Cant believe people are happy paying over £1300+ on a 5080 for less performance against a 5090 than a than 3070 delivered against a 3090Since the 4090 had too many 40%+ leads and the 16 GB became an issue, can't be high end if you have to slum it like the peasants and drop down textures/pool to not have the game stall. It was also closer to the 4070 Ti than to the 4090, and the difference was made worse with the Supers. With the 50 series the x80 is even further below the x90. The issue is the x90 lead keeps growing and the other models just stagnate, it used to be only the case for the budget range (started with the GTX 950) but it has now migrated to everything that's not the literal best. It's easy to be confused by the pricing, but unfortunately the 5080 is now just upper mid-range (hence even AMD, the eternal mid-rangers, can get close with the 9070 XT). Again - how can a card with half the cores, half the memory, half the bandwidth be in the same tier as the full fat version?

AMD isn't much better either when just 4 years ago when their sub £600 card got you much closer to flagship performance than what it does now

Last edited: