Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
get a real job
VRAM is important, if it's low, then PCIe lanes are important because SAM and ReBar are doing a lot and the memory bus is important, because you'll wonder why increasing the core frequency by 10% gets you nowhere. Core complexes are also important and yes…
Тhe price is $$$
The nitty gritty details are nice to get into it if you want to, but none of them are worth hyper focusing on by themselves because they are just the collective variables that add up to the performance it offers. So performance for price, and in modern times I'd say performance/VRA for price, are key things. And then go from there. For some people, raw price has a limit, and to others, it doesn't and they just want about the highest performance. Depends on which one is you.
In certain situations, a certain specification might indeed be more important than usual. But you can't just look at it and say "what spec matters most". A lot of them simply matter a lot, and some even barely matter, so it's (usually) not worth hyper focusing on as though one is more important in a broad sense. They're nice to get into when discussing specifics, but it's too broad to generalize.
I don't think you can nail down a single attribute most of the time. For some it's brand name and for a few even going for looks of the thing--like rgb and whatever.
VRAM is important, but secondary, and although it's not ideal you can technically make up for a lack of VRAM with actual system RAM. My son was playing some Star Citizen on his 4 GB GPU. His VRAM was maxed out and his 16 GB of RAM was also just about maxed out. The game was a stuttery mess. We upped his system RAM to 32 GB, and the game is actually quite smooth and playable now.
If you max out your VRAM, your system will offload the overflow to RAM. As I mentioned, it's not ideal. RAM is typically slower than VRAM but from what I can tell it's fast enough to make a normally unplayable game playable if you have enough of it.
There's also plenty of systems that make no distinction between VRAM and RAM anyway. Lots of laptops and other portable PCs like the Steam Deck, or really any APU based system including consoles just have one big pool of memory shared between video and CPU.
I would think saving money for a replacement vehicle, when your McDonald's employee special breaks down side of the rode for the 1000th and last time, would take priority over a GPU.
Buying a GPU and then being late for work because your car breaks down again is not going to look good on your work history.
The demand for high power "RGB" computers has declined year over year. Mini PCs are rising in popularity.
People want computers to disappear, to hide them away.
Somebody thought that the XBox Series X could be hidden away in plain sight, likely as a compromise for the wife's aesthetic tastes. It is supposed to be better than the extremely unsightly PlayStation 5 that clashes with nearly all decor.
Smaller for me also suggests lower power consumption. Small footprint, low energy consumption, low heat output, low noise output.