Diablo 4 PC - DF Tech Review - A Great Game but VRAM/Textures Are Problematic

Blizzard's Diablo 4 on PC is an excellent effort overall, with exceptional scalability and great performance. The only real issue concerns texture quality and VRAM requirements. Remarkably, only a 16GB GPU can match the visual quality of the PlayStation 5 version - a situation that's clearly sub-optimal and needs to be addressed. Don Allen reports on this one!
Subscribe for more Digital Foundry: bit.ly/DFSubscribe
Join the DF Patreon to support the team more directly and to get access to everything we do via pristine quality downloads: bit.ly/3jEGjvx
Want some DF-branded tee-shirts, mugs, hoodies or pullovers? Check out our store: bit.ly/2BqRTt0
For commercial enquiries, please contact [e-mail]

[@sapphyrus]

It amazes me that low textures in 2023 requiring 6GB of VRAM look worse than 2013 textures needing 512MB of VRAM.

[@Broformist]

Yeah this graphics whoring stuff is a big scam. They treat gamers like addicts to be milked. I used to joke back in the day that when they will reach the sufficient level of detail in graphics they will just start increasing system requirements without significant visual improvement, turned out it was more of a prediction than a joke.

[@simsdas4]

Yeah it's baffling, you'd expect better textures with higher requirments.

[@qlum]

It's simply a matter of console quality forming the baseline for pc, most, game devs really don't bother to create separate assets for lower vram cards on pc. This is a level of laziness that really has always been the case, just now that a lot of gpu's simply have less vram than their console counterparts does this become an issue. The lower texture settings simply swap out the textures for their lower lod version, which looks much worse. GPU makers, especially Nvidia could have seen that one coming and made sure cards had at least a little bit more Vram. when a 2016 card that costs $ 230 can have 8GB then certainly more recent cards that cost a lot more can have more. Sure game devs could have better accommodated low vram pc use, but that does not change the fact that this is still definitely a fault on gpu's as well.

[@giannis_tar]

@@qlum your explanation makes sense... Except it's not laziness, it's budget and time constraints

[@zZiL341yRj736]

Do you guys not have VRAM?

[@sunyavadin]

"Old News to Franchise Veterans" My disc copies of D1 and D2 Bnet was always optional, everyone I know played entirely offline over LAN. People needed the line free to use the phone! Presumably by "Franchise veterans" they mean "Everyone who jumped on at D3"?

[@Lucky_Drive]

Me and some other people on Reddit have been having some weird texture issues on long play sessions or when further in the campaign. A lot of textures just wont load on an 8gb 3070. Was hoping DF would address it.

[@TheDrewchebag]

Do you have the high res texture pack installed? I’m on a 3070 myself and have finished the campaign and played many hours between the full game and the betas and haven’t had any issues. No high res texture pack. 16 GB of RAM.

[@ImPuLsEPaRaDoX1]

Straight to the point, great visual examples and spoken well and clearly, great video. Hope to see more Don

[@MMoer]

See or hear?

[@kekcukka]

this. Love the vocal quality

[@michaelandersson6088]

@@kekcukka He got a great sounding voice indeed!

[@Mene0]

I agree C.Viper

[@realityvanguard2052]

I can't believe he started off the video by claiming: "from its gameplay to its art style, Diablo has remained incredibly consistent throughout the years." When one of the main controversies surrounding Diablo 3 was that it had completely and utterly failed to even try and live up to the art style the previous 2 games pioneered.

[@Schizm1]

Turning off crossplay is getting rid of a LOT of stutter issues in HUB areas

[@FoxbatStargazer]

Mostly because its getting rid of other players.

[@danielsonjrlibra]

yeah thats the only time i notice it during gameplay it only happens if the server goes down with there always online bullshit

[@yoltsbp]

I e never seen any stutter problems :/

[@SussedRage]

@@danielsonjrlibra I'm so sick of this always online trend. Tying a game to the Internet is such a shitty bad move

[@Schizm1]

@@yoltsbp In this case it's rubber banding that's causing stutters. And if you didn't "see" that then you're not playing the game. It literally happens for ALL players across ALL platforms because it's related to servers.

[@Demoerda]

Hey Don! Congrats on your second great video! Your analysis was detailed without dragging on for too long! I also really like your presentation style :3 you are a great fit for the DF crew! Greetings from Germany

[@CroneKorkN]

Another congrat from germany 😀

[@realityvanguard2052]

I can't believe he started off the video by claiming: "from its gameplay to its art style, Diablo has remained incredibly consistent throughout the years." When one of the main controversies surrounding Diablo 3 was that it had completely and utterly failed to even try and live up to the art style the previous 2 games pioneered.

[@patb3356]

DF, like always, is guiding me beyond the veil

[@Demoerda]

@@patb3356 are they freeing you from your mortal shell though?

[@HeretixAevum]

​@@realityvanguard2052I assume he meant that it was consistently lacklustre.

[@MiikeMonts]

Is he new? He’s got a great narration voice! Great video and highlights the exact same issue I’ve been having, the hitching has been ridiculous, even with 32gb of Ram and 16gb of vram.

[@yellowblanka6058]

Yeah, he should present everything really. Olly seems to know his stuff, but no offense, he really doesn't have a good voice for presenting (neither, I think, do I, to be fair).

[@RolandHazoto]

Those supposed network issues mentioned at the end do feel like they are essentially just that. They seem to be when a character shifts shards/servers. I say this because they are repeatable to a degree and sometimes when you can get them to trigger other players suddenly appear that weren't there before. (experiment with some of the town entrances and you'll see what I mean) This theory is further supported by the fact that I've had parties split when a world boss starts, where half of us are fighting a different instance of the same boss, and we were even able to finish before the others, go to town, and then warp to that fight to help. (we did not get loot a second time)

[@awolCZ]

Playing on 3070ti 8 GB VRAM and I'm experiencing stutters mentioned in the video. It's getting worse with the session length. Upon starting a game, there are no stutters at all, but they seem to become more frequent the longer I play. I then need to restart a game for problem to disappear. There seems to be some allocation or leak issue.

[@sturenorth]

Ye same, like someone else pointed out, Nvidia is on a warpath to push their consumers to upgrade from min 8gb cards to their 16g+ cards. A bit conspiratorial but I legit think Nvidia legit fuck around with their drivers to worsen the experience for certain series to push the consumers to buy new cards.

[@Wraithix88]

I have the same card. Playing at 1440p no DLSS. Everything maxed except texture, shadows, and clutter are high and anti aliasing low. I'd say it's smooth 95%, even with extended plays. If I Alt Tab at any point, I will get stutters within a couple of minutes. Even outside of town. I hope they bring back the option for full screen and rez choice. Having to change the desktop rez IS annoying but it looks and runs better than 4K DLSS at Balanced. Edit - NM what you described happened

[@J_Echoes]

​@@sturenorth No need for conspiracy. Nvidia released "high end" cards targeted at 1440p/2160p with 8GB VRAM while current gen consoles can use >12GB while relying on FSR. It's just natural that devs are targeting >8GB for anything beyond 1080p, Nvidia simply decided to shoot their cards in the leg to make them prematurely obsolete as modern, more demanding games start releasing.

[@CaptToilet]

Again it seems developers aren't optimizing their textures vs the vram required. those low textures should not eat up 6GB+ of vram. That is asinine. If the console version with a shared memory pool can have textures equal to Ultra, then there should be no excuse an 8GB card can't do the same.

[@StonedSolid]

Yep. Keeping up with tradition, developers are squandering the additional memory on the Gen 9 consoles to make their jobs easier rather than doing things that weren't possible before. And it's screwing over PC users.

[@bradhaines3142]

@@StonedSolid been like that for a while though, back in the ps3 era when they HAD to make good use of hardware they did, but now they seem to go by the understanding they have plenty of headroom

[@StonedSolid]

@Brad Haines Yeah, I know it's been like that for a long time, that's why I jokingly said it's a tradition.

[@Imgema]

@@bradhaines3142 That's why you should never give developers too many recourses to work with. The less they have, the more they optimize their shit and the more creative they become. I'm sure they would find a way to fit these current textures in 1/3 of VRAM if they really tried. But when they have too much freedom they become lazy.

[@bradhaines3142]

@@Imgema programs in general have been like that for a long time. it used to be running office required a relatively fast machine. now they'll run on any potato

[@GamerSg84]

You cant just conclude that 16gb is required when you only tested 8GB and 16GB. That is a huge gulf. FWIW, im playing all 1440p native/ultra on a 6700xt at 100+fps without any noticable stutter outside of major towns (which feel like loading stutters maybe cos im on a SATA SSD). So 12 GB is enough for ultra, perhaps 10 GB would be too.

[@vaghatz]

It would be very interesting if a 12GB GPU like the 4070 was also included in the comparison

[@03chrisv]

I have a 4070 and vram usage hovers at around 87% to 90% at ultra quality. I don't notice any performance issues aside from the occasional network variety.

[@JFinns]

@@03chrisv Same also have a 4070, running at 1440p 120fps g-sync enabled no issues here.

[@arutzuki2491]

No problems with my RTX 3080 TI at 4k, Ultra settings, no dllss. No stutter at all.

[@ricardoalvialtorres3614]

it drops frames cuz vram in ultra quality 4k

[@platontzintzis4637]

I have the 4070ti and i do keep my texture quality at high. Everything else is at maximum. At Ultra textures i get the same stuttering mentioned here, especially when entering new locations, like dungeons. Also i get a very bad stuttering at in game cutscenes when texures are set on ultra. At 4k, high textures,everything else max, DLAA, and frame generation on, i get 110 to 120 fps. I don't use DLSS 2 because my OLED tv has a 120hz refresh rate and geting higher fps causes tearing, even with GeForce VRR. I tried every compination, with DLSS at Quality or Balance. As long as textures are Ultra i get the same stuttering and in game cutscenes are hard to watch. Funny thing is, Nvidia itself suggests ultra textures for my card, when I have their app optimise my game.

[@FreyVII]

Thank you DF! I freaking pointed this out to a friend just last week that at 1440p Ultra and 1440p High my VRAM utilization was maxing out at around 12GB and I found that strange.

[@doctorsacred]

Was that with DLSS? I had hoped that 8 GB would be enough for 1440p / high textures. Man, I really shouldn't have bought an 8 GB VRAM card.

[@FreyVII]

@@doctorsacred I am using an RX 6750 XT while using FSR 2.X for upscaling. All 12 GB of VRAM will be saturated even with turning textures down to High at 1440p (and following this videos recommended settings). I noticed VRAM stutters most occasionally when hopping out of a TP into a new area. My processor = Ryzen 9 5900X / SSD = GAMMIX S70 Blade pcie 4.0 / RAM = 32 GB DDR4 3600 CL 16 - so the other components are certainly not being taxed.

[@doctorsacred]

@@FreyVII Thanks for the answer, even though I don't like what it says. 🥲

[@FreyVII]

@@doctorsacred what GPU are you currently running?

[@doctorsacred]

@@FreyVII My Laptop has an RTX 4070, which has 8 GB. I have a Desktop as well with a 3060, which has 12 GB, fortunately. I guess I'll be playing D4 on my Desktop.🥴

[@mtx1212]

It's a miracle these days that a major triple-A PC release like D4 is quite optimized and mostly runs well even on prior-gen PCs! 🤣🤣🤣

[@IESUproductions]

There's an argument to be made that the PC version of a Diablo game shouldn't *be* a port in the first place. And I say that as primarily a console gamer.

[@raresmacovei8382]

Diablo isn't now a PC only title tho. It's PC, last-gen and current-gen. Probably next-gen when that arrives. There's a bigger market to service now.

[@joyhappiness]

There are a billion (and growing) PC configs. only one PS5, one XSX, one XSS config. Now cope and dance.

[@speedracer2please]

I agree, it's weird for such a historical PC franchise to become console-first. Not that it's necessarily a problem in other cases.

[@Sakisasvictorianmask]

@@speedracer2please Diablo has always released on consoles, starting with D1 on PS X. Just because until D3 most people played it on PC doesn't mean the PC release necessarily needs to be the focus.

[@letsgetacid]

Show me that original Diablo 2 port

[@Moxzot]

I find it odd that this review covers dlss and fsr so much when most gamers 85-90% if not more dont have rtx cards and are using much older cheaper hardware.

[@porina_pew]

It is hard to get good statistics but the nearest we have might be the Steam Hardware Survey. May 2023 results show nvidia in total is about 6x that of all AMD, including APUs. Within nvidia, RTX share make up 48%. In other words, RTX GPUs alone make up about 3x that of all AMD. The data wont be perfect, but that's a LOT of DLSS capable users out there. Also on FSR, that runs on pretty much anything unless it is really ancient.

[@christofos]

I was wondering where Don went! We need more of you.. please don't disappear on us again!

