Future proofing your GPU Upgrade: 12GB vs 16GB?

Steve and Tim discuss how much VRAM you are going to need moving forward to keep enjoying your gaming experience.
Join us on Patreon: / hardwareunboxed
Join us on Floatplane: www.floatplane....
Buy relevant products from Amazon, Newegg and others below:
Radeon RX 7900 XTX - geni.us/OKTo
Radeon RX 7900 XT - geni.us/iMi32
GeForce RTX 4090 - geni.us/puJry
GeForce RTX 4080 - geni.us/wpg4zl
GeForce RTX 4070 Ti - geni.us/AVijBg
GeForce RTX 3050 - geni.us/fF9YeC
GeForce RTX 3060 - geni.us/MQT2VG
GeForce RTX 3060 Ti - geni.us/yqtTGn3
GeForce RTX 3070 - geni.us/Kfso1
GeForce RTX 3080 - geni.us/7xgj
GeForce RTX 3090 - geni.us/R8gg
Radeon RX 6500 XT - geni.us/dym2r
Radeon RX 6600 - geni.us/cCrY
Radeon RX 6600 XT - geni.us/aPMwG
Radeon RX 6700 XT - geni.us/3b7PJub
Radeon RX 6800 - geni.us/Ps1fpex
Radeon RX 6800 XT - geni.us/yxrJUJm
Radeon RX 6900 XT - geni.us/5baeGU
Future proofing your GPU Upgrade: 12GB vs 16GB?
Disclaimer: Any pricing information shown or mentioned in this video was accurate at the time of video production, and may have since changed
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. We may also earn a commission on some sales made through other store links
FOLLOW US IN THESE PLACES FOR UPDATES
Twitter - / hardwareunboxed
Facebook - / hardwareunboxed
Instagram - / hardwareunb. .
Music By: / lakeyinspiredg. .

[@kaystephan2610]

How it should've been: 4060 & 4060Ti with 12GB (on 192 bit Bus!) 4070 & 4070 Ti with 16GB (on a 256 bit Bus!) 4080 & potential 4080Ti with 20GB

[@6ch6ris6]

plapy to work at Nvidia. You migiht even overqualified :D

[@X_irtz]

One could only dream for that to come true...

[@Adri9570]

4050 with 8GB and 4060 with 10GB (looking at you 3080) could be fair IMHO, but I agree with everything else.

[@BigHeadClan]

I think 16gb would have been fine for a 4080 but otherwise I agree.

[@syncmonism]

That would have been awesome. But, you know... what if I told you that you could buy an Nvidia graphics card which performs around the level of a 4070 ti, but has 24GB of Vram, for around the same price as a 4070 ti? That's right, on the used market. Some of those cards are EVGA and (most) EVGA 3090's will still be covered by the warranty because the warranty is transferable to the new ownder. Sure, you'll want to make sure that you have some kind of buyer-protection coverage, and you'll also want to run thorough tests on it after you get it to make sure it's in good working order, and it will draw significantly more power, but if you don't mind dealing with that, the 3090 is a MUCH better product than the 4070 ti. A 4070 ti tends to be slightly faster, but the 3090 can be faster at 4k sometimes, and obviously having double the Vram is going to make a huge difference in some games at resolutions over 1440p, and sometimes even AT 1440p. In a recent video by Daniel Owen comparing the 16GB 4060 ti with the 4070 and the 8GB 4060 ti, Ratchet and Clank seems to benefit from more than 12GB of Vram even at 1440p, because a 16GB 4060 ti can get within 1 FPS of the 4070 (43 to 44) at 1440p Very High settings with RT on. A 4060 ti should not be able to get anywhere near that close to a 4070 with a high end CPU, unless it's a Vram issue or game engine issue, and this wasn't a game engine limitation. You'd likely be able to get close to 60 FPS if the 4070 had 16GB. I'd like to see that test done again with the 3080 ti (which has 12GB) vs. the 3090 (which is almost the same GPU but double the Vram).

[@subcon959]

Ultra settings are only there to drive GPU sales. It's not that hard to optimise for both FPS and visual quality. It's also kinda fun and the benefit of PC gaming over consoles.

[@glenmcl]

I can run Ultra easily (i9, 4090, 64gb ram) That said, HIGH settings are still best for everyone. Use High.

[@Supinori]

So true

[@braydondarragh1094]

@@glenmclpsst i9 doesn’t matter it’s after those little numbers behind it kinda like if I said yeah I’ve got a 40 series graphics card we’ll just cause it’s new doesn’t mean it’s better it could be a 4060 who knows

[@superjofi1]

@@braydondarragh1094I9 isn’t the generation though. It’s like saying i have a xx90 gpu. What you are saying is like a 12th gen intel processor.

[@umbasa01]

I agree but sometimes people just wanna boot up a new game and it just work

[@strick9noob]

I have a feeling the next gen consoles will have a bigger impact on what vram will be needed for gpus for cards as they age.

[@fafski1199]

Thumbs up, because you're 100% correct!! The consoles have always been the yardsticks when it comes to the minimum required specs on PC and always will be. Like it or not, but all Third Party games are now developed with the consoles being their main priority. When it comes to VRAM on the main consoles, both of them pretty much allocate around 10-12GB of their 16GB shared VRAM to the GPU and the rest goes to the CPU. As for the Series S that has 10GB of VRAM and allocates around 7-8GB of that to the GPU. Therefore all third party games for the next 5+ years will be designed and squarely targeted by games dev's, to those specific console specifications. Which will mean them targeting around 8GB to 12GB of VRAM for the GPU, max. Therefore pretty much any GPU on PC, with a similar level of performance to the consoles or better, which also has 8 to 12GB of VRAM, should also be fine going forward (if optimised correctly). Yep, higher-end GPU's on PC will be capable of pushing that threshold even further, however the consoles will still be the criterion when it comes to game development and a game's targeted hardware requirements. Because of this, 8GB GPU's will only be dead on PC, when the Series S is dead and 12GB GPU's will only be dead on PC, when both the Series X & PS5 are dead. Yep, some GPU's on PC with a simular level or more performance than the consoles, which do have less VRAM may suffer slightly (3070, 3060Ti, 6700, 6650XT, 4060 & 7600 all come to mind). However, there are easy ways around that situation by either lowering down the graphical settings (not as bad as people think) or by using upscaling tech (quality mode should suffice). I honestly believe that some people think that if a GPU hasn't got 16GB of VRAM or more nowadays, that it's somehow DOA or will be obsolete within just a year or two.... That's simply not true, since a game's development is so heavily teathered to the capabilities and limitations of the hardware inside of the new consoles. Plus, it's going to be like that, for a several more years yet!!

[@DenverStarkey]

I speculate the next gen of consoles will have either 20 or 24 gigs of unified memory. Consoles always seem to make do with as little ram as possible. I was surprised when the current gen doubled ram capacity over the last gen.

[@gauravnegi6857]

Devs will optimize for consoles, and not for pcs, so it won't have any difference ig.

[@MORGUEZHR]

Games ran well on 4Gb cards when they were developed for consoles with 8Gb system ram. The same should turn out being the case with 8Gb cards this time around when consoles pack 16Gb of system ram. Provided, that is, that you're willing to play these current gen games at the level of textures equivalent of what was possible on last gen consoles with 8Gb of system ram.

[@itshugh6750]

​@@fafski1199Not always. Basically current gen is the first time consoles have been 'better' then budget PC's, due to the memory and the handling of it. Most of this is also due to suboptimal optimalisation of pc titles and lazy dumb ports from consoles. If only pc gamers would stop buying dumb unoptimised ports on pc. Oh, and stupid sportsgames which are basically slot machines, lol

[@CartGoBroom]

me still using my RX570 4G: hahahahahhahaha

[@christophermullins7163]

I thought that was illegal at this point..

[@thegod7412]

Hhhh

[@tomokun3234]

Im using rx 560 4gb hahahaha

[@zsoltalm8988]

I have the same feelings with ma rx 470 4gb hahahaha

[@xPhantomxify]

Me with my GTX 960 2GB

[@paulo..ferreira]

The best worse deal of my life was a GTX680 2GB back in 2012. Its being awhile since but I am confident situation today is the very same. Buying a 8GB today is everything vendors want you to do, so in 2 years time you have to buy another one with more vram.

[@Kage0No0Tenshi]

I got gtx 770-4gb back in 2011-2012 xD

[@AdamSmith-gs2dv]

The worst offender is the 4070ti, $800 for 12GB of VRAM is criminal

[@lloydaran]

I'm quite surprised there wasn't a focus on the resolution, when talking about the issue. 12 GBs are for sure going to age badly on 4K, 800 bucks cards like the 4070 Ti, even without RT, but for a 6700 XT, where the target is rastered 1080p high FPS/ultra settings or 1440p60 high settings, that's going to be enough for quite a bit.

[@mojojojo6292]

None of the 12gb cards are really 4k capable without using dlss anyway so you're still rendering at 1440p max.

[@sapphyrus]

One thing that's not mentioned: Odd VRAM levels like 3GB, 6GB, 12GB as a result of 192-bit etc rather than 256-bit is generally somewhat rare so I doubt game developers would prefer to target those when they're adjusting textures.

[@Kules3]

Rtx 3060 is a rare card?

[@WidePhotographs]

I love the design on the 4070. I know ASUS, Gigabyte and other manufacturers provide better cooling but love the design on the FE model.

[@jamesg8246]

Recently got COD MW (the 2019 release) and at 1440p pretty much maxed out it's using over 11Gb of vram which surprised me.

[@eaman11]

You need vRAM for the tricks like Frame Generation and upscaling, and RT. See the 4060: it can't manage DSSL3 frame generation in Forza Horizon because it has only 8gb.

[@brucefly3612]

Me with my old 2080ti 11 Gbs graphic card laughing at 3070 8 Gbs owners that have worse performance and less VRAM.

[@rl53]

I also feel power consumption is the next one to talk about especially in countries where energy is becoming unaffordable & will only become more expensive that tech companies will have to address at some point.

[@wesme9948]

The 40 series uses much less power than the 30 series. I had a 3080 12g that used over 450w, now using a 4080, it uses less than 300w.

[@rl53]

@@wesme9948 That is a massive saving over a 5 yrs period depending on where you are in the world. People should never squander money for the sake of it.

[@syncmonism]

That's definitely getting better.

[@khirasier]

this is an old vid, but i have a rx 6800 and on 3440x1440 ive had games that nearly cap the 16gb vram letalone if i tried to run them at 4k, this is also why i went and bought a 3060 12gb instead of a 4060 for my other pc

[@chincemagnet]

VRAM amount has been a problem starting, imo around the GTX 400/HD 5000 series. When 1 GB wasn’t enough but most cards came with 1 GB or less. The 700 series had a 6 GB Titan, which was perfect, but the GTX 980 was only 4 GB, and it suffered, despite what tech KZbinrs say, I had personally had VRAM issues multiple times going from a 6 GB Titan to a 4 GB 980, all in SLI. 1080 Ti was fine, 2080 Ti was fine, 3090 good, 4090 good. So it’s mostly the mid range cards now, you just have to be aware of it.

[@mccock3154]

went for the 7900xt partly for the crazy 20gb of vram, linux support, power envelope, proper hdmi 2.1 support and price.....

[@cosmicchaos7181]

How’s its been treating you? I’m thinking about upgrading to one.

[@mgkpraesi]

Well i can say, since i own a 4090,.no matter what game i played or how far i tweaked it...even skyrim nolvus..i didnt manage to come even close to use the 24gb VRAM yet. But i didnt regret the buy one bit. This card is just too much fun.

[@errgoseven4680]

I have made my switch to AMD. While nGreedia was building AI tech for cloud gaming. AMD has built a serious technology stack and on the software side they are open source. Switcheroos. This generation they gave me 20GB with the 7900xt and I’m satisfied (once the price came down). I’m good for several generations and nit looking back while team green fans already talking about selling their the 12GB cards next gen. Pfft.

[@syncmonism]

Yeah, 900 was a terrible price. 700-770 is not so bad. It's expensive at around 770, but it's a great card, and you could still build an entire new system around it for a very reasonable price today. At 700, it makes the 4070 look pretty bad even if you could find one for as low as 550, but a 4070 for 550 could make sense for a lower-end system I suppose. Personally, I wouldn't pay 550, or even 450, for a card which only has 12GB, especially if there's a good chance that you're not going to have any good upgrade options for another 3-5 years or so, which I think is probably true for most people.

[@Lu5ck]

For max graphics, including ray tracing, 12gb is a fair recommendation for 1080p. At 1440p, the highest requirement I have seen is 14gb but there's only 16gb option so yea. At 4k, highest usage I have seen is 21gb but we only got 24gb option so yea. Even Nvidia frame generation eats more memory and they have the audacity to release a 8gb 4060, lmao. In today's context, for max graphic which include high enough frame rates for AA to work properly, 4070 seems to be ideal for 144 fps 1080p while you need a shocking 4090 for 144 fps 1440p. Of course if you can use DLSS for 1440p to get 144 fps, if your monitor is not big thus not able to note the differences between native and non-native. However, important thing to note is 144 fps seems to be the ideal frame rate for AA to work properly at max graphics. If using DLAA, you could get away with it at 60 fps thus making 4080 alright for 1440p but not every tittle has DLAA.

[@1SaG]

I never bought that whole "future proofing"-thing with hardware. Kinda reminds me of the Colecovision I had as a kid. That thing was sold with an expansion slot ("The window into the future", lol), to potentially turn it into a home computer at some point down the line. Think that computer was called the "Adam". I'm not even sure the components you would've needed for that were ever sold in earnest over here in Europe, but suffice it to say when the time came to make the switch to home computers, I simply bought (well, had my parents gift me) a Sinclair ZX Spectrum and then a C-64. My point being: I don't think I ever wished for more VRAM above anything else. Whenever the time came that my card was getting kinda low on VRAM for my games, it was also time to get a faster, more current GPU, anyway. I also don't have a problem turning down certain settings in games to reduce VRAM-requirements - if it's just "eye-candy" we're talking about. Besides: If you time your upgrades right and don't wait super-long, you will have an easy time selling your old GPU and using that money to partially fund your next card. All in all, I think 8GB is too low in 2023 *if you're buying new* and plan on using the card for more than a year or two. 12 GB should be fine for my needs I reckon, even if I would've preferred my 4070 to have 16. But seeing how I would've had to go 4080 at least (ignoring AMD-cards of course) to get more than 12 GB, I really didn't have much of a choice, anyway.

