FlexiSpot. Check out their website for the Premium Standing Desk E7: bit.ly/3OLracz - US bit.ly/3OMitQf - Canada You can use my code ''YTB15'' for extra 10% off on order over $500 GET DISCORD ACCESS FOR ONLY $1: www.patreon.com/ErockOnTech Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/ErockOnTech
I bought the Flexispot EN1 55 X 28 for my new gaming PC / setup earlier this year and love it. It's a great product. When I want to stand I just hit the preset and stand. When I want to sit I just hit the next preset and sit. Awesome. And very stable. Even while gaming and standing at height. Would recommend.
I play all my games at 4k with a 4k display obviously and rarely do I run into major performance issues. A few games have been challenging and I had to drop some shadows or something but more or less I can run it with high or better settings. Now I’m not smashing 100+ fps but honestly it looks incredibly smooth and the picture quality is great with 70 - 90 fps. Great video Erock!
The 4080 is a solid 4K GPU. It can run the majority of demanding AAA games at native 4K max settings at 60+ FPS. However, if you want to do native 4K max settings with RT at 60+ FPS, the 4090 is the only GPU that can currently do that in quite a few games. The 4090 is the only GPU that handles RT without any compromises. Any other GPU using RT means having to compromise, such as using upscaling/Frame Gen or lowering the settings.
@@ErockOnTechRequest to test UnrealEngine 5.2 Tropical Rainforest TechDemo...the application size around 5gb. The graphics is mind blowing with next-gen nanite & lumens implements turn on....even RTX4090 only got 40+fps maxed out setting.
I own a 4080 & game on a m32u 4k 144hz monitor. I LOVE gaming at 4k & mostly, the 4080 allows me to game between 90hz-144hz. Sometime I use "High" instead of Ultra & honestly can't tell the difference. Thanks for the video man
Interesting to see a few years ago the 1080Ti was considered a 4K card, graphics are evolving and we aren't going to leave 4K soon, looks like 1440p will be the new 1080p and 4K still be hard to run unless you get the most expensive cards. But honestly the real important thing is to have fun.. I remember finishing CP 2077 playing 1080p fsr with only 25-35fps and genuinely had fun..
Also important to take into account regional price differences between the two GPUs. Most people from NA say "just get the 4090" as if they're talking about a 50-100 dollar difference. In my country, the difference between a 4080 and a 4090 in retail markets is (still) a whole 500-600 euros. Making the choice to upgrade from my 2060 to the 4080 was super easy. The performance jump is pretty insane.
@@ErockOnTech Yeah, I think whether or not that's a huge jump in price depends entirely on your budget as well. Some folks can totally afford to have the "if I'm paying 1200 for a GPU, what's another 400 bucks?" mindset. I do miss the days of sub-1000 80-series cards, though. I was able to build a whole top of the line system for the price of a 4080 back in 2014. GTX 980, 4790k and all. Suppose that's inflation, post-COVID shortages & scalpers all having compounding effects. Sucks, lol.
Agreed. My MSI Suprim X 4080 was $1999AUD when I bought it months ago, and the Suprim X 4090 was $3299AUD. For someone that games on a 3440x1440 monitor and has a 5800x3d, the 4090 just didn’t make sense.
Ever since the 4080 launched I thought the performance was awesome. The 4080 is a great card in terms of specs and performance. The only thing that was holding the it back was and still is the price. If it launched at $999 I think it would of been a banger especially against the RX 7900 XTX for the same price. Great video as always my guy. I'm looking forward more reviews.
At $1100 the 4080 is a great deal, but now that AMD has Starfield Premium ($100) with the 7900xtx, they should lower it to $999 Undecided bc my TV is freesync, but the 4080 has better RT and DLSS 3.5
Why would Nvidia lower their price to match that of the 7900 XTX if the 4080 is objectively a better overall product, and still outsells the 7900 XTX 10 to 1? I'd gladly pay ~200 more for an Nvidia card over the glitchy and always "but it will get better with time" AMD. I also think the whole price issue is silly. Look at us. The people, in general. We have no problem dropping $1000+ every year on the exact same phone we already have, but a $1200 GPU that should last us several years is outrageous? IDK guys, we need to re-evaluate our priorities.
@carrickdubya4765 The 4080 is a terrible deal at $1100. It would be a good deal at $800 and maybe $900 for premium AIB versions such as the ROG STRIX and SUPRIM X, but that is pushing it. The 4080 has good performance, but it doesn't offer the halo performance you get from the 4090. It should not be over $900, no matter what. Nvidia has tricked people into thinking $1100 is a good price for the 4080, and the 3080 had an MSRP of $700. The 4080 has an MSRP of $1200. A $500 price increase in one generation is fucking pathetic.
@@carrickdubya4765I do not know what yoh have been smoking but i do not want any of it , another one that belives in all the marketing bollox this gpu should be £750 thats still £100 more than the 3080 launched at
@@BETEP-gw7qpI won't go AMD GPUs either due to drivers being worse, slower to be fixed, and to some extent lagging behind technology development. It's fine they are worse at ray tracing or AI graphics (DLSS equivalent features) if cheap enough but that's the thing. Must be a big discount. They are fine on the driver front for the right gamers. If someone plays just recent AAA stuff they generally do the trick promptly. Its the older and AA stuff that they don't bother with. Look at RuneScape, a 2 decade old game and still near the most played MMO, had a good year stretch of crashes on AMD drivers without rolling way back far enough to not play current AAA. WTF. Seriously. For me it's stuff like that which makes AMD not worth it outside of batting half price vs an Nvidia equivalent. I believe the only reason they bother with PC GPUs at all is to stay capable enough to sell budget small form factor GPUs for consoles. It enables them to stay just a few years behind which is about the best consoles ever shoot for so they remain able to entirely control that massive segment of the gaming market. AMD actually has an immense market share in graphics for gaming. It's just not in PCs and only some generations in laptops. I'm curious if Intel manages to take hold in the budget segment for more than a discreet GPU generation if they might actually underbid AMD in consoles and steal their whole lifeblood. Probably not a good outcome long term for consumers but I'd sure get a laugh.
@ErockOnDeck thanks, the thing is I’m in South Africa so I don’t have much trust but I saw my local PC parts place has made the 4080 cheaper, it’s about R27000 about $1400
Lol. Well, yes and no. Nvidia absolutely exaggerates their products and marketing. However, products shift over time. So a 4K card today may not be a 4K card in 5-7 years from now.
I bought my 4k monitor months ahead of the rest of my build, in anticipation of upgrading, to avoid the financial hit all at once. So, for many months, I ran a 4k monitor driven only by a RTX 2070. I expected I would just have to run everything at a lower res, but it actually performed much better than I anticipated. Most every game from 2018 and earlier, ran at native 4k without issue, and most graphically intensive games from 2018 & onward had DLSS, which at least made 4k 60 fps possible on the 2070. I have a RTX 4090 now, and it's literally 4x the performance. But I reject the notion that a less capable card can't do 4k, as I got by for months on only a 2070, even if it wasn't ideal.
I feel like people underestimate the 4080 because of the performance gap between it and the 4090, compared to the 3080 and 3090 which are pretty close in performance. But that's just due to the limitations of Ampere; cramming in more wattage for a few extra frames. If you think about it, the numbers make sense. The 4090 is equivalent to two 3080s, and the 4080 is equivalent to two 3070s. This way there's room for a hypothetical 4080 Ti to be put in the middle, which would mean 15% more performance per-tier, and that sounds fair to me. I don't get why people were bashing on it saying it's not a true 80-Class card, and that the 4090 is the only true next-gen GPU. The only thing wrong here is that the price ain't right, but that's obvious already. Regardless, my experience with the 4080 FE using DLSS 3 has been fantastic, and is definitely worthy of being called a 4K GPU.
its being underestimated because the price. its a 50% increase over the 3080 which is rescpectable, but its also 71% more expensive..... you the problem there ? lol the performance increase doesnt match the price increase. the difference in performace between the 2080 and 3080 was around the same but had the exact same price !! its honestly ridiculous. the card should of been $800 at the most lol then it would of been seen as a decent card. so untill its under atleast $900 its not a great card unless you like being taken advantage of
I went team red, 7900XTX but I didn't do it to win a pissing contest. The 4080 is the chosen challenger for the 7900XTX according to AMD. I can confirm, there aren't many titles I can't run at 4K. Most of the ones I couldn't run at 4K at launch got patched in a month or two so I could. Games can't be confused with movies. You don't go play a game once on opening weekend, then never look back. That's the reason most of us game. I can't recommend a 4080 because I didn't buy one. I'm not about to bad mouth it either. if 4080 was the caliber of card you were going for, it's the one you should have bought.
4080 is perfectly fine. DLSS quality isn’t even a noticeable difference unless you are really looking for it. 4K/60 in all games. I’m even fine with using FG in certain games if I have to, which so far is only Cyberpunk and Starfield with the DLSS FG mod. I don’t see many games giving the 4080 issues until next generation unless they are poorly optimized, which unfortunately happens all too often these days. But in that case a game isn’t worth my time or money until it gets fixed and by that time it will likely be on sale lol.
I am like you for my targeted FPS overall, at least for 1440p. I too usually aim for 120fps. For me, my goal is just to stay above 100fps overall. 90ish FPS i can sorta handle. But, anything below 90fps i can start telling the difference in FPS performance. Especially once i start getting to 60fps range, thats when everything starts looking stuttery for me. I usually have to be a mix of ULTRA to High graphic settings, in order to stay 120fps range with my 3080 @ 1440p 165hz. I truly see the benefits with my 165hz monitor, once i start staying around the 100 to 120fps mark.
Well, seems that nobody wants to acknowledge that there are phases in gaming that it is determined by the consoles and engines. We just started the 2nd phase of this era with UE5.
Consoles set the standards. It’s sad but true. The Xbox One X and PS4 Pro pushed the narrative of 4K. Because of that, now everyone talks about 4K and expects all products to do 4K. It’s ridiculous. Consoles gamers got the worst of it. The Xbox One couldn’t even do 1080p 60 FPS on most games. They had no business launching a refresh of the Xbox One and targeting 4K. The refresh should have targeted a locked and guaranteed 1080p 60 FPS experience on all games.
@@ErockOnTech I agree with what you said. My perspective is from this: DX 12 has at the moment 3 eras: the last phase of PS4 with demanding games like Shadow of the Tomb Raider and others. For example, you require a 2080 Ti or better to play this game at 4K Highest settings to achieve 60 FPS. Then the first PS5 era of the last DX12 games running with UE4 or other engines. This was more demanding, you need at least a RTX 4080 for 4K or faster. The second phase we are right now with DX12 and UE5. Where the first "modernish" looking game and to quote others or 50 series owners, "unoptimized", like Remnant 2 you need a 7900 XTX or 4090 for that 4K Ultra and maybe not even reaching 60 FPS. This is all my memory of watching benchmarks since the resurgence of PC gaming since 2016, just some examples.
@@takehirolol5962Very True. I've already comes to terms that my 4090 will be a 1440p gpu very soon. It will need upgraded to a 5090 in the very near future.
@@jjlw2378 that's pretty pessimistic. The AI features work really well on the 4090 and should allow for many years use. HUB has also commented that 16GB will be the standard for many years to come especially considering the lag in software development. If you must have the best then that's a different story and the 5090 etc. won't be released till 2025, probably because of the AI boom and the lack of competition from AMD.
I bought a 4080 for 4K gaming. My happy place is being able to play games at 4K@60fps max settings with ray tracing, but I can definitely settle for 30-60 fps as long as everything else is still the same. Also, the Founder's Edition of the 4080 only needs a 750W PSU which I already had. Many of us dream of getting the 4090, but so much comes along with that (unless you have these things already): - Larger PSU to meet power requirements - High-end CPU to get the best performance and avoid bottlenecks - A motherboard that supports DDR5 (again performance related) - A new case to fit the GPU Once you've purchased all these things, you're going out of at least $2,500 before tax. Both GPUs are overpriced, but I couldn't spend the extra $400 for the 4090.
This is the comment. I had to upgrade my PC case for the 4080 gigabyte gaming oc. The 4090 needs a 1000w power supply and chances are you will need to upgrade the CPU cus your bottlenecking if it's not good enough. Same thing will apply for the 4080ti if it draws 450ish watts like the rumours say that's a PSU upgrade for most people and if it's 10 to 15% range of a 4090..cpu upgrade as well Hidden costs of pc that is overlooked by content creators alot
@@c523jw7 appreciate the love 👍🏿 PC gaming is so expensive that I see why people go the console route or keep their current PC. Nowadays you even gotta have a high end GPU to sell that's no more than one generation behind just to even offset some of the cost to upgrade.
Just bought it in SUPER version to replace 3080 10GB for 1440p ultrawide 21:9 monitor. I was criticized due to "slow" i5 11400f processor, but to be honest I think people are fixed on high fps, but what I WANT is stable 60+ RT ultra or high/ultra experience. Man, people are playing console games 30fps and I can play them 60-90fps ultrawide and add DLSS or/and Frame Gen on top of that, THAT IS AWESOME
I have both the 4080 and 3080 systems side by side and love both. I play a lot of sims and single player @ 4k 60+fps on 2 Alienware ultra wides and love it. Not thrilled with the 3080's 10gig vram, but with minor tweaks has not been as big a deal as I first thought, for now? I have a gigabyte 4080 also and my experience is spot on with yours. The 4090 was $400 plus more at the time of purchase, but was way more than I wanted to spend. I may get a 5090 to replace the 3080 or skip next gen altogether, not sure? How my grandsons age into the online gaming eco systems will let me know what and when to pull the trigger. Because of their age they are only allowed to play on weekends right now. They must learn the value of work ethic and education first. Take care.
Some games look better with DLSS on Quality than native, but no game looks better at native than either DLAA, which you can turn on in all games that support DLSS using DLSSTweaks, or, DLDSR + DLSS, so altho DLSS sometimes does look better than native, you do want a GPU that can support 4K 60 fps using a native resolution anyways, if possible. I think the 4080 is a solid option for that, but I wouldn't go lower than that. It is there, but... it doesn't have as much room as the 4090 for the future.
I run my 4080 in 4K-60 no problem. It was an upgrade from my 4k 970 ( Yes they called that a 4k card when it came out ) and am very happy with that performance uplift.
I love my 4080 so much Because im running it at 4K (On my 48" LG C1, its such a beauty), I was able to get an Amd 7600x while not hurting my performance.
alot of the time, going from some high settings to max, barely makes a difference to the eye, but having a huge performance hit, so thats something to keep in mind as well
Hey Dude and comment Team! In the process of building my 4080, and I have the following going for me: Ive purchased the ASRock Z790 TAICHI, Arctic Liquid Freezer II 420 A-RGB, MSI Gaming X Trio 4080 16GB & Corsair 7000D Airflow Black. To round it off I'm getting the Intel Core i9-13900k, G-Skill Trident Z5 RGB 64GB (2x 32GB) DDR5 5600 CL 28 and the Thermaltake Toughpower GF3 1200w. I wish I could get the last three Items sooner. haha. Another 6 months and I'm there 😅
Well you have to be careful with TVs. A lot of TVs say they are 120 hz but really they are not. Make sure it’s a legit HDMI 2.1 connection. But honestly, monitors have gotten so much better recently. I’d suggest a good gaming monitor.
@@ErockOnTech Thank you! Also - have you noticed that some 4080's don't come with a HDMI 2.1a output? Went in on the research for my rig - so the MSI Range of 4080's always have HDMI 2.1a. Many 4080's don't. What's the impact of that?
4080 is absolutely a 4K card, however for me personally, I am sticking with 1440 to get the most out of it. I do not want to rebuild my pc for at least 3 more years.
I disagree 4K gives you so much more clarity and detail, on high texture settings it becomes obvious. And usually people can run 4K on today's graphics cards just turn the shadows down a notch etc. But more importantly outside of gaming you'll have a higher resolution for videos, movies, documents, all the other things you use your PC for.
@ErockOnTech I run 1440p at my desk, but my 70in tv is on the other side of the wall so I run 4k on there, it took me some time to figure out how to get it to work right (big thanks to Steam big picture settings) but now I can run 4k native 60fps max settings on the TV is super smooth with no screen tearing. I do have to adjust settings for cyberpunk and run dlss quality for Control though.
@@ErockOnTech what is your opinion on 3550 x1440 34 inch vs 2550 x 1440 32 inch? if my 2550x 1440 is Good and functional 144 hz is it worth the upgrade for 300 bucks?
4080 owner here and LOVE IT! I also got a lot of pushback for purchasing the 4080, with some actually being quite nasty. What can I say… the PC community can be very toxic. Regardless, it was my money and I couldn't be happier with my gaming experience.
I agree 100%! I was criticized so much for buying a 4080. I hate to admit it but yes the PC community is very toxic actually. As a whole, the community comes up with certain narratives and if you step outside of that narrative, then you’re a bad guy. It’s ridiculous. Consumers should buy the product that best fits their needs within their budget. It’s that simple. But instead, the community expects us to buy a competitors potentially inferior product simply because it’s “not Nvidia.” Smh
@@ErockOnTech I know it's hard but I try to just ignore people who obviously have nothing productive to say. Nothing wrong with disagreements and differences of opinion, that can be interesting to discuss but sometimes some people dont even act like human beings the way they talk to one another and over what exactly, graphics cards? lol
@@TerraWare That is so true! Thank you. It’s almost as if people are finding their identity in a graphics card that plays video games. It’s a bit absurd.
I love my 4080, it did come as a prebuild from lenovo(i9 13900kf liquid cooled) that i just couldnt let pass, for under $2,350 with 3 year warranty onsite repair, taxes and shipping included. Ive had it for 4 months now, the perforance to price ratio i believe its more then worth it.
Seriously considering the 4080 now that it’s down to 1000 dollars as of August 11, 2023. But I keep going back and forth to the 7900 XTX Sapphire Nitro because I love that it has (2) HDMI 2.1 Ports !!! Ugh
@@TheRealDlo Thanks for this info, mate! I've been trying to decide between the MSI 4080 Suprim X and that Sapphire Nitro 7900XTX. The MSI is about $300 more expensive, but RT and DLSS3 are pretty cool features to have in the bullpen as more games incorporate them.
I was only able to afford 3080 and still a great card , someday I’ll wait for whatever card in the future comes to upgrade again. ( upgraded from gtx 1060 to 3080 )
Just got a 4080. Literally a 3x improvement over my Titan X Pascal. Is it frustrating that Cyberpunk 2077 only pushes 13 fps on the benchmark with all the raytracing/path tracing on at native 4k ultra/psycho? Sure. It'll take 200 Tflops to do that at 60. However turning off path tracing, turning on DLSS quality and frame generation gets around 100 easily. 100 fps with RT on is great. Is DLSS in general perfect? Hell no, but it's good enough. Also The Witcher 3 can only hit around 35 fps maxed out native, but once again DLSS quality setting and frame gen kicks that up to 80+. I really wish there was less difference in the core count of the 4080 and 4090, it's pretty extreme how cut down the 4080 is. Should have been closer to 12000 cores instead of the 9728. I doubt we'll see a Ti variant.
Bought a 1440p 240hz monitor the other day. Coming from an RTX 2060, the 4080 is a god send. I could’ve went for the 4090, but the 4080 is going for $999-$1099. So I saved about $500-$600 by buying this monitor and a new CPU instead of the 4090.
@@DanuForhonor Esports games are a breeze on my PC CSGO: 700 Fps at 1440p Fortnite performance mode: 300-450 fps Fortnite DX12 Lumen and Nanite: 120 fps at 1440p DLSS Quality Call of Duty Modern Warfare II: 144 fps locked at 1440p extreme settings AAA single player games are also a breeze with my 4080 Sekiro Max settings 1440p with FPS unlock mod: 144 FPS locked Elden Ring 1440p max settings: 144FPS locked Elden Ring 1440p max settings Ray tracing on high: 120 fps with dips into 90 Cyberpunk 2077 Ray Tracing Ultra preset 1440p: 60FPS locked Cyberpunk 2077 Ray Tracing OverDrive preset DLSS 3 quality 1440p: 120FPS with dips into 80 while driving in the city.
I think then it comes to native 4K60 or maybe a little higher the 4080 is a good card for today's games. The 16GB buffer in 3-4 years is going to be a good question that we all can argue until our fingers bleed from typing. I can't see myself ever buying a 4090-cost card, but I would certainly debate spending the money on a 4080 or 7900 XTX for a 4-year 4K60 investment.
Not really much of a question. 16GB will be fine until consoles upgrade past 16GB which isn't going to happen in 3-4 years. As always the industry is held back by what the consoles can do. That's why there was absolutely 0 issues with 8GB cards until the new consoles released. Before then 3-4GB was 100% fine until the previous consoles released that had 8GB ram. For those of us who have been doing this game a long time the cycle is clear. Rule of thumb: Don't buy a GPU towards the end of a console generation unless it massively exceeds the current console generations memory/performance because game requirements are going to take a massive spike as soon as the next console generation hits.
My question is how do the consoles manage certain games at 4k 120fps whereas we struggle with cards 4080 worth twice as much as a the console for the card alone and with the technology on the card.
4080 is an incredible card. If you can afford it buy it. you wont regret it. I've owned mine for months and don't regret it. Once people try it they'll realize how powerful and how great it is. The MSI ventus 4080 for $1000 is a great deal.
