Wait for the 5080ti/super then. If you need more than a plain 5080, which you probably don’t.
Companies are very good at convincing you that you *need* to spend more money. You don’t.
-
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.
At what point do you say GPU's are too expensive and refuse to buy?
- Thread starter Sparky
- Start date
Companies are very good at convincing you that you *need* to spend more money. You don’t.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,370
- Location
- Birmingham
It probably won't be value for money either.
I agree with you a 5080 could run every game I own under some of the highest settings at 1440p or 4k. And it could run the quest 3 at its highest settings too.
The 5080 is only 26% faster than a 7900 xt which is two years old now. It's not sufficient to upgrade to.
It couldn't run the crystal light vr headset at its max - the 5090 barely can. Let alone the crystal super.
But the issue is that if you're spending £1k, you may as well spend £2k, especially if in two years time you can resell it for almost the same money.
That scenario is messed up and is distorting the market.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 47,148
As long as I’m enjoying gaming and want to experience them maxed out 4K, I’m not sure what my limit is. £3-5k maybe. It’s still my favourite hobby when a decent game comes along.
That was my through process for the 5090. I’m already spending silly money, what’s another grand on the 5080. Plus it should resell decently down the line. If not, I’m not too bothered.
That was my through process for the 5090. I’m already spending silly money, what’s another grand on the 5080. Plus it should resell decently down the line. If not, I’m not too bothered.
Last edited:
How much faster is a 5080 over a 7900XTX then? 15-18%?
I'm guessing that a 4090 must be what, 46% faster than a 7900XTX?
I very much doubt the 5090 price will hold up as well as a 4090. The 4090 launched with +75% performance over its predecessor whereas the 5090 was less than half that.
If a node jump delivers much better performance and efficiency gains over the 5090 then it will probably go the same way as a 3090ti.
Damn, there was me thinking I was close with my guesstimate!
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 9,370
- Location
- Birmingham
Yeah all this just screams a poor generation doesn't it and should just be skipped.
We can only hope for a larger performance jump, and limited price point changes, for the next series.
We can only hope for a larger performance jump, and limited price point changes, for the next series.
The 7900 XTX was a really good card for that £900 price that it was not long after launch. It's surprisingly capable!Damn, there was me thinking I was close with my guesstimate!
The 4090 is only 13% faster at 4k yet cost nearly double the price!
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2011
- Posts
- 1,946
NVIDIA becomes first company to hit $4 trillion market cap
Get ready for those £3K 6090's
Get ready for those £3K 6090's
Still loving my 7900xtx plays everything great at 4k no issues. I paid about £900 and no regrets and has converted me to AMD cards after years of Nvidia.
why you seeing many price cuts recently across the board. most cards are way over priced.
Would it be worth going from a 4070 to a 7900XTX or would a 5070Ti be a bigger jump?
31% faster, more with raytracing.
AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX Specs
AMD Navi 31, 2498 MHz, 6144 Cores, 384 TMUs, 192 ROPs, 24576 MB GDDR6, 2500 MHz, 384 bit
The 5070 Ti is 1% give or take on the XTX's performance. It depends on what you can buy either for, what features you value (DLSS vs FSR, etc) and so on.
It's 13% faster at pure raster (see relative performance charts in previous post). Fake frames don't count as performance. Ray tracing is an interesting one as playable FPS for ray tracing relies on the aforementioned fake frames.31% faster, more with raytracing.
AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX Specs
AMD Navi 31, 2498 MHz, 6144 Cores, 384 TMUs, 192 ROPs, 24576 MB GDDR6, 2500 MHz, 384 bitwww.techpowerup.com
Ultimately, people can buy whatever card they want. It makes no difference to me. Cards are still too damn expensive for me.
As I thought.
Yeah I'd go for Nvidia again purely for the extra lifespan DLSS, Reflex2, and frame generation give. Having tried both AMD/Nvidia, FSR just doesn't cut the mustard visually.
The 4070 is still allowing me to max out all games (bar Alan Wake 2) at 4K DLSS with frame generation as and when needed, and 60FPS is fine by me if I can have maximum eye candy...
Maybe I'll wait one more generation, or just wait until I encounter games I cannot play I guess?
Always wait if you can, I certainly wouldn’t consider upgrading just for Alan wake.
Yep, it does everything I want currently so...
As for AW2, I just played it on max settings 1440P DLSS with RT off
I could get around 52-54FPS in places with 4K DLSS, but I wanted a consistent 60.