News 5090 Reviews are here....

This is probably the worst generation, even worse than FX5000 or the GTX 480(bbq grill) or the rebaged oem only series or the 7900 or the 2080ti
 
Last edited:
kewlboy9 said:
+25% cost
+25% power usage
+25% performance
-50% cooler width

The real advancements with this generation seem to be with the cooling solution for the FE card. Cooling that with a 2-slot cooler is pretty impressive.

That being said, there is no way in any world that I would spend that much dough on a single component for my PC.
Click to expand...
But the 5090 fe model does run a bit hotter than the 4090. The cooling is not bad but there does seem to a penalty for the decrease in size. But then again the 40 series coolers were quite overbuilt for them and most never crossed 70c-80c
 
Kaching999 said:
But the 5090 fe model does run a bit hotter than the 4090. The cooling is not bad but there does seem to a penalty for the decrease in size. But then again the 40 series coolers were quite overbuilt for them and most never crossed 70c-80c
Click to expand...
5090 FE still runs at 73° after an hour of usage (source). Further, the decrease in size isn't a penalty per se, considering the 5090 consumes 575W instead of the 4090's 450W.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anony
kewlboy9 said:
5090 FE still runs at 73° after an hour of usage (source). Further, the decrease in size isn't a penalty per se, considering the 5090 consumes 575W instead of the 4090's 450W.
Click to expand...
I have seen it reach over 80c(source) in thermal testing using furmark. That 73c is for gaming load for which the 4090 mostly remains at or under 65c in the testing by HUB the 5090 is running 15% hotter, furmark on the 4090 results in temps of around 75c. Even though relatively it might not be a penalty it still feels like one especially considering silicon degradation over a long period of say 7-10 years also the performance increase is just meh. But one good thing is the supposed fix of melting connectors, we are going to have to wait to see if that is really true or not.
1737647176281.png
 
Kaching999 said:
I have seen it reach over 80c(source) in thermal testing using furmark. That 73c is for gaming load for which the 4090 mostly remains at or under 65c in the testing by HUB the 5090 is running 15% hotter, furmark on the 4090 results in temps of around 75c.
View attachment 221467
Click to expand...
What @kewlboy9 is trying to say is that even with the dual fan and dual slot design, the RTX 5090 is impressive for the max temperature it is operating at since it is a 28% increase in power from 450 to 575.
Everyone knows more power generates more heat but they have reduced the size of the card from 3 slot to 2 slot hence why the impressive cooler performance deserves to be praised.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kaching999
anony said:
What @kewlboy9 is trying to say is that even with the dual fan and dual slot design, the RTX 5090 is impressive for the max temperature it is operating at since it is a 28% increase in power from 450 to 575.
Everyone knows more power generates more heat but they have reduced the size of the card from 3 slot to 2 slot hence why the impressive cooler performance deserves to be praised.
Click to expand...
I get it but still:
Kaching999 said:
Even though relatively it might not be a penalty it still feels like one especially considering silicon degradation over a long period of say 7-10 years also the performance increase is just meh
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: anony
Darth Vader said:
4000 series GPU owners are very relieved now. This is the age of milking AI, no focus on core performance improvements.
Click to expand...
Since 3080 at 700$ i don't see any worthwhile price/perf jump. Any perf jump also has more or less proportionate price jump - maybe only getting better 10% or so per gen. So 2 useless gens for me, VRAM/software stuff aside.
 
Tracer_Bullet said:
Since 3080 at 700$ i don't see any worthwhile price/perf jump. Any perf jump also has more or less proportionate price jump - maybe only getting better 10% or so per gen. So 2 useless gens for me, VRAM/software stuff aside.
Click to expand...
If you did managed to get 3080 for 700 USD on release, sure nothing will impress you lol.

I got my 3090 for 700 USD after mining craze died, but the 4090 was a still a huge improvement in performance (40-80%) and not like this crap 4090Ti 5090.

This slide from Optimum summarize how bad the jump between 2000->3000 vs 4000 ->5000 is:
1737703282501.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: anony and desi_gamer
Darth Vader said:
If you did managed to get 3080 for 700 USD on release, sure nothing will impress you lol.
Click to expand...
Na i got it a bit more than 2 years back when my old 1050 failed. I bought it for 60k, amazon had a sale at 70k + discount gave 10k off - aug 2022 before diwali .
That's when i discovered techenclave btw, reddit guys posted deal info that came from here.

Darth Vader said:
I got my 3090 for 700 USD after mining craze died, but the 4090 was a still a huge improvement in performance (40-80%) and not like this crap 4090Ti 5090.
Click to expand...
yeah, gpus above 3080 had much worse value in 3000 series, so 4090 will compare well against 3090ti for instance.
Against 3080 it was 2x-3x price with 2x perf. Its a good gpu but not in price/perf which is what i was talking about.
Covid prices were abnormal, ofc gpu companies would like that to be normal wouldn't they ..

--------

Nvidia is an AI company first now it seems. They want to sell AI hardware and then retrofit some features for gamers to justify selling probably defective AI cards as gaming cards instead of an optimized gpu for gamers.
Features that don't work in vast majority of past games

That's what it feels like - 5070 = 4090 yeah right ..

Market is really up for AMD/Intel to make inroads into.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom