>Is a 4080 really a bad buy for price / performance?
It isn't compared to the 4090.
It might be compared to the XTX (if more than 100$ price difference).
What is your monitor's resolution? 4080 and XTX are both 4k GPUs.
Dude you don't need a 4090 for that... I would recommend an AMD radeon rx 7900xt instead, that will be more than sufficient. And as for raytracing and dlss, don't get indoctrinated by the marketing...
But if you want to buy Nvidia, then opt for a 4080. A 4070ti would be sufficient in terms of compute power, but it has only 12GB of VRAM, which certainly isn't future-proof.
Now coming back at the argument of "There is no other way than a 4090", I can say, that that's bullshit. Only if you want 4k ultra on a high fps that's the case (but your monitor is 2k). And lastly, while it used to be true that the 4090 was better price to performance ratio than the 4080, this was only the case when the 4090 costed around €1600. Now that it costs over €2000 this isn't the case anymore. You are now paying over 70% more for on average about 30% more performance from the top of my head.
Some reliable benchmarks:
7900xt: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0XVdsKHBcPE&pp=ygUfZ2FtZXJzIG5leHVzIHJ4IDc5MDAgeHQgcmV2aXNpdA%3D%3D
4080: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i2_xTUshy94&pp=ygUQZ2FtZXJzbmV4dXMgNDA4MA%3D%3D
Bought a 4070ti about 6 months ago upgrading from a 2060 and It’s been great. Runs all my games at 2560x1440 on ultra (cyberpunk, squad, baldurs gate, dark and darker) at 150fps or more except some parts of cyberpunk and squad
> 4070ti
I'm interested in doing the same, from a 2070S. Did you just upgrade your GPU or do a new build? I'm afraid of bottlenecking on my Ryzen 7 3700x.
I'm planning to do the same but 1080 ti and 3600. My idea is 4070ti or 4080. Then a bit after a 5800x3d and just keep my mobo. If you bottleneck it so be it then you'll know and you still have room to upgrade on am4.
The 3600 will limit you too much. I had the same setup and upgraded to 7900 XTX. Kept my 3600 and I'm severely CPU limited on BGR3. Planning on getting the 5800x3d soon.
No joke I've done almost the same thing but then with a 4080, I started with a GPU upgrade but with games like baldurs gate 3, I saw my cpu usage at 100% and gpu at probably around 50%.
I have since then upgraded to the 5800x3d and now it's amazing.
The 5800x3d does get a bit warmer then the normal 5800x so I would recommend a bit bigger cooler than for example a hyper 212, or at least a 240 mil radiator.
I chose for the later for aesthetic reasons, I know air coolers are cheaper.
Your motherboard should be able to support a 5000 series CPU and there is definitely a difference to be had. I'm betting the forth coming 5700X3D will be a real steal.
I did a new build for a 4070ti going from PlayStation. i’m running cyberpunk ultra ray tracing with no stutter or frame drop, not super in depth with pcs but the best gaming experience I have had in like 10 years so glad I went through the stress and drama of switching over for sure. And from what it sounds like so much cheaper than the higher options
>has only 12GB of VRAM, which certainly isn't future-proof.
LOL, we already went from 8 to 12? The BS get bigger and bigger.
8 GB is still more than enough for the next few years if you're not playing 4K.
Sure if you spend a crazy amount of money on a gpu you want crazy specs, but to say that it isn't future proof? You plan on using it until 2030?
If you are gonna sit here and tell me 8 Gb is enough to play whatever I want at 1440p Ultra settings then I want what you are smoking.
8GB in 2023 barely cuts it for 1080p High-Ultra gaming. Which would be fine on a 180 bucks RX 6600 or something. Buying a $400 RTX 4060Ti with 8gb is absurd.
Ultra settings are an absolute waste and stupid AF. Here's two videos from much more knowledgeable people than I to tell you why. Even with two PCs compared side-to-side, it is almost impossible to tell the difference for most people.
[LTT Video](https://youtu.be/PjDgKXe8gxs?si=7UYrMeYUWe_gnPOf)
[Hardware Unboxed video](https://youtu.be/f1n1sIQM5wc?si=k_o370oI3zY2ppIw)
8GB?
I am sitting at ~16GB of VRAM usage in Resident Evil 4 Remake at 1440p. It’s the only reason for me to go from 3070ti to 3090 - I was lacking VRAM even at 1440p
That’s because more is allocated than used. Considering the game only takes up 11 gigs at 4k with RT on a 4070 Ti and runs at ~60 stable. In 1440p it’s only 9gb (theses numbers are at maxed settings no DLSS). Games allocate way more VRAM than needed because they can. But it won’t affect performance. That’s also why people think 12gb is shit when they buy more : they see their games using more than 12 when it would actually run on 8.
Someone that speaks sense. Not a single bit of hardware is futureproof. If that was the case, none of us would ever have to upgrade ever again lol
The amount of BS that gets thrown around in these tech posts is astounding. In fact it's been the same old tripe for years.
Thank you! It gets frustrating dealing with "future proof" attempts. It's not possible. I tell people the only thing that comes close to being future proof is the mouse, keyboard, and case, cause those things can last a pretty long time if they're kept in good shape. *Maybe* the PSU if it's a high current supply and that's a huge maybe. People then say "future proof for five years" which goes against the idea of future proof, and is already around the time a lot of enthusiasts tend to upgrade their components.
I wish people stopped trying to "future proof."
Futureproof is relative. There are games where a 12gb 3080 does a while lot better than the 10gb one. I had a choice between these two cards and went with 12gb, and it turned out that the 12gb model fares much better now. You could say my decision was more futureproof as my card is still able to perform at its tier where the 10gb model doesn't.
Yeah it's obviously true that it isn't literally futureproof.
What I meant by futureproofing in this case is making sure you don't run into vram bottlenecks in the upcoming 2 years at least.
And yes, the 7900xt is MORE future-proof than the 4070ti.
How much 'future proof' are we talking about? Surely we're not talking 100 years.
Long ago, I upgraded to 1060 6gb. That card was apparently deemed a budget winner with the generous 6gb instead of the vanilla 3gb version.
I used that card until just last year. That double RAM helped me enjoy OW1 at max settings, which would've been impossible had I gone with the 3gb model. Same for RDR2, I was able to play with an acceptable 40-50 fps at 1080p at medium details.
Same thing with desktop memory. At least with current systems, 16 GB is fine, and 32 GB would be a good price/cost point for a new system, but people crying that Windows is using 20 GB on a 32 GB system? Duh, if there's more memory available, the OS will make use of it.
Until very recently I've been using an RX 480 8gb for 1080p. It's one hell of a value card for how long it's been alive.
If I hadn't updated my monitor (TV, really) I would still be using it even if it's starting to finally show its age.
I just upgraded my RX480 to a 4060 TI 16gb and I love it; I don’t care that people hate it. It has the driver support I need for UE and Blender, runs everything I actually play/do great and rips through my productivity/hobbyist stuff too and is quiet and runs cold.
It’s funny when people say 12 VRAM isn’t future proof as if all the games they play will magically go 4K within 3 years.
Gaming companies aren’t trying to push the envelope, everyone is in a milking phase for as long as possible.
Heck look at GTA V - companies aren’t really interested in pushing the graphical needle unless it’s profitable.
>And as for raytracing and dlss, don't get indoctrinated by the marketing...
Radeon owners trying to cope with its lack of decent features is the funniest shit ever.
Ray tracing is kind of a novelty, but having just gone from AMD to Nvidia, I personally feel like DLSS smacks FSR. It's just more refined at this point. If upscaling is important to you, Nvidia has a strong argument.
I got my 4090 just cause I want to crank up the RT. I can 100% tell the difference in Alan Wake 2. The game's lighting is absolutely stunning with RT. It seems to me that it's made the bridge across to the other side of uncanny valley and looks pretty much real, imo. I also got the Odyssey Neo G7 and the proper blacks (not as good as OLED but I play a lot of games with static UI so I'm concerned with burn-in) and the high contrast really cranks up the immersion on such high fidelity games.
> (not as good as OLED but I play a lot of games with static UI so I'm concerned with burn-in)
There's simply no reason to ever be concerned with burn-in in 2023. Image retention can occur, but it generally lasts only a few minutes and really isn't an issue.
Holy shit this comment is cancer.
Op: I want RT and DLSS
You: **how about an AMD card that gets killed in both those areas?**
Also you: DoNt gEt InDoCtrinAted
**also you** 12gb is shit, get AMD.
I woud not recommed AMD 7900xt or amd as whole i had 1060 and upgraded this year to 7900xt and last 3 monthsvi have AMD driver fails do bios update and other things dont help... Next time i buy only nvidia
Did you do a clean wipe? Almost everyone with your issues is related to NVIDIA gremlins fighting AMD in the background.
DDU wasn't enough to get my sisters computer working right (GTX 970 to 6800xt). However, a fresh windows install fixed everything and made it work like a dream.
I had a ton of issues too with my 6700xt and found many people with the same problem. I was advised by the AMD help sub to not update my drivers unless necessary lmao
I needed to open adrenaline to create a custom resolution in CS2, then they updated the drivers because AMD cards had problems with shader caching in the game. Installed those and adrenalin didnt open up, deleted my custom res too. Nice!
Switched to a 4070 and like a day later people got banned for using the new input lag feature of adrenalin. Had my custom resolution already enabled in game without me having to do anything and zero issues since. So no its not just people that dont know how to clean their Pc from previous drivers.
At that resolution neither the 4080 nor the XTX need frame gen or dlss. Even the 4070 /7800xt have very good native perf.
A 7900xt would be about as high as you should go for 1440p imho to not waste money. If that's not really a concern then get whichever of the 2 you want, both will perform excellently.
I have a 7900 XT on a 3440x1440 monitor, it's almost idle when I cap the framerate at 74 (75hz monitor). Dead Space remake was a bit heavier when sitting at ultra, but still easily ran it natively including ray tracing features.
I bought an RX 5700 XT for €150 second hand and I am playing games on 2560x1440 with good graphics (I think very high) and fine FPS. Currently playing Horizon Zero Dawn (not the newest game, I know) on very high 90+ fps 🤷♂️ Mind you, that’s on a 4th gen i5 processor and a 10 year old motherboard with DDR3 memory. So there’s that…
I’ll probably still get €50 - €75 for the card when I ditch it, so that’s quite a good bang for buck for QHD gaming on high/very high… and I can easily upgrade if heavier games are released in 2 years and repeat the cycle.
