At the same price it's a no brainer, 4080 is faster

 

Faster at some stuff slower at other stuff it seems. The 4080 should be faster. A used one is $usa1100 vs $700 new for the 9070. And the fact that it has CUDA cores means it does things besides game. Looking at the vs. game tests though the 9070 consistently out performs it by a small margin mostly by having better 1% lows. avg is usually more-or less the same. This is a straight 4080 though not a 4080fe or a 4080s. Should it be faster? According to costs yes. The thing is I'm not seeing data that says so. The 4080 is consistently better above 1440p, but upscaling messes with that SO hard. My current is a 6800xt which cant do 4k very well. I bought a 4k monitor for it though because it does 1440p fine, so i upscaled from 1440p to 4k and it worked fine. The problem though is while FSR2 (which is what the 6800xt has for upscaling) can do one bump (1440p to 4k) it cant do 2 well (1080p to 4k) and games are getting faster. Theyre also occasionally adding effectively mandatory ray tracing now and the 6800xt is NOT good at ray tracing. So I’m likely going to have to replace it. Hence the dillema.

 

RTX 4080 is about as fast as RTX 5070 Ti.

it has better features especially for video editing.

 

Traditionally FEs are a whit faster than standard ones, though they tend to have other issues. The 5070ti has the same new parts issues as the 9070 though, just not quite as bad. It’s more expensive than the 9070 though so when I add it up a used 5070ti comes out a whisper behind. Which makes sense because CUDA has more value to some people (various types of non gamers usually. Architects and whatnot) Just not me. FE used full coverage water blocks are cheap compared to other stuff though.

 

From a pure value and future-proofing standpoint, the 4080 FE wins. You get the block for less total cost, and the card will age better in games. The 9070 Nitro is great but those blocks can be crazy pricey and harder to find.

 

If it was a 9070 XT, then it would be a toss up. If it's just a normal 9070, no question 4080.

 

I meant xt. 9070s are $200 cheaper atm

 

Why 9070 and not 9070xt ?

 

Because I forgot the xt bit. I’ll fix that now…

 

I would still go 4080 tbh. 5% faster in raster and 16% faster in RT stock vs stock, cheaper blocks and it draws less power as well. 4080 Super would be even better even tho it's like 2% but still. If you can find a properly priced used one..

 

You could flash a 5080 vbios onto the 5070ti and if it's a good overclocker, it could be better than a stock 5080.
But the cost of the block on the 4080FE go for it and flash a higher watt vbios.
But Daniel Owen and techyescity (on youtube) would recommend, over the price difference the 9070xt

 

9070XT if $600 or lower
4080 if $700 or lower

Supposedly 9070XT drivers age like wine and the most recent have eclipsed 5070 Ti performance in certain scenarios. For me it would all come down to the price.

Why don't you share what your bottom line cost would be?

 

The biggest cost variable is the block. 9070xt blocks can only be bought new, can only be bought from one place, and the only ones in stock (From what I gather back ordering anything is something like a year out unless you already did and i haven’t) are the less popular more expensive cards. There are used cards but they are the same cost as new (so new is a no brainer)So the block is $250 and the card is $840. You can get a new card cheaper, but you can’t get a block for it. To get both you gotta buy the pricey card.
The 4080fe is the card with the most available used block. So it’s like $900-$1100 and the block is $50-$80. They’re really close to the same price. But only if you watercool. There are cheaper 4080s but block availability is catch-as catch-can, and the blocks tend to be more expensive during the short window they are available