NVIDIA RTX 50 SUPER Series Might Debut at CES 26, Launch Between March-May, and Has Been Spotted on the Seasonic Website

Peter_Brosdahl

Peter_Brosdahl

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
May 28, 2019
Messages
9,978
Reaction score
6,897
Points
113
Fall is here, and as usual, the rumor mill is in full swing, as are the industry leaks, with news regarding NVIDIA's RTX 50 SUPER series.

See full article...
 
So many people were convinced it was happening this fall/Xmas season. The advice "just wait for the fal for the supers" wasn't the best advice. After all with Blackwell being released this year it would be pretty odd to have a refresh so soon
 
No news of the $350? 5060 super 12gb yet ???
 
MadMummy76 said:
5080 Super with 32GB for half the price of a 5090 and I'm in. Otherwise non-buynary.
Click to expand...
16 GB is not an issue at 1440. I can max out settings for every game in my library.

TBH, I tried a few of my games, side by side, on two 32" monitors. One 1440, other 4k. I honestly can't tell much, if any, difference in quality. Maybe, slightly, in some instances is the 4k better.

YMMV
 
Riccochet said:
16 GB is not an issue at 1440. I can max out settings for every game in my library.
Click to expand...
I have a 4K wide monitor, plus I also want 32GB for AI use.
Riccochet said:
TBH, I tried a few of my games, side by side, on two 32" monitors. One 1440, other 4k. I honestly can't tell much, if any, difference in quality. Maybe, slightly, in some instances is the 4k better.

YMMV
Click to expand...
Was it native or with DLSS? Because DLSS ruins everything, even on quality preset, if you try native it looks far better. nVidia and devs just gaslit people into believing DLSS is just as good as native.
 
Tyler-98-W68 said:
So many people were convinced it was happening this fall/Xmas season. The advice "just wait for the fal for the supers" wasn't the best advice. After all with Blackwell being released this year it would be pretty odd to have a refresh so soon
Click to expand...
The advice "just wait for XYZ" never changes - something better is always just around the corner.

Just a matter of if it ends up being worth it. For most people, the answer is yes, it's almost always better to wait unless you are several generations behind and/or are having issues with most current software today (not just a few outliers). For us bleeding edge people, it isn't always about a value proposition though.
 
MadMummy76 said:
I have a 4K wide monitor, plus I also want 32GB for AI use.

Was it native or with DLSS? Because DLSS ruins everything, even on quality preset, if you try native it looks far better. nVidia and devs just gaslit people into believing DLSS is just as good as native.
Click to expand...
In some games, DLSS is better than native 4k if only because TAA sucks, which is weird since DLSS uses a form of TAA for antialiasing, I'm assuming it uses AI also for the AA part hence DLAA.
 
Last edited:
Stoly said:
In some games, DLSS is better than native 4k if only because TAA sucks, which is weird since DLSS uses a form of TAA for antialiasing, I'm assuming it uses AI also for the AA part hence DLAA.
Click to expand...
That's because those games have no AA implementation beyond DLSS, but you can try DLAA even though that also has temporal smearing the image will be 10x clearer than with upscaling enabled. If there was proper AA it would look even better.
 
Brian_B said:
The advice "just wait for XYZ" never changes - something better is always just around the corner.

Just a matter of if it ends up being worth it. For most people, the answer is yes, it's almost always better to wait unless you are several generations behind and/or are having issues with most current software today (not just a few outliers). For us bleeding edge people, it isn't always about a value proposition though.
Click to expand...
I think it's never worth waiting precisely because there is always something new around the corner. And the leaps between the new and the old are not that big anymore as they used to be anyway. If you are an early adopter you overpay anyway and deal with potential issues too. The best is to buy right bang in the middle of the life cycle. Meaning if someone wants a 5xxx now is the time. I'd certainly buy now and wouldn't wait if I didn't already have a 4080.
 
Tyler-98-W68 said:
So many people were convinced it was happening this fall/Xmas season. The advice "just wait for the fal for the supers" wasn't the best advice. After all with Blackwell being released this year it would be pretty odd to have a refresh so soon
Click to expand...
Take a look back over the past 5 years...
RTX 3000 - Late 2020
RTX 3090 Ti/3080 12gb - CES-ish 2022
RTX 4000 - CES-ish 2023
RTX 4000 Super - CES-ish 2024
RTX 5000 - CES-ish 2025

When I say CES-ish, the cycle has been initial announcing starting as early as Nov/Dec before CES (usually first week to 10 days of January) running through CES, with on-shelf dates staggered every week or two from mid Jan until they're done with the batch of cards being launched. Usually samples arrive after getting back from CES for the first one up....

From a stock perspective, the last few generations have been tough to find until about now, especially on the upper end - end of Q4/start of Q4, but then they quickly evaporate by November or so to make way for the new stock.

If history is any indicator, we'll see some supers lighting up in the run up to CES. This is also how NVIDIA reprices their cards to better align with the market (AMD) - they never dropped the 4080 price (as it was overpriced compared to where it should have been), they simply priced the 4080 Super $200 less....

Riccochet said:
16 GB is not an issue at 1440. I can max out settings for every game in my library.

TBH, I tried a few of my games, side by side, on two 32" monitors. One 1440, other 4k. I honestly can't tell much, if any, difference in quality. Maybe, slightly, in some instances is the 4k better.

YMMV
Click to expand...
Local hosted AI models would be my reason - fits the 27B-ish parameter versions with room to spare, where they won't fit on a 16GB card.
 
MadMummy76 said:
Meaning if someone wants a 5xxx now is the time. I'd certainly buy now and wouldn't wait if I didn't already have a 4080.
Click to expand...
I do not disagree with you, I think we are talking about the same thing - but I think that statement right there is exactly what I'm trying to describe. Why upgrade unless it serves a purpose?
 
Brian_B said:
I do not disagree with you, I think we are talking about the same thing - but I think that statement right there is exactly what I'm trying to describe. Why upgrade unless it serves a purpose?
Click to expand...
Of course it goes without saying that you should wait until there is a wortwhile upgrade available. I'm just against waiting for the next thing when something is already readily available.
 
I skipped the RTX50 series, but I'll keep an eye on the RTX5070Ti Super
 
I'm focused on gaming, and I really don't see 16GB being a problem for at least the next couple of years, i.e., I don't think there is any advantage between a 16GB, 18GB, or 24GB GPU for gaming. As long as it's 16GB, I think it's fine for a couple of years. Now, once games that are designed for the PS6 come out, yeah maybe 24GB will be welcomed at the high-end. But I do think 12GB should be the bare minimum entry-level at this point. 8GB should be reserved for cards under $200, anything above that, 12GB, and then 16GB should start in the $350 range and up.
 
Other than surfing the net, shopping, and basic office work, my rigs are primarily used for gamin as well.

At 1440p (2500x16000) my laptop with 12 GB does very well. I've only had to turn things down a few times with it.

At 4K things are only slightly different. My old 4080 SUPER could be used at 4K and had a similar amount of times where I had to dial things back due to its 16 GB memory. Meanwhile from 4K to 3840x1600, I've noticed most of the games with RT effects, or MFG and high-res textures will use between 17 GB - 22ish GB, although mostly in the 17-18 GB range. However I'll also add that sometimes that usage is unwarranted since turning a setting or two down by one or two notches will usually get it under 16 GB.
 
Peter_Brosdahl said:
At 4K things are only slightly different. My old 4080 SUPER could be used at 4K and had a similar amount of times where I had to dial things back due to its 16 GB memory. Meanwhile from 4K to 3840x1600, I've noticed most of the games with RT effects, or MFG and high-res textures will use between 17 GB - 22ish GB, although mostly in the 17-18 GB range. However I'll also add that sometimes that usage is unwarranted since turning a setting or two down by one or two notches will usually get it under 16 GB.
Click to expand...
Yeah but some games will use more Vram if they have it without actually needing it and will run perfdectly fine on machines with less
 
Denpepe said:
Yeah but some games will use more Vram if they have it without actually needing it and will run perfdectly fine on machines with less
Click to expand...
Mostly true and always has been but there some occasions that having that availability will give slightly more FPS. Totally comes down to engines, optimizations, etc though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Become a Patron!
Back
Top