 when I first started rocking G-sync.

Well I have a C1 OLED, so HDMI is all I get for that. So this would definitely be a factor in my decision. You just have to make sure you get a quality 2.1 cable to get the 4k120.

 

You know a few months ago a guy was asking on some other forums I am on if he should take a 2080 Ti or a 3070 in an RMA and most, including myself, were telling him 3070. Retrospect, I think you take RT out of the equation and the 2080 Ti is better for the simple reason being it has 11GB of VRAM instead of 8GB. Performance wise, it and the 3070 are practically equal, so all things being equal aside from perhaps RT, 11GB > 8GB.

[Agall]

12 minutes ago, Sir Beregond said:

Well I have a C1 OLED, so HDMI is all I get for that. So this would definitely be a factor in my decision. You just have to make sure you get a quality 2.1 cable to get the 4k120.

 

You know a few months ago a guy was asking on some other forums I am on if he should take a 2080 Ti or a 3070 in an RMA and most, including myself, were telling him 3070. Retrospect, I think you take RT out of the equation and the 2080 Ti is better for the simple reason being it has 11GB of VRAM instead of 8GB. Performance wise, it and the 3070 are practically equal, so all things being equal aside from perhaps RT, 11GB > 8GB.

I agree, the VRAM problem that HWUB has reported for years that started with the RTX 3000 series really is something I heeded a while ago. TBH if I bought an RTX 3090 on launch like I should've instead of getting an RTX 3060ti, then 3070, then 6900xt, I wouldn't have had to buy the RTX 4090 to simply play at 4K.

 

I run a Neo G8 and started off using HDMI since it could native drive the display. The latency issues I experienced weren't worth it, but note this was starting with the 6900xt. Its quite possible I'd get a better experience on hdmi 2.1 than dp1.4, though I haven't had any issues with running DSC through dp1.4 for 4K 240Hz. I'm just scared to try again.

 

"HDMI® Specification HDMI 2.1a is the most recent update of the HDMI® specification and supports a range of higher video resolutions and refresh rates including 8K60 and 4K120, and resolutions up to 10K. Dynamic HDR formats are also supported, and bandwidth capability is increased up to 48Gbps." So technically its still running DSC on 4K 240Hz... You'd think 8K 60Hz is just 4K 240Hz with extra steps but its not.

[Sir Beregond]

8 minutes ago, Agall said:

I agree, the VRAM problem that HWUB has reported for years that started with the RTX 3000 series really is something I heeded a while ago. TBH if I bought an RTX 3090 on launch like I should've instead of getting an RTX 3060ti, then 3070, then 6900xt, I wouldn't have had to buy the RTX 4090 to simply play at 4K.

 

I run a Neo G8 and started off using HDMI since it could native drive the display. The latency issues I experienced weren't worth it, but note this was starting with the 6900xt. Its quite possible I'd get a better experience on hdmi 2.1 than dp1.4, though I haven't had any issues with running DSC through dp1.4 for 4K 240Hz. I'm just scared to try again.

 

"HDMI® Specification HDMI 2.1a is the most recent update of the HDMI® specification and supports a range of higher video resolutions and refresh rates including 8K60 and 4K120, and resolutions up to 10K. Dynamic HDR formats are also supported, and bandwidth capability is increased up to 48Gbps." So technically its still running DSC on 4K 240Hz... You'd think 8K 60Hz is just 4K 240Hz with extra steps but its not.

Yeah I somewhat regret the 3080 Ti purchase. Granted it was secondhand so I definitely did not pay MSRP for it, but I think now that I am at 4k, I'll be upgrading it already next gen. That said, I just am not interested in $1600+ graphics cards, so I'll either grab a 4090 when they hit the used market cheap next gen, or else look at what kinda performance/specs we get below the 90-class next gen and if we get some sort of price correction (though to be clear, definitely not holding my breath on that).

 

Yeah given the choice, I would always choose DP over HDMI. In this case, I was just providing a scenario where you might not have that choice so it may factor into what card you choose.

[Agall]

5 minutes ago, Sir Beregond said:

Yeah I somewhat regret the 3080 Ti purchase. Granted it was secondhand so I definitely did not pay MSRP for it, but I think now that I am at 4k, I'll be upgrading it already next gen. That said, I just am not interested in $1600+ graphics cards, so I'll either grab a 4090 when they hit the used market cheap next gen, or else look at what kinda performance/specs we get below the 90-class next gen and if we get some sort of price correction (though to be clear, definitely not holding my breath on that).

 

Yeah given the choice, I would always choose DP over HDMI. In this case, I was just providing a scenario where you might not have that choice so it may factor into what card you choose.

4090 is however an absolute monster at 4K. The only reason I jumped. It was disproportionally higher and its showed with the RTX 4080 benchmarks.

[Sir Beregond]

31 minutes ago, Agall said:

4090 is however an absolute monster at 4K. The only reason I jumped. It was disproportionally higher and its showed with the RTX 4080 benchmarks.

No doubt. It's definitely truly the first 4k120 card.

[Agall]

1 minute ago, Sir Beregond said:

No doubt. It's definitely truly the first 4k120 card.

I wouldn't have jumped on it if it wasn't like a +70% advantage over the 6900 xt at 4K. A bigger reason was some games genuinely need more than 16GB of VRAM at 4K, Division 2 being the one where I had to dial down texture settings to compensate in the DX12 engine. DX11 didn't eat as much, but lost some features. My RTX 4090 on the other hand is a solid maxed out 4K experience at +150 fps...

[Agall]

3 hours ago, EJOE said:

Hello, I'm looking on the used market for GPUs. I found the RTX 3070 for around $350 and the RTX 2080ti for around $230. Would anyone here spend the extra money for the RTX 3070?

Back to OP, the consensus is definitely the 2080ti.

[Agall]

59 minutes ago, Sir Beregond said:

Well I have a C1 OLED, so HDMI is all I get for that. So this would definitely be a factor in my decision. You just have to make sure you get a quality 2.1 cable to get the 4k120.

 

You know a few months ago a guy was asking on some other forums I am on if he should take a 2080 Ti or a 3070 in an RMA and most, including myself, were telling him 3070. Retrospect, I think you take RT out of the equation and the 2080 Ti is better for the simple reason being it has 11GB of VRAM instead of 8GB. Performance wise, it and the 3070 are practically equal, so all things being equal aside from perhaps RT, 11GB > 8GB.

back to this point, I'd argue anything but the 3090ti, 4080, and 4090's RT performance isn't enough. At least with the RTX 4090, at 4K when I enable RT, enabling quality DLSS negates the performance hit entirely with actually no loss in visual quality, kind of mind blowing how well it works at 4K with a 4090.

[Sir Beregond]

14 minutes ago, Agall said:

I wouldn't have jumped on it if it wasn't like a +70% advantage over the 6900 xt at 4K. A bigger reason was some games genuinely need more than 16GB of VRAM at 4K, Division 2 being the one where I had to dial down texture settings to compensate in the DX12 engine. DX11 didn't eat as much, but lost some features. My RTX 4090 on the other hand is a solid maxed out 4K experience at +150 fps...

Yep probably needed more than 16GB and despite the Infinity Cache, the 256-bit bus definitely harmed the performance scaling to 4k for the 6900 XT. Great card, but not without its drawbacks.