[@plonk420]

love the up front emphasis on the Online Only requirements and good menu UI! (and usability friendliness)

[@realityvanguard2052]

I can't believe he started off the video by claiming: "from its gameplay to its art style, Diablo has remained incredibly consistent throughout the years." When one of the main controversies surrounding Diablo 3 was that it had completely and utterly failed to even try and live up to the art style the previous 2 games pioneered.

[@professorc-dawgscastle8591]

"From its gameplay to its artstyle, it's remained incredibly consistent throughout the years..." - Has he not seen/played D3??? lol

[@MichaelPohoreski]

D2 _and_ D3 didn’t get good until the first expansion. D4 is meh. This reviewer is a Simp / tool.

[@kaptenteo]

How did they manage to confuse system RAM with VRAM?

[@anrucas]

If you have more ram than vram it will start eating system ram, say a 4gb gpu with 32gb of system ram. Then down to hdd/ssd/nvme drive. I assume.

[@ian6239]

Really like Don's style. Informative and concise

[@Ceredante]

The fact that the consoles can run higher texture quality without stuttering than my 3080ti is a major piss off. I hope the devs see this video and all the forum posts about this and try to rectify the situation. This is brutal. I wish I would have bought it on console to be honest.

[@OrtadragoonX]

It’s pretty mind boggling. And I’m on PS5. But it’s ridiculous that so many PC games on really high end GPUs have worse textures than my basically a RTX 2070 Super equivalent PS5. Developers have got to start doing better on the PC. It’s unacceptable.

[@JGD185]

​@@OrtadragoonX PS5 really has RTX 2070 Super equivalent? That's pretty good. I have a RTX 2070, been holding out on upgrading. This game might force me to.

[@Masterchief12455]

This is why consoles are the way to go and pc master race is wrong.. coming from someone who built his first 3080 pc in 2020

[@OrtadragoonX]

@@JGD185 yeah it hovers between RTX 2070 and RTX 2070 Super when it comes to rasterization performance. Your PC RTX 2070 is better at Ray tracing though. If you move to console you’ll notice way worse ray tracing resolutions over PC nVidia cards.

[@dannonyogurt98]

I'll wait to see If the Activision deal goes through. If it does we know it'll go to steam.

[@raudelravelo1169]

Awesome video! Love to see in depth analysis for PCs. Keep it up!

[@lil----lil]

I have a 3080 Ultra/4K/Max/HDR setting (NO DLSS) but I haven't experienced any slow down? It only has 10GB VRAM I believe. So what gives?

[@andersonanderson1009]

Holy shit. That stuttering in the video is EXACTLY the stuttering I think most of us were attributing to the network; for sure there is rubberbanding, but what we're seeing in that video is absolutely the majority of the stuttering behavior I get ingame. On a 5600X with 32GB or ram and a 6800XT, I am able to get 120FPS with FSR, so never ever considered that it wasn't a hardware issue. . . .hopefully BLIZZARD sees this and is ready to address it.

[@Healcraft]

dude why you using FSR with a 6800XT? Unless its 4k?

[@Krokodilius]

ultra textures when you open map or inventory....FREEZE, the only fix is to go to high textures...which look like low textures lmao------this is with a tuf 4080, 13,7k, 32giggles of ram.

[@goeddy]

gotta say regarding the VRAM issues there should have been more investigation done. even on high textures, after crossing through a couple biomes the VRAM will fill up and result in frequent horrible stutters on 8GB GPUs. the suggested fixes of lowering other settings have no impact on VRAM usage either, it seems to be exclusively tied to a texture memory leak. this can be "fixed" by going into the menu and changing graphics settings which apparently flushes the VRAM, which for whatever reason blizzard has decided not to do when the VRAM fills up during gameplay. it seems when the VRAM fills up the game will just remove as much space as needed to load the new assets, so it constantly stays filled to the max and you get lovely 500+ ms stutters every time a new asset loads in. seems like a simple fix in theory, but who knows whats going on the background thats preventing them from fixing it.

[@billiamlarson608]

I dont think its a memory leak. I think the game does not know how to cache its VRAM properly for some reason. Kinda a dumb oversight for a million dollar company if ya ask me...

[@CMSonYT]

@@billiamlarson608 that'd be blizz for you

[@etienne1062]

The last of us has been notorious for having horrible VRAM usage, along with bad textures with 8gb GPUs. Somehow, after a series of patches they reworked their streaming system, so that it works better with 8gb GPUs, allowing these GPUs to display better textures and not having their VRAM filled up. My hypothesis is that 8gb is no longer the target for devs. They target current consoles VRAM. Which is a problem since a large percentage of PC gamers are still on 8g cards. Including people that upgraded to RTX3XXX. Just like with shader compilation stutters, it's disheartening to see that PC gaming has become a second class citizen. And seeing how things are evolving, I don't see that situation changing anytime soon...

[@Tiasung]

​@@billiamlarson608 The game is filling up all the VRAM. In my case all my 6800XT's 16gb. Even with textures on high the game keeps crashing. If that is not a memory leak, what is it?

[@billiamlarson608]

@@Tiasung I all ready said what it was lol, but ill repeat sure. This game does not know how to cache its VRAM apparently. Therefore as you move throughout the world, doing world tree bounties or w/e the VRAM fills up more and more, until it hits the pagefile, ( or shared RAM ) then it either lags, locksup, or stutters w/e. It does not matter the setting really. It can happen on ultra high or even medium textures. Even low textures will fill up your VRAM eventually. I have tested this extensively.

[@liquidsnake23]

kinda like the medium settings they way they look lol. Looks closer to a "old school filter" but its just me

[@blessedred]

Well done video Don! D4's performance seems overall quite good which is great. Odd they obscure upscaling techniques based upon your GPU though.

[@fensoxx]

I wonder if XeSS is in there but he didn’t plug an Arc in?

[@blessedred]

@@fensoxx possibly

[@MPRX87]

The ram issue wouldn't have really affected you while running in town, due to the way texture pooling works. Nothing really new is needing be to loaded, so there's nothing to push out stale assets for garbage collection or shuffle assets between the RAM and VRAM. The main stuttering issues tend to hit people most when they fast travel around or when they cross into different biomes where there's some overlap between the two pools of environmental textures, but both need to still be displayed. Also, the "500ms" freezes you were getting in town were almost certainly network related and there's been some issue with crossplay causing it. Finally, I don't think the PC version is actually using directstorage+GPU decompression yet, even though the DLLs are there in the folder, but I'd have to double check. The consoles basically exclusively use an equivalent version of these. There are probably reasons why the PC version isn't using it, likely having to do with compatibility for older OS builds and hardware.

[@cipherbenchmarks]

The version in the installation folder is 1.0.2 which is the first version/release of direct storage (just matured with fixes aka 2 minor/patch versions). GPU decompression using gdeflate isn't added in until 1.1. The version they are using just improves loading times (which is welcomed considering the amount this game has).

[@MPRX87]

@@cipherbenchmarks Right, but just because the DLL is there, doesn't mean the EXE is actually using it. I can use an AMD GPU and see DLSS DLLs in a game's folder, but they don't actually get used. I think during the beta, a dev said it wasn't enabled yet or something, but my memory is a little foggy. But yeah, if it's only DS 1.0.2, then it's only a fairly minor decrease in the latency of loading assets. GPU decompression would be exponentially more useful, since loading in a bunch of high quality PBR textures channels hogs a lot of resources. At the minimum, I'd assume they're using at least three RGB or RGBA textures per asset (Albedo/normal/packed masks), so the cost per asset adds up when you slap 4k or 8k textures on tons of assets. I don't feel like digging too deep, but I don't think they have any virtual texturing systems to lighten any of that load either (you can look up UE4 or UE5 virtual texturing to learn more).

[@denniswrede2130]

Thanks for the clarifications. The moment I saw him try to compare the performance of two different GPUs while also using vastly different CPUs for each set up(i7 13700k vs Ryzen 5 3600) I knew this "reviewer" can't be trusted for an actual expert opinion. I feel like unless it's Alex or John doing these, these DF videos don't hold much value.

[@milandalosur1850]

Thanks for writing this. I really don't understand how you could feel confident publishing a video on a channel this large with such an obviously flawed test.

[@cipherbenchmarks]

@@MPRX87 You're right... but why would they add it to their build process if it's not being used in some way. I don't really understand that. It also makes the installation size larger.

[@AlanBWarrick]

No mention of the Steam Deck? for a relatively "weak" piece of hardware, it runs Diablo IV extremely well. If you tweak it just right, you can just about nail down a locked 60 on it.

[@RageJ]

Yep I was shocked I could run D4 at 40-60 fps on medium settings (with a few tweaks) on my steam deck.

[@PwnyPony]

They seem to be avoiding anything that requires more than just downloading and clicking play. Downloading BattleNet would be more than clicking play and with multiple different ways to launch BattleNet on Linux and even more on Steam Deck. The variability between different solutions of running the game would be too much. They could test in Steam Deck desktop mode and have performance issues while people that launch BattleNet straight from game mode may not have any issues and it could possibly create a controversy.

[@kaikiske7436]

😢 the state of PC gaming is very problematic, I feel 😢

[@realityvanguard2052]

I can't believe he started off the video by claiming: "from its gameplay to its art style, Diablo has remained incredibly consistent throughout the years." When one of the main controversies surrounding Diablo 3 was that it had completely and utterly failed to even try and live up to the art style the previous 2 games pioneered.

[@GeraltOfRivia99]

they picked 24 FPS during the first cutscene to make scenes like that look more like a movie. any movie from paramount or a real movie is 24 fps and varies around there. Alot of the times lower FPS in movie like cutscenes looks better and has a charm to it and looks better. like diablo 2 non resurrection being at such a low FPS is much better than that game would be at 60 FPS.... 60 FPS old school diablo 2 would feel really odd and not have the proper environment and feel

[@MichaelPohoreski]

You’ve been brainwashed by shitty 24 movies. 24 was chosen to be the _bare minimum._ Anything less then < ~100 Hz looks stuttery. D2R runs at 60 FPS and there is no contest compared to the crap 25 FPS of D2 Legacy.

[@MrH-GB]

My 10GB 3080 cannot do ultra textures without getting a ton of stutter, and the high textures are really poor and muddy. I've been complaining about this since beta so it's nice to have this confirmed by Digital Foundry, hopefully Blizzard can bring out a fix much like with The Last of Us which had its VRAM usage reduced whilst also improving texture quality across the board.

[@Tiasung]

My 6800XT has 16gb of VRAM and ive noticed a memory leak. Eventually the game always crashes after showing that the VRAM managed to exceed all 16GB. (even on high, it just takes longer) I doubt its related to the CPU as capping fps to 80 or 100 doesnt fix the problem.

[@liquidpaper1349]

Same issue with 3080. Luckily I don't get any stuttering in combat - just around town. Kind of thought I was going crazy, but I guess it's not just me after all.

[@OnlineWerds]

Same with my 3080 but I also get the latency spikes for no good reason.

[@A_Noid]

The art style has remained consistent? What?

[@TheCrewExpendable]

Lol this game is online only even in single player? No thank you.

[@huawafabe]

It's 2023, almost everyone is doing it in order to prevent easy piracy.

[@Mariner35]

There is no true single player unfortunately. Even if you’re not in a party, other players can and do show up in your world.

[@mustjustbe]

Have you been stuck in a vault?

[@rpgfan8650]

Yeah it's basically an online game now. I'm not a fan either😢 But I look forward to finding out if the game becomes good in 2028 when public beta is over and the status of micro transaction as well as the quality of its server

[@sega_kid4288]

@@rpgfan8650I think the micro transactions are purely cosmetic and I’ve had no server issues at all but to each their own

[@taylorstock6044]

I wish Digital Foundry would test at least one AMD and Intel GPU when doing these benchmarks.

[@Wolvonic]

This has been one of the best video dives into a title. I appreciate absolutely everything about and in this video!

[@maybejensen]

It's a "cinematic" intro cutscene. Of course it's 24 fps. Weird thing to dunk on

[@Charl3sX]

Great review, though testing with AMD GPUs and CPUs would be a welcome addition. I played the beta on a 5800x3d with 32GB of ram, gen 4 ssd and 6800XT, crossplay turned off and during the 25hours or so I played never encountered any problems. Was really surprised because I always expect there to be some.

[@adityabhusari9645]

Idk but low textures that looks this bad should not take 6GB+ VRAM like, older games with ultra texture which look way better than this sometimes dosen't even take 6GB VRAM, Ik it also depends on resolution and other settings too, but still any game be it released in 2000BCE or 2077 with that kind of low textures should not take that much VRAM.

[@RolandHazoto]

I've been raging about this trend pretty hard lately. Devs have gotten lazy with their textures. Blizz did surprise me with 4k being an optional download, but like you said, lower settings like 1080p should not use enormous amounts of VRAM. Jedi Survivor was even worse, requiring 8GB for 1080p and even on the lowest settings it was using more than 6GB at 1080p.

[@TruckermanJS]

Love the video, Don! Very informative.

[@mortenjensen946]

Movie/film FPS Is 24. That is why the introduction is in 24 fps

[@desmondbrown5508]

Speaking on comments of devs being "lazy" I'll put it this way. I used to feel the same way until I got in their shoes and started working on monolith software. And what I've discovered most of the time is that it boils down to time needed to make complicated software systems like this. Had these developers been given 6 or so extra months (possibly a bit more) to hash out these problems, most of them (the excessive VRAM issue, as an example) likely wouldn't be there at launch. But instead executives deem it fine to release the product incomplete and so do so. On the coding side, you can make extremely performant code, but usually must do so later in the development cycle as there is a serious consideration in development time when making performant code not just because it takes a lot more time to optimize well than to optimize "okay", but also you don't know all of the problems you're going to run into along the way, so premature optimization can cause a massive waste of time if you need to pull something out suddenly because you couldn't foresee a constraint until one of the systems were finished. But then on top of that, there is a very real trade off between code readability of less performant vs. a lack-there-of with very performant code. This is especially true with complex systems. And the more you have to optimize around your program, the less readable most of it can/will become. I know some people have seen the "magic/simple" square root function in Quake 3's source code. And while it's genius, it can be very difficult to debug things like that and take exorbitant time to figure out a better alternative (if you still needed a performant piece of code like that) but with slightly more accuracy or functionality while maintaining the performance benefits. It can (and often does) get to the point where fixing even small bugs can take up to 3 times as long because just figuring out how things work together when their split up and segmented so much to isolate parts to optimize for SIMD gets complicated. There are ways to make SIMD performant code readable, but that also requires a lot of time, heavy consideration, years of experience (which let's face it, any team will have at least half a team of inexperienced programmers and/or artists due to the sheer time it takes to learn all of this), and a lot more money to pay for that time. I will also say at the higher levels of programming (at the game/world programming stage) OOP has not made anything any easier either. I can't say if Diablo 4 used that at their game level (not the engine level). But if they did, that's certainly not helping with maintainability, and still far too many codebases are bereft with OOP logic because we're still going through that transition period in both colleges and workplaces. None of this is to justify the end results here, but to say you can't simply target devs with no context and claim they "are lazy". I'd much more likely target the executives and shareholders that make all of the money (tons and tons of it) and choose not to allow very much of it to be invested, at the end of the day, into more development time, resources and training on software to get inexperienced devs up to par and allow experienced devs time to build said systems effectively. For mid to small developers it's an understandable and largely unavoidable problem if the project tries to be too large. But for gigantic studios like this that make billions in profit (PROFIT being the operative word here, not just revenue) almost every game? There's really no excuse they can't pour more of that money back in at a better rate. After all you have to spend good money to make good money... or at least if you want a good end-product you do.

[@JebesNikove]

WTF Blizz... Good I didn't pay for this garbage PC version... Textures are literally the most important part of a game with camera like this and 8gb is "not enough" lol

[@JFinns]

Not enough for Ultra no, but it's plenty for High just run it at that and enjoy it.

[@ben_ger1988]

Really was hoping to see a 12 gig card in this analysis. I have a 4070ti for example and i play at 1440p everything maxed out. Besides from the server lags i have locked in 144 fps.

[@Healcraft]

do you have ultra textures installed? On my 6750xt (which is 12 gb) after 1-2 hours of playing with everything maxed (usually 100-150 fps) I get that "out of memory" crash. 5800X3D, 32GB system ram. So i just uninstalled the ultra textures and it doesn't do it now.

[@arutzuki2491]

​​@@Healcrafteird, I don't have any problems playing with a 3080 TI (12gb) at 4k Ultra, no dllss.

[@GamerSg84]

@@Healcraft I am playing 1440p ultra without any crashes or stutters on a 6700xt. I installed ultra textures. Are you on 4k?

[@ben_ger1988]

@@Healcraft im pretty sure that is an amd problem, 12 gigs on Nvidia is not euqal to 12 gigs amd. The Memory Management is way better on Nvidia cards. I play 5 hours without any problems and i use Ultra Textures.

[@Healcraft]

@@GamerSg84 no 1440p, are you using fsr? im not. Also 4k runs really low fps compared to 1440p for me, its like 50 fps on 4k, 120+ on 1440. But I didn't test at actual 4k desktop res, just 150% scale in game

[@rubenjorge13]

To be honest i don't know why games have increased a lot in vram usage recently, because i haven't seen a proportional improvement in texture quality in recent games compared to games from 5 years ago

[@shodancat1000]

one interesting thing i noted is that the Diablo 4 'game ready' Nvidia drivers include a profile for the game with specific resizable BAR flags (and it's turned on by default)

[@MinosDaedalus]

I just turned down texture quality from Ultra to High and what they try to pass on to you as "high" which still requires exceptional high VRAM looks so blurry at times it looks worse than a game's textures from a decade ago. Completely nuts. And yet they do not want us to call them incompetent or lazy. Ultimatively I don't care, as a consumer paying much money on a product, how you gonna make it work, but make it work. I've been gaming all my live and obviously there's a lot to compare this game to and you have to face this scrutiny. Also the fact that so many settings in the graphics options doesn't do a thing is also not new to PC gaming but still baffling.

[@dudeBirdyy]

Is Don new or have I just missed one of his previous videos on the channel? I think he's a great addition. Great voice for commentary and very easy to understand what he's talking about.

[@shaunvrabel4428]

Digital Foundry presents How It's Made: Diablo IV Edition. Seriously though, great job Don!

[@noodles9345]

Diablo 4 takes up a lot of memory for me. Playing on a 7900xtx 5800x3d and 32gb ram at 4k native max settings. I get around 120 fps on average. All 24gb of vram is constantly used up after 15 minutes or so of play while using up to 18gb of ram. Surprisingly I dont notice any stutters but the memory usage is still insane.

[@808slumps]

That makes no sense, my 4080 with 16GB of VRAM runs 4K just fine.

[@IAmHereOrThere]

​@@808slumpsIt uses 15 GB of my VRAM on my 4080. The game just eats up all available VRAM. I hope it's fixed soon. I also play on Ultra at 4K.

[@noodles9345]

@@808slumps I believe you, I'm sure it does. I know 24GB isn't needed for the game, but thats just what it does. I suppose its not optimized properly.

[@anrucas]

One simple fact most people do not mention is this: If your gpu has only 16gb of vram the game will use that and swap between what is show on screen with what it needs from the files the game load and unloads. If your gpu has 24gb of vram the game has the extra headroom to load all files the game needs and starts swapping from that large pool on that it needs. It comes down to developers to decide are we going to limit the game engine to only use files that are loaded for the current level you are playing, or allow the game to load everything it can and start swapping when needed. Easier to let it eat all vram than to limit it. One can cause load spikes or hitching if loading from hdd/ssd/nvme to no lag spikes at all. Then ofcoarse there is also the issue of does the game have a memory leak that eats up all the memory. Which will show as stutering or if no stuttering is present it will simply eat all memory till windows freezes or the game crashes causing you to restart the pc. The shard system where it swaps you between available players on a server to mix and max is the cause of lag spikes too or in this case rubber banding. You will not know which is which until you take the time to see what the game is eating up resource wise.

[@noodles9345]

@anruca Oh okay that makes sense. In the beta my vram would fill up then the game would crash soon after so I gave up on playing. The full release hasn't crashed at all for me. I suppose since it's not stuttering it doesn't matter if the memory is being used. I had just been always waiting for that crash to come and since no other game I have does it, makes it seem like something is wrong.

[@Edmundostudios]

Does Don still work at DF? Not seen any videos from them in a while

[@PatrickBellWebDev]

Has anyone else noticed the sound effects (not voice acting) is out of sync if you disable the cutscene FPS lock?

[@Holmz84]

yea i noticed this too

[@MrMrTravman]

Yeah, happens for me as well. Better than being locked at 30fps. Im assuming its default to 30 because they know its causing issues.

[@kevinmlfc]

How did pc gaming get to a state where diablo is considered a port?

[@ramonosuke]

NVIDIA in 2035: “8GB of vram is totally enough”

[@RowanHD15]

But But its a game issue ;)

[@masti733]

It will be 128gb vram by then, paired with an 8bit memory bus I reckon.

[@zagorim7469]

on my 2080S (8GB) with high textures the game is mostly smooth but I noticed it gets slower and slower after a few hours of playtime. I suspect there is a memory leak.

[@Eternalduoae]

Congrats on the second video. I feel like this is stronger than the first one. However, I really feel like it's being rushed-through. Compared to typical DF fare, it's almost like I want to watch this as 0.75x speed. The video jumps around with cuts here and there every couple of seconds. It's like an ADHD version of the normal DF videos. I guess that given the comments liking this style of presentation things won't change. But I kinda really hate the constant switching, being unable to focus on something before it's snatched away... I mean, the four-way comparison shots last around 4 seconds. That's less than a second to even compare them for the viewer! If I was just listening and not watching that's fine... but I'm not watching a video to pause all the time. RE: VRAM usage. It would be nice to know how this data was collected. Is this using the latest afterburner/RivaTuner that logs application usage or is this using allocation data? Audio levels were a bit all over the place in the settings on/off section with BLAring lead-ins. And the shader compilation section had two graphs at essentially the same colour. (IMO, they need to be differentiated more for clarity!)

[@FoRmaTiTo]

I'd ratcher watch Don at 0.75x than having to endure a video by Oliver, which is unbearable to watch at less than 1.5x-2x because it's like watching who just had a stroke

[@Eternalduoae]

@@FoRmaTiTo I guess we're two very different audiences! I like the slower pace of Oliver. :)

[@FoRmaTiTo]

@@Eternalduoae Fair enough. I like Oliver, but sadly I just find him really hard to listen to.

[@GaminylGames]

Yessss my fav thing ever is games that are full priced with microtransactions, are always online, require an account, have a bunch of technical issues and and have their own store you have to buy from that doesn't offer refunds! goty

[@demistr7435]

8GB just doesnt cut it anymore no matter how you ... slice it.

[@rng81]

Well for D4 it should without problems, just look at the medium/high textures. It's like unpatched TLOU on PC, textures that look like PS2 or worse on 8GB cards. That is not how you optimize a game.

[@sven957]

with this title it looks like even 12gb arent enough

[@erikhendrickson59]

@@rng81 Yea it's completely unacceptable consider that the PS5/XSX have just 16GB of TOTAL, shared system memory. There's no reason for the PC port to look & perform like this.

[@TheOtherOtherAccount]

Given the prevalence of 8GB cards you would think more devs would set a goal to author reasonable looking textures that stay within the 8GB cap. Games like TLOU show that they CAN go in and rework the textures to look good at these levels. Otherwise it just feels like the devs are getting lazy - using higher VRAM budgets “just cause they can” and not to achieve anything particularly special and scaling down poorly.

[@defeqel6537]

@@erikhendrickson59 consoles are a different beast

[@KroZen.]

Please specify in the video title that you're talking about the beta, which actually required 32 GB of RAM, the game used to take me up to 30 GB of ram, now with the final game, it takes me up to 20 GB of ram. The game is much better finished, but the main problem was ram optimization! Apparently you encountered a problem with the graphic parameter settings. Why didn't you try with 10/11/12 GO GPUs from Vram ????? You've gone from 8GB to 16GB, how can you say that you need a 16GB card to get the best quality if you haven't even tried with a card between 8GB and 16GB??? I have an 11GB card from Vram and I have no worries about texture quality! A lot of games today consume a lot of VRAM and the phenomenon is happening on a lot of games! When you don't have enough Vram, textures are compressed and you lose some quality, but that's nothing to do with Diablo 4! And as for the LAGs, it's because the game's servers were a victim of their own success! On the beta it was horrible, there were bugs no matter where you were. Now there are far fewer bugs, I still have a few in areas with lots of players, but they're really minimal. Just disable CROSS-PLAY and it'll be better. As you can imagine, an 8-GB card for 4K is going to be really complicated in 2023. A 12-GB Vram graphics card is the minimum you'll need in 2023, given the speed at which things are evolving. Even 10-GB will be out of date very quickly. Don't forget that the GTX 1080TI has 11GB of Vram and dates back to 2017, and that the 1080 TI's 11GB of Vram has long been in demand on many games.

[@mjakgaming6214]

Please make more videos for PC games in this format.. first DF video I felt compelled to hit like and comment on to try to show support for the format.

[@phant0mdummy]

Damn, what channel you been watching? First video you felt compelled to like? The are all quality.

[@xBINARYGODx]

@@phant0mdummy i wouldn't say that are all quality, but if we focus on the pc port report videos, then his post is ultra strange since Alex, ignoring some issues otherwise, always delivers, especially with this optimized settings.

