12Gb GPUs already obsolete, brand new game takes up to 18Gb Vram at 1440p

[Bomby569]

I am aware of this, and there is still a need for at least 8GB cards but buyers also need to be aware of the requirements but when they complain that Nvidia specially don't give their cards enough vram for the performance they offer it's time to look else where.

I personally got annoyed with all the things Nvidia needs to stuff down their users throat when installing their drivers so I use NVcleaninstall from @W1zzard on my laptop it got a MX150 2GB gpu not really using it for gaming so the normal Nvidia Control Panel is more than enough for me.

so it isn't just nvidia? they shouldn't just go to intel or amd?

really confusing message

 

[Shou Miko]

so it isn't just nvidia? they shouldn't just go to intel or amd?

really confusing message

You need to look for what's needed but most people complain about Nvidia and their vram offerings because Nvidia's mind set is like even if the GPU supports 12, 16 and more they reserve that for their Quadro line-up.

Again UE developers has stopped compensating for max 8GB ram and wanted to be able to do more but for 1080p and esports titles 8GB is still fine again look for what you use your computer for and what games/applications you need and buy from there.

Just because UE developers stops something doesn't mean specially Nvidia can keep forcing to f**** consumers over but I guess doing a little research and ask is too much now a days.

 

[Bomby569]

You need to look for what's needed but most people complain about Nvidia and their vram offerings because Nvidia's mind set is like even if the GPU supports 12, 16 and more they reserve that for their Quadro line-up.

Again UE developers has stopped compensating for max 8GB ram and wanted to be able to do more but for 1080p and esports titles 8GB is still fine again look for what you use your computer for and what games/applications you need and buy from there.

Just because UE developers stops something doesn't mean specially Nvidia can keep forcing to f**** consumers over but I guess doing a little research and ask is too much now a days.

you were doing great but then the confusion returned in the end, because like i said AMD is going to release a 8GB card too.

I do agree new cards with 8GB are not ideal, and we should choose accordingly to what we play. The anti nvidia rant ignoring amd is doing the exact same thing is just as idiotic as these cards. Sorry but i'm not sorry.

 

[Shou Miko]

you were doing great but then the confusion returned in the end, because like i said AMD is going to release a 8GB card too.

I do agree new cards with 8GB are not ideal, and we should choose accordingly to what we play. The anti nvidia rant ignoring amd is doing the exact same thing is just as idiotic as these cards. Sorry but i'm not sorry.

AMD doesn't just think about their FirePro serie like Nvidia do for their Quadro series this is why Nvidia even when the RTX gpu support 16GB Nvidia would rather put this on the same gpu and slap a Quadro name on it and make for money because they believe that the Quadro users will buy a the same card as RTX card for a lower price.

Which is more or less BS but that's the truth if it wasn't you would see RTX 3070 with 16GB of vram.

 

[Bomby569]

AMD doesn't just think about their FirePro serie like Nvidia do for their Quadro series this is why Nvidia even when the RTX gpu support 16GB Nvidia would rather put this on the same gpu and slap a Quadro name on it and make for money because they believe that the Quadro users will buy a the same card as RTX card for a lower price.

Which is more or less BS but that's the truth if it wasn't you would see RTX 3070 with 16GB of vram.

idk what is the reason they do what they do, and it's irrelevant for whoever buys the new 4070 8GB or the new 7060 8GB cards. Do owners of the 7060 fell better for not having the Quadro thing?

 

[HTC]

The way i see it is that nVidia has RT as a MAJOR selling point, but then cripple the cards by having them not have enough VRAM to be able TO USE RT effectively after a relatively short amount of time (relative to launch), thus making the competition's cards (that in the vast majority of titles have lower RT performance) actually have MUCH HIGHER RT performance in titles that require more VRAM than what nVidia supplies with their cards.

 

[Shou Miko]

idk what is the reason they do what they do, and it's irrelevant for whoever buys the new 4070 8GB or the new 7060 8GB cards. Do owners of the 7060 fell better for not having the Quadro thing?

View attachment 295243

AMD FirePro and Nvidia Quadro is for professional for not gaming.

As I said Nvidia fear that Quadro buyers will go with the consumer card if they allow the same gpu on the consumer side to have the same amount of vram.

Steve from Hardware unboxed has covered this and the double amount of vram doesn't lead to the big premium price that the Quadro card costs.

 

[80251]

This is here starting to be an annoying thread, some UE developers have stated already they compensated for 8GB and lower for years now and changed their focus and it suddenly has become a problem.

If Valve also this did this it would be a mess but seriously you can only cramp so much data into 6 or 8GB and we have Nvidia on the other end with their graphics card that won't give people 16GB because they are afraid it will mess up their Quadro business.

I am here thinking buyers should think more of their choices because keep going with Nvidia that doesn't care much instead of trying AMD or Intel that will provide you for the same prices or less with at least 16GB and people start to complain.

If we want to change Nvidia's behaviour and get them to understand that the normal consumer also need 16GB on their RTX gaming cards not just Quadro cards stop buying their cards and get the demand more down because some companies only listen when their wallet starts to hurt.

Clearly for me Nvidia has shown that they only care about what they think is relevant and it's not more memory for their RTX gaming cards, this is why I only look for AMD now adays and why I choose to keep my RX 6800 XT even the RX 7900 XT is tempting.

For a side note I had RTX 3090 and 3070 cards but I went back to my current RX 6800 XT which is my third card and I am happy with my 1440p experience and I never really bother with ray tracing.

Nvidia seems to offer a wide-range of VRAM capacities on their Quadro cards: from 6 GiB up to 48 GiB, so VRAM capacity can't be the only thing differentiating the quadro line from the RTX, consumer line.

The way i see it is that nVidia has RT as a MAJOR selling point, but then cripple the cards by having them not have enough VRAM to be able TO USE RT effectively after a relatively short amount of time (relative to launch), thus making the competition's cards (that in the vast majority of titles have lower RT performance) actually have MUCH HIGHER RT performance in titles that require more VRAM than what nVidia supplies with their cards.

Do the original turing RTX cards suffer from a lack of VRAM or just a lack of sufficient RT cores?

 

[HTC]

Do the original turing RTX cards suffer from a lack of VRAM or just a lack of sufficient RT cores?

I'm not even referring to cards of 1st generation RT: i'm referring to SECOND and THIRD generation RT cards.

 

[80251]

Fourth generation RTX cards? Where are those?

 

[Bomby569]

Fourth generation RTX cards? Where are those?

he is a time traveler

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Fourth generation RTX cards? Where are those?

Maybe he's talking about the 4090 because in RT it's at least a generation ahead of the competition lol.

 

[HTC]

Fourth generation RTX cards? Where are those?

he is a time traveler

Maybe he's talking about the 4090 because in RT it's at least a generation ahead of the competition lol.

My bad: 10XX cards didn't have RT.

I meant 2nd and 3rd generation cards: not 3rd and 4th.

 

[Deleted member 230939]

I don't own this game that is showcased in the OP and never plan to either as it is not for me, but anecdotally I moved from a 3070 to the 6900 XT due to Vram constraints at 1440P in certain scenarios and am now moving to a 7900 XT, the 6900 XT has never had any troubles since I have owned it in 2 years but it is a loud card (AIB ASRock Manufacturer)

Hogwarts Legacy had no problems on my system from day 1 with 32GB system ram and 16GB Vram.
I seemingly did not have too much issue with Calysto Protocol either but RT dragged perf down.

I did look up the RTX 4080 as my next GPU but for the cost I would rather grab a 20GB GPU with an extra free game.


If you want the latest, Radeon is the wya to go seemingly, if all you care about is RT and not your games performing to par, RTX 4080 and 4090 are no brainers.

