4090 concerns

[CuriousTomCat]

Id like to have seen less performance with say 200w power draw and then for me the 4090 would be an essential purchase, cheaper and cooler to run.

So a 4060 then? That will have lower performance and consume about 200w

 

[SpellowHouse]

As far as I can see the 4090 provides very good performance and if your worried about power then you can lock it at 300w and lose 5-10%. Whether or not it's worth £1700 is debatable as 6 years ago a halo card cost £700 and inflation has not over doubled in that time.

The real criticism this time should be directed at the 4080s though as despite costing top end prices neither offer top end performance.

I agree. The 4090 are expensive but that can be expected on top tier. The real inexcusable are the 4070 and 4080 which nowhere near have the performance to justify their price.

 

[Insanties_birth]

Ah, the classic "I could comfortably buy one" but here's a long list of excuses why I can't buy the best-performing GPU on the market.

Just on your first point alone, the power draw isn't even that much of an issue. The card is not consistently pulling 450-600w unless you've got the power target wacked right up on a 600w board.

What's wrong with that, too many thoughts at once? At a certain point common sense kicks in for most people because affordability does not automatically equate value and I can say the same, I can comfortably afford any gpu and have money to spare but I've never been an elitist or a money waster either. I play consoles and games since I was a kid and I'm happy to play regardless of graphics, recently played fire emblem three hopes on the nintendo switch and diofield chronicles on my PS5 before I move onto other strategy games like triangle strategy or other action games like wo long and god of war ragnarok. I can appreciate good graphics but lets be honest, video games are video games and they will still be fun on a cheaper card and still look good on a cheaper card too.

Anyone can have concerns about these cards and one of the major concerns may just be what balance you want to place on it when you want a good deal for what you actually intend to use it for. The 3080 was £649 on launch. You'd be fairly daft to think the 4080 is worth £1200 for example. Just because they tweaked a decent generational improvement however some people will just pay it regardless because they want to be more future proofed and this is the crap they've been dealt with. I don't blame them if they want to play the latest games but Nivida are supposed to improve generation over generation and I can understand a bit of a rise but the problem here is that the performance is now decent while the asking price is definitely not. We all know Nvidia hiked the price due to mining crash and then had left over 30 series to sell, they wanted to purposefully keep these at a higher price so they price gouged the 40 series. Those who are not desperate can look at this for what it is and make an informed decision of whether the market is in a good place or not.

I'd understand if this pricing was enough to put some people off for a year or two until the market cooled down from Nvidia's price scalping of it's less sensible customers. They're dangling old cards at RRP and new cards at hiked up prices, anyone can see that much. I'm just not hyped enough for it really, if they raise price then they need to make it worth it whereas dlss 3 sounds like it has issues with latency and artifacting at times. When I do buy a new machine (going to be a gaming laptop) it's going to have a lot of games that don't need 300fps fake frames as well. Warhammer Chaosgate Daemon hunters, Baldurs Gate 3, Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous, Diablo 4 etc. these will not majorly benefit from marketing hype, thus the asking price is not justified. If you're buying a 4090 it's closer to what the 3090 price was but the same principles definitely applied, Nvidia had overstock and you're paying them a premium because they produced too many old things you're not even buying. It all comes down to this, can I afford it? Yes. Would I buy it if I am not impressed and have alternatives? Still could do but I'm just not in a rush. May as well let the prices drop on the first good offer really and let AMD hopefully shake up the pricing from Nvidia.

 

[Angilion]

The power still too high.

That's because the default settings have been set to sacrifice all efficiency in the pursuit of performance. It's way out of its efficient range at default settings. With enough cooling and suitable power management hardware on the board it's possible to jack up the power usage of a graphics card by a large margin in pursuit of performance but it's very much a case of diminishing returns. Seems to work for selling cards at inflated prices, though. Magic bignumbers does the trick. Even if half of the frames are just completely estimates, not rendered at all, and the other half are partially estimates.

Well, that's not what you said.

And most people can afford £2300 if they want to. It is a question of priority rather than how they actually fund it. Many people would prefer to put it towards a nicer car, settee, spend it on the kitchen, and so on. Not many people will prioritise gaming to that extent.

I'm not criticising those people who do prioritise gaming, I am just saying that I think your comment was rather silly.

I don't think most people can afford £2300 as a discretionary payment for a luxury version of an item when something with very similar (and more than adequate) functionality is available at much less than half the price. Whether that's a graphics card, a settee or whatever.

Personally, I'm in a very fortunate position and I could pay £2300 for a graphics card without it having any effect on my finances at all. But I won't. Partly because it's a blatant insult to inflate prices that much and partly because I think the runaway inflation of PC gaming hardware will kill the entire market if it continues and I won't be part of the problem.

If I was in such a fortunate position that I could pay £20,000 for a toy and not care at all about it, that £20,000 was a trivial amount of money to me, then I might pay £2300 for a graphics card. But probably not even then.

 

[andybird123]

The 4090 price isn't the problem, as every generation Nvidia always do a halo card with too much vram and a stupid price. The problem is we've become accustomed to a cut down version xx80 for half the price but 80-90% of the performance in most practical gaming situations, and this time they decided to instead to relabel the 4070 as a 4080 and the 4060 they nearly tried to palm off as also a 4080. The 4090 or Titan type cards aren't the issue, it's the fact that they completey removed an entire tier of card (the real 4080) and tried to palm us off with a 4070 at £1200.

At least the market have made it clear they aren't going to pay £900 for a 4060, but they are still probably going to try labelling it a 4070 and trying to get £700 for it.

Some people will always pay the top price for the top card and that's kind of ok, but it's the fact that Nvidia are trying to palm off the previous gen as the lower tier and stack all the new cards over them that is deplorable. And luckily it looks as though most people are not going to be that stupid.

 

[BigBANGtheory]

The 4090 price isn't the problem, as every generation Nvidia always do a halo card with too much vram and a stupid price. The problem is we've become accustomed to a cut down version xx80 for half the price but 80-90% of the performance in most practical gaming situations, and this time they decided to instead to relabel the 4070 as a 4080 and the 4060 they nearly tried to palm off as also a 4080. The 4090 or Titan type cards aren't the issue, it's the fact that they completey removed an entire tier of card (the real 4080) and tried to palm us off with a 4070 at £1200.

At least the market have made it clear they aren't going to pay £900 for a 4060, but they are still probably going to try labelling it a 4070 and trying to get £700 for it.

Some people will always pay the top price for the top card and that's kind of ok, but it's the fact that Nvidia are trying to palm off the previous gen as the lower tier and stack all the new cards over them that is deplorable. And luckily it looks as though most people are not going to be that stupid.

Can you separate the two though? the halo product (which frankly the 4090 isn't because we know there are bigger AD102 dies) is used as a mechanism to inflate the lower tier products.

Nvidia wants the same margins on all their products whilst simultaneously pushing the top end.

Someone on these forums the other day was saying they would skip the 4xxx series this generation because they felt it was too expensive... and they owned a 3090! Utter cabbage you couldn't make it up, they probably had a 2080Ti before as well.

 

[Grim5]

The 4090 price isn't the problem, as every generation Nvidia always do a halo card with too much vram and a stupid price. The problem is we've become accustomed to a cut down version xx80 for half the price but 80-90% of the performance in most practical gaming situations, and this time they decided to instead to relabel the 4070 as a 4080 and the 4060 they nearly tried to palm off as also a 4080. The 4090 or Titan type cards aren't the issue, it's the fact that they completey removed an entire tier of card (the real 4080) and tried to palm us off with a 4070 at £1200.

At least the market have made it clear they aren't going to pay £900 for a 4060, but they are still probably going to try labelling it a 4070 and trying to get £700 for it.

Some people will always pay the top price for the top card and that's kind of ok, but it's the fact that Nvidia are trying to palm off the previous gen as the lower tier and stack all the new cards over them that is deplorable. And luckily it looks as though most people are not going to be that stupid.

The 4090 doesn't have too much vram. It's actually capable of playing some modern games at native 8k 60fps and from what I've seen these games use between 15 and 22gb of vram at this resolution so don't say 24gb is too much

 

[Grim5]

Here, playable 8k performance in a good looking game.

Look at VRAM usage, 24gb is well worth it for the 3090 class card

 

[Purgatory]

The 4090 doesn't have too much vram. It's actually capable of playing some modern games at native 8k 60fps and from what I've seen these games use between 15 and 22gb of vram at this resolution so don't say 24gb is too much

Someone on these forums the other day was saying they would skip the 4xxx series this generation because they felt it was too expensive... and they owned a 3090! Utter cabbage you couldn't make it up, they probably had a 2080Ti before as well.

I own a pair of 3090s in NVLINK and think the 4090 FE MSRP is too expensive, for UK customers it is now £300 ($100 more for USA and €500 more for EU countries) more than a 3090 FE @ £1400 msrp and has same VRAM 24GB and the same uplift from 2080ti to 3090 in raster. So yes it is over priced considering they removed NVLINK, kept same VRAM size and kept to older DP 1.4 where it should have been DP 2.0 or 2.1 now and also PCIE 4 while we have PCIE 5 cpus and motherboards. So really they have not made a huge leap apart from performance same uplift from previous which we should be happy because they will go back to giving us 25%-30% as normal.

 

[Insanties_birth]

The 4090 price isn't the problem, as every generation Nvidia always do a halo card with too much vram and a stupid price. The problem is we've become accustomed to a cut down version xx80 for half the price but 80-90% of the performance in most practical gaming situations, and this time they decided to instead to relabel the 4070 as a 4080 and the 4060 they nearly tried to palm off as also a 4080. The 4090 or Titan type cards aren't the issue, it's the fact that they completey removed an entire tier of card (the real 4080) and tried to palm us off with a 4070 at £1200.

At least the market have made it clear they aren't going to pay £900 for a 4060, but they are still probably going to try labelling it a 4070 and trying to get £700 for it.

Some people will always pay the top price for the top card and that's kind of ok, but it's the fact that Nvidia are trying to palm off the previous gen as the lower tier and stack all the new cards over them that is deplorable. And luckily it looks as though most people are not going to be that stupid.

There's a reason EVGA left the scene entirely, Nvidia are just not respectable any more for their business practices. If there was only one bit of evidence it could be brushed off but EVGA left because of their arrogance, the 4080 misadvertising / mis-selling attempt with the shady naming, the price fixing on the 30 series and 40 series with drip fed cards and using each other to justify mining level prices due to Nvidia's over prodcution of 30 series, the dodgy benchmarks on release trying to show none like for like comparisons and avoiding showing the normal performance etc. Then they was locking out the 30 series owners from having the DLSS3 to push their higher prices, they say its all about the performance but can you really give them the benefit of the doubt that they tried on that one? Considering these other shady practices and bad behaviour lately it's hard to assess Nvidia as trustworthy in that manner. Like I always say, I don't blame the gamers for wanting to simply have fun and buy the options in front of them, I do blame Nvidia for manufacturing a con game and treating fans and board partners alike with disdain though. It would just be nice if people had the sense to not feed the demon that wants to corrupt the market. That's always a hard sell though, consumers primary goal is rarely to be informed or to avoid manipulation, when companies realised this they tested tolerances over and over until they realised how malleable peoples common sense was. Like you say, they would have us paying £1200 for a 4080 equivalent, £900 for a blooming 4070 and probably £600 for a 4060. Nvidia are losers at present and we can only hope they learn to be better.

 

[andybird123]

There's a reason EVGA left the scene entirely, Nvidia are just not respectable any more for their business practices. If there was only one bit of evidence it could be brushed off but EVGA left because of their arrogance, the 4080 misadvertising / mis-selling attempt with the shady naming, the price fixing on the 30 series and 40 series with drip fed cards and using each other to justify mining level prices due to Nvidia's over prodcution of 30 series, the dodgy benchmarks on release trying to show none like for like comparisons and avoiding showing the normal performance etc. Then they was locking out the 30 series owners from having the DLSS3 to push their higher prices, they say its all about the performance but can you really give them the benefit of the doubt that they tried on that one? Considering these other shady practices and bad behaviour lately it's hard to assess Nvidia as trustworthy in that manner. Like I always say, I don't blame the gamers for wanting to simply have fun and buy the options in front of them, I do blame Nvidia for manufacturing a con game and treating fans and board partners alike with disdain though. It would just be nice if people had the sense to not feed the demon that wants to corrupt the market. That's always a hard sell though, consumers primary goal is rarely to be informed or to avoid manipulation, when companies realised this they tested tolerances over and over until they realised how malleable peoples common sense was. Like you say, they would have us paying £1200 for a 4080 equivalent, £900 for a blooming 4070 and probably £600 for a 4060. Nvidia are losers at present and we can only hope they learn to be better.

I seriously hope AMD don't follow their previous pattern of just copying nvidia's pricing and actually use this opportunity to give Nvidia a kick in the teeth for it.
And I actually own shares in nvidia. But Nvidia seriously need a lesson on being competitive and not just ripping people off.

The 4090 doesn't have too much vram. It's actually capable of playing some modern games at native 8k 60fps and from what I've seen these games use between 15 and 22gb of vram at this resolution so don't say 24gb is too much

I'm sure those handful of people running a £4k 8K monitor for gaming, or £12k TV will be very grateful. You know full well what I meant so I don't really get what just being argumentative gets you.
I can guarantee you 90% of the people buying a 4090 are not running 8K monitors, they just aren't.

 

[gerardfraser]

EDIT: real PC game performance,Iposted a screen at first with voltages and waatts but that is not real .Screen with 3000Core 12000 memory PC gameplay at 4K max ray tracing setting.I hope I do not offend tow with my speiling

 

[Naff8000]

So buy a £2000 GPU but then dont run it at maximum performance. Makes sense. Bit like our Government.

The price is ridiculous but the maximum performance part is irrelevant. If you can run it at far less power for only small drops in performance then why not. The performance per watt increases would be insane vs 3000 series

I seriously hope AMD don't follow their previous pattern of just copying nvidia's pricing and actually use this opportunity to give Nvidia a kick in the teeth for it.
And I actually own shares in nvidia. But Nvidia seriously need a lesson on being competitive and not just ripping people off.

We all hate their prices but what lesson are you referring to? Companies profit maximise by default, not say hey we want less money. Their products have been good enough to get away with it. Competition to nvidia doesn't come from nvidia

 

[Type_R]

I am still trying to work out how someone who can afford £2300 (everyone in this thread clearly..as a matter of fact easily!) is worried about 600W of power consumption

 

[netarangi]

I am still trying to work out how someone who can afford £2300 (everyone in this thread clearly..as a matter of fact easily!) is worried about 600W of power consumption

Credit card debt + increased power use sucks

 

[jonneymendoza]

Eh come again?

What does the temp of the GPU have to do with heat output? Your previous reply already said it uses ~100W more than your 3090.

That is:
Your 3090 has around 335W of heat output.
Your 4090 has around 435W of heat output.

What temperate they exhausted air comes out at is pretty much meaningless.

This. Well spotted.

The 4090 uses more heat output then a 3090.

 

[jonneymendoza]

I am still trying to work out how someone who can afford £2300 (everyone in this thread clearly..as a matter of fact easily!) is worried about 600W of power consumption

They probably was able to afford that 2300 item due to having had a lower mortgage interest rates and previously bargain bin energy costs just a year ago

 

[andybird123]

We all hate their prices but what lesson are you referring to? Companies profit maximise by default, not say hey we want less money. Their products have been good enough to get away with it. Competition to nvidia doesn't come from nvidia

That trying to release mainstream products of a tier that was previously $700-800 and then trying to tap $1200 is a bad idea that consumers won't like. I'm hoping thats the tipping point where consumers actually do step in and say no. (the stuff that happened with the 3000 series was due to mining so I'm hoping it was miners paying the inflated prices and not actual gamers, as that seems bonkers). If AMD step in and release a near performance xx80 type card in the usual xx80 price bracket, when nvidia are sat there are $1200, hopefully the loss of market share will actually get nvidia to rethink themselves.

 

[Greebo]

So buy a £2000 GPU but then dont run it at maximum performance. Makes sense. Bit like our Government.

I disagree. Its been shown by lots of people that you can run the 4090 at 60-70% power for 95% of the performance which is still 80% faster than the 3090 and will be using less power and generating less heat.

Nvidia turned the dial up to max with the 4090 and left no overclocking headroom unlike the 3090.

They could have released a smaller, less powerful card which was 95% as fast if they had wanted to. Which does make me wonder how scared they are of AMD.

 

[Greebo]

I am still trying to work out how someone who can afford £2300 (everyone in this thread clearly..as a matter of fact easily!) is worried about 600W of power consumption

I have passed comment on this often by comparing it to somebody buying a £300k supercar and then is concerned over the 9mpg the car does to the gallon.