Apparently, the RTX 4070 Super is good.

[Bagzie]

10 minutes ago, 8tg said:

i dont care

this is the issue:

 

the 4070 should have a minimum of 16gb

there is no justification otherwise

I was not a big fan of 12GB on a 4070ti because it was an $800 GPU , At $600 i actually think 12GB is enough.

 

It would have been nice if it had more but because of the AD104 die you are either getting 12GB or 24GB ( Unless you go the GTX970 route which didn't work out well for Nvidia's lawyers )  , The latter is massive overkill and would have increased the cost enough to make a difference.

 

5 minutes ago, Why_Me said:

The Intel drivers are a mess atm. With that said the 4070 Super is meant for gaming at 1080P where 12GB will be fine.

 

The 4070 Super is a 1440p GPU not 1080p , It has performance that puts it on par with a 3090 , Nobody thinks a 3090 is a 1080p gpu do they?

[Why_Me]

1 minute ago, 8tg said:

Intel drivers havent been a mess for months, closing in on almost a year.

The 4070 super is a $600 gpu, it is a tier above the midrange x60 series where the A770 is designed to compete as well, there is a 12gb RTX 3060 and a 16gb 4060 ti

A $600 1080p card is an oxymoron

 

again, there is no justification for 12gb of vram besides to cheap out on the manufacturing, or to direct consumers to a higher tier product that has more video memory, or to a cheaper to manufacture product that has more video memory 

 

If someone wants to spend less then they can look at the 7800 XT for pure raster. With that said I see this card selling pretty well for those who want a high end card for 1080P.

[Retro_R]

now im conflicted! I just bought a 7800xt, and this looks like a decent option, at least better than the previous 4070. At least i still have time to return it once i get it if theres good 4070 super deals. That would be the first time i went team green in a long time tho

 

[Why_Me]

1 minute ago, Bagzie said:

The 4070 Super is a 1440p GPU not 1080p , It has performance that puts it on par with a 3090 , Nobody thinks a 3090 is a 1080p gpu do they?

If I averaged less than 100 fps on any game I play I'd either stop playing said game or do a rebuild. I play first person shooter games and it has nothing to do with what the eye can see and all to do with smoothness of game play. The people that purchase this card for 1440 either just came off a console or they play those WoW type games. If you want high frame rates at 1440 then look at the 7900 XT 20GB or the upcoming 4070 Ti Super 16GB if you want DLSS.

[8tg]

 

1 minute ago, Bagzie said:

I was not a big fan of 12GB on a 4070ti because it was an $800 GPU , At $600 i actually think 12GB is enough.

12gb for $600 looks like enough because theres a comparison of 12gb of $800, not the other way around where its justifiable in either sense, which is what they intentionally have done to convince people this is ok

its also why the 3070ti existed, 8gb of vram? like the 2080 with its $700 msrp, suddenly thats 100$ cheaper and fits the 70ti thing they did with pascal so people think its just the 80 series cards performance for less money

 

except it wasnt, it was terrible, i would know as i own one as well

because really all they did was make a cheaper to manufacture card priced through the ceiling to trick their customers into accepting less for more money

need i remind you at one point AMD managed to get an itx form factor card to outperform the gtx 980 and nvidias response was to add more vram to their gpus and cut prices down

and now with a few generations of convincing customers they should pay more for less, we  have dumb ass products like the 12gb 4070 super with a $600 msrp

[Bagzie]

5 minutes ago, Why_Me said:

If I averaged less than 100 fps on any game I play I'd either stop playing said game or do a rebuild. I play first person shooter games and it has nothing to do with what the eye can see and all to do with smoothness of game play. The people that purchase this card for 1440 either just came off a console or they play those WoW type games. If you want high frame rates at 1440 then look at the 7900 XT 20GB or the upcoming 4070 Ti Super 16GB if you want DLSS.

Well i respect your opinion but you have to accept that your opinion is an outlier , Now i'm trying to work out what FPS games you play that cannot get a 100FPS experience on a 4070 super or even a 7800XT at 1440p.

 

5 minutes ago, 8tg said:

 

12gb for $600 looks like enough because theres a comparison of 12gb of $800, not the other way around where its justifiable in either sense, which is what they intentionally have done to convince people this is ok

its also why the 3070ti existed, 8gb of vram? like the 2080 with its $700 msrp, suddenly thats 100$ cheaper and fits the 70ti thing they did with pascal so people think its just the 80 series cards performance for less money

 

except it wasnt, it was terrible, i would know as i own one as well

because really all they did was make a cheaper to manufacture card priced through the ceiling to trick their customers into accepting less for more money

need i remind you at one point AMD managed to get an itx form factor card to outperform the gtx 980 and nvidias response was to add more vram to their gpus and cut prices down

and now with a few generations of convincing customers they should pay more for less, we  have dumb ass products like the 12gb 4070 super with a $600 msrp

The problem is though that in order to get more Vram you are going to have to downgrade performance , Having 12GB is not amazing but are you going to lose raw performance to get more Vram because as it stands that's the only option unless you want to pony up more money.

[8tg]

7 minutes ago, Bagzie said:

The problem is though that in order to get more Vram you are going to have to downgrade performance

no you dont, nvidia just convinced you thats how this works

There were 4gb and 8gb R9 290x's over 10 years ago now

the 980 had a 4gb variant and a 6gb variant

 

or god, pascal in general was nuts for this, where vram increased progressively with card tier

[Bagzie]

14 minutes ago, 8tg said:

no you dont, nvidia just convinced you thats how this works

There were 4gb and 8gb R9 290x's over 10 years ago now

the 980 had a 4gb variant and a 6gb variant

 

or god, pascal in general was nuts for this, where vram increased progressively with card tier

 

Few things to note here.

 

- The 980 4GB and 980TI 6GB are two completely separate cards that don't even share the same DIE , One is GM204 and the other is GM200.

- The 8GB R9 290X cost a $100 more than the 4GB R9 290X at launch  , It was not an AMD thing either it was AIB's deciding to add it themselves to there boards and it was largely a marketing gimmick that had no performance gain over the 4GB model especially in 2014 when it released.

-  None of these companies are your friends , So you get what is the best value at the time you buy it , The 4070 Super is not a perfect GPU but at the price it is supposedly going to be available at its the best option available.

 

Do i think Nvidia skimp on Vram? Other than there top tier cards yes they do but Vram is only a small part of the Equation and you have to stack them up , 12GB of Vram sucks but its not so small as to take away the fact that the 4070 Super is a reasonably powerful card at a semi reasonable price (We will wait and see on that front).

[The Pizza Man]

22 hours ago, Why_Me said:

The Intel drivers are a mess atm. With that said the 4070 Super is meant for gaming at 1080P where 12GB will be fine.

The 4070 Super is a 1080p? Whelp. Looks like I've been priced out of 1440p gaming then.

[The Pizza Man]

22 hours ago, Why_Me said:

If I averaged less than 100 fps on any game I play I'd either stop playing said game or do a rebuild. I play first person shooter games and it has nothing to do with what the eye can see and all to do with smoothness of game play. The people that purchase this card for 1440 either just came off a console or they play those WoW type games. If you want high frame rates at 1440 then look at the 7900 XT 20GB or the upcoming 4070 Ti Super 16GB if you want DLSS.

Please... Check your privilege, because you're clearly in a steady enough financial position that you can afford to just do a rebuild with $600+ video cards and all the rest if you dip below 100fps. You need to appreciate you're the edge case, not the standardised consumer.

[Middcore]

32 minutes ago, The Pizza Man said:

The 4070 Super is a 1080p? Whelp. Looks like I've been priced out of 1440p gaming then.

 

There was a brief, shining moment (when Nvidia was trying to win back goodwill after Turing) when the 70-tier card was unquestionably meant for more than 1080p, because the 3070 was basically a 2080 ti and the 2080 ti was obviously for at least 1440p if not 4k.

 

Now apparently you aren't supposed to be able to ask for more than 1080p unless you're willing to spend... a thousand bucks, ballpark? 

[starsmine]

On 1/16/2024 at 11:38 AM, 8tg said:

12gb of vram on a $600 GPU is unacceptable 

 

ram size is as function of bus width and ram die density. To go up to 16GB you either murder ram bandwith and thus lose massive ammounts of performance, or make a die massive and expensive for the increased bus width. Or you wait for mircon to come out with denser chips. 24GB was never on the table. 

Also, I have yet to find any game I cant essentially max out at 1440p with my 3060 12GB, I also have not yet played Allen wake 2. anyone who makes the claim the 4070 super is just a 1080p card because its not 16GB is taking the piss and not worth listening to. 

This card plays practically all games at 4k 60fps without DLSS, people really need to take a chill pill about how they talk about hardware and what is needed.

Like jesus christ

Turn on DLSR for the games that dont have a 60 minimum, and go and play your god damn backlog on steam that will be running at 200+ fps at 4k

 

OR, ill give you a secret gamers, Ultra is a dumb setting. Dont use it, Ultra in games coming out today are for the generation of cards that are not out yet, not the cards out today, does not mater if its a 2000 dollar inflated 4090. 

 

[8tg]

30 minutes ago, Middcore said:

Now apparently you aren't supposed to be able to ask for more than 1080p unless you're willing to spend... a thousand bucks, ballpark? 

Reminder the GTX 1070 was $379 at launch, was marketed as a 1440p max settings kinda card with ok 4k capability, and came with 8gb of vram just like the 1080. 
Reviews of its era show it in 1440p pulling above 60fps in everything, and 4k at mixed settings getting 60fps.

But the 4070 super is a 1080p GPU according to these nerds now.

What does that make the 4060, a 768p powerhouse?

[Mister Woof]

On 1/16/2024 at 10:09 AM, 8tg said:

Intel drivers havent been a mess for months, closing in on almost a year.

The 4070 super is a $600 gpu, it is a tier above the midrange x60 series where the A770 is designed to compete as well, there is a 12gb RTX 3060 and a 16gb 4060 ti

A $600 1080p card is an oxymoron

 

again, there is no justification for 12gb of vram besides to cheap out on the manufacturing, or to direct consumers to a higher tier product that has more video memory, or to a cheaper to manufacture product that has more video memory 

 

Be that as it may, an A770 won't perform matching a 4070 Super even if the A770 had 48GB. 

 

You're preaching to the choir here on what the card should have, should have been, could have been, whatever. 

 

The options we have are what we have. Right now the 4070 Super is a good value despite the 12GB VRAM, and although the 7800XT has 33% more VRAM, it lacks other features that you can't simply ignore because you want to laser focus on one single metric. And on that front, the pricing is competitive with featureset and performance favoring the 4070S.

 

Personally, I picked up a 4070S FE from Nvidia for $599 and the price is fine. I'm not over the moon about 12GB, but it's more than the 10GB that my 3080 and also we need another GPU. So here we are.

 

The ability to use DLSS in addition to the option for FSR if/when needed just gives the Nvidia cards more versatility. 

[Mister Woof]

On 1/16/2024 at 10:16 AM, Retro_R said:

now im conflicted! I just bought a 7800xt, and this looks like a decent option, at least better than the previous 4070. At least i still have time to return it once i get it if theres good 4070 super deals. That would be the first time i went team green in a long time tho

 

4070S vs 7800XT 

 

4070S Pros:

Strong Rasterization Performance, about 5%-10% faster than 7800XT

Strong Ray Tracing Performance, more consistently competent than the 7800XT

DLSS gives two options for upscaling since all cards can use FSR

DLSS3 Frame Gen as another option for smoothing when available

Superior Video capture and hardware encoding performance

 

4070S Cons:

Costs about $100 more

12GB VRAM buffer could be a problem later in life; solved by reducing texture quality

 

7800XT Pros:

$100 Cheaper than 4070S

Competitive Rasterization, within 90-95% performance of the 4070S

16GB VRAM has more breathing room

 

7800XT Cons:

Inconsistent Ray Tracing, with some outliers being unplayable but others being great; non-issue if you don't care about RT

FSR is the only upscaling option

Worse video capture and encoding performance; non-issue if you don't do these things

 

I don't think you can really go wrong with either. If I was shopping the $500-700 segment I'd get a 4070S. I'd skip everything else in the middle except for a discounted 7900XT at $700, and then go straight to a 4090 after that. The 4080S might upend this though.

[Mister Woof]

5 hours ago, The Pizza Man said:

The 4070 Super is a 1080p? Whelp. Looks like I've been priced out of 1440p gaming then.

It's most definitely a high-end 1440P card. It seems to average around 105-120fps in aggregated average FPS across multiple titles at 1440p when reviewers used mostly Ultra settings; nobody actually plays on Ultra. Drop to high and you'll be bouncing off the vsync on your typical high refresh 144hz display, barring certain games that have poop FPS for any GPU.

[IkeaGnome]

4 hours ago, 8tg said:

Reminder the GTX 1070 was $379 at launch, was marketed as a 1440p max settings kinda card with ok 4k capability, and came with 8gb of vram just like the 1080. 
Reviews of its era show it in 1440p pulling above 60fps in everything, and 4k at mixed settings getting 60fps.

But the 4070 super is a 1080p GPU according to these nerds now.

What does that make the 4060, a 768p powerhouse?

No, it's still a 1080p card. My 4090 is a true 1440p card. Truth be told, if I wanted to play at 4k I'd have to throw a second card in the system.

I hope the sarcasm is very clear here.

[Why_Me]

29 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

It's most definitely a high-end 1440P card. It seems to average around 105-120fps in aggregated average FPS across multiple titles at 1440p when reviewers used mostly Ultra settings; nobody actually plays on Ultra. Drop to high and you'll be bouncing off the vsync on your typical high refresh 144hz display, barring certain games that have poop FPS for any GPU.

The RTX 4070 Ti Super 16GB is a true high end card for gaming at 1440P.

https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/geforce-rtx-40-super-series

[Mister Woof]

Just now, Why_Me said:

The RTX 4070 Ti Super 16GB is a true high end card for gaming at 1440P.

https://nvidianews.nvidia.com/news/geforce-rtx-40-super-series

Gotta wait a few weeks though

[Why_Me]

Just now, Mister Woof said:

Gotta wait a few weeks though

6 more days for the reviews, 7 more days until it's released.

[Mister Woof]

1 minute ago, Why_Me said:

6 more days for the reviews, 7 more days until it's released.

then another week until it gets to your door!

[Bagzie]

19 hours ago, 8tg said:

Reminder the GTX 1070 was $379 at launch, was marketed as a 1440p max settings kinda card with ok 4k capability, and came with 8gb of vram just like the 1080. 
Reviews of its era show it in 1440p pulling above 60fps in everything, and 4k at mixed settings getting 60fps.

But the 4070 super is a 1080p GPU according to these nerds now.

What does that make the 4060, a 768p powerhouse?

Only one person stated it was a 1080p card , Nobody else is saying that.

 

It's clearly marketed at and performing well at 1440p.

 

The problem with the logic is of said person is that the 4070 super is performing like a 3090..

 

If you went back a generation and said the 3090 was a 1080p card you would get laughed at and rightfully so.

 

I play at 1440p but honestly my 7900XT makes a decent account of itself at 4k and I wouldn't scoff at anyone for using it at 4k either , I mean why not it has a large vram buffer with a large bus width that makes it a reasonable 4k card.

 

Is there better options out there? Sure the 4090 , 4080 and 7900XTX are all faster but other than the 4090 it's all within about 15-20%.