8GB VRAM not enough (and 10 / 12)

Page 12 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

BFG10K

Lifer
Aug 14, 2000
22,709
2,980
126
8GB
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.
Resident Evil Village 3060TI/3070 tanks at 4K and is slower than the 3060/6700XT when ray tracing:
Company Of Heroes 3060 has a higher minimum than the 3070TI:

10GB / 12GB

Reasons why still shipping 8GB since 2014 isn't NV's fault.
  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!
 
Last edited:

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
14,841
5,456
136
UE5 only went out of beta last year, so it might be some time before you start seeing games using it instead of UE4.

Fortnite does use it but I imagine they used Fortnite as a testing platform.
 

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
6,240
2,559
136
UE5 only went out of beta last year, so it might be some time before you start seeing games using it instead of UE4.

Fortnite does use it but I imagine they used Fortnite as a testing platform.

Fortnight and Forspoken are the only two games using UE5 that come to mind. I know there are a bunch of tech demos, but those arent really games.
 

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
6,240
2,559
136
Forspoken does not use UE5. It uses Square's internal Luminous Engine.

I think you are right, but boy is there some contradicting information on it. Some articles say it started off using UE5. Some say its Luminous, but using UE5 elements.

But either way, very few games using UE5 for now, as the engine is still new.
 
Feb 4, 2009
34,703
15,951
136
I think you are right, but boy is there some contradicting information on it. Some articles say it started off using UE5. Some say its Luminous, but using UE5 elements.

But either way, very few games using UE5 for now, as the engine is still new.
Agreed this thread prompted me to read about what’s using UE5 and apparently if you’re not using a console not many games are or the sort of use it but it’s not clear how much it’s used
 

amenx

Diamond Member
Dec 17, 2004
4,008
2,278
136
In TPU's performance review of Hogwarts Legacy, he notes the stuttering some may experience is due to shader compiling. Which happens not only at the start of the game, but during gameplay as well resulting in "serious drops in framerate (to unplayable levels) for about 30 seconds. Just stop and wait for the shader compiler to finish—this breaks the immersion of course and I wonder if this can't be solved more elegantly..."

 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,450
10,119
126
In TPU's performance review of Hogwarts Legacy, he notes the stuttering some may experience is due to shader compiling. Which happens not only at the start of the game, but during gameplay as well resulting in "serious drops in framerate (to unplayable levels) for about 30 seconds. Just stop and wait for the shader compiler to finish—this breaks the immersion of course and I wonder if this can't be solved more elegantly..."
Could AMD use their advantage of having a common GPU core arch here, between the Zen 4 iGPU, and an RDNA2/3 GPU? Could they do the shader compiling in the background on the iGPU, to off-load the task from the main GPU?
 

Bigos

Member
Jun 2, 2019
138
322
136
Could AMD use their advantage of having a common GPU core arch here, between the Zen 4 iGPU, and an RDNA2/3 GPU? Could they do the shader compiling in the background on the iGPU, to off-load the task from the main GPU?

Shader compilation is purely a CPU task. It incurs latency before the frame can be rendered, possibly leaving the GPU idle for some time. This is what is then visible as stuttering (the lag is not consistent, so some frames are faster and some are slower).

This is not a full shader compilation which would take a long time. Usually, a specific combination of vertex and pixel shader (and possibly other shader stages) is merged from pre-optimized parts, the result is further optimized and the graphics pipeline binary is produced.

Some game engines can substitute the optimized variant with less optimized version and compile the better one in the background, to use it in later frames. In that case the GPU will run 100% but the framerate will be lower than it should be until this is done. In Vulkan world this mode of operation is facilitated by using the VK_EXT_graphics_pipeline_library extension. I am not sure if there is a DX12 equivalent (for DX11 this is all opaque to the application).

Maybe some game engines do their own "variant" processing that works similarly but less explicitly? You can use "uber-shaders" which there are fewer of so they can be compiled during the load time, and then replace them with optimized variants later. Depending on how big the uber-shader is and how small a specialized one is, there might be a significant difference in performance.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
8,011
6,454
136
I think you are right, but boy is there some contradicting information on it. Some articles say it started off using UE5. Some say its Luminous, but using UE5 elements.

But either way, very few games using UE5 for now, as the engine is still new.

The game was first unveiled back in 2020 and would have been in development for a while prior to that. There's no way it uses UE5 as they wouldn't have had access to it for most of the development and there's almost no way a company would switch engines late in development without facing significant delays.
 

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
6,240
2,559
136
RTX 3090 owner: Anyone managed to have a real fix for Hogwarts Legacy? The game is a stutterfest pretty much everywhere. I can't make it run at all on Windows with either VKD3D by itself, or DXVK+VKD3D.

We need to talk about UE4 Shader compilation issues

I am on an AMD card, with with me playing it on a 1440P display, with FSR Quality (960P), with everything set to High, it runs fine with no stuttering. If I set it to ultra, it stutters every time I run out of VRAM (Which I can watch in afterburner).

I should note that I also have Smart Access Memory enabled. And while I have not seen a bench mark that compares it with that setting on and off, it would make sense that the game would run a lot better with it on.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Tlh97 and Cableman

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
6,240
2,559
136
The game was first unveiled back in 2020 and would have been in development for a while prior to that. There's no way it uses UE5 as they wouldn't have had access to it for most of the development and there's almost no way a company would switch engines late in development without facing significant delays.

The games coming out this year on UE5 all had unveilings several years ago. Its not like nobody had access to UE5 until this last summer.
 

amenx

Diamond Member
Dec 17, 2004
4,008
2,278
136
I am on an AMD card, with with me playing it on a 1440P display, with FSR Quality (960P), with everything set to High, it runs fine with no stuttering. If I set it to ultra, it stutters every time I run out of VRAM (Which I can watch in afterburner).

I should note that I also have Smart Access Memory enabled. And while I have not seen a bench mark that compares it with that setting on and off, it would make sense that the game would run a lot better with it on.
Steve Walton (same HUB reviewer) in his Techspot Hogs Legacy review found the 1440p results (Ultra quality, high TAA) with the RX 6800 (16gb) and 3070 ti (8gb) cards that their "performance is basically identical" (though the 5700xt is trailing way behind). So some 8gb cards apparently do far better than other 8gb cards at this res/setting.


Of course when RT is applied at 1440p ultra, even 16gb cards are struggling, and yes, 8gb cards tank completely. Not sure why anyone would use RT on less than upper tier cards in an already brutally demanding game. When this thread began a couple years ago, no games existed that could tank 8gb cards, unless perhaps in completely unrealistic scenarios. Now there apparently is, though think that some of these scenarios are still unrealistic.
 

amenx

Diamond Member
Dec 17, 2004
4,008
2,278
136
I'm playing at 1080p ultra with 0 stuttering. So is my daughter. What are your settings?
Just bought the game and will install it soon, though dont know what value my findings will be with a 16gb card (4080) and 4k display. Have not seen anyone complain about 1080p performance yet. But at higher res, it was interesting to note findings of various users and reviewers, many of whom are seeing differing experiences with the game. Some pinning the issues to insufficient vram, some blaming shader compiling. I can guess a combination of both would result in an absolute tanking of performance. Yes, its clear that 8gb cards are hampered in the most demanding scenarios (esp with RT) in Hogs Legacy.
 

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
6,240
2,559
136
Steve Walton (same HUB reviewer) in his Techspot Hogs Legacy review found the 1440p results (Ultra quality, high TAA) with the RX 6800 (16gb) and 3070 ti (8gb) cards that their "performance is basically identical" (though the 5700xt is trailing way behind). So some 8gb cards apparently do far better than other 8gb cards at this res/setting.


Of course when RT is applied at 1440p ultra, even 16gb cards are struggling, and yes, 8gb cards tank completely. Not sure why anyone would use RT on less than upper tier cards in an already brutally demanding game. When this thread began a couple years ago, no games existed that could tank 8gb cards, unless perhaps in completely unrealistic scenarios. Now there apparently is, though think that some of these scenarios are still unrealistic.

Like I mentioned above, they use the built in benchmarking tool. Which in my experience, runs fine for me. No VRAM issues. The VRAM issues happen after playing for a while.
 

amenx

Diamond Member
Dec 17, 2004
4,008
2,278
136
Been a few hours into Hogs Legacy, so far, so good. Not encountered any shader compiling stuttering and game ran well maxed out at 4k with RT ultra (reflections) and mostly held 60 fps. Some settings I turn off in all games out of preference (motion blur, film grain, chromatic aberration, etc), and thats it.

This game hammers the CPU and system memory. RAM usage over 20gb at some points. Guess its why they recommend 32gb memory. I can imagine various combinations of HW encountering issues that others may not. An old CPU or non-Nvme drive or not enough RAM can all be added to insufficient Vram as potentially hampering performance, esp if heavy shader compiling is involved.

Tbh, after experiencing the game maxed out and with RT on and off, and although looking great, the graphics do not look like they justify such demanding HW. I can almost smell a scam, like someone in the game studio took a thick envelope under the table to cripple older HW so ppl will upgrade. This is the type of game that Nvidia and AMD welcome with open wallets.

But I will note that you do not have to run the game maxed out for it to look good. I think maxed out settings are more gratuitous than necessary for one to be satisfied. This applies to most games imo. Just my 2c.

