My impressions from a combination of this review and DF video.
Lowest quality setting has absolutely horrid textures, so I can only assume the high VRAM usage is again down to unified memory architecture memory management which I think is going to dominate many new AAA titles moving forward.
Lack of stutters is likely DS, so its good thats doing what it is supposed to do, however DS logically surely will consume VRAM, so will also be a contributor to the VRAM usage, as using system RAM would require the CPU.
Even the lowest resolution setting at your max settings is going to be too much for my 10 gig 3080, although hoping the setting below that is manageable.
VRAM usage might go up further if they fix the problem with not all high res textures loading on PC port.
Think I might buy this game just as a technical test on my PC.
@W1zzard did state the 8 gig cards suffered. 6700XT has 12 gigs VRAM.
DF is the most partisan half-technical site there is, evidently pro console.
A patch came out the day after the first test, yet the final analysis contains parts (photos, references, etc...) of the problems solved, even if it is said in the whole text, but half-heartedly.
RTAO looks great, but they look in odd places to make the difference seem insignificant.
Shadows look for mistakes, in the first analysis they considered natural shading differences to be flaws.
The comparison of the last article is deliberately set with the 30fps settings, while the RT performance ones are decidedly lower.
In the preview video it was immediately noticeable that there were 4 vehicles in the air bazaar, much less than the PC ones, perhaps below low.
On the SSD they showed the 5400rpm HD of PS4, not only that, they also installed Windows.
It didn't help, because SONY said that only PS5 SSD was good, it didn't speak di HDD.
It's not the first time they've mixed as they prefer, and their tendency is now clear: On PC, big titles with bad ports (that's not them, it's the excuse to look for flaws, making the console version look like the original one, so better optimized).
I remember GTA-5 PS5 vs PC, PS5 won even though it lacked many things and was at 1440p.
There the RT in the shadows - which suck at every opportunity on PC - tipped the balance.
On PS5 Low AF as usual, low LOD, sparse grass etc... no problem.
I would have many other examples of their modus: On PC, a defect rejects the porting which is not, on consoles it's always good, even when it drops to 720p at 40fps and with FSR-1, as on FF-XVI, which from the title seemed the most stable job in the world...
Forspoken idem, a disaster that became half good and half bad.
In Returnal they were looking for the difference with 'AO at a minimum on PS5 by zooming in on a meaningless detail, when it was enough to see the preview in the settings to understand the big difference.
In this regard, Kena for 2 a little more occlusion than PS4 seemed to change the world, while textures mixed with low, aniso always low, shadows worse, low res VS. PCs were not noteworthy differences.
It's so obvious to me that it bothers me to point it out.
Probably many follow without having a historical memory of their values.
If you pay attention, you always notice the low-level tricks useful to convince noobs.
Then above it becomes less easy to notice them, It serves to defend oneself from the partisanship that is seen.
Someone pushes from behind, and pushes hard.
Guess they are not very experienced yet with the implementation of RT for PC games.
The game has obviously quite some issues, not only with AMD cards but also with Nvidia cards.
