Should I consider a 3090?

[Ryukadin]

I'm going to be running an Asus PG27UQ Monitor (4K, 144hz). I'm looking to play a large variety of titles, most notably things like: Cyberpunk 2077, Control and various other large open world games and single player story driven games. I don't like to compromise between performance and visuals, I want to run everything at max settings and still push 120+ fps at 4K and money isn't an issue, so my question is, should I consider a 3090 or will a 3080 suffice for my purpose?

[xg32]

5 minutes ago, Ryukadin said:

I'm going to be running an Asus PG27UQ Monitor (4K, 144hz). I'm looking to play a large variety of titles, most notably things like: Cyberpunk 2077, Control and various other large open world games and single player story driven games. I don't like to compromise between performance and visuals, I want to run everything at max settings and still push 120+ fps at 4K and money isn't an issue, so my question is, should I consider a 3090 or will a 3080 suffice for my purpose?

x27 owner here, 3080 isn't enough, waiting on 3090 also, specs should be about 25% higher than a 3080, with an aib model with 3 8pin plugs hopefully we get a 10% oc, it still won't play control at 4k without dlss with RT on, it'll run at like 50fps, so there will still be compromises.

 

For control you can max everything but you'd have turn dlss on for 90~ fps, for cyberpunk we don't have numbers yet, but expect the worst case of control-like performance. For 120+ fps we will have to wait for next gen, yet again.

 

 

[Ryukadin]

Going in I was hoping for a 3080ti but I already knew they weren't going to release one until 6-8 months later and I'd rather not wait that long. Even when they do I assume it'll basically be the 3090 with some VRAM stripped off to reduce the price anyways and won't outperform it, so TBH it seems to me like 3090 is probably my best option.

[SolarNova]

The 3090 will be likely at most 20% higher performance, and thats if performance scales with cores perfectly.

 

That wont make it good enough for 4k 120hz max settings in ALL games.

 

The 3080 obviously also wont cut it, but its likely the better choice due to price.

 

IMO ur best option may be to wait for a 3080ti. It 'should' come in at $700 (dropping the price of the 3080) and have most of the performance of the 3090. But its likely to be at least 6months away unless AMD really pull something out their arse that beats the 3080.

 

Im personally upgrading to a 4k 120hz OLED and will need to get a new GPU with HDMI 2.1, one thats good enough for 4k 120hz as well, the 3090 is out of the question due to its ridiculous price, but the 3080 and perhaps future 3080ti is something im considering. But i wont be making that decision until after AMD has their cards out and at least Xmas for sales.

[JoostinOnline]

26 minutes ago, Ryukadin said:

I'm going to be running an Asus PG27UQ Monitor (4K, 144hz). I'm looking to play a large variety of titles, most notably things like: Cyberpunk 2077, Control and various other large open world games and single player story driven games. I don't like to compromise between performance and visuals, I want to run everything at max settings and still push 120+ fps at 4K and money isn't an issue, so my question is, should I consider a 3090 or will a 3080 suffice for my purpose?

What you want doesn't exist, and won't exist for many more years.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

19 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

What you want doesn't exist, and won't exist for many more years.

Lets do some math. Nvidia claims 8k 60fps gaming on 3090. Dlss 2.0 is a thing, so it sould do 1440p. up scaling. Ill knock off, say 300fps in my math, for Nvidia over exaggerating.  1440p*4=4K*4=8K. 1440p*16=8K. 60*16=930-300=630. Nvidia probably didnt mean 8k 60 high, but if 8k 60 is possible 4k 120 high is. 

 

OP, if you want RTX to be on, idk if it is possible, but if money isnt a problem, as you say, depending on if the 3090 uses sli mode nvlink or nvlink like it is on quadro rtx, maybe you should get two.

[xg32]

8 minutes ago, HelpfulTechWizard said:

.

i think someone posted tom's hardware benches and it had medium 4k on there, i know op said no compromise, but lemme go take a quick peek lol.

[Ryukadin]

I tried SLI some time back with dual 680ti's, it was very disappointing to say the least... most things I played didn't scale worth a crap with it and some games I had to actually disable a card because it wasn't compatible with SLI -at all-, now I haven't tried NV-Link, and to the best of my understanding the main difference is that it has enough bandwidth to share memory unlike SLI, which may or may not fix some of those issues, I'm just not sure if I trust it enough to spend $1500 on a second card to find out. It'd be nice if Linus or someone else could do that and run some gaming benches and see how it performs. I'd have been FAR more likely to try that with 3080's but it'd seem they don't support NV-Link.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

3 minutes ago, Ryukadin said:

I'd have been FAR more likely to try that with 3080's but it'd seem they don't support NV-Link.

they dont.

[SolarNova]

32 minutes ago, xg32 said:

i think someone posted tom's hardware benches and it had medium 4k on there, i know op said no compromise, but lemme go take a quick peek lol.

https://www.tomshardware.com/features/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-ampere-cpu-scaling-benchmarks

 

4k Medium is on average 120hz territory.

 

but Medium presets general do have a noticeable difference in fidelity vs High. The difference between High and Ultra however is usual less but the performance hit can be significant.

 

The 3080 regardless still doesn't cut it for 4k 120hz ..and certainly not 4k 144hz.

 

Wait for Big Navi, at the very least, chances are it wont beat the 3080 in 4k ..but its still worth the wait.

 

What may be more interesting is the possibility for 'biggest Navi' in 2021, which could beat the 3090 and force nvidia to release an RTX Titan 3000 to maintain the performance crown.

 

Knowing Nvidia a RTX Titan 3000, will be $3,000 , and as much as AMD is usually cheaper, were still likely talking $1500+ which is just to damn high. Its likely a 3080ti slotted in at 3080 price point in 6 to 8 months is the best we'll get this generation for ur average Enthusiast, with cards liek the 3090 ,Biggest NAvi, a A possible Titan being for professionals and those with money to literately burn.

[xg32]

13 minutes ago, Ryukadin said:

I tried SLI some time back with dual 680ti's, it was very disappointing to say the least... most things I played didn't scale worth a crap with it and some games I had to actually disable a card because it wasn't compatible with SLI -at all-, now I haven't tried NV-Link, and to the best of my understanding the main difference is that it has enough bandwidth to share memory unlike SLI, which may or may not fix some of those issues, I'm just not sure if I trust it enough to spend $1500 on a second card to find out. It'd be nice if Linus or someone else could do that and run some gaming benches and see how it performs. I'd have been FAR more likely to try that with 3080's but it'd seem they don't support NV-Link.

here are the 4k benches

 

https://www.tomshardware.com/features/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-ampere-cpu-scaling-benchmarks

 

average is about 98fps on ultra (78 min)  for the 3080, let's hope we get that 25-30% bump for a 3090 oc for 120 avg, 100min

 

medium average is 130

 

so it's basically paying (more than) double to play on ultra instead of medium.

 

This is all with RT off. RT on without DLSS is still not there yet, with DLSS it's ok.

 

[JoostinOnline]

56 minutes ago, HelpfulTechWizard said:

Lets do some math. Nvidia claims 8k 60fps gaming on 3090. Dlss 2.0 is a thing, so it sould do 1440p. up scaling. Ill knock off, say 300fps in my math, for Nvidia over exaggerating.  1440p*4=4K*4=8K. 1440p*16=8K. 60*16=930-300=630. Nvidia probably didnt mean 8k 60 high, but if 8k 60 is possible 4k 120 high is. 

 

OP, if you want RTX to be on, idk if it is possible, but if money isnt a problem, as you say, depending on if the 3090 uses sli mode nvlink or nvlink like it is on quadro rtx, maybe you should get two.

That's some pretty subjective math (i.e. not really math), but the OP said 4K120fps max settings on everything.  That means nothing on just High.  That likely also means no DLSS since that's a drop in minor drop in quality.  Also almost nothing supports DLSS, and it's not going to be added to old games that already can't run it.  The 3080 can't even get 60fps at 4K in a lot of titles. Expecting more than double the performance for a 3090 is just ridiculous.

 

Long story short, get a 1440p monitor.

[Ryukadin]

I'm leaning more toward quality than performance for the most part given that I rarely play competitive games but when I do I can just turn down the quality for more frames. I just don't want dips below 60fps when maxed out.

[JoostinOnline]

2 minutes ago, Ryukadin said:

I'm leaning more toward quality than performance for the most part given that I rarely play competitive games but when I do I can just turn down the quality for more frames. I just don't want dips below 60fps when maxed out.

That's still not going to be a universal thing with a 3090, just based on history.  Again, I say get a 1440p monitor.  Resolution is just a canvas.  It doesn't automatically make the picture better.  Nothing is detailed enough to need 4K.  You're just adding unnecessary stress to your GPU.  1440p is the sweet spot.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

9 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

That likely also means no DLSS since that's a drop in minor drop in quality.  Also almost nothing supports DLSS, and it's not going to be added to old games that already can't run it.

Both games he mentioned my name will. And thats not true, Doom Eternal is getting it added, at least from rurmors, and Fortnite is getting it tomorow.

[JoostinOnline]

1 minute ago, HelpfulTechWizard said:

Both games he mentioned my name will. And thats not true, Doom Eternal is getting it added, at least from rurmors, and Fortnite is getting it tomorow.

Those aren't hard games to run as it is. The OP said "everything", not "easy to run games".

[Helpful Tech Witch]

5 minutes ago, JoostinOnline said:

Those aren't hard games to run as it is. The OP said "everything", not "easy to run games".

He said "everything" as in all settingd, not "everything" as in all games.