CES 2025 AMD & Nvidia Keynote Live Chat [06/01/25]

[Tinek]

I'll look at the reviews the day before I guess. If a 5080 is mostly 4090 performance with a grand in my pocket, that may be the better option after all.

Or 5070Ti when the arrives as it seems to be just below 5080, with same vRAM and should be considerably cheaper. That said,I highly doubt 5080 will be on 4090 level of performance but independent benchmarks should confirm - as long as they are done properly and it's not just dlss4 advert

 

[Octoplex7]

I'm starting to think there might be a genuine opening for AMD here, under certain narrow conditions:
1. The 5070 is around a 4070ti in raster.
2. The 9070xt is around a 7900xt in raster.
3. The 9070xt is 400 quid.

That would make the AMD card 10% more powerful, with 16gb of VRAM (as opposed to just 12gb) and 100 quid cheaper. For me, a 500 quid card with only 12gb of VRAM in 2025 is DOA. If AMD can still make a profit at 400, they have a real opportunity for success.

 

[chaparral]

I'll look at the reviews the day before I guess. If a 5080 is mostly 4090 performance with a grand in my pocket, that may be the better option after all.

But you won't be getting a grand in your pocket

You sold a 4090 for £1699 , But a 5080 is going cost you more then £699

 

[Hostile_18]

But you won't be getting a grand in your pocket

You sold a 4090 for £1699 , But a 5080 is going cost you more then £699

I've got the 2k set aside for a while now. I'd be paying myself the other 300 lol.

 

[KNiVES]

The more you save, the more you save.

 

[Sedgey123]

Also if the FE is £1939 then you can pretty much guess that the cheapest AIB is going to be £2050-2100 and more expensive ones up to £2500... if i remember correctly it was £1699 for an FE 4090 and i ended up paying £1910 for a gigabyte gaming OC from overclockers on launch day

 

[Grim5]

The more you save, the more you save.

The more money you save, the more money you buy

 

[Hostile_18]

Also if the FE is £1939 then you can pretty much guess that the cheapest AIB is going to be £2050-2100 and more expensive ones up to £2500... if i remember correctly it was £1699 for an FE 4090 and i ended up paying £1910 for a gigabyte gaming OC from overclockers on launch day

If it's like last time I think AIBs have to offer one sku (nearly always the none oc) at MSRP for launch.

 

[Sedgey123]

If it's like last time I think AIBs have to offer one sku (nearly always the none oc) at MSRP for launch.

Didn't realise that was a thing to be honest

 

[jonneymendoza]

yes around 30% improvement for the 5090
edit: i will go by the timespy benchmarks till we are on dx12, as a fair indicator of performance

wait what? 5090rtx has a 30% increase in rasta performance vs the 4090? Link? source?

 

[Sedgey123]

wait what? 5090rtx has a 30% increase in rasta performance vs the 4090? Link? source?

There isn't obviously anything 100% confirming it, but educated guesses from the slides they showed, the difference in cuda cores, both are 4Nm etc

 

[Nitefly]

wait what? 5090rtx has a 30% increase in rasta performance vs the 4090? Link? source?

I don’t think anybody knows for sure, it’s just extrapolation from the spec sheet:

GPU	RTX 4090	RTX 5090
CUDA Cores	16,384	21,760
Core Frequency	2.23 GHz	2.01 GHz
Boost Core Frequency	2.52 GHZ	2.41 GHZ
Memory Capacity / Type	24 GB GDDR6X	32 GB GDDR7
Memory Bandwidth	1008 GB/s	1792 GB/s
Memory Interface	384-bit	512-bit
Memory Clock	21 Gbps	28 Gbps
TGP	450W	575 W

Ignoring all the DLSS stuff the 4090 is still absolutely dominated by the 5090, other than the 5% drop in boost clocks. I’d be very surprised if it’s only a 20% gain, but you never know!

By the time we’re seeing above 24g vram usage as standard and the 5090 pulls ahead significantly, it’ll probably be 4 years time and these cards may both be outdated compared to the new top end.

 

[Grim5]

It may be "dominated" by the numbers in the table but many of these numbers have little to no impact on performance.

Memory clock, bit rate and power draw don't matter, what does matter is bandwidth, and yes it's hugely higher but I'm not convinced it's needed unless you are a 8k gamer. Memory capacity also doesn't matter

Then for core count, it's a 30% increase and a 5% decrease in clocks, for a net 25% improvement. As we saw with the 4090 each extra 1 core you add on Nvidia cards doesn't add 1 unit more performance, so this net 25% won't be 25% more gaming rasterisation

 

[Rroff]

Until tested side by side you can't really account for any architecture changes, optimisations and so on even at the same terraflops, etc. numbers effectively utilisation of those stats can change.

 

[Grim5]

Until tested side by side you can't really account for any architecture changes, optimisations and so on even at the same terraflops, etc. numbers effectively utilisation of those stats can change.

I think if there was changes Jensen would have announced it. All he mentioned was changes to AI and RT cores, he never said they improved Cuda cores or Rasterisation performance

In previous generations when they improved the Cuda cores they announced proudly and the last time this happened was in the RTX3000 series and Jensen was proud to tell you how they improved rasterisation by updated Cuda cores architecture