Thoughts on Nvidia's Geforce RTX 4080...

[ZeekAncient]

I was wondering what people thought of the RTX 4080.

I have been reading some initial reviews, and I have some mixed feelings on it myself.

Here are some of the reviews that I have read:

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-review

https://www.techspot.com/review/2569-nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080/

https://www.pcgamer.com/nvidia-rtx-4080-16gb-review-performance-benchmarks/

I have read some others, but I figured I would post these as their scores vary from one an other and they provide the same important and relevant info as other review you will find.

The consensus is that the 4080 provides excellent gen-on-gen performance increases over the 30 series, and compared to the 4090, is very power efficient, and probably more worth purchasing if you are eyeing resolutions lower than 4K, like 2560 x 1440.

At 4K, it can be less than 30%% less powerful than an RTX 4090, however still a great performer at 4K, outperforming the flagships of the last generation.

However, it seems to be way overpriced. Obviously not a surprise here, as I think everyone was expecting this to be the case. But with the advent of AMD's 7900XTX, and 7900XT, to be released for $999, and $899, respectively, I was wondering what you all thought about the 4080's performance and how it should compare to AMD's RDNA3 offerings.

Some seem to think that even the 7900XTX will fall short of the 4080's overall performance, while others think that AMD's flagship will easily outperform the 4080 in rasteriztion performance, but fall short when it comes to ray tracing.

While most don't seem to care about ray tracing, or upscaling tech for that matter, I for one DO care about ray tracing performance, and love upscaling tech, especially at 4K. Most games nowadays are going to have some kind of ray tracing implemented, and more and more newer titles are going to be implementing it better, and more so. I don't think it will be very long before we see games completely rendered with ray-tracing. And not just older games like Quake II and Portal.

So, I think ray tracing performance is very important, and I don't want my next generation GPU to fall flat in that area. So, that is why I am very curious to see how AMD's next GPUs will perform in that area. I mean, if the 7900XTX can outperform the 4080 in rasterization but then be more on the level of the 40 series midrange cards when ray tracing is implemented, that might turn me off.

And then when it comes to upscaling tech, I am very interested in what DLSS 3.0 has to offer. DLSS 2.0 is already fantastic, but the performance gains that 3.0 seem to be providing, almost seem like a game changer. Considering that DLSS 3.0 can only be used on 40 series cards, unlike FSR which can be used on any card, FSR 3.0 might need to be a game changer as well if I am going to consider buying an AMD card.

I have been on Nvidia a long time, but I will be wanting to upgrade my GPU when I upgrade my display to a 4K 120Hz+ display. The RTX 4090 is just too expensive and too power hungry for me to realistically consider it. And while the 4080 seems to push all the right buttons for me when it comes to performance and power consumption, even it it still uses the 16-pin power connector, that $1199 price tag, and even more when you consider AIB cards, is way too overpriced.

If it would have been $999, or less, I think it would have been a no brainer. But it will be hard to drop $1200 or more on a GPU, when AMD's $999, or even $899, offering provide better rasterization performance. Not too mention more VRam. Even if the ray tracing will not be quite as good, and DLSS 3.0 will be a no no.

I've been impressed by what the specs, and price, of the 7900XTX and XT have shown but I guess now it all depends on how well it will perform in ray tracing and how good, and how well adopted, FSR 3.0 will be. I guess we will have to wait and see in December.

I'm kind of one that would like to stick with Nvidia since I have been there for so long, and it is comfortable for me, even with Nvidia's shady business practices, but $1200 or more for a GPU is just too much to stomach. The 4080 really should have been $200-$300 bucks cheaper. But if AMD falls flat in ray tracing, and FSR 3.0 just can't match the quality of DLSS 3.0, I just can't see myself going the AMD route. Might have to wait for Nvidia to come to their senses and drop their prices....

I might be waiting long....

Anyway, those are my very long two cents on the matter...sorry....

[Jamebonds1]

Pirate☠️Pocah původně napsal:

In two words - TOO EXPENSIVE!

I really believe that NVIDIA are killing gaming.

Buying a new GPU was an upgrade anyone could do, even me! It was something that happened every few years as the latest tech came out and was a cost effective increase in performance.

But now NVIDIA are just killing that. The 4080 is not just really poor value, it's gone past the $1000 mark which makes it unjustifiable for many gamers.

Gamers now have to re-align their thinking. They have to maybe not buy that higher resolution monitor, or maybe miss one or two generations of GPU upgrade so they get better value, but the days of affordable updates have gone.

