• 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.

RTX 4090 - actually future proof?

ALXAndy said:
No, but the more you spend the longer it lasts. It has always been that way in computing, and if you are into incremental upgrades the monumental ones ALWAYS work out to be the best value.

Of course if you are fickle there is no point in wasting money. But if you are in it for the long haul it is deffo worth spending more, and always has been.
Click to expand...
I know.

I have a Threadripper for future proofing hehe
 
the thing is that people who buy the flagship tend to want the next flagship, so its not so much about if the GPU is future proof. The question is are you able to be satisfied with a product when most around you are all talking about a newer generation of products and the desirability of your product has fallen a great deal from where it was.
 
dave28 said:
the thing is that people who buy the flagship tend to want the next flagship, so its not so much about if the GPU is future proof. The question is are you able to be satisfied with a product when most around you are all talking about a newer generation of products and the desirability of your product has fallen a great deal from where it was.
Click to expand...
I tend to skip a gen
 
There's only a few factors to consider here. First is it future proof for performance? Probably not, it's going to last a fair while but future proof would imply you want it to hit a good performance and the real question is what are the alternatives? Typically speaking you could get something like 4070 or a radeon 7900 XTX for a lot cheaper than the 4090 and then upgrade again sooner. If it was me I'd much rather bag a well performing card for around half the price then upgrade again in 3 or 4 years time than I would spend over the odds and hope a card doesn't age because the performance will not last compared to making sensible upgrades.

Second factor is features, high end card vs upgrading on a quicker cycle also seems to favour upgrading more often as well. After all, you will get newer software support like the latest FSR or DLSS tech, you'll get better ray tracing and other performance to make use of the latest implementations of these features. You may even get new things you're not aware of like how Nvidia introduced the RTX Remix just this gen. Maybe there's more tech in the line up over time. I'd give this one to upgrading on a shorter cycle too. You said there was nothing on the horizon that would make the 4090 obsolete but we're actually in the early stages of DLSS3 and the 4090 can't do it without latency problems. It could be that ray tracing in 3 years time is advanced enough to make true that vision for most games, then it's not about new tech but making the current tech actually work smoother to get the real future proofing. If DLSS3 is the future then the 4090 hasn't delivered on it with the current stuttering / ghosting / latency.

To be fair, I'm a buy and forget guy, I like to just get a big upgrade, whole new system each time I do and then wait for a while before I do it again (because that suites my needs) but if you're asking for recommendations on future proofing then I'd consider more frequent upgrades because it's way better for maintaining performance, features and other bits. One other factor is that performance usually jumps up massively when new consoles lift the bottom line / other new gpu's are released. The games will be made to take advantage of new cards, I can't honestly recommend the 4090 over quicker upgrade cycles if you want to future proof the best way but if you mean that you want the most future proof system money can buy right now and not worry about upgrading then the 4090 would sound like a good option. But of course if upgrading is an option then it looks far and away better to do that in my mind, it could even work out cheaper if prices come down over time or the intel / AMD competition picks up.
 
Alt0153 said:
there is always going to be a bottleneck somewhere tho, and besides you can always use res scaling to run lots of 1440p titles at 4k to get higher gpu usage if you really want to :)
Click to expand...
With the appropriate fps drop. A 4090 won't be obsolete in the next series, since the 3090 didn't become obsolete now. I use ultrawide 1440p btw witch is around 60% the 4K resolution pixelwise.
 
Hedge said:
You haven't really bought the halo cards with the intention of keeping them until they are no longer capable of playing anything.
Click to expand...

On the contrary. They may get used less frequently, but the working ones still - apart from the 2080 Ti - get used. BTW the 2080 Ti was supposed to go to my nephew but he decided that he didn't want it. He decided that PC gaming would be too much of a distraction from his studies.
 
Last edited:
fantasticCG said:
You guys think a 4090 for a 34 DWF is over kill?
Click to expand...

No. Find another card that will get you near 165hz at that res on max settings.
Or as above, if you want to admire puddles instead of play games, turn on meme tracing.
 
Last edited:
Vexr said:
Especially for us 1440p / UWQHD 3440x1440 users. Are we talking about rock solid max settings with ray tracing at these resolutions at 100-120-144 Hz? Even the power consumption scales when it's under-utilized.

Sure, currently it's said the 4090 is wasted on anything less than a high refresh rate 4K display. However, looking back at a previously mega-OP GPU, the 1080 Ti, I'm sure that was once considered wasted on 1080p displays, yet now 1080p is the only category it can truly bring a high FPS experience to still.

Also there is no new technology on the near horizon that might render the 4090 obsolete as far as I'm aware of. Sounds to me like you could buy the 4090, and that might be a GPU that will last you 5 years+ or more at 1440p / UWQHD with DLSS 3.0, maybe evem 6, 7, 8 years.

I'm throwing this out there as Devil's Advocate. I don't want to pay £1600 for a GPU, but if I could actually get a triple A futuristic experience that might last the better part of a decade from a GPU, then that sounds to me like a potential investment.
Click to expand...

At 4k or close it won't be future proof without turning down settings. Just look how it performs in games that use a relatively high amount of RT effects. In Cyberpunk it scores about 40 in RT and 70fps in rasterization natively. DLSS sure helps, but if you use it now already, there isn't much room left for the future.
We haven't really seen next gen games, so it can go either way considering consoles are already lagging way behind, so it will depend in how much effort studios put into adding proper RT effects or developing rasterization further for PC.

1440p it will last longer and at 1080p could get closer to that 6-8 years if the card will actually function for that much time, but is overkill now.
DLSS2 is where you want to base your performance on as it will also reduce input lag. DLSS3 is great in certain scenarios, but isn't ideal, is more like a bonus atm.

As a side note, a R290 lasted about as long as a console life cycle (res and details depending, of course). It could be the same now, but is a risk you'll need to take. If you need the performance of a 4090 now, then that's a good card to have*. If 4080/7900xt is sufficient, then get that one and save some money as a next gen upgrade will be just as good.

*if the prices were actually good. :p
 
I've looked at this many times. It's a great idea to think you can buy the best at the time and it will last. No matter how overkill you start off the performance will degrade over time, even if it is still enough you'll always feel it's less than it was.

Purely from a financial standpoint, I think the numbers have been run before, you are best of buying midrange and upgrading every generation or two. You but in the sweet spot of price to performance and get more of your money back/spend less on the next purchase. You also keep up with any changes in things like DX or other proprietary ;) technologies.

I'd go for xx60Ti to xx80 class cards or AMD equivalents depending on current price to performance and then swap out every couple of years. Not as exciting as buying high end but no buyer's remorse and more upgrade opportunities. If you're well off, just go high end every time:cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom