• 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.

NVIDIA 4000 Series

Caporegime
Joined
8 Sep 2005
Posts
26,879
Location
Utopia
I plan to do both. I currently game at 1440p on a 165hz monitor. Whilst my 5700xt has been serving me largely fine for that purpose, I would also like to game at 4K on a LG C2 (Dual monitor setup ; 1440p for work/competitive gaming and OLED for story games/immersion). As said, that obviously points to the next gen. The problem is, I'm a rather impatient person for one, and secondly, am concerned about using a new gen at launch that will require DDR5 and would possibly be susceptible to reliability issues of the new socket/gen. Another option I've been flirting with is staying on AM4 and going 5800X3D and then just upgrading the GPU to a 4000 series or 7000 AMD. That would save me having to get a new motherboard and RAM and should still fully push a next gen GPU seeing as we may be looking at 'only' a 10-15% increase on next gen CPU's (probably around 10% compared to 5800X3D).

I'm probably just being impatient and overly tight though. Going full next gen is very likely the best option. Although I doubt I would have the patience to wait for a 3D 7000 series chip as I highly doubt that will be available until some time after original launch of the new gen. Would probably just go with a 7900x or something.
The very best option is to wait for second gen on AM5 to get an even larger jump and DDR5 with much tighter timings. But there's no way in hell I'm waiting that long.
The 5800X3D +4000 would then be the 'cheaper' option although you very likely need a PSU too.
 
Associate
Joined
5 Jan 2004
Posts
1,539
Hi lads, I need some advice. Current PC is verrrry old (970 gtx old) and I don't' really game on it anymore. I was going to buy a new PC a while ago when I managed to get my hand on a 3070 but decided to return it as I had bought a 48" oled as a third monitor for my set up and the 40 series weren't that far away. Currently I have x2 24" 1080p lcd monitors that's mostly for work and a third 48" oled (not currently connect to my pc though it is on my desk) that's for media and consoles. I really do want to start playing PC games again but on the oled in 4k. My 2 options are buy a 3090 now or wait for a 4080 for my new build. I keep flipping between the 2. My impulse side says get a 3090 and start playing asap but my sensible side says 4080 would be better. What do you guys think?

Side note, I'm not looking to replace the x2 1080p monitors as they are perfect in size and usability for my current layout and so want to keep them for now.

Cheers
 
Associate
Joined
29 Oct 2019
Posts
799
Hi lads, I need some advice. Current PC is verrrry old (970 gtx old) and I don't' really game on it anymore. I was going to buy a new PC a while ago when I managed to get my hand on a 3070 but decided to return it as I had bought a 48" oled as a third monitor for my set up and the 40 series weren't that far away. Currently I have x2 24" 1080p lcd monitors that's mostly for work and a third 48" oled (not currently connect to my pc though it is on my desk) that's for media and consoles. I really do want to start playing PC games again but on the oled in 4k. My 2 options are buy a 3090 now or wait for a 4080 for my new build. I keep flipping between the 2. My impulse side says get a 3090 and start playing asap but my sensible side says 4080 would be better. What do you guys think?

Side note, I'm not looking to replace the x2 1080p monitors as they are perfect in size and usability for my current layout and so want to keep them for now.

Cheers
4080 is likely to be 50% faster and significantly cheaper than a 3090, I'd wait a few months for the 4080.
 
Caporegime
Joined
8 Sep 2005
Posts
26,879
Location
Utopia
Hi lads, I need some advice. Current PC is verrrry old (970 gtx old) and I don't' really game on it anymore. I was going to buy a new PC a while ago when I managed to get my hand on a 3070 but decided to return it as I had bought a 48" oled as a third monitor for my set up and the 40 series weren't that far away. Currently I have x2 24" 1080p lcd monitors that's mostly for work and a third 48" oled (not currently connect to my pc though it is on my desk) that's for media and consoles. I really do want to start playing PC games again but on the oled in 4k. My 2 options are buy a 3090 now or wait for a 4080 for my new build. I keep flipping between the 2. My impulse side says get a 3090 and start playing asap but my sensible side says 4080 would be better. What do you guys think?

Side note, I'm not looking to replace the x2 1080p monitors as they are perfect in size and usability for my current layout and so want to keep them for now.

Cheers
It depends if you want to start playing games now or in 6 months (or more if the card supply is hoovered up by scalpers). The more affordable the card, the more competition there will be for the initial launch supply.
 
Associate
Joined
5 Jan 2004
Posts
1,539
Yeah thought as much, the 4080 be the best option. My impulse side wants to play now but the ps5 and Xbox can keep me busy for 6 months, so the 4080 it is. Well, I say that but if the 3090 drops lower....I have very poor impulse control. Cheers for the advice.
 
Associate
Joined
4 May 2012
Posts
73
The 5800X3D +4000 would then be the 'cheaper' option although you very likely need a PSU too.

Yeah, it’s a tough decision tbh. I’ll probably wait for September 15th and see what sort of IPC increase we can expect. I would ideally like to fully upgrade to next gen, but as said, depends on a few things

Either way, I’ll be going for 4090 or AMD equivalent. Hopefully we’ll have those in October, fingers crossed
 
Associate
Joined
4 May 2012
Posts
73
The other thing to consider is that I only have a B450 Tomahawk Max. Not sure how much the next gen will saturate the PCIE, but that’s another factor to consider. Plus it only has 1 NVME slot.

I think it’s very likely I’ll full upgrade to AM5 and 4000/7000, unless the availability is shocking (shouldn’t be) or there isn’t a worthwhile IPC increase. Even if the latter happens and I stay AM4, I’m still stuck with PCIE3 lanes and a dead end socket. So I’d be trading a lower upgrade cost ‘now’ with another cost later when I have to upgrade to DDR5 etc later anyway.

My setup (3600 and 5700xt) is a tricky position because it’s just in the middle of mid range and approaching lower end. An upgrade to 5800x3D is tempting as a result, but is it ‘enough’ when we are approaching next gen? Debatable.

If you go lower end like the poster above, the decision is much simpler. Going from a 970, I’d just upgrade now as the uplift in performance would be massive
 
Associate
Joined
4 May 2012
Posts
73
Hi lads, I need some advice. Current PC is verrrry old (970 gtx old) and I don't' really game on it anymore. I was going to buy a new PC a while ago when I managed to get my hand on a 3070 but decided to return it as I had bought a 48" oled as a third monitor for my set up and the 40 series weren't that far away. Currently I have x2 24" 1080p lcd monitors that's mostly for work and a third 48" oled (not currently connect to my pc though it is on my desk) that's for media and consoles. I really do want to start playing PC games again but on the oled in 4k. My 2 options are buy a 3090 now or wait for a 4080 for my new build. I keep flipping between the 2. My impulse side says get a 3090 and start playing asap but my sensible side says 4080 would be better. What do you guys think?

Side note, I'm not looking to replace the x2 1080p monitors as they are perfect in size and usability for my current layout and so want to keep them for now.

Cheers

Ahh. Didn’t see you want to do 4K. If that’s the case, like me, you’re probably better off waiting for the next gen. 3090/3090TI are capable of 4k60 on most titles, but if like me you have a 4k120 OLED, even the 3090Ti won’t push that frame rate in nearly all titles

I think we’re probably looking at another two gens before we see 4K being pushable with midrange setups, but I would hope the 4000/7000 series gpus will be able to push 4K 120 in ‘most’ titles with the highest sku’s (4080/4090 and 7900xt/7950xt) etc
 
Associate
Joined
3 Dec 2020
Posts
29
Location
London
I agree. I think this time around Nvidia will insist on having several thousand in stock on launch day in each country, tens of thousands for the bigger countries etc. That, coupled with higher prices, no lockdown, global recession, should mean it'll be possible to get the high end cards on launch day.

4080 = £850
4090 = £1600

Those are my estimates. Days of the £650 3080 (that many people got via FE from Nvidia) are gone, Nvidia won't make that mistake again.

4070 and lower will be hard to get for weeks/months though I suspect, as these are the cards the majority can afford to purchase and run, factoring in electricity costs and PSU requirements etc.

