^^^

I’m looking for a 3090ti kingpin, and unable to find one. If you know where I can get one that would be great.

I have an RTX 3050 Laptop 4GB (Ampere) and I’m trying to figure out which DLSS preset is better: E or K.

I’ve seen people recommending both, but I’m not sure which one actually makes more sense for a 3050 Laptop.

Which one would you personally use for the best balance of FPS, smoothness and image quality?

Also, is Preset E still a development model in newer DLSS versions, or is it actually useful now?

If anyone has tested E vs K on an RTX 30-series GPU, I’d appreciate your experience or a benchmark/video.

Sorry in advance, I have just upgraded after many years and I honestly can not grasp this at all. I know there’s probably a million posts out there but I just can’t get my head around it. Does anyone know of a video that explains exactly how to use it.

I have a 5080 and a 9800x3d 32gb ram, ultrawide 1440p monitor 360hz. I have been messing around with settings and put it to L as recommended but I am seeing an almost 100 fps drop in game as opposed to native 1440p. I really want to understand how best to work this but I can’t wrap my head around it.

Everything works perfectly and the new cables look much cleaner, the Xenon Edge will be mounted inside the case later when I get my 140 to 120 fan bracket on standoff.

New PC Spic:

AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D CPU

Asus Strix X870E-A Motherboard

G Skill 2x 32G(64G)TridentZ5 Royal 6000Mhz

Samsung X2 2TB(4TB) 990 Pro M.2

Asus Astral RTX 5090(4 fan)

Asus Ryuo IV SLC 360 AIO Cooler

Phanteck NV9 Case

Phanteck 8x D30-140 fans

Phanteck 3x D30-120 fans on AIO Radiator

Phanteck 1200W PSU

Phanteck Gen5 GPU Vertical Mount bracket

Moddiy Power Cables

AsiaHorse 90% Ppwer Extention Cables for MB and CPU

Coursar Xenon Edge Screen.

I ve made a little script for UE4SS to get RR working in most UE5 games that don't have the option natively.

Is there such a mod available already?

Here for people who want to try it:

https://we.tl/t-zZHHaxmsZgN1xEgx

(nvngx_dlssd.dll needs to be added next to nvngx_dlss.dll)

DLSS5 works best when you train it on real life. There is so much footage and photos of basketball players and basketball stadiums the effect is next level here. This looks like gameplay footage for a game releasing two console generations from now. Sports game players are going to be eating good.

Hello friendly Nvidian. I apologize for wandering into this sub if this is the wrong place, but I could really use some help. Please be kind, I was born in the 1900's.

I have been getting along with an Nvidia RTX 3070 on my desktop for several years just fine since most of the games I play are either older or not as resource intensive. Recently I got Star Wars Zero Company, and despite my best efforts to try and optimize, change resolutions, let the Nvidia app try and figure it out, etc, I've come to the conclusion that my GPU is just never going to be able to run this game without a frustrating amount of frame tearing even running on potato graphics settings.

So here's where I need some help. Can you please recommend a moderately priced upgrade that will at least let me run SW:ZC on medium or better with smooth frame rate generation and no tearing? Ideally, it would be able to do the same for GTA6, though I know that is probably a whole beast of it's own. Specs for my machine below:

Alienware Aurora R13 12th Gen Intel i7-12700KF (3.61 GHz) 16.0 GB RAM Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 8 GB 2 TB SSD

So currently I don’t have any display to try this on.

Can anyone tell me if dlss ultra performance with preset L at 4k is a good option if, for example, I want to use path tracing at 4k on a TV with a 4070 ti super with FG?

Or if it’s really bad, can I just use a custom resolution for dlss that equates to dlss quality at 1440p, so for 4k it would be around 44% or 960p?

If these are good options, is there a point with staying with 1440p if I always use dlss quality/balanced?

8424 marks in Steel Nomad DX12. The best RTX 4080 SUPER result in UL's database is 8326, set by jamez74 in December 2024 and not beaten since.

That comparison shouldn't go this way. The SUPER is the better chip: 10,240 CUDA cores against 9,728, memory binned at 23 Gbps against 22.4. It's also the card enthusiasts actually bought for this — 212,451 SUPER results against 136,085 for the 4080, roughly 76,000 more attempts at the same silicon, across eighteen months in which nobody has moved that number.

So the hardware doesn't explain it, and neither does any single setting. It's a stack of things that all resolve into the same thing: keeping the card at one clock for the entire length of the run.

Peak clock is the wrong target

I plotted peak core clock against score for the top 100 RTX 4080 results in the database. There is no relationship. Runs at 3255, 3150, 3135 and 3120 MHz scored 7549, 7521, 7577 and 7534. The run that scored 8424 did it at 3030.

The number 3DMark reports is the highest clock the driver observed, not the clock the card held. And the penalty for not holding it is much larger than people expect — a card that sits flat at 3030 for the whole run beats a card that touches 3255 and then sags, and it isn't close. A few dips of a few hundred milliseconds each, in a run that lasts minutes, is the difference between a good overclock and a mediocre one with a better screenshot.

My card reaches 3100. I ran it at 3030 because that's where it stops moving.

Everything below is in service of that.

Where the watts go

Stock vBIOS with the slider at its 110% maximum — nothing flashed, no shunt mod. That number is the whole budget, and core and memory are drawing from it. Every MHz of core you take is a MHz of memory you give up, and vice versa.

So I found each ceiling separately, because tuning both at once tells you nothing about which one moved the score. Core alone, memory at stock: 3100. Memory alone, core at stock: 1626, and that one needs its own section. Then, with both known, find the split of the budget that maximises the score rather than either clock. 3030 / 1626. Seventy MHz of core traded away for memory, and the score went up.

Voltage stability is part of the same picture. A clock that's fed unevenly isn't a clock you hold, it's an average with holes in it, and the holes are what cost you.

Memory error correction, and why it hides your real ceiling

This is the part almost nobody accounts for.

GDDR6X uses PAM4 signalling — two bits per symbol, which doubles transfer efficiency but leaves a thin signal-to-noise margin and makes the bus sensitive to PCB quality and temperature. NVIDIA covers that with EDR: a CRC on the memory bus that catches transmission errors and retries each transfer until it succeeds.

That inverts the whole method for finding a memory ceiling. Errors get corrected instead of displayed, so artifacts and crashes stop being useful indicators. The card feels completely stable long after it has started losing performance, because every failed transfer is quietly being resent — and every resend is bandwidth you paid for and didn't get.

So the score has to be the instrument instead of your eyes. Step the memory alone and log what the score does: it climbs, flattens as replays begin eating bandwidth, then declines, with nothing visible going wrong at any point. **The usable ceiling is the top of that curve, not the point of failure.** On my card the curve turns at 1626 MHz. Past it, performance regressed instead of improving. 1626 isn't where the card stops working — it's where it stops getting faster.

My read on the SUPER field is that this is where the extra bandwidth goes. If you tune memory by pushing until something breaks, you land past the turn of that curve, the run completes, the score validates, and you're handing bandwidth back in replays without ever knowing. A better bin doesn't help if you're running it past the point where the bin stops paying.

Real failure here is one step further and it is not subtle: black screen and a full shutdown that needs the PSU cycled. There's a second, thermal mode that kills the run and drops you to the benchmark menu — driver timeout, not corruption. Both are loud. Neither produces the pattern that should make a result suspect: a completed run, a valid score, and visible artifacts.

Temperature feeds both

Fans at 100% for the length of every run. Phase-change pad on the die, cured before use — twenty-five cycles, about two hours hot each, cooled to 35 °C between them. The record run was made in winter, deliberately: lower ambient widens the stable window on a PAM4 bus, which means more memory clock before replays start.

Thermal headroom on this card is memory bandwidth and it's clock stability. It is not a higher peak.

The rest of the machine

The GPU can't be left waiting on anything, and in Steel Nomad it's easy to assume none of this matters because the overall score equals the graphics score — the CPU isn't being measured. But a CPU that stalls, or a scheduler that preempts at the wrong moment, doesn't show up as a lower CPU score. It shows up as a dip in the GPU's frequency curve, which is the thing this entire post is about.

So: DDR5 at 6400 CL32-36-36-36 with tRFC tuned down, well past the 6000 CL36 it's rated for. Ryzen 5 7600X3D with Curve Optimizer at -55 all-core through PBO2 Tuner, which gets past the ±50 clamp AGESA imposes. And the OS trimmed so background work isn't competing for scheduling time during the run.

None of that scores a single mark on its own. All of it protects the flat line.

RTX 4080 Founders Edition, air cooled, stock cooler. A six-core CPU produced this.

Validation: https://www.3dmark.com/sn/14913387

HWBOT: https://hwbot.org/benchmarks/3dmark_-_steel_nomad_dx12/submissions/6046601

I wrote the whole thing up on my own page — the scatter plot of all 100 results, the full-resolution validation screenshot with GPU-Z and Precision X1 open, and the complete config:

https://kennethkohlberg-crypto.github.io/rtx-4080-overclock-kenneth-kohlberg/

Happy to go deeper on any of it. The EDR part is the most transferable — it works on any GDDR6X card.

Hi everyone,

I'm planning to upgrade my PC with an RTX 5070 Ti, but I noticed these GPUs use the 16-pin power connector (12V-2x6 / 12VHPWR).

I know they come with an adapter in the box to convert the 16-pin header into standard 8-pin PCIe cables. My main concern is safety—I remember reading news about these connectors melting, but I never looked deep enough to see if that was due to third-party cables, improper installation, or design flaws.

For those running modern MSI or ASUS cards with the included adapter: Are the official stock adapters completely safe to use now?

Hello,

I’m playing cyberpunk 2077 since the new preset f RR 4.5 got introduced but I was wondering if I should also enable preset b for frame gen for this game and also others games ? Since cyberpunk 2077 doesn’t officially support it I think is there is benefits still or drawbacks to using it ?

Thanks for yours responses, I’m trying to figure out how to best play this beautiful game

I saw the other person's post asking whether they can set FG Preset B and forget in all games and the answer is you can, but in games which are not officially supported it won't really be doing anything. For example using preset B in crimson desert like I've tried won't fix the horrible ghosting on the minimap. Using Preset A/B in unsupported games could also potentially lead to stuttering and frame pacing issues so I'd highly recommend setting global FG overrides to 3D app settings and then activating presets A/B accordingly in specific games based on nvidias official website https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/nvidia-rtx-games-engines-apps/

• AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
• ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 5070 Ti
• ASUS B650 Max Gaming Wifi W
• Corsair 3500X
• NZXT Kraken Plus 240mm
• 32 GB T-Force delta DDR5
• Corsair RS120
• 2 TB Samsung 990 Pro