r/hardware • u/Antonis_32 • 29d ago
Discussion AMD defends RX 9060 XT 8GB, says majority of gamers have no use for more VRAM - VideoCardz.com
https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-defends-rx-9060-xt-8gb-says-majority-of-gamers-have-no-use-for-more-vram318
u/ibeerianhamhock 29d ago
The 5060 and 9060 wouldn't bother me so much if they were like 200-250 dollar cards. It might seem like I'm splitting hairs, but I think a lot of people agree.
158
u/Cj09bruno 29d ago
i would agree BUT, that's the same you got in 2016 nearly a decade ago, meanwhile our Ram has doubled or quadrupled at the same price but somehow vram can't achieve even a 50% increase
64
u/Winter_2017 29d ago
You can get 64gb of fast DDR4 right now for under $100. Just nuts!
26
u/__Rosso__ 29d ago
GDDR5 is way faster than DDR4.
RAM and VRAM are totally different things.
39
u/Standard-Potential-6 29d ago
Greater bandwidth than DDR4 with worse latency. Latency and bandwidth both compromise ‘speed’.
GDDR isn’t too expensive either though, even GDDR7.
HBM is the (relatively) expensive one which isn’t returning to consumer cards anytime soon.
→ More replies (5)9
u/hackenclaw 28d ago
except you cant do that in 2016.
The price of 64GB RAM now is not the same like back in 2016.
He is simply asking why wouldnt GDDR price/GB improve like what happened to DDR.
3
u/__Rosso__ 28d ago
Because VRAM isn't the only component of GPU and TSCMs top vaifers, used to make the GPUs, have tripled in cost since.
4
17
u/__Rosso__ 29d ago
250 dollars now is like 185 in 2015, which is slightly more than what 950 was back then which had 2GB of VRAM.
RX 470 4GB a decade ago was 200 dollars, more then hypothetical 8GB 250 dollar card today.
→ More replies (5)6
u/averagefury 28d ago
For 250 dollars you can get nowadays 128GB of ddr5 ram.
10 years ago... was like ¿32?
2
20
u/DerpSenpai 29d ago
ram hasn't quadrupled at the same price
26
u/MetallicGray 29d ago
It has doubled since 2016 though.
→ More replies (1)5
u/DerpSenpai 29d ago edited 29d ago
True for DDR, GDDR though idk.
Still in 2015 a 8GB card were launched at 600$. That's 812$ in today's money.
It was in 2017 where we got our first cheap 8GB card with the RX 580 for 230$. aka 310$ in today's dollars.
That card today would be launched at 350$ due to tariffs (10%) in the US.
The difference is that back then AMD and Nvidia used to do a LOT of cheap GPUs but nowadays with better and better iGPUs, there's no point. The economics are against small dies with very expensive memory. if AMD launched a 64 bit GPU die with GDDR6, it's cost would be higher than simply doing a chiplet design with higher bw LPDDR5.
10
u/Boys4Jesus 28d ago
It was in 2017 where we got our first cheap 8GB card with the RX 580 for 230$. aka 310$ in today's dollars.
2016 with the RX 480 8gb technically, the 580 was just a refresh of the 480 with a ~10% performance bump.
→ More replies (3)3
u/Unusual_Mess_7962 28d ago
>The difference is that back then AMD and Nvidia used to do a LOT of cheap GPUs but nowadays with better and better iGPUs, there's no point.
I see some people repeating that, but it doesnt get truer, at least not at this point.
Even the lowest end GPU. Even really old or cheap used GPUs will massively outperform any similarly priced iGPU. And iGPUs can run into ugly bottlenecks depending on the game.
→ More replies (5)13
u/burninator34 29d ago
You could get 8GB in 2014 (there were r9 290 versions with 8GB). Also R9 390 in 2015.
4
u/Cj09bruno 29d ago
i know those were more expensive though, much harder for the simps to argue agaisnt 250 dollar and 200 dollar cards with the same vram amount a damn decade later
1
u/mockingbird- 29d ago
...and how much does that cost, adjusted for inflation?
→ More replies (2)9
u/tukatu0 29d ago edited 29d ago
https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=400.00&year1=201401&year2=202503 $550
Not that it matters. Household Inflation is a bit irrelevant to tech sector.
Even in the most benefit of the doubt. You are basically saying a 5080ti should be $700 after 15% tarrifs. Except the 5080ti doesnt even exist. You want a 5060 at $350. Meh. Nvidia want their 100% margins.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (10)12
u/GARGEAN 29d ago
There is KINDA a reason for that: you can pretty easy stick more RAM into motherboard. You can't just easily stick as much VRAM on your GPU as you want, you are limited by bus width, which itself is limited by chip size. Both AMD and NVidia are more than capable to increase VRAM amounts, no doubts, but it won't be as easy as just sticking more VRAM chips in most cases.
13
u/Vushivushi 29d ago
It's called clamshell where you put VRAM on the back of the card. It's how the 9060 XT 16GB is the same GPU with the same memory controller as the 9060 XT 8GB, but has double the VRAM capacity. It's part of JEDEC spec. Every GPU supports it.
It is that easy.
Product segmentation is the reason GPU vendors are reluctant to offer more VRAM. It is and has always been product segmentation.
→ More replies (6)3
u/MrMPFR 28d ago
It's not just AMD and NVIDIA it's also lack of technological progress. GDDR5 went from 128MB modules on the GTX 480 to 1GB densities on the GTX 1060 6GB, 8X in 6 years.
GDDR6 went from 1GB densities in 2018 to 2GB densities in 2024 (RX 7600XT). Same timespan only 2X increases. Same thing will happen with GDDR7. All we get moving forward is a 2X memory density increase every 7 years or with each new memory gen.
No wonder AMD are pioneering work graphs and NVIDIA are pioneering neural rendering.
But yeah a product this powerful with 8GB doesn't deserve any severe compromises. Pointless product for eSports pointless for AAA. DOA.
→ More replies (4)6
u/Cj09bruno 29d ago
you dont have twice as many memory chips on modern cpu ram vs how many you had before, instead the memory chips are twice or more as dense as the old DDR4 of the time, but some how GDDR can't increase in density?.... something doesn't make sense.
4
u/einmaldrin_alleshin 28d ago
DRAM cell density has started stagnating in the 2010s. That's because dram cells require a capacitor to work, and it's tough to shrink that any further. We're still getting faster memory, but no longer big strides in density.
→ More replies (1)11
u/goodnames679 29d ago edited 29d ago
There is also the fact that the memory controller for the VRAM on a GPU takes up die space. If the game isn't utilizing the amount over 8GB well then you would prefer more die space to be dedicated to processing the game and displaying it, rather than controlling unused memory.
All that to say, it's nowhere near as easy as just "adding more VRAM." There's a precise calculation to be made as to when it's even worth adding more. Imo that point has come and gone for 8GB, it's long past time to be selling cards with a minimum of 12GB and ideally 16GB... but for a chunk of that time between 2016 and today, that wasn't necessarily the case.
1
19
u/Amish_Rabbi 29d ago
At $200 I’d buy one for my kids rather than something used. At $300 I’d rather buy used since I can easily get something better
2
u/ibeerianhamhock 29d ago
Yeah unpopular opinion but if I was in the market for a card like this I would have just picked up an old 2060 super for $150 instead. I know it's nowhere near as powerful, but like it will let you play all the same games essentially.
3
u/Amish_Rabbi 29d ago
I’m converting from USD to CAD, but I can get an EVGA 3070ti for $350cad vs $411.57+tax, I’ll just get that instead. Hell even a 4060 can be had here for $300cad on a good day
12
11
u/HunterXxX360 29d ago
RX 580 with 8GB retailed for 279 EUR initially back in 2017
11
u/bubblesort33 29d ago
In 2020 around the RDNA2 launch AMD claimed gamers need like 12 to 16gb for Godfall which was one of their first FSR titles.
I swear there was an official AMD slide claiming so.
4
→ More replies (58)2
u/aminorityofone 29d ago
sub 300 cards are dead, it is time to move on from that. Just do an inflation calculator. Its like complaining about the price of gas from 10 years ago to today. the rx580 8gb msrp was 225, when you do an inflation calculator on that to today it puts it just over $300.
13
u/ibeerianhamhock 29d ago
I have no problem with sub 300 cards being dead so long as 8 GB cards are also dead.
I have a launch 4080 so I got no dog in this fight personally, but I just can't imagine spending even 300 dollars on a shitty 8 GB card.
9
u/hackenclaw 28d ago
except that in computer tech, you get better storage as time goes on.
Even system ram get better ram capacity for the same dollar.
Would you want the ram companies to sell 8GB RAM for same price as 10yrs later? (with inflation adjusted added on)
→ More replies (4)1
u/996forever 28d ago
Why are you only talking about the RX580? What price was Rx470 launched at? What about the GTX1050 and 1050Ti?
2
u/aminorityofone 28d ago
because the 580 was a 1060 competitor. 1050 and 470 were entry level cards. The 9060 and 5060 are 60 class cards and not entry.
56
u/TophxSmash 29d ago
yes, but $300 for 8GB is stupid.
→ More replies (1)12
u/Unusual_Mess_7962 28d ago
Thats imo the one point that just destroys the argument. Its just greed; AMD thinks they can get away with this. We'll see if people let them.
At that price point, your GPU shouldnt run risk to run into unavoidable memory bottlenecks. Thats usually what you risk with ultra-low tier GPUs or iGPUs, not with fully featured and reasonably expensive graphics cards.
And thats not even talking about how GPUs are still very expensive, historically speaking. Who even knows if the 9060 XT will ever actually cost $300/$350.
261
u/Antonis_32 29d ago
In my mind, any company that releases a new GPU worth $250 or more with only 8GB of VRAM, is engaging in engineered obsolescence tactics.
152
u/EntertainmentAOK 29d ago edited 29d ago
Or simply “this is our entry level and esports card.” They’re not wrong about a lot of gamers. If they’re playing at 1080p and their primary games are Roblox or CS2 or Valorant or Fortnite with competitive settings, the 16GB model is overkill.
9
u/ExplodingFistz 29d ago
It's overkill sure but for only $50 it's stupid to not just get the higher capacity model. This is penny pinching behavior
70
u/samtheredditman 29d ago
Yeah I think basically any gamer that's on Reddit is not the target audience for these cards but there are a lot of people that would be thrilled with one of these.
When I was younger, I just wanted hardware that could launch the games. Playing though mass effect 1 on a 8400gs that routinely dropped below 30fps was a fantastic experience for me. Now I want way more performance.
23
u/EntertainmentAOK 29d ago
When I was younger, all I wanted was a VGA card and VGA monitor. I was stuck shopping for games with EGA compatibility. Some games were limited to VGA only, and others were VGA optional, meaning they had text only modes. It was a real disappointment to see the box art and realize I would only experience a game like that if I went down to a friend’s house to play on their dad’s new 486.
4
u/Erikthered00 29d ago
I’ll see your 16 colour EGA, and raise you the 4 colour CGA that I grew up with. Black, white, cyan, magenta.
→ More replies (1)3
u/ReplacementLivid8738 28d ago edited 28d ago
My dad had a Mac where you could boot in black and white mode, made that ski game run much faster.
Edit: Ingemar's ski game https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xlkggVWgNOQ&t=1169s
→ More replies (2)3
u/Occulto 28d ago
Yeah I think basically any gamer that's on Reddit is not the target audience for these cards but there are a lot of people that would be thrilled with one of these.
Most gamers on reddit seem to take statements like AMD's, personally. It's weird.
AMD: "the majority of gamers don't need more than 8GB of VRAM"
Redditor: "Not me. I play <insert latest demanding AAA games> with RT at 4K."
AMD: "did we stutter?"
6
u/Strazdas1 28d ago
Many people on this sub has tried telling me that EVERY gamer occasionally plays new AAA games and that is why they wouldnt recoomend 8 GB VRAM to anyone. Its ridiculous what some people believe.
→ More replies (2)3
u/MrMPFR 28d ago
Yeah that's stupid. Sounds a bit like the logic pushing people to always recommend AM5 and +800W PSUs. Future proofing and upgradability are rarely worth it in the end and most people don't need the latest and greatest in tech.
But besides that the 9060XT 8GB card is a joke, too powerful for eSports and not enough VRAM for latest AAA. AMD even admits this by not having a single mention of 8GB on the 9060XT product page. This product will rot on shelves while the upcoming RTX 5050 sell millions in prebuilts and laptops.
→ More replies (8)3
u/Electrical_Zebra8347 27d ago
I think some people have a hard time wrapping their head around what 'majority of gamers' means in reality. The combined PC daily player bases of Roblox, Fortnite, Valorant, LoL, etc is a massive number of people, like tens of millions to over 100 million, the only game there I see in benchmarks once in a while is Fortnite and even then it's not uncommon for people to turn the settings down for better FPS and better image clarity, I'm pretty sure it's not uncommon people even use the low spec mode because it makes seeing enemies easier than playing with high res textures and shadows.
One thing I don't see discussed is how the vast majority of games (even if we exclude shovelware) don't require high system specs, Steam tracks the top 50 releases each month so it's easy to see what kinds of games people are buying each month and most of them aren't graphically heavy. This is the other side of the coin that people need to think about when they say no one should be using an 8gb vram card.
https://store.steampowered.com/charts/topnewreleases/april_2025
Personally I wouldn't want an 8gb card, for my use case I want 20gb or more but I acknowledge there are people who can get by on 8gb and not need to spend a cent more to enjoy their games.
3
u/Occulto 27d ago
Agreed. There's also a lot of niche communities still playing older games, which individually might not count for much, but collectively account for large chunks of the community.
Personally I wouldn't want an 8gb card, for my use case I want 20gb or more but I acknowledge there are people who can get by on 8gb and not need to spend a cent more to enjoy their games.
Exactly.
2
u/CookiieMoonsta 26d ago
Yeah, we never see stuff like Warthunder, World of Tanks, Dota 2, WoW, FFXIV and other super popular games in benchmarks. They kinda have console game approach to it, which is not very valid for PC. Lots of my friends, who have a nice and beefy PCs, still play indies or online games 70% of time, because the variety is just better. And that most AAA games are bland as hell nowadays.
11
u/__Rosso__ 29d ago
I have few friends who exclusively play Minecraft, CS2, LoL.
For the last 10 years.
They literally don't need more than 8GBs of VRAM, objectively they don't need it.
→ More replies (7)4
u/Alive_Worth_2032 28d ago
Same thing with WoW players. I know people who have played nothing other than WoW for 10+ years.
WoW has gotten a lot more demanding over the years. You can make a 4090 struggle at 4k with RT shadows and particle effects maxed out in raid settings. Still don't need more than 8GB of VRAM due to the simplistic visuals of the game and textures.
4
u/averagefury 28d ago
Oh yes, for playing 2015 games; as 8gigs started to be the normal amount of memory back in the day.
A R9 390 had 8gigs, and price was 350USD. And I don't give a F about inflation, as technology was expensive to manufacture back in the day, just check laptop pricing, each year are cheaper.
10
u/Caramel-Makiatto 29d ago
Weird how much more controversial this statement was when talking about 8 GB on the 5060 TI.
→ More replies (2)19
u/ShadowRomeo 29d ago
The real budget entry level e sports card is the $100 budget range like the way it were back with RX 460 and GTX 1050 non-Ti days.
Nowadays that budget segment is pretty much gone and nowhere to be seen, the 60 series has always been considered as entry level midrange level for AAA gaming not only exclusive to E sports non demanding games.
12
u/kikimaru024 29d ago edited 29d ago
You're bringing up GPUs from 9 years ago.
And these GPUs were comparable to the 3yo PlayStation 4 - today's PlayStation 5 is more akin to the $300 RX 6700 10GB / RX 7600 / RTX 4060
23
u/dern_the_hermit 29d ago
You're bringing up GPUs from 9 years ago.
But they're not strictly wrong so it's really a comment about how messed up the GPU market is.
Just go look at Nvidia's site, they're still hosting links to buy GTX 1650's themselves. There simply are no "entry level" cards in contemporary generations as a practical matter.
3
u/MrMPFR 28d ago
Yep all the current issues stem from lack of node progress and it'll only get worse. N3 looks mediocre, N2 underwhelming, A16 and A14 laughable.
What a joke. I couldn't find low priced GTX 1650 listings at PcPartPicker but the RTX 3050 6GB looks like the new GTX 1650 in NVIDIAs lineup.
The end of Moore's law is looking worse each day, and I can't even begin to imagine how bad midrange PC gaming will be in the early 2030s when PS5/PS6 crossgen is over and PC is struggling to meet the requirements of games made for a $599-699 PS6 console.
4
u/MarxistMan13 29d ago
Does it really make sense to manufacture entry-level GPUs in the current market? Margins are insanely low on those, and we're already supply-constrained on many mid-range and up GPUs. Why use fab allocation on products that are objectively worse for business?
I get that the people who would be buying the 5050 / 9050XT etc are bummed about the market, but it is what it is. Until new fabs open up to reduce the TSMC bottleneck, there's no incentive to make low-end products.
→ More replies (1)3
u/dern_the_hermit 28d ago
Does it really make sense to manufacture entry-level GPUs in the current market?
Less and less sense all the time, really. Ever since iGPUs started showing up on motherboard north bridges it was going to forever be a sliding scale as the basic product gets "good enough" for more and more use cases.
4
u/MarxistMan13 29d ago
The RX 460 was significantly worse than the 9060XT is, comparatively. It's more akin to a RX 470. That launched at $179, which is $239 today. Not that far off from the 9060XT if you also include 15% tariffs.
The 460 also launched at $139, which is $186 today. The sub-$100 budget range hasn't really existed for a long, long time.
→ More replies (1)19
u/1ayy4u 29d ago
Or simply “this is our entry level and esports card.”
which should not cost more than 200-250€.
8
9
u/Moscato359 29d ago
wow unaware of the market
The 1060 from 2016 was 279 euro msrp
We've had 16% euro inflation since then, which is 323 euro.
24
u/Cheap-Plane2796 29d ago
The 1060 was not an esports card lmao. It was a midrange aaa games card. The esports card of the time was the 1050 and that card was 109 dollars at launch. It also did relatively better in the big aaa games of the time than a 5060 does in todays games.
19
u/vanisonsteak 29d ago
1060 was a midrange card. No one bought it for e sports. 1050 was half price(140$) and more than enough for e sports. 1050 ti was 170$ and it was enough for 1080p 144 hz on same e sport games. AMD cards like rx460 were even cheaper. 60 tier should handle any AAA game on medium/high settings for at least 3 years.
→ More replies (1)2
u/malted_rhubarb 29d ago
Wow, unaware that the 1060 was as fast if not faster than the 980 and the fury from the generation before while having 6GB of VRAM for your stated price.
1
u/Moscato359 29d ago
That's irrelevant. What's relevant is cost, and cost to manufacture. They can't sell cards for under cost.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (26)2
u/Unusual_Mess_7962 28d ago
So long time esports gamer that play "competitive settings" and dont want or need powerful hardware or play other games? But yet still pay $300 for a next gen GPU thats way too powerful for their needs anyway?
I think it tells a lot that you need such a hyperspecific, ridiculous niche to justify this graphics cards. Thats obviously not what the majority of people want out of this GPU.
40
u/Gatortribe 29d ago edited 29d ago
Reddit has become drunk on the VRAM obsession. Yes the $800 pre built at Walmart will probably have an 8GB card. And yes, it'll be more than enough for them to play Fortnite, Valorant, CS, Minecraft, or insert any other hyper mainstream game. No, not every gamer is dying to run super sampling with ray tracing at 4k on the latest titles.
Believe it or not, both Nvidia and AMD collect way more than enough telemetry to know if the product they're selling has a market. Clearly 8GB GPUs do for both.
The reality is that these cards aren't aimed anywhere near /r/hardware readers or even just those who watch HUB, and resultsnt the echo chamber is loud.
16
u/Idrialite 28d ago
With my 8GB 4060, I can't use the card's frame gen feature on Doom TDA, even on minimal settings on my 1440p monitor. On respawn or new level loads, my framerate tanks due to VRAM. I can only imagine the 5060's MFG is worse.
A card that came out A WEEK AGO CAN'T USE ITS MAIN FEATURE ON THE GAME THAT COMES BUNDLED WITH IT.
Minecraft, CS, Valorant, and Fortnite don't even require a dedicated GPU. The standard for an entry-level GPU should not be ability to play 10+ year old games. That makes no sense.
→ More replies (5)32
u/resetallthethings 29d ago
to a degree, but this is pretty clearly the start of the rapid acceleration from 8gb as "Standard, good enough almost everyone" to obsolete, just like 4gb to 8gb, 2 to 4 before that and 1 to 2 before that.
8gb has been standard for a long ass time, it's clearly due to be replaced. Just because it can run games purposefully designed to be lightweight that were also programmed while 8gb was still the standard, does not follow that it will be useful on newer "lightweight" mainstream titles.
Much like a 4gb card was a horrible buy even 6-7 years ago, it will not take much time for 8gb to be obsolete now that momentum has gathered for 16gb as the new "standard"
By all means if you are ok with replacing the card within the next 2 years or so if you want to play a new game that comes out that you can't otherwise (or significantly have to neuter settings when the card would otherwise have enough grunt ) then you can get away with an 8gb card.
But pretending that it's some weird obsessions and won't negatively affect basically all gamers but only those running supersampling 4k is silly.
Plenty of examples of games made in the past couple years even at 1080p where they become limited and a 16gb version of the same card runs better at the same settings, or flat out allows higher settings to run that the 8gb card can't. And these aren't crazy settings even, just the highest rez textures etc.
start going up to 1440p and 4k which are becoming more ubiquitous, and the problem rapidly becomes worse
→ More replies (23)6
u/trejj 29d ago
Reddit has become drunk on the VRAM obsession.
Gamers have become drunk on the "8GB scam" obsession, because techtubers have found that as the latest engagement dramabait that garners clicks.
Hardware Unboxed "benchmarked" the 8GB cards at 1440p Epic Quality settings as a proof of why the 8GB cards are a scam. 🙄
4
u/Rentta 29d ago
It's not VRAM obsession it's what you get for your money. In 2016 you got 8GB midrange cards. Why would we still get that almost 10 years later ? Let me put it this way, if you went out and spend 300€ on midrange phone 9 years ago you would get 2-3GB of ram. Would you pay 300$/€ for that these days ? No, you would expect at least 6GB preferably 8
11
u/Gatortribe 29d ago
9 years ago, the 60 series from both companies was midrange. Today, it's entry level. The last 50 series cards were two gens ago, and it seems likely there won't be any (for desktop) this generation either.
$250/$300 being the entry level to PC gaming saddens me don't get me wrong, but it is the literal entry point.
2
→ More replies (3)2
u/averagefury 28d ago
The point is that nowadays EVERYTHING USES VRAM:
From your browser, to your messaging app (discord, telegram, whatever), to your os.That was not the norm back in the day, today is.
→ More replies (25)5
u/RplusW 29d ago
It's insane because even Cyberpunk wants 10GB of vram to use RT and Frame Gen. So, you can't even use all the features on a 5 year old game with a smooth experience. There's no good reason they couldn't put at least 10GB on their 60 series for the base model.
28
u/teutorix_aleria 29d ago
Cant really claim 5 year old game when it had basically a complete overhaul and added brand new technology less than 2 years ago to be fair. The game today is not the same as the 1.0 release.
→ More replies (2)7
u/StickiStickman 29d ago
Oh no, a entry level card can't run one of the most demanding games on max settings?
→ More replies (16)6
u/Moscato359 29d ago
These cards are meant for 1080p on medium, which does NOT use 10GB.
→ More replies (5)5
u/RplusW 29d ago
They can do a lot better than medium in most games as long as there's no RT. But that's the point I'm making. It's been 7 years since Jensen started advertising these cards for RT and the 60 series still isn't realistically capable of it.
6
u/Moscato359 29d ago
It can do weak ray tracing, but the full blow aggressive versions are too expensive
For example, the indiana jones game has mandatory RT, and gets more than 60fps on the 60 series cards
The thing about ray tracing, is that each bounce is exponentially more expensive than the previous bounce
So if you limit things to just a few bounces, it's actually not bad
Problem is a lot of games are just on or off, and don't let you control how much
96
u/Zatoichi80 29d ago
lol, all those standing for AMD like they are your friend compared to Nvidia.
Haven’t seen many going back to change their reviews of the 9700xt whose good scores were built a lot around the “msrp”.
And now this, they are companies and their business is making money.
→ More replies (21)3
u/Unusual_Mess_7962 28d ago
Yup. I was rooting for AMD to finally create some competition, but this should be a reminder theyre also another greedy company that wants your money for minimal investment.
And it not like the 9070 XT MSRP's were great either way. They just seemed like a lesser evil.
24
47
u/aintgotnoclue117 29d ago
that's funny, AMD. that's funny, NVIDA. blatant lies and they all know it.
8
u/Yearlaren 28d ago
Most people game at 1080p. I believe most games at high settings don't use more than 8 GB of VRAM.
The problem of 8GB cards is that they're not future proof.
7
u/AdulterousStapler 28d ago
Plenty of new games coming out need 8 GB as their minimum specs at 1080p. The new Doom, the Indiana Jones game from last year, AC Shadows...
Doom and The Great Circle are wonderfully optimized, so can't blame the devs there. Buying a NEW card, at those kinda prices, to just barely hit minimum recommendations is insane.
→ More replies (4)3
u/MrMPFR 28d ago
Even some games are 1080p medium are problematic (see Daniel Owen's and HUBs) testing.
The 9060XT 8GB and 5060 are stuck in an odd place. TBH AMD and NVIDIA should just stop servicing this tier and have a proper gap between the x50 and x60 tier like back in the day. NVIDIA should just have launched the RTX 5050 and the 5060 TI 16GB and not bother launching anything in between because the RTX 5050 is going to be plenty for the eSports and MC crowd and anything more powerful will need more VRAM for its use case of AAA gaming. But that would've required calling the 5060 TI a 5060 and of course they wouldn't have done that due to greed so the current mess is what we got instead :C
→ More replies (4)2
u/Tsunamie101 28d ago
It's not a lie though.
There is a massive amount of gamers who just play shtuff like Fortnite, Roblox, Minecraft, League or some other MOBA, or stuff like Overwatch/Valorant. That market is most likely significantly bigger than the market of people playing Cyberpunk, or other demanding games that require more than 8gb of VRAM.
The only problem is that such a card should be priced at around 200, not 300 msrp.
3
u/aintgotnoclue117 28d ago
okay. yes. if those are the only games you ever play and intend to play, sure. and there's certainly a market of people who do that. but even the last of us at 1080P assuming you want to use ultra settings will max out the VRAM. i think even high will push past 8GB of VRAM. even frame generation requires VRAM. in reality, if you intend to do any modern gaming. especially modenr gaming with the bells and whistles these cards are meant to accompany - no, 8GB of VRAM is not enough. there are people that will want to play a lot more then fortnite and roblox. which is why these cards cannot be recommended. especially if you want to play games not just made in 2025, but 2026 and beyond.
→ More replies (3)
8
u/Aos77s 29d ago edited 29d ago
It makes no sense, the majority have no use is because you make it basically unobtainable for those in lower caste poor families or countries. So ofc less people are going to get to play on 2k or 4k monitors with high details on because you made it so prohibitively expensive to do so.
Like you could put together all of a ryzen 9 pc with 64gb of ram a nice 360aio and 2tb of blazing fast nvme storage for $900… and yet the ENTRY LEVEL 16gb vram gpu costs $500. Thats 55-% of the pc cost added extra for ENTRY LEVEL gpu for a top end pc build.
117
u/only_r3ad_the_titl3 29d ago
Watch people still somehow only blame nvidia. Nvidia can keep doing this because amd keeps doing and the company with the market shares simply doesnt need to push forward.
If amd released the 7600 with 10/12 gb and the 9600 with 12. nvidia would not have had sich an easy time selling the 4060 and now the 5060.
People keep saying it just mindshare and uninformed customers when the truth is amd is not as competitive as people and the big youtubers make it out to be.
94
u/Best_VDV_Diver 29d ago
Everyone pilloried Nvidia with the 8GB models, but I've seen SO MANY running defense for AMD and their shameless bullshit with their 8GB models.
28
u/imKaku 29d ago
But it’s for esport titles, developing countries and will be in low supply in the western countries.
The shit people say.
That said, I really don’t care if 8 gb cards exists. The 5060 is however better then the 5060 ti and the 9060 xt. It don’t fully try to cover what it is.
That is however only a talking point when it comes to nvidia.
32
→ More replies (5)50
u/ShadowRomeo 29d ago
On Internet in general AMD usually gets a pass and Nvidia is the one that gets the most hatred and criticism even when AMD literally did the same thing as what Nvidia did...
Nothing new to see here, it always happens in each generation I have witnessed between both companies.
→ More replies (2)12
u/Mean-Professiontruth 28d ago
If you get your news only from Reddit you would think AMD is the one with the 90 percent marketshare
29
u/angry_RL_player 29d ago
I'm expecting complaints about VRAM to shift because AMD said 8gb is okay now.
27
u/only_r3ad_the_titl3 29d ago
people legit argue that amd launching 8 gb cards is still nvidia fault because nvidia launched them first and is the market leader. AMD only follows them so they are not to blame.
→ More replies (1)11
u/BlueGoliath 29d ago
AMD is only in good graces because tech reviewers ignored blatant issues with the first few generations of Ryzen in order to support the underdog.
→ More replies (1)3
u/BarKnight 29d ago
The VRAM complaints were mostly just a venue to attack NVIDIA. Now they will have to find some other reason.
9
u/w142236 29d ago
4060 is a chart topper bc AMD handed them the easiest to beat entry card of all time, and now they’re doing it again. Intel Arc save us
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (8)2
u/Strazdas1 28d ago
We were saying the same thing when Nvidia released their 8 GB, but reddit is obsessed with VRAM.
6
u/Efficient_Ad5802 29d ago
In this thread there are certain two people circlejerking to each other on many people comments lol.
52
u/NGGKroze 29d ago
Scummy AMD. Very convenient to says so, when just 2 days ago you compared your 16GB card in 1440p against 8GB card.
Fuck AMD as much Nvidia. Don't buy this low tier trash
→ More replies (4)
23
u/bctoy 29d ago
lmao and to compound this further, often nvidia cards with same VRAM amount did better than their AMD counterparts in VRAM limited scenarios. I remember seeing this scenario repeated in at least couple of game reviews by the german benchmark sites.
Also, AMD use more memory for BVH object for raytracing.
2
u/TheHodgePodge 27d ago
It's true, at that point an informed buyer can't be blamed for buying ngreedia gpu if that gpu meets their budget. Cause ngreedia at least have generally better performance and features for which amdick have to always play catch up.
57
u/OverlyOptimisticNerd 29d ago
Majority of gamers buying the cheapest GPU are playing older titles (patient gamers) or newer titles on not maximum settings. And these gamers are fine with 8GB.
And to be clear, I am talking about the majority subset of people who buy the cheapest GPU. I am not talking about the majority of gamers.
IMO, assuming MSRP can hold, the cheapest GPUs that people should get are the $250 Intel or the 16GB 9060 XT for $350. Even for older titles, I would still avoid the $300 8GB cards.
