It'll be interesting to see what the numbers from near release titles will be. Will the new Watchdogs enjoy having a 14 gig excessive buffer to use? Or will it just ignore the available space?

Will CP2077 be able to leverage the excess vram? Or will it be locked to 10 gig, like most titles are now?

I remember being pissed when I found out that Dragon Age Origins was locked to 4 gig utilization max, even if you had more to spare.

lantern48
 I've exceeded that in 2 games I'm currently playing: Wolfenstein: Youngblood and Grand Theft Auto V. Once I get to about 9.8GB's of V-Ram used, FPS drops like crazy and the screen looks like a flip book. I have to drop a setting or 2 to keep it under 9.8GB's used.
 
Bottom line is that if you game at 4k and want to max most or all settings, then 10GB is not enough. V-RAM gets eaten up like it's nothing at high resolution with max settings. And thanks to the 450w BIOS for the FTW3, you can stay over 60 FPS in most games and are limited only by the 10GB's of V-RAM.

None of the games? Keep moving the goal posts. I am putting up evidence in 2 specific games you have mentioned where 3rd party reviewers do not seem to have a catastrophic failure in performance as you would put it. Why is it your anecdotal "9.84GB" of VRAM usage spike more valid in this argument that 10GB of VRAM is plenty but the links I have shown are not? You don't like the 2080Ti results? Fine, but for the VRAM argument it's close enough. I spent the 10 minutes googling results with links and numbers vs your "it happened to me, therefore you are wrong."
 
Seems more like you are at a predetermined conclusion not me. I say it is currently a non issue, but you want to make your 2-3 examples the be all and end all. 10GB is fine for almost everyone but the extreme fringe cases currently. Will it get worse? Probably, but it's not as catastrophic as you currently make it out to be.
 
The 3080 20GB remains to be seen. Since Nvidia could just not bother if it turns out the RX 6x00 series with it's 16GB of VRAM doesn't threaten the 3080. I think they'll release a 20GB version to just play the numbers game, not because it will actually be needed/used.
 
EDIT:
 
Actually while I'm at it a few more.
 
Legitreviews: https://www.legitreviews.com/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-fe-video-card-review-ampere_221996/4
Wolfenstein Youngblood - 4K Uber settings
3080FE - 150fps (RT off)
Far Cry 5 - 4K Ultra preset (I think you mentioned Far Cry)
3080FE - 95fps average
 
Techspot: https://www.techspot.com/article/2109-nvidia-rtx-3080-ray-tracing-dlss/
Wolfenstein Youngblood - 4K Mein Leben! settings, TSSAA(?)
4K Native - 142fps average
 
Guru3D: https://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/geforce-rtx-3080-founder-review,23.html
Far Cry New Dawn (Same engine as 5, probably optimized better) - 4K Ultra
3080FE - 96fps average
 
So as it currently stands, 10GB is plenty.
 
 
 

LinS123
 
None of the games? Keep moving the goal posts.

Not moving any goal post. You still haven't shown V-RAM usage on a 3080 at all. The games as you play them ramp up V-RAM usage - it gets higher. It doesn't start from go exceeding. Is that what's confusing you?
 
And again, it's very possible the reviewer/tester never played long enough or went into an area to cause the V-RAM spike and the issues. Or maybe they did and felt it wasn't worth mentioning for whatever reason.
 

LinS123 I am putting up evidence in 2 specific games you have mentioned where 3rd party reviewers do not seem to have a catastrophic failure in performance as you would put it.

See above.
 
 
 

LinS123Why is it your anecdotal "9.84GB" of VRAM usage spike more valid in this argument that 10GB of VRAM is plenty

Is this a serious question? Because it's 3 different games all having the same issue when V-RAM reaches that number. As soon as the number lowers from a setting change, FPS returns from stuck in the 20's to normal.
 
You only have an opinion - nothing else. You've tested nothing.
You "feel" it is enough. I mean, come on. Don't be ridiculous.
 

LinS123 You don't like the 2080Ti results? Fine,

Notice you dishonestly try to spin it as I don't like the results. For 5-seconds, be honest and admit testing a 2080 Ti is completely irrelevant. And that's without even bringing up no V-RAM data is provided there, either.
 
 

LinS123 your "it happened to me, therefore you are wrong."

It didn't just happen. I can repeat it over and over 100%. In 3 different games at the exact same number the issues occur. That's called reproduceable evidence.
 

LinS123 Seems more like you are at a predetermined conclusion not me.

That doesn't make any sense. I wish I wasn't exceeding V-RAM usage in these games and that the 10 GB's were enough and not a limiting factor in some cases. I certainly would be doing more playing right now or paying more attention to the Sunday night football game than pretending V-RAM goes over and causes issues. For what? That's just dumb. Think about it.
 
On the other hand, those of you not testing clearly just don't want to believe you bought or will buy a $800 card that can already have V-RAM exceeded in some games. Despite this train of thought being annoying, I get it. But it's better to be honest even if the outcome isn't one you want to hear.
 

LinS123 it's not as catastrophic as you currently make it out to be.

Play the games I'm playing at the settings I am. Not for 30-seconds. I mean really playtest. Then you can have a valid opinion on what the level of severity it is. Can you at least see how pointless it is to be making such statements and you're not playing/testing any of the games? 
 
 
 

LinS123 The 3080 20GB remains to be seen. 

It's essentially been confirmed by multiple sources. But sure, it doesn't exist until it does.


I'd bet the farm on it, though. Feel free to bring this up at a later point.

Since the originally question OP had was whether or not anyone had any issues with it's 10GB of VRAM. I read the question as is 10GB enough for modern games. You have had repeatable issues and I don't doubt your claims of VRAM issues. But your aggressive attitude to one sarcastic comment on my end hardly seems reasonable. I simply found reviews where 2 of the aforementioned games do not seem to show a huge issue with VRAM. Sure in your specific case it happens, that sucks. But that doesn't make your argument the only correct one. It shows that most reviewers do not seem to have this issue you are having. You then demanding VRAM usage numbers is "moving the goalposts."
 
Going on to accuse me of dishonesty simply because I included a 2080Ti result in an argument about VRAM and made an offhand remark about you "not liking" it is also quite extreme. It's a figure of speech, I was acknowledging the fact that you felt the 2080Ti results are invalid.
 
As for the 20GB model, until hits shelves "it remains to be seen." How come you cut out the bit immediately after where I state my belief it's also real and probably coming to market? As it seems you can't really have an discussion/argument civilly without resolving to moving goal posts and ad hominem attacks. I am done. 

I know it's been said here but allocation doesn't equal utilization. If 10 gb was holding back the 3080 at 4k then you would think the 3090 would outperform the 3080 way more than the average 12% in those titles. Far Cry New Dawn is 8% faster with the 3090, Wolfenstein Youngblood at Mein Leben is 13% faster with a 3090, and Doom Eternal is 15% faster with a 3090, GTA:V is about 15% faster with a 3090. Maybe an extra 3% over the average is a sign of a memory bottleneck but I don't think so being that World War Z is 18% faster on a 3090 over a 3080 while using only 6 gb of vram. 

CraptacularOne
Funny how it took me all of 30 seconds to illustrate you are completely ignorant to what you're trying to argue.
 
Here we have GTA 5 running at 4K with 8XMSAA no less and only "requesting" 9.3GB VRAM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Axd3-007kWM
 
Thanks for also taking the bait and PROVING you have no idea what you're talking about.

lantern48
Since you edited to add this comment, I'll respond. It's not a hard concept to understand. The extra 50w is allowing higher overclocks which provide more FPS. There are games where that extra few FPS where you're hovering around 60 FPS makes a difference. The 2 I already listed and Far Cry 3 at 4k are all examples.
 
You make yourself look really bad when you can't understand something so basic and simple.

If you were really VRAM limited, no amount of overclocking or increased power limits would help. When a game is truly VRAM capped it starts swapping information between the windows page file and physical system RAM. Increasing a GPUs core clocks will not alleviate this. DO I need to redownload this myself on my RTX 3090 system as well? 

That was a spectacular bait, hook and sinker.

budi20
In advance: sorry for some bad english incoming, i'll try my best
Let me try some math, at least thats my stupid basic theroretical understanding of whats going on with vram, correct me if thats bs 
Lets say you got a 4k monitor, thats 3840x2160, so 8,294,400 pixels to be rendered. Now you got 3 led in every pixel, and all of those want to be rendered in a color depth of 32 bit.
That means there are 8,294,000 x3 x32 bit to be rendered, thats 796,262,400.
Now 8 bit is 1 byte, 1,000,000 byte are a Mbyte, so 796,262,400 /8 /1,000,000 equals 99.5328 Mbyte, so roughly 100Mbyte per frame are needed in theory, if you really render every single bit every frame. 
 
So 10000Mbyte of vram should be able to store 100 rendered images, which would provide you 100fps, again, at least in my "theory"
I think, if the gpu is fast enough to provide as much frames fast enough, 10gb should be enough.
 

No, this is not how it works. What you are talking about plays only a small role in the VRAM, this is the "frame buffer" that will usually hold only a few frames. Vast majority of VRAM is used for assets to render those frames; think of textures, geometry data and the like.
 
When you increase resolution there is room to show more details on the screen, therefor you need better (higher resolution) textures in particular and maybe some more detailed geometry. This is what requires more VRAM.
 
The speed of the graphics card is independent of the amount of VRAM until you hit a situation where everything the GPU needs no longer fits in it.
 
The problem here is that if assets no longer fit in VRAM, you will have to get it from either regular RAM and/or have some clever streaming system to pull them from storage. RAM and storage are a lot slower than VRAM, so your graphics card is more likely to wait on these until it can render resulting in a lower frame rate or temporary lower fidelity (texture popping).

Can we please stop looking at allocated vram and saying thats how much it is using? There was a guy on reddit yesterday showing me that half life alyx uses all 24gb of vram on his 3090 and that people without 3090 wont be able to run that game at max settings which isnt true. For me i went from gtx 970 to 2080 super for 2 weeks to 3080 and on same games with same settings my vram usage went from 4 to 8 to almost 10, you cant tell me i need 10gb of vram on world of warcraft a game from 2004, especially when it ran exactly the same on gtx 970 with less than half of vram 3080 has

I feel it's a chicken and the egg situation. The 3080 10GB is enough since if you are a game publisher and you release a game that needs more then a 3080 10GB has the game will be trashed online as running like garbage. Thus the developers are going into release knowing 10GB is enough. That doesn't mean if games could use more like 20GB that they wouldn't be able to use more then 10GB but right now the 3080 10GB is out so if a 3080 20GB did come out down the road it wouldn't really matter since the existence of the 3080 10GB has development of games locked on a target of 10GB being enough. Adding more memory to the current generation wouldn't really help right now but down the road when a next generation of cards comes out it might allow people to hold out longer in upgrading.

Hoggle
I feel it's a chicken and the egg situation. The 3080 10GB is enough since if you are a game publisher and you release a game that needs more then a 3080 10GB has the game will be trashed online as running like garbage. Thus the developers are going into release knowing 10GB is enough. That doesn't mean if games could use more like 20GB that they wouldn't be able to use more then 10GB but right now the 3080 10GB is out so if a 3080 20GB did come out down the road it wouldn't really matter since the existence of the 3080 10GB has development of games locked on a target of 10GB being enough. Adding more memory to the current generation wouldn't really help right now but down the road when a next generation of cards comes out it might allow people to hold out longer in upgrading.

also developers arent gonna release games that arent gonna run on high end gpus, people keep brining up the consoles have 16gb of gddr6 therefore in a year all the games would need gpus with 16gb of vram to run any new games at all, even ignoring the part that those consoles dont have access to all that ram to use as vram that would never happen, if you look at steam majority of people use graphics cards in 200-300$ range, 2080ti was literally like 0.5%, devs arent gonna release a game that only like 1% of people can play if even that many people even buy a 3080 with 20gb of vram or 3090, i was using a 970 with 3.5gb of vram until a week ago and was still able to run every new game at 1080p60 on high, even gamersnexus did testing where they took gpus and tested how much vram games need and found out it was way less than it allocated, games will need more powerful gpus way before they will need more vram

lantern48

ReZpawN
devs arent gonna release a game that only like 1% of people can play 

Why wouldn't people with less V-RAM be able to play a game? If a game can use up to 10GB of V-RAM, that doesn't mean it's the minimum requirement to play it. You can simply turn settings down until you are using less. There's a minimum requirement for games - that's all a player needs to meet to play. You understand that, right? For example: You can play a modern game that uses up to 8GB's of V-RAM on a 7080 Ti which only has 3GB of V-RAM.
 
 
 
 

i guarantee you vram wont be an issue, it will be even less of an issue when rtx io releases and xbox is using it it so most cross platform games will use, no games show actual vram usage, when i switched from 970 with 3.5gb to 2080 2080 super with 8 my vram usage went from 3.5 to 8 on exact same resolution and settings with same 60fps cap and my games ran the same, yet according to you my vram was maxed out and i needed even more even tho before i was doing just fine on  same settings with only 3.5gb 

ReZpawN

lantern48

ReZpawN
devs arent gonna release a game that only like 1% of people can play 

Why wouldn't people with less V-RAM be able to play a game? If a game can use up to 10GB of V-RAM, that doesn't mean it's the minimum requirement to play it. You can simply turn settings down until you are using less. There's a minimum requirement for games - that's all a player needs to meet to play. You understand that, right? For example: You can play a modern game that uses up to 8GB's of V-RAM on a 7080 Ti which only has 3GB of V-RAM.
 
 
 
 

i guarantee you vram wont be an issue, it will be even less of an issue when rtx io releases and xbox is using it it so most cross platform games will use, no games show actual vram usage, when i switched from 970 with 3.5gb to 2080 2080 super with 8 my vram usage went from 3.5 to 8 on exact same resolution and settings with same 60fps cap and my games ran the same, yet according to you my vram was maxed out and i needed even more even tho before i was doing just fine on  same settings with only 3.5gb 

You completely skipped what I just said and are responding to stuff way earlier in the tread. Way to duck and dodge. You made a ridiculous statement saying devs won't make games for only 1% of people that have 3090s and 3080 20GB versions. No one said that will happen and that's not even how V-RAM works. 
 
No one ever said graphic cards will need 16GB in order to play upcoming games to match consoles. That's you not able to comprehend what you read. The maximum amount of V-RAM a console has is not the minimum requirement to play a game. Are you even listening to yourself? Total V-RAM does not = minimum requirement.
 
Now go ahead and dance around it some more.
 

ReZpawN
 
also nvidia and amd know there are people who think 10gb isnt enough so they are gonna release 3080 with exact same core but twice the vram for 300 or 400$ more and people will sell their 10gb 3080s and buy 20gb 3080s and nvidia will make a ton of money even tho those people didnt need that vram 


 

There are games than can exceed 10GB of V-RAM right now. And upcoming games are going to push even harder. That's just basic common sense. I mean, it doesn't work like you think it does where people can't play unless they have a 3090 or 3080 20GB, you'll just have to turn some settings down.


But shame on me for trying to explain something to someone who thinks V-RAM is a conspiracy.
The Earth is flat too, right?

lantern48

DarkTAO

lantern48

notarjy
Well I ask because I am also running fully max settings. Even then I did not have any issues with vram or slow down.

Sorry, I don't believe you. That's flat-out not possible with a 3080 at 4k in GTA:V without exceeding V-RAM usage in game. And you sure aren't getting 120 FPS either with everything maxed.

I wonder if they forget that GTAV has an advanced graphics tab as well. 

It doesn't matter. Some people would rather believe a lie to be happy than accept a truth they don't like.
It is what it is.

i love how literally everyone is like 10gb of vram is enough but you still get people that are like no its not enough, somehow i think im gonna trust nvidia and game devs more than some guy on a forum 

ReZpawN
 
i love how literally everyone is like 10gb of vram is enough but you still get people that are like no its not enough, somehow i think im gonna trust nvidia and game devs more than some guy on a forum 

You shouldn't trust me. Test for yourself. My goal is not be right. It was to share what I came across in testing. Instead of other people testing to see if I'm an isolated case, this turned into a thread full of Twitter level opinions. People who don't even own a 3080 making claims about what it can and can't do. People who don't play in 4k. People who don't have the games mentioned. People using a 2080 Ti as a comparison.


 
If it turned out what I tested was completely wrong if tested by others, then that's fine. It's not about being "right."
I just never thought a forum of fellow computer geeks would think feelings and opinions matter more than data.
Now I know.