NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the performance difference between the RTX 4080 SUPER and the RTX 5090 SE based on average benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 54,209, while the RTX 5090 SE currently has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so a direct numerical comparison is not possible.

Q: How do the two cards compare in terms of memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER uses 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 736.3 GB/s. The RTX 5090 SE uses 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 1.34 TB/s.

Q: What are the thermal design power (TDP) ratings for each card?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has a TDP of 320 W, while the RTX 5090 SE has a TDP of 500 W.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has a boost clock of 2550 MHz, which is higher than the RTX 5090 SE's boost clock of 2377 MHz.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER is listed as end-of-life, while the RTX 5090 SE is listed as active.

Q: Do the two cards support the same DirectX and Vulkan versions?

A: Yes, both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 4080 SUPER and RTX 5090 SE represent two distinct generations of NVIDIA GPU design. The RTX 4080 SUPER is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture using the AD103 chip, while the RTX 5090 SE uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB202 chip. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process node, but the transistor counts differ dramatically. The RTX 4080 SUPER packs 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 121.1M per mm². The RTX 5090 SE doubles this scale with 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, yielding a slightly higher density of 122.9M per mm².

The compute resources scale accordingly. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. The RTX 5090 SE increases these to 14,080 shading units, 440 TMUs, and 160 ROPs. Ray tracing and tensor core counts also rise: the RTX 4080 SUPER has 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores, while the RTX 5090 SE has 110 RT cores and 440 tensor cores.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The RTX 4080 SUPER uses 16 GB of GDDR6X with a 256-bit bus, achieving 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 5090 SE uses 24 GB of GDDR7 with a 384-bit bus, nearly doubling bandwidth to 1.34 TB/s. The memory clock speeds also differ: the RTX 4080 SUPER runs at 1438 MHz (23 Gbps effective), while the RTX 5090 SE runs at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective).

The two cards also differ in interface and physical design. The RTX 4080 SUPER uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the RTX 5090 SE uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs have been updated on the newer card: the RTX 4080 SUPER has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, whereas the RTX 5090 SE has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. Power requirements scale with performance: the RTX 4080 SUPER has a TDP of 320 W with a suggested PSU of 700 W, while the RTX 5090 SE has a TDP of 500 W with a suggested PSU of 900 W.

Clock speeds present an interesting inversion. The RTX 4080 SUPER has a base clock of 2295 MHz and a boost clock of 2550 MHz. The RTX 5090 SE runs lower at 1740 MHz base and 2377 MHz boost, yet delivers higher theoretical throughput because of its larger compute array. The RTX 4080 SUPER achieves 52.22 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 (1:1), while the RTX 5090 SE reaches 66.94 TFLOPS in both. Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern: the RTX 4080 SUPER has 285.6 GPixel/s and 816.0 GTexel/s, while the RTX 5090 SE has 380.3 GPixel/s and 1,045.9 GTexel/s.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database currently lacks direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the RTX 4080 SUPER and the RTX 5090 SE. The head-to-head array is empty, and the RTX 5090 SE has no individual benchmark scores recorded. Consequently, the wins counter shows zero victories for either card in direct matchups.

However, the RTX 4080 SUPER has a full set of individual benchmark results in the database. Its best showing is in the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 260,075, followed by a Geekbench OpenCL score of 219,065. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 6,600. PassMark results include a G3D score of 34,245, a GPU compute score of 19,822, a G2D score of 1,270, a DirectX 9 score of 381, a DirectX 11 score of 301, a DirectX 10 score of 193, and a DirectX 12 score of 134.

The RTX 5090 SE's lack of benchmark data means its relative standing cannot be quantified from recorded measurements. Its percentile rank is listed at 50, while the RTX 4080 SUPER sits at the 86th percentile among all GPUs. This percentile gap suggests the RTX 4080 SUPER occupies a higher tier in the database's overall distribution, but without RTX 5090 SE scores, the comparison remains qualitative.