[@03chrisv]

Strange, my 4070 has no problems running the game at ultra quality. Vram usage hovers between 85% to 90%..... Doesn't seem like I need 16GB of vram. Unless I'm not sensitive to micro stutters or split second frame time hitches I'm not seeing anything. My perception is a rock solid smooth experience. Is Diablo 4 simply allocating more vram than it needs if it has access to larger frame buffers? It would explain why people with 4090s and 7900 XTXs are seeing vram "usage" beyond 20GB. My PC is new so it has 64GB DDR5 memory (it's a workstation first, gaming pc second) and resizable bar on along with an i9 13900 so maybe my particular setup hides the issues better 🤷‍♂️

[@rng81]

Have to set textures to medium on my 8GB 2070S in 1440P (DLSS balanced) 32GB DDR4 AND disable video hardware acceleration in my browser because every bit of VRAM counts in this game and even then after a while of traversing the world it still starts to stutter until i manually flush the textures by switching quality or restarting the game. It's a shame that even Blizzard is now one of many devolopers who don't give a damn about PC ports and prio consoles.

[@AnomieDomine]

I have a 2070 Super and run everything max with DLSS on quality at 1440p and Chrome running in the background, there has to be something wrong with your setup. Windows 11? CPU? Storage?

[@rng81]

@@AnomieDomine Maybe you just don't notice the stuttering or think it's rubberbanding from server lag because it is very similiar in this game. My CPU is a 5800X3D, so more than enough. Samsung 970 nvme. Win 10. Tried every tip in every forum and discord. Today it's running mostly fine with high textures and quality DLSS, so i don't know if its because of the hardware acceleration or because of the patch last night. Hopefully it stays that way now :) Oh and i almost forgot, there was a windows update last night when i shutdown the PC. KB5027215, but that's only a security update. PS: did you download the ultra textures pack? EDIT: so i thought why not give ultra textures a try since it's running better today.. well.. nope.. stuttery stutterydoodelidoo

[@or1on89]

The spikes you see are networking issues alone. I have a 7900XTX and the game fills 22GB of VRAM…I think you have a wrong interpretation of the issues you are seeing…also, high res textures in this game rely a lot on loading as much possible of the world in video memory. This game is memory hungry by design, in an age where consoles have 10GB memory as a minimum 8GB cards will suffer inevitably.

[@richardwiech]

Hey you did a great job! A nicely detailed, concise video!

[@KleinMeme]

Unacceptable that a game with such textures eats up 16GB+ of VRAM. When developement time is rolled down to customers wallets. And companies will continue that trend of course, because it saves money. It's not even the peoples fault buying such games. How should you know? Only after someone does a deep dive video about it, maybe. Or it comes up in a forum. And said companies know that. So the sales are secure.

[@DGFTardin]

I was getting worried that Don never showed up anymore. Great to have you here!

[@唐唯剛]

Thanks for the overall great video. But can we do away with the white flash transition effect between video segments? It makes some of us physically uncomfortable.

[@kmo475]

I'm so glad you mentioned the problem with DLSS3. When I turn it on I get like 90 fps that feel stuttery and terrible, without it I max out my refresh rate at 116 most of the time and it feels smooth.

[@chicharones9640]

i12900k, 4080 watercooled, 64gigs of ram. Have high assets and the game on ultra is a stutter fest, game had no issue when it was released, something in the last couple of patches completely brome it for me, it’s practically unplayable

[@MadViking82]

A fantastic video! Straight to the point, very well condensed and edited, and good comments. Professional level stuff!!

[@vicveco]

For me, the reason why the pc ports have been lame lately is because now they're developing games for consoles. It's sad that Diablo, a game that was born and deeply related to PC gaming, suffers from the same problems. Ultimately, it's all about money and how much they can sell. That's why they go with consoles in mind now.

[@bennykurns]

With my 10GB 3080, if I have textures set to high, I see the issue noted at 10:50 exactly as described. I think it has something to do with garbage collection. If I set textures to MEDIUM, this issue goes away entirely. In my testing, HIGH textures seems to utilize about 12GB to 13GB of VRAM. I very rarely see this issue when using my 12GB 3060 at HIGH textures. This can be quickly tested by teleporting around to different areas, walking outside of towns and entering dungeons and fighting new groups of enemies. Runs perfectly at MEDIUM textures for me, I never encounter any stutters ever but the textures look awful. When there is a network lag issue, it is presented as rubber-banding and not stuttering.

[@niewazneniewazne1890]

It's like RDR2 except, the Ultra textures there fit on 3GB cards.

[@bennykurns]

@@teamdoa I am running at 4K across both systems, maybe the higher resolution is a factor. I might test at 1440p at HIGH textures to see if it gets rid of these hitches.

[@rng81]

@@bennykurns You know that ultra textures is the max setting not high right? So your missing out on the awesome textures even on high.

[@bennykurns]

@@rng81 I do, and it stutters much worse on Ultra. I prefer a smooth gameplay experience and not dying to stuttering.

[@zombieash1]

I know it's the manufacturers error in full but gigabyte 3080ti's are still being bricked when playing this game. Just something to keep in mind if anyone has one of those and is thinking of picking this up. Even RMAing the card doesn't help cause it's a defect on the whole product line.

[@ireallyreallyreallylikethisimg]

Makes me scared to play it on my poor 3060 12gb 💀

[@luc1ferous]

It almost cooked my Founders edition 3080ti, turning off Reflex seems to have stopped the CPU bbq happening in my case.

[@zombieash1]

@@luc1ferous From what I can work out from what I've read it's a VRAM issue on the gigabyte cards that could either be a voltage issue or a temp issue. During the beta I monitored my temps while playing and they didn't go High before I had the graphics card go nuts. Displays go off and fans go mental. I was lucky and card still works but others where not so lucky.

[@Glotttis]

Not a good look for Gigabyte. Also recent news about PCB cracking and RMA woes just adds to the pile of Giga-fails.

[@zombieash1]

@Glotttis honestly they are terrible and I won't be buying their stuff again. I've tried to raise a support ticket about it. At first they blamed it on the beta but when the full game came out they wouldn't acknowledge it and takes days at a time to reply

[@GENKI_INU]

Players: "Is not supporting 8GB cards an out-of-season April Fools joke?" Blizzard: "No... Do you guys NOT have VRAM?"

[@ChronoBrother]

I love tweaking my settings to get the best performance to quality ratio I can in games, but some games like this just make that process a slog. The shader quality setting for example gives no information on what it actually does and other settings seem to change nothing when on the lowest vs highest settings. Greatly appreciate these videos where you breakdown each setting and examples of each in game to show the performance boost you get and the graphics quality it gives too.

[@sevensharp9]

Why is it strange that the CGI cutscenes play at 24 FPS? 🤦 It's been the cinematic standard since the 30's, and clearly that's the look and feel they're going for

[@fullkebabalchemist3371]

My 4090 is using, or atleast allocating, 20 gigs of vram at 4k ultra, don't think I've seen a game yet that goes this far.

[@jeremymaas7784]

I'm not sure what you are expecting from the settings. Low means low. Ultra means top gaming pc.. so high vram 32gb ram. Why is a mid gpu and ram not running ultra textures an issue?

[@xwhEdward]

Thanks for the detailed review! It makes me feel more certain that buying the 7900xt is the right choice.

[@GlassFoxGear]

7900xt is a really nice card with an appropriate amount of vram for how much it costs

[@Masterchief12455]

This is why consoles are honestly way to go..

[@jaredweiman2987]

D4 was ported to PC? I thought it was ported from PC to consoles… lol

[@KhromTX]

I think they're using the term port really loosely as a general term. Because D4 isn't a "port"

[@jamescole3143]

Thank you DF!

[@Ausnen]

Is this really DF? Sounds like Gamespot or IGN. Had to rewind to check after the logo. Never heard this voice or seen this kind of video before.

[@MarkSynthesis]

I was hoping you might comment on the ~40 GB texture pack (a nice addition, though it's hard to tell exactly much it improves "fidelity" for the space it takes up), but this was a helpful guide nonetheless.

[@Glotttis]

Dude get your eyes checked. Difference between medium (no texture pack) and high/ultra (with texture pack) is night and day.

[@MarkSynthesis]

@@Glotttis Dude, get your eyes checked. You can set it to 'high' without the 40 GB add-on, and the video already shows the difference between that and medium.

[@belphegor_dev]

@@MarkSynthesis You must be blind. Or you're using a shitty 1080p monitor.

[@TheOnlyJohnAbraham]

Why is it an odd decision for the pre-rendered cutscenes to be 24 fps? It's a cinematic and the cinema framerate is 24 fps. Almost every single movie ever made is presented in that framerate.

[@bryanalexismusic]

Loving your videos Don! Really appreciate the audio quality.

[@TheDarq0n]

do the devs even fucking know we have RAM on PC??? WHAT A COMPLETE JOKE GAMING IS IN 2023!!! I'm done!

[@luc1ferous]

Great video... PSA for my 3080ti having brethren if your card is getting supertoasty and the fans start to scream turn off Reflex, for some reason it is cooking GPUs

[@JFinns]

Reflex alone doesn't, it's the Reflex + Boost combo that is terrible because it holds the GPU clocks at max rather than letting them ramp up/down as needed. Wonder if this game is enabling that by accident.

[@luc1ferous]

@@JFinns I was using the standard reflex setting when my card started screaming at me (it hit 116c before I turned off the game). From messing around with settings I founded the safest thing to do was turn it off entirely. It's probably a poor implementation that's letting normal Reflex behave like +boost.

[@puffpeter]

My 3090 is at 20,2GB Vram. 4K maxed out no dlss. My friend with a 3080 10gig has stuttering from time to time.

[@Carinthian_Oak]

I haven’t had any issues with my 2080Ti on max settings. With HD Textures. I cranked everything up and had 70 hours absolutely no problems. Great and polished Release. Edit.: with DLSS set to Quality i get over 100 fps. Resolution is 3440x1440.

[@winslowpippleton7157]

Useless comment without saying your resolution

[@Carinthian_Oak]

@@winslowpippleton7157 oh sorry, my mistake. 3440x1440 Ultrawide.

[@dredknotgsx600f]

Opening up the any menu makes my wattage jump up to from ~400 to 700w on my pc with a 4090. Literally costs me money to look at my gear.

[@thomHD]

I think the feedback has been too generous, perhaps because it is a classic or perhaps because it seems interesting and indie), but the title looks like something from 20 years ago literally not only stylistically. Should never be demanding those specs.

[@erikhendrickson59]

Back in 2020 I was calling out NVIDIA on the "10GB VRAM 3080," I *_KNEW_* it would be insufficient in the long-run and I was absolutely torn to shreds. Vindication always feels so good.

[@alpha007org]

But but but 1080p DLSS to 4K is better than Native! (It's insane how Nvidia brainwashed so many people, that even after almost all reputable Tech outlets (GN, HUB, DF,...) were shouting about VRAM problem, I still see those comments.)

[@subcon959]

Yet another PC game where VRAM requirement seems artificially high. Is there some sort of collusion going on here?

[@Shadowsmoke11]

Strange that DF didn't confirm what kind of AA (anti aliasing) Diablo 4 is using. Would have loved to know if AA is worth using in this game.

[@WbosonLP]

And I´m also wondering how did they make Dynamic Shadows look so good. Little screen space RT version?

[@morkaili]

What about the game being slightly less sharp when you move your character around and the issue with current pcie 4.0 and 5.0 SSDs, which are too fast for the game to handle (can't log in, if you somehow do manage it, lots if crashes and freezes)?

[@stirfrysensei]

You can configure most PC monitoring software to show you allocated VS dedicated VRAM usage…

[@sturenorth]

Which software?

[@唐唯剛]

Those are fake. It just shows you the full memory used vs those dedicated for the game you are currently running. You still won't be able to tell whether the game allcocate more memory than it needs.

[@stirfrysensei]

@@唐唯剛 ok, but allocated doesn’t mean used. Wouldn’t the more interesting value be the amount of VRAM actually being used? Currently, in Afterburner I am able to separate out allocation vs dedication and it seems to track with other sources and people who do the same, so I’m confused on what exactly is fake. Are you suggesting that the amount of VRAM being used, as shown in Afterburner is fake? Or are you implying that the amount allocated, as shown in Afterburner is fake?

[@唐唯剛]

@@stirfrysensei The name people associate with these funciotns is fake. MSI Afterburner can only tell how much VRAM is used. It can't tell how they are being used. What people claim to be "allocation" is just the VRAM the entire system use, and the "dedicated memory" is just what the program you are running use. What people think MSI Afterburner is supposed to tell is "the amount of VRAM a program ask for" vs "the amount it actually need". For example, games like Call of Duty will ask as much as 12GB of vram if you have them, but it can actually run fine with just 8GB. However, no monitoring software out there can do that as of right now.