Sorry, but the RTX 5090 is outdated: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 is in town

So that would mean the performance jump is similar to the leap from the RTX 4090 to the RTX 5090.
It's definitely much more than that. Even without MFG, there are games where the 5090 is 50% faster than the 4090. For example counter strike or RDR2 with MSAA.

counter-strike-2-3840-2160.png
 
So that would mean the performance jump is similar to the leap from the RTX 4090 to the RTX 5090.

is this person a troll or something?

10 fps gain in what ? Yukong for example ? so a jump from 20 fps path tracing to 30 fps which is more than 33% performance gain ? all the sudden this is not a performance jump ?

because the jump from the PS5 to PS5 pro is way less than that for a 100$ shy it being double the price of the initial PS5 release which was 400$...

i am confused..
 
That 96GB VRAM would be great for keeping a large model in memory. I kinda want one just for that, but not at that price. I'll stick with smaller ones and muddle through.
 
I get that it's just benchmarking for the hell of it, but it does just make me annoyed that stuff like the RTX 5090 even exists as a "gaming" card.

Shit is overpriced because it includes crap that is useless for gaming you're being charged for, like 32gb of vram during a time where top-end games are barely using 16gb, and it's actual utility is a workhorse card for AI, content creation, rendering, etc. It's not even beneficial for future proofing, by the time games use that much vram other specs on the card will be out of date.
 
Last edited:
is this person a troll or something?

10 fps gain in what ? Yukong for example ? so a jump from 20 fps path tracing to 30 fps which is more than 33% performance gain ? all the sudden this is not a performance jump ?

because the jump from the PS5 to PS5 pro is way less than that for a 100$ shy it being double the price of the initial PS5 release which was 400$...

i am confused..
Dude, chill. Obviously, I was being sarcastic, since the general consensus here was that the RTX 5090 isn't a massive jump over the previous generation, and there was a lot of debate about 'fake frames.' I personally upgraded from a Gigabyte RTX 4090 to an RTX 5090 Founders Edition and I'm loving it. Frame Generation and MFG doesn't bother me, and input lag isn't an issue for me because I mainly play single‑player games and some racing as well.
 
I get that it's just benchmarking for the hell of it, but it does just make me annoyed that stuff like the RTX 5090 even exists as a "gaming" card.

Shit is overpriced because it includes crap that is useless for gaming you're being charged for, like 32gb of vram during a time where top-end games are barely using 16gb, and it's actual utility is a workhorse card for AI, content creation, rendering, etc. It's not even beneficial for future proofing, by the time games use that much vram other specs on the card will be out of date.
That's not how it works.

The 5090 has a 512 bit bus with a rather insane bandwidth; which is beneficial for games today. Simply put, more processing wants more memory bandwidth.

512 bit bus means 16 memory channels though. Which in turn means that 16 memory modules are required. And since the lowest capacity GDDR7 modules are 2GB you end up with at least 32GB to "fill up" that bus.

Also, the memory modules aren't that expensive to begin with. Let's say that 8 modules add $100 to the price.
 
Last edited:
Id love to grab one of these. Not cheap and not easy to get your hands on. Wouldn't be a wise use of money though. But this feels like the modern day Titan to me.
 
Top Bottom