The process of creating a new graphics card is an arduous and costly one. Founders, such as NVIDIA and AMD, often invest millions in research to develop the most powerful GPU on the market. One brand that got around this expensive hurdle was Intel with its i9 line of processors. With AMD’s recent introduction of its Radeon RX 5700 XT (which has taken over from the R9), we wanted to see how it compares against Nvidia’s RTX 2080 (2020).

The “5700 xt vs 2080 super” is a test to see how the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT compares to the Nvidia RTX 2080. The test was run on an Intel Core i7-8700K.

Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 versus AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT

It’s difficult to be a gamer. Every two years or so, a new graphics card is released, and you must decide if it is worthwhile to update or wait.

Which GPU offers the most value for money and is the most future-proof, so you don’t have to worry about updating your graphics card every year?

According to conventional opinion, AMD has a superior price-performance ratio, whereas Nvidia has greater high-end performance. We’ll find out whether that’s the case in this review.


In this test, we pitted the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT against the Nvidia RTX 2080, two of the most popular graphics cards among gamers.

Not just for gaming, but also for video editing and workstations, both provide a lot of power.

They’re also diverse in price. But is it really worth it to spend more money on the more costly option?

In the final Verdict below, we take a deeper look at both GPUs and offer you our judgment on which one is better for you.

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT versus Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 Results


Best Price-to-Performance


Radeon RX 5700 XT PowerColor Red Devil

Result of the Test

May 2020 Result of the Test 9.8/10 Excellent

May 2020 Result of the Test 9.6/10 Very Good


  • Capable of 4K gaming at 60 frames per second
  • Another fascinating feature with a lot of promise is DLSS.
  • It raises the bar for single-GPU performance.
  • Excellent connections
  • Great 1440p graphics performance in the mid-range
  • Large performance boost, beating the RTX 2070 and approaching the Radeon VII.
  • Excellent design
  • The best value-for-money


Test Result

May 2020 Test Result 9.8/10 Excellent


  • Capable of 4K gaming at 60 frames per second
  • Another fascinating feature with a lot of promise is DLSS.
  • It raises the bar for single-GPU performance.
  • Excellent connections

Best Price-to-Performance


Radeon RX 5700 XT PowerColor Red Devil

Test Result

May 2020 Test Result 9.6/10 Very Good


  • Great 1440p graphics performance in the mid-range
  • Large performance boost, beating the RTX 2070 and approaching the Radeon VII.
  • Excellent design
  • The best value-for-money

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is ranked second.


  • Large performance boost, beating the RTX 2070 and approaching the Radeon VII.
  • Easily outperforms the RTX 2060 Super.
  • Excellent design
  • The best value-for-money

Excellent value for money.

Only Radeon RX 580/590 upgrades have been offered to owners of mid-range graphics cards since AMD debuted the Radeon RX 480 three years ago.

On the other hand, the Radeon RX Vega graphics cards from 2017 were first scarce and pricey, and they also required a lot of power.

The Radeon RX 5700 XT and Radeon RX 5700 are the direct successors to the Radeon RX 480/470, but they are much more expensive than their predecessors – since Nvidia has showed how it’s done.


AMD positioned both graphic cards above and below the Geforce RTX 2060 Super, with beginning costs of 420 dollars for the XT and 370 dollars for the non-XT.

The pixel accelerators, also known as navigation devices internally, have received such good marks in the competition that new Super versions of the Geforce RTX 2060 and the Geforce RTX 2060 have been introduced with faster speeds, stealing the show from AMD.

The success of this relies on the perspective from which the navigation maps are seen.

navi, the umbrella title for a number of graphics processors based on the new RDNA technology, is a critical design for AMD: It’s not just in the Navi-10-GPU for the Radeon RX 5700 (XT), but it’s also in the upcoming Playstation and Xbox Anaconda alias Project Scarlett’s systems-on-a-chip.

However, for the time being, the manufacturer has opted not to offer hardware-accelerated raytracing in the desktop versions, opting instead to focus on console implementation.

Later variants with the Navi-20 processor may be capable of rapid real-time ray tracing, although no such consumer graphics cards are expected until the end of 2020.


However, even without ray tracing, the Radeon RX 5700 (XT) are technically intriguing and fast cards: Both employ the Navi 10 GPU, which is the first major graphics chip built by TSMC utilizing the N7P process after the Vega 20 of the Radeon VII.

The Navi 10 is fairly small, with 251 mm2 and 10.3 billion transistors, but the Polaris 10/20 of a Radeon RX 480/580/590 is quite huge, with 232 mm2 and 5.7 billion transistors.

For AMD, this implies more GPUs per wafer and lower pricing, but Nvidia’s TU106 Geforce RTX 2060 Super, despite its low-cost 12 nm manufacture with 445 mm2 and 10.8 billion transistors, is likely to be more costly.

AMD, like Nvidia, is now adopting GDDR6 visual memory with a 256-bit interface to provide high data transfer rates at a lower cost than Vega 64’s HBM2 memory.

In terms of the amount of shader units and their frequency, the two navi-cards are similar to the Geforce RTX Super: The Radeon RX 5700 XT features 2,560 ALUs and a normal AMD gaming speed of 1,755 MHz, while the Radeon RX 5700 has 2,304 processing cores and a typical AMD gaming clock of 1,625 MHz.

However, for apps that place less burden on the graphics card, the GPU may be clocked higher.

For contrast, the Geforce RTX 2060 Super has 2,176 cores and a boost clock of 1,650 MHz.

Previous Polaris and Vega processors needed many more shader units than Nvidia’s models, and could only use them at 1440p or 4K-UHD resolutions. As a result, AMD has created a new navigation system architecture that varies dramatically from the old Graphics Core Next (GCN) technological foundation: It’s called RDNA, which stands for Radeon Deoxyribonucleic Acid, and it’s effectively a gene.

RDNA improves navigation.


The Navi-10 processor has the initial iteration of AMD’s RNDA technology, which, like GCN, will be expanded and improved over the next years.

The fundamental layout of RDNA is well-known: the chip has a display unit, a multimedia block, a root controller, different caches, two shader engines instead of four (as in Vega 10) and the real compute units.

Support for 16 PCIe Gen4 lanes is new, double the speed of PCIe Gen3 lanes.

To take use of this benefit, you’ll need a compatible CPU – specifically, a Ryzen 3000 with X570 chip, which AMD also introduced today.

For the time being, PCIe Gen4 isn’t important for games, but certain apps, such as Davinci Resolve, could benefit from the much faster data transfer rate during 8K timeline playback.

We haven’t been able to duplicate this circumstance yet due to a lack of time, but special internal testing are being prepared.

RDNA is built on the same ISA (Instruction Set Architecture) as GCN, although the hardware implementation differs significantly:

The objective was to increase performance per clock cycle by a substantial amount.

AMD overhauled the Compute Units for this purpose, and dramatically modified the SIMD units and cache mechanism for the first time in many years.

The manufacturer claims a 50 percent boost in speed for the same energy consumption, with the architecture accounting for half of that and 7 nm and frequency enhancements accounting for the remainder.


Each compute unit is made up of 64 ALUs, which are fed instructions in the form of numerous threads through wavefronts.

AMD has previously relied on a Wave64 implementation, which is rather coarse-grained.

For years, Nvidia has been employing a finer-grained Warp32 implementation, which offers benefits in code branching and hence enhances shader efficiency.

AMD is now adopting a Wave32 technique for RDNA, and the ALUs have been altered to reduce the time it takes to complete the incoming work.

RDNA employs SIMD32 units instead of SIMD16 units at GCN, which implies two Wave32 fronts are finished in one cycle rather than one Wave64 front in four.

In the best-case scenario, the workload is quadrupled, and SIMD units have to wait for data less often.

The shader compiler can still supply a Wave64 front to the SIMD32 slots if desired, but this will require two cycles.

There are twice as many scalar and scheduler units as with GCN, in addition to the usual vector units. Furthermore, the asynchronous computation engines should improve data delivery to the CUs.

Because 2x 32 ALUs are usually coupled in one, AMD refers to them as Dual Compute Units.

Because AMD previously mentioned an L1 cache in this context, they share the L0 cache with 16 KByte and quadrupled bandwidth.

This is now shared by five Dual Compute Units and has a 128 KByte capacity. The L3 cache is considerably bigger, but it’s 4 MByte slower.

This is double the size of Polaris 10 (RX 480) and corresponds to Vega 10, although Navi 10 only has 40 compute units instead of 64, resulting in greater buffer capacity per compute unit.

In addition, AMD claims to have enhanced the lossless delta color compression and lowered RDNA cache latencies. The latter decreases the effective bandwidth requirement, but not the required amount of buffer or GDDR6 visual memory space.

This is interleaved with 64 raster output stages, which is twice as many as Polaris 10. It is coupled to four 64-bit controllers.

In-depth look at the RX 5700 (XT).


According to AMD, the Primitive Shader, which was introduced with Vega but never utilized, has now been deployed in navigation systems in such a manner that it is active: Under Direct3D and Vulcan, the Primitive Shader rejects hidden triangles sooner (culling), which improves performance.

Navi has also merged previously used implementations such as FP16 speed, which is twice as fast as FP32 instructions. This feature is used in current games such as Resident Evil 2, and it will be used in future games such as Borderlands 3 and Wolfenstein Youngblood.

The multimedia block, alias VCN (Video Core Next), as well as the display controller, have experienced various changes: H.264 material can be decoded in 8K at 30 frames per second and encoded in 4K at 90 frames per second in Navi 10, and AMD has now incorporated 4K60, 8K24, and 4K90 decode and encode for H.265 content.

4K60 decodes the widely used VP9 codec in hardware, however our power consumption results indicate that the driver is not yet mature. The CPU is still in charge of the AV1 codec.

Navi now supports Displayport 1.4, as well as DSC (Display Stream Compression) for higher-resolution displays, however HDMI 2.0b is still supported.

As a result, the slot bezel of the Radeon RX 5700 XT and Radeon RX 5700 contains three display connectors and one HDMI, as well as a virtual connection through USB-C, which Nvidia lacks.

However, AMD claims that support for the Navi-10 processor is widespread.

In the standard design, both Radeon graphics cards feature a blower cooler, often known as DHE (Direct Heat Exhaust). AMD utilizes a phase-change graphite paste that is visually similar to a thermal pad, in addition to an evaporation chamber instead of heat pipes, as seen in the Radeon VII.

In idle mode, the cards are relatively quiet, however they become rather noisy when loaded.


The dented radiator and backplate distinguish the Radeon RX 5700 XT. The dent and plate on the rear of the Radeon RX 5700 are missing, however this is just cosmetic and does not affect performance.

Because the PCBs are similar, both graphic cards utilize an 8-pin and a 6-pin power connection. The XT just has an additional GPU voltage converter phase.

Navigation systems now offer a contrast-based post-processing filter called Radeon Image Sharpening, which is similar to Nvidia’s Freestyle or the manufacturer-independent Reshader: After the picture is created, it is sharpened because varied techniques to temporal edge smoothing soften it significantly – allowing small texture features to be seen more clearly.

Radeon Image Sharpening is enabled in the driver’s display settings and works at any resolution with D3D9, D3D12, and Vulcan.

It will suffice in the 2060s.

We used a Core i9-9900K with a normal clock rate and Intel’s PL1 goal of 95 watts for our testing, together with 16 GByte DDR4-2667 on a Z370 board.

All of my apps and games, as well as Windows 10 x64 v1930, are installed on a WD Black SN750 with 1 TByte, one of the fastest NVMe SSDs on the market. Nvidia’s Geforce 431.16 and AMD’s Radeon Software 19.7.1 Beta5 are the drivers we’re using.


According to our tests, the Radeon RX 5700 XT is over 20% quicker than the Radeon RX Vega 64 on average. The navigation card is especially well suited to GTA 5, Jurassic World Evolution, and No Man’s Sky, where it is a quarter to a third quicker.

The advantage over non-XT is 10%, implying that the Radeon RX 5700 outperforms a presently comparable Radeon RX Vega 64 on average. Despite having twice the memory bandwidth and 4,096 shader units instead of 2,560, AMD’s previous top model, the Radeon VII, can hardly differentiate itself from the Radeon RX 5700 XT; the difference is just 5%.

When applied to Nvidia’s portfolio, this implies that a Radeon RX 5700 XT outperforms a Geforce RTX 2060 Super and is also marginally ahead of a standard Geforce RTX 2070, which costs 450 dollars, or $50 more than the new Radeon RX 5700 XT.

The Radeon RX 5700 sans XT is almost as fast as a much more costly Geforce RTX 2060 Super, and hence quicker than an earlier Geforce GTX 1080. The navigation cards deliver about double the performance of the most popular AMD card, the Radeon RX 580, according to Steam.

It depends on which game is presently running at which resolution, as it does so frequently in a fight between AMD and Nvidia: In games like Ark Survival Evolved, which is still at the Top10 on Steam, Radeons lag well behind in 1080p.

Only at 1440p does it improve, although with epic details, the game stutters on all graphics cards. However, AMD has made significant progress in GTA 5, a popular game that is still demanding on high settings. The Radeon RX 5700 (XT) is well-suited to 1440p gaming in general, with even the highest settings often rendering at over 60 frames per second.

Aside from gaming, AMD’s GPUs wow with superb Davinci Resolve performance; the XT is quicker than a Geforce RTX 2080!

The navigation pixel accelerators are far more energy efficient than earlier generations in terms of power usage.

The Radeon RX 5700 XT, which is almost as fast as the Radeon VII, just requires 220 watts under load rather than 290 watts. The Radeon RX 5700 also manages to outperform the Radeon RX Vega 64, but only by a few watts instead of 285 watts.

This indicates an almost doubled Fps/Watt ratio when compared to a Radeon RX 580, but the Polaris processor is being used much beyond its sweet spot.


The efficiency lowers somewhat when compared to Nvidia’s Geforce RTX: a Geforce RTX 2070 uses 175 watts instead of 220 watts to get the same performance as the Radeon RX 5700 XT, and is quicker than a Radeon RX 5700 with almost comparable power consumption.

This reveals that AMD’s Navi achieves equivalent performance per computing unit to Nvidia’s Turing in navigation, but despite the 7 nm technology, has the less efficient architecture at similar frequency.

Conclusion and availability

The Radeon RX 5700 XT costs 420 dollars, while the Radeon RX 5700 costs 370 dollars. For the time being, only reference models will be available; unique designs from partners will be available in the weeks after the debut.

With the navigation cards, AMD gives a three-month subscription to Xbox Game Pass for PC.

Conclusion: Excellent value for money.


If the competition swiftly introduces a few super cards and the normal Geforce RTXs decrease in price, AMD’s navigation models will be put to the test: Because the Radeon RX 5700 XT just tops the Geforce RTX 2070 and the Radeon RX 5700 is on par with the new Geforce RTX 2060 Super, both graphics cards give great performance.

The navigation pixel accelerators are definitely less expensive, and partners will be able to provide cheaper bespoke designs in the future.

AMD has greatly improved the computational power per shader unit with the Navi architecture: it is now nearly similar to what Nvidia accomplished with the Turing technology, and both graphics card makers employ GDDR6 video memory.

However, for titles like Cyberpunk 2077, Doom Eternal, Metro Exodus, Vampire Bloodlines 2 and Wolfenstein Youngblood, AMD models lack hardware-accelerated raytracing.

Despite 7 nm processors, the Radeon RX 5700 (XT) has a disadvantage in terms of energy efficiency, however the difference is not as significant as it is with a Radeon RX 580 or a Radeon RX Vega 64.

In terms of performance per watt, the XT model seems to be above the sweet spot, but the non-XT variant is on par with the Geforce RTX 2060 Super.

In reality, however, the variances are minor, and this should have no impact on the power cost or the noise level of the cooler in bespoke designs. The little chip should also not be a technological issue.

Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 comes in first.


  • Excellent for 1440p and 1080p gaming
  • DLSS is a fascinating feature with a lot of promise.
  • Deep learning and ray tracing
  • Improved and new design
  • Power supply of 650W is required.

Exceptional performance

Nivida worked for a long time under the codename Turing on the next GPU generation, which has now been publicly available for a longer period — with the exception of a little delay with the RTX 2080Ti is a high-end graphics card..

Nvidia only released information on how powerful the graphics cards are in the run-up to the event. On September 19th, 2018, Nvidia relaxed the embargo on releasing test findings, allowing independent performance data to be revealed for the first time.


First and foremost, Turing included much more technology from Nvidia’s workstation/server-oriented Volta architecture than its immediate predecessor Pascal.

