News GeForce RTX 2070 Super Beats Radeon RX 5700 XT In FFXV Leak

[Admin]

The Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070 Super, AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT and RX 5700 show up in Final Fantasy XV benchmark database.

GeForce RTX 2070 Super Beats Radeon RX 5700 XT In FFXV Leak : Read more

 

[digitalgriffin]

At $599 that won't create much of a price war. But the $450 2070 will make a serious dent into the 5700XT sales.

This also kills the $670 Vega VII which is about 1080ti performance levels. I wonder what will happen to the 2080 which sits at similar performance and $700. $100 is a big jump for that small performance increase.

Last gen sales ratio was >~4:1 at this price point (favoring NVIDIA) I think the ratio will be even more lopsided this gen.

BTW: Amazon took down the 2070 Super and 2060 Super links.

 

[spentshells]

So the far more expensive card is marginally better. Well if that isn't news.

 

[Deleted member 14196]

Lol. Yes. I can’t afford either one so. If I could I still wouldn’t

 

[cryoburner]

The Final Fantasy XV benchmark is notorious for being terribly broken, and isn't even representative of performance in the actual game. The benchmark heavily utilizes Nvidia's gameworks features to gimp performance on AMD's graphics hardware, and does so in ways that don't even make sense, for example by applying hairworks to objects far outside the scene...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eXbbh1f52I


Just look at where the Radeon VII appears in that chart, down below the 1660 Ti. In reality though, the VII performs similar to a 1080 Ti on average, or around 50% faster than a 1660 Ti. That should be a red flag to anyone looking at this data that the results are complete nonsense.

It's possible that the 2070 Super could end up slightly faster than a 5700XT, but there is no way the difference would be anywhere near as large as what's shown here.

 

[Floppy Drive]

This is for "Final Fantasy XV", so I won't put too much weight on it.
The RTX lineup has been around for several months, so the drivers are fully mature.
Still, AMD will need to lower their price shortly after launch to compete with the Nvidia paper launch.

 

[hannibal]

Still the best option is 1080ti... so not big hurah for ”super” versions...

 

[Hog54]

That benchmark is useless.I get 7872 on my internet laptop at 1920 x 1080.

 

[maddogfargo]

Hairworks on or off? They have the Radeon VII at the bottom, slower than everything. When it actually performs on par with the 2080 in most games. And in the FF bench it was between the 2070 and 2080. Definitely something wrong with this test. Bad info.

 

[Sliek]

I run a Radeon VII at 1440p and have a consistent 125+ fps. Benchmark numbers look bad here but I can say in game I'm having no issues.

 

[setx]

Why not honestly call it "RTX 2080 Poor" instead of "RTX 2070 Super"?

 

[jimmysmitty]

The Final Fantasy XV benchmark is notorious for being terribly broken, and isn't even representative of performance in the actual game. The benchmark heavily utilizes Nvidia's gameworks features to gimp performance on AMD's graphics hardware, and does so in ways that don't even make sense, for example by applying hairworks to objects far outside the scene...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eXbbh1f52I


Just look at where the Radeon VII appears in that chart, down below the 1660 Ti. In reality though, the VII performs similar to a 1080 Ti on average, or around 50% faster than a 1660 Ti. That should be a red flag to anyone looking at this data that the results are complete nonsense.

It's possible that the 2070 Super could end up slightly faster than a 5700XT, but there is no way the difference would be anywhere near as large as what's shown here.

A 15% jump over the existing 2070 is not too far fetched. It has increased clock speed along with more CUDA cores. Add in that most AiB partners will increase clock and memory speeds along with better cooling for better sustained boost clocks it could be a decent jump over the original 2070.

Hopefully the pricing is better though.

 

[shmoochie]

"It should be taken into consideration that test systems' specifications and testing environment are unknown to us. Additionally, Nvidia was part of Final Fantasy XV's development, so the title favors the Green team. With everything considered, take the numbers with a bit of salt. "

This should be in bold at the top of the article. The fact that Tom's still refers to this benchmark for anything other than comparing Nvidia cards speaks volumes. Also, if you don't know the test system specifications and testing environment, then the data is literally meaningless.

 

[Deleted member 14196]

"It should be taken into consideration that test systems' specifications and testing environment are unknown to us. Additionally, Nvidia was part of Final Fantasy XV's development, so the title favors the Green team. With everything considered, take the numbers with a bit of salt. "

This should be in bold at the top of the article. The fact that Tom's still refers to this benchmark for anything other than comparing Nvidia cards speaks volumes. Also, if you don't know the test system specifications and testing environment, then the data is literally meaningless.

this^^ very well stated and very true

 

[10tacle]

So the far more expensive card is marginally better. Well if that isn't news.

I'm not sure what your definition of "marginally better" is in the real world, but in the world of tech for GPUs and CPUs, a 38.5% performance boost is massively significant:

"In comparison to its AMD rivals, the RTX 2070 Super is 38.48% faster than the Radeon RX 5700 XT. "

Then there's the fact that the 5700 XT is a 225W TDP card vs. the 175W for the 2070 (mistakenly referenced in the chart here as "TBD"). Regarding pricing, that remains to be seen, but Nvidia is way ahead of the 5700 XT just based on performance and lower power consumption (which also means running cooler which means higher overclock capability with proper cooling). But all of that is neither here nor there. The people will decide on which card is the better card for them, and based on what I see here, it will not favor AMD. Again. I want competition but AMD has many irons in the fire between CPUs and APUs for consoles and they have nowhere near the deep pockets that Nvidia does which has a very broad range of products and services outside of the GPU and Shield that the general consumer doesn't even know exist.

Finally, as we slowly move to more GPU demanding games, specifically regarding higher resolutions and moving from 1080p to 1440p and 4K being the main stream resolution in the coming years, AMD is going to have to kick it up a notch. I want to support them, but I'm not paying less for an inferior performing card. I'd rather spend another $100 on a card that guarantees what I am targeting on FPS for my resolution and monitor Hz capability. I work hard for my money and I want the best for it and am willing to pay for it. I have not owned an AMD video card since the HD 4870 circa 2009-2010, and there's a reason for that. I have however bought two desktop computers for family members with Ryzen 2-series chipsets because they were much better than Intel's comparable offerings and performance.

 

[gio2vanni86]

Ladies ladies. Let the cards come out and be reviewed. Everyone knows its the next GPU from AMD we all hope gives consumers the right to choose. I seriously miss buying a top of the line GPU for 499.99. I make 120k a year and i think 1200 for a GPU is just out right dumb. Makes no sense even for inflation purposes. I hope if AMD doesnt get it right, intel does.

 

[Phaaze88]

I'm not sure what your definition of "marginally better" is in the real world, but in the world of tech for GPUs and CPUs, a 38.5% performance boost is massively significant:

"In comparison to its AMD rivals, the RTX 2070 Super is 38.48% faster than the Radeon RX 5700 XT. "

Then there's the fact that the 5700 XT is a 225W TDP card vs. the 175W for the 2070 (mistakenly referenced in the chart here as "TBD"). Regarding pricing, that remains to be seen, but Nvidia is way ahead of the 5700 XT just based on performance and lower power consumption (which also means running cooler which means higher overclock capability with proper cooling). But all of that is neither here nor there. The people will decide on which card is the better card for them, and based on what I see here, it will not favor AMD. Again. I want competition but AMD has many irons in the fire between CPUs and APUs for consoles and they have nowhere near the deep pockets that Nvidia does which has a very broad range of products and services outside of the GPU and Shield that the general consumer doesn't even know exist.

Finally, as we slowly move to more GPU demanding games, specifically regarding higher resolutions and moving from 1080p to 1440p and 4K being the main stream resolution in the coming years, AMD is going to have to kick it up a notch. I want to support them, but I'm not paying less for an inferior performing card. I'd rather spend another $100 on a card that guarantees what I am targeting on FPS for my resolution and monitor Hz capability. I work hard for my money and I want the best for it and am willing to pay for it. I have not owned an AMD video card since the HD 4870 circa 2009-2010, and there's a reason for that. I have however bought two desktop computers for family members with Ryzen 2-series chipsets because they were much better than Intel's comparable offerings and performance.

I'm expecting the same thing from Intel, once they get their crap together. Money does speak volumes, and Intel also has bigger pockets than AMD. They should provide some nice competition in the gpu market.

OT: That crap benchmark aside, no one should really be surprised here. Although I'm sure there are some RTX owners grabbing up their pitchforks right about now.
Now where's that 2080Ti Super? Anger your flagship owners too, Nvidia! 🤣