AusWolfA grand on a gaming toy is still way too much in my opinion. Even my theoretical limit of £500 feels like pulling teeth to be honest.

True but some people spend more on alcohol, drugs, tobacco, golfing etc etc. Plus the 4090 doesn't become paper weight on the 5090 coronation day. It should hold value in the second hand market especially if the rumors of it being superior or equivalent to the 5080 in performance. Hey I remember some people even spent more money on a annual cable subscription than what a 4090 cost on launch.

GhostRyderOk I get your metaphor better. However, I still stand by you don't lose a ton of performance using it which is also a downside beyond just paying to get better. Because realistically its more than just needing a 4090 to get decent performance, you still sacrifice significant performance to use it even on that card.

I stand by my reasoning because the argument used in favor of it does not make sense because of the lack of performance on the cards most people use. When the games dont utilize it too heavily, most of the compared cards from both companies offer good performance (Nvidia still ahead, but not be near that much) and are beyond playable. When its heavily utilized like Cyberpunk, you see a humongous drop in performance to nearly unplayable levels except on the 4090 (4080 can do ok at 1440p ultra everything, but its average is around 60 which means its got alot of drops below that threshold).

Its true that they should work on it, but raw performance should be king because that's what the majority of games are going to care about. Plus it may take off or it may not, we don't know and all the similar techs that start or people say will revolutionize gaming that end up disappearing after a time for one reason or another. There is no telling if this will do the same (I definitely have less doubts about this one disappearing than others but still).

Their earnings in gaming are low, but they are fighting an uphill battle and have been for years. I mean Nvidia has made it very hard to compete and get big press, especially with Nvidia's attitude towards reviewers and such when they don't focus on things they want as we saw when a big reviewer didn't do enough talk about RT in a video. Not to say this generation was flawless from AMD (Far from it), but it should be performing better than it is in my opinion.

I hope they can improve performance with this redesign, will be interesting to see where it is with RDNA 4.

When newer tech has proven its superiority, it will surely propagate over time anyways. Just look at DLSS, 3 years ago some people said it was pointless because few games had it, now it's everywhere.

Raw performance is the highest Metric, that's true, but people are also looking at what visual settings that the extra performance can give them. For example instead of 160FPS with rasterization (that my screen cannot display anyways), I would go for RT/PT enabled at 80FPS (DLSS are always enabled of course).

RT is very much like OLED, once you get used to it it is very hard to let go ;). But yeah right now the cost of entry for RT/PT is still high, but it should lower over time.

RGAFLAnd again where did I say that's a bad thing. But what about the 2060/3060/4060 owners that bought it when it came out full price thinking they were going to get the full RT/PT experience and then had to turn it all off to get acceptable performance. Tough luck I suppose.

No, simple commerce. Create a want, get cash. @nguyen isn't wrong here. If you buy x60 you know and accept compromises. Always been like that and the price point still works for that segment, even if Ada's x60 is a total shitshow.

AusWolfA grand on a gaming toy is still way too much in my opinion. Even my theoretical limit of £500 feels like pulling teeth to be honest.

But you have multiple systems, no? Do you even have teeth left?

We talk alot about pricing but fwiw we're still buying...

nguyenWhen newer tech has proven its superiority, it will surely propagate over time anyways. Just look at DLSS, 3 years ago some people said it was pointless because few games had it, now it's everywhere.

Raw performance is the highest Metric, that's true, but people are also looking at what visual settings that the extra performance can give them. For example instead of 160FPS with rasterization (that my screen cannot display anyways), I would go for RT/PT enabled at 80FPS (DLSS are always enabled of course).

RT is very much like OLED, once you get used to it it is very hard to let go ;). But yeah right now the cost of entry for RT/PT is still high, but it should lower over time.

I mean sure, I can agree with that statement about when tech proves its superiority it will propagate over time. However, with Ray Tracing I will say that while it is superior, its still a huge trade off on performance even ignoring the high cost of entry in being able to truly experience it. If Nvidia can make the trade off much less on the performance front, then I would have no argument against using it to its fullest. With DLSS 3/FSR, while they did have some growing pains (And still do) I feel they are better overall because they give you more performance while retaining visual clarity (Again growing pains caused some graphical concerns but recently they have been very good).