Raytracing is a key feature that also lends it its name. This term may have been etched into your brain by now if you saw the live broadcast.

Model RTX 2080Ti RTX 2080 RTX 2070
Architecture TU102 12nm TU104 12nm TU104 12nm
CUDA cores are graphics processing units. 4352 2944 2304
Clock’s foundation 1350 1515 1410
Boost the timer 1515 1710 1620
Storage GDDR6 11GB 8GB GDDR6 8GB GDDR6
Buses of memory 352 bits 256 bits 256 bits
Bandwidth 616GB / s 448GB / s 448GB / s
TDP 250W 215W 175W
Price Dollar 1259 Dollars 849 Dollar 639

But if there was one thing that left a bad taste in my mouth, it was Nvidia’s price tag.

The Founders Edition of the RTX 2080Ti, for example, costs 1260 dollars, about twice as much as the previous GTX 1080Ti at launch.

Is the corporation abusing its market strength in the graphic card category, or are there legitimate grounds for such a large price increase? We’ll find out in the next section.

The Turing TU102 and TU104 chips are used in the RTX 2080Ti and RTX 2080, respectively. The technological performance on paper is remarkable even in the 12nm process: There’s enough space for 18.6 billion transistors, plus raytracing and tensor gear.

The CUDA cores are also more efficient, promising a significant performance boost over the previous generation.

The TU104 chip is included in the RTX 2080 once again, as previously stated.

The GPU should be much slower than the RTX 2080Ti, but still quicker than the GTX 1080Ti, according to the technical data.

Because, in the previous generation, the 1070 model had the same performance as the GTX 980Ti.


The GDDR6 memory, which supports 14 Gb/s over a 256-bit interface, should perform well.

However, both RTX cards have the same amount of pure memory (8GB), although the GTX 1080Ti still has 11GB video memory.

The next paragraphs demonstrate how this impacts the actual exam.

Before we get into the benchmarks, let’s take a closer look at the RTX 2080Ti, which, other from the power connector (8+8 pin instead of 8+6 pin), is identical to the RTX 2080.

The various metal components in light grey and black dominate in terms of color.

Nvidia has totally flipped the reference design on its head with the new RTX models and added a new cooling system for the first time in a long time. Instead of a radial fan that blows exhaust air to the back, a cooler with two 13-bladed fans has been installed.

These spin at 1500 revolutions per minute in idle mode, which is almost inaudible in practice. We’ll find out how loud the supporters become while they’re working hard later.

From a strictly aesthetic standpoint, whether the new cards seem appealing is, of course, a matter of personal preference.

However, Nvidia’s manufacturing is excellent, as the RTX 2080Ti FE feels quite high-end.

Nvidia, however, does not explore in this area since everything stays in the 2-slot form factor. The card’s length is little under 27cm, so it should fit into most PCs without issue.


Instead of RGB lighting, the maker uses a “Geforce RTX” inscription on the side that sticks out from the rest of the design.

The VirtualLink connection (USB type C) is a unique feature that is located in the back right corner.

It has four DisplayPort lanes and a maximum power output of 23 watts, which is meant for VR headsets, among other things. There’s also one HDMI port and three DisplayPorts.

The current version of the popular synthetic benchmark is 3DMark.

Although this test does not offer accurate conclusions about real gaming performance, the data may still be used to infer an approximate direction for GPU performance.

Both the RTX 2080 and the RTX 2080Ti have high performance numbers in this area.

The 2080Ti outperforms the straight previous model by more than a third, while the RTX 2080 outperforms it by at least twelve percentage points.

It’s obvious in the strategy game Civilization VI that the graphics card’s enhanced performance is only visible at higher resolutions.

Under FullHD, the three GPUs previously described are almost similar in performance. Only at 4K resolution can the RTX 2080Ti outperform the GTX 1080Ti by roughly 40%, resulting in significantly higher FPS.

In the meanwhile, the RTX 2080 is somewhere in the middle, with a small FPS advantage over the GTX 1080Ti.


We’re dealing with a dynamic and action-packed game in Shadow of the Tomb Raider.

Under FullHD, the FPS rates are already visibly different, with the RTX 2080 just a few frames ahead of the GTX 1080Ti. Under 4K, the RTX 2080Ti is also roughly 40% quicker than the GTX 1080Ti.

