Power and Temperature
To test the power and temperature we perform a manual run-through in Cyberpunk 2077 at “Ultra” settings for real-world in-game data. We use GPU-Z sensor data to record the results. We report on the GPU-Z sensor data for “Board Power” and “GPU Chip Power” when available for our Wattage data. For temperature data, we report the GPU (Edge Temp of the GPU or Package Temp) as well as Hot Spot (Junction Temperature) when available for our temperature data.
The ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 4070 Ti OC video card was the most power-efficient video card in our comparison. It literally was at the top of the graph, with the lowest Board and GPU Power numbers. At 271.1W Board Power it uses 23% less power than the GeForce RTX 3090, and 40% less power than the GeForce RTX 3090 Ti, that’s getting close to half as much power. Compared to the Radeon RX 7900 XT, it uses 12% less power. That’s right, it is more power efficient than the new Radeon RX 7900 XT. In terms of Board Power, it’s even less than the GeForce RTX 3070 Ti! That means it is performing between an RTX 3090 and RTX 3090 Ti, but consuming less power than the RTX 3070 Ti! That is truly efficient. Even overclocked, it’s still under the RTX 3070 Ti.
The GPU temperatures seem fine here, it runs cooler than the RTX 3090 Ti, RTX 3090, and RTX 3090 Ti. It’s actually very close to Radeon RX 7900 XT temperatures. This is of course a custom video card from ASUS, so temperatures will vary by board partner. This one keeps it cool, and overclocking wasn’t an issue. The cooler is not holding back overclocking potential.
GPU-Z Sensor Data
The first two screenshots of GPU-Z above are at Default, and the second two screenshots of GPU-Z are at Overclocked.
Discussion (19 replies)
Join Discussion →Aaaand, it's a dud. The 7900 XT now actually makes sense.
Sort of want, but will wait until under 500. 1080ti still gets job done.
Ok, so this is only tangential to the topic... but at what point do you get to call it either a monopoly or price fixing?
Now, I do not think that AMD and nVidia are colluding to raise consumer prices. I think nVidia is doing it because they can get away with it, and AMD is just playing along with "just slightly less than" pricing because their shareholders would oust them outright if they didn't.
There is no government limit on the margin a company can ask, or the profit they can pull in. That's kinda how capitalism works. But I sure hate this feeling that we are just getting utterly taken advantage of. I guess it's just a hobby, I don't have to play along - I just hate seeing it happen before my eyes.
Nvidia has enormous pricing power because of RTX & DLSS3
At the premium price points ($500 plus) people most likely go by added features rather than outright raster performance
What is surprising is that: even in below $500 prev gen GPUs, higher price Ampere cards outsell equivalent but much cheaper RDNA 2 cards
If more people purchase Navi 22 cards (RX 6750 XT, 6700 XT, RX 6700) instead of Ampere, than Nvidia might get the message !!
DLSS3 itself isn't a real selling point. It exists, and it has a purpose - but not for most gaming scenarios. DLSS2 is still the main DLSS technology and remains more competitive overall, especially in situations where RT is used with heavy loads overall.
If nvidia pushes DLSS3 as hard as they pushed DLSS, we'll see support in most upcoming games.
Besides, 100% performance increase does sound like a big selling point.
Thanks, @Brent_Justice for the very thorough review which answered nearly every question I could have about this card.
Well, it seems the card lies between the RTX3090 and 3090Ti, but men the thing gets bandwidh starved at 4k
I'm really impressed just becauese looking at the specs I really didn't think it would do that good.
Great review!
I figured Nvidias "faster than 3090ti" claims were going to be all fluff, but it does at least get close most of the time, and actually succeeds in others.
Still, not quite sure I'd be happy with the value proposition $799 is a lot for a mid range card.
If I could make a request, if it isn't too much of a main in the ass, Minimum/1%/0.1% framerates are very relevant and would add a lot of information to your reviews. I'd even argue that minimum frames are MORE relevant that average frames.
Sure?
DLSS 1.0 was pretty bad - but showed the promise of intelligent upscaling.
DLSS 2.0 has more or less delivered on that promise. My opinion, of course; I find DLSS 2.0 to be more than close enough to justify any perceived degradation in visuals. Granted I have no problem using FSR / FSR 2.0 where exclusively available, whether I'm gaming on an AMD GPU or that's just what the game in question supports.
DLSS 3.0 is 'frame doubling'. This works great for pre-recorded media (if you like the effect itself), but for real-time applications it means that there's a definite insertion of additional input latency attached with usage. So, for DLSS 3.0 to even be useful in a particular situation, performance already has to be high enough for real-time interaction. Whereas DLSS 2.0 taking you from an arbitrary 20FPS to 35FPS, or 60FPS to 90FPS and so on can significantly impact the quality of the experience, DLSS 3.0 (that is, the 'frame generation' part of it) needs you to be running at 60FPS+ in the first place.
And there's a place for that - many games that aren't as user-response dependent can benefit, thinking anything turn-based or perhaps RPG and adventure-style games. Some simulators as well.
But for anything where optimizing for input latency is already a concern, DLSS 3.0 is a non-starter.
No one should be! But it's still the cheapest entry point for the level of technology Nvidia is bringing to the table.
BTW seems to me the cards are unnecessarily big. It seems the PCB is about 2/3 the size of the card.
I wonder if they reused parts from its bigger brothers to save R&D and inventory costs.
It's a tradeoff. It costs more per unit, but it saves having to develop new parts.
Yeah, I'm sure. There are already about 50+ games announced that will support DLSS3. If someone know how to shove new technology down your throat, that's nvidia. BTW thanks to nvidia reflex, latency is actually lower than without DLLS3. Not saying its going to be great, but by now DLSS already gained high praise and is considered a must have for many gamers, DLSS3 at least deserves a chance.
Anyway AMD is also having its own frame interpolation/frame creation technology coming soon. We'll see.
I haven't owned a Nvidia GPU newer than my 2016 Pascal Titan X, so I ahve not personally played with DLSS yet.
Can all titles that support DLSS3 also run DLSS2? In other words is it backwards compatible or an option?
Because I too tend to think - from what I have read and seen, through not through personal experience) that DLSS2 was the pinnacle of the tech.
Pretty sure the answer is yes. Brent has a write-up on it in his 4090 review that also goes a little more in-depth about the frame generation feature. It's about midway down the first page.
https://www.thefpsreview.com/2022/10/11/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-founders-edition-review/