• 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.

3090 is NOT a gaming card - Gamers Nexus DESTROYS the 3090

fx1 said:
No it isnt.

Shadow of the tomb raider its 17.8% with 480W power limit. That is insane. That is compared to the cheapest & slowest 3080 versus the most expensive 3090 so far.

Talk about skewing the figures. Strix vs Strix there would be around 10% in it still. I dont get why you people dont understand the 24GB VRAM doesnt make any difference. The scaling is linear. But it still doesnt change the fact the 3080 Strix OC is 97% of a 3090 FE at 1400 quid.

Again the Strix 3080 is 840 quid. The 3090 is a grand more expensive to get 10% which is lunacy.

In control with RTX that buys you about 4 FPS which is 250 quid a frame lol
Click to expand...

it don't matter just like it didn't matter last gen, you can overclock your 3080 and people can overclock their 3090 - the 15-20% gap will still be there
 
Im happy paying the extra for the 3090. When the 30 series cards were first announced I said to myself ‘ If the 3090 manages to be 40% better than my 2080ti at 2k Im in’ Its 42% better on average than the 2080ti and 15% better than the 3080, thats good enough for me. Also by getting the 3090 I will be able to skip next years face lift models the 3080ti/ Super and go straight for the 40 series cards in 2 years time. And with the extra 40% I will be able to play COD BR at 2k with all the bells and whistles and maintain 170fps. I pre ordered a Asus Strix OC 3090 and will be building a full custom water cooling loop straight of the bat so the overclocking headroom on the Strix OC may produce something really special!
 
Last edited:
Managed to buy a FE 3090 just now! Woooo! So that means this 3090 Ventus will be going on the MM at some point... Do you think I'll get the £1,530 I paid for it for it even though it would be second hand (I've not opened it yet but my old card is slowly dying and I wanna give it a spin!)
 
Grim5 said:
it don't matter just like it didn't matter last gen, you can overclock your 3080 and people can overclock their 3090 - the 15-20% gap will still be there
Click to expand...

Where are you getting this imaginary gap from? At best its 8-13% depending on game.

You cant take an £1800 Strix OC and claim 20% versus the entry level 3080.
 
fx1 said:
No it isnt.

Shadow of the tomb raider its 17.8% with 480W power limit. That is insane. That is compared to the cheapest & slowest 3080 versus the most expensive 3090 so far.

Talk about skewing the figures. Strix vs Strix there would be around 10% in it still. I dont get why you people dont understand the 24GB VRAM doesnt make any difference. The scaling is linear. But it still doesnt change the fact the 3080 Strix OC is 97% of a 3090 FE at 1400 quid.

Again the Strix 3080 is 840 quid. The 3090 is a grand more expensive to get 10% which is lunacy.

In control with RTX that buys you about 4 FPS which is 250 quid a frame lol
Click to expand...

I was in MSFS the other day and the GPU was using 11.5gb of ram.
 
At 480W you are severely limited by thermals. Once the watercooled 480W Strix 3090 results are out I think the % differences will widen
 
VincentHanna said:
Ah, guilt tripping.

Buying a Lamborghini SUV is stupid when you can get a KIA Sportage. Those people should donate £125,000 to a food bank Instead.
Click to expand...

Silly comparison. It’s like thinking it’s reasonable to buy a 10% quicker lambo that costs double, looks the same and has some useless bling (the extra vram for gaming when 8k is beyond this card too)
 
McGraw said:
Silly comparison. It’s like thinking it’s reasonable to buy a 10% quicker lambo that costs double, looks the same and has some useless bling (the extra vram for gaming when 8k is beyond this card too)
Click to expand...

Well a E63 AMG costs double what my E200 AMG costs and goes 6mph faster.

It looks pretty much the same...

It gets there much quicker but it's not ultimately much faster.
 
VincentHanna said:
Well a E63 AMG costs double what my E200 AMG costs and goes 6mph faster.

It gets there much quicker but it's not ultimately much faster.
Click to expand...

Its got a 155mph limiter. Not the same.

Also the E63 would go around a track significantly faster than an E200.

The E63 has more power, better interior and exterior and is a totally different car made by AMG.

The 3090 is a 3080 with a bit turned off. Put them side by side and you would not be able to see the extra 5 frames per second unless you had the counter on.
 
BaueruTc said:
Well it would not be able to allocate it if it was not there to use. I have 64 gigs of ram but msfs only uses around 15 of it. Clearly if it allocates it then its going to use it if need be.
Click to expand...

Im amazed i have to keep explaining how this stuff works.

MSFS will use as much VRAM as it can. It just loads as much in as it can. This does not result in any FPS drop or gain. VRAM is constantly being streamed in and out in an open world game. This does not result in increased performance.

If the card has 24GB of VRAM but loads in 48GB of VRAM worth of assets this is no different than 12GB of Vram loading in 48GB of assets. The only time that VRAM would make a difference is if the game engine is trying to render 12GB on screen with only 10GB VRAM buffer. As it would need to swap out 2GB on the fly which would delay the rendering of those frames.

to get crazy VRAM usage you have to use 4x Super Sampling or even 8x Super sampling. This taxes the core far more than the VRAM requirement. So by filling your VRAM buffer with Super Sampled Assets you are taxing your GPU which results in massive loss of FPS. So you would be better off not supersampling and keep the GPU pumping out frames as you would not see any visual difference between 2x and 4x MSAA anyway but you will feel the massive FPS loss.
 
I think that the main problem here is that somehow a card that is not meant for gaming is judged in gaming terms. The 3090 has some awesome value for certain applications, while for others (gaming) is not so special compared with a 3080. When the card was presented it was made pretty clear that it had a different scope. This said... is it really so important? Some people for sure will need it, some people is rich and they do not care about that amount of money (or money at all), and some others are just a bit more happy if they buy it and that is also totally fine :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom