• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

10GB vram enough for the 3080? Discuss..

Status
Not open for further replies.
The developers for the dark souls remake confirmed that the usage of the PS5 SSD allows them to cache less and to increase the textures and details of the enviroments.

 
Hickaru said:

Towards the end, the 970 with only 4gb(or 3.5gb idk) of vram can still play with the 4k texture pack at 1080p... how??

It says the game needs 7.5gb.. How is the 970 still giving out decent framerates? Is the usage actually a lot less at 1080p? Like below 4gb?

If it was running out of vram it would be at 5-10fps.

Seeing this makes me feel a lot better about 10gb vram... i mean ill be at 1440p so there is a bit of a headroom anyways...
Although its weird that 3060 gets 12gb of vram but 3080 only has 10gb(latest rumours)
Click to expand...
That's a fake video, should be obvious to anyone who actually played the game because when he's driving around his fps goes up which never ever happens especially near piccadilly. Also there's times when you see obvious stutter-stop on video but nothing on graph.
 
That's a fake video, should be obvious to anyone who actually played the game because when he's driving around his fps goes up which never ever happens especially near piccadilly. Also there's times when you see obvious stutter-stop on video but nothing on graph.
Click to expand...

Fake video lol. It drops to under 20fps when he get's on the bike in places but yeah sure it's fake. HAHA.
 
Chuk_Chuk said:
The developers for the dark souls remake confirmed that the usage of the PS5 SSD allows them to cache less and to increase the textures and details of the enviroments.

Click to expand...

It's nice too see this being taken advantage of so soon, it gives me a lot of hope for DirectStorage on the PC. Looks like they're making good use of just in time preloading of assets because the SSD is so fast you can full vRAM in only a few seconds. It looks an awful lot like classical loading at least in their game is now essentially dead because of this. That's a very nice step in the right direction.
 
Sorry guys, it seems like a battle between peasants in the mediaeval time... no offence :D

Developing for MSFS 2020 (known abuser of GPU) I can tell you that moving forward 10gb will be saturated pretty quickly, yes the engine can get data as quick as you want, but if I model something and want to texture it with some very high quality material and very high resolution maps, sorry but I need your GPU Vram, if it displayed on the screen it has to be in the GPU not on a super duper SSD. Else you will have to lower your settings and not get the experience I wanted you to have, this hold back the platform really.

Now how long that will be is another story, the fact that Nvidia knowingly release a card with 10gb VRAM to double dip their known fanbase isn't exactly a secret, they did so with 20xx and the same people screaming "Heresy" are the same one that bought 2080ti and got absolutely no RTX games for it but a couple, worst the other ones got "Super" card with specs that should have been on the launch's card.

I tend to use Nvidia and did so for the past 10 years (before that I cannot remember rally) but when Nvidia fanboys call "Lisa best fan" whilst at the same time showing poor judgement, lack of common sense, adoration for a brand that is screwing not just the GPU but overall PC Gaming is frankly, as said, a fight among peasants, or like we say where I am from "THE OS CALLS THE BULL HORNS ONE" as bad as each other.

10Gb won't be enough for 4k as much as people like to cry, Nvidia pulled another 20xx there, also as probably the only youtubers one can trust are pointing out pricing was never £6xx for a 3080 and AIB are all complaining about Nvidia being greedy forcing them to increase prices further.

When people defend anti consumer companies I feel pity, AMD isn't any better as they are following AMD as we all seen with ridiculous pricing, despite being strong anyone working with markets and customers in other industry knows that if you try to win over a client used to custom with another brand, you have to win on pricing first and foremost, not value for money as they (wrongly or not) see value on their current provider. Of course they see people being easily fooled and try too.

3070 is the most glaringly obvious example, £500 for a card that will have to lower res of texture to play games than a £500 consoles, and anyone with a bit of gaming development knowledge would know that with Teraflop only you can wipe where...you know where.
 
Trustdesa said:
Sorry guys, it seems like a battle between peasants in the mediaeval time... no offence :D
Click to expand...
Not a great start to your post...went on to agree with the sensible people (it's a question of when. Not if) then lost it completely when you called out mingey for pointing out poneros's typical response to material that doesn't suit his own argument (whaaa it's fake etc)

Can't be bothered with the rest. *shrug*
 
koooowweeee said:
So, what's the conclusion to this massive discussion?
Click to expand...

I think no one can thank Nvidia for its choices - in the best case for it, 10GB is the barely satisfactory lower end or minimum capacity; in the worst case for it, 10GB is just not enough VRAM capacity even today and would limit one's framerates.
 
koooowweeee said:
Hahaha

Surly it is? I mean, if it wasn't, why would Nvidia gimp there cards. They know people will pay more, so they would just put more ram on the cards and charge more.

They must have done loads of testing with different amounts and know it's enough?
Click to expand...
Yeah no doubt it's fine now but nobody can predict the future. Especially with the new consoles doing new things.

Plus people play different games, want different levels of performance at different resolutions and different quality settings.
 
4K8KW10 said:
I think no one can thank Nvidia for its choices - in the best case for it, 10GB is the barely satisfactory lower end or minimum capacity; in the worst case for it, 10GB is just not enough VRAM capacity even today and would limit one's framerates.
Click to expand...

Is there any real proof of it? Does a game need 10gb all the time, or is it up to the game Devs to use it properly. I'm no expert, it's just a thought
 
Trustdesa said:
Now how long that will be is another story, the fact that Nvidia knowingly release a card with 10gb VRAM to double dip their known fanbase isn't exactly a secret, they did so with 20xx and the same people screaming "Heresy" are the same one that bought 2080ti and got absolutely no RTX games for it but a couple, worst the other ones got "Super" card with specs that should have been on the launch's card.

I tend to use Nvidia and did so for the past 10 years (before that I cannot remember rally) but when Nvidia fanboys call "Lisa best fan" whilst at the same time showing poor judgement, lack of common sense, adoration for a brand that is screwing not just the GPU but overall PC Gaming is frankly, as said, a fight among peasants, or like we say where I am from "THE OS CALLS THE BULL HORNS ONE" as bad as each other.

10Gb won't be enough for 4k as much as people like to cry, Nvidia pulled another 20xx there, also as probably the only youtubers one can trust are pointing out pricing was never £6xx for a 3080 and AIB are all complaining about Nvidia being greedy forcing them to increase prices further.
Click to expand...

\o/ A man of my thoughts! Was many a year ago I stopped caring about the brand and just went with which card gave best value. I know nvidia command 80% GPU market but it disguises the misinformed as if you press the average moron out there with a laptop/pc they only retort the pc salesman spiel of 'nvidia just better than amd' 'for gamers' its very comical but thats as deep as their knowledge extends.
 
No, it was just an invitation to use google search to find all the cases:

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/forums/geforce-graphics-cards/5/293976/high-vram-usage/

Hi went from a sli of gtx 1080 to a nvlink of rtx 2080ti, they work fine so far but when I check in fallout76 the max vram used i have between 9.5 to 10.5gbytes max..

With my 1080s I couldn't have gone beyond 8gb of course, so i suspect this is to fecth more textures but why? I mean the game was ok with the 1080 but not powerful enough for radiation areas or the whitesprint bunker.. also the textures in the bunker shouldn't use too much vram because it's a small bunker... to sum up a bit bewildered why it uses so much and if amd says 11gb isn't enough for far cry 5 maybe it's the same process happening on the radeaon VII?
Click to expand...

Its by design. The more vram a card has, the more memory may be allocated to it by games. Instead of swapping textures/assets in and out of vram, cards with more vram may retain such assets longer and is why the higher vram usage is shown.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom