-
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.
Do we really need a 5090 ?
- Thread starter Pooh
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Feb 2007
- Posts
- 15,706
- Location
- Sol
Save £100 per month and you can have one for spring 2025
I still reckon Around October next year, They likely released that slide showing spring 2025 to throw off competitors.
Nvidia’s current pricing strategy is only working because of AI, if those orders dry up then 2b a quarter on gaming GPUs ain’t going to go down well with shareholders.
Should be a grand tops for the top end, but now that's reserved for cards that are moved up a tier from their proper price\performance point.
2 tiers when you compare current cards hardware specs to that of ampere. A 4080 uses the same memory bus and a smaller die than a 3060ti yet cost £800 more, where’s the additional cost coming from as the actual hardware isn’t accounting for that much?
Last edited:
All it really comes down to IMO is covid, both players seen people paying out the arse for cards during that time period and thought to themselves, 'we'll have some of that'. Less for more.
Last edited:
Majority of people are not buying though which is why gaming revenue isn’t anywhere near 6 billion and that’s despite most of the cards seeing huge price increases for the same spec products as last gen.
Then they'll have to drop prices next go around, I know some cards have got some cuts, but still not reflective of their performance imo.
I think next gen pricing will hinge on what’s happening with AI.
More than likely.
I still think that expectations of at least the 5090 are overblown.
AD102 is over 600mm².
Despite the names, TSMC 3nm is only meant to bring 33% extra density vs their 5nm.
There are always overheads on new designs so at 600mm² any 5090 is unlikely to be more than 25% faster.
For cards below the halo '90, Nvidia have plenty of scope. At the cost of some margins!
Or have BW100 (AI and data centre only) and BW102 on 3nm, and the rest on the existing 3nm/4mm but using larger dies.
AD102 is over 600mm².
Despite the names, TSMC 3nm is only meant to bring 33% extra density vs their 5nm.
There are always overheads on new designs so at 600mm² any 5090 is unlikely to be more than 25% faster.
For cards below the halo '90, Nvidia have plenty of scope. At the cost of some margins!
Or have BW100 (AI and data centre only) and BW102 on 3nm, and the rest on the existing 3nm/4mm but using larger dies.
Yes, according to Todd:
"Uh… we did [optimise the game]," says Howard, as Phil Spencer fails to suppress a chuckle. "It's running great. It is a next gen PC game, we really do push the technology, so you may need to upgrade your PC..
However, like Fallout 4 and Skyrim before it, Starfield needs a CPU and fast memory subsystem upgrade before it needs a GPU upgrade.Yes, according to Todd:
"Uh… we did [optimise the game]," says Howard, as Phil Spencer fails to suppress a chuckle. "It's running great. It is a next gen PC game, we really do push the technology, so you may need to upgrade your PC..
Otherwise, the rendering thread has to wait for "other stuff™" and even GPUs far below a 4090 spend their time waiting.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 16,941
I'll be tempted with a 5090.
Racing and flight sims in VR is very demanding, not to mention future higher res headsets.
To be honest, I don't think even a 5090 is going to cope with some of them.
Running flight sim on a 4K headset like the rumoured 3840x3840 panels due out in 2024 will be around 61.13 million pixels (render res) compared to 8.2 million of a regular 4K monitor. That's a massive difference, even with eye tracking and foverated rendering it's still a big ask.
Remember, the 5090 is a super high-end gpu. It's not meant for gamers playing the likes of cod and fifa imho.
It's an easy question to answer though. What games are you playing, or plan on playing where a 4090 won't run at the detail/framerate you want.
Perhaps a better thread title would be "do you really need a 5090?"
Racing and flight sims in VR is very demanding, not to mention future higher res headsets.
To be honest, I don't think even a 5090 is going to cope with some of them.
Running flight sim on a 4K headset like the rumoured 3840x3840 panels due out in 2024 will be around 61.13 million pixels (render res) compared to 8.2 million of a regular 4K monitor. That's a massive difference, even with eye tracking and foverated rendering it's still a big ask.
Remember, the 5090 is a super high-end gpu. It's not meant for gamers playing the likes of cod and fifa imho.
It's an easy question to answer though. What games are you playing, or plan on playing where a 4090 won't run at the detail/framerate you want.
Perhaps a better thread title would be "do you really need a 5090?"
Last edited:
Someone claimed yesterday that 4090 was good value, it just shows how easily people can be manipulated just by making other products like the 4080 even worse.
Yes, according to Todd:
"Uh… we did [optimise the game]," says Howard, as Phil Spencer fails to suppress a chuckle. "It's running great. It is a next gen PC game, we really do push the technology, so you may need to upgrade your PC..
Is there a more empty phrase in gaming than "next gen"?
Last edited: