• 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

tommybhoy said:
Ampere was better priced because Turning sales fell off a cliff after NV doubled the price for the 80Ti.


It's nowhere close to the 4080 experience though, it's Streaming and all the downfalls that brings from considerably reduced IQ and stuttering and that's only if you have really fast internet to begin with.
Click to expand...

And knowing how Nvidia marketing works what you're actually getting is an RTX 4060 with all the DLSS crancked up.....
 
Joxeon said:
Sticking with what I have till the 5000 series, these supers are still priced far to high for what they offer and could end up be replaced in as little as 9 months.

The 4080 super is only 3% faster than the original 4080 according to Nvidia and that card has been available for 1k for a while now so in the grand scheme nothing has really changed.

The 4070ti super is a better deal now because it’s on the 103 but almost £800 in 2024 is still a lot for a card that only looks to be around 30% faster than a 3080 from 2020.

I stuck it out despite being temped when Nvidia released the Turing supers, OCUK had a Xmas 2019 offer on the KFA 2070 super for £435 which offered 35% more performance than my 1070ti at the time. Waited 9 months and ended up getting 3080 for £650 which was 136% faster than the 1070ti.
Click to expand...
Pretty much where I'm at. I don't look at benchmark numbers, I look at how with the rest of my hardware, how much difference will I actually see and feel. And running at 1440p with a G-Sync monitor and the rest of this set up, for what it'd cost and the improvement in what I would see and feel, it's really not worth it for me with this current set of 4000 series cards.

Especially when this one cost me 649 quid. As a famous football manager once said, "No value in the market!".
 
t2na said:
How do you sell out of GeForce Now..?!
Click to expand...

Marketing department gets involved.

RavenXXX2 said:
2080ti was a turd as well. Why you think ampere was better priced bar the stupid 3090.
Click to expand...

Take that back! The 3090 had 24gb of vram that allowed you to play FC6 with the optional texture pack! Not to mention came in handy a handful of times since!
 
Last edited:
t2na said:
How do you sell out of GeForce Now..?!
Click to expand...

Has anyone actually tried it, bar the visual quality drop vs a local machine it's as latency free as I could ever imagine cloud gaming, way ahead of anything offered by Xbox etc and it's closest competitor in performance is shadow.tech who is still not close to giving you the same gpu choices (granted it runs a full windows machine)
I can happily play fps games on there without an issue (The Finals, Warzone)
I got a sub for a friend so I could actually have someone play with me as their PC isn't good enough to run those two games.. so it's a quick fix solution so someone can play demanding games if they're stuck on old hardware, and don't know how to upgrade their hardware or whatever other reasons they may have.

If I wasn't so insistent on having a dedicated windows machine (for outside gaming reasons) geforce now is a nice solution at this point provided you have fast enough internet and the games you want to play are actually on there.
 
Last edited:
Personality+ said:
Has anyone actually tried it, bar the visual quality drop vs a local machine it's as latency free as I could ever imagine cloud gaming, way ahead of anything offered by Xbox etc and it's closest competitor in performance is shadow.tech who is still not close to giving you the same gpu choices (granted it runs a full windows machine)
I can happily play fps games on there without an issue (The Finals, Warzone)
I got a sub for a friend so I could actually have someone play with me as their PC isn't good enough to run those two games.. so it's a quick fix solution so someone can play demanding games if they're stuck on old hardware, and don't know how to upgrade their hardware or whatever other reasons they may have.

If I wasn't so insistent on having a dedicated windows machine (for outside gaming reasons) geforce now is a nice solution at this point provided you have fast enough internet and the games you want to play are actually on there.
Click to expand...

The problem i have with all of this, apart from the reduced image quality and latency is the idea of renting a GPU online, if i'm going to pay £600 over 3 years for a chunk of hardware then i want it to be mine, i want to be able to feel its waight in my hands, i also want to be able to pass it down to someone who needs it or part exchange it when it comes to upgrading.

You see no matter how close the experience of it might get to running a GPU locally in your own system the fact remains the moment you stop paying your recuring fees you no longer have access to it.

Its the same reason i don't like the idea of renting my Desktop over the Internet, if Microsoft ever dare to switch to cloud only Desktop i'm switching to Linux, i will becomes one of those Linux fanbois over night, because "I own nothing, have no privicy and life has never been better" sounds to me like an orwellien dystopia rather than something i should aspire to, i'm not an idiot, someone always owns something and make no mistake international corps would like it to be them, i'm not a Tiktok generation NPC sheep.
 
Last edited:
rumple9 said:
Isn't £240 a year for use of a 4080 4k/120fps a good deal? To buy one now costs £1000. Even over 3 years the rental works out at £720, whereas after 3 years you could probably sell a 4080 on ebay/cex for maybe £450, but you're only having to spend £20 per month. So £720 - £550 (£1000-£450)= £170 difference without the upfront outlay.

To put it in other words it costs around £170 more to rent the 4080 over 3 years than it costs to buy it outright after reselling it, equivalent to 5.6% interest per year (current average credit card rates are 22%).

I've said a few times on these forums that Nvidia are pricing their cards so high they are going to introduce something like PCP on cars to lock consumers into the company - but it seems they are going down the mobile phone sales model.

I bet if they did 4090 for £50 a month over 3 years (total £1800) most forum users would bite their hands off.
Click to expand...

Don't bring logic into this!

A lot of people will sadly dismiss it because it's "cloud streamed" (going of far lesser options like stadia, gamepass etc.) or/and because it's nvidia without having tested it themselves (specifically the ultimate tier as the other ones are ****) but as evidenced by people who have tried it themselves and even review sites, it is actually very good and offers some advantages over local pc gaming like no fan noise at all, no heat output, play on mac/mobile when travelling and so on.

Only reason I haven't renewed mine is the game choice isn't great for older games, I wasn't paying for 6 months when I wouldn't be using it and there were/are no games to justify the need of the 4080 outside of CP 2077 phantom liberty at the time.
 
Last edited:
RavenXXX2 said:
2080ti was a turd as well. Why you think ampere was better priced bar the stupid 3090.
Click to expand...

Turing was all about laying the foundations for RT and, whilst you can look back now and claim that, without it, we wouldn't be where we are now with it, at the time it was a total joke.

Barely any increase in rasterisation performance but huge price hikes. The first time a non-Titan card broke the £1k barrier I believe.

It's the one generation I skipped, hanging onto my 1080Ti and going straight to 3080.
 
Vertigo said:
Turing was all about laying the foundations for RT and, whilst you can look back now and claim that, without it, we wouldn't be where we are now with it, at the time it was a total joke.

Barely any increase in rasterisation performance but huge price hikes. The first time a non-Titan card broke the £1k barrier I believe.

It's the one generation I skipped, hanging onto my 1080Ti and going straight to 3080.
Click to expand...
As bad as Turing was that even those delivered a better price to performance uplift than most of the 40 series has and even now with the supers you’re only really getting back to parity with Turing V1.
 
humbug said:
2070 Super at about 65% faster than the 1070 it replaced for £50 more was a good deal.

Turing really wassn't bad at all, compare that ^^^ to RTX 4070 vs RTX 3070, 25% faster for £100 more.
Click to expand...
Can you have a look at AMD, I’m not sure they’re that much different to Nvidia.

6800 to 7800xt about 30% uplift for similar MSRPs.
 
humbug said:
2070 Super at about 65% faster than the 1070 it replaced for £50 more was a good deal.

Turing really wassn't bad at all, compare that ^^^ to RTX 4070 vs RTX 3070, 25% faster for £100 more.
Click to expand...

The 2070 SUPER replaced the 2070, not the 1070.

Not sure where you're getting 65% from. The original 2070 was about 30% faster than the 1070 and the SUPER about 13% faster again.
 
JediFragger said:
To make it fair you should be looking at 3070 to 4070 Super, not that I like defending Nvidia's awful pricing!!
Click to expand...

I will once they get reviewed, they will no doubt be an improvment, i still think the 7800XT is better, but lets see, as it is to me the 4070 none super is more in line with the 7700XT and £600 for a decent one of those is £150 too much.
 
pete910 said:
Not sure on perf difference but price wise.

6800 msrp at release $579 ( That's also not including adjustment for inflation)
7800xt msrp at release $499

So in nothing like Nvidia unless the 7800xt is a chunk slower than the previous gen 6800 .
Click to expand...
7800xt can be overclocked easily too like 10-12% so would be a match almost for the 4070ti vanilla in some games EXCEPT Cyberpunk where Nvidia rules.

So it’s actually cheaper than its predecessor which AMD stated from the off was the 6800 non xt.
 
Last edited:
GhostDog1981 said:
7800xt can be overclocked easily too like 10-12% so would be a match almost for the 4070ti vanilla in some games EXCEPT Cyberpunk where Nvidia rules.

So it’s actually cheaper than its predecessor which AMD stated from the off was the 6800 non xt.
Click to expand...

Right, overclocked its in line with a 4070Ti, this the Saphire Pulse, an £800 GPU :rolleyes: and it only overclocks 5%, so in real terms that £800 GPU is only 5% better in raster performance.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
Right, overclocked its in line with a 4070Ti, this the Saphire Pulse, an £800 GPU :rolleyes: and it only overclocks 5%, so in real terms that £800 GPU is only 5% better in raster performance.
Click to expand...
That £800 gpu will be more like £570 though now with the 4070 super, so now we’ll see how much people value better RT and features over 4gb of vram and a £100 saving.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom