Nvidia's RTX 5090 may feature this HUGE Founders Edition cooler

[WYP]

Recent rumours suggest that Nvidia's RTX 4090 Ti prototype heatsink may be the basis of their RTX 5090 Founders Edition.



Read more about Nvidia's alleged RTX 5090 heatsink design.

 

[Warchild]

it looks so ridiculous, its almost like one of those meme photoshops that are created to poke fun at a manufacturer.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

it looks so ridiculous, its almost like one of those meme photoshops that are created to poke fun at a manufacturer.

I quite like the look of massive graphics cards. I love to see a case that's full and every space is used well. Not saying that a 4-slot GPU is space 'well used', but still.

 

[Warchild]

id be more concerned about weight and stress on GPU slots, GPU sag and such. Its also slowly ruling out alot of case options.

 

[g0ggles1994]

I'm not on board with this. GPUs getting more and more power hungry is just a sign that Nvidia and AMD are trying to make each generation look better than the last by ramping the clocks and voltages up rather than putting out any meaningful innovation in the underlying architecture in the first place. I know adding in things like RT cores and whatnot doesn't help matters but RT has been around for multiple generations now, long enough to see some efficiency gains but it seems to be getting worse each time.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

I'm not on board with this. GPUs getting more and more power hungry is just a sign that Nvidia and AMD are trying to make each generation look better than the last by ramping the clocks and voltages up rather than putting out any meaningful innovation in the underlying architecture in the first place. I know adding in things like RT cores and whatnot doesn't help matters but RT has been around for multiple generations now, long enough to see some efficiency gains but it seems to be getting worse each time.

In fairness, while I agree that hotter and hungrier is not generally a good thing, Nvidia's 4000 series was very efficient and AMD's RDNA3 series was supposed to be more efficient but something went wrong with the final end product.

For context:

Reference 1080 - 166W in gaming / Strix 1080 - 196W
Reference 2080 - 215W in gaming / Strix 2080 - 215W
Reference 3080 - 303W in gaming / Strix 3080 - 318W
Reference 4080 - 304W in gaming / Strix 4080 - 340W

We saw a big jump from 2000 series to 3000 series in part because it was the same process node. In spite of the power consumption and cost, most liked the 3000 series.

The 4000 series was disliked for its price, for its connectors, etc. not for its lack of efficiency. It remained the same TDP as the 3000 series while vastly improving performance and improving cooling (see below).

Also to note:

1080 - 166W in gaming - 37dB
2080 - 215W in gaming - 35dB
3080 - 303W in gaming - 36dB
4080 - 304W in gaming - 34dB

 

[Dawelio]

In fairness, while I agree that hotter and hungrier is not generally a good thing, Nvidia's 4000 series was very efficient and AMD's RDNA3 series was supposed to be more efficient but something went wrong with the final end product.

For context:

Reference 1080 - 166W in gaming / Strix 1080 - 196W
Reference 2080 - 215W in gaming / Strix 2080 - 215W
Reference 3080 - 303W in gaming / Strix 3080 - 318W
Reference 4080 - 304W in gaming / Strix 4080 - 340W

We saw a big jump from 2000 series to 3000 series in part because it was the same process node. In spite of the power consumption and cost, most liked the 3000 series.

The 4000 series was disliked for its price, for its connectors, etc. not for its lack of efficiency. It remained the same TDP as the 3000 series while vastly improving performance and improving cooling (see below).

Also to note:

1080 - 166W in gaming - 37dB
2080 - 215W in gaming - 35dB
3080 - 303W in gaming - 36dB
4080 - 304W in gaming - 34dB

Do keep in mind that if you're referring to the reference as Founders Edition, than the 4080 uses the same cooler as on the 4090. Basically an very over engineered cooler for that specific GPU model, hence should run rather cool and quiet ^_^

 

[AngryGoldfish]

Do keep in mind that if you're referring to the reference as Founders Edition, than the 4080 uses the same cooler as on the 4090. Basically an very over engineered cooler for that specific GPU model, hence should run rather cool and quiet ^_^

Yeah, true, but that's not really my point. My point is, the 3080 was just as power hungry yet was a well-received GPU (minus availability issues).

And the fact that the 4080 has a cooler that's overpowered as a negativism is debatable. Many consider 'overpowered' to be a selling point; they'd rather have headroom. I'm one of them.

The reality is, from the way I can see it at least, while GPU architectures are more power hungry, the issue of heat—which is the biggest issue—is not a problem for most when you get to the 4080 and 4090 class of GPU's because the coolers have kept up and because enthusiasts often don't mind the headaches. ITX enthusiasts are going to have a hard time, but that's always been a challenge for ITX users. And it's part of the fun.

Ultimately, I don't understand the vitriol towards higher power consumption. If you're buying a 4090, you understand that you'll have to make changes to the rest of your system to make it work, if your system is not already set up for it. You're an enthusiast with a lot of money; you're probably overjoyed at the idea of building a new system just to fit the 4090. People love finding excuses to spend money and treat themselves. I'm sure there are some that found the new connectors tiresome and worrisome, and that's understandable. But beyond that I just don't get it. It sounds like people are complaining for the sake of complaining. The 1000 series completely spoiled everyone rotten. They demand 1080Ti's at every generation. The reason why there are endless articles and videos saying the 1080Ti is the best GPU of all time is because nothing was better after it but also before it. So Nvidia peaked. You can't expect a company to do that when you're dealing with such fragile engineering.

And if you can't handle the 4090 or even a 4080, don't buy one. Realistically, most people can get by perfectly fine with a 4070 Super, which consumes 218W during gaming. The average FPS at 1440p is 118 FPS. Most people don't need more than that. And most people don't need more than 12GB of VRAM at that resolution. So the point is moot. The 1080 when overclocked (which everyone did) was 190W. The power draw of the 4070 Super is 218W. I don't consider that a huge discrepancy or regression.

I know this is not directed at you because you commented on another point, but I wanted to post it anyway.

 

[Dawelio]

Yeah, true, but that's not really my point. My point is, the 3080 was just as power hungry yet was a well-received GPU (minus availability issues).

And the fact that the 4080 has a cooler that's overpowered as a negativism is debatable. Many consider 'overpowered' to be a selling point; they'd rather have headroom. I'm one of them.

The reality is, from the way I can see it at least, while GPU architectures are more power hungry, the issue of heat—which is the biggest issue—is not a problem for most when you get to the 4080 and 4090 class of GPU's because the coolers have kept up and because enthusiasts often don't mind the headaches. ITX enthusiasts are going to have a hard time, but that's always been a challenge for ITX users. And it's part of the fun.

Ultimately, I don't understand the vitriol towards higher power consumption. If you're buying a 4090, you understand that you'll have to make changes to the rest of your system to make it work, if your system is not already set up for it. You're an enthusiast with a lot of money; you're probably overjoyed at the idea of building a new system just to fit the 4090. People love finding excuses to spend money and treat themselves. I'm sure there are some that found the new connectors tiresome and worrisome, and that's understandable. But beyond that I just don't get it. It sounds like people are complaining for the sake of complaining. The 1000 series completely spoiled everyone rotten. They demand 1080Ti's at every generation. The reason why there are endless articles and videos saying the 1080Ti is the best GPU of all time is because nothing was better after it but also before it. So Nvidia peaked. You can't expect a company to do that when you're dealing with such fragile engineering.

And if you can't handle the 4090 or even a 4080, don't buy one. Realistically, most people can get by perfectly fine with a 4070 Super, which consumes 218W during gaming. The average FPS at 1440p is 118 FPS. Most people don't need more than that. And most people don't need more than 12GB of VRAM at that resolution. So the point is moot. The 1080 when overclocked (which everyone did) was 190W. The power draw of the 4070 Super is 218W. I don't consider that a huge discrepancy or regression.

I know this is not directed at you because you commented on another point, but I wanted to post it anyway.

Ohh I feel extremely directed here and so put on the spot right now after this novel of yours, not cool at all Goldfish ^_^ ...

I do completely agree with everything you said though and I'm in the same boat.

Even the 4070 is enough, seeing as the 4070S is just slightly faster but depending on region etc, can be quite a bit more expensive though.
Albeit I'd personally go with the 4070S FE over the 4070 FE any day, that all black cooler for the aestethics alone are worth the extra eye candy for me personally.

 

[AngryGoldfish]

Ohh I feel extremely directed here and so put on the spot right now after this novel of yours, not cool at all Goldfish ^_^ ...

I do completely agree with everything you said though and I'm in the same boat.

Even the 4070 is enough, seeing as the 4070S is just slightly faster but depending on region etc, can be quite a bit more expensive though.
Albeit I'd personally go with the 4070S FE over the 4070 FE any day, that all black cooler for the aestethics alone are worth the extra eye candy for me personally.

Yeah, 4070 non-Super might make more sense economically. I haven't been keeping up with actual real world prices for a while. I still check AMD sometimes though.

 

[Dawelio]

Yeah, 4070 non-Super might make more sense economically. I haven't been keeping up with actual real world prices for a while. I still check AMD sometimes though.

Buying FE cards in my region, the 4070S FE is about $70 more than the 4070 FE. Which is quite a big chunk for like 5-12% more performance.

 

[NeverBackDown]

Buying FE cards in my region, the 4070S FE is about $70 more than the 4070 FE. Which is quite a big chunk for like 5-12% more performance.

4070S is more 15-20% faster than a 4070. That's a lot of value for $70.