Really curious to see a) how the 5080 and 5090 will perform relative to current top offerings and b) how they will be priced.

That being said, most likely wont be upgrading just yet this time around. My 7900 XTX is good enough performance wise for now. But certainly gonna go back to nvidia at some point after this test with AMD GPU (the 7900 XTX is good at raster, but the drivers are a little buggy, and FSR is not as good as DLSS, not to mention the inferior RT, which granted on anything that is not a 4090 RT aint worth the massive perf drop imo anyway but still).

Wow that looks bad, looks like a game from the X360/PS3 era, but running at a higher resolution than 720p (not much higher lol, guessing its like 900p upscaled with some temporal thing or FSR)

It will be extremely expensive seeing Nvidia's pricing trajectory lately, coupled with them no longer needing their gaming GPUs to sell in high volumes due to their focus on other industries (AI). Hope I am wrong though and that it comes in at $1500, which, although still an unreasonable price, at least is same as current 4090 MSRP.

I had switched from a 3080 Ti to a 7900 XTX and frankly miss Nvidia (fewer driver bugs, dont get me wrong they had them too but less frequently than AMD) and also prefer their superior tech (DLSS and their framegen).

Looking forward to seeing though since I will probably switch if its worth it, especially since my last few upgrades over past like 5-6 years were essentially free (sold 2070 Super to get 3070 at MSRP, so effectively free upgrade, then sold the 3070 non-LHR at massive markup to miners to switch to a 3080 Ti, which then I sold and added $350 to get a 7900 XTX). Beauty of PCs is their upgradability, can sell a part, add a little, and upgrade.

@osan0: Agreed there, if you are in Europe, given the higher cost of electricity, mixed with the relatively small difference in price, the 4080 would make sense (especially given the superior RT and upscaling performance). But man you guys in the EU get screwed on prices (more expensive cards, especially given that salaries tend to be significantly lower in the EU than in the US, granted I am mostly focusing on the salaries of professionals rather than the "average" person). Yeah you are less price sensitive when you go up to those "high end" cards but I would argue there is still some sensitivity (plus in this case, if one does not care about RT, technically the 7900 outperforms it slightly so more performance in those scenarios for less $$ may be justifiable).

Tbh though I feel like spending this kind of money on GPUs is ridiculous to begin with. The only reason I had a 3080 Ti was because during COVID and due to mining, the prices of my 3070 (non LHR) was the same as that of a 3080 Ti, so I sold my 3070 to get that (and prior to that had a 2070 which I also sold for same prices I paid for my 3070). Only reason I got 7900 was because I could sell my 3080 Ti for a decent price, otherwise I would never entertain the idea of spennding 1k on a cardd.d

@osan0: I feel like the price difference very much depends on which AIB card you are looking at, but I would argue that the price difference is still more around the $200-$250 mark (which at that point, harder to choose between the two).

For example, one of the cheaper 7900 XTX (Sapphire Pulse) can be had for $900 (and recently you could even get an XFX or an Asrock variant, granted I would probably avoid the Asrock one, for 860ish). On the 4080 side the cheapest ones are still in the 1100-1150 range (Zotac and PNY). I know this just cause I had the same debate (4080 vs 7900), decided to go with 7900 due to better raster performance (and, to a lesser extent, to not support Nvidia and their overpricing practices, this is my first AMD card ever tbh). I think with a $100 difference the choice is less clear (raster vs DLSS and RT), but at 200+ I think the 7900 still makes more sense (granted I may be biased).

@Xtasy26:As someone who recently switched from Nvidia to AMD I completely agree with you here. Although both DLSS and FSR Quality are good at 4K, DLSS is just a bit better IQ wise (less shimmering and sometimes sharper) from what I have seen. The performance (FPS) is identical but DLSS definitely has the upper hand in IQ and therefore is the superior product. I do hope with sometime FSR can catch-up with DLSS given that FSR can be used on any card while DLSS is exclusive to Nvidia. That being said, it is kind of crappy of AMD to lock DLSS away on games that are sponsored by them (granted Nvidia used to pull this crap although the time as well in the past). I feel like (and this is unscientific) FSR Quality >= DLSS Balanced in perceived image quality in most case.

The other "big" issue AMD currently has is with their ray-tracing performance. Although they have gotten better, their latest line (7900) is still definitely behind Nvidia when it comes to RT. Granted one could argue that RT on Nvidia (outside of 4090) is also meh if you don't use upscaling as it tanks performance, and relatively few games support it currently, but more and more will get RT over time. Moving from 3080 Ti to 7900 XTX I noticed a "massive" improvement in my performance in traditional rasterized games, but a relatively small increase in games with RT.

I have been running at 4K display on consoles for a while now (and for a year on my PC).

That being said, on the PS5/XSX even though it outputs at 4K, almost none of the games on those systems actually run at 4K (and when it does it is at 30FPS, which is a no go in my book). And even then the "quality" modes on consoles are rarely full 4k anyway (usually 85%ish of 4k with Dynamic Res). Frankly would much rather have 60FPS and lower render resolution so I run my games, when given the option, using the "performance" mode.

Yeah it is not the greatest looking console (neither is the XSX tbh), but honestly I don't care about that. I do wish that it was smaller, and that it came black by default (no idea why they chose the white color scheme). Certainly the PS5 stands out more than the XSX (and not in a good way imo). I am too cheap to buy the replacement face, but I am sure it would look fine/more palatable were it in black.

But honestly, for a gaming console, don't see why someone would make a buying decision based on how the console looks. Frankly don't think it matters.

I will add though that in my setup (or old setup) the PS5, in some ways works better than my XSX. The PS5 at least fits inside my entertainment cabinet. The XSX did not fit (since it is so wide). Not a big deal since the XSX could be hidden behind the TV but still...I think any console should be made taking into account whether it can fit (horizontally) inside an entertainment center.

Given how close the new GPU launch is (and assuming I currently did not have a 30 series card), no I would not go for that now personally. It is a good card but for the price, you can get almost as much performance (but save quite a bit of $$) by going with a 3080 (or even a 3080ti, seems like those are getting discounted heavily too now). Wow how the tables have turned, just a few months ago these card were hard to find, hell I paid more than that for my 3080Ti less than 12 months ago (granted I sold my 3070 FE for almost the same price as I paid for 3080 Ti, otherwise would not have gone 3080Ti, that is far too much money just for a GPU)

@goldenelementxl Congrats on the card and more importantly on the Steam Deck (since those are still tough af to get)!

Don't plan on getting another one for a while, mine suits me well enough for now. I do need a cpu upgrade though but that can wait a bit too.

Only situation I can see in which I get the new 40 series is if a) can get one for close to the price I can sell my old card for, b) PSU requirements are not crazy (as rumored) and c) the 40 series provides a substantial bump in performance from 30 series.