NVIDIA GeForce 4XX Series Discussion

Jaffakeik · Oct 14, 2009

willl 300 be better than 5xxx?

SNiiPE_DoGG · Oct 14, 2009

yes, it will be better but we dont know what dual GPU solutions will have and we also dont know what prices will do. I think we may very well see a < $300 5870 @ gt300 launch.

also gt300 aint comin soon

Binge · Oct 14, 2009

SNiiPE_DoGG said:
also gt300 aint comin soon

Yeah totally 2021. :rolleyes:

Animalpak · Oct 14, 2009

Binge said:
Yeah totally 2021.

Yup the nevercome GT3xx

Bjorn_Of_Iceland · Oct 15, 2009

not sure if its legit though.. because if thats the case, there is not much to look forward to in terms of performance.

GC_PaNzerFIN · Oct 15, 2009

Bjorn_Of_Iceland said:
not sure if its legit though.. because if thats the case, there is not much to look forward to in terms of performance.

Are you seriously saying 512 Cores, 384bit GDDR5, added internal cache and pretty much new architechture is not much in terms of performance?

troyrae360 · Oct 15, 2009

Arciks said:
willl 300 be better than 5xxx?

Know one knows, yet....

Nivida arn't really on the game at the moment, they dont even have a release date for it, no ones seen it(apart form an empty shell of a graphics card) by the time the are redy to release ATI may have released 5870x2 or 5890, they will be some pretty damn hefty cards to be compeating with.

qubit · Oct 15, 2009

troyrae360 said:
Know one knows, yet....

Nivida arn't really on the game at the moment, they dont even have a release date for it, no ones seen it(apart form an empty shell of a graphics card) by the time the are redy to release ATI may have released 5870x2 or 5890, they will be some pretty damn hefty cards to be compeating with.

And heck, will our CPUs be fast enough to max out the new generation of cards?!

Perhaps it'll take something like Crysis at 2560x1600 with maxed AA & AF to make them sweat? That's not a configuration that most of us have.

phanbuey · Oct 15, 2009

I have this mental image of AMD researchers hangin around the lab working to AC/DC's [I]Caught With Your Pants Down[/I] blaring in the background.

Binge · Oct 15, 2009

So guys... I've been going here, http://forum.beyond3d.com, a lot because these guys actually talk the tech. They are familiar with what these cards do and the differences of the architectures each company uses. Since the release of nVidia's Fermi White papers (yes there are many) these fine folks have been really getting into the gritty nits of what the chip is and isn't. In layman's here is what is mostly different from AMD's design plan.

The GF100, Fermi, chip uses a different kind of shader processor called a 'CUDA core'
The 'CUDA core' shader unit is much like their previous generation cores in that it is very programmable. This means that when people talk about specialized tessilators they are talking about the exact opposite of a 'CUDA core' which could be programmed to emulate functions which other GPU manufacturers would design specific hardware.
The GF100 is the first gpu since the start of DX9 gpus to have read and write access for L1 cache. Read and write access gives the 'CUDA cores' an edge over specialized hardware that has to send some data off chip and into GPU-mem before completing its task.
The ammount of cache available to the 'CUDA cores' is significantly larger than ATI's current generation of cards.
The number of program threads and how they are executed is handled by a new WARP schedueler. The specifics of the schedueler is not exactly clear at this time, but it does not use true multi-threading. ATI does not use true threads either, but Intel's Larabee will.
Because of how much of the GPU computing can be done on the card, with proper drivers, CPU bottlenecking can be decreased(mid rage systems) or eliminated(high end systems).
The existance of double precision computation, and ECC may affect performance for the mainstream enthusiasts in a negative way.
There is speculation that the GF100 does not actually use any memory on the GPU when in a mode where it would use ECC, but instead uses ECC modules in the PC's mainboard if installed.

That's what I've gathered, and I am still hoping for a 09 release.

Bjorn_Of_Iceland · Oct 15, 2009

Binge said:
...

Because of how much of the GPU computing can be done on the card, with proper drivers, CPU bottlenecking can be decreased(mid rage systems) or eliminated(high end systems).

This is what I was thinking also.. If used in the same way, it would very much perform on par with the GTX295.. but when utilized correctly on the app's code level, will pretty much outdo 295..

Binge · Oct 15, 2009

Bjorn_Of_Iceland said:
This is what I was thinking also.. If used in the same way, it would very much perform on par with the GTX295.. but when utilized correctly on the app's code level, will pretty much outdo 295..

