8GB VRAM not enough (and 10 / 12)

Page 86 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar

BFG10K

Lifer
Aug 14, 2000
22,709
2,974
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:
Reactions: Chicken76, iLLusiveMan, maddie and 29 others
Sort by date Sort by votes

psolord

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2009
1,931
1,194
136
psolord said:
I am posting the same frame from the GTX 970. 1080p, fsr balanced, medium preset.

View attachment 97126

There's a difference of course, but considering the delta between these two cards, the GTX 970 ain't atrocious. That's just to show how beautiful UE5 really is and how you absolutely must not use FAFO settings.
Click to expand...
A new Frostpunk 2 screenshot. This game is funny because one screenshot can show you what to expect.

Anyhoo, rx6600 this time. 1080p/fsr quality/high preset.





Yes you can have a perfect 60 on the rx6600, if you don't go over 9000 with the settings. And on a 2500k no less.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,557
20,824
146
mikeymikec said:
Side note to anyone - I'd like to know if texture popping is still a current issue.
Click to expand...
Indeed it is. Sometimes it isn't a vram issue though. Probably just the way the game handles draw distance, streaming, and filtering.

When Aloy jumps and glides you see the same pop in on the ground below her regardless of whether you have 6GB at medium or 16GB at max.
vids will start at correct times.


 
Reactions: Tlh97 and mikeymikec
Upvote 0 Downvote

psolord

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2009
1,931
1,194
136
igor_kavinski said:
Dear Sir Psolord,

Could you be so kind to take the same screenshot with hyperthreading disabled?

Yours truly,
Click to expand...
igor_kavinski said:
Igor Kavinski
Click to expand...
Here you are. Same as before. 4k/dlss balanced/ultra



and an extra one, 4k/dlss balanced/high preset with maxed textures and terrain. vram drops by a tiny bit, but performance gets stable.

 
Reactions: igor_kavinski
Upvote 0 Downvote

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,557
20,824
146
@SolidQ

Are you expecting that game to have issues with 8GB of vram? Because that's the topic of the thread; games requiring more vram now. And the screenshot you shared shows a 3070ti as recommended and it has 8GB.

On topic: Aussie Steve just revisited the RX 5700XT. More AMD fine wine. 🍷 But what was interesting is when he exceeded the 8GB in Ratchet&Clank there was no impact on fps or frame pacing. It simply didn't render the textures properly. Yet another nail in the coffin of bigger bar better. At some point old dogs need to learn new tricks. Because bar charts are outdated without accompanying gameplay video or commentary about the actual in game experience that point out issues like that. Otherwise here in 2024 it amounts to gaslighting.

I am seeing tech tubers that are nothing more than DIYers with a camera do positive reviews of the RTX 4060. "Hurr durr it's not that bad, what's all the fuss about?" Then in the comments section acknowledge that it's overpriced for 8GB. Something they don't emphasize on camera. Instead using whataboutism "It's only a little more than the RX 7600." Uh huh. And that's a card flying off the shelves eh? They both suck, that's the whole point. Doing several videos to show it sucks less than AMD's overpriced entry isn't the flex you think it is. Around $200 is the most anyone should be paying for 8GB now. That there is a $400 8GB card is proof suckers are born every second.
 
Reactions: MangoX, loafbred, Tlh97 and 6 others
Upvote 0 Downvote
R

Ranulf

Platinum Member
Jul 18, 2001
2,364
1,213
136
Early reports on No Rest for Wicked are "huge fps drops and stutters" on a 4090 w/14900k. More serious I think is no re-bindable keys but it is early access.

EDIT TO ADD: Game lists min specs as a 970/Vega 56. CPU is 8400/2600.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,557
20,824
146
Ranulf said:
Early reports on No Rest for Wicked are "huge fps drops and stutters" on a 4090 w/14900k. More serious I think is no rebindable keys.
Click to expand...
Explain what an early access title has to do with the topic please. Otherwise it's simply derailing the thread which is no bueno.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
R

Ranulf

Platinum Member
Jul 18, 2001
2,364
1,213
136
DAPUNISHER said:
Explain what an early access title has to do with the topic please. Otherwise it's simply derailing the thread which is no bueno.
Click to expand...

It was mentioned twice above so I thought I'd chime in but delete it if you want. Perhaps I also forgot to add in that the min gpu specs for the game are a gtx 970/Vega 56.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
28,557
20,824
146
Ranulf said:
It was mentioned twice above so I thought I'd chime in but delete it if you want. Perhaps I also forgot to add in that the min gpu specs for the game are a gtx 970/Vega 56.
Click to expand...
You don't need to delete it. But let's stay on topic. There is so much here that's on topic and still a chore to wade through if you don't use the ignore feature That adding to it with off topic commentary makes reading the thread insufferable.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
J

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
14,642
5,271
136
DAPUNISHER said:
On topic: Aussie Steve just revisited the RX 5700XT. More AMD fine wine. 🍷 But what was interesting is when he exceeded the 8GB in Ratchet&Clank there was no impact on fps or frame pacing. It simply didn't render the textures properly.
Click to expand...

It's rendering the textures properly... it's just using the LOD texture until the real texture finishes loading.

(It should be fast to load in R&C given it's using DirectStorage... the fps hit from using the shaders OTOH...)
 
Reactions: DAPUNISHER
Upvote 0 Downvote

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
9,130
3,071
136
www.teamjuchems.com
jpiniero said:
It's rendering the textures properly... it's just using the LOD texture until the real texture finishes loading.

(It should be fast to load in R&C given it's using DirectStorage... the fps hit from using the shaders OTOH...)
Click to expand...
LMAO, that's such a "WORKS AS INTENDED, TICKET CLOSED" response it makes my skin crawl.

Yeah, but is that "works as intended" the same as "works as customers expect"? Or in a way that avoids disappointment? Those can be vastly different things, and that would be the same case here IMO.

It can work as its supposed to and still be considered defective.
 
Reactions: Tlh97, Thunder 57, Mopetar and 5 others
Upvote 0 Downvote

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
6,218
11,992
136
jpiniero said:
It's rendering the textures properly... it's just using the LOD texture until the real texture finishes loading.

(It should be fast to load in R&C given it's using DirectStorage... the fps hit from using the shaders OTOH...)
Click to expand...
Here's your reply being rendered properly while the browser is still loading vowels:
It's rndrng th txts prprl... t's jst sng th LOD txtr ntl th rl txtr fnshs ldng.

(t shld b fst t ld n R&C gvn t's sng DrctStrg... th fps ht frm sng th shdrs TH...)​
Click to expand...
 
Reactions: Tlh97, Mopetar, CouncilorIrissa and 6 others
Upvote 0 Downvote
J

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
14,642
5,271
136
blckgrffn said:
LMAO, that's such a "WORKS AS INTENDED, TICKET CLOSED" response it makes my skin crawl.

Yeah, but is that "works as intended" the same as "works as customers expect"? Or in a way that avoids disappointment? Those can be vastly different things, and that would be the same case here IMO.

It can work as its supposed to and still be considered defective.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that developers could build in intelligence to better manage the VRAM. They won't though.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

psolord

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2009
1,931
1,194
136
BFG10K said:
Brand new numbers, 3060 12GB has higher 1% low than 4060 8GB in:

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.


And now, back to your usual scheduled lunatic flat earther ranting. Everyone else is wrong, yo!
Click to expand...
Another 1440p example, on upper entry level cards, good job! Why don't you find a 8k test next, where the 3060 would give 3fps and the 4060 only 1fps? You could then add a 300% performance claim, solely based on vram!

The fact of the matter is, that the 4060 remained consistently faster and in the games that the 3060 had a win in 1% lows, the win was small in most of them. What is even worse, is that in the games that they were unplayable, they both remained unplayable.

Also I love how there is a 16GB card in there, which the 8GB card is very competently fighting and actually beating in a few cases, at 1440p ultra/very high settings no less and you posted this with a straight face, lol.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

psolord

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2009
1,931
1,194
136
BFG10K said:
The thread didn't invent VRAM problems. The effects of not enough VRAM are known as far back as the late 1990s and are well-established. I just list examples where it applies to 8GB.
Click to expand...
Well to me, when you post things like Deliver us Mars at 1440p Ultra+RT, on an 8GB card, compared to a 12GB one, where they both fail anyway, but the 8GB card fails harder, is not much of a usable proof. This looks like vram problems invention, especially where they are easily fixable with correct settings and minimal image degradation.

BFG10K said:
There was no focus on resolution, ever. That was caused by a goalpost shifting individual that doesn't understand elementary 3D rendering concepts and constantly posts misinformation, sprayed with an explosive diarea of screenshots.
Click to expand...
Not having a resolution focus is wrong and that's why I put it there. It's basic gpu knowledge. Sure there are some games, that are problematic from the get go. I have admitted to this. They are drops in the ocean in the grand scheme of things. What's even worse, is that they are easily fixable and you deny to see the fix. I mean I showed you what the ultra texture preset does in TLOU with what image degradation.

It's not goalpost shifting. It's real usable info. Use correct settings, game goes back up to being playable, image quality is great. You chose to be fixated on the problem, not my fault. And all that, in very few corner cases, where most of them are specifically games from the playstation ecosystem. Coincidence? I don't think so...

BFG10K said:
The same reason 320MB wasn't enough on 8800GTS in 2007.
The same reason 4MB wasn't enough on i740 in 1999.
Click to expand...

Not the same thing. Different eras. We had 1080p screens back then too. We have 1080p screens today. But we have 8 whole freagin GBs to fill the screen. Textures and other assets can only get SO good. You need to go with sub pixel sized assets, to make 8GBs fail. Or RT, which will hamper the gpu too.

BFG10K said:
We were told 1440p isn't "a proper setting" for $500 GPUs, so I provided plenty of 1080p examples. Notice how he stopped short saying 1080p isn't "proper", but then says it needs upscaling added. A lie by omission since 1080p + upscaling is 720p.
Click to expand...
I never said that ffs. I said that I never cared for the 3070/3070 ti and that's why I got the 3060ti. Never disappointed me. Why? Because I don't crank everything over 9000. I don't do that even on my 4070ti. This never ends well. You have to understand, that settings are there for a reason and one of the reason actually IS, to make people spend more money. You tone down a couple settings, boom, problem gone, you saved a tier of graphics card.

Also I don't remember where I used upscaling as an excuse like that arbitrarily? I showed my 3060ti with DLAA on Horizon Forbiden West and Alan Wake 2. Run like charm. I did not use DLSS on my TLOU screenshots. I only used FSR on my lesser 8GB cards and that was due to gpu power and not vram issues.

Also, either you like it or not, upscalers are here to stay and with good reason. Games are heading to disastrous gpu power requirements first and foremost and a good quality upscaler will be a necessity.

Also there's the matter of power draw/heat. I was playing Bee Island at 4K on the 4070ti and it had more power draw, than A plague tale requiem at 4K/dlss. That's ludicrous.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote

psolord

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2009
1,931
1,194
136
blckgrffn said:
Giving a next gen game a small and ugly texture pack for that little install base serves as a way to serve low spec PC gamers too. Win/win? LOW SPEC BEING EVERYONE WITH AN 8GB OR LESSER GPU FOR THOSE THAT AREN"T PIKCING UP WHAT I AM LAYING DOWN.
Click to expand...
The 8GBs of the Series S, is the least of its problems. It's the 4 glorious tflops that are holding it back and the locked ecosystem. My rx6600 also has 8GBs. Runs Baldur's Gate 3, Remnant II, A plague tale requiem at 60fps. Only 30 on the Series S. It can also run Ratchet & Clank, TLOU, Spiderman, HZD, Godfall, The Last Epoch and even Mario Kart 8, much more successfully than all the XBOXes combined can do. If you get my drift....

The RTX 3060ti is way more capable than the rx6600. Still 8GBs.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
T

Timorous

Golden Member
Oct 27, 2008
1,630
2,818
136
The primary issue is that the inflection point of current performance / estimated future performance for an 8 GB card makes it not worth much more than $300 at most and realistically $250 or less.

The 4060/7600 and 4060Ti 8GB are all varying degrees of bad value for this reason. The 3070 got away with it more because that card is approaching 4 years old already so turning down some settings to make it work is less of a problem.

With equal compute the correct settings for a 12/16GB card will sometimes be a lot higher than the correct settings for an 8GB card. As we can see there are cases where the 12GB 3060 can provide a very playable experience where the 3070/3070Ti/4060/4060Ti 8GB/7600 all suffer due to VRAM limits. Yes you can turn the settings down on those 8GB parts to make it work but why should someone who has one of those cards need to turn settings down that the 3060 12GB owner does not need to? They purchased a last gen $330 card so why is it beating last gen $500/$600 and current gen $300/$400 cards? That should not at all be the case in any scenario.

So it is not that we don't get that you can 'fix' the issue by turning down IQ because that is trivially obvious. It is that the price point of some of these products means they should not be having this issue in the 1st place when less than $50 of extra VRAM solves it from the vendor side and makes it a non issue it just reeks of planned obsolesence.

EDIT: The final point to make here is that generally games scale really well with varying amounts of compute. When it comes to textures and VRAM they are less graceful. If the lowest settings fits in the VRAM buffer fine but if it does not you are either going to have severe hitches or lots of texture swapping. Right now the lowest settings do fit in the 8GB buffer but I do think we will start seeing more and more games where even the lowest texture settings is borderline. TLOU was somewhat like this at launch and it received tons of backlash so the devs worked on it but I don't see that being the norm. Titles will launch where 8GB is only good for low textures and they won't be worked on to improve the situation. It is just a matter of time.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Tlh97, MrPickins, SteveGrabowski and 4 others
Upvote 0 Downvote

Aapje

Golden Member
Mar 21, 2022
1,394
1,881
106
@Timorous

Indeed. And don't forget that increased texture quality generally puts close to zero extra load on your system. I prefer having the same level of graphics quality by upping the texture quality and having a cool card that draws less power, over having to brute force it.
 
Reactions: Tlh97, MrPickins and Rigg
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom
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/    |