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

KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click OC review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£1,850VRAM:32 GBMemory bus width:512 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):575 W

KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click OC Review: Compare 117 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click OC
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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 83% of models
Score components

40%

9.2

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.6, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

?

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

10%

8.1

Sentiment score

â–²Better than 83% of graphics cards
6.1

Value for money

Value for money
6.1/ 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 96% of models
Score components

70%

8.3

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

â–¼Worse than 96%
9.2

Technical score

Technical score
9.2/ 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 94% of models
Score components

44%

9.6

Performance

24%

9.7

Memory

12%

7.1

Power

11%

10

Features

5%

5.8

Design

4%

10

Connectivity

★Better than 94%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
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
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.6.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

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
  • kfa2-geforce-rtx-5090-1-click-oc
kfa2-geforce-rtx-5090-1-click-oc
Where to buy
    N/A~ £1,850
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 KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click OC

Based on 241 owners sharing their experience in online comments

69%positive11%mixed20%negative

Owners praise its exceptional gaming speed, while high power draw, heat, and uneven performance at demanding settings temper the excitement.

What owners dislike

  • Owners say it misses high frame-rate targets, such as 240 or 300 fps at 4K or 1440p, and some games drop below 50 fps without frame generation.6
  • Owners report it pulls about 570 to 600 watts under full load, pushing PC draw to 700 to 800 watts and raising electricity bills.6
  • Owners report crashes and stutters, some fixed by removing GeForce Experience, and a recent update that enabled shared memory and slowed games.5
  • Owners say 4K with path tracing or ultrawide 5K-class resolutions need DLSS upscaling, and some games still drop to about 50 fps.4
  • Owners report distracting ghosting, blur and artifacts with DLSS and 4x frame generation, leading some to turn these features off.4
  • Owners say the native gain over a 5080 is small for the extra cost, and one claims a 4090 is faster.4
  • Owners say it runs hot, reaching 75 to 89°C in some builds, and gives off enough heat to noticeably warm the room.3
  • Owners say frame generation adds noticeable input lag, making mouse aiming feel sluggish or rubbery, especially in Stalker 2.3

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

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click OC

Technical score
Technical score
9.2/ 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 94% of models
Score components:

44%

9.6

Performance

24%

9.7

Memory

12%

7.1

Power

11%

10

Features

5%

5.8

Design

4%

10

Connectivity

9.2
Reviews score
7.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.1/ 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 96% of models
Score components:

70%

8.3

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

6.1
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
43,370 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 43,370 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 98.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.3% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
37,726 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 37,726 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 98.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.5% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
38,967 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 38,967 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 96.7% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
25,200 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 25,200 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 87.2% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
104.8 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 97.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
32 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 32 GB of VRAM, which is more than 96.6% of graphics cards and equal to 3.1% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR7
This graphics card uses GDDR7 memory, which is newer than on 79.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.4% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
512 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 512 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 96.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.8% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
1,792 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 1,792 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 97.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.1% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
28,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 28,000 MHz, which is faster than that of 78.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 16.8% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
5
This graphics card supports PCIe 5, which is newer than on 73% of graphics cards and equal to 27% 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
2.1b
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 2.1b, which is more advanced than on 77.8% of graphics cards and equal to 22.2% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
20 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 20 Gbps, which is slower than on 50.4% of graphics cards and equal to 7.2% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
575 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 575 W, which is higher than that of 97.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.5% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
575 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 575 W under peak load, which is higher than 97% of graphics cards and equal to 1.6% 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
575 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 575 W, which is higher than that of 96.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.4% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
575 W
Show more
Size
326x 137x 60 mm
Length
326 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 326 mm long, which is longer than 78.9% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Height
137.7 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 137.7 mm tall, which is taller than 76.6% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Slot width
3 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 3 slot/s, which is wider than 70.7% of graphics cards and equal in width to 16.8% of graphics cards.
Weight
?
Show more

KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click OC vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 130 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (170 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    170 vs 40
  • 130 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (170 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    170 vs 40
  • 4x higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (1,792 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    1,792 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 20 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (32 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    32 GB vs 12 GB
  • 320 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (512 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    512 bit vs 192 bit
  • 4.33x higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (1,637 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    1,637 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 496 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (680 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    680 vs 184
  • 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
  • 130 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (170 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    170 vs 40
  • 130 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (170 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    170 vs 40
  • 4.33x higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (1,637 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    1,637 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 496 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (680 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    680 vs 184
  • 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
  • 536 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (680 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    680 vs 144
  • 2.63x higher pixel rate
    This graphics card has a higher pixel rate than the average graphics card (423.6 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    423.6 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 4.64x higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (104.8 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    104.8 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 4.12x higher ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a higher ray tracing score than the average graphics card (37,726 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    37,726 points vs 9,148 points
  • 2.93x higher gaming score
    This graphics card has a higher gaming score than the average graphics card (43,370 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    43,370 points vs 14,779 points
  • 72.1% higher PassMark score
    This graphics card has a higher PassMark score than the average graphics card (38,967 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    38,967 points vs 22,638 points
  • 2 years newer
    This graphics card was released more recently than the average graphics card (2025 vs 2023).
    January 2025
    2025 vs 2023
  • 3.44x higher FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP64 performance than the average graphics card (1.7 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    1.65 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 17,408 more FP32 units
    This graphics card has more FP32 units than the average graphics card (21,760 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    21,760 vs 4,352
  • 5.9x higher BF16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher BF16 performance than the average graphics card (209.5 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has BF16 performance of 35.48 TFLOPS.
    209.5 TFLOPS vs 35.48 TFLOPS
  • 3.57x higher FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP16 performance than the average graphics card (105.4 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    105.4 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 5.1% higher base clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher base GPU clock than the average graphics card (2017 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    2,017 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 2.09x higher compute score
    This graphics card has a higher compute score than the average graphics card (25,200 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    25,200 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 4x higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (1,792 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    1,792 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 20 GB more VRAM
    This graphics card has more VRAM than the average graphics card (32 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    32 GB vs 12 GB
  • 320 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (512 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    512 bit vs 192 bit
  • 47.4% faster memory speed
    This graphics card has a higher effective memory speed than the average graphics card (28,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    28,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 4x larger L2 cache
    This graphics card has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (96 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    96 MB vs 24 MB
  • 24x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (96 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    96 MB vs 4 MB
  • Newer GDDR version
    This graphics card uses a newer GDDR version than the average graphics card (GDDR7 vs GDDR6).
    GDDR7 vs GDDR6
  • Newer PCIe version
    This graphics card supports a newer PCIe version than the average graphics card (5 vs 4).
    5 vs 4
  • 4.03x more transistors
    This graphics card has more transistors than the average graphics card (92,200 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    92,200 million vs 22,900 million
  • 1 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    1 vs 0
  • Newer DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports a newer DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (2.1b vs 1.4a).
    2.1b vs 1.4a
  • Newer HDMI version
    This graphics card supports a newer HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.1b vs 2.1a).
    2.1b vs 2.1a
  • 2.67x higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (575 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    575 W vs 215 W
  • 3.9% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,407 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,407 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 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
  • 2.61x higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (575 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    575 W vs 220 W
  • 43.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (326 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    326 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 3.56x more expensive
    KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click OC is more expensive than the average graphics card (£1,850 vs £520).
    £1,850 vs £520
  • 12.7 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (137.7 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    137.7 mm vs 125 mm
  • 21.9% worse value for money
    KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click OC has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.08 vs 7.4).
    6.08 vs 7.41
  • 3.56x more expensive
    KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click OC is more expensive than the average graphics card (£1,850 vs £520).
    £1,850 vs £520
  • 21.9% worse value for money
    KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click OC has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.08 vs 7.4).
    6.08 vs 7.41
  • 3.9% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,407 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,407 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 2.53x larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (744 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    744 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • 2.67x higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (575 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    575 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
  • 2.61x higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (575 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    575 W vs 220 W
  • 2.5x higher idle power draw
    This graphics card has a higher idle power draw than the average graphics card (30 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    30 W vs 12 W
  • 2.61x higher peak power draw
    This graphics card has a higher peak power draw than the average graphics card (575 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    575 W vs 220 W
  • 3.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (39 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    39 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 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
  • 43.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (326 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    326 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 12.7 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (137.7 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    137.7 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s wider design
    This graphics card occupies more slots than the average graphics card (3 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    3 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s

Third-party reviews

What customers like about KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click OC

  • Unmatched raw performance, offering a 25-30% boost over the previous generation in 4K gaming and professional workloads
  • Massive 32GB GDDR7 VRAM with a 512-bit bus, providing enormous bandwidth for high-resolution textures and AI tasks
  • Support for DLSS 4, which significantly multiplies frame rates in demanding titles like Cyberpunk 2077
  • Refined 12V-2-6 power connector designed to be more robust and safer than previous versions
  • Exceptional 8K gaming capability, maintaining playable frame rates without compromising graphical settings
  • Versatile for both gamers and creative professionals, significantly reducing rendering times in software like V-Ray and Blender

What customers don't like about KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click OC

  • Extremely high power consumption, with a 575W TDP and peak draws sometimes exceeding 600W
  • Prohibitive MSRP of $1,999, which often rises significantly due to limited stock and reseller markups
  • Severe CPU bottlenecks at lower resolutions like 1080p, making the card redundant for non-4K setups
  • Large physical footprint that may not fit in many small form-factor cases, despite a thinner two-slot design
  • Potential for high heat output, acting as a 'space heater' within the PC case and requiring robust airflow
  • Limited performance-per-dollar value compared to the previous generational jump

Verdict

The KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click OC is a high-performance graphics card built on NVIDIA's Blackwell architecture, featuring 21,760 CUDA cores and a massive 32GB of GDDR7 VRAM on a 512-bit bus. It operates with a base clock of 2017 MHz and a boost clock of 2407 MHz, which can be further increased to 2422 MHz via the Xtreme Tuner Plus software. Main pros include its record-breaking 1.79 TB/s memory bandwidth, support for DLSS 4 with multi-frame generation, and a PCIe 5.0 interface that makes it a future-proof choice for 8K gaming and intensive AI workloads. However, notable cons include its extreme 575W power consumption requiring at least a 1000W PSU, its high launch price, and its large physical footprint that requires significant case space.

Compare KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click 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 KFA2 GeForce RTX 5090 1-Click OC and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found