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

GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£1,210VRAM:16 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):320 W

GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 3 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO
8.3/10

Overall score

Score
8.3/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 85% of models
Score components

40%

9.0

Technical score

25%

8.1

Reviews score

25%

?

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

10%

7.8

Sentiment score

▲Better than 85% of graphics cards
7.0

Value for money

Value for money
7.0/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components

70%

8.3

Overall score

30%

4.1

Price

▼Worse than 75%
9.0

Technical score

Technical score
9.0/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 85% of models
Score components

44%

9.5

Performance

24%

9.0

Memory

12%

7.8

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

6.0

Design

4%

9.5

Connectivity

▲Better than 85%
8.1

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.1/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 60% of models

80%

8.2

Average grade

20%

7.4

Popularity

Grades by review (3)
1 review, with a printed score. 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 60%
?

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
  • gigabyte-geforce-rtx-4080-aero
gigabyte-geforce-rtx-4080-aero
Where to buy
    N/A~ £1,210
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What owners say about the GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO

Based on 204 owners sharing their experience in online comments

72%positive7%mixed21%negative

Owners love the big performance gains, smooth high-resolution gaming, and efficiency; the steep price is the main frustration.

What owners dislike

  • Owners say the card costs too much for the performance, with street prices often around $1,000 to $1,800 depending on region and model.17
  • Owners say the RTX 4090 is only a modest price step up for much more performance, so some wish they had paid for the 4090 instead.3

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

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO

Technical score
Technical score
9.0/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 85% of models
Score components:

44%

9.5

Performance

24%

9.0

Memory

12%

7.8

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

6.0

Design

4%

9.5

Connectivity

9.0
Reviews score
8.1
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.0/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components:

70%

8.3

Overall score

30%

4.1

Price

7.0
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
28,500 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 28,500 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 86.6% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
17,600 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 17,600 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 78.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
34,587 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 34,587 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 87.3% of graphics cards and equal to 0.5% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
20,493 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 20,493 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 81.6% of graphics cards and equal to 1.8% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
49.32 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 49.32 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 83.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
16 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 16 GB of VRAM, which is more than 62% of graphics cards and equal to 28.1% 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
256 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 256 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 50.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 35.5% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
716.8 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 716.8 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 75.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.6% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
22,400 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 22,400 MHz, which is faster than that of 73.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.4% 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)
320 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 320 W, which is higher than that of 79.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 5.6% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
320 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 320 W under peak load, which is higher than 76.9% of graphics cards and equal to 5% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
850 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 850 W PSU, which is higher than that of 83.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 11.9% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
320 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 320 W, which is higher than that of 75.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
320 W
Show more
Size
342x 150x 75 mm
Length
342 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 342 mm long, which is longer than 93.3% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.8% of graphics cards.
Height
75 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 75 mm tall, which is shorter than 91.4% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Slot width
4 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 4 slot/s, which is wider than 97.6% of graphics cards and equal in width to 2.3% of graphics cards.
Weight
2000 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 2000 g, which is heavier than 89.1% of Graphics cards and equal to 2.2% of Graphics cards.
Show more

GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 36 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (76 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    76 vs 40
  • 36 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (76 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    76 vs 40
  • 2.04x higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (770.6 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    770.6 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 48 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (112 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    112 vs 64
  • 120 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (304 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    304 vs 184
  • 60% higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (716.8 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    716.8 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 4 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (16 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    16 GB vs 12 GB
  • 76% higher pixel rate
    This graphics card has a higher pixel rate than the average graphics card (283.9 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    283.9 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 12.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.1/ 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
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 60% of models

