Rtx 2060 Vs Gtx 1070 Ti

GTX 1070 Ti vs RTX 2060

Price now 370$

Games supported 99%

Cost now 428$

Games supported 99%

Full general info

Comparing of graphics card architecture, market place segment, value for money and other general parameters.

Place in functioning rating	76	83
Value for money	56.74	53.84
Compages	Pascal (2016−2021)	Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code name	Pascal GP104	Turing TU106
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release appointment	2 Nov 2017 (four years ago)	six January 2019 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$399	$349
Price now	$370 (0.9x MSRP)	$428 (1.2x MSRP)

Value for coin

To become the index we compare the characteristics of video cards and their relative prices.

Technical specs

General functioning parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base of operations clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you lot accept to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	2432	no data
Core clock speed	1607 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1683 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	7,200 million	10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	xvi nm	12 nm
Thermal design power (TDP)	180 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	255.8	201.6
Floating-point operation	8,186 gflops	no data

Compatibility, dimensions and requirements

Data on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), boosted power connectors (ability supply compatibility).

Interface	PCIe three.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	267 mm	229 mm
Width	two-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	no data

Retentiveness

Parameters of memory installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Note that GPUs integrated into processors have no dedicated VRAM and use a shared part of organisation RAM.

Memory type	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	no data
Retentivity jitney width	256 Bit	no data
Retentiveness clock speed	8000 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	256.3 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	-	-

Video outputs and ports

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this department is precise merely for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may modify the number and blazon of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	no information
HDMI	+	no data
Thousand-SYNC support	+	+

Technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if y'all need some particular engineering science for your purposes.

API support

APIs supported, including item versions of those APIs.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	no data
Shader Model	6.4	6.5
OpenGL	4.half-dozen	no information
OpenCL	1.ii	no information
Vulkan	ane.2.131	1.2.131
CUDA	6.1	seven.5

Benchmark functioning

Non-gaming benchmark functioning comparison. Note that overall benchmark performance is measured in points in 0-100 range.

---

Overall score

This is our combined criterion performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if y'all find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we ordinarily fix bug quickly.

• Passmark
• 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
• 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
• 3DMark Fire Strike Score
• 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
• GeekBench v OpenCL
• 3DMark Water ice Tempest GPU
• GeekBench 5 Vulkan
• GeekBench v CUDA

This is probably the well-nigh ubiquitous benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under diverse load, providing iv split benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last existence done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more than tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Criterion coverage: 25%

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used 4 tests based on ii scenes, ane being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abased temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded past Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX xi feature level 10 criterion that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. Information technology displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Water ice Storm benchmark, information technology has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Nighttime Raid.

Criterion coverage: fourteen%

Burn Strike is a DirectX xi benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature seemingly fabricated of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Burn down Strike shows off some realistic plenty graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Geekbench v is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Grouping.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Water ice Storm was used to measure out entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX eleven feature level 9 to brandish a boxing betwixt two space fleets almost a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in Jan 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Nighttime Raid.

Criterion coverage: 8%

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics bill of fare benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics menu benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Benchmark coverage: five%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Item gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Hither are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full Hard disk drive	111	120
1440p	72	76
4K	53	fifty

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

45−fifty

45−50

Full Hard disk
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 −87.8%	92 +87.8%
Assassin'southward Creed Valhalla	45−fifty −61.2%	79 +61.two%
Battleground v	45−fifty −196%	145 +196%
Call of Duty: Modernistic Warfare	45−fifty −176%	135 +176%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +four.3%	45−50 −4.iii%
Far Weep 5	114 +10.7%	103 −10.vii%
Far Cry New Dawn	107 +5.nine%	101 −v.nine%
Forza Horizon 4	45−l −186%	140 +186%
Hitman iii	45−50 +4.3%	45−l −four.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −106%	101 +106%
Cherry-red Dead Redemption ii	45−fifty −108%	102 +108%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 −118%	107 +118%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 −106%	101 +106%

