Nvidia’s RTX 4090 graphics card offers big improvements over the older 3090 and 3090 Ti,
but is it worth trading your whole wallet for? I’ve compared all three GPUs in 25 games at 4K,
1440p and 1080p resolutions to find out!
All 3 of these graphics cards have 24 gigs of GDDR6X memory with a 384-bit bus,
and the memory speeds between the 3090 Ti and 4090 are basically the same. The 3090
Ti only has 2% more CUDA cores compared to the non-Ti version, while the new 4090 has
52% more compared to the 3090 Ti, and the 4090 has a much higher boost clock too.
Both the 3090 Ti and 4090 have a 450 watt TGP, but the 4090 is based on TSMC 4nm compared to
the older Samsung 8nm process used with Ampere. Although Nvidia’s MSRP puts the
4090 in between the 3090 and 3090 Ti, right now at Newegg you can pick up the 3090 from
$950 USD and the 3090 Ti from $1100, as the 3090 Ti price was recently cut. Prices will
continue change over time, so refer to the links in the description for updates.
So then, is it worth spending at least $500 more for the 4090?
To find out, I’ve compared all three graphics cards in this test system. It’s got AMD’s
latest Ryzen 9 7950X 16 core CPU and 32 gigs of DDR5-6000 CL30 memory. All testing has been
done with resizable BAR enabled, with Windows 11 22H2 fully up to date and core isolation off, and
with my BIOS patched against a known early issue that causes problems for 4090s running on AM5.
Alright let’s get straight into the 25 game comparison at 3 different
resolutions. Then after that we’ll check out things like ray tracing,
DLSS 3, thermals, clock speeds, power draw, performance per watt and cost per frame.
If you don’t want to hear me talk about every single one of those
25 games then make use of those timestamps below.
Let’s start out with Cyberpunk 2077, no ray tracing or DLSS here, but we’ll check those
out later. I’ve got the 1080p results down the bottom, 1440p in the middle, and 4K up the top,
with three GPUs tested from lowest down the bottom to highest up the top within each resolution. The
differences at 1080p were rather small, as we’re just less GPU bound here. The 4090 was
only 11% faster than the 3090 Ti here, but then at 4K where the GPUs actually get put
to work we’re looking at a 57% boost over the 3090 Ti, and 67% ahead compared to the 3090.
Halo Infinite again only had minor differences at 1080p, so not really worth spending the extra
money unless you’re planning on gaming at higher resolutions. The gap gets bigger at 1440p though,
with the 4090 25% faster than the 3090 Ti and 32% faster than the 3090,
but then at 4K the 4090 ends up being 64% ahead of the 3090 Ti and 79% ahead of the 3090,
a much bigger difference. I mean even the 4090’s dips in performance measured by the
1% lows at 4K were higher than the average FPS coming out of the 3090, impressive stuff.
Apex Legends has a 300 FPS frame cap, even if you set the frame limit to 0. The 4090
was hitting the frame limit at both 1080p and 1440p, even with all settings set to maximum.
At 4K, the 4090 was reaching a 79% higher average frame rate compared to the 3090 Ti,
the biggest improvement between these two GPUs out of all 25 games tested. The 4090 was 84%
ahead of the 3090, but this still wasn’t the biggest gap between those two GPUs.
Call of Duty Warzone wasn’t limited by such frame caps, and the 4090 was
still able to deliver and excellent boost at the lower 1080p resolution. At least compared
to most other games. The 4090 gets us a 38% higher average frame rate compared to the 3090 at 1080p,
and 35% higher compared to the 3090 Ti, so yeah really goes to show how small the performance
gap between the 3090 and 3090 Ti was. At least compared to the newer 4090 anyway.
Total War Warhammer III also had some big improvements with the 4090 at 1080p as well.
I thought this was meant to be a CPU heavy game? Clearly the Ryzen 9 7950X is giving it what it
needs, because the 4090 was 43% ahead of the 3090 at 1080p, and 35% ahead of the 3090 Ti,
which are above average gains at this lower resolution. Just for context, at the more GPU
bound 4K resolution the 4090 was 70% ahead of the 3090, and 57% ahead of the 3090 Ti.
Marvel’s Spider-Man Remastered is more of a CPU heavy game, so all three GPUs were
performing about the same at the lower 1080p resolution. The gaps at 1440p were only minor,
and then at 4K the 4090 was 62% faster compared to the 3090,
and 50% faster compared to the 3090 Ti, both of which are slightly below the 25 game average.
Speaking of CPU heavy, Microsoft Flight Simulator was in a similar boat. Or should I say plane?
Anyway there’s basically no difference between the three GPUs at 1080p and 1440p resolutions,
the differences are within the margin of error range. The 4090 was 30% ahead of the 3090 Ti
at 4K, and 44% ahead of the 3090, the second smallest difference out of all 25 games tested.
Red Dead Redemption 2 also had basically no difference at 1080p, though to be fair I’m
testing with the high setting preset rather than the highest ultra settings, so it’s possible that
we’d see a bigger difference there as it might make us a bit more GPU bound. Ideally I would have
used the highest settings for a GPU comparison like this, but I’ve reused a lot of my recent data
from Zen 4 and Intel 13th gen comparisons, rather than waste an additional 2 days in re-testing.
This is why I’ve also got some random games like CS:GO. GPU difference doesn’t matter at
all at 1080p and 1440p resolutions, and then at 4K it only makes a little difference. It’s
by far the smallest change out of all 25 games, with the 4090 just 7% faster than the 3090 Ti.
Back to some more GPU heavy games. Dying Light 2 had a big boost with the 4090,
even at the lower 1080p resolution. The 4090 was 51% ahead of the 3090 Ti at 1080p,
the biggest difference between them out of all 25 games at this lower
resolution. The 4090 was then 55% ahead at 1440p, and 52% ahead at 4K.
DOOM Eternal also had above average gains on the 4090 at the lower 1080p resolution,
at least with the highest ultra nightmare setting preset. The 1% lows from the 4090
were way ahead of the average FPS coming out of the 3090 and 3090 Ti, an impressive result.
Death Stranding has a 240 FPS frame cap, which is why they’re all the same at 1080p.
Kind of no point testing it, but I think it illustrates that depending on the game,
there are varying reasons why GPU selection might not matter at all. Only the 4090 was
capable of hitting the frame rate limit at 1440p max settings, and then at 4K none of
them could do it, maybe we need a 5090. The 4090 was 48% faster than the 3090 Ti here,
and 61% ahead of the 3090, a below average difference out of the 25 games tested.
Borderlands 3 on the other hand saw above average gains on the 4090. At 1440p the 4090
was 72% ahead of the 3090, the biggest performance gap between these two GPUs
at this resolution out of all 25 titles tested.
The Assassin’s Creed Valhalla results got me a little excited,
not gonna lie. I’m currently 100 hours through my second playthrough on a laptop 3070 Ti,
but now the 4090 has me wanting to just play on my testing machine.
How about some racing games? F1 2021 had the biggest difference between the 3090 and
4090 at 4K out of all 25 games tested, with the 4090 reaching an 87% higher average frame rate,
crazy stuff. Again like most other games, only minor changes at the lower 1080p resolution.
The Forza horizon 5 differences between the 3090 and 3090 Ti look really small
when sitting next to the 4090, despite the fact that the differences we’re seeing at
4K were relatively close to the 25 game average. This was another where even the
1% lows from the 4090 were higher than the average FPS coming out of the Ampere cards.
God of War had some decent gains at the lower 1080p resolution at high settings,
so not even the highest ultra settings. Again, reusing my CPU data,
it is what it is. For some reason the 1% lows were worse on the 4090 at 4K, not sure what
the deal was there but it was reproducible. It’s not that much of a difference though,
and the average frame rate was still 50% faster compared to the 3090 Ti and 63% ahead of the 3090.
This is my first time testing Rainbow Six Extraction. It’s behaving similar to many
others with 1080p not being that much different between the three GPUs. The 4090 was just 17%
faster compared to the 3090 at 1080p, but then 68% faster at the higher 4K resolution.
Watch Dogs Legion had an even smaller difference at 1080p,
and the 1440p results don’t exactly make me want to run out and exchange my wallet for
a 4090. At 4K the 4090 was 74% ahead of the 3090, and 60% ahead of the 3090 Ti.
Metro Exodus Enhanced was only tested at high settings,
so perhaps by maxing it out we’d see larger gains with the 4090 at 1080p,
but regardless 4K was still giving the 4090 above average gains, reaching a 62%
higher average frame rate compared to the 3090 Ti, and 75% ahead of the 3090.
Fortnite is probably one of the worst instances of reusing my CPU comparison data,
as I tested with medium settings figuring competitive players probably aren’t maxing
everything out. So not ideal for a GPU comparison. As a result, the gains from
the 4090 were below average compared to most other games, with the 4090 reaching a
46% higher average frame rate compared to the 3090 at 4K, and 38% higher than the 3090 Ti.
Kind of similar deal in Far Cry 6, I didn’t even test with HD textures on, and the 1080p and 1440p
results only had minor differences. Even the differences at 4K were small, so maybe it's
just the game, with the 4090 41% ahead of the 3090 Ti and 50% ahead of the 3090. I mean those
are still decent results, just not as impressive compared to most of the other games tested.
The Riftbreaker is another leftover from my recent CPU comparison data,
so as a CPU heavy test it’s no surprise to see no differences at 1080p and 1440p resolutions.
I could have not included this game, but the fact is some games are just CPU heavy,
and I wanted to represent that by showing that the 4090 might not always offer gains.
It seems hard to have a 25 game comparison without including Shadow of the Tomb Raider,
which was tested with the game’s benchmark tool if you want to compare to your own
results or those of another reviewer. The 4090 was 82% ahead of the 3090 at 4K,
and 66% ahead of the 3090 Ti, some of the bigger differences out of the games covered.
Last game before we get into the good stuff, so it's time to wake up if you've
been falling asleep. The Witcher 3 was tested with the highest ultra setting preset,
and at 4K the 4090 was 52% ahead compared to the 3090 Ti, and 65% ahead compared to the 3090.
On average over all 25 games tested, at 4K the RTX 4090 was 63% faster compared to the RTX 3090
from last gen. As we can see results really vary and depend on the specific game. CS:GO benefits
more from extra CPU power than GPU, so it wasn’t a surprise to see it down the bottom here with
nearly a 13% gain on the 4090. Meanwhile F1 2021 up the top was 87% faster on the 4090.
Stepping down to the lower 1440p resolution and the RTX 4090 now had a 39% lead over the
RTX 3090. We’ve got a few more of our CPU heavy games down the bottom of the graph,
and in some cases the RTX 4090 isn’t able to offer any performance gains over the RTX 3090,
at least with the setting levels I’ve tested with.
The difference gets smaller at the lower 1080p resolution, as we're just less GPU bound here,
with the RTX 4090 now 22% ahead of the RTX 3090. There are still clearly some very nice
gains with the newer RTX 4090, but honestly 1080p isn’t really where these GPUs shine.
The RTX 4090 was 52% faster when compared to the RTX 3090 Ti at 4K. This looks like
a rather impressive gain compared to the best that was available last gen.
Of course some of our more CPU limited titles didn’t see quite as big gains,
but then others like Apex Legends were more than 80% faster with the RTX 4090.
At 1440p we’re looking at a 32% boost with the RTX 4090 over the RTX 3090
Ti in our same 25 game selection. Just like we saw when comparing the RTX 3090,
a few of the CPU heavy games were seeing basically no differences between these two GPUs,
again at least with the specific setting presets I’ve tested with.
At 1080p the 4090 was now almost 18% faster than the 3090 Ti on average,
though 9 of the 25 games saw less than a 5% performance difference. It clearly
depends on the game, as Dying Light 2 was still 50% faster with the 4090,
but yeah if you’re playing 1080p the 4090 becomes less worthwhile, though at the same time,
I doubt most people are looking to buy either of these GPUs for 1080p gaming.
If we look at the average frame rates for all 25 games, we can clearly see that the
4090 has a bigger improvement compared to the smaller difference between the
3090 and 3090 Ti. The gap between the 3090 and 3090 Ti is way smaller comparatively,
and we can also see that the 4090 has the biggest lead at the highest 4K resolution,
as more games are GPU bound there and the 4090 gets better utilized.
Once we factor in price, an important thing to do as these don't grow on the GPU tree,
the 4090 ends up being worse value from a cost per frame perspective at 1080p and 1440p resolutions.
The 4090 was slightly better value than the 3090 Ti at the highest 4K resolution. Technically the
3090 is best in terms of value, basically you’ve got to pay more if you want the extra performance
from the 4090, not really a surprise. If you’re planning on gaming at 4K though and can afford the
4090, it’s looking like a better pick compared to last generation’s best 3090 Ti at today’s prices.
The PC with the 3090 Ti installed was using the most power in Cyberpunk 2077
at 4K ultra settings, while the 4090 was only using a little more compared
to the 3090. The 4090 is boosting average FPS in this game by more than 50% though,
so from a performance per watt perspective, the 4090 actually ends up being the most efficient,
at least in this one specific game. So not only is the 4090 objectively performing the
best in terms of frame rate, you’re getting more performance out of your power bill with it too.
As we expected from the spec sheet, the 4090 is clocking much higher compared to the 3090
and 3090 Ti as well, which is no doubt part of what contributes to it performing so much better.
We can’t really fairly compare thermals because I’ve got Nvidia’s founders edition 4090,
while my 3090 and 3090 Ti are MSI’s Gaming X Trio design,
but just for completeness, my 4090 was running a little cooler too.
As for ray tracing performance, I’ve tested Cyberpunk 2077 with the highest RT preset
at 4K. Now we would of course get much higher frame rates with DLSS enabled,
but I wanted to compare raw RT performance only. In this test,
the 4090 was reaching a 70% higher average frame rate compared to the 3090 Ti,
and 91% higher compared to the 3090, so some nice gains if you’re inclined to trace those rays.
DLSS 3 sounds like a nice improvement, but it’s only available for the RTX 40 series,
and I've tested it with the 3DMark DLSS test for this video. The 4090 was scoring 25% better
with DLSS 3 enabled compared to the older DLSS 2. This is nearly a 200% higher score
with DLSS 3 compared to DLSS off for the 4090, a huge boost, but it’s hard to say for sure if
this would translate directly to games, as 3DMark tests are generally more synthetic.
Now I haven’t actually tested DLSS 3 on the RTX 4090 in any real games, because right now when
I’m making this video it’s before the 4090 has officially launched, and it’s just kind of hard
to get BETA builds of different games that do have DLSS 3 support built in. Now to be fair to Nvidia,
they did provide us with a number of games that we could use to test DLSS 3 early. But with
the amount of customizations, workarounds and other various caveats, honestly I just couldn’t
really be bothered after doing 25 games on 3 graphics cards. Properly comparing DLSS 3
would be way easier once it’s actually available publicly in games. I also don’t normally compare
visual quality, so I don’t think there’s too much point of me comparing the performance
differences between DLSS 2 and DLSS 3 if I’m not going to analyze how they look. Yeah sure,
I could say DLSS 3 is whatever percent faster, but unless I’m actually comparing the differences in
visual quality, I don’t think there’s much point. I’m just not much of a pixel peeper,
so I’ll leave those comparisons for channels like Hardware Unboxed and Digital Foundry. Anyway,
the 4090 costs about 45% more money compared to the 3090 Ti right now,
but at 4K it also performs 50% better, so if you’re rich and have the money then the 4090
is certainly looking pretty good. If you’re not made of money like most of us, then you
might want to wait for the 4080 launch next month. Get subscribed for my upcoming 4080 comparisons,
and if you are spending this sort of money on your PC, I’ll also be comparing the best CPUs
in these same 25 games soon. So Intel Core i9-13900K versus AMD Ryzen 9 7950X. Again,
you’re definitely going to want to make sure you’re subscribed for those comparisons.