RTX 3080 **10GB VRAM ENOUGH?!**

[makadee]

Hi guys,

 

I am not an expert with computers etc but my friend is telling me the RTX 3080 is a waste of money because of its VRAM. For example he was telling me that in the new Watchdogs game, the VRAM is like 99% being used. He says when this happen the textures of the game will be all messed up and issues will happen.

 

I did some research and some people agree on this and some dont. I was hoping someone with a lot of experience can address this concern for people wondering out there.

 

Is 10GB VRAM enough for next gen gaming? And will the textures be reduced and messed up by using too much VRAM? Please see the photo below, he is using 9.8GB VRAM on only 1440p without RTX enabled.

 

Should I be worried about spending so much money on a RTX 3080 to not even be able to run new games on the settings we deserve? 

[Leisor]

In my opinion it's definitly not enough, there are a lot of games right now which need more than 10GB even at 1440P, that's the main reason why i plan to get a 3090 or 6800XT/6900XT.

It is certainly not future proofed, unless you are willing to reduce texture quality or play in 1080P.

[Fasauceome]

14 minutes ago, makadee said:

Please see the photo below, he is using 9.8GB VRAM on only 1440p without RTX enabled.

Games allocate more ram than they actually use, so software is almost always unreliable. It has lead to many misconceptions about how much ram is needed. 

 

For 4K gaming at really high details, benchmarks show that 10GB is hurting performance in some specific scenarios, but for 1440p you'd be covered across the board.

 

However, with much more Vram on those new AMD cards, and that little extra performance they can get with 5000 series Ryzen CPUs, it appears to be a better choice (and we'll know for sure once people can get their hands on them and run the numbers.)

 

As for your friend's comment, a 3080 is by no means a "waste" of money cause it kicks ass in gaming but there might be better value from team red in about a month's time.

[makadee]

9 minutes ago, Fasauceome said:

Games allocate more ram than they actually use, so software is almost always unreliable. It has lead to many misconceptions about how much ram is needed. 

 

For 4K gaming at really high details, benchmarks show that 10GB is hurting performance in some specific scenarios, but for 1440p you'd be covered across the board.

 

However, with much more Vram on those new AMD cards, and that little extra performance they can get with 5000 series Ryzen CPUs, it appears to be a better choice (and we'll know for sure once people can get their hands on them and run the numbers.)

 

As for your friend's comment, a 3080 is by no means a "waste" of money cause it kicks ass in gaming but there might be better value from team red in about a month's time.

I wonder if DLSS can possibly solve this VRAM issue even if there is an issue

[Fasauceome]

2 minutes ago, makadee said:

I wonder if DLSS can possibly solve this VRAM issue even if there is an issue

DLSS isn't in every game, in the games that have it the vram seems to be less used but either way, unless a ton of developers start adopting it, it's not reliable as a solution.

[Jarsky]

Keep in mind VRAM is just the highest level of memory for your GPU. Textures and such will still live in memory and Virtual memory (pagefile) if needed. You'll never "run out" of video memory. 

[Jurrunio]

31 minutes ago, makadee said:

the VRAM is like 99% being used.

being "allocated", not used. It's like renting a warehouse to store my stuff, just because I've allocated that much area doesnt mean I'm using all of it. A lot of badly optimized games have way higher allocated memory than used memory, WD Legions is one of them (come on, it's from Ubisoft)

 

31 minutes ago, makadee said:

He says when this happen the textures of the game will be all messed up and issues will happen.

When usage does go beyond what the card has, performance (i.e. frame rate) will tank but it will not ruin textures in normal circumstances. I say normal, because some game engines simply skip textures in order to maintain frame rates, most notably Rockstar's RAGE engine on for example, GTA 5.

 

31 minutes ago, makadee said:

Is 10GB VRAM enough for next gen gaming? 

If you're not the max out everything idiot, instead focus on whether it makes a difference shown on your monitor when you're moving around (instead of staring at a wall for example), then so far I havent really seen a game that makes 10GB irrelevant at 1440p, simulators excluded.

 

31 minutes ago, makadee said:

Should I be worried about spending so much money on a RTX 3080 to not even be able to run new games on the settings we deserve? 

#HailAMD

[Leisor]

There will be a huge jump in Vram requierment when games are not developed on current consoles anymore.

If 10GB is barely enough right now even in 1440P, im pretty sure there will be a massive problem if you dont lower resolution or texture quality, which I wouldnt want if I buy an expensive card. It's a bit like GTX 680 (2GB) and HD 7970 (3GB) back then, the HD 7970 was much better in terms of "future proof".

[dizmo]

I wouldn't worry too much about it, especially at that resolution. The others have already explained why.

 

28 minutes ago, Leisor said:

In my opinion it's definitly not enough, there are a lot of games right now which need more than 10GB even at 1440P, that's the main reason why i plan to get a 3090 or 6800XT/6900XT.

It is certainly not future proofed, unless you are willing to reduce texture quality or play in 1080P.

Not accurate.

2 minutes ago, Leisor said:

There will be a huge jump in Vram requierment when games are not developed on current consoles anymore.

If 10GB is barely enough right now even in 1440P, im pretty sure there will be a massive problem if you dont lower resolution or texture quality, which I wouldnt want if I buy an expensive card. It's a bit like GTX 680 (2GB) and HD 7970 (3GB) back then, the HD 7970 was much better in terms of "future proof".

Maybe, maybe not. If someone's buying a 3080 chances are in a couple years when that might be come a problem, they'll simply upgrade anyway.

[makadee]

4 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

being "allocated", not used. It's like renting a warehouse to store my stuff, just because I've allocated that much area doesnt mean I'm using all of it. A lot of badly optimized games have way higher allocated memory than used memory, WD Legions is one of them (come on, it's from Ubisoft)

 

When usage does go beyond what the card has, performance (i.e. frame rate) will tank but it will not ruin textures in normal circumstances. I say normal, because some game engines simply skip textures in order to maintain frame rates, most notably Rockstar's RAGE engine on for example, GTA 5.

 

If you're not the max out everything idiot, instead focus on whether it makes a difference shown on your monitor when you're moving around (instead of staring at a wall for example), then so far I havent really seen a game that makes 10GB irrelevant at 1440p, simulators excluded.

 

#HailAMD

I understand what you are saying but I just hear so many mixed opinions so I am not sure who is right or wrong here lol!!

 

[Leisor]

Right now in 1440P you are ok, but expect to lower resolution or texture quality when games are not developed for current gen consoles anymore.

Remember 2013 when the new consoles came and Vram requierment literally exploded, be sure that will happen again this time.

The raw performce is really good, but i would either recommend a 3090 if you have enough budget or just stick to the RX 6800XT, with similar or higher raw performance, but with 16GB Vram.

[makadee]

5 minutes ago, dizmo said:

I wouldn't worry too much about it, especially at that resolution. The others have already explained why.

 

Not accurate.

Maybe, maybe not. If someone's buying a 3080 chances are in a couple years when that might be come a problem, they'll simply upgrade anyway.

I mean i did my own test on my RTX 3080 ASUS TUF OC. I tried warzone for example and was using 9.8GB vram. But I could not tell a differnce in textures or anything at all. There was not FPS drops or stuttering. 

 

I am running a 3440x1440p monitor and I even have RTX enabled in warzone, and I dont see my FPS going below 110FPS

[makadee]

1 minute ago, Leisor said:

Right now in 1440P you are ok, but expect to lower resolution or texture quality when games are not developed for current gen consoles. 

Remember 2013 when the new consoles came and Vram requierment literally exploded, be sure that will happen again this time.

Yeah I am a bit worried because the RTX 3080 was not a cheap card at the end of the day. And to not be able to run games on ultra already thats pretty fucking retarded. Thats like nvidia scamming us... 

[Leisor]

1 minute ago, makadee said:

Yeah I am a bit worried because the RTX 3080 was not a cheap card at the end of the day. And to not be able to run games on ultra already thats pretty fucking retarded. Thats like nvidia scamming us... 

It is not a scam, you knew that the card has 10GB of Vram and shouldnt only listen to their marketing, and you know that even right now 10GB is very much on the edge even at 1440P.

Nvidia also offers a RTX 3090 with a massive 24 GB Vram pool, for people who always want to have the highest texture quality. Its only a shame that right now they dont offer anything between 10 and 24 GB.

AMD does that with their 16GB cards, which is pretty much perfect with enough headroom for the future.

[ewitte]

Not 4k but 35% higher number of pixels with RTX and everything on Ultra.  It is allocating 8.5-9GB on mine.  How much it *needs* vs allocated who knows.

 

Edit: I don't think the glitches have to do with memory its launch day it is poorly optimized and Nvidia hasn't released an updated driver yet (supposed there is a beta that gives a decent fps boost).  I mean it gets 58fps average at 3440x1440 with DLSS on (quality +1fps for optimized) with RTX on a 3080 and a lot of models and animations still look like poo.

[dizmo]

16 minutes ago, makadee said:

I mean i did my own test on my RTX 3080 ASUS TUF OC. I tried warzone for example and was using 9.8GB vram. But I could not tell a differnce in textures or anything at all. There was not FPS drops or stuttering. 

 

I am running a 3440x1440p monitor and I even have RTX enabled in warzone, and I dont see my FPS going below 110FPS

Depends how you're looking. Just because it's allocated doesn't mean it's actually being used, and a lot of games, especially CoD ones, will take all the resources they can, even if it doesn't actually need them.

[makadee]

5 minutes ago, ewitte said:

Not 4k but 35% higher number of pixels with RTX and everything on Ultra.  It is allocating 8.5-9GB on mine.  How much it *needs* vs allocated who knows.

 

Edit: I don't think the glitches have to do with memory its launch day it is poorly optimized and Nvidia hasn't released an updated driver yet (supposed there is a beta that gives a decent fps boost).  I mean it gets 58fps average at 3440x1440 with DLSS on (quality +1fps for optimized) with RTX on a 3080 and a lot of models and animations still look like poo.

Which game are you talking about?

[makadee]

12 minutes ago, Leisor said:

It is not a scam, you knew that the card has 10GB of Vram and shouldnt only listen to their marketing, and you know that even right now 10GB is very much on the edge even at 1440P.

Nvidia also offers a RTX 3090 with a massive 24 GB Vram pool, for people who always want to have the highest texture quality. Its only a shame that right now they dont offer anything between 10 and 24 GB.

AMD does that with their 16GB cards, which is pretty much perfect with enough headroom for the future.

Only issue is my monitor is quite expensive and it has g sync, thats why I rather stick to nvidia but im just worried about all of these mixed opinions lol

[ewitte]

12 minutes ago, Leisor said:

It is not a scam, you knew that the card has 10GB of Vram and shouldnt only listen to their marketing, and you know that even right now 10GB is very much on the edge even at 1440P.

Its not though there has been 1-2 games with in game settings (not mods) that have a huge performance drop for 8GB cards at 4K let alone 10GB at 1440p.

[makadee]

1 minute ago, ewitte said:

Its not though there has been 1-2 games with in game settings (not mods) that have a huge performance drop for 8GB cards at 4K let alone 10GB at 1440p.

Sorry are you saying 10GB is not enough or it is? I didnt quite understand 

[ewitte]

2 minutes ago, makadee said:

Sorry are you saying 10GB is not enough or it is? I didnt quite understand 

Yes 10GB is fine there is barely anything that pushes 8GB is what I said.  *need* vs allocation.

[Leisor]

5 minutes ago, ewitte said:

Its not though there has been 1-2 games with in game settings (not mods) that have a huge performance drop for 8GB cards at 4K let alone 10GB at 1440p.

Flight Simulator or Horizon Zero Dawn for example are very thankfull for more Vram. I experienced frametime spikes in 1440P due to a shortage of vram. 

And those are Games which are already released, future games will have higher quality textures and require more vram.

[makadee]

1 minute ago, ewitte said:

Yes 10GB is fine there is barely anything that pushes 8GB is what I said.  *need* vs allocation.

oh right i didnt know this, so there is a need and allocation and thats the big difference. Is there a way to truly be able to tell what is being use?

 

my friend was mentioning to me that if I was to run everything ultra on a demanding game for example, he was saying that your texture might be running on ultra but really its high not ultra because of your limited vram and blah blah so im a big confused about this 

[makadee]

2 minutes ago, Leisor said:

Flight Simulator or Horizon Zero Dawn for example are very thankfull for more Vram. I experienced frametime spikes in 1440P due to a shortage of vram. 

On my 1440p monitor i ran FS on high settings and was getting around 65FPS, sometimes it would dip to like 45FPS but even a RTX 3090 has this issue with this game... Am i right on that?

[ewitte]

6 minutes ago, Leisor said:

Flight Simulator or Horizon Zero Dawn for example are very thankfull for more Vram. I experienced frametime spikes in 1440P due to a shortage of vram. 

And those are Games which are already released, future games will have higher quality textures and require more vram.

I can't find it but GN did an analysis video that showed the only game that really suffered with a huge performance hit at 4k on 8GB was nightmare in Doom Eternal and "ultra" cleared it right up.  I believe flight sim was also mentioned but I'm not sure if anything satisfies it.

 

Horizon Zero Dawn benchmark shows I'm CPU limited based on the #s.  Hopefully the 5900x fixes that...