24 Gb video RAM is worth for gaming nowadays?

[AusWolf]

Definitely not. What you tested only shows VRAM allocation, not VRAM usage. For example, you can peg an 8 GB card to max usage in one game, but still have a similar experience with a card of equal processing power but only 4 GB VRAM (I'm not saying that you should, though). When the game starts to stutter at random points (especially when loading assets), then you know you've hit a VRAM wall.

With the above logic, I'd say 8 GB is more than enough for 1080p, 16 GB for 4K.

 

[MentalAcetylide]

I game on a 3090 at 1440p resolution. Is that alone worth it? Imo, that would be a big hell no. I also have an RTX A6000 installed, which goes beyond being "stupid" for gaming. I use them both together for faster iray rendering, and since I also game on the same system, the 3090 is just an added bonus since at the time it was cheaper than buying an additional separate system for gaming.

I'm not sure how far along apps have come in regards to scaling, but older ones(especially if you like playing older games from Gog or Steam) can be a problem with 4k. My opinion is if you can get similar results at 1440p or lower with a less beefy graphics card compared to a higher end one at 4k, then you're not getting the most out of your money when you opt for the higher resolution & spend more for the better graphics card. heh, just keep in mind that once you go to a bigger screen for your desktop, you'll never want to go back to a smaller one. The 27" screen I use now makes my old 17" alienware laptop look like a small noisy ipad.

 

[Lei]

Hi,
Pretty much why I don't watch the emmies or oscar's or pay to see movies any more that has to be one of the dumbest movies I've ever seen for free

I like this quote from the movie:

"Most people only have a few significant alternate life paths so close to them.
But you, here, you’re capable of anything because you’re so bad at everything."


"I saw my life, without you. I wish you could have seen it. It was beautiful. I should have listened to my father and not gone with you all of those years ago. "

我看到我的生活，如果没有你是多么的美好。当年我应该听我爸说的话 不要跟你嫁
She said it right after he asked: are you crying?
btw, Jackie Chan was first chosen to act instead of him. He did a great job though

With the above logic, I'd say 8 GB is more than enough for 1080p, 16 GB for 4K.

12gb is enough for 4k:

I game on a 3090 at 1440p resolution. Is that alone worth it? Imo, that would be a big hell no. I also have an RTX A6000 installed, which goes beyond being "stupid" for gaming. I use them both together for faster iray rendering, and since I also game on the same system, the 3090 is just an added bonus since at the time it was cheaper than buying an additional separate system for gaming.

for pure gaming, 3090 is a hell choice. but 4090 seems excellent. even if you don't utilize the vram, the cuda cores are massively higher than 4080 with little price difference. even a white ROG 4080 can cost as much as a gigabyte eagle 4090.
I mean look, it's like 40% faster. even you'll fill it upto 8~10gb max. but still worth paying for it rather than getting a 4080:

 

[TumbleGeorge]

I will allow myself to give a strange example. Which doesn't seem technical at all...Or rather, I'll ask a question so that while you search for the answer, you can draw some conclusions. Do you know what a "happy hen" means?
With game content in VRAM situation is...same. "The more the better"

 

[Lei]

I will allow myself to give a strange example. Which doesn't seem technical at all...Or rather, I'll ask a question so that while you search for the answer, you can draw some conclusions. Do you know what a "happy hen" means?
With game content in VRAM situation is...same. "The more the better"

but a 4070ti right now and a 6070ti in 2026, is better than a 4090 now and keep it until 2030.

It's better to get one golden egg from the magic goose everyday than to fetch all the eggs out all at once.

 

[DemonicRyzen666]

but a 4070ti right now and a 6070ti in 2026, is better than a 4090 now and keep it until 2030.

It's better to get one golden egg from the magic goose everyday than to fetch all the eggs out all at once.

How about Nvidia make a RTX 5050 equal to a RTX 4090 than I'll be impressed until then I'm not buying anything new.

 

[Lei]

How about Nvidia make a RTX 5050 equal to a RTX 4090 than I'll be impressed until then I'm not buying anything new.

If you knew that a single 5nm wafer is 16000$
If you knew Taiwan is running out of water washing the wafers.

If you knew the mirrors and lenses used for lithography.

Then you wouldn't call leather jacket greedia.
If you knew there are more transistors on 4090 than are neurons in a couple of gorillas brain...
If Alan Turing and William Shockley were alive, they would say why GPUs are sooooo cheap

This is another Alan, giphy didn't show me Turing

 

[AusWolf]

If you knew that a single 5nm wafer is 16000$
If you knew Taiwan is running out of water washing the wafers.

If you knew the mirrors and lenses used for lithography.

Then you wouldn't call leather jacket greedia.
If you knew there are more transistors on 4090 than are neurons in a couple of gorillas brain...
If Alan Turing and William Shockley were alive, they would say why GPUs are sooooo cheap

This is another Alan, giphy didn't show me Turing

If you knew that AMD constantly prices their GPUs under Nvidia, if not at launch, then during the product cycle through various discounts which just don't happen on the green side.
If you knew that Nvidia keeps releasing partially disabled GPUs as x90 series flagships for extortionate prices, and then refreshing the lineup with even more expensive Ti models a year later.
If you knew that AMD has low-range, low-profile, low-power cards starting from £129, while Nvidia only has the 1650 for £179, with the low profile version costing above the £200 mark. We haven't seen a really low-range Nvidia card since the 1030 (the 3050 with its 8 GB VRAM doesn't count).

Oh wait, you can actually know these, this is all publicly available info...

The reasons you listed aren't relevant from a consumer standpoint. If wafers and lithography are so expensive, that's all the more reason to make smaller, more budget-conscious chips, yet that's not what's happening. They keep releasing flagship after flagship for ever increasing prices in the middle of an economic recession. This is why people call the green company "Ngreedia" (imo).

 

[TumbleGeorge]

Hmm how number of transistors in GPU and manufacturing (and environmental) costs of it are related to how gigs VRAM we needs to play? My coffee wait me but question is reasonable.

 

[Lei]

Hmm how number of transistors in GPU and manufacturing (and environmental) costs of it are related to how gigs VRAM we needs to play? My coffee wait me but question is reasonable.

vram also uses silicon wafer and transistor.

If you had more vram, games could be designed so that two goats in Elden Ring wouldn't have the same wool. Two doors in Hogwarts Legacy wouldn't have the same crack in the same place. Two rows of stairs wouldn't have the same dirt spots.
If you walk on a metal rail in Resident Evil, you see they have copy pasted (tiled) the texture. Curbs in Forza are copy pasted with same texture next to each other.

Textures could be generated procedurally to look unique, so it wouldn't increase the game installation size, but it would be great if we could have infinite vram. For all the limits we have today, 12gb seems to be what most games use at 4k.

Just go to bathroom in Hogwarts Legacy, you'd see out of 6 doors, there are only really 2 different doors. Others are flipped horizontally or simply repeated (to save vram)

 

[TumbleGeorge]

vram also uses silicon wafer and transistor

Yes but not 5nm node and not necessary taiwanese waters.

 

[AusWolf]

vram also uses silicon wafer and transistor.

If you had more vram, games could be designed so that two goats in Elden Ring wouldn't have the same wool. Two doors in Hogwarts Legacy wouldn't have the same crack in the same place. Two rows of stairs wouldn't have the same dirt spots.
If you walk on a metal rail in Resident Evil, you see they have copy pasted (tiled) the texture. Curbs in Forza are copy pasted with same texture next to each other.

Textures could be generated procedurally to look unique, so it wouldn't increase the game installation size, but it would be great if we could have infinite vram. For all the limits we have today, 12gb seems to be what most games use at 4k.

Just go to bathroom in Hogwarts Legacy, you'd see out of 6 doors, there are only really 2 different doors. Others are flipped horizontally or simply repeated (to save vram)

Does it matter, though? Do you stop to count the pixels in sheep's wool or on doors?

 

[Dr. Dro]

Does it matter, though? Do you stop to count the pixels in sheep's wool or on doors?

I can't lie, since a game like this was never really made, the concept is quite intriguing. That step is certainly on the way before we truly have completely photorealistic graphics. I wonder what high-end PC gaming will look like 20 years from now, because the leap from 20 years ago is tremendous!

 

[Mussels]

Nope!
But i'm still happy to have it, thanks to stuff like DLSS i'll be able to keep using this GPU For a very long time to come - and features like DirectStorage will hopefully make use of any excess VRAM

My 8GB VRAM systems still perform adequately, they just get more 0.1% and 1% lows than this system (which was the entire point of these parts going together)


Oh this is something i realised and discussed with W1zz a few weeks ago, but one important thing is that more VRAM helps a lot with systems with slow system RAM - they cant load new content to the VRAM from RAM fast, so they're at risk of FPS dips and stutter.

More VRAM? More cached, less likely to stutter.
Smaller, faster VRAM? higher speeds when paired with fast system RAM - but heavily reduced benefits when paired with slow RAM.

The data needs a source and a destination, more VRAM is a buffer (literally) to help cover up a lack of speed with the transfer from A to B


This came up for me with a friends poor PC with an i5 6500 and GT960 2GB and DDR4 2133. We more than doubled the average FPS (25-40 to ~75) in an unreal engine DX12 title OCing that RAM speed to DDR4 3000, which realisitally everyone would say makes no sense - but it simply had to keep swapping the data so often, the systems RAM was the bottleneck

Tested this at home with an 8GB GPU on 3570k DDR3 system, no real change from DDR3 1333 to DDR3 2000
750Ti 2GB tho? ~30% increase.


The 3090 just made all of the previous norms weird because it came out not just with a LOT of VRAM, but fast VRAM too. Normally it's one or the other, in the GPU space. I'm guessing it was a lack of high denisity GDDR6X that made them choose that setup, since the 3090ti had half the memory modules.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

thahk to stuff like DLSS

Which number dlss because we see how dlss3 isn't working on older GPUs?

 

[Mussels]

vram also uses silicon wafer and transistor.

If you had more vram, games could be designed so that two goats in Elden Ring wouldn't have the same wool. Two doors in Hogwarts Legacy wouldn't have the same crack in the same place. Two rows of stairs wouldn't have the same dirt spots.
If you walk on a metal rail in Resident Evil, you see they have copy pasted (tiled) the texture. Curbs in Forza are copy pasted with same texture next to each other.

Textures could be generated procedurally to look unique, so it wouldn't increase the game installation size, but it would be great if we could have infinite vram. For all the limits we have today, 12gb seems to be what most games use at 4k.

Just go to bathroom in Hogwarts Legacy, you'd see out of 6 doors, there are only really 2 different doors. Others are flipped horizontally or simply repeated (to save vram)

Could be, wouldn't be.
Too labour intensive for the end result - so we'll get what we have now, they reuse the same texture with randomised effects slapped over the top.

You'd have a game that ran like ass because every blade of glass was unique, that no one would ever look at.

Which number dlss because we see how dlss3 isn't working on older GPUs?

I managed to hack FSR 2.0 into DLSS On my 10 series GPU's, it's not perfect but it certainly works

Also i literally said "stuff LIKE DLSS", but if you need handholding that includes FSR and XeSS

 

[xtreemchaos]

i have a 2080 with 8 gb vram and its more than enough for 4k for me but i not greedy with the settings.

 

[DemonicRyzen666]

If you knew that a single 5nm wafer is 16000$
If you knew Taiwan is running out of water washing the wafers.

If you knew the mirrors and lenses used for lithography.

Then you wouldn't call leather jacket greedia.
If you knew there are more transistors on 4090 than are neurons in a couple of gorillas brain...
If Alan Turing and William Shockley were alive, they would say why GPUs are sooooo cheap

This is another Alan, giphy didn't show me Turing

Doesn't matter when Raytracing alone takes 10-10,000 times or more caluatlions, compared to pure rasterization rendering. This little 1.5 times maxuim faster & average of 1.35 faster than last generation for double the prices is asinine. When you know the raytracing needed capiabliles are barely going to put a dent in anything.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

I don't really care how useful it is if I'm paying over 1500 usd for a gpu it better come with 24GB of vram..... I mean even if I was spending 700+ in 2023 I would expect at a min the amount of memory on PS5/XSX.

 

[Ruru]

-4K
-settings at high or better
-no raytracing

No issues with RX 6700 XT 12GB

 

[MentalAcetylide]

for pure gaming, 3090 is a hell choice. but 4090 seems excellent. even if you don't utilize the vram, the cuda cores are massively higher than 4080 with little price difference. even a white ROG 4080 can cost as much as a gigabyte eagle 4090.
I mean look, it's like 40% faster. even you'll fill it upto 8~10gb max. but still worth paying for it rather than getting a 4080:

CUDA Cores mean everything for iray rendering. I know people use to buy 3-4+ 1080ti's or even lower spec'ed NVidia cards just for the rendering speed alone due to the collective number of CUDA Cores. Only drawback is sometimes you can either run out of VRAM(scene won't render) or RAM(system crashes) since you typically need 4 x VRAM amount of system RAM installed. So if you have say 48 Gb VRAM total with all of the installed graphics cards, you'll need >192 system RAM to be able to safely use near the full 48 Gb VRAM.

 

[Bond008]

24gb is overkill if your gaming @1440p.

 

[Lei]

CUDA Cores mean everything for iray rendering. I know people use to buy 3-4+ 1080ti's or even lower spec'ed NVidia cards just for the rendering speed alone due to the collective number of CUDA Cores. Only drawback is sometimes you can either run out of VRAM(scene won't render) or RAM(system crashes) since you typically need 4 x VRAM amount of system RAM installed. So if you have say 48 Gb VRAM total with all of the installed graphics cards, you'll need >192 system RAM to be able to safely use near the full 48 Gb VRAM.

This is interesting, director said they did the vfx in their bedroom. And I thought the sausage hands were CGI. They were real

Timestamp 3:55 talks about sausage hands
1:47 they explain how they used low-pixel vaguely LED panels to light up Michelle while flying through the verse tunnel.

Haha, imagine how long would it take to sculpt and render those hands, if they weren't real.
This movie got 7 Oscars.

 

[Mussels]

24gb is overkill if your gaming @1440p.

its overkill for 4k and 8k at this point in time.
I would have happily got less, but i had no real choice at the time of purchase (GPU shortage, warranty return offer)


I really hope things like directstorage change this, because it'll make budget GPU's with more VRAM more useful, preloading/streaming in 16GB of data to a 3060 would certainly improve the experience vs using 4GB of it and hoping for the best

 

[TumbleGeorge]

directstorage

Is there something new about? Version 1.11 or 1.2?