# Gigabyte GeForce RTX 2080 Gaming OC 8 GB



## W1zzard (Oct 9, 2018)

Gigabyte's RTX 2080 Gaming OC is a customized, overclocked variant of the RTX 2080. It runs at a boost clock of 1815 MHz, which is 15 MHz higher than the Founders Edition. Gigabyte has also released a new BIOS that increases the card's power limit. We ran all our tests with the stock and new BIOS.

*Show full review*


----------



## PanicLake (Oct 9, 2018)

When I see all this reviews and I think: does it cost just a few bucks more than a 1080? No? Not interested!
I think i've never been so not interested in GPU reviews since this series.


----------



## techy1 (Oct 9, 2018)

in conclusion in negatives: "High non-gaming power consumption (fixable, says NVIDIA)" - how is part about "fixable" working out so far? not enough time, huh? when it is time to drop that "fixable"?


----------



## ONEoo7 (Oct 9, 2018)

I was thinking that it would be nice to see a graph with gpu usage percentage over time and gpu frequency, since it dynamically scales because of the boost and also maybe TDP percentage?
I am making this request because I saw that my card is advertised at (1800mhz OC and 1785mhz gaming) and the observed frequencies where 1920 in benchmarks and 1860-1890 in games(that is gpu frequency). Using GPU-Z tool for these measurements.

I am having some issues with a few games on my rtx 2080 that they average around 50% gpu usage and less than 50% cpu usage. Maybe someone has a clue where to start looking for solutions?

Congrats for people who do not want to buy or already own one of the rtx cards because of whatever reasons. That information is redundant and simply expressing frustration should be moderated out (just a personal POV). I am tired of these people, please go away or do something else with your time. Nvidia will not read your comments and take it into consideration for the next releases.It's a business and businesses survival is based on money. You are only wasting other peoples time by having to scroll through junk.


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 9, 2018)

ONEoo7 said:


> a graph


Chart on the "temperature & clocks" page, near the end



techy1 said:


> in conclusion in negatives: "High non-gaming power consumption (fixable, says NVIDIA)" - how is part about "fixable" working out so far? not enough time, huh? when it is time to drop that "fixable"?


updated charts and text, thanks for reminding


----------



## lexluthermiester (Oct 9, 2018)

Good review. What can be taken away from it is that this card is over-priced and under-performing when compared to offerings from competitors.


----------



## lZKoce (Oct 9, 2018)

No, simply no. Three Fan GPU never again (especially from GB). I'll stick to two fans max- lower noise, same job basically. At least for me.


----------



## ppn (Oct 9, 2018)

The Gpu was designed for 10nm later to be refreshed on 8nm anyways. This release will repeat the history of GTX 280 and GTX 285 - the latter being 249$ cheaper.

The shroud disassembly for cleaning and replacement fans is very difficult when I tried not to remove the heatsink on my 670, same cooler. Had to use 90°angled screwdrivers.


----------



## Joss (Oct 9, 2018)

@W1zzard 

Just out of curiosity, why such a discrepancy between the number of cards tested (Nvidia versus AMD). 
AMD's AIBs don't send you samples, is that it?


----------



## Fluffmeister (Oct 9, 2018)

Damn, that Wolfenstein II Vulkan performance remains bonkers.


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 9, 2018)

Fluffmeister said:


> Damn, that Wolfenstein II Vulkan performance remains bonkers.


How is it broken?


----------



## coonbro (Oct 9, 2018)

'' It runs at a boost clock of 1815 MHz, which is 15 MHz higher than the Founders Edition;'

lol... like Pascal's    remember when like  you get one of these  OC'ed aftermarket cards and you got like 60- 90 + [or something worth the cost ]  MHz ? like a reference  to a classy  for example   .  so now it just like 17 ..lol..      so here what you get is an logoed branded  shroud in the end over the reference founders  cards ..

and then the founders has a 2 fan aftermarket type cooler now too boot .....lol.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Oct 9, 2018)

W1zzard said:


> How is it broken?


I don't think they meant broken. By "bonkers" I think they meant crazy fast. Might be wrong, that's the way it seems.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Oct 9, 2018)

W1zzard said:


> How is it broken?



No not broken! As lex already mentioned... bonkers as in crazy fast!


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 9, 2018)

lexluthermiester said:


> I don't think they meant broken. By "bonkers"


I misread, sorry. Long day


----------



## lexluthermiester (Oct 9, 2018)

W1zzard said:


> I misread, sorry. Long day


No worries. We've all been there.


----------



## Power Slave (Oct 10, 2018)

WOW its being sold for $829 at newegg - that's expensive. What happened where that used to be the flagship prices for Ti's? And now we can't get anything better than an xx80....sad times. Guess I'll wait and see what AMD brings in 2019.


----------



## Joss (Oct 10, 2018)

Power Slave said:


> What happened where that used to be the flagship prices for Ti's?


It's not with Tis we should be comparing with but the flagships of a handful of years ago.
Take 2012. The flagship GTX 680 was $500 and the GTX 690 (dual 680s, remember?) was $999.
Did inflation... of course not. Not even putting together inflation, raw materials scarcity (which is a lie), manufacturing limitations (another lie), tariffs (which didn't bite yet) would we come close to such discrepancy.
I'd never buy under the indecent robbery the current tech market is. And I put some of the blame on who does.


