No, you are fine. x22ow does have slightly worse hardware than me tho, RAM being the biggest difference. Here is a video that I just recorded (excuse the pepega aim, first game).
You are right though, I am less consistent than I thought I would be. I dipped to 300 twice if I saw correctly, but mostly I am between 380 and 390. Do note, however, that I have high texture filtering and high anti aliasing enabled.
https:// streamable. com/6hiqr8
Thanks for following up. Do you usually cap at 300? Still good performance, but unfortunately I think all the effects going off during teamfights kills the framerate on even the best systems. Not sure how this can be fixed…
I already know your problem! I knew it from reading your title, it’s an extremely common issue. So first, what you’re going to do is follow these instructions:
https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/overwatch/categorieshttps://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/overwatch/c/technical-support/8I cap at 250. And I don’t think anything can be done about it. I could turn down all of my settings and I guess than it would be a little more consistent but busy fights will still drop me to 310ish.
Maybe a 3090 with a 5950x could achieve no dips below 350, but I don’t think the additional cost would justify that slight improve in frames.
I am hoping that OW2 will optimize for newer hardware and 5v5 will positively affect performance.
Yeah, that’s a good take and I agree. Thanks for following up and good luck in your games. 
This is the main reason I don’t think it possible n Intel to hold 400fps.
On 5600x ryzen you could
On 5800x you can
You may need more ram as well I had to upgrade to 32gb that could be a 3090 problem. Speed doesn’t matter too much
OW is terribly optimized but that’s par for the course for blizzard products. They are terrible at FPS stability.
competitive ow forces you to 1080p all low settings 75% render scale because of the games horrendous input lag.
lmao what?? 390fps? Is this serious or am I getting trolled here?
I tell ya, these threads are getting more and more ridiculous.
Waiting to hear from someone who is getting 500fps lmfao
All of this is factually wrong. Neither of those CPUs can and the amount of ram does not affect performance, only ram speed and latency does.
I have always felt OW tends to bottleneck on the CPU, without maxing out the CPU cores.
I can’t tell you if it is a 3090 thing or a architecture thing but if you run a 3090 with 5800x you will need 32gb of ram to hit 400fps because of issues with virtual memory.
You should have double the ram to your vram if you want to eliminate all virtual memory issues. 32 was enough for me.
aside from your actual question, which people have answered (OW is not optimized to squeeze the most out of modern hardware), I just wanna pipe in to say “performance” power mode is unnecessarily increasing your electricity bill and wear and tear with zero performance gain. “Performance” locks your processor into being ramped up at all times, modern processors know when to ramp up and when to ramp down, with zero impact on your performance.
This is the first time hearing about this so I googled:
https:// linustechtips. com/topic/1240678-rtx-3090-ram-requirements/
Some claim it’s a myth, some guys agree with you. One guy is saying that it will only matter if the game eats up all of the gpu’s VRAM, such as Microsoft flight sim.
In any case, op has a 3080 so it wouldn’t matter anyway.
Since you seem interested when the issue happened Overwatch couldn’t break past a certain frame cap (can’t remember the number but it was around 300ish)
What I can tell you, it’s not a use up all your Vram issue 100% since it would be impossible for me to use up 24gb VRAM on 1080p gaming and in Overwatch.
It’s an issue that your GPU needs system memory and if for w/e reason it can’t use Ram it’ll start using virtual memory then once this happens there no easy way to clear it outside of restarting your computer. So often if I wanted to play OW at 400fps I’d have to restart and hope it doesn’t happen (which it could).
From what I read in the Nvidia forum that the more vram you have the more ram you’ll need to mitigate the issue (some people said double and that seemed to be the consensus)
Since the issue hasn’t repeated for me when I have 32GB Ram and 24GB of Vram I’d say it’s likely you’ll at the very least need to have RAM free = VRAM
So maybe 3080 with 12GB Vram can be ok with 16GB Ram but with a 4GB RAM overhead. I wouldn’t rule it out as a potential issue and something you 100% should be aware of if you care about hitting 400fps+
Either way, it’s easy to test. Disable Virtual memory then if the issue happens you’ll get a crash instead of lost frames with an error run out of VRAM (not RAM)
If I had to guess this is either a Ryzen architecture problem or more likely just an Nvidia driver optimization problem since it’s an issue that would only occur at 300+ fps so would probably affect 0.001% of users so it may never be fixed.
I play on 144Hz at 144fps constant with ultra settings. Paying all that money for a rig to play on low graphic settings just to get 390fps makes absolutely no sense to me. I want the game to look its best rather than some notional improvement in response time which you are unlikely to notice when the game itself is updating what’s happening at a fraction of that rate.
I’ll fire it up on low settings and see how high the fps goes with no frame limit set and vsync disabled. Will be interesting - using a 3080ti and slightly older CPU (9th gen i9 I think). If that can hit 390fps then it’s unlikely to be your CPU and more likely, as someone else said, to be limitations of your motherboard.
Hi, I am unable to maintain 9000 FPS with my quad SLI 3090s. Please assist. 
Maybe people spend that money because it’s their passion or they have a lot of disposable income.
Now if you want to speak down to people maybe at a clue of what’s going on.
You may care about if the game looks the best, that’s really cool and since you did say it makes no sense I’ll explain why someone plays the game on low.
First, it’s the highest competitive advantage you can have in a competitive game.
While you may think the improvement is notional and people don’t notice. To put simply your wrong and haven’t looked into it and seem your trying to defend your point of view with lie’s you told yourself.
It has been shown even at 240hz vs 144hz it makes a difference via many tests you can find on youtube that it increases the number of shots you can land and reaction time.
Also, in ultra, you get more frame drops and more visual clutter which does hurt player performance too.
So while you may not get it. Playing the game at the highest fps at low is the most competitive setting you can use. It’s proven and widely excepted.
Like I understand if you don’t play overwatch competitively and don’t care about winning over looks. That’s absolutely fine your a casual gamer and don’t care about min-maxing just don’t make up crap and talk down to people (or do and look like a cool informed dude)
Just as a kicker, to highlight you don’t really understand things. You imply you use vsync on overwatch which if you do is really bad it adds a large amount of latency for something that isn’t that important at high frame rates. You should have that turned off all the time or if you really can’t do without enabling Nvidia’s fast version (which is still bad).
So yea I’ll run overwatch on low at max fps cause I play a competitive game to be competitive. When I want eye candy I’ll fire up something like Doom Eternal with it all maxed out or 2077 (bad game tho). As for cost, this PC has made me more money that’s it cost 
but if someone saved and spent 2k on there passion to use it for what they want, I wouldn’t look down on that people waste more on booze, lotto, cigs or WoW store mounts…
I think you mean channel and not rank. Single rank and dual rank memory are not something we should really be worried about here.
Higher speeds mean little when your cas latency is through the roof.
damn since when was 3000mhz ran low end lmaoxzz i got 1333 ram