this post was submitted on 23 May 2025
102 points (91.8% liked)

PC Gaming

11052 readers
343 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ryper@lemmy.ca 130 points 2 days ago (3 children)

The full tweet:

Majority of gamers are still playing at 1080p and have no use for more than 8GB of memory. Most played games WW are mostly esports games. We wouldn't build it if there wasn't a market for it. If 8GB isn't right for you then there's 16GB. Same GPU, no compromise, just memory options.

I don't think he's that far off; eSports games don't have the same requirements as AAA single-player games.

[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 78 points 2 days ago (2 children)

This is a much more nuanced take than the headlines implies.

[–] snoons@lemmy.ca 42 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Are you saying journalists will publish articles with inflammatory headlines to maximize engagement with their ad-based website funding? Nah way, I don believe it.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

Just as an FYI editors usually pick the headlines.

[–] insomniac_lemon@lemmy.cafe 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I still see it being an issue of pricing and questionable value (over older/used/already-owned) of a bottlenecked part, particularly when it ends up with users who aren't esports users (for a multitude of reasons). In other words: stagnation.

It's more obvious with AMD selling new 4GB cards still in the budget category rather than ultra-budget, as in they aren't raising the floor. The jokes still work:

Sheen (from the show Jimmy Neutron) as AMD holding a GPU in the air: "This is the 6500XT!" Teacher: "AMD, this is the 5th year in a row that you've launched the RX 480"

EDIT: There were even polaris GPUs with 8GB

[–] SharkAttak@kbin.melroy.org 11 points 1 day ago

In this case, Intel's options of 10/12GB sounds like a more reasonable middle ground.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Then put 8GB in a 9060 non-XT and sell it for $200. You're just wasting dies that could've been used to make more 16GB cards available (or at least a 12 GB version instead of 8).

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 49 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Tell that to game developers. Specifically the ones that routinely don't optimize shit.

[–] DriftingLynx@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 day ago

Or to gamers who insist on playing these unoptimized games at max settings. $80 for the game, and then spend $1000 buying a gpu that can run the game.

[–] fox2263@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

Do you just not want more money?

Nvidia have dropped the ball epically and you have a golden opportunity to regain some GPU share here.

[–] SomeRandomNoob@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 1 day ago (2 children)

IMHO The Problem is only partly the 8GB VRAM (for 1080p). An at least equal part of the Problem is the sitty Optimisation of some game engines. Especially Unreal Engine 5.

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

There is nothing wrong with Unreal Engine and UE5 is not meaningfully different than UE4. The problem is that developers only “optimize” to pass console certifications while PC gamers are left out in the cold. It also doesn’t help that PC gamers have a lot more options and will often insist on choosing settings that are far beyond the capabilities of their particular hardware.

[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Yeah seeing a cool game and then seeing it's made in UE5 really puts a damper on things. I wish the engine had more work into performance optimization.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] mormund@feddit.org 23 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Guess I'll stick with my GTX 1070TI until next century when GPU manufacturers have passed the bong to someone else. Prices are insane for the performance they provide these days.

[–] skulblaka@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago

Same. I've encountered exactly one game, ever, that I couldn't play with that card, and that was last month with Doom: Dark Ages which won't even boot without RTX support.

Literally never had a single other problem over the past 7 years of use. I played Cyberpunk 2077 with that card. I'm currently playing Clair Obscur with that card and it looks stupendously beautiful on it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mintiefresh@lemmy.ca 20 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Lmao. AMD out here fumbling a lay up.

[–] BombOmOm@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Seriously.

All AMD had to do here is create a 12GB and 16GB version (instead of 8 and 16), then gesture at all the reviews calling the RTX 5060 8GB DOA because of the very limiting VRAM quantity.

8GB VRAM is not enough for most people. Even 1080p gaming is pushing the limits of an 8GB card. And this is all made worse when you consider people will have these cards for years to come.

Image (and many more) thanks to Hardware Unboxed testing

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Exactly. Even if you accept their argument that 8GB is usually enough today for 1080P (and we all know that is only true for high performance e-sports focused titles), it is not true for tomorrow. That makes buying one of those cards today a really poor investment.

[–] dormedas@lemmy.dormedas.com 8 points 1 day ago

Even worse when you consider the cost difference between 8GB and 16GB can’t be that high. If they ate the cost difference and marketed 16GB as the new “floor” for a quality card, then they might have eaten NVIDIA’s lunch where they can (low-end)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CrowAirbrush@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I just ditched my 8gb card because it wasn't doing the trick well enough at 1080p and especially not at 1440p.

So if i get this straight AMD agrees that they need to optimize games better.

I hate upscaling and frame gen with a passion, it never feels right and often looks messy too.

First descendant became a 480p mess when there were a bunch of enemies even tho i have a 24gb card and pretty decent pc to accompany that.

I'm now back to heavily modded Skyrim and damn do i love the lack of upscaling and frame gen. The Oblivion stutters were a nightmare and made me ditch the game within 10 hours.

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

FSR4 appears to solve a lot of problems with both upscaling and frame gen – not just in FSR, but generally. It appears they’ve fixed disocclusion trails, which is a problem even DLSS suffers from.

[–] r00ty@kbin.life 8 points 1 day ago

"8gb ought to be enough for anybody"

[–] MyOpinion@lemm.ee 11 points 2 days ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] 30p87@feddit.org 11 points 2 days ago

Oh fuck you AMD. NVidia fucked up with the 4060 already, and again with the 5060.

[–] newthrowaway20@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (2 children)

My 4k tv disagrees. Even upscaling from 1440p, my 10GB is barely enough on new games

[–] ryper@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 day ago

Last month's Steam survey had 1080p as the most common primary display resolution at about 55%, while 4k was at 4.57%.

[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

4K is a tiny part of the market. Even 1440p is a small segment (albeit rapidly growing).

[–] Fizz@lemmy.nz 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (7 children)

Ive got 16gb of vram 2k monitor and this tracks pretty accurately. I almost never use over 8gb. The only games that I can break 10gb are games where I can enable a setting (designed for old PCs) where I can load all the textures into vram.

Weird. You must be playing old games. Most modern games are going over 8gb at 1440p no problem. They have been for at least a few years now.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] original_reader@lemm.ee 7 points 2 days ago

I wish.

Send one of these guys by my place. I'll show them what 8GB can not do..

[–] xploit@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Oh so it's not that many players are FORCED to play at 1080p because AMDs and Novideos "affordable" garbage can't cope with anything more to make a game seem smooth, or better yet the game detected we're running on a calculator here so it took pity on us and set the graphics bar low.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] barusu@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Tell that to my triple 1440p screen flight simulator!

[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 days ago

Have you tried buying three graphics cards?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Quibblekrust@thelemmy.club 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This video I just watched the other day says otherwise (with clear evidence.)

https://youtu.be/C0_4aCiORzE

[–] alphabethunter@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

He is only testing AAA games at top settings. And that's the point AMD is "making". Most pc gamers are out there playing Esport titles at the lowest possible settings in 1080p to get the max fps possible. They're not wrong, but you could still say that it's ridiculous to buy a brand-new modern card only expecting to run esport titles. Most people I know that buy modern GPUs will decide to play new hot games.

load more comments
view more: next ›