Monday, February 14th 2022
NVIDIA Provides a Statement on MIA RTX 3090 Ti GPUs
NVIDIA's RTX 3090 Ti graphics card could very well be a Spartan from 343 Industries' Halo, in that it too is missing in action. Originally announced at CES 2022 for a January 27th release, the new halo product for the RTX 30-series family even had some of its specifications announced in a livestream. However, the due date has come and gone for more than half a month, and NVIDIA still hadn't said anything about the why and the how of it - or when should gamers hoping to snag the best NVIDIA graphics card of this generation ready their F5 keys (and bank accounts). Until now - in a statement to The Verge, NVIDIA spokesperson Jen Andersson said that "We don't currently have more info to share on the RTX 3090 Ti, but we'll be in touch when we do". Disappointed? So are we.
While the reasons surrounding the RTX 3090 Ti's delayed launch still aren't clear - and with NVIDIA's response, we're left wondering if they ever will be - there were some warning signs that not all the grass was green on the RTX 3090 Ti's launch. The consensus seems to be that NVIDIA found some last-minute production issues with the RTX 3090 Ti, which prompted an emergency delay on the cards' launch. The purported problems range from issues with the card's PCB, BIOS, and even GDDR6X 21 Gbps memory modules - but it's unclear which of these (or perhaps which combination) truly prompted the very real delay on the product launch.
Source:
The Verge
While the reasons surrounding the RTX 3090 Ti's delayed launch still aren't clear - and with NVIDIA's response, we're left wondering if they ever will be - there were some warning signs that not all the grass was green on the RTX 3090 Ti's launch. The consensus seems to be that NVIDIA found some last-minute production issues with the RTX 3090 Ti, which prompted an emergency delay on the cards' launch. The purported problems range from issues with the card's PCB, BIOS, and even GDDR6X 21 Gbps memory modules - but it's unclear which of these (or perhaps which combination) truly prompted the very real delay on the product launch.
31 Comments on NVIDIA Provides a Statement on MIA RTX 3090 Ti GPUs
The only thing stopping Nvidia or its cards.... is HEAT, boys. Heat.
They built a boost algorithm that works better than the hardware it's used on. Everytime we see Space Invaders or EVGA producing yet another shite cooler, its a heat problem.
Or, put differently for this current gen, Ampere is shit on Samsung 8nm, as it was initially scaled for TSMC.
Nobody in their right mind willingly chooses to up the TDP on the top end of its stack by nearly a third in one gen - and that's just counting the non ti. Every lower configuration can 'make it' fine, albeit also with inflated TDPs. But the top end... that's new territory. We didn't need Raja after all to get a solid handle on >300W cards in the consumer space did we...
Its a trend with all newer components now. To get more perf, we get more heat, and the margin for error is thin, but hardware is stopped from frying itself by smart algorithms.
Just look at the spec difference between the 3080 and 3090, the spec difference between those two is pretty massive on paper but in reality it's what, 10 to 15fps faster in the best cases. For a 3090 Ti you would be paying way more than a 3090, you'd get a card with a much larger power draw so most likely hotter for what, 0fps to 5fps if your very lucky.
It would be a DOA product at launch and ridiculed by reviewers, it would be the worst Ti card to ever be released and nvidia knows it.
1725mhz/750mV (~280W)
1830mhz/800mV (~310W)
1920mhz/850mV (~350W)
I just toggle between them in-game to find the optimal FPS/efficiency, 90% of the time I use 1830mhz/800mV though
It requires a different stance I think towards overclocking or undervolting.
You're no longer setting the exact situation you want, you're setting the limitations you want. Much like @nguyen here above: 3 sets of limitations for voltage and boost will ensure you have the maximum clock within that limitation. The net result is probably an equal amount of control to the old situation, but still a fluctuation of clocks, where the fluctuation is likely to be overclock potential you'd never have had with a flat clock line.
But... it all depends on how refined and well designed the boost algorithm is, and what its stock limits are.