• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

NVIDIA 4000 Series

humbug said:
They are using AI to design GPU's now? that's impressive, that AI can do that, also scary.....
Click to expand...

More so using AI to work out the most optimal layouts within the silicon and the ability to do a silly high amount of testing before anything is actually physicalized.

AFAIK they did it with the 2000, 3000 and 4000 series.
 
Dicehunter said:
More so using AI to work out the most optimal layouts within the silicon and the ability to do a silly high amount of testing before anything is actually physicalized.

AFAIK they did it with the 2000, 3000 and 4000 series.
Click to expand...

Makes sense...
 
Joxeon said:
Using a less cut down chip of 95% instead of 89% would get you +10%, the higher bandwidth from GDDR7 another +10% then add +20% for the new 3NM node and 15% for architecture improvements and your already at +55% so not to dissimilar to the +70% which the 4090 has over a 3090.
Click to expand...

Agree... in best case scenarios! Overall it will likely be the usual 25-30% :) (apart from the obligatory lock ins and proprietary features they can share).
 
Well the 4090 only got a big jump in performance from the 3090 because it skipped 2 nodes right? So assuming that doesn't happen this round for the 5000 series, we definitely won't be seeing the same performance uplift.

Makes sense to hold onto your 4090's and skip a gen.
 
4090 was way more than just nodes helping the uplift, it was significantly over-specced:

6jmOZKB.jpeg


Nearly 2 years on and still nothing touches it from any vendor.
 
Last edited:
mrk said:
4090 was way more than just nodes helping the uplift, it was significantly over-specced:

6jmOZKB.jpeg


Nearly 2 years on and still nothing touches it from any vendor.
Click to expand...


Looking at those side by side just shows how much of a beast the 4090 is.
 
humbug said:
Why are they still only Display Port 1.4?
Click to expand...
Probably because at time of launch no high res display on sale was suitable for higher dp spec for high end gaming. These hve only just started to come out with solid specs.
 
mrk said:
Probably because at time of launch no high res display on sale was suitable for higher dp spec for high end gaming. These hve only just started to come out with solid specs.
Click to expand...

Like 8 GB was enough for the 3070, on the day....

There were no Displays at more than 120 Hz 4K 18 months ago?
 
Last edited:
The 2022 Neo G8 32" doesn't count even if it was one of the first 4k 240Hz panels, it used DP1.4a and DSC which is display compression over HDMI and DP to reach 240Hz and whilst the image quality is claimed to be nearly the same as uncompressed, it's not quite "native", nor is it DP 2.0.
 
mrk said:
The 2022 Neo G8 32" doesn't count even if it was one of the first 4k 240Hz panels, it used DP1.4a and DSC which is display compression over HDMI and DP to reach 240Hz and whilst the image quality is claimed to be nearly the same as uncompressed, it's not quite "native", nor is it DP 2.0.
Click to expand...

Its 25.92Gb/s 1.4 vs 77.3.7 Gb/s DP 2.1, the 128b encoding is significantly higher vs the 8b encoding.

Do any of the panels today count?
 
Last edited:
The even bigger question is, is the 4090, as powerful as it is, capable of pushing over 120fps on 4K displays taht are over 144Hz?

The answer is not really on the latest gaming engines. Here are a couple of comparisons at 5160x2160 with ray tracing and then path tracing. Note that DLSS Performance was used, and Frame Gen.

Ray Tracing Psycho:
EAsMlz2.jpeg


Path Tracing:
dQlZ5zE.jpeg


Ok I have a 12700KF so the average fps range will be higher with say a 13900KS or 14700K, but it won't be that much higher given that the CPU usage shown isn't showing a CPU bottleneck at this resolution anyway. And it certainly won't be anywhere near 30fps+ higher lol.

So really, DP2.0 being on the 4090 would be largely pointless for modern gaming as the card just won't do those framerates to meet the refresh rate maximums.
 
Last edited:
mrk said:
The even bigger question is, is the 4090, as powerful as it is, capable of pushing over 120fps on 4K displays taht are over 144Hz?

The answer is not really on the latest gaming engines. Here are a couple of comparisons at 5160x2160 with ray tracing and then path tracing. Note that DLSS Performance was used, and Frame Gen.

Ray Tracing Psycho:
EAsMlz2.jpeg


Path Tracing:
dQlZ5zE.jpeg


Ok I have a 12700KF so the average fps range will be higher with say a 13900KS or 14700K, but it won't be that much higher given that the CPU usage shown isn't showing a CPU bottleneck at this resolution anyway. And it certainly won't be anywhere near 30fps+ higher lol.

So really, DP2.0 being on the 4090 would be largely pointless for modern gaming as the card just won't do those framerates to meet the refresh rat maximums.
Click to expand...

My 7800 XT can, or does that also not count because of your qualifiers for this too?
 
I don't even understand what question you are asking there lol. A 7800XT does not do over 120fps at 4k (with full ray tracing/path tracing) to benefit a 120Hz+ 4K display.
 
Last edited:
mrk said:
I don't even understand what question you are asking there lol. A 7800XT does not do over 120fps at 4k (with full ray tracing/path tracing) to benefit a 120Hz+ 4K display.
Click to expand...

Of course it does, what makes you think that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom