I don't think the 3080 has enough Vram

* MS Flight Simulator is already hitting 8GB. Some have reported higher.
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pag...-graphics-performance-benchmark-review,4.html

* The new Avengers game is hitting 10.5GB when "next-gen" textures are selected.
https://www.dsogaming.com/pc-performance-analyses/marvels-avengers-pc-performance-analysis/

While the argument can be made about bad/lazy optimization for both, let's be real. That's a problem we have been and will continue to deal with on PC. So while it may be true, it's not going anywhere. Therefore, best be prepared for it. Not every game is optimized like Gears 5.

These are just 2 examples. But they are so far the only examples we have as far as getting a taste of next-gen requirements. This seems bit concerning to me as we barely dip a toe into next gen. What do you guys think? Is 10GB enough? Should Nvidia have put out a 20GB alternative right away?

 

VRAM used =/= VRAM needed ..

 

It should have had 12GB minimum in my opinion.

 

Of course! And we need empty slots to plug additional memory in!

 

AMD was always putting more vram on their cards. I really do hope big navi comes out with 16gb and makes this 3080 absolete in few months.

 

Yes, please. So NV Ampere cards will become cheap like dirt and people buy them all.

 

which is why I will buy the 3090

 

Yeah, people buy all kinda crap this days with a nice sticker on it.

 

Yeah, as long as it has a shiny badge from big company like AMD, NVIDIA, INTEL.

 

I agree honestly. It's happened with every console launch since the original Xbox, PC's need almost double the amount of ram to make up for the lack of optimization with new games. But, things could be different this time around since development and cross platform hardware has become so unified. However I can see PS5 exclusives that come to PC requiring an insane amount of GPU and system memory in the next 2-3 years. With XSEX, I think things will be fairly balanced though.

 

Its not bad thing to follow what consoles are doing. If they have 8c/16t cpu get one yourself, if the gpu have 16gb vram go with that as well. You know developers will be using those system specs.

 

I get your point totally, but it just shows how little effort goes into PC games now days. Control is a great example. If that game was developed for PC first and then ported to consoles it would run 10x better.

 

NO, the extra VRAM:

 

I too think RTX IO will be very helpful, but does need to be built into the game, so new or updated games only.
Also better memory compression will alleviate the problem a bit.
And as pointed out above, memory used doesnt necessarily translate to memory needed.

I expect MS Flight Sim to get an update for RTX IO, its precisely what will make best use of it.

 

10gb will be fine for me at 1440p, i never use any blur effects nor aa anyways so here's hoping!
No way in hell i'm waiting any more time.

 

Finally someone that notice that! Of course 10gb is not enough, so much power wasted in my opinion. CoD Warzone is already eating 8gb on 1080p with High Textures, I have an RTX 2080 and I had to lower the textures due to vRAM issues... Also RayTracing eats more vRAM and if you think that today consoles have 8gb and we are already at the limit, think about 16gb of vRAM consoles.

I remember picking a GTX 770 2gb over the 4gb version, worst desition ever... Watch Dogs 1 came out and needed more than 2gb, I had to lower the textures... GPU power wasted.

 

That's what I think. 20 seems like overkill if they go that route. 12 would have been perfect.

PC is an afterthought for most developers. PC gamers just refuse to admit such. Games brought to PC are generally to maximize profits or hit profit goals if not made on console. It's ironic because PC has proven to be profitable, yet keeps being treated like it's 2007 and piracy is rampant. Control IS a great example of such. Most ports should look far more improved than they do given the power PC has. (Or at least run far better) But nope. 4k res, and fov options - throw wide screen support in and everyone shits themselves and praises the dev for adding such awesome features ...like...wut? That's minimal.

I see it like this. PS4 Pro and Xbox One X. There is a solid difference between many games running on both. PS4 Pro usually has a lower resolution, less detail, less shadows, lower res textures where you can see an immediate noticeable difference between those system with many 3rd party titles. Now, introduce a PC with a 2080Ti against the X. There should be another level between those two just as big, if not bigger than what's between the Pro and X. Yet there really isn't. Unless you go to eurogamer and click their comparison pics that magnify the image by 50%, you're really not noticing much. So the devs put little effort.

And it's like PC gamers don't learn their lesson. Every damn time, since 2001 when I got into this hobby, when a promise is made, it is not kept. So Microsoft has this new storage implementation that's going to work magic. Sure. But, drivers have to be made just right, developers need to support it. Then they need to support it properly and not half-ass it. I've just read too many praises on upcoming game changers like this that never come through. Remember DX12 was supposed to speed everyone up.... and it basically stutters and runs like ass in most games. But that's forgotten.

Anyway, with all the new features of next-gen consoles....I don't see how 10gb will cut it.

 

I'll stop right there because you speak the truth. Let me just throw out a few examples of games that were created with PC as the priority. Max Payne, Max Payne 2, Call of Duty. Half Life, Half Life 2, Medal of Honor, and many more I won't even go into. It's a changing world, and we gotta adapt to it I guess.

 

As much as i'm interested in this "RTX IO" it's again something we won't see for 1 or 2 years.

 

so OP is saying 2/3 of nvidias new gpus are vram limited, i don't buy it, at least not 3080.
Best wait for reviews peeps.