 

[Shou Miko]

Nvidia seems to offer a wide-range of VRAM capacities on their Quadro cards: from 6 GiB up to 48 GiB, so VRAM capacity can't be the only thing differentiating the quadro line from the RTX, consumer line.

Well The RTX 3070 and A4000 have the exact same GA104 the Quardro card like the GTX 1060 3GB and 6GB where the A4000 have more cores, 6144 core and the RTX 3070 have 5888 cores.

RTX 3070 Specs TPU
RTX A4000 Specs TPU

Compare the 2 cards are a bit so and so because the gpu frequency is different.

 

[wolf]

Wow what a meaningful contribution to the discussion.

Meaningful, definitely not, but highly amusing. I often enjoy reading their replies just to know what the worst take on a subject is. IMO it's mostly not worth replying however, nothing to gain, and only lost time trying to explain concepts they will reject anyway. I do also enjoy when others are willing to do so and demonstrate the daftness of some takes, if only for it to be a public record because they'll never concede.

I had a hilarious one about DLSS, I was asserting that it should be judged in motion as well as standing still, and that for a truly accurate representation, you should see it rendering natively with your own eyes, not through compressed steaming services. Well,, apparently you can get absolutely everything you need from stills posted online, and reading/watching cherry picked reviews. They must be fun at LAN parties.

Now in here misrepresenting the current situation and utterly denying the logic and rationale applied by other members, not even diplomatic enough to agree to disagree, or say perhaps there's some truth to that, just blocked ears and bad takes.

I mean seriously, virtually ever crap release this year is quickly getting patched to improve performance and visual quality, demonstrating unequivocally that the games could have released in that state, and customers are paying to beta test and get the game playable. Nobody would have bat an eyelid about VRAM if the games ran as they do now (for some patched releases like Hogwarts, TLOU and Jedi Survivor at least so far). And nobody denies that the long term trend is you need increasingly more VRAM, but that ≠ a current need for 16-24GB, nor does it excuse piss poor optimisation work on ~$70 USD AAA releases. All the game content already exists ffs, just spend time getting it to run decently, that's sure as hell what I expect for that much money.

 

[MarsM4N]

Badly programmed games like "Jedi Survivor" are a bad example. If you buy a entry level GPU with 8GB of RAM you're fine in almost all games at 1080p. But don't expect to not run out of memory if you try to run 4k, 1440p with raytracing or Skyrim with tons of mods. You get what you pay for. Choose the correct card for your needs.

How much GPU memory do I need? | Digital Trends

Dedicated GPUs have their own memory, called VRAM, and not having enough VRAM can cause performance problems. How much you need depends on the application.

www.digitaltrends.com

https://www.reddit.com/r/nvidia/comments/10azrga

 

[Deleted member 230939]

I would not use 8GB even at 1080P.

12GB minimum if at 1080P. We do have that anyway, RTX 2060 and RTX 3080 12GB. RX 6700 XT.

 

[mäggäri]

I would not use 8GB even at 1080P.

12GB minimum if at 1080P. We do have that anyway, RTX 2060 and RTX 3080 12GB. RX 6700 XT.

speaking about 1080p makes me think that your standards are not too high at all

 

[64K]

Nothing is going to change with the rushed out bug riddled, performance issues, sometimes broken games until Publishers change the way that they market games. It costs a lot to market a game so they don't like missing a release date during the marketing window. Seems to me the solution is to set a more sensible marketing window before spending money on marketing hype to give the Developer the time that they need to fix more issues with the game before marketing hype begins and setting a release date.

 

[Deleted member 230939]

speaking about 1080p makes me think that your standards are not too high at all

If that is directed towards me, I run a pair of 2560x1440 165hz Freesync displays.

Viewsonic XG270QC and Philips Momentum 5500VS

I will be running a 7900 XT by the end of my day, selling my 6900 XT tomorrow locally.

Nothing is going to change with the rushed out bug riddled, performance issues, sometimes broken games until Publishers change the way that they market games. It costs a lot to market a game so they don't like missing a release date during the marketing window. Seems to me the solution is to set a more sensible marketing window before spending money on marketing hype to give the Developer the time that they need to fix more issues with the game before marketing hype begins and setting a release date.

I agree with you but we are seeing a push into Vram capacities beyond 8GB now thanks to leaving behind porting to PS4 and XBOX ONE. I would not recommend someone who is going to be playing the latest to buy an 8GB GPU.

 

[Vayra86]

Meaningful, definitely not, but highly amusing. I often enjoy reading their replies just to know what the worst take on a subject is. IMO it's mostly not worth replying however, nothing to gain, and only lost time trying to explain concepts they will reject anyway. I do also enjoy when others are willing to do so and demonstrate the daftness of some takes, if only for it to be a public record because they'll never concede.

I had a hilarious one about DLSS, I was asserting that it should be judged in motion as well as standing still, and that for a truly accurate representation, you should see it rendering natively with your own eyes, not through compressed steaming services. Well,, apparently you can get absolutely everything you need from stills posted online, and reading/watching cherry picked reviews. They must be fun at LAN parties.

Now in here misrepresenting the current situation and utterly denying the logic and rationale applied by other members, not even diplomatic enough to agree to disagree, or say perhaps there's some truth to that, just blocked ears and bad takes.

I mean seriously, virtually ever crap release this year is quickly getting patched to improve performance and visual quality, demonstrating unequivocally that the games could have released in that state, and customers are paying to beta test and get the game playable. Nobody would have bat an eyelid about VRAM if the games ran as they do now (for some patched releases like Hogwarts, TLOU and Jedi Survivor at least so far). And nobody denies that the long term trend is you need increasingly more VRAM, but that ≠ a current need for 16-24GB, nor does it excuse piss poor optimisation work on ~$70 USD AAA releases. All the game content already exists ffs, just spend time getting it to run decently, that's sure as hell what I expect for that much money.

Well said honestly.

I think both sides of the argument are true in fact. More VRAM would have suited Ada, 12-16 should have been knocked down a tier, quite simply because RT also demands additional VRAM. The way they've done it now kind of damages their own RT push if you ask me. At the same time about game release states, absolutely, but we cannot deny assets are taking more space and we also cannot deny many titles are console-first and this will affect PC spec requirements one way or another. 16GB is definitely in reach for todays cards and every upper mid range or better card should simply have it.

People tend to forget that previous generations were still somehow tied to games releasing on PS4 and PS5. Engines and assets were not primarily made with 4K in mind. They are now, and its no longer the low poly upscaled crap we used to get on DX11 and early DX12. Those shiny new FSR and DLSS techs also support that push.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Well said honestly.

I think both sides of the argument are true in fact. More VRAM would have suited Ada, 12-16 should have been knocked down a tier, quite simply because RT also demands additional VRAM. The way they've done it now kind of damages their own RT push if you ask me. At the same time about game release states, absolutely, but we cannot deny assets are taking more space and we also cannot deny many titles are console-first and this will affect PC spec requirements one way or another. 16GB is definitely in reach for todays cards and every upper mid range or better card should simply have it.

People tend to forget that previous generations were still somehow tied to games releasing on PS4 and PS5. Engines and assets were not primarily made with 4K in mind. They are now, and its no longer the low poly upscaled crap we used to get on DX11 and early DX12. Those shiny new FSR and DLSS techs also support that push.

I still feel that the majority of people in here getting overly defensive about this subject are Nvidia owners who got shafted in the Vram department. Sure there are a ton of factors that are contributing to the increasing demands on Vram but if Nvidia just equipped their cards with similar amount of vram to their only competitor last generation we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

 

[Deleted member 230939]

 

[sepheronx]

16GB wont be minimum. 12GB will be. Since consoles cannot just use all 16GB for purely gaming.