AMD’s 8GB Radeon RX 5700 is a mid-range Navi 10 GPU. The 5700 has 36 compute units (compared to 40 in the 5700 XT). At $349 USD, the 5700 is more affordable than the $399 USD 5700 XT which is approximately 10% faster and more power hungry (225W vs 180W). Unlike the benchmark busting reference XT which overheats and chokes on its default settings, the reference 5700 (non XT), though still noisy, is able to maintain composure and is capable of delivering a very respectable 100+ EFps. This puts it 5% ahead of the RTX 2060 and just 8% behind the RTX 2060S in most of today’s popular games. In terms of compatibility the short test runs in our lab had issues with GTAV where reflection MSAA resulted in very poor, almost matt, reflection fidelity (the same bug appeared on several Navi and Vega cards). Prices are necessary to confirm which graphics card offers the best bang for your buck but there is certainly a lot more choice in the upper end of the GPU market. [Nov '19GPUPro]
AMD Radeon RX 5700 vs. Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060 Super: 40+ Game Mega Benchmark
Today we’ve got a massive 41 game benchmark comparing the GeForce RTX 2060 Super and Radeon RX 5700 head to head. This big comparison includes new titles such as Borderlands 3, Gears 5 and Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Breakpoint. All the results are brand new and were gathered during the last week using the latest display drivers as well as the latest game versions.
Representing AMD we have the PowerColor Red Devil 5700 and for Nvidia we have the MSI RTX 2060 Super Gaming X. The Red Devil is a premium Radeon RX 5700 card that comes in at $390, but as we’ve already established in previous reviews, in terms of performance, it’s no faster than base model cards selling at the MSRP. The same is largely true of the Gaming X, it comes in at $430, but you’ll get very similar performance from other models sporting the same GPU.
Going on the AMD and Nvidia suggested pricing, the RX 5700 comes in at $350 and the RTX 2060 Super at $400. We’ll go over pricing in better detail at the end of the article, while also discussing alternative options.
For now let’s see how these two GPUs compare in a massive range of games using our Core i9-9900K test rig which has been overclocked to 5 GHz and features 16GB of DDR4-3400 memory. All the testing took place at 1080p and 1440p and as usual, we’ll look at around a dozen games and then jump into the performance breakdown graphs for all 41 games.
Kick starting the benchmarks we have Borderlands 3 and here the Radeon RX 5700 offers higher frame rates at both tested resolutions, though the margins aren’t huge. The 5700 is 6% faster at 1080p and 10% faster at 1440p. On second thought, the 1440p margin is reasonably large and you’ll start to notice that 14% increase in 1% low performance.
The Radeon GPU was also faster when testing with Gears 5 as it enjoys up to a 10% performance margin at 1080p. The results are more competitive at 1440p and while we do see the same 1% low performance, the 5700 was a whisker faster when comparing the average frame rate.
The 2060 Super gets its first win in Ghost Recon Breakpoint, providing 7% more performance at 1080p. That said the margin was neutralized at 1440p and here both GPUs averaged just over 70 fps.
Upon release the Radeon RX 5700 was 31% faster than the 2060 Super when testing with Forza Horizon 4. However a recent Nvidia driver boosted performance by around 20-25% for the Turing based GPUs and as a result the 5700 is now just 8% faster, though both GPUs did push over 100 fps at both 1080p and 1440p.
World War Z has seen a couple of performance updates over the past few months, but these haven’t changed the margins between AMD and Nvidia GPUs. The 5700 is still 11% faster on average at 1080p and 8% faster at 1440p.
The Battlefield V results are extremely competitive, here the 5700 was just a frame faster at 1080p and only 5% faster at 1440p, so overall a very similar gaming experience using either GPU.
Nvidia generally enjoys a performance advantage in Apex Legends and we see exactly that when comparing the 5700 and 2060 Super. The GeForce GPU was 9% faster at 1080p and 7% faster at 1440p, not big margins, but still a win for the green team.
