A leaked “in store” date of November 11th for it, as well.
Dejin
6198
That was definitely the first thing that came to my mind from @lordkosc’s post :-)
Have there been any whispers as to an AMD answer to DLSS? I’d love for AMD to be competitive this cycle and would even consider one based on performance and specs, but, at this point, it seems like buying a card without DLSS would be shooting yourself in the foot for “4K” gaming.
J_Thomas
6200
If you want to be cheap like me, cut a piece of corrugated cardboard from a box and use that to prop up the card. I suppose you could stick an LED strip on it too, if you care how it looks.
stusser
6201
No. I’m sure they will address it when they finally announce.
morlac
6202
Not a bad idea! Daughter could even paint it…neon!
I kid as I would totally just use Star Wars action figures to prop it up now that you’ve inspired me.
Aceris
6203
Interesting to hear you so down on intel. Is it all about the PCIe4 and faster RAM? (which would be totally legit) I’m not sure there’s that much difference between the chips themselves in terms of performance and price (Although the zen 3 might change that of course).
No, I think it is more about speculative execution exploits and Intel releasing patches that downgrade speeds to combat them. Apologies if I’ve messed up the verbiage there
stusser
6205
Yes, very much so. Also AMD is much better value for money in terms of core counts. I wouldn’t buy intel right now unless all you do is game. And even then, really, screw intel.
MichaelD
6206
The MSI includes one in the box (I didn’t use it). It’s a solid card, though – there’s no flex to it at all (thanks I suppose to a honkin’ big heat sink). The area of the backplate directly behind the GPU is open – no covering on the back of the PCB there.
Dejin
6207
Linus Tech seems to like the 3090 quite a bit. He does have some criticisms, but he says for a prosumer with a lot of money, a content creator, or a 3D artist it’s a very good card.
Criticisms: It chews power a lot, it sounds like he’s not sure 750W its actually enough for it. It’s also deliberately crippled in specific ways so that it won’t compete with the Titan line.
I OC’d my 3080 XC3 just to see how far I could push it - the Core Clock wouldn’t go much past +120Mhz without getting a little crashy, so I stuck with 110, but Memory let me add +750Mhz without any issues. I upped my score a little in Time Spy:
I mean, that’s not a huge jump - it’s a little less than 400 more, or like 1% - and that’s why I don’t really OC my cards or CPU - I just don’t feel like the benefit is there. While benching this card was a good 5-8C hotter than when I didn’t OC - why bother for a 1 or 2% gain? Even if you pulled in +5fps I don’t know if the extra wear and tear on the card is worth while, same with CPU OC. Just my thoughts on Over Clocking.
I rolled my BIOS back to the non-OC (I still have an XMP profile set on my Memory, of course) for the CPU and after saving the stable OC to a profile in MSI, I went back to defaults there as well. The card idles at 30C and hasn’t jumped up past 63 or so while under a heavy load (benchmarking games/software) with the default non-OC and fan profile, which seems good to me (let alone quiet).
MichaelD
6209
Juuust over the 17k mark with the MSI Gaming Trio 3080 card. The 3950X’s CPU score is better with the RAM set to the correct (3600) speed. I’ll play around with OC’ing in a bit.
All I do is game, and I like that the Intel CPU I have is better for gaming while being less expensive than the 3950X (which I also looked into). I have no complaints with performance, that’s for sure, and it was several hundred bucks cheaper (I paid $450 for my chip, I see 3950X goes for $250+ more). I can render a video from Camtasia at 1440p very, very quickly - that’s the only really intensive CPU bound thing I can think of I do outside of gaming. I’ve never been a big AMD fan, I guess. Every time I’ve had their products I’ve been happier when I go Intel/Nvidia the next go-round, so it’s been many “go’s” since I dipped a toe into the AMD well. Maybe next time.
I am much more likely, that being said, to go AMD with a CPU upgrade at some point, if I were to switch over, but I’m probably never going to use AMD for my GPU until they finally become the king of the hill, which of course is always possible - competition is good, after all - but for now, being a gamer primarily, I go where the best gaming experiences (tend to) be. I know some games are optimized for AMD, kind of annoying that any game is optimized for one video card over another in my opinion, so that’s something I try to keep an eye on.
Desslock
6211
As someone who hates messing with motherboards/CPUs but otherwise upgrades components during a PC’s lifespan, is a Core i9 10900K the CPU to get for a RTX 3080?
KevinC
6212
Does it need to be immediate? The Zen 3 specs should be out in two weeks and might change that answer.
Soma
6213
At the very least I would wait for Zen 3 announcement. Even if there is no immediate availability it may cause a price cut from Intel.
Editer
6214
As other said, Zen 3 looks promosing, so if you can wait until 10/9 to make a decision…
If you want to buy now, or definitely want Intel, the 10850K is likely your best choice. It’s only a couple percent slower than the 10900K, but you can FIND it. Ever since I started looking at upgrading, the 10900K has been out of stock everywhere except for B&H, which occasionally gets them in and is now charging $649 (up from $599) for a CPU most places charge $529 for.
Given how much easier the 10850K is to find, I’m guessing Intel is having big issues getting enough yield of 10900K cards.
I’ll also say if a gamer is aiming for a non-Zen 3 AMD CPU due to pricing, availability or what not, the 3900xt is by far and away the better purchase than the 3950x. The difference is cord/thread count and the impact on gaming is basically zero between these two while the 3950x is priced $250 more; it’s specifically designed for “content creators”/mixed use as current games won’t be able to benefit from the extra 4 cores & 8 threads. Lower chips are better values, still, but I get the draw of the high end.
That’s actually why I’m not expecting much more actual cores in Zen 3, as they don’t seem to provide much added value for most users. Allegedly, it’s a redesign which will significantly improve upon various aspects we’ve seen in Zen 2 and its gaming should be much better. Regardless, time will soon tell.
Even the 3900XT seems to be disfavoured by reviewers compared to the 3900X.
If you’re less concerned about value and just want maximum gaming performance, you’re probably better off getting a 10900K/10850K. If you’re dead set on AMD, the 3900X seems to make most sense pre-Zen 3.
