Power, Temperature, and Noise

As always, we'll take a look at power, temperature, and noise of the RTX 2060 Founders Edition, though most of the highlights and trends we've seen twice before with the RTX 2080 Ti, RTX 2080, and RTX 2070 Founders Edition launches. For the most part, the dual axial fan open air design provide straightforward benefits in lower noise and cooling, which counterbalences the atypically large GPUs and new fixed-function hardware.

As this is a new GPU, we will quickly review the GeForce RTX 2060's stock voltages and clockspeeds as well.

NVIDIA GeForce Video Card Voltages
Model Boost Idle
GeForce RTX 2060 (6GB) Founders Edition 1.050V 0.725V
GeForce RTX 2070 Founders Edition 1.050v 0.718v
GeForce GTX 1060 6GB Founders Edition 1.062v 0.625v

The voltages are broadly comparable to the preceding 16nm GTX 1070. In comparison to pre-FinFET generations, these voltages are exceptionally lower because of the FinFET process used, something we went over in detail in our GTX 1080 and 1070 Founders Edition review. As we said then, the 16nm FinFET process requires said low voltages as opposed to previous planar nodes, so this can be limiting in scenarios where a lot of power and voltage are needed, i.e. high clockspeeds and overclocking. Of course, Turing (along with Volta, Xavier, and NVSwitch) are built on 12nm "FFN" rather than 16nm, but there is little detail on the exact process tweaks.

Power Consumption

The TDP increase to 160W brings the RTX 2060 (6GB) in between the 180W GTX 1080/1070 Ti and 150W GTX 1070. In turn, load consumption is more-or-less on that level, and nothing dissimilar to what we've seen. This also means that efficiency is around the same relative to performance, as opposed to the RTX 2070, 2080, and 2080 Ti.

Idle Power ConsumptionLoad Power Consumption - Battlefield 1Load Power Consumption - FurMark

 

 

Temperature & Noise

With an open air cooler design with dual axial fans, the results are in line with what we've seen with the other RTX Founders Editions.

Idle GPU TemperatureLoad GPU Temperature - Battlefield 1Load GPU Temperature - FurMark

Idle Noise LevelsLoad Noise Levels - Battlefield 1Load Noise Levels - FurMark

Compute & Synthetics Closing Thoughts
Comments Locked

134 Comments

View All Comments

  • JRW - Saturday, February 23, 2019 - link

    2060 is considerably faster than a 580 tho, I recently upgraded from an R9 290X to EVGA RTX 2060 XC Black and love it, the 290X served me very well tho great card even with todays games @ 1080P but struggled a bit trying to hit my monitors 144hz refresh.
  • PeachNCream - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link

    Turing's MSRP makes the benchmark performance meaningless.
  • jrs77 - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link

    Midrange card for 350 bucks... :facepalm:

    I don't care if it's as fast as a 1070ti. A xx60 series card should never cost more than 250 and the 1060 was allready overpriced for most of the time, due to all that bitcoin-fuckery.
  • Manch - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link

    The Vegas are a good bit cheaper than what the scale shows. Not just on sale but regular price reductions. Even mentioned in the article so why tye discrepancy? Also I thoight Vega was a bit slower than the vanilla1080. Its showing to be faster than the FE?
  • sing_electric - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link

    I'm not sure what you're referring to, since the best deal I've heard of on the Vega 56 was ~$320 on Black Friday, and today, I can't find a card for less than $370 (at NewEgg on one model, all others are $400+). I like AMD but given today's prices, the only price category where I think AMD wins right now is with the ~$200 580. The ~$280 RX 590 is most of the way to the 2060's MSRP but offers significantly less performance.
  • Manch - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link

    Per the article, ". In the mix are concurrent events like AMD-partner Sapphire’s just-announced RX Vega price cuts, which will see the RX Vega 64 Nitro Plus moved to $379 and the RX Vega 56 Pulse to $329, and both with an attached 3-game bundle" Thats even better than what Ive seen.

    I just bought a MSI vega 64 from amazon for $399 with the 3 game bundle in Dec. Ive seen on avg 400-450 for Vega 64 and a good bit lower for Vega 56.

    The chart has Vega 56 at 499 which isnt the case.
  • Manch - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link

    Vega 64 $399, Vega 56 $368 new egg. Plus 3 games.
  • Manch - Monday, January 7, 2019 - link

    vega 64 $399 on amazon as well. There are higher pri ed cards but who cares is theyre readily available at these prices?
  • Vayra - Wednesday, January 9, 2019 - link

    They also take twice as much power at the wall. *poof* there go the savings. And you get free extra noise and heat in the case to boot.
  • Manch - Friday, January 11, 2019 - link

    Double?! LOL

    Compared to a 2060? The avg diff according to Anand's Bench is 130watts.

    Avg price of electricity in the US is 12 cents a kilowatt hour. That means it would cost you 1.2 cents per 100watts an hour. It would cost you on average 1.668 cents more an hour to run a VEGA 64 at full bore balls out compared to the 2060. If we then calculate the difference for an entire year @ 100% power draw for 365 days or 8760hrs the total comes out to $146.12 Here in Germany it would be about double that.

    Lets be real no one does that. (Miners?)

    Avg is 12hrs a week! Highly doubtful the card is running 100% for 12hrs a week but if it were.
    52 weeks in a year, 12 hrs a week for 624hrs for a soul crushing total of $10.41

    So yes it cost more to run a higher power card....duh, but it's not double. Stop the FUD.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now