Is the fastest GPU ALWAYS the best?

[Emily Young]

Nvidia’s GeForce RTX 4090 is a GPU that’s been rumoured to be a power-hungry beast since it was first leaked. Is it really that bad? And can its gaming performance possibly justify its massive price tag?
 

 

[GodAtum]

Please test MSFS at 4K!

[MadAnt250]

This is getting out of hand, we need lower power consumption and not this OP monster.

[Tan3l6]

2 minutes ago, MadAnt250 said:

This is getting out of hand, we need lower power consumption and not this OP monster.

Exactly what I was goint to add. But at least there will be 4070 - decent performance and is not exactly a powerhog. Assumably.

[Nocturn]

I am lost, is the GPU launching today or tomorrow? I though it was tomorrow, but it is sold out on BestBuy 

[jaslion]

12 minutes ago, Tan3l6 said:

Exactly what I was goint to add. But at least there will be 4070 - decent performance and is not exactly a powerhog. Assumably.

Which 4070? The 4070 12gb or the 4070?

 

But like for real this thing is crazy. Even for me where time is money for rendering this thing is a huge avoid at all costs. I can run 2 3090s for that energy useage after tweaking them ever so slightly.

[LpoolTech]

I've watched few reviews so far and I find it interesting that the numbers are high everywhere but they differ a lot too jayz cyberpunk was average but SOTR was high, opposite of ltt scores 

[jaslion]

Ok so hear me out. Now that I think of it its been what 4 years since the 2080ti and you could comfortably run it on a decent 450w psu. Even the rtx titan could.

 

But in just 4 years we went from 450w psus are alright enough for the highest end gpus (I really loved the efficiency targets) to that top end rmx850w is most likely not gonna work. That rmx1000w is now the new baseline for a top end pc.

 

And thats insane to me. For the same class computer you end up with double the power consumption. Yes its a lot faster but still thats just insane to me.

 

I thought we really were going to way of this performance is enough lets get very efficient but I guess I guessed wrong?

[silentdragon95]

Okay so I get why we need to have "clickbait" titles, but you'd think that a title mentioning the RTX 4000 release would have gotten at least as much traction? I actually didn't make the connection until I saw an article elsewhere with benchmarks of the RTX 4090 and thought to myself "wait a minute, how does LTT not have a video on that yet?". Well, turns out they do, it just was hiding behind a boring title.

 

As far as the card itself is concerned, those performance gains are mighty impressive and would be extremely tempting. However, the power consumption is too high and at €2000 there is simply no way I'm buying it, and neither should anybody else. Interestingly enough, NVIDIA appears to have done the thing both Intel and AMD have been doing lately with their CPUs and cranked the power targets too high, I'm reading reports of only 3% less performance on average with 350 watts instead of 450 (according to ComputerBase.de).

[Dedayog]

Hey. 3090Ti is $999 now at least 4090 has done SOME good!

[Fluph]

1 hour ago, LpoolTech said:

I've watched few reviews so far and I find it interesting that the numbers are high everywhere but they differ a lot too jayz cyberpunk was average but SOTR was high, opposite of ltt scores 

Noticed that as well.
Numbers across reviews are very odd.
Might be an update, dodgy drivers.

@Linus This should give you a laugh.  Comment posted on Jayz youtube review
 

Quote

I'm convinced LTT are faking the reviews in Nvidia's favor. Since that video where they said they're surprised the 4090 is "only" $100 more than a 3090 and that it's great value they've lost all credibility.

Come on Linus own up
The guy clearly didn't even watch Anthonys video.
Hilarious the person thinks you are shilling Nvidia 

[Darkgaledust]

So, I've watched all the reviews now.

LTT chose the 7950X here, with DDR5-6000.

GN used a 12700k with DDR5-6000,

HUB used a 5800x3D with DDR4-3200

And Jay used a 12900K - He didn't post his bench specs I believe.

LTT's CP2077 scores line up WAY too neatly with the 1440p scores of the other reviewers to not be a mistake, especially considering the lack of actual 1440p benches for that game in LTT's video. Everything else seems to line up except for a few weird results from AMD's side but I think that could be windows version/Drivers

[Darknighterror]

But can it run Crysis?

[Darknighterror]

2 minutes ago, Darkgaledust said:

LTT's CP2077 scores line up WAY too neatly with the 1440p scores of the other reviewers to not be a mistake, especially considering the lack of actual 1440p benches for that game in LTT's video. Everything else seems to line up except for a few weird results from AMD's side but I think that could be windows version/Drivers

I've only watched DerBauer's video and he said that there are currently performance problems with combining 4090 and AM5 processors (Statet by NVIDIA themself).

[Sir Beregond]

I'd argue nothing justifies $1600 for a gaming card. 12 years ago top flagship gaming card which had the full top die of the generation was $500-$600. Obviously inflation, material, wafer costs have gone up, so I am not expecting flagships to still be that price, but $1600 is just Nvidia trying to see how much the market will tolerate given we tolerated the following since 2012:

 

• With Kepler, Nvidia moving the x04 chip (previously used for mid-range 60-class products) into the GTX 680 and charging the same price as last gen's top dog die card, the GTX 580.
• Nvidia continuing to put x04 chips into 80-class products while increasing the launch prices from $499 for the 680, to $549 for the 980, $599 for the 1080, $699 for the 2080, and now $899 and $1199 respectively for the 4080's.
• Introducing the first $1k graphics card (the original Titan), which the prior generation would have just been the x80 card for half the price.

And we let them get away with it.

 

So no, it's not worth $1600 in historical context. I guess in the context of what the market now is over the past decade since Kepler, I guess it's up to everyone if north of $1k is now acceptable for a gaming product. Titans had the quasi excuse of being a "pro-sumer" product (though the original was marketed as gaming). That doesn't exist anymore in that sense.

 

So yeah, impressive card, no doubt, but pricing is out of hand.

[Tan3l6]

Just now, Sir Beregond said:

So yeah, impressive card, no doubt, but pricing is out of hand.

Infaltion also a tad of a factor.

[Sir Beregond]

Just now, Tan3l6 said:

Infaltion also a tad of a factor.

Not as much as you think it is. Look at Nvidia margins on their cards.

 

And please just see the whole context of my post. I mentioned inflation. But the bigger news is the trend of Nvidia giving us less in terms of die/card for more over the past decade.

[CommanderAlex]

2 hours ago, MadAnt250 said:

This is getting out of hand, we need lower power consumption and not this OP monster.

Totally agreed here. I've said this on another thread as well, with others replying consumers want extra performance and the need to increase power consumption is how they will get it. IMO, I think we need to rethink and redesign the architectures of graphics cards, possibly even through software to increase performance. 

 

Hope AMD can pull off better gains than Big Navi with RDNA3-which I'm more excited for. 

[Sir Beregond]

3 minutes ago, CommanderAlex said:

Totally agreed here. I've said this on another thread as well, with others replying consumers want extra performance and the need to increase power consumption is how they will get it. IMO, I think we need to rethink and redesign the architectures of graphics cards, possibly even through software to increase performance. 

 

Hope AMD can pull off better gains than Big Navi with RDNA3-which I'm more excited for. 

I hope AMD can also pull sane pricing and not just slightly undercut high prices with still high prices.

[CommanderAlex]

3 minutes ago, Sir Beregond said:

I hope AMD can also pull sane pricing and not just slightly undercut high prices with still high prices.

I don't think AMD will price themselves higher than when Big Navi came out, maybe 10% at most. I know the YT channel, Moore's Law is Dead, is not the most reliable for information leaks but rumors from his sources say the cost to produce RDNA3 is not that much more than RDNA2, so they might just keep prices where they are. 

 

I don't think AMD will have a "7900XT", or whatever their naming their next gen flagship will be able to compete against the 4090, but at least 50% gains (of performance) over the 6900XT. 

[Tan3l6]

39 minutes ago, Sir Beregond said:

And please just see the whole context of my post. I mentioned inflation.

Yeah, I guess I live in the part of the Europe that has been hit hardest with inflation this year, yet 2k € for launch price seems not absolutelly inconseivable, as the demand is there.

[Fluph]

7 minutes ago, Tan3l6 said:

Yeah, I guess I live in the part of the Europe that has been hit hardest with inflation this year, yet 2k € for launch price seems not absolurtelly inconseivable, as the demand is there.

For a 4090 GPU.
wow.  Nvidia marketing really did a number on you!

[Sir Beregond]

8 minutes ago, CommanderAlex said:

I don't think AMD will price themselves higher than when Big Navi came out, maybe 10% at most. I know the YT channel, Moore's Law is Dead, is not the most reliable for information leaks but rumors from his sources say the cost to produce RDNA3 is not that much more than RDNA2, so they might just keep prices where they are. 

 

I don't think AMD will have a "7900XT", or whatever their naming their next gen flagship will be able to compete against the 4090, but at least 50% gains (of performance) over the 6900XT. 

And if priced right, yet close enough in performance, could be enough to gain market share. Especially with the 4080's being ludicrously priced.

[Tan3l6]

Just now, Fluph said:

Nvidia marketing really did a number on you!

The number of transistors per buck I guess...

[ragesaq]

Would love to see a benchmark of OpenVR Benchmark on an Index, its pretty much the only actually good VR benchmark.