I would argue you are in the minority on that statement. Mostly because you have the only card that can do it reasonably well (RTX 4090). I mean using your argument you are sacrificing a huge amount of FPS for better lighting visuals. When I look up the latest reviews, they mostly combine Ray Tracing and DLSS 3/3.5 to get the playable performance which is relying on not only tons of things working together to work perfectly and keep the game functioning, its also hoping that the DLSS is working right with the visuals (Which I am not saying DLSS is not working right, but we have seen screenshots showing differences in games when on or off in the visuals at times). Now I am similar to you as I prefer to have highest visuals I can in my games over 300 FPS which is why I normally buy a high end card (I know my card is aging but life happens LOL), but I cannot stand to be below 120FPS anymore (Well maybe below 100 is better to say) especially in games that involve shooting/driving. Though I also cannot stand potato mode graphics.

Sure, I agree it will but I think its not going to really catch on fully unless the performance hit (At least on Nvidia hardware) is around 10%. 50% is just too high in many cases.

GhostRyderI mean sure, I can agree with that statement about when tech proves its superiority it will propagate over time. However, with Ray Tracing I will say that while it is superior, its still a huge trade off on performance even ignoring the high cost of entry in being able to truly experience it. If Nvidia can make the trade off much less on the performance front, then I would have no argument against using it to its fullest. With DLSS 3/FSR, while they did have some growing pains (And still do) I feel they are better overall because they give you more performance while retaining visual clarity (Again growing pains caused some graphical concerns but recently they have been very good).

I would argue you are in the minority on that statement. Mostly because you have the only card that can do it reasonably well (RTX 4090). I mean using your argument you are sacrificing a huge amount of FPS for better lighting visuals. When I look up the latest reviews, they mostly combine Ray Tracing and DLSS 3/3.5 to get the playable performance which is relying on not only tons of things working together to work perfectly and keep the game functioning, its also hoping that the DLSS is working right with the visuals (Which I am not saying DLSS is not working right, but we have seen screenshots showing differences in games when on or off in the visuals at times). Now I am similar to you as I prefer to have highest visuals I can in my games over 300 FPS which is why I normally buy a high end card (I know my card is aging but life happens LOL), but I cannot stand to be below 120FPS anymore (Well maybe below 100 is better to say) especially in games that involve shooting/driving. Though I also cannot stand potato mode graphics.

Sure, I agree it will but I think its not going to really catch on fully unless the performance hit (At least on Nvidia hardware) is around 10%. 50% is just too high in many cases.

I have played lots of RT games on 2080Ti and 3090. A 3090 or 4070Super can get good level of RT (RT GI, reflection and AO) + good FPS in all RT games today (PT is reserved for 4090 class and above i guess).

As for what is considered good FPS, i believe most people would be happy with 80FPS

GodrillaTrue but some people spend more on alcohol, drugs, tobacco, golfing etc etc. Plus the 4090 doesn't become paper weight on the 5090 coronation day. It should hold value in the second hand market especially if the rumors of it being superior or equivalent to the 5080 in performance. Hey I remember some people even spent more money on a annual cable subscription than what a 4090 cost on launch.

It's not AMD's, Nvidia's or your privilege to decide what other people spend their money on. If I buy a bottle of something, it'll give me a few hours of fun with friends. If I spend a few hundred more on a graphics card, what do I get? More shiny lights in the newest games?

I don't think the 4090 will be worth much on the used market considering that it needs a high-power, quality PSU, which people looking for mid-range/used cards usually don't have.

Vayra86But you have multiple systems, no? Do you even have teeth left?

We talk alot about pricing but fwiw we're still buying...

I do, but if you add their price up, maybe you get to the price of a single 4090. Maybe...

Not to mention, I can use my multiple systems to watch films and play low-demanding games in the living room and in the bedroom. I couldn't watch or play anything on just a 4090 sitting on my desk on its own.

AusWolfIt's not AMD's, Nvidia's or your privilege to decide what other people spend their money on. If I buy a bottle of something, it'll give me a few hours of fun with friends. If I spend a few hundred more on a graphics card, what do I get? More shiny lights in the newest games?

I don't think the 4090 will be worth much on the used market considering that it needs a high-power, quality PSU, which people looking for mid-range/used cards usually don't have.


I do, but if you add their price up, maybe you get to the price of a single 4090. Maybe...

Not to mention, I can use my multiple systems to watch films and play low-demanding games in the living room and in the bedroom. I couldn't watch or play anything on just a 4090 sitting on my desk on its own.

I personally got to play Vermintide 2 at maximum efficiency with maximum settings using 4090 suprim liquid and 7800X3D around 300 to 350 watts of power multiplied by 1000 hours give or take; Along with dozens of triple aaa titles that was a very immerse experience .
Also the market is not determined by one person's subjective hypothesis but more of a collective summation of multiple factors like competing products, sure let's add power requirements, vram size, ai compute demand ( currentco conditions), ebay current used price is for suprim liquid x 4090 $1609. If the 5080 doesn't dethrone the 4090 the prices will sure hold. I personally sold my used 3090 at $950 and 2080ti for $850.
Lastly one bottle of alcohol is fine but the summation of two years ( the rate of some enthusiast upgrade) is sometimes more if you are an ethenolic that is doing more self harm than good in the long run. In the end it's all subjective and the market rarely depends on your opinion due to outside factors for example ai. Let me know if you have any questions

GodrillaI personally got to play Vermintide 2 at maximum efficiency with maximum settings using 4090 suprim liquid and 7800X3D around 300 to 350 watts of power multiplied by 1000 hours give or take; Along with dozens of triple aaa titles that was a very immerse experience .

The 7800X3D is a very economical CPU in terms of power use. If you have something like a 13600K, or a 7700X, or 5800X (which is more representative of mainstream use), your CPU power use multiplies.

Anyway, regardless of CPU choice, a 450 W TDP graphics card requires a 750-800 W quality PSU at least, which costs north of 100 quid. I am not going to assume that budget builders are going to fork out that cash.

GodrillaLastly one bottle of alcohol is fine but the summation of two years ( the rate of some enthusiast upgrade) is sometimes more if you are an ethenolic that is doing more self harm than good in the long run. In the end it's all subjective and the market rarely depends on your opinion due to outside factors for example ai. Let me know if you have any questions

It is still not up to you to decide how I want to "harm myself" while enjoying my friends' company. Having a few beers on a weekend hardly constitutes the definition of alcoholism.

Similarly, it's not up to me to judge that your choice of buying a 4090 instead of um... you know... having a life... is a huge waste. You do you, but don't expect everyone to follow your way. The vast majority of people have got many other things to spend their money on besides PC upgrades and games.

@AusWolf
except that the US cost for many "services" are multiple times higher, and for no reason, vs cost in EU.

mobile plan in the US cost me ~100$/month, while it costs me 15E/month (limited to 100GB).
so im spending on a year of service, what would barely cover 2 month in the US.

a mobile plan is something i needed, especially with work (upload images/reports etc),
but paying ~100$/m for cable? nope. i rather spend 1K on a gpu and stream stuff.

and thats ignoring that after paying for 1y of cable, i have nothing, while spending +1K on the gpu, i still own the card..

Waldorf@AusWolf
except that the US cost for many "services" are multiple times higher, and for no reason, vs cost in EU.

mobile plan in the US cost me ~100$/month, while it costs me 15E/month (limited to 100GB).
so im spending on a year of service, what would barely cover 2 month in the US.

a mobile plan is something i needed, especially with work (upload images/reports etc),
but paying ~100$/m for cable? nope. i rather spend 1K on a gpu and stream stuff.

and thats ignoring that after paying for 1y of cable, i have nothing, while spending +1K on the gpu, i still own the card..

It proves my point that our priorities are different. I know that a lot of people in not so well-equipped countries are happy to put food on the table every day. Even in some places on the Eastern side of the EU (where I'm originally from), your entire salary goes for rent and bills unless you're the CEO. For a lot of people like that, spending even 2-300 on a graphics card feels like an investment for life. If you can justify buying a 4090, good for you. But it doesn't mean that it's equally justified for everyone else.

has nothing to do with priorities.
just stating the fact that some ppl (like a friend) are willing to spend money on things that are obviously overpriced in the US (vs EU),
things that will not add to what you "own" (like unlimited mobile/cable plan), while then saying im wasting my money buying a 2080S WB for almost 1000$,
which i now still use, contrary to any service "rented" for a year for the same cost by my friend.

and you can say the same about those spending 2-300$ on a single part (gpu), as there are others having less than that for a whole pc/laptop.
that, i would actually call an investment for life.

or to say it like one of my teachers when explaining want/need:
you need air/food/shelter/tv (as in watching news) and now maybe internet/transportation for some countries,
everything past that is a want, no matter if its 10, 100 or 1000 (of "your" currency)...


edit: ahh, those were the days, when a 460ti was 200 DM :D

Waldorfhas nothing to do with priorities.
just stating the fact that some ppl (like a friend) are willing to spend money on things that are obviously overpriced in the US (vs EU),
things that will not add to what you "own" (like unlimited mobile/cable plan), while then saying im wasting my money buying a 2080S WB for almost 1000$,
which i now still use, contrary to any service "rented" for a year for the same cost by my friend.

and you can say the same about those spending 2-300$ on a single part (gpu), as there are others having less than that for a whole pc/laptop.
that, i would actually call an investment for life.

or to say it like one of my teachers when explaining want/need:
you need air/food/shelter/tv (as in watching news) and now maybe internet/transportation for some countries,
everything past that is a want, no matter if its 10, 100 or 1000 (of "your" currency)...

Exactly. Once your needs are satisfied, your wants are a matter of priority. Like I said earlier, if I want to have a few drinks with friends every now and then, it's my choice. If someone would rather buy a top-end GPU, that's theirs. All I'm saying is, there are far more people who either 1. can barely satisfy their needs, let alone think about their wants, or 2. would rather have some drinks with friends than overspend on PC parts.

I used to go for high-end parts when they were much more affordable. Nowadays, though, I couldn't care less if my games run at 60 FPS on medium graphics instead of 120 on ultra.

sure, but it still questionable, on what some are "wasting" their money on, as it took a good friend 3y to switch the whole family to tmobile,
only to realize he not only had better coverage (work/home) but also saving a lot of money (what i told him).
and for me, i have seen the benefit of spending more on a LC upper tier, now having a card still good enough to do 4K@30/60,
and with my "new" screen allowing for vrr, making up for not buying a card in years, while giving better experience i had prior using vrr,
even for games i already had enough fps in the past (Siege).

Waldorf@AusWolf
except that the US cost for many "services" are multiple times higher, and for no reason, vs cost in EU.

mobile plan in the US cost me ~100$/month, while it costs me 15E/month (limited to 100GB).
so im spending on a year of service, what would barely cover 2 month in the US.

There is a partial reason though. The population density in Spain is 229 per square mile while in the lower 48 states in the US it's 111 per square mile. There has to be far more cell towers and cable to service the same amount of customers so the investment cost and maintenance costs are much higher. We're just more spread out. That doesn't account for all of the difference in prices though.

not really, even outside spain, im not spending anywhere close to what it cost me in the US.
ignoring that especially tmobile shut down all 2/3G sites, to convert to 5G, so cost didnt really go up for them, as the old stuff is off the "budget",
and as you "only" replace the antennas (to say it in simple terms), it saves the cost for survey/plan/setup of a new "spot" to place the hw.

and its even worse for cable/internet, as living in a city center is the same, no matter what 1st world country,
while EU countries offering 3-500Mbit, i had 25/50 over fiber, at multiple times the cost.
i remember almost 20y ago i spend 16E/month for landline/gateway with 16Mbit in germany, while US offered 1Mbit internet only for 50$month.

GodrillaI personally got to play Vermintide 2 at maximum efficiency with maximum settings using 4090 suprim liquid and 7800X3D around 300 to 350 watts of power multiplied by 1000 hours give or take; Along with dozens of triple aaa titles that was a very immerse experience .
Also the market is not determined by one person's subjective hypothesis but more of a collective summation of multiple factors like competing products, sure let's add power requirements, vram size, ai compute demand ( currentco conditions), ebay current used price is for suprim liquid x 4090 $1609. If the 5080 doesn't dethrone the 4090 the prices will sure hold. I personally sold my used 3090 at $950 and 2080ti for $850.
Lastly one bottle of alcohol is fine but the summation of two years ( the rate of some enthusiast upgrade) is sometimes more if you are an ethenolic that is doing more self harm than good in the long run. In the end it's all subjective and the market rarely depends on your opinion due to outside factors for example ai. Let me know if you have any questions

I maxed out Vermintide 2 at 144hz on a GTX 1080. The game runs on a toaster... total sys power probably at or under 250W. Now, lets add the fact your 7800X3D does at least 25W less than my 8700K did. So much for progress ;)

Yep curc

AusWolfThe 7800X3D is a very economical CPU in terms of power use. If you have something like a 13600K, or a 7700X, or 5800X (which is more representative of mainstream use), your CPU power use multiplies.

