is the extra VRAM really that beneficial?

[TNA]

I had a 3080. Now on a 4070 Ti which I got for £575 brand new and not had a single issue with vram in anything I play. Much better than being stuck on a power hungry 3090 that is slower with no likely no warranty left by now I say

 

[Zeebedy]

I have warranty on mine. And cost me a fraction of what number people are spitting out here..

 

[ATIorNvidia]

If you want to max everything, ensuring no texture pop in and consistent frame time performance then yeah, it is.

 

[Quartz]

i originally ordered a 3080 for my "budget" gaming PC..and I returned and upgraded to a 3090 Aorus Master, mainly because the 24gb VRAM seemed to be more benificial.t is it really going to help a lot against, say, a 3080 with 10gb VRAM?

Yes, especially if you do VR chat. I don't but I'm reliably informed that the more VRAM the better as some people's avatars can use a lot of VRAM. The same person was streaming Jedi Survivor on a 3080 (maybe 3080 Ti) and it couldn't cope because of the lack of VRAM.

 

[TNA]

I have warranty on mine. And cost me a fraction of what number people are spitting out here..

Enlighten us then, how much did you pay? Most paid 3090 FE price or more. Also most would have run out of warranty by now no?

 

[Grim5]

DL moar ram

 

[Purgatory]

i originally ordered a 3080 for my "budget" gaming PC..and I returned and upgraded to a 3090 Aorus Master, mainly because the 24gb VRAM seemed to be more benificial.t is it really going to help a lot against, say, a 3080 with 10gb VRAM?

 

[TNA]

Nice. My £575 12GB 4070 Ti card not only beating the 3090. But doing so using a lot less watts. Not to mention it has frame gen which has been great so far for me

The 4080 is loads more ahead too

Forget all that though. The chart shows a more important thing. One runs out if performance way before vram in most occasions.

 

[brostradamus]

How is that working out for 3090 users?

haha.. got to be the worst purchase of the century

 

[Nexus18]

Nice. My £575 12GB 4070 Ti card not only beating the 3090. But doing so using a lot less watts. Not to mention it has frame gen which has been great so far for me

The 4080 is loads more ahead too

Forget all that though. The chart shows a more important thing. One runs out if performance way before vram in most occasions.

Exactly.

Also, surprise surprise, using a benchmark from when the game first came out and has had multiple patches to improve perf etc. since I rather reduce settings than play at 30 fps or the obvious choice, use dlss and get a better experience overall..... especially for the ray reconstruction which massively improves IQ as evidenced.

PCGH did an update recently with the new dlc that came out, if we're looking at 1440P:

Aside from 4080+ there, no gpu has playable performance there imo so question is then, is likes of a 4080/4090 worthwhile purchase for the rare demanding titles like this?

No doubt, AW 2 is a game which will prefer more vram at res such as 4k, even if you were to use dlss, 12+GB probably is required for the "best" experience (and even more if using nvidias frame gen since it uses more vram).

The only way a 3090 would have ever been worth it imo was:

- if you really couldn't get a 3080 for <£900
- you need the extra vram for workloads
- you mod your games with extreme high res texture packs

"future proofing" as shown is a stupid reason when it comes to purchasing anything these days.

There was a questionable time with some awful releases last year about vram, more so for 8gb gpus but as shown, a few patches came out for such games like TLOU and sorted most of the issues out and now with ue 5+, as also picked up by a few channels, vram optimisation is in a far better place where EU 5 seems to be generally using quite low amounts compared to other games. Snowdrop engine is the best engine to date for vram optimisation and the way it works with the buffer system and thankfully, all of ubi titles will now be using this engine to my knowledge.

The fact that nvidia changed this approach with the 4080 and 4090 shows that they needed to make the xx90 more worthwhile and given how successful the 4090 has been, it's safe to say, from their pov, they did the right thing.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Nice. My £575 12GB 4070 Ti card not only beating the 3090. But doing so using a lot less watts. Not to mention it has frame gen which has been great so far for me

The 4080 is loads more ahead too

Forget all that though. The chart shows a more important thing. One runs out if performance way before vram in most occasions.

