Sod it I'm buying a 4080

[fs123]

I still see people peddling the false narrative that AMD's card is a flop. If you look carefully at some actual videos of the card running you will see that the card is not running optimally in many RT games. That alone tells you that there is still some performance left off the table.

The card is not boosting in Cyberpunk, WD:L and F1 in RT mode. That is most likely driver issues.

Coupled with the fact that most AIB cards are able to overclock to 3GHz gaining a further 5-8% performance, I think we will discover that the 7900XTX is indeed going to be sitting between the 4080 and 4080 in a month or two when AMD fix the bugs.

 

[JonnyG1982]

Yep, really disappointing. Slides indicated possibly getting 15% more performance than rtx4080 for £1000. Instead its about up to 5% faster and costs £1,050+. Factor in RT performance, power consumption, arguesbly worse driver support, the fact you can get rtx4080 for £1,150 as prices dropping and suddenly nvidia option looks OK. It's not OK, it's too expensive, they both are. And once your spending over £1,050 on a gpu it's tempting to go all the way and pay £1,600 for a far better card. But again, it's crazy money for a gpu. I dont think AMD has done enough to persuade people, if they had managed that 15% extra performance and got it in under £1,000 think many would have gone team red.

Think most of us are stuck on the side line between a rock and a hard place. As I said in previous post, I upgraded graphics card like every year for 15 years. I've now been stuck with gtx980ti for 5-6 years. Now it's either pay msrp for 2 year old tech or pay over a grand for the new stuff. Both options suck. But im sick of waiting having skipped like the last 3 generations. I'm 40 years old, I've lost my enthusiasm with gaming and overclocking but hoping to get it back with a brand new computer. YOLO. I may wait til after Christmas, hope AMD drivers improve and hopefully both companies drop their prices a bit because I struggle to see either selling well, or maybe people will eventually break now options on table and it's pretty much pay out or tough

 

[B@Th*nG]

I still see people peddling the false narrative that AMD's card is a flop. If you look carefully at some actual videos of the card running you will see that the card is not running optimally in many RT games. That alone tells you that there is still some performance left off the table.

The card is not boosting in Cyberpunk, WD:L and F1 in RT mode. That is most likely driver issues.

Coupled with the fact that most AIB cards are able to overclock to 3GHz gaining a further 5-8% performance, I think we will discover that the 7900XTX is indeed going to be sitting between the 4080 and 4080 in a month or two when AMD fix the bugs.

I understand that it can't hold sustained boost in heavy workloads, losing around 9-10% performance in doing so to nvidia's 1%. IF they sort it out, and it's a big IF, then they've got a real winner here.

This ties into that comment of Jonnys, above. 5% faster than a 4080 currently, will it make it to 15% faster is the million dollar q.

I'm not sure it's a good value proposition currently, with it really only being £100 cheaper than a 4080.

 

[Grim5]

I still see people peddling the false narrative that AMD's card is a flop. If you look carefully at some actual videos of the card running you will see that the card is not running optimally in many RT games. That alone tells you that there is still some performance left off the table.

The card is not boosting in Cyberpunk, WD:L and F1 in RT mode. That is most likely driver issues.

Coupled with the fact that most AIB cards are able to overclock to 3GHz gaining a further 5-8% performance, I think we will discover that the 7900XTX is indeed going to be sitting between the 4080 and 4080 in a month or two when AMD fix the bugs.

It's not a bug, it's still running RT games 80% faster than last Gen. the clocks are low because AMD tried to be fancy and gave the card just 350w but 96CUs wants more power than that, the card needs 450w to be able to hit its target boost clocks

 

[Howling]

arguesbly worse driver support

Wait... what? What decade are we in? Did I time travel in my sleep? Am I a wizard?! OMG IM A WIZARD!

 

[Joxeon]

But you say a 4070 class die? But define what a 4070 class die is? You are judging based on the 30XX series. To use the car analogy, you are saying dont buy the latest car because it is only 2.0L when the previous version was 6.8L but the issue is the 2.0L is a newer more revised engine that no longer needs to be 6.8L or even 3.6L because the revised 2.0 engine is just as good.

There is little point in harping back to past generations, the 4080 is a stonking card despite its price. the 4070 will not be a patch on the 4080.

I had a 3090 and I got a 4080 and it has been a huge upgrade especially in MSFS.

My 3D Mark Result 4080 @ 4k

I scored 11 046 in Time Spy Extreme

AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 x 1, 32768 MB, 64-bit Windows 11}

www.3dmark.com

My 3D Mark Result 3090 @ 4k

I scored 8 454 in Time Spy Extreme

AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 x 1, 32768 MB, 64-bit Windows 11}

www.3dmark.com

No overclocking. Its a fairly big jump and triple digits in MSFS, and all the new tech is amazing. I think people forget the 4090 is also probably the first GPU that can really push 8K. on my 3840X1600 Ultra wide ACER 38s that maxes out at 175hz what am I going to do with all that power. My feeling is the 4080 will last till the 50XX series and I hope NVIDIA get real with the prices then!

Stop listening to all these streamers that pusing out garbage lies. My Friend has a 4090 and honestly aside from the odd exception the FPS difference is what these streamers are saying in real terms. I get 138 FPS in MSFS, he gets 144-150FPS under the same conditions....big wow!! and I saved £520. It may drop to 40FPS at some large airports, his will drop to 55fps maybe even 50.

A few games can be 30-35FPS difference, but at that point it is usually above the 120hz range. He has the same monitor, but he also has a 4k 16:9 monitor as well as he wont play some games in Ultra Wide.

All I am saying is there is a **** ton of misinformation out there about how bad 4080 is, and when you have one in hand you will see that. I am not defending NVIDIA it is way over priced! but so is the 4090 IMHO.

A 70 class is die is defined by the cuda % you get compared to the top die.

As you can see by this chart showing the dies used for every generation over the last 10 years the 4080 is the only 80 card that sits within the 70 class bracket.

Nvidia are selling you a heavily cut down die for premium prices and the only reason it looks remotely decent on performance is the jump gained from samsung 8NM to TSMC's N4.

Had they used a proper 80 class die then you would have got the full 75% uplift over the 3080 similar to how the 4090 got a 75% uplift over the 3090. Instead I would be looking at just 48% over a 3080 for a for a 85% price increase. It does however give a 75% improvement over a 3070/ti.

 

[andybird123]

Wait... what have they blown exactly? You get 4080 performance for $2-300 less; and that's on release drivers -- everyone knows AMD cards go up in performance (see 6000 series vs 3000 series release performance vs current, AMD cards moved up the line significantly).... Sounds like you just wanted to buy nVidia and for some bizarre reason are simply trying to justify it (with flawed reasoning) which you don't need to do, it's your money... I'm confused at the purpose of this thread.

Edit:: Obviously they've blown the pricing, a bit less than nVidia have... but it's worth acknowledging that neither company's pricing policy is remotely acceptable and I'm not ignoring that by asking what they've blown above

What they blew was telling everyone it was 50-70% faster than a 6950XT, when reviewers are showing it as being more like 30% faster, even in the games that AMD cherry picked for their marketing.
70% put it within single digits of the 4090, so yes people are disappointed that it's trading blows with a 4080 and losing in RT still quite badly because AMD marketing numbers would have made it an absolute steal of a card, instead of just a "yeah it's ok at raster and a tiny bit cheaper than a 4080". It's just about setting expectations, which AMD always seem to suck at.

 

[Azic]

A 70 class is die is defined by the cuda % you get compared to the top die.

As you can see by this chart showing the dies used for every generation over the last 10 years the 4080 is the only 80 card that sits within the 70 class bracket.

Nvidia are selling you a heavily cut down die for premium prices and the only reason it looks remotely decent on performance is the jump gained from samsung 8NM to TSMC's N4.

Had they used a proper 80 class die then you would have got the full 75% uplift over the 3080 similar to how the 4090 got a 75% uplift over the 3090. Instead I would be looking at just 48% over a 3080 for a for a 85% price increase. It does however give a 75% improvement over a 3070/ti.

I still do not agree. This is the past. Different architectures and platforms. Yes I agree it looks like this on paper, but IMHNO the reality is the performance you get in games, and even if the 4080 was 25% of the full fat die, if it still offered the performance it does now, then so what? Why does this matter so much, why is it such a sticking point? and compared to past architectures?

The 4080 is offering great performance for its price WHEN COMPARED to the 4090 prices IMHO, especially at 4k or below. Also what when the Ti cards land? its not like they are going to be any cheaper? To change this for us all, we need to not buy any cards from the 50XX series if the pricing is the same or above.

