قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / Technology / faster than 2080 Super, easily beats 1080 Ti • Eurogamer.net

faster than 2080 Super, easily beats 1080 Ti • Eurogamer.net

The rumors were true: the GeForce RTX 3060 Ti is a real graphics card, and we’ve been testing it for the past week. Nvidia promises RTX 2080 Super Level Performance in a smaller, cheaper and more efficient Ampere design, and – spoiler warning – that’s exactly what our testing shows they have delivered.

For £ 370 in the UK, $ 400 in the US and around € 399 in Europe, the 3060 Ti is not pretty in the usual territory, but it’s significantly faster than the RTX 2060 Super it replaces at the same price point, and AMD̵

7;s competitive Big Navi architecture has yet to debut at anything below the $ 580 / £ 530 price point on the RX 6800. If the Green Team is capable To actually produce these cards in volume – and sell them to actual customers instead of bot farms – they can be on a winner.

In terms of specifications and the underlying architecture, the RTX 3060 Ti uses the same GA104 GPU as the RTX 3070, but with fewer CUDA cores – 4864 versus 5888. The card also works with slightly lower clock speeds (1665MHz boost versus 1725MHz) to fit in a 20W lower TDP (200W versus 220W). However, the memory subsystems are unchanged, with both cards having the same 8 GB GDDR6 operating at 448 GB / s. It’s good to see 8 GB VRAM become the new standard, with all next generation cards from both teams giving at least as much so far.

This content is hosted on an external platform, which only displays it if you accept cookie targeting. Activate cookies to view.

RTX 3080 RTX 3070 RTX 3060 Ti RTX 2060 Super RTX 2060 GTX 1060
GPU GA102 GA104 GA104 TU106 TU106 GP106
CUDA cores 8704 5888 4864 2176 1920 1280
Memory Bus 320-bit 256-bit 256-bit 256-bit 192-bit 192-bit
Bandwidth 760 GB / s 448 GB / s 448 GB / s 448 GB / s 336 GB / s 192 GB / s
Base Clock 1440MHz 1500 MHz 1410MHz 1470MHz 1365MHz 1506MHz
Boost Clock 1710MHz 1725MHz 1665MHz 1650MHz 1680MHz 1709MHz
TDP 320W 220W 200W 175W 160W 120W
The Size 628mm2 392mm2 392mm2 445mm2 445mm2 200mm2
Transistors 28B 17.4B 17.4B 10.8B 10.8B 4.4B

The comparison with older generation cards is more interesting. The 3060 Ti manages to more than double the number of graphics cores for the 2060 Super, in a smaller matrix that only uses a little more power. Looking further back, on the GTX 1060, and the multiplier is closer to 4x – with a corresponding increase in the number of transistors, thanks to the shift from 16nm with Pascal to 12nm with Turing and now 8nm with Ampere.

In addition to performance-enhancing improvements, all the usual features of Nvidia’s Ampere architecture are present and accurate, including next-generation beam tracking and tensor cores, so we can expect more noticeable performance increases in RT- and AI-accelerated workloads. We have covered Ampere in more detail in our previous RTX 3070, 3080 and 3090 reviews, so let’s move on to the physical design of the card.

As usual, we are testing the Founders Edition of the card, which comes with the same beautiful industrial design and in the same compact dimensions as the RTX 3070. We have two axial fans in a “flow-through” configuration, with the small, pennant-shaped motherboard design and miniature 12-pin power connector that allows the last third of the card to be used for cooling. Even I / O is arranged to maximize airflow, with a single row of monitor outputs (three DisplayPort 1.4, one HDMI 2.1) located under a 16×5 grid with ventilation clippings.

As with other RTX 30 series cards, the 3060 Ti is a PCIe 4.0 device, but works in PCIe 3.0 motherboards with no loss of performance in most gaming loads. Another invisible feature is the AV1 decoding support, which will allow websites such as Twitch and Netflix to significantly increase the resolution, frame rate and bit rate with a given bandwidth – or reduce the bandwidth by up to 50 percent, while keeping these calculations the same. AV1 support is not important now, and is available on both AMD and Nvidia’s new cards, but it can be a nice cherry on top for anyone who chooses to upgrade when it hits mainstream.

One of the biggest questions we had when we tested the 3060 Ti – beyond the gaming performance, which we will get to soon – revolved around power efficiency. The RTX 3070 was significantly more efficient than its more powerful siblings, so is the 3060 Ti more efficient?

To answer this question, we use Nvidia’s Power Capture Analysis Tool, or PCAT. This is an intermediate card that sits between the PCIe slot and the graphics card, as well as between the extra 8-pin power input used by the 3060 Ti and our power supply. In this way we can measure the number of watts drawn by the card itself, instead of the load on the whole system which can vary naturally over time, and plot this power take exactly against the frame rate to get a sense of how much power is used to make each frame.

Nvidia’s PCAT system uses PCIe interfaces and power supply cables to measure the actual juice used by the GPU. Note that we used an RTX 3080 PSU adapter here – the 3060 Ti only requires an eight-pin PCIe input and uses a different dongle.
Joules per frame RX 6800 XT RX 6800 RTX 3080 FE RTX 3070 FE RTX 3060 Ti FE RTX 2070 FE RX 5700 XT
Death Stranding 2,933 2,644 3,349 2,915 3,064 3,651 3,846 th most common
Percentage difference 110.9% 100% 126.6% 110.2% 115.9% 138.1% 145.5%
Joules per frame RX 6800 XT RX 6800 RTX 3080 FE RTX 3070 FE RTX 3060 Ti FE RTX 2070 FE RX 5700 XT
Gir 5 4,384 3,792 4,156 3,603 3,163 4,734 5,403
Percentage difference 138.6% 119.9% 131.4% 113.9% 100% 149.7% 170.82%

In Death Stranding, the RTX 3060 Ti is almost equivalent to the RTX 3070, which requires 3,064 joules per frame to render our test scene compared to 2,915 joules per frame for the 3070. AMD’s Big Navi graphics card works better in Death Stranding than Nvidia’s Ampere, so we see a even better efficiency rating for RX 6800 and RX 6800 XT. So the 3060 Ti uses less power than the 3070, but the performance reduction is greater than the reduction in power consumption – at least in this test.

Gears 5 is more hopeful, with the 3060 Ti setting a new record of 3,163 joules per frame, with the 3070 requiring 14 percent more power per frame and the RX 6800 requiring around 20 percent more. Normally we expect cards in the same family to be arranged in the same order in each game, so it is unusual to see 3060 Ti lead against 3070 in one test and track in another. However, retests tested our initial results, so that the 3060 Ti could claim the ‘most efficient Ampere GPU’ title in at least one game. It is worth looking back at the RTX 2070 FE as well, which requires 50 percent more joules for each frame – Amps and the switch to 8 nm have really had solid results in terms of energy efficiency.

Once our short power test is complete, it’s time to confirm the specifications of our test rig. You will see some new components here if you have not checked out our RTX 30 series reviews yet, but for those of you who are familiar, there are no surprises here. We have a Core i9 10900K locked to a 5 GHz all-core frequency and cooled by a 240 mm Alpacool Eisbaer Aurora AiO – which keeps the overclocked system at around 75 C under full load.

The 10900K is supported by an Asus Maximus 12 Extreme Z490 motherboard and two 8 GB pins by G.Skill Trident Z Royal 3600MHz CL16. Our games are powered by a spacious 2TB Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe drive provided by Box. The entire rig is powered by an 850 W Gamer Storm power supply.

With the stage set, let’s start the show with some game values.

Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 Ti Analysis

  • Introduction, hardware and power analysis [This Page]

  • Doom Eternal, Control, Borderlands 3, Shadow of the Tomb Raider – Benchmarks for Games, Part 1

  • Death Stranding, Far Cry 5, Hitman 2, Assassin’s Creed Odyssey – Game Benchmarks Part 2

  • Metro Exodus, Dirt Rally 2, Assassin’s Creed Unity – Game Benchmarks Part 3

  • Control, Metro Exodus, Battlefield 5 – RTX Game Benchmarks

  • Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 Ti Judgment from Digital Foundry

fbq('init', '897415313645265');

fbq('init', '738979179819818');

fbq('track', 'PageView');

appendCarbon(); }

Source link