Can confirm the vram usage. At 1440P ultra setting, I am still just around the 12 gb vram usage. However I can't say for sure, but it feels like they got a better performance about the lag spikes I had before. But stil to early to say for sure.

Nice to see them on top of it. Hope they keep churning out patches over time like Horizon Zero Dawn, if people remember HZD had a bad start as well, and 7 patches later its a proper PC game. It was so long ago people don't remember.

TomgangCan confirm the vram usage. At 1440P ultra setting, I am still just around the 12 gb vram usage. However I can't say for sure, but it feels like they got a better performance about the lag spikes I had before. But stil to early to say for sure.

That's insane. =/

Why_MeThat's insane. =/

More like this coming...

This is why I refuse to play any game that's not at least 12 months old. Pay $94AUD to be an alpha tester. Shove that where the sun don't shine.

TomgangCan confirm the vram usage. At 1440P ultra setting, I am still just around the 12 gb vram usage. However I can't say for sure, but it feels like they got a better performance about the lag spikes I had before. But stil to early to say for sure.

Is it actually using 12, or is it allocating 12?

bearClaw5Is it actually using 12, or is it allocating 12?

The old bs argument by nvidia owners...

Using or allocating, the fact is this game plus RE4 and many other recent ports from next gen consoles run like crap (severe FPS drops) once the 8-12GB of you card is reached

All games developed for the PS5 and Series X have 16GB of unified memory, so their ports to PC will use a lot of memory. Like any console generation bump, this happened around 3 years after the new consoles were released, as games takes 1-3 years to be developed to a new target system and quality. 8GB-12GB cards will struggle to keep up ultra + rtx at 1440p, forget 4k.

You can call it whatever, using / allocating, I call it coping...

man i love these devs so much for releasing a broken piece of shit game and fixing it to cover up their asses!
they're so good!

Those moaning about vram are weird. Unlike noone said that years ago.

The best thing from all this may be not the moaning bunch having crippled cards by design, but also people who invested 2-3K $ into 4090 having only 24GB, not 48GB rendering it a useless card without future, while using at 4-8K. But it may be by design choice also, well also we have to understand that 4090 is the 4080Ti really and the fully enabled Titan had to be 2-3K priced no matter how we look at it. In the end it is wasted money by poor strategic choice. And those who still bought it are the Leather Jacket fans buying fairy bath water. Nvidia is not making cards that last either way. Look at how 3090ties aged... shrug

Basically I am telling, when the time will arrive for games that really will flex 4090 power at high resolution, the reason people really bought it, it will be rendered useless by deficiency like vram, just like we see 8GB cards being eoled now, if we think about it, even Polaris was in 8GB flavor as definition for a mid tier card... like more than 6 years ago? So what about we are even arguing about? Six years.

UT5 will come out and settle all things as it should be setting 16GB as bare minimum, will it scale down without issues for FHD that's the questions are if basic assets that flexible. We are blaming devs about this Crysis Tessellation moment, but people will carry on and the decision already has been made for the future development.

Ferrum MasterThose moaning about vram are weird. Unlike noone said that years ago.

The best thing from all this may be not the moaning bunch having crippled cards by design, but also people who invested 2-3K $ into 4090 having only 24GB, not 48GB rendering it a useless card without future, while using at 4-8K. But it may be by design choice also, well also we have to understand that 4090 is the 4080Ti really and the fully enabled Titan had to be 2-3K priced no matter how we look at it. In the end it is wasted money by poor strategic choice. And those who still bought it are the Leather Jacket fans buying fairy bath water. Nvidia is not making cards that last either way. Look at how 3090ties aged... shrug

Basically I am telling, when the time will arrive for games that really will flex 4090 power at high resolution, the reason people really bought it, it will be rendered useless by deficiency like vram, just like we see 8GB cards being eoled now, if we think about it, even Polaris was in 8GB flavor as definition for a mid tier card... like more than 6 years ago? So what about we are even arguing about? Six years.

UT5 will come out and settle all things as it should be setting 16GB as bare minimum, will it scale down without issues for FHD that's the questions are if basic assets that flexible. We are blaming devs about this Crysis Tessellation moment, but people will carry on and the decision already has been made for the future development.

or just be like me and get a 6800 xt with 16gb vram at $540, and once oc'd it maxes out my monitor at 165 hz 165 fps 1440p in 90% of games, and if i lower settings it does just fine in the other 10% of games too, especially since freesync makes everything feel fluid even at around 90-120 fps for games that don't make it to 165 fps.

honestly, we are hitting a wall with hardware. unless I upgrade to 240hz monitor, or 4k, I really don't see the need for anything more.

Space Lynxor just be like me and get a 6800 xt with 16gb vram at $540, and once oc'd it maxes out my monitor at 165 hz 165 fps 1440p in 90% of games, and if i lower settings it does just fine in the other 10% of games too, especially since freesync makes everything feel fluid even at around 90-120 fps for games that don't make it to 165 fps.

honestly, we are hitting a wall with hardware. unless I upgrade to 240hz monitor, or 4k, I really don't see the need for anything more.

Well AMD ain't better, but at least they did better 6900/6800 and 7900 are true mid tier cards... again the naming is off and 7900 should be a 7800, we all know that and the performance tier confirms it really. We are being played again.

But at least they did not gimp on memory and made those cards are viable to be used much longer on lower settings it stems from 7970 days vs 680 where 7970 aged much better due to VRAM... just as I can cope with my heavily overclocked 1080Ti for ~ 5 years already in my main PC. I have a spare RTX2080 in the shelf... that simply works like shit in most current games and took it out of my secondary PC to conserve power. Any the DLSS/RTX gimmick you enable even on LOW taxes more VRAM rendering that card useless. Either way I treat DLSS as an abstract thing, they marketed image degradation as a feature, it looks okayish on 4K but really weird on 2K or FHD. The added latency is dreadful, I feel like on pot when that thing is enabled, I really like DLAA, but I am surprised how undermarketed that thing is and often relies on community hacks, which is another weird moment.

Reviewers should stop praising this practice and despite all the critique they give editors awards, recommended etc. they tag along with the paid trolls praising any wet feature from both camps.

For me, I want to hook up the PC to a LG OLED. This game or RE4 really plays better on TV like it was meant in the first place really with a joystick. The thing is... current TVs are already far superior than most of our monitors and deliver much better experience and asks for really beefy cards and HDMI 2.1.

So console is the way? I don't care for esports titles on really anymore... especially multiplayer shooters due to cheaters and that thing will not end ever. Bring back LAN and dedicated server features for local gaming ffs.

PC gaming is derailed and in a pretty ill state.

• Nvidia doesn't care for gaming, leather jacket now have AI slogans sewn on and cares for selling silicon to China while they can and uncle Joe doesn't slap them. Gaming? Who cares.
• AMD plays safe, doesn't care either, they try, but have problems. Their ZEN moment is yet to be seen. And not in near future. They tag along nvidia actually.
• Intel turned out to be a joke.... again.
• Bitcoin craze killed interest a generation of PC gamers, basically that's the problem, games did develop for a audience that is missing.
• Prices for games are skyrocketing too.
• Games are a buggy mess and every dev really doesn't care about PC platform much, despite they charge even more. Community hacks, patches. Aren't we used too much to it? We PAID?
• We now also have a stupid generation 200-300W CPU from team Blue paired with near 500W GPU from both camps actually, okay the 7800X3D is a relief in power department, but still, that power budget is hot, noisy and expensive venture if you really wish some quality gaming at high resolution or FPS or both. They say gamers really don't care for power usage. They don't but their spouses or parents paying bills do. Why does everyone slip this fact? Gaming laptops scorching on 100C and having loads of threads here about their undervolting not working anymore or platform not supported... who said that gaming on a crippled laptop is normal idea in the first place? Some makers cannot even route a real HDMI 2.1 even they have RTX3xxx card on board, so what to expect? It is a joke, now a joke with a crippled VRAM around 8GB max rendering that device EOL.

So WTF is happening?

Get a darn console with subscription? Weird, but sometimes it makes more sense. The Steam Deck idea also seems not that bad really, and just leave the PC workstation for work.

Space LynxNice to see them on top of it. Hope they keep churning out patches over time like Horizon Zero Dawn, if people remember HZD had a bad start as well, and 7 patches later its a proper PC game. It was so long ago people don't remember.

I hardly call this “on top of things”, because if so, the game will not end up this unplayable to begin with. HZD had a lengthy shader compilation period, but this game broken the record where you need upward of a couple of hours to complete the shader compiling. And as far as I recalled, HZD is supposedly a more current title than The Last of Us.

Why_MeThat's insane. =/

It is what the future will bring us. More demand for Vram.

bearClaw5Is it actually using 12, or is it allocating 12?

I will say it is actually using 12 GB. It says so in the game and MSI afterburner overlay confirms usage of just around 12000 mb vram usage.

watzupkenI hardly call this “on top of things”, because if so, the game will not end up this unplayable to begin with. HZD had a lengthy shader compilation period, but this game broken the record where you need upward of a couple of hours to complete the shader compiling. And as far as I recalled, HZD is supposedly a more current title than The Last of Us.

Not to mention HZD was a totally different dev with a totally different engine.

TomgangCan confirm the vram usage. At 1440P ultra setting, I am still just around the 12 gb vram usage. However I can't say for sure, but it feels like they got a better performance about the lag spikes I had before. But stil to early to say for sure.

Makes me wonder about how well the RTX 4070 Ti 12GB will hold up over time...

All them Nvidia bois who bought the RTX 4070

Still crashing during shader compilation! That thing in game showing 3 GB of vram used by os and apps is total bs! If you don' t have apps open that its using hw acceleration, "windows and other apps" is using 200 mb of vram, out of my 16 gb - RX6800! Im stating to believe that devs doesn't care anymore or it's done on purpose to fill up your ram and vram with junk , forcing you to buy latest and greatest!

This port takes the All Time crown of the most unoptimized PC port ever released.
Saying that the performance is horrid, is an understatement, while the graphics is nothing special.
Sometimes I feel like I play this "game" on a emulator, that bad it is optimized.

Glad I didn't pull the trigger at release on this one. I already knew better than to preorder. Got burned on CyberPunk2077 and never again will preorder any title.

Why_MeThat's insane. =/

and ps3 ran it with 256mb shared memory

avidgamer121and ps3 ran it with 256mb shared memory

It's a console game that didn't port over well to PC and that's pretty obvious by the benchmarks. On the flip side plenty of PC gamers will spend money on this trash game.