I am not saying you do not have a point, what I am saying is paper stats do not always show a measure of real world in game performance. Yes I would love more power, and the 4080 may very well be really cut down, but then in the UK it is as I said £500-£900 cheaper so what do we want in the current price market that WE HAVE ENABLED? with my current set up for me personally £500 is not worth another 30FPS, I am playing Portal RTX at max settings at +100 FPS, the witcher Next Gen update is running amazing, etc etc.

 

[Joxeon]

I still do not agree. This is the past. Different architectures and platforms. Yes I agree it looks like this on paper, but IMHNO the reality is the performance you get in games, and even if the 4080 was 25% of the full fat die, if it still offered the performance it does now, then so what? Why does this matter so much, why is it such a sticking point? and compared to past architectures?

The 4080 is offering great performance for its price WHEN COMPARED to the 4090 prices IMHO, especially at 4k or below. Also what when the Ti cards land? its not like they are going to be any cheaper? To change this for us all, we need to not buy any cards from the 50XX series if the pricing is the same or above.

I am not saying you do not have a point, what I am saying is paper stats do not always show a measure of real world in game performance. Yes I would love more power, and the 4080 may very well be really cut down, but then in the UK it is as I said £500-£900 cheaper so what do we want in the current price market that WE HAVE ENABLED? with my current set up for me personally £500 is not worth another 30FPS, I am playing Portal RTX at max settings at +100 FPS, the witcher Next Gen update is running amazing, etc etc.

If Nvidia had called this a 4070 and priced it at £1200 would you still have bought one?

48% performance over a 3080 for 85% more cash is not good value, its actually terrible value and a massive regression in price to performance.

Is it really that amazing to spend £1200 get 100 fps on a game made in 2007 that was specifically redesigned to make the cards look good or a reskinned game from 2015?

The 4090 is the halo product so you could argue that it commands a premium price, you might not like the higher price tag but by buying cards like the 4080 for silly money your just telling Nvidia your happy to pay more for less so don't moan when you come to upgrade next time around if Nvidia is trying to sell you an even more cut down card for 4090 money.

 

[Alt0153]

I still do not agree. This is the past. Different architectures and platforms. Yes I agree it looks like this on paper, but IMHNO the reality is the performance you get in games, and even if the 4080 was 25% of the full fat die, if it still offered the performance it does now, then so what? Why does this matter so much, why is it such a sticking point? and compared to past architectures?

The 4080 is offering great performance for its price WHEN COMPARED to the 4090 prices IMHO, especially at 4k or below. Also what when the Ti cards land? its not like they are going to be any cheaper? To change this for us all, we need to not buy any cards from the 50XX series if the pricing is the same or above.

I am not saying you do not have a point, what I am saying is paper stats do not always show a measure of real world in game performance. Yes I would love more power, and the 4080 may very well be really cut down, but then in the UK it is as I said £500-£900 cheaper so what do we want in the current price market that WE HAVE ENABLED? with my current set up for me personally £500 is not worth another 30FPS, I am playing Portal RTX at max settings at +100 FPS, the witcher Next Gen update is running amazing, etc etc.

dont agree all you want but you are still wrong

 

[Worthy]

The 4090 is the halo product so you could argue that it commands a premium price, you might not like the higher price tag but by buying cards like the 4080 for silly money your just telling Nvidia your happy to pay more for less so don't moan when you come to upgrade next time around if Nvidia is trying to sell you an even more cut down card for 4090 money.

How do you explain away the fact that the XTX is about the same performance raster wise, yet way worse in RT though, *roughly* the same price?

They're all too expensive, but it's just a fact of life now that GPUs will cost more in the future. We may get a return to form with the 5000 series, the same as with the 2000 series being mega expensive, followed by the 3080, but I doubt it.

 

[dvinell]

This was my thinking as well.
I previously had an RX6900XT which was fine up to a point, but quite noisy under load.
Then the AMD Drivers and Windows 11 22H2 started causing me black screens once or twice a day.
This could well be Microsoft's fault, but I use the same PC for work, and it was just becoming embarrassing: it needs to be stable.

So ... Nvidia ... can I really justify a RTX4090?
Yes it is the best card, but requires more power, runs hotter, more £££, and will I see a difference in the games I have today?
Conclusion: RTX4080

In the OC benchmark charts, my 4080 is obviously behind all the 4090s, but above almost anything else.
RX7900XT could be a different story.

 

[silvagti]

Yep, really disappointing. Slides indicated possibly getting 15% more performance than rtx4080 for £1000. Instead its about up to 5% faster and costs £1,050+. Factor in RT performance, power consumption, arguesbly worse driver support, the fact you can get rtx4080 for £1,150 as prices dropping and suddenly nvidia option looks OK. It's not OK, it's too expensive, they both are. And once your spending over £1,050 on a gpu it's tempting to go all the way and pay £1,600 for a far better card. But again, it's crazy money for a gpu. I dont think AMD has done enough to persuade people, if they had managed that 15% extra performance and got it in under £1,000 think many would have gone team red.

Think most of us are stuck on the side line between a rock and a hard place. As I said in previous post, I upgraded graphics card like every year for 15 years. I've now been stuck with gtx980ti for 5-6 years. Now it's either pay msrp for 2 year old tech or pay over a grand for the new stuff. Both options suck. But im sick of waiting having skipped like the last 3 generations.

Your post pretty much mirrors my situation and thought process regarding the new video cards!

 

[BUDFORCE]

The 4090 is the halo product so you could argue that it commands a premium price,

Yup I think we can all agree that if you are buying the top end of the cards, particularly the top end one you are paying quite a large "e-peen" premium that completely blows bang for buck out of the picture.

But for that reason I don't believe top end cards, in Nvidia case xx80+ are good value for money.

That being said, some people don't care about that and just want/need max perfomance, and fine, no issue with that but understand you are paying a premium for it.

 

[DeathStorm]

I think because of the economic climate people are holding off on the hope the prices will lower before pulling the trigger.

While that may be true for some I know I'm holding off on a 4080 because it's just so very badly priced.

I could understand paying £900+ for a 3080 back when supply was completely destroyed but now and they want £1200+? A used 3080 is like £600 ish, so what's a used 4080 going to be in a year or so? I can wait.

 

[keyser van someone]

I hadn't been keeping track of prices, and I'm not in the UK, but some retailers near me are doing 35% discounts on 4080's
I'm actually half tempted at that price

Thats MSRP yeah good deal. I would. 4080 is my fav card so far tbh.

 

[Joxeon]

How do you explain away the fact that the XTX is about the same performance raster wise, yet way worse in RT though, *roughly* the same price?

They're all too expensive, but it's just a fact of life now that GPUs will cost more in the future. We may get a return to form with the 5000 series, the same as with the 2000 series being mega expensive, followed by the 3080, but I doubt it.

I'd argue that AMD messed up big time with the RDNA3 architecture, they told us 50-70% over a 6950XT yet in reality its just 35% so it looks like something went wrong with the move to chiplets.

They have also taken advantage of the ridiculous pricing by Nvidia to rename their card tiers so instead of a decently priced 7800XT we now have a £900 7900XT while the actual 7800XT we will end up getting looks like it will have just 60 CU's a drop from 72 on the 6800XT so anyone who bought an MBA 6800XT for just over 600 quid can forget about getting a performance upgrade for a similar spend this generation, the same for 3080FE buyers with whatever Nvidia decides to release at £650

Both of these companies are at it and are all to happy to fleece consumers, the GPU market is broken, Nvidia have a monopoly and AMD are just happy to toe the line rather than actually bring genuine competition.

 

[rumple9]

I still see people peddling the false narrative that AMD's card is a flop. If you look carefully at some actual videos of the card running you will see that the card is not running optimally in many RT games. That alone tells you that there is still some performance left off the table.

The card is not boosting in Cyberpunk, WD:L and F1 in RT mode. That is most likely driver issues.

Coupled with the fact that most AIB cards are able to overclock to 3GHz gaining a further 5-8% performance, I think we will discover that the 7900XTX is indeed going to be sitting between the 4080 and 4080 in a month or two when AMD fix the bugs.

Clutching at straws pal. Top and bottom of it is the £1000+ card doesn't work so well out of the box and you hold out hope for "fine wine" drivers in 2 years time.

If it were a new car you'd take it back

 

[ProStreet]

Clutching at straws pal. Top and bottom of it is the £1000+ card doesn't work so well out of the box and you hold out hope for "fine wine" drivers in 2 years time.

If it were a new car you'd take it back

But a car doesn't have drivers...

Pardon the pun.

 

[Stanners]

How do you explain away the fact that the XTX is about the same performance raster wise, yet way worse in RT though, *roughly* the same price?

They're all too expensive, but it's just a fact of life now that GPUs will cost more in the future. We may get a return to form with the 5000 series, the same as with the 2000 series being mega expensive, followed by the 3080, but I doubt it.

Just buy one, anything