# EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 XC Ultra 6 GB



## W1zzard (Jan 14, 2019)

EVGA's RTX 2060 XC Ultra is the company's flagship RTX 2060, priced at $379. It comes with the largest overclock of all RTX 2060 cards: 1830 MHz. You may also raise the board power limit to 217 W, which is almost the maximum capability of the 8-pin PCIe power input configuration.

*Show full review*


----------



## jabbadap (Jan 14, 2019)

So, a bit better than Zotac in terms of noise. But that price 

Any way great review as always, keep em coming  (Palit seems to be next in line.)


----------



## jeremyshaw (Jan 14, 2019)

EDIT: Price has been corrected to be only $30 over FE. Given this is the higher clocked version of EVGA's dual slot card, I have some hope the regular model is $350.



I have to agree with your commentary on the price. $50 over the Founder's Edition with little to show for it (I think the only tangible gain is fan idle stop). I am curious what the other major vendors will have for the RTX2060. Also, while Virtualink may not be popular now (or ever?), I noticed the Founder's Edition still has it.

I've moved to a tiny mITX case (Dancase A4) and it really made the individual component noises much more noticeable. No more case fans to smother over the noise. The last major source of noise is the always-on blower fan on my GTX780Ti.

Such a shame with this batch of EVGA RTX2060 cards. The single fan model is three-slots, whereas the two-slot models are pricey and massive (a bit over 10.5" or ~26cm long). I've stuck exclusively with EVGA for a long time (since Fermi, basically; after a good warranty experience, in a sea of bad customer support from other brands at the time), perhaps it's time to look elsewhere.


----------



## W1zzard (Jan 14, 2019)

jeremyshaw said:


> Also, while Virtualink may not be popular now (or ever?), I noticed the Founder's Edition still has it.


Yeah, I'm unsure about its significance too, especially since it adds a lot of cost/complexity to the board designs.


----------



## bug (Jan 14, 2019)

W1zzard said:


> Yeah, I'm unsure about its significance too, especially since it adds a lot of cost/complexity to the board designs.


It's probably done to stick with a single 8pin connector? VirtualLink needs to supply an additional 40W or so.
Also, you probably copy/pasted the price in the first page table. It says $380.
$399 is a bit much, especially considering it's missing VirtualLink. But since there are 5 other models in EVGA's lineup, I'm pretty sure the SC version can be had at close to MSRP. That's what I usually shoot for, they boost pretty much as high as their top model.


----------



## W1zzard (Jan 14, 2019)

EVGA just updated us that the launch price is $380, the review has been updated accordingly.


----------



## bug (Jan 14, 2019)

W1zzard said:


> EVGA just updated us that the launch price is $380, the review has been updated accordingly.


Even better. Though this round they may have lost a customer when, besides not implementing VirtuaLink, they went with a 3-slot solution for their other models. I have the space to spare, but I don't want to encourage this practice.


----------



## Steevo (Jan 15, 2019)

Congrats W1zz


----------



## LocutusH (Jan 15, 2019)

Is there a reason why not Battlefield 5 is testend?
And also the copypaste text at Battlefield 1 doesnt apply anymore, since thats not the latest Frostbite engine.


----------



## GeorgeMan (Jan 15, 2019)

So the flagship 2060 from a respectable manufacturer still has a worse cooler than the FE... At a higher price point. If I were searching for a GPU right now, I'd opt for the FE for sure.


----------



## swirl09 (Jan 15, 2019)

2C less for that amount of noise is a terrible trade off!


----------



## dj-electric (Jan 15, 2019)

This RTX 2060 model seems alarmingly inefficient. I'm not happy with this power consumption for that type of GPU.
We need to move to 7nm asap.


----------



## bug (Jan 15, 2019)

I just took another look at the pictures: where have all the capacitors gone?


----------



## jabbadap (Jan 15, 2019)

bug said:


> I just took another look at the pictures: where have all the capacitors gone?



Well I counted 18 Tantalum polymer SMD caps on the circuit board. And I won't be counting all those little Ceramic smd caps.


----------



## bug (Jan 15, 2019)

jabbadap said:


> Well I counted 18 Tantalum polymer SMD caps on the circuit board. And I won't be counting all those little Ceramic smd caps.


Yeah, I meant where have all those solid capacitors (as seen on the Zotac board) have gone.
I will admit I'm not really familiar with SMD/SMT caps, are there any advantages to them, besides their smaller form factor?


----------



## Casecutter (Jan 15, 2019)

Sorry, Before they're gone I'd think the GTX 1070 Ti is the card that... Wore it Better! 
I mean with 8Gb so voluminously showing, all that Vivacious volume has me not turning any for this.  Especially when some deals today price similar!   Even if it's $50 more to drop... on hot date, Look at it... Lookatit?


----------



## jabbadap (Jan 15, 2019)

bug said:


> Yeah, I meant where have all those solid capacitors (as seen on the Zotac board) have gone.
> I will admit I'm not really familiar with SMD/SMT caps, are there any advantages to them, besides their smaller form factor?



They are usually more heat resistant and more reliable. But they are a lot more expensive compared to aluminium solid caps too. And of course one have to design good circuit to begin with if using Tantalums, they are prone to explode if misused.


----------



## bug (Jan 15, 2019)

jabbadap said:


> They are usually more heat resistant and more reliable. But they are a lot more expensive compared to aluminium solid caps too. And of course one have to design good circuit to begin with if using Tantalums,* they are prone to explode if misused*.


And there I was thinking they could come with drawbacks 

Do these hold charge any better?


----------



## TheGuruStud (Jan 16, 2019)

You don't expect me to buy that sniper elite 4 score for AMD, do you? This is getting a bit absurd. Not only is it WAY low, it's even lower than the initial vega 64 review score. They were looking shady already, but once I got to SE4, I knew it was bogus. The blower model sucks, but not that hard.

You might end up in a video like Steve from HU at this rate LOL


----------



## jabbadap (Jan 16, 2019)

bug said:


> And there I was thinking they could come with drawbacks
> 
> Do these hold charge any better?



Can't really tell, there ain't just one type of Tantalum SMD capacitor. But yeah Tantalums are low leakage high capacity capacitors, thus have good for holding charge. It really depends what is the intended use case for the capacitor.

Haven't designed DC/DC -converters for ages, but If my memory does not deceive me, one should always use some ceramic capacitor in parallel with Tantalums for better high frequency performance. And for love of god don't exceed the rated voltage.


----------



## bug (Jan 16, 2019)

jabbadap said:


> Can't really tell, there ain't just one type of Tantalum SMD capacitor. But yeah Tantalums are low leakage high capacity capacitors, thus have good for holding charge. It really depends what is the intended use case for the capacitor.
> 
> Haven't designed DC/DC -converters for ages, but If my memory does not deceive me, one should always use some ceramic capacitor in parallel with Tantalums for better high frequency performance. *And for love of god don't exceed the rated voltage*.



Why? Could come in handy on July 4, couldn't it?


----------



## jabbadap (Jan 16, 2019)

bug said:


> Why? Could come in handy on July 4, couldn't it?



Well


Spoiler


----------



## bug (Jan 17, 2019)

jabbadap said:


> Well
> 
> 
> Spoiler


So it's not only tantalum, it's also got fireflies inside. Neat.

@W1zzard This just hit me. There's no power draw test that includes DXR/DLSS, would it be possible to add that? Also, Furmark probably doesn't know about those features either, so it kind of fails in its role to stress the cards to the max for Turing. Unfortunately, I don't know any tool that could pick up that task.

(And yes, I know you've been dying to lengthen the duration of your tests. But if it draws more page clicks, it might be worth it.)


----------



## SpaceRangerWoody (Mar 10, 2019)

Just for reference, I just purchased this card in early March 2019, and after just 3 months on the market, the EVGA and the FE cards have skyrocketed in price. I watched sales for about a month and the lowest I could find the EVGA card was $399. The Nvidia FE edition hovered around $420+ so I'm satisfied with paying slightly less for a better card, especially since a free game (Anthem, BFV, or Metro: Exodus) was thrown in.


----------



## bug (Mar 10, 2019)

SpaceRangerWoody said:


> Just for reference, I just purchased this card in early March 2019, and after just 3 months on the market, the EVGA and the FE cards have skyrocketed in price. I watched sales for about a month and the lowest I could find the EVGA card was $399. The Nvidia FE edition hovered around $420+ so I'm satisfied with paying slightly less for a better card, especially since a free game (Anthem, BFV, or Metro: Exodus) was thrown in.


There was was that mishap at TSMC that affected a lot of waffers, but various RTX 2060 models have always been available at $349 or $359. I almost pulled the trigger on one, but decided not to in the end.


----------



## John Naylor (Mar 10, 2019)

I assume by largest overclock you're talking boost core .... id have to go back and check the out of the box clocks but for the 2080 Ti when manually overclocked,   the EVGA XC Ultra didn't do so well when manually overclocked .   And it would seem that they dropping to old model designations ... presumable to get away from the shade on previous SC and FTW models.   Of the eight 2080 Ti cards tested here on TPU, the EVGA XC Ultra finished

in 7th place for overclocked fps, topping only the FE
in 8th place for core OC
in 7th place for memory  OC

As for the 2060 models tested here ...

(????) NVIDIA RTX 2060 Founders Edition (1680 Boost Clock) in box) hit 2010 MHz on core and 2090 MHz memory w/ 118.1 fps and 190 watts on TPUs OC test
($399) EVGA RTX 2060 XC (*1830*) Ultra hit 2055 MHz / 2000 MHz w/ 120.2 fps and 217 watts on TPUs OC test
($369) ZOTAC RTX 2060 AMP (1800) hit 2055 /* 2130* MHz w/ 121.1 fps and 190 watts on TPUs OC test
(????) Palit RTX 2060 GamingPro OC (1830) *2090* MHz / 2090 MHz  w/ *123.9* fps and* 225* watts on TPUs OC test
($389) MSI RTX 2060 Gaming Z (*1830*) 2055 MHz / 1990 MHz   w/ 121.1 fps and 200 watts on TPUs OC test

Highest OC Clock => Zotac Amp w/ 2090/ MSI, Zotac and EVGA at 2055
Highest OC Memory => Zotac Amp w/ 2130, Palit and FE w/ 2090
Highest Power Limit => Palit w/ 225, EVGA w/ 225 and MSi w/ 200
Highest fps = 123.9 w/ Palit, Zotac and MSi w/ 121.1

(????) NVIDIA RTX 2060 Founders Edition => => 32 dbA / 73C / 6  + 2 VRM / Samsung memory
($399) EVGA RTX 2060 XC => 35 dbA / 70C /  6  + 2 VRM / Micron memory
($369) ZOTAC RTX 2060 AMP => 40 dbA / 72C / 6  + 2 VRM / Samsung memory
(????) Palit RTX 2060 GamingPro OC => 36 dbA / 68C / 6  + 2 VRM / Micron memory
($389) MSI RTX 2060 => 31 dbA / 68C / 5  + 2 VRM / Micron memory

Loving MSIs 31 dbA / 68C  ... wondering why they only one not to use reference VRM (OnSemi NCP81610 ) and what the difference is
Hope my neighbors don't by a Zotac


----------

