this post was submitted on 01 Jan 2024
72 points (92.9% liked)

Games

16785 readers
797 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 39 points 10 months ago (3 children)

We don’t need faster GPUs as much as we need more VRAM. Double the memory instead of leaving it stagnant again.

[–] BigDaddySlim@lemmy.world 36 points 10 months ago

It's not just the lack of VRAM, it's also Nvidia and their stupidity lowering the bit bus for lower tier cards compared to the last gen counterparts.

[–] 9488fcea02a9@sh.itjust.works 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I dont understand the VRAM cuts.... The RAM fabs have been cutting production because of low prices

I would love more VRAM so that i can have a GPU that can do a bit of gaming and dabble in some AI stuff. 100% agree i'd pay for more VRAM instead of horsepower

[–] CaptainProton@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

More memory means you can do real work with it, and enterprise AI training is a money printer that they'd be scavenging the shit out of with cards that are closer substitutes.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 1 points 10 months ago

Honestly, the gap between the server parallel compute cards and the home video cards isn't that large. 24GB on video cards, 80GB for a compute card.

That's not even two binary orders of magnitude. That's a narrow window to try to make their money from. Plus, some tasks can be subdivided and run on multiple GPUs, and they can't segment up the market for those.

Like, in general, my bet is that when for most things that fit the above requirements of fitting in that window and having a task that can't be subdivided, there's probably enough room for algorithmic improvements to get two binary orders of magnitude of reduction in memory requirements.

[–] CaptainProton@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

But then you can do work with it, and that's where the real money is at.

They should all be shipping with 32GB now... AMD is at least seeing the light by releasing some 24gb cards under $1k

Really hope Intel's next generation of GPU silicon makes it a more realistic substitute - that would actually spice things up a lot, you basically won't see real competition again until nVidia's AI training dominance is in someone's crosshairs