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    1 review, with a printed score. 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.
    8.1 vs 7.2
  • 36 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (76 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    76 vs 40
  • 36 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (76 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    76 vs 40
  • 2.04x higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (770.6 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    770.6 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 48 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (112 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    112 vs 64
  • 120 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (304 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    304 vs 184
  • 76% higher pixel rate
    This graphics card has a higher pixel rate than the average graphics card (283.9 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    283.9 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 160 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (304 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    304 vs 144
  • 2.18x higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (49.3 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    49.32 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 92.8% higher gaming score
    This graphics card has a higher gaming score than the average graphics card (28,500 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    28,500 points vs 14,779 points
  • 52.8% higher PassMark score
    This graphics card has a higher PassMark score than the average graphics card (34,587 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    34,587 points vs 22,638 points
  • 14.8% higher base clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher base GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,205 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    2,205 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 92.4% higher ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a higher ray tracing score than the average graphics card (17,600 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    17,600 points vs 9,148 points
  • 1.2% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,535 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,535 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 3.22x higher INT8 performance
    This graphics card has a higher INT8 performance than the average graphics card (780 TOPS vs 242 TOPS). The average graphics card has INT8 performance of 242 TOPS.
    780 TOPS vs 242 TOPS
  • 5,376 more FP32 units
    This graphics card has more FP32 units than the average graphics card (9,728 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    9,728 vs 4,352
  • 60% higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (716.8 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    716.8 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 4 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (16 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    16 GB vs 12 GB
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 2.67x larger L2 cache
    This graphics card has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (64 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    64 MB vs 24 MB
  • 17.9% faster memory speed
    This graphics card has a higher effective memory speed than the average graphics card (22,400 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    22,400 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 16x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (64 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    64 MB vs 4 MB
  • 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
  • 2x more transistors
    This graphics card has more transistors than the average graphics card (45,900 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    45,900 million vs 22,900 million
  • 50 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (75 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    75 mm vs 125 mm
  • 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
  • 48.8% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (320 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    320 W vs 215 W
  • 59.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (342 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    342 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 30.8% higher PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a higher PSU requirement than the average graphics card (850 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    850 W vs 650 W
  • 1.5 slot/s wider design
    This graphics card occupies more slots than the average graphics card (4 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    4 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 45.5% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (320 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    320 W vs 220 W
  • 2.33x more expensive
    GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO is more expensive than the average graphics card (£1,210 vs £520).
    £1,210 vs £520
  • 20% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,400 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,400 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 2.33x more expensive
    GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO is more expensive than the average graphics card (£1,210 vs £520).
    £1,210 vs £520
  • 5.4% worse value for money
    GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO has worse value for money than the average graphics card (7.03 vs 7.4).
    7.03 vs 7.41
  • 1 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2022 vs 2023).
    November 2022
    2022 vs 2023
  • 20% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,400 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,400 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 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
  • 28.9% larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (379 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    379 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • 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
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 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
  • 48.8% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (320 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    320 W vs 215 W
  • 30.8% higher PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a higher PSU requirement than the average graphics card (850 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    850 W vs 650 W
  • 45.5% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (320 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    320 W vs 220 W
  • 10 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (105 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    105 °C vs 95 °C
  • 45.5% higher peak power draw
    This graphics card has a higher peak power draw than the average graphics card (320 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    320 W vs 220 W
  • 59.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (342 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    342 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 1.5 slot/s wider design
    This graphics card occupies more slots than the average graphics card (4 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    4 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 97.2% heavier
    This graphics card is heavier than the average graphics card (2000 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    2,000 g vs 1,014 g

Video reviews

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

7.0
Computer Surgeon
≈ estimated
31/12/2022
Build and review · benchmarks against RTX 4090 and cooling
Verdict
GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO looks great and runs cool, but most buyers don't need this much performance.
Overview video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.7
muycomputer.com
✓ explicit
04/12/2022
Benchmark review · Factory-overclocked card
Verdict
The GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO OC is a fast 4K card with huge DLSS 3 gains, though ray tracing hits demanding games like Dying Light 2 hard.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO

  • Striking white and silver aesthetic, ideal for themed PC builds
  • Excellent cooling performance with peak temperatures often staying below 65°C
  • Quiet operation with a effective 'Silent' BIOS mode
  • Top-tier 4K gaming performance with high frame rates
  • Solid build quality using premium materials and a metal backplate
  • Includes a useful anti-sag bracket to support its heavy weight

What customers don't like about GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO

  • Very high price point, often viewed as poor value for money compared to other GPUs
  • Massive physical size requires a very large case and may block other components
  • Minimal and subdued RGB lighting might disappoint those wanting more 'flash'
  • The included 12VHPWR power adapter can be difficult to manage and unsightly
  • Anti-sag bracket may have compatibility issues with certain case designs

Verdict

The Gigabyte GeForce RTX 4080 Aero OC is a high-performance graphics card built on the NVIDIA Ada Lovelace architecture, featuring 9,728 CUDA cores and 16GB of GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus. It offers a factory-overclocked boost clock of 2535 MHz and utilizes the Windforce cooling system with three 110mm alternate-spinning fans and a large vapor chamber for efficient thermal management. Main pros include its striking all-white aesthetic ideal for themed builds, dual BIOS for performance or silent modes, and exceptional 4K gaming performance with DLSS 3 support. However, its primary cons are its massive physical footprint requiring a quadruple-slot clearance and a high market price compared to its performance gains over previous generations.

Compare GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO 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 GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 AERO and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found