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

[oxrufiioxo]

In regards to vram it is way more about forcing more frequent upgrades than it is keeping costs down.

I think this has more to do with how they view the sub 1000 usd market you get the sense that they feel like gamers are lucky they even are offering them a half decent card to begin with....

Us 4090 owners and 3090 owners get taken care of for the most part the problem is the barrier to entry is way higher.

Not that AMD has been any better this generation giving gamers 20GB of vram which is nice but asking 900 usd for what is essentially a 6800XT replacement.

 

[A Computer Guy]

The kepler cards were infamously stingy on vram, so bad example.

In 2016 the 1070 had 8gb vram. In 2022 the 3070 had 8gb vram. Amazing progress.

But yes, the 3060 (the original 12gb version anyways) was an oddity in the lineup, and its 12gb vram is what makes it the only viable midrange gpu from the 30 series going forward.

I remember on newegg for awhile they were selling 2060's with 12GB vram.

 

[dirtyferret]

get taken care of for the most part the problem is the barrier to entry is way higher.

"Lately, game consoles are selling for about $599. And the reason for that is because it’s more useful than ever. You use your gaming console for your greatest form of entertainment, and you use it for a very, very long time. And GeForce essentially is a game console inside your PC. And we’ve always believed that the ASP of GeForce should drift towards the average selling price of a game console. And so it should be something along the lines of $500 or so roughly at this time." - Jensen Huang

NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) CEO Jensen Huang on Q2 2023 Results - Earnings Call Transcript

NVIDIA Corporation (NASDAQ:NASDAQ:NVDA) Q2 2023 Results Conference Call August 24, 2022 5:00 PM ETCompany ParticipantsSimona Jankowski - Head of IRJensen...

seekingalpha.com

FYI, ASP is Average Sales Price

 

[N/A]

at what details. Show me where at normal details delivering more than 75 FPS the given game takes up to 18 GB. On a 4070 for example this means 4090 is getting 150 FPS on normal detail. I don't go insane about what Uber and ultra textures take up to, that's unplayable anyway.

 

[A Computer Guy]

Isn't rebar/SAM supposed to help make up for limited vram?

 

[Ferrum Master]

Somebody sneezed at my statement that the biggest sore losers are the RTX4090 users actually. It should have had 32GB not 24GB considering at what resolution that card is aimed for use. It will be a short lived card also, despite the price. Mark my words. 2-3K donation for Leather Jacket Only fans page. (I will get leather jacket sale ads again across all internet again because of this, algo thinks I am into buying some)

The current situation with the 8 and 12GB cards are only the precursors. The real rocknŗoll is reserved for later for each game being natively designed for this generation of consoles, dropping the need to support the previous also like PS4.

Also the ASUS Ally and Steam Deck kinda looks a hasted product in that regard also.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Somebody sneezed at my statement that the biggest sore losers are the RTX4090 users actually. It should have had 32GB not 24GB considering at what resolution that card is aimed for use. It will be a short lived card also, despite the price. Mark my words. 2-3K donation for Leather Jacket Only fans page. (I will get leather jacket sale ads again across all internet again because of this, algo thinks I am into buying some)

The current situation with the 8 and 12GB cards are only the precursors. The real rocknŗoll is reserved for later for each game being natively designed for this generation of consoles, dropping the need to support the previous also like PS4.

Also the ASUS Ally and Steam Deck kinda looks a hasted product in that regard also.

I plan on using mine for 1440p after the 5000/8000 series launch so it'll probably be fine at a minimum better than all these 4-500 usd 8GB cards.

Also as a 4090 owner I want games to improve and use more hardware resources if a game makes my card cry in the next 2 years awesome as long as the visuals justify the performance.

