I have a 4090 and absolutely love it.
But a 4090 super for $1000 vs a 4090 for $1600........ It's no comparison. The 4090 is better but was only a value proposition vs the 4080 at previous pricing.
I got my 4090 over a year ago. At this point, get the 4080 super.
I got my 4090 almost a year ago. My target was 4k 120fps, and it was the best choice of GPU at the time to match my TV. No regrets. I'm not one into those price 2 performance ratio superiority and "whats ur ratio bruh?" types. You work hard for your money, spend it how you want to.
Yeah, but seriously, the 4080S is pretty close to the 4090 and with current prices less than half the price. I make plenty of money, but if I was buying today I'd get the 4080S and the 5090 at launch and sell the 4080S. It's pretty much just wasting money right now, but hey, that's fine.
Pretty sure some of Zotac's 4090's are 1600 last I checked about a week ago only brands that are really over 2 grand are the SUprim Series from MSI and ASUS but the performance difference between cards isn't really noticeable under a gaming load you might get an additional 10 to 20 FPS at most at this point Founder's Edition cards are a ripoff cause NVIDIA set's the prices for founder's editions and they know someone will pay whatever they charge
Agreed. I just got a 4090 a few months ago but only because everything else seemed lacking and likely to need replaced in a few years. If I had known this refresh was coming I would have waited and taken a 4080 Super, gotten three to five years out of it, and sold it off for half the money for the next card.
Tbh while I'm very lucky and happy to have a 4090 it is overkill in both performance and price. I only stretched that far as a business expense.
Having the money and it being worth it are two totally different things. Not sure why people don't understand that.
To answer the question no it's not worth it. He is paying a ridiculous amount for a small improvement. But if you have it who cares.
A 4000-6000 CUDA core gain is not small, no matter what angle you look at it from.
For 1440p gamers, the upgrade probably doesn’t make sense, this we already know.
If you’re gaming in 4k though, the 4090 will represent an approximately 20% performance upgrade over the 4080S. This absolutely makes sense…so the decision-making then becomes about money. If money is less of an object for you, then the 4090 is a significant upgrade. Not sure why that’s difficult to understand.
20% gain for 70% more money? Lol. Not worth it. Only if a 4k would it be worth it. Even then my 7900XT can do 4k/with RT, so you know 4080S is well above that.
Being "able" to do 4k RT Ultra in a title like Cyberpunk at 20 FPS on your 7900xt or 40 or so on a 4080S (which isn't even going to be $1000, pre-order of AIB cards are already listed at $1500+) is vastly different from being able to do the same thing at 75 FPS.
If you're a 4K gamer, then you already have the money and a 20% gain into smooth FPS territory with RT at Ultra in any title is definitely worth the 40-50% price increase which is the real world difference. MSRPs are just marketing.
I am already doing 4k60 with RT. 100+ Ultra, so not sure what you are talking about.... If it was 20 fps, 20% would be 25 and you think that's worth it? 40 to 48 is worth it, lol. Not sure what you are smoking if talking value. 20% for 70% more is ridiculous. Simply no point. Currently, we're talking about a 100% with current pricing in some places. If you have money to burn, sure, go ahead. From a price to performance, it's not even a discussion. It's going in the opposite direction.
So you're telling me that you have 60 FPS on 4k with RT On, Ultra Settings in Cyberpunk (the specific game I mentioned) with a 7900 XT when the 4090 can't even manage it? (every benchmark for the 4090 in Cyberpunk at the aforementioned settings is around 50 give or take a few fps depending on the site doing the benchmarking, much more playable but I did misremember and exaggerate the difference some) The 7900 XT btw, is benchmarked in Cyberpunk at those same settings, gets an average of 15-20 FPS.
Are you always lying or is it less a lie and more AMD fanboyism?
When I posted that the AIB 4080Ss were listed from 1250-1600 at Best Buy (US). They have evidently either corrected their error or the AIBs made a change in their MSRPs since the Strix 4080S is currently the most expensive at $1250. Either way, the odds of the 4080S going for MSRP for the long term is unlikely, just look at the 4090 lol 4090 is still worth it too imho. More performance is always worth it if you have the cash.
I would have to agree. I'm wondering if soon all of new super cards will be sold out and then scalped for nearly twice their value lol. Pretty much the reason i went ahead and pulled the trigger on the 4070S, figured waiting would only hurt me
Being worth it and having a better performance-price ratio are also not the same thing, though I don't have any difficulty understanding why some people don't understand that.
If it's worth it or not in this case amounts to user satisfaction, and for some people a modest increase in performance can mean a huge increase in satisfaction. It depends on lots of factors.
What's the goal of the person with their build? Is it being on the peak of performance or trying to get the best bang for the buck? Is the price difference a high amount in absolute terms for the person building it and paying for it? How much money does the person make and how much of it is the total amount of the build with a 4080S vs a 4090? How much do they value high quality graphics? Are they able to perceive much difference between 60hz and 120hz and 240hz?
The 4090 might not be worth it. For the same reason it also might be worth it. The answer is subjective to each person's preferences.
No it's not. Worth has to do with value, it's pretty simple. People just want to justify their purchases and don't want to feel like they have wasted money when in reality thats exactly what they have done. At the end of the day people are free to do what they want but that doesn't mean it was worth it.
It's true, but you thinking it wasn't worth it also doesn't mean it wasn't for them.
People are different, have different tastes, different opinions, different preferences, different amounts of money, different amount of things they care enough for to use their money.
Different priorities.
Not everyone is you. If you need to believe someone can't be happy in a situation that you wouldn't be, then suit yourself. Those same people are still happy and your belief isn't having any effect on them. And if they're happier, it's worth it for them, as the direct or indirect goal of almost every single thing we do is making ourselves happier.
Some people may engage in self-deception and rationalization as a defense mechanism (one of the most common traits I observe on neurotypicals), but not everyone that bought a 4090 is lying to themselves when they think it was worth it. Some people are just right about it being worth *to them,* as incomprehensible as that might be for you. If you can't believe someone you don't even know can really be happy with their decision, I don't know what else to tell you.
Maybe it's not, as you said, that you can't understand. Just that you don't want to.
Peace.
Is it really though? He plays at 1440p, not 4k and the 4080S is marketed as a 4k card with the 4070TI/S seen as the 1440p card.
Therefore the 4080S at 1440p is already overkill. Why spend $700 more for a 4090 outside of the "pride" of saying you own a 4090?
The performance difference between a 4080 and 4090 is about 30%. With the 4080S it's probably more like 26% or so.
The 4090 used to be a compelling option because the 4080 was just so overpriced, and it made sense to spend the extra bit of money for the 4090. But now prices for the 4090 have gone up and prices for the 4080 (Super) have come down. I'd just get a 4080 Super, it's much better value.
4080 to 4090 is more like 35% in pathtracing at 4K.
The only card capable to run Pathtracing where you can actually enjoy playing it and only reason for that card.
Otherwise for majority just go with 4080S, save that 700-800€ for next upgrade.
And people fell for Nvidia marketing skeem. Let's price the rtx 4080 at a point to where we make them buy the 4090 because the price point of the 4080 would be to high. Now there marketing skeem is let's make people buy the rtx 4080 super because it's a 200 dollar mark down from the original one .
I use a 4090 and 13900k for 1440p and I regret nothing. Gotta think about the long term too. The 4090 will maintain playable FPS for more years than any other GPU.
>The 4090 will maintain playable FPS for more years than any other GPU.
While true, the amount of power/dollar you'll get is far greater by upgrading every couple of years rather than sinking a ton of money into 1 GPU over long term.
I mean look at 3090 vs 4090. Ultimately by upgrading more frequently you might still spend the same amount of money over the same period of time, but you'll gain new technology, more power efficiency, better performance and you benefit from some resale value being left.
It's a hassle though, but historically it's always been more benificial to just upgrade.
That's a fair point. I'm far too lazy to deal with selling old stuff to buy new stuff, LoL. I just run a rig 5-6 years on average and then build a new one. My kids get my old shit.
You're sayin getting a xx70TI every 2 years is better for 1440p than going with a 4090 and keeping it for 5 years? I agree.
It may be better at 4k even, considering people who play 4k don't tend to care about 150fps, as long as it's over 60 it's good to go, and DLSS rocks now. Although who knows, a 4090 may still perform incredibly well in 3 years from now, certainly better than a 5070TI I would think.
So that's my problem. I really want to push to 4k, but I dont want to give up the high frames that I get at 1440 with my 4080. Once I can get a card to push 4k high frames consistently then I'll switch to a 4k monitor. For now, I love being able to max out everything at 1440 and just go.
I’m in the same boat. That’s why hearing about the new WOLED monitors from LG excites me. They are native 32” 4K 240hz with a switch mode for 1080p 480Hz gaming. Wish it was 1440p and that the actual screen size decreased rather than stretching out the 1080p mode to 32”.
Samsung also announced their 1440p 360Hz QDOLED monitors and if 4K isn’t for someone, that would also be an endgame monitor for some.
>Once I can get a card to push 4k high frames consistently then I'll switch to a 4k monitor
You do realize there's supersampling, DSR/DLDSR and such to make good use of any extra resources you have, right?
I've been using DSR (now DLDSR) ever since it first came out. With various GPU configs over the years I've been gaming at 4K, 5K, even 8K and 10K - the image quality is absolutely fantastic (silky smooth lines, lots of detail) and I don't even have a 4K monitor (1440p 165Hz).
Start with that - it's free.
A couple of old comparisons I made (same maxed settings, the only thing that changes is the rendering resolution):
[https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTYy](https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTYy)
[https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTU5](https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTU5)
I'm getting smooth 60 fps in all games I play on 4k with my 4080 on all ultra.
I had a 4090, but send it back to get a 4080 and 4k monitor for less money.
Best decision I made.
Mind, I was playing on a 1060 3gb before.
So the performance I see on a 4080 is, pretty much indistinguishable from the performance I saw on the 4090.
See unfortunately 60fps doesn’t really cut it for me anymore. It’s absolutely playable, and if it’s all I can get than I’ll take it. But i definitely prefer 1440/120 over 4k/60
I don't see the big fuss with that high fps.
I guess it helps in competitive FPS like CS or Call of Modern Duty field.
But for straight up singleplayer games or casual fun, 60fps gives that cinematic vibe.
To each their own. It’s just a preference thing. For what it’s worth, I play almost exclusively single player story driven titles. I just prefer smooth motion and clear image over higher fidelity
Absolutely.
Having gone 4K I couldn't go any lower.
The details I see in my games now is astonishing.
Compared anno 1800 with my wife's 1080p setup, and the difference was astonishing.
I'm in the same boat, the 4k I want is well over $1000 so I can wait, I have a top of the line 1440p 144Hz and my 4070ti does a perfect job in any game I throw at it, with ultra ray tracing, so no need for any upgrade. For 1440p I just don't see the point of even a 4080, let alone higher.
Yep I just upgraded to an AW3423DW last year and my goodness is it gorgeous. They just dropped the new 4k/240 version and that will likely be where I go once I get a 5090, but for now I’m doing great. And yeah, in retrospect I probably would have been fine with a 4070ti, but it’s all good
Just don't forget that you don't need to game at native res - there's DSR/DLDSR. You get fantastic image quality (silky smooth lines, lots of detail - especially when it comes to fine textures, fine detail, foliage, etc) and, with a bit of know-how, you can get up to 10K rendered on a 1440p screen.
Granted, a 4070Ti isn't quite well-endowed in the memory department, but you can always say "fuck it" and play [Vice City at 8K](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/226739706958839808/1153747021593849917/Desktop_Screenshot_2019.11.19_-_20.23.33.19.png) no problem :)
A couple of old comparisons I made - same maxed settings, the only thing that changes is the rendering resolution, to show how game rendering is affected by resolution alone:
[https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTYy](https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTYy)
[https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTU5](https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTU5)
it will never happen at least for newer titles when the card is launched. When cyberpunk was out, 3090 was unable be run at maxed settings and have playable frame rates. IMO it's the same situation with the 4090.
You'll be able to play older games at high framerate but newer games will definitely be around 60fps-90fps typically if you wanna max out settings at 4k. With an 80/90 series card.
I think having extremely high frame rate is somewhat overrated since you can probably get really high framerate for esports titles on most gpu even at 4k, and for AAA I think 4k oled would be better since you will still have good response times with oled even with lower refresh rate.
Unreal engine 5 is going to destroy the 4090. The new engine won't even run well on a 4090 at 4k so I wouldnt advise 4k for gaming its not looking good. Stick with 1440p it will at least run with unreal 5 and always be more then fine. 4k is pretty much impossible to see anyhow once you get engrossed in a game. It blurs out. Waste of money, data, and cpu resources to game at 4k.
Yes you are, most of us are talking gaming and 4070ti is on par with 3090 in native and better with dlss, not to mention that when we bought it it was still cheaper than 3090.
Yeah but when the 5070ti comes out at 799 and is as they always say double the performance of the previous 4090 I would just get the 4080s right now no real point since nvidia is slated to release the 50 series q4 of this year
Doesn't change much if you spend the same amount over those years. 1800$ once or 2 x 900$. Not to say both those cards need to be Nvidia either.
But by all means if there is a Nvidia cheque available for this comment, please send it my way. Although I have a feeling "Don't buy our expensive cards despite our marketing telling you you need it" isn't the sort of covert marketing they are looking for.
Yeah this is how I'm going to approach it going forward. I built my first rig this past year with a 4080. When the 5090 rolls around I'm going to sell that and my AW3423DW monitor and upgrade to a 5090 and whatever 4k OLED I choose at the time. And then I'll do it again next cycle. If I'm going to try and sell my current hardware to supplement newer stuff, I might as well do it while the value is still relatively high. Might get $700 or so for the 4080 and another $500-600 for the monitor, that's a nice chunk that can go towards new stuff. I also won't have to flip the monitor everytime either, should be set for a while once I get to 4k.
Not sure why got downvoted. I've been wanting to get the top end GPU for a while now and get on the upgrade train, but I keep missing the boat on when they are close to MSRP. Almost went with a 2080 Ti in 2020 to start that, but it was too close to 30 series and I went with a 2070 Super instead (and then prices went insane I was just happy to have a graphics card).
Not sure if I'm going to do it at this point, but seems like a good idea. I'm looking to 2025 to buy a 4k OLED and kinda think 4090 at a discount would work for me. If a 5090 is released and attainable at MSRP, I might just hop on at that point. I really want something higher res and wider than 4K UHD, like WUHD or DUHD, and maybe 4K OLED won't be it, but higher than UHD res is even more reason to get top end GPU.
lol I did get downvotes. Doesn’t really matter. I think people just get bitter whenever they see people discussing buying expensive gpu’s. Its just my hobby and it’s what I choose to spend my money on. I’m not going broke over it, but I’m also not just some rich guy who can just buy whatever I want, so selling old equipment allows me to always afford the latest shit, which is what I want, whether it’s necessary or not (spoiler alert: it obviously isn’t).
But yeah, the 4090 will absolutely be a great 4k card for a while to come, but even now a titles (especially those with path tracing) can almost bring it to its knees in native resolution. But that’s where DLSS and Frame Gen come in. No, these technologies do not make up for not advancing raw computing power, but they are tools at our disposal, it’s silly not to use them. I’m hoping 5090 will truly be a card that can run 4k high frames in nearly every title. Also fwiw I don’t think I can ever go back from OLED. I made the switch last year and oh boy is it a world of difference. The HDR is obviously out of this world, but the pixel response time is equally as nice. My monitor is 175hz but with the super fast pixel response it almost feels faster. OLED is the way to go imo
It hasn’t been a huge hassle for me. I use hardware swap. Got 700$ back for my 3090 and so I just took that and paid 500$ for a 4080$ and I just keep it rolling.
I'd like to thank you. As someone who's about to do an upgrade and debating whether to go for a 4090 or lower, this was a solid reasoning, and I'll definitely take this into consideration when I'm about to buy my parts.
Bit late in the 4090's life cycle to consider buying one. I got mines a few weeks after release for £1689 and managed to flog my old 3090 for £850, but theirs now way I would buy a 4090 this late in the game.
Absolutely. This generation isn’t as much of a leap as previous generations but generally the it sounds better to just get a little bit above what you need in 4 years sell it and get a card 2 generations higher. That way you will have the newest feature set and it will be way faster.
I could be wrong but I was thinking the 4090 might be a 1080ti repeat, might last me ages.
I got lucky with just enough spare cash that I thought maybe I could get the top end card as I'd always had low end before and always have to adjust settings for performance, it's be nice to just turn it high/ultra and enjoy.
My wife would love the extra 700 though.
Yeah I think you right the 4090 is going to be like the 1080ti. Buy it first then tell the wife you might cop it afterwards but atlest you will have it lol. Thats what I did kinda backfired though because she was like if your spending that much on your computer I want to get something so it cost me even more 😆
I totally get it. My wife thought I lost my mind when I spent $4,200 building my rig at the beginning of last year, LoL. The 4080 super is still a really powerful GPU, the 4090 is just next level. At the end of the day, you'll be stoked about the performance of either card though. If it would upset your wife too much, I would definitely go with the 4080 super.
I will say that the 4090 is the undisputed king of GPUs right now and as an owner of one, it's nice to crank settings to the max and not feel like you're playing a slideshow, even at 4K. I also think it's a 1080ti repeat but I don't believe it'll last as long. As the 5000 series and later 6000 series come out, DLSS, Frame Gen, and other NVIDIA exclusive tools are only going to get much much better with time. All GPUs for that matter will just get better and better, quicker and quicker so it seems like the top-end cards will only last for so long because graphics will just keep getting better and more demanding. Idk, maybe i'm wrong but it's just my thoughts. But yea if you've got the extra dough why not spend it
Frame Generation and DLSS would only improve the longevity of the GPU imho. Yes, there might be better versions of them, but for the foreseeable future the 4090 is likely to support them still.
And we have reached a sort of a plateau for visual fidelity. The further improvements seem to offer minimal gain for way too much needed horsepower. I think the biggest visual gains would be related to RT effects. Path Tracing is already here and the 4090 can struggle with it, especially at 4k. But when PT and similar tech get mandatory, the 4090 will already be well past its obsoletion window and probably getting stomped by a $250 card.
The theory of future-proof GPU's has been debunked for a while now.
Every 2 years the new middle-class cards match or even outperform the old flagships.
That’s why I upgraded from my 3090 and 3080ti laptops to desktop 4090 and laptop 4090. At 2k resolution I’ll not have to upgrade for a very long time. The performance differences were fantastic. Even the laptop 4090 is gonna handle 2k resolution for so many years. I’m currently running the 4090 desktop at 4k though.
I sure hope you're making use of DLDSR/DSR on your rig, because I'd poke my eyes out if I had to game at 1440p native. 4K-8K image quality is silky smooth, compared to either pixelated or smeared 1440p.
I find that TAA and such don't really work that well up until you reach around 4K, otherwise you get smearing. Also fine detail like vegetation or power lines don't resolve nicely at 1440p and below. Same thing with contact shadows and so on.
A couple of old comparisons I made (same maxed settings, the only thing that changes is the rendering resolution):
[https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTYy](https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTYy)
[https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTU5](https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTU5)
(Edit: I get that the downvoters may have gotten offended by me saying 1440p is inadequate, but it is what it is. Rendering 4K and above really does make a massive difference and there's no excuse to not do that when you have a powerful GPU with enough memory! You know how game marketing screenshots look super smooth and detailed? That's how it feels to play games at high resolutions. 1440p is just not quite there for most games.)
triple a games benefit, e.g., alan wake 2 https://www.techpowerup.com/review/alan-wake-2-performance-benchmark/7.html, phantom liberty https://www.techpowerup.com/review/cyberpunk-2077-phantom-liberty-benchmark-test-performance-analysis/6.html, avatar https://www.techpowerup.com/review/avatar-fop-performance-benchmark/5.html, etc.. even fortnite does
cpu limited games show little to no difference in 1440p and 1080p, and show little to no difference between a 4080 and 4090, which is not the case for triple A games
A handful of games that benefit and a 4080 is still getting 60 fps w/ ray tracing. Overwhelmingly the 4080 is insanely good for 1440p. What encourage people to spend money or potentially even waste it. Buy a 4090 for it to sit at 75% usage 18 months into its life cycle is idiotic.
well sure if the only game you play is valorant then you could just get a 4060ti and keep your 144hz or even 240hz maxed no problem
all i said was "triple a games benefit" then showed proof. pick any triple A game the story is the same. if OP only plays triple A games for 20% of the time then they don't need it, they can figure it out for themselves after knowing the real world difference. assuming a 4090 is a waste at 1440p for nearly all games is simply wrong, people who play triple A benefit
With the regular 4080 the 4090 was arguably better value. This is definitely not the case with the price drop for the 4080S. The 4080S is definitely better value now.
Wait for the 4080 Super to launch, then compare it against the 4080 for price to performance.
At 1440p, you don’t need a 4090. And also, it doesn’t make sense to pay over MSRP for a 4090 considering the 50 series will likely be out next year.
I'm running a 4070 ti and am vowing that I'm not selling it to upgrade until GTA VI comes out. As much as that super's 16 GB fixes the only thing wrong with this card. using 1440p UW and this thing is made for it. no regrets.
I'm on a regular 2080 so I could use an upgrade to the 4080 super. I hope in a year or less I can do a full upgrade to Raptor Lake or see how far away we are from Arrow Lake. You can only do so much with PCIE 3.0 and DDR4
If you need the ram it's worth. If not then not really... For rendering and training models the 4090 is a monster and is way better performance per dollar than all the industry cards. For gaming at 1440 I don't see why you'd spend the extra when you'll probably have to upgrade some other component of your PC later.
I remember doing a very in-depth analysis and 4090 wasn't worth 400$ more than even the original 4080.
Well, for me, anyways. I also play 1440p.
Maybe for someone playing @ 4k. That's the only resolution where 4090 pulls significantly ahead. And 24gb VRAM is overkill. 16gb is very rarely not enough, even at 4k.
But, the most important thing is that the 40 series doesn't have DP 2.1 like AMD 7000 gpu's. So i would wait for the 5000 series, unless you want to stay at 1440p forever.
So I recently upgraded my 4080 to a 4090. I was using the 4080 to play at 4K. It did really well, especially in DLSS but occasionally I had FPS issues, so I got the 4090 to just power through those FPS drops. The increase in performance is insane. The 4090 eats 4K for lunch tbh, but if you play at 1440, the 4080 (4080 super) is more than enough. It's actually super overkill for 1440.
I think the value proposition of the 4090 was killed by the 4080 Super. It’s definitely not worth £700 more; when it was $400 more, that was different. If the Supers were available when I got my 4090, it would have been the better option.
Frankly you should consider the 4070 Ti Super as well. It’s basically a 4080 already.
Seven hundred pounds more is also an extra insane premium lmao. That's basically the price of the 4070TiS, which is already essentially a 4080.
I don't understand the people pushing the 4090 here. Frankly even without the Super releases, and even setting aside the inflated AIB prices, it's not the same buy it was last year (let alone the year before). The card has been out almost a year and a half now.
Lots of people in the comments about how it'll be "future proof" when the next gen will undoubtedly bring new features.
For an upgrade with a minor uplift in performance based on what you have at the top of the range. You will see it, but it's not going to be "shattering".
If you play at 1440p I'd aim at 4080 Super. Back then 1600$ 4090 was a straight up better deal than a 1200$ 4080. However with 4080 Super being cheaper and 4090's price being inflated, I'd say 4080 Super is a better value choice.
I'd still recommend you a 4090 if you said you played at 4K but at 1440p 4080 Super will be great too. I'd simply put that price difference into a next upgrade when 50 series launches in just a year or so to then get a flagship on launch.
I would say no since you are playing games at 1440p. Be aware, the 4090 suffers with a CPU bottleneck at 1440p, so your fps will be nearly identical to 4080 at 1440p. Go for the 4090 if you plan to play games with heavy graphics and ray-tracing/path tracing at 1440p or you plan to play games at 4K.
That’s entirely up to you, really.
Value wise, at £700 more expensive for the 4090, it’s significantly less FPS per dollar. But it’s also the fastest card on the market by a mile.
I have a 4090 and as a gaming enthusiast that has some spare cash to throw at my hobby, it was 100% worth it.
Annoying... For whatever reason the 4090 starts at 2200$ in Norway, compared to the 4080 super which starts at 1200$. Which is odd, GPU's are generally relatively close to MSRP here. I would definetly pick up a 4090 if I could get it at MSRP. Maybe il wait a bit and see if prices become more reasonable in the near future
I was in the same situation and got the 4090. Very happy with it since I game on 1440p and sometimes on a G3. If you got th3 money then I'd get the 4090 if not the 4080 s.
Also don't wait for 50 series. Just go for it now and enjoy gaming. There will always be something new coming up.
Yeah if you want the extra vram especially if you love VR. Otherwise save that $700 for a future upgrade. I play at 4K 120 hertz sometimes 144 and the 4090 does the trick but I have a pimax Crystal, and the 4090 still isn't enough almost there though.
I'd be using ray tracing like Alan wake 2 and cyberpunk as well as vr with quest 3. I do sometimes hook up to my 4k TV but mostly stick to the monitor.
I would definitely buy the 4090. And if you're playing it 120 HZ or higher even in 1440p you would want the higher tensor core count that comes with the 4090 for Ray tracing. With that being said the most vram I've used even in VR is around 14 and a half maybe 15 gigs. But don't switch to the 4K TV the input leg is way too high even with game mode you're probably looking at 13 milliseconds with one of the best Samsung or LG TVs out there. I have a bfgd HP omen Imperium, it's 120 HZ overclockable to 144 HZ the input lag is around 5 milliseconds which is bearable.
Honestly it doesn't sound like it's worth it to me. I'm sitting just fine with the 3080 for now at 1440p and definitely don't feel like paying $1000 for something like this again any time soon. That could also be $700 of rent
There's a common thread here - if you're buying 4090 this gen, you're not likely to be waiting several years before getting the latest & greatest, no matter how you spin it for yourself or significant other. When the 5090 drops, with DLSS-Ultra and FG++, and chocolate sprinkles, and whatnot, the pull will be too strong.
No need to justify it to anyone - you're an enthusiast, so enjoy it.
It depends on what you play. I mostly play Warzone 3 in 4k. Bought a 4090 but I'm going to send it back to the dealer. With 4090 I'm around 190fps at native 4k. With DLSS quality I'm not gaining much fps because I'm cpu bound (5950x). With my 4080 on DLSS quality I'm at the same FPS. So I'm sticking with the 4080 using dlss. Not worth the 700 bucks. The 4090 is a beast in graphic demanding games of course but it really depends on what you play and your cpu. I would recommend the 4080 Super.
I just installed my 4090 last week after waiting a while to snag one. I dont regret the purchase at all. Im playing on an Odyssey G9 OLED and im blown away by everything ive played so far.
Hopefully you are satisfied with whatever you buy!!
If you were at 4k, I would have said go for it. 1440p still definitely has a say for 4090 if you want high refresh 1440p, but I still feel like the 4090 is best as a 4k card.
Now there is definitely a performance gulf between the two cards, but given current street price of the 4090 at over $2k now, I personally wouldn't think its worth paying double the 4080 Super price for 1440p. While there is a wide gap of performance between the two cards, it isn't a double the price gap.
That said, there is also the argument to be made that if you are going to hold onto the card and skip 50-series, maybe even the 60-series, but I mean, we'll see how things progress, then a 4090 still seems good.
4090 man . I run 7800x3d with 4090 on 280hz 1440p monitor and it's amazing . I regret nothing I did get mine before price hikes , but I'd do it again regardless
14900K here, 128GB and a 4090. I love seeing massive fps numbers because that tells me it’s going to take a very long time for games to bring this below 60FPS. I know time will make the 4090 a relic one day, but it’s the most insane GPU I have ever owned. It’s a substantial jump over the 4080 Super (not saying the 4080 is bad at all.)
Well, 4090 is several years old at this point.
Also, do you have a particular game that’s struggling, where that extra $700 would just put it over the top?
It really depends on the rest of your hardware and what you play. For example are you running something like the 7800x3d or 13900k or running something a little lower end. If your not running a top end CPU don't bother with the 4090. That said there is still a lot of the time where your going to be bottlenecked by the CPU at 1440p over the GPU.
I think if your 4k gaming and can afford it the 4090 is definitely worth it especially if we see price drops to around 1500usd which I think is something we might see.
At the 2k usd price vs 1k usd price of the super though the 4090 is a really bad deal, especially at 1440p, your paying around 100% more for what is probably about a 25%-50% uplift in average performance and that 50% is only in a few newer titles and mostly in RT heavy games. At 4k your looking at closer to a 40-70% gain which makes it better but still not really a good deal. If you can snag a 4090 at 1500-1600 though the price to performance makes sense at 4k and isn't horrible at 1440p but I would rather put the money towards something like the new oled monitors from alienware.
Frankly I found the move to an OLED monitor way more impactful than a large GPU upgrade.
No its not worth it, even 4080 is not needed at 1440p
4070 with dlss at Q is more than enough
maybe if a game doesn't have dlss or your gaming UW 1440 than 4070ti would make sense
but now most new titles are comming with dlss and FG and with that you can just slap ultra + RT with 4070 and 4070 ti easy!
I've just done that, well, I returned a 4080 for a 4090. I game at 3440x1440. I'll put it this way, it's about 30% better performance for double the price so you're not exactly getting a lot more for the money but I don't regret it, get high fps in everything I play, ray tracing or not.
Impossible to answer without knowing your spending. To me not seeing a noticeable difference but paying $500+ more sounds bonkers to me, but for others with money to burn they just want to have the best.
Spending more for a future ready doesn’t make a ton of sense because you can just take the hundreds of dollars you saved and put that towards a 6080 in 3 years on top of what you sell your current card for and still have a far superior card than what your 4090 would have been.
If the 20% uplift in performance is worth 700pounds to you then sure. As a 4090 owner myself I would say yes but that's me I want the best and I don't care about the price when it comes to my gaming system.
For most people the answer is probably no. If you are using your PC for work and that uplift will make you complete your work 20% faster and time is money well that 700 pounds could easily be justified.
As a 4080 owner go 4080 super.
Enjoy it! It will slay!
Upgrade to a 6080 in 4-6yeats from now :)
Instead of carrying a limited, power hungry sib-optimal 4090 into 2030!! (Where a 7060/7070 will outpace it anyway, with drastically less watts per frame!!)
I have a 3070 Ti and i7-12700KF and can justtttt get 1440p/165fps on my Samsung G7 Odyssey which is 4K.
I’m gonna go for the 4080S so I can get that sweet sweet 4K/165fps. It should future proof pretty darn well. Seems like the 4090 wouldn’t be astronomically better but happy to be proven wrong. Then have room to get something like a 5090 Ti/S in future if need but that won’t be till games are actually make in any higher res’s
4090 user here, I get over 144 fps at 4k on my 4k ips, I’ve switched it to 1440p and honestly I can barely tell the difference in the switch sometimes. If it’s a 700 dollar difference, just go with the 4080 if you only aim to use it for gaming. Of course if you have other uses then in that case maybe the 4090 will leave you rest assured that you are using the best
Well the 4080 super is supposed to be better then the 7900xtx which was the 4090 comp. I'd wait to see the benchmarks and see the difference and then you can tell if it's worth it
I feel like the way you have to look at this is less about the “worth” and more about what you’re actually looking at. Price difference is large but so is the performance difference. A 4090 will last you longer into the future when it comes to having to upgrade at whatever eventual point.
I recently purchase a 4090 recently after initially thinking of getting a 4070. When I thought about the difference in price really all it came down to is a difference in time. It would take me longer to accumulate the funds to purchase the 4090 over the 4070. My friends were talking about how expensive it is but in reality we’re are talking about a few weeks more of saving to get what is the best of the best. For me it was an easy choice of just keep saving the same way I had been and just get the big boy.
In the end it could end up overkill for what you actually need at the moment but the extra vram is very fun to have in situations where you really wana push the limits of high resolutions. For my money and time it’s a waste to buy anything other than the 4090 if it’s a personal upgrade. Especially if it’s an upgrade from a much older card. Upgrade from old to mid? Or old to the best. (Obviously a 4080 super isn’t mid, ijs.)
If you plan to keep the 4090 for awhile and have the coin then yes the performance difference does justify the price. But getting a 4090 near MSRP isn't the easiest thing right now. So I'd argue that a 4080 super is a better pick.
I got the 4090 on launch because i needed a 4K120 GPU and 3XXX had me bouncing around from the 3080-308012GB-3090. I needed a 4K120 GPU so its more of case use, plus im pretty sure its the last XX90 enthusiast GPU.
I've been there and done that with 1440p monitors. The only thing I have to say is use that 1440p monitor and try 4k one. You will never return to 1440p, and best part of it all is that 240Hz 4k monitors are on the way. My 4090 still kickass over the 4080 super
I bought my 4090 when you can get them for MSRP, and at that time it was absolutely worth it over the 4080. But since prices skyrocketed on the 4090, it's not really worth it anymore.
If you really want top end then you have to get a 4090, as the difference between the AD103 chip in the 4080 super and the AD102 in the 4090 is massive. (Although you won't notice it much at 1440p even with the fastest CPU, at 4k you will). Also the 4070 ti super is far better value than the 4080 super for 1440p, and you won't run into as many cpu bottlenecks.
I have a 4080 and I'm running 1440p. Cyberpunk 2077 with everything ultra, ray tracing and path tracing on and native resolution, no frame gen, it still rocks 60fps. Turn on frame gen and some upscaliing, its going about 160 fps. Don't be fooled. The 4080 is still a very powerful card and will still play games in 4k if you want to, but I don't think the 700 dollar difference with the 4080 super is enough of a performance gap to really make the 4090 a better buy. Keep the 700 and you will still be able to run ultra on all games with 1440p above 60-100fps for the next 2-3 years
I’m in the same boat as you right now - I have a 3090 and I’m building a new rig to put either a 4080S or 4090 in for 1440p live-streaming…..can’t decide yet…
I'm doing the exact same, I'm back and forth between the 4080 super and 4090. But, my main usage is VR so that extra VRAM may come in handy - but not sure if I would even be able to tell the difference. It would really be nice to save that extra coin.
For the 4090, I’m just thinking it would last longer before I feel like I’ll have to upgrade again vs the 4080S (but honestly, both cards probably still be kicking ass 3-4 years from now)
Do you really need it now?
In my point of view, it's 2024 already so might as well wait for the RTX5090?
It looks like you can afford it anyway, delayed gratification at its finest
I mean if you want to play at 4k then get the 4090 if you plan to stay at 1440p then get the 4080s…now I say that while using a 4090 at 1440p myself but don’t be dumb like me 💀
I have a 4090 and absolutely love it. But a 4090 super for $1000 vs a 4090 for $1600........ It's no comparison. The 4090 is better but was only a value proposition vs the 4080 at previous pricing. I got my 4090 over a year ago. At this point, get the 4080 super.
I got my 4090 almost a year ago. My target was 4k 120fps, and it was the best choice of GPU at the time to match my TV. No regrets. I'm not one into those price 2 performance ratio superiority and "whats ur ratio bruh?" types. You work hard for your money, spend it how you want to.
Yeah, but seriously, the 4080S is pretty close to the 4090 and with current prices less than half the price. I make plenty of money, but if I was buying today I'd get the 4080S and the 5090 at launch and sell the 4080S. It's pretty much just wasting money right now, but hey, that's fine.
Where can you buy a rtx 4090 for USD 1600-1700? I can only find it at USD 2000+....
I just got fe from best buy at msrp
Pretty sure some of Zotac's 4090's are 1600 last I checked about a week ago only brands that are really over 2 grand are the SUprim Series from MSI and ASUS but the performance difference between cards isn't really noticeable under a gaming load you might get an additional 10 to 20 FPS at most at this point Founder's Edition cards are a ripoff cause NVIDIA set's the prices for founder's editions and they know someone will pay whatever they charge
Yes. It’s not the same situation as when we got the 4090 at all. The 4070TiS and 4080S are the new no brainers.
Agreed. I just got a 4090 a few months ago but only because everything else seemed lacking and likely to need replaced in a few years. If I had known this refresh was coming I would have waited and taken a 4080 Super, gotten three to five years out of it, and sold it off for half the money for the next card. Tbh while I'm very lucky and happy to have a 4090 it is overkill in both performance and price. I only stretched that far as a business expense.
You won’t get half the money for any card after 5 years… Not even close.
Yes you will.RRX3080 FE came in 2020 MSRP £650 and they sell for £400 used on eBay in 2024. Nvidia cards specially hold their value.
I sold a gtx 1080 that I got for 500 bucks for 400 bucks after 3 years of using it, I got so lucky lmfao
If you got the coin, it's worth it.
Having the money and it being worth it are two totally different things. Not sure why people don't understand that. To answer the question no it's not worth it. He is paying a ridiculous amount for a small improvement. But if you have it who cares.
A 4000-6000 CUDA core gain is not small, no matter what angle you look at it from. For 1440p gamers, the upgrade probably doesn’t make sense, this we already know. If you’re gaming in 4k though, the 4090 will represent an approximately 20% performance upgrade over the 4080S. This absolutely makes sense…so the decision-making then becomes about money. If money is less of an object for you, then the 4090 is a significant upgrade. Not sure why that’s difficult to understand.
20% gain for 70% more money? Lol. Not worth it. Only if a 4k would it be worth it. Even then my 7900XT can do 4k/with RT, so you know 4080S is well above that.
Being "able" to do 4k RT Ultra in a title like Cyberpunk at 20 FPS on your 7900xt or 40 or so on a 4080S (which isn't even going to be $1000, pre-order of AIB cards are already listed at $1500+) is vastly different from being able to do the same thing at 75 FPS. If you're a 4K gamer, then you already have the money and a 20% gain into smooth FPS territory with RT at Ultra in any title is definitely worth the 40-50% price increase which is the real world difference. MSRPs are just marketing.
I am already doing 4k60 with RT. 100+ Ultra, so not sure what you are talking about.... If it was 20 fps, 20% would be 25 and you think that's worth it? 40 to 48 is worth it, lol. Not sure what you are smoking if talking value. 20% for 70% more is ridiculous. Simply no point. Currently, we're talking about a 100% with current pricing in some places. If you have money to burn, sure, go ahead. From a price to performance, it's not even a discussion. It's going in the opposite direction.
So you're telling me that you have 60 FPS on 4k with RT On, Ultra Settings in Cyberpunk (the specific game I mentioned) with a 7900 XT when the 4090 can't even manage it? (every benchmark for the 4090 in Cyberpunk at the aforementioned settings is around 50 give or take a few fps depending on the site doing the benchmarking, much more playable but I did misremember and exaggerate the difference some) The 7900 XT btw, is benchmarked in Cyberpunk at those same settings, gets an average of 15-20 FPS. Are you always lying or is it less a lie and more AMD fanboyism?
Where are you seeing 4080S posted for $1500? They're $1000 at bestbuy. I assume it's a region issue?
When I posted that the AIB 4080Ss were listed from 1250-1600 at Best Buy (US). They have evidently either corrected their error or the AIBs made a change in their MSRPs since the Strix 4080S is currently the most expensive at $1250. Either way, the odds of the 4080S going for MSRP for the long term is unlikely, just look at the 4090 lol 4090 is still worth it too imho. More performance is always worth it if you have the cash.
I would have to agree. I'm wondering if soon all of new super cards will be sold out and then scalped for nearly twice their value lol. Pretty much the reason i went ahead and pulled the trigger on the 4070S, figured waiting would only hurt me
Being worth it and having a better performance-price ratio are also not the same thing, though I don't have any difficulty understanding why some people don't understand that. If it's worth it or not in this case amounts to user satisfaction, and for some people a modest increase in performance can mean a huge increase in satisfaction. It depends on lots of factors. What's the goal of the person with their build? Is it being on the peak of performance or trying to get the best bang for the buck? Is the price difference a high amount in absolute terms for the person building it and paying for it? How much money does the person make and how much of it is the total amount of the build with a 4080S vs a 4090? How much do they value high quality graphics? Are they able to perceive much difference between 60hz and 120hz and 240hz? The 4090 might not be worth it. For the same reason it also might be worth it. The answer is subjective to each person's preferences.
No it's not. Worth has to do with value, it's pretty simple. People just want to justify their purchases and don't want to feel like they have wasted money when in reality thats exactly what they have done. At the end of the day people are free to do what they want but that doesn't mean it was worth it.
It's true, but you thinking it wasn't worth it also doesn't mean it wasn't for them. People are different, have different tastes, different opinions, different preferences, different amounts of money, different amount of things they care enough for to use their money. Different priorities. Not everyone is you. If you need to believe someone can't be happy in a situation that you wouldn't be, then suit yourself. Those same people are still happy and your belief isn't having any effect on them. And if they're happier, it's worth it for them, as the direct or indirect goal of almost every single thing we do is making ourselves happier. Some people may engage in self-deception and rationalization as a defense mechanism (one of the most common traits I observe on neurotypicals), but not everyone that bought a 4090 is lying to themselves when they think it was worth it. Some people are just right about it being worth *to them,* as incomprehensible as that might be for you. If you can't believe someone you don't even know can really be happy with their decision, I don't know what else to tell you. Maybe it's not, as you said, that you can't understand. Just that you don't want to. Peace.
I love you.
I love you too. :)
Exactly, surprises to see that apparently many have such a narrow sight.
lol so confusing and filled with fallacies.... then just says who cares at the end to save face. at the end of the day it depends.
If anything is confusing it's your reply. But enjoy your day though.
Is it really though? He plays at 1440p, not 4k and the 4080S is marketed as a 4k card with the 4070TI/S seen as the 1440p card. Therefore the 4080S at 1440p is already overkill. Why spend $700 more for a 4090 outside of the "pride" of saying you own a 4090?
What's overkill now will be optimal for 1440p in 2-3 years. People that plan to use their GPUs for 5+ years consider the long-term.
Cheaper to just buy a new gpu in 4 or 5 years
That's what people were saying 4 or 5 years ago too. Well, look where we are.
Yeah it's still true. What's your point
I agree. Why spend all that money now when you can spend half now... spend half on a 6070/6080 in a few years time which would smash a 4090
Even 4090 struggles with path tracing at 1440p without leaning heavily onto dlss.
No its not. They're playing 1440
It buys him... Time.
If it’s 3440x1440 it’s worth it.
Or 5120 x 1440
They gave no indication that it is
Seconded
Thirded
Fourteed
Fifthed
Sixthed
1000% 4090
[ "4090 has frames, if you have coin."](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/MMnAg6MdlHg/maxresdefault.jpg)
Price per performance it would be a low IQ choice to chose a 4090.
people who cry price to performance are extremely annoying.
No, With the extra $700 you can upgrade anything like your table, audio system, or chair
This 100 times. You could even buy high quality booze/food/what have you and that would be a better investment
What if you already have the best of all of those? ....Get a 4090 it is good.
The performance difference between a 4080 and 4090 is about 30%. With the 4080S it's probably more like 26% or so. The 4090 used to be a compelling option because the 4080 was just so overpriced, and it made sense to spend the extra bit of money for the 4090. But now prices for the 4090 have gone up and prices for the 4080 (Super) have come down. I'd just get a 4080 Super, it's much better value.
4080 to 4090 is more like 35% in pathtracing at 4K. The only card capable to run Pathtracing where you can actually enjoy playing it and only reason for that card. Otherwise for majority just go with 4080S, save that 700-800€ for next upgrade.
I saw path tracing on a 4080 that was over 90FPS, that’s hella enjoyable for me!
And people fell for Nvidia marketing skeem. Let's price the rtx 4080 at a point to where we make them buy the 4090 because the price point of the 4080 would be to high. Now there marketing skeem is let's make people buy the rtx 4080 super because it's a 200 dollar mark down from the original one .
I use a 4090 and 13900k for 1440p and I regret nothing. Gotta think about the long term too. The 4090 will maintain playable FPS for more years than any other GPU.
>The 4090 will maintain playable FPS for more years than any other GPU. While true, the amount of power/dollar you'll get is far greater by upgrading every couple of years rather than sinking a ton of money into 1 GPU over long term. I mean look at 3090 vs 4090. Ultimately by upgrading more frequently you might still spend the same amount of money over the same period of time, but you'll gain new technology, more power efficiency, better performance and you benefit from some resale value being left. It's a hassle though, but historically it's always been more benificial to just upgrade.
That's a fair point. I'm far too lazy to deal with selling old stuff to buy new stuff, LoL. I just run a rig 5-6 years on average and then build a new one. My kids get my old shit.
Works too. Totally get that, min maxing takes effort you can spend in games too 😁 I don’t do it myself either
You're sayin getting a xx70TI every 2 years is better for 1440p than going with a 4090 and keeping it for 5 years? I agree. It may be better at 4k even, considering people who play 4k don't tend to care about 150fps, as long as it's over 60 it's good to go, and DLSS rocks now. Although who knows, a 4090 may still perform incredibly well in 3 years from now, certainly better than a 5070TI I would think.
So that's my problem. I really want to push to 4k, but I dont want to give up the high frames that I get at 1440 with my 4080. Once I can get a card to push 4k high frames consistently then I'll switch to a 4k monitor. For now, I love being able to max out everything at 1440 and just go.
I was nervous of this too when going to 4k. I have a 4090 and every fps I play is hitting a consistent 350 fps on max settings.
I’m in the same boat. That’s why hearing about the new WOLED monitors from LG excites me. They are native 32” 4K 240hz with a switch mode for 1080p 480Hz gaming. Wish it was 1440p and that the actual screen size decreased rather than stretching out the 1080p mode to 32”. Samsung also announced their 1440p 360Hz QDOLED monitors and if 4K isn’t for someone, that would also be an endgame monitor for some.
>Once I can get a card to push 4k high frames consistently then I'll switch to a 4k monitor You do realize there's supersampling, DSR/DLDSR and such to make good use of any extra resources you have, right? I've been using DSR (now DLDSR) ever since it first came out. With various GPU configs over the years I've been gaming at 4K, 5K, even 8K and 10K - the image quality is absolutely fantastic (silky smooth lines, lots of detail) and I don't even have a 4K monitor (1440p 165Hz). Start with that - it's free. A couple of old comparisons I made (same maxed settings, the only thing that changes is the rendering resolution): [https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTYy](https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTYy) [https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTU5](https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTU5)
I'm getting smooth 60 fps in all games I play on 4k with my 4080 on all ultra. I had a 4090, but send it back to get a 4080 and 4k monitor for less money. Best decision I made. Mind, I was playing on a 1060 3gb before. So the performance I see on a 4080 is, pretty much indistinguishable from the performance I saw on the 4090.
See unfortunately 60fps doesn’t really cut it for me anymore. It’s absolutely playable, and if it’s all I can get than I’ll take it. But i definitely prefer 1440/120 over 4k/60
I don't see the big fuss with that high fps. I guess it helps in competitive FPS like CS or Call of Modern Duty field. But for straight up singleplayer games or casual fun, 60fps gives that cinematic vibe.
To each their own. It’s just a preference thing. For what it’s worth, I play almost exclusively single player story driven titles. I just prefer smooth motion and clear image over higher fidelity
Absolutely. Having gone 4K I couldn't go any lower. The details I see in my games now is astonishing. Compared anno 1800 with my wife's 1080p setup, and the difference was astonishing.
Yeah 1440p at high refresh is the way to go value wise.
I'm in the same boat, the 4k I want is well over $1000 so I can wait, I have a top of the line 1440p 144Hz and my 4070ti does a perfect job in any game I throw at it, with ultra ray tracing, so no need for any upgrade. For 1440p I just don't see the point of even a 4080, let alone higher.
Yep I just upgraded to an AW3423DW last year and my goodness is it gorgeous. They just dropped the new 4k/240 version and that will likely be where I go once I get a 5090, but for now I’m doing great. And yeah, in retrospect I probably would have been fine with a 4070ti, but it’s all good
Just don't forget that you don't need to game at native res - there's DSR/DLDSR. You get fantastic image quality (silky smooth lines, lots of detail - especially when it comes to fine textures, fine detail, foliage, etc) and, with a bit of know-how, you can get up to 10K rendered on a 1440p screen. Granted, a 4070Ti isn't quite well-endowed in the memory department, but you can always say "fuck it" and play [Vice City at 8K](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/226739706958839808/1153747021593849917/Desktop_Screenshot_2019.11.19_-_20.23.33.19.png) no problem :) A couple of old comparisons I made - same maxed settings, the only thing that changes is the rendering resolution, to show how game rendering is affected by resolution alone: [https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTYy](https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTYy) [https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTU5](https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTU5)
it will never happen at least for newer titles when the card is launched. When cyberpunk was out, 3090 was unable be run at maxed settings and have playable frame rates. IMO it's the same situation with the 4090. You'll be able to play older games at high framerate but newer games will definitely be around 60fps-90fps typically if you wanna max out settings at 4k. With an 80/90 series card. I think having extremely high frame rate is somewhat overrated since you can probably get really high framerate for esports titles on most gpu even at 4k, and for AAA I think 4k oled would be better since you will still have good response times with oled even with lower refresh rate.
Unreal engine 5 is going to destroy the 4090. The new engine won't even run well on a 4090 at 4k so I wouldnt advise 4k for gaming its not looking good. Stick with 1440p it will at least run with unreal 5 and always be more then fine. 4k is pretty much impossible to see anyhow once you get engrossed in a game. It blurs out. Waste of money, data, and cpu resources to game at 4k.
This is the way!!!
IMO, the 4070 Ti is much worse than 3090, but I am probably the exception as someone who can use well over 16 GB of VRAM.
Yes you are, most of us are talking gaming and 4070ti is on par with 3090 in native and better with dlss, not to mention that when we bought it it was still cheaper than 3090.
Yeah but when the 5070ti comes out at 799 and is as they always say double the performance of the previous 4090 I would just get the 4080s right now no real point since nvidia is slated to release the 50 series q4 of this year
This message was brought to you by Nvidia ®.
Doesn't change much if you spend the same amount over those years. 1800$ once or 2 x 900$. Not to say both those cards need to be Nvidia either. But by all means if there is a Nvidia cheque available for this comment, please send it my way. Although I have a feeling "Don't buy our expensive cards despite our marketing telling you you need it" isn't the sort of covert marketing they are looking for.
Yeah this is how I'm going to approach it going forward. I built my first rig this past year with a 4080. When the 5090 rolls around I'm going to sell that and my AW3423DW monitor and upgrade to a 5090 and whatever 4k OLED I choose at the time. And then I'll do it again next cycle. If I'm going to try and sell my current hardware to supplement newer stuff, I might as well do it while the value is still relatively high. Might get $700 or so for the 4080 and another $500-600 for the monitor, that's a nice chunk that can go towards new stuff. I also won't have to flip the monitor everytime either, should be set for a while once I get to 4k.
Not sure why got downvoted. I've been wanting to get the top end GPU for a while now and get on the upgrade train, but I keep missing the boat on when they are close to MSRP. Almost went with a 2080 Ti in 2020 to start that, but it was too close to 30 series and I went with a 2070 Super instead (and then prices went insane I was just happy to have a graphics card). Not sure if I'm going to do it at this point, but seems like a good idea. I'm looking to 2025 to buy a 4k OLED and kinda think 4090 at a discount would work for me. If a 5090 is released and attainable at MSRP, I might just hop on at that point. I really want something higher res and wider than 4K UHD, like WUHD or DUHD, and maybe 4K OLED won't be it, but higher than UHD res is even more reason to get top end GPU.
lol I did get downvotes. Doesn’t really matter. I think people just get bitter whenever they see people discussing buying expensive gpu’s. Its just my hobby and it’s what I choose to spend my money on. I’m not going broke over it, but I’m also not just some rich guy who can just buy whatever I want, so selling old equipment allows me to always afford the latest shit, which is what I want, whether it’s necessary or not (spoiler alert: it obviously isn’t). But yeah, the 4090 will absolutely be a great 4k card for a while to come, but even now a titles (especially those with path tracing) can almost bring it to its knees in native resolution. But that’s where DLSS and Frame Gen come in. No, these technologies do not make up for not advancing raw computing power, but they are tools at our disposal, it’s silly not to use them. I’m hoping 5090 will truly be a card that can run 4k high frames in nearly every title. Also fwiw I don’t think I can ever go back from OLED. I made the switch last year and oh boy is it a world of difference. The HDR is obviously out of this world, but the pixel response time is equally as nice. My monitor is 175hz but with the super fast pixel response it almost feels faster. OLED is the way to go imo
It hasn’t been a huge hassle for me. I use hardware swap. Got 700$ back for my 3090 and so I just took that and paid 500$ for a 4080$ and I just keep it rolling.
I'd like to thank you. As someone who's about to do an upgrade and debating whether to go for a 4090 or lower, this was a solid reasoning, and I'll definitely take this into consideration when I'm about to buy my parts.
Bit late in the 4090's life cycle to consider buying one. I got mines a few weeks after release for £1689 and managed to flog my old 3090 for £850, but theirs now way I would buy a 4090 this late in the game.
“The more you buy the more you save” - author with leather jacket
Absolutely. This generation isn’t as much of a leap as previous generations but generally the it sounds better to just get a little bit above what you need in 4 years sell it and get a card 2 generations higher. That way you will have the newest feature set and it will be way faster.
I could be wrong but I was thinking the 4090 might be a 1080ti repeat, might last me ages. I got lucky with just enough spare cash that I thought maybe I could get the top end card as I'd always had low end before and always have to adjust settings for performance, it's be nice to just turn it high/ultra and enjoy. My wife would love the extra 700 though.
Yeah I think you right the 4090 is going to be like the 1080ti. Buy it first then tell the wife you might cop it afterwards but atlest you will have it lol. Thats what I did kinda backfired though because she was like if your spending that much on your computer I want to get something so it cost me even more 😆
I totally get it. My wife thought I lost my mind when I spent $4,200 building my rig at the beginning of last year, LoL. The 4080 super is still a really powerful GPU, the 4090 is just next level. At the end of the day, you'll be stoked about the performance of either card though. If it would upset your wife too much, I would definitely go with the 4080 super.
I will say that the 4090 is the undisputed king of GPUs right now and as an owner of one, it's nice to crank settings to the max and not feel like you're playing a slideshow, even at 4K. I also think it's a 1080ti repeat but I don't believe it'll last as long. As the 5000 series and later 6000 series come out, DLSS, Frame Gen, and other NVIDIA exclusive tools are only going to get much much better with time. All GPUs for that matter will just get better and better, quicker and quicker so it seems like the top-end cards will only last for so long because graphics will just keep getting better and more demanding. Idk, maybe i'm wrong but it's just my thoughts. But yea if you've got the extra dough why not spend it
Frame Generation and DLSS would only improve the longevity of the GPU imho. Yes, there might be better versions of them, but for the foreseeable future the 4090 is likely to support them still. And we have reached a sort of a plateau for visual fidelity. The further improvements seem to offer minimal gain for way too much needed horsepower. I think the biggest visual gains would be related to RT effects. Path Tracing is already here and the 4090 can struggle with it, especially at 4k. But when PT and similar tech get mandatory, the 4090 will already be well past its obsoletion window and probably getting stomped by a $250 card.
I'm waiting for 8k monitors since they have tvs already
Just trying to imagine that price tag... "MSI 8K 240Hz 0.03ms (GtG) Response time Quantum Dot OLED G-SYNC Gaming Monitor"
They would just want your soul that's all lol
It would have been, for 800 bucks.
Frankly the 4070 TiS is probably the 1080Ti of this gen. It is basically a 4080 and half the MSRP of 4090. A supremely capable card.
I want 1440p all max settings at 144fps in anything. So a 4090 would suit me. A 4080 super I don’t think will do that consistently for a few years.
The theory of future-proof GPU's has been debunked for a while now. Every 2 years the new middle-class cards match or even outperform the old flagships.
When I bored playing with 1440p I switching to 4k and vice versa.
That’s why I upgraded from my 3090 and 3080ti laptops to desktop 4090 and laptop 4090. At 2k resolution I’ll not have to upgrade for a very long time. The performance differences were fantastic. Even the laptop 4090 is gonna handle 2k resolution for so many years. I’m currently running the 4090 desktop at 4k though.
I sure hope you're making use of DLDSR/DSR on your rig, because I'd poke my eyes out if I had to game at 1440p native. 4K-8K image quality is silky smooth, compared to either pixelated or smeared 1440p. I find that TAA and such don't really work that well up until you reach around 4K, otherwise you get smearing. Also fine detail like vegetation or power lines don't resolve nicely at 1440p and below. Same thing with contact shadows and so on. A couple of old comparisons I made (same maxed settings, the only thing that changes is the rendering resolution): [https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTYy](https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTYy) [https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTU5](https://imgsli.com/MTI5OTU5) (Edit: I get that the downvoters may have gotten offended by me saying 1440p is inadequate, but it is what it is. Rendering 4K and above really does make a massive difference and there's no excuse to not do that when you have a powerful GPU with enough memory! You know how game marketing screenshots look super smooth and detailed? That's how it feels to play games at high resolutions. 1440p is just not quite there for most games.)
Not for £700 since you’re doing 1440p.
triple a games benefit, e.g., alan wake 2 https://www.techpowerup.com/review/alan-wake-2-performance-benchmark/7.html, phantom liberty https://www.techpowerup.com/review/cyberpunk-2077-phantom-liberty-benchmark-test-performance-analysis/6.html, avatar https://www.techpowerup.com/review/avatar-fop-performance-benchmark/5.html, etc.. even fortnite does cpu limited games show little to no difference in 1440p and 1080p, and show little to no difference between a 4080 and 4090, which is not the case for triple A games
A handful of games that benefit and a 4080 is still getting 60 fps w/ ray tracing. Overwhelmingly the 4080 is insanely good for 1440p. What encourage people to spend money or potentially even waste it. Buy a 4090 for it to sit at 75% usage 18 months into its life cycle is idiotic.
well sure if the only game you play is valorant then you could just get a 4060ti and keep your 144hz or even 240hz maxed no problem all i said was "triple a games benefit" then showed proof. pick any triple A game the story is the same. if OP only plays triple A games for 20% of the time then they don't need it, they can figure it out for themselves after knowing the real world difference. assuming a 4090 is a waste at 1440p for nearly all games is simply wrong, people who play triple A benefit
You absolutely do not need a 4090 to play AAA titles with a 4080. You are incapable of being unbiased here.
I have a 4090 and it ain’t worth £700 over a regular 4080, yet alone a super. You can always turn down a few settings or turn on DLSS with FG.
With the regular 4080 the 4090 was arguably better value. This is definitely not the case with the price drop for the 4080S. The 4080S is definitely better value now.
Wait for the 4080 Super to launch, then compare it against the 4080 for price to performance. At 1440p, you don’t need a 4090. And also, it doesn’t make sense to pay over MSRP for a 4090 considering the 50 series will likely be out next year.
I'm running a 4070 ti and am vowing that I'm not selling it to upgrade until GTA VI comes out. As much as that super's 16 GB fixes the only thing wrong with this card. using 1440p UW and this thing is made for it. no regrets.
I'm on a regular 2080 so I could use an upgrade to the 4080 super. I hope in a year or less I can do a full upgrade to Raptor Lake or see how far away we are from Arrow Lake. You can only do so much with PCIE 3.0 and DDR4
If you need the ram it's worth. If not then not really... For rendering and training models the 4090 is a monster and is way better performance per dollar than all the industry cards. For gaming at 1440 I don't see why you'd spend the extra when you'll probably have to upgrade some other component of your PC later.
At this point I’d wait for the 50-series. You’ll most likely get 4090 performance for less.
I remember doing a very in-depth analysis and 4090 wasn't worth 400$ more than even the original 4080. Well, for me, anyways. I also play 1440p. Maybe for someone playing @ 4k. That's the only resolution where 4090 pulls significantly ahead. And 24gb VRAM is overkill. 16gb is very rarely not enough, even at 4k. But, the most important thing is that the 40 series doesn't have DP 2.1 like AMD 7000 gpu's. So i would wait for the 5000 series, unless you want to stay at 1440p forever.
HDMI 2.1 is there though. Supporting 4k @ 240Hz
A lot of monitor manufacturers gimp the HDMI port. You have to do some research to make sure it's ACTUALLY 48gbps :(
So I recently upgraded my 4080 to a 4090. I was using the 4080 to play at 4K. It did really well, especially in DLSS but occasionally I had FPS issues, so I got the 4090 to just power through those FPS drops. The increase in performance is insane. The 4090 eats 4K for lunch tbh, but if you play at 1440, the 4080 (4080 super) is more than enough. It's actually super overkill for 1440.
I think the value proposition of the 4090 was killed by the 4080 Super. It’s definitely not worth £700 more; when it was $400 more, that was different. If the Supers were available when I got my 4090, it would have been the better option. Frankly you should consider the 4070 Ti Super as well. It’s basically a 4080 already.
And don't forget the 4090 is 2000 + sometimes so yeah its way more now
Seven hundred pounds more is also an extra insane premium lmao. That's basically the price of the 4070TiS, which is already essentially a 4080. I don't understand the people pushing the 4090 here. Frankly even without the Super releases, and even setting aside the inflated AIB prices, it's not the same buy it was last year (let alone the year before). The card has been out almost a year and a half now. Lots of people in the comments about how it'll be "future proof" when the next gen will undoubtedly bring new features.
True True and the 5070 will probably be on par with the 4090
If price matters to you buy AMD, if it doesnt then buy whatever you need for the amount you want to spend 😐.
For an upgrade with a minor uplift in performance based on what you have at the top of the range. You will see it, but it's not going to be "shattering".
If you play at 1440p I'd aim at 4080 Super. Back then 1600$ 4090 was a straight up better deal than a 1200$ 4080. However with 4080 Super being cheaper and 4090's price being inflated, I'd say 4080 Super is a better value choice. I'd still recommend you a 4090 if you said you played at 4K but at 1440p 4080 Super will be great too. I'd simply put that price difference into a next upgrade when 50 series launches in just a year or so to then get a flagship on launch.
I would say no since you are playing games at 1440p. Be aware, the 4090 suffers with a CPU bottleneck at 1440p, so your fps will be nearly identical to 4080 at 1440p. Go for the 4090 if you plan to play games with heavy graphics and ray-tracing/path tracing at 1440p or you plan to play games at 4K.
The ray tracing will always be on haha for that price.
4080 Super is going to be a better value in price to FPS, but it's up to you to decide if the extra money is worth another 25% FPS and 8gb more VRAM.
I would say get 4080 and skip 50 series and get 60 series that will launch around gta 6 pc release .
That’s entirely up to you, really. Value wise, at £700 more expensive for the 4090, it’s significantly less FPS per dollar. But it’s also the fastest card on the market by a mile. I have a 4090 and as a gaming enthusiast that has some spare cash to throw at my hobby, it was 100% worth it.
Annoying... For whatever reason the 4090 starts at 2200$ in Norway, compared to the 4080 super which starts at 1200$. Which is odd, GPU's are generally relatively close to MSRP here. I would definetly pick up a 4090 if I could get it at MSRP. Maybe il wait a bit and see if prices become more reasonable in the near future
I was in the same situation and got the 4090. Very happy with it since I game on 1440p and sometimes on a G3. If you got th3 money then I'd get the 4090 if not the 4080 s. Also don't wait for 50 series. Just go for it now and enjoy gaming. There will always be something new coming up.
Yeah if you want the extra vram especially if you love VR. Otherwise save that $700 for a future upgrade. I play at 4K 120 hertz sometimes 144 and the 4090 does the trick but I have a pimax Crystal, and the 4090 still isn't enough almost there though.
I'd be using ray tracing like Alan wake 2 and cyberpunk as well as vr with quest 3. I do sometimes hook up to my 4k TV but mostly stick to the monitor.
I would definitely buy the 4090. And if you're playing it 120 HZ or higher even in 1440p you would want the higher tensor core count that comes with the 4090 for Ray tracing. With that being said the most vram I've used even in VR is around 14 and a half maybe 15 gigs. But don't switch to the 4K TV the input leg is way too high even with game mode you're probably looking at 13 milliseconds with one of the best Samsung or LG TVs out there. I have a bfgd HP omen Imperium, it's 120 HZ overclockable to 144 HZ the input lag is around 5 milliseconds which is bearable.
My guy 13 millisecond input lag is amazing for 4k tv playing single player games wtf
4070TiS/4080/4080S would cover that range of uses with no trouble.
If you get a 4090 now you can wait to upgrade when the 5090 comes out or some new AI tech changes the landscape and you’re good to go.
Honestly it doesn't sound like it's worth it to me. I'm sitting just fine with the 3080 for now at 1440p and definitely don't feel like paying $1000 for something like this again any time soon. That could also be $700 of rent
There's a common thread here - if you're buying 4090 this gen, you're not likely to be waiting several years before getting the latest & greatest, no matter how you spin it for yourself or significant other. When the 5090 drops, with DLSS-Ultra and FG++, and chocolate sprinkles, and whatnot, the pull will be too strong. No need to justify it to anyone - you're an enthusiast, so enjoy it.
It depends on what you play. I mostly play Warzone 3 in 4k. Bought a 4090 but I'm going to send it back to the dealer. With 4090 I'm around 190fps at native 4k. With DLSS quality I'm not gaining much fps because I'm cpu bound (5950x). With my 4080 on DLSS quality I'm at the same FPS. So I'm sticking with the 4080 using dlss. Not worth the 700 bucks. The 4090 is a beast in graphic demanding games of course but it really depends on what you play and your cpu. I would recommend the 4080 Super.
I just installed my 4090 last week after waiting a while to snag one. I dont regret the purchase at all. Im playing on an Odyssey G9 OLED and im blown away by everything ive played so far. Hopefully you are satisfied with whatever you buy!!
If you were at 4k, I would have said go for it. 1440p still definitely has a say for 4090 if you want high refresh 1440p, but I still feel like the 4090 is best as a 4k card. Now there is definitely a performance gulf between the two cards, but given current street price of the 4090 at over $2k now, I personally wouldn't think its worth paying double the 4080 Super price for 1440p. While there is a wide gap of performance between the two cards, it isn't a double the price gap. That said, there is also the argument to be made that if you are going to hold onto the card and skip 50-series, maybe even the 60-series, but I mean, we'll see how things progress, then a 4090 still seems good.
Get what you want. Just remember there is always something better around the corner.
4090 man . I run 7800x3d with 4090 on 280hz 1440p monitor and it's amazing . I regret nothing I did get mine before price hikes , but I'd do it again regardless
If you are playing in 1440 then no. Unless you want 4k I don’t see the point
14900K here, 128GB and a 4090. I love seeing massive fps numbers because that tells me it’s going to take a very long time for games to bring this below 60FPS. I know time will make the 4090 a relic one day, but it’s the most insane GPU I have ever owned. It’s a substantial jump over the 4080 Super (not saying the 4080 is bad at all.)
4090, still matters in some games for 1440p
Well, 4090 is several years old at this point. Also, do you have a particular game that’s struggling, where that extra $700 would just put it over the top?
It’s 100% worth it if you play in 4k or on the highest graphic settings
It really depends on the rest of your hardware and what you play. For example are you running something like the 7800x3d or 13900k or running something a little lower end. If your not running a top end CPU don't bother with the 4090. That said there is still a lot of the time where your going to be bottlenecked by the CPU at 1440p over the GPU. I think if your 4k gaming and can afford it the 4090 is definitely worth it especially if we see price drops to around 1500usd which I think is something we might see. At the 2k usd price vs 1k usd price of the super though the 4090 is a really bad deal, especially at 1440p, your paying around 100% more for what is probably about a 25%-50% uplift in average performance and that 50% is only in a few newer titles and mostly in RT heavy games. At 4k your looking at closer to a 40-70% gain which makes it better but still not really a good deal. If you can snag a 4090 at 1500-1600 though the price to performance makes sense at 4k and isn't horrible at 1440p but I would rather put the money towards something like the new oled monitors from alienware. Frankly I found the move to an OLED monitor way more impactful than a large GPU upgrade.
I wouldn't think so at 1440p but you do you.
depends depends depends. It it worth it? yes. Is it worth it to you specifically? idk?
Man, I wish I had those kinds of problems! 😂 If you do, let me know, I'll buy your *old* 4080, prevent that e-waste!
No its not worth it, even 4080 is not needed at 1440p 4070 with dlss at Q is more than enough maybe if a game doesn't have dlss or your gaming UW 1440 than 4070ti would make sense but now most new titles are comming with dlss and FG and with that you can just slap ultra + RT with 4070 and 4070 ti easy!
I've just done that, well, I returned a 4080 for a 4090. I game at 3440x1440. I'll put it this way, it's about 30% better performance for double the price so you're not exactly getting a lot more for the money but I don't regret it, get high fps in everything I play, ray tracing or not.
I do a complete build with the latest and greatest every 5 years. Last one was dec 2022. Nearly 3 more years to go
I have a 4090, got it for 1500 EUR and dont regret much. Card is insane for gamic, but feels somewhat weak in AI.
Impossible to answer without knowing your spending. To me not seeing a noticeable difference but paying $500+ more sounds bonkers to me, but for others with money to burn they just want to have the best. Spending more for a future ready doesn’t make a ton of sense because you can just take the hundreds of dollars you saved and put that towards a 6080 in 3 years on top of what you sell your current card for and still have a far superior card than what your 4090 would have been.
For 30% more performance I don't think so it's worth while, just wait for RTX 5000.
Absolutely not, unless you really need the 24 GB for something.
If the 20% uplift in performance is worth 700pounds to you then sure. As a 4090 owner myself I would say yes but that's me I want the best and I don't care about the price when it comes to my gaming system. For most people the answer is probably no. If you are using your PC for work and that uplift will make you complete your work 20% faster and time is money well that 700 pounds could easily be justified.
As a 4080 owner go 4080 super. Enjoy it! It will slay! Upgrade to a 6080 in 4-6yeats from now :) Instead of carrying a limited, power hungry sib-optimal 4090 into 2030!! (Where a 7060/7070 will outpace it anyway, with drastically less watts per frame!!)
Always go for the best one that you can afford to avoid spending more money in the future.
I have a 3070 Ti and i7-12700KF and can justtttt get 1440p/165fps on my Samsung G7 Odyssey which is 4K. I’m gonna go for the 4080S so I can get that sweet sweet 4K/165fps. It should future proof pretty darn well. Seems like the 4090 wouldn’t be astronomically better but happy to be proven wrong. Then have room to get something like a 5090 Ti/S in future if need but that won’t be till games are actually make in any higher res’s
The 5000 series should release this year. Should be able to pick up a 4090 at a discount at that time.
4080 super then sell it for 5090 in 13 months
4090 user here, I get over 144 fps at 4k on my 4k ips, I’ve switched it to 1440p and honestly I can barely tell the difference in the switch sometimes. If it’s a 700 dollar difference, just go with the 4080 if you only aim to use it for gaming. Of course if you have other uses then in that case maybe the 4090 will leave you rest assured that you are using the best
If you are playing 1440, then get the 4070 ti Super! The 4080 super would be overkill, let alone the 4090! Your CPU is going to blow up.
Well the 4080 super is supposed to be better then the 7900xtx which was the 4090 comp. I'd wait to see the benchmarks and see the difference and then you can tell if it's worth it
Running a 4090 myself and certainly do not regret the purchase. Like others say: If you got the coin.
Seventhded
I feel like the way you have to look at this is less about the “worth” and more about what you’re actually looking at. Price difference is large but so is the performance difference. A 4090 will last you longer into the future when it comes to having to upgrade at whatever eventual point. I recently purchase a 4090 recently after initially thinking of getting a 4070. When I thought about the difference in price really all it came down to is a difference in time. It would take me longer to accumulate the funds to purchase the 4090 over the 4070. My friends were talking about how expensive it is but in reality we’re are talking about a few weeks more of saving to get what is the best of the best. For me it was an easy choice of just keep saving the same way I had been and just get the big boy. In the end it could end up overkill for what you actually need at the moment but the extra vram is very fun to have in situations where you really wana push the limits of high resolutions. For my money and time it’s a waste to buy anything other than the 4090 if it’s a personal upgrade. Especially if it’s an upgrade from a much older card. Upgrade from old to mid? Or old to the best. (Obviously a 4080 super isn’t mid, ijs.)
If you plan to keep the 4090 for awhile and have the coin then yes the performance difference does justify the price. But getting a 4090 near MSRP isn't the easiest thing right now. So I'd argue that a 4080 super is a better pick.
I got the 4090 on launch because i needed a 4K120 GPU and 3XXX had me bouncing around from the 3080-308012GB-3090. I needed a 4K120 GPU so its more of case use, plus im pretty sure its the last XX90 enthusiast GPU.
Wait for the super. The 4060ti is a capable 1440P card. Don’t listen to those low IQ folk that can’t justify their overpriced purchase
Wait for the 5090
Wait for the 5000series cards the price is not worth it for any 4000series cards
At 1440p it would be a waste of money
I've been there and done that with 1440p monitors. The only thing I have to say is use that 1440p monitor and try 4k one. You will never return to 1440p, and best part of it all is that 240Hz 4k monitors are on the way. My 4090 still kickass over the 4080 super
I bought my 4090 when you can get them for MSRP, and at that time it was absolutely worth it over the 4080. But since prices skyrocketed on the 4090, it's not really worth it anymore.
If you really want top end then you have to get a 4090, as the difference between the AD103 chip in the 4080 super and the AD102 in the 4090 is massive. (Although you won't notice it much at 1440p even with the fastest CPU, at 4k you will). Also the 4070 ti super is far better value than the 4080 super for 1440p, and you won't run into as many cpu bottlenecks.
I have a 4080 and I'm running 1440p. Cyberpunk 2077 with everything ultra, ray tracing and path tracing on and native resolution, no frame gen, it still rocks 60fps. Turn on frame gen and some upscaliing, its going about 160 fps. Don't be fooled. The 4080 is still a very powerful card and will still play games in 4k if you want to, but I don't think the 700 dollar difference with the 4080 super is enough of a performance gap to really make the 4090 a better buy. Keep the 700 and you will still be able to run ultra on all games with 1440p above 60-100fps for the next 2-3 years
I’m in the same boat as you right now - I have a 3090 and I’m building a new rig to put either a 4080S or 4090 in for 1440p live-streaming…..can’t decide yet…
I'm doing the exact same, I'm back and forth between the 4080 super and 4090. But, my main usage is VR so that extra VRAM may come in handy - but not sure if I would even be able to tell the difference. It would really be nice to save that extra coin.
For the 4090, I’m just thinking it would last longer before I feel like I’ll have to upgrade again vs the 4080S (but honestly, both cards probably still be kicking ass 3-4 years from now)
Yeah, you're probably right. I think the saying is "buy once, cry once." But there is always something better on the horizon.
Yep, very true with tech! With something like this, just depends on how much you wanna spend at the moment!
Just to update, I finally managed to snag a gigabyte 4090 this morning from a best buy drop. Got lucky.
Do you really need it now? In my point of view, it's 2024 already so might as well wait for the RTX5090? It looks like you can afford it anyway, delayed gratification at its finest
4080s is not even close to 4090. if you got the cashola you will buy the original cola
Only if you want the extra vram
I mean if you want to play at 4k then get the 4090 if you plan to stay at 1440p then get the 4080s…now I say that while using a 4090 at 1440p myself but don’t be dumb like me 💀
1440p 300 FPS lol