Graphics card for 1440p gaming?

[Sol_NB]

3 minutes ago, WereCat said:

It's not. I've seen this happen in multiple videos of different channels where they test cards with lower amount of VRAM and the game falls apart and starts glitching like crazy. HUB is just one of the more popular channels that actually mentions it as an issue to look out for and consider when benching this game.

Also is this a case of that game just being bad? Not an inductive thing of games to come? 

[ewitte]

On 4/23/2023 at 12:19 PM, RONOTHAN## said:

None of us can predict the future with any accuracy. Given current trends, 8GB of VRAM on that 3070 might struggle with higher textures so you'll probably have to run at medium for those games

Might?  It already is!  

[WereCat]

5 minutes ago, Sol_NB said:

So what’s the solution if you have a 8gb card? Get bent? Or just lower settings until the VRAM isn’t being overused? 

Lower the settings. You don't have to run on Ultra.

 

4 minutes ago, Sol_NB said:

Also is this a case of that game just being bad? Not an inductive thing of games to come? 

I mean, not really. The alternative is RE4 where the game crashes outright. IMO I would rather deal with some visual degradation from time to time if you're at the edge of VRAM amount instead of the game crashing outright.

[ewitte]

1 hour ago, NekoBubbles said:

I'm in the same boat but ultimately we gotta remember that game devs are ultimately limited by what consumers can afford. Inflating Vram usage can only go as far as what consumers can get their hardware to be. There is almost no point in making a video games that take up more than the current median of 8GB's of Vram. There are what like an albino squirrels amount of over 8 GB VRAM GPU's so ethnically we have at least 5 years maybe 10 before any of us at 1440P apsolutely have to upgrade our GPU's. 

 

Until we have an ethical release of like 32 GB VRAM inexpensive GPU's A lot of the highest end visual game devs have a pretty long time to wait before they can force on the market super demanding titles. Cause its gonna be hard to sell a game that no one can ethically run. 

 

 

For PC designed titles possibly.  They are working with 16GB unified in the consoles.  As we have seen the last three months pretty much anything designed for "next gen" only is going to struggle with anything less than 10-12GB, possibly 16GB if pushed to 4K with higher than console settings.

[Sol_NB]

3 minutes ago, WereCat said:

Lower the settings. You don't have to run on Ultra.

 

I mean, not really. The alternative is RE4 where the game crashes outright. IMO I would rather deal with some visual degradation from time to time if you're at the edge of VRAM amount instead of the game crashing outright.

Well if you don’t use RT it dosent crash. You can go well past the 8gb amount and it runs great still as long as you don’t use RT. That’s what I’m doing and the VRAM usage is at like almost 11gb used out of my 8 and no crashing or hitching.

if you want RT you gotta keep textures to 2 or 3 gb I think 

[Sol_NB]

I mean I don’t mind playing on high settings. As long as that still runs well in a 8gb card 

[Agall]

47 minutes ago, Sol_NB said:

I mean I don’t mind playing on high settings. As long as that still runs well in a 8gb card 

Its a choose your own adventure either way. You can either get a relatively good experience on medium/high settings, or spend thousands of dollars to reach peak gaming. In this scenario, the skill you should be learning is how to tweak settings to min-max the performance of the hardware you have.

 

Back in 2016 when I first got 1440p ultrawide, it wasn't possible to max things out until the GTX 1080ti came out, even then it was a stretch and I only had a GTX 1080. I had to learn how to min-max the settings to get the most out of the system, since it was no longer 'crank everything to ultra and forget about it'.

 

The only thing capable of doing that in every game right now is the RTX 4090 with a relatively new CPU, to be getting the peak experience. So unless you're willing to drop $4k to get the maximum experience, you should start learning what settings are what and how they affect performance.

[Sol_NB]

1 hour ago, Agall said:

Its a choose your own adventure either way. You can either get a relatively good experience on medium/high settings, or spend thousands of dollars to reach peak gaming. In this scenario, the skill you should be learning is how to tweak settings to min-max the performance of the hardware you have.

 

Back in 2016 when I first got 1440p ultrawide, it wasn't possible to max things out until the GTX 1080ti came out, even then it was a stretch and I only had a GTX 1080. I had to learn how to min-max the settings to get the most out of the system, since it was no longer 'crank everything to ultra and forget about it'.

 

The only thing capable of doing that in every game right now is the RTX 4090 with a relatively new CPU, to be getting the peak experience. So unless you're willing to drop $4k to get the maximum experience, you should start learning what settings are what and how they affect performance.

Honestly that kinda sounds not great. But I mean I don’t mind tweaking settings, but I don’t want to like have spread sheets of settings for games to make my card work 

[Agall]

1 minute ago, Sol_NB said:

Honestly that kinda sounds not great. But I mean I don’t mind tweaking settings, but I don’t want to like have spread sheets of settings for games to make my card work 

It just involves knowing what settings you can dial down and which you'd prefer to be higher. Its all subjective and based on how you perceive the experience. Like I mentioned though, if you want to just crank everything to ultra, be ready to spend a lot of $$.

[Sol_NB]

1 minute ago, Agall said:

It just involves knowing what settings you can dial down and which you'd prefer to be higher. Its all subjective and based on how you perceive the experience. Like I mentioned though, if you want to just crank everything to ultra, be ready to spend a lot of $$.

There isn’t a GPU class that isn’t the most expensive but I can just keep things pretty high am without messing with it too much? I don’t know if that would be the XX80 series NVIDIA GPUs or whatever the AMD equivalent is of that 

[Agall]

1 minute ago, Sol_NB said:

There isn’t a GPU class that isn’t the most expensive but I can just keep things pretty high am without messing with it too much? I don’t know if that would be the XX80 series NVIDIA GPUs or whatever the AMD equivalent is of that 

Best I can tell you is an RX 6950 XT, but it depends on what resolution and games, which I don't know if you've mentioned those variables yet.

[Sol_NB]

9 minutes ago, Agall said:

Best I can tell you is an RX 6950 XT, but it depends on what resolution and games, which I don't know if you've mentioned those variables yet.

I play at 1440p but doing some 4k could be nice. And I kinda oaky but if everything. New games too 

 

I actually am thinking about it more and I don’t really wanna sell and replace my 3070 so soon. I’m kinda just looking for ways to make it last a bit unless I have to replace it due to performance 

[Agall]

6 minutes ago, Sol_NB said:

I play at 1440p but doing some 4k could be nice. And I kinda oaky but if everything. New games too 

 

I actually am thinking about it more and I don’t really wanna sell and replace my 3070 so soon. I’m kinda just looking for ways to make it last a bit unless I have to replace it due to performance 

If you're primarily running issues with ray tracing in some newer games, then that's everyone's experience except for RTX 4080 and RTX 4090 owners. That might require medium/high settings, even for an RTX 3070.

 

I would genuinely wait for the RTX 4080ti that'll inevitably come out. Nvidia has to have millions of AD102 GPUs that didn't make the cut as an RTX 4090 or the fully unlocked RTX 6000. I would expect the GPU to be 12,000 to 14,000 CUDA cores with a 320bit bus and 20GB of VRAM, ideally in the $1200 or less range. I assume the only reason it doesn't exist right now is because of a lack of market pressure. Maybe when Radeon releases their RX 7950 XTXxxxxxx later this year we'll see the RTX 4080ti there to compete.

[Sol_NB]

35 minutes ago, Agall said:

If you're primarily running issues with ray tracing in some newer games, then that's everyone's experience except for RTX 4080 and RTX 4090 owners. That might require medium/high settings, even for an RTX 3070.

 

I would genuinely wait for the RTX 4080ti that'll inevitably come out. Nvidia has to have millions of AD102 GPUs that didn't make the cut as an RTX 4090 or the fully unlocked RTX 6000. I would expect the GPU to be 12,000 to 14,000 CUDA cores with a 320bit bus and 20GB of VRAM, ideally in the $1200 or less range. I assume the only reason it doesn't exist right now is because of a lack of market pressure. Maybe when Radeon releases their RX 7950 XTXxxxxxx later this year we'll see the RTX 4080ti there to compete.

Why would they release it at 1200 dollars when that’s the current price if the 4080? 

[Agall]

14 hours ago, Sol_NB said:

Why would they release it at 1200 dollars when that’s the current price if the 4080? 

Because almost no one is buying the RTX 4080 at $1200 for good reason, so obviously there'd be a price cut down to like $900-1000 to compensate. Never should've been $1200 to start.

[maartendc]

On 5/2/2023 at 5:21 PM, Sol_NB said:

So I’ve been debating lately due to these recent VRAM stories and how it’s gonna be a potential issue if I should sell my 3070 and get another GPU. I was thinking maybe the 6800xt or 6950XT. I could also do a 4070TI or 4070, but even the 12gb VRAM on those I’m not too sure about. Like right now I’m not having ton of issues with the 8gb of the VRAM on the 3070, but it seems like it’s just gonna be a issue going forward and I’m kinda not sure what to do.  

Actually, I say sell NOW, before the prices drop in the used market. You can still get a good price for it currently.

 

As Hardware Unboxed recently pointed out, the used market is a bit slow to react usually. Now it is slowly dawning on people that the RTX 3070 isn't gonna cut it for very long..