 

[Bomby569]

Somebody sneezed at my statement that the biggest sore losers are the RTX4090 users actually. It should have had 32GB not 24GB considering at what resolution that card is aimed for use. It will be a short lived card also, despite the price. Mark my words. 2-3K donation for Leather Jacket Only fans page. (I will get leather jacket sale ads again across all internet again because of this, algo thinks I am into buying some)

The current situation with the 8 and 12GB cards are only the precursors. The real rocknŗoll is reserved for later for each game being natively designed for this generation of consoles, dropping the need to support the previous also like PS4.

Also the ASUS Ally and Steam Deck kinda looks a hasted product in that regard also.

Things are also getting ridiculous, what we need is better optimisation of the games.
CP77 in terms of textures looks insane and it does fine on the old cards, are these new games looking any better, Hogwarts, RE and shit? NO! Sorry but NO!
And i bet if Id Software come up with a new Doom with would embarrass most of these shitshow ports and we could max everything on a toaster.

So now everyone needs 32GB for 4k, like 24GB for 1440p and 12GB for 1080p, and if you play at 1080p you have to go sell blood and harvest organs to buy these supposed good cards.

 

[dirtyferret]

Isn't rebar/SAM supposed to help make up for limited vram?

I've not seen a lot of independent tests on it but if I recall those I did see showed zero to 2-3 FPS improvements in situations with most testers saying it didn't hurt but didn't do much also.

lso as a 4090 owner I want games to improve and use more hardware resources if a game makes my card cry in the next 2 years awesome as long as the visuals justify the performance.

That's the thing. If I made Hello Kitty: Island Adventure from the ground up for PCs with amazing visuals and it laughed at everyone's hardware, there are "Can it play Hello Kitty: Island Adventure?" memes everywhere and I said "I have no clue how we are going to get Hello Kitty: Island Adventure to play on the PS5 but it definitely won't be at normal PC settings and 1440p resolution"...no one would have an issue with it.

If I had released Hello Kitty: Island Adventure on the PS5 two years ago and here it gets ported to the PC with worse performance at similar settings and requires high end hardware to just make it playable at high settings than everyone is going to say WTF!? and justifiably so.

 

[Vayra86]

I didn't say it increases VRAM consumption, I said it's cost is non trivial, if you are VRAM constrained DLSS wont solve your problems.




Are you both actually blind ?

View attachment 293330
View attachment 293331

4K native no rt and 4k dlss quality no rt both use roughly 9.8 GB.

I hate to say this but... if you zoom in and try to look past the Youtube UI you can see that the DLSS Quality screenshot has 8.8GB, and the no DLSS is 9.8GB. Requires a long look but its definitely there, you can see the top half of the number is different and similar to the 9 on position 3 of the VRAM number in the top screenshot.

The one certainty you do have is that if you want Quality FSR you're going to land close to native and certainly higher than Balanced or Performance, and Balanced isn't always a great thing to look at. Highly game dependant. Balance vs Quality was an 800MB gap in Cyberpunk and pretty close to native as well. I'm gonna revisit that tbh, I must have drawn a wrong conclusion then thinking it was more than native - @Dragam1337 certainly not trolling!

But frankly if you have to use Balanced or Performance to remain within VRAM you're just accepting yet another IQ reduction to cope.

I'm definitely going to check more games side by side with FSR Quality and see what the VRAM gaps are. Could've sworn it was an increase on several occasions, but then again, I might also have mixed up with RT on/off in conjunction, much like how you probably misread the chart.

 

[Ferrum Master]

Things are also getting ridiculous, what we need is better optimisation of the games.
CP77 in terms of textures looks insane and it does fine on the old cards, are these new games looking any better, Hogwarts, RE and shit? NO! Sorry but NO!
And i bet if Id Software come up with a new Doom with would embarrass most of these shitshow ports and we could max everything on a toaster.

So now everyone needs 32GB for 4k, like 24GB for 1440p and 12GB for 1080p, and if you play at 1080p you have to go sell blood and harvest organs to buy these supposed good cards.

It is called progress. It was a normal thing during 90, 00, even early 201x. VRAM figures increased even doubled gen to gen. Now we are scammed and offered only a fraction, with twice the price. And even then you get a gimped product and thus why I think RTX4090 is the real flop in the room.

Calling CP77 okay in software/game engine wise is a pretty whacky statement. I've said... that game also was designed with ps4 in mind and one of the reasons it got bad reputation to attempt limiting your artistic vision, ideas and please all. They tried to please all and got slapped hard for it. No you have to make cuts.

 

[evernessince]

Why are you comparing different scenes? Native outside 10GB, DLSS outside 9 GB.

Typically DLSS vs non DLSS memory usage is pretty close, within 0.5 GB. At best you are typically looking at 1GB going from 4K to 1080p, which is not nearly enough to save cards like the 3070 in modern games. I believe the point Varya was getting at earlier is that there is some overhead associated with DLSS. Just because overall memory consumption reduced does not mean that overhead does not exist. You'd have to compare the memory usage with DLSS enabled to running the game natively at DLSS's input resolution to see if there is any overhead. If you are using 10.2 GB at native 1080p but 10.3 GB at 2K DLSS with an input image of 1080p, then you have an overhead of 0.1GB. Don't think I've ever seen this tested surprisingly.

i remember the 1060 6GB drama,

The drama was over the 3GB model and the fact that Nvidia made the 6GB card faster. The 3GB card of which ironically still lasted longer than the 3070 but was still roundly criticized for it's short life-span. The 4GB and 8GB RX 480 aged significantly better.

Game assets are made for this console generation at 4K, and they HAVE to fit in 12GB VRAM because that's all the consoles can allocate to graphics from their 16GB shared pool.

The PS5 has 16GB of unified memory, all 16GB are usable by the GPU. It has a separate 256 MB in addition to that dedicated to the OS. Plus both consoles have dedicated hardware decoding units, meaning they can quickly stream assets from the SSD. A game on consoles can get away with 11GB of VRAM usage whereas that same game would take 14GB plus on PC. The min specs of this game are targeting the Xbox while the medium are targeting the PS5, same as the other AAA titles coming out.


In regards to the opening post, regardless of whether this individual game is optimized or not, it appears more and more that 8GB is really only viable for low-medium settings nowadays. That's the trend that's been forming among new titles and people should purchase graphics cards with that in mind.

 

[A Computer Guy]

The drama was over the 3GB model and the fact that Nvidia made the 6GB card faster. The 3GB card of which ironically still lasted longer than the 3070 but was still roundly criticized for it's short life-span. The 4GB and 8GB RX 480 aged significantly better.

8GB RX 5500XT I think aged better over 4GB RX 5500XT models. More vram = more better.

 

[dirtyferret]

The drama was over the 3GB model and the fact that Nvidia made the 6GB card faster. The 3GB card of which ironically still lasted longer than the 3070 but was still roundly criticized for it's short life-span

the 3GB 1060 and 6GB were not the same card with just less RAM like the RX 480 4GB vs 8GB. 1060 3GB had cut down cores and shaders. Nvidia simply decided to keep the 1060 name on the 3GB version for marketing reasons, it should have been name something different.

 

[80251]

The PS5 has 16GB of unified memory, all 16GB are usable by the GPU. It has a separate 256 MB in addition to that dedicated to the OS. Plus both consoles have dedicated hardware decoding units, meaning they can quickly stream assets from the SSD. A game on consoles can get away with 11GB of VRAM usage whereas that same game would take 14GB plus on PC. The min specs of this game are targeting the Xbox while the medium are targeting the PS5, same as the other AAA titles coming out.


In regards to the opening post, regardless of whether this individual game is optimized or not, it appears more and more that 8GB is really only viable for low-medium settings nowadays. That's the trend that's been forming among new titles and people should purchase graphics cards with that in mind.

Doesn't the game engine itself need some of that 16 GiB? I see games utilizing 6 GiB of memory all by themselves (Metro Exodus: Enhanced Edition). I haven't seen a game engine that uses less than 1 GiB of system RAM since before GTAIV.

 

[evernessince]

the 3GB 1060 and 6GB were not the same card with just less RAM like the RX 480 4GB vs 8GB. 1060 3GB had cut down cores and shaders. Nvidia simply decided to keep the 1060 name on the 3GB version for marketing reasons, it should have been name something different.

Which I pointed out in my comment, as at the time people did not like the fact that there were two tiers of 1060s.

Doesn't the game engine itself need some of that 16 GiB? I see games utilizing 6 GiB of memory all by themselves (Metro Exodus: Enhanced Edition). I haven't seen a game engine that uses less than 1 GiB of system RAM since before GTAIV.

You mean akin to main system memory usage on PC correct? If so I'm not sure how that translates over to console, if they can save space due to the memory being unified, ect. I don't know enough about game engines and how they work on console vs PC to know how that is handled. The only thing I can comment on is the observation that in step with games being made for the new consoles, PC requirements have also increased. Obviously these new games do work on the console so either they are very well optimized for console or PCs will simply require a lot more memory overall to makeup for the close to metal approach consoles take.

 

[dirtyferret]

Obviously these new games do work on the console so either they are very well optimized for console

There are many factors in it so it's really not a fair comparison of console to PC.

SONY and MS worked with the large publishers to make sure their consoles carried the hardware the popular engines worked well on, with consoles the hardware is finite so you know what you have going in and can optimize for that hardware, you can checkerboard games all day long with consoles, etc.,

With PC the hardware possibilities can almost seem endless, you may have an Nvidia, Intel or AMD GPUs with some supporting DLSS and some FSR yet even if their brand supports DLSS or FSR the specific GPU may not. Some cards support Ray tracing, some cards don't, some cards don't do it well. Then you can go into all the different OS, RAM, CPU variations.

 

[AusWolf]

"Lately, game consoles are selling for about $599. And the reason for that is because it’s more useful than ever. You use your gaming console for your greatest form of entertainment, and you use it for a very, very long time. And GeForce essentially is a game console inside your PC. And we’ve always believed that the ASP of GeForce should drift towards the average selling price of a game console. And so it should be something along the lines of $500 or so roughly at this time." - Jensen Huang

NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) CEO Jensen Huang on Q2 2023 Results - Earnings Call Transcript

NVIDIA Corporation (NASDAQ:NASDAQ:NVDA) Q2 2023 Results Conference Call August 24, 2022 5:00 PM ETCompany ParticipantsSimona Jankowski - Head of IRJensen...

seekingalpha.com

FYI, ASP is Average Sales Price

That's the biggest bullshit Mr leather jacket man has ever said! If GPUs have to be expensive because they serve a similar purpose as a game console (I don't see any kind of logic in this statement, but whatever), then my £150 Samsung Galaxy A22 is a work tool because my boss messages me on WhatsApp, so it's worth at least £1,000. Anyone interested in buying?

Edit: To translate that statement from English to English: "We believe that the market shouldn't dictate prices of GeForce cards. We should. And we say they're worth $500 just because, and you'll buy them whether you like it or not." This is why I'm not gonna buy an Nvidia card in the foreseeable future. Their attitude sucks.

 

[docnorth]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 16gb RAM on consoles isn't VRAM and operating system RAM? The OS should use 3-4gb of that, so the free RAM to be used as VRAM is at 4070 (ti) levels.
On the other hand I agree that for 4070 ti, 12gb are not enough, but 'ok' for 4070 and it's processing power.

 

[dirtyferret]

That's the biggest bullshit Mr leather jacket man has ever said! If GPUs have to be expensive because they serve a similar purpose as a game console (I don't see any kind of logic in this statement, but whatever), then my £150 Samsung Galaxy A22 is a work tool, so it's worth at least £1,000. Anyone interested in buying?

I mean if he wants to include a free CPU, PSU, RAM, case, gamepad (do they still come free w/ a console) and SSD with every Nvidia GPU purchase than I would consider buying one for $599.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but 16gb RAM on consoles isn't VRAM and operating system RAM?

16GB GDDR6 that is used by both, the OS has a separate amount

 

[N/A]

The actual graphic quality preset on consoles is actually many times lower than on pc, the equivalent of low and medium lets say. Although It's not visible as a slider or anything, can't be modified. I believe Digital foundry the channel stressed this many times in the past, so why are we even talking about this when the required memory on the PC would naturally quadruple simply because of that. It's not a bad port it's what it should look like when the texture is full size.

 

[Dragam1337]

Somebody sneezed at my statement that the biggest sore losers are the RTX4090 users actually. It should have had 32GB not 24GB considering at what resolution that card is aimed for use. It will be a short lived card also, despite the price. Mark my words. 2-3K donation for Leather Jacket Only fans page. (I will get leather jacket sale ads again across all internet again because of this, algo thinks I am into buying some)

The current situation with the 8 and 12GB cards are only the precursors. The real rocknŗoll is reserved for later for each game being natively designed for this generation of consoles, dropping the need to support the previous also like PS4.

Also the ASUS Ally and Steam Deck kinda looks a hasted product in that regard also.

Oh yeah, 24gb isn't enough for it to be a proper 8k gpu (even with dlss) which it was marketed as. There are already games that basically can't run at 8k, even with ultra dlss - like witcher 3 next gen, when you have all the raytracing enabled, due to the vram swapping.

I don't see it becoming an issue at 4k any time soon though.

Still, 512 bit bus with 32gb vram... that would have been the shizzle for 8k gaming !

The actual graphic quality preset on consoles is actually many times lower than on pc, the equivalent of low and medium lets say. Although It's not visible as a slider or anything, can't be modified. I believe Digital foundry the channel stressed this many times in the past, so why are we even talking about this when the required memory on the PC would naturally quadruple simply because of that. It's not a bad port it's what it should look like when the texture is full size.

That entirely depends upon the game. The last of us uses the equivelant of high settings on pc.

 

[AusWolf]

I mean if he wants to include a free CPU, PSU, RAM, case, gamepad (do they still come free w/ a console) and SSD with every Nvidia GPU purchase than I would consider buying one for $599.

At this rate, the next thing he says will be that GeForce cards are actually free. You just pay $800 for nothing, then you get the card for free. All you have to do afterwards is put a picture of him in your room and adore it with tears of gratitude for your "free" gaming card every morning.

Disgusting.

 

[dirtyferret]

Digital foundry the channel stressed this many times in the past

That's part of the problem. DF does a good job of trying to break down the settings many of these console games play but it's not an apples to apples approach to PC settings. For things the console does well the settings are closer to "high" but for things the console struggles with the settings are "low" so not to use up to0 much performance resources. So it's not even a medium to medium setting type comparison.
Put on top of that the army of fan boys who demand all game be played at Ultra settings or it doesn't count as gaming and their ever need for more demanding settings which in turn needs more powerful hardware creates a very happy Jensen Huang

You just pay $800 for nothing, then you get the card for free.

I can totally see them selling cards where the you pay more to turn on the ray tracing and DLSS performance so don't kid yourself if they haven't looked into some sort of subscription model

 

[Dragam1337]

Doesn't the game engine itself need some of that 16 GiB? I see games utilizing 6 GiB of memory all by themselves (Metro Exodus: Enhanced Edition). I haven't seen a game engine that uses less than 1 GiB of system RAM since before GTAIV.

Memory utilization between unified memory and vram / ram can't really be compared like that.

In addition to that, the consoles have a dedicated decompression chip that enables them to load in a ton on the fly, rather than having it stored in the vram, like you have to on pc.
The result is what you in the last of us, where it's a butter smooth experience on ps5, but on pc it both has to use alot more vram to compensate, aswell as have very high cpu usage, due to the lack of the decompression chip on pc, meaning the cpu has to do it.

I remember on newegg for awhile they were selling 2060's with 12GB vram.

They did that during the gpu shortage, after the 30 series had been launched, yes.