Nvidia Ada Lovelace and GeForce RTX 40-Series: Everything We Know

31
YouTube YouTube
Watch On

Nvidia's Ada architecture and GeForce RTX 40-series graphics cards first started shipping on October 12, 2022, starting with the GeForce RTX 4090. The GeForce RTX 4080 followed one month later on November 16, 2022, then the RTX 4070 Ti (formerly RTX 4080 12GB) launched on January 5, 2023, and the RTX 4070 on April 13. Those are all basically two years after the Nvidia Ampere architecture and basically right on schedule given the slowing down (or if you prefer, death) of Moore's 'Law.' Now, with the launch of the 40-series Super mid-cycle refresh, Nvidia has seemingly wrapped up the current offerings that compete with the best graphics cards.

With the Nvidia hack early in 2022, we had a good amount of information on what to expect. All the cards are now shipping and we have tested and reviewed every model of the Nvidia RTX 40-series. We've collected everything into this central hub detailing everything we know about Nvidia's Ada architecture and the RTX 40-series family.

The one remaining "unknown" is whether the rumored Titan RTX Ada / RTX 4090 Ti will ever appear, and if Nvidia might attempt to create an RTX 4050 — most likely no on both, but never say never. Just look at the RTX 3050 6GB, which came years after the 30-series first launched. But outside of those two potential exceptions, we now have basically everything there is to know about the Ada Lovelace architecture.

With the Ada whitepaper now available alongside the GPUs, we've updated the information here to cover exactly what the new generation of GPUs delivers. Let's start with the high level overview of the specs and rumored specs for the Ada series of GPUs.

Jarred Walton
Senior Editor

Jarred Walton is a senior editor at Tom's Hardware focusing on everything GPU. He has been working as a tech journalist since 2004, writing for AnandTech, Maximum PC, and PC Gamer. From the first S3 Virge '3D decelerators' to today's GPUs, Jarred keeps up with all the latest graphics trends and is the one to ask about game performance.

  • -Fran-
    One nitpick with this way of phrasing: "That means the big Infinity Cache gave AMD a 50% boost to effective bandwidth".

    The Cache on the GPUs doesn't make it so the card has a higher bandwidth, much like AMD's 3D VCache is not making DDR4 magically have more bandwidth. I know what the implied point is, but I think it shouldn't be explained that way at all. Preventing using the GDDR/DDR BUS to fetch data is not the same as increasing the effective bandwidth of it. You saturate that cache and you're back to using the slow lane. On initial load, you still use the slow lane. Etc...

    Other than that, thanks for the information. I do not look forward to 600W GPUs. Ugh.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • thisisaname
    The one thing we know for sure is it is not going to be cheap!
    Reply
  • escksu
    I reckon 1000w gpu isnt that far away...

    Not a good thing for power consumption to keep going up when pple are all talking about climate change and going green
    Reply
  • drivinfast247
    escksu said:
    I reckon 1000w gpu isnt that far away...

    Not a good thing for power consumption to keep going up when pple are all talking about climate change and going green
    People talk a lot and most of it is only to hear their own voice.
    Reply
  • spongiemaster
    -Fran- said:
    Other than that, thanks for the information. I do not look forward to 600W GPUs. Ugh.
    Unless you're shopping for a $2000+ GPU, you're not going to have to worry about 600W any time soon. These new flagships are going to be the equivalent of SLI setups from years ago minus the headaches of needing SLI profiles for proper performance. You'll only need one physical slot, but the cooler is going to take up 4 like old school dual slot card SLI.
    Reply
  • warezme
    I have been using a 1000w PS for many years but it's getting really long on the tooth so I purchased a new 1200w, waiting to get installed one of these days. I don't really like the idea of needing so much power but I remember the days of 2 and 4 card SLI , I used to run and that was excessive. Now a single card can run circles around all that without the driver and game compatibility issues so it is better.
    Reply
  • hannibal
    So these prices are for the first 5 seconds and after that we get normal 250% increase in price?
    Have to start saving for the 2000w PSU and getting a bank loan for the GPU!
    Good times ahead ;)
    Reply
  • DougMcC
    What are GPUs going to do in the next (50) generation? If power increased this much again, we'd be bumping up against the maximum wattage for a north american wall outlet.
    Reply
  • sizzling
    DougMcC said:
    What are GPUs going to do in the next (50) generation? If power increased this much again, we'd be bumping up against the maximum wattage for a north american wall outlet.
    Until the current generation there had been slight decreases or staying about the same for several generations. It seems after all other consumer electronics have upped their game for decreasing their products power requirements the gpu industry has gone the other way.
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    -Fran- said:
    One nitpick with this way of phrasing: "That means the big Infinity Cache gave AMD a 50% boost to effective bandwidth".

    The Cache on the GPUs doesn't make it so the card has a higher bandwidth, much like AMD's 3D VCache is not making DDR4 magically have more bandwidth. I know what the implied point is, but I think it shouldn't be explained that way at all. Preventing using the GDDR/DDR BUS to fetch data is not the same as increasing the effective bandwidth of it. You saturate that cache and you're back to using the slow lane. On initial load, you still use the slow lane. Etc...

    Other than that, thanks for the information. I do not look forward to 600W GPUs. Ugh.

    Regards.
    Cache hits reduce going to GDDR6/GDDR6X memory, which means you get the equivalent of more bandwidth. That's what "effective bandwidth" means. Or put another way, a large L3 cache had a hit rate of something like 50% higher than no L3 cache for AMD, which means 50% of memory accesses that formerly went to the GDDR6 didn't need to go there. AMD even said "effective bandwidth" with some of its RDNA 2 presentations, so if it's good enough for AMD I figure it's good enough for us.

    It's the same as saying 16Gbps for GDDR6 memory speeds, with an "effective clock" of 8GHz. Technically, the base GDDR6 clock is actually 2GHz. It then sends eight bits per clock (quad-pumped and DDR), which gives us 16Gbps. That's the data rate, but the clock speed is nowhere near 8GHz. And yet, that's what most GPU utilities will report as the memory speed.
    Reply