[@519achilles]

If you can’t get the future proofing of something that costs hundreds of dollars, then you are a really stupid person

[@BytoGeekLab]

i agree 12gb vram should be the minimum 12-16gb thenn 20gb for mid then 20+ on higer tiered cards

[@syncmonism]

I think it also depends on the price of the card and how much GPU compute power it has.

[@tekjunkie28]

I found a bug. I can make Farming simulator 22 use more then 12GB of vram. Start playing with the DLSS settings. Although this might be an nvidia driver issue or windows because a restart is the only way to fix it. It’s lot an issue unless you change the setting a a few times.

[@syncmonism]

Possibly a memory leak. One advantage of having more Vram is that it can just take a lot longer before a memory leak becomes an issue, sometimes so long that it will basically never happen unless you're doing some kind of crazy gaming marathon.

[@Altrop]

Ratched & Clank with max RT and Frame Generation at 1440P already causes issues on the 4070Ti in some sections of the game where the VRAM shits the bed. And that's 1440P! I would never recommend anything less than 16GB to anyone unless it's a budget build.. which the 4070 cards are not. Frame Generation uses 1GB in that game, that's a LOT if you only have 12.

[@1989rs500]

I ve played that with 4070 Ti and I never felt any issues, I m not even using FG. I use DLSS Quality and RT and 1440p ultra and its working at say 85-95 fps average and in no place has itt lagged or overflown. I use 12700k+ 4070Ti with 16 GB 3200 Mhz RAM.

[@rhysdavis5761]

​@@1989rs500do you get weird artifacts in the space port/arena level on the metal mesh grating floor thing? I found I get little white squares appear, and it happened in my desktop, my laptop and my mates laptop, all Nvidia cards if I have dlss on. If it's off it's fine but on and it happens. I'm guessing it's not just my computer if I could replicate it amongst multiple machines. Is your doing it too

[@1989rs500]

@@rhysdavis5761 I don't observe anything like U ve said.. I ve tried gaming with DLSS on MSI M28U. A brilliant monitor 2 say the least

[@rhysdavis5761]

@@1989rs500 it can't be the monitor tho, it happens on 3 separate devices 2 of them laptops with Thier own monitor. Have you played it recently? Thinking a driver update messed things up? Doesn't make sense for 3 separate devices all running different cards to all have the same issue unless it's a Nvidia driver issue surely?

[@1989rs500]

@@rhysdavis5761 I ve no issues with my M28U 180 Hz monitor while playn games with DLSS Q. I ve observed artifacting with Dead Space remake, like banding effect, but on all or majority of other games it at times looks even better than Native TAA. So I ve no idea what square thing U r seeing

[@MichaeltheORIGINAL1]

For casual player's 12GB might just do fine for a while, but if you are modding almost all your games extensively at higher resolutions, I even struggle with 24 gigs. (All games are ultra modded, 4k) My Witcher 3 NG uses 22GB of Vram, Skyrim 23.8, Fallout 4 12GB, RDR 2 11GB, ETS2 15.2GB, GTA 5 23GB of Vram... I can never go below a 24gig card since I had the 3090ti and now currently 4090. I guess it's similar to playing in native 2k or 4k, you will never EVER go back to 1080p after experiencing decent fps 2k/4k. Mind you, I also use RTX reshade from Pascal Glicher in games like Gta V, RDR2, Skyrim, Fallout 4, etc. And some very heavy RT mods for The Witcher 3 alongside Ultra RT in the game itself, all contributing to high Vram usage.

[@synergygaming65]

I find the 5700XT struggles somewhat with FO4 ENB modded 1440p, 60 frames at the very best. Starfield will fuck it completely, assuming it can even run Starfield 1440p.

[@MichaeltheORIGINAL1]

I feel you. Modding with 8GB cards especially with ENB and high res texture mods, reshade, etc., can be a real pain in the ass. The 5700xt will be able to run Starfield at 1440p with FSR quality 60+ high settings is my best guess, but visually modding the game is a whole different story and most likely 8GB just won't cut it in that case.

[@donaldpetersen2382]

I just built two systems, one with a 7900xtx and the other my personal system has a 12gb refurbished 3060. The 3060 is paired with a 7950x3d while I wait the ai craze for the a potential Titan release. The only noticeable shared performance drop between games involved AA, as the 7900xtx does noticeably better on higher grade AA. Haven't even needed to consider using DLSS on my 3060 yet. Even with some high resolution texture mods I never see my gpu reserve more then 8gb at any given moment. The 3060 is running duel monitor, one playing games at 144fps ultrawide resolution while streaming video on the other.

[@AntiGrieferGames]

Is AA antialiasting ?

[@donaldpetersen2382]

yes@@AntiGrieferGames

[@tomtomminger6227]

They only try to give us a reason to buy the high tier cards by making the mid tier cards worse.

[@Ajstyle48]

Nvidia should made same 3000 series style memory bus for 5000 series so we worry less about VRAm and enjoy games ultra textures im ok with lowering other setting except textures. rtx 5090 384 bit 24GB Vram rtx 5080/70 256 bit 16GB VRAM rtx 5060/50 192 bit 12GB Vram

[@thepan]

But would a 12GB+ card be viable for a few years if we "only" game at QHD or below?

[@AngusBeef0]

I'm shopping for a headstone for 8GB 1070 now.. just get most you can afford, can squeeze a year or 2 more out comfortably

[@diegoresendezsanchez6979]

I that regard, what would you say is more convenient; 16gb VRAM / 128bit [RTX 4060 Ti] or 12Gb VRAM / 198bit [RTX 4070 Ti]? I think the reduced bus on the 4060 ti would be more detrimental than having 12Gb on the 4070 Ti, obviously there's a price difference. Or what other card would you recommend on that midrange price point? BTW awesome content thanks for the useful info :)

[@YuThinkUrCool]

i have way too many texture mods at 2k and 4k on my skyrim modlist and I'm constantly hitting my vram limit in certain areas which makes the game freeze really badly for a few seconds. 3070 ti at 1440p, getting a good stable 60 outside and 120 inside when I'm not hitting the vram limit otherwise. such a shame, i had huge buyers remorse cause i love the card and its performance but the vram holds it back.

[@mine2craft2015]

I can say with confidence that 16 gigabytes of vram will be viable until ram amounts on console increase again

[@ProductP]

🎯

[@rimgaudastamulevicius8614]

Far cry 4 HD texture pack required more than 8 GB of vRam and it is a game from 2014. Game would work on 8 gb but you would get stutters...

[@steveklein9335]

i bought a 4070. only 12GB, but gddr6x and 192 bit... i'm not too worried about needing a new card for at least 4-5 years. my 1070 lasted me over 7 before i just upgraded. would have preferred 16GB, but wasn't worth an extra $200 for me

[@aspyr5681]

My 1060 held up great since 2016, it pushed all games on Ultra with steady fps up until 2021, by 2022 it started struggling with new titles that are unoptimized, and that was a sign that new times are coming and I started saving up for an upgrade, and that upgrade is 3060ti, which is pretty much 130% better than 1060, and I expect it to last 3 years or so, after that I'll probably upgrade again and sell the 3060ti. I choose 3060ti because it was 450€, while 3070 and 3070ti are 200€ more, so they're not really an option, and neither are the 4060s, for obvious reasons

[@jimmicrackhead12]

32MB used to be balling...

[@Warsign01]

Running 4k on a G8 NEO, with a Asus 4070ti OC. Cyberpunk runs 80fps, d4 runs 120fps. No issues running 4k.

[@lefter700]

I just upgraded from i7 7700K to a 13600K and kept my GTX 1080 and I'm really surprised how well my PC runs (almost double the framerate). I'm really glad that I didn't upgrade my the GPU first, because now I feel like I can wait to see how the RTX 50 series unravels, next year. Cheers!

[@VaultArchive72]

I can run cyberpunk at psycho RT 1080p 60+fps and that game barely crosses 7GB VRAM. It's the best looking game on the market right now. No intention of gaming at a higher resolution for a long time. Starfield hovers at around 4GB.

[@angeltzepesh1]

Honestly this really depends on what resolution you aim for, 12gb should be enough 1080p, but seeing how unoptimized some recent games were and how VRAM hungry UE5 looks to be, i cant be so sure. For higher resolutions anything below 16gb is not really smart to buy right now if you dont plan to upgrade in the next 2 years. At least this is how i see it.

[@_qwe_fk_1700]

12 gb is still fine for 1440p hardly any games require more at that resolution. Hub obviously didn‘t retest one of the games after it got updated, because obviously doesn‘t suit their narrative.

[@angeltzepesh1]

@@_qwe_fk_1700 for now yes, but look how many unoptimized games are released lately and we just start seeing UE5 in action, who knows in a year or 2 if 12gb will be enough for 1440p, so buying a 4070 or 4070 ti isnt really smart if you cant afford changing in 2 years or so, rather go with 16gb that AMD offers. You lose RTX, that's true, but many don't really care about it

[@wilddropbear7215]

Yeah I regret buying the RTX 3070 for my first PC build, I didn't know better but in Australia there weren't a lot of options for NVIDIA cards , the 3080 and 3090 are just as expensive as the 4080 and 4090 despite being older cards so I kind of had no other choice if I want a 30 series or higher in terms of price

[@gwky]

Bought a 4070 like last week simply because it's okay-ish value for what I need it for (mainly CUDA tasks). Otherwise would've went with an AMD card.

[@lepton_01]

I am in the same position, do you think 12 GB is enough for machine learning purposes? (online gpu services are not an option). I worked with a 6 GB card and it was limited in convolutional models.

[@gwky]

@@lepton_01 depends on the TPU utilization that you require. Before I was forced to use Google VMs for heavy processing. At the moment I only do small model training and running image generation/instructional text models. Of course the performance won't ever approach an A100 card that is purpose-specific, so if you're in my boat of buying a card that can do both games and ML, you'll likely have to upgrade. I am able to run 13b parameter models reasonable well, larger ones are obviously not as performant or entirely out of the question. So, if able, definitely go for a better card, but I reckon a 4070 provides a balance between price to performance that other cards simply do not. tl;dr yeah upgrade if able, and obviously if you can buy a card with more juice, you should

[@amankumar5062]

I have decided to stick to 1080p 165hz rather than 1440p 144hz or 60hz. Now the question is will the rx6700xt with 12GB Vram for 1080p be good for years to come? I think it should work fine but I am really looking forward to future 12/16gb vram cards.

[@EjayT06]

For 1080p 12GB will be fine

[@nepp-]

my 2070 super runs out of vram in jedi survivor, but I mainly play minecraft with shaders so it’s fine

[@marcobezuidenhout5050]

We are now in 2023 where we were 10yrs ago. In 2013 we had the R9 290X 8gb and GTX 770 2/4gb. 8GB aged well. 16GB will at least age half as well...

[@Fallen608]

Good lord I would not be touching anything lower than 16GB at this point. If I had to buy new I'd grab a 7900xtx and at least consider myself future proofed for rasterised games.

[@Pistolita221]

Ikr? All these people talking about GPU's in the comments like Nvidia is the only game in town, AMD is pretty good now, especially for rasterized games. Idk why people would feel the need to support Nvidia as a way of waiting out their predatory VRAM sizing.

[@truhunk1]

Agreed. But if you are on a budget and playing 1080P, an 8GB card is fine. Buy a used RX5700xt for $150 and you'll be happy. Even playing Cyberpunk at high settings I get in the upper 60s FPS. Playing at medium I get upper 70s fps and I don't really notice a difference in picture quality. Most other games I get over 80-120 fps.

[@leafbelly]

I would say that anyone who cares that much about their build components and has enough enough money for high-VRAM cards is going to upgrade their GPU every 2-3 years anyway, so this is a totally moot point. There are still people using 3GB 1060s right now who are just fine. It's all about your budget and how much you care about high-res textures. 12GB will be relevant as long as you want it to be. I think your content is great, but if I'm being totally honest, I have to take everything you all say with a grain of salt because of your AMD bias -- whether you all realize it or not. But I sympathize and completely understand that NVidia shoulders most of that blame for how they have treated you, but the bias was pretty well known even before the incident. Keep on trucking, though. I'm obviously in the minority, and I don't even know why I'm saying this, but hopefully you get what I'm saying without taking it as an attack.

[@runslinganOG]

Im still using my GTX1080 6gb and it can still run 4k no problem. Its only when i start any game that the lag begins

[@walley2637]

thee must a point where max ram levels off.. I may be aging myself but i remember back-in-the-day when I got myself a graphics card with 8mb vram and 256mb of system ram I thought I had the world in my hands! I could play everything out there at the time and i didnt have to wait 2mins for a 1mb image to load!

[@mikkelaagaard240]

My arc a770 with 16 vram is gonna age like fine vine

[@Genny_Woo]

Yeah I sold my 4070ti for a 4080 super, 12Gb wasn’t cutting it out for 1440p ray tracing I used to get big fps dips

[@Hemeltijd]

Used 2080ti in 2023 is kind of a baller purchase on a budget, ngl

[@alexandrumihci4058]

i don t agree .. i will stick with rtx 4070 because the power consumption its a big thing aswell . i didn t buy an amd 16 g card because they draw 300+ w so i upgraded my 1080 with a 4070 . why u never say nothing about power consumption and the extra money needed on the psu and the electric bill ?

[@loganyoung9244]

Yeah I’m using a 3070 and I’m waiting for these new 40 series super cards to come out and I’m prob gonna snag one

[@ar12.]

I’ve got a 4070 ti with 12gb playing at 4k so far no real issues the day I start to run into issues without dropping a few settings is when I’ll sell and buy a newer card it’s that easy I think I’ll be set for 2 years at least and it to mention dlss works very well ended at 1440p and upscale and it looks 90% as good or equal in many cases not to mention games like ratchet and clank amd get smoked my 4070 ti can level with a 7900xtx with ray tracing maxed it’s embarrassing 7900xtx using fsr and 4070 ti dlss quality.

[@AntiGrieferGames]

Funfact: Ratchet and clank rift apart works well with 1080p highest no dlss, no overrated raytracing, no antialiasing, no motion blur whatever with 3070 60fps capped. I dont need very high resolution when 1080p 60hz doing very well. Games needs better optimization.

[@ar12.]

@@AntiGrieferGames your not wrong games need way better optimisation vram is slowly but surely going up to crazy amounts and it’s making gpus like the 3070 enough power somewhat useless at 1440p now, I will say why don’t you get a 1080p 144hz monitor since the massive price drops in them and enjoy the extra fps.

[@chrisb-nf7iy]

unless VR arrives mainstream PC resolution is still 1080p / 1440p is creeping up in surveys and 4k is basically none existent. On the same survey 4070 ti and 4080 are the 2 most popular cards (steam survey)

[@PureChaos_NA]

12gb will be fine if you upgrade frequently, say every 2 - 4 years.

[@sergiomarin7632]

Every 2 years??? That's not good , every 4 to 5 years now that's great

[@portman8909]

Turn off RT and turn down settings from ultra. People are being stupid.

[@badisbisserni3020]

Current RX 7900 XT/X cards and the upcoming ones are going to age well in the next 2 years specially for 1440p folks

[@Ali_Dan47]

I still have my gtx 970 4gb ... still kicking well

[@thejackdaw1]

hey you forgot to mention the resolution because 8 gb might be enough for 1080p, but 1440p in the new titles is not enough at all

[@fallenlegion1828]

I have a 4090 right now. Im really hoping it can last until the 5090 releases 😬

[@MrAwesumo]

It’s funny this wasn’t really a issue until the likes of Last Of Us Part 1, Star Wars Jedi Survivor and even RE4 Remake to make a few that would easily exceed past 12GB on certain settings it’s a shame because 8GB is what most people have from my understanding it’s becoming a serious bottleneck moving forward

[@jens0_064]

I think 16gb wil be safe till the point, where even the 16gb cards can do raytracing at a high level, with like 2364 rt cores, being able to play cyberpunk 8k rt max, but until then, 16 won't be to less, unless u play in 8k.

[@StephenSwargiary]

Me with 8GB RX 6650XT 😢

[@charlesg5085]

Great card - it's cheap enough don't worry about it. I bought one as well.

[@StephenSwargiary]

@@charlesg5085 I know runs every game at high-ultra settings but i'm using it with 10400f so it's not using it's full potentials plus I have a 1440p monitor so stressful for my card

[@charlesg5085]

@westsidegsrecords1058 I bet with a 10400f you are getting full utilization. What makes you think you are not?

[@Wiganpilot]

I had to wait a few years to get my new GPU, but as I am not really a gamer I ended up buying the RTX 3060 12GB to pair with my RYZEN 5 3600XT so the VRAM should be fine for me for a while.

[@FutureDocta]

Picked up a rx6900 xt for 450. The 16gb vram should last me the next 5 years easily

[@sgdude1337]

I play at 1080p. I just scored a Titan Xp to replace the 980Ti in my ancient rig. Goal is to keep the current pc for 2 more years and build a new rig when windows 10 support ends. I think this will carry me until the 5000 series when hopefully mid range cards will have 16gb of vram and match 4070 performance

[@Pistolita221]

If you don't use ray tracing I'd consider an AMD card, they're pretty reliable and generally a better price/performance. Plus the software interface is nicer even if it doesn't have DLSS 3 or 4.

[@sgdude1337]

@@Pistolita221 scored my Titan xp for $165 shipped. Pretty solid performer that compares well with a 2080 and has 12gb of vram

[@kennyakatyler]

Building a new PC with all new parts. 4060 ti 16GB or 4070 12GB? Mostly playing at 1080p, but will eventually upgrade to 1440p. Thoughts? In theory, it could save me $100 to go with the 4060 ti 16GB, and prolong a new monitor, but what do y'all think?

[@sammy-uy8hb]

4060ti shouldn't be an option to consider, its not powerful enough to use 16gb of ram, if u can find a new one, get a 6800xt, if u care about power efficiency more than vram get a 4070

[@_TrueDesire_]

For me it's €100 difference and I would rather have the stronger 4070. I avoid the vram hogger MSAA in every game, also due to the insane performance loss.

[@RuruFIN]

"4060 Ti" (more like a 4050 Ti) shouldn't even be an option for serious gaming.

[@kennyakatyler]

Sadly I do fall in that Nvidia camp lol. Do you think the 4070 will age gracefully at 12GB?@@sammy-uy8hb

[@tomtomkowski7653]

None of them. I would buy 6800xt 16GB for $500 instead while waiting for the new generation of cards with more VRAM from Nvidia because $1200 for 4080 is insane.

[@ausfoodgarden]

The 4Gb GTX 1650 in my web browsing box has been enough for what I do on it until recently. I'll be replacing it with a used 3060 12Gb any day now that I expect to tide me over at least until the next gen. My other box has an Intel Arc 770 16Gb that is used mainly for AV production but occasionally use for games. Anything below 12Gb new is a very poor investment long term. For games on new midrange cards, AMD is where you should be looking IMHO.

[@RohitKumar-dq8fb]

Will my 3070 last me till the 5 series Gpus are out ? Gaming at 1440p. Or should I upgrade now ?

[@i3l4ckskillzz79]

Probably yes when you don't go crazy with your in game settings. Look for optimization guides for the games you play. and keep an eye on your vram usage for example via the msi afterburner overlay.

[@secularspectator]

I think the real point here is, if we could all afford GPUs with loads of RAM we would buy them......but we can't! Is 16 better than 12 ...yes...is 24 better than 8....yes.

[@pedrolantyer]

I've got 2 big problems with the whole situation, the first one is that the only options with more than 8GBs cost 500 bucks or more (and the only ones who actually back up the performance costs 600+), the second one is that the GPUs with more than 8GB of VRAM are 1440p GPUs, and 12GB isn't enough for a 1440p GPU! NVIDIA forces you into buying at least the 4080 otherwise you get a limit straight out of the gate. I just want AMD to release ROCm so that people who actually need NVIDIA (due to CUDA) can start betting on buying an AMD GPU and then waiting for the improvements to come over time.

[@freakyfreak7777]

I'm regretting my 3070 purchase at the moment. My main game is Escape from Tarkov and I'm forced to run low textures and it looks horrible. Currently weighing up options like pre-owned 3080ti or a 6800 xt.

[@GameCookerUSRocks]

There has to be a VRAM usage limit. It can't just go up and up and up. Recent games versus older games have proven it's all how you code the game.

[@parthibanspace]

4060,4060 Ti - 12GB 4070,4070 Ti - 16GB 4080 - 20GB 4090 - 24GB This is how they should've launched the 40 series cards.

[@SagazHero]

And how about: 4060,4060 Ti - 8GB - 10GB 4070,4070 Ti - 12GB - 16GB 4080 - 20GB 4090 - 24GB It would make people understand price gaps better

[@newsmansuper2925]

3090ti 24 GB

[@blast5558]

If they made a 4070 with 16gb the price would jump from 600 to 850

[@ProfShibe]

@@blast5558not out of necessity though, but out of greed. The 4070 was supposed to be $100 more expensive initially and labeled as a 12gb 4080. That’s his point

[@blast5558]

@@ProfShibe you know what I was actually gonna buy a 4070 despite everything but after hearing that, I don’t think I will anymore

[@x2stefan2701]

Crazy to think that the gtx 1070 has 8gb of VRAM and the rtx 3070 has also 8gb of VRAM

[@ivann4512]

no not really, GPU companies always do whatever they can to make us buy cards more often than it is really necessary. They have been doing it for a decade

[@charlesg5085]

1070 was a great card. I bought it for the 8gb ram. The fact that Nvidia still shorts ram just keeps me from buying their cards anymore.