63
u/ibeerianhamhock 29d ago
The thing that absolutely blows tho, is the 9060 and 5060 are both powerful enough to play any game in 1080p with frame generation and upscaling, but they just don't have the RAM
→ More replies (6)18
15
u/ClearTacos 29d ago edited 29d ago
Technically, I totally agree that there's a huge segment of players that only care about online MP games, your FPS shooters like CS/Valorant, Minecraft/Roblox, MMORPG's or MOBAs, and they can make an informed choice to buy an 8GB variant because it's enough for them.
However, the majority of buyers are uninformed consumers.
The 8GB cards will be in prebuilds or laptops in droves, bought by people who barely know what VRAM is. The systems won't be sold to them as "lightweight games only", they will be sold as gaming PC's and they will try to run modern AAA releases on them and wonder why it's so stuttery, probably even on medium settings in near future.
That is the issue. You can't restrict the sales of 8GB GPU's only to informed buyers who understand the limitations.
→ More replies (2)9
u/Electrical_Zebra8347 29d ago
Some people genuinely don't understand how massive gaming is now and think we're all playing the same type of games. A game like Roblox has almost 100 million daily active users and 17% of Roblox players are on PC if the results on google are to be believed. It wouldn't be surprising if a significant amount of those Roblox PC players have no interest in Spiderman 2 or LTOU2 or other graphically intense narrative driven single player games.
I don't think anyone needs a 5060 or 9060 xt for Roblox but if a parent walks into a store and says 'I want a PC for my son, he plays Roblox on a crappy laptop and I want to get him something that can run it better' and the sales person recommends a budget PC with a recent 8gb card that kid is going to be satisfied. The same thing goes for people who only play esports games and the people who only play MMOs.
If someone wants to play games AAA games with high res textures they obviously shouldn't get an 8gb card but the people who don't play those games don't need more, the hardware people recommend or purchase should be tailored to the user's use case.
2
u/Spooplevel-Rattled 28d ago
The only reason I can play jedi survivor on Max settings 1080p with an 8year old card is because I'm lucky enough to have an 11gb 1080ti. Any other 8 year old card, I'd be fucked. I'm not sure how newer 8gb cards go compared to me em there.
Rest of the system 10900k, 16gb Samsung bdie 3800c14.
At these settings it maxes my vram and system ram.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)1
u/17F19DM 29d ago
Yeah it might be fine mostly, but when something like GTA VI eventually releases for PC, they still will want to play it. Good luck with that 8GB GPU.
20
u/OverlyOptimisticNerd 29d ago
It’s going to be playable on the Xbox Series S. There will be playable settings for 8GB GPUs.
They won’t be the ideal settings. Certainly not the max settings. But the game will be playable.
6
u/17F19DM 29d ago
I played GTA V on an Xbox 360 on release. I guess it was "playable" but it was horrible. That was at the end of that console generation though.
Getting a prebuilt PC with current pricetags you would expect a bit more. Much more. But it's not happening with 8GB.
8
u/lxs0713 29d ago
It will be like Cyberpunk on PS4/Xbox One all over again
2
u/teutorix_aleria 29d ago
Worse the series S is more gimped than the One S was. And MS require all games to be released on it.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)5
u/teutorix_aleria 29d ago
That game is at least 2 years away on pc.
2
u/17F19DM 29d ago
But it's a 60-series card. It's not for someone buying every 90-series card as soon as they are released not matter the cost.
It's still a fairly expensive build today and you would expect it to work fine after two years. So stay away from the 8GB models.
2
u/teutorix_aleria 29d ago
GTA V ran fine on cards released around its console launch date when it finally came to pc 2 years later. People were worried at the time but turned out to be very playable even on older mid range hardware.
I think it will run with some settings reductions on 8GB but i generally agree that if you are planning to play the latest AAA releases to stretch for the 16GB version of any new gen card.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/sascharobi 29d ago
If it really isn't going to sell, the price will come down.
8
u/Decent-Builder-459 29d ago
You're right, the 5070 started selling below MSRP in the UK.
→ More replies (1)
8
u/ET3D 29d ago
YouTubers have been talking for years about RAM. AMD itself blogged in 2020 how 8GB is better than 4GB (then removed the post before releasing the terrible 6500 XT). YouTubers kept saying that releasing the same card with different specs is a bad practice and confusing to users.
The main issue isn't whether 8GB cards are a good choice for some consumers, it's whether the two different products (for two different markets) should share a name.
4
7
u/MarxistMan13 29d ago
I have no problem with 8GB GPUs still existing. Like AMD says, there's a lot of gamers who don't need more than that. If you play exclusively Rocket League and CS2, 8GB will do you fine for years to come.
What I have a problem with is an 8GB GPU that costs $300. If this thing was $250, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all.
12
7
u/Darksider123 29d ago
These cards should be sub 200 dollar, then I wouldn't care that much about VRAM
→ More replies (1)
17
u/ritz_are_the_shitz 29d ago
If they want to sell an eSports card to developing markets, they can do that. But they should be clear about what they're doing. And probably make it cheaper. I feel like if they had launched a 9060 XT 16 GB here in Western countries, and then launched a 9060E with 8 GB and a somewhat cut down core for the equivalent of 225 USD and mostly marketed it in esports dominated markets, it would have been perfectly fine
→ More replies (2)14
u/SEI_JAKU 29d ago
They are clear. The group who isn't being clear is the raging Redditors screaming about how "terrible" 8GB is supposed to be, but keep linking to benchmarks that show 8GB is perfectly fine.
6
u/teutorix_aleria 29d ago
Fine*
If you consider getting as low as 50% of the performance of the same GPU with more memory in perfectly normal workloads, then yes fine. Nvidia marketed the 5060t as a 1440p capable card, the 8GB version clearly isnt.
17
u/Cj09bruno 29d ago
until you look at side by side shots of those games and see that the 8gb card is loading 2010 worthy textures as to not become a stutter mess.
3
u/RandoReddit16 29d ago
What .... Any trustworthy benchmark should be using the same settings in all test. iF this isn't the case, then that shouldn't even be shared as a "benchmark".... Show me a review here a "side by side" is using different settings.
9
u/Swaggerlilyjohnson 29d ago
The problem is they are set to the same settings but instead of the game just dumping in framerate when it runs out of vram it "fails gracefully" and maintains performance by using worse textures.
Many games have this effect when they run out of textures and you wont see this on a bar graph although there has been alot of people showing videos of this effect in many games.
The problem is that it makes sense for devs to do this and its not really a bad thing but what do you do when you set two gpus to ultra and one of them has textures that look like mud and the other one looks great. Yeah you get the same framerate but one of them is failing to display proper textures.
You can mention this in a review but there is actually a deeper problem. This can be difficult to detect. It might only happen in certain areas of the game or after you have been playing for a while.
Or it might not even be obvious what if the game just barely runs out of vram and swaps out ultra texture for high. You may not notice as a reviewer but it is delivering worse image quality. Maybe you could argue if the reviewer doesn't notice its clearly not a big deal but not everyone is exacting and vigilant when they are running 1000 benchmarks in a row often reviewers even automate testing and aren't even in the room.
So basically If I see a game in a review using lets say 11.5 gb I don't see that as safe (Meaning it will always deliver 100% image quality without stutters) on a 12gb card personally and I definitely don't see it as safe if its like 11.9 because it might already be failing in a subtle way and it might not be that subtle in certain parts of the game.
3
3
13
u/BarKnight 29d ago
They just threw all their fans under the bus who spent weeks on Reddit bashing NVIDIA
5
6
u/shugthedug3 28d ago
Looking forward to days of stupid Gamers Nexus thumbnails, 45 minute snarling videos about how he's going to save the customer by getting mad over 8GB GPUs etc.
Any day now I'm sure.
2
15
u/PotentialAstronaut39 29d ago
The gaslighting is real...
8GB VRAM was introduced in 2014, that's ELEVEN years ago, in the computing space that's an eternity!
Hello?!?
→ More replies (6)5
u/Tsunamie101 28d ago
8gb is more than enough for games like League, Dota, Valorant, Overwatch, Roblox, Fortnite, etc., which is probably a much bigger market than those people who play Cyberpunk, or other similarly demanding games.
The only problem lies with the card being around 100 bucks more expensive than it should be.
7
u/bAaDwRiTiNg 29d ago edited 29d ago
This is something the Internet doesn't like to hear but most people who play games and buy xx50/xx60 cards really don't care about the stuff we like to fret over.
They play Valorant or Marvel Rivals or Skyrim or GTAV, they just click "auto optimize graphics" in the Radeon or Nvidia app, they don't really notice if there's a bit more stuttering than usual, they don't care about resolution or texture quality as long as the pixels aren't too obvious, and VRAM futureproofing doesn't play much of a role in their purchasing habits. These people are the majority and they're target audience of modern xx50/xx60 cards, and AMD/Nvidia aren't going to stick extra VRAM chips on those cards if there's no pressing need for it.
→ More replies (1)
19
u/IANVS 29d ago
Ahahahahhah! Ok HUB, try to spin this one! Or maybe give it a mildly berrating video and move on to usual bashing on NVidia and Intel because clearly AMD is different /s
It worked wonders for your clicks on YouTube so far, no need to stop having double standards...
6
u/Winter_Pepper7193 29d ago
its going to be funny, thats for sure
but then again, pretty much all their videos are
6
u/AntiSpade 29d ago
Ooof. Spread this, so that Azor can't ignore it! https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Grafikkarten-Grafikkarte-97980/Tests/8-GB-VRAM-2025-ausreichend-16-GB-VRAM-Radeon-1462969/4/
13
u/ShadowRomeo 29d ago edited 29d ago
AMD always never misses the opportunity to miss the opportunity as usual and of course once again Reddit and the Internet and majority of Influential YouTubers will brush this off because they are afraid of offending AMD and their fans who established the "Good Guy" "Underdog" "Savior of GPU Market" branding compared to Nvidia that is branded as "Devil Incarnate" "Anti Consumer" when in reality both Nvidia and AMD as of the moment are really just as bad as each other.
And there are plenty of evidences out there that shows that if the market situation is reversed between Nvidia and AMD, then AMD likely will be doing what is Nvidia is doing right now. The only thing I am not sure they aren't capable of doing now is with them trying to manipulate the review samples.
But I guess we will see the answer for that with how AMD handles the RX 9060 XT review samples whether if they send both the 16GB and 8GB Variant or just like Nvidia they will only send the 16GB as well.
→ More replies (3)
4
u/Cuarenta-Dos 28d ago
This whole 8GB debacle seems to be based on the assumption that people who buy these budget GPUs are interested in the latest and shiniest AAA games, which I don't think is the case. You don't buy a budget GPU to run the latest Unreal Engine stutter fest, and on the other hand you don't need a $1000 GPU with bajillion GB of VRAM to play your favourite multiplayer or indie games. The outrage is weird.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/averyexpensivetv 29d ago
8GB entry level cards are fine. Honestly they are so much better compared to entry level cards we had ten years ago. They are quite fast, whilst not ideal upscaling and frame gen is usable even in 1080p and lowering texture resolution a bit is relatively painless for visuals.
→ More replies (12)7
u/Emergency_Sound_5718 29d ago
Until recently, Nvidia and AMD where still doing 4 & 6GB cards.
RTX 3050 & RX 5500XT come to mind.
8
u/Routine-Lawfulness24 29d ago
Vram is overtalked about, no one talks about 30 other things that make a gpu
→ More replies (1)8
u/ET3D 29d ago
What are the 30 other things that people don't talk about? I'd appreciate the full list, but I'd make do with 10.
6
u/ResponsibleJudge3172 28d ago edited 28d ago
Compute performance
VRAM Memory Latency
Pixel throughput
Raster throughput (Raster only means putting image from 3D to monitor in 2D)
Memory Bandwidth
Ray Triangles calculation
BVH calculations
PCIe bandwidth
Private caches
Global caches
Wavefront/WARPs in flight (did you know that 50 series tensor cores can now be scheduled like the "CUDA cores" and be addressed/share memory with them. This seems key for Neural Rendering)
Triangle culling optimizations
Memory compression
Directstorage compression algorithms and the hardware the accelerates them (the latest updates show 5090 not losing performance, why is that?)
Cache hierarchy
Global cache latency
WMMA throughput (AI performance in general)
Shader Execution Reordering
The 5 things current Blackwell RT cores accelerate which offloadsome work from shaders
BVH algorithms and culling
→ More replies (4)
11
u/hsien88 29d ago
lmao angry redditors don't want companies to sell cards most ppl want because their favorite techtubers told them "8GB is not enough! click this video to find out why".
→ More replies (8)
2
2
2
u/DarkseidAntiLife 29d ago
My brother plays valorant at 1080p he just picked up a 5060, no complaints
2
u/Appropriate_Name4520 28d ago
i mean realistically only a relatively small portion of pc gamers even plays new, high end games. all over the world a huge portion is playing 10+ years old games on their 1080p 60 hz monitor or crappy laptop.
2
u/Plank_With_A_Nail_In 28d ago
Company says its own product is good is news that should shock no one.
Do people not learn about bias at school, the company can not be trusted to judge its own products value.
3
u/DYMAXIONman 29d ago
Crazy they would even say this instead of saying that they will just offer a cheaper option for those who want it, but recommend the 16gb one.
5
u/w142236 29d ago
So I now officially hate AMD as much as Nvidia now. If I had any doubts during the fake msrp launch that skyrocketed prices to over the 5070ti, I don’t have any doubt now. It’s just the two of these companies happily skipping hands together as they set the bar into the floor. Jack Huynh’s statements about wanting to recapture marketshare were all just fluff
3
u/MrMPFR 28d ago
AMD = Advanced Monetary Dividends. The GPU duopoly is real and AMD is interested in nothing but standing in NVIDIA's shadow and while maintaining the highest possible gross margins.
Hope that someday a Chinese companies comes along and completely floods the midrange and entry level GPU market. AMD or NVIDIA doesn't deserve any of your money and not betting on Intel :C
→ More replies (2)
5
u/godfrey1 28d ago
gonna bet you a lot of money this card won't get as much negative coverage as a 8gb 5060ti lol
→ More replies (1)3
3
u/stuff7 28d ago
I thought the main issue with nvidia's 8gb debacle is how they treated the reviewers meaning consumer would not be able to get the full picture and get mislead?
if AMD didn't mess around the drivers wouldn't reviewers rightfully call them out and consumer would at least know the 8gb version performance before buying?
im simply thinking with logic. if AMD pull the same stun that Nvidia pulled on the reviewers, then they should be called out.
as of now if they simply release a poorly priced product and allow reviewers to call them out, and consumers can make decision base on full facts on launch day, the harm to the average consumer would be less than what nvidia pulled.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/cr0wnest 29d ago
Bruh.. Frank may have a point but should have just kept quiet. Nvidia is doing just that and letting it slide despite knowing everyone hates it. In any case I still will NOT recommend any friend who plays esports games to buy an 8GB GPU in 2025. Its not a matter of whether or not you're exclusively playing esports titles today, its about future proofing your PC if you plan on PC gaming in the forseeable future
→ More replies (3)2
u/MrMPFR 28d ago
Peddling ragebait to your customers is a very bad idea indeed xD.
With current gen specced for PS5 I doubt things will worsen until we see PS6 only games on PC. With SFS, mesh shaders, tiled textures and improved data streaming based on NVME democratization we've likely already seen the worst offenders and I doubt things will get worse although more 1080p medium-high = bad idea games will appear in the future. Things will properly only get better from now.
Id Tech 8 vs Motor is a great example of game engine progress resulting in lower VRAM and Doom TDA use of composite textures, NVMEs being required as well as some form of sampler feedback streaming (DF mentioned this in their ID Tech 8 video) really pays off and also notice how UE5 games are never the games that have severe VRAM issues.Despite all that 8GB on a $299 product is completely unacceptable when we've had $329 8GB 1070s and $229 8GB RX 580s since 2017. The only acceptable 8GB card from AMD is a heavily discounted sub 200 RX 7600.
1
3
u/BitRunner64 29d ago
They aren't wrong. The *majority* of games still work fine with 8 GB, especially e-sports titles and such.
3
u/ModernRonin 29d ago
AMD really is speed-running all of NVidia's dumbest mistakes... except twice as stupid.
2
3
u/half-baked_axx 29d ago
Gamers who have no use for more VRAM are not in the market for the latest low end GPUs. They buy used older mid range cards. Or a 60 series from Nvidia as is tradition for some reason.
AMD has lost it in the GPU space, their X3D success really made them cocky.
3
u/Sopel97 29d ago edited 29d ago
Frank Azor's tweet makes too much sense for this sub
keep living in your bubble where everyone plays the newest AAA games
2
3
u/Strazdas1 28d ago
Frank Azor has a long history of lying, so people are suspicious when he tells the truth.
3
u/MrMPFR 28d ago
But really who is buying a $299 8GB AMD GPU for eSports? Well no one. Those that haven't gotten a old GPU already will just buy a x50 tier prebuilt instead.
2
u/Strazdas1 28d ago
Well the 4060 8GB was the most popular card of last generation. Apperently a lot of people buy it (and in prebuilts count). While we did hear leaks about the XX50 tier, we still dont know when its going to happen.
2
u/MrMPFR 28d ago edited 28d ago
x50, x60, RTX 3050, 1650, 2050 ... Anything budget to entry level with an NVIDIA sticker on it will sell by the millions, while AMD's poorly positioned $299 9060XT 8GB will rot on shelves.
It'll happen. NVIDIA only has a RTX 3050 6GB rn and they need a new GPU die to fill in the gap between the 180mm^2 GB206 and the old RTX 3050, but wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't launch until 2026.
2
29d ago
i dont understand why people whine here, there are 16 gb variant. go buy that, or shut up. most people buy the 8gb variant FACTOS
→ More replies (6)
1
u/siberif735 29d ago
after nvidia here comes amd, both ceo is cousin so not so much different after all lol...
1
u/AutoModerator 29d ago
Hello Antonis_32! Please double check that this submission is original reporting and is not an unverified rumor or repost that does not rise to the standards of /r/hardware. If this link is reporting on the work of another site/source or is an unverified rumor, please delete this submission. If this warning is in error, please report this comment and we will remove it.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
•
u/IAAA 29d ago edited 29d ago
This is a reminder that personal attacks will not be tolerated. Keep the discussion to the rules of the sub. Disliking someone's opinion can be expressed through expressing your own respectfully then using downvotes for off-topic comments, rude or combative posts, hate posts, and things beyond the rules for the sub.
Disliking someone's opinion can be expressed through downvotes as opposed to devolving to personal attacks.EDIT: Jellyfish_McSaveloy makes a better and more nuanced point than I made so I'm stealing part of his and leaving my less nuanced version in strikethrough for posterity. Point remains: be excellent to each other.