NVIDIA RTX 50 SERIES - Technical/General Discussion

[Ascendancy]

You can browse old Reddit threads and see this being discussed if you like.

It's funny because if you'd bought one of those cards at the inflated price you'd still be able to sell it today second hand and get all of your money back.

 

[harmattan]

Yes, it does.

It’s worth remembering that (I) we are just over a week into the 50 series launch (II) the 30 series was unobtanium for a very long time and (III) the 4090 AIB cards were similarly overpriced for a good time post-launch:

… and the above is significantly lower than the actual prices that some models were later sold for by OcUK:

You can browse old Reddit threads and see this being discussed if you like.

… I think it would be a bit ‘revisionist’ to say that cards being sold over MSRP at launch is exclusively a 50 series thing. It’s clearly not. Yes, the 50 series is suffering from additional supply shortage because of the Chinese new year release window and that is contributing to the situation.

There's an entirely different pricing dynamic occuring at present with 4090, one that is normal for EOL products but particularly acute this round, exasterbated by pressure from the 5090's near-complete lack of stock and mediocre price/performance. 4090 was, however, for months and months sold at near MSRP/RRP. If 5080 or 5090 ever reach near RRP in any significan volume during their lifecycle, I'll be extraordinarily surprised.

 

[Nitefly]

Charts like these are rather two-dimensional, and don't really tell the story over time: it's only showing you price/performance at present. A card that is two+ years newer, that is sold at the exact same price as it's predecessor in the same tier, should have significantly higher price/performance (~30% is normal). What we have is a measly 12% increase over 4080 Super. It's basically unprecendented in the history of graphics cards gen-on-gen improvements.

Moreover and importantly, it's time to call a spade a spade: 5080 (or 5090) will not be sold at RRP/MSRP in volume whereas nearly all those cards in the list were. This was the plan for nV which they kicked off with ADA, driven by them increasing BAP costs (and thereby cutting margins) for AIBs. It is not a £1000 card, more like £1200 - and it won't be sold at RRP in volume even after supply has stabilized. RRP is effectively something nV states to get consumers in the door -- it's the base trim model in the car shoeroom that's never available that exists soley to set a spring board for more expensive trims..

I’ve dealt with the ‘revisionist’ aspects of this in my previous post; the (good) 40 series cards were not sold at anywhere near MSRP at launch.

You can’t say “but the 50 series cards are overpriced now!” when the exact same thing was true for the 40 series and 30 series. It remains to be seen how this will play out in the coming months, we simply don’t know. But I seriously doubt there will be a high supply of, say, Gaming X Trios that are selling for £3k per piece in 3 months time.

In respect of the other side of your post, I’d like to borrow a meme posted by @mrk:

^^^ your position on the 50 series being poo is pretty much based on the first panel, looking at gen on gen increase. Buying just because it’s the ‘new gen’ would be pretty stupid, sure. In reality though, most people interested in the 50 series are buying on the basis of the second panel - they are getting a large performance uplift, because they don’t own 40 series cards.

 

[no_1_dave]

I think that chart asumes MSRP.

That's dictated by the consumer
I've never spent more than £25 over MSRP and that was to get a Palit 3080 when it launched, because the FE would not have fit in the case I had at the time

If people are willing to pay stupid prices companies will take advantage of that and charge stupid prices
All cards would be available at MSRP if people refused to pay extra. The graph has to use MSRP because it's unaffected by stupid decisions consumers make

IMO the 5080 should be more powerful, at least in line with a 4090, if not more.
But, it's still a very nice upgrade for anybody on a 30 series card or below!!

 

[Grim5]

I’ve dealt with the ‘revisionist’ aspects of this in my previous post; the (good) 40 series cards were not sold at anywhere near MSRP at launch.

You can’t say “but the 50 series cards are overpriced now!” when the exact same thing was true for the 40 series and 30 series. It remains to be seen how this will play out in the coming months, we simply don’t know. But I seriously doubt there will be a high supply of, say, Gaming X Trios that are selling for £3k per piece in 3 months time.

In respect of the other side of your post, I’d like to borrow a meme posted by @mrk:

^^^ your position on the 50 series being poo is pretty much based on the first panel, looking at gen on gen increase. Buying just because it’s the ‘new gen’ would be pretty stupid, sure. In reality though, most people interested in the 50 series are buying on the basis of the second panel - they are getting a large performance uplift, because they don’t own 40 series cards.

No doubt 50 series buyers are getting a bad deal if they are buying at oc uk's current pricing. Performance is fine if the price is at MSRP or less but not when the price of the GPU is 2x MSRP

 

[Nitefly]

It's funny because if you'd bought one of those cards at the inflated price you'd still be able to sell it today second hand and get all of your money back.

Nobody (sane) is buying second hand Strix 4090 for £2,300

IMO nobody (sane) would have bought it new at that price when it was brand new

 

[no_1_dave]

I’ve dealt with the ‘revisionist’ aspects of this in my previous post; the (good) 40 series cards were not sold at anywhere near MSRP at launch.

Actually the 4070/4080 were trashed hard in the reviews and were not selling at all.
Don't you remember all the stories of how nobody wanted them and there were shops full of them, only selling single digit numbers of them? There are lot's of youtube videos of it from back then.

The 4090 sold out, but within 3-4 months it was selling at MSRP.
The 4080/4070 had to go below MSRP before they started selling in half decent numbers

 

[Ascendancy]

Nobody (sane) is buying second hand Strix 4090 for £2,300

IMO nobody (sane) would have bought it new at that price when it was brand new

 

[StarShock]

so what you're saying is that right now the 5080 and 5090 are terrible price to performance and no one should buy them and all the reviewers are correct to call them out for the terrible price and poor uplift? I agree

If at some point they become much cheaper then we can re-evaluate.

 

[harmattan]

I’ve dealt with the ‘revisionist’ aspects of this in my previous post; the (good) 40 series cards were not sold at anywhere near MSRP at launch.

You can’t say “but the 50 series cards are overpriced now!” when the exact same thing was true for the 40 series and 30 series. It remains to be seen how this will play out in the coming months, we simply don’t know. But I seriously doubt there will be a high supply of, say, Gaming X Trios that are selling for £3k per piece in 3 months time.

In respect of the other side of your post, I’d like to borrow a meme posted by @mrk:

^^^ your position on the 50 series being poo is pretty much based on the first panel, looking at gen on gen increase. Buying just because it’s the ‘new gen’ would be pretty stupid, sure. In reality though, most people interested in the 50 series are buying on the basis of the second panel - they are getting a large performance uplift, because they don’t own 40 series cards.

The only consumer who can look at this in a vacuum -- which is effectively your arguement -- are people who don't own a previous-gen graphics card at all. Even if you were stepping up from a 30-series card e.g. 3080 to 5080, while the performance uptick is immense, it's still seriously disappointing since you could have essentially had near-parity in performance for the past 2 years -- and at the "same" (lower considering actual retail) price.

As for the polemic on pricing i.e. were/weren't previous gens sold near MSRP, they definitely were after prices were stabilized. I'm game for coming back to this thread a year from now to do some cost averaging on retail prices of 5080 and 5090 as I have a strong suspicison they will veer exceedingly further above MSRP on average than previous gens.

 

[Nitefly]

Actually the 4070/4080 were trashed hard in the reviews and were not selling at all.
Don't you remember all the stories of how nobody wanted them and there were shops full of them, only selling single digit numbers of them? There are lot's of youtube videos of it from back then.

The 4090 sold out, but within 3-4 months it was selling at MSRP.
The 4080/4070 had to go below MSRP before they started selling in half decent numbers

In the post you quoted, I did specifically + intentionally refer to the ‘good’ 40 series cards.

The 5070 and TI edition are up in the air as it stands, let’s see how they turn out.

Ditto, let’s see where the 5090s in end up in 3-4 months time. Yes, the low and mid-range 4090 AIBs did get close to MSRP in that timescale. The Suprims, Strix, and Aorus cards did not - they hovered around £2k with the Aorus then eventually dipping to high £1700s at its lowest in a sale. I’m not sure the Suprim or the Strix ever went significantly below £2k…? Not sure!

 

[StarShock]

As far as I can tell it’s really not that bad on the price / performance front:

In fact, going by that chart there isn’t a single card that can actually outperform the 5080 whilst offering better performance / price.

One thing that really stands out to me on this chart is the rx6600, cos yeah at 330 it's terrible value. But about a year and a half ago I got one for £150, at which point it tops the chart... so not a particularly useful chart

 

[Grim5]

The only consumer who can look at this in a vacuum -- which is effectively your arguement -- are people who don't own a previous-gen graphics card at all. Even if you were stepping up from a 30-series card e.g. 3080 to 5080, while the performance uptick is immense, it's still seriously disappointing since you could have essentially had near-parity in performance for the past 2 years -- and at the "same" (lower considering actual retail) price.

As for the polemic on pricing i.e. were/weren't previous gens sold near MSRP, they definitely were after prices were stabilized. I'm game for coming back to this thread a year from now to do some cost averaging on retail prices of 5080 and 5090 as I have a strong suspicison they will veer exceedingly further above MSRP on average than previous gens.

That's why price matters not just performance, as I've mentioned a number of times

5080s are selling for close to 1500, same price the 4090 was 2.5 years ago, and so someone who buys a 5080 at 1500 could have bought a 4090 2.5 years ago and enjoyed the same performance. The 5080 only makes sense if you can buy it for 1000 or less

 

[Nitefly]

so what you're saying is that right now the 5080 and 5090 are terrible price to performance and no one should buy them and all the reviewers are correct to call them out for the terrible price and poor uplift? I agree

If at some point they become much cheaper then we can re-evaluate.

Personally, I think the 5080 is fair for £1k. I think a good AIB for £1.2k would be ‘good’. Above that, less good. It probably won’t drop to that for some time.

Even at their non-inflated prices (e.g. gaming trio at £2.5) I think the 5090s are priced highly and I really don’t think that anyone buying a 5090 should be thinking of it as a value purchase.

I’ve pre-ordered a Suprim 5090 at £2,600 and I consider that an extravagant, opulent purchase.

One thing that really stands out to me on this chart is the rx6600, cos yeah at 330 it's terrible value. But about a year and a half ago I got one for £150, at which point it tops the chart... so not a particularly useful chart

The chart means what it means; value at MSRP.

If you’re able to beat the MSRP of any card and therefore get better value, that’s great. But I don’t think this really extends to any of the points being discussed in there thread though…? I’m not aware of many high end cards going for significantly less than MSRP.

 

[Grim5]

Not good guys, rtx5090 full load and the GPU side connector is hitting 90c and the PSU side connector is hitting 120+ degrees

Rtx5090 cards should have two power connectors; one is not enough headroom and it is playing with fire, literally

 

[Absolutely Clueless]

Not good guys, rtx5090 full load and the GPU side connector is hitting 90c and the PSU side connector is hitting 120+ degrees

Rtx5090 cards should have two power connectors; one is not enough headroom and it is playing with fire, literally

What a **** connector. It doesn't take a genius to look at the spec of the connector and realise it is going to go pete tong sooner rather than later.

I also thought it is interesting that Nvidia's prototypes had 4 of the connectors: https://videocardz.com/newz/nvidia-...s-featured-quad-16-pin-power-connector-design

 

[StarShock]

The chart means what it means; value at MSRP.

If you’re able to beat the MSRP of any card and therefore get better value, that’s great. But I don’t think this really extends to any of the points being discussed in there thread though…? I’m not aware of many high end cards going for significantly less than MSRP.

It presents a situation that has never happened though. It's comparing things that haven't existed at the same time.
As for cards under msrp all last year and until last week you could get a 7900xtx for well under 1000. And they've only just sold through now as people have looked at the price of the 5080 and noped out of that.

Hopefully in a few weeks the 9070 cards will appear with better price to performance. But who knows.

