The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 6GB Founders Edition Review: Not Quite Mainstream
by Nate Oh on January 7, 2019 9:00 AM ESTWolfenstein II: The New Colossus (Vulkan)
id Software is popularly known for a few games involving shooting stuff until it dies, just with different 'stuff' for each one: Nazis, demons, or other players while scorning the laws of physics. Wolfenstein II is the latest of the first, the sequel of a modern reboot series developed by MachineGames and built on id Tech 6. While the tone is significantly less pulpy nowadays, the game is still a frenetic FPS at heart, succeeding DOOM as a modern Vulkan flagship title and arriving as a pure Vullkan implementation rather than the originally OpenGL DOOM.
Featuring a Nazi-occupied America of 1961, Wolfenstein II is lushly designed yet not oppressively intensive on the hardware, something that goes well with its pace of action that emerge suddenly from a level design flush with alternate historical details.
The highest quality preset, "Mein leben!", was used. Wolfenstein II also features Vega-centric GPU Culling and Rapid Packed Math, as well as Radeon-centric Deferred Rendering; in accordance with the preset, neither GPU Culling nor Deferred Rendering was enabled. NVIDIA Adaptive Shading was not enabled.
In summary, Wolfenstein II tends to scales well, enables high framerates with minimal CPU bottleneck, enjoys running on modern GPU architectures, and consumes VRAM like nothing else. For the Turing-based RTX 2060 (6GB), this results in outpacing the GTX 1080 as well as RX Vega 56 at 1080p/1440p. The 4K results can be deceiving; looking closer at 99th percentile framerates shows a much steeper dropoff, more likely than not to be related to the limitations of the 6GB framebuffer. We've already seen the GTX 980 and 970 struggle at even 1080p, chained by 4GB video memory.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
134 Comments
View All Comments
dave_the_nerd - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Selfish opinion: but I really would have appreciated a 970 in the graph, in addition to the 1060. (Only two generations old, same market segment and similar price point.)CiccioB - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Yes, also the 1080Ti is missing, and it is quite a pity, especially for the compute tests.Icehawk - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
I wish they would show the 970 in tests too - partially because it was a popular card and most folks wait a couple of cycles to update and partially because that is what I have :) I would like to upgrade as it struggles at 4k and even 1440 on some of the latest games but I can’t stomach $500+poohbear - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Uhm, you didn't test for its RTX performance? Wasn't that the main contention with a GTX 2060????boozed - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Still waiting for real-world tests?saiga6360 - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
Battlefield V? Crappy game but it does have ray tracing implemented.RamIt - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
This card is worth no more than $199 us dollars. Sorry Nvidia your pricing stricture keeps me from buying your products from now on.RamIt - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link
Sorry for the typos. A little bit hammered at the moment but certainly mean what I implied.mkaibear - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
Don't you buy on price/performance then? That seems odd.For the price this offers great performance.
sing_electric - Tuesday, January 8, 2019 - link
There's a lot of good value at ~$200 (RX 580, 1060 6GB since prices are being dragged down by the 2060), and then essentially nothing worth buying until the 2060 at $350, and then nothing until the 2070. (You could make a case for a Vega 64 on sale for $350, but even then, it's more power-hungry, etc.).So if GPU performance is important, and your budget can accommodate a $250-400 GPU, the 2060 is the one to buy. People can complain about $350 being a "high end" price, but the fact is, it's WAY faster than what you get for spending say, $280 on an RX 590.