4K Gamers, How much VRAM do you have?

[Dragam1337]

Gotta say, i have a VERY difficult time believing that 61.4 % of users on TPU are using 4k... more like 50% of users didn't really read / understand the poll before voting (which can also be seen from several comments).

 

[aliceif]

Gotta say, i have a VERY difficult time believing that 61.4 % of users on TPU are using 4k... more like 50% of users didn't really read / understand the poll before voting (which can also be seen from several comments).

except people using 4K monitors are more likely to even vote on the poll than people who don't - the latter could just see the headline and not bother reading the options

 

[Dragam1337]

except people using 4K monitors are more likely to even vote on the poll than people who don't - the latter could just see the headline and not bother reading the options

Hence why if it's "just" 50% trash votes, that would still have the amount of users on TPU using 4k at more than 10%, which is a vastly higher number than all other hardware surveys.

And there are several "oops, read that wrong" comments - and those are people commenting. People just voting are even more likely to just have quickly voted without really reading it.

 

[Kapone33]

Hence why if it's "just" 50% trash votes, that would still have the amount of users on TPU using 4k at more than 10%, which is a vastly higher number than all other hardware surveys.

And there are several "oops, read that wrong" comments - and those are people commenting. People just voting are even more likely to just have quickly voted without really reading it.

Well I know I use 4K. FV43U look it up. You don't need 16GB for 1440P. A 6700XT or 3060 12GB are fine for 1440P.

 

[human_error]

I'm using 4k and wouldn't want to have less than 16GB of VRAM. Finding my card very capable of native 4k in the games I play (including modern titles) but I don't use ray tracing so that's probably why.

I only use FSR if it produces a better image than the native temporal AA in games - not felt the need for it to gain performance today.

Biggest difference I noticed recently was frame times when I moved my CPU from a 9900K to my 7800x3d. Certainly made things feel smoother in the majority of games, even though at 4k I'm more often GPU limited from hitting 144hz.

 

[Guwapo77]

Desktop is only 1440p; however, I'll be Macbook Pro M3 Max gaming at whatever that almost 4K screen is at with 48GB of unified memory.

 

[cvaldes]

Gotta say, i have a VERY difficult time believing that 61.4 % of users on TPU are using 4k... more like 50% of users didn't really read / understand the poll before voting (which can also be seen from several comments).

Your logic is faulty.

61.4% of people who PARTICIPATED IN THE TPU POLL say they are gaming in 4K.

Note that this excludes people who didn't vote in the poll. It also doesn't account for poll participants who have multiple systems running different screen resolutions and who happened to vote for something other than 4K. It also excludes people with tragically awful reading comprehension.

These TPU polls are pretty much meaningless (apart from generating forum discussion). And essentially every poll is worse because people simply don't know how to read.

 

[Psychoholic]

I game at 3840 X 1600 and my 12Gb card seems to be plenty.

Recently Downgraded from 7900XTX to 4070 Super because i wanted a shorter (2 fan model) card without going to liquid cooling.

Granted, i do use DLSS to reach 144hz of my monitor at 3840X1600 but it works fine.

 

[RadeonBlue]

I run synthetic benchmarks more than I actually game, but I have found that the title makes a big difference thanks to optimizations. I typically run everything at native rendering, no DLSS or the like. A title like Cyberpunk 2077 will run at 4k with 8GB but it is unplayable. For comparison's sake (and out of sheer curiosity), I ran a Vega 64 LC vs a Vega Frontier Edition LC (Workstation-Disabled Mode) in Cyberpunk 2077 to see what difference the extra VRAM makes in actual gameplay. At 4k, the Vega Frontier Edition was far better than the Vega 64 (27-32 FPS vs 18-22 FPS) running identical clock/memory speeds. Shifting to 1440P made little difference, with all VRAM still being utilized by the V64 and about 14GB/16GB being used on the Frontier. At 1080P, the V64 pulled away from the Frontier by around 8%, which is more typical when frame buffer isn't an issue. Vega can use HBCC, but this has made frame rates worse in my experience.

My "everyday" gaming GPU is either the RX 6800 or the Radeon VII, depending on which workstation I'm using, and both of them are easily playable with most titles at 1440P (High or Ultimate), which is where I typically stay. I also try to vsync if possible, mainly just because my monitors are 60hz/75hz respectively. For the 4k testing, I connected up to a 65" Sony flatscreen in order to achieve the native 4k experience. No ray tracing obviously, but still interesting nonetheless. I will be testing a workstation-grade GP100 against a 1080 Ti a bit later to compare the 16GB HBM2 (732 GBs Bandwidth) against 11GB GDDR5X (484 GBs Bandwidth). The 1080 Ti runs much faster, but the GP100 has more ROPs and higher bandwidth (albeit at lower clocks).

My use case is mainly workstation-based (data science and ML), so most of the testing I do is on GPUs that fit this category. Benchmarking/overclocking/modding is my hobby, but I enjoy gaming as well.

 

[Macro Device]

The thing with 4K is do you even need Ray Tracing once you get to 4K?

The higher the resolution the more it's obvious how non-RT lighting is inferior to more realistic stuff. That said, I'd prefer 1440p with RT to 4K with no RT given the same framerate.

It also excludes people with tragically awful reading comprehension.

It's like 98 percent of humankind. Reading ability is a myth.

My current GPU is an RX 6700 XT, so it's 12 GB, and my screen is 4K but I don't game at the moment. And when I did, the VRAM has never been an issue as this GPU is clearly too slow for the VRAM amount to be a limiting factor.

 

[wEeViLz]

I'll play 4k some day, still haven't found a 4k monitor that has a reasonable price performance ratio.

 

[Kapone33]

I'll play 4k some day, still haven't found a 4k monitor that has a reasonable price performance ratio.

Gigabyte actually make good monitors. I have had the 32QC which is a 1440P 165hz monitor with a curve that is pretty immersive. I replaced that with the Gigabyte FV43U 144hz Mini LED when it was on sale. Unfortunately that was the lowest it has been. Even if you want 4K 120Hz TVs it is about $1000 in Canada. I also had one of those Korean 4K panels but my controller had an accident and broke it.

 

[wEeViLz]

Gigabyte actually make good monitors. I have had the 32QC which is a 1440P 165hz monitor with a curve that is pretty immersive. I replaced that with the Gigabyte FV43U 144hz Mini LED when it was on sale. Unfortunately that was the lowest it has been. Even if you want 4K 120Hz TVs it is about $1000 in Canada. I also had one of those Korean 4K panels but my controller had an accident and broke it.

I have the dell version of that monitor, but they're 2k, there are affordable 4k monitors if you like 60hertz

 

[cellar door]

Interesting results thus far. Neo 4K with 3080ti (power modded to 500watts). 12GB has been fine so far since we all have to use DLSS and now with frame gen mods these cards are still very usable. This one scores on par with what 4070ti cards get.

Ultra textures for all games except Ratchet and Clank. Its the only game that will drop perf like a brick when vram buffer is exceeded.

In my experience 12GB is on the brink, another year and 16GB will feel like this for 4K.

 

[Dorek]

Cant vote but dont really play at 4k on pc.

 

[Ruru]

Kickin' with RX 6700 XT 12GB.

 

[cou60]

4k with an RX 6700 XT ?

 

[ARF]

4k with an RX 6700 XT ?

Smart gaming at its finest.

propaganda, brain-washing

Look at the actual gaming performance.

Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Pulse Review

The Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Pulse is priced at the AMD MSRP of $330, offering 16 GB of VRAM for future-proofing. It comes equipped with an excellent dual-slot cooler, providing good noise levels and temperatures.

www.techpowerup.com

That is ^^^^^ maxed out settings, if you know what of the settings to dial down, the framerate will go up to 2160p144 with ease.

 

[Ruru]

4k with an RX 6700 XT ?

Yeah, 4K with a RX 6700 XT as I have two 4K monitors (4K120 and 4K60). Actually I already tried with 980 Ti years ago (didn't own a 4K monitor then but I used DSR).

Smart gaming at its finest.

propaganda, brain-washing

Look at the actual gaming performance.

View attachment 339362

Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Pulse Review

The Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 XT Pulse is priced at the AMD MSRP of $330, offering 16 GB of VRAM for future-proofing. It comes equipped with an excellent dual-slot cooler, providing good noise levels and temperatures.

www.techpowerup.com

That is ^^^^^ maxed out settings, if you know what of the settings to dial down, the framerate will go up to 2160p144 with ease.

Who the hell in their right mind plays CS with high settings? I play at lowest of course.

 

[cou60]

my rtx 3080 was struggling with at 1440P , but that might be because of the 10 go vs 12 go.

 

[Avro Arrow]

I'm kinda shocked at the results. What games can run at 4K with only 6GB of VRAM? I have to assume that they're either online games or quite old.

 

[Ruru]

I'm kinda shocked at the results. What games can run at 4K with only 6GB of VRAM? I have to assume that they're either online games or quite old.

Exactly. Everyone just doesn't play the latest AAA titles with all the eyecandy on (new games suck anyway. Maybe 1-3 good releases per year).

 

[Raiden85]

24GB (4090) and 4K, made the switch to 4K gaming back in March 2017 and never looked back. I used to run GPU's in two way SLI so that should have been the 980 Tis back then and then SLI 1080 Ti and my last SLI setup being the 2080 Ti so driving 4K at maxed out settings was just about doable early on at 60fps as 4K was pretty hard to run then at least up until the single 2080 Ti. Dropped SLI when I had the 3090 as it was a dying tech by the 2080 Ti anyway. Do miss the way SLI looked though, good thing considering they killed it and GPU prices are now getting way out of hand.

No excuse not to to run 4K now as it's a pretty easy resolution to run these days even for mid range cards.

 

[Guwapo77]

24GB (4090) and 4K, made the switch to 4K gaming back in March 2017 and never looked back. I used to run GPU's in two way SLI so that should have been the 980 Tis back then and then SLI 1080 Ti and my last SLI setup being the 2080 Ti so driving 4K at maxed out settings was just about doable early on at 60fps as 4K was pretty hard to run then at least up until the single 2080 Ti. Dropped SLI when I had the 3090 as it was a dying tech by the 2080 Ti anyway. Do miss the way SLI looked though, good thing considering they killed it and GPU prices are now getting way out of hand.

No excuse not to to run 4K now as it's a pretty easy resolution to run these days even for mid range cards.

My excuse is I like high refresh rates with max graphical settings?

 

[AleXXX666]

Need to add an 11GB option for those (me included) happily owners of 1080Ti @4K

same as 12, you can vote, no need to thank

Not see 10 GB , rtx 3080.

you can too put 12 maybe...?

We're wondering how much memory people have when they are playing on 4K. If you don't game at 4K, select the last option please.

well, have owned recently 3070 Ti (with 8 GB if someone doesn't know or IDC if there was "other options") and Dell 4K 60 Hz monitor. Played very well Hitman 3 at least (my main game so), maybe med-high settings, RT cr*p off.