My estimates around 15% higher than 30 series on that climate.

4080 = £750 especially after they downgrade to make more room for Ti
4090 = £1600

Hope 4070 wont be the new 3080 for waiting times..
 
Soldato
Joined
28 Oct 2009
Posts
2,718
Location
Birmingham
I agree. I think this time around Nvidia will insist on having several thousand in stock on launch day in each country, tens of thousands for the bigger countries etc. That, coupled with higher prices, no lockdown, global recession, should mean it'll be possible to get the high end cards on launch day.

4080 = £850
4090 = £1600

Those are my estimates. Days of the £650 3080 (that many people got via FE from Nvidia) are gone, Nvidia won't make that mistake again.

4070 and lower will be hard to get for weeks/months though I suspect, as these are the cards the majority can afford to purchase and run, factoring in electricity costs and PSU requirements etc.

Nvidia have competition can't just price what they like , my guess 4080 £700-£750 can tag me if I'm wrong :)
 
Associate
Joined
22 Nov 2018
Posts
2,405
Nvidia have competition can't just price what they like , my guess 4080 £700-£750 can tag me if I'm wrong :)

What do you mean? Nvidia ALWAYS price what they like and the consumer ALWAYS chooses Nvidia over the competition. Nvidia currently have 83% market share I believe, despite being more expensive. The majority clearly dont watch benchmarks or read reviews, otherwise there wouldn't be that much of a disparity between the two company's. The 4080 probably will cost around £750 but the competition will be less. The consumer doesn't want value, they want an Nvidia GPU.

AMD will offer better pricing next gen, yet I guarantee Nvidia will get more sales. The same will happen with the 50 series and the 60 series etc.
 
Last edited:

HRL

HRL

Associate
Joined
22 Nov 2005
Posts
2,495
Location
Devon
What do you mean? Nvidia ALWAYS price what they like and the consumer ALWAYS chooses Nvidia over the competition. Nvidia currently have 83% market share I believe, despite being more expensive. The majority clearly dont watch benchmarks or read reviews, otherwise there wouldn't be that much of a disparity between the two company's. The 4080 probably will cost around £750 but the competition will be less. The consumer doesn't want value, they want an Nvidia GPU.

AMD will offer better pricing next gen, yet I guarantee Nvidia will get more sales. The same will happen with the 50 series and the 60 series etc.

Pretty sure the 6800XT was about the same price as the 3080FE at launch, no?

I would have opted for an AMD card if their RT had been up to scratch but it wasn’t as good so went for Nvidia.

If a like for like product, like those two examples, are priced the same then most would have gone for the card with the better feature set, e.g. RT. AMD shot themselves in the foot this gen as their raster performance was very good, and in the odd instance superior, if RT had been level too then they would have sold far more IMO. I would have taken a punt at least.
 
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,844
Pretty sure the 6800XT was about the same price as the 3080FE at launch, no?

I would have opted for an AMD card if their RT had been up to scratch but it wasn’t as good so went for Nvidia.

If a like for like product, like those two examples, are priced the same then most would have gone for the card with the better feature set, e.g. RT. AMD shot themselves in the foot this gen as their raster performance was very good, and in the odd instance superior, if RT had been level too then they would have sold far more IMO. I would have taken a punt at least.
Well said.

IIRC, 6800xt was £590-600? IMO, the extra £50 for a 3080 was well worth it, getting similar raster (win some, lose some) but much better RT as well as DLSS.

Having no dlss competitor either didn't help and arguably fsr 2 is still playing catchup and possibly will be for another few months imo.

This is the first time I have gone with nvidia in years, since the 8800 days, everything since then had been amd as they simply were the kings for bang per buck but nvidia in the last few years have been leading the way with some game changing tech imo, at least getting there "first", enthusiast pc gamers don't want to be waiting months/years for said tech., which imo is why nvidia largely have the market by the balls, that and unfortunately amds "bad driver" days still tarnish them even though their drivers have been very good for the past 4-5 years imo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HRL
Top Bottom