EVGA

Hot!3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy?

Page: 12 > Showing page 1 of 2
Author
redarman
New Member
  • Total Posts : 72
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2020/01/30 05:45:42
  • Status: offline
  • Ribbons : 0
2020/09/28 18:27:20 (permalink)

If I go above +30 core clock timespy locks up and above +400 in mem clock the scores start to drop. On a good day I was getting ~16000 in timespy on my 2080ti in the same rig so I was expecting more than 15% improvement. What's going on?

Since this screenshot I've installed the new PX1 and same story.
#1

39 Replies Related Threads

    rain2_usa
    iCX Member
    • Total Posts : 332
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/09/15 19:29:36
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 1
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/28 18:38:58 (permalink)
    *Deleted*  I'm an idiot.  I somehow glanced over 3090 and instinctively read 3080.  
    post edited by rain2_usa - 2020/09/28 18:47:43

    Core i7 6700k
    Gigabyte Z170XP-SLI
    2x8GB Team T-Force Vulcan Z 3200Mhz
    EVGA 2070 Super XC Ultra
    Corsair AIO? with 3D Printed spacer
    Mushkin 240GB SSD
    1TB NVMe 
    1TB Seagate SSHD
    LG Black BD-Drive UH12NS30
    Seasonic Focus GM-750 80+ Gold
    Silverstone Grandia GD09B HTPC Case
    #2
    vgerik1234
    Superclocked Member
    • Total Posts : 234
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2007/02/03 11:59:20
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 1
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/28 18:41:06 (permalink)
    Stealing a comment from someone who is quite knowledgeable:
    It's a combination of power draw, temperature, and voltage. 
     
    For example, I've pulling 440 or so watts while in Superposition. 62C, ~1950MHz.
     
    In Mafia Remastered, I'm pulling 320 or so watts, 71C (auto OC VBIOS fan curve) and 2070Mhz capped at 60 FPS.
     
    We are very limited by power draw, and don't see the top overclocked frequency because of it. If we could put these under water, you'd see a much more stable, higher frequency with all the same settings.


    Some games including 3DMark for whatever reason just won't let the GPU go over 1950MHz, even though other applications we are pushing 2060+ without a sweat. I am not smart enough to know why. Could be drivers, firmware, or just general #Windows. Linux OS is reporting almost guaranteed boost above 2000 without ever dropping below. With that knowledge its probably just Windows and the drivers being funky, even with the 456.55. 

    TLDR: 3DMark just doesn't want to use the voltage we want it to, resulting in low boost (MHz), resulting in low GPU score.


     

     
    #3
    arestavo
    CLASSIFIED ULTRA Member
    • Total Posts : 5225
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2008/02/06 06:58:57
    • Location: Through the Scary Door
    • Status: online
    • Ribbons : 30
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/28 18:49:57 (permalink)
    My 3090 FTW3 Ultra at stock (power slider maxed) only gets about 1100 points more for the GPU score, so I don't think you're that far off considering that the 30 series is totally power draw limited - https://www.3dmark.com/spy/14211835

    EVGA affiliate code: 9ZWDWFNW6A
    (Don't forget to upload your invoice or no credit is given!)
     
     FOLD ON
    #4
    redarman
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 72
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/01/30 05:45:42
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/28 19:04:26 (permalink)
    Here is some more detail on my best 3090 score vs my best 2080ti score so far. Graphics score is 20% improvement from 2080ti to 3090. In bitwit's video that matches his gain to a 3080. Shouldn't I get an additional 5-10% the a 3090 instead of a 3080? I know there are a lot of variables here.

    attached screenshot
     

    Attached Image(s)

    #5
    redarman
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 72
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/01/30 05:45:42
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/28 19:10:18 (permalink)
    arestavo
    My 3090 FTW3 Ultra at stock (power slider maxed) only gets about 1100 points more for the GPU score, so I don't think you're that far off considering that the 30 series is totally power draw limited - https://www.3dmark.com/spy/14211835


    Thanks, your clock and avg clock are 15mhz and 50mhz higher resp. and you hadn't touched any sliders other than power slider? You can see from my screenshot that I maxed power/gpu temp/voltage, and added only 30 to the core. 
    #6
    redarman
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 72
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/01/30 05:45:42
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/28 19:39:11 (permalink)
    rain2_usa
    *Deleted*  I'm an idiot.  I somehow glanced over 3090 and instinctively read 3080.  


    OK, maybe that explains the clock difference.
    #7
    Goloith
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 7
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2015/03/23 18:12:30
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/28 20:40:30 (permalink)
    Dude, the GPU is locked at 366w. Meanwhile, the $100 cheaper Asus TUF is OCing higher and much more stable at +375w.
    #8
    arestavo
    CLASSIFIED ULTRA Member
    • Total Posts : 5225
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2008/02/06 06:58:57
    • Location: Through the Scary Door
    • Status: online
    • Ribbons : 30
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/28 20:41:59 (permalink)
    redarman
    arestavo
    My 3090 FTW3 Ultra at stock (power slider maxed) only gets about 1100 points more for the GPU score, so I don't think you're that far off considering that the 30 series is totally power draw limited - https://www.3dmark.com/spy/14211835


    Thanks, your clock and avg clock are 15mhz and 50mhz higher resp. and you hadn't touched any sliders other than power slider? You can see from my screenshot that I maxed power/gpu temp/voltage, and added only 30 to the core. 


    Power slider maxed, fans maxed, GPU core and VRAM clocks untouched.

    I suggest you not max voltage out (set it to default) and test that.
    post edited by arestavo - 2020/09/28 20:44:47

    EVGA affiliate code: 9ZWDWFNW6A
    (Don't forget to upload your invoice or no credit is given!)
     
     FOLD ON
    #9
    kevinc313
    CLASSIFIED Member
    • Total Posts : 2054
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2019/02/28 09:27:55
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 14
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/29 06:25:39 (permalink)
    redarman
    Here is some more detail on my best 3090 score vs my best 2080ti score so far. Graphics score is 20% improvement from 2080ti to 3090. In bitwit's video that matches his gain to a 3080. Shouldn't I get an additional 5-10% the a 3090 instead of a 3080? I know there are a lot of variables here.

    attached screenshot
     




    Wow that's rough.  I hope you didn't sell your 2080 Ti for $500 or something.
     
    Time to start looking for a Reference waterblock and a XOC bios.
    #10
    wolfe155
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 16
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2016/05/13 16:40:47
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/29 06:52:07 (permalink)
    Close X1 when you run time spy. I got an extra 1000 from that. 
     
    I got a score of 20112 on my 3090 FTW3 Ultra with +900 on Memory and +90 on Clock. it was pretty stable and i could play RDR2 maxed out at 65 fps
     
    also my scores started at in the low 18000 before i started messing with fan speeds and overclocking
    #11
    redarman
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 72
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/01/30 05:45:42
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/29 08:41:18 (permalink)
    wolfe155
    Close X1 when you run time spy. I got an extra 1000 from that. 
     
    I got a score of 20112 on my 3090 FTW3 Ultra with +900 on Memory and +90 on Clock. it was pretty stable and i could play RDR2 maxed out at 65 fps
     
    also my scores started at in the low 18000 before i started messing with fan speeds and overclocking


    What were the corresponding "graphics" scores? Yes I can close PX1 but I've also got it open during the 2080ti tests so I'm controlling for that difference.
    #12
    wolfe155
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 16
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2016/05/13 16:40:47
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/29 09:39:52 (permalink)
    no overall score went up by a 1000 not the gpu score.  i cant remember the break down
    #13
    HawkOculus
    iCX Member
    • Total Posts : 403
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2019/04/10 10:50:51
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 1
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/29 09:49:25 (permalink)
    Your scores aren’t that far off of some results I’m seeing for a 3090 FE.

    Just seems like a combination of crappy silicon, hotter temps, and a power starved card.
    #14
    IWafflesI
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 24
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2015/11/18 18:36:07
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/30 06:01:33 (permalink)
    We have the same card. What temps are you seeing under full stress in gaming? My card rides at 80C or higher when pushed hard.
    #15
    ehabash1
    iCX Member
    • Total Posts : 399
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2019/01/03 12:02:48
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/30 07:00:29 (permalink)
    Here is a little tip
     
    Looking at benchmark scores and remembering an old video from gamers nexus about 10600k with memory overclock beating 10900k, this generation of intel cpus scale with memory. Ppl over look this completely but it will improve your scores AND fps significantly
     
    There are plenty of game benchmarks on youtube and you will be genuinely surprised how much performance boost. It's like the equivalent of upgrading your main components to a higher tier. It's almost embarrassing seeing people try to squeeze 5.3Ghz out of a 10900k but then leaving memory at 3200Mhz.
     
    Thats why i went and bought a z490 APEX mobo. My current can only handle 3600 cl1500. With the new mobo I plan to do 4000 cl15 and try for 14 14 14 30 as well.
    #16
    MatthewAMEL
    Superclocked Member
    • Total Posts : 107
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2016/07/13 23:15:40
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/30 07:59:19 (permalink)
    vulcan1978
     
    Here's what upsetting the discrete GPU market looks like: 
     
    Navi 21 is shaping up to be as fast as the 3090 with 16GB of video memory on 7nm TSMC node with a 256 bit bus (128mb cache will compensate for this) @ 300w (100w less than GA-102-300) for $1000 and will run all of the next gen console ports, whose underlying architecture, RDNA 2, is the same and whose engines, including Unreal engine, will be heavily optimized around. Both next-gen consoles will have native path tracing, AI super-sampling and their equivalent of 'RTX IO' (AMD invented this first, NGreedia followed suit). 
     



    You were doing fine with your post until this.
     
    There are no leaked numbers or expectations that say Big Navi will be on par with the 3090. Everything to date says it slots between 3070 and 3080. Wish it was a better performer, but that lines up with their goal of double a 5700XT performance. What remains to be seen is how much headroom is avail due to TSMC's 7nm process.
     
    I assume when you talk about RTX IO you are referring to AMD's HBCC? HBCC was forward thinking of AMD, but still sits unused. RTX IO is Nvidia's implementation of DX12's DirectStorage. Since XBSX is using RDNA2(ish), I would assume AMD has HBCC or a newly re-vamped version of it ready to go.
     
    Also, just FYI, the Samsung 8nm isn't EUV. Their 7nm is and their 5nm will be then transitioning to GAA. It's one of the reasons there are such power inefficiencies with Ampere.
    https://news.samsung.com/...ion-of-8nm-lpp-process

    10G-P5-3897-KR 9/17/2020 8:07:39 AM PT Yes
    #17
    vulcan1978
    iCX Member
    • Total Posts : 262
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/05/25 02:18:19
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/30 09:46:49 (permalink)
    MatthewAMEL
    vulcan1978
     
    Here's what upsetting the discrete GPU market looks like: 
     
    Navi 21 is shaping up to be as fast as the 3090 with 16GB of video memory on 7nm TSMC node with a 256 bit bus (128mb cache will compensate for this) @ 300w (100w less than GA-102-300) for $1000 and will run all of the next gen console ports, whose underlying architecture, RDNA 2, is the same and whose engines, including Unreal engine, will be heavily optimized around. Both next-gen consoles will have native path tracing, AI super-sampling and their equivalent of 'RTX IO' (AMD invented this first, NGreedia followed suit). 
     



    You were doing fine with your post until this.
     
    There are no leaked numbers or expectations that say Big Navi will be on par with the 3090. Everything to date says it slots between 3070 and 3080. Wish it was a better performer, but that lines up with their goal of double a 5700XT performance. What remains to be seen is how much headroom is avail due to TSMC's 7nm process.
     
    I assume when you talk about RTX IO you are referring to AMD's HBCC? HBCC was forward thinking of AMD, but still sits unused. RTX IO is Nvidia's implementation of DX12's DirectStorage. Since XBSX is using RDNA2(ish), I would assume AMD has HBCC or a newly re-vamped version of it ready to go.
     
    Also, just FYI, the Samsung 8nm isn't EUV. Their 7nm is and their 5nm will be then transitioning to GAA. It's one of the reasons there are such power inefficiencies with Ampere.
    https://news.samsung.com/...ion-of-8nm-lpp-process


    MatthewAMEL
    vulcan1978
     
    Here's what upsetting the discrete GPU market looks like: 
     
    Navi 21 is shaping up to be as fast as the 3090 with 16GB of video memory on 7nm TSMC node with a 256 bit bus (128mb cache will compensate for this) @ 300w (100w less than GA-102-300) for $1000 and will run all of the next gen console ports, whose underlying architecture, RDNA 2, is the same and whose engines, including Unreal engine, will be heavily optimized around. Both next-gen consoles will have native path tracing, AI super-sampling and their equivalent of 'RTX IO' (AMD invented this first, NGreedia followed suit). 
     



    You were doing fine with your post until this.
     
    There are no leaked numbers or expectations that say Big Navi will be on par with the 3090. Everything to date says it slots between 3070 and 3080. Wish it was a better performer, but that lines up with their goal of double a 5700XT performance. What remains to be seen is how much headroom is avail due to TSMC's 7nm process.
     
    I assume when you talk about RTX IO you are referring to AMD's HBCC? HBCC was forward thinking of AMD, but still sits unused. RTX IO is Nvidia's implementation of DX12's DirectStorage. Since XBSX is using RDNA2(ish), I would assume AMD has HBCC or a newly re-vamped version of it ready to go.
     
    Also, just FYI, the Samsung 8nm isn't EUV. Their 7nm is and their 5nm will be then transitioning to GAA. It's one of the reasons there are such power inefficiencies with Ampere.
    https://news.samsung.com/...ion-of-8nm-lpp-process



    NGreedia made the task of matching or exceeding GA-102-300 an easy one when they went with 8nm EUV to save $26 per yield. It will be viewed in retrospect as their dumbest decision after AMD upsets the discrete GPU market this year: 
     
     
    https://youtu.be/dChKb3LG38s?t=657
     
    https://youtu.be/t5DQXB7dRT8
     
     

    8700k @ 5.1 GHz - 0 AVX @ 1.386v Dynamic Offset w/ EK Monoblock + Delid | Gigabyte Z370 Aorus Gaming 7 | EVGA 2080 Ti XC2 Ultra @ 2130 Mhz core, 7950 MHz memory @ 1.063v w/ 375W FTW3 vbios + Phanteks Glacier Block  | EK CE 420 + EK XE 360 | 2x16GB G-Skill Trident Z Royal 3600 MHz 17-20-20-38 | 2 TB Sabrent Rocket | Corsair RM1000x | Thermaltake View 71 | Alienware AW3418DW + Asus ROG Swift PG278Q (for 3D Vision) on Amazon Basics Arms | Win10 Pro 1809
     
    philosophersbunker.blogspot.com
    #18
    terry2776
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 56
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2008/02/29 17:31:13
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/30 09:47:04 (permalink)
    MatthewAMEL
    vulcan1978
     
    Here's what upsetting the discrete GPU market looks like: 
     
    Navi 21 is shaping up to be as fast as the 3090 with 16GB of video memory on 7nm TSMC node with a 256 bit bus (128mb cache will compensate for this) @ 300w (100w less than GA-102-300) for $1000 and will run all of the next gen console ports, whose underlying architecture, RDNA 2, is the same and whose engines, including Unreal engine, will be heavily optimized around. Both next-gen consoles will have native path tracing, AI super-sampling and their equivalent of 'RTX IO' (AMD invented this first, NGreedia followed suit). 
     



    You were doing fine with your post until this.
     
    There are no leaked numbers or expectations that say Big Navi will be on par with the 3090. Everything to date says it slots between 3070 and 3080. Wish it was a better performer, but that lines up with their goal of double a 5700XT performance. What remains to be seen is how much headroom is avail due to TSMC's 7nm process.
     
    I assume when you talk about RTX IO you are referring to AMD's HBCC? HBCC was forward thinking of AMD, but still sits unused. RTX IO is Nvidia's implementation of DX12's DirectStorage. Since XBSX is using RDNA2(ish), I would assume AMD has HBCC or a newly re-vamped version of it ready to go.
     
    Also, just FYI, the Samsung 8nm isn't EUV. Their 7nm is and their 5nm will be then transitioning to GAA. It's one of the reasons there are such power inefficiencies with Ampere.
    https://news.samsung.com/...ion-of-8nm-lpp-process




    Holy crap dude, sounds like you need a hug and a big navi card, but then you would probably need to code your own drivers to have something stable but at least you would have real problems
     
    Edit: That was supposed to quote Vulcan1978 not Matt

    Intel i9 9900K @ 5GHz
    Corsair H110i AIO Liquid Cooler
    Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master
    32GB (4x8GB) GSkill TridentZ RGB @ 3600MHz 16-19-19-39 1.35v
    Samsung 960 Pro 1TB NVME SSD
    eVGA RTX 3090 FTW3 Ultra 24GB
    1000W Silverstone Strider Plus ST1000-P Power Supply
    Phanteks Enthoo Primo Case w/ 7 x 140MM Fans
    Acer Predator XB241YU Monitor 1440p 144Hz
    Windows 10 Professional 64-Bit
    #19
    vulcan1978
    iCX Member
    • Total Posts : 262
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2014/05/25 02:18:19
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/09/30 09:51:04 (permalink)
    terry2776
    MatthewAMEL
    vulcan1978
     
    Here's what upsetting the discrete GPU market looks like: 
     
    Navi 21 is shaping up to be as fast as the 3090 with 16GB of video memory on 7nm TSMC node with a 256 bit bus (128mb cache will compensate for this) @ 300w (100w less than GA-102-300) for $1000 and will run all of the next gen console ports, whose underlying architecture, RDNA 2, is the same and whose engines, including Unreal engine, will be heavily optimized around. Both next-gen consoles will have native path tracing, AI super-sampling and their equivalent of 'RTX IO' (AMD invented this first, NGreedia followed suit). 
     



    You were doing fine with your post until this.
     
    There are no leaked numbers or expectations that say Big Navi will be on par with the 3090. Everything to date says it slots between 3070 and 3080. Wish it was a better performer, but that lines up with their goal of double a 5700XT performance. What remains to be seen is how much headroom is avail due to TSMC's 7nm process.
     
    I assume when you talk about RTX IO you are referring to AMD's HBCC? HBCC was forward thinking of AMD, but still sits unused. RTX IO is Nvidia's implementation of DX12's DirectStorage. Since XBSX is using RDNA2(ish), I would assume AMD has HBCC or a newly re-vamped version of it ready to go.
     
    Also, just FYI, the Samsung 8nm isn't EUV. Their 7nm is and their 5nm will be then transitioning to GAA. It's one of the reasons there are such power inefficiencies with Ampere.
    https://news.samsung.com/...ion-of-8nm-lpp-process




    Holy crap dude, sounds like you need a hug and a big navi card, but then you would probably need to code your own drivers to have something stable but at least you would have real problems
     
    Edit: That was supposed to quote Vulcan1978 not Matt




    "Holy crap lik dud just buy Intel dud, 14nanamaters++++++++++++, lovin, McDonalds pimp dud lik totally dud better drivings, gonna have to make your own drivings, lik dud nothing beats Nvidia and Intel dud, stay with them forever dud"

    8700k @ 5.1 GHz - 0 AVX @ 1.386v Dynamic Offset w/ EK Monoblock + Delid | Gigabyte Z370 Aorus Gaming 7 | EVGA 2080 Ti XC2 Ultra @ 2130 Mhz core, 7950 MHz memory @ 1.063v w/ 375W FTW3 vbios + Phanteks Glacier Block  | EK CE 420 + EK XE 360 | 2x16GB G-Skill Trident Z Royal 3600 MHz 17-20-20-38 | 2 TB Sabrent Rocket | Corsair RM1000x | Thermaltake View 71 | Alienware AW3418DW + Asus ROG Swift PG278Q (for 3D Vision) on Amazon Basics Arms | Win10 Pro 1809
     
    philosophersbunker.blogspot.com
    #20
    bmgjet
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 70
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2015/06/26 06:14:07
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 1
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/10/03 07:29:39 (permalink)
    Its the powerlimiter, Some chips a more hungry the others for power and that 366W is gimping it.

    Here is the best I could get on 366W.


    post edited by bmgjet - 2020/10/03 07:31:56

    Attached Image(s)

    #21
    slayer6288
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 21
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2009/03/08 01:54:28
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/10/03 07:47:55 (permalink)
    vulcan1978
    arestavo
    My 3090 FTW3 Ultra at stock (power slider maxed) only gets about 1100 points more for the GPU score, so I don't think you're that far off considering that the 30 series is totally power draw limited - https://www.3dmark.com/spy/14211835




    It's not "power draw limited", 3090 Strix only gains another 3% at 480W vs 390w and we see that shunted 3080 ( 'vmanuelgm') is only 7-10% faster @ 550w vs 390w!
     
    The problem is that NGreedia had to pre-overclock Ampere right at the point in the performance-efficiency curve where any more freq requires a non-linear, inordinate increase in voltage and wattage. 
     
    This is the case with any silicon. My 2080 Ti for example, it will do 2055 MHz core with an undervolt (1.025v on volt/freq curve). It can do 2130 MHz but this requires nearly another 50mv (1.069v) and another 50w+ on average. 
     
    2055 MHz is done with ~300-320w and then the last 80 MHz requires another 50w up and over that. 
     
    This is where Ampere is clocked from the factory. 
     
    It's why people are having black-screens (aside from the POSCAP, MLCC issue). 
     
    Had NGreedia gone with 7nm TSMC the 3080 would have it's present performance with a 425mm2 die @ 225w and the 3090 would easily be 40% faster with a 628mm2 die at only 320w! 
     
    And it would overclock way better, 25% overclock, like what is capable with Turing, would be possible. 
     
    They couldn't do that though, they needed to save $26 per yield. They are really smart, they know that with slick marketing and by gimping the outgoing architecture via driver updates for newer games, i.e. Cyberpunk 2077 where the 3080, although only 10-15% faster than 2080 Ti at the same power draw, will probably "magically" be something ridiculous like 30-40% faster in Cyberpunk 2077 as NGreedia "focuses on the new architecture", a euphemism they use to mean that they will make the outgoing architecture appear slow in comparison via driver shenanigans. 
     
    That's great! So instead of actually releasing a faster, quality product they can simply buy out tech-tubers (Digital Foundry) and gimp the outgoing architecture via driver updates with newer games that have yet to be released on the older architecture so that you don't even know it's happening and have no reference point. 
     
    RTX 3090, 25% faster than 2080 Ti (same power draw): $1500-1800.
    GTX 2080 Ti, 50% faster than 1080 Ti at the same power draw: $1200.
    GTX 1080 Ti, 50% faster than 980 Ti at the same power draw: $700
    GTX 980 Ti, 50% faster than 780 Ti at the same power draw: $700
    GTX 680, 50% faster than 580 at the same power draw
    GTX 580, 50% faster than 480 at the same power draw
     
    All of these cards I've personally owned. 
     
    TU-102 is capable of a 30% overclock. My personal sample is doing nearly 25% overclock (13,600 Timespy GPU @ 260w to 16,900 @ 373w @ 1.063v)
     
    GA-102-200 is capable of a 7% overclock (~17,500 to 18,750-19k @ 370w) 
     
    GA-102-300 is capable of a 5% overclock (20,500 to 21,500 @ 393w)
     
    Ampere is clocked so aggressively because it needed to impress the masses on the inferior node and the only way to do that is to pre-overclock GA-102 20% into it's 30% overclock. 
     
    Hence the black screens (although the mismatch between POSCAP and MLCC caps is implicated AIB's have been doing this for years, only now is this a problem because Ampere is clocked so aggressively. The solution short of RMA? Underclock by 100 MHz)
     
    If anyone is buying this mediocrity before waiting to see how Big Navi shapes up is voting for more mediocre gains and price gouging with whatever NGreedia dishes up next. 
     
    Don't buy this garbage. 
     
    Nvidia's decision to got with 8nm EUV was their dumbest decision, now AMD is going to clean their clock, will do to them what they did to Intel with 14+++++++++. NGreedia has become like Intel. Their sitting on their laurels because they falsely believe they have no competitor. 
     
    Ampere will be viewed in retrospect as NGreedia's Comet Lake moment when AMD upset the discrete GPU market. 
     
    Here's what upsetting the discrete GPU market looks like: 
     
    Navi 21 is shaping up to be as fast as the 3090 with 16GB of video memory on 7nm TSMC node with a 256 bit bus (128mb cache will compensate for this) @ 300w (100w less than GA-102-300) for $1000 and will run all of the next gen console ports, whose underlying architecture, RDNA 2, is the same and whose engines, including Unreal engine, will be heavily optimized around. Both next-gen consoles will have native path tracing, AI super-sampling and their equivalent of 'RTX IO' (AMD invented this first, NGreedia followed suit). 
     
    Here's an idea as to what's coming with Big Navi. 
     
    The APU in the XBOX Series X is the CPU and GPU compute equivalent of an AMD 3700x and an RTX 2080 @ 170w. 
     
    Navi 21 will be that all GPU compute @ 300w. 
     
    NGreedia rushed Ampere out of the door to try to beat AMD to the punch. 
     
    NGreedia is done, anyone still supporting them is voting against their own interests as a consumer. 
     
    They killed off 3D Vision to save pennies. I literally have no reason other than the G-Sync module in my AW3418DW to remain trapped in their ecosystem any longer. 
     
    How much work and money did adding the 3D Vision driver bits forward to the next display driver update entail? 5 minutes of work, copying and pasting a few lines of code? 
     
    There are thousands of us still enjoying 3D Vision (PG278Q here). We have simply modified newer display drivers, taking the bits from 425.31 and adding them to newer drivers via 3D Fix Manager (credit to Paul Dusler). 
     
    Now it appears that we can no longer do that. 
     
    I have zero reason to remain with this shady ass corporation. 
     
    The decision to go with 8nm EUV was an economic one (to save $26 per yield, and no, the 7nm queue was not forecasted to be full as it was known crApple was moving to 5nm. 7nm TSMC is currently only at 30% capacity). 
     
    They knew that they had a captive market that would buy anything with sophisticated marketing. $26 per yield is $26 per yield! Granted, the consumer would evaporate $26 in the form of higher electricity bills in 3-4 months vs the same performance from a 225w 425mm2 7nm TSMC die, and guess what? None of that $26 savings was passed on to the consumer. Youre still buying ridiculously overpriced garbage, ESPECIALLY the 3090. And the environment (what's that? Unprecedented wild-fires in the Arctic, West Coast, Australia, the Atlantic ocean hurricane season starting 1 month early because the surface temp is 7 degrees above average?)? Imagine everyone who is buying a 3080 @ 370w when that same level of compute is possible with a 7nm TSMC die @ 425mm2 @ 225w. This is criminal. 
     
    Their first stupid decision was the decision to sell discrete GPU's hand over fist to mining farms in Asia and the U.S. in 2017 and telling investors that these were purchases from people building gaming PC's for the first time. 
     
    Crypto-bubble crashed, and they had all of this built up investor activity, so they had to keep profits high without moving inventory. Best way to accomplish that? Price the new GPU's higher! How can they do that? Introduce some new technology! Introducing the 20 series GPU's where every GPU was renamed one GPU higher on the product stack in a vain attempt to conceal a literal doubling in historical pricing! 
     
    RTX 2070? TU-106 SKU. 106 designates 60 card SKU. No SLI, heretofore every 70 card has had an SLI tab. Doesn't share PCB with the 80 card, heretofore every 70 card shares PCB with 80 card. Only as fast as outgoing 80 card, not 80 Ti card like every new 70 card before it, i.e. GTX 1070, as fast as 980 Ti and GTX 970, as fast as 780 Ti. Making for a $600 60 card in actuality that can't even do ray tracing at 1080p 
     
    Same story for the 2080, which is basically a $900 70 card. 
     
    And the 2080 Ti, a glorified $1200 80 card. (I bought my Samsung B-Die equipped XC2 used, local, no sales tax with 2 years remaining on the transferable warranty for $900 around 6 months ago and I already had the Phanteks water block on hand. I need the upgrade because 1080 Ti wasn't enough for 3440x1440, 3D Vision, and VR and the upgrade has yielded 50% gains in all of my demanding titles, as represented by the Timespy GPU improvement. I would NOT have paid $1200 before taxes for this and another $250 for water-block and back-plate before taxes, even at 50% performance gain and Ampere only represents a 25% gain from here for $2300 estimated after taxes for quality AIB variant and water-block. Twice the price for half the gain. Masterful marketing Jacket Man!) 
     
    And now they are at it again with their shenanigans! They learned real quick this time that the best way to overstate the performance jump is to simply buy out a tech-tuber and allow them to show specially curated "benchmarks" showing how fast the new architecture is two weeks before anyone else! According to Digital Foundry the 3080 is 90% faster than the 2080 and 65% faster than 2080 Ti! 
     
    In reality the 3080 is 10-15% faster than 2080 Ti when running both cards as the same power draw. 
     
    And the brain-dead zombified masses eat it up. 
     
    Then, NGreedia intentionally botch the launch (they knew scalpers with bots would occur, this is by design: 1. it lets them off the hook from warranty responsibility. 2. It creates a situation of artificial scarcity, which creates hysteria and and amplifies demand. Then they invariably "run out" of the FE variant, which as MLID has point out, is intentional, as they intend to make the bulk of their profit through AIB sales, replete with inferior components and which cannot run as fast "just underclock your AIB 3080 by 100 MHz to resolve the black-screen issues". 
     
    And now? 
     
    Now they will simply gimp the outgoing architecture driver-side with newer games. They will call it "focusing on the new architecture". Here's how it works. They set out to UNOPTIMIZE the outgoing architecture with a newer game where the consuming public has no reference point. (they can't do it with existing games, well they can, but this is already becoming TLDR). 
     
    So then the benchmarks will show: 
     
    RTX 3080 = 50% faster than 2080 Ti in Cyberpunk 2077!
     
    When in reality, the 3080 isn't actually faster, they simply GIMPED the 2080 Ti with this game to make it look faster. 
     
    Stop buying this mediocrity. Do not support this shady corporation. It's time to support the competition. We are in this mess with a $1500 80 Ti card that is only 25% faster than the outgoing 80 Ti card at the same power draw because mindless morons support it with their wallet. 
     
    Wait for Big Navi, due out in one month. 
     
     




    You are an idiot the 2080ti was not 50% faster than a 1080ti unless you had an extreme ocer. Dont spread fud like the clown you are
    #22
    kevinc313
    CLASSIFIED Member
    • Total Posts : 2054
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2019/02/28 09:27:55
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 14
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/10/03 08:33:57 (permalink)
    bmgjet
    Its the powerlimiter, Some chips a more hungry the others for power and that 366W is gimping it.

    Here is the best I could get on 366W.







    That is insane.
    #23
    kevinc313
    CLASSIFIED Member
    • Total Posts : 2054
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2019/02/28 09:27:55
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 14
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/10/03 10:22:25 (permalink)
    slayer6288
     
    You are an idiot the 2080ti was not 50% faster than a 1080ti unless you had an extreme ocer. Dont spread fud like the clown you are



    LOL, he literally posted proof.
    #24
    HawkOculus
    iCX Member
    • Total Posts : 403
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2019/04/10 10:50:51
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 1
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/10/03 10:53:04 (permalink)
    lol hard at this Vulcan clown, just a straight up AMD shill. That or just so dissatisfied with life in general that he feels the need to “insult” corporations that don’t care about his existence.
    #25
    Viper97
    CLASSIFIED ULTRA Member
    • Total Posts : 5188
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2007/09/07 13:06:18
    • Location: Chillin'
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 11
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/10/03 10:58:48 (permalink)
    I can't be certain but I believe every iteration of 3D Mark requires a new or updated version to fully benchmark the new cards. I remember benching my 2080ti and I kept getting errors such as unsupported hardware/software etc.


     
    #26
    MatthewAMEL
    Superclocked Member
    • Total Posts : 107
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2016/07/13 23:15:40
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/10/03 13:24:43 (permalink)
    Solid post, vulcan. The more time I spend reading and watching about Ampere, the less impressed I am.
     
    It's clearly a compute card that can handle rasterization. It's not a gaming architecture. It has terrible efficiency and scaling.
     
    Ampere is beginning to look more and more like Fermi to me.

    10G-P5-3897-KR 9/17/2020 8:07:39 AM PT Yes
    #27
    NoFear99
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 7
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2019/08/30 14:41:21
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/10/08 19:27:12 (permalink)
    My spytime graphic score is 20 240 points and my card is an XC3 Gaming ( not the ultra ).

    My overall score is 16 275 and before I was at 13 300 with my Evga 2080TI Black and my cpu is a Ryzen 5 3600.

    My blueroom VRmark score passed from 4 953 to 6 360.

    It represent about a 25-27% gain and not 35%-45% like I was expecting.

    When I look at other benchmarks with 3080 card they are about 12-14% slower then 3090.
    post edited by NoFear99 - 2020/10/09 04:48:34
    #28
    aelnegres
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 4
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/09/04 12:15:04
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/10/21 18:10:59 (permalink)
    I can't even get 19k with my ftw3 ultra...
    #29
    aelnegres
    New Member
    • Total Posts : 4
    • Reward points : 0
    • Joined: 2020/09/04 12:15:04
    • Status: offline
    • Ribbons : 0
    Re: 3090 XC3 Ultra underperforming in timespy? 2020/10/21 18:13:09 (permalink)
    arestavo
    My 3090 FTW3 Ultra at stock (power slider maxed) only gets about 1100 points more for the GPU score, so I don't think you're that far off considering that the 30 series is totally power draw limited - 


    I have the same card and I can't even break 19k stock...what score are you getting with power slider stock, not maxed(100%)? I'm thinking I got a really low performing card or something.
    #30
    Page: 12 > Showing page 1 of 2
    Jump to:
  • Back to Mobile