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

MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£3,070VRAM:24 GBMemory bus width:384 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):450 W

MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 2 expert reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim
8.4/10

Overall score

Score
8.4/ 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 93% of models
Score components

40%

9.1

Technical score

25%

8.0

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 93% of graphics cards
6.2

Value for money

Value for money
6.2/ 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 93% of models
Score components

70%

8.4

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

â–¼Worse than 93%
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
â–² Better than 87% of models
Score components

44%

9.8

Performance

24%

9.2

Memory

12%

7.1

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

4.8

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

â–²Better than 87%
8.0

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.0/ 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
â–² Better than 51% of models

80%

8.4

Average grade

20%

6.5

Popularity

Grades by review (2)
2 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 51%
?

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
  • msi-geforce-rtx-4090-suprim
msi-geforce-rtx-4090-suprim
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
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 MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim

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 MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim

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
â–² Better than 87% of models
Score components:

44%

9.8

Performance

24%

9.2

Memory

12%

7.1

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

4.8

Design

4%

9.6

Connectivity

9.1
Reviews score
8.0
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.2/ 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 93% of models
Score components:

70%

8.4

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

6.2
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
38,400 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 38,400 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is higher than 97.6% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
25,000 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 25,000 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 92% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
39,128 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 39,128 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 97% of graphics cards and equal to 0.9% 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
86 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 86 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 97% 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
16.2 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 16.2 Gbps, which is slower than on 59% of graphics cards and equal to 2% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
450 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 450 W, which is higher than that of 94.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.9% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
480 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 480 W under peak load, which is higher than 96.2% of graphics cards and equal to 0.3% 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
600 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 600 W, which is higher than that of 98.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.8% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
450 W
Show more
Size
336x 142x 78 mm
Length
336 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 336 mm long, which is longer than 88.1% of graphics cards and equal in length to 1.9% of graphics cards.
Height
142 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 142 mm tall, which is taller than 87.1% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.8% 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
2,413 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 2,413 g, which is heavier than 96.7% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of Graphics cards.
Show more

MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim 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
  • 3.52x higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (1,329 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    1,329 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
  • 11.1% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.0/ 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
    â–² Better than 51% of models

    80%

    8.4

    Average grade

    20%

    6.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (2)
    2 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.0 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
  • 3.52x higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (1,329 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    1,329 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
  • 3.81x higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (86 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    86 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 2.6x higher gaming score
    This graphics card has a higher gaming score than the average graphics card (38,400 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    38,400 points vs 14,779 points
  • 72.8% higher PassMark score
    This graphics card has a higher PassMark score than the average graphics card (39,128 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    39,128 points vs 22,638 points
  • 2.73x higher ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a higher ray tracing score than the average graphics card (25,000 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    25,000 points vs 9,148 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
  • 2.8x higher FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP16 performance than the average graphics card (82.6 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    82.58 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
  • 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
  • More NVENC sessions
    This graphics card has more concurrent NVENC sessions than the average graphics card (12 vs 8). The average graphics card has 8 concurrent NVENC sessions.
    12 vs 8
  • Uses hybrid cooling
    This graphics card uses hybrid cooling, the average graphics card does not.
  • 6 °C higher thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a higher thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (89 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    89 °C vs 95 °C
  • 6.8 dB quieter under load
    This graphics card has a lower load noise level than the average graphics card (28.6 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    28.6 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 7 °C lower load temperature
    This graphics card has a lower load temperature than the average graphics card (60 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    60 °C vs 67 °C
  • 2.09x higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (450 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    450 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
  • 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
  • 53.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (336 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    336 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
  • 2.73x higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (600 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    600 W vs 220 W
  • 17 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (142 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    142 mm vs 125 mm
  • 5.9x more expensive
    MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim is more expensive than the average graphics card (£3,070 vs £520).
    £3,070 vs £520
  • 5.9x more expensive
    MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim is more expensive than the average graphics card (£3,070 vs £520).
    £3,070 vs £520
  • 20% worse value for money
    MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.18 vs 7.4).
    6.18 vs 7.41
  • 1 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2022 vs 2023).
    October 2022
    2022 vs 2023
  • 25% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,313 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,313 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
  • 2.07x larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (608 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    608 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • 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
  • 2.09x higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (450 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    450 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
  • 2.73x higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (600 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    600 W vs 220 W
  • 3.17x higher idle power draw
    This graphics card has a higher idle power draw than the average graphics card (38 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    38 W vs 12 W
  • 2.18x higher peak power draw
    This graphics card has a higher peak power draw than the average graphics card (480 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    480 W vs 220 W
  • 9 °C higher idle temperature
    This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (46 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    46 °C vs 37 °C
  • 53.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (336 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    336 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
  • 17 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (142 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    142 mm vs 125 mm
  • 2.38x heavier
    This graphics card is heavier than the average graphics card (2,413 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    2,413 g vs 1,014 g

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.0
thefpsreview.com
✓ explicit
12/05/2023
Hands-on review · Flagship air cooler
Verdict
The MSI RTX 4090 SUPRIM X 24G has premium build and cooling, but its heavy, nearly four-slot body and mediocre overclocking hold it back.
9.5
es.gamegpu.com
≈ estimated
05/02/2023
Hands-on test · Liquid-cooled card
Verdict
The MSI RTX 4090 SUPRIM LIQUID X 24G is the quietest and coolest card tested, though it draws the highest peak power and needs room for a radiator.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim

  • Industry-leading performance for 4K gaming and professional AI workloads
  • Excellent cooling performance with low operating temperatures under heavy load
  • Premium build quality featuring brushed metal finishes and a sophisticated aesthetic
  • Remarkably quiet operation, particularly when using the dedicated 'Silent' BIOS mode
  • Comprehensive feature set including dual BIOS, customizable RGB, and a provided support bracket
  • Higher factory overclocks compared to the Founders Edition, offering immediate performance gains

What customers don't like about MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim

  • Extremely high price point that may not offer the best value-per-dollar for budget-conscious users
  • Enormous physical dimensions (4-slot thickness for the air-cooled version) that require a very large case
  • High power consumption, necessitating a high-quality 850W+ power supply unit
  • Occasional reports of audible coil whine during intensive tasks
  • Software interface (MSI Center) can sometimes be unintuitive or complex to navigate

Verdict

The MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim X is a flagship graphics card powered by the NVIDIA Ada Lovelace architecture, featuring 16,384 CUDA cores and 24GB of high-speed GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus. It offers an impressive factory-overclocked boost clock of up to 2640 MHz (via MSI Center) and utilizes the advanced TRI FROZR 3S cooling system with TORX Fan 5.0 technology and a vapor chamber for elite thermal management. Main pros include its extreme 4K and 8K gaming performance, exceptional build quality with a brushed metal aesthetic, and a dual BIOS for switching between silent and gaming modes. However, notable cons include its massive physical footprint at 336mm in length and nearly 4 slots in thickness, high power consumption requiring at least an 850W-1000W PSU, and reported instances of coil whine under heavy loads.

Compare MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim 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 MSI GeForce RTX 4090 Suprim and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found