----------



## John Naylor (Oct 10, 2018)

I imagine the reason we don't see as many AMDs reviews include...

a) Less manufacturer's models available.
b) Sales are 5:1
c)  Many vendor's don't want detailed reviews

Most GFX card reviews consist of"

-Wording from manufacturer's press release
-A handful of Game benchmarks
-A "Gee its great" conclusion.

Vendors may not want to send samples to sites like TPU, Bitech, Guru3D who do detailed tear downs and report PCB components, PCB Cooling, temp and sound measurements because their product doesn't measure up well against the competition.   I have noticed of late that certain manufacturer's and model lines are no longer being sent out.   A good example is EVGA SC line.  

The aforementioned sites all note the major fail that was the EVGA SC 970 whereby 1/3 the heat sink missed the GPU.  We saw the fail for the 1060 - 1080 SC and FTW likes where they cheaped out and skiped the thermal pads which would have prevented the cards from going up in smoke.  While it was perhaps well known that since the 5xx series, the SC line almost always used a reference PCB, it wasn't generally addressed in most reviews.  So since the 9xx series, I have noticed a scarcity of reviews being done on these cards.

I notice that TPU only has the Reference Vega 56 or 64 ... I have no way of knowing why MSI and Sapphire decided to follow past practice and submit samples ... playing devil's advocate, I can imagine one reason might be that there is a general perception that AIB cards are superior to Reference cards and, if the AIB card doesn't provide that, well maybe it's best not to help that info get out there.

In short, there are various answers to your question, some obvious, some just supposition ... but I gotta think, if a card was sent to TPU, sooner lor later it's going to get published on the site.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Oct 10, 2018)

Joss said:


> @W1zzard
> 
> Just out of curiosity, why such a discrepancy between the number of cards tested (Nvidia versus AMD).
> AMD's AIBs don't send you samples, is that it?


There have not exactly been a plethora of AMD releases.  I think W1z has actually done pretty well in covering AMD.  

Could there be more? Sure, like anything by Sapphire, but there’s been a good cross section besides that.


----------



## @man_daddio (Oct 14, 2018)

FYI: the 1080ti is not so cheap anymore for the third party versions. Therefore, in my opinion, it would be more sensible to buy a newer product than buy old. Even if the RTX features are used right away you're still getting newer parts and a card that has extra features. And to add to that these cards are great for Developers who can afford to buy a Titan V for $3,000. The RTX 2080ti is less than half the price of it and it's faster. This is what I don't hear people talking about. Just too much complaining about price. RTX 2080 and the 2080ti perform very well and that's all that matters. They do their job. I do love the articles though. I think for the most part you're being fair and not really taking advantage of feeding the naysayers too much as a lot of tech sites and YouTube channelers are doing. Keep up the good work. And by the way if people really really want one of these cards cheaper than what they are then they have to look. And that takes work. I just happened to stumble across the gigabyte windforce 2080ti for $1064. And yes it's legitimate because I have to go pick it up personally. So that's a good deal for me. I've never owned a flagship product ever from any company. I am a 4K gamer and also a virtual reality gamer so this cards should do me well for quite some time. I'll probably doing a YouTube video showing off the parts to my new computer. Hopefully do a building video also although I don't have a lot of time these days. Cheers.



ONEoo7 said:


> I was thinking that it would be nice to see a graph with gpu usage percentage over time and gpu frequency, since it dynamically scales because of the boost and also maybe TDP percentage?
> I am making this request because I saw that my card is advertised at (1800mhz OC and 1785mhz gaming) and the observed frequencies where 1920 in benchmarks and 1860-1890 in games(that is gpu frequency). Using GPU-Z tool for these measurements.
> 
> I am having some issues with a few games on my rtx 2080 that they average around 50% gpu usage and less than 50% cpu usage. Maybe someone has a clue where to start looking for solutions?
> ...


Well at least I'm not the only one that's tired of the complainers. And yes thanks for requesting charts. I usually don't have time to read full articles anymore so I just kind of skim through. This site seems to be pretty fair and doing assessments rather than feeding naysayers. I look forward to doing my own benchmarks when I get my card. The ones that the text cites and YouTubers use are not really accurate for me because I want to know how my card performs when I'm streaming when I'm gaming for a long time when I'm doing VR or if I'm just doing multiple things in general. It's all nice to have test done on a fresh clean build but that's not really realistic for most people. We all know how sluggish Windows gets overtime. But that's just how I feel. So when I post my benchmarks I'm selling the frames per second in the results while I'm doing things and recording at the same time. A lot of people don't like that but that's how I make my determination of whether a video card is doing its job or not. Not to say that I don't think enthusiast for doing their test and posting them for us. I see that more as entertainment though. Take it easy.


----------



## Joss (Oct 14, 2018)

@man_daddio said:


> RTX 2080 and the 2080ti perform very well and that's all that matters


No, there's the price as well, and if the price isn't right (and it is not) the product is flawed.


----------



## @man_daddio (Nov 2, 2018)

Joss said:


> No, there's the price as well, and if the price isn't right (and it is not) the product is flawed.


I don't think that the RTX series cards are high-priced. If it was just a pascal refresh then I would be a little upset but Nvidia decided they wanted to pack more into their cards, add DDR 6, and also make them more powerful which they are. And just because something is high-priced doesn't make it flawed. It may make it unfortunate for people who don't have a lot of money but that doesn't make it bad product. Apple has a flawed product that is overpriced. that would be an example of what you're actually talking about.


----------