[@anthero4816]

@@charlesg5085 I think if you bought it for the 8gb of vram, why did rx 470 8GB is missed out xDD

[@charlesg5085]

@anthero4816 I bought 5 rx 580s and 590s for family builds. Those cards were nuts for value. I wasn't really paying attention to amd during the 400 series (i should have been). I stopped building PCs after intel gen 3 right up until zen 2. Intel seemed to stagnate with 4 core consumer grade chips. Zen 2 got me interested in pc building again. After that 1070 upgrade that I needed for work, I have been 100% amd. I have done 10 pc builds since covid started. I just wish more people would give amd a try.

[@Tokena14]

@@charlesg5085 problem with team red is the software. Horrible blue screen rate and DLSS towers over team red anyday.

[@AndreFreitas91250]

In my perspective, if you are the type of person of upgrading your GPU frequently the VRAM issue doesn't matter that much, but for people who only upgrade after your gpu is barely usable the VRAM matters.

[@Leptospirosi]

I went from a GTX GTX 460 (1GB) to a GTX 670 (2GB) and then from an RTX 2060 (6GB) to a RX 7900XT (20GB). As you can see I mostly switch due to memory related issues, and the problem is surfacing more often then it used to. Considering how much more expensive graphic cards are becoming with time I think a "think forward" approach is wiser then just throwing money at whatever comes to the market. The 400$ RTX 4060 is dead on arrival for the insane prices it was launched at. If you think about it, between the 410€ they ask for a 4060 and the 690€ I paid for a high end 7900, the difference is less then 300$. Is it worth it with the costs involved in building a new PC, to cheap out so much? Would you rather spend another 500$ in the next graphic card in, probably, less then 2 years (inflation, greed et all considered)? From someone who NEVER accepted to spend more then 330$ on a video card before!

[@MechAdv]

I upgrade my desktop GPU whenever I can get 50% more performance for around 700$. I upgrade my laptop every 5 years. My current laptop is from 2018, and it looks like I’m going to have to buy a 4080 for the 12gb unless AMD releases something compelling soon.

[@nithia]

@@MechAdv Well for less then the price of a 4080 you can get an RX 7900xtx. Both perform amazingly but the 7900 has twice the vram of the 4080. If you are looking for something more compelling then either of those cards from AMD then it is not going to be soon. You will be waiting at least until RX 8000 series and the leaks imply there will be no ultra high tier cards in the 8000 series from them. So it may not be until a potential 9000 series that something can beat the 7900 or the 4080. If you can actually find a 4080 for only $700 I say go for it as I cant find any for less then about $1k right now. I was using a 1070Ti up until like a month ago and only reason I upgraded was because I wanted more then minimum requirement when Starfield comes out, but other then that it has been able to keep me around 60 fps in most games and keep my settings at high or ultra with only a few titles dipping below 60, and the only titles I care about a slight dip below 60 is in competitive games which most people that want to be competitive will run their settings at a med or low anyway.

[@JamesFox1]

Excuse Me ? Games Are LITERALLY DEMANDING MORE Vram NOW !!! but I Bet you have a HIGH END GPU Already = RIGHT ? so its no skin off your crashing or blue screening AND I Bet you want to Blame That On Something Else = RIGHT ? so arrogant of a statement to Even Thinking about posting

[@JamesFox1]

@@MechAdv The 6950xt @ $650 is Very Reasonable and IS still VERY Relevant ,

[@JosePineda-jn8jk]

When I start running into *actual* issues with my RX 6600 I will then consider upgrading. I honestly am not the type of gamer to keep buying the newest thing, I have so many games in my back catalog that I could sit for months or years with them and still be happy with my current performance.

[@bmqww223]

Hi can you tell me rx 6600 is good enough for future proofing @720 ultra setting for atleast coming 10 years?

[@diysai]

@bitanmandal1309 no sorry, nothing can be truly future proof. What if a new tech comes around and the games become extremely demanding? But whatever is the best for your budget. Preferably something that can play 1080p ultra, with at least 8gb vram. If you intend to play older games your card can last longer.

[@yoshy5651]

​@@bmqww223I have a 6600xt and most games run at like 70-100 fps at 1440p. If you aren't playing cyberpunk then you'll be fine for many years only 10 if you play only old games

[@bmqww223]

no sir i want all new and upcoming games to be played at ultra @1366x768 at 60 fps if preferable what gpu would be best for it , and how much vram would be necessary.......@@yoshy5651

[@crisschan2463]

​@@bmqww223no real future proof as software tend to upgrade, but as long as the "masses" cant be swayed to set the floor into making the most gpu used in steam for like 12gb minimum, the games will always be optimized for 60 tier cards They are just trying to reinvigorate the overall public usage of gpu to higher tier, so when games came out, we "should" be having a 12gb minimum and making the price higher than it has to be Tldr, 6600 is very good card for 1080p, if you plan 720p lol, it should not be a prob

[@edwarda.tokash8166]

Up until a few years ago there was no constant discussion about the concept of "future proofing" regarding components. You just bought a new part when the time came because the prices weren't unreasonable. Now things have become so expensive that you really have to think it through just to future proof it long enough that it's not an outright ripoff.

[@guilhermedecarvalhofernand1629]

Welcome to the economy equivalente people from third world countries had to deal for years in terms of overpriced Pc componentes.

[@bami2]

Also Moores law slowing down a lot. Hardware simply hasn't been improving as quick in the past 10 years than they did compared to the 10 years before that. When I used to buy new components (from early 90s to about 2012) I basically tried to get double the performance for the part I'm replacing or 3-4x the performance when building a completely new PC while paying roughly the same for each iteration (taking into account inflation of course, so it's always the same "tier" of components). This used to mean I would go around 12-18 months between upgrades and 3-4 years between building an entirely new system. Anything less was just a hassle since you would get marginal benefits and more is wasteful since price would come down on newer components and would not be worth the early adopter rate. Now however for a graphics card that is about 2-3x as fast as my 1070 I have to look at a 4070, a graphics card about twice the price and 7 years newer. It's just has gotten completely insane and the timescale I use for upgrades is now more like 72-96 months. So yeah you better believe I'm looking more at the value since it's just going to have to last so much longer, since the components don't improve as much anymore there is less drive to upgrade. I would really want to get a new graphics card since the 1070 is having some major struggles with 4K but I still can't justify dropping down about as much on just a graphics card upgrade as I would drop on about 4/5ths of a complete new pc 10 years ago, even though with inflation it should cost maybe 1.3x as much.

[@FuelX]

@@guilhermedecarvalhofernand1629 I'd say that buying a 1000$ video card to play games is much more of a first world problem than a third world one.

[@anthonyrizzo9043]

If you care about your money, you should always be thinking about buying the best anything for the price, and we should have had these conversations, the entire time, but everyone was so content with the take my money attitude until it got way out of control. People have this attitude with many video games now as they think 70 dollars for an unfinished product isn't too much to ask, these are headed in the same direction, as is anything else people mindlessly throw their money at.

[@edwarda.tokash8166]

@@anthonyrizzo9043 I agree. I remember when games used to come out on media (floppies, CDs, DVDs - for those that don't know) the games were thoroughly tested. Rarely would a game have more than 2 patches/updates. It's unacceptable that things are running rampant because companies got greedy and the public allowed it.

