maybe because there is no official ko edition ?? maybe its just something evga released for product naming only ?? 2060S maybe cause there was no point to enclude it in the charts ? you could always use ATs bench comparison...
I think its interesting how little performance is actually gained beyond the 1650 Super. This is only 10% faster... Roughly. Going from 150 bucks, to 300 gets you 10-20% better fps? What a ripoff!
This article makes an argument for the 1660 Super Better Than Anything Else, but even that's an extra $70 for what amounts to an extra 5-10fps? So, never gonna be the difference between playable and unplayable for 70 bucks!?
Idk what's going on with GPUs, going higher end has always been a bad value but now its just dumb.
It really is like everything has been reduced to xbone graphics so as long as your next card exceed ps5 performance you're good for 10+ years!
Any way we could get some rendering comparisons in the Compute sections of these GPU reviews? Considering that GPU renderers with the OptiX backend are taking full use of the RT cores in Nvidia GPUs, I'd be interested to see how these Navi cards hold up. A simple comparison in Blender using the Cycles renderer would be great.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
202 Comments
View All Comments
Korguz - Tuesday, January 21, 2020 - link
maybe because there is no official ko edition ?? maybe its just something evga released for product naming only ?? 2060S maybe cause there was no point to enclude it in the charts ? you could always use ATs bench comparison...philosofool - Wednesday, January 22, 2020 - link
Probably because it’s a totally different price tier. They also didn’t include AMD offerings in that tier.BG19902 - Tuesday, January 21, 2020 - link
There's an error in the conclusion:"memory overclock in particular giving RX 5660 XT a several percent boost in performance". I believe that should be "5600 XT"
Ryan Smith - Tuesday, January 21, 2020 - link
Right you are. Thanks!Hrel - Tuesday, January 21, 2020 - link
I think its interesting how little performance is actually gained beyond the 1650 Super. This is only 10% faster... Roughly. Going from 150 bucks, to 300 gets you 10-20% better fps? What a ripoff!This article makes an argument for the 1660 Super Better Than Anything Else, but even that's an extra $70 for what amounts to an extra 5-10fps? So, never gonna be the difference between playable and unplayable for 70 bucks!?
Idk what's going on with GPUs, going higher end has always been a bad value but now its just dumb.
It really is like everything has been reduced to xbone graphics so as long as your next card exceed ps5 performance you're good for 10+ years!
Retycint - Wednesday, January 22, 2020 - link
1650 super is roughly equivalent to the 580, so the 5600XT is a lot more than "5-10% faster"Samus - Tuesday, January 21, 2020 - link
So the 2060 is basically irrelevant now. It was always too slow for ray tracing, and now it's outclassed for a cheaper, faster card.Kurosaki - Wednesday, January 22, 2020 - link
The 5950xt could not come sooner. We don't need another 590-league cardTheWereCat - Wednesday, January 22, 2020 - link
Maybe I've read different review than you did but how is 5600XT a 590 performer?misterragequit - Wednesday, January 22, 2020 - link
Any way we could get some rendering comparisons in the Compute sections of these GPU reviews? Considering that GPU renderers with the OptiX backend are taking full use of the RT cores in Nvidia GPUs, I'd be interested to see how these Navi cards hold up. A simple comparison in Blender using the Cycles renderer would be great.