Nvidia RTX 5080 is on average 8.3% faster than RTX 4080 SUPER – first review
1–10 of 21 posts
Re: Nvidia RTX 5080 is on average 8.3% faster than RTX 4080 SUPER – first review
#2Well that's good news for current 4000 series owners I suppose.
Re: Nvidia RTX 5080 is on average 8.3% faster than RTX 4080 SUPER – first review
#3It's targeted at the "AI" gold rushers isn't it? Not at gamers.
Re: Nvidia RTX 5080 is on average 8.3% faster than RTX 4080 SUPER – first review
#4It's targeted at the "AI" gold rushers isn't it? Not at gamers.
Not really, given that it doesn't increase the amount of RAM compared to the old 4080 Super. If you want to do 'modern' AI on a (relative) budget you should be looking at a 4090 or 5090. This seems to be the card targeted most squarely at gamers.
Re: Nvidia RTX 5080 is on average 8.3% faster than RTX 4080 SUPER – first review
#5It's targeted at the "AI" gold rushers isn't it? Not at gamers.
It's it a good rush to want to run open models on your own computer? This isn't like Bitcoin mining where there is some direct monetary reward for hoarding compute.
Re: Nvidia RTX 5080 is on average 8.3% faster than RTX 4080 SUPER – first review
#6It's targeted at the "AI" gold rushers isn't it? Not at gamers.
It's it a good rush to want to run open models on your own computer? This isn't like Bitcoin mining where there is some direct monetary reward for hoarding compute.
Either gold rush or fear of missing out if you ask me.
I've succesfully run (not trained) local models * on my mac mini that cost less than a single video card anyway.
* That fit in my ram. They were probably slower than the FOMO hardware but good enough.
Re: Nvidia RTX 5080 is on average 8.3% faster than RTX 4080 SUPER – first review
#7It's targeted at the "AI" gold rushers isn't it? Not at gamers.
It's it a good rush to want to run open models on your own computer? This isn't like Bitcoin mining where there is some direct monetary reward for hoarding compute.
it is a gold rush from nvidia's perspective in that they're selling shovels
Re: Nvidia RTX 5080 is on average 8.3% faster than RTX 4080 SUPER – first review
#8It's targeted at the "AI" gold rushers isn't it? Not at gamers.
Not really, given that it doesn't increase the amount of RAM compared to the old 4080 Super. If you want to do 'modern' AI on a (relative) budget you should be looking at a 4090 or 5090. This seems to be the card targeted most squarely at gamers.
I heard nvidia is gimping consumer-grade cards to not be good at LLM training, is this true? If so are they gimped only for training or also for running LLMs?
I guess the limited amount of RAM is also a way to limit the cards.
Re: Nvidia RTX 5080 is on average 8.3% faster than RTX 4080 SUPER – first review
#9It's targeted at the "AI" gold rushers isn't it? Not at gamers.
I got a 2080Ti and was looking to upgrade, and I also enjoy running local AI models. Given that the card only has 16GB memory I don't see it as a huge upgrade over my 2080Ti, I can only get marginally larger models in memory on it. And if the model is in memory then the 2080Ti is fast enough.
Re: Nvidia RTX 5080 is on average 8.3% faster than RTX 4080 SUPER – first review
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really, given that it doesn't increase the amount of RAM compared to the old 4080 Super. If you want to do 'modern' AI on a (relative) budget you should be looking at a 4090 or 5090. This seems to be the card targeted most squarely at gamers.
I heard nvidia is gimping consumer-grade cards to not be good at LLM training, is this true? If so are they gimped only for training or also for running LLMs? I guess the limited amount of RAM is also a way to limit the cards.
At least Mistral 7B for its 128 token text generation is 58% faster with 5090 compared to 4090.
https://www.phoronix.com/review/nvidia-rtx5090-llama-cpp/3