jones177

I did 3d for a living(now retired) and I would use the 5900x. My computers rendered just about 24/7 and heat was a big issue. The 5900x with a good 360mm AIO will do all core renderings and stay in the 60s. My Intels are 20c hotter doing the same job. I always used a separate computer for 2D/video editing since I created all my own textures and the rendering machines were always too to busy. I use Intels for that since they run cooler when the GPU is doing all the work. Even though I am retired I did buy a 3090 since one of my biggest issues was previewing RT scenes for errors. It could have saved me 1000s of hours. I just wanted to see what it was like in person.

I have a H500M with an MSI Gaming X Trio 3090 in it and with everything stock it is cool and quiet. At stock the Suprim X uses 50 watts more than the Trio and that has put your setup over the edge so the case can't get rid of the hot air around the GPU fast enough to stop it from ingesting it. I had the same issue with my CM H500P Mesh case. It was fine with an EVGA XC3 Ultra 3080 ti that used 350 watts stock but it could not handle the extra 50 watts of the EVGA FTW3 Ultra 3080 ti. There was no place to add more fans to the H500P so I replaced it with a Lian li o11 dynamic that takes in air from the bottom instead of the front. The GPU runs 10c cooler. All my traditional cases with the PSU below the GPU except the H500M I use 60mm Noctua fans below the GPU. All it does is pull the hot below the GPU out the back of the case. It is good for about 3c but that is all it takes sometimes. My CM H500 ARGB and Corsair 5000d use them. Also you need to see when your GPU downclocks since 74c can produce the same performance as 70c with some cards. I do this by running Heaven in a window and watching when the the GPU downclocks. In my tests there is about 10c between downclocks so on the EVGAs it is 54, 64c, 74c and 84c. I have not tested the MSIs(2x 3090s and 1x 3080 ti) because I am not having issues with them.

I bought my first 28" 4k monitor for work in 2015 and for 3D design. It was perfect since it was much easier to spot flaws/mistakes in OpenGl viewports. It also helped with 2D since at the time 4k was my rendering target. In games it looked fantastic compared to 1080p. In the 2015 I also bought a 3440 X 1440 monitor. I could only game on it since text looked terrible compared to the 4k monitor that was only a few feet away. I also had the same issue with a 1440p 144hz monitor I bought a few years later. This is not an issue with 1600 vertical pixels since my 3840 X 1600 ultra wide is perfect for productivity. Strange that 1600p did not become popular. The down side to 4k is that it can be costly to game on since you will always want more power. Before the 4k monitor I was happy with Nvidia XX70 video cards. So it was GTX 470, 570 670 and 970. After the 4k monitor it was XX80 and ti cards. My old 28" 4k 60hz monitors are still in use but my 1080p and 1440p monitors are not. I will replace them with modern 144hz 4k monitors with HDR at some point but there is no rush since I now use 120hz 4k TVs for gaming.

There is no fixing it and it will only get worse. I have already put money aside to replace it so as soon as it starts to annoy me it will be gone.

I bought the LG OLEDs in 2019. Even though I had 3 TVs in the house I ended up watching content on a monitor so when LG added VRR to its OLEDs I wanted to see if I could combine the two and just use the TVs. It worked. Even with 20 series video cards VRR worked but they ran at 4k 60hz. At 1440p they ran at 120hz. Now my monitors feel too small to use at all. This is the amount of burn in I got after 4900 hours. It is a line at the top caused by Chrome. It now has 6700 hours and is about the same since I stopped using it for general computing. The burn in is where there are black bars in movies so it is still perfect for that. My other OLED has about half the hours with no signs of burn in.

Not much at all. My i9 9900k produces about the same amount of frames as my i9 10900k and 5900x at 4k. The only gain is at lower resolutions. Here are 2 games comparing the 5800x, 5900x and i9 9900k with a FTW3 Ultra 3080 ti and a i9 10900k with a MSI Gaming X Trio 3090. Horizon Zero Dawn does not use cores so the 8, 10 and 12 core CPUs do about the same. May i9 9900k is using MCE so it does well. 1080p 1440p 4k. 5800x 156fps 138fps 89fps 5900x 156fps 138fps 88fps i9 9900k 155fps 138fps 88fps i9 10900k 160fps 142fps 89fps Shadow of the Tomb Raider does use cores and is CPU bottlenecked at 1080p. The i9 can only keep up at 4k since the game is GPU bound at that resolution. 1080p 1440p 4k. 5800x 198fps 163fps 96fps 5900x 211fps 175fps 104fps i9 9900k 169fps 154fps 96fps i9 10900k 192fps 164fps 97fps I don't think less than a i9 12900k will get a much better result.

I use LG OLEDs for gaming but for things like forums I use my LG Nano 85. If the Nano Cell 85 died tomorrow I would replace it with a LG Nano Cell 90. Like the 85 it is 120hz, has VRR and HDMI 2.1 for the 30 series video cards. The reason I use the Nano Cell 85 is that OLEDs do burn in running apps like Chrome or Premier but are fine for 2 to 4 hour gaming sessions. My OLEDs will last longer than I want to keep them since they only game. For productivity they last for about 4800 hours before the burn in becomes obvious.

It means what it says. EVGA has sent me thermal pads in the past but stated that any damage caused installing them was on me. Stuff happens. If you want to take the risk that is your business. I don't take risks with things I can't easily replace or afford to replace. When I was paying around $750 for a card and they were usually in stock I had a slightly different attitude.

I go by this. https://www.evga.com/warranty/graphics-cards/ Products that are modified outside of factory specifications and/or not in factory condition. It is the same for cars and cards.

You also may void the warranty. I buy from 3 to 5 cards per series and before the 30 series 1 in 10 had to be RMAed. Usually they die because of a known design flaw so easy to RMA. I won't touch mine until the warranty is up and then most likely sell them after that. Heat also was not really a big issue with older generations. I did have issues with my FTW3 Ultra 2080 tis that had a stock power limit of 300 watts but a few extra case fans fixed it. Now my 30 series cards us up to 100 watts more at stock so much harder to cool. The only 30 series card that I have that runs as cool an my 2080 tis in the same case is my Strix 3080 OC but it is huge(319mm). It is the only card that seems to be designed for the extra heat that is produced.

That is a good one. I didn't know if my 3080 is LHR or not before reading your post. The only way to know for sure is the device ID that is displayed with GPUZ. Mine is 2206 so non LHR. If it was 2216 then it would be LHR. It should say on the box as well. There is a big difference between 3080 tis. The Palit Gamerock is a middle of the road card the has 3 8 pin power connectors but a low boost clock of 1665mhz. It uses 350 watts stock and 400 watts overclocked. By contrast my FTW3 Ultra 3080 ti has a boost clock of 1800mhz and uses 400 watts stock and 45 watts overclocked. Use this video to compare cards.

Here is the difference between a high end 3080, low end 3080 ti and high end 3080 ti at 1440p. This is with an i9 9900k. The cards are: ROG Strix White OC: 370 watt stock power limit EVGA XC3 Ultra: 350 watt stock power limit EVGA FTW3 Ultra: 400 watt stock power limit These are older games because I use the benchmarks to see what I get from upgrades. A high end 3080 like the ROG Strix is very close to a low end 3080 ti but can be owned by a high end 3080 ti. I prefer the XC3 Ultra 3080 ti over the Strix because of the vram. Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1440p i9 9900k ROG Strix 3080 144fps XC3 Ultra 3080 ti 143fps FTW3 Ultra 3080 ti 154fps Horizon Zero Dawn 1440p i9 9900k ROG Strix 3080 118fps XC3 Ultra 3080 ti 128fps FTW3 Ultra 3080 ti 155fps Assassins Creed Odyssey 1440p i9 9900k ROG Strix 3080 82fps XC3 Ultra 3080 ti 90fps FTW3 Ultra 3080 ti 89fps The high end 3080 ti can pull away by about 20 frames from the 3080 in some games at 1440p so I think it is worth getting. The FTW3 Ultra is in a my 5900x rig now and it can do over 50 frames more at 1440p in some games than the i9 9900k but I have never put the 3080 in it. The reason is the vram. My modded games use less than 12 but more than 10 and I can feel it with the 3080. If it was a 12gb version it would not be an issue. I have a MSI Gaming X Trio 3090 and it performs about the same as a FTW3 Ultra 3080 ti. It is in a video editing rig since that uses the vram. I am planning to get another as a spare so I will stick it in a gaming rig just for fun.

The other issue I have with the Intel system is that the game wants to use the Rift S for sound. The new game ready drivers for Nvidia fixed it but performance is even worse with the update. Since my 5900x computer is running it good enough I will keep going. I will wait before updating the Nvidia drivers since it was a fail on the Intel system. I tested without HDR since I had the game in windowed mode. Had to go full screen for it to work. So far I have had no reason to turn it off. I don't mind spoilers at all on games like this since I need all the help I can get to even get to what is being spoiled.

I installed it on both my gaming PCs and on the Intel it stutters a lot. With the Ryzen it is only in specific areas. Usually these PCs play exactly the same. With both setups frames are nailed to 60 at 4k. I have not even seen 59. The game also looks dull(washed out) on the Intel rig even though it is on an OLED that has the same settings as the OLED used by the Ryzen setup. Again all other games look exactly the same on these rigs. It has been less than a week since I tested both computers with Total War Warhammer III and both performed and looked the same(I give it to the 5900x by one frame). Nothing yet has drawn me into this game so it looks like it will be a more of a YouTube event for me than actually playing it.

I have been buying from Newegg since 2006 with no issues but there are thinks I doesn't buy from them unless it is a great deal. The reason I don't buy is there are no easy returns. Some of the things I usually don't buy are motherboards, monitors and cases. The last motherboard I bought from them was in 2017 and it was a Hero VIII for $124 so I consider it a risk worth taking. I usually don't buy monitors there either unless it is a crazy low black Friday deal. The last time that happened was in 2018. These are the things I do buy: CPUs. They are a minimum risk items and easy to return. CPU coolers and fans. They are shipped by Newegg but sold by the manufacturer. Noctua and EK are 2 company's that do this. Memory and SSDs. The last time I had to return memory was in the 2000s so a safe bet. Video cards. Because if I have an issue I will RMA it with the manufacturer. I have never had an issue with a new card and I buy about 3 to 5 a series. I buy motherboards, monitors and cases usually from Amazon or Best Buy since they are easy returns. The only other store I use is B&H. I have been using them with no issues since the 70s. My hobby was photography before computers were a thing.

My LG OLED TVs are G sync compatible with HDMI 2.0b but my LG Nano Cell 85 TV needed HDMI 2.1 for it to work. The Nano Cell 85 has Freesync Premium that does work with HDMI 2.0b. So I think it depends. The only extra feature I got with HDMI 2.1 was 4k 120hz.

Just imagine buying a car and then having to de tune it so it doesn't overheat. What we put up with would not fly in any other market. ASUS probably has divisions so they would operate separately. It is hard to say. Many people retired early because of the pandemic so there has be an experience drain.

That is strange. I used my Rift S with an i7 8086k and a 2080 ti with no issues even on modded games and with an i9 10900kf and 3080 ti it has not really changed the gameplay. I think you need to look at other parts of your system other than your CPU and GPU. I do know that the Rift S sensitive to i/o calls by other apps so I shut down everything else when playing.

The GPU companied have to do something. My 30 series cards use as much power and put out as much heat as my 2080 tis did with a max overclock but the 2080 ti had the fans at 100% when I did this. It thought they would have come up with something different since even with the 2080 tis I had to add fans to my cases to run them below 80c. What they mainly did was to stop using a 2x fan configuration. I was a bit shocked when I saw the line up at launch and did expect that a lot of the cards would cook in their cases. What I did not expect is how users would be ok with tearing down a new card to modify it. Margins were low but that has changed so there is no excuse not to do the R&D. Not suprisingly ASUS has come out on top this series but it has been at a higher price. I have a Strix 3080 and it runs cooler with its 370 watt stock power limit than my cards that are limited to 350 watts. With the computer I am using now only had the stock fans when It had the Strix. Now it uses a EVGA XC3 Ultra 3080 ti that uses 350 watts stock and I had to add 2 more case fans to achieve the same temps. Fans rarely fail. I just retired my last 2011 vintage case and no fans had failed. I also usually buy 3 to 5 GPUs per series and I have never had a failure. Selling a dead GPU for donor parts is a thing.

I have the FTW3 Ultra 3080 ti. I got from EVGA. The card is a beast. It uses 400 watts stock and the is very hard to cool. None of the cases I had could get it to game lower than 80c so I had to buy a new case for it. The difference between it and a budget 3080 ti is about the same as going from a 3080 to a budget 3080 ti or about 10 frames. Is it worth a $1700 for gaming? It depends. Mine has no problem beating my MSI Gaming X Trio 3090 that cost $2,250 or my MSI 3080 ti that cost $1,750. It basically only competes with the ASUS Stix OC, MSI Suprim and AORUS Extreme. If you have a Ryzen 5000 series or Intel 10 gen 8 core and up then yes. If you have less with no plans to upgrade get the 3070 ti.

Snip

It is not anything obvious that is for sure. Good Luck.

Your CPU score in Times Spy is about right but the GPU score is low so something is pulling it down. Your card should do about 18500 stock. I would test the card in another system before throwing money at the problem.

If you are not happy the the performance you get now do it. I am on the fence not for the CPU itself but having to use Windows 11 with it. It took 2 years for all my apps to get working properly with Windows 10. If I was to build right now for doing productivity it would be another R9 setup. I have been running one beside my Intels with no issues so I consider them a safe bet. I also priced out a i9 12900k system today. Intel Core i9-12900K $616 GIGABYTE Z690 AORUS MASTER LGA 1700 $469 CORSAIR Vengeance 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR5 $360 Corsair MP600 Pro M.2 2280 1TB PCIe Gen 4 $160 EK 360mm AIO Basic, All-in-One $129 Microsoft Windows 11 Pro 64-bit $160 $1,894 This is just to put it on a bench. I already have a 3080 for it.

It could be the 24 pin motherboard cable. It also could be not enough power to the board from the power supply.