3 ms·

Considering the poor generational performance uplift the original 4000 series cards had vs the 3000 series - it almost seems like these super variants are what

Considering the poor generational performance uplift the original 4000 series cards had vs the 3000 series - it almost seems like these super variants are what nVidia should have originally launched. :-/

ziml77 3y ago
Poor performance uplift? The 4080 is significantly faster than the 3090 with much lower power consumption!
- tagrun 3y ago
  Raw performance per dollar (after including inflation adjustment) has stagnated in 40 Series. A similar thing happened in 20 Series. SUPER series has been a response to rival products offering better raw performance/price released afterwards. Power consumption is a separate issue which may or may not be a concern depending on where you live.
- kllrnohj 3y ago
  The 4080/4090 are outliers of the generation though unfortunately, and also are themselves still a rather typical generational gain at that. Most of the rest of the 40xx stack was either unexpectedly slow or unexpectedly expensive (or both), such that performance per dollar stayed flat or regressed
  - ziml77 3y ago
    Ah that makes sense. I don't pay close enough attention to the mid tier or the low end. I'm sure I saw at some point that there were problems with those cards but it's hard to remember when it doesn't stand out because people are negative about every GPU.
- beebeepka 3y ago
  It's not always faster than the 3090, let alone "significantly", except in very specific resolutions and games. here's a review from a traditionally pro intel and nvidia outlet: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-founders-edition/5.html https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-f...
  - ziml77 3y ago
    I checked a sampling of a few games there and the only one where it's not ahead by a solid margin at 2560x1440 is Far Cry 6... the game that I gave up trying to play because it would not run smoothly on my 3090 + 5900X even with the settings turned down.
    - beebeepka 3y ago
      I guess that site is serving completely different graphs to me and you. Or one of us sees what they want to see.
      - ziml77 3y ago
        Besides Far Cry 6 and it's strange bottlenecks, these are the other games I checked: | Game | 3090 FPS | 4080 FPS | Delta | % Change | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 83.3 | 114.6 | 31.3 | +38% | | Doom Eternal | 261.2 | 378.4 | 117.2 | +45% | | Forza 5 | 108.2 | 147.3 | 39.1 | +36% | | Halo Infinite | 95.7 | 107.0 | 11.3 | +12% | Maybe all those years where Intel was stuck on 14nm made me forget how big leaps could be generation to generation, but to me those jumps of more than 30% are huge especially considering that while the 4080 is a gen ahead of the 3090 it's also a tier down. Also if you look at 4K performance, the % gaps for all these games are even larger (and I'm not looking at 4K now because it's better for my point. My next monitor will be one of the 4K QD-OLEDs that were announced at CES, so those charts are now more relevant to me than the 1440p ones)

ziml77 3y ago

Poor performance uplift? The 4080 is significantly faster than the 3090 with much lower power consumption!

tagrun 3y ago
Raw performance per dollar (after including inflation adjustment) has stagnated in 40 Series. A similar thing happened in 20 Series. SUPER series has been a response to rival products offering better raw performance/price released afterwards. Power consumption is a separate issue which may or may not be a concern depending on where you live.
kllrnohj 3y ago
The 4080/4090 are outliers of the generation though unfortunately, and also are themselves still a rather typical generational gain at that. Most of the rest of the 40xx stack was either unexpectedly slow or unexpectedly expensive (or both), such that performance per dollar stayed flat or regressed
- ziml77 3y ago
  Ah that makes sense. I don't pay close enough attention to the mid tier or the low end. I'm sure I saw at some point that there were problems with those cards but it's hard to remember when it doesn't stand out because people are negative about every GPU.
beebeepka 3y ago
It's not always faster than the 3090, let alone "significantly", except in very specific resolutions and games. here's a review from a traditionally pro intel and nvidia outlet: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-founders-edition/5.html https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-f...
- ziml77 3y ago
  I checked a sampling of a few games there and the only one where it's not ahead by a solid margin at 2560x1440 is Far Cry 6... the game that I gave up trying to play because it would not run smoothly on my 3090 + 5900X even with the settings turned down.
  - beebeepka 3y ago
    I guess that site is serving completely different graphs to me and you. Or one of us sees what they want to see.
    - ziml77 3y ago
      Besides Far Cry 6 and it's strange bottlenecks, these are the other games I checked: | Game | 3090 FPS | 4080 FPS | Delta | % Change | | Cyberpunk 2077 | 83.3 | 114.6 | 31.3 | +38% | | Doom Eternal | 261.2 | 378.4 | 117.2 | +45% | | Forza 5 | 108.2 | 147.3 | 39.1 | +36% | | Halo Infinite | 95.7 | 107.0 | 11.3 | +12% | Maybe all those years where Intel was stuck on 14nm made me forget how big leaps could be generation to generation, but to me those jumps of more than 30% are huge especially considering that while the 4080 is a gen ahead of the 3090 it's also a tier down. Also if you look at 4K performance, the % gaps for all these games are even larger (and I'm not looking at 4K now because it's better for my point. My next monitor will be one of the 4K QD-OLEDs that were announced at CES, so those charts are now more relevant to me than the 1440p ones)