Whereas I agree the RTX3090 didn't make sense unless you were not gaming on on it, that chart highlights some things.

The RTX4070 12GB is barely faster than an RTX3080 10GB. Yet its 3x faster here. So the RTX3080 12GB would probably be much higher than the 10GB version.

I have an RTX3060TI which I am increasingly finding my mates RX6700XT seems to be edging ahead off. But 8GB was probably acceptable for the era. But the RTX4060TI in 2023? A big nope.

It's quite clear, that with the consoles having upto 12GB VRAM, we shouldn't be having cards above £200 with under this.

I also expect all the people who spent £750 on RTX4070TI at launch will see the RTX4070TI Super slowly push ahead. At least your one was under £600 which was great value.

The reality is that you need not only core performance but sufficient VRAM to achieve it.

The big issue is why we have cards selling upto £400 with only 8GB of VRAM and PCI-E 8x buses.

 

[Nexus18]

Whereas I agree the RTX3090 didn't make sense unless you were not gaming on on it, that chart highlights some things.

The RTX4070 12GB is barely faster than an RTX3080 10GB. Yet its 3x faster here. So the RTX3080 12GB would probably be much higher than the 10GB version.

I have an RTX3060TI which I am increasingly finding my mates RX6700XT seems to be edging ahead off. But 8GB was probably acceptable for the era. But the RTX4060TI in 2023? A big nope.

It's quite clear, that with the consoles having upto 12GB VRAM, we shouldn't be having cards above £200 with under this.

I also expect all the people who spent £750 on RTX4070TI at launch will see the RTX4070TI Super slowly push ahead. At least your one was under £600 which was great value.

The reality is that you need not only core performance but sufficient VRAM to achieve it.

The big issue is why we have cards selling upto £400 with only 8GB of VRAM and PCI-E 8x buses.

These are the main things really.

At the time, 3070 and 3080 were incredible value if you could get one for msrp (which was more possible and achievable than any amd gpu [the only other gpus to offer more than 8/10gb] at the time but then you lose out on dlss and other nvidia tech. which has proven to be of more value than having higher vram). At the end of the day the 3070/3080 is coming up to 4 years old now and are arguably still doing pretty damn well outside of the questionable odd title (which I think most of the main controversial ones have been patched), imo, they have aged better than any other gpu released at that time. As I noted before in my case, the 3080 has held up better than any of my previous gpus in terms of fps and being able to keep settings dialed up (largely thanks to dlss obviously), usually I have felt more of a need to upgrade gpu after 2 years.

Even though games have improved with regards to vram usage/optimisation, no one should be buying a gpu nowadays with <12gb vram for £500+

 

[TNA]

The RTX4070 12GB is barely faster than an RTX3080 10GB. Yet its 3x faster here. So the RTX3080 12GB would probably be much higher than the 10GB version.

But what does it matter with that kind of performance? What it highlights is you run out of performance anyway..

I also expect all the people who spent £750 on RTX4070TI at launch will see the RTX4070TI Super slowly push ahead. At least your one was under £600 which was great value.

I agree with this. That is why it is better to change gpu's often. Doing so does not have to mean more money. As in my case can mean less money actually

The reality is that you need not only core performance but sufficient VRAM to achieve it.

Exactly. Making that chart show that you really need a 4090 in that game for those settings. 4080 at the bare minimum.

Therefore the extra vram is useless on that card on this occasion. Making that chart a own goal

 

[TNA]

Even though games have improved with regards to vram usage/optimisation, no one should be buying a gpu nowadays with <12gb vram for £500+

Yep. An in 2025 with next gen cards coming the minimum needs to be 16GB. I know I won't get a card with less than that.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Even though games have improved with regards to vram usage/optimisation, no one should be buying a gpu nowadays with <12gb vram for £500+

I would say under £300 for 8GB cards though - because consoles are also moving forward towards better performance too.

There is no real room for a RTX5060(or AMD equivalent) with RTX4070 level performance to be hampered by only 8GB of VRAM,especially as FG,etc push VRAM usage.

It's also more and more common to find budget 1440p monitors.

But what does it matter with that kind of performance? What it highlights is you run out of performance anyway..

Not to the extent you are seeing there and the reality there should be no situation where an RTX4070 should show that delta. The core itself is barely faster than the RTX3080. The reality is that there is no place from Nvidia or AMD to be selling cards with less than 12GB for over £250 in 2024. It's a con especially to take advantage of those less knowledgeable.

I agree with this. That is why it is better to change gpu's often. Doing so does not have to mean more money. As in my case can mean less money actually

Which is not practical for most of the market. Most of the market buys pre-built systems and most gamers I know who even build their own PCs are not enthusiasts. To put it in context about 98% of all gamers I know don't change dGPUs quickly,because once a PC is bought or built they show no interest in reading about hardware.

This is why I find the RTX4060/RTX4060TI/RX7600 incredibly cynical products. Most of them will be sold in prebuilt systems or to those who know no better and are on a budget.

 

[TNA]

I would say under £300 for 8GB cards though - because consoles are also moving forward towards better performance too.

There is no real room for a RTX5060(or AMD equivalent) with RTX4070 level performance to be hampered by only 8GB of VRAM,especially as FG,etc push VRAM usage.

It's also more and more common to find budget 1440p monitors.




Not to the extent you are seeing there and the reality there should be no situation where an RTX4070 should show that delta. The core itself is barely faster than the RTX3080. The reality is that there is no place from Nvidia or AMD to be selling cards with less than 12GB for over £250 in 2024. It's a con especially to take advantage of those less knowledgeable.


Which is not practical for most of the market. Most of the market buys pre-built systems and most gamers I know who even build their own PCs are not enthusiasts. To put it in context about 98% of all gamers I know don't change dGPUs quickly,because once a PC is bought or built they show no interest in reading about hardware.

This is why I find the RTX4060/RTX4060TI/RX7600 incredibly cynical products. Most of them will be sold in prebuilt systems or to those who know no better and are on a budget.

Truth is these companies only care about their bottom line. Simple as that.

If people don't want to do research then let them overpay for vram. I would rather change of often. More fun that way too

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Truth is these companies only care about their bottom line. Simple as that.

If people don't want to do research then let them overpay for vram. I would rather change of often. More fun that way too

But most of the market is limited to prebuilt systems and most gamers still are limited by realworld budgets - it's easy to forget this as we are enthusiasts. Most gamers don't build their PCs - they buy them. Also you can invalidate your warranty if you change out parts on a prebuilt system.Its why cards like the RTX4060/RTX4060TI/RX7600 are disasters for the market.

A bit like some of the low end Apple branded products(8GB of RAM on their entry level laptops and desktops) - they are trading on the brand but not the product.

Its not general practice for people to change cards every year,especially as you need to be really interested in keeping track of prices. So its great if you are willing to put that effort in to minimise the upgrade costs.

However,I think you overestimate how much people know about tech. Plenty of people spend £1000s on phones to get better cameras. I spent less buying a cheaper phone and a dedicated camera and lenses and have more fun,and probably better images too.

 

[Proto]

Nice. My £575 12GB 4070 Ti card not only beating the 3090. But doing so using a lot less watts. Not to mention it has frame gen which has been great so far for me

The 4080 is loads more ahead too

Forget all that though. The chart shows a more important thing. One runs out if performance way before vram in most occasions.

It shows something even more important.

The 4060 is faster than the 3070.

 

[opethdisciple]

This topic makes me laugh. Yeah, makes loads of sense spending £750 extra for more vram... Lol.

How is that working out for 3090 users?

Would make a whole lot more sense saving the £750 and selling the 3080 and getting a 4080. Same money, yet end result you have 4080 with fresh warranty.

For those who held out they can just get a 5070 with the money and keep the 3080 as a spare. Could even smash it with a hammer for fun!

Yes we know that Nvidia exhort their customers but this isn't the topic.

 

[Proto]

Most of these influencers and reviewers aren’t trustworthy these days.