rtx 2060 with I5 7600k

[ShawarmaTank]

i want to buy a rtx 2060, if i do so will my cpu keep up or i will have to buy a new 1?

[Cathulhu]

That won't be a problem.

[ShawarmaTank]

Thanks for the reapond! ill wait for more responds, thanks!

Originally posted by Cathulhu:

That won't be a problem.

[Ogami]

That CPU will not bottleneck the RTX 2060. So you are fine.

[JIGGY]

Did you end up getting the 2060? I have the same CPU and I'm looking into getting a 2060 myself.

[!HotCakeX]

Originally posted by My Internet Sucks:

Did you end up getting the 2060? I have the same CPU and I'm looking into getting a 2060 myself.

i would go for Vega 64 or Radeon V, much better than nvidia cards

[Cathulhu]

No such thing as a Radeon V. And the Vega 64 is barely on par with a 2060 while drawing more power and not having stuff like DLSS or RTX effects.

[!HotCakeX]

those useless technologies are not important at all, nvidia monopoly is so desperate lol
if nvidia was good console makers wouldn't use AMD. both CPU and GPU. they used AMD when AMD wasn't as good as now, today they are on par and better than nvidia and Intel.

nvidia game works, hair works, physics, all depreciated tech that are destined to die. DMC 5, RE2, Division 2 and many more to come are all optimized with AMD cards as well. but shady games like metro use rtx and only 1% of players of metro can use that technology, it's not even a big difference, 99% of others on console or PC don't use it and don't miss it. that's why nvidia had to come up with different cards that don't have useless tensor cores lol

Not Radeon V, it's VII or 7. 16GB HBM2

[Cathulhu]

If nVidia is so bad, why is 75% of the Steam users having them in their PC?
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey
14% running AMD and the last 10% running Intel videochips.
Yes, AMD videocards are only 50% higher than those running on integrated videochips!
Three out of four users are using nVidia. They may be expensive, but they provide the best performance and aren't such power hungry hogs.

[!HotCakeX]

marketshare lol nvidia got market share with just advertisement but AMD is taking it back soon. you must be do desperate that you're talking about marketshare xD

power usage lol 16GB RAM vs 11GB and higher memory bandwidth, ofc that needs a lil more power, you don't know anything about electronics.

[!HotCakeX]

BTW, im comparing nvidia 2080 TI which is anywhere between 1200$ to 1800$ to AMD VII or 7 which is 700$-800$. again AMD wins by a mile. AMD always beats nvidia in price to performance ratio.
the raw power it has is undeniable. that's why console companies as well as gamers and crytocurrency miners all use AMD. so you still wanna talk about marketshare? be my guest

[DonJuanDoja]

Originally posted by HotCakeX:

those useless technologies are not important at all, nvidia monopoly is so desperate lol
if nvidia was good console makers wouldn't use AMD. both CPU and GPU. they used AMD when AMD wasn't as good as now, today they are on par and better than nvidia and Intel.

nvidia game works, hair works, physics, all depreciated tech that are destined to die. DMC 5, RE2, Division 2 and many more to come are all optimized with AMD cards as well. but shady games like metro use rtx and only 1% of players of metro can use that technology, it's not even a big difference, 99% of others on console or PC don't use it and don't miss it. that's why nvidia had to come up with different cards that don't have useless tensor cores lol

Not Radeon V, it's VII or 7. 16GB HBM2

Consoles use AMD because it's the cheaper budget option. There's no other reason. No seriously stop. No other reason.

[!HotCakeX]

Originally posted by DonJuanDoja:

Originally posted by HotCakeX:

those useless technologies are not important at all, nvidia monopoly is so desperate lol
if nvidia was good console makers wouldn't use AMD. both CPU and GPU. they used AMD when AMD wasn't as good as now, today they are on par and better than nvidia and Intel.

nvidia game works, hair works, physics, all depreciated tech that are destined to die. DMC 5, RE2, Division 2 and many more to come are all optimized with AMD cards as well. but shady games like metro use rtx and only 1% of players of metro can use that technology, it's not even a big difference, 99% of others on console or PC don't use it and don't miss it. that's why nvidia had to come up with different cards that don't have useless tensor cores lol

Not Radeon V, it's VII or 7. 16GB HBM2

Consoles use AMD because it's the cheaper budget option. There's no other reason. No seriously stop. No other reason.

no other reason? lol you seem so sure like you're the Microsoft ceo. you said that for yourself ;)

[Cathulhu]

What does the RAM size have to do with the difference in power draw? The draw needed to power the RAM is negligible. You are discrediting yourself with statements like that.
300 Watt for the Radeon VII vs 230 Watt for the RTX 2070 which it competes with.
That is a difference of 70 Watt for about the same performance in games (depends on the game).
Never ever is it the RAM causing that difference.
If you have no idea what you are talking about, maybe you should inform yourself before you enter a discussion.

I like AMD, especially their CPUs. But their videocards are still woefully inadequate to compete with nVidia and the Radeon VII was pretty much a disappointment. It isn't cheaper, faster or more efficient than the card it is supposed to compete with.

[!HotCakeX]

to keep it simple for you guys, 2x AMD Radeon VII costs 1500$ (each 750$) and it beats 2080TI which can be around 1600$ or 1700$, (a single Radeon VII already beats 2080).

AMD isn't stupid, they made VII not to have people crossfire it, a single one of them is more than enough for 4K 60fps. but if you wanna have a crazy setup then add another VII and you still make profit by not buying nvidia and you get 10GB more VRAM that is HBM2 and better than GDDR6 from nvidia.

[DonJuanDoja]

Originally posted by HotCakeX:

Originally posted by DonJuanDoja:

Consoles use AMD because it's the cheaper budget option. There's no other reason. No seriously stop. No other reason.

no other reason? lol you seem so sure like you're the Microsoft ceo. you said that for yourself ;)

I'm pretty sure. They only have 2 options. If they don't pick one of those they're foolish.

Like others said they could've picked Nvidia but it would've been more expensive. And better. Proportionally better by Price per Performance or how ever you want to measure it? Probably not.

Just because you don't agree that you should have to pay that much for slight performance boosts doesn't mean that's how it should be. Our economy doesn't scale like that for anything, especially tech. Just take cars for example, you'll pay ALOT more for those final HPs... performance is expensive at the highest levels.

X one X is good, I have one, but it could be better, and the most demanding games STRUGGLE ON IT. So it needs more. AMD is not enough. The End.