However, the much-anticipated raytracing function is still a long way off.

The initial games that are meant to support the functionality are still in the works or will be patched later.

For the time being, it’s unclear if raytracing is really useful, given the performance requirements.

Although the RTX 2080Ti’s power consumption has risen somewhat over its predecessor, the difference is hardly perceptible when the card is idle.

Under intense gaming load, when the new RTX models use 324 or 282 watts, the picture becomes a little clearer.

Both new cards are cooler than all other similar models, as predicted, demonstrating the new cooling design’s superiority in temperature monitoring.

At the same time, the cards are very quiet, with an idle noise level of around 28 decibels and a game noise level of roughly 37 dB.

With the previous cooler with the radial fan, such results would very certainly have been unattainable.

Conclusion: An outstanding performance.


In conclusion, let’s start with the obvious: the Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080Ti is now the fastest graphics card for end users.

It is substantially quicker than its predecessor, particularly at higher resolutions, and may attain more than a third more frames per second.

Meanwhile, we don’t even need to discuss AMD’s graphics cards: they’re in a different league and simply aren’t competitive.

The new cooling design is quite beneficial in this regard, and it also helps to the increased performance.

The RTX 2080 requires a little more explanation from Nvidia, since it was often just slightly quicker than the GTX 1080Ti in the tests.

From prior years, it can still be determined that the xx70 model is always as powerful as the preceding generation’s xx80Ti model. Given the findings, it is doubtful that this technique would work with Turing, since the RTX 2070 would have to compute nearly as quickly as the RTX 2080.

Which tradeoffs players must make while using raytracing is likewise unknown.

We have previously raised concerns about Nvidia’s high costs and can now confirm:

The ostensibly suggested price ranges are high. This begins with the RTX 2080Ti, which retails for almost twice as much as its predecessor at 1260 dollars (prices have dropped since launch), but only provides a third more performance.

In summary, everyone who does not want to forego the Turing accomplishment – and for whom pricing is a secondary consideration – may take advantage of the new RTX models.

However, if you’re looking for a good price-performance ratio or just want to set a good example against Nvidia’s pricing strategy, the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is a good choice.

Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 versus AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT verdict

Overall, the conclusion of this review is straightforward. If you choose performance above all else, the Nvidia RTX 2080 is the way to go. Yes, it is pricey for the performance you receive, but it is also a highly future-proof GPU that will last at least three years.

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT is a good choice if you’re on a budget and don’t need to play every game on extreme graphics settings while sustaining 180 FPS.

The “2080 vs 5700 xt” is a test between the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT and the Nvidia RTX 2080. The test was done on an i7-8700K with 32GB of RAM, running at stock speeds.

{“@context”:””,”@type”:”FAQPage”,”mainEntity”:[{“@type”:”Question”,”name”:”Is the RX 5700 XT still good in 2020?”,”acceptedAnswer”:{“@type”:”Answer”,”text”:”A: Yes, the RX 5700 XT is still a great graphics card. It has 5GB of VRAM and supports DirectX 12 which allows games to run smoother than ever before.”}},{“@type”:”Question”,”name”:”Is the RTX 2070 Super better than RX 5700 XT?”,”acceptedAnswer”:{“@type”:”Answer”,”text”:”A: The RTX 2070 Super is better than the RX 5700 XT because it has higher specs, including a faster core clock speed and more memory.”}},{“@type”:”Question”,”name”:””,”acceptedAnswer”:{“@type”:”Answer”,”text”:””}}]}

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the RX 5700 XT still good in 2020?

A: Yes, the RX 5700 XT is still a great graphics card. It has 5GB of VRAM and supports DirectX 12 which allows games to run smoother than ever before.

Is the RTX 2070 Super better than RX 5700 XT?

A: The RTX 2070 Super is better than the RX 5700 XT because it has higher specs, including a faster core clock speed and more memory.

Related Tags

  • rx 5700 xt vs rtx 2080 reddit
  • amd radeon rx 5700 vs rtx 3080
  • amd rdna 2 vs rtx 2080
  • 2080 ti vs 5700 xt 1440p
  • red devil 5700 xt vs 2080 super

Comments are closed.