OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 SC Gaming review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£310VRAM:6 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):160 W

EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 SC Gaming Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 2 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 SC Gaming
5.9/10

Overall score

Score
5.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 90% of models
Score components

40%

5.4

Technical score

25%

5.4

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

5.4

Sentiment score

▼Worse than 90% of graphics cards
6.8

Value for money

Value for money
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components

70%

5.9

Overall score

30%

8.9

Price

▼Worse than 82%
5.4

Technical score

Technical score
5.4/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 79% of models
Score components

44%

4.2

Performance

24%

4.1

Memory

12%

7.7

Power

11%

8.7

Features

5%

7.9

Design

4%

5.8

Connectivity

▼Worse than 79%
5.4

Reviews score

Reviews score
5.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 86% of models

5.4

Mark 7.9 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

8.2

Average grade

20%

6.5

Popularity

Grades by review (2)
2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 86%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
  • evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
  • evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
  • evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
  • evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
  • evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
  • evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
  • evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
evga-geforce-rtx-2060-sc-gaming
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 SC Gaming

Technical score
Technical score
5.4/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 79% of models
Score components:

44%

4.2

Performance

24%

4.1

Memory

12%

7.7

Power

11%

8.7

Features

5%

7.9

Design

4%

5.8

Connectivity

5.4
Reviews score
5.4
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components:

70%

5.9

Overall score

30%

8.9

Price

6.8
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
7,500 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 7,500 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 79.2% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
2,980 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 2,980 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 78.4% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
13,121 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 13,121 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 78.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.5% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
5,689 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 5,689 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 79.9% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
6.57 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 6.57 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 81.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
6 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 6 GB of VRAM, which is less than 82.5% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
192 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 192 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 31.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 18.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
336 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 336 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 63.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
14,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 14,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 69.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 11.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.8% of graphics cards and equal to 77.2% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
3
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 3 displays, which is fewer than 91% of graphics cards and equal to 6.6% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
1
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 1 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 88.1% of graphics cards and equal to 8.7% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.4
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4, which is older than on 80.8% of graphics cards and equal to 13.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
8.1 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 8.1 Gbps, which is slower than on 65.3% of graphics cards and equal to 22.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
160 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 160 W, which is lower than that of 67.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.8% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
160 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 160 W under peak load, which is lower than 71.4% of graphics cards and equal to 3.8% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
500 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 500 W PSU, which is lower than that of 75.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.8% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
218 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 218 W, which is lower than that of 52.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
160 W
Show more
Size
229x 113x 35 mm
Length
189.89 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 189.89 mm long, which is shorter than 92% of graphics cards.
Height
111.15 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 111.15 mm tall, which is shorter than 81.1% of graphics cards and equal in height to 2.4% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2.75 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2.75 slot/s, which is wider than 68.1% of graphics cards and equal in width to 1.1% of graphics cards.
Weight
880 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 880 g, which is lighter than 65.3% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.3% of Graphics cards.
Show more

EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 SC Gaming vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 92.31 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (189.9 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    189.89 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 96 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (240 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    240 vs 144
  • 13.85 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111.2 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111.15 mm vs 125 mm
  • 25.6% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (160 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    160 W vs 215 W
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • 7 °C higher thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a higher thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (88 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    88 °C vs 95 °C
  • 1 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    1 vs 0
  • 96 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (240 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    240 vs 144
  • 1 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    1 vs 0
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • More NVENC sessions
    This graphics card has more concurrent NVENC sessions than the average graphics card (12 vs 8). The average graphics card has 8 concurrent NVENC sessions.
    12 vs 8
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 25.6% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (160 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    160 W vs 215 W
  • 7 °C higher thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a higher thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (88 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    88 °C vs 95 °C
  • 92.31 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (189.9 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    189.89 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 13.85 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111.2 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111.15 mm vs 125 mm
  • 31.7% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,710 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,710 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 6 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (6 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    6 GB vs 12 GB
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 2.4x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (12 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    12 nm vs 5 nm
  • 25.0% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.4/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 86% of models

    5.4

    Mark 7.9 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    6.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (2)
    2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.4 vs 7.2
  • 28.9% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,365 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,365 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 10 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (30 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    30 vs 40
  • 25.0% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.4/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 86% of models

    5.4

    Mark 7.9 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    6.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (2)
    2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.4 vs 7.2
  • 30.8% lower sentiment score
    5.4 vs 7.8
  • 9.2% worse value for money
    EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 SC Gaming has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.79 vs 7.4).
    6.79 vs 7.41
  • 31.7% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,710 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,710 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 28.9% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,365 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,365 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 10 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (30 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    30 vs 40
  • 64 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (120 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    120 vs 184
  • 46.7% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (201.6 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    201.6 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 49.1% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (82.1 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    82.08 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 10 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (30 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    30 vs 40
  • 70.9% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (6.6 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    6.57 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 16 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (48 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    48 vs 64
  • 4 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2019 vs 2023).
    January 2019
    2019 vs 2023
  • 42% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (13,121 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    13,121 points vs 22,638 points
  • 49.3% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (7,500 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    7,500 points vs 14,779 points
  • 67.4% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (2,980 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    2,980 points vs 9,148 points
  • 52.9% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (5,689 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    5,689 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 56.3% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (12.9 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    12.9 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 56.3% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.2 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.21 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 2,432 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1920 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,920 vs 4,352
  • 6 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (6 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    6 GB vs 12 GB
  • 26.3% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (14,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    14,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 25% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (336 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    336 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 87.5% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (3 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    3 MB vs 24 MB
  • 50% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (64 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    64 KB vs 128 KB
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 2.4x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (12 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    12 nm vs 5 nm
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3 vs 4
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • 51.4% larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (445 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    445 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • 52.8% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (10,800 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    10,800 million vs 22,900 million
  • 2 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    1 vs 3
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 1 fewer displays supported
    This graphics card supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (3 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    3 vs 4
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.0b vs 2.1a).
    2.0b vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 1.4a).
    1.4 vs 1.4a
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (4 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    4 vs 6
  • 62.5% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.
  • 0.25 slot/s wider design
    This graphics card occupies more slots than the average graphics card (2.8 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2.75 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

8.0
Joao BCC
≈ estimated
17/11/2023
Hands-on review · installation, temperatures and benchmarks
Verdict
EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 SC Gaming works properly and performs as advertised, with no real problems in use.
9.0
Yilbert
≈ estimated
16/10/2022
Hands-on review · gaming, editing and streaming tests
Verdict
EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 SC Gaming is a very good, powerful card with temperatures that hold up during editing and streaming.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 SC Gaming

  • Solid 1080p and decent 1440p gaming performance
  • Compact form factor suitable for small builds
  • Effective cooling, often staying under 75°C under load
  • Supports modern features like Ray Tracing and DLSS
  • Quiet operation for many users, especially at idle
  • Straightforward installation and setup process
  • Good value for money as a mid-range entry point

What customers don't like about EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 SC Gaming

  • Single-fan design can get noticeably loud under heavy load
  • 6GB VRAM can be a limitation for high-end textures in newer titles
  • Substantial thickness (2.75 to 3 slots) may block other PCIe slots
  • Lack of a backplate on this specific SC model
  • Basic aesthetics with a plastic shroud and no RGB lighting
  • Limited port selection compared to higher-end variants

Verdict

The EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 SC Gaming is a compact mid-range graphics card built on NVIDIA's Turing architecture, featuring 1,920 CUDA cores and 6GB of GDDR6 VRAM with a 192-bit interface. It operates with a factory-overclocked boost clock of 1,710 MHz and utilizes a specialized Hydro Dynamic Bearing (HDB) fan within a 2.75-slot cooler for thermal management. Key pros include its solid 1080p and 1440p gaming performance, support for real-time ray tracing and DLSS technology, and a space-saving design ideal for smaller builds. However, its main cons are the lack of RGB lighting, a single-fan configuration that may run louder under heavy loads than dual-fan models, and the 6GB memory capacity which can struggle with ultra-settings in highly demanding 4K titles.

Compare EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 SC Gaming with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of EVGA GeForce RTX 2060 SC Gaming and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found