8GB VRAM not enough (and 10 / 12)

[BFG10K]

8GB

• Dying Light 2, Battlefield 2042, Avatar Frontiers of Pandora, Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3, Starfield, Forza Horizon 5, Horizon Forbidden West, Alan Wake 2, The Last of Us, Tekken 8, FC 24, Detroit Become Human, Death Stranding, Alone in The Dark, Overwatch 2
  3060 12GB higher 1% low than 4060 8GB https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIfz57wmywg
• Cyberpunk 2077, Diablo 4, Hogwarts Legacy, Horizon Zero Dawn, Microsoft Flight Sim 2020, Witcher 3, Watch Dogs Legion skip to 4K + DLSS for each game https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPiaWWd0xGc
• Ratchet & Clank, Plague Tale Requiem, Last Of Us, Jedi Survivor, Far Cry 6, Hogwarts Legacy, Forza Horizon 5, Cyberpunk 2077 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wr3MckDxMfE&pp=ygUTMTZnYiB2cyA4Z2IgNDA2MCB0aQ==
• Far Cry 6, Godfall, Hogwarts Legacy, Forza Horizon 5, Forspoken, Doom Eternal, Watchdogs Legion https://youtu.be/fJc--C01P90?t=268
• Last Of Us, Resident Evil 4, Callisto Protocol, Plague Tale Requiem, Halo Infinite, Forspoken https://youtu.be/2_Y3E631ro8?t=429
• Last Of Us, Hogwarts Legacy, Resident Evil 4, Forspoken, Plague Tale Requiem, Callisto Protocol https://youtu.be/Rh7kFgHe21k?t=288
• Hogwarts Legacy, Last Of Us, Spider Man Remastered, Doom Eternal, Forza Horizon 5 https://youtu.be/R943CbDTq_s?t=1473
• Horizon Forbidden West 4060 has issues @ 1080p + DLSS unless you switch off frame generation and reduce settings to high https://youtu.be/3AyKvI23VGw?t=233
• Horizon Forbidden West 3070 requires reducing textures 2 notches https://youtu.be/xTwEGy6HHKo?t=351
• Deathloop https://youtu.be/lu_XHyO-6zY?t=918
• Ghost Recon Breakpoint https://youtu.be/iUGppQVpXzU?t=529
• Resident Evil 2 https://youtu.be/Aa-gsgRjMII?t=796
• Talos Principle 2 https://youtu.be/K6FATQAuEwI?t=337
• Spider Man Remastered https://youtu.be/vRVR_plVSlc?t=1060
• Witcher 3 https://youtu.be/vRVR_plVSlc?t=1240

Horizon Forbidden West 3060 is faster than the 2080 Super despite the former usually competing with the 2070. Also 3060 has a better 1% low than 4060 and 4060Ti 8GB.

Spoiler

Resident Evil Village 3060TI/3070 tanks at 4K and is slower than the 3060/6700XT when ray tracing:

Spoiler

Company Of Heroes 3060 has a higher minimum than the 3070TI:

Spoiler

10GB / 12GB

• Plague Tale Requiem 3080 10GB tanks if you enable ray tracing, would be fast enough if it had more VRAM because if you stop moving, the framerate stabilizes to >60FPS https://youtu.be/7zjrMww3fAc?t=496
• Hogwarts Legacy 4K + RT, 4060Ti 16GB is faster than 4070 12GB https://youtu.be/X-h_R488Mq8?t=191

Reasons why still shipping 8GB since 2014 isn't NV's fault.

Spoiler

1. It's the player's fault.
2. It's the reviewer's fault.
3. It's the developer's fault.
4. It's AMD's fault.
5. It's the game's fault.
6. It's the driver's fault.
7. It's a system configuration issue.
8. Wrong settings were tested.
9. Wrong area was tested.
10. Wrong games were tested.
11. 4K is irrelevant.
12. Texture quality is irrelevant as long as it matches a console's.
13. Detail levels are irrelevant as long as they match a console's.
14. There's no reason a game should use more than 8GB, because a random forum user said so.
15. It's completely acceptable for the more expensive 3070/3070TI/3080 to turn down settings while the cheaper 3060/6700XT has no issue.
16. It's an anomaly.
17. It's a console port.
18. It's a conspiracy against NV.
19. 8GB cards aren't meant for 4K / 1440p / 1080p / 720p gaming.
20. It's completely acceptable to disable ray tracing on NV while AMD has no issue.
21. Polls, hardware market share, and game title count are evidence 8GB is enough, but are totally ignored when they don't suit the ray tracing agenda.

According to some people here, 8GB is neeeevaaaaah NV's fault and objective evidence "doesn't count" because of reasons(tm). If you have others please let me know and I'll add them to the list. Cheers!

 

[Ranulf]

FPS Review has forums, run by old HOCP reviewers.

 

[marees]

FPS Review has forums, run by old HOCP reviewers.

Good idea

 

[Mopetar]

Part of it I identify with. I LOVE low budget gaming. It's a box of chocolates.

My only gripe is that both AMD and NVidia forgot that budget gaming cards need a budget price. An 8 GB GPU is fine, but not at $400. Keep it at $200 tops and there's not much room for complaints. At $400 for just the GPU, why should I not just buy a console instead?

The only real options for budget gaming are used cards or an APU. Strix Point has the same (well slightly newer tech) 16 CU that AMD was previously putting in a 6500 XT amd selling for $200. If any of the desktop models come in at under $300, that's a pretty obvious budget buy. If the top model comes out for the same $330 that the 8700G originally retailed for even that might reasonable for some.

With the recent Windows updates applied Strix Point can put up some impressive results for the latest titles.


Source: https://www.tweaktown.com/articles/...-point-apu-windows-11-23h2-vs-24h2/index.html

 

[Hitman928]

My only gripe is that both AMD and NVidia forgot that budget gaming cards need a budget price. An 8 GB GPU is fine, but not at $400. Keep it at $200 tops and there's not much room for complaints. At $400 for just the GPU, why should I not just buy a console instead?

The only real options for budget gaming are used cards or an APU. Strix Point has the same (well slightly newer tech) 16 CU that AMD was previously putting in a 6500 XT amd selling for $200. If any of the desktop models come in at under $300, that's a pretty obvious budget buy. If the top model comes out for the same $330 that the 8700G originally retailed for even that might reasonable for some.

With the recent Windows updates applied Strix Point can put up some impressive results for the latest titles.

View attachment 107066
Source: https://www.tweaktown.com/articles/...-point-apu-windows-11-23h2-vs-24h2/index.html

FG on = terrible experience in that example. You need closer to 80 fps to have a decent gaming experience with FG on.

 

[Mahboi]

Search for that post where I just wrote "this thread doesn't seem to have any sound arguments"
It's on page 88
Only response is :"yep, this is a total waste of time"

Current page is 115.
Hey @Mopetar.
See you in 3 months and another 30 pages.

 

[jpiniero]

My only gripe is that both AMD and NVidia forgot that budget gaming cards need a budget price. An 8 GB GPU is fine, but not at $400.

Entry Level is $400 now.

 

[marees]

Entry Level is $400 now.

The 6800 R.I.P. used to sell for as low as $350

 

[SteveGrabowski]

Entry Level is $400 now.

7600 XT is $320, I'd probably call that entry level. Still sucks though since it's 15% slower than the 6700 XT that sold for the same price for a year and a half.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

7600 XT is $320, I'd probably call that entry level. Still sucks though since it's 15% slower than the 6700 XT that sold for the same price for a year and a half.

XFX is $310 on Amazon. You can get a 6750XT for $300 NIB there.

 

[marees]

7600 XT is $320, I'd probably call that entry level. Still sucks though since it's 15% slower than the 6700 XT that sold for the same price for a year and a half.

The 6750xt is the same price

But once that is sold out, I expect 7700xt to drop to $350

That would be entry level or 1080p max gpu from AMD

From nvidia's side they can sell the 4070 gddr6 for $400

 

[Mopetar]

FG on = terrible experience in that example. You need closer to 80 fps to have a decent gaming experience with FG on.

I thought it was just the upscaling, but I'm not really up on the specifics of FSR/DLSS.

Still some impressive results in other titles though. 60+ FPS in Forza and 30+ FPS in Cyberpunk at Medium settings.





Yeah, nothing earth shattering, but it's impressive for an APU running in a laptop. The article says the TDP was 33W, so there's conceivably still some gas left in the tank in a desktop part.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Those 24H2 gains are chef's kiss. And at least with enough system ram you never have to settle for the low vram experience.

 

[igor_kavinski]

https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-strategy-shifts-to-prioritize-market-scale-over-enthusiast-radeon-gpus

Hopefully this means that AMD will leave behind 8GB cards and go for minimum 10GB VRAM. There's no better way to get 4060 and RX 6600/7600 users to upgrade other than offer a VRAM upgrade. When they see games running better on the 10GB cards and the price is reasonable, they WILL upgrade.

If they still go for 8GB, hope they offer some compression scheme BEFORE Nvidia.

 

[SolidQ]

Hopefully this means that AMD will leave behind 8GB cards and go for minimum 10GB VRAM.

N44 still 8GB, maybe they're gonna like 7600XT 16GB version also. N44 for 200-230 is ok, but not more

NV trying scam

 

[marees]

N44 still 8GB, maybe they're gonna like 7600XT 16GB version also. N44 for 200-230 is ok, but not more

NV trying scam

2 versions of n44 (16?/8, 8)
3 versions of n48 (16, 16, & 12)

I expect 12gb n48 to replace 7700xt at $350

 

[igor_kavinski]

NV trying scam

Nothing new, including the fact that fools were ready to jump on that "deal".

 

[Thunder 57]

Nothing new, including the fact that fools were ready to jump on that "deal".

When you could buy the GDDR6X version for $15 less.

 

[psolord]

There are a few circumstances where monomaniacal behavior is beneficial. This is not one.

This is a personal attack sir.

 

[psolord]

Because we want cards that cover all the games, just because I've got enough render for some games doesnt negate the need for vram in others.

For the umpteenth time, when you buy a graphics card, you buy a range of capabilities. The makers of these cards know very well what their card can do in terms of gpu power and how much vram it will need. All the geniuses of the internet as usual know better.

I keep saying I have three 8GB cards and they are nothing alike. Nobody listens.

 

[psolord]

No one here believes that. We wanted the 3060Ti and the 3070 to have more VRAM to make them better cards.

As a 3060ti owner, I can assure you it would not be a better card with 16GBs of vram. I mean the percentage of betterness would be very very low. I am not sure about the rest of the GA104 cards. Maybe just maybe they would be better off with a little more vram. It really doesn't matter though, because people in this price range, are prone to move on.

 

[psolord]

Man, you are so funny. Why are you ignoring the fact that 4060 Ti 16GB is doing considerably well compared to 4060 Ti 8GB? That's the point DAPUNISHER was making.

And stop whining about people being rude to you. We have been very patient and very nice to you, considering what you have subjected us to. So shut up and post

I did not ignore it. On the contrary. I addressed it directly and showed how you can setup your 4060ti 8GB to have a great gaming experience. It's not me who is ignoring things in this thread. I am just looking for solutions and not problems.

And seriously YOU ARE PATIENT after all the attacks I've been getting? Really? lol

 

[psolord]

This same situation has been mentioned multiple times in this thread for various games. Unfortunately the person you want to understand this point will promptly ignore or hand waive it away.

Oh wow, really? 25% speed to see a texture popping up? What a disaster oh my god.



I may like beautiful vsynced framepaced frames as much as the next person, but I am not a T1000 to have to slow things down to 25% to see a texture pop up. Which by the way was not that bad in the first place. The above shot is before the better texture popped up.

 

[psolord]

This is what I'm not getting in his arguments.

Everyone: card XXX8gb would be better if it was card XXX16gb
Psolord: What? Why would you think YYY16gb would be better than XXX8gb? (adds 15 bazzilion screen shots and youtube videos not showing XXX8gb vs XXX16gb)

I am using the method of deduction sir, by using 3060 vs 3060ti. The 3060 has been better than the 3060ti in like 1% of the games. I'll take my chances with the 3060ti thank you very much.

I'm testing my 3060ti all the time, along with the rest of my many cards. It would not be better no matter how much more vram it would have. It needs more gpu power first and foremost.

 

[psolord]

Max settings at the three primarily used resolutions has been the standard way of benchmarking GPUs and measuring their performance for over two decades now.

There are certainly other ways to measure performance, but calling those charts a deliberate effort to make certain cards look bad is pure nonsense.

This is a prime example of the wrong mentality that is going on in this thread, which I am trying to correct, to no avail.

Things have changed. Now we have max settings + RT. This is a different playground. No matter how good RT is, it IS a different thing. It increases processing power requirements by four times in some cases but it can only need 1GB more, which just happens to force the 8GB cards to crash and burn and yet you see THESE examples.

So in your mind this AOM result is representative of how things are?



Congratulations, now the 7900XTX is equal to the 3060ti. Oh my god.

 

[psolord]

It's trolling plain and simple. It's only that I think he believes it, that I never hit him for it. It isn't really trolling if you think it's true. Just willful ignorance living in a reality distortion field.

I am not trolling sir. I am explaining my point of view and how these cards should be used, which ultimately have 0 impact on the gaming experience. Use correct settings, problem solved.

Digital Foundry has this clip arguing about the 4090 having problems with the resolution it was meant for.

It has run out of GPU power not vram.

My thinking is very simple. The 4090 is 3.7X more powerful than the 4060ti. Yet it only has 3X more vram which doesn't even come close to using. We've been shown before that even Avatar with unobtainium settings was less than 16GBs. Try doing that math.