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
What is the rest of your system? If you install CPU-z and run the validator then post the validation link here it will have all the relevant hardware specs for people to make better recommendations regarding potential upgrades.
Lastly, what display do you have and/or are you intending to get a new display as well? If you're running a 1080p display and have no intention of upgrading your display your 3060Ti is likely perfectly capable for most games currently and that shouldn't change between now and the end of Q1'25.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Unreal_Engine_5_games?useskin=vector
The short list of games I can't play because my 3070 Ti has 8GB VRAM would be: Satisfactory, the new version of ARK: Survival Evolved, and No Man's Sky after the recent update (runs but have to play it on a mix of low-medium with DLSS on max performance mode just to maintain 60 FPS).
I know it's VRAM because I can watch in MSI Afterburner (or GPU-Z) and see VRAM usage go right up to 8192 MB used and then FPS tanks down and the game gets slow.
So I just don't get to play those games at all until Nvidia releases another better video card. The only options right now is a 4070 Ti Super @ 16GB (not an option.. I'm not paying $500 for a card that is the same performance as mine with just more VRAM), or the 4080 starting at $960 for a faster 16GB card, and the money cost of cards goes up from there.
but i will upgrade in a year or 2 anyway, but i look at gpu prices as descent, if i get 5 to 8 years out of it for 1500 or less then it's ok, myself and other people spend a grand every 2 years on a new phone so if i can do that i can surely pay 1500 for a top notch gpu.
It's difficult to answer what should be done, we know in broad terms that the 4000 series is designed better than the 3000, but at the same time Nvidia has problems finding memories, so the 5000 might not be promising.
a card with ddr6 memories instead of ddr6x is also about to arrive, 4070 with more Cache
RTX 4070 Ti Super for $800 is best you can do currently if you want 16 GB Nvidia card.
Gonna say that all 3 of these examples are nonsense. I have a friend who has a 3060 (non-Ti) which only has 6GB of VRAM and they can play both Satisfactory and No Man's Sky without issue. Considering ARK lists a 2GB VRAM card in their system requirements I'd expect it'd also have no issues.
Treating UE5 as a blanket "needs more VRAM" is nonsense also. They can play Black Myth: Wukong on their 3060 without issue as well. They can play Dark and Darker without issue. The only UE5 game that has launched that they wanted to play and couldn't was the Pax Dei early access; as it does actually need 8GB of VRAM.
There will certainly be specific features that you won't be able to use and/or will need turned down but there is by no means some long laundry list of games that you "can't play" with a 3060 Ti; and that will likely still be the case for the next few years considering the current gen consoles available memory.