NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Founders Edition

[Bwaze]

We have seen some gamers, influencers cheer unavailability and scalper prices during Crypto madness - it gave them much larger bragging rights, e-peen enlargement than being just a part of large group of gamers. But I'm sure Nvidia evaluated them as irrelevant - prices went up due to AI usage, not because a few people with more money than sense.

 

[lexluthermiester]

No, that's just logic...

No it's meritless, fanciful blatherskite. Comparing a 5090 to a Ferrari would only work if the 5090 was priced @$50,000. It's not. Most people who can afford a $500 GPU could easily afford a $2000 GPU if they saved money for a few months longer. Whereas anyone who can afford a $50,000 vehicle would NOT be able to afford a $5,000,000 Ferrari if they saved for a months longer.

If you're going to make statements that amount to mental twaddle, you can't be surprised when someone calls you out on your nonsense. Just stop. Perspective, context and merit count for a lot. Think before you type.

 

[x4it3n]

We have seen some gamers, influencers cheer unavailability and scalper prices during Crypto madness - it gave them much larger bragging rights, e-peen enlargement than being just a part of large group of gamers. But I'm sure Nvidia evaluated them as irrelevant - prices went up due to AI usage, not because a few people with more money than sense.

They didn't raise them because of Gamers only, but they saw that most people were willing to pay a lot more money than they originally thought. When they saw people spending $1200-1300 on a 3080 or $3000-4000 on a 3090 during the pandemic they definitely realized that they could definitely raise their margins. Look at the MSRP of the 3080 ($700) adm 4080 ($1200) that was a $500 increase! But they had to release the 4080 SUPER because nobody wanted to pay that price anymore but $1000 worked great even though it was still $300 higher than the 3080.

 

[Bwaze]

Where are all those buyers? Sure, crypto miners, but RTX 4090 for $2000 - you could go to local store with a shopping cart and buy them by the dozens, nobody was buying them. Cards are almost nonexistent in all stats like Valve's. Not worth even talking about.

 

[x4it3n]

No it's meritless, fanciful blatherskite. Comparing a 5090 to a Ferrari would only work if the 5090 was priced @$50,000. It's not.

I'm going to do like you and cut most of the post... $2,000 for a Gaming GPU is not something 99% of Gamers are going to do. Even buying a Tesla S Plaid at $120,000+ isn't something most people are gonna do either.
The 5090 even if a lot less expensive than that is considered like a Gaming Ferrari for Nvidia knowing that they said "the 5080 is already a High-End GPU and most people don't need more anyway" (that's their point of view, not gamers' POV). The 5090 is a GeForce/Gaming GPU and for most people (mostly outside the US where salaries are a lot lower) $2,000 is absolutely insane knowing that it's just 1 component of a PC and you cannot do anything without the other components.

Where are all those buyers? Sure, crypto miners, but RTX 4090 for $2000 - you could go to local store with a shopping cart and buy them by the dozens, nobody was buying them. Cards are almost nonexistent in all stats like Valve's. Not worth even talking about.

The 4090 actually sold really well, sure a lot of Pros also bought a 4090 for the 24GB VRAM but a lot of Gamers wanting 4K Gaming or very high fps went for it.
People do whatever they want with their money. Some people spend thousands and thousands of dollars on Pokémon cards...that's their problem.

 

[lexluthermiester]

$2,000 for a Gaming GPU is not something 99% of Gamers are going to do.

Whether or not they're going to do it is not the same as whether they can do it. $2000 is not beyond the ability of most people who game on PC can save over the space of a few months. Whether they will is up to the gamers in question. Most will go for something under $1000, but that's a personal preference. I'm someone who can easily afford a 4090 or 5090, but I'm still rockin my 3080.

Choice is not the same as ability.

 

[Bwaze]

Yeah, compared to some of my other hobbies, for instance photography, medieval re-enactment, even RTX 5090 is relatively affordable, and that's the most exclusive, priciest gaming card in existence?

Must seem like a peasant equipment to people that install $1.5 million black Pagani Zonda R as a room divider.

 

[x4it3n]

Whether or not they're going to do it is not the same as whether they can do it. $2000 is not beyond the ability of most people who game on PC can save over the space of a few months. Whether they will is up to the gamers in question. Most will go for something under $1000, but that's a personal preference. I'm someone who can easily afford a 4090 or 5090, but I'm still rockin my 3080.

Choice is not the same as ability.

I understand what you're trying to say, but most people are living paycheck to paycheck so buying a GPU $2000 (without Tax) is not really something that you're going to see very often... even though they can save a whole year or 2 years to buy one! But if you buy a 5090 then you better get a High-End CPU, RAM, PSU, SSD, Monitor, Case, etc. and that's not something most people can easily afford either (and I mean globally not just in the US).

Yeah, compared to some of my other hobbies, for instance photography, medieval re-enactment, even RTX 5090 is relatively affordable, and that's the most exclusive, priciest gaming card in existence?

Must seem like a peasant equipment to people that install $1.5 million black Pagani Zonda R as a room divider.



View attachment 382282

Well it's still a Gaming GPU... the PS5 Pro in comparison is $700 (3x cheaper) and is a whole system. You can't run it if you have no other components either lol. But yeah if people spend $1.5M on that thing, that's on them... My gf is an architect and there's no way we would ever buy that thing for our living room even if we were billionaires

 

[lexluthermiester]

I understand what you're trying to say, but most people are living paycheck to paycheck so buying a GPU $2000 (without Tax) is not really something that you're going to see very often...

I'm a retailer. I own a shop and know my clientele. Anyone who is in the market for a $400 to $500 GPU is someone who, if they wanted to, could save up for 4, 5 or 6 months and get a top shelf card. People living paycheck to paycheck aren't going to spend money on a next gen card anyway. They're going to buy a card that is a gen or two old, a 2080 or 3080 for example. But that's not most people. Most people have the ability to save if they want to. I see it every day.

even though they can save a whole year or 2 years to buy one! But if you buy a 5090 then you better get a High-End CPU, RAM, PSU, SSD, Monitor, Case, etc. and that's not something most people can easily afford either (and I mean globally not just in the US).

This is where the nitpicking begins. You're missing the fact that you missed your own point.

 

[x4it3n]

Haha, best at what? In the spam of electronic garbage of outdated, low-quality SMs at exorbitant prices?) With disproportionate power consumption? With zero generational improvement? It seems like it was just recently - Intel tried with RPL/R and literally burned out with these CPUs. Despite this, the 13900k/14000k got 5 stars and the editor's choice...

Back then they were the best Gaming CPUs... Also people forget but Intel used to sell us some 4c/8t CPUs for $350 every year with Skylake! And their EE (Extreme Edition) CPUs like QX6800 were sold $1000.

 

[10tothemin9volts]

Oh man, sad times are coming, eh. With fab process improvements slowing down, cards will get faster mainly via being bigger and consuming more power... Basically a 4090Ti.

I don't get why FE is "recommended".
[...]

But with 5090' 575W TDP I wonder how much further they can increase the power consumption. The 12V-2x6 (H++) is designed to deliver up to 600W so they would either need to develop a new connection (if they want to stay with a single connection) or they could use multiple. Guess then they can increase the TDP even further. I found the 450W of the 4090 already too much (well, the price also matters of course, but now I want 3GB VRAM modules for the 4090, then the 450W would be ok (I know the 4090 is replaced or not going to be produced/modified any further, what I mean is the VRAM per Watt TDP density and affordable price, aka up to 256-bit/384-bit chips with 3GB VRAM modules and/or clamshelled VRAM)), and/or clamshell VRAM design for consumer GPUs, so I can self-host big LLMs). My 4070 is set to 110W most of the time.

 

[mxthunder]

I want to see a 128 x 128 GB202 config with 16384 cuda cores go against the 4090 with same # of cores. want to see how they compete core for core and how much the increased memory bandwidth is helping.

 

[x4it3n]

I'm a retailer. I own a shop and know my clientele. Anyone who is in the market for a $400 to $500 GPU is someone who, if they wanted to, could save up for 4, 5 or 6 months and get a top shelf card. People living paycheck to paycheck aren't going to spend money on a next gen card anyway. They're going to buy a card that is a gen or two old, a 2080 or 3080 for example. But that's not most people. Most people have the ability to save if they want to. I see it every day.

This is where the nitpicking begins. You're missing the fact that you missed your own point.

Some people maybe can if they save severala months or maybe a year but like I said if it's for GAMING only that's 3x the price of a PS5 Pro... and that latter is a fully working system! If we were able to really use 3x PS5 Pro together (Performance, VRAM, Bandwidth, etc.) it would probably beat the 5090.
Nvidia know they can't price it at $7000 like a Quadro because otherwise almost nobody will buy one except Professionals (and they make money with it since it's their job).

My 4070 is set to 110W most of the time.

110W? Is that the minimum Power Target on your card? What kind of performance do you get with that? (If you're Gaming ofc).

I want to see a 128 x 128 GB202 config with 16384 cuda cores go against the 4090 with same # of cores. want to see how they compete core for core and how much the increased memory bandwidth is helping.

They could have released a 4090 Ti with a full AD102 die and a 512-bit but + GDDR7 and the performance would have been maybe 20-25% faster than the 4090 since the 4090 is definitely bandwidth starved (fyi I get a ~10% fps increase with a GDDR6X OC @ 25Gbps aka +19%). So 80% more bandwidth would have definitely filled 144SM.
Also Nvidia raised the L2 Cache to 96MB (vs 72SM on the 4090) aka +33%. 96MB was the full amount of AD102 whereas GB202 can have up to 128MB.

 

[mxthunder]

They could have released a 4090 Ti with a full AD102 die and a 512-bit but + GDDR7 and the performance would have been maybe 20% faster than the 4090 since the 4090 is definitely bandwidth starved.

They could have released a 4090Ti full AD102 die but would have still only been a 384bit card as far as I know AD102 was only plummed up to be 384 bit, 12 memory controllers x 32 bit.

 

[x4it3n]

They could have released a 4090Ti full AD102 die but would have still only been a 384bit card as far as I know AD102 was only plummed up to be 384 bit, 12 memory controllers x 32 bit.

So they made some changes to GB202 for that I guess. But yeah there's definitely a scaling issue with the 5090, it should be 50-60% faster if all those cores were being filled.