# EVGA GeForce RTX 3080 FTW3 Ultra



## W1zzard (Oct 16, 2020)

The EVGA RTX 3080 FTW3 Ultra is extremely impressive. It is the fastest RTX 3080 we've reviewed so far, thanks to a massively increased power limit. The new iCX cooler works well, reaching amazing noise levels that are better than most other RTX 3080 cards, and fan-stop is included, too.

*Show full review*


----------



## QUANTUMPHYSICS (Oct 16, 2020)

This was the card I ended up getting on launch day.

I've been anxiously awaiting Techpowerup to write up about it. 

I was off-put when trying to connect it to my EVGA 850W PSU until I realized they purposefully designed it without the new 12 pin adapter and just let you run dual 8 pin cables to it. That actually made installing it a cinch. 

Thus far, no issues - I'm loving it. Waiting for my3090FE to come in the mail.


----------



## Cheeseball (Oct 16, 2020)

QUANTUMPHYSICS said:


> This was the card I ended up getting on launch day.
> 
> I've been anxiously awaiting Techpowerup to write up about it.
> 
> ...



What you have is slightly different: XC3 Ultra

Two-slot board and not oversized with light RGB. Not sure if you have the dual-BIOS functionality and extra fan/RGB headers though.

Its still a great card and good alternative to the FTW3 ULTRA at US $810.00.


----------



## Darktalon (Oct 16, 2020)

You really wasted everyone's time in this review in the overclocking section, where you decided to keep the limit at 380w. How can you say with a straight face that, "Overclocking results listed in this section are achieved with the default fan, power, and voltage settings as defined in the VGA BIOS. We choose this approach as it is the most realistic scenario for most users." 

If someone actually decides to overclock their GPU the first thing they will do is increase the power and temp slider all the way to to the right. So I argue that your approach is the least realistic scenario for most users who would overlock.


----------



## ddarko (Oct 16, 2020)

The benchmark comparison charts include a generic and unnamed "RTX 3090 24GB" card.  I assume this is actually the Zotac RTX 3090 Trinity since the numbers match and the Zotac has the same core/boost/memory clock as the 3090 FE?  And can the "RTX 3090 24GB" results be added to the overclocked 3090 card reviews?  I know it's probably a lot of work but it would be useful to have the reference 3090 numbers in the 3090 overclocked card reviews instead of only the 3080 numbers.


----------



## P4-630 (Oct 16, 2020)

Still waiting for the 3080 Asus ROG Strix OC review....


----------



## Jawz (Oct 16, 2020)

Darktalon said:


> You really wasted everyone's time in this review in the overclocking section, where you decided to keep the limit at 380w. How can you say with a straight face that, "Overclocking results listed in this section are achieved with the default fan, power, and voltage settings as defined in the VGA BIOS. We choose this approach as it is the most realistic scenario for most users."
> 
> If someone actually decides to overclock their GPU the first thing they will do is increase the power and temp slider all the way to to the right. So I argue that your approach is the least realistic scenario for most users who would overlock.


I recently discovered this myself when reading the 3080 x trio review. Glad I'm not the only one who is puzzled by this method of overclocking... Especially with how these cards appear to be so power limited.


----------



## 5150Joker (Oct 17, 2020)

Darktalon said:


> You really wasted everyone's time in this review in the overclocking section, where you decided to keep the limit at 380w. How can you say with a straight face that, "Overclocking results listed in this section are achieved with the default fan, power, and voltage settings as defined in the VGA BIOS. We choose this approach as it is the most realistic scenario for most users."
> 
> If someone actually decides to overclock their GPU the first thing they will do is increase the power and temp slider all the way to to the right. So I argue that your approach is the least realistic scenario for most users who would overlock.



Yeah I really have to wonder who he thinks his audience is? Especially for a card like this that is designed for user overclocking. Also it's time to get rid of some of the games in the benchmark tests like Anno.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Oct 17, 2020)

Where can you buy this card from???


----------



## Caring1 (Oct 17, 2020)

QUANTUMPHYSICS said:


> This was the card I ended up getting on launch day.
> 
> ..... Waiting for my3090FE to come in the mail.


Humble brag.
Congrats on being able to afford both, so how's life with no kidneys workin out for you?


----------



## Cheeseball (Oct 17, 2020)

Prima.Vera said:


> Where can you buy this card from???



I ordered mine from EVGA.com in that queue system thing they set up less than two weeks ago. I got a secure e-mail saying I can make the purchase and pushed on through. $809.99 + state tax.


----------



## okbuddy (Oct 17, 2020)

how come 3090 only 4% better


----------



## zbig (Oct 17, 2020)

Awesome article dude, lots of good data condensed in one place.  I especially like seeing average fps at various resolutions across all the tested games compared between so many cards. The performance per watt and dollar is nice to see too.  After much obsessive F5ing was able to get one of these on newegg on like 9/25 or something. Obviously reading reviews is something one should do before buying a card rather than after but I like seeing how things stack up now that the smoke is just starting to clear on this launch.


----------



## owen10578 (Oct 17, 2020)

I believe it has a third memory VRM phase on the top right side where I boxed in orange.


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 17, 2020)

Darktalon said:


> You really wasted everyone's time in this review in the overclocking section, where you decided to keep the limit at 380w. How can you say with a straight face that, "Overclocking results listed in this section are achieved with the default fan, power, and voltage settings as defined in the VGA BIOS. We choose this approach as it is the most realistic scenario for most users."
> 
> If someone actually decides to overclock their GPU the first thing they will do is increase the power and temp slider all the way to to the right. So I argue that your approach is the least realistic scenario for most users who would overlock.





Jawz said:


> I recently discovered this myself when reading the 3080 x trio review. Glad I'm not the only one who is puzzled by this method of overclocking... Especially with how these cards appear to be so power limited.



The idea to test at stock settings is so that manufacturer cannot hide the good stuff behind second BIOS / manual adjustment / software required to activate. I still believe the vast majority of users will use the card at near stock levels. What do you propose?



owen10578 said:


> I believe it has a third memory VRM phase on the top right side where I boxed in orange.


You are right of course. lol I kept searching for the third memory phase and kept missing it t.t


----------



## owen10578 (Oct 17, 2020)

W1zzard said:


> The idea to test at stock settings is so that manufacturer cannot hide the good stuff behind second BIOS / manual adjustment / software required to activate. I still believe the vast majority of users will use the card at near stock levels. What do you propose?
> 
> 
> You are right of course. lol I kept searching for the third memory phase and kept missing it t.t



Ha now that I see the other users comments I too wish you'd test the overclocking section with the power and temp limit maxed out as that's what anyone who overclocks these new power limited cards will do.


----------



## kiriakost (Oct 17, 2020)

owen10578 said:


> I too wish you'd test the overclocking section with the power and temp limit maxed out as that's what anyone who overclocks these new power limited cards will do.



*I am just checking my sanity. *
And why some one to do that when he has the fastest GPU all ready ?  With whom you will compete with?  AMD


----------



## lepudruk (Oct 17, 2020)

I see that EVGA recommends at least 750W PSU for this card. At the same time ASUS is recommending 850W PSU for their Strix card. Hm.. I wonder, is 850W really needed for common, non-oc use? I plan on switching to Corsair RMx750 - will it work with EVGA RTX 3080 FTW?


----------



## bubbleawsome (Oct 17, 2020)

lepudruk said:


> I see that EVGA recommends at least 750W PSU for this card. At the same time ASUS is recommending 850W PSU for their Strix card. Hm.. I wonder, is 850W really needed for common, non-oc use? I plan on switching to Corsair RMx750 - will it work with EVGA RTX 3080 FTW?


At stock settings with a reasonable CPU? 750w is probably fine. With the 450w BIOS and a high-end OC'd CPU? I'd go 850w honestly.


----------



## lepudruk (Oct 17, 2020)

bubbleawsome said:


> At stock settings with a reasonable CPU? 750w is probably fine. With the 450w BIOS and a high-end OC'd CPU? I'd go 850w honestly.


Default BIOS on GPU, 8700k @ 5GHz OC.


----------



## Darktalon (Oct 17, 2020)

W1zzard said:


> The idea to test at stock settings is so that manufacturer cannot hide the good stuff behind second BIOS / manual adjustment / software required to activate. I still believe the vast majority of users will use the card at near stock levels. What do you propose?


This is a card $110 higher than MSRP of the FE. You must ask, why would someone pay the additional money? Who is the user of THIS specific card? Why would someone pay for a larger cooler and a third power pin?

The "vast majority" of people paying $810 for a GPU, will be doing so in order to overclock it, and I do not for a second believe that there is one person out there that would overclock a FTW3 without sliding the power slider to the right, without being willfully ignorant. 

Your definition of "manual adjustment / software", already rules out overclocking entirely, so why do you even include it as a section? Why is it ok for you to adjust the core and memory sliders, but to ignore the other 3? 

I didn't even bring up the fact that there is now another bios released officially by EVGA to raise the max wattage to 450w. That was released within the last few days, and I think it is reasonable to believe that bios flashing will actually be a more niche usage case of the card, but it would still be nice to have coverage of it. But I would happily concede any of that coverage, if the card was actually pushed to its limits. How about educating your readers about the fact that EVGA told potential buyers that it would ship with a 420w power limit, yet it only shipped with a 400w power limit?

Whether the user eventually decides to undervolt the card, or use it at stock, is irrelevant to an overclocking section. I disagree with the entire philosophy that someone would mess around with core and memory clocks, without touching power, voltage, temperature, or fans.


----------



## jaggerwild (Oct 17, 2020)

lepudruk said:


> Default BIOS on GPU, 8700k @ 5GHz OC.



 Your Buying a $900 dollar card, but you worry about weather or not the PSU is good enough?


----------



## Noztra (Oct 17, 2020)

How can a 450W BIOS be a plus? TPU always Seem to hammer AMD for their powerusage. When its NVIDIA its fine. I see there is some double standards going on here a TPU.


----------



## Jawz (Oct 17, 2020)

W1zzard said:


> What do you propose?


I’d propose testing a cards overclocking potential with power limit and temp limit sliders maxed. 

Regarding manual adjustment / software required to activate, you already need software like Afterburner or Precision to overclock it. But I would agree with you on this one and bet most people don’t bother with extra software, like that Gaming App that MSI had with the 10 series. 

Manufacturers putting out extra BIOSes becomes tricky. Part of me would want to see them tested separately so long as they were publicly released. However, I realize this would just create even more work while testing/reviewing. 

Just my opinion. Not sure if a poll would be in order, or if people even care enough about this. I just find it a bit strange that someone would try to increase core and mem clocks without at least increasing the power limit. Especially as a reviewer evaluating a cards potential performance headroom.


----------



## Gan77 (Oct 17, 2020)

I don't like card mofsets. Alpha & Omega AOZ5311NQI. The worst performance I've ever seen.


----------



## EarthDog (Oct 17, 2020)

Jawz said:


> I’d propose testing a cards overclocking potential with power limit and temp limit sliders maxed.
> 
> Regarding manual adjustment / software required to activate, you already need software like Afterburner or Precision to overclock it. But I would agree with you on this one and bet most people don’t bother with extra software, like that Gaming App that MSI had with the 10 series.
> 
> ...


agreed. Would love to see these in wild. I didnt know overclocking was with stock power limits... yikes. Crank those up and go!!! 



Noztra said:


> How can a 450W BIOS be a plus? TPU always Seem to hammer AMD for their powerusage. When its NVIDIA its fine. I see there is some double standards going on here a TPU.


For reviews this is easily one of the best sites for gpus and least bias. You're absolutely 100% off the mark (I'm being kind).


----------



## lepudruk (Oct 17, 2020)

jaggerwild said:


> Your Buying a $900 dollar card, but you worry about weather or not the PSU is good enough?


I always follow manufacture recommendations but it doesn't mean I can't question if they are within reason ;-)


----------



## ThrashZone (Oct 17, 2020)

Hi,
EVGA should be shot for using those nasty thermal pads.

Just noticed there are two memory chips missing lol 12gb version might be a super duper.


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 17, 2020)

5150Joker said:


> who he thinks his audience is?


Looking at my traffic stats, pretty much everyone who is buying any graphics card and decides to google for info. By that standard my reviews are way too technical.



Jawz said:


> I’d propose testing a cards overclocking potential with power limit and temp limit sliders maxed.





Darktalon said:


> keep the limit at 380w





5150Joker said:


> designed for user overclocking





owen10578 said:


> I too wish you'd test the overclocking section with the power and temp limit maxed out





Darktalon said:


> will be doing so in order to overclock it


Done, added data for 400 W (maxxed out default BIOS) and 450 W (maxxed out 450W beta BIOS). Differences are surprisingly small.

Nope, not CPU limited, 3090 OC gets 293 FPS in the exact same test


----------



## Zmon (Oct 17, 2020)

Wonder if it would be beneficial at all to stick a few thermal pads on the back of the card where the memory chips and VRMs are. Seems like a few other manufacturers are doing that for their 3080s (Asus Strix/TUF, MSI, etc) yet EVGA didn't.


----------



## ThrashZone (Oct 17, 2020)

Zmon said:


> Wonder if it would be beneficial at all to stick a few thermal pads on the back of the card where the memory chips and VRMs are. Seems like a few other manufacturers are doing that for their 3080s (Asus Strix/TUF, MSI, etc) yet EVGA didn't.


Hi,
Good evga double stick thermal pads suck.


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 17, 2020)

Zmon said:


> Wonder if it would be beneficial at all to stick a few thermal pads on the back of the card where the memory chips and VRMs are


You'll gain a few degrees C, like 1-3, not a big deal, but not nothing. I just measured the gap for someone on Reddit, it's 2.8 mm, so 3 mm thermal pads should be great


----------



## rtwjunkie (Oct 17, 2020)

QUANTUMPHYSICS said:


> This was the card I ended up getting on launch day.
> 
> I've been anxiously awaiting Techpowerup to write up about it.
> 
> ...


I actually prefer your XC to the FTW3. Major selling points are 2-slot design and only 2 8-pin plugs.


----------



## goodeedidid (Oct 17, 2020)

QUANTUMPHYSICS said:


> This was the card I ended up getting on launch day.
> 
> I've been anxiously awaiting Techpowerup to write up about it.
> 
> ...


3090FE is such a bad value for the money, not worth it.


----------



## Count Shagula (Oct 18, 2020)

W1zzard said:


> Done, added data for 400 W (maxxed out default BIOS) and 450 W (maxxed out 450W beta BIOS). Differences are surprisingly small.
> 
> Nope, not CPU limited, 3090 OC gets 293 FPS in the exact same test



Thankyou for doing this!
I'm waiting on one of these in the mail and your review confirmed I picked the right card. I'm putting it on water as soon as there's a block for this model and was curious what would happen when using the higher wattage bios. Cheers!


----------



## basco (Oct 18, 2020)

thx for the review!
even dual gpu monsters like amd 6990 did not use so much power.
overclocking is dead with this plus of power consumption versus clocks to gain.

could ya give us a hint plz how much power furmark would put out with the 450watt PL ? my guess near 600watt?


----------



## Darktalon (Oct 18, 2020)

basco said:


> my guess near 600watt?


no, the max possible draw from 3x 8 pins and the PCIE is 525 watts.


----------



## basco (Oct 18, 2020)

yeah that was dumb from me-thx dark


----------



## Amite (Oct 19, 2020)

So over waiting on Nvidia - Just going to wait on AMD


----------



## owen10578 (Oct 19, 2020)

W1zzard said:


> Looking at my traffic stats, pretty much everyone who is buying any graphics card and decides to google for info. By that standard my reviews are way too technical.
> 
> Done, added data for 400 W (maxxed out default BIOS) and 450 W (maxxed out 450W beta BIOS). Differences are surprisingly small.



Well I happen to like your reviews being really technical haha! Appreciate all the hard work, thanks for updating it. Its a small difference but now we can see the absolute max the card can do, so I think in the future just testing with the max power limit only is enough.



Darktalon said:


> no, the max possible draw from 3x 8 pins and the PCIE is 525 watts.



That's not true that's just the official PCIe spec the card itself is only limited by what is in the BIOS.


----------



## bubbleawsome (Oct 19, 2020)

owen10578 said:


> That's not true that's just the official PCIe spec the card itself is only limited by what is in the BIOS.


Which will never ever exceed 525w


----------



## tepusal (Oct 19, 2020)

@W1zzard Thank you for adding the new data points for higher power limits. Pretty much all reviews of 3080 stated that overclocking is heavily limited by the BIOS power limit. The expectation was that with the 450 Watt power limit on this particular card, overclocking headroom would improve and noticeably better performance will be achieved. However, looking at the new data points you have added, it seems there is very minor difference in performance between the different power limits both in terms of overclockability and actual performance achieved with said overclock. Temperature does not seem to be an issue here; why is it that overclocking performance hardly improves with higher power limits, then, when the card is neither hitting the power limit nor the temperature limit?


----------



## bubbleawsome (Oct 20, 2020)

tepusal said:


> @W1zzard Thank you for adding the new data points for higher power limits. Pretty much all reviews of 3080 stated that overclocking is heavily limited by the BIOS power limit. The expectation was that with the 450 Watt power limit on this particular card, overclocking headroom would improve and noticeably better performance will be achieved. However, looking at the new data points you have added, it seems there is very minor difference in performance between the different power limits both in terms of overclockability and actual performance achieved with said overclock. Temperature does not seem to be an issue here; why is it that overclocking performance hardly improves with higher power limits, then, when the card is neither hitting the power limit nor the temperature limit?


The silicon itself is maxing out now.


----------



## W1zzard (Oct 20, 2020)

tepusal said:


> overclocking headroom would improve and noticeably better performance will be achieved


Looking at the data, I think that is the case. People just had unrealistic expectations. You're getting +50 MHz, +2% performance, taking you even closer to RTX 3090 stock perf. At some point you're simply maxing out the chip, like @bubbleawsome says


----------



## Prima.Vera (Oct 20, 2020)

Cheeseball said:


> I ordered mine from EVGA.com in that queue system thing they set up less than two weeks ago. I got a secure e-mail saying I can make the purchase and pushed on through. $809.99 + state tax.


Thank you. Are they shipping outside US, like Japan?


----------



## Cheeseball (Oct 20, 2020)

Prima.Vera said:


> Thank you. Are they shipping outside US, like Japan?



Just checked. It looks like purchases made on EVGA.com only ship to US, Canada, Mexico and Puerto Rico.  Sorry dude. Their official distributor list shows JD.com for those living in Asia-Pacific.


----------



## mta (Oct 25, 2020)

I am surprised the review does not draw more parallels to the MSI card - based on the review, the EVGA FTW3 Ultra performs almost identically to it (virtually the same FPS averages on both 1440p and 4k), slightly hotter idle temps (+4C), slightly cooler load temps (-3C), slightly quieter load noise (-1 dBA), but higher power limits (+40W stock, +100W max?) and +$50 more expensive to buy.


----------



## Deleted member 203344 (Oct 27, 2020)

I personally dont believe there isnt more headroom left in Ampere ... Nvidia have a history of crippling performance when there is serious doubt at what their competitors are doing .. call it an obsession to keep the No. 1 title ... let me explain.
Many years back when they were at risk, Nvidia with their then current Geforce 2 cards released Detonator Drivers that improved actual performance by 20 to 40 percent ... yes you read that right.
Some of you are puzzled as to why Ampere wont go further even when power and thermals arent maxed. I personally would not be surprised if Nvidia does release a new driver to counter Radeon 6000 if they feel their dominance threatened .. citing some bullshit that they found an underlying power bug that was holding back performance ... after all it wouldnt be the first time Nvidia has done that exact same thing in the past ... fanciful thinking ? ... perhaps.
We will know soon enough whether history repeats itself.


----------



## tomfuegue (Nov 4, 2020)

Hi from Spain, I would like very much that you include the *weigh*t in the next graphic cards reviews, it would be something welcome.


----------



## Liamtran29 (Nov 5, 2020)

Best card I ever own ! Upgraded from 2080 Ti FTW3 Ultra
It runs every games max settings in 4K
Temp stays ~73”C
Specs : 10900K overclocked 5.2Hz
              Asus strix Z490E
              64gb Ram


----------



## JustAnEngineer (Nov 6, 2020)

I received mine on Tuesday.  It's remarkably quiet at full load, considering how much heat it's putting out.


----------



## Deleted member 193596 (Dec 16, 2020)

the got rid of the clown lips and red RTX text on the card.


----------



## bubbleawsome (Dec 16, 2020)

Yep, just grabbed one today and it's blacked out.


----------

