• 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.
EastCoastHandle said:
Hmm, apparently the "secret" to this game is still a "secret" in order to get better FPS.
Well, I'll tell you what it is. This game has the Standby List Bug. In order to fix it you need an app to consistently flush out the standby list or else it will continue to eat ram and thus lower your frame rates.
This explains why the frame rates can be "higher" while driving (as the ram is getting flushed more often). And explains why the fps plummet towards the end of the video. Because the ram is filling up.

In order to circumvent this issue is to use something like ISLC from Wagnersoft.

But here's the rub in all this. That bug was fixed in Win10 1903 or 1909. I forget which one. And most other newer games out there don't exhibit this kind of behavior. For this game to still have "last year's problem" tells me the were using a pretty old build of win10 (IMO).

If the game isn't "crashing" I doubt they will pay the resources it would take to fix it. It would be nice if they did though.
Click to expand...
Watch Dogs Legion Patch Notes 1.08
Global

  • Fixed an issue that allowed players to change game difficulty and permadeath options while in the main menu.
  • Fixed an issue where a black screen could occur when opening the door to hidden rooms.
  • Super Game Over: Fixed an issue where, after getting Game Over in Permadeath Mode, players would spawn without any player characters when starting a new game.
  • Players can no longer defy space and time to open an ETO safe an infinite amount of times.

PC

  • Fixed an issue where operatives would sometimes fall through the water on builds with AMD GPUs.
  • Fixed an issue where players could get stuck on saving after exiting the game.
  • Fixed a crash that could occur when loading the team menu.
  • Fixed a crash that might occur when using the inventory.
  • Fixed an issue where lightning could get overblown during the day.
  • Optimized loading time when quitting to the main menu.
  • Fixed a crash that could occur when the game autodetected input devices.
  • Fixed an out of memory crash.
  • Fixed a crash that could occur when enabling or disabling Ray Tracing.
  • Further optimizations made to save games to reduce the likelihood of corruption and lost progression.
Click to expand...
Just a quick follow up to Watch Dogs: Legions looks like they finally addressed the memory issue in the game. Will test this out. Hopefully you don't need to use ISLC from Wagnard.
But I'm not sure about the glitch on AMD gpus nor why it was only AMD gpus :confused:
 
LtMatt said:
Sounds like video memory saturation. I've seen similar behaviour before in several games, although the stuttering did not sound as severe as yours when testing with a 8GB GPUs. I've used 8GB/16GB GPUs side by side and only the 8GB GPU would show this behaviour on certain games. The GPUs i used were Vega 64 8GB/Vega Frontier 16GB and a 5700 XT 8GB/Radeon VII 16GB. What you described is exactly the behaviour i saw.

Would you mind running MSI Afterburner and enabling per process video memory allocation to see what the actual video memory usage is in MB?

My theory is that the VRAM allocation metric (touted as the holy grail) will not show more usage (in MB) than the physical video memory available on your GPU - making the metric almost redundant for determining how much video memory is required for an optimal experience.

Instructions here on how to set it up. PSA: MSI Afterburner can now display per process VRAM! : nvidia (reddit.com)
Click to expand...

So, I had some fun with it. Game actually became almost unplayable when this metric went just above 6GB of vram use. Playing for few hours, few times alt-tab to check some email and it moved closer to 6.5GB and game crashed with out of vram error. Good times! Meanwhile GPU-Z shown pretty much full 8GB of vram use right before the crash.
 
Tinek said:
So, I had some fun with it. Game actually became almost unplayable when this metric went just above 6GB of vram use. Playing for few hours, few times alt-tab to check some email and it moved closer to 6.5GB and game crashed with out of vram error. Good times! Meanwhile GPU-Z shown pretty much full 8GB of vram use right before the crash.
Click to expand...
Thank you for confirming my theory. :)
 
LtMatt said:
Thank you for confirming my theory. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, well, I need a new GPU with more vram :P But that aside, game might use less but Windows and other stuff use vram too. It all needs to fit, especially in higher resolutions. And I don't even use triple buffering to lower latency - that would be even more vram use.
 
Tinek said:
Yeah, well, I need a new GPU with more vram :p But that aside, game might use less but Windows and other stuff use vram too. It all needs to fit, especially in higher resolutions. And I don't even use triple buffering to lower latency - that would be even more vram use.
Click to expand...
Try setting windows to adjust for performance in the system advanced settings menu it should lower video memory usage by a couple of hundred MB.
 
Wrinkly said:
Can only guess that it's down to overly aggressive geometry culling.
Click to expand...
Just did the benchmark before and after and it does appear they lowered vram and system ram.
CPU load is the same
GPU load is the same
1%/0.1% gains as well as Min FPS gains noticed.
All using the same clocks/IQ settings (I just so happen to run the benchmark last night).
Max FPS decreased but averages are about the same.

While driving around town I've noticed more steady FPS that don't dip as much as it did in the past. I took no stock while walking/running as that was never a problem before.
Perhaps, they did some culling after all.
;)
 
Posted this before but dunno what it is, maybe after the recent updates or improvements on DLSS. Ive noticed much better FPS in general going from a stuttery mess to very smooth.

settings: ultra on everything including Raytracing on ultra. DLSS Quality.

Before:

Driving: 40-45fps
Walking around london: 50-60fps
Inside buildings: 70fps

after:
Driving: 60fps (mostly)
Walking: around london: 80fps average
In buildings: 100fps average

managed to finish the game with these new improvements, so much more playable.
 
PrincessFrosty said:
One of the problems we've had in this thread is accusations that somehow nvidia are greedy, or that they're skimping on vRAM which has the implication that in theory they could have produced a 20GB variant for the same cost to the consumer. It's that weird belief mixed with bad expectations on vRAM together which has caused a lot of this mess and the end result is going to be that a 20GB variant if such a thing comes to exist will be a lot more expensive, probably at least £150 more on MSRP as that's likey the cost of the raw components themselves. And once that happens we'll get to see if people are willing to put their money where their mouth is, I did with my 3080 and bought the 10GB variant but it remains to be seen that if given all of the info here and some large added premium on a 20GB variant if people would actually buy that or not. Time will tell.



It's difficult to test because there's really no games that exceed 10GB for real real, you can apparently do it if you have 1000+ mods on skyrim but there's just no way I was able to replicate that claim because even getting such a thing to work purely from a compatibility standpoint is a nightmare. And the few games that get anywhere near close are already running so slowly that it's a moot point anyway.

In the old days running out of vRAM would cause a cache miss, and cause the card to fetch the asset from RAM or disk which resulted in huge pauses/stuttering and thus average frame rate drop. In more recent engines that do texture streaming the impact is pretty much gone, they simply display a lower resolution texture on the surface, and so the penalty is a visual one, not a performance one. This fact especially when considered along side the ability to push file steaming speeds to 7-8GB/sec as early as next year is going to mean for many gamers that fetching high res assets from disk is not going to be a problem.
Click to expand...


what about fallout 4. with a tone of 8k texturemods? im pretty sure that will get to 10gb easily.
 
https://www.notebookcheck.net/The-N...-GA104-GPU-and-6-144-CUDA-cores.508157.0.html

So a mobile 3080 will have 16gb vram lol? And they gave us only 10gb on their flagship.

Its gddr6 though so that is how they are cutting costs but still kinda stings...

I wish it was on the deskop 3080 too...

https://www.notebookcheck.net/The-N...gisters-eight-SKUs-with-the-EEC.508041.0.html

3080 20gb is back lol... if its like $800 or something im buying this.. The only way for them to do something like this is to do 20gb of gddr6 instead of gddr6x to save costs and if they use normal g6 they might even be able to discontinue the 10gb model and do a $700 3080 20gb gddr6 who knows
If its gddr6x 20gb its gonna be expensive
 
Hickaru said:
https://www.notebookcheck.net/The-N...-GA104-GPU-and-6-144-CUDA-cores.508157.0.html

So a mobile 3080 will have 16gb vram lol? And they gave us only 10gb on their flagship.

Its gddr6 though so that is how they are cutting costs but still kinda stings...

I wish it was on the deskop 3080 too...

https://www.notebookcheck.net/The-N...gisters-eight-SKUs-with-the-EEC.508041.0.html

3080 20gb is back lol... if its like $800 or something im buying this.. The only way for them to do something like this is to do 20gb of gddr6 instead of gddr6x to save costs and if they use normal g6 they might even be able to discontinue the 10gb model and do a $700 3080 20gb gddr6 who knows
If its gddr6x 20gb its gonna be expensive
Click to expand...
Not the same card then is it? Not same bus width or speed. Not even GA102. Just marketing.
 
Sargatanas2511 said:
Did you ever assume a GA102 chip would be used in a mobile platform? This isn't new.
Click to expand...
I used it as an example... Just look at his post. He uses a laptop 3080 as an example that a 3080 can have 16gb and wished the desktop one should also. When all that is happening is marketing as the desktop one is nothing like mobile one. I think it is far to point out to him then that there are differences, one being it is not GA102 chip.
 
james.miller said:
This is not unsual for nVidia. They had mobile maxwell parts that had more ram then the desktop equivalents and I'm sure other generations too. ie, the gtx970m was available with 6gb of ram and the 980m 8gb.
Click to expand...

Not been a laptop man myself (for gaming) but I always seen they were way weaker than the desktop counterparts and would throttle way before being able to stretch the legs even if they could. Sometimes that's a bit pointless no?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom