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!

 

[psolord]

This is a screenshot from Frostpunk 2.

My 4070ti, 4k/fsr at freagin balanced, ultra high. 50fps with LESS than 8GBs vram usage. Yes, it is UE5. Good luck enjoying that 4060ti 16GB, because you know....vram will save you!

 

[nurturedhate]

This is a screenshot from Frostpunk 2.

My 4070ti, 4k/fsr at freagin balanced, ultra high. 50fps with LESS than 8GBs vram usage. Yes, it is UE5. Good luck enjoying that 4060ti 16GB, because you know....vram will save you!

View attachment 97085

Doesn't disprove the countless examples of 8gb vram not being enough...
But I'm just repeating the last 85 pages...

 

[Hitman928]

This is a screenshot from Frostpunk 2.

My 4070ti, 4k/fsr at freagin balanced, ultra high. 50fps with LESS than 8GBs vram usage. Yes, it is UE5. Good luck enjoying that 4060ti 16GB, because you know....vram will save you!

View attachment 97085

And it only cost you 60% more money to play with the “correct settings!” Congrats, I guess.

 

[MrPickins]

Edit: What am I doing? I decided I'm done with this nonsense...

All I have to say is: if you think everyone you talk to is wrong, maybe you should reevaluate your own position.

 

[jpiniero]

NVIDIA launches RTX A1000 & A400 low-profile Pro GPUs based on Ampere architecture - VideoCardz.com

NVIDIA RTX A1000 & RTX 400 GPUs are small Following the release of RTX 2000 ADA, NVIDIA has new graphics cards featuring even lower specs. NVIDIA is launching new Ampere-based RTX GPUs for professional use. The new models are called RTX A1000 and RTX 400, and both share a minimalist design...

videocardz.com

Eat your heart out... NV releases a new Ampere Pro 4 GB card. And it has the SM count cut all the way down to 6.

 

[psolord]

Let's assume that 5000 series is launched and 4000 series cards are being sold at a heavy discount to clear inventory. What would you advise a friend in those cases when 4060 Ti 16GB of some cheaper brands like Zotac is selling for the same price as an ASUS TUF 4060 Ti 8GB? Would you still tell your friend to go for ASUS because VRAM does not matter, assuming he is unwilling to spend even dollar more for the next tier of performance? You would have no qualms about getting your friend to go with the lower VRAM card? You won't feel any guilt?

I'd tell him to try to buy a 4070.

If he* was absolutely hell bent between these two, the 16GB of course. For the same price? Absolutely.

*edit

 

[psolord]

Quality over quantity. Just because I can gather a bunch of data, doesn't mean that data is useful. GameGPUs business model is basically rush to publish because being first gets lots of views. It's similar to the 24 hour news networks who are constantly airing "breaking news" as stories happen. Problem is, by rushing out stories, you don't have time for actual investigation or proper vetting of data and you get things wrong, a lot. The model works to make money because you grab attention, but it's terrible for actual journalism. GameGPU has even been accused of not actually having measured data behind all of their results but that they use algorithms to calculate values based upon the measurements they do take. No idea if it's true, but I've seen it thrown out by other reviewers.

As a consumer, I'd much rather wait for proper tests that are much less likely to be junk data and more likely to be representative of the actual game play experience. That means probably having to wait a bit to get better data published and maybe hunting a little bit for specific model tests, but getting quality data is vastly preferred to quick data that's unreliable.

Gamegpu's findings are fine for the most part. Their 4070ti, 3060ti and RX6600, but also the GTX 1070 and other cards of the past, are/were on par with my own hardware. I wouldn't quote them if I saw great discrepancies.

 

[psolord]

The moment when @psolord realizes his most quoted proof for low VRAM utilization in games is slipping through his fingers, and then promptly proceeds to accuse his debate partner of being irrational.

I am not quoting gamegpu to show low vram utilization. I am quoting them to show how, higher vram video cards, are dead in the water on heavier games and therefore, the whole premise of this thread, is moot.

Case in point Frostpunk 2 which I showed above and lo and behold, they already tested. That's why I love them.

Frostpunk 2 Beta: PC Performance Benchmarks for Graphics Cards and Processors | RTS / Strategy | GPU TEST

We tested Frostpunk 2 Beta at the highest graphics settings, on video cards from the GEFORCE RTX and RADEON RX series. Also, during the tests we conducted, we assessed the performance and quality o

gamegpu.tech

4060ti 8gb is beating the 6800 16gb, again...It also has 226% of the performance of the rx6600, which goes to show than not all 8GB cards are the same...

3060 has 31 marvelous fps at 1080p, beaten by many 8GB cards. The 4060ti 8gb is beating it by 67%. Yeah vram aint gonna help you. Most of these are unplayable anyway btw. However you will need to apply a lesser level of correct settings, the higher you go in gpu power.

 

[psolord]

Edit: What am I doing? I decided I'm done with this nonsense...

All I have to say is: if you think everyone you talk to is wrong, maybe you should reevaluate your own position.

I have been doing performance tests for decades now, thank you very much. It is not I that needs to re-evaluate. But if the need arises, I will. I am showing you where things are going and you (not you) keep looking at the ceiling. Not my fault.

At this point I can safely use this meme.

 

[igor_kavinski]

At this point I can safely use this meme.

View attachment 97125

The 8GB Messiah has spoken. We are all WRONG.

/thread

 

[psolord]

This is a screenshot from Frostpunk 2.

My 4070ti, 4k/fsr at freagin balanced, ultra high. 50fps with LESS than 8GBs vram usage. Yes, it is UE5. Good luck enjoying that 4060ti 16GB, because you know....vram will save you!

View attachment 97085

I am posting the same frame from the GTX 970. 1080p, fsr balanced, medium preset.



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.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Yellow text color works best for readability.

 

[psolord]

View attachment 97128

Yellow text color works best for readability.

I like them flamboyant and super gay, for my GTX 970!

 

[igor_kavinski]

View attachment 97085

Dear Sir Psolord,

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

Yours truly,
Igor Kavinski

 

[BFG10K]

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!

 

[igor_kavinski]

Spoiler: SCREENSHOTS

Yep. Games don't love VRAM. It's just a bug in the GPU drivers causing a higher reported minimum fps value. DLSS3 saves the day!

OR

These lousy game developers need better training in the Nvidia school of graphics excellence.

/s

​	3060 12GB​	4060 8GB​	% difference​
COD: MW3​	50​	46​	8.70%​
Starfield​	36​	34​	5.88%​
Forza Horizon 5​	89​	86​	3.49%​
Horizon II: FW​	22​	16​	37.50%​
Alan Wake 2​	22​	17​	29.41%​
FC 24​	101​	76​	32.89%​
Detroit Become Human​	52​	46​	13.04%​
Death Stranding​	89​	84​	5.95%​
Alone in the Dark​	44​	37​	18.92%​
Overwatch 2​	193​	180​	7.22%​

 

[mikeymikec]

It seems to me that the premise of this thread has altered since I first encountered it, or perhaps my impression of the problem was incorrect in the first place.

IIRC the problems were:

1 - texture popping with 8GB cards that didn't occur with higher VRAM cards, which is problematic because it isn't something that is represented in typical benchmarking figures.
2 - hitting 8GB VRAM usage ceiling at 1080p in modern gaming
3 - hitting 8GB VRAM usage resulting in sharp frame rate drops (which still seems to be a theme, I haven't watched all of the updated videos in the OP)

Is texture popping still an issue, or could it have been an issue with games that were still in a 'recently released' state?

The focus of the thread seems to have changed from 1080p to 1440p, or is there a general consensus that more recent benchmarks are typically 1440p with upscaling which are a fair representation of 1080p non-upscaled?

I wonder if the OP needs to be more explicit in its wording about what 8GB isn't enough for.

 

[BFG10K]

It seems to me that the premise of this thread has altered since I first encountered it, or perhaps my impression of the problem was incorrect in the first place.

The thread's premise has never altered, with the exception of adding 10/12GB examples later.

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.

The focus of the thread seems to have changed from 1080p to 1440p, or is there a general consensus that more recent benchmarks are typically 1440p with upscaling which are a fair representation of 1080p non-upscaled?

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.

("I posted 84 screenshots, so I must be right!!!")

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.

I wonder if the OP needs to be more explicit in its wording about what 8GB isn't enough for.

The same reason 320MB wasn't enough on 8800GTS in 2007.
The same reason 4MB wasn't enough on i740 in 1999.

 

[igor_kavinski]

I wonder if the OP needs to be more explicit in its wording about what 8GB isn't enough for.

8GB is BAD. BAD. BAD.

It's ancient. Shouldn't be in anything other than RX 6400/6500 and Geforce 3050 class cards.

It's preventing the graphics industry from moving forward in visual fidelity.

It's the reason console ports wreak havoc on the relatively expensive entry level machines of PC gamers and make the consoles look far better from a value perspective.

It's making Jensen wayyyyyy too rich. He's not donating the money to alleviate world hunger so why should we keep paying for his uber expensive useless leather jackets?

The PC industry may soon move to minimum 12GB RAM with new RAM chips. It's just going to look bad in specs when the PC has 12GB RAM and the GPU has only 8GB. Heck, even APUs with 16GB LPDDR5X have access to more than 8GB then why saddle the faster dGPU with only 8GB?

People, don't be morons by supporting moronic decisions made by greedy morons who themselves would get their kids the graphics card with the highest VRAM.

 

[SolidQ]

Ghost of Tsushima Director's Cut​

4GBAMD
GTX 2060AMD

 

[MrPickins]

I have been doing performance tests for decades now, thank you very much. It is not I that needs to re-evaluate. But if the need arises, I will. I am showing you where things are going and you (not you) keep looking at the ceiling. Not my fault.

At this point I can safely use this meme.

View attachment 97125

You seem to forget that most of us here are a bunch of old men who have also been doing this for decades. Your self-professed expertise isn't really impressive.

But that's fine, pride comes before the fall.

 

[DeathReborn]

8GB is BAD. BAD. BAD.

It's ancient. Shouldn't be in anything other than RX 6400/6500 and Geforce 3050 class cards.

It's preventing the graphics industry from moving forward in visual fidelity.

It's the reason console ports wreak havoc on the relatively expensive entry level machines of PC gamers and make the consoles look far better from a value perspective.

It's making Jensen wayyyyyy too rich. He's not donating the money to alleviate world hunger so why should we keep paying for his uber expensive useless leather jackets?

The PC industry may soon move to minimum 12GB RAM with new RAM chips. It's just going to look bad in specs when the PC has 12GB RAM and the GPU has only 8GB. Heck, even APUs with 16GB LPDDR5X have access to more than 8GB then why saddle the faster dGPU with only 8GB?

People, don't be morons by supporting moronic decisions made by greedy morons who themselves would get their kids the graphics card with the highest VRAM.

So you're saying that Microsoft is hobbling the industry with the paltry 8GB available to Graphics on the Series S (a 1080-1440p console according to MS)? 3GB GDDR7 is 2025+

I do think 8GB is decidedly budget/eSports level now ($200 max).

 

[blckgrffn]

So you're saying that Microsoft is hobbling the industry with the paltry 8GB available to Graphics on the Series S (a 1080-1440p console according to MS)? 3GB GDDR7 is 2025+

I do think 8GB is decidedly budget/eSports level now ($200 max).

Ha, only for the studios that need to care about that putrid thing as some sort of priority target. If you are making your game work Xbox One through Xbox Series X then its not that big of a deal. 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.

What a weird mistake updating that console but crippling its ram capacity was, can't even use the Xbox One X backwards compat profiles because it doesn't have the framebuffer for the textures. So you can't even enjoy the HDR/high res version of games that were optimized for that late in the One lifecycle. SMH.