[@sunkrest2581]

I still have RX580 8gb and I'm very happy I decided to go with this version. Its still perfectly usable in 1080p with mix of medium and low details in demanding games, especially with fsr 2, and that was a midrange card on release... I remember well that 8gb on this card was considered to be an overkill. Well, It wasn't. 1060 3gb and 6gb aged much worse. That's why I'm about to buy 7900 XT or XTX to play Starfield in 4k. I'm pretty confident I will be able to lower resolution and details in 5 years and still enjoy new games. I would not be confident about that with 12gb 4070ti.

[@BigHeadClan]

12gb is probably going to be fine, but yeah the 7900 is the smarter buy in either case.

[@syncmonism]

The 6GB 1060 aged worse, but not MUCH worse. Those cards are all 7 years old right now, and the 6GB 1060 is still not that bad. Even the 3GB 1060 was still fairly cheap, and is still very usable in most games today, just not very demanding ones. It was still a good value card, even if it was worse than the amazing 8GB RX 480 and RX 580. The RTX 4060 ti is going to age much worse than the 3GB GTX 1060 did, especially considering that the 3GB GTX 1060 was cheap enough that its low amount of Vram wasn't a bad deal. It took about 3-4 years before the 3GB version of the 1060 really started to have significant problems in some games, though the Vram did hold it back somewhat in some other games even in the first year or two, but at first it was very rare and relatively easy to fix with changes to settings.

[@jamesgodfrey1322]

Yes I also still have am gaming on RX580 8gb Band I am sad to see it go I just upgrade why I am upgrading the Vram

[@cjlake5754]

That's exactly the generational skip I'm in the middle of pulling the trigger on myself! My trusty old Sapphire Nitro+ 8GB has done me proud. And likewise, I was told it was overkill at the time on VRAM. Which is why I'm going for the 24GB Sapphire Nitro+ 7900XTX.

[@jamesgodfrey1322]

@@cjlake5754 Good card I end up getting it younger sibling the Sapphire Radeon RX 7900 XTX Pulse. I not upgrade my mother board etc I drop a 5800X3D + 32gb memory into it and then put extra cash I save into GPU like your self I was running a Sapphire Nitro and chance had it that Sapphire that best value in UK when I pull the trigger given the costs let hope they age as well as old RX580 have

[@nDman]

It is funny, when I bought my 3060 12gb 2 years ago everyone was telling me it is wast of money there is no game to use VRAM higher than 8gb blah blah blah... but I bought it because I needed that 12gb VRAM for my creative works. Now everyone wants 16gb of VRAM, 12 is not enough for them. 😄

[@innocentiuslacrim2290]

I also bought the 12gb one for my son, because I thought this will eventually become a problem.

[@AntiGrieferGames]

People making drama. I'm not one of them Glad for 3070.

[@TheEmolano]

Last year I was watching benchmarks and that was the consensus lol. "Pay for rasterization power, more than 8gb vram is useless for anything smaller than 4k".

[@ThePipojp]

​@@TheEmolanoThe 3060 truly runs anything demanding more than 8gb like shit though

[@Kage0No0Tenshi]

My friend have rtx 3060 and he have higher fps in some games vs my rtx 3070, it was seriously issue to have 8gb vram in 1440p and 4k no chance to run it there, that's why I had to upgrade for few month ago to rx 6950xt. My old gtx 770-4gb could run csgo back in the day at 4k easily but rtx 3070 struggled cs2 in 1440p what a joke.

[@Dr.WhetFarts]

VRAM don't matter much because the GPU itself will be the limiting factor and force you to use lower settings hence lower VRAM is used. This is why 16GB on for example 7800XT is pointless. High-end GPUs have more VRAM and will last longer but if you want to keep it for 2-3 generations then no matter which GPU you buy it will be mediocre after 2-3 generations. Just look at 3090 after 1 generation, the VRAM did not futureproof this card at all because GPU already is mid-end or so. Look at 4070 Ti 12GB vs 4070 Ti SUPER 16GB for proof that VRAM don't matter much. There's also 4060 Ti 8 vs 16GB -> The same happens, LITTLE to NO GAIN. VRAM never futureproofed a GPU and I would rather have a fast GPU with less VRAM than a slow GPU with more VRAM, because the faster GPU will put out more frames in the end when settings are tweaked. Anyway, VRAM demand won't increase on PC games before 2028 when next gen consoles hit, most likely it will go down because DEVS get better at optimizing engines like UE5 (engine itself is improving as well). Some games uses WAY MORE VRAM than they should and dev's simply need to optimize better.

[@andrewbroadfort6856]

My EVGA 2080 Ti FTW3 is aging gracefully. I'm so glad it shipped with 11 GB of memory.

[@UranusfromBrussels]

I just got a 2080ti for 260€. A new Rtx 4060ti here in Belgium is like 450€. 500€+ for the 16g

[@UranusfromBrussels]

@NoodleAsian Massive upgrade, I thought if that GPU too but I would have had to replace my 650psu

[@upfront2375]

@NoodleAsian U could've bought a well maintained used 3090 for around 600$ (even less in some regions). Congrats anyway tho👍

[@futurepastnow]

I wonder how much longevity the original 3080s will have with 10GB. At least they have plenty of memory bandwidth for it.

[@gauravnegi6857]

how much did u get it for? cause 1200 dollars was insane for it. Considering it succeeded, 1080ti, father of all GPUs.

[@Ignisan_66]

Im glad I went with RX 7800 XT instead of 4070. Not only it is more powerful than 4070 but also cheaper and has 16 GB 256 bit bus. I upgraded from a pre-built GTX 1060 6 GB.

[@hungry07580]

Agree they ripping people off at rtx cards😂

[@superkoopatrooper4879]

Lower your texture settings from ultra to medium you hot dog water brained gamers. Watch how that 12gb lasts past 2025. Source: People play modern games on the steam deck, how much vram does that have? You dont need to spend 800$ every couple years. These youtube channels are always trying to sell you on the upgrade idea.

[@ChristopherPunton]

Got myself the 7900 XTX, got 24gb of Vram should be good for a while lol

[@michaelhart2575]

Nice but not everybody is that fortunate. NVIDIA be deliberately making their cards have low amounts of VRAM, mostly 8 gigs because they want you to fork out more money. It's a marketing scandal

[@everhigh777]

Just sold my 3070 for 7900xt and wow. No more random stutters @1440p. VRAM was being maxed out way to easily. I didn't think I would love the Adrenaline software as much. It creams Nvidia and you don't have to log in like Geforce Experience.

[@normsutton]

I'm going from a 1060 6gb up to the 7900 XT with 20gb

[@cz5836]

I went from adrenaline to GeForce and was so disappointed. But my next card gonna be Intel arc or battlemage. I just want to see their software/interface.

[@jerryzacharatos7691]

@@normsutton you won't regret it :)

[@RanFranklin]

Haha how much does AMD pay you to post these comments ?

[@KG-kp3le]

@@RanFranklin nvidea causes people to make these comments with their cards that are designed to be obsolete in 2 years. I had the same experience with my 3070 and had to sell it.

[@DavidWalker-ko6po]

Extra VRAM on Nvidia cards would also be incredibly nice for AI and machine learning tasks - but I suppose that's why Quadros exist, and why they can charge so much for them!

[@BogdanM116]

It really depends on the performance of the card. VRAM should be sufficient for the GPU's performance. An RX 6700XT/6750XT is okay with 12gb while a 4070Ti is not. 8gb of VRAM do still have a use case, just not on a 4060Ti.

