Hardware Unboxed did a test with a 5500XT with 4GB vs 8GB and various PCIe speeds. The result was 4GB instead of 8GB was not that big a deal for most games (1080p), but PCIe 3.0 4x was a huge limiter. So their original blog post was marketing bullshit.
That assumes you want to be able to run the games on high. Which is nice of course but when dealing with shortages, beggers can't be choosers. I only have a 4GB card myself (RX570) and it does what it needs to do
To be charitable, the argument could be "high-res textures won't be visibly different on 1080p" which is not generally true but at least it makes sense as an argument.
Hardware Unboxed did a test with a 5500XT with 4GB vs 8GB and various PCIe speeds. The result was 4GB instead of 8GB was not that big a deal for most games (1080p), but PCIe 3.0 4x was a huge limiter. So their original blog post was marketing bullshit.
That assumes you want to be able to run the games on high. Which is nice of course but when dealing with shortages, beggers can't be choosers. I only have a 4GB card myself (RX570) and it does what it needs to do
How? 2-3 games show a significant difference out of 12.
The games he tested at medium quality were the highest playable settings for that card. No one is saying you don't need more than 4GB for 4K gaming.
You are right, I see what you are saying now.
Hey man my pixel art indies don't need more than 4GB of VRAM to clearly this blog post is full of shit.
VR games also benefit from having >= 6GB.
It's not about screen framebuffer (4K vs 1080p), it's about textures. You didn't read his post.
Doom Eternal uses 8 GB of VRAM with hi-res textures.
To be charitable, the argument could be "high-res textures won't be visibly different on 1080p" which is not generally true but at least it makes sense as an argument.
I did not know that high resolution textures don't impact performance significantly as long as you have enough VRAM.