Summary and conclusion
The Palit GeForce RTX 4080 GameRock 16 GB runs very quietly – thanks to the extremely large cooler – and the card has a boost clock of 2920 MHz, which is also kept like this in the long run. I could perceive a bit more coil whistling than in the GeForce RTX 4090 FE. Open test setup. Igor will surely tell us how it behaves in the housing. Because the card goes to him in the lab as quickly as possible and is then measured again properly. The RGB-ists among you will be happy about the optics. From my point of view, a successful graphics card – praise goes to Palit.
NVIDIA’s DLSS is the clear number one when it comes to upscaling. The graphical performance up to the Performance level is unrivaled so far. You can see that especially in 1080p, where the competitors can’t even begin to keep up. However, it is also a fact that the Ultra Performance mode looks basically modest. Basically unplayable, regardless of the resolution you play in. NVIDIA should improve this. This also clarifies my question number three posed at the beginning.
The new DLSS 3.0 with Frame Generation can push the FPS enormously up to 5 times the native screen performance. Comparing the DLSS upscaling levels with and without FG on, the FPS limit is at the technically feasible level. Namely, at max. 2 times the performance without frame generation. Even if they are not real frames in the end, this is basically hardly noticeable. However, a certain rule applies here: The fewer raster FPS you have, the lower the DLSS frame generation FPS will be, and the more likely you are to notice image artifacts.
Who needs DLSS 3.0 and FG on now? Basically, you don’t need frame generation with either a GeForce RTX 4080 or a RTX 4090 – currently. These cards manage to conjure up every game with playable frame rates on the monitor with DLSS 2.x if necessary. But, looking further into the future, there will probably be more games like CP2077 soon. With very sophisticated DXR on and very likely path tracing as well. I just say: better to have frame generation than to have! DLSS 3.0 can also be seen as an option for the future, when it will be available nationwide in two years’ time. Then such a card, which is just abysmally expensive today, can be a long-term investment. See RTX 2000, these cards benefit from DLSS and FSR today.
The only drawback are the latencies. As nice as a game with FG on and well over 200 FPS can be visually perceived on the monitor, it is not a recommendation for eSports titles. The latency night part can be enormous. Especially when you consider the 1% low latencies. As of today, DLSS 3.0 with FG on is – from my point of view – only something for elaborate AAA titles in which ray tracing brings the GPU’s raster performance to a crash – or extremely limits the CPU. This is because leveraging the CPU limit is a special discipline of DLSS Frame Generation.
This also answered the questions I asked at the beginning. See you on the forum…
The graphics card was provided by Palit for this test. The only condition was compliance with the blocking period; there was no influence or remuneration.
- 1 - Einführung und Testsystem
- 2 - Cyberpunk 2077 @ 2160p
- 3 - Cyberpunk 2077 @ 1440p
- 4 - Cyberpunk 2077 @ 1080p
- 5 - A Plague Tale: Requiem @ 2160p
- 6 - A Plague Tale: Requiem @ 1440p
- 7 - A Plague Tale: Requiem @ 1080p
- 8 - Bright Memory: Infinite @ 2160p
- 9 - Bright Memory: Infinite @ 1440p
- 10 - Bright Memory: Infinite @ 1080p
- 11 - Spider-Man Remastered @ 2160p
- 12 - Spider-Man Remastered @ 1440p
- 13 - Spider-Man Remastered DLSS vs. FSR vs. XeSS
- 14 - Zusammenfassung und Fazit
87 Antworten
Kommentar
Lade neue Kommentare
Mitglied
Mitglied
1
Moderator
Urgestein
Veteran
Urgestein
Veteran
Moderator
Veteran
Moderator
Veteran
Veteran
Mitglied
Veteran
Veteran
Alle Kommentare lesen unter igor´sLAB Community →