OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£1,890VRAM:24 GBMemory bus width:384 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):515 W

COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 6 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC
8.5/10

Overall score

Score
8.5/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 98% of models
Score components

40%

9.1

Technical score

25%

8.5

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

9.0

Sentiment score

★Better than 98% of graphics cards
6.3

Value for money

Value for money
6.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
Score components

70%

8.5

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

â–¼Worse than 90%
9.1

Technical score

Technical score
9.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 90% of models
Score components

44%

9.8

Performance

24%

9.6

Memory

12%

7.0

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

4.2

Design

4%

9.5

Connectivity

★Better than 90%
8.5

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.5/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 92% of models

80%

8.6

Average grade

20%

8.3

Popularity

Grades by review (6)
4 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
★Better than 92%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • colorful-igame-geforce-rtx-4090-vulcan-oc
colorful-igame-geforce-rtx-4090-vulcan-oc
Where to buy
    N/A~ £1,890
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC

Based on 4 · 3

Reviewers like its built-in screen, cool running and solid build, but find it big and heavy, and are split on overclocking.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC

Based on 241 owners sharing their experience in online comments

78%positive9%mixed13%negative

Owners praise its exceptional gaming speed and longevity, while power draw and occasional driver problems remain the main drawbacks.

What owners dislike

  • Owners say frame rates can fall short in some demanding games and settings, especially at 4K or on very high-resolution VR headsets, where some need to drop settings badly.3
  • Owners report driver crashes, display errors and black screens at launch, and some features such as DLSS 3 frame generation not appearing for some users.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC

Technical score
Technical score
9.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 90% of models
Score components:

44%

9.8

Performance

24%

9.6

Memory

12%

7.0

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

4.2

Design

4%

9.5

Connectivity

9.1
Reviews score
8.5
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
Score components:

70%

8.5

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

6.3
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
38,000 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 38,000 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 96.9% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
26,410 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 26,410 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 95.7% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
38,430 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 38,430 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 94.8% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
26,333 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 26,333 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 88% of graphics cards and equal to 2.7% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
82.6 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 82.6 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 95.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
24 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 24 GB of VRAM, which is more than 91.2% of graphics cards and equal to 5.5% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6X
This graphics card uses GDDR6X memory, which is newer than on 57.1% of graphics cards and equal to 22.4% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
384 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 384 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 89.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
1,008 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 1,008 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 94% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.9% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
21,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 21,000 MHz, which is faster than that of 61.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 12.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.5% of graphics cards and equal to 50.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.8% of graphics cards and equal to 77.2% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21.7% of graphics cards and equal to 76% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.4a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4a, which is more advanced than on 19.3% of graphics cards and equal to 46.3% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
32.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 32.4 Gbps, which is faster than on 56.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.9% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
515 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 515 W, which is higher than that of 97.4% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
515 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 515 W under peak load, which is higher than 96.8% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
1,000 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 1,000 W PSU, which is higher than that of 95.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 3.8% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
520 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 520 W, which is higher than that of 96.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
515 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
348.5x 159.5x 70.4 mm
Length
349 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 349 mm long, which is longer than 95.6% of graphics cards.
Height
159.5 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 159.5 mm tall, which is taller than 99% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Slot width
3.5 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 3.5 slot/s, which is wider than 90.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 5.5% of graphics cards.
Weight
2,500 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 2,500 g, which is heavier than 97% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.4% of Graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say

COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 88 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (128 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    128 vs 40
  • 88 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (128 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    128 vs 40
  • 2.25x higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (1,008 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    1,008 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 12 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (24 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    24 GB vs 12 GB
  • 3.56x higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (1,344 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    1,344 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 192 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (384 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    384 bit vs 192 bit
  • 112 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (176 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    176 vs 64
  • 328 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (512 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    512 vs 184
  • 18.1% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.5/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ★ Better than 92% of models

    80%

    8.6

    Average grade

    20%

    8.3

    Popularity

    Grades by review (6)
    4 reviews: 3 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.5 vs 7.2
  • 15.4% higher sentiment score
    9.0 vs 7.8
  • 88 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (128 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    128 vs 40
  • 88 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (128 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    128 vs 40
  • 3.56x higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (1,344 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    1,344 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 112 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (176 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    176 vs 64
  • 328 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (512 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    512 vs 184
  • 2.86x higher pixel rate
    This graphics card has a higher pixel rate than the average graphics card (462 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    462 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 368 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (512 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    512 vs 144
  • 3.65x higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (82.6 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    82.6 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 2.57x higher gaming score
    This graphics card has a higher gaming score than the average graphics card (38,000 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    38,000 points vs 14,779 points
  • 2.89x higher ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a higher ray tracing score than the average graphics card (26,410 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    26,410 points vs 9,148 points
  • 69.8% higher PassMark score
    This graphics card has a higher PassMark score than the average graphics card (38,430 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    38,430 points vs 22,638 points
  • 16.4% higher base clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher base GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,235 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    2,235 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 12,032 more FP32 units
    This graphics card has more FP32 units than the average graphics card (16,384 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    16,384 vs 4,352
  • 2.69x higher FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP64 performance than the average graphics card (1.3 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    1.29 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 4.66x higher BF16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher BF16 performance than the average graphics card (165.2 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has BF16 performance of 35.48 TFLOPS.
    165.2 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS
  • 2.18x higher compute score
    This graphics card has a higher compute score than the average graphics card (26,333 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    26,333 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 2.92x higher FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP16 performance than the average graphics card (86 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    86.02 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 2.25x higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (1,008 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    1,008 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 12 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (24 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    24 GB vs 12 GB
  • 192 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (384 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    384 bit vs 192 bit
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 3x larger L2 cache
    This graphics card has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (72 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    72 MB vs 24 MB
  • 18x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (72 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    72 MB vs 4 MB
  • 10.5% faster memory speed
    This graphics card has a higher effective memory speed than the average graphics card (21,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    21,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 20% smaller process node
    This graphics card uses a smaller manufacturing process than the average graphics card (4 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    4 nm vs 5 nm
  • 3.33x more transistors
    This graphics card has more transistors than the average graphics card (76,300 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    76,300 million vs 22,900 million
  • 4x higher HDMI bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher HDMI bandwidth than the average graphics card (48 Gbps vs 12 Gbps). The average graphics card has HDMI bandwidth of 12 Gbps.
    48 Gbps vs 12 Gbps
  • 2.4x higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (515 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    515 W vs 215 W
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • 53.8% higher PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a higher PSU requirement than the average graphics card (1,000 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    1,000 W vs 650 W
  • 66.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (349 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    349 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 34.5 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (159.5 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    159.5 mm vs 125 mm
  • 1 slot/s wider design
    This graphics card occupies more slots than the average graphics card (3.5 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    3.5 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 2.36x higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (520 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    520 W vs 220 W
  • 3.63x more expensive
    COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC is more expensive than the average graphics card (£1,890 vs £520).
    £1,890 vs £520
  • 3.63x more expensive
    COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC is more expensive than the average graphics card (£1,890 vs £520).
    £1,890 vs £520
  • 18% worse value for money
    COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.28 vs 7.4).
    6.28 vs 7.41
  • 1 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2022 vs 2023).
    September 2022
    2022 vs 2023
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • 2.07x larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (609 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    609 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (1 vs 3.1).
    1 vs 3.1
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 2.1a).
    2.1 vs 2.1a
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (5 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    5 vs 6
  • 2.4x higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (515 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    515 W vs 215 W
  • 53.8% higher PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a higher PSU requirement than the average graphics card (1,000 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    1,000 W vs 650 W
  • 2.36x higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (520 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    520 W vs 220 W
  • 2.34x higher peak power draw
    This graphics card has a higher peak power draw than the average graphics card (515 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    515 W vs 220 W
  • 2.17x higher idle power draw
    This graphics card has a higher idle power draw than the average graphics card (26 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    26 W vs 12 W
  • 5 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (100 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    100 °C vs 95 °C
  • 5 °C higher idle temperature
    This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (42 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    42 °C vs 37 °C
  • 66.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (349 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    349 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 34.5 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (159.5 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    159.5 mm vs 125 mm
  • 1 slot/s wider design
    This graphics card occupies more slots than the average graphics card (3.5 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    3.5 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 2.47x heavier
    This graphics card is heavier than the average graphics card (2,500 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    2,500 g vs 1,014 g

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

8.0
goldfries
≈ estimated
10/11/2022
Long-term test · five days of Folding@home
Verdict
COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC is very efficient for Folding@home and the card to consider if you're buying a 4090.
8.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
18/10/2022
Hands-on review · thermals, power and overclocking tests
Verdict
COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC runs cool and has useful features, though its overclocking gains are small.
9.5
goldfries
≈ estimated
09/02/2023
Short review · folding use and customisable panels
Verdict
COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC is the best RTX 4090 for the price, mainly thanks to its customisable LCD and LED panels.
Hands-on video, no verdict
Overview video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

10
techpowerup.com
✓ explicit
12/10/2022
Hands-on review · Color screen design
Verdict
The Colorful RTX 4090 Vulcan OC-V is a flashy, well-built flagship 4090 with a color screen, best for builders who want looks and extras.
9.0
gadgetpilipinas.net
≈ estimated
15/11/2022
Hands-on review · Smart LCD design
Verdict
The Colorful iGame RTX 4090 Vulcan OC-V is a flashy, heavy 4090 with a detachable LCD, but its length limits you to ATX and E-ATX cases.
8.0
tomshardware.com
✓ explicit
16/12/2022
Lab test · Cooling and noise
Verdict
The Colorful RTX 4090 Vulcan OC is a cool-running 4090 with a useful detachable screen, but it's loud and needs a very large case.
9.6
videocardz.com
✓ explicit
26/10/2022
Mini-review · Cooling and design
Verdict
The Colorful RTX 4090 iGame Vulcan OC is a restrained, cool-running 4090 with a detachable screen, but at 2.5 kg it needs its support bracket.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC

  • Detachable magnetic LCD display for real-time stats or custom GIFs
  • Excellent thermal performance, especially keeping VRAM temperatures low
  • Sturdy build quality with a reinforced frame to prevent sagging
  • Physical 'One-Key OC' button for easy performance boosts
  • Rich accessory bundle including a display stand, screwdriver, and gloves
  • Impressive aesthetic design with customizable RGB lighting

What customers don't like about COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC

  • Massive physical footprint requiring a very large PC case (3.5-slot height)
  • Higher fan noise levels compared to some other custom 4090 models
  • Limited global availability outside of specific markets
  • Significant price premium over the base MSRP of the RTX 4090
  • High power consumption, necessitating a 1000W+ power supply for safety
  • Noticeable coil whine reported by some users under heavy loads

Verdict

The Colorful iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC is a flagship graphics card featuring the NVIDIA Ada Lovelace architecture with 16,384 CUDA cores and 24GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus. It distinguishes itself with a factory-overclocked boost clock of 2,625 MHz—accessible via a physical 'One-Key OC' button—and a high-performance 24+4+3 phase power design with a 515W TDP. Main pros include its exceptional cooling performance from the 'Hurricane Scythe' triple-fan system, high-quality build with an anti-sag frame, and unique customizable extras like the magnetic, detachable iGame Smart LCD for real-time monitoring. However, significant cons include its massive 3.5-slot physical footprint (348.5mm length), high power requirements (1,000W+ PSU recommended), and limited regional availability outside of Asia.

Compare COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of COLORFUL iGame GeForce RTX 4090 Vulcan OC and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found