NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Super Founders Edition

[W1zzard]

NVIDIA's new GeForce RTX 4080 Super introduces a noteworthy $200 price reduction compared to the non-Super 4080, placing significant pricing pressure on AMD's RX 7900 XTX. Despite this, the performance gains vs RTX 4080 non-Super are only marginal, we expected more.

Show full review

 

[3valatzy]

Average framerate and relative performance is the same. Why warrant the "Super" tag?
Vote with your wallets. Maybe if the stock remains untouched on the shelves, they will discount it more.

Meh!

 

[JIWIL]

Must be NVIDIA's way to make me feel less guilty for buying a 4080 more than a year ago.

 

[rv8000]

Oof, tad surprising it’s still overall slower on average in pure raster than a 7900XTX.

 

[gridracedriver]

It will cost less on paper, but it's funny so like this
They even had them reviewed, they made a better impression by not doing the Super but directly discounting those on the market

 

[Onasi]

So it, ironically, turned out that the cheapest of the three Supers also is the biggest update overall. Good for the 4070S.
As far as the AIB models are concerned, I do find it funny how Asus has the audacity to ask 150 more for a Strix that has a cooler not really any better than the TUF. Cute.

 

[wolf]

wow, the Super lineup has been downhill from the start, the 4070 Super was a good chunk faster, not a bad result there, but 4070TiS less than expected, seems like memory bandwidth doesn't make a whole lot of difference and just scales with the small SM count increase, and now this 4080S.. at least the price is slightly better? eh

 

[JIWIL]

The subtitle on image 3 and 4 of page 33 charts mistakenly has a 4090 listed. Thanks for reviews Wiz.

 

[Crackong]

Same priduct with a better price

 

[MDWiley]

Outperforms the 4080 by 1-3%... that's rough. Also let's not applaud Nvidia for lowering the price by $200. $1200 for the 4080 was actually delusional. The 4080S is a good card, but $1000 is still a hard sell.

 

[neatfeatguy]

Hells bells. Nvidia could have just quietly replaced the original 4080 with the "Super" variant without telling anyone and no one would have noticed.

Now they look like morons dropping a "super" version that gives you no performance gains. The only upside to this at all is that the MSRP is starting out lower than the original 4080, but even at $1000 it's still priced $200 too high.

I can see this card selling simply because it's the same performance as the original 4080, but it retails for less. That is literally the only thing this card has going for it.

 

[3valatzy]

Outperforms the 4080 by 1-3%...

1-3% is the statistical error. Actually, the difference from a system to another system can easily be 5-10% and the old RTX 4080 is actually faster.
This is a straight-forward rebrand.

And the problem lies in the BIOS TDP limit. Maybe if it's OCed, some more performance could be extracted from the increased number of shaders.

 

[theouto]

Holy shit, it's a margin of error!

 

[W1zzard]

The subtitle on image 3 and 4 of page 33 charts mistakenly has a 4090 listed. Thanks for reviews Wiz.

Whoops, fixed

 

[Onasi]

@W1zzard
Oh, by the way, forgot to ask when you added this test, but what’s the workload that is being run for Blender testing? Which renderer is used? Just to have a point of reference.

 

[EatingDirt]

The only impressive feat of this card is the $200 price reduction. A little strange that it isn't any faster than the Non-Super it replaces. Memory bandwidth limited or ROP limited?

With the new price it's now much more attractive than the 7900XTX. The only real advantage the 7900XTX has now is it comes with a better Display Port, which only makes a difference if you're using something like the Samsung G9 57", which can't get to 240hz on DP 1.4a(HDMI is not supported at 240hz). I'm not sure how much AMD can lower the cost of the 7900XTX without losing money, but it needs to be at least $100 cheaper to be an attractive purchase over this.

 

[3valatzy]

I'm not sure how much AMD can lower the cost of the 7900XTX without losing money, but it needs to be at least $100 cheaper to be an attractive purchase over this.

Speaking of which... why is AMD silent recently? No new 7950 or something.
AMD has a solution - go to TSMC and ask for that 50% wafer price reduction!

 

[Hyderz]

As for super series… 4070 super is the gpu with a decent bump… 70ti and 80 super nvidia should have just lowered the price of existing 70ti and 80… and call it a day…. Right…. Looking forwards to 8000 series from amd and 50 series and arc2

 

[Macro Device]

Memory bandwidth limited or ROP limited?

Considering terrible yields for the maxed out Ada GPUs I'm inclined to imagine it's not a room to fit any additional speed in the same wattage.

4080 Super has lower core frequency compared to non-Super. Not much lower but still. This GPU's performance is crippled by power limit, just like it happened to RTX 3090 non-Ti which had about 40% power spendings on VRAM and RTX 4070 Super which was much closer to Ti on paper but with much more limited TDP, it behaved more like a regular 4070.

 

[rv8000]

The only impressive feat of this card is the $200 price reduction. A little strange that it isn't any faster than the Non-Super it replaces. Memory bandwidth limited or ROP limited?

With the new price it's now much more attractive than the 7900XTX. The only real advantage the 7900XTX has now is it comes with a better Display Port, which only makes a difference if you're using something like the Samsung G9 57", which can't get to 240hz on DP 1.4a(HDMI is not supported at 240hz). I'm not sure how much AMD can lower the cost of the 7900XTX without losing money, but it needs to be at least $100 cheaper to be an attractive purchase over this.

The 7900XTX has had $900 options for awhile. Even with the msrp drop this is an odd take, for 90-95% of games you’re gonna play, the 7900XTX is a way better value, even then there are only a few notable games where RT provide real visual benefit and have a large delta in performance (CP2077).

With most of these models having minimal PL adjustments, seems you dont lose out on getting an msrp (“cheap”) built card, so theres that.

Surprised we didnt see more cards at the ASUS strix level of brand tax though; basically charging $250 for a higher PL and some extra vrm components.

That funky MSI all metal card seems to be a flop too, worse thermal performance and identical fps performance for an extra $150

 

[Chaitanya]

A year late and barely any difference to upsell attempt from the SKU its replacing. Another pass worthy product launch from either of 2.

 

[Denver]

Average framerate and relative performance is the same. Why warrant the "Super" tag?
Vote with your wallets. Maybe if the stock remains untouched on the shelves, they will discount it more.

Meh!

It's not true, it gained almost 1fps on average. I'm not a fan of Nvidia, but let's be honest here.
Maybe it would get more performance if Nvidia didn't cap the TDP.

 

[mxthunder]

Expected more of a performance increase out of it, but makes sense. We have seen this before with other cards like 980Ti vs Titan X - the cut down chip can be equally as fast or faster in some scenarios because it does not run into (the same) power limits as fast. Higher clock speed even with less cuda cores can sometimes be more efficient.
The $200 price drop is the star of the show here. I still prefer the looks of the OG 4080 / 4090 TBH. Wish they would have gone with the more polished gem cut pieces like they did from 3080 > 3080Ti instead of the black aesthetic.

 

[Macro Device]

the 7900XTX is a way better value, even then there are only a few notable games where RT provide real visual benefit and have a large delta in performance (CP2077).

Every time you fall in need of upscaling the NV card wins. DLSS isn't the greatest influence on the image quality but it's still better than FSR.

I personally enjoy 4K + DLSS at both Quality and Balanced. At Performance, it's no more ideal but still greatly exceeds what you can have using a 1440p display (tested a friend's 3060 Ti last week). FSR becomes noticeably artifacting at Balanced; and at Performance, it also loses a bit more fidelity per se being somewhat inferior to 1440p+DLAA and having parity with 1440p+TAA.

So if you only compare pure raster speed at native resolution then yes, 7900 XTX screams "why do you exist?" in the face of 4080 series GPUs. But when it comes to RT (I can bet it's enough people willing to turn RT on after paying a thousand on a GPU) and upscaling (imagine having such a GPU 4 years later when games become even more demanding), 4080 is clearly ahead.

NGreedia have been in need for a reality check for a long while but this check can't come online because AMD need it even harder and Intel are currently too new to this market. Can't blame the latter, though. It's delusional to expect the first generation GPUs to compete with any success at 300+ USD mark. Intel are doing a good job all things considered. AMD are not.

4080 outsold 7900 XTX despite being much more expensive. 4080 Super will outsell it even harder because it's not only an NV GPU, it's also a better value overall (OG 4080 at 1200 USD VS 7900 XTX at 1000 USD is a worse value overall but NV fanbase is not to be underestimated).

I rate this release... "I didn't expect things to go better but they lowkey did. Hurray, I guess."

 

[Metroid]

1% x non super, this must be a joke. I believe they dont want to outshine the next nvidia gpus that are coming this year.