Don't wait. The RTX 5090 is not available on any cloud render farm I use as of May 2026 and the RTX 4090 is already more GPU than most animation projects need.
Last Updated: May 2026
Don’t wait. The RTX 5090 is not available on any cloud render farm I use as of May 2026 and the RTX 4090 is already more GPU than most animation projects need. NVIDIA launched the RTX 5090 for desktop consumers with 32 GB VRAM and roughly 1.5-1.7× the CUDA performance of the 4090. But cloud farms need the data center variant, supply is limited, and pricing isn’t established. iRender currently offers RTX 4090 with 24 GB VRAM at ~$8.20/hour – a configuration that handles every animation engine I’ve tested (Redshift, Octane, Arnold GPU, V-Ray GPU, Cycles) without hitting VRAM limits on standard production scenes. I’ve been rendering animation on the RTX 4090 for over 2 years. Not once has the GPU been the bottleneck.
| Spec | RTX 4090 (Available Now) | RTX 5090 (Desktop Only) | Impact on Animation |
|---|---|---|---|
| VRAM | 24 GB GDDR6X | 32 GB GDDR7 | 4090 handles 95%+ of scenes |
| CUDA Cores | 16,384 | 21,760 | ~1.5-1.7× raw throughput |
| Tensor Cores (AI Denoise) | 512 (4th gen) | 680 (5th gen) | Faster AI denoising |
| Cloud Farm Availability | iRender, Xesktop | Not available anywhere | Can’t use what doesn’t exist |
| Hourly Rate (Cloud) | ~$8.20/hr | Unknown (estimated $12–16/hr) | Higher cost per frame expected |
| Renderer Support | All major engines | Driver maturity varies | 4090 drivers are battle-tested |
Why Hasn’t iRender Added RTX 5090 Servers Yet?
Three reasons I’ve gathered from watching the market. First: NVIDIA’s data center GPUs ship on a different timeline than consumer cards. The RTX 5090 desktop launched for gamers, but the professional/data center variant that cloud farms need may follow months later. Second: supply constraints, even desktop 5090 cards were hard to find at launch, and bulk procurement for server farms takes longer. Third: cost-effectiveness. iRender needs to price 5090 servers competitively. If a 5090 server costs $14/hour but only delivers 1.5× the speed of a $8.20/hour 4090, the cost-per-frame actually increases. That math doesn’t help animators.
I asked iRender’s support about 5090 availability. The honest answer: no confirmed timeline as of May 2026. They’re evaluating it. My guess and it’s just a guess – is late 2026 or early 2027 for cloud availability.
Should Animators Wait for RTX 5090 or Render on RTX 4090 Now?
Render now. Here’s my reasoning: the RTX 4090 on iRender handles everything I’ve thrown at it for 2+ years. My heaviest scene, a 3,000-frame character animation with volumetric fog, SSS, and 16-sample motion blur, used 18 GB of the 4090’s 24 GB VRAM. I still had 6 GB of headroom. The only scenario where 32 GB VRAM matters: massive 8K textures or extreme-resolution volumetric datasets, which are film production territory, not typical animation work.
The performance gain from 5090 (~1.5×) would save about $1.20 per 300-frame project at current complexity. That’s $60/year if you render 50 projects. Meanwhile, waiting 6-12 months for cloud availability means delaying $3,000-5,000 worth of client work. The math is obvious. Use the RTX 4090 now. Switch to 5090 when it’s available and the pricing makes sense. Don’t let future hardware stop you from shipping work today.
The RTX 4090 is available right now and it’s more than enough → Try iRender’s RTX 4090 today
FAQ
Does iRender have RTX 5090 servers?
No. As of May 2026, iRender offers RTX 4090 servers only. No major cloud render farm, including Xesktop, GarageFarm, or RebusFarm, has announced RTX 5090 availability. The desktop RTX 5090 launched for consumers, but the data center variants that cloud farms require ship on a different timeline. iRender’s support confirmed there’s no announced date for 5090 servers. When availability is confirmed, this article will be updated. For now, the RTX 4090 with 24 GB VRAM handles all major animation renderers without issues.
How much faster would RTX 5090 be for animation rendering?
Based on NVIDIA’s specs, roughly 1.5-1.7× faster than the RTX 4090 in raw GPU throughput. For a 300-frame Redshift animation that takes 26 minutes on a 4090, the 5090 might finish in 15-17 minutes. But faster rendering doesn’t automatically mean cheaper rendering. If the 5090 hourly rate is $12-16/hour (estimated based on hardware cost), the cost-per-frame might be similar or even higher than the 4090 at $8.20/hour. The real value would be the 32 GB VRAM for extremely complex scenes.
Is the RTX 4090 still good enough for animation rendering in 2026?
Absolutely. I’ve rendered 50+ animation projects on iRender’s RTX 4090 over the past 2 years, spanning Redshift, Octane, Arnold GPU, V-Ray GPU, and Blender Cycles. The 24 GB VRAM handles every standard animation scene without swapping. My heaviest project used 18 GB, still 6 GB of headroom. At ~$8.20/hour, the 4090 delivers render costs of $0.01-0.04 per frame depending on complexity. There’s no animation project in my pipeline where the 4090 has been the limiting factor. Waiting for the 5090 means waiting for an improvement you probably don’t need.
You may want to read other articles of mine here.
Image source: NVIDIA
COMMENTS