ValantarDidn't the 970 just have a single double density die, though, giving that last 0.5GB a 32-bit bus width (or was it two/64-bit)? This time around it would at least be several, making the performance difference much smaller (effectively 10GB with a 320-bit bus + for example 6GB with a 192-bit bus). Of course they'd need to include some sort of data priority system in the driver to minimize the effects of this difference.

MxPhenom 216They don't though. Nvidia's cards are still beating out AMDs offerings at 1440p to 4k for right now.

MxPhenom 216The amount of VRAM doesn't tell the whole story and never has.

Vayra86It is possible. The GTX 660 for example had 0.5 GB with 64 bit and the 1.5 GB on 192 bit I believe

lexluthermiesterWith some current games maybe, however, some games on highest settings go above 10GB and the 3080 is being held back by that limitation already. Such will be more pronounced in a short time. This is not the first time GPU performance has been limited by a lack of VRAM.

No, but it tells part of the story and an important part.


Only the 2GB version. The 1.5GB and 3GB versions were full bandwidth.

Vayra86It is possible. The GTX 660 for example had 0.5 GB with 64 bit and the 1.5 GB on 192 bit I believe; 550ti also had a different split.


Source: www.anandtech.com/show/6159/the-geforce-gtx-660-ti-review/2

And there is no SLI issue now with these bandwidths, so dont rule it out.. I dont know if they added support for it, it had been absent since Pascal.

MxPhenom 216What games?

Cyberpunk looks to be the only game released this year that could max out a 3080 frame buffer, and that's only with RT.

With how quickly we get new GPUs (yearly) it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to to buy a card with future game requirements in mind when its only speculation, because at that point you'd never buy a card. Buy what's best and fits your budget for todays game (or your workloads specifically if you need one for compute, etc.) and when its not enough, a better card will be out that will trump what you have on every metric.

VRAM narrative being pushed on forums lately is way over exaggerated.

MxPhenom 216What games?

Cyberpunk looks to be the only game released this year that could max out a 3080 frame buffer, and that's only with RT.

With how quickly we get new GPUs (yearly) it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to to buy a card with future game requirements in mind when its only speculation, because at that point you'd never buy a card. Buy what's best and fits your budget for todays game (or your workloads specifically if you need one for compute, etc.) and when its not enough, a better card will be out that will trump what you have on every metric.

VRAM narrative being pushed on forums lately is way over exaggerated.

Vayra86Cyberpunk is past gen development, not next gen ;)

MxPhenom 216Nvidia's cards are still beating out AMDs offerings at 1440p to 4k for right now.

N3M3515I'm always amused by the word "beating" like it's something noticeable on a blind test for example. One would think that beating is something like 25%+, but 5%? 8%? gimme a break.
It's more like trading blows, some games amd "beats" nvidia and some games nvidia "beats" amd. (Hell, on some review sites the 6800xt is like 2% ahead of the 3080 on the 23 game total). The rest of them is equal performance. Of course there are some outliers where 3070 "beats" 6800xt and in some the 6800xt "beats" the 3090.

MxPhenom 216The point I'm trying to make is it that there doesn't appear to be any evidence that the 10GB frame buffer on the 3080 is its downfall at those resolutions right now.

lexluthermiesterRight now, no. But it's right up at the limit. And that's just for games. For many other tasks GPU's are used for, 10GB is a limiting factor now, a serious one in some cases.

ValantarGeforce is after all a very explicitly gaming-oriented product line

ValantarOf course one can argue that a $700 GPU ought to handle pretty much anything you throw at it, which ... well, it does, really.

lexluthermiesterAnd that's a fair statement however, with current games already bumping up against the 8GB and 10GB barrier, future gaming advances will leave these cards coming up short.

My 2080 with 8GB is already limiting a few things that I could be doing much faster if the card had 16GB of VRAM. Regardless of the performance level of the 3080 is not as attractive with an artificial limit of 10GB. A 3080ti with 20GB is much better, but not for $1000. $850, ok that's more attractive. An alternate version of of the 3080(or 3070) with 16gb for $700? Now that can be justified.

Right now, NVidia is just handing business to AMD because RTRT is not as important to some while more VRAM is.

Valantar$850 for a 20GB 3080Ti barely covers the gross DRAM cost increase over a 10GB 3080 for Nvidia though

lexluthermiesterI doubt that. If that were true, $700 for the 3080 would be in the same situation, especially for AIB's using custom PCB's & cooling. $850 would allow for a very reasonable margin of profit for everyone involved.

MxPhenom 216Maybe for GDDR6. But GDDR6X is a lot more expensive and for Ti card Nvidia will not drop to GDDR6. Also only Micron is making it right now.

lexluthermiesterThat's a really good point. I wonder what the BOM data looks like? My guess is that it's not super expensive. Micron whats to sell memory not sit on inventory so they are likely going to be charging reasonable prices for bulk orders.