We’d be quite surprised by these results if we hadn’t recently seen similar margins when comparing the RTX 2070 Super and 5700 XT. AMD appears to do very well in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive and here the 5700 was 16% faster at 1080p and 8% faster at 1440p. Of course, we’re seeing frame rates well over 200 fps, so how much these margins matter we’ll leave up to you to decide.
F1 2019 provides very competitive results, the 2060 Super was a few frames faster at 1080p while we see basically identical performance at 1440p. Both GPUs maintained well over 60 fps at 1440p.
Another title to show very competitive results is The Witcher 3 Wild Hunt, the 2060 Super was a few frames faster, but again an identical gaming experience.
The 2060 Super nudged ahead in Wolfenstein: Youngblood, delivering 6% more performance at 1080p and 9% more performance at 1440p. Not a huge difference and both GPUs did push over 100 fps at all times, even at 1440p.
Fortnite is a mega popular title and you’ll see strong frame rates with either the 5700 or 2060 Super. The GeForce GPU was 6% faster at 1080p, though 1% low performance was identical and then at 1440p we see up to a 4% margin in favor of the green team.
Strange Brigade was a title AMD used to dominate but with a few optimized driver updates Nvidia’s clawed away at AMD’s advantage. In the case of the 2060 Super and 5700, Nvidia’s actually well ahead, beating the $350 Radeon GPU by a 9% margin.
PUBG fans have always been best served by GeForce GPUs and that still remains the situation even today. The 2060 Super was around 17% faster at both resolutions and you will notice that extra performance in this title. That said if you play with competitive settings the frame rates will be so high it won’t really matter which GPU you use.
The 5700 suffers rather weak 1% low performance at 1080p when testing with Project Cars 2, this data is of course based on an average of three runs and in this instance, all three passes reported the same 63 fps. Despite the poor 1% low performance the average frame rate was comparable to that of the 2060 Super and we do see more competitive performance overall at 1440p.
Last up we have World of Tanks and this one goes in favor of Nvidia as the 2060 Super delivers 7% more performance at 1080p and 11% more at 1440p. You won’t notice the difference at 1080p but at 1440p you might notice the extra frames with the 2060 Super, plus it did show a much better 1% low fps performance.
It’s hard to say which GPU had the upper hand in that sample of games, it certainly seemed to go back and forth quite a bit, but for the most part the margins were small. Still we’ve only looked at a dozen or so titles, so let’s see how the two GPUs compare across 41 games at both 1080p and 1440p...
At 1080p across 41 games tested as shows above, the GeForce RTX 2060 Super is ~3% faster on average. The biggest outlier here was Vermintide 2 where the RTX 2060 Super was 34% faster, but even if we remove that result, the GeForce GPU was still 3% faster on average and that’s the beauty of testing so many games, outliers don’t impact on the overall result.
Moving to 1440p, as shown on the graph below, the 2060 Super is 4% faster on average when looking at the full 41 games. We’re looking at less than a 5% margin overall, which means for the most part, performance is going to be close with either GPU as we observed in the dozen or so games we looked at closely.
For the cost per frame analysis we're using the MSRP as it is possible to purchase either the RX 5700 or RTX 2060 Super at these prices. Doing so means you’ll be paying 12% more per frame for the GeForce GPU based on the 1080p data, or 11% more based on the 1440p data. Going in this review we knew the Radeon was a tad more affordable, so based on the performance results the RTX 2060 Super comes in at a little over a 10% price premium.
Closing Remarks, Overclocking
Overall the RTX 2060 Super is a whisker faster, but the RX 5700 offers slightly more bang for your buck. We can’t see you going wrong with either option though as they are evenly matched and perform well for the price.
As a side note, we recently benchmarked an overclocked RX 5700 flashed with a 5700 XT BIOS. We found you’re looking at a 10% boost in performance on average. However this is not a solution for everyone as there is some risk associated with flashing a graphics card BIOS and it’s not as simple as just firing up your favorite tuning utility and cranking up the clock frequency.
If you’re willing to take on the challenge and tech savvy enough to pull it off, then yes, you can unlock quite a bit more performance from an RX 5700, but note that will also increase power consumption by 25+% which makes the card to run hotter and therefore generate more noise, but hey, that’s overclocking. In such instances we also recommend you buy an RX 5700 with a better stock cooler.
But before sealing the deal on a flashed RX 5700, it’s also worth noting that you can boost the performance of the RTX 2060 Super by about 8% with a basic core and memory overclock using a utility such as MSI AfterBurner.
As for which way you should go, it will come down to pricing in your region and what models are available. Assuming the RX 5700 is $50 cheaper, then we think we’d get the RX 5700. But once you get closer in price, say by a minor ~$20 difference, then the GeForce RTX 2060 Super becomes the better choice in our opinion, so be mindful of that when looking at AIB models. For example, we'd rather have a base model RTX 2060 Super than a premium RX 5700.
Besides price and performance there aren’t any other factors swaying us in either direction. Nvidia wants to push ray tracing support as a selling point of the RTX 2060 Super but we don’t believe that it is a factor. The 2060 we feel is woefully underpowered to take advantage of ray tracing in modern titles and that's why we hadn't mentioned it until this point. As a follow-up to our previous on the matter, we'll be revisiting ray tracing performance with the Super series GPUs very soon.
Lastly, it's worth mentioning there's RTX 2060 non-super model which seems to be selling for around $350. That's the same price as the RX 5700 however it’s ~9% slower than the Radeon, so unless you can get it for something closer to $310, it doesn’t make sense. There's also the GTX 1660 Ti, which is an exceptional GPU at $280 meaning it will cost you less but you will get less performance than the RTX 2060 Super and RX 5700 can offer.
- GeForce RTX 2060 Super on Amazon
- AMD Radeon RX 5700 on Amazon
- AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT on Amazon
- GeForce GTX 1660 Ti on Amazon
- GeForce RTX 2070 Super on Amazon
- GeForce RTX 2080 Ti on Amazon
- AMD Ryzen 9 3900X on Amazon
- AMD Ryzen 5 3600 on Amazon
306 interactionsSours: https://www.techspot.com/review/1924-radeon-5700-vs-geforce-2060/
- Stackable closet storage bins
- Barbour county wv indictments 2020
- Mavic air 2 parts
- Stardew valley map planner
AMD vs. Nvidia: the midrange graphics card battle is heating up
AMD has been trying to put a dent in Nvidia’s gaming GPU dominance for years. So far, its attempts — like the Radeon VII and its new 7nm process, which are designed to compete with Nvidia’s RTX 2080 — have fallen a little flat. Now, AMD is setting its sights on Nvidia’s midrange cards with its Radeon RX 5700 ($349) and RX 5700 XT ($399). They’re both built on AMD’s new RDNA architecture, and the big promise is that it can provide up to 1.25x performance per clock and 1.5x performance per watt compared to the Graphics Core Next (GCN) architecture that powered its previous Polaris and Vega GPUs.
Price, performance, and power usage are key at the $300 to $400 price points, and AMD is trying to find a delicate balance of all three with the RX 5700 series. Not to be outdone, Nvidia has also launched its upgraded midrange RTX cards: the RTX 2060 Super ($399) and RTX 2070 Super ($499). These cards offer modest speed bumps over the existing RTX cards they are replacing at the same price points. They were also enough to force AMD’s hand to cut the price of the Radeon RX 5700 and 5700 XT graphics cards just two days before their release last month.
That price cut was hugely important because if the Radeon RX 5700 XT had debuted at its original $449 price instead of $399, then Nvidia’s $499 RTX 2070 Super would have been easily worth the $50 upgrade. As it stands, AMD’s aggressive pricing makes the choices at the midrange a lot more difficult, especially as the RX 5700 and 5700 XT are now going head-to-head with Nvidia on performance.