[@user-eq2fp6jw4g]

Yep. Basically gimping cards with enough VRAM (4070ti example) Is the case where industry suffers more than having it too much. It's always better to get model with more VRAM

[@azteca_619]

A 4060ti 8gb vram for 250 us dollar would be ok

[@xPhantomxify]

12GB VRAM is no issue for me. New games are releasing unoptimized, buggy and magically allocate 16GB when they only use 10GB at most. There's an entire mountain of games backlog from

[@blondegirl7240]

It was mentioned couple times, higher textures does not impact fps much

[@user-eq2fp6jw4g]

@@xPhantomxify The cap has been kept artificially at 8GB for too long. PC needs (specially with 1440p) 16 BG vram on GPU to counter that variable scaling PS5/Xbox are doing with their hardware if you want to keep those modern game textures at ultra. To optimize UE5 era games to meet 8GB or less is totally not worth it for anyone. Yet again the issue here is that GPU manufacturers have been greedy fucks since they allready have got their payday FUCKING TWICE with Cryptobuble and now with AI bubble. Apparently duopoly cant get enough. This market truly needs 3dfx like 3rd competitor that whips the floor and put those greedy fucks back to their place.

[@goofball1_134]

I feel like if your using 1440p and 4k and you dont plan on upgrading for a while, 16gb is a no brainer.

[@bartix698]

This week I was forced to use 1060 3 gb. Most games still work fine in 1080p, but some are either stuttering or you get blurry mess. Upscaling tech helps alot

[@jakejoyride]

Thanks to AMD

[@HB20022]

I am still using it and surprisingly forza horizon 5 runs on high details with 60 fps

[@silverwatchdog]

That card was a complete scam of a gpu. It was genuinely worse than the 1050ti which had 4gb of vram just because of it and performance wise it was closer to a 1050ti than the 1060.

[@bartix698]

Just saying it was fine for the time when 3 gb was still popular (lots of 2 gb cards still in many computers). Same way as today I'm fine with only 12 GB for 4k (my next gpu will have at least 16, but now all is well with 12)

[@Spodlude]

Where does this place the standard 4070 for you with 12gb? As I just bought one, love it, but feel it may not be that well futureproofed

[@Jasontvnd9]

They said in the video that they are not too concerned with the standard 4070. It's the 4070ti they have gripes with.

[@Spodlude]

@@Jasontvnd9 didn’t catch that bit thanks.

[@TheEmolano]

There's too many gamers playing in 8gb and 12gb cards for studios to ignore. Either they optimize games to run on those GPUs or they won't sell a lot. So you're fine with 12gb for 1440p and 8gb for 1080p, except for the eventual "tech showcase" game like Cyberpunk and the "badly optimized mess at launch" like Jedi Survivor.

[@abdullahzafar4401]

The "optimization" they're doing is setting the textures to low without telling the gamer. I can set everything to ultra for all I care to make me feel good That's the optimization.

[@Rintero_Pryde]

The R9 290X was I believe is the earliest consumer card to feature 8GB of VRAM, and I believe that variant launched in NOV of 2014-nearly 9 years ago. The Radeon lineup has had an 8GB card in the product stack ever since (R9 390 series, Polaris RX 580, Vega, RX 5000, and of course RX 6000 onward to today). Time is definitely up for 8GB VRAM capacity.

[@DigitalMoonlight]

To add to this, starting with the 7000 series, AMD has maintained a lead in VRAM for reference designs (3GB for the 7970 vs 2GB for the 680). It's unfortunate that board partners are no longer allowed to double up he RAM on cards the 200 series for AMD and the 700 series for NVIDIA were the last cards that had board partner RAM doublings. The R9 290 reference was only 4GB but board partners frequently sold it with 8GB and the GTX 780 had a few models with 6GB while the reference was 3GB. I think an AIB 4070 with 24GB of VRAM could make a lot of sense if it were allowed and priced right.

[@syncmonism]

That 8GB version was very rare, and pretty expensive, but, yes, I was aware that it existed. I think there might have also been 8GB versions of the 290 (non X). I don't think those versions were available until a while after launch. I think it's already been nine years since the 8GB RX 390 and 390X came out. The 290X came out 6 months or a year before then, I think, though the 8GB variant was maybe not available until a few months after launch.

[@syncmonism]

@@DigitalMoonlight A used RTX 3090 could make a lot of sense too ;)

[@DigitalMoonlight]

@@syncmonism There were 8GB non X 290s but they commanded high prices for the same reason as the 8GB 290X, a cryptoboom (Litecoin). The 8GB cards were a couple months after launch because all launch cards were forced to be reference by AMD. Arctic capitalized on this by releasing an after market air cooler for the 290/X since the blower design of the reference model was terrible even in a high airflow case.

[@ivann4512]

no not really

[@voteDC]

I have a GTX 970 in my media PC which has only 4GB of vRAM (or 3.5 depending on who you ask) and if it was the only card I had, I could still be gaming with modern titles. Hogwarts Legacy is the most demanding I've tried and with settings on Low, and Balanced FSR, the game sticks to a fairly stable 60fps at 1080p when paired with the Ryzen 5 1600AF and 8GB of 3200MHz DDR4. Marvel's Spider-Man also runs well with mostly Low settings and again Balanced FSR. Both games still look good. I think people looking at the RAM issue seem to have forgotten that you can turn the settings down, you don't have to run everything at the maximum.

[@Gazer75]

People expect to play at ultra textures. I've found pretty massive VRAM use difference between high and ultra textures, but visually its pretty hard to notice in a moving image. My 3070Ti will probably work just fine for me for a while. I suspect the overall performance of the card will be what makes me upgrade, not the lack of VRAM.

[@voteDC]

@@Gazer75 I struggle to tell the difference between Ultra and High myself. Even going down to Medium will often take me a few moments to work out what has changed. I'm sure there's people who'd be able to tell the difference between High and Ultra textures instantly but I expect they are in the minority. My current card is a RTX 3060 (12GB) and I suspect it is going to last me at least as long as the GTX 970 did (8 years) as I genuinely don't mind turning down the settings.

[@bumpahhi]

It's simple guys, - do you play in 4k? yes -> get 16gb or more vram no -> you'll be fine don't worry it

[@soumyosubhromukhopadhyay9727]

Amen

[@smefour]

Ultra settings really are diminishing returns compared to High settings (which looks almost indiscernible to Ultra but with lot less GPU resources needed), stick to high settings and your GPU will have great performance for many years with almost no difference in visual quality

[@Gailim]

I am not sure i agree that 16gb will be fine for the next few years. At least not at 4k. The 3090 will have been released 3 years ago next month. It has 24gb of vram, so does the 3090 ti, and the 4090, and the 7900xtx, and then the 7900 xt is just below with 20gb My point is the hardware is out there to go beyond 16gb and has been for years now. Do you really expect no AAA developer to take advantage of that for 4-5 years?

[@syncmonism]

That's definitely true. There could even be some games where 16GB isn't enough at 1440p, though that will be a lot easier to fix by turning down one or two settings at that resolution, and I don't see that happening for another year or two, not unless mods, memory leaks, or very serious optimization issues are involved.

[@natecartwright2319]

using the 2080ti still and it has held up decently well for 3440x1440. Looking to upgrade but wouldnt want to consider anything other than the 4090 for a high fps ray tracing experience at that resolution. There needs to be more competition so high end cards can come down. the strix is like 2.3k us