$2500 5090 I’m out

MistaSparkul said:
That's not how it works lol.
Click to expand...
How do you know how it will work in 5-10 years? We are all taken aback even today by Nvidia's pricing models.....how can you be definitive about anything; especially when it comes to leather jacket man? All of your smug remarks and self assuredness doesn't change the reality one iota....all of you are pissed off because none of you are happy with the current market situation. It's going to get worse and 5 years from now you will be having the same conversation
 
Last edited:
I am disappointed by the price increases, especially for the AIB models. But I also find it funny that so many of the hardcore enthusiasts are complaining about the price.

I remember that a 2080 TI SLI setup was pretty popular back in the day. That was $2500 before tax? At the least, the 5090 should age much better than 2X 2080 TI.
 
Last edited:
rhcliff said:
I am disappointed by the price increases, especially for the AIB models. But I also find it funny that so many of the hardcore enthusiasts are complaining about the price.

I remember that a 2080 TI SLI setup was pretty popular back in the dark. That was $2500 before tax? At the least, the 5090 should age much better than 2X 2080 TI.
Click to expand...
Yes, but we had the games to play to justify the costs. Nowadays you get like one or two AAA games a year that are actually great games....not just good but great! Let's be honest, for many of us pc gaming sucks!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: spine
like this
rhcliff said:
I am disappointed by the price increases, especially for the AIB models. But I also find it funny that so many of the hardcore enthusiasts are complaining about the price.

I remember that a 2080 TI SLI setup was pretty popular back in the day. That was $2500 before tax? At the least, the 5090 should age much better than 2X 2080 TI.
Click to expand...
RTX 2080 Ti MSRP was $999 which was a $300 increase from a 1080 Ti. I can afford the RTX 5090 easily that's not the point, I don't think most of us enthusiasts are complaining about the price specifically. We are disappointed about the gen on gen improvement coupled with the 4x larger than last gen price hike. If they presented this card at $2000 AND said it was 80% faster or more than my RTX 4090 I'd probably bite. When we went from RTX 3090 to RTX 4090 we got a die shrink, massive performance uptick, 60% more CUDA cores and only a $100 higher ask. This time we didn't get die shrink, we didn't get a massive performance uptick, we didn't get a huge CUDA core count bump, but we DID get a 400% larger price hike......
 
CraptacularOne said:
RTX 2080 Ti MSRP was $999 which was a $300 increase from a 1080 Ti. I can afford the RTX 5090 easily that's not the point, I don't think most of us enthusiasts are complaining about the price specifically. We are disappointed about the gen on gen improvement coupled with the 4x larger than last gen price hike. If they presented this card at $2000 AND said it was 80% faster or more than my RTX 4090 I'd probably bite. When we went from RTX 3090 to RTX 4090 we got a die shrink, massive performance uptick, 60% more CUDA cores and only a $100 higher ask. This time we didn't get die shrink, we didn't get a massive performance uptick, we didn't get a huge CUDA core count bump, but we DID get a 400% larger price hike......
Click to expand...

You basically get a overclocked 4090 with DLSS 4.
 
I have concerns about reliability of the connector, wiring, and card itself at 575W.

I have concerns about the reliability and stability of the GDDR7 pegged at 90C.

Those of us who owned EVGA 3080 FTW3 cards remember the thermal pad mods to try to control the VRM temps, the heat soak problems into the VRAM, and more pads on the back to attempt to dump more heat into the back plate as a band aid to the card's overall temp issues even though it was a monster brick of a heat sink.

BUT, Everything else about the 5090 and tech is really quite awesome. Wish I could justify the price, but the 5080 is my limit and that's ok I still enjoy watching everyone else play guinea pig.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Niner
like this
CraptacularOne said:
RTX 2080 Ti MSRP was $999 which was a $300 increase from a 1080 Ti. I can afford the RTX 5090 easily that's not the point, I don't think most of us enthusiasts are complaining about the price specifically. We are disappointed about the gen on gen improvement coupled with the 4x larger than last gen price hike. If they presented this card at $2000 AND said it was 80% faster or more than my RTX 4090 I'd probably bite. When we went from RTX 3090 to RTX 4090 we got a die shrink, massive performance uptick, 60% more CUDA cores and only a $100 higher ask. This time we didn't get die shrink, we didn't get a massive performance uptick, we didn't get a huge CUDA core count bump, but we DID get a 400% larger price hike......
Click to expand...
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-founders-edition,5805.html

The 2080TI founders was $1200. Were the AIBs actually cheaper?
Strange because AIBs have consistently been more expensive for the last 3 generations.

The 5090 has a healthy boost in cores and a major increase in VRAM for a 90 card but staying on the same node is probably holding it back. Even with more CUDA cores, I doubt performance would be improved much unless they're really gonna make a 900W videocard.
 
rhcliff said:
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-founders-edition,5805.html

The 2080TI founders was $1200. Were the AIBs actually cheaper?
Strange because AIBs have consistently been more expensive for the last 3 generations.

The 5090 has a healthy boost in cores and a major increase in VRAM for a 90 card but staying on the same node is probably holding it back. Even with more CUDA cores, I doubt performance would be improved much unless they're really gonna make a 900W videocard.
Click to expand...
I personally never saw a $1000 2080 ti on release, only $1200 offerings. I did hear about the existence of "$999" models but I'm not sure if it was a (very rare) thing, or just wrong listings stuck in peoples' memories.
 
Advil said:
I have concerns about reliability of the connector, wiring, and card itself at 575W.
Click to expand...
This would be my main concern as well. I will be watching to see if end users have any issues with this. I look at this like buying a power supply, as you want some headroom when choosing one, but here you have no choice and are going to be very close to maxing out that connector.
 
rhcliff said:
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-founders-edition,5805.html

The 2080TI founders was $1200. Were the AIBs actually cheaper?
Strange because AIBs have consistently been more expensive for the last 3 generations.

The 5090 has a healthy boost in cores and a major increase in VRAM for a 90 card but staying on the same node is probably holding it back. Even with more CUDA cores, I doubt performance would be improved much unless they're really gonna make a 900W videocard.
Click to expand...
Yes the AIB boards were cheaper. NVIDIA used to charge a premium for their “founders edition” cards.

And no, comparatively we did NOT get a healthy CUDA core bump, we only got a 30% increase.
 
rhcliff said:
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-founders-edition,5805.html

The 2080TI founders was $1200. Were the AIBs actually cheaper?
Strange because AIBs have consistently been more expensive for the last 3 generations.

The 5090 has a healthy boost in cores and a major increase in VRAM for a 90 card but staying on the same node is probably holding it back. Even with more CUDA cores, I doubt performance would be improved much unless they're really gonna make a 900W videocard.
Click to expand...
Nvidia is probably collecting a huge profit margin on the AIB cards which lets them undercut them with the founders edition while making good money.
 
My main reason most likely not getting a RTX-5090, besides the near $3,000 price, is because I'm just not gaming that much nowadays, I mostly play World of Warcraft still at night, for an hour or so few days a week, and my current system gets 200 fps with ultra max settings 8xAA. Other than that I haven't been playing anything, except maybe old games like Quake 1 and 2 or Remaster, or used to play BF2042 but that game is dead, or Doom Eternal a little, but I already get like 240 fps with my system, and maybe some Diablo IV here or there.

So besides playing WoW any other game I play I already get high frames at max settings, nothing is chugging or bogged down for me on my system, but my monitor is 3440 X 1440 OLED it's not 4k, so my 13900k + RTX-4080 + 32GB DDR5 easily play modern games very smooth.

Not making excuses but for me, right now with my current game catalog and monitor resolution, a RTX-5090 is beyond overkill and not required for my gaming needs, unless some killer new games come out that start slowing my system down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spine
like this
Zorachus said:
My main reason most likely not getting a RTX-5090, besides the near $3,000 price, is because I'm just not gaming that much nowadays, I mostly play World of Warcraft still at night, for an hour or so few days a week, and my current system gets 200 fps with ultra max settings 8xAA. Other than that I haven't been playing anything, except maybe old games like Quake 1 and 2 or Remaster, or used to play BF2042 but that game is dead, or Doom Eternal a little, but I already get like 240 fps with my system, and maybe some Diablo IV here or there.

So besides playing WoW any other game I play I already get high frames at max settings, nothing is chugging or bogged down for me on my system, but my monitor is 3440 X 1440 OLED it's not 4k, so my 13900k + RTX-4080 + 32GB DDR5 easily play modern games very smooth.

Not making excuses but for me, right now with my current game catalog and monitor resolution, a RTX-5090 is beyond overkill and not required for my gaming needs, unless some killer new games come out that start slowing my system down.
Click to expand...
I'm in exactly the same boat, my choice of gaming poison is Guild Wars 2 and I barely play anything else these days. Alan Wake 2 and Cyberpunk are the sole games where I actually need more performance, and I'm bored of both and stopped caring about them a long time ago! :LOL:

Honestly, who still is playing Cyberpunk right now? Have you not completed it yet, and the expansion?

Seems like 5090's sole purpose is for playing a 5 year old game.
 
spine said:
I'm in exactly the same boat, my choice of gaming poison is Guild Wars 2 and I barely play anything else these days. Alan Wake 2 and Cyberpunk are the sole games where I actually need more performance, and I'm bored of both and stopped caring about them a long time ago! :LOL:

Honestly, who still is playing Cyberpunk right now? Have you not completed it yet, and the expansion?

Seems like 5090's sole purpose is for playing a 5 year old game.
Click to expand...

I played the hell out of cyberpunk 2077 when that big patch came out like a year or two ago

And then bought the expansion and played that.

Tried playing it again here and there the last few months and I'm just kind of done with the game. It was cool when that big patch came out a couple years ago but I've moved on.
 
I'd rather buy one of the new 2025 65" TV's from LG or Panasonic using the new 4-layer stack OLED design for $3000 than a GPU for $2000 but that's just me...the $1000 5080 actually looks reasonable but is basically a severely gimped 5090 and not all that much better than the 4080 Super...unless you really love the new Frame Gen or DLSS 4
 
I decided to use the money and buy a brand new Alienware 27in OLED 1440p monitor instead of a 5080, which really was a game changer for movies and games. I most demanding game I have right now is Stalker2, which my 4080 handles very well and get around 120fps, most settings are set to epic, only the shadows I turned down to high. If Im going tro spend $1000+ on a card it better be double the performance of what I have, and I don't see that happening with the 5080, not even close.
 
killroy67 said:
I decided to use the money and buy a brand new Alienware 27in OLED 1440p monitor instead of a 5080, which really was a game changer for movies and games. I most demanding game I have right now is Stalker2, which my 4080 handles very well and get around 120fps, most settings are set to epic, only the shadows I turned down to high. If Im going tro spend $1000+ on a card it better be double the performance of what I have, and I don't see that happening with the 5080, not even close.
Click to expand...
I think 5080 won’t even pass 4090 but I maybe wrong.
 
killroy67 said:
I decided to use the money and buy a brand new Alienware 27in OLED 1440p monitor instead of a 5080, which really was a game changer for movies and games. I most demanding game I have right now is Stalker2, which my 4080 handles very well and get around 120fps, most settings are set to epic, only the shadows I turned down to high. If Im going tro spend $1000+ on a card it better be double the performance of what I have, and I don't see that happening with the 5080, not even close.
Click to expand...

Lol if you bought a 5080 then you would have gained like 10% coming from a 4080. Good move.
 
KickAssCop said:
I think 5080 won’t even pass 4090 but I maybe wrong.
Click to expand...
From what the leaks are showing, the 5080 is maybe 20% faster than a 4080S? If that is true......it won't be as fast as a 4090.

Now actually getting one for $999 is going to be the hard part. Otherwise AIB's are starting at $200 over Nvidia's MSRP.
 
polonyc2 said:
I'd rather buy one of the new 2025 65" TV's from LG or Panasonic using the new 4-layer stack OLED design for $3000 than a GPU for $2000 but that's just me...the $1000 5080 actually looks reasonable but is basically a severely gimped 5090 and not all that much better than the 4080 Super...unless you really love the new Frame Gen or DLSS 4
Click to expand...

Interested in those TVs. Are they available to buy now?
 
KickAssCop said:
I think 5080 won’t even pass 4090 but I maybe wrong.
Click to expand...
That seem a safe bet to me, Nvidia benchmark and price point, both goes into that direction, could be close, but still below.