I do think it feels like it's either falling for the marketing or being disingenuous to look at what for now is a best case scenario for the 5080 and compare it to what we know to have been almost worst case for several cards on that list. 7900s were all well under msrp for the majority of thier life, 4080 supers were often seen for 900 - 950. And those are all a generation older than the 5080, and its embarrassing that the 5080 isn't clearly better value.

 

[ED209]

Not good guys, rtx5090 full load and the GPU side connector is hitting 90c and the PSU side connector is hitting 120+ degrees

Rtx5090 cards should have two power connectors; one is not enough headroom and it is playing with fire, literally

Just finsihed watching it.

Cable was hitting 150C after 5 mins of stress testing and this is on his own 5090 Founders edition card, PSU and PSU cable.

 

[Nitefly]

The only consumer who can look at this in a vacuum -- which is effectively your arguement -- are people who don't own a previous-gen graphics card at all. Even if you were stepping up from a 30-series card e.g. 3080 to 5080, while the performance uptick is immense, it's still seriously disappointing since you could have essentially had near-parity in performance for the past 2 years -- and at the "same" (lower considering actual retail) price.

As for the polemic on pricing i.e. were/weren't previous gens sold near MSRP, they definitely were after prices were stabilized. I'm game for coming back to this thread a year from now to do some cost averaging on retail prices of 5080 and 5090 as I have a strong suspicison they will veer exceedingly further above MSRP on average than previous gens.

Thanks for the comments. Just sharing some extended thoughts on the ‘disappointment’ side of things and where I’m sat personally, which is all subjective / biased to circumstances.

Coming from a 30 series card (3090), I’m genuinely not disappointed. I tried to buy a 4090 as an unnecessary opulent purchase but it didn’t work out (noisy cards) and they all got sent back. Oh well, I’ve been happy to use my 3090 - it tends to hit 90 fps in most titles - and I really haven’t felt I’ve been ‘missing out’ on anything, even though a 4090 is clearly superior.

Truthfully, the only game that has made me go “meh I’d really like to upgrade now” is Silent Hill 2. But even looking at @mrk ’s 4090 FPS with this game I haven’t thought “wow that 4090 is light years better!” - it IS a lot better but has seemed a shade on the ‘underperforming’ side relative to where I’d like to be when I do upgrade, which is running at 90ish fps with bells and whistles on. Lo and behold, the 5090’s uplift will get me where I want to be. Great.

On which point, IMO there is a lot of downplaying the of the 5090s performance over the 4090. Frankly, that 30% on top of the already impressive 4090 performance is a lot. Looking at 4k benchmarks, not picking and choosing specifics, the 1% lows on the 5090 can outstrip the 4090s max frame rate. That’s a lot of uplift. It’s meaningful.

I’m willing to spank down £££ for a nice monitor and a pricey card as my personal circumstances allow me to (which is fortunate but I assure you there are pros and cons to my circumstances!). Am I willing to pay ‘scalper’ prices though? No. In which case, I’m really not sure who these ‘whales’ are that are. There can’t be many of them, surely…?!

I acknowledge that my experience isn’t the only one. There probably are many people out there that has been holding on for an epic performance increase over the 40 series and they are now disappointed for the reasons you mention. But as far as I have seen, there really are not many people that have said as much, on OcUK at least (maybe a couple).

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

It presents a situation that has never happened though. It's comparing things that haven't existed at the same time.
As for cards under msrp all last year and until last week you could get a 7900xtx for well under 1000. And they've only just sold through now as people have looked at the price of the 5080 and noped out of that.

Hopefully in a few weeks the 9070 cards will appear with better price to performance. But who knows.

I do think it feels like it's either falling for the marketing or being disingenuous to look at what for now is a best case scenario for the 5080 and compare it to what we know to have been almost worst case for several cards on that list. 7900s were all well under msrp for the majority of thier life, 4080 supers were often seen for 900 - 950. And those are all a generation older than the 5080, and its embarrassing that the 5080 isn't clearly better value.

The RX7900XT dropped to under £600 briefly and the RX7900XTX was available for under £800. The RTX4070TI was also under £600 a few times as @TNA can attest to. The RX7800XT was below £400 and the RTX4070 Super/RX7900GRE even got close to £450.