Full Hard disk drive
High Preset

Assassinator'southward Creed Odyssey	45−fifty −59.two%	78 +59.two%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	45−l −thirty.vi%	64 +30.half-dozen%
Battlefield 5	45−50 −163%	129 +163%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 −141%	118 +141%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +iv.3%	45−50 −4.3%
Far Weep 5	108 +nine.1%	99 −9.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	103 +6.ii%	97 −vi.2%
Forza Horizon iv	45−fifty −167%	131 +167%
Hitman three	45−50 +4.three%	45−50 −4.three%
Horizon Nix Dawn	45−50 −59.ii%	78 +59.2%
Metro Exodus	66 −1.5%	67 +1.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 −14.3%	56 +14.iii%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	42 −129%	96 +129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 −178%	136 +178%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 −77.6%	87 +77.6%

Total Hard disk drive
Ultra Preset

Assassinator's Creed Odyssey	63 +12.five%	56 −12.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	45−50 −12.2%	55 +12.2%
Battlefield 5	111 −vii.ii%	119 +vii.two%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−l +4.3%	45−50 −4.three%
Far Weep five	102 +8.five%	94 −8.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	93 +v.7%	88 −5.vii%
Forza Horizon 4	100 −5%	105 +5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	72 −one.4%	73 +i.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +eight.nine%	45 −8.9%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−l −55.one%	76 +55.1%
Hitman 3	45−50 +iv.3%	45−50 −4.three%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −vi.1%	52 +half-dozen.i%
Metro Exodus	40 −5%	42 +5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 +40%	35 −forty%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	51 +eight.5%	45−50 −8.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin'due south Creed Odyssey	48 +2.i%	45−50 −2.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	45−50 +sixteen.seven%	42 −sixteen.seven%
Battlefield five	83 +76.half dozen%	45−50 −76.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +4.three%	45−50 −iv.3%
Far Cry 5	75 +59.six%	45−l −59.six%
Far Weep New Dawn	76 +0%	76 +0%
Forza Horizon four	81 +72.3%	45−l −72.3%
Lookout Dogs: Legion	45−50 +63.3%	30 −63.3%

4K
Loftier Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−l +14%	43 −14%
Hitman 3	45−50 +4.3%	45−l −4.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +63.3%	30 −63.3%
Metro Exodus	25 −4%	26 +4%
Red Expressionless Redemption two	45−50 +104%	24 −104%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	28 −14.three%	32 +14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	47 −8.v%	51 +8.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassinator'southward Creed Odyssey	27 −3.seven%	28 +3.seven%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	45−50 +104%	24 −104%
Battlefield 5	47 −12.eight%	53 +12.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +4.three%	45−fifty −4.iii%
Far Cry 5	39 −v.ane%	41 +five.1%
Far Weep New Dawn	42 +0%	42 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55 −seven.three%	59 +7.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +188%	17 −188%

Advantages and disadvantages

---

Operation rating	48.83	46.93
Novelty	2 November 2017	6 January 2019
Cost	$399	$349
Fleck lithography	16 nm	12 nm

Technical City couldn't decide betwixt

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti

and

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060

The differences in performance seem too modest.

---

Should yous nonetheless have questions concerning choice betwixt the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Bandage your vote

Exercise you lot think we are right or mistaken in our option? Vote past clicking "Like" button most your favorite graphics card.

---

Competitors of GeForce GTX 1070 Ti past AMD

The nearest GeForce GTX 1070 Ti'due south AMD equivalent is Radeon RX Vega 64, which is faster past 1% and higher by 3 positions in our rating.

Here are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce GTX 1070 Ti:

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti 100

Competitors of GeForce RTX 2060 by AMD

We believe that the nearest equivalent to GeForce RTX 2060 from AMD is Radeon RX 6600, which is nigh equal in speed and higher by one position in our rating.

Here are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce RTX 2060:

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 100

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with operation more than or less close to those reviewed, providing yous with more than options to consider.

User rating

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, equally well as rate them yourself.

---

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti on a scale of i to five:

Rate NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 on a scale of ane to v:

Questions and comments

Hither you tin ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.

---

Graphics settings

Screen resolution

FPS

Source: https://technical.city/en/video/GeForce-GTX-1070-Ti-vs-GeForce-RTX-2060

Share this post