Furious_Styles said:
It's kinda the key selling point of this series imo.
Click to expand...
Will depends on the Reflex 2, faster DLSS could more the at close price go with the 5000 series argument (would transformer DLSS would have been Blackwell only that would have been the obvious selling point but it will work on a 2060)

If you do not have a 4k-240hz monitor have more than one fake frame for your frame generation, how much it become useful, yes some people will have 1080-480hz monitor, but those people will be quite latency sensitive and will run at a lot of real frame per s, will need good reflex 2 to even consider using it and maybe more for 240->480 jump than 120->480, in either case those 2 things (4k-240) or very high FPS sound a bit niche.

Will have to see if even at FrameGeneration X2 vs Framegeneration x2 on the previous generation if it run better and faster (because of FP4 support) on the 5000 series, than maybe has x2 (60->120, 75->144, or low resolution 120->240) would be more mainstream use case.
 
Last edited:
killroy67 said:
I decided to use the money and buy a brand new Alienware 27in OLED 1440p monitor instead of a 5080, which really was a game changer for movies and games. I most demanding game I have right now is Stalker2, which my 4080 handles very well and get around 120fps, most settings are set to epic, only the shadows I turned down to high. If Im going tro spend $1000+ on a card it better be double the performance of what I have, and I don't see that happening with the 5080, not even close.
Click to expand...

Rumors are a 5080 over a 4080 is very minimal upgrade in performance, 15% to 20% at best. I think that's why it's actually cheaper this time around. The 4080 launched at $1200 the 5080 will be $999.
 
Furious_Styles said:
It's kinda the key selling point of this series imo.
Click to expand...
Exactly, with the subpar performance uplift over the previous generation, they need something to "try" to sell these cards.

I just don't think the fake frames angle will work. Marketing is something you dont wanna trust from any company. Why you wait for review from 3rd party reviews.....Case in point look at the 5090!
 
Brackle said:
Exactly, with the subpar performance uplift over the previous generation, they need something to "try" to sell these cards.

I just don't think the fake frames angle will work. Marketing is something you dont wanna trust from any company. Why you wait for review from 3rd party reviews.....Case in point look at the 5090!
Click to expand...
Jensen did himself in with the whole 5070 performance quote.
 
Brackle said:
Marketing is something you dont wanna trust from any company. Why you wait for review from 3rd party reviews.....Case in point look at the 5090!
Click to expand...
As any review contradictated any claim made by Nvidia marketing about the 5090 ?

It looked like a 30-33% uplift at 4k according to nvidia graphbar, ended up around 35% on TPU average set of game, 5070 marketing claim are extremely low expectation, I doubt that it will be any different. They spin things, but the number those AMD-Intel-Nvidia put up tend to be quite legit.
 
Why is CP77 the main game people keep referencing for benchmarks with the 5090? It's a 5 year old game, that people have played already. I'm not tempted to buy a 5090 just so I can play one old game at ultra settings.

Look at Doom Dark Ages, that game will look better and actually perform way smoother and be easier on your system than Cyberpunk.
 
Zorachus said:
Why is CP77 the main game people keep referencing for benchmarks with the 5090? It's a 5 year old game, that people have played already. I'm not tempted to buy a 5090 just so I can play one old game at ultra settings.
Click to expand...
A bit like Shadow of the tomb raider was a constant benchmark for a very long time, those latest tech when released game (updated quite a bit since launch) are a measuring stick people can well understand.

Doom has yet to be released and a lot of the game more recent that are challenging for a 5090 to be interesting to see a benchmark (alan wake, hellblade 2, plague tale type) were not big sellers or multiplayer that people do not like to benchmark because of what a server involve.

In term of big selling single player game, Phantom Liberty path tracing update is still one of the hardest game to run on a gpu if not the most.

Has for game looking better, they are often doing way less things than cyberpunk, doom seem to always be in cloudy situation, upcoming Black state limited on rail often interior level, less asset but higher quality, Cyberpunk updated is a giant open city with a ridiculous amount of active light source.
 
Last edited:
Zorachus said:
Why is CP77 the main game people keep referencing for benchmarks with the 5090? It's a 5 year old game, that people have played already. I'm not tempted to buy a 5090 just so I can play one old game at ultra settings.

Look at Doom Dark Ages, that game will look better and actually perform way smoother and be easier on your system than Cyberpunk.
Click to expand...
CP77 has been known to bring modern PC's to it's knees is why I think they keep referencing it, though it wasn't my cup of tea. The latest Doom games have been easier to crank everything up with no issues to the latest hardware.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top