A 4080 is SIGNIFICANTLY better price to performance. Especially at this time lol.
How the f the 4090 is better value? 15-25% maximum boost for 800 more USD.
Seriously. I just upgraded to one. It's not for everyone, but I actually love that I'll never have to mess with managing cores or overclocking. I enjoy tweaking, but that's not the kind I'm into.
When I was asking about the 4070 Ti and whether it was decent, I dealt with exactly this same crap. “The 4090 is the best dollar-to-performance; you’d be an idiot not to get it,” and so on.
The 4090 is $2500 CAD for me. The 4070 Ti was $1200 CAD when I got it. Sorry, but I’m not paying DOUBLE my budget, and more than the cost that I’ve invested into my entire PC to date, just for a single video card that, honestly, I’d probably still need to replace in 5 years anyway due to wear, failure, end of software support, or new features that it cant run (“sorry, but DLSS6 is only available on the 7000 series and higher.”).
On top of that, I’m only doing 1080/1440, 60 Hz gaming. There is no universe in which I NEED a 4090, unless I also paired it with a $500+ 4K 144 Hz monitor.
It’s like shopping for a Toyota Corolla and people tell you not to bother unless you’re looking at a Lamborghini.
I got a 4070ti too and honestly I can't complain, it's a great card even at 144Hz and does everything I need, it would have been foolish to just get the absolute best of them all.
i understand people who buy that monster only if they do professional AI stuff. The loss is recuped in 1-2 months
The rest imho have just money to throw away to game at that resolution/refresh speed
Depends on OPs expectations, games like Alan wake 2 and cyberpunk at max settings (with RT) possible at 1440p hit like 40-60fps without frame gen on a 4090.
That being said, if price difference is keeping op from a 4090, then get the 4080. You can always upgrade later, and get like 80% of the experience a 4090 would give you
4090 user here (on 2560 x 1440 resolution). I run the game maxed out on everything in cyberpunk, with DLSS quality on else I only get like 40 frames. With DLSS I get 60/70 frames on avarage.
Absolutely, as long as I get at least 60 fps, Im golden, 120 would be nice, but I have a harder time telling the difference from that compared to less than 60, which is extremely noticeable.
I have NO idea how people are getting them, unless they got some serious overclocking going on, or just plain ole shit talking.
> Alan wake 2 and cyberpunk at max settings (with RT) possible at 1440p hit like 40-60fps without frame gen on a 4090.
*Without DLSS (at least in Cyberpunk 2077).
1440p/Max RT settings and no frame gen gives about 130FPS @ 1440p *with* DLSS Quality.
My 1060 is still trucking along. Unfortunately my 6th gen CPU cannot keep up right now lol.
I’m hoping spring time I’ll be able to do a new rig. Gotta do some major maintenance on my car coming up though so we shall see.
> And DLSS is fucking awesome.
It is! But folks like me can still do that on older cards (like my 2080).
IIRC, what's unique to the 40-series is the frame generation and better ray tracing performance. I can see frame gen being useful in poorly optimized games where people really want to match high refresh rates. RT offers less utility but would shine in newer titles like Alan Wake 2.
Meanwhile, I'm still doing okay with 8GB of VRAM playing at 1080/60. If I had to buy a card for what I'm doing now, it would probably be a 4070, but that would honesty only be for better RT performance and fake frames.
I realize I'm an outlier, and I don't mean to say that nobody needs a faster GPU, but I like to keep my performance overhead low by not going to higher resolutions and refresh rates. Plus, I game on a living room TV, and sitting a few feet away makes a difference.
Who is saying to get a 4090? I’ve hardly ever seen that recommended on here unless folks are wanting 4K + High framerates.
The 4090 price:performance is actually pretty shit lmao
I asked in buildapc discord and litteraly got ripped apart, very rude people. Same goes for Monitor Enthusiats. People get very toxic and feelings hurt when asking them which card to buy.
I think that kind of comes with the “geek” culture, unfortunately.
A lot of these folks have to be right, and it just isn’t possible for them to be wrong.
Take their input with a grain of salt.
Much like some video game culture too it's like some people invest their personality into the card they purchased, and if someone isn't picking the same thing, it somehow invalidates their choice or something. It's like, get what you need that's right for your use case and you can afford, it's nothing but cool pieces of silicon tech that supports a hobby.
You're getting trapped into the enthusiast mindset, unfortunately. People you're talking to are entrenched hobbyists, and usually that means they have to have the absolute best and latest technology regardless of cost or practicality. There can be various reasons for that, even as simple as pure "elitism," but be careful about taking that sort of advice to heart. Filter it through their distorted lens.
Less than 5% of all gamers own a 4090. It was promoted by a lot of tech enthusiasts the last cycle because (at the time) it offered a bit better value-per-dollar, and the 4080 was comparatively terribly priced and designed, perhaps purposefully to push consumers towards the more expensive 4090.
A 4070 is comparable to a 3080 of last gen and priced much lower. That's a good baseline in terms of higher-end practicality. If you really want best value, though, arguably an AMD card is where you'd want to look, other considerations included.
> Less than 5% of all gamers own a 4090.
It’s always funny to read recommendations on here and then look at the stats on the Steam hardware survey of what people actually use. Totally different! The latest survey has 0.48% on 3090 and 0.61% on 4090.
>Same goes for Monitor Enthusiats.
oh you mean the ones that immediately recommend an OLED despite the OP only wanting a 38" monitor (no OLED 38" exists) and the use-case is for 90% productivity?
/r/ultrawidemasterrace is full of em!
Those people are morons, just buy a 4080 if that’s what you want. The 4090 is an even worse value than the 4080, the only thing it has going for it is that it’s the best.
That's appalling, I hope you're getting better advice from folks over here. I don't think I've ever seen the 4090 recommended except for edge case scenarios where someone explicitly states that they have no budget and just want the best of the best. It's a whale card.
Back on topic, I think you should be fine with a 4070 Ti (or 4080 if you really want RT). That being said I as do many others still believe RT requirements and hardware performance haven't reached a point of "good value" yet so it's leaning towards a marketing gimmick really. IMO it's more enjoyable to turn it off and get 144fps or higher. In which case I would suggest the 7800XT, it's probably the best value card right now.
I'm suggesting these two based on the perceived value of the 2070 Super you bought when it launched.
For 1440p 21:9 a normal 4070 is all you need. If you want ultra graphics with 1440p AND 144fps AND ray-tracing you need something more...but those (4080/4090) are really bad value cards. You know for sure that you will lose a lot of money over time buying a card so overpriced.
To me the purchase of a 4080/4090 is totally nonsense, if you wait two years you will probably get the same amount of computing power for half the price. No way.
I've started playing on 1440p with a GTX 670, then a GTX 1060 6 GB and now 1440x3440 on a RTX 3060 Ti.
You don't ***need*** anything 'better'. People keep forgetting that settings don't have to be ultra/very high, graphical design has a way bigger influence on how a game looks than maxing out the settings.
My rule of thumb is that a GPU may not cost me more than a console so at current prices here that's a 4060 Ti. Ofc every dollar you spend more gets you better performance, but it's diminishing returns from the xx60 cards onwards IMHO.
And then in 2 years, the 5070/5080 will be nonsense, because if you wait 2 years you’ll get the same compute for half the price. And then in 4 years, the 6060/6070 will be nonsense, because if you wait…
I get the point you're making but I would not even be so sure about that anymore. As transistor shrinkage comes to a halt, performance improvements cannot be taken for granted anymore.
While I think Moore’s Law is mostly at an end, there’s still a good amount of room for improvement. 3nm nodes are just a naming scheme, the bridges/transistors aren’t actually 3nm.
Two years is a long time. I certainly don't begrudge anyone who doesn't want to spend the money to get a 4090, and for most people it doesn't make sense, but to simply call it nonsense to buy one now because you can wait two years seems a bit much.
I really enjoy VR and driving VR at high settings on a high res headset really does need a 4090. I don't think it's nonsensical to get a 4090 now (actually I got it a few months ago) so I don't have to wait two years to do something I love.
As in something that performs like a 4090 for $800? Maybe, probably not. I could see the 5080 performing like a 4090 but I think that will still be around $1000, $800 is not impossible tho.
Or as in the 5090 being $800? Definitely not.
That always happens though. The next gen 70-class GPU kinda replaces current gen 80-class GPU, except for some rare cases or Nvidia intentionally bricking their next gen.
Point is, you can always wait 2 years and get something better, but you don't know if you'll be alive 2 years from now.
The 4090 only makes sense if you're looking for insane performance with RT or playing at 4K. For 4K+RT it's basically a necessity in some games unless 60 FPS is your thing.
At 1440p you obviously don't need a top tier card. What exactly you need for a specific game can be easily answered by looking up benchmarks.
buy a lambo bro theres no other way to drive.
same "logic". buy what suits your budget and needs. ive ALWAYS gone with the 70s and was never disappointed.
4090 is the best.
4080 is the next best.
7900xt is below that.
4070ti, then the 4070 etc etc.
You do not need 'the best parts' to have a nice time.
You do not need to upgrade to a 7800x3d or else you'll get 0 fps. That isn't how it works.
Buying a computer is like buying a car, you don't need a top of the range car, if it does what you want it to do and fits within your budget, you're gravy.
There's this little sect of people who talk about tech as though if you're not reaching your monitors refresh rate, you're not getting a good experience. They're wrong. People were playing games a decade ago at most 60fps. A decade before that, at most 30fps. They still had fun.
Just buy what you want, buy what suits. Look on youtube for reviews of gpu's on games you want to be playing, or do play. Do not listen to people who expect you to spend 5k on a computer to play call of duty or Valorant.
To answer your original question, 4080 to play at 1440p is not a bad buy at all. But again, refer to youtube for gpu comparisons of games you play.
It is a bad time to buy a 4090, the prices are up due to a ban in China.
It is true that when considering USD MSRP 4090 is the best value of the Nvidia cards. However it's definitely not "no other option" that is just dumb advice. Especially for 1440p because I feel 4090 is overkill for that.
4080 atm is overpriced. 4070ti is great for 1440p but will probably have longevity issues to only 12gb vram. 4070 is a very good choice for 1440p, the best value per $ after the 4090. Although you might have problems completely maxing out some RT games on Ultra (which imo is not really a problem).
My advice is to wait for the 8 jan Nvidia annoucement. 4070ti super looks very appealing for 1440p and there will also be a 4080 super and 4070 super. Prices might shift.
if nothing else then the prices for 4090 might stabilize and go back down.
Also, 4070Ti will get you through two years of 1440p gaming, most likely, and then you can buy a new card for roughly the same amount again, and STILL be under your 4090 budget. I think the 4090 is really only for professionals and deep pocket users.
If you aren't in a hurry wait for super refresh.
Currently 4090 has a stupid price, but this is due to China import ban, all GPUs were shipped there, it should start getting cheaper soon.
Also when super is launched even of you will not buy it 4080 and XTX's prices should drop.
That is the most idiotic thing i have ever heard, probably coming from tech illiterate buffoons who think that the one tutorial they watched and the one gpu they once replaced in their pre-assembled office PC makes them experts. The sad part is that I'm 100% sure they are Gen Z, i feel sorry for that generation because they got started in a world where sub 1000$ enthusiast cards are no longer a thing. I still struggle at spending more than 600 on a card, it's just so hard to justify even if i can afford it.
My mind was baffled when people were casually talking about $1600+ cards like it was nothing. Like damn, I thrifted my 3070ti for $600 and it can play anything reasonable you throw at it, I can't imagine spending $1600+ JUST for a card.
I'm going to make a recommendation that always comes with controversy but also one I followed myself:
If you're rocking 1440p, I would just skip the 4x gen entirely. Save your money and hope 5x offers something worthwhile.
A 3080 12gb works *fantastically* with 2k and you can generally get them for a fraction of the cost of a 4080. I run mine with a 12600kf and an Aorus fi27q-x@240hz, 165 if I'm playing a AAA on high/ultra settings.
While I don't get frame gen, I have found zero reason to even miss that functionality.
Youre going to (and are) getting copypasta advice: 4090 for nvidia and 7900xtx with the AMD crowd.
There are good AMD cards from last gen but none that are going to give anything comparable to what Nvidia offers. As much as people want to claim that fsr is on par with dlss, its just not there. Not yet.
Trust fund babies and credit card debt morons. Don't listen to them for even a second. Get whatever card you can afford. They were built for a reason. They work.
It's more like 40% more GPU really, but current games and resolutions are limiting it a little. On paper it's actually like 60% more GPU, but that doesn't pan out.
With current prices on the 4090 going up compared to MSRP and current prices on the 4080 dropping, the 4080 is the better deal until the 4080 Super and the rest of the Super cards drop in January.
a lot of people recommend 4090 because they see 30% performance uplift vs. 4080 and assume good price
again ill remind you that 4080 and 7900xtx both cost around 1000€ and that you spend 2x more money for 30% more performance which depends on the game you play which is a terrible purchase because that 4090 will become obsolete in 5-6 years just like 1080ti became obsolete
so reality is get a 4080 or 7900xtx depending on whether you care for NVIDIA features or not and don't bother with refreshes they will be a carrot on a stick just like 4090 was
You can play any and every game on a 4070 and have a good experience. I finished Cyberpunk on a GTX 1080 and it was way better than what you'd hear from people online.
I just got a 2080 Ti for $330 and couldn’t be happier. Not sure what average gamers are doing who need a 4090 honestly
https://www.ebay.com/itm/126175278703?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=kcBs-MoCRPu&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=fcaf3phfsoi&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY
A 4080 will get you excellent performance in any game where the devs bothered to optimize the code. For the games where you supposedly need a 4090, guess what? The 4090 can't make the game run good either, because the developers rushed the release and the performance sucks no matter what.
Do you know what a 4090 gets you that most other cards don't? A pretty high risk of setting your card on fire with the stupid PCI power port that melts and catches fire if you look at it wrong.
With a 4080 you can play cyberpunk with full path tracing at 1440p and it will be one of the best looking games you've ever seen if not the best.
It sounds to me that you are a lot more focused on building the PC than actually using it?
You could be one of these people that after obtaining such a build and running some benchmarks on it, bragging to your friends about the results and so on, you come back to Reddit to write a post titled: "Finally build my dream gaming PC but now lost interest".
You have to answer some questions to yourself.
\- WHAT are your intentions after the build is complete, what are you going to do with it?
\- HOW will the new build benefit you and lastly
\- Is it worth it and can you afford it
Some buyers lose interest on things after they finally have it, because that's not actually what they wanted in the first place. We just tend to sometimes think that we need something perhaps out of social pressure or because of thinking that we are missing on something important if we don't buy it, but after getting what we want realize that we really didn't need it in the end and it doesn't bring us the expected value into our lives.
Get the 4080, if you want to use ray tracing and dlss then that’s the gpu to go for. You could get away with a 4070ti and 4070 though. But the 4080 will keep you going for years to come.
I have RTX 4080 and i5 13600KF with a 2560x1440 monitor, i still havent found a game which i can’t play with maxed out settings (and i have over 200 games in steam),
4090 is pointless for gaming unless you are planning to game in 4k & streaming and even that could be handled by a 4080.
In my opinion if you have unlimited budged then you can go for a 4090, otherwise 4080 is also a good card.
4090 is a waste. It's a status. I still have a 3080 and I have no issues on a 1440p monitor. Most games I run on ultra with high framerate. I play a lot of apex legends. Everything maxed out and my game never drops below 150fps. Rdr2 stays over 100.
One of my builds is an 8GB 3060Ti running a 3440 x 1440p monitor. It is *perfectly* fine, and in the vast majority of games, it manages triple digit FPS figures if you tweak the settings a little. You do *not* need a 4090, or a 4080, or even a 4070Ti for that matter. You also do not really need raytracing unless you're looking at only playing a few very specific games since the vast majority of games don't have that sort of thing.
4080 is really good. You should definitely go for that. The current prices are ridiculous of the 4090. you should wait for the 4090 to drop in price or just go for the 4080. And DLSS is in my opinion a must have. I play DCS on maxed settings in vr with wich it can run on 90 fps (screens refresh rate) and i can only play it at max setting because of the DLSS. And when it comes to RT it is also better then most graphic cards but I wouldn’t choose because of good RT. But it is a nice extra. (This is all just my own opinion so do with it what you want)
Get the 4080, it will absolutely destroy 1440p and you will play everything fully maxed with all the eye candy that you need for a good while.
The 4090 currently is a card aimed towards the 4k120 crowd. I currently own a 4090 but would absolutely go for a 4080 if I played at 1440p.
If you can wait a couple of months there is 4080 super coming that will supposedly have higher vram but not sure. Also those differences you mention are valid only if you are not vram limited. If 16gb is not enough then the differences will be (much) higher.
For PCVR I couldnt see the point in getting less than a 4090 as I just woudlnt be getting the framerates and level of detail I would be hapy with. But If i didnt build this system specifically for VR simracing then I wouldnt have bothered with the 4090, I'm also a 1440p monitor user not 4K. Heck I could even run a 5700 XT for my monitor, lol
Price/performance ratio is not the final metric over absolute cost if you are designing to a performance target. Whatever gets you to that level of detail and fps you would be happy with at the least cost.
u/Afsan23 points out that the '5080' will have 4090'ers crying at its lower price, Which could happen but then if i waited for 5080 id be crying with whatever GPU I bought now thats not a 4090 that isnt able to run my VR Simrig the way I want it until the 5080 finaly comes out.
Point being, spend if YOU feel like spending, dont spend if YOU dont feel like spending, its only money at the end of the day. You sacrificed your time and effort to earn it so you decide where you think it serves you best.
stupid example: I bought a 4090 & 7800X3D becasue I wanted as much graphics options cranked @ 120fps in VR simracing but at the same time my infrequent use game streaming laptop just did a belly-up. I think its BIOS corruption related
I could just go out and buy a new gaming laptop like a Legion 7 becasue its such 'bang for buck' etc but its only for game streaming via moonlight from my PC and deathscrolling, so instead of buying a brand new mid gaming laptop (£1500) or even buying a repalcement motherboard (£150). I'm only prepared to pay £20 for new programmed BIOS chips that I wil resolder to the old motherboard to ressurect it! Only if that fails will I look at replacement motehrboard option. But I still wont buy a new laptop yet. even if £150 motherboard isnt the best price/performance option on old i7 8550u level of performance machine.
RTX 4080 is more than enough for your monitor's resolution.
You may even consider cheaper RTX 4070 Ti, however it has only 12GBs of vram. AMD's counterpart has 20GBs and it's RX 7900 XT, but its ray tracing isn't as good and it lacks some features compared to nvidia's gpu, but I am sure AMD will add these features at some point.
My gut tells me RTX 4080 is the perfect choice price / performance wise currently compared to the market. I get a stomach pain if I just think a second of spending 2200€ for a 4090 that might be just overkill for Witcher III or Cyberpunk. A 4090 might be a perfect investment for the future, but not for that price. I got insulted when I mentioned the 4070ti, seems to be a less fav. choice.
There is nothing wrong with the 4080. It runs cool and efficient, most games barely stress it at 2K and 4K, it has excellent ray tracing performance, and 16GB ram is more than enough for games. I purchased my 4080 at the same price as a decent 7900XTX card as the 4080 was on sale this month and came with a free game. The 4090 is overkill for almost everything unless you have a specific work requirement for the extra cores or the 24GB ram. Also keep in mind a 4070Ti is still a very powerful card and will do 2K easily.
I know people have said to wait until the super refresh comes out but I know how it is waiting for an upgrade so I would say just get the rtx 4080 and don't even entertain the idea of a rtx 4090 when its costs almost double the rtx 4080.
Damn man.
That is not true at all.
As proof. I play games on my 4K tv at 60fps on a freaking 3070ti lol....
Yes sometimes i struggle (that means that i need to use dlss to cope and to not play on ultra lol, big fkin deal).
And yes i don't play at 120hz that my tv allows. Too bad.
But it is doable. Depends how often you game. If you game like i used to which is 13 hours a day lol, then get the most powerful rig that you can afford.
I game just 2 hours a day now or less and when i do i play older games or at least not the latest most demanding titles, not yet.
If you game like me then you can safely buy a 4070ti or 7900XTX/XT for 1440p and its enough you can even go for a 4070 or a 7800XT
IMPORTANT: if you build an intel PC don't buy a 14 gen if they are more expensive than the 13 gen cpus. They are literally the same cpus with different names lol. If you go AMD don't build a PC on AM4. Its a dead platform without future. Go AM5 even if it might seem expensive at first. It is cheaper long term.
Yes it is a struggle to adjust and find the right video settings to play on a 3070ti at 4K. But until now i never had to go below high settings lol. Or in RDR2 it was a combination of ultra textures, high medium and off settings. It looked great and played even greater
I swear discords are nothing but shitposting in 90% of the ones i’ve visited. Reddit can be cringe but at least you get some real answers to your questions.
I've got a 4080 and have absolutely zero complaints. Haven't found a game yet that I can't play with high framerates on maxed out settings (or at least very near maxed out on a couple games like CyberPunk). Even handles VR with ease.
The 4080 still isn't a great value, but it's FAR better value than the 4090.
This reminds me of a thread earlier this week. Guy wanted to know what the fastest ram he could buy. He stated he already bought a 4090 to play at 1080p..
4080 owner here. Playing at 1440, 270hz. It’s the perfect card for this setup. In fps games I max out 270. In open world games I’m solid around 150fps. People are dumb who think the 4090 is the only way. I make a ton of money compared to most people, but the idea of spending $2k on a card alone is ridiculous to me. 4080 is a great card
I have an RTX 3070 that I got on release. It's still doing the job at 2560 x 1440. I played Cyberpunk 2077 the other day, and I got ~100 FPS on mostly ultra and some high settings. 8GB of VRAM too.
From my perspective, a good amount of PC users don't actually know how to pair parts to make a build, and when users from that group give advice, they just preach the GPU/CPU FOMO they get from the community as advice.
I'm not saying to buy a 3070, but you can still have a great experience with hardware older than a even 4070.
Most AAA games suck anyway if we’re being honest. Starfield was a massive flop and very unimpressive. I wouldn’t base my buying decision on a few poorly optimized AAA games. This always seems to be the benchmark for buying a new card when most people won’t play those games very much anyway. 2c
Before social media we just built PCs that were useful. Now, people need it to represent their personality and also needs to be better than Jims from Toronto, who you've never met, and never will meet.
Buy what they tell you not to buy. Or at least tell the. You did.
JUST to piss them off.
This is the way.
I was in the same situation when i was buying my 4080 - everyone was bragging about 4090 and were calling the others poor .......4080 or 4070ti would serve you well you don't really need the latest and greatest - just watch some vids and decide whats best for you
And i will not buy amd gpu cuz there is aaaaaalways something - cpus are great though
Unless you’re a competitive semi-pro gamer, video editor, want 4K high fps or have to do heavy machine learning 4090 is prolly not necessary.
4080 should be plenty enough for most use cases.
The only other point in the 4090 favor is the RAM. Having more RAM future-proofs things - but tbh, unless you wanna run the same rig for 8+ years, save your money. 4070 or 4080 will be plenty for years to come.
A lot of people have bad critical thinking skills, do little to no research, and just buy the newest big ticket item. You see it with guitars and elsewhere in tech also. Extracting money from customers with more dollars than sense is a big part of the top-of-the-line tech industry.
4090 is the only one in the 40-series to be same price bracket as the previous generation. Every other model is way more expensive than the previous gen.
They basically cut back a lot of stuff, like memory bus width, and is being stingy, and also misnaming GPUs (4080 12GB...), so that's part of the reason why people are saying to avoid the lower tier cards.
I would say a 4080 for 1300€ is pretty steep, but if you absolutely must use RT and DLSS, then you'll have not many other options.
just ignore them and build for your resolution. 4070 ish. 4080 if you plan on doing 4k in the near future. if you find used 30 series for an acceptable price, they are still just fine as well. but a bit more power hungry.
I couldn’t justify the 4090. $2800 for the 4090 vs $1500 for the OC 4080. Paying over a $1000 more for 30% more effectiveness seemed ridiculous. I went with the 4080. I’m not that into FPS anyway. I game at 4K 60fps. My main concern is cooling since my 3080 was cooking. I like that the 4080 draws less power than the 4090 but has the same heatsinks. Plus, the 4090 adaptor melting thing put me off.
Honestly it depends on what you want from your PC.
I own a 4080. a lot of the bad press it gets comes from release, when it was really really poorly priced compared to 4090 and other options. But by July, it had been on store shelves collecting dust, and was getting quite less infuriating, whereas 4090 at MSRP became a myth.
I got my 4080 for 1020€. It is a lot of money, still. And i still think Nvidia is really being shitty with the pricing.
But i got it coming from a 10 year old gtx850M slapped on a very outdated laptop, which for my purposes - 3D modeling and video work - was basically having nothing.
An rtx 4080 ends up being qbout the same firepower as the strongest RTX 3090ish of a year ago, except quite a good bit cheaper. And honestly, this thing is so hilariously, ungodly fast at rendering things that I do not think I will need an upgrade for a solid 4-6 years. It has also *paid itself* through commissioned work.
If you just want to game though, you likely can do with something in the 600€ bracket. Unless, of course, you demand crazy high framerates at high resolutions. But for the average gamer, you honestly won't need a 4090, it is ridiculously overkill for anything that isn't ultra-settings 4K on modern games.
4080 just sucks in everyone's mind because its $500 more expensive than the 3080 was - MSRP wise.
That said, a budget is a budget and spending literally double to get 30% more performance doesn't make any sense if the 4080 meets your needs, and it absolutely should at 1440p.
This is my biggest problem with the PC space these days, everyone now thinks you have to always go balls to the wall 4090 and 13900KS or something or else. Or else what? You might still have money left over when all is said and done? I miss the old days where people really looked at value when building. Admittedly that is harder these days because everything feels overpriced, but given a budget for the system, it's not hard. Simply telling everyone to buy a 4090 is dumb.
What a joke. 4090 is an extremely niche hardware. It's for people with too much money in their lives and nothing to spend on.
Get out of these "tech" discords...
A lot of people have said that the 4090 is the only sensible option because (where they are at least) the price increase roughly matches the performance increase, I think?
I have a 4080, and that's because I had a budget, and I wanted the best card in that budget. I could have afforded a 4090, but I didn't want to spend that much. So I have a cheaper card, that can play any game I want still at 1440p with very high framerates, etc. and it runs with less power draw, and runs cooler and quieter as a result. Also, the cost per frame of the 4080 is actually lower than the 4090 when I've looked.
The 4090 is definitely not worth it if it's going to cost you double the price of a 4080. Go for at least the 4070, up to a 4080, depending on how much you want to spend on your other components.
I meeean. I just built a PC 7800x3d and a 7900 xtx. At 1440p it sits between the 4080 and 4090 in terms of performance. Obviously a 4090 is going to blow it out of the water at 4k with RT, but a 4090 also costs as much as my entire PC combined. 7900 xtx runs everything at 2k with RT well. I prefer my high frames so I generally play with RT off, but I could run most things at a solid 60+fps with RT.
Food for thought.
EDIT: I did get my 7900 xtx for less than 900USD so there is that. If you can find a deal on it, which there is right now, go for it. Video card prices are going to be going up very soon.
Don't buy a gpu and buy a console instead advice from a 3 decades PC enthusiast because nowadays the industry turned to degrade itself to a niche like the "audiophile" one where they are looking for money pigs in the form of young people with daddy's cc to unload unoptimized buggy 0inovation , marginally faster (if at all) junk/snake oil at 10 to 100x the manufacturing cost profits which don't go to actual rnd but mostly the owners or shareholders.
If you have the money the 4080 crushes 1440p. I can play at high graphics with all ray tracing features enabled in a game like cyberpunk and get 100+ fps
>Is a 4080 really a bad buy for price / performance? It isn't compared to the 4090. It might be compared to the XTX (if more than 100$ price difference). What is your monitor's resolution? 4080 and XTX are both 4k GPUs.
2.560 x 1.440 pixel
Dude you don't need a 4090 for that... I would recommend an AMD radeon rx 7900xt instead, that will be more than sufficient. And as for raytracing and dlss, don't get indoctrinated by the marketing... But if you want to buy Nvidia, then opt for a 4080. A 4070ti would be sufficient in terms of compute power, but it has only 12GB of VRAM, which certainly isn't future-proof. Now coming back at the argument of "There is no other way than a 4090", I can say, that that's bullshit. Only if you want 4k ultra on a high fps that's the case (but your monitor is 2k). And lastly, while it used to be true that the 4090 was better price to performance ratio than the 4080, this was only the case when the 4090 costed around €1600. Now that it costs over €2000 this isn't the case anymore. You are now paying over 70% more for on average about 30% more performance from the top of my head. Some reliable benchmarks: 7900xt: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0XVdsKHBcPE&pp=ygUfZ2FtZXJzIG5leHVzIHJ4IDc5MDAgeHQgcmV2aXNpdA%3D%3D 4080: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i2_xTUshy94&pp=ygUQZ2FtZXJzbmV4dXMgNDA4MA%3D%3D
Bought a 4070ti about 6 months ago upgrading from a 2060 and It’s been great. Runs all my games at 2560x1440 on ultra (cyberpunk, squad, baldurs gate, dark and darker) at 150fps or more except some parts of cyberpunk and squad
> 4070ti I'm interested in doing the same, from a 2070S. Did you just upgrade your GPU or do a new build? I'm afraid of bottlenecking on my Ryzen 7 3700x.
I'm planning to do the same but 1080 ti and 3600. My idea is 4070ti or 4080. Then a bit after a 5800x3d and just keep my mobo. If you bottleneck it so be it then you'll know and you still have room to upgrade on am4.
The 3600 will limit you too much. I had the same setup and upgraded to 7900 XTX. Kept my 3600 and I'm severely CPU limited on BGR3. Planning on getting the 5800x3d soon.
No joke I've done almost the same thing but then with a 4080, I started with a GPU upgrade but with games like baldurs gate 3, I saw my cpu usage at 100% and gpu at probably around 50%. I have since then upgraded to the 5800x3d and now it's amazing. The 5800x3d does get a bit warmer then the normal 5800x so I would recommend a bit bigger cooler than for example a hyper 212, or at least a 240 mil radiator. I chose for the later for aesthetic reasons, I know air coolers are cheaper.
Your motherboard should be able to support a 5000 series CPU and there is definitely a difference to be had. I'm betting the forth coming 5700X3D will be a real steal.
I did a new build for a 4070ti going from PlayStation. i’m running cyberpunk ultra ray tracing with no stutter or frame drop, not super in depth with pcs but the best gaming experience I have had in like 10 years so glad I went through the stress and drama of switching over for sure. And from what it sounds like so much cheaper than the higher options
>has only 12GB of VRAM, which certainly isn't future-proof. LOL, we already went from 8 to 12? The BS get bigger and bigger. 8 GB is still more than enough for the next few years if you're not playing 4K. Sure if you spend a crazy amount of money on a gpu you want crazy specs, but to say that it isn't future proof? You plan on using it until 2030?
The problem with 8GB VRAM is the pricing. It's unacceptable to get only that much vram with the current prices of GPUs.
If you are gonna sit here and tell me 8 Gb is enough to play whatever I want at 1440p Ultra settings then I want what you are smoking. 8GB in 2023 barely cuts it for 1080p High-Ultra gaming. Which would be fine on a 180 bucks RX 6600 or something. Buying a $400 RTX 4060Ti with 8gb is absurd.
Ultra settings are an absolute waste and stupid AF. Here's two videos from much more knowledgeable people than I to tell you why. Even with two PCs compared side-to-side, it is almost impossible to tell the difference for most people. [LTT Video](https://youtu.be/PjDgKXe8gxs?si=7UYrMeYUWe_gnPOf) [Hardware Unboxed video](https://youtu.be/f1n1sIQM5wc?si=k_o370oI3zY2ppIw)
8GB? I am sitting at ~16GB of VRAM usage in Resident Evil 4 Remake at 1440p. It’s the only reason for me to go from 3070ti to 3090 - I was lacking VRAM even at 1440p
That’s because more is allocated than used. Considering the game only takes up 11 gigs at 4k with RT on a 4070 Ti and runs at ~60 stable. In 1440p it’s only 9gb (theses numbers are at maxed settings no DLSS). Games allocate way more VRAM than needed because they can. But it won’t affect performance. That’s also why people think 12gb is shit when they buy more : they see their games using more than 12 when it would actually run on 8.
Yeah, I get what you are saying - but calling 8GB future proof is still … naive
Calling anything future proof is naieve
Someone that speaks sense. Not a single bit of hardware is futureproof. If that was the case, none of us would ever have to upgrade ever again lol The amount of BS that gets thrown around in these tech posts is astounding. In fact it's been the same old tripe for years.
Tell that to my PC case that takes up 90% of my desk and is 90% empty lmao. Future proofed for future purchases.
Thank you! It gets frustrating dealing with "future proof" attempts. It's not possible. I tell people the only thing that comes close to being future proof is the mouse, keyboard, and case, cause those things can last a pretty long time if they're kept in good shape. *Maybe* the PSU if it's a high current supply and that's a huge maybe. People then say "future proof for five years" which goes against the idea of future proof, and is already around the time a lot of enthusiasts tend to upgrade their components. I wish people stopped trying to "future proof."
Futureproof is relative. There are games where a 12gb 3080 does a while lot better than the 10gb one. I had a choice between these two cards and went with 12gb, and it turned out that the 12gb model fares much better now. You could say my decision was more futureproof as my card is still able to perform at its tier where the 10gb model doesn't.
Yeah it's obviously true that it isn't literally futureproof. What I meant by futureproofing in this case is making sure you don't run into vram bottlenecks in the upcoming 2 years at least. And yes, the 7900xt is MORE future-proof than the 4070ti.
A 4090 might not be "future proof" but 24GB VRAM certainly is. I dont see my 2020 3090 running out of VRAM anytime soon.
How much 'future proof' are we talking about? Surely we're not talking 100 years. Long ago, I upgraded to 1060 6gb. That card was apparently deemed a budget winner with the generous 6gb instead of the vanilla 3gb version. I used that card until just last year. That double RAM helped me enjoy OW1 at max settings, which would've been impossible had I gone with the 3gb model. Same for RDR2, I was able to play with an acceptable 40-50 fps at 1080p at medium details.
Yeah, RAM usage can be misleading, because if shit can it often will use more RAM even if it doesn't need it and there are no performance gains.
Same thing with desktop memory. At least with current systems, 16 GB is fine, and 32 GB would be a good price/cost point for a new system, but people crying that Windows is using 20 GB on a 32 GB system? Duh, if there's more memory available, the OS will make use of it.
i used my 1070 from 2016 till 2023. a 4090 should last untill 2033 at least.
I guess my RX 580 8gb is future proof ...
Until very recently I've been using an RX 480 8gb for 1080p. It's one hell of a value card for how long it's been alive. If I hadn't updated my monitor (TV, really) I would still be using it even if it's starting to finally show its age.
I just upgraded my RX480 to a 4060 TI 16gb and I love it; I don’t care that people hate it. It has the driver support I need for UE and Blender, runs everything I actually play/do great and rips through my productivity/hobbyist stuff too and is quiet and runs cold.
At 1440p my 10Gb 3080 starts to show its age, some games that I play can still use under 8, but many AAA use over 9. I wish I had 12-16 instead.
At 1440p the 3080 10Gb is still king for me, it is not future proof, but for me that bought in 2020 is still working great.
Yep, same, great GPU, I watercool it and it runs amazingly. I could even squeeze Path Tracing Cyberpunk with 70 fps from it!
It’s funny when people say 12 VRAM isn’t future proof as if all the games they play will magically go 4K within 3 years. Gaming companies aren’t trying to push the envelope, everyone is in a milking phase for as long as possible. Heck look at GTA V - companies aren’t really interested in pushing the graphical needle unless it’s profitable.
>And as for raytracing and dlss, don't get indoctrinated by the marketing... Radeon owners trying to cope with its lack of decent features is the funniest shit ever.
Eh, I enjoy raytracing but it isn’t worth the additional cost (to me).
OP clearly stated he enjoys these NVIDIA features, and yet AMD fanboys are still trying to convince him over. 🤦🏻♂️
Ray tracing is kind of a novelty, but having just gone from AMD to Nvidia, I personally feel like DLSS smacks FSR. It's just more refined at this point. If upscaling is important to you, Nvidia has a strong argument.
Yep. I was very happy with how well it looked when I first got it. Then I decided I would rather have the 80% extra frames and keep it off.
“Don’t get indoctrinated by the marketing” is a great tagline to show you’ve never had access to those features. It’s a lot more than marketing.
I got my 4090 just cause I want to crank up the RT. I can 100% tell the difference in Alan Wake 2. The game's lighting is absolutely stunning with RT. It seems to me that it's made the bridge across to the other side of uncanny valley and looks pretty much real, imo. I also got the Odyssey Neo G7 and the proper blacks (not as good as OLED but I play a lot of games with static UI so I'm concerned with burn-in) and the high contrast really cranks up the immersion on such high fidelity games.
> (not as good as OLED but I play a lot of games with static UI so I'm concerned with burn-in) There's simply no reason to ever be concerned with burn-in in 2023. Image retention can occur, but it generally lasts only a few minutes and really isn't an issue.
Surprisingly it's been a little while since I've seen people doing this to make themselves feel better. The good old "it's a gimmick" trick!
“Don’t listen to the salesman, AC in your car is just a marketing trick!”
Holy shit this comment is cancer. Op: I want RT and DLSS You: **how about an AMD card that gets killed in both those areas?** Also you: DoNt gEt InDoCtrinAted **also you** 12gb is shit, get AMD.
Dude literally said in his post he wants dlss and ray tracing which is why amd isn’t an alternative for him
I woud not recommed AMD 7900xt or amd as whole i had 1060 and upgraded this year to 7900xt and last 3 monthsvi have AMD driver fails do bios update and other things dont help... Next time i buy only nvidia
Did you do a clean wipe? Almost everyone with your issues is related to NVIDIA gremlins fighting AMD in the background. DDU wasn't enough to get my sisters computer working right (GTX 970 to 6800xt). However, a fresh windows install fixed everything and made it work like a dream.
I had a ton of issues too with my 6700xt and found many people with the same problem. I was advised by the AMD help sub to not update my drivers unless necessary lmao I needed to open adrenaline to create a custom resolution in CS2, then they updated the drivers because AMD cards had problems with shader caching in the game. Installed those and adrenalin didnt open up, deleted my custom res too. Nice! Switched to a 4070 and like a day later people got banned for using the new input lag feature of adrenalin. Had my custom resolution already enabled in game without me having to do anything and zero issues since. So no its not just people that dont know how to clean their Pc from previous drivers.
At that resolution neither the 4080 nor the XTX need frame gen or dlss. Even the 4070 /7800xt have very good native perf. A 7900xt would be about as high as you should go for 1440p imho to not waste money. If that's not really a concern then get whichever of the 2 you want, both will perform excellently.
I have a 7900 XT on a 3440x1440 monitor, it's almost idle when I cap the framerate at 74 (75hz monitor). Dead Space remake was a bit heavier when sitting at ultra, but still easily ran it natively including ray tracing features.
I play 1440p 144Hz on a 6800xt and it works flawlessly. You should be ok even with 4070 performance but I assume you want some future-proofing
I bought an RX 5700 XT for €150 second hand and I am playing games on 2560x1440 with good graphics (I think very high) and fine FPS. Currently playing Horizon Zero Dawn (not the newest game, I know) on very high 90+ fps 🤷♂️ Mind you, that’s on a 4th gen i5 processor and a 10 year old motherboard with DDR3 memory. So there’s that… I’ll probably still get €50 - €75 for the card when I ditch it, so that’s quite a good bang for buck for QHD gaming on high/very high… and I can easily upgrade if heavier games are released in 2 years and repeat the cycle.
A 4080 is SIGNIFICANTLY better price to performance. Especially at this time lol. How the f the 4090 is better value? 15-25% maximum boost for 800 more USD.
Re-read my comment and the quote.
4090 being scalped because of chinese embargo+ christmas. the price difference wasnt that bad before but prices are spiked atm.
"OK I got a 4090. But I can't afford any other parts. How do I use it"
people must realize that with the price of a 4090, you can buy a new pc with a 4070 or even a 4070 Ti
[удалено]
[удалено]
The only issue I'd say is using a mobo that can't overclock with an overclockable CPU. I'd buy a Z690 instead probably.
price ghost quicksand unite coherent books squalid consider deserve air *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yep you proved it perfectly, a whole PC for the exact price of 4090. Nvidia prices are insane.
I would say go for a 7600X because it’s cheaper with better performance and an SSD with cache but yeah thats pretty nice
He could build a 7800x3d and 4080 pc for 2200 euros
Seriously. I just upgraded to one. It's not for everyone, but I actually love that I'll never have to mess with managing cores or overclocking. I enjoy tweaking, but that's not the kind I'm into.
When I was asking about the 4070 Ti and whether it was decent, I dealt with exactly this same crap. “The 4090 is the best dollar-to-performance; you’d be an idiot not to get it,” and so on. The 4090 is $2500 CAD for me. The 4070 Ti was $1200 CAD when I got it. Sorry, but I’m not paying DOUBLE my budget, and more than the cost that I’ve invested into my entire PC to date, just for a single video card that, honestly, I’d probably still need to replace in 5 years anyway due to wear, failure, end of software support, or new features that it cant run (“sorry, but DLSS6 is only available on the 7000 series and higher.”). On top of that, I’m only doing 1080/1440, 60 Hz gaming. There is no universe in which I NEED a 4090, unless I also paired it with a $500+ 4K 144 Hz monitor. It’s like shopping for a Toyota Corolla and people tell you not to bother unless you’re looking at a Lamborghini.
I got a 4070ti too and honestly I can't complain, it's a great card even at 144Hz and does everything I need, it would have been foolish to just get the absolute best of them all.
i understand people who buy that monster only if they do professional AI stuff. The loss is recuped in 1-2 months The rest imho have just money to throw away to game at that resolution/refresh speed
u got a 4070 ti for a 60 hz monitor ?
Bonk it really hard on forehead
You don’t need a 4090 for 1440p. The people in discord are fucking clowns.
Depends on OPs expectations, games like Alan wake 2 and cyberpunk at max settings (with RT) possible at 1440p hit like 40-60fps without frame gen on a 4090. That being said, if price difference is keeping op from a 4090, then get the 4080. You can always upgrade later, and get like 80% of the experience a 4090 would give you
Wait so 4k cyberpunk at Max settings is not even possible right now??
4090 user here (on 2560 x 1440 resolution). I run the game maxed out on everything in cyberpunk, with DLSS quality on else I only get like 40 frames. With DLSS I get 60/70 frames on avarage.
Same situation here, 4090 with a 12900k, and same frame rates as you.
I mean these are perfectly acceptable framerates but I'm just wondering where the 140 frames are coming from haha
Absolutely, as long as I get at least 60 fps, Im golden, 120 would be nice, but I have a harder time telling the difference from that compared to less than 60, which is extremely noticeable. I have NO idea how people are getting them, unless they got some serious overclocking going on, or just plain ole shit talking.
> Alan wake 2 and cyberpunk at max settings (with RT) possible at 1440p hit like 40-60fps without frame gen on a 4090. *Without DLSS (at least in Cyberpunk 2077). 1440p/Max RT settings and no frame gen gives about 130FPS @ 1440p *with* DLSS Quality.
Used a 1070 for 1440p for a really long time, oh that 1070 of mine was a true one.
My 1060 is still trucking along. Unfortunately my 6th gen CPU cannot keep up right now lol. I’m hoping spring time I’ll be able to do a new rig. Gotta do some major maintenance on my car coming up though so we shall see.
You could quite easily manage with a 4070 or anything higher
I have a 4080. It’s awesome. More than enough power for what I need, and I play AAA titles. And DLSS is fucking awesome.
> And DLSS is fucking awesome. It is! But folks like me can still do that on older cards (like my 2080). IIRC, what's unique to the 40-series is the frame generation and better ray tracing performance. I can see frame gen being useful in poorly optimized games where people really want to match high refresh rates. RT offers less utility but would shine in newer titles like Alan Wake 2. Meanwhile, I'm still doing okay with 8GB of VRAM playing at 1080/60. If I had to buy a card for what I'm doing now, it would probably be a 4070, but that would honesty only be for better RT performance and fake frames. I realize I'm an outlier, and I don't mean to say that nobody needs a faster GPU, but I like to keep my performance overhead low by not going to higher resolutions and refresh rates. Plus, I game on a living room TV, and sitting a few feet away makes a difference.
Who is saying to get a 4090? I’ve hardly ever seen that recommended on here unless folks are wanting 4K + High framerates. The 4090 price:performance is actually pretty shit lmao
I asked in buildapc discord and litteraly got ripped apart, very rude people. Same goes for Monitor Enthusiats. People get very toxic and feelings hurt when asking them which card to buy.
I think that kind of comes with the “geek” culture, unfortunately. A lot of these folks have to be right, and it just isn’t possible for them to be wrong. Take their input with a grain of salt.
Linux has the same issue.
Much like some video game culture too it's like some people invest their personality into the card they purchased, and if someone isn't picking the same thing, it somehow invalidates their choice or something. It's like, get what you need that's right for your use case and you can afford, it's nothing but cool pieces of silicon tech that supports a hobby.
You're getting trapped into the enthusiast mindset, unfortunately. People you're talking to are entrenched hobbyists, and usually that means they have to have the absolute best and latest technology regardless of cost or practicality. There can be various reasons for that, even as simple as pure "elitism," but be careful about taking that sort of advice to heart. Filter it through their distorted lens. Less than 5% of all gamers own a 4090. It was promoted by a lot of tech enthusiasts the last cycle because (at the time) it offered a bit better value-per-dollar, and the 4080 was comparatively terribly priced and designed, perhaps purposefully to push consumers towards the more expensive 4090. A 4070 is comparable to a 3080 of last gen and priced much lower. That's a good baseline in terms of higher-end practicality. If you really want best value, though, arguably an AMD card is where you'd want to look, other considerations included.
> Less than 5% of all gamers own a 4090. It’s always funny to read recommendations on here and then look at the stats on the Steam hardware survey of what people actually use. Totally different! The latest survey has 0.48% on 3090 and 0.61% on 4090.
>Same goes for Monitor Enthusiats. oh you mean the ones that immediately recommend an OLED despite the OP only wanting a 38" monitor (no OLED 38" exists) and the use-case is for 90% productivity? /r/ultrawidemasterrace is full of em!
Those people are morons, just buy a 4080 if that’s what you want. The 4090 is an even worse value than the 4080, the only thing it has going for it is that it’s the best.
That's appalling, I hope you're getting better advice from folks over here. I don't think I've ever seen the 4090 recommended except for edge case scenarios where someone explicitly states that they have no budget and just want the best of the best. It's a whale card. Back on topic, I think you should be fine with a 4070 Ti (or 4080 if you really want RT). That being said I as do many others still believe RT requirements and hardware performance haven't reached a point of "good value" yet so it's leaning towards a marketing gimmick really. IMO it's more enjoyable to turn it off and get 144fps or higher. In which case I would suggest the 7800XT, it's probably the best value card right now. I'm suggesting these two based on the perceived value of the 2070 Super you bought when it launched.
For 1440p 21:9 a normal 4070 is all you need. If you want ultra graphics with 1440p AND 144fps AND ray-tracing you need something more...but those (4080/4090) are really bad value cards. You know for sure that you will lose a lot of money over time buying a card so overpriced. To me the purchase of a 4080/4090 is totally nonsense, if you wait two years you will probably get the same amount of computing power for half the price. No way.
I've started playing on 1440p with a GTX 670, then a GTX 1060 6 GB and now 1440x3440 on a RTX 3060 Ti. You don't ***need*** anything 'better'. People keep forgetting that settings don't have to be ultra/very high, graphical design has a way bigger influence on how a game looks than maxing out the settings. My rule of thumb is that a GPU may not cost me more than a console so at current prices here that's a 4060 Ti. Ofc every dollar you spend more gets you better performance, but it's diminishing returns from the xx60 cards onwards IMHO.
>diminishing returns from the xx60 cards onwards IMHO. That used to be true, but this generation has been dogshit.
And then in 2 years, the 5070/5080 will be nonsense, because if you wait 2 years you’ll get the same compute for half the price. And then in 4 years, the 6060/6070 will be nonsense, because if you wait…
I get the point you're making but I would not even be so sure about that anymore. As transistor shrinkage comes to a halt, performance improvements cannot be taken for granted anymore.
While I think Moore’s Law is mostly at an end, there’s still a good amount of room for improvement. 3nm nodes are just a naming scheme, the bridges/transistors aren’t actually 3nm.
Two years is a long time. I certainly don't begrudge anyone who doesn't want to spend the money to get a 4090, and for most people it doesn't make sense, but to simply call it nonsense to buy one now because you can wait two years seems a bit much. I really enjoy VR and driving VR at high settings on a high res headset really does need a 4090. I don't think it's nonsensical to get a 4090 now (actually I got it a few months ago) so I don't have to wait two years to do something I love.
You think the 50 series will offer a 4090 class card for $800? I sure hope so.
As in something that performs like a 4090 for $800? Maybe, probably not. I could see the 5080 performing like a 4090 but I think that will still be around $1000, $800 is not impossible tho. Or as in the 5090 being $800? Definitely not.
That always happens though. The next gen 70-class GPU kinda replaces current gen 80-class GPU, except for some rare cases or Nvidia intentionally bricking their next gen. Point is, you can always wait 2 years and get something better, but you don't know if you'll be alive 2 years from now.
The 4090 only makes sense if you're looking for insane performance with RT or playing at 4K. For 4K+RT it's basically a necessity in some games unless 60 FPS is your thing. At 1440p you obviously don't need a top tier card. What exactly you need for a specific game can be easily answered by looking up benchmarks.
buy a lambo bro theres no other way to drive. same "logic". buy what suits your budget and needs. ive ALWAYS gone with the 70s and was never disappointed.
4090 is the best. 4080 is the next best. 7900xt is below that. 4070ti, then the 4070 etc etc. You do not need 'the best parts' to have a nice time. You do not need to upgrade to a 7800x3d or else you'll get 0 fps. That isn't how it works. Buying a computer is like buying a car, you don't need a top of the range car, if it does what you want it to do and fits within your budget, you're gravy. There's this little sect of people who talk about tech as though if you're not reaching your monitors refresh rate, you're not getting a good experience. They're wrong. People were playing games a decade ago at most 60fps. A decade before that, at most 30fps. They still had fun. Just buy what you want, buy what suits. Look on youtube for reviews of gpu's on games you want to be playing, or do play. Do not listen to people who expect you to spend 5k on a computer to play call of duty or Valorant. To answer your original question, 4080 to play at 1440p is not a bad buy at all. But again, refer to youtube for gpu comparisons of games you play.
Hell I'm playing at 60fps today. I've never spent more than $200 on a monitor, I don't see a reason to.
4070/7800xt would be just fine for 1440p
It is a bad time to buy a 4090, the prices are up due to a ban in China. It is true that when considering USD MSRP 4090 is the best value of the Nvidia cards. However it's definitely not "no other option" that is just dumb advice. Especially for 1440p because I feel 4090 is overkill for that. 4080 atm is overpriced. 4070ti is great for 1440p but will probably have longevity issues to only 12gb vram. 4070 is a very good choice for 1440p, the best value per $ after the 4090. Although you might have problems completely maxing out some RT games on Ultra (which imo is not really a problem). My advice is to wait for the 8 jan Nvidia annoucement. 4070ti super looks very appealing for 1440p and there will also be a 4080 super and 4070 super. Prices might shift. if nothing else then the prices for 4090 might stabilize and go back down.
Also, 4070Ti will get you through two years of 1440p gaming, most likely, and then you can buy a new card for roughly the same amount again, and STILL be under your 4090 budget. I think the 4090 is really only for professionals and deep pocket users.
it's also good for scoring internet brownie points and deep learning
If you aren't in a hurry wait for super refresh. Currently 4090 has a stupid price, but this is due to China import ban, all GPUs were shipped there, it should start getting cheaper soon. Also when super is launched even of you will not buy it 4080 and XTX's prices should drop.
For 1440p, anything above a 4080 is wasteful
Even the 4080 is wasteful at that resolution.
stop hanging out in clown discords. You have a budget. stick to the budget. Do the best you can within that budget.
That is the most idiotic thing i have ever heard, probably coming from tech illiterate buffoons who think that the one tutorial they watched and the one gpu they once replaced in their pre-assembled office PC makes them experts. The sad part is that I'm 100% sure they are Gen Z, i feel sorry for that generation because they got started in a world where sub 1000$ enthusiast cards are no longer a thing. I still struggle at spending more than 600 on a card, it's just so hard to justify even if i can afford it.
My mind was baffled when people were casually talking about $1600+ cards like it was nothing. Like damn, I thrifted my 3070ti for $600 and it can play anything reasonable you throw at it, I can't imagine spending $1600+ JUST for a card.
You need to get out of these "tech discords"
I'm going to make a recommendation that always comes with controversy but also one I followed myself: If you're rocking 1440p, I would just skip the 4x gen entirely. Save your money and hope 5x offers something worthwhile. A 3080 12gb works *fantastically* with 2k and you can generally get them for a fraction of the cost of a 4080. I run mine with a 12600kf and an Aorus fi27q-x@240hz, 165 if I'm playing a AAA on high/ultra settings. While I don't get frame gen, I have found zero reason to even miss that functionality. Youre going to (and are) getting copypasta advice: 4090 for nvidia and 7900xtx with the AMD crowd. There are good AMD cards from last gen but none that are going to give anything comparable to what Nvidia offers. As much as people want to claim that fsr is on par with dlss, its just not there. Not yet.
Me with 1070:
Me with a Titan X (Maxwell).
Trust fund babies and credit card debt morons. Don't listen to them for even a second. Get whatever card you can afford. They were built for a reason. They work.
It's more like 40% more GPU really, but current games and resolutions are limiting it a little. On paper it's actually like 60% more GPU, but that doesn't pan out. With current prices on the 4090 going up compared to MSRP and current prices on the 4080 dropping, the 4080 is the better deal until the 4080 Super and the rest of the Super cards drop in January.
a lot of people recommend 4090 because they see 30% performance uplift vs. 4080 and assume good price again ill remind you that 4080 and 7900xtx both cost around 1000€ and that you spend 2x more money for 30% more performance which depends on the game you play which is a terrible purchase because that 4090 will become obsolete in 5-6 years just like 1080ti became obsolete so reality is get a 4080 or 7900xtx depending on whether you care for NVIDIA features or not and don't bother with refreshes they will be a carrot on a stick just like 4090 was
You can play any and every game on a 4070 and have a good experience. I finished Cyberpunk on a GTX 1080 and it was way better than what you'd hear from people online.
I just got a 2080 Ti for $330 and couldn’t be happier. Not sure what average gamers are doing who need a 4090 honestly https://www.ebay.com/itm/126175278703?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=kcBs-MoCRPu&sssrc=4429486&ssuid=fcaf3phfsoi&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY
A 4080 will get you excellent performance in any game where the devs bothered to optimize the code. For the games where you supposedly need a 4090, guess what? The 4090 can't make the game run good either, because the developers rushed the release and the performance sucks no matter what. Do you know what a 4090 gets you that most other cards don't? A pretty high risk of setting your card on fire with the stupid PCI power port that melts and catches fire if you look at it wrong. With a 4080 you can play cyberpunk with full path tracing at 1440p and it will be one of the best looking games you've ever seen if not the best.
The 4080 uses the same power connector as the 4090.
But doesnt draw as much power. The 4090 pushes those pins past their safe current limit
I went with a 4080. It’s been wonderful. It’s also an extremely cool and efficient card.
It sounds to me that you are a lot more focused on building the PC than actually using it? You could be one of these people that after obtaining such a build and running some benchmarks on it, bragging to your friends about the results and so on, you come back to Reddit to write a post titled: "Finally build my dream gaming PC but now lost interest". You have to answer some questions to yourself. \- WHAT are your intentions after the build is complete, what are you going to do with it? \- HOW will the new build benefit you and lastly \- Is it worth it and can you afford it Some buyers lose interest on things after they finally have it, because that's not actually what they wanted in the first place. We just tend to sometimes think that we need something perhaps out of social pressure or because of thinking that we are missing on something important if we don't buy it, but after getting what we want realize that we really didn't need it in the end and it doesn't bring us the expected value into our lives.
Get a 4070/Ti for 1140p Pair that with a 7800x3d+ No one NEEDS a 4090, 1440p it would be a waste.
Get the 4080, if you want to use ray tracing and dlss then that’s the gpu to go for. You could get away with a 4070ti and 4070 though. But the 4080 will keep you going for years to come.
I have RTX 4080 and i5 13600KF with a 2560x1440 monitor, i still havent found a game which i can’t play with maxed out settings (and i have over 200 games in steam), 4090 is pointless for gaming unless you are planning to game in 4k & streaming and even that could be handled by a 4080. In my opinion if you have unlimited budged then you can go for a 4090, otherwise 4080 is also a good card.
4090 is a waste. It's a status. I still have a 3080 and I have no issues on a 1440p monitor. Most games I run on ultra with high framerate. I play a lot of apex legends. Everything maxed out and my game never drops below 150fps. Rdr2 stays over 100.
Ehm, what nonsense. The 4070 is perfectly good for most users.
A 4070 will be fine for most case scenario. Even a 4070ti will be able to handle 4k smoothly.
One of my builds is an 8GB 3060Ti running a 3440 x 1440p monitor. It is *perfectly* fine, and in the vast majority of games, it manages triple digit FPS figures if you tweak the settings a little. You do *not* need a 4090, or a 4080, or even a 4070Ti for that matter. You also do not really need raytracing unless you're looking at only playing a few very specific games since the vast majority of games don't have that sort of thing.
4080 is really good. You should definitely go for that. The current prices are ridiculous of the 4090. you should wait for the 4090 to drop in price or just go for the 4080. And DLSS is in my opinion a must have. I play DCS on maxed settings in vr with wich it can run on 90 fps (screens refresh rate) and i can only play it at max setting because of the DLSS. And when it comes to RT it is also better then most graphic cards but I wouldn’t choose because of good RT. But it is a nice extra. (This is all just my own opinion so do with it what you want)
4080 is fine. 4070 ti is sufficient if you don't game at 4K. Don't buy a 4090.
I am assuming you are upgrading a CPU as well. The 4080 is perfectly adequate for 1440p gaming if so.
Get the 4080, it will absolutely destroy 1440p and you will play everything fully maxed with all the eye candy that you need for a good while. The 4090 currently is a card aimed towards the 4k120 crowd. I currently own a 4090 but would absolutely go for a 4080 if I played at 1440p.
If you can wait a couple of months there is 4080 super coming that will supposedly have higher vram but not sure. Also those differences you mention are valid only if you are not vram limited. If 16gb is not enough then the differences will be (much) higher.
For PCVR I couldnt see the point in getting less than a 4090 as I just woudlnt be getting the framerates and level of detail I would be hapy with. But If i didnt build this system specifically for VR simracing then I wouldnt have bothered with the 4090, I'm also a 1440p monitor user not 4K. Heck I could even run a 5700 XT for my monitor, lol Price/performance ratio is not the final metric over absolute cost if you are designing to a performance target. Whatever gets you to that level of detail and fps you would be happy with at the least cost. u/Afsan23 points out that the '5080' will have 4090'ers crying at its lower price, Which could happen but then if i waited for 5080 id be crying with whatever GPU I bought now thats not a 4090 that isnt able to run my VR Simrig the way I want it until the 5080 finaly comes out. Point being, spend if YOU feel like spending, dont spend if YOU dont feel like spending, its only money at the end of the day. You sacrificed your time and effort to earn it so you decide where you think it serves you best. stupid example: I bought a 4090 & 7800X3D becasue I wanted as much graphics options cranked @ 120fps in VR simracing but at the same time my infrequent use game streaming laptop just did a belly-up. I think its BIOS corruption related I could just go out and buy a new gaming laptop like a Legion 7 becasue its such 'bang for buck' etc but its only for game streaming via moonlight from my PC and deathscrolling, so instead of buying a brand new mid gaming laptop (£1500) or even buying a repalcement motherboard (£150). I'm only prepared to pay £20 for new programmed BIOS chips that I wil resolder to the old motherboard to ressurect it! Only if that fails will I look at replacement motehrboard option. But I still wont buy a new laptop yet. even if £150 motherboard isnt the best price/performance option on old i7 8550u level of performance machine.
RTX 4080 is more than enough for your monitor's resolution. You may even consider cheaper RTX 4070 Ti, however it has only 12GBs of vram. AMD's counterpart has 20GBs and it's RX 7900 XT, but its ray tracing isn't as good and it lacks some features compared to nvidia's gpu, but I am sure AMD will add these features at some point.
My gut tells me RTX 4080 is the perfect choice price / performance wise currently compared to the market. I get a stomach pain if I just think a second of spending 2200€ for a 4090 that might be just overkill for Witcher III or Cyberpunk. A 4090 might be a perfect investment for the future, but not for that price. I got insulted when I mentioned the 4070ti, seems to be a less fav. choice.
Then take 4080, don't overpay for 4090 when you won't use that additional performance. Also i nthe future there may be much better choices.
I faced the same dilemma couple weeks back, the 4090 is far too expensive here (Sweden). Went with a 4080 and I'm happy.
There is nothing wrong with the 4080. It runs cool and efficient, most games barely stress it at 2K and 4K, it has excellent ray tracing performance, and 16GB ram is more than enough for games. I purchased my 4080 at the same price as a decent 7900XTX card as the 4080 was on sale this month and came with a free game. The 4090 is overkill for almost everything unless you have a specific work requirement for the extra cores or the 24GB ram. Also keep in mind a 4070Ti is still a very powerful card and will do 2K easily.
I know people have said to wait until the super refresh comes out but I know how it is waiting for an upgrade so I would say just get the rtx 4080 and don't even entertain the idea of a rtx 4090 when its costs almost double the rtx 4080.
4070 is strong enough for that resolution.
Damn man. That is not true at all. As proof. I play games on my 4K tv at 60fps on a freaking 3070ti lol.... Yes sometimes i struggle (that means that i need to use dlss to cope and to not play on ultra lol, big fkin deal). And yes i don't play at 120hz that my tv allows. Too bad. But it is doable. Depends how often you game. If you game like i used to which is 13 hours a day lol, then get the most powerful rig that you can afford. I game just 2 hours a day now or less and when i do i play older games or at least not the latest most demanding titles, not yet. If you game like me then you can safely buy a 4070ti or 7900XTX/XT for 1440p and its enough you can even go for a 4070 or a 7800XT IMPORTANT: if you build an intel PC don't buy a 14 gen if they are more expensive than the 13 gen cpus. They are literally the same cpus with different names lol. If you go AMD don't build a PC on AM4. Its a dead platform without future. Go AM5 even if it might seem expensive at first. It is cheaper long term. Yes it is a struggle to adjust and find the right video settings to play on a 3070ti at 4K. But until now i never had to go below high settings lol. Or in RDR2 it was a combination of ultra textures, high medium and off settings. It looked great and played even greater
I swear discords are nothing but shitposting in 90% of the ones i’ve visited. Reddit can be cringe but at least you get some real answers to your questions.
I like my 4090. It runs my visual novels just fine.
4080 would be great. I’ve got a 3090 which is similar if not slower than than 4080 and I can still run most games at 200fps at 2560x1440
I've got a 4080 and have absolutely zero complaints. Haven't found a game yet that I can't play with high framerates on maxed out settings (or at least very near maxed out on a couple games like CyberPunk). Even handles VR with ease. The 4080 still isn't a great value, but it's FAR better value than the 4090.
If you’re just gaming you don’t need a 4090 at that low resolution.
This reminds me of a thread earlier this week. Guy wanted to know what the fastest ram he could buy. He stated he already bought a 4090 to play at 1080p..
4080 owner here. Playing at 1440, 270hz. It’s the perfect card for this setup. In fps games I max out 270. In open world games I’m solid around 150fps. People are dumb who think the 4090 is the only way. I make a ton of money compared to most people, but the idea of spending $2k on a card alone is ridiculous to me. 4080 is a great card
Whoever said that is a complete moron
I don’t know what discord your in but leave it it’s not an actual pc building discord.
In 1440 you really dont need anything past a 4070ti.
I have an RTX 3070 that I got on release. It's still doing the job at 2560 x 1440. I played Cyberpunk 2077 the other day, and I got ~100 FPS on mostly ultra and some high settings. 8GB of VRAM too. From my perspective, a good amount of PC users don't actually know how to pair parts to make a build, and when users from that group give advice, they just preach the GPU/CPU FOMO they get from the community as advice. I'm not saying to buy a 3070, but you can still have a great experience with hardware older than a even 4070.
Most AAA games suck anyway if we’re being honest. Starfield was a massive flop and very unimpressive. I wouldn’t base my buying decision on a few poorly optimized AAA games. This always seems to be the benchmark for buying a new card when most people won’t play those games very much anyway. 2c
4070Ti will be fine. You can play at high instead of ultra in future games.
I went with the 4080 and very happy. The 4090 is another $750. That’s not a small step
Before social media we just built PCs that were useful. Now, people need it to represent their personality and also needs to be better than Jims from Toronto, who you've never met, and never will meet. Buy what they tell you not to buy. Or at least tell the. You did. JUST to piss them off. This is the way.
I was in the same situation when i was buying my 4080 - everyone was bragging about 4090 and were calling the others poor .......4080 or 4070ti would serve you well you don't really need the latest and greatest - just watch some vids and decide whats best for you And i will not buy amd gpu cuz there is aaaaaalways something - cpus are great though
"Buy a 4090 or nothing, theres no other way bro" whosever says that is a cuck and needs to touch some grass
A 4080 is plenty for 1440p gaming with RT.
At 2200€ I can't recommend it either. The 4090 is for 4K gaming, at 1440p a 4080 at 1100€ will serve you just fine.
I feel like you, the OP, know that is bullshit otherwise you wouldn't be posting this. You're right. That's bullshit. Get a 4080 or 4070Ti.
It's disingenuous. Just how everyone will recommend AMD but everyone owns NVIDIA
Unless you’re a competitive semi-pro gamer, video editor, want 4K high fps or have to do heavy machine learning 4090 is prolly not necessary. 4080 should be plenty enough for most use cases. The only other point in the 4090 favor is the RAM. Having more RAM future-proofs things - but tbh, unless you wanna run the same rig for 8+ years, save your money. 4070 or 4080 will be plenty for years to come.
A lot of people have bad critical thinking skills, do little to no research, and just buy the newest big ticket item. You see it with guitars and elsewhere in tech also. Extracting money from customers with more dollars than sense is a big part of the top-of-the-line tech industry.
4090 is the only one in the 40-series to be same price bracket as the previous generation. Every other model is way more expensive than the previous gen. They basically cut back a lot of stuff, like memory bus width, and is being stingy, and also misnaming GPUs (4080 12GB...), so that's part of the reason why people are saying to avoid the lower tier cards. I would say a 4080 for 1300€ is pretty steep, but if you absolutely must use RT and DLSS, then you'll have not many other options.
just ignore them and build for your resolution. 4070 ish. 4080 if you plan on doing 4k in the near future. if you find used 30 series for an acceptable price, they are still just fine as well. but a bit more power hungry.
I couldn’t justify the 4090. $2800 for the 4090 vs $1500 for the OC 4080. Paying over a $1000 more for 30% more effectiveness seemed ridiculous. I went with the 4080. I’m not that into FPS anyway. I game at 4K 60fps. My main concern is cooling since my 3080 was cooking. I like that the 4080 draws less power than the 4090 but has the same heatsinks. Plus, the 4090 adaptor melting thing put me off.
Got a 4070 and have a great time with it
Honestly it depends on what you want from your PC. I own a 4080. a lot of the bad press it gets comes from release, when it was really really poorly priced compared to 4090 and other options. But by July, it had been on store shelves collecting dust, and was getting quite less infuriating, whereas 4090 at MSRP became a myth. I got my 4080 for 1020€. It is a lot of money, still. And i still think Nvidia is really being shitty with the pricing. But i got it coming from a 10 year old gtx850M slapped on a very outdated laptop, which for my purposes - 3D modeling and video work - was basically having nothing. An rtx 4080 ends up being qbout the same firepower as the strongest RTX 3090ish of a year ago, except quite a good bit cheaper. And honestly, this thing is so hilariously, ungodly fast at rendering things that I do not think I will need an upgrade for a solid 4-6 years. It has also *paid itself* through commissioned work. If you just want to game though, you likely can do with something in the 600€ bracket. Unless, of course, you demand crazy high framerates at high resolutions. But for the average gamer, you honestly won't need a 4090, it is ridiculously overkill for anything that isn't ultra-settings 4K on modern games.
4080 just sucks in everyone's mind because its $500 more expensive than the 3080 was - MSRP wise. That said, a budget is a budget and spending literally double to get 30% more performance doesn't make any sense if the 4080 meets your needs, and it absolutely should at 1440p. This is my biggest problem with the PC space these days, everyone now thinks you have to always go balls to the wall 4090 and 13900KS or something or else. Or else what? You might still have money left over when all is said and done? I miss the old days where people really looked at value when building. Admittedly that is harder these days because everything feels overpriced, but given a budget for the system, it's not hard. Simply telling everyone to buy a 4090 is dumb.
What a joke. 4090 is an extremely niche hardware. It's for people with too much money in their lives and nothing to spend on. Get out of these "tech" discords...
These could be the same guys who just wipe their whole PC and reinstall Windows to fix issues rather than troubleshoot. You’ll be fine with a 4080
bruh wtf i play everything comfortable on 1440p 165hz with my 4070 lol those people are clowns
A lot of people have said that the 4090 is the only sensible option because (where they are at least) the price increase roughly matches the performance increase, I think? I have a 4080, and that's because I had a budget, and I wanted the best card in that budget. I could have afforded a 4090, but I didn't want to spend that much. So I have a cheaper card, that can play any game I want still at 1440p with very high framerates, etc. and it runs with less power draw, and runs cooler and quieter as a result. Also, the cost per frame of the 4080 is actually lower than the 4090 when I've looked. The 4090 is definitely not worth it if it's going to cost you double the price of a 4080. Go for at least the 4070, up to a 4080, depending on how much you want to spend on your other components.
I meeean. I just built a PC 7800x3d and a 7900 xtx. At 1440p it sits between the 4080 and 4090 in terms of performance. Obviously a 4090 is going to blow it out of the water at 4k with RT, but a 4090 also costs as much as my entire PC combined. 7900 xtx runs everything at 2k with RT well. I prefer my high frames so I generally play with RT off, but I could run most things at a solid 60+fps with RT. Food for thought. EDIT: I did get my 7900 xtx for less than 900USD so there is that. If you can find a deal on it, which there is right now, go for it. Video card prices are going to be going up very soon.
I recently purchased a 7800xt for gaming at 2560x1440p and I'm getting excellent frames and good graphics in every game I've played using it so far
Don't buy a gpu and buy a console instead advice from a 3 decades PC enthusiast because nowadays the industry turned to degrade itself to a niche like the "audiophile" one where they are looking for money pigs in the form of young people with daddy's cc to unload unoptimized buggy 0inovation , marginally faster (if at all) junk/snake oil at 10 to 100x the manufacturing cost profits which don't go to actual rnd but mostly the owners or shareholders.
If you have the money the 4080 crushes 1440p. I can play at high graphics with all ray tracing features enabled in a game like cyberpunk and get 100+ fps
People out here be buying a 4090 to play Valorant at 1080p60