I think the thing is that most people ready to drop 1200$ on a GPU likely can afford the 1600 for the 4090. but that being said the 4080s performance per watt is actually pretty good. if you're a power consumption conscious user then the 4080 is a great choice for things like 3d rendering and production tasks. If you're using it for a business the cost of operation is significantly lower than a 4090
Upgraded from 6900xt at launch. Happy to fully utilize my older 5800x3d and 750w psu at 4k. I agree that there is no single true way of pc building. There are just too many possible scenarios. Great informative video btw 👍
I’m currently using the Red Devil 6950 XT and considering the 4080. But I keep going back to the 7900 XTX Sapphire bc it has (2) HDMI 2.1 Ports which would work perfectly with my monitors
I'm looking for a GPU for a build and the 4080 is a great choice. I'm using this card for 3d modeling, game development, and video editing. The 16gb of VRAM will be enough. 4k is a gimmick and a lot of games right aren't running native 4k without hardware tricks like DLSS.
Well the games can run 4K without the tricks. I ran most of these benchmarks without DLSS. But on console I agree. Most games are marketed as 4K. But 100% those games are running with upscaling solutions and dynamic scaling.
@@ErockOnTech Yup. I mostly game on console and I often see PS5 and XSX games having to resort to hardware tricks to maintain 60 FPS, because developers aren't optimising their assets properly. There are a few console games running at a native 4k, like God of War Ragnarok, but those guys really put a ton of effort into a game
I just ordered the parts for a complete PC build minus the GPU as I am waiting for the 4080 super to launch as I am un willing to pay 2k plus for a 4090 lol. This video has shown me that I will be very happy with the 4080 super. Thank you for the great work
very solid video. informative, broad in scope but focused on topic, truly answering the questions people like me wanna know. I bought an alienware aurora r14 from dell while it was on clearance a week ago, and when it came in the HDMI port was dead on arrive (trust me, i tried), so after calling dell support i asked to do an exchange for "equal or better machine". I recently found out they are replacing it with a R15 that ups my 3080 to a 4080, and i am ecstatic. I plan on playing on my 4k hdr roku tv and i can deal with 60fps for the very top demanding games (Ark, looking at you), but ideally I agree with the diminishing returns lower than 90fps, and it seems like this card will get the job done if its not bottlenecked by ram and cpu. Woo!
Thank you for the kind words! Much appreciated! Oh wow that is a nice upgrade for you. I’m sorry you had that headache but it seems to have worked out in your favor! Enjoy!
I am currently using a 3060ti bought it for around $800USD during the price hikes, waiting for 5 series because I want to experience all the new games at least in 60fps with RT ON. No point buying a 4 series GPU which still breaks down with RTX on at 4K, and frame generation feature that introduces latency does not interest me just like DLSS.
I've waited a little and got the 4080 super... It's a nice card.. I didn't push it for 4k because I have a 240hz 1440p monitor.. the fps are damn sky high.
I want to buy this card to replace my 3060 but im worried about bottlenecking. My current specs are AMD Ryzen 5 5600x 16gig ddr4 ram HDD 1tb 512gb ssd Asus Prime B450M-A II Desktop Motherboard Thanks
The 4k narrative is rubbish Im running a 4070Ti at 4k get between 80 - 120 fps in all games using upsaclaing but at 4k why not I cant complain Im not sure what the hell people are talking about with the 4090. Sure if you want 120-140 fps in everything but yeah after 90 FPS its pretty minor for me.
I upgraded from the 3080 oc strix cus I could and though why not. But the 3080 is going well. The library of games you can play maxed with rt and the fact it's running new games like tlou at 4k 60 with dlss it's good. I get its funny I say this as I upgrade, but I do agree it has life in it for sure. Too much doom and gloom about that card for sure. But 50 series will be insane. I think I'll wait for the 60 series now.
I use my 3080 which I got recently used to play single player games at 4k going high instead of ultra and using dlss quality gets me by in everything I've played so far (hogwarts legacy, cyberpunk 2077) Hogwarts I played at ultra with rt reflections on Good enough for me since I don't play single player games as they release and wait for them to get optimised
Is a 7900 xtx worth it for $1,049? (Sapphire Nitro+) or should I just go a bit further and get the msi 4080 white for $1,269? 24GB seems like a decent step up from 16GB and for less money. Also playing at 1440P 165hz. Having such a hard time deciding😅 thanks in advance and have a good day.
Same here, at the moment I'm feeling like that 16 GB of VRAM is going to be the sweetspot for a while, and I much prefer the features Nvidia has to offer, but I haven't ruled out AMD either.
No, it is not. If you want to play 4k and have the money to get a 4080, get a 4090 instead. It is not much more expensive but way faster and you can get reasonable good fps for newer games. ~60 fps is to low for aaa games imo, wich is what u get with a 4080. In addition when I play less demanding games like WOT, the 4090 consumes only about 180 - 200 watts for 4k 144 fps with gsync on. Or even less. I do not see a real reason to buy a 4080 for its price. IF and this is a big if! it would cost like a 3080 msrp, it would be a nobrainer and I would highly recommend it. And the point with DLSS is, that it should not be requiered for a 1000$+ card to use to get reasonable fps in new titles. There is a visable decline in image quality on my 32' 4k monitor with DLSS quality. It is still a good picture though. And not all new games support this tech. Frame generation is worsening latency and produces artifacts. It should also not be considered for a 1000$+ card. DlSS 3.5 with enhanced ray tracing is reasonable good. But it should be usable without the otherr DLSS modes. If I spend that much money I want the best picture quality AND high fps. Even at 4k.
Are there still melting issues with 4090, planning new PC soon, and if i get new ATX3.0 psu, with 1 cable to use and connect with my 4090, do i need anything else, endless reddit post about cable mod adapters etc...
The short version is the melting issue is mostly subsided right now. I have not yet heard of any ATX 3.0 cables melting. It’s mostly been the Nvidia adapter that comes in the box or the cable mod adapter. I think you’re fine.
@@ErockOnTech Tnx, i plan maybe for MSI ventus 4090 as it is cheapest where i live, and one of smallest 4090-s, 450W capped but tbh i like it even better that way. Here in Europe prices is crazy atm for GPU-s, 4080 cost way too much for what i get , gaming mostly at 4k oled.
I don't care about 4k. I game at 1440p and I love it. But i bought the 4080. Why? Because I don't want to ever have to worry about compromising a damn thing at 1440p for the next 4 or 5 years. Basically until I need a new PC which I just replaced earlier this year. And I didn't need a 4090 to do that. The 4080 was sitting there so I grabbed it. Couldn't be happier with it.
4k/60 in everything i play and usually that equals the gpu loafing along with plenty of overhead. the card is dumb expensive but the 4080 is a beastly beast.
Yeah, I went with amd because of price and overall performance, as most of the games I play do not have DLSS or RT. But holy the nvidia 40 series cards are so power efficient.
I have pretty much exactly the same spec as you, just waiting on my cpu which will be an upgrade from the 7600, I also have an lg 42 inch c2 so I only need 120fps max but anything over 60 I’m more than happy with
This why I subbed to you a few months ago, you helped me a lot with considering what to get, doubt you'd remember me as it's been a while and I don't really remember what video it was on but you did respond to me about me getting that 3080, I got it used and then returned it shortly after understanding what kind of standards I'd want for PC gaming(120fps+ on avg 1440p maxed out), and now I'm saving up the money to possibly get a 4080 used or new as I'm still building my PC, Just curious, do you think it was worth getting that 7800x3D? because I was thinking about just getting idk maybe a 7600x as I heard it was still way faster than the 5800x3d and I'm building into the AM5 platform, like is the extra money even worth the frames as a gamer? rn as I see it on PC part picker it's a $120 more than the 7600x(this being $230) (yours being $350) Like I'm not too sure if the upgrade is necessary but Ig I'd have to look at hardware unboxed for an answer then but, your input would still be appreciated! and also any tips of any kind related to building this PC would be greatly appreciated!
I see so many comments, yes it is hard to remember every user name. But I understand the 3080. It’s a good card for sure. But if your standards are for more, then I understand and respect that entirely. As for the 7800X3D, it’s great. It’s the fastest gaming CPU on the market. It even beats the 13900k on average. So I think it makes sense to pair it with the 4080. But the 7600x is more cost efficient and it’ll perform just fine at 1440p with the 4080. You’re ok either way you want to go. If you go with the 7600x, I’ll recommend looking for a bundle deal of some kind.
You can run some lighter games at 8K already but god knows where you'll find a display for it. Only good thing about 8K is you need less antialiasing but it requires like 4x more power to run lol
In my country the 4080 is $1500 and 4090 is around $2500 ......... Now you guys tell me which will be better to buy .......... Juwt for extra 30 fps and 8gb vram, should i go for 4090 ever in my life ...........
As someone who plays at 4k with a 6950xt I can appreciate this sentiment. People generally overthink and/or overestimate what it takes to drive 4k even at 120hz. I can also understand as content creator to wanting CUDA acceleration, so honestly no issues there.👍 I am also one of the people who bought the $1200 RTX 2080 ti on release to "experience" 4k ray-tracing, whatever that's worth. Like many others, I used to be dependent on CUDA for work purposes. Hopefully AMD ROCm can prove to be a turning point in that aspect. DLSS 2 is better than FSR 2, that is a fact. With that said the 4080 is still a TERRIBLE purchase for the majority of users. Even if you have the mind boggling $1200 to throw at a GPU for gaming, the 7900 xtx would be faster in the majority of titles. On top of that, the 6950 xt (New/Used) or 3090 (Used) would be far superior than both current gen cards in terms of price to performance. Frame generation isn't worth the price, and the rasterization performance gap isn't as big as people try to make it seem (especially with an OC). Hilariously none of this matters anyways since UE5 is apparently so difficult to run everyone needs to upgrade next release! 😱
When I will be ready to upgrade my gaming PC, I want to be able to play all games at max settings with ray tracing in 4K. Unfortunately, ray tracing is crushing the 4080 in Cyberpunk 2077 even in 1080p. I was quite surprised by the result of zWORMz Gaming tests. The 4090 is the only graphics card that can manage Cyberpunk with those settings and the FPS rate is not that impressive (but enough for a game like Cyberpunk because it's a single player game). But I think that the 4080 can do better with DLSS.
I would argue even the 4090 isn’t a 4K GPU regarding “current gen” games. Ultra settings imo are the true representation of the artistic vision of developers. There’s already examples of AAA titles that the 4090 can’t run at 3840x2160 pixels / 60fps. Sure there’s DLSS 3.5 to help mask that and offer the illusion of 4K/60 but it can’t deliver the pristine look of native res.
Without ray tracing it is. However, maybe not all ultra settings. This year, jedi survivor, forspoken, hogwarts, witcher 3 update, cyberpunk pathtracing psycho, callisto protocol, dead space…..they kicked my pc’s ass. I ran a 7950x, 4090, 32gb ddr5 6mhz, and am now used to 40-60 fps at 4k ultra RT settings. Dlss 3 is unusable. Leaves awful horizontal artifacts, and stutters and F’s up frame times of you turn too fast. Try dlss in witcher 3, jedi survivor and you will see it. Upgraded to a 14900k from the 7950x, and it is way smoother with less stutter than my AMD systems I have run since Ryzen 1. Now just need a better gpu, as I dont think even an Rtx 5090 will be able to run the next few years games well. For those who want 4k max settings, probably a 6090 and the next real cpu generation will be able to handle todays games.
I had prebuilt 1390k with a 4090 from Corsair and had it for about 2 weeks. Before starting overheating shutting down. Most likely it was a faulty build but, I realized I paid 4k for that system. I also game on a TV 65-inch oled Samsung S95b that can only do 120hz. So most likely I'm capping myself so decided to return the system and get a replacement from NZXT with a 4080 instead. I wanna be realistic the 4090 is the true king in 4k ultra it will brute force itself to over 120fps in 90% of games that are well optimized. So I don't crank up all my settings with my 4080 I usually just go with high settings to medium like on shadows if I use raytracing well I use DLSS on quality. I'm content with it least I'm getting way more than I would with my PS5 or Xbox Series X so I'm happy with the results. Also saved about $1,400 bucks that's always a major win.
Hmm.. I just got a 4090. In Canada, it was either $2200 for the 4090 or $1600 for the $4080, So if I was going to spend BIG.. I went BIG. Now if the 4080 had been around the same MRSP as what my 3080 10gb was..THEN it might have been a different story.
To be honest jumping from 3080 to 4080 is not a great experience. It's not like your games will look/play better. They both run 4k, medium to high settings, and your oled with g-sync gets the work done. Maybe the 5080 will shine and make future games (unreal 5 games and such) worth the upgrade.
i have a 4080 on a 3840x1600 75Hz monitor and it can easily do 60-70fps without upscaling or framegen in most games, and dlss quality when needed basically locks anything short of cyberpunk to 150+ (and 60 for rt) fantastic card, people who hate on it for the die size really underestimate the gains of switching to tsmc from samsung especially on efficiency i splurged on the noctua edition after saving up for months and i don’t regret it, i can easily see myself using it for the next 4-5 years, especially given the likely slowdown in performance gains at the top top end. the ‘ultra’ tier of graphics cards right now (4090, 7900 xtx, 4080) are all capable of driving way more performance than 4K60 which is the sweet spot for the cinematic high-fidelity aaa games people get these cards for
hope you ain't sleeping on your oled motion pro high option!....I have the exact same setup as you 4080 + lg c1...if you can maintain a constant 99-100fps with frame gen on(technically 50), cap your fps at 50 in game or nvcp(make sure it's working, if uncapped you'll get some mild stutter when your frames go beyond 100)...gsync OFF (yes off! bfi doesn't work with it enabled), vsync OFF in game/ON in nvcp ...monitor set to native at 100hz (keep in mind the lag goes up the lower your resolution and the lower your refresh rate, so ultimately you want 120fps(60fps without frame gen enabled) ....enjoy...for lots of games we should be able to dldsr the shit out of them! now it's an 8k card bro! lol
I have a 3080 ti from gigabyte, it bricked once and I RMAd, now its dying again. have to rma again, they will not refund the money unless it BREAKS THREE FREAKING TIMES. Im getting fed up and I need a card. I game at 4k on an OLED 120 gsync. Do you think spending the 1k+ on a 4080 is the best price? or do u think tweaking settings and going for a 4070 ti is the better bet? its saving like 400$
Even with my 3080 12GB I've been able to game 4k just fine, however, I am considering getting the 4080 Super just to get myself more in the 'sweet' spot for 4k. I'm fine with 60fps but I do get some performance hit with my 3080 and rely a lot on DLSS on some titles. I would like to push to 80 to 90fps as well if able.
I play Cyberpunk in 4K on a 1660 Super at 40 FPS, and the same with RDR2, up scaling off level of detail High anisotropy and ambient occlusion low because you don't need it in 4K and it looks and plays great. so yes a 4080 is a 4K gaming card. why is everyone going nuts about frame rates over 60 FPS. $200 vs $1,300 aprox pricing.
I have an LG C3 42 inch display with a 6950xt and I run everything at native 4K 120fps, of course not on "ultra" instead an optimized mix that looks great but without the diminishing returns killing your framerate. Gamers have to stop thinking if a card is "viable" because it can't max out a game at a certain resolution. A 2024 game on medium usually looks better than a 2018 game maxxed out. And native on lower graphics settings blows away any upscaling/frame gen
Heck, I'm using, watching, editing, rendering & playing games at 4K on my 4070, so I sure as hell hope a 4080 is a 4K card. Gaming at 4K is gorgeous and crisp, and with a bit of DLSS 3, which hardly affects fidelity whatsoever, but provides far more FPS, gaming at 4K at over 100FPS is not an issue at all, and I love it! And am thankful, too, as this Aorus FO48U monitor wasn't cheap, either!!! >_< Graphics card & monitor alone = CAD$2,000. Ouch. I've never spent this much on computer components in my life, and it was a real struggle to make it happen. It just sucks that I had to pay CAD$800 for the 4070, when there are actually 3 other tiers above mine from NVIDIA alone, making my card mid-tier........ at 800 freaking dollars. Huge problem.
btw check Hardware Unboxed tests comparing the two dominant upscaling technologies - DLSS and FSR. The bottom line is that in maybe 80-90% of the cases the difference between DLSS Quality and native 4K are negligible at best. And in maybe 20% of the games DLSS Quality even looks better that native 4K (yes I was surprised too). So buying a 1200 $/Euro card and not using all its available features (DLSS and Frame generation) sound illogical to me. Yes 4090 is a faster card but WAY more expansive and not to mention power hungry. Here in EU the prices of electricity lately are bonkers so 150-200 watts extra are no small expense - especially if you multiply it throughout the years of use. That makes 4090 more expensive both upfront and during the ownership period. That is just unnecessary overkill for me IMHO
I understand completely. The longer I have a 40 series card, the more DLSS and Frame Generation grow on me. I’ve always been about native rendering and raw horse power. However, for better or worse, or like it or not, I’ve come to accept that Ray Tracing and upscaling technologies are here to stay. If you buy the product, you are paying for those features. So to not use it, is to waste your money in a sense.
FlexiSpot. Check out their website for the Premium Standing Desk E7:
bit.ly/3OLracz - US
bit.ly/3OMitQf - Canada
You can use my code ''YTB15'' for extra 10% off on order over $500
GET DISCORD ACCESS FOR ONLY $1: www.patreon.com/ErockOnTech
Follow me on Twitter: twitter.com/ErockOnTech
I bought the Flexispot EN1 55 X 28 for my new gaming PC / setup earlier this year and love it. It's a great product. When I want to stand I just hit the preset and stand. When I want to sit I just hit the next preset and sit. Awesome. And very stable. Even while gaming and standing at height. Would recommend.
@@willia451 I agree! I truly love this desk so much! It’s incredible!
I play all my games at 4k with a 4k display obviously and rarely do I run into major performance issues. A few games have been challenging and I had to drop some shadows or something but more or less I can run it with high or better settings. Now I’m not smashing 100+ fps but honestly it looks incredibly smooth and the picture quality is great with 70 - 90 fps. Great video Erock!
Thank you!
Shadows on low is all time fps boost trick every gamer uses since the dawn of time :D
The 4080 is a solid 4K GPU. It can run the majority of demanding AAA games at native 4K max settings at 60+ FPS. However, if you want to do native 4K max settings with RT at 60+ FPS, the 4090 is the only GPU that can currently do that in quite a few games. The 4090 is the only GPU that handles RT without any compromises. Any other GPU using RT means having to compromise, such as using upscaling/Frame Gen or lowering the settings.
That’s a fair assessment. Thank you for sharing.
@@ErockOnTechRequest to test UnrealEngine 5.2 Tropical Rainforest TechDemo...the application size around 5gb.
The graphics is mind blowing with next-gen nanite & lumens implements turn on....even RTX4090 only got 40+fps maxed out setting.
4090 can't handle RT Overdrive in Cyberpunk 2077 @ 4K.
Thank You A True Answer:)
But Wait HOOW MUCH ££££
@karlwalker1771 The 4080 is anywhere from £1050 to £1300, and the 4090 ranges from £1449 to £1800. £1800+ for some models, depending on the retailer.
I own a 4080 & game on a m32u 4k 144hz monitor. I LOVE gaming at 4k & mostly, the 4080 allows me to game between 90hz-144hz. Sometime I use "High" instead of Ultra & honestly can't tell the difference. Thanks for the video man
I have the m28u with a 3090. Mostly play slightly older games. I'll get the 5090 next and 8k 144hz or whatever comes out.
Thank you! Ultra is diminishing returns. High is more than fine.
@@xpodx m28u has a crappy firmware, I have one and I was obliged to flash it with a modified F10 firmware to get it working right
@@yves1926 oh weird. Never had an issue with mine.
@@xpodx It's not really an issue, but the overdrive is much too strong with this monitor, which cause eye strain
Interesting to see a few years ago the 1080Ti was considered a 4K card, graphics are evolving and we aren't going to leave 4K soon, looks like 1440p will be the new 1080p and 4K still be hard to run unless you get the most expensive cards. But honestly the real important thing is to have fun.. I remember finishing CP 2077 playing 1080p fsr with only 25-35fps and genuinely had fun..
Hell yeah dude my pc if old too i play on low to medium settings but i still enjoy the games lol
Also important to take into account regional price differences between the two GPUs. Most people from NA say "just get the 4090" as if they're talking about a 50-100 dollar difference. In my country, the difference between a 4080 and a 4090 in retail markets is (still) a whole 500-600 euros.
Making the choice to upgrade from my 2060 to the 4080 was super easy. The performance jump is pretty insane.
Incredibly valid point. However, even here in NA, the difference between a 4080 and 4090 MSRP is $400.
@@ErockOnTech Yeah, I think whether or not that's a huge jump in price depends entirely on your budget as well.
Some folks can totally afford to have the "if I'm paying 1200 for a GPU, what's another 400 bucks?" mindset.
I do miss the days of sub-1000 80-series cards, though. I was able to build a whole top of the line system for the price of a 4080 back in 2014. GTX 980, 4790k and all.
Suppose that's inflation, post-COVID shortages & scalpers all having compounding effects. Sucks, lol.
Agreed. My MSI Suprim X 4080 was $1999AUD when I bought it months ago, and the Suprim X 4090 was $3299AUD. For someone that games on a 3440x1440 monitor and has a 5800x3d, the 4090 just didn’t make sense.
Ever since the 4080 launched I thought the performance was awesome. The 4080 is a great card in terms of specs and performance. The only thing that was holding the it back was and still is the price. If it launched at $999 I think it would of been a banger especially against the RX 7900 XTX for the same price. Great video as always my guy. I'm looking forward more reviews.
At $1100 the 4080 is a great deal, but now that AMD has Starfield Premium ($100) with the 7900xtx, they should lower it to $999
Undecided bc my TV is freesync, but the 4080 has better RT and DLSS 3.5
Why would Nvidia lower their price to match that of the 7900 XTX if the 4080 is objectively a better overall product, and still outsells the 7900 XTX 10 to 1? I'd gladly pay ~200 more for an Nvidia card over the glitchy and always "but it will get better with time" AMD. I also think the whole price issue is silly. Look at us. The people, in general. We have no problem dropping $1000+ every year on the exact same phone we already have, but a $1200 GPU that should last us several years is outrageous? IDK guys, we need to re-evaluate our priorities.
@carrickdubya4765 The 4080 is a terrible deal at $1100. It would be a good deal at $800 and maybe $900 for premium AIB versions such as the ROG STRIX and SUPRIM X, but that is pushing it. The 4080 has good performance, but it doesn't offer the halo performance you get from the 4090. It should not be over $900, no matter what. Nvidia has tricked people into thinking $1100 is a good price for the 4080, and the 3080 had an MSRP of $700. The 4080 has an MSRP of $1200. A $500 price increase in one generation is fucking pathetic.
@@carrickdubya4765I do not know what yoh have been smoking but i do not want any of it , another one that belives in all the marketing bollox this gpu should be £750 thats still £100 more than the 3080 launched at
@@BETEP-gw7qpI won't go AMD GPUs either due to drivers being worse, slower to be fixed, and to some extent lagging behind technology development. It's fine they are worse at ray tracing or AI graphics (DLSS equivalent features) if cheap enough but that's the thing. Must be a big discount.
They are fine on the driver front for the right gamers. If someone plays just recent AAA stuff they generally do the trick promptly. Its the older and AA stuff that they don't bother with.
Look at RuneScape, a 2 decade old game and still near the most played MMO, had a good year stretch of crashes on AMD drivers without rolling way back far enough to not play current AAA. WTF. Seriously. For me it's stuff like that which makes AMD not worth it outside of batting half price vs an Nvidia equivalent.
I believe the only reason they bother with PC GPUs at all is to stay capable enough to sell budget small form factor GPUs for consoles. It enables them to stay just a few years behind which is about the best consoles ever shoot for so they remain able to entirely control that massive segment of the gaming market.
AMD actually has an immense market share in graphics for gaming. It's just not in PCs and only some generations in laptops.
I'm curious if Intel manages to take hold in the budget segment for more than a discreet GPU generation if they might actually underbid AMD in consoles and steal their whole lifeblood. Probably not a good outcome long term for consumers but I'd sure get a laugh.
4080 is a very strong card, hopefully, it will cost less than $1000 during the upcoming holidays
Did you watch the end of the video? I show you eBay listings. 4080s are selling for $900 and below.
@@ErockOnTech yeah but i prefer new parts, have never been a fan of open box and used products
@@shasha023 EBay now has extremely good buyer protection. Money talks. Sometimes it’s worth considering a lightly used item. Just saying.
@ErockOnDeck thanks, the thing is I’m in South Africa so I don’t have much trust but I saw my local PC parts place has made the 4080 cheaper, it’s about R27000 about $1400
I just bought a lightly used 4080 FE on hardwareswap for 950. I recommend others who want one do the same
But wait. Nvidia told us the 2080 Ti was a 4K card, and that the 3080 was an 8k card. Were they ... exaggerating by chance?
Lol. Well, yes and no. Nvidia absolutely exaggerates their products and marketing. However, products shift over time. So a 4K card today may not be a 4K card in 5-7 years from now.
4K card, 8K card, that don't means nothing. You can always run GTA San Andreas at 8K
I bought my 4k monitor months ahead of the rest of my build, in anticipation of upgrading, to avoid the financial hit all at once. So, for many months, I ran a 4k monitor driven only by a RTX 2070. I expected I would just have to run everything at a lower res, but it actually performed much better than I anticipated. Most every game from 2018 and earlier, ran at native 4k without issue, and most graphically intensive games from 2018 & onward had DLSS, which at least made 4k 60 fps possible on the 2070. I have a RTX 4090 now, and it's literally 4x the performance. But I reject the notion that a less capable card can't do 4k, as I got by for months on only a 2070, even if it wasn't ideal.
Oh wow that’s incredibly fascinating. I really appreciate you sharing your story and experience with this. Thank you.
I have the same experience but I use a 2070 super. I'm thinking of upgrading to 3090 or 4080... which one?! @ErockOnTech
I feel like people underestimate the 4080 because of the performance gap between it and the 4090, compared to the 3080 and 3090 which are pretty close in performance. But that's just due to the limitations of Ampere; cramming in more wattage for a few extra frames.
If you think about it, the numbers make sense. The 4090 is equivalent to two 3080s, and the 4080 is equivalent to two 3070s. This way there's room for a hypothetical 4080 Ti to be put in the middle, which would mean 15% more performance per-tier, and that sounds fair to me. I don't get why people were bashing on it saying it's not a true 80-Class card, and that the 4090 is the only true next-gen GPU.
The only thing wrong here is that the price ain't right, but that's obvious already.
Regardless, my experience with the 4080 FE using DLSS 3 has been fantastic, and is definitely worthy of being called a 4K GPU.
The 4090 is almost twice as fast as a 3090 in some demanding applications.
Well said. I agree. The 4080 was underestimated.
its being underestimated because the price. its a 50% increase over the 3080 which is rescpectable, but its also 71% more expensive..... you the problem there ? lol the performance increase doesnt match the price increase. the difference in performace between the 2080 and 3080 was around the same but had the exact same price !! its honestly ridiculous. the card should of been $800 at the most lol then it would of been seen as a decent card. so untill its under atleast $900 its not a great card unless you like being taken advantage of
I went team red, 7900XTX but I didn't do it to win a pissing contest. The 4080 is the chosen challenger for the 7900XTX according to AMD. I can confirm, there aren't many titles I can't run at 4K. Most of the ones I couldn't run at 4K at launch got patched in a month or two so I could. Games can't be confused with movies. You don't go play a game once on opening weekend, then never look back. That's the reason most of us game.
I can't recommend a 4080 because I didn't buy one. I'm not about to bad mouth it either. if 4080 was the caliber of card you were going for, it's the one you should have bought.
The quality of comments in your section is high. You have really good followers it seems. I subbed, hope I don't bring down the average 😁
Lol
@@Wobbothe3rd not you naturally 😂
Thank you! I appreciate that!
4080 is perfectly fine. DLSS quality isn’t even a noticeable difference unless you are really looking for it. 4K/60 in all games. I’m even fine with using FG in certain games if I have to, which so far is only Cyberpunk and Starfield with the DLSS FG mod. I don’t see many games giving the 4080 issues until next generation unless they are poorly optimized, which unfortunately happens all too often these days. But in that case a game isn’t worth my time or money until it gets fixed and by that time it will likely be on sale lol.
Im buying the 4080 for 1440p 170hz single player max settings with raytracing
Awesome! That’ll be a good fit!
@@ErockOnTech thank u man .
Even taking the inflation in mind, the RTX 4080 should have cost max. 850 USD. Setting that aside, it is definitely a 4K GPU, even without using DLSS.
I agree all around.
Does the montech case gives good temps&airflow? I've seen the case and no one talks about it. @ErockOnTech
I am like you for my targeted FPS overall, at least for 1440p. I too usually aim for 120fps. For me, my goal is just to stay above 100fps overall. 90ish FPS i can sorta handle. But, anything below 90fps i can start telling the difference in FPS performance. Especially once i start getting to 60fps range, thats when everything starts looking stuttery for me.
I usually have to be a mix of ULTRA to High graphic settings, in order to stay 120fps range with my 3080 @ 1440p 165hz. I truly see the benefits with my 165hz monitor, once i start staying around the 100 to 120fps mark.
That’s awesome! I agree! Thanks for sharing with me.
Well, seems that nobody wants to acknowledge that there are phases in gaming that it is determined by the consoles and engines.
We just started the 2nd phase of this era with UE5.
Consoles set the standards. It’s sad but true. The Xbox One X and PS4 Pro pushed the narrative of 4K. Because of that, now everyone talks about 4K and expects all products to do 4K. It’s ridiculous. Consoles gamers got the worst of it. The Xbox One couldn’t even do 1080p 60 FPS on most games. They had no business launching a refresh of the Xbox One and targeting 4K. The refresh should have targeted a locked and guaranteed 1080p 60 FPS experience on all games.
@@ErockOnTech I agree with what you said. My perspective is from this:
DX 12 has at the moment 3 eras: the last phase of PS4 with demanding games like Shadow of the Tomb Raider and others. For example, you require a 2080 Ti or better to play this game at 4K Highest settings to achieve 60 FPS.
Then the first PS5 era of the last DX12 games running with UE4 or other engines. This was more demanding, you need at least a RTX 4080 for 4K or faster.
The second phase we are right now with DX12 and UE5. Where the first "modernish" looking game and to quote others or 50 series owners, "unoptimized", like Remnant 2 you need a 7900 XTX or 4090 for that 4K Ultra and maybe not even reaching 60 FPS.
This is all my memory of watching benchmarks since the resurgence of PC gaming since 2016, just some examples.
@@takehirolol5962Very True. I've already comes to terms that my 4090 will be a 1440p gpu very soon. It will need upgraded to a 5090 in the very near future.
@@jjlw2378 Me as well, I saving for a new Windows 11 build in 2025 for a RTX 5000 or RX 9000 series GPU.
@@jjlw2378 that's pretty pessimistic. The AI features work really well on the 4090 and should allow for many years use. HUB has also commented that 16GB will be the standard for many years to come especially considering the lag in software development. If you must have the best then that's a different story and the 5090 etc. won't be released till 2025, probably because of the AI boom and the lack of competition from AMD.
I bought a 4080 for 4K gaming. My happy place is being able to play games at 4K@60fps max settings with ray tracing, but I can definitely settle for 30-60 fps as long as everything else is still the same. Also, the Founder's Edition of the 4080 only needs a 750W PSU which I already had. Many of us dream of getting the 4090, but so much comes along with that (unless you have these things already):
- Larger PSU to meet power requirements
- High-end CPU to get the best performance and avoid bottlenecks
- A motherboard that supports DDR5 (again performance related)
- A new case to fit the GPU
Once you've purchased all these things, you're going out of at least $2,500 before tax. Both GPUs are overpriced, but I couldn't spend the extra $400 for the 4090.
This is the comment.
I had to upgrade my PC case for the 4080 gigabyte gaming oc. The 4090 needs a 1000w power supply and chances are you will need to upgrade the CPU cus your bottlenecking if it's not good enough.
Same thing will apply for the 4080ti if it draws 450ish watts like the rumours say that's a PSU upgrade for most people and if it's 10 to 15% range of a 4090..cpu upgrade as well
Hidden costs of pc that is overlooked by content creators alot
@@c523jw7 appreciate the love 👍🏿 PC gaming is so expensive that I see why people go the console route or keep their current PC. Nowadays you even gotta have a high end GPU to sell that's no more than one generation behind just to even offset some of the cost to upgrade.
i like 1440p just because i can move all the graphics sliders to max and get crazy high fps, especially with fg
Just bought it in SUPER version to replace 3080 10GB for 1440p ultrawide 21:9 monitor. I was criticized due to "slow" i5 11400f processor, but to be honest I think people are fixed on high fps, but what I WANT is stable 60+ RT ultra or high/ultra experience. Man, people are playing console games 30fps and I can play them 60-90fps ultrawide and add DLSS or/and Frame Gen on top of that, THAT IS AWESOME
As long as you’re happy with your gaming experience, that’s what matters most!
Nice video and info. Cingrats in your channel growth. Keep it up
Thank you! I appreciate it!
I have both the 4080 and 3080 systems side by side and love both. I play a lot of sims and single player @ 4k 60+fps on 2 Alienware ultra wides and love it. Not thrilled with the 3080's 10gig vram, but with minor tweaks has not been as big a deal as I first thought, for now? I have a gigabyte 4080 also and my experience is spot on with yours. The 4090 was $400 plus more at the time of purchase, but was way more than I wanted to spend. I may get a 5090 to replace the 3080 or skip next gen altogether, not sure? How my grandsons age into the online gaming eco systems will let me know what and when to pull the trigger. Because of their age they are only allowed to play on weekends right now. They must learn the value of work ethic and education first. Take care.
I agree. These are values I plan to teach my son as well. Work first. Play later. But all work and no play makes Johnny a dull boy as they say.
@@ErockOnTech so true.
Some games look better with DLSS on Quality than native, but no game looks better at native than either DLAA, which you can turn on in all games that support DLSS using DLSSTweaks, or, DLDSR + DLSS, so altho DLSS sometimes does look better than native, you do want a GPU that can support 4K 60 fps using a native resolution anyways, if possible. I think the 4080 is a solid option for that, but I wouldn't go lower than that. It is there, but... it doesn't have as much room as the 4090 for the future.
I run my 4080 in 4K-60 no problem. It was an upgrade from my 4k 970 ( Yes they called that a 4k card when it came out ) and am very happy with that performance uplift.
I love my 4080 so much
Because im running it at 4K (On my 48" LG C1, its such a beauty), I was able to get an Amd 7600x while not hurting my performance.
My boy with the sponsorship! 🙏
I genuinely love this desk.
I ended up grabbing a 4080 used off ebay for $900, bit unfortunate now that there are some 4080 supers selling around $999 but I saved at least $100.
Why? I got my brand new 4080 super for $1029
Used 4080 should be $800 to make it reasonable
@@willy7968 supply and demand, the 4080 is more powerful than the 4070 ti super, if it were $799, there would be no 4080s on market.
alot of the time, going from some high settings to max, barely makes a difference to the eye, but having a huge performance hit, so thats something to keep in mind as well
Hey Dude and comment Team!
In the process of building my 4080, and I have the following going for me: Ive purchased the ASRock Z790 TAICHI, Arctic Liquid Freezer II 420 A-RGB, MSI Gaming X Trio 4080 16GB & Corsair 7000D Airflow Black. To round it off I'm getting the Intel Core i9-13900k, G-Skill Trident Z5 RGB 64GB (2x 32GB) DDR5 5600 CL 28 and the Thermaltake Toughpower GF3 1200w.
I wish I could get the last three Items sooner. haha.
Another 6 months and I'm there 😅
I forgot to ask my question.
@ErockOnTech I see you tested on a Television - Would you suggest I do the same?
Well you have to be careful with TVs. A lot of TVs say they are 120 hz but really they are not. Make sure it’s a legit HDMI 2.1 connection. But honestly, monitors have gotten so much better recently. I’d suggest a good gaming monitor.
@@ErockOnTech Thank you! Also - have you noticed that some 4080's don't come with a HDMI 2.1a output?
Went in on the research for my rig - so the MSI Range of 4080's always have HDMI 2.1a. Many 4080's don't.
What's the impact of that?
4080 is absolutely a 4K card, however for me personally, I am sticking with 1440 to get the most out of it. I do not want to rebuild my pc for at least 3 more years.
I think unless you have a massive screen 1440p is the way to go plus everything on max even ray tracing with no compromises
1440p is the true sweetspot these days.
I disagree 4K gives you so much more clarity and detail, on high texture settings it becomes obvious. And usually people can run 4K on today's graphics cards just turn the shadows down a notch etc. But more importantly outside of gaming you'll have a higher resolution for videos, movies, documents, all the other things you use your PC for.
@ErockOnTech I run 1440p at my desk, but my 70in tv is on the other side of the wall so I run 4k on there, it took me some time to figure out how to get it to work right (big thanks to Steam big picture settings) but now I can run 4k native 60fps max settings on the TV is super smooth with no screen tearing. I do have to adjust settings for cyberpunk and run dlss quality for Control though.
@@ErockOnTech what is your opinion on 3550 x1440 34 inch vs 2550 x 1440 32 inch? if my 2550x 1440 is Good and functional 144 hz is it worth the upgrade for 300 bucks?
Got my 4080 super for 940 dollar here in the states, love it.
That’s a good deal!
4080 owner here and LOVE IT! I also got a lot of pushback for purchasing the 4080, with some actually being quite nasty. What can I say… the PC community can be very toxic. Regardless, it was my money and I couldn't be happier with my gaming experience.
Pc community is mostly broke salty toxic fan boys sad these days
I agree 100%! I was criticized so much for buying a 4080. I hate to admit it but yes the PC community is very toxic actually. As a whole, the community comes up with certain narratives and if you step outside of that narrative, then you’re a bad guy. It’s ridiculous. Consumers should buy the product that best fits their needs within their budget. It’s that simple. But instead, the community expects us to buy a competitors potentially inferior product simply because it’s “not Nvidia.” Smh
@@ErockOnTech 100%
@@ErockOnTech I know it's hard but I try to just ignore people who obviously have nothing productive to say. Nothing wrong with disagreements and differences of opinion, that can be interesting to discuss but sometimes some people dont even act like human beings the way they talk to one another and over what exactly, graphics cards? lol
@@TerraWare That is so true! Thank you. It’s almost as if people are finding their identity in a graphics card that plays video games. It’s a bit absurd.
I love my 4080, it did come as a prebuild from lenovo(i9 13900kf liquid cooled) that i just couldnt let pass, for under $2,350 with 3 year warranty onsite repair, taxes and shipping included. Ive had it for 4 months now, the perforance to price ratio i believe its more then worth it.
Seriously considering the 4080 now that it’s down to 1000 dollars as of August 11, 2023. But I keep going back and forth to the 7900 XTX Sapphire Nitro because I love that it has (2) HDMI 2.1 Ports !!! Ugh
I bought and tried them both. I returned the XTX as SOME titles really work well with DLSS3 and RT.
@@TheRealDlo Thanks for this info, mate! I've been trying to decide between the MSI 4080 Suprim X and that Sapphire Nitro 7900XTX. The MSI is about $300 more expensive, but RT and DLSS3 are pretty cool features to have in the bullpen as more games incorporate them.
The 4080 is superior to the xtx if you factor in 1% lows and power draw, amd you can overclock a 4080 pretty far...
@@Wobbothe3rd I’m definitely leaning towards the 4080 bc I’m using an AMD card currently and wanna try Nvidia
I returned my XTX and bought a 4080.
I was only able to afford 3080 and still a great card , someday I’ll wait for whatever card in the future comes to upgrade again. ( upgraded from gtx 1060 to 3080 )
Just got a 4080. Literally a 3x improvement over my Titan X Pascal. Is it frustrating that Cyberpunk 2077 only pushes 13 fps on the benchmark with all the raytracing/path tracing on at native 4k ultra/psycho? Sure. It'll take 200 Tflops to do that at 60. However turning off path tracing, turning on DLSS quality and frame generation gets around 100 easily. 100 fps with RT on is great. Is DLSS in general perfect? Hell no, but it's good enough. Also The Witcher 3 can only hit around 35 fps maxed out native, but once again DLSS quality setting and frame gen kicks that up to 80+. I really wish there was less difference in the core count of the 4080 and 4090, it's pretty extreme how cut down the 4080 is. Should have been closer to 12000 cores instead of the 9728. I doubt we'll see a Ti variant.
Bought a 1440p 240hz monitor the other day. Coming from an RTX 2060, the 4080 is a god send. I could’ve went for the 4090, but the 4080 is going for $999-$1099. So I saved about $500-$600 by buying this monitor and a new CPU instead of the 4090.
Nice !
How many fps are you getting:?
@@DanuForhonor Esports games are a breeze on my PC
CSGO: 700 Fps at 1440p
Fortnite performance mode: 300-450 fps
Fortnite DX12 Lumen and Nanite: 120 fps at 1440p DLSS Quality
Call of Duty Modern Warfare II: 144 fps locked at 1440p extreme settings
AAA single player games are also a breeze with my 4080
Sekiro Max settings 1440p with FPS unlock mod: 144 FPS locked
Elden Ring 1440p max settings: 144FPS locked
Elden Ring 1440p max settings Ray tracing on high: 120 fps with dips into 90
Cyberpunk 2077 Ray Tracing Ultra preset 1440p: 60FPS locked
Cyberpunk 2077 Ray Tracing OverDrive preset DLSS 3 quality 1440p: 120FPS with dips into 80 while driving in the city.
I think then it comes to native 4K60 or maybe a little higher the 4080 is a good card for today's games. The 16GB buffer in 3-4 years is going to be a good question that we all can argue until our fingers bleed from typing. I can't see myself ever buying a 4090-cost card, but I would certainly debate spending the money on a 4080 or 7900 XTX for a 4-year 4K60 investment.
Not really much of a question. 16GB will be fine until consoles upgrade past 16GB which isn't going to happen in 3-4 years. As always the industry is held back by what the consoles can do.
That's why there was absolutely 0 issues with 8GB cards until the new consoles released. Before then 3-4GB was 100% fine until the previous consoles released that had 8GB ram.
For those of us who have been doing this game a long time the cycle is clear. Rule of thumb: Don't buy a GPU towards the end of a console generation unless it massively exceeds the current console generations memory/performance because game requirements are going to take a massive spike as soon as the next console generation hits.
I have a PNY 4080 that plays everything I need fine at 4k. No need for anything until 5 series. Totally fine with mine.
Yes, the 4080 is a good performing card. PNY is a good brand as well.
My question is how do the consoles manage certain games at 4k 120fps whereas we struggle with cards 4080 worth twice as much as a the console for the card alone and with the technology on the card.
I think you are right in your logic with the caveat that the end result is highly dependant on the specific game.
Solid breakdown. Professionally done. Surprised you don't have more subs.
4080 is an incredible card. If you can afford it buy it. you wont regret it. I've owned mine for months and don't regret it. Once people try it they'll realize how powerful and how great it is. The MSI ventus 4080 for $1000 is a great deal.
100% had mine 3 months and absolutely love it 👍👍
I think the thing is that most people ready to drop 1200$ on a GPU likely can afford the 1600 for the 4090. but that being said the 4080s performance per watt is actually pretty good. if you're a power consumption conscious user then the 4080 is a great choice for things like 3d rendering and production tasks. If you're using it for a business the cost of operation is significantly lower than a 4090
spending $1000 on just a GPU is pure insanity in my mind even if you can afford it.
@@Lennox032 everyone has their opinions. I spent $1000 and don’t regret it teheheh
@@3_kids_one_shot726I’m in the same boat as him. The most expensive thing I bought was my pc itself which was 900 at the time.
Upgraded from 6900xt at launch. Happy to fully utilize my older 5800x3d and 750w psu at 4k. I agree that there is no single true way of pc building. There are just too many possible scenarios. Great informative video btw 👍
Oh there is most certainly a true way of building. It's called price to performance.
@@x8jason8x use case, budget constraints and parts in hand can make it complicated imo. Yet some bad/problematic models can be ruled out in advance.
I’m currently using the Red Devil 6950 XT and considering the 4080. But I keep going back to the 7900 XTX Sapphire bc it has (2) HDMI 2.1 Ports which would work perfectly with my monitors
RTX 4080 is a 4K Gaming GPU
RTX 4090 is a High-Refresh 4K Gaming GPU
I'm looking for a GPU for a build and the 4080 is a great choice. I'm using this card for 3d modeling, game development, and video editing. The 16gb of VRAM will be enough.
4k is a gimmick and a lot of games right aren't running native 4k without hardware tricks like DLSS.
Well the games can run 4K without the tricks. I ran most of these benchmarks without DLSS. But on console I agree. Most games are marketed as 4K. But 100% those games are running with upscaling solutions and dynamic scaling.
@@ErockOnTech Yup. I mostly game on console and I often see PS5 and XSX games having to resort to hardware tricks to maintain 60 FPS, because developers aren't optimising their assets properly. There are a few console games running at a native 4k, like God of War Ragnarok, but those guys really put a ton of effort into a game
Nobody want to show what the graphic card is OK for 4K 60fps - do we need nVidia 4080 or 7900XT is enough.
Not sure I follow.
I just ordered the parts for a complete PC build minus the GPU as I am waiting for the 4080 super to launch as I am un willing to pay 2k plus for a 4090 lol. This video has shown me that I will be very happy with the 4080 super. Thank you for the great work
4k 60 is all I need...just picked up a 4080s...love it.
I play From Software games almost exclusively. For me the 4080 is perfect @ 2K and 4K.
Makes sense for sure.
very solid video. informative, broad in scope but focused on topic, truly answering the questions people like me wanna know.
I bought an alienware aurora r14 from dell while it was on clearance a week ago, and when it came in the HDMI port was dead on arrive (trust me, i tried), so after calling dell support i asked to do an exchange for "equal or better machine". I recently found out they are replacing it with a R15 that ups my 3080 to a 4080, and i am ecstatic. I plan on playing on my 4k hdr roku tv and i can deal with 60fps for the very top demanding games (Ark, looking at you), but ideally I agree with the diminishing returns lower than 90fps, and it seems like this card will get the job done if its not bottlenecked by ram and cpu. Woo!
Thank you for the kind words! Much appreciated! Oh wow that is a nice upgrade for you. I’m sorry you had that headache but it seems to have worked out in your favor! Enjoy!
definitley RTX 4080 is the best because of VRAM 16 GB for 1440p
I am currently using a 3060ti bought it for around $800USD during the price hikes, waiting for 5 series because I want to experience all the new games at least in 60fps with RT ON.
No point buying a 4 series GPU which still breaks down with RTX on at 4K, and frame generation feature that introduces latency does not interest me just like DLSS.
I've waited a little and got the 4080 super... It's a nice card.. I didn't push it for 4k because I have a 240hz 1440p monitor.. the fps are damn sky high.
I want to buy this card to replace my 3060 but im worried about bottlenecking. My current specs are
AMD Ryzen 5 5600x
16gig ddr4 ram
HDD 1tb
512gb ssd
Asus Prime B450M-A II Desktop Motherboard
Thanks
The 4k narrative is rubbish Im running a 4070Ti at 4k get between 80 - 120 fps in all games using upsaclaing but at 4k why not I cant complain Im not sure what the hell people are talking about with the 4090. Sure if you want 120-140 fps in everything but yeah after 90 FPS its pretty minor for me.
Awesome content, I have a similar build with the 4080RTX and i9,13000
Thank you!
4080 is a beast but ill wait for a 5080 my 3080 still has its legs😍
I understand completely!
I upgraded from the 3080 oc strix cus I could and though why not. But the 3080 is going well. The library of games you can play maxed with rt and the fact it's running new games like tlou at 4k 60 with dlss it's good. I get its funny I say this as I upgrade, but I do agree it has life in it for sure. Too much doom and gloom about that card for sure. But 50 series will be insane. I think I'll wait for the 60 series now.
I use my 3080 which I got recently used to play single player games at 4k going high instead of ultra and using dlss quality gets me by in everything I've played so far (hogwarts legacy, cyberpunk 2077)
Hogwarts I played at ultra with rt reflections on
Good enough for me since I don't play single player games as they release and wait for them to get optimised
Sounds good. As long as you're happy with it.
Is a 7900 xtx worth it for $1,049? (Sapphire Nitro+) or should I just go a bit further and get the msi 4080 white for $1,269? 24GB seems like a decent step up from 16GB and for less money. Also playing at 1440P 165hz. Having such a hard time deciding😅 thanks in advance and have a good day.
I'm with you. Trying to decide whether to get that Sapphire Nitro or just keep my MSI 4080. The Nitro is about $340 less.
@@Mad.Maxx.77 yeah the price tag on the 7900 xtx is pretty tempting especially with that specific model. $300+ is a good chunk to save too.
The 4080 is superior to the xtx if you factor in 1% lows and power draw, and you can overclock a 4080, unlike an XTX...
Same here, at the moment I'm feeling like that 16 GB of VRAM is going to be the sweetspot for a while, and I much prefer the features Nvidia has to offer, but I haven't ruled out AMD either.
Meanwhile I game at 3440x1440 on a 4090. And I love it!
No, it is not. If you want to play 4k and have the money to get a 4080, get a 4090 instead. It is not much more expensive but way faster and you can get reasonable good fps for newer games. ~60 fps is to low for aaa games imo, wich is what u get with a 4080. In addition when I play less demanding games like WOT, the 4090 consumes only about 180 - 200 watts for 4k 144 fps with gsync on. Or even less. I do not see a real reason to buy a 4080 for its price. IF and this is a big if! it would cost like a 3080 msrp, it would be a nobrainer and I would highly recommend it.
And the point with DLSS is, that it should not be requiered for a 1000$+ card to use to get reasonable fps in new titles. There is a visable decline in image quality on my 32' 4k monitor with DLSS quality. It is still a good picture though. And not all new games support this tech. Frame generation is worsening latency and produces artifacts. It should also not be considered for a 1000$+ card. DlSS 3.5 with enhanced ray tracing is reasonable good. But it should be usable without the otherr DLSS modes. If I spend that much money I want the best picture quality AND high fps. Even at 4k.
Are there still melting issues with 4090, planning new PC soon, and if i get new ATX3.0 psu, with 1 cable to use and connect with my 4090, do i need anything else, endless reddit post about cable mod adapters etc...
The short version is the melting issue is mostly subsided right now. I have not yet heard of any ATX 3.0 cables melting. It’s mostly been the Nvidia adapter that comes in the box or the cable mod adapter. I think you’re fine.
@@ErockOnTech Tnx, i plan maybe for MSI ventus 4090 as it is cheapest where i live, and one of smallest 4090-s, 450W capped but tbh i like it even better that way. Here in Europe prices is crazy atm for GPU-s, 4080 cost way too much for what i get , gaming mostly at 4k oled.
I don't care about 4k. I game at 1440p and I love it. But i bought the 4080. Why? Because I don't want to ever have to worry about compromising a damn thing at 1440p for the next 4 or 5 years. Basically until I need a new PC which I just replaced earlier this year. And I didn't need a 4090 to do that. The 4080 was sitting there so I grabbed it. Couldn't be happier with it.
That’s awesome and I understand completely. And as I said in the video, the 4080 dominates at 1440p.
i got one 3 weeks ago. plays 4k no problem on my rig. love this card
One thing no one can question about the 40 series is their incredible efficiency
4k/60 in everything i play and usually that equals the gpu loafing along with plenty of overhead. the card is dumb expensive but the 4080 is a beastly beast.
Yeah, I went with amd because of price and overall performance, as most of the games I play do not have DLSS or RT. But holy the nvidia 40 series cards are so power efficient.
I have pretty much exactly the same spec as you, just waiting on my cpu which will be an upgrade from the 7600, I also have an lg 42 inch c2 so I only need 120fps max but anything over 60 I’m more than happy with
What is the program used for FPS count?
MSI Afterburner.
This why I subbed to you a few months ago, you helped me a lot with considering what to get, doubt you'd remember me as it's been a while and I don't really remember what video it was on but you did respond to me about me getting that 3080, I got it used and then returned it shortly after understanding what kind of standards I'd want for PC gaming(120fps+ on avg 1440p maxed out), and now I'm saving up the money to possibly get a 4080 used or new as I'm still building my PC, Just curious, do you think it was worth getting that 7800x3D? because I was thinking about just getting idk maybe a 7600x as I heard it was still way faster than the 5800x3d and I'm building into the AM5 platform, like is the extra money even worth the frames as a gamer? rn as I see it on PC part picker it's a $120 more than the 7600x(this being $230) (yours being $350) Like I'm not too sure if the upgrade is necessary but Ig I'd have to look at hardware unboxed for an answer then but, your input would still be appreciated! and also any tips of any kind related to building this PC would be greatly appreciated!
I see so many comments, yes it is hard to remember every user name. But I understand the 3080. It’s a good card for sure. But if your standards are for more, then I understand and respect that entirely.
As for the 7800X3D, it’s great. It’s the fastest gaming CPU on the market. It even beats the 13900k on average. So I think it makes sense to pair it with the 4080. But the 7600x is more cost efficient and it’ll perform just fine at 1440p with the 4080. You’re ok either way you want to go. If you go with the 7600x, I’ll recommend looking for a bundle deal of some kind.
What GPU do I need to buy for 8k 120fps gaming
Lol 😂 8K is marketing BS right now. Maybe a 7900 XTX if you listen to AMD.
You can run some lighter games at 8K already but god knows where you'll find a display for it. Only good thing about 8K is you need less antialiasing but it requires like 4x more power to run lol
Picked up a Gigabyte Gaming OC 4080 open box for $975. Great 1440 high refresh card.
That is an incredible deal!
@@ErockOnTechlool
In my country the 4080 is $1500 and 4090 is around $2500 ......... Now you guys tell me which will be better to buy .......... Juwt for extra 30 fps and 8gb vram, should i go for 4090 ever in my life ...........
I love the 4080 for my 3440x1440 monitor. I would have gone with a 4090 if I was using a 4K monitor, as I like high refresh rates.
As someone who plays at 4k with a 6950xt I can appreciate this sentiment. People generally overthink and/or overestimate what it takes to drive 4k even at 120hz. I can also understand as content creator to wanting CUDA acceleration, so honestly no issues there.👍
I am also one of the people who bought the $1200 RTX 2080 ti on release to "experience" 4k ray-tracing, whatever that's worth.
Like many others, I used to be dependent on CUDA for work purposes. Hopefully AMD ROCm can prove to be a turning point in that aspect.
DLSS 2 is better than FSR 2, that is a fact. With that said the 4080 is still a TERRIBLE purchase for the majority of users. Even if you have the mind boggling $1200 to throw at a GPU for gaming, the 7900 xtx would be faster in the majority of titles. On top of that, the 6950 xt (New/Used) or 3090 (Used) would be far superior than both current gen cards in terms of price to performance. Frame generation isn't worth the price, and the rasterization performance gap isn't as big as people try to make it seem (especially with an OC).
Hilariously none of this matters anyways since UE5 is apparently so difficult to run everyone needs to upgrade next release! 😱
thank you for a good 4 K review, however, I lack the performance in VR such as Primax Crystal
When I will be ready to upgrade my gaming PC, I want to be able to play all games at max settings with ray tracing in 4K. Unfortunately, ray tracing is crushing the 4080 in Cyberpunk 2077 even in 1080p. I was quite surprised by the result of zWORMz Gaming tests. The 4090 is the only graphics card that can manage Cyberpunk with those settings and the FPS rate is not that impressive (but enough for a game like Cyberpunk because it's a single player game). But I think that the 4080 can do better with DLSS.
I don't regret my 4080 one bit. And while I do use it in 4K, sometimes? I mostly opt 1800p+RT where possible.
I would argue even the 4090 isn’t a 4K GPU regarding “current gen” games. Ultra settings imo are the true representation of the artistic vision of developers. There’s already examples of AAA titles that the 4090 can’t run at 3840x2160 pixels / 60fps. Sure there’s DLSS 3.5 to help mask that and offer the illusion of 4K/60 but it can’t deliver the pristine look of native res.
Without ray tracing it is. However, maybe not all ultra settings.
This year, jedi survivor, forspoken, hogwarts, witcher 3 update, cyberpunk pathtracing psycho, callisto protocol, dead space…..they kicked my pc’s ass. I ran a 7950x, 4090, 32gb ddr5 6mhz, and am now used to 40-60 fps at 4k ultra RT settings.
Dlss 3 is unusable. Leaves awful horizontal artifacts, and stutters and F’s up frame times of you turn too fast. Try dlss in witcher 3, jedi survivor and you will see it.
Upgraded to a 14900k from the 7950x, and it is way smoother with less stutter than my AMD systems I have run since Ryzen 1. Now just need a better gpu, as I dont think even an Rtx 5090 will be able to run the next few years games well.
For those who want 4k max settings, probably a 6090 and the next real cpu generation will be able to handle todays games.
You should try Alan Wake 2 in the forest location at day. I think it is now one of if not the most demanding game out there.
I made this video before Alan Wake released.
@@ErockOnTech then you can probably make another one, including Cyberpunk and Alan Wake 2 :)
I had prebuilt 1390k with a 4090 from Corsair and had it for about 2 weeks. Before starting overheating shutting down. Most likely it was a faulty build but, I realized I paid 4k for that system. I also game on a TV 65-inch oled Samsung S95b that can only do 120hz. So most likely I'm capping myself so decided to return the system and get a replacement from NZXT with a 4080 instead.
I wanna be realistic the 4090 is the true king in 4k ultra it will brute force itself to over 120fps in 90% of games that are well optimized. So I don't crank up all my settings with my 4080 I usually just go with high settings to medium like on shadows if I use raytracing well I use DLSS on quality. I'm content with it least I'm getting way more than I would with my PS5 or Xbox Series X so I'm happy with the results. Also saved about $1,400 bucks that's always a major win.
Hmm.. I just got a 4090. In Canada, it was either $2200 for the 4090 or $1600 for the $4080, So if I was going to spend BIG.. I went BIG. Now if the 4080 had been around the same MRSP as what my 3080 10gb was..THEN it might have been a different story.
1440p ultrawide. I Love my 4080.
Dude I’ve been playing 4k on my 4070ti on high settings and it ran smoothly at over 100FPS
To be honest jumping from 3080 to 4080 is not a great experience. It's not like your games will look/play better. They both run 4k, medium to high settings, and your oled with g-sync gets the work done. Maybe the 5080 will shine and make future games (unreal 5 games and such) worth the upgrade.
i have a 4080 on a 3840x1600 75Hz monitor and it can easily do 60-70fps without upscaling or framegen in most games, and dlss quality when needed basically locks anything short of cyberpunk to 150+ (and 60 for rt)
fantastic card, people who hate on it for the die size really underestimate the gains of switching to tsmc from samsung especially on efficiency
i splurged on the noctua edition after saving up for months and i don’t regret it, i can easily see myself using it for the next 4-5 years, especially given the likely slowdown in performance gains at the top top end. the ‘ultra’ tier of graphics cards right now (4090, 7900 xtx, 4080) are all capable of driving way more performance than 4K60 which is the sweet spot for the cinematic high-fidelity aaa games people get these cards for
hope you ain't sleeping on your oled motion pro high option!....I have the exact same setup as you 4080 + lg c1...if you can maintain a constant 99-100fps with frame gen on(technically 50), cap your fps at 50 in game or nvcp(make sure it's working, if uncapped you'll get some mild stutter when your frames go beyond 100)...gsync OFF (yes off! bfi doesn't work with it enabled), vsync OFF in game/ON in nvcp ...monitor set to native at 100hz (keep in mind the lag goes up the lower your resolution and the lower your refresh rate, so ultimately you want 120fps(60fps without frame gen enabled) ....enjoy...for lots of games we should be able to dldsr the shit out of them! now it's an 8k card bro! lol
Why are people pursuing 4k for a computer monitor? 1440p with higher frame rates for PC gaming makes so much more sense.
To answer the question just ask yourself a question. Is the 7900 xtx a 4k card? If so then the 4080 definitely is.
Sound logic.
I have a 3080 ti from gigabyte, it bricked once and I RMAd, now its dying again. have to rma again, they will not refund the money unless it BREAKS THREE FREAKING TIMES. Im getting fed up and I need a card. I game at 4k on an OLED 120 gsync. Do you think spending the 1k+ on a 4080 is the best price? or do u think tweaking settings and going for a 4070 ti is the better bet? its saving like 400$
I Own A GTX1080TI OC And Only Play 60FPS At 4K SOOO Is This The GPU FOR ME?
Your Help Would Be Truly Appreciated Folkes....:)
The 4080 would be a massive upgrade for you yes.
@ErockOnDeck The Price is Astronomical My Friend. I will Gladly Buy A Console lol
@@karlwalker1771 Yes I thought you knew that. Sorry.
So in conclusion it runs most games fine in 4k as long as you have no Ray traced elements enabled
Even with my 3080 12GB I've been able to game 4k just fine, however, I am considering getting the 4080 Super just to get myself more in the 'sweet' spot for 4k. I'm fine with 60fps but I do get some performance hit with my 3080 and rely a lot on DLSS on some titles. I would like to push to 80 to 90fps as well if able.
I play Cyberpunk in 4K on a 1660 Super at 40 FPS, and the same with RDR2, up scaling off level of detail High anisotropy and ambient occlusion low because you don't need it in 4K and it looks and plays great. so yes a 4080 is a 4K gaming card. why is everyone going nuts about frame rates over 60 FPS. $200 vs $1,300 aprox pricing.
I have an LG C3 42 inch display with a 6950xt and I run everything at native 4K 120fps, of course not on "ultra" instead an optimized mix that looks great but without the diminishing returns killing your framerate. Gamers have to stop thinking if a card is "viable" because it can't max out a game at a certain resolution. A 2024 game on medium usually looks better than a 2018 game maxxed out. And native on lower graphics settings blows away any upscaling/frame gen
The major catch here is that the card is $1,200!!!!!!! For inconsistent 4k performance that is a MAJOR ask
Heck, I'm using, watching, editing, rendering & playing games at 4K on my 4070, so I sure as hell hope a 4080 is a 4K card. Gaming at 4K is gorgeous and crisp, and with a bit of DLSS 3, which hardly affects fidelity whatsoever, but provides far more FPS, gaming at 4K at over 100FPS is not an issue at all, and I love it! And am thankful, too, as this Aorus FO48U monitor wasn't cheap, either!!! >_< Graphics card & monitor alone = CAD$2,000. Ouch. I've never spent this much on computer components in my life, and it was a real struggle to make it happen. It just sucks that I had to pay CAD$800 for the 4070, when there are actually 3 other tiers above mine from NVIDIA alone, making my card mid-tier........ at 800 freaking dollars. Huge problem.
btw check Hardware Unboxed tests comparing the two dominant upscaling technologies - DLSS and FSR. The bottom line is that in maybe 80-90% of the cases the difference between DLSS Quality and native 4K are negligible at best. And in maybe 20% of the games DLSS Quality even looks better that native 4K (yes I was surprised too). So buying a 1200 $/Euro card and not using all its available features (DLSS and Frame generation) sound illogical to me. Yes 4090 is a faster card but WAY more expansive and not to mention power hungry. Here in EU the prices of electricity lately are bonkers so 150-200 watts extra are no small expense - especially if you multiply it throughout the years of use. That makes 4090 more expensive both upfront and during the ownership period. That is just unnecessary overkill for me IMHO
I understand completely. The longer I have a 40 series card, the more DLSS and Frame Generation grow on me. I’ve always been about native rendering and raw horse power. However, for better or worse, or like it or not, I’ve come to accept that Ray Tracing and upscaling technologies are here to stay. If you buy the product, you are paying for those features. So to not use it, is to waste your money in a sense.
Hey Erock, what casing are you using? looks cool.