NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Only 19 Percent Faster than RTX 3080, According to Leaked 3DMark Scores

Tsing

The FPS Review
Staff member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Messages
12,211
Points
113
nvidia-geforce-rtx-3090-badge-close-up-1024x576.jpg
Image: NVIDIA



VideoCardz has shared the first third-party benchmarks for NVIDIA’s 8K “BFGPU,” the GeForce RTX 3090. According to the scores, which were derived from 3DMark’s Time Spy and Time Spy Extreme tests, the ultra-flagship is only 19 percent faster on average than the reference-clocked GeForce RTX 3080.



Is that disappointing? That’s what a lot of enthusiasts are saying. Remember, the GeForce RTX 3090 costs a whopping $1,499 (again, don’t think about the auction prices), which is an $800 premium over its mildly lesser sibling, the GeForce RTX 3080. $800 more for a 19 percent increase in performance? That does seem like tough deal to swallow.



NVIDIA’s GeForce RTX 3090 flaunts 10496 CUDA Cores, a base/boost clock of 1.40/1.70 GHz, and 24 GB of GDDR6X memory...
Click to expand...

Continue reading...
 
That reminds me, 32K, I wonder if that's how much they'll cost by then.
 
AntiQuark said:
19% is in the ballpark of what is expected, why 'only'?
The days when gfx cards were made from magic are long gone ;)
Click to expand...

3DMark scores are absolutely meaningless by themselves. What effects your scores isn't necessarily what impacts games. That is to say I've seen overclocks that don't have a huge impact on gaming change scores radically. I've seen slower graphics cards do better than 3DMark than faster ones. Remember the 2900XT versus the 8800GTX? It was the 2900XT that scored better.

Lastly, you can't take the numbers from 3DMark and translate them into gaming performance for any specific engine.
 
Dan_D said:
3DMark scores are absolutely meaningless by themselves. What effects your scores isn't necessarily what impacts games. That is to say I've seen overclocks that don't have a huge impact on gaming change scores radically. I've seen slower graphics cards do better than 3DMark than faster ones. Remember the 2900XT versus the 8800GTX? It was the 2900XT that scored better.

Lastly, you can't take the numbers from 3DMark and translate them into gaming performance for any specific engine.
Click to expand...
I didnt [confused], we are talking cross purposes.
If they had released the supposed gaming results and commented the same on that, I would agree, but at the same time await confirmed results.
My comment was about the 19% 3DMark improvement being close to dead on what is expected from max throughput testing, because it is.
 
I put in for the Evga step up program with my 2070 Super. Just seven days shy of the 90 day limit so I figured why not. Looking to get the 3080 FTW Ultra Gaming card. We'll see how it goes. Was going to hold out for a 3090, but don't really need to be paying that much for card right now or anytime soon, plus I'd miss my step up window.
 
The Asus TUF was reviewed very well too, I might reconsider my original plan for a hybrid,
I have very little room in my Fractal Nano S for anything over 2 slots.

But I probably could make a bracket and move the PSU to the top front of the case and gain a ton of space at the bottom.
Easily do 2.75 slots then.
Could be a fun project, I havent fabricated anything in a while and the shop could use a dust off.
 
But it has 140% more VRAM, that's all I care about. Not that I could afford one, but this is clearly a prosumer product. Only not for non-western prosumers like me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Become a Patron!
Back
Top