RTX 4070 Ti Super - reviews are live

[Bond007]

And I always feel most gloss over the DLSS3 frame generation, that gives you like +20-30FPS too.

I always disable it. The frame rate gains are not worth the quality / accuracy loss for the games I play so I intentionally ignore the DLSS variants of the benchmarks.

I agree with @Izerous . I don't have parts to use this, but I tried playing with settings at a friends place in a couple games. Other than showing a higher FPS number, I found the experience better with frame gen disabled. I found that if you adjusted the settings up to where you needed to "boost" FPS (and turned on frame gen), then movement/inputs felt off and unpleasant (more so than just low FPS). And If you adjust the settings down to where you have more FPS natively, then you don't need frame gen and it didn't really do anything tangibly better if enabled. Maybe there is a sweet spot in the middle where it may feasibly provide a benefit, but so far it is a marketing thing IMO. It isn't something I would use and I now completely bypass reviews or parts of reviews that are done with it on.

 

[JD]

I guess it's probably similar to the AMD's version that they just launched, whereby the say you should already be hitting 60FPS before enabling frame generation.

I've noticed that in Cyberpunk running say psycho RTX preset and tossing DLSS + Frame Gen on top will pull the FPS up but the latency is insane to the point where it feels like ~30FPS anyways. My current mix of settings (mostly high, but ultra RT) gets me around 60FPS, then adding DLSS Quality + Frame Gen on top pulls me up to 90-100FPS. Makes it feel a lot smoother and I would say keeps the minimum FPS higher too. Latency doesn't seem noticeable, but I'm sure it exists.

In competitive games, I can understand not using it at all. You'd simply want to dial down the graphic settings.

 

[Bond007]

I guess it's probably similar to the AMD's version that they just launched, whereby the say you should already be hitting 60FPS before enabling frame generation.

I've noticed that in Cyberpunk running say psycho RTX preset and tossing DLSS + Frame Gen on top will pull the FPS up but the latency is insane to the point where it feels like ~30FPS anyways. My current mix of settings (mostly high, but ultra RT) gets me around 60FPS, then adding DLSS Quality + Frame Gen on top pulls me up to 90-100FPS. Makes it feel a lot smoother and I would say keeps the minimum FPS higher too. Latency doesn't seem noticeable, but I'm sure it exists.

In competitive games, I can understand not using it at all. You'd simply want to dial down the graphic settings.

I think I would feel the same way with the AMD equivalent, but I haven't tried it.

Have your tried those same settings both with and without frame-gen (just the DLSS Quality)? I would be curious to know if your have a different opinion with your setup and in cyberpunk (I didn't try that one). When I tried it with FPS in that ballpark (say 75-80FPS for you with DLSS Quality/no frame gen), I found absolutely no benefit to the the extra frames in a frame rate counter by turning it on...it was just visually showing a higher number. But when native FPS dropped lower (regardless what the "boosted" number was) I had issues with how it felt (assuming it was latency or visual not aligning with the inputs, but I didn't do any scientific validation).

 

[JD]

The "System Latency" in the NVIDIA overlay goes from about mid-30ms to mid-50ms and the 99% FPS goes from about 60 to 90 with frame generation (and DLSS remaining as-is at quality). May sound silly, but the coil whine changes too. Without frame generation, there's "stutters" periodically. It's not smooth and you can hear the coil whine stop too when the game stutters like that. With frame generation, the pitch of the coil whine is less and the game runs buttery smooth. Honestly, I'm in awe when I can drive around the world at 200kmh without any perceivable drop in FPS, while watching the wet roads reflect all the lights.

Without DLSS and only frame gen, it feels laggy. And it's unplayable without both as it seems only get about 40FPS lol

Maybe certain game engines fair better than others? Obviously NVIDIA has worked heavily with CD Projekt Red, so it may be the "best case" scenario? I have it enabled in Hogwarts & Starfield too, but those are even slower paced than Cyberpunk.

Which games did you try out of curiosity?

 

[moocow]

HUB posted an update. There were spec mistakes in the original video and they discover the MSI Ventus version is pulling some power.

 

[Lysrin]

HUB posted an update. There were spec mistakes in the original video and they discover the MSI Ventus version is pulling some power.

I consistently find these guys a class act. I appreciate how they review, they seem to be balanced imo across brands, insightful in their observations, and they don't jump on "click-bait" type stuff very often. At least since I've started watching them anyway.

 

[Groove]

I agree with you JD, I find the exact same in CP2077 and it's impressive stuff. However, like you mentioned, I also think it's a "best case" scenario given nvidia heavy hand in it, probably won't be as good across the board (at least for now). Enabling FG in Starfield gives me some kind of weird screen tearing at the bottom on my screen when running across certain types of terrain. Still, I really like it in CP2077 though.

 

[moocow]

MSI posted a BIOS update and from Kitguru's test and GN's comment, it's 0% to 5% uplift. The speed got a slight bump.

MSI’s new RTX 4070 Ti Super BIOS tested – does it make a difference? - KitGuru

If you were following the launch of Nvidia's RTX 4070 Ti Super graphics card this week, you will lik

www.kitguru.net

 

[Marzipan]

I was looking for a side by side review of the 4070, 4070 Super, 4070 Ti and 4070 Ti Super and found LTT had something pretty close. I loved his conclusion...that APU may be the future of gaming with the higher prices and lack of performance gains offered by the newest GPU's released.