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]

引用自 尺．し工几句ヨ尺：

引用自 ZAP：

i7 makes more sense now because two additional real cores. i9 is a dumb move now.

I'd take two more physical cores over any amount of E-cores or hyperthreading within reason.

It's a big cost increase for two physical cores that most won't even need. i5s are still king.

Nope. It does make a big difference over i5.

https://tech4gamers.com/core-i7-12700k-vs-core-i5-12600k/

[ZAP]

引用自 尺．し工几句ヨ尺：

引用自 ZAP：

i7 makes more sense now because two additional real cores. i9 is a dumb move now.

I'd take two more physical cores over any amount of E-cores or hyperthreading within reason.

It's a big cost increase for two physical cores that most won't even need. i5s are still king.

I'd get an i3 then if that's the case. Most don't need more than 4cores.

[r.linder]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=todoXi1Y-PI Really not much of a point to get an i7 when it costs 30~50% more for a small uplift. They don't stand out a decent amount above the 13600K in gaming particularly when you have a 4090.

Two cores for up to 200$ more really isn't worth it, and if you really need the extra core count for other things, probably better off with a 13900K or 7950X. i7s are still in that murky area where the value is questionable because it's not enough of a boost over the i5s and no longer enthusiast grade either.

And there are cheaper 8+ core CPUs that don't require Windows 11 to get the full performance of the processor. People who have Comet Lake really still have no reason to upgrade.

[ZAP]

Yeah but most people don't need more than 4 cores.

[r.linder]

引用自 ZAP：

Yeah but most people don't need more than 4 cores.

Gradually that's moving up to 6, gamers definitely need 6, and technically if you include office workers, they don't need more than 2. You can argue that point all day long but it doesn't change the fact that people don't need 8 cores, but gamers, and these are mostly marketed to gamers, only really need 6.

There are obvious penalties to having less than 6, but there's still not enough reason to consider 8 necessary for the vast majority of users and gamers.

[ZAP]

Was generalized to every single person on earth that uses a PC like was with the 8 vs 6 core scenario.

Anyways, this is boring.

[Mr White]

AMD new GPU are supposed to better than NVIDIA 4000 series

[r.linder]

引用自 The Void：

AMD new GPU are supposed to better than NVIDIA 4000 series

Not in raw performance. The 7900-XTX would be lucky to trade blows with the 4080, AMD confirmed that it’s competing with the 4080, they don’t have an answer for the 4090.

[ZeekAncient]

You actually think it will be lucky to trade blows with the 4080? What makes you say that?

From what I am seeing, I thought it would actually beat the 4080 in rasterization performance but probably(well most likely) fall short in ray tracing.

I am one though that thinks that a GPU's ray tracing performance needs to be considered in the overall performance of the GPU. As it was with the 30 series and 6000 series, benchmarks and reviews show the rasterization performance of the GPU, which shows the 30 series and their 6000 series counterparts neck and neck, with AMD's cards sometimes ahead of Nvidia.

But then they include ray tracing in a seperate metric and benchmark, and there you see that Nvidia's cards are way ahead. Considering that most games coming out now have some form of ray tracing in their graphical settings, it is something I care about. And care about enabling, as when it is done well can look super beautiful.

But back to the 7900XTX and 4080, I am very curious on how they will stack up against one an other. I have read some that think the 7900XTX will fall short of the 4080's overall performance, while others claim it will have superior rasterization but inferior ray tracing.

And if AMD's own performance numbers are to be believed, while it won't close to the 4090, it appears that it would be ahead of the 4080. I even watched a Linus video where they claimed it could be not too far off from a 4090.

I guess we will have to wait for the actual launch to find out.

Back to the 4080, it is no surprise that it is not selling well. And I don't think it should sell well with how much Nvidia is asking for it. Maybe after the 3090 and 3080 stock has dried up for good, they will come to their senses and drop the price of this thing.

[Illusion of Progress]

Raw performance is nice, but to most consumers, performance doesn't exist in a vacuum, especially in today's economy where that pesky thing known as a budget becomes important. To most customers, the upper tiers don't even matter to begin with anyway.

AMD's upcoming options are just going to fill the spot nVidia's RTX 4080 is all but failing to fill, and that will be true even if the RX 7900 series both fall short of the RTX 4080 in rasterized performance because it still has like a nearly 50% price premium (I think presuming that they will be slower so easily is discrediting them though, but time and benchmarks will tell).

The more meaningful competition will actually happen when AMD releases the lower tiers (x600 and x700 especially, but even x800), and we see how they compare to nVidia's options at the time, be those the RTX 30 series if they are still on the market alone, or nVidia's upcoming mid-range RTX 40 series stuff. I'm still hoping I'm right about the RTX 4080 and that it was just intentionally made to be a poor product to sell everything around it rather than a real attempt at a product by nVidia, because if it's the latter, that doesn't inspire much hope for the eventual RTX 4070 or 4060 series.

[ZeekAncient]

I personally though, am looking for raw performance if I am going to upgrade my GPU. I will be looking for a GPU that can handle a 4K 120Hz+ screen. Not necessarily get 120FPS in every game. But a card where I can max settings at 4K, and not worry about getting less than 60FPS. In fact, closer to 90+ FPS.

So, considering that I already own a 3070 Ti, for me, the mid-range this coming generation is just not something I can consider, or realistically upgrade to. It wouldn't make sense. I should either wait for the 50/8000 series cards, or go high-end this generation.

So far, while the 4090 has excellent 4K performance, it is just too damn expensive as well. And power hungry. I would need to buy a new PSU if I were to buy that. The 4080 appears to check all the boxes of what I am looking for. Performance is there. Power consumption is there. I wouldn't need to upgrade PSU. Thermals are there. It really is the product I would be looking for. And definitely enough of a step-up from my 3070 Ti to be worth upgrading to.

Unfortunately, the price just isn't there. For what you are getting for $1200, or more, I might as well just spend the extra for the 4090. But like I said, that would mean getting a new PSU as well.

That is why I am very curious to see what AMD's offerings in December will bring. Even if it is just to kick some sense into Nvidia and drive the price of the 4080 down.

Honestly, I should just wait a generation before upgrading GPU. I am one that will usually want to wait at least two generations before upgrading GPU. But considering that I am also looking to upgrade my display soon. And considering that display will most likely be an OLED 4K 120Hz+ screen, I would like to have a GPU with a little more oomph than what my current 3070 Ti can provide.

I don't think that anything less than the performance of what the 4080 provides will do. So, I am kind of stuck if I want to get a GPU. Either pay the premium, or wait it out.

[r.linder]

引用自 ZeekAncient：

I personally though, am looking for raw performance if I am going to upgrade my GPU. I will be looking for a GPU that can handle a 4K 120Hz+ screen. Not necessarily get 120FPS in every game. But a card where I can max settings at 4K, and not worry about getting less than 60FPS. In fact, closer to 90+ FPS.

So, considering that I already own a 3070 Ti, for me, the mid-range this coming generation is just not something I can consider, or realistically upgrade to. It wouldn't make sense. I should either wait for the 50/8000 series cards, or go high-end this generation.

So far, while the 4090 has excellent 4K performance, it is just too damn expensive as well. And power hungry. I would need to buy a new PSU if I were to buy that. The 4080 appears to check all the boxes of what I am looking for. Performance is there. Power consumption is there. I wouldn't need to upgrade PSU. Thermals are there. It really is the product I would be looking for. And definitely enough of a step-up from my 3070 Ti to be worth upgrading to.

Unfortunately, the price just isn't there. For what you are getting for $1200, or more, I might as well just spend the extra for the 4090. But like I said, that would mean getting a new PSU as well.

That is why I am very curious to see what AMD's offerings in December will bring. Even if it is just to kick some sense into Nvidia and drive the price of the 4080 down.

Honestly, I should just wait a generation before upgrading GPU. I am one that will usually want to wait at least two generations before upgrading GPU. But considering that I am also looking to upgrade my display soon. And considering that display will most likely be an OLED 4K 120Hz+ screen, I would like to have a GPU with a little more oomph than what my current 3070 Ti can provide.

I don't think that anything less than the performance of what the 4080 provides will do. So, I am kind of stuck if I want to get a GPU. Either pay the premium, or wait it out.

You can undervolt the 4090 to get it running in 650 and 750 watt PSUs, it’s fine on 850W if you manage consumption. Linus managed to get it working on a 550W unit IIRC.

[Rod]

I will skip this whole Nvidia generation if that trash DP 1.4a is not gone. I hope at CES they recall or announce a Black edition with DP 2.1 lol would not surprise me. I do need an upgrade as well but im not a dumb sheep and theres other things i can spend it on now and just wait meh.

I never understood how when i kept withholding purchases they still kept prices high and then i realized 160k people spent between 1500-2000 bucks on a DP 1.4a card. *gulp*

[Jamebonds1]

引用自 尺．し工几句ヨ尺：

引用自 ZeekAncient：

I personally though, am looking for raw performance if I am going to upgrade my GPU. I will be looking for a GPU that can handle a 4K 120Hz+ screen. Not necessarily get 120FPS in every game. But a card where I can max settings at 4K, and not worry about getting less than 60FPS. In fact, closer to 90+ FPS.

So, considering that I already own a 3070 Ti, for me, the mid-range this coming generation is just not something I can consider, or realistically upgrade to. It wouldn't make sense. I should either wait for the 50/8000 series cards, or go high-end this generation.

So far, while the 4090 has excellent 4K performance, it is just too damn expensive as well. And power hungry. I would need to buy a new PSU if I were to buy that. The 4080 appears to check all the boxes of what I am looking for. Performance is there. Power consumption is there. I wouldn't need to upgrade PSU. Thermals are there. It really is the product I would be looking for. And definitely enough of a step-up from my 3070 Ti to be worth upgrading to.

Unfortunately, the price just isn't there. For what you are getting for $1200, or more, I might as well just spend the extra for the 4090. But like I said, that would mean getting a new PSU as well.

That is why I am very curious to see what AMD's offerings in December will bring. Even if it is just to kick some sense into Nvidia and drive the price of the 4080 down.

Honestly, I should just wait a generation before upgrading GPU. I am one that will usually want to wait at least two generations before upgrading GPU. But considering that I am also looking to upgrade my display soon. And considering that display will most likely be an OLED 4K 120Hz+ screen, I would like to have a GPU with a little more oomph than what my current 3070 Ti can provide.

I don't think that anything less than the performance of what the 4080 provides will do. So, I am kind of stuck if I want to get a GPU. Either pay the premium, or wait it out.

You can undervolt the 4090 to get it running in 650 and 750 watt PSUs, it’s fine on 850W if you manage consumption. Linus managed to get it working on a 550W unit IIRC.

I do not recommend undervolt because it could stressed the drive in order to supplying correct voltage.

[Napoleonic S]

Very over priced card, should be just $700 at max, ideally it's only $500 since it's only a mid range chip based on historical precedents.