 

[Mopetar]

You seem to forget that most of us here are a bunch of old men who have also been doing this for decades. Your self-professed expertise isn't really impressive.

But that's fine, pride comes before the fall.

I think that claiming to have been doing it for decades honestly makes it worse. That doesn't preclude a person from having done it incorrectly for that entire time.

Frankly it's his money and if reducing settings to medium is the correct way to play, more power to him.

 

[mikeymikec]

The thread's premise has never altered <snip, I promise I've read it!>

I am not accusing you of anything, so please dispense with accusatory wording like "invent", nor have I suggested that lack of VRAM is a new problem. I am simply offering advice in good faith, take it or leave it. Ignore the person you're referring to, they're not relevant to what I'm talking about; perhaps when I said "thread" I should have stated "OP" partly because I am not attempting to summarise 84 pages worth of posts. I think the OP does need to be more explicit if you intend for it to be as informative as possible.

Resolution - in my opinion there ought to be some focus, surely? Upscaling aside (and AFAIK it does muddy the waters considerably), resolution has to be right up there in the top few graphics settings as having the largest effect on performance / viewing pleasure. To put this in the simplest terms, if you took a random person off the street (and with the assumption that they know what basic terms mean like resolution), introduced them to the fact that new graphics cards sell for prices as low as <$100 and up to let's say $2000 (it's a while since I've checked the highest-end figure so feel free to substitute for whatever the accurate figure is), then even the average person is not likely to expect say a $100 graphics card to perform agreeably at the highest resolutions (4k and above) at least without some kind of significant sacrifice (perhaps of settings and/or expectations), because logically if they did then the $2000 graphics cards would have little need to exist.

I don't know if I have a good grasp of what gamers in general might agree with, but nowadays in terms of resolution I'd summarise the popular resolutions as follows:

1080p: Entry level
1440p: Mid-range
4k and beyond: Enthusiast / premium

I would not regard any 8GB cards I'm aware of as "entry level" as they tend to be at least $300 (I'm British and in my experience UKP prices tend to be the same figure as USD prices, so if my figures are off by a bit that's probably why), so based on that I might expect (assuming ignorance of this thread / the 8GB debate in general) an 8GB card to be sufficient for 1080p regardless of settings and 1440p depending on the circumstances, but to treat 4k as if it's somehow similar to the previous two categories is to dilute the advice you want to give with what IMO is an absurdity; logically based purely on pixel count 4k is going to want quadruple the computing power compared to 1080p.

I went on the advice this thread gives when picking on my 6700XT 12GB and I'm glad I did given that HZD consumed over 8GB VRAM on max 1080p settings right from the word go. I would have been annoyed if I had spent a little less and got an 8GB card to run into framerate issues on the very first new game I played! But when I picked this card, I wanted a strong card for 1080p/60 that would hopefully be a decent long-term choice; me going out and buying a 4k monitor would just be a case of setting myself up for disappointment in all terms: immediate, short and long-term.

IMO talking about VRAM requirements in 2007 or 1999 does not help the message that you intend to convey in this thread; some people who might read your advice might not even have been born in 1999 and while I had been buying graphics cards for many years by 2007, I'm not sure I could even tell you with a great degree of confidence which card I had back then. A GeForce 7600GS / 512MB maybe?

I don't think saying "8GB is not enough" with zero preamble is particularly helpful because at face value it's a highly subjective statement, especially if you don't know the person making it.

I'm just suggesting more explicit wording like, "you might expect of cards that cost $300 to at least deliver x fps at y resolution on max settings, here's some examples of modern games whose performance may disappoint you", and possibly label example benchmark URLs with the resolutions they cover, and possibly a quick summary of symptoms like say texture popping / frame rate drops / ~30fps* framerates.

* - pick a figure based on a perceived consensus. I personally aim for consistent 60fps performance and I'm not keen about reducing the graphics settings other than for features I regard to be gimmicks like motion blur.

Side note to anyone - I'd like to know if texture popping is still a current issue.