Exactly, it seems like these cards will be as good as their drivers :toast:

mlee49 · Oct 19, 2009

Binge said:
So guys... I've been going here, http://forum.beyond3d.com, a lot because these guys actually talk the tech. They are familiar with what these cards do and the differences of the architectures each company uses. Since the release of nVidia's Fermi White papers (yes there are many) these fine folks have been really getting into the gritty nits of what the chip is and isn't. In layman's here is what is mostly different from AMD's design plan.

The GF100, Fermi, chip uses a different kind of shader processor called a 'CUDA core'

The 'CUDA core' shader unit is much like their previous generation cores in that it is very programmable. This means that when people talk about specialized tessilators they are talking about the exact opposite of a 'CUDA core' which could be programmed to emulate functions which other GPU manufacturers would design specific hardware.

The GF100 is the first gpu since the start of DX9 gpus to have read and write access for L1 cache. Read and write access gives the 'CUDA cores' an edge over specialized hardware that has to send some data off chip and into GPU-mem before completing its task.

The ammount of cache available to the 'CUDA cores' is significantly larger than ATI's current generation of cards.

The number of program threads and how they are executed is handled by a new WARP schedueler. The specifics of the schedueler is not exactly clear at this time, but it does not use true multi-threading. ATI does not use true threads either, but Intel's Larabee will.

Because of how much of the GPU computing can be done on the card, with proper drivers, CPU bottlenecking can be decreased(mid rage systems) or eliminated(high end systems).

The existance of double precision computation, and ECC may affect performance for the mainstream enthusiasts in a negative way.

There is speculation that the GF100 does not actually use any memory on the GPU when in a mode where it would use ECC, but instead uses ECC modules in the PC's mainboard if installed.

That's what I've gathered, and I am still hoping for a 09 release.

This needs to be added to post 1. Thanks binge for the investigation, work, and delivery.

I would like to know more about the 300 series, specifically details regarding the initial card line up(hopefully Nov/Dec 09).

Bo_Fox · Oct 19, 2009

Binge said:
So guys... I've been going here, http://forum.beyond3d.com, a lot because these guys actually talk the tech. They are familiar with what these cards do and the differences of the architectures each company uses. Since the release of nVidia's Fermi White papers (yes there are many) these fine folks have been really getting into the gritty nits of what the chip is and isn't. In layman's here is what is mostly different from AMD's design plan.

The GF100, Fermi, chip uses a different kind of shader processor called a 'CUDA core'

The 'CUDA core' shader unit is much like their previous generation cores in that it is very programmable. This means that when people talk about specialized tessilators they are talking about the exact opposite of a 'CUDA core' which could be programmed to emulate functions which other GPU manufacturers would design specific hardware.

The GF100 is the first gpu since the start of DX9 gpus to have read and write access for L1 cache. Read and write access gives the 'CUDA cores' an edge over specialized hardware that has to send some data off chip and into GPU-mem before completing its task.

The ammount of cache available to the 'CUDA cores' is significantly larger than ATI's current generation of cards.

The number of program threads and how they are executed is handled by a new WARP schedueler. The specifics of the schedueler is not exactly clear at this time, but it does not use true multi-threading. ATI does not use true threads either, but Intel's Larabee will.

Because of how much of the GPU computing can be done on the card, with proper drivers, CPU bottlenecking can be decreased(mid rage systems) or eliminated(high end systems).

The existance of double precision computation, and ECC may affect performance for the mainstream enthusiasts in a negative way.

There is speculation that the GF100 does not actually use any memory on the GPU when in a mode where it would use ECC, but instead uses ECC modules in the PC's mainboard if installed.

That's what I've gathered, and I am still hoping for a 09 release.

I would not expect the mere existence of double precision units to affect performance in a negative way. Some games might actually make good use of double precision buffers, given the flexibility of the units.

qubit · Oct 20, 2009

Fermi is reverse direction Fusion

More Fermi news, courtesy of Fudzilla once again.

qubit · Oct 21, 2009

AMD: Fermi a "Paper Dragon" & Nails nvidia with PP slide

Rather than beating it in a PowerPoint slide, wouldn't it be better to do it with real-world trusted benchmarks when the competition is on sale?

Fudzilla

erocker · Oct 21, 2009

That's why it's on Fudzilla and should be ignored. I forsee AMD releasing more slides stating more facts*

Speculative future AMD/ATi slide that doesn't exist yet said:
-Fermi will take your job
-Fermi is bad for the environment
-You will need to buy a separate PC case just for Fermi
-Fermi will give you swine flu
-Fermi hates you
-Fermi hates America
-Hitler chooses Fermi
-etc.

troyrae360 · Oct 21, 2009

erocker said:
I forsee AMD releasing more slides stating more facts*

I forsee Fermi being way overpriced and way too late! I also forsee AMD releasing a 5870x2 or 5890 (which will be an extreamley highpowered card) around the same time as Fermi is being released.

qubit · Oct 21, 2009

erocker said:
That's why it's on Fudzilla and should be ignored. I forsee AMD releasing more slides stating more facts*

Fudzilla is actually quoting two other sites, so it's not coming from Fudzilla. It wouldn't surprise me if AMD is spreading FUD to help further their own sales... sorta like nvidia and Intel and everyone else do. :laugh:

Benetanegia · Oct 21, 2009

Of course it's FUD :laugh:

. Specially the ones refering to performance. If we make similar slides about RV770 and GT200, the latter would look much worse than Fermi in comparison, but we all know how things really are, don't we? I would have liked that AMD had put their real FP efficiency on the slides and speculate about which one on Fermi. :rolleyes:

TBH I don't know for what they want those slides, I'd think that partners know very well the differences in architectures enough to know that Nvidia is focused on operation efficiency, while AMD is focused on area efficiency at the cost of operation efficiency (Curiously both obtaining around the same results in performance/die area. That's why I love GPUs so much.). So partners (customers) and various key people in the industry, know how useless those bold comparisons are. IMO comparing both like that is kinda lame on AMDs part, desperate if you ask me:

"I have 2.7 Tflops and they have only 1.5, wohoo! Let's just forget that the 622 GFlops* GTX280 is still faster than our 1.36 TFlops HD4890, not to mention the 708 Gflops* GTX285. That the 470 Gflops* GTS250 has a slight lead over our 1000 Gflop HD4850. Or that we need the 2 Tflop HD5850 in order to be slightly faster than the GTX285."

^^By last generation(s) comparisons we can say that Nvidia's shader efficiency is 2x that of AMD's. Peak figures never meant much anyway.

And don't make me change the HD4850 and HD4890 for the HD5750 and HD5770 (respectively) which have exactly the same Flops but are significantly slower.

* By now we know that G80/G92/GT200 couldn't really dual issue in any realistic scenario. Fermi lost the MUL, but it's not a big loss considering that it wasn't used for the most part (definately not in graphics). But AMD, based on speculation from white papers, apparently didn't mind:

1- Comparing dual issue with single issue.
2- On the comparison with previous generation they compare Fermi to GTX285, while at the same time boosting their number by comparing the HD5870 to the HD4870 instead of the HD4890, which has the same clock (GTX285 does have the same clocks as speculated Fermi clocks). Either the GTX280 or the HD4890 had to be used.

HD5870 vs HD4890 = 2x.
Fermi vs GTX285 = 2x single issue.
Fermi vs GTX280 = 1.6x dual issue, 2.4x single issue (not a comfortable number AMD?).
3- And finally they show a slide with different (INT MUL, INT ADD...) ops-per-clock figures, conveniently forgetting that Fermi shaders run almost twice as fast.

phanbuey · Oct 21, 2009

^^ I agree with all that... but there is a slight problem... where is this mythical unicorn we call gf100/gt300/ w/e..?

Binge · Oct 21, 2009

Nevermind about people on EVGA's community. They are liars and spread BS.

Confirmed as fake, read original post here: http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.asp?m=100973314&mpage=1&key=�

Also no idea where this other news is coming from, so consider it rumor:

NVIDIA representatives prefer to not speak about the announcement periods of first gaming video card with fermi architecture, but they recognize that with time this architecture will be extended on all price segments of the consumer market. According to the independent sources, in this year low-end product with fermi architecture will cost $299, and more accessible graphical solutions of this generation will appear in the following year.

Associate asserts that the more accessible representatives fermi card will appear in the first quarter, nearer to March month. Here we deal with graphical solutions, which cost less than $200.

Associate also report that the demand for video chip with fermi architecture from NVIDIA partner side is completely high.

Source: http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-10285-view-NVIDIA-fermi-card-expected-release-date.html

Benetanegia · Oct 21, 2009

phanbuey said:
^^ I agree with all that... but there is a slight problem... where is this mythical unicorn we call gf100/gt300/ w/e..?

The official word is still late November for the release, with availability in the end of Q4. There's no sense doubting that for the time being IMO. No info means they want to keep it secret as much as they can so that AMD has to finalize HD5890 (or whatever card) on their own and not based on being faster than any of Nvidia cards.

So IMO they will not show it until review time or until AMD shows what the HD5890 will be, if latter is going to be released this year. Nvidia still has to decide the final clocks, and probably want GTX380 to be faster than the supposed HD5890, while GTX360 is faster than HD5870 to repeat what happened the last two generations. AMD on the other hand is probably waiting until Nvidia reveals Fermi performance or final specs before they finish HD5890 specs. Right now Nvidia is on a very big advantage, because if Fermi has the same OCing headroom as any previous Nvidia chip (15-20% OC), Nvidia can play a lot with the place their cards will take on the stack. The same could have happened with GT200 if it released after HD4xxx. GT200 OC headroom was a 20% on stock cooling, while HD48xx was around 10%. If Nvidia had released GT200 after RV770 launch they could have decided to release the cards with a 10% higher clocks, making the GTX260 10% faster than HD4870 while having the same OC potential. The story would have been very different than it was. Remember that Ati hid the fact that RV770 had 800 SPs instead of the rumored 640 until the last minute and it's that what cought Nvidia off-ward.

Now, HD58xx doesn't overclock particularly well (not better than previous Ati generations), so if Fermi retains Nvidia's track record of OC potential*, that's a very powerful weapon they have, if they need it.

* And that's a very long time, since GF6800 days, always always around 20% OC headroom, something that IMO is not casual and is designed so that their partners can release 10% OC cards that still have a bit of OCing potential. That makes partners happy, because it's a marketing weapon they can use.

EDIT: I've made this chart for me and decided to share. It's all speculation, but I think it's very realistic.

My conclusions based on the chart:

1. Nvidia can relax their harvesting strategy from 2 clusters (GTX360) to 3 (GTX350) greatly improving yields and still be competitive with HD5870 and HD5850 (GTX320).

2. That's assuming that Nvidia Fermi architecture suffers the same efficiency hit as Hd5xxx cards. Based on past generations (G92-to-GT200), Nvidia managed to "double" performance to same degree that AMD did, but while AMD used 2.5x the number of SPs (and TMUs), Nvidia did only 1.87x the SPs and 1.5x the TMUs. HD5870 with twice the units only manages a 40-50% improvement over the equally clocked HD4890 so the efficiency is ~75%. Now we are talking about a 2.16x increase in SPs for Fermi, add to that a possible higher efficiency of... let's say 80-90% (less than G92/GT200) and we would have a much much faster architecture.

3. That's assuming 1.5 Ghz SPs on all cards, which IMHO is a little bit conservative. Especially smaller cards shouldn't have a problem reaching 1.6-1.8 Ghz on 40nm. I'd expect the same kind of improvement in clocks as AMD when moving to 40nm. If we compare HD5870 to HD4870 and assume that they have a 1000 Mhz HD5890 up their sleeves that's a 15% jump. GTX285 shaders run at ~1500 and that could mean that Nvidia could reach 1725 easily.

mlee49 · Oct 21, 2009

Great discussion here guys. I'm very impressed with the research and updating you guys are providing. Thanks!

Is it to early to speculate the 300 series lineup? ie 360/380/395? Any guesses on detailed specs?

Binge · Oct 21, 2009

mlee49 said:
Great discussion here guys. I'm very impressed with the research and updating you guys are providing. Thanks!

Is it to early to speculate the 300 series lineup? ie 360/380/395? Any guesses on detailed specs?

Not that it's too early, but nV isn't giving us any good info. The GF100 wiki has a lot of spec speculations :toast:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Nvidia_graphics_processing_units#GeForce_300_Series

System Name	Jaffakeik
Processor	I9 12900K
Motherboard	MSI Pro B660M-A WIFI DDR4
Cooling	Arctic Liquid Freezer II High Performance CPU Water cooler- 240mm
Memory	Corsair Vengeance LPX Black 32GB (2x16GB) 3600
Video Card(s)	7900XTX gigabyte OC edition
Storage	WD Black SN770 1TB SSD M.2 2280 NVME x2
Display(s)	TV LG C2
Case	Phanteks Enthoo Pro 2 Full Tower Case Tempered
Audio Device(s)	Mother board + Sennhiser HD650+ Elgato wave xlr + shure SM7B
Power Supply	EVGA 1600w G+
Mouse	Glorious Model 0
Keyboard	Corsair RBG mini K65 + Steelseries Apex150
Software	Windows 11
Benchmark Scores	over 9000

System Name	Flow
Processor	AMD Phenom II 955 BE
Motherboard	MSI 790fx GD70
Cooling	Water
Memory	8gb Crucial Ballistix Tracer Blue ddr3 1600 c8
Video Card(s)	2 x XFX 6850 - Yet to go under water.
Storage	Corsair s128
Display(s)	HP 24" 1920x1200
Case	Custom Lian-Li V2110b
Audio Device(s)	Auzentech X-Fi Forte 7.1
Power Supply	Corsair 850HX

System Name	Molly
Processor	i5 3570K
Motherboard	Z77 ASRock
Cooling	CooliT Eco
Memory	2x4GB Mushkin Redline Ridgebacks
Video Card(s)	Gigabyte GTX 680
Case	Coolermaster CM690 II Advanced
Power Supply	Corsair HX-1000

Processor	i9 9900KS ( 5 Ghz all the time )
Motherboard	Asus Maximus XI Hero Z390
Cooling	EK Velocity + EK D5 pump + Alphacool full copper silver 360mm radiator
Memory	16GB Corsair Dominator GT ROG Edition 3333 Mhz
Video Card(s)	ASUS TUF RTX 3080 Ti 12GB OC
Storage	M.2 Samsung NVMe 970 Evo Plus 250 GB + 1TB 970 Evo Plus
Display(s)	Asus PG279 IPS 1440p 165Hz G-sync
Case	Cooler Master H500
Power Supply	Asus ROG Thor 850W
Mouse	Razer Deathadder Chroma
Keyboard	Rapoo
Software	Win 10 64 Bit

System Name	Thakk
Processor	9800X3D
Motherboard	MSI B650M Gaming Wifi
Cooling	Id Cooling A410 + P12 Max 3300 RPM
Memory	32GB DDR5 6000 C30
Video Card(s)	Zotac RTX3080 Trinity
Storage	Crucial NVME 512 / Intel 250GB SSD / Samsung Pro 512 SSD / SanDIsk 1TB SSD / WD Black 6TB
Display(s)	Acer Predator X34 100hz IPS Gsync
Case	Generic mATX
Audio Device(s)	Hyper X 7.1 USB Soundcard
Power Supply	Corsair CV750 Bronze
Mouse	Logitech G304
Keyboard	Monsgeek MG75S Hall Effect + XDA Keycaps + Holee Mod
VR HMD	HTC Vive
Software	Windows
Benchmark Scores	https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/123890762?

System Name	RGB-PC v2.0
Processor	AMD Ryzen 7950X
Motherboard	Asus Crosshair X670E Extreme
Cooling	Corsair iCUE H150i RGB PRO XT
Memory	4x16GB DDR5-5200 CL36 G.SKILL Trident Z5 NEO RGB
Video Card(s)	Asus Strix RTX 2080 Ti
Storage	2x2TB Samsung 980 PRO
Display(s)	Acer Nitro XV273K 27" 4K 120Hz (G-SYNC compatible)
Case	Lian Li O11 Dynamic EVO
Audio Device(s)	Audioquest Dragon Red + Sennheiser HD 650
Power Supply	Asus Thor II 1000W + Cablemod ModMesh Pro sleeved cables
Mouse	Logitech G500s
Keyboard	Corsair K70 RGB with low profile red cherrys
Software	Windows 11 Pro 64-bit

System Name	My Computer!
Processor	AMD 6400+ Black @ 3.5
Motherboard	Gigabyte AM2+ GA-MA790X DS4
Cooling	Gigabyte G-Power 2 pro
Memory	2x2 gig Adata 800
Video Card(s)	HD3870x2 @ 900gpu and 999mem
Storage	2x wd raid edition 120gig + 1 samsung 320 + samsung 250
Display(s)	Samsung 40inch series6 full HD 1080p
Case	NZXT Lexa
Audio Device(s)	ALC889A HD audio with Enables a Superior Audio Experience (on board)
Power Supply	Vantec ION2+ 550w
Software	Vista Home pream 64

System Name	Quantumville™
Processor	Intel Core i7-2700K @ 4GHz
Motherboard	Asus P8Z68-V PRO/GEN3
Cooling	Noctua NH-D14
Memory	16GB (2 x 8GB Corsair Vengeance Black DDR3 PC3-12800 C9 1600MHz)
Video Card(s)	MSI RTX 2080 SUPER Gaming X Trio
Storage	Samsung 850 Pro 256GB \| WD Black 4TB \| WD Blue 6TB
Display(s)	ASUS ROG Strix XG27UQR (4K, 144Hz, G-SYNC compatible) \| Asus MG28UQ (4K, 60Hz, FreeSync compatible)
Case	Cooler Master HAF 922
Audio Device(s)	Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Fatal1ty PCIe
Power Supply	Corsair AX1600i
Mouse	Microsoft Intellimouse Pro - Black Shadow
Keyboard	Yes
Software	Windows 10 Pro 64-bit

System Name	Arrow in the Knee
Processor	265KF -50mv, 32 NGU 34 D2D 40 ring
Motherboard	ASUS PRIME Z890-M
Cooling	Thermalright Phantom Spirit EVO (Intake)
Memory	64GB DDR5 7200 CL34-44-44-44-88 TREFI 65535
Video Card(s)	RTX 4090 FE
Storage	2TB WD SN850, 4TB WD SN850X
Display(s)	Alienware 32" 4k 240hz OLED
Case	Jonsbo Z20
Audio Device(s)	Yes
Power Supply	Corsair SF750
Mouse	DeathadderV2 X Hyperspeed
Keyboard	Aula F75 cream switches
Software	Windows 11
Benchmark Scores	They're pretty good, nothing crazy.

System Name	The Dove Box Rev 5.0
Processor	9800x3D
Motherboard	Asus 870E STRIX
Cooling	Custom Water
Memory	32 GB 6400 MTs
Video Card(s)	Asus 3080 TUF
Storage	2TB Crucial T705
Display(s)	32" LG 1440p 180hz
Case	Lian Li O11 Dynamic
Audio Device(s)	ON BOARD FTW
Power Supply	Corsair 1000W
Mouse	Corsair something
Keyboard	Steelseries
Software	Win 10 64x

System Name	Flame Vortec Fatal1ty (rig1), UV Tourmaline Confexia (rig2)
Processor	2 x Core i7's 4+Gigahertzzies
Motherboard	BL00DR4G3 and DFI UT-X58 T3eH8
Cooling	Thermalright IFX-14 (better than TRUE) 2x push-push, Customized TT Big Typhoon
Memory	6GB OCZ DDR3-1600 CAS7-7-7-1T, 6GB for 2nd rig
Video Card(s)	8800GTX for "free" S3D (mtbs3d.com), 4870 1GB, HDTV Wonder (DRM-free)
Storage	WD RE3 1TB, Caviar Black 1TB 7.2k, 500GB 7.2k, Raptor X 10k
Display(s)	Sony GDM-FW900 24" CRT oc'ed to 2560x1600@68Hz, Dell 2405FPW 24" PVA (HDCP-free)
Case	custom gutted-out painted black case, silver UV case, lots of aesthetics-souped stuff
Audio Device(s)	Sonar X-Fi MB, Bernstein audio riser.. what??
Power Supply	OCZ Fatal1ty 700W, Iceberg 680W, Fortron Booster X3 300W for GPU
Software	2 partitions WinXP-32 on 2 drives per rig, 2 of Vista64 on 2 drives per rig
Benchmark Scores	5.9 Vista Experience Index... yay!!! What??? :)

Processor	AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Motherboard	ASUS TUF x670e-Plus Wifi
Cooling	EK AIO 360. Phantek T30 fans.
Memory	64GB G.Skill 6000Mhz
Video Card(s)	Asus RTX 4090
Storage	WD/Samsung m.2's
Display(s)	LG C2 Evo OLED 42"
Case	Fractal Design North
Audio Device(s)	Topping E70 DAC, SMSL SP200 Amp, Adam Audio T5V's, Hifiman Sundara's.
Power Supply	FSP Hydro Ti PRO 1000W
Mouse	Razer Basilisk V3 Pro
Keyboard	Epomaker 84 key
Software	Windows 11 Pro

NVIDIA GeForce 4XX Series Discussion

Overclocking Surrealism

New Member

Overclocked quantum bit

Overclocking Surrealism

Overclocking Surrealism

New Member

Overclocked quantum bit

Overclocked quantum bit

*

New Member

Overclocked quantum bit

New Member

Overclocking Surrealism

New Member

Overclocking Surrealism