Really, NVIDIA could be solely responsible for a sharp decline in PC gaming.

I might add that AMD aren't helping much. Although there are better value, even they are too expensive.

I don't know where this is going, but wherever it is, it's not good. :sadcube:

No it is not. There is an issue with economic.

There is no need to get 4K 27" monitor too, because 1440p 27" is just right size. 4K 27" monitor won't make a big difference.

[Yamantaka]

Pirate☠️Pocah původně napsal:

In two words - TOO EXPENSIVE!

I really believe that NVIDIA are killing gaming.

Buying a new GPU was an upgrade anyone could do, even me! It was something that happened every few years as the latest tech came out and was a cost effective increase in performance.

But now NVIDIA are just killing that. The 4080 is not just really poor value, it's gone past the $1000 mark which makes it unjustifiable for many gamers.

Gamers now have to re-align their thinking. They have to maybe not buy that higher resolution monitor, or maybe miss one or two generations of GPU upgrade so they get better value, but the days of affordable updates have gone.

Really, NVIDIA could be solely responsible for a sharp decline in PC gaming.

I might add that AMD aren't helping much. Although there are better value, even they are too expensive.

I don't know where this is going, but wherever it is, it's not good. :sadcube:

It's unfortunate situation. Not just for gamers, but for the whole gaming industry in general. Number of uncertainties have risen over the future.

The main issue is that "bad time to upgrade" has been on for quite some time. Now, as competition is ought to settle in to push prices down, we're in a odd phase. There's combination of crypto crash leaving old stock, pure corporate greed and inflation at the same time. Paying premium for GPU is not high on priorities, if life standards are under pressure already.

While possible recession is lurking around the corner. We'd need a new 1060 or 1660S level of deal more than before. Mainstream gaming will take a hit, if performance/ratio is found around 500 and upwards just for GPU. In weaker developing economies that's even more of an issue. PC gaming is not dying, but making it even more privilege will have shrinking effect for the industry. That can snowball in ways which are hard to predict.

So we just wait and see. Hopefully the normal won't be premium for few, over decent performance with affordable price for many. I'd guess better times will come, but hopefully sooner than later. Would be a pity, if there's longer period of "downfall" in between.

[Seamus]

Yamantaka původně napsal:

While possible recession is lurking around the corner. We'd need a new 1060 or 1660S level of deal more than before. Mainstream gaming will take a hit, if performance/ratio is found around 500 and upwards just for GPU.

Well, if not for the godawful ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ drivers, the intel arc cards would be a good candidate.

But again. Drivers.

[ZeekAncient]

Jamebonds1 původně napsal:

No it is not. There is an issue with economic.

There is no need to get 4K 27" monitor too, because 1440p 27" is just right size. 4K 27" monitor won't make a big difference.

But see, my next display will be 4K, but it will not be a 27" monitor. In fact, I am already gone way beyond that. My setup right now is setup for a large display. I am about 5 to 6 feet away, and the next display I get will probably be a 4K OLED 48" or more. Right now, the LG C2 is still my front runner. Sure, it is a TV. But I need something that will double as a TV and monitor for the type of content/media consumption that I am doing. And the LG C2 is a super speedy OLED screen that is GSync compatible, 120Hz, with excellent response times. It maybe a TV, but it is great for gaming.

[Jamebonds1]

ZeekAncient původně napsal:

Jamebonds1 původně napsal:

No it is not. There is an issue with economic.

There is no need to get 4K 27" monitor too, because 1440p 27" is just right size. 4K 27" monitor won't make a big difference.

But see, my next display will be 4K, but it will not be a 27" monitor. In fact, I am already gone way beyond that. My setup right now is setup for a large display. I am about 5 to 6 feet away, and the next display I get will probably be a 4K OLED 48" or more. Right now, the LG C2 is still my front runner. Sure, it is a TV. But I need something that will double as a TV and monitor for the type of content/media consumption that I am doing. And the LG C2 is a super speedy OLED screen that is GSync compatible, 120Hz, with excellent response times. It maybe a TV, but it is great for gaming.

I prefer 4K 32" monitor since I could see difference from 1440P 32" monitor, but not enough space. So for now, I only want 1440p 27" monitor. This way I do not see smaller UI on my games.

[antoniobennett72]

Way too expensive. The top of the price range should be the $899 they were trying to extract on the cancelled/re-named 12 gig card they pretended was 80 class.

$899 would be a $200 increase on the 3080, a significant mark up that would more than account for any inflation.

I hope few buy one at $1200 plus because I believe doing so is harmful to the whole market. NGREEDIA needs to be forced to back down some and not silo all performance increases to the Rockefeller set and sell essentially refreshes to everyone else.

[Illusion of Progress]

antoniobennett72 původně napsal:

Way too expensive. The top of the price range should be the $899 they were trying to extract on the cancelled/re-named 12 gig card they pretended was 80 class.

Even the remaining one isn't. They were an x60 Ti and x70 Ti both being passed off as an x80 class for the purpose of trying to justify their price points. The latter is easier to sneak by as an x80, especially if you have a convenient distraction to draw some of the attention, which is what the former RTX 4080 12 GB was.

But due to nVidia's oversupply of RTX 30 series and not wanting to sell them for any less than they already are, while also having to start RTX 40 series production because they already invested in it and investors want to see ROI, it means the RTX 40 series has to sit atop the RTX 30 series more as a compliment to it rather than a successor, hence the absurd pricing.

And by making the gap the RTX 4080 presently occupies such a poor value, it accomplishes many things. It makes the RTX 30 series look better, and it helps push the price people are willing to pay for RTX 4090s higher because the RTX 4080 exists as an anchor point (as in "if it's a better price/performance than the RTX 4080, it's a good deal" mindset, when the reality is price/performance has shifted so poorly the last few generations that the price/performance of an RTX 4090 would be awfully bad in a world where things were as I think they "should" be, but... we're not in that world). And for those who fall into the spot "I already have, or absolutely need more than, RTX 3080/3090 levels of performance but can't afford an RTX 4090, and I either refuse to look beyond nVidia's options or I really want ray tracing", well... nVidia gets to double dip on anyone who buys a price/performance product as bad as the RTX 4080 is.

[antoniobennett72]

Illusion of Progress původně napsal:

antoniobennett72 původně napsal:

Way too expensive. The top of the price range should be the $899 they were trying to extract on the cancelled/re-named 12 gig card they pretended was 80 class.

Even the remaining one isn't. They were an x60 Ti and x70 Ti both being passed off as an x80 class for the purpose of trying to justify their price points. The latter is easier to sneak by as an x80, especially if you have a convenient distraction to draw some of the attention, which is what the former RTX 4080 12 GB was.

But due to nVidia's oversupply of RTX 30 series and not wanting to sell them for any less than they already are, while also having to start RTX 40 series production because they already invested in it and investors want to see ROI, it means the RTX 40 series has to sit atop the RTX 30 series more as a compliment to it rather than a successor, hence the absurd pricing.

And by making the gap the RTX 4080 presently occupies such a poor value, it accomplishes many things. It makes the RTX 30 series look better, and it helps push the price people are willing to pay for RTX 4090s higher because the RTX 4080 exists as an anchor point (as in "if it's a better price/performance than the RTX 4080, it's a good deal" mindset, when the reality is price/performance has shifted so poorly the last few generations...

EdZachery!

[Nerva Matapan]

Cards are always really costly when they launch. This is likely exacerbated by last year's shortages. Nvidia is still taking advantage of a perceived desperation.

[ZeekAncient]

Illusion of Progress původně napsal:

Even the remaining one isn't. They were an x60 Ti and x70 Ti both being passed off as an x80 class for the purpose of trying to justify their price points. The latter is easier to sneak by as an x80, especially if you have a convenient distraction to draw some of the attention, which is what the former RTX 4080 12 GB was.

See, I actually like the 4080 16GB. See, I do think that the 4080 12GB was more of a 4070, or even 4060 Ti, that they branded as a 4080 so they could justify the pricing, if you look at the performance numbers of the 4080 16GB, it really does have the gen-on-gen performance increase that you would expect over the 3080.

In fact, more so. The 4080 16GB is a good 30% more powerful than a 3090 Ti, and about 30% less powerful than a 4090. All while have less power consumption than a 3080. That is pretty damn good. The 4080 IS a good product. It is just ruined by outrageous pricing.

If it was the true successor to the 3080, than the pricing would be closer to that of the 3080's MSRP, or even slightly more. But as it stands, because they are still selling the 30 series, the 40 series is not here to replace the 30 series. Is currently intended to be a compliment. With the 4090 and 4080 occupying the high-end for enthusiasts, and the 30 series being for the "gamers".

But still, due to the 4080's outrageous pricing, it completely diminishes its value and makes it a bad product. Like most reviews say, it isn't because of the ADA architecture, but because of the outlandish pricing schemes Nvidia has come up with to keep the 30 series cards as expensive as possible and still milk what they can out of the 40 series cards for those willing to pay that premium.

I really feel like the 4080 was designed for me. Someone who has a next-gen 4K OLED display in mind that wants to upgrade their 30 series card to something that will push it. The 4090 is for "enthusiasts" and is just too expensive and too power-hungry to be a realistic option. While the high-end 30 series is not really powerful enough to be considered a worthy upgrade. Thus, I am stuck in no-man's land. Enter the 4080. It has the performance numbers and power consumption I am looking for, and is really currently the only option if I am going to realistically upgrade my 3070 Ti, and have it be worth it.

I think Nvidia was banking on people like me, and banking that I would just say screw it, and dish out the $1200, or more. But I will not. A gen-on-gen upgrade should come with similar pricing to the previous generation. As it stands, I would pay like 1% more for every 1% performance increase I get. That is not how it is supposed to work.

So, I will not fall victim to their schemes and will wait it out. Or, like I am doing, wait to see what AMD brings to the table. Unless Nvidia lowers the pricing, and makes the 4080 more appealing to me, they will lose my business. It is that simple.

[Illusion of Progress]

PrincessRoyal původně napsal:

Cards are always really costly when they launch. This is likely exacerbated by last year's shortages. Nvidia is still taking advantage of a perceived desperation.

This isn't a mere case of "it's a new product so of course it's expensive" though. This isn't even the normal routine for a launch, but rather it's quite unprecedented. Usually a new generation launches and slots in more in spots to replace the former one. This time around, it's just being stacked on top of the former one.

And the reasoning for all of this is pretty well understood. There's ultimately a lot that's going into it, but it mostly boils down to nVidia trying to minimizes potential losses when the supply to demand ratio is lopsided against them right now. The irony is that there is no shortage (and, production-wise, never was, because it was instead an infinite demand spurred by the valuation Ethereum was inflicting on the GPU market). It's why the RTX 40 series sits atop the former series at a far higher price than it is.

The GTX 980 was $550. The RTX 3080 was $700 (granted, few people could actually access it at such a price given the Ethereum spike that happened shortly after its launch, but still, this was the price nVidia set for it). The RTX 4080 is $1200, and it's no longer even the top launch SKU.

[Illusion of Progress]

ZeekAncient původně napsal:

Illusion of Progress původně napsal:

Even the remaining one isn't. They were an x60 Ti and x70 Ti both being passed off as an x80 class for the purpose of trying to justify their price points. The latter is easier to sneak by as an x80, especially if you have a convenient distraction to draw some of the attention, which is what the former RTX 4080 12 GB was.

See, I actually like the 4080 16GB. See, I do think that the 4080 12GB was more of a 4070, or even 4060 Ti, that they branded as a 4080 so they could justify the pricing, if you look at the performance numbers of the 4080 16GB, it really does have the gen-on-gen performance increase that you would expect over the 3080.

In fact, more so. The 4080 16GB is a good 30% more powerful than a 3090 Ti, and about 30% less powerful than a 4090. All while have less power consumption than a 3080. That is pretty damn good. The 4080 IS a good product. It is just ruined by outrageous pricing.

I absolutely agree. The performance alone is fine. Technical matters don't always matter, but it does still indicate nVidia launched what is supposed to be a higher end SKU with an unusually lesser chip AND is asking a higher price for it at the same time. The fact that it performs well despite that just indicates nVidia could probably be doing so much better if they wanted to, but that's merely speculation on my part (I would not at all be shocked if they hold back when they know or think AMD can't keep up because if they press forward too much, it risks becoming more of a monopoly and that's why Intel dragged their feet in the mid-2010s too; nVidia and ATI/AMD have a history of market/price fixing after all).

But anyway, I agree that the performance is about right, but unfortunately performance is just half the equation. Price is the other, and ultimately, the price/performance on it is pathetic, even if performance alone lands where it would be expected.

[☎need4naiim☎]

GTX980 was $550.

This one shouldn't exceed $750.

Even 7900XT is a bit pricey. It should't get over $700.

[A&A]

☎need4naiim☎ původně napsal:

GTX980 was $550.

This one shouldn't exceed $750.

Even 7900XT is a bit pricey. It should't get over $700.

And GTX Titan was 999$

[Seamus]

A&A původně napsal:

☎need4naiim☎ původně napsal:

GTX980 was $550.

This one shouldn't exceed $750.

Even 7900XT is a bit pricey. It should't get over $700.

And GTX Titan was 999$

And the titan Z was $3k.