Nvidia RTX Series

[LadyCrimson]

^ I should note that the whole reason I went to higher end gpu's was because of longevity re: higher game settings.
If you buy high end nvidia it's typical that a couple generation series later, the "lower end" ends up being kinda like what used to be higher end 2-3 gens ago.

But I really don't want to give nvida 2k+ for a stupid gpu. $1400 for the 2080ti 5 years ago was bad enough, even tho I've liked that gpu/it's served me very well (I've only played 4k since I bought it).

tripleEdit: it's not at all about affordability for me. It's consumer principle at this point + less gaming interest. I just want to play on a giant 4k screen. >.>

Edited September 24 by LadyCrimson

[Humanoid]

Games have different failure modes for running out of VRAM. Some may at least gracefully dial back texture quality dynamically, which sometimes might not be noticeable. But others aren't nearly as well-prepared for it and become a stutter-fest.

Funny thing about the 4070 Ti in the first place is that I think it's a card they're struggling to sell. It's one of the two older models in the family, the other being the original 4070 GDDR6X version. The Super variants were released later, and the 4070 Super ended up being a 5-10% slower Ti, but with the same VRAM and for around 20% less money. Mind you it's the same again with the Ti Super, 5-10% faster than the Ti for 20% more money, though at least you also get 4GB extra VRAM this time, unlike going from a Super to a Ti.

At any rate, I don't think it's a card you should fear missing out on, mainly because it's hardly a paragon of value in the first place. The 5070 will have it covered easily, and even with AMD abandoning the high-end, the 7900 XT is already faster than it for the same price, so you can infer that their replacement for that card will also be a suitable alternative.

 

(Note that prices are based on what I've seen locally, so the pricing gaps might not be representative. The Super is around $900AUD here, then add $200 AUD for each successive step up)

[Azdeus]

17 hours ago, Humanoid said:

The same thing has already happened multiple times in recent memory, so it's nothing new really. Is it really any different to just 5 years ago with the 5700 XT, a decade ago with the RX 480, and going further back, the 3870? Doesn't feel like it. The mainstream gamer will be find and well catered for by whichever products they'll likely release.

They try to create a halo product that matches nVidia's best when they can, but if they're way behind in a particular generation, they don't bother. Yeah, it hurts the Radeon brand in terms of it increasingly being viewed as just a value product, but it's not like it has much cachet right now even with the existence of the 7900 XTX.

It's their timing and pricing that ****ed them over more than anything. They barely undercut nvidias cards and had less features, so why not spend the extra 100$ and get good ray tracing performance, DLSS and their other features. And they were nowhere to be seen when nvidia released their 30-series cards, since there was nothing to go on, I bought an 600$ 3080, waited for several months for the delivery, and shortly before I took delivery of my card AMD released their products.

[Bokishi]

Any guess on price? $2500??

https://videocardz.com/newz/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5090-and-rtx-5080-specs-leaked

[majestic]

The spec difference between the 5090 and 5080 is bizarre. kopite7kimi is usually right though, so I guess that is what we're getting.

[LadyCrimson]

13 hours ago, Bokishi said:

Any guess on price? $2500??

https://videocardz.com/newz/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5090-and-rtx-5080-specs-leaked

Since 4090 and 4080 were 1600 and 1200 at launch (I think), I'd guess $1999 and $1499 this time.

8 hours ago, majestic said:

The spec difference between the 5090 and 5080 is bizarre. kopite7kimi is usually right though, so I guess that is what we're getting.

Yeah...can't even give the 5080 20gb vram. I suppose they'll give that to the 5080ti or 5080ti super or whatever they're planning on squeezing inbetween as usual.
That's what I mean by gimping everything but the xx90's, but not making the xx90's twice the price. Thus driving people to buy the xx90 "for a little more."

I figure at some point Nvidia will only put out xx90's for $4k for the elites and everyone else will buy mid tier Intel or AMD for $800-$1200. Pfft.

[majestic]

Lower and mid tier GPUs might as well stop existing in the (not so far off) future as integrated graphics become more and more powerful. If you stick to 1080p at slightly lower settings, you can already make do with Lunar Lake or Strix Point, and those are laptop CPUs.

Well, unless Intel walks back on their ARC support and kills the rest of the team in the wake of their layoffs.

[Sven_]

 

2 hours ago, majestic said:

Lower and mid tier GPUs might as well stop existing in the (not so far off) future as integrated graphics become more and more powerful. If you stick to 1080p at slightly lower settings, you can already make do with Lunar Lake or Strix Point, and those are laptop CPUs.

 

Yeah, they're naturally priced accordingly. On the desktop front, things have been the same for a decade now give or take. Which is: The fastest desktop APU has about the rendering power of entry level gaming GPUs of ~5 years prior. Currently Ryzen 8700G roughly matching a 2019 GTX 1650. APUs have their place, but they're niche. For a budget build you're far better off with a Ryzen 5500 + RX 6600 -- which both combined cost about the same as the 8700G, whilst offering multiple times the gaming power due to the GPU.

 

Prior to the market exploding, I'd have changed my GPU pretty regularly. Now I'm probably gonna sit on my 1050ti until it rots.  The only games I'd currently upgrade for are Stalker 2 + KCD II (and MAYBE Avowed) anyways. For everything else, it's mostly still... ok (not playing many gfx blockbusters anyway). However, I'm not gonna buy a 8GB VRAM GPU in 2025 -- the RX 480 already had 8GB in 2016 (and the GTX 1060 6 as well). A decade later, those aren't gonna last any much longer even in Full-HD. The only exception would be the smaller Intel Battlemage budget model, depending on which. However, a RTX 5060 / RX 8600 with 8GB? Go **** yerselves.  I'd rather spend big and build an altogether new proper gaming PC than doing that -- which I haven't done in more than 20 years. PC gaming as such had been pretty inexpensive for a very long time -- even a GeForce 4 ti I could get a year after launch in 2003 for below 100 bucks, which was less than half of what it launched for ~15 months earlier.

Edited September 28 by Sven_

[Azdeus]

21 hours ago, Bokishi said:

Any guess on price? $2500??

https://videocardz.com/newz/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5090-and-rtx-5080-specs-leaked

2999$ I'm guessing, maybe something like that for nvidias own cards on release.

16Gb of memory is really on the low end, that is really depressing.

[Zoraptor]

6 hours ago, Azdeus said:

2999$ I'm guessing, maybe something like that for nvidias own cards on release.

16Gb of memory is really on the low end, that is really depressing.

OK, and how much do you think the 5090 will go for?

12 hours ago, majestic said:

Well, unless Intel walks back on their ARC support and kills the rest of the team in the wake of their layoffs.

Dunno, kind of feel Intel has to persevere with the GPU division. Not for the GPUs themselves though.

[Azdeus]

22 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

OK, and how much do you think the 5090 will go for?

Dunno, kind of feel Intel has to persevere with the GPU division. Not for the GPUs themselves though.

I'm thinking 4K, or there about, you know, for a 1$ per K resolution

Edit; To be fair though, with those specs, that "5080" ought to be called 5070. They're doing it again, just not being as stupid about it.

Edited September 29 by Azdeus