$2,500 RTX-5090 ( 60% faster than 4090 )

cesarioFL71 said:
I think I'm coming to the end of "modern pc" gaming after 30 years in the hobby. This trend of possible 2500.00 gpu's combined with "modern games" that really don't target my age bracket is forcing me to reevaluate my priorities. At least I have thousands upon thousands of past pc, arcade and retro console games to ensure that I will always be a "gamer"; just not a so called "modern gamer" with the stomach to pay for 2500.00 video cards to play games that no longer speak to me........
Click to expand...
Perhaps you are in need of reeducation via a consultation from sweetbaby inc.?
 
Not that long ago that people talked about Nvidia being overpriced and inflated at 700 millions, that a over 11 billions revenues quarter was some wild ridiculous rumours... that the AI bubble did not exist.
 
LukeTbk said:
Not that long ago that people talked about Nvidia being overpriced and inflated at 700 millions, that a over 11 billions revenues quarter was some wild ridiculous rumours... that the AI bubble did not exist.
Click to expand...

Bear in mind that Tesla was worth more than pretty much the rest of the auto industry at one point. People (and professional analysts) told themselves that this made sense because "Tesla's not a car company, it's a tech company", "EVs are taking over", "everyone else is stuck in the past", etc. Then interest rates went up, and China was like "thanks again for the tech guys, we're building our own now", and Tesla's getting crunched. The story was absolutely true, at least until it changed.

That's the problem with the market sometimes. It can be incredibly difficult to properly assess a company's worth in a boom time. The sky's the limit for Nvidia right now. Is it overvalued? Maybe, but we won't know until the growth stops. I would say a few things are true at this point:

1) Nvidia is the real deal and is way ahead of the competition, not just in hardware but in software.
2) There is an unknown amount of forward earnings being pulled forward right now and Nvidia is being valued on that.
3) Some fund managers are going to be buying Nvidia now just so they don't have to explain to clients why they don't already own it, or own enough of it.
4) There will be a lot of companies putting a lot of R&D work to try to get part of Nvidia's market, which Nvidia is dominating (see point 1).

Fun times in any case. Enjoy the ride!
 
HockeyJon said:
Bear in mind that Tesla was worth more than pretty much the rest of the auto industry at one point.
Click to expand...
Tesla > all the old cars company combined is still somewhat true

54B (GM) + 47B (Ford) + 51B (Honda) + 261B (Toyota) + 60B(Stellantis the Chryslar-fiat group) + 62B (volks) = 535 billions vs Tesla 589 billions.

The many direct electric car company and China in generals, changed the overall auto industry face too.
 
LukeTbk said:
Tesla > all the old cars company combined is still somewhat true

54B (GM) + 47B (Ford) + 51B (Honda) + 261B (Toyota) + 60B(Stellantis the Chryslar-fiat group) + 62B (volks) = 535 billions vs Tesla 589 billions.

The many direct electric car company and China in generals, changed the overall auto industry face too.
Click to expand...

Yes, that’s true, but it’s also been cut almost in half from its all time high. Story changed, competition emerged, and everyone suddenly decided there was an upper limit, at least for now.
 
hu76 said:
Hello. I have an question. When will be released and ready to buy new rtx 5090?
Click to expand...
Based on the following 5090 speculation video, I'm going to predict the 5090 will have 28GB GDDR7 VRAM, 448 bit bus, and offer about a 50% raw performance increase over the 4090.

The price will probably be somewhere between $1,599 and $1,999. If Nvidia only bumps the price up to say $1,699 none of the whales will blink and it will sell like hotcakes.

Source:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUxsWi1aY3I
 
  • Like
Reactions: hu76
like this
vjhawk said:
Based on the following 5090 speculation video, I'm going to predict the 5090 will have 28GB GDDR7 VRAM, 448 bit bus, and offer about a 50% raw performance increase over the 4090.

The price will probably be somewhere between $1,599 and $1,999. If Nvidia only bumps the price up to say $1,699 none of the whales will blink and it will sell like hotcakes.

Source:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUxsWi1aY3I
Click to expand...

thx
 
DouglasteR said:
Don´t forget to add the "mandatory"
Click to expand...
Hope you guys are looking forward to your inevitable internment in the reeducation camps
vjhawk said:
Based on the following 5090 speculation video, I'm going to predict the 5090 will have 28GB GDDR7 VRAM, 448 bit bus, and offer about a 50% raw performance increase over the 4090.

The price will probably be somewhere between $1,599 and $1,999. If Nvidia only bumps the price up to say $1,699 none of the whales will blink and it will sell like hotcakes.

Source:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUxsWi1aY3I
Click to expand...

It's not gonna cost under 2k
 
Captain Newmackwa said:
Some people are hoping it's gonna be well over 2K just so they can prove their point that Nvidia is really "Ngreedia".
Click to expand...

I just don't get that line of thought.. nVidia should price their products as high as they can get away with, let the market dictate the price - it works in most sectors.

nVidia is not a charity, they are doing it for profit.

also - this IS a super-luxery item, if you want it - you might have to save up, or choose this over something else.

nothing wrong with 1080p or 1440p - and it costs alot less.
 
RamboZombie said:
also - this IS a super-luxery item, if you want it - you might have to save up, or choose this over something else.
Click to expand...
Didn't used to be. Luxury in the sense it wasn't necessary? Absolutely, always has been. To the point you now need to just be a whale to get any decent gen over gen performance increases? Nah. Never used to be that way.

Don't hear me saying that I am expecting everything to just stay 2010 pricing, because no, that's not at all realistic. But I am saying that outside of the halo, first it was low end and now its getting to be the mid-range that costs more than ever, but is also seeing less and less improvement gen over gen. 60-branded has stagnated. Next it will be the 70-branded cards.
 
Generation Transition | Performance Increase (%)
--------------------------------------------|-------------------------------
GeForce GTX 260 to GeForce GTX 460 | ~40%
GeForce GTX 460 to GeForce GTX 560 | ~20%
GeForce GTX 560 to GeForce GTX 660 | ~30%
GeForce GTX 660 to GeForce GTX 760 | ~15%
GeForce GTX 760 to GeForce GTX 960 | ~30%
GeForce GTX 960 to GeForce GTX 1060 | ~50%
GeForce GTX 1060 to GeForce RTX 2060 | ~35%
GeForce RTX 2060 to GeForce RTX 3060 | ~30%
GeForce RTX 3060 to GeForce RTX 4060 | ~25%


Generation Transition | Performance Increase (%)
--------------------------------------------|-------------------------------
GeForce GTX 270 to GeForce GTX 470 | ~48%
GeForce GTX 470 to GeForce GTX 570 | ~20%
GeForce GTX 570 to GeForce GTX 670 | ~30%
GeForce GTX 670 to GeForce GTX 770 | ~15%
GeForce GTX 770 to GeForce GTX 970 | ~40%
GeForce GTX 970 to GeForce GTX 1070 | ~50%
GeForce GTX 1070 to GeForce RTX 2070 | ~25%
GeForce RTX 2070 to GeForce RTX 3070 | ~40%
GeForce RTX 3070 to GeForce RTX 4070 | ~30%


Generation Transition | Performance Increase (%)
--------------------------------------------|-------------------------------
GeForce GTX 280 to GeForce GTX 480 | ~54%
GeForce GTX 480 to GeForce GTX 580 | ~18%
GeForce GTX 580 to GeForce GTX 680 | ~39%
GeForce GTX 680 to GeForce GTX 780 | ~25%
GeForce GTX 780 to GeForce GTX 980 | ~35%
GeForce GTX 980 to GeForce GTX 1080 | ~65%
GeForce GTX 1080 to GeForce RTX 2080 | ~35%
GeForce RTX 2080 to GeForce RTX 3080 | ~60%
GeForce RTX 3080 to GeForce RTX 4080 | ~30%


Generation Transition | Performance Increase (%)
--------------------------------------------|-------------------------------
GeForce GTX Titan to GeForce GTX Titan X (Maxwell) | ~30%
GeForce GTX Titan X (Maxwell) to GeForce Titan X (Pascal) | ~68%
GeForce Titan X (Pascal) to GeForce RTX 2080 Ti | ~33%
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti to GeForce RTX 3090 | ~40%
GeForce RTX 3090 to GeForce RTX 4090 | ~60%


Things haven't changed all that much at least since GTX 200 series, the higher end cards always received a more substantial uplift. At least according to techpowerup's data. The only real outliers is the RTX 3080 and receiving a more substantial uplift than the 3090 that generation, and the GTX 580 receiving 2% less of an uplift compared to the 570 and 560.
 
Last edited:
LittleBuddy said:
Generation Transition | Performance Increase (%)
--------------------------------------------|-------------------------------
GeForce GTX 260 to GeForce GTX 460 | ~40%
GeForce GTX 460 to GeForce GTX 560 | ~20%
GeForce GTX 560 to GeForce GTX 660 | ~30%
GeForce GTX 660 to GeForce GTX 760 | ~15%
GeForce GTX 760 to GeForce GTX 960 | ~30%
GeForce GTX 960 to GeForce GTX 1060 | ~50%
GeForce GTX 1060 to GeForce RTX 2060 | ~35%
GeForce RTX 2060 to GeForce RTX 3060 | ~30%
GeForce RTX 3060 to GeForce RTX 4060 | ~25%


Generation Transition | Performance Increase (%)
--------------------------------------------|-------------------------------
GeForce GTX 270 to GeForce GTX 470 | ~48%
GeForce GTX 470 to GeForce GTX 570 | ~20%
GeForce GTX 570 to GeForce GTX 670 | ~30%
GeForce GTX 670 to GeForce GTX 770 | ~15%
GeForce GTX 770 to GeForce GTX 970 | ~40%
GeForce GTX 970 to GeForce GTX 1070 | ~50%
GeForce GTX 1070 to GeForce RTX 2070 | ~25%
GeForce RTX 2070 to GeForce RTX 3070 | ~40%
GeForce RTX 3070 to GeForce RTX 4070 | ~30%


Generation Transition | Performance Increase (%)
--------------------------------------------|-------------------------------
GeForce GTX 280 to GeForce GTX 480 | ~54%
GeForce GTX 480 to GeForce GTX 580 | ~18%
GeForce GTX 580 to GeForce GTX 680 | ~39%
GeForce GTX 680 to GeForce GTX 780 | ~25%
GeForce GTX 780 to GeForce GTX 980 | ~35%
GeForce GTX 980 to GeForce GTX 1080 | ~65%
GeForce GTX 1080 to GeForce RTX 2080 | ~35%
GeForce RTX 2080 to GeForce RTX 3080 | ~60%
GeForce RTX 3080 to GeForce RTX 4080 | ~30%


Generation Transition | Performance Increase (%)
--------------------------------------------|-------------------------------
GeForce GTX Titan to GeForce GTX Titan X (Maxwell) | ~30%
GeForce GTX Titan X (Maxwell) to GeForce Titan X (Pascal) | ~68%
GeForce Titan X (Pascal) to GeForce RTX 2080 Ti | ~33%
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti to GeForce RTX 3090 | ~40%
GeForce RTX 3090 to GeForce RTX 4090 | ~60%


Things haven't changed all that much at least since GTX 200 series, the higher end cards always received a more substantial uplift. At least according to techpowerup's data. The only real outliers is the RTX 3080 and receiving a more substantial uplift than the 3090 that generation, and the GTX 580 receiving 2% less of an uplift compared to the 570 and 560.
Click to expand...
Sure they have. This chart doesn't account for the difference in chip tiering either.
 
GoldenTiger said:
This. It's been over a decade since the codename of the chip matched its performance tier. It's irrelevant now.
Click to expand...
AMD is no different here. Naming a card 7900 as if were competing with the 4090 when it barely edges out a 4080 which is much weaker than a 4090 to begin with has rubbed me the wrong way since their release.
 
ZeroBarrier said:
AMD is no different here. Naming a card 7900 as if were competing with the 4090 when it barely edges out a 4080 which is much weaker than a 4090 to begin with has rubbed me the wrong way since their release.
Click to expand...

Funniest part is when AMD fanboys were on hardcore copium saying that a refreshed 7950XTX with more infinity cache, higher clock speeds, and "fixed" drivers would be the real 4090 competitor that the 7900XTX never was. Even the great MILD was on the same copium at one point.

1719342824931.png
 
LittleBuddy said:
Code-names are not relevant to Nvidia's naming scheme. They showed us that with the GTX680.
Click to expand...
Right, that's entirely my point.

GoldenTiger said:
This. It's been over a decade since the codename of the chip matched its performance tier. It's irrelevant now.
Click to expand...
Kinda changed again for 30-series and again for 40-series. All to say can't really draw a one to one comparison to stuff from a decade ago. A 260 and how it related to its product stack is completely apples to oranges to what a 4060 is and how it relates to its product stack.
 
MistaSparkul said:
Funniest part is when AMD fanboys were on hardcore copium saying that a refreshed 7950XTX with more infinity cache, higher clock speeds, and "fixed" drivers would be the real 4090 competitor that the 7900XTX never was. Even the great MILD was on the same copium at one point.

View attachment 661828
Click to expand...
AMD won’t be able to beat Nvidia because they can’t build competitive monolithic gpu. Until they perfect a chiplet solution they will be going for runner up. At this point battle mage feels more compelling as Intel continues to make strides in their gpu designs.
 
vjhawk said:
AMD won’t be able to beat Nvidia because they can’t build competitive monolithic gpu. Until they perfect a chiplet solution they will be going for runner up. At this point battle mage feels more compelling as Intel continues to make strides in their gpu designs.
Click to expand...

Even then Nvidia would probably make a better chiplet card than AMD anyways. I think we are soon approaching even smaller reticle limits for monolithic designs, around half of what it is right now so both team red and green will be forced to go MCM at some point in the future and I'm betting team green will probably be on top again.
 
I picked up a 4650g for the truenas box the other day and did a little testing on some gaming before I do the swap. AMD is so close to making these things viable for 60FPS gaming it hurts. Once that happens, who needs video cards?
 
Randall Stephens said:
I picked up a 4650g for the truenas box the other day and did a little testing on some gaming before I do the swap. AMD is so close to making these things viable for 60FPS gaming it hurts. Once that happens, who needs video cards?
Click to expand...
People with brain damage like me who need 4k 144hz or they think the game is broken. Joking aside 60+ at all times @ 4k is kind of mandatory now. FSR Quality to 4k is okay too depending on the implementation, DLSS or XeSS would be preferable.
 
Randall Stephens said:
I picked up a 4650g for the truenas box the other day and did a little testing on some gaming before I do the swap. AMD is so close to making these things viable for 60FPS gaming it hurts. Once that happens, who needs video cards?
Click to expand...
Some of us like our eye candy and high resolutions, plus higher framerates than 60 average (which means you'll be dipping below that half the time).
 
Randall Stephens said:
Oh sure, but if you could get 60fps consistently with some candy, 80% of the market would be satisfied
Click to expand...
The issue is that nowadays, a "good enough" cards are in the 4070 pricing Tier, WAY outside of a normal gamer's budget. Remember the 1060? how that could play MOST games at the high-to-ultra settings at common resolutions? how it was half the price of the 4060? and how the 4060 is 25% less silicon than the 1060? Remember how the 1060 was the GO-TO choice for any gamer on a budget?

Nvidia is selling us less silicon
For a higher price
that doesn't play the games of the time as well as previous generations.

We're getting less
Paying more for it
and being told we're whining and entitled because we can't afford $2500 for a luxury 4K gaming card.

It's not about the 4090 or 5090, its about the absolute dogwater 4050 that Nvidia is labelling "4060" and selling for $300

That $300 doesn't get you anything noteworthy! the 4060 is barely faster than the 3060, the 3060 that didn't review well when it was NEW.

Want something that has balls? you can grab the 4060 that was labelled as the 4080 12Gb 4070 and get a card that will run todays games at today's resolutions well and consistently.... for $600...

Whatever happened to "a great choice that won't break the bank"? Inflation's a bitch and I'll probably buy the 5090 when it comes out because I love tech, but recommending a system for my broke friends USED to be a fun challenge, now it's just depressing.

Sorry, ranting.
 
KazeoHin said:
The issue is that nowadays, a "good enough" cards are in the 4070 pricing Tier, WAY outside of a normal gamer's budget. Remember the 1060? how that could play MOST games at the high-to-ultra settings at common resolutions? how it was half the price of the 4060? and how the 4060 is 25% less silicon than the 1060? Remember how the 1060 was the GO-TO choice for any gamer on a budget?

Nvidia is selling us less silicon
For a higher price
that doesn't play the games of the time as well as previous generations.

We're getting less
Paying more for it
and being told we're whining and entitled because we can't afford $2500 for a luxury 4K gaming card.

It's not about the 4090 or 5090, its about the absolute dogwater 4050 that Nvidia is labelling "4060" and selling for $300

That $300 doesn't get you anything noteworthy! the 4060 is barely faster than the 3060, the 3060 that didn't review well when it was NEW.

Want something that has balls? you can grab the 4060 that was labelled as the 4080 12Gb 4070 and get a card that will run todays games at today's resolutions well and consistently.... for $600...

Whatever happened to "a great choice that won't break the bank"? Inflation's a bitch and I'll probably buy the 5090 when it comes out because I love tech, but recommending a system for my broke friends USED to be a fun challenge, now it's just depressing.

Sorry, ranting.
Click to expand...
I think, maybe we are in agreement?
 
I think from time to time we forget what is possible at 1080p, a 6600xt-4060 can do very well for 60 fps people.

Hogwart, last of us part 1, cyberpunk, plague tale, Elden Ring, Callisto protocol at very high graphic.

If they are on 1440p-120fps type, that way deep in mid range gaming than poor gaming.
 
LukeTbk said:
I think from time to time we forget what is possible at 1080p, a 6600xt-4060 can do very well for 60 fps people.

Hogwart, last of us part 1, cyberpunk, plague tale, Elden Ring, Callisto protocol at very high graphic.

If they are on 1440p-120fps type, that way deep in mid range gaming than poor gaming.
Click to expand...
I think what's lost in this discussion is that even back then, $700 cards were marketed as 4k cards. Now you want that? We'll take $1200, $1600, $2500 please!

Why has one segment, specifically 1080p become (or stayed) cheaper to run easily, while others have only gotten more expensive? You're calling 1440p-120hz mid-range gaming (and I'd agree), but now that's a pricier segment than ever.

Certain people in this thread sure like to pretend nothing bad is going on with pricing. I like all the eye candy too, but I'm not blind to the fact that as time goes on it just keeps getting more and more expensive instead of the other way around? 1440p and 4k aren't new resolutions.
 
Last edited:
Sir Beregond said:
Why has one segment, specifically 1080p become (or stayed) cheaper to run easily, while others have only gotten more expensive? You're calling 1440p-120hz mid-range gaming (and I'd agree), but now that's a pricier segment than ever.
Click to expand...
I think it can be console cycle, how upscaling currently work and now we add complex per pixel tech like Unreal 5.

In 2016 running game made to run at 720p or more at 30 fps on a jaguar 8 core and 1.85 FP16 teraflops was easy enough to do at 1080p at 60fps.

If optimized game now run at 60fps at 1080p on a 3700x-6600xt/6700 type of system to run at 1440p-120hz with higher details at native resolution, you need 4 time the power of what was not a bad system to do it.

I am not sure how costly it was to run at 1440p-120hz it would have sound very high end for a long time to do something like that 1080p-120hz for high detail newAAA game was the starting to get into some fancy zone.
 
Sir Beregond said:
I think what's lost in this discussion is that even back then, $700 cards were marketed as 4k cards. Now you want that? We'll take $1200, $1600, $2500 please!

Why has one segment, specifically 1080p become (or stayed) cheaper to run easily, while others have only gotten more expensive? You're calling 1440p-120hz mid-range gaming (and I'd agree), but now that's a pricier segment than ever.

Certain people in this thread sure like to pretend nothing bad is going on with pricing. I like all the eye candy too, but I'm not blind to the fact that as time goes on it just keeps getting more and more expensive instead of the other way around? 1440p and 4k aren't new resolutions.
Click to expand...

Well how much money do you think is reasonable for 1440p 120fps gaming then? The 7900GRE is capable of 1440p 120fps and can be found for around $500-$550. Do you want the same capability for $300 or something?

1719428913249.png


1719428952837.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top