I’ve been testing Nvidia and AMD’s latest midrange cards over the past couple of weeks, with the intention of finding a clear winner for 1440p gaming. While AMD has failed to match Nvidia in terms of performance at the high end, competition at the midrange couldn’t be closer. The graphics card wars are finally heating up.
AMD’s new cards are both based on the company’s 7nm process, RDNA architecture, and use 8GB of GDDR6 graphics memory. AMD might be using a new architecture here, but the company isn’t pushing any real new hardware advantages to using RDNA just yet. There’s no support for ray tracing or promises of AI-powered anti-aliasing. AMD is focusing on raw performance instead of eye candy.
AMD’s big architecture changes do mean that the company has higher bandwidth memory and improvements to its compute units. We’ve seen AMD use 7nm for the Radeon VII, but this card was based on the previous GCN architecture. AMD claims that RDNA cards will have 50 percent better performance than previous GCN cards, which could mean we’ll see some interesting developments in the high-end of the market soon.
That 8GB of VRAM is the same amount found on both the RTX 2060 Super and RTX 2070 Super. Nvidia has done very little in terms of hardware to its upgraded RTX Super cards, but there are now more raw CUDA cores and higher clock speeds. Both the RTX 2060 Super and RTX 2070 Super look physically the same as their predecessors, though, which means they’re very well-built and look great.
AMD and Nvidia midrange GPUs (2019) specs
|Specs||GeForce RTX 2060 Super||GeForce RTX 2070 Super||Radeon RX 5700||Radeon RX 5700 XT|
|SP compute||7.2 TLFOPS||9.1 TFLOPS||7.9 TFLOPS||9.7 TFLOPs|
|Memory||8GB GDDR6||8GB GDDR6||8GB GDDR6||8GB GDDR6|
|Architecture||Turing 12nm TSMC||Turing 12nm TSMC||RDNA 7nm TSMC||RDNA 7nm TSMC|
While Nvidia moved to a new dual-fan setup for its Founders Edition RTX cards last year, AMD has stuck to its blower-style on its reference cards. This feels like an obvious mistake because the RX 5700 and RX 5700 XT both run hotter and are way louder than Nvidia’s RTX competition as a result. Blowers have benefits for space-constrained cases, but for everyone else, a dual- or triple-fan system will be far more efficient. On the 5700 XT, there’s also a dent in the casing, which is designed to improve airflow, but it just ends up looking strange rather than providing an obvious improvement to how the card performs.
Both of AMD’s new cards also support PCIe 4.0, but you’ll need a new motherboard and AMD’s third-generation Ryzen CPUs to see the benefit from that right now. While PCIe 4.0 doubles the bandwidth of PCIe 3.0, this isn’t really required at current resolutions and refresh rates, and it will become far more important in the future when resolutions push beyond 4K. In a card designed for 1440p monitors, it’s nice to have for future-proofing, but it’s totally unnecessary. Fortunately, it is backwards compatible with PCIe 3.0, so you can still use the 5700 cards with existing motherboards and CPUs.
I’m genuinely impressed by how well both of these new AMD cards perform in 1440p gaming. In Far Cry 5, frame rates regularly exceeded 90 fps on max settings, and the 5700 XT outperformed Nvidia’s RTX 2060 Super and came close to the higher-priced 2070 Super in most of my tests. However, I did find that frame rates between the AMD and Nvidia cards can vary a lot depending on the game.
Destiny 2 performed a lot better on both the 2060 Super and 2070 Super than AMD’s 5700 series in terms of raw frame rates, but Division 2 seems to be better optimized for AMD’s cards. I ran both at maxed-out settings, and all of the cards handled well. Likewise, the Fire Strike Extreme benchmark performed far better on both the 5700 XT and 5700 than Nvidia’s cards. Time Spy ran better on Nvidia’s cards.
AMD vs. Nvidia midrange 2019 benchmarks
|Benchmark||GeForce RTX 2060S||GeForce RTX 2070S||Radeon RX 5700 XT||Radeon RX 5700|
|Fire Strike Extreme||9,782||10,784||10974||10016|
|Far Cry 5||87fps||96fps||94fps||87fps|
|Shadow of the Tomb Raider||50fps||59fps||50fps||45fps|
I tested all games with a 27-inch Asus ROG Swift PG279Q monitor (G-Sync disabled) at 1440p resolution and max settings. Shadow of the Tomb Raider, a recent DirectX 12 title, performed similarly on both the $399 5700 XT and the $399 RTX 2060 Super.
I was most surprised with the RTX 2070 Super performance, bringing it very close to what the standard RTX 2080 can offer. If you’re looking at spending $699 on the new RTX 2080 Super, then I would definitely look at the 2070 Super, which has most of the performance of an RTX 2080 for $200 less. I briefly tested the 2080 Super, too, and the performance gains over the regular RTX 2080 weren’t as significant as the 2060 Super and 2070 Super.
All four cards seem ideal for 1440p gaming, even at max settings in modern games. You can obviously adjust the settings down to improve frame rates for a 144MHz monitor setup or get usable frame rates with all the eye candy enabled.
As with all games and tests, I’d expect both AMD and Nvidia’s cards to perform better over time once titles are optimized and drivers are tweaked and improved. Even without that, the performance gap in the midrange has definitely shrunk, thanks to AMD’s new cards, though.
This surprisingly close performance at the same $399 price point makes the decision between AMD or Nvidia a lot more difficult. That choice will probably come down to whether you value less heat, less power consumption, and a lot less noise from your PC.
During my testing, both of AMD’s cards regularly exceeded 80C, while Nvidia’s cards hovered around 73C under load. AMD is using a different way to measure temperature than Nvidia, which does result in higher reported temps. But even with that considered, the AMD card made the overall temperature inside my PC higher than either Nvidia card. Temperature aside, the difference in the cooling between the 2060 Super and the 5700 XT is night and day. AMD’s cards are noticeably louder than Nvidia’s equivalents, and if you value a silent PC, then I can’t recommend AMD’s cards here. Nvidia’s cooling means the 2060 Super and 2070 Super stay at similar noise levels (in terms of what you notice) whether your PC is idle or pushing out a demanding AAA title at 1440p.
AMD’s RX 5700 XT and 5700 blower spins up almost immediately into a game, and it’s distracting unless you’re using headphones. AMD’s cards also draw a lot more power than Nvidia’s new Super line. The RTX 2060 Super has a TDP of 175 watts, whereas AMD’s similarly priced 5700 XT draws up to 225 watts. The RX 5700 comes in lower at 185 watts, while the $499 RTX 2070 Super has a TDP of 215 watts.
I’m hoping that third-party RX 5700 XT and 5700 cards will deal with the noise and heat situation a lot better than AMD’s reference blower, as they usually come with multiple fans. I’d recommend waiting on those if you’re impressed by the performance gains but not by the heat and noise produced or if you’re interested in overclocking these cards.
Another consideration will be the features that Nvidia offers with its cards compared to AMD’s latest. AMD has clearly optimized for raw performance here, but Nvidia offers similar performance plus extra features like real-time ray tracing on top. The promise of cinematic effects in games is still early days, but Nvidia is investing a lot of time and money into getting game developers to take ray tracing seriously. This has been bolstered, thanks to the fact that Sony’s next-generation PlayStation and Microsoft’s Project Scarlett Xbox console will both support ray tracing.
That should mean more game developers start focusing on ray tracing, as both next-gen consoles will support it. We haven’t seen enough games with ray tracing to really make it worth it just yet, but the promise is there, and without support for ray tracing, it does mean AMD’s Radeon 5700 and 5700 XT aren’t exactly future-proof. You also miss out on Nvidia’s Deep Learning Super-Sampling (DLSS) that leverages the company’s supercomputer farms to scan games before they are released (or even afterwards) and work out the most efficient way to render graphics.
AMD does offer Radeon Image Sharpening to upscale games without big frame rate penalties and Radeon Anti-Lag to improve competitive games, but neither comes close to the impact real-time ray tracing has on a gaming experience. I’ve found Battlefield V is one of the good examples of ray tracing effects, thanks to the reflections on objects and guns, and Shadow of the Tomb Raider uses ray tracing in a number of shadowy scenes.
The choice between AMD and Nvidia for $399 or below has suddenly become a lot more complicated. AMD’s price cut was brilliantly timed to react to Nvidia’s Super cards, and the performance promises match up. If you’re looking at spending $400 on a new graphics card, then you now have two great choices (or a $499 RTX 2070 Super option if you’re willing to spend a little more to get even better performance).
If, like me, you value a cool and quiet PC, then the obvious choice is still Nvidia right now. AMD has certainly closed the performance gap in the midrange, thanks to some impressive price points, but it still has a long way to go with its reference cards to compete on heat, power consumption, and noise.
AMD has laid some important and exciting groundwork with the move to 7nm and the RDNA architecture. We’re unlikely to see Nvidia move to 7nm this year, so AMD’s new architecture is the big new challenger for graphics cards in 2019. It’s a challenge that AMD has pulled off on the performance side in the midrange. Now, it has to look beyond the sub-$400 price points and get a lot more competitive at the higher end of the market to make things truly interesting.
Photography by Tom Warren / The Verge
Vox Media has affiliate partnerships. These do not influence editorial content, though Vox Media may earn commissions for products purchased via affiliate links. For more information, see our ethics policy.
The good news is, with the release of the RX 5700 XT, the RX 5700 's price is getting more discount. AMD ’s xx00 cards have always been defined by mid-range prices with performance that knocks on the door of high-end graphics cards – especially when overclocked. After taking the time to fully test the RDNA 1.0 graphics card inside the RX 5700, we can say without a doubt that it continues the trend.
In our synthetic benchmarks, the RX 5700 blows past the RX Vega 56 and, amazingly, even the RX Vega 64 as well. Unfortunately, gaming performance was not quite as impressive. Even if the RX 5700 consistently delivers frame rate increases over the RX Vega 56, the gain is not much to justify an upgrade.
For 1080p Full HD, we were able to play Metro Exodus, Assassin's Creed Odyssey, Marvel's Avengers, Borderlands 3, Anthem at 62 fps to 77 fps and kept frame rates hovering around 68 fps. For 1440p Quad HD, we were able to play Anthem, Final Fantasy XV, Gears of War 5, Need For Speed: Heat, Just Cause 4 at 61 fps to 66 fps and kept frame rates hovering around 64 fps.
For 2160p 4K, we were able to play World War Z, F1 2018, Valorant at 65 fps to 160 fps and kept frame rates hovering around 98 fps.
5700 2060 rx vs
Compare RX 5700 vs RTX 2060 vs RX 5700 XT Benchmarks
AMD Radeon RX 5700 / i7-8700KWith some tuning, the RX 5700 makes the most sense for gamers with 4K monitors. Though serious gamers hardly play at 4k. It is worth noting that the RX 5700 is a very power hungry card and requires a decent power supply unit. In terms of memory, the RX 5700 's 8192 MB RAM is more than enough for modern games and should not cause any bottlenecks. In short the performance is exceptional, there's no question that this is one of the most powerful single GPU out there in 2019 .
View Current Price List
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 / i7-8700KIt is clear that the RTX 2060 is a significantly more capable high-end card that can play AAA titles at 1080p/1440p with 50-60 frames per second. In terms of memory, the RTX 2060 's 6144 MB RAM is more than enough for modern games and should not cause any bottlenecks. In short the performance is exceptional, there's no question that this is one of the most powerful single GPU out there in 2019 .
View Current Price List
AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT / i7-8700KWith some tuning, the RX 5700 XT makes the most sense for gamers with 4K monitors. Though serious gamers hardly play at 4k. It is worth noting that the RX 5700 XT is a very power hungry card and requires a decent power supply unit. In terms of memory, the RX 5700 XT 's 8192 MB RAM is more than enough for modern games and should not cause any bottlenecks.
View Current Price List
|RX 5700||RTX 2060||RX 5700 XT|
|Length||12 inches 305 mm||9 inches 229 mm||12 inches 305 mm|
|Outputs||1x HDMI 3x DisplayPort||1x DVI1x HDMI2x DisplayPort1x USB Type-C||1x HDMI 3x DisplayPort|
|Power Connectors||1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin||1x 8-pin||1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin|
|TDP||180 W||160 W||225 W|
|RX 5700||RTX 2060||RX 5700 XT|
|Boost Clock||1625 MHz||1680 MHz||1755 MHz|
|GPU Clock||1465 MHz||1365 MHz||1605 MHz|
|Memory Clock||1750 MHz||1750 MHz 14000 MHz effective||1750 MHz|
|RX 5700||RTX 2060||RX 5700 XT|
|Bus Interface||PCIe 4.0 x16||PCIe 3.0 x16||PCIe 4.0 x16|
|Launch Price||349 USD||399 USD|
|Release Date||Jul 7th, 2019||Jan 7, 2019||Jul 7th, 2019|
|RX 5700||RTX 2060||RX 5700 XT|
|DirectX||12.0 (12_1)||12.0 (12_1)||12.0 (12_1)|
|RX 5700||RTX 2060||RX 5700 XT|
|Architecture||RDNA 1.0||Turing||RDNA 1.0|
|Die Size||251 mm²||445 mm2||251 mm²|
|GPU Name||Navi 10||TU106||Navi 10|
|GPU Variant||Navi 10 PRO||Navi 10 XT|
|Process Size||7 nm||12 nm||7 nm|
|Transistors||10,300 million||10,800 million||10,300 million|
|RX 5700||RTX 2060||RX 5700 XT|
|Bandwidth||448.0 GB/s||336.0 GB/s||448.0 GB/s|
|Memory Bus||256 bit||192 bit||256 bit|
|Memory Size||8192 MB||6144 MB||8192 MB|
|RX 5700||RTX 2060||RX 5700 XT|
|RX 5700||RTX 2060||RX 5700 XT|
|FP16 (half) performance||14,980 GFLOPS (2:1)||12,902 GFLOPS (2:1)||17,970 GFLOPS (2:1)|
|FP32 (float) performance||7,488 GFLOPS||6,451 GFLOPS||8,986 GFLOPS|
|FP64 (double) performance||468.0 GFLOPS (1:16)||201.6 GFLOPS (1:32)||561.6 GFLOPS (1:16)|
|Pixel Rate||104.0 GPixel/s||80.64 GPixel/s||112.3 GPixel/|
|Texture Rate||234.0 GTexel/s||201.6 GTexel/s||280.8 GTexel/s|
Then they changed their position to missionary and Oleg had the opportunity to caress the woman's breasts with his mouth. They changed their positions several times until Oleg's excitement reached the limit. He decided that it would be best to cum in the girl's mouth. Taking out at the last moment a member from the vagina, he jerked to Natasha's head.
You will also like:
- Ink cartridge refill kits walmart
- Kissimmee hotels with indoor pools
- Duties of a navy officer
- Fresh milk near me
- 2003 silverado 2500hd leveling kit
- Joseph joestar holy shit
- Project status presentation slides ppt
Like girls. Video. - Ed. ) Now get down on your knees.