 

As far as what to replace it with, don't get the 4070 or you'll be posting the same question a year from now. Get something with 16GB of VRAM. 6800XT or better sounds fine. At current prices, you can sell your RTX 3070 for 350 USD and get an RX 6800XT for 500 USD. Not a bad swap... Its like a 25% performance boost, and it will probably age better with more VRAM. You'll lose ray tracing performance though..

[maartendc]

20 hours ago, WereCat said:

Lower the settings. You don't have to run on Ultra.

The thing is that you really only need to lower texture quality. That is the only thing that really impacts VRAM usage. The rest could be on Ultra.

 

That being said, its kind of stupid. You have a powerful GPU like the RTX 3070 that can do RT and everything. And then you have to lower texture quality, a setting which can REALLY impact visual quality a lot. Low textures can look shit. Who cares that you have RT on, if you have to look at bad textures.

 

I don't know what it is with Hogwarts Legacy or The Last of US, but something about how those games are built eats up VRAM. You can say "Oh those games are just badly optimized". But 8GB has been mainstream since the GTX 1070 now.. it is really normal that games are starting to require more VRAM nowadays.

[Sol_NB]

Well to be honest I don’t think it’ll be a good idea to replace the GPU until I run into issues. I may soon who knows with what new games are doing. But it just seems like setting money in fire even if I sell my current one. I’m just trying to think of ways to prolong the 3070 as well to give it a better chance. But yeah next GPU defiently will go for 16gb of VRAM. I didn’t really see signs or people saying the 8gb was gonna be that much of a issue when I bought it so maybe I shouldn’t feel too bad 

[WereCat]

50 minutes ago, maartendc said:

The thing is that you really only need to lower texture quality. That is the only thing that really impacts VRAM usage. The rest could be on Ultra.

 

That being said, its kind of stupid. You have a powerful GPU like the RTX 3070 that can do RT and everything. And then you have to lower texture quality, a setting which can REALLY impact visual quality a lot. Low textures can look shit. Who cares that you have RT on, if you have to look at bad textures.

 

I don't know what it is with Hogwarts Legacy or The Last of US, but something about how those games are built eats up VRAM. You can say "Oh those games are just badly optimized". But 8GB has been mainstream since the GTX 1070 now.. it is really normal that games are starting to require more VRAM nowadays.

Agree.

My guess is that they don't compress the data so that you don't have to spend resources decompressing it which should result in better performance at the cost of more DRAM and VRAM usage but... these games are still heavily CPU bound anyways and run like ass for the most part so I'm not sure if that's the case.

[Sol_NB]

Besides I should probably see what new AMD or NVIDIA GPUs that may come this year

[Sol_NB]

5 minutes ago, WereCat said:

Agree.

My guess is that they don't compress the data so that you don't have to spend resources decompressing it which should result in better performance at the cost of more DRAM and VRAM usage but... these games are still heavily CPU bound anyways and run like ass for the most part so I'm not sure if that's the case.

Well hopefully I won’t need to lower the textures too much 

[Sol_NB]

I’m gonna be upgrading my 3070 semi soon and am trying to choose between the 7900XT and the 7900XTX. I know the XTX has 4 more GBs of VRAM and about 30 percent more performance or so. But I’m curious if it’s worth 200 dollars more then what the XT is going for. I can get a 7900XT for about 800 dollars or little less. The XTX is like at 1,000. 
 

I should note my CPU is an intel i7-10700f with 16gb of RAM and my PSU is an EVGA 850W Gold plus. I mainly play at 1440p but would like to use my 4K tv some too with it. I know I should upgrade my CPU sooner then later but I don’t plan on doing that upgrade at the moment. So I don’t if I’ll get a ton of bottlenecking 

[FloRolf]

I think it's more like 10-15% faster and at 25% more expensive that makes it just even in some games or overpriced in others. 

I opted for the XT and love it so far. It's plenty fast for 4k, let alone 1440p. It's also quiet and rather power efficient. I say save some money and get the XT. 

[Sol_NB]

2 minutes ago, FloRolf said:

I think it's more like 10-15% faster and at 25% more expensive that makes it just even in some games or overpriced in others. 

I opted for the XT and love it so far. It's plenty fast for 4k, let alone 1440p. It's also quiet and rather power efficient. I say save some money and get the XT. 

Oh I thought it was more. Interesting. I mean I do get 4 more gb of VRAM, but I don’t know if like, it’s diminishing returns since the XT already has 20gb 

[Shimejii]

9 minutes ago, Sol_NB said:

Oh I thought it was more. Interesting. I mean I do get 4 more gb of VRAM, but I don’t know if like, it’s diminishing returns since the XT already has 20gb 

the Core itself will be the issue far before you need the extra 4 GB of vram.