The nearest rivals for the RTX 4080 SUPER provide context for its performance level. The RTX 4080 (non-SUPER) averages 54,247, which is 0.1% ahead of the RTX 4080 SUPER's 54,209 average. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X averages 54,828, 1.1% ahead. The AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB averages 55,698, 2.7% ahead, and the AMD Radeon 8060S averages 55,757, 2.8% ahead. These deltas indicate the RTX 4080 SUPER is closely matched with its immediate predecessor and slightly behind several competing AMD parts in aggregate score.

The RTX 5090 SE has no nearest rivals listed, which means the database has not yet placed it relative to other GPUs. Its architecture, with more shading units, more memory, and higher bandwidth, suggests it should outperform the RTX 4080 SUPER in compute-heavy workloads, but the recorded data does not verify this expectation.

The Verdict

The RTX 4080 SUPER is a fully characterized GPU in the database. It has a complete benchmark suite, an average score of 54,209, and an 86th percentile ranking. Its closest rival, the stock RTX 4080, is nearly identical in aggregate performance with a 0.1% delta. The other nearby rivals are all AMD parts that sit slightly higher in average score. This places the RTX 4080 SUPER in a well-defined performance band.

The RTX 5090 SE is an unmeasured entity in the database. It has a 50th percentile rank by default, no benchmark scores, and no nearest rivals. The only quantitative anchors are its specifications: a larger chip, more compute units, more memory, higher bandwidth, and a higher TDP. The architecture comparison shows the RTX 5090 SE has 37.5% more shading units, 37.5% more TMUs, 42.9% more ROPs, 37.5% more RT cores, and 37.5% more tensor cores than the RTX 4080 SUPER. Its FP32 throughput is 28.2% higher at 66.94 TFLOPS versus 52.22 TFLOPS. Its memory bandwidth is 82% higher at 1.34 TB/s versus 736.3 GB/s.

Based on the recorded data, the RTX 4080 SUPER remains the only card with verified performance. It is end-of-life but has a clear performance profile. The RTX 5090 SE is active but unproven in the database. Its specifications indicate a higher capability ceiling, but the absence of benchmark results means any claim of superiority is speculative. The RTX 4080 SUPER also has a lower TDP of 320 W versus 500 W, meaning it draws less power and requires a smaller PSU (700 W versus 900 W). The RTX 5090 SE is physically smaller as well: 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, 40 mm wide, versus 310 mm, 140 mm, and 61 mm for the RTX 4080 SUPER. It also uses a dual-slot design versus the triple-slot RTX 4080 SUPER.

For users who need a GPU with confirmed performance data, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the documented option. For users who prioritize the latest architecture, more memory, higher bandwidth, and greater theoretical compute, the RTX 5090 SE appears positioned to deliver, but the database has not yet captured any measurements to confirm this.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE |

|----------------|-------------------------------|-----------------------------|

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Chip | AD103 | GB202 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 45,900 million | 92,200 million |

| Die Size | 379 mm² | 750 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 121.1M / mm² | 122.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2295 MHz | 1740 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2550 MHz | 2377 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1438 MHz (23 Gbps effective) | 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6X | GDDR7 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 736.3 GB/s | 1.34 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 10,240 | 14,080 |

| TMUs | 320 | 440 |

| ROPs | 112 | 160 |

| RT Cores | 80 | 110 |

| Tensor Cores | 320 | 440 |

| Pixel Rate | 285.6 GPixel/s | 380.3 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 816.0 GTexel/s | 1,045.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 52.22 TFLOPS | 66.94 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 52.22 TFLOPS (1:1) | 66.94 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 320 W | 500 W |

| Slot Width | Triple-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | 900 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |

| Length | 310 mm (12.2 inches) | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Height | 140 mm (5.5 inches) | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Width | 61 mm (2.4 inches) | 40 mm (1.6 inches) |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2024-01-30 | 2025-12-31 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 30 | GeForce 40 |

| Successor | GeForce 50 | GeForce 60 |

| Launch MSRP | 999 USD | 1,499 USD |