Anyway, regardless of CPU choice, a 450 W TDP graphics card requires a 750-800 W quality PSU at least, which costs north of 100 quid. I am not going to assume that budget builders are going to fork out that cash.


It is still not up to you to decide how I want to "harm myself" while enjoying my friends' company. Having a few beers on a weekend hardly constitutes the definition of alcoholism.

Similarly, it's not up to me to judge that your choice of buying a 4090 instead of um... you know... having a life... is a huge waste. You do you, but don't expect everyone to follow your way. The vast majority of people have got many other things to spend their money on besides PC upgrades and games.

Yep circling back to it's all subjective.

Vayra86I maxed out Vermintide 2 at 144hz on a GTX 1080. The game runs on a toaster... total sys power probably at or under 250W. Now, lets add the fact your 7800X3D does at least 25W less than my 8700K did. So much for progress ;)

Nice what resolution are you running? I'm at 4k120 dlaa for aa.

GodrillaYep curc

Yep circling back to it's all subjective.


Nice what resolution are you running? I'm at 4k120 dlaa for aa.

It ran 1440p at the time; still it goes a long way for perspective on things. In raw raster, Nvidia hasn't made such big strides.

Vayra86It ran 1440p at the time; still it goes a long way for perspective on things. In raw raster, Nvidia hasn't made such big strides.

strange my 3090/9900ks was using 450 to 500 watts of power at 115 fps dips into to the low 100s at same settings/res. I am satisfied with it. Can you do you results in the scaling in the other titles I posted?

AMD RDNA5 is reportedly entirely new architecture design, RDNA4 “merely a bug fix for RDNA3”

:banghead:

videocardz.com/newz/amd-rdna5-is-reportedly-entirely-new-architecture-design-rdna4-merely-a-bug-fix-for-rdna3

Haven't released any RDNA 3 refresh yet, haven't released any RDNA 4 card yet, and now started to talk about RDNA 5 ? :peace:

Godrillastrange my 3090/9900ks was using 450 to 500 watts of power at 115 fps dips into to the low 100s at same settings/res. I am satisfied with it. Can you do you results in the scaling in the other titles I posted?

No, I run a 7900XT now

ARF


:banghead:

videocardz.com/newz/amd-rdna5-is-reportedly-entirely-new-architecture-design-rdna4-merely-a-bug-fix-for-rdna3

Haven't released any RDNA 3 refresh yet, haven't released any RDNA 4 card yet, and now started to talk about RDNA 5 ? :peace:

Nah... If you want a proper upgrade, you wait for RDNA 17 coming around 2049. :roll:

Vayra86No, I run a 7900XT now

enjoy

ARF


:banghead:

videocardz.com/newz/amd-rdna5-is-reportedly-entirely-new-architecture-design-rdna4-merely-a-bug-fix-for-rdna3

Haven't released any RDNA 3 refresh yet, haven't released any RDNA 4 card yet, and now started to talk about RDNA 5 ? :peace:

Hopefully me being critical on AMD's lack of competition in the enthusiast level graphics will make them more competitive fingers crossed!

AusWolfNah... If you want a proper upgrade, you wait for RDNA 17 coming around 2049. :roll:

Life is too short plus Ch!na is eyeing Taiwan especially with current admin. Hence why I went with 4090. Lol. Also I did it for science.

GodrillaLife is too short ...

I know. It was a joke. ;)

I don't like speculating too far into the future, as it tends to be inaccurate which makes it pointless.

AusWolfNah... If you want a proper upgrade, you wait for RDNA 17 coming around 2049. :roll:

Except that RDNA will die when the next RDNA version comes out later this year.
By 2049, there won't be graphics cards in this form and shape, because TSMC will have long been closed, because as we know Moore's law is dead, and you can't shrink the transistors indefinitely.