(tested on: 13600k, 32gb DDR5 6000, RTX 4080, 2tb pcie 4 Nvme system drive).
 
Reactions: Tlh97 and Stuka87

amenx

Diamond Member
Dec 17, 2004
4,008
2,278
136
Like I mentioned above, they use the built in benchmarking tool. Which in my experience, runs fine for me. No VRAM issues. The VRAM issues happen after playing for a while.
The game but doesnt appear to have an inbuilt benchmark that shows performance stats. The "run benchmark" in the options only runs for a few secs, assesses your HW and automatically applies suggested settings to it, nothing more.

Techspot says "We have benchmarked two sections of the game, one benchmark pass took part on the Hogwarts Grounds as you exit, and the second at Hogsmeade as you arrive...". So seems he is referring to actual game play. If so, then the 3070ti 8gb is doing well at 1440p ultra settings and matching the 16gb 6800. The other 8gb cards though are lagging behind.
 

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
6,240
2,559
136
The game but doesnt appear to have an inbuilt benchmark that shows performance stats. The "run benchmark" in the options only runs for a few secs, assesses your HW and automatically applies suggested settings to it, nothing more.

Techspot says "We have benchmarked two sections of the game, one benchmark pass took part on the Hogwarts Grounds as you exit, and the second at Hogsmeade as you arrive...". So seems he is referring to actual game play. If so, then the 3070ti 8gb is doing well at 1440p ultra settings and matching the 16gb 6800. The other 8gb cards though are lagging behind.

Ahh, OK. I probably should have clicked on that before mentioning it, but figured it was a benchmarking tool. My mistake.

I still question the benchmarking if they are starting off in an area, and not moving to another area. Thats where everybody has issues. Like, being indoors at hogwarts, and then running outside. Anything that causes a bunch of data to be shuffled. Because their benchmarks should show 1% lows being really bad in these cases.
 

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
7,064
7,490
136
2200g + 980ti, SATA m.2 drive, 16GB Ram. Medium settings and FSR Quality @ 1080p. Maximum FOV.

Game has the toughest time with transitions through doors. When you're in an area it plays reasonably well, ~30FPS. But there are a solid 2-3 seconds after transitioning from an interior to exterior environment through a door that the game can really chug (to the point where the door doesnt even open and a little loading icon appears on it before it opens).

Clearly the areas are sectioned pretty heavily and there is a ton of asset swapping happening on the fly at those transition points.

TBF it doesn't really detract from the experience.
 
Reactions: Tlh97 and coercitiv

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
9,198
3,185
136
www.teamjuchems.com
2200g + 980ti, SATA m.2 drive, 16GB Ram. Medium settings and FSR Quality @ 1080p. Maximum FOV.

Game has the toughest time with transitions through doors. When you're in an area it plays reasonably well, ~30FPS. But there are a solid 2-3 seconds after transitioning from an interior to exterior environment through a door that the game can really chug (to the point where the door doesnt even open and a little loading icon appears on it before it opens).

Clearly the areas are sectioned pretty heavily and there is a ton of asset swapping happening on the fly at those transition points.

TBF it doesn't really detract from the experience.

I'd be interested, though not to the point of sending you hardware ( ) in what the experience would be first stepping to 32GB of ram - especially on a card with "only" 6GB of memory - and then stepping to a 5600 type CPU. It seems like that might dramatically impact the game. It's a nice benefit to AM4 that such a step is possible for what could be a very reasonable outlay.

That said, it's not a PS1/2 level of loading times we are talking about here, or a 30 second elevator ride between levels of the castle or something
 

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
7,064
7,490
136
@blckgrffn I have been tempted to drop in a more powerful (but still cheap) processor into the franken-rig for a while, but part of the fun is squeezing a second and third life out of the parts.

Looking at used and new prices, damn its temping. Can grab 32G's for ~$100 and could prob snag a 5600 class proc for the same or less.

BUT NO, I told the wife I'd cool the PC parts buying after putting together sig rig. I'm not going to die lonely and unloved on account of some PC parts. MUST REMAIN STRONG.
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,824
21,608
146
I'd be interested, though not to the point of sending you hardware
I will. For science.

I'll swap him even for a 2400g so he can see if the extra threads help at all. Or if it's a single thread IPC issue.

If the system has 4 rams slots I'll send along 16GB of ram too.

Don't laugh, I'm serious. If you want the stuff, PM me where you want them mailed. You can send the 2200G along afterwards. I've traded with well over 100 forum members here. My reputation is impeccable. I will hook you up. Us married men have to stick together.

Do you know why husbands predominantly die first?
Because we want to.
 
Last edited:
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |