r/hardware 2d ago

Video Review Gaming Laptops are in Trouble - VRAM Testing w/ ‪@Hardwareunboxed‬

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ric7yb1VaoA
84 Upvotes

107 comments sorted by

115

u/shugthedug3 2d ago

It is a crime that 70 tier laptop chips are coming with 8GB.

Gaming laptops with an adequate amount of VRAM are very expensive, you have to go for a 5070Ti at a minimum. A 4080 laptop is almost certainly a better buy right now, there's still some for sale with good discounts.

38

u/scannerJoe 2d ago

As somebody who really wants (needs?) the mobility of a laptop (I travel a lot for work), this is a really awkward time to buy if you cannot afford or justify spending that much money. The machine before my current one had a GTX 1060 with 6GB that basically ran as fast as the desktop version and the laptop felt like a solid midrange buy that would do well for some years to come. Then I got a 4060 laptop two years ago, already didn't inspire full confidence, but I got a good price for a machine that has a lot of nice aspects and serves me perfectly fine at the moment. But with the 5070 capped at 8GB this now feels like a really risky buy, or at least very debatable value, although the chip is perfectly capable. If you get a budget option it's a hard maybe, but a $2000 machine like the one tested in the video, no way.

19

u/kyp-d 2d ago

Valid buy today is either 4060 / 5050 as bottom tier 8GB GPU or 5070 Ti 12GB (4080 if it's still around) to start crawling out of the 8GB VRAM bottleneck...

4070, 5070 and even 5060 are clearly the bad move. (4070 was already a badly priced product)

11

u/teffhk 2d ago

5060 is clearly better than 5050 and the price difference isnt that big. E.g. the new legion 5 I've just got only costs $90 USD more for the upgrade from 5050 to 5060

0

u/qazzq 1d ago

Isn't a decent iGPU a much smarter pick at that point? It's clearly not going to be as performant, but the newest gens are almost at the 'good enough' tier? And if you've got thunderbolt or oculink, an external dGPU would work too

11

u/kyp-d 1d ago

Appart from Strix Halo best iGPU are still in the GTX 1060 performance range, any current dGPU is 3 times the performance at least, even with lacking VRAM.

1

u/qazzq 1d ago

huh, i thought the progress was better than that. i guess i let myself get a little bamboozled then. I watched one of those vids a while ago were the, i think, ai 395 was tested and thought that i'd be totally ok with that level of performance for a laptop.

2

u/kyp-d 1d ago

AI 395 is Strix Halo, it can reach RTX 4060/4070 Laptop performance, but the chip is big, needs a specific memory configuration (soldered 256bits) and won't be included in anything under $1500

1

u/Green_Struggle_1815 23h ago

I'm amazed the Strix naming didn't cause problems with Asus.

2

u/Not_Daijoubu 2d ago

I got tired of my old 1660 Ti laptop. CPU was still going strong, but it was just hot, loud, and had a 30min battery life if I was lucky.

Since it wasn't exactly useful off the plug, I built a SFF system. I only needed the computer to be transportable from A to B. If you really want to go down in size, you can build 5060 Ti or even 5070 (FE) systems that are 5-6L. It's great.

1

u/GabrielP2r 1d ago

You probably need 2 monitors at each spot but to be fair you can find decent 1080p monitors for 100 bucks used and ok 1440p ones for 200 or less, so it's not awful.

1

u/Not_Daijoubu 1d ago

Yeah, the biggest pain with portable SFF is all the loose peripherals. Luckily, there are like a billion portable 16 inch monitors for sale; 2 would be the same thickness as my old laptop and would fit in the laptop compartment of a bag no problem.

I'm typically a staunch wired mouse/keyboard/headphones person, but I recently switched to wireless since reducing my wire count by 3 is a good deal of convenience haha.

2

u/Dasboogieman 2d ago

Honestly, I'd probably be looking at a laptop that has the best I/O Thunderbolt configuration so you can bypass the internals entirely and use an eGPU if you need proper GPU grunt that bad

Laptop GPUs are a total shitshow for longevity.

2

u/shugthedug3 1d ago

I use thunderbolt and I agree, I much prefer it to using the dGPU just for heat and noise reasons alone. My gaming is casual enough that TB3 is enough but of course I'm losing performance.

Thunderbolt 5 in reasonably priced machines should hopefully make it a more common set up, there isn't many of us who actually need a dGPU for gaming given we tend to sit down at a desk or whatever to game and very, very rarely on battery power.

It's certainly taking its sweet time to show up however, particularly on cheaper laptops.

9

u/MoonStache 2d ago

I just got a Lenovo Legion recently and deliberately downspec'ed to a 5060 model because paying more for an 8GB 5070 is stupid.

-3

u/Cynical_Cyanide 1d ago

Paying Legion prices (i.e. a premium just for the name) seems pretty stupid just to end up with a 5060. 

3

u/MoonStache 1d ago

You do you. I stacked a bunch of discounts for a good deal. Was a PITA and required multiple chats in but worth it in the end. I don't intend to game a ton on it anyways but for the few I did it works perfectly fine.

7

u/Wonderful-Lack3846 2d ago

The only '70' thing about this mobile GPU is the name.

It is using the same die as RTX 5060 desktop

7

u/shugthedug3 2d ago

Doesn't matter, it's a 70 tier mobile chip and firmly mid range. Despite this they've hobbled it with an entry level amount of VRAM.

3

u/Klutzy-Residen 2d ago

Doesnt really matter for the end user. You pay for the performance, not for the name.

But when all the options suck you are kinda screwed.

1

u/Alive_Worth_2032 9h ago

Mobile GPUs sitting a tier or even multiple below the desktop namesake has been the historical norm. Pascal was the aberration and it also resulted in that generation not having a "1080 Ti mobile" as a result.

3

u/CazOnReddit 2d ago

Depends on your regiom

Here in Canada, 4080 laptop stock is light and outside of the used market, not much cheaper than a 5070 Ti lappy - and neither are particularly cheap at that.

1

u/comperr 2d ago

that's why i bought my 4080 laptop in October. $1999 no brainer. threw 64GB RAM in it with a couple 2TB NVMEs and it's fine for web browsing for at least a couple years

1

u/BlueGoliath 2d ago

70 tier GPUs? Those are poor people GPUs meant for Esports. Stop being poor if you want a better experience.

/s

0

u/imaginary_num6er 2d ago

I’m frustrated how the ASUS G14 only had a 16GB VRAM option with their 2023 year model, but none ever since. I was expecting GPU VRAMs to not be stuck to 8GB for 14” laptops after 2023.

5

u/Shadow647 2d ago edited 2d ago

Good news - ASUS ROG Zephyrus G14 is available with RTX 5080 16GB since last month

Expensive af though and it only runs at 85W TGP, which limits that card quite a lot - chunkier 16" laptop running at ~120W TGP would give you 20%+ higher performance.

1

u/imaginary_num6er 2d ago

They released a 5080 model? I’ll probably get that during black Friday

-5

u/rabouilethefirst 2d ago

When the AI bubble pops, courtesy of GPT-5 basically being GPT-4 but worse, VRAM will slowly come back to consumers hopefully

5

u/shugthedug3 2d ago

I don't think them being stingy has anything to do with that really.

1

u/Getherer 2d ago

Generally speaking, it's best to stay quiet if you don't have a clue what you're talking about

23

u/Salty_Tonight8521 2d ago

For laptops, it seems like you either go with "budget" options like xx60 tier cards and accept you're gonna sacrifice some visuals or just go all out with some top of line models for adequate vram. xx70 class laptops are not worth it over xx60 imo.

7

u/teffhk 2d ago

With 8GB VRAM only yea there is no point of getting 5070 over 5060 for laptops right now.

5

u/Salty_Tonight8521 2d ago

Yeah, it was mostly the same for last gen laptops. 4060 laptop was also surprisingly good for a laptop gpu in its price point.

1

u/teffhk 2d ago

5060 performance is pretty good too, it actually out performs 4070 in laptop models that with limited TDW

10

u/thelastsupper316 2d ago

Yeah even my mobile 5060 is very very bottlenecked with 8gb of Vram it sucks a lot, I wish I just took a $400 L and got the 12gb 4080

9

u/_Yank 2d ago

This whole situation is completely ridiculous because you can create scenarios where laptops without a mux switch, or with it disabled, are faster than the opposite because the whole system OS and everyday application VRAM overhead is entirely offloaded to the iGPU VRAM/system RAM.

15

u/Hayden247 2d ago

It's so terrible. The GTX 1070M had 8GB in 2016! Why tf nine years later does the 5070M still have 8GB? It's ridiculous, in the console world nine years is longer than a generation dammit and PS4 to PS5 doubled the memory amount.

17

u/zeronic 2d ago

Why tf nine years later does the 5070M still have 8GB

The same reason we were stuck on 4 cores and 8 threads for years with intel. No competition.

Nvidia is also clearly doing this for market segmentation purposes. AI use demands tons of VRAM, they don't want people buying "cheap" gaming chips for AI, they want you to pay the premium for the potential AI use cases.

3

u/Hayden247 2d ago

Of course, Radeon barely exists in laptop and AMD literally gave up for RDNA4 to have mobile chips. At least on desktop Radeon is somewhat there for the DIY crowd for a resemblance of competition but Nvidia truly has a dGPU monopoly in laptops so they can screw over that market even harder when it's already bad enough laptop GPUs cannot be upgraded, so your laptop with a 5070 is forever limited by 8GB. Really just trying to make you pay even more for a 5070M, or skimp out on a 5050M or 5060M as better "value" than they'd otherwise look like. Means AI performance comes hella expensive to boot since you mentioned AI.

3

u/NeroClaudius199907 2d ago

AI doesn't make sense because people can buy $449 5060ti 16gb. Why would ai farms buy more expensive 5070s with 16gb over 5060ti 16gb desktops?

This is more about lack of competition/greed/segmentation/ "Good enough”

33

u/kyp-d 2d ago

8GB 5070 Laptop at 115W vs 16GB 5060 Ti Desktop at ~140W

8GB VRAM is butchering performance in some modern titles at totally playable settings.

And those "midrange" laptops are already north of $2500.

If you can't afford more than 8GB VRAM laptop you'll probably have to upgrade sooner. (I would advice going for the cheapest 8GB VRAM laptop you can find if it's going to be replaced quickly)

16

u/Raikaru 2d ago

if you're paying $2500 for a 5070 laptop you're getting extremely scammed. Hell I've seen 5070ti laptops for $1600-1700

1

u/ProfessionalPrincipa 2d ago

That's hardly the norm. When I checked a month or two ago most laptops with more than 8GB VRAM were over $2000 on Newegg and Amazon. There was one lone MSI laptop under $2000 and I'm sure they probably made sacrifices to hit that price point. If people thought Nvidia was making bank on desktop GPU, they're taking people to the cleaners with gaming laptops.

0

u/Raikaru 2d ago

0

u/ProfessionalPrincipa 1d ago

The word "plenty" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. It looks to be mostly the same two models (MSI Vector and Asus G16) and the MSI is actually the model I was referring to in my previous post.

2

u/Raikaru 1d ago

Yeah if you ignore the Acer HP and Lenovo models that sure is true

-1

u/teffhk 2d ago edited 1d ago

That actually not entirely true, I just got my new legion 5 which is similar model as in the video but with a 5060 instead for around 1000 USD only in Canada with discounts. It is a decent spec laptop that comes with a nice OLED screen. I doubt you can get desktop equivalent spec with the same price, not with the OLED screen at least.

With the 8GB VRAM there is basically no point to get a 5070 over 5060. And still with 5060 and 8GB VRAM, if you know the limitation and fine turning the game settings not just using presets, combine with DLSS performance mode(Transformer model) playing new games like Hellblade 2 still runs quite well.

4

u/secretOPstrat 2d ago

Following that logic just get an rtx 5050 laptop, also has 8gb of gddr7 vram. depending on the power level it wont be much slower than a 5060 laptop

1

u/teffhk 2d ago

I mean you can, depends on what games you want to play, its the same as buying anything, do your own research, know your expectation and budget, then purchase accordingly. And tbf the price difference between 5050 and 5060 is small, I only paid $90 USD more for the upgrade. However 5060 to 5070 models price difference surely isnt just $90.

1

u/secretOPstrat 2d ago

Well the difference between the desktop 5050 and 5060 is less than that when there is an actual more spec difference than the laptop ones, if all else is the same the 5050 is better. But tbh gaming laptops are still so bad because you can't really game on battery with them I'd rather just not game on laptops except for really old games that can run on apus like lunar lake or amd 890m. But sure everyone has their own usecase.

1

u/teffhk 2d ago

If you know you cant game on the battery then why dont you game it on power instead? I dont have a desktop, and I dont really play game when I travel with the laptop, so I have no reason not to just play games on power instead. I dont understand why you brought up the desktop 5050 and 5060 when we are talking about laptops, how is it relevant?

9

u/Wonderful-Lack3846 2d ago

Just to make it more clear:

Laptop/Mobile

5050, 5060 and 5070: GB206 (8GB vram)

5070 ti: GB205 (12GB vram)

5080: GB203 (16GB vram)

5090: GB203 (24GB vram, because it uses 3GB modules)

Desktop

5050, 5060 and 5060 ti: GB206 (8GB vram)

5070: GB205 (12GB vram)

5070 Ti and 5080: GB203 (16GB vram)

4

u/Affectionate-Memory4 2d ago

To add on the desktop side, the 16GB version of the 5060ti, and of course the 5090 is 32GB on GB202's giant bus.

3

u/kyp-d 2d ago

You forgot the 5060 Ti 16GB variant (which is the card used to in this video)

3

u/Wonderful-Lack3846 2d ago

Oh yes, it is the same die, just clamshelled. Thanks for pointing out

3

u/DeliciousIncident 2d ago

Steve's opening comment is very on point. The theme of gaming laptops in 2025 has been "too fucking expensive", to the point you can build a x2 faster PC, or an equally fast PC + lightweight laptop + Nintendo Switch.

4

u/Ar0ndight 2d ago

It's bad on the desktop side but Nvidia's dominance is having even worse consequences on the laptop side it seems. These 8gb XX70 cards seem to exist solely to either fuck people who don't know better so they need to upgrade sooner, or upsell to the next tier that has 12gb/16gb cards.

When an entry point, everyday laptop at $700 has 8gb of ram I honestly don't care, the target audience will do just fine on that. But these $1500-2000+ GAMING machines are just crippled to the point of not being able to do what they're meant to be doing, aka running games appropriately. 16-32gb of ram does nothing for you when vram is so low.

1

u/tukatu0 1d ago

You should care. Those laptops you consider worthless at $700 with 4050s and soon 5050s are stronger than an xbox series s. They should have 12gb too if not 10. Especially considering they have 96bit buses and __

Writing off a whole section because you dont think they are paying enough is bad. The same logic could be extend to $1500 buyers.

2

u/dorting 19h ago edited 17h ago

When I said the same thing in this sub I got downvoted to hell

2

u/AccomplishedTop8661 2d ago

laptop 5070 os a scam just like 4070 was, just like when Intel sold dual core cpus and called them i7 in mobile SKUs

1

u/awayish 2d ago

5070ti deals are there for under 2k but you'd need to be on the deals page every day to find them.

1

u/MrGunny94 1d ago

I travel a lot for work as well, at home I got a 5080. For my gaming laptop I bought 4080 12GB since I only play at 1600p

1

u/One-Tomato-970 2d ago

Oh shit, I almost forgot about 8gb vram, thanks for the reminder. I might forget about it later, do remind me again, a month later would be perfect, thanks!

2

u/kikimaru024 1d ago

DAE think we need to move on from 8GB VRAM???!1

1

u/Winter_Pepper7193 2d ago

cant wait for their inevitable video of low vram on smartwatches

-2

u/teffhk 2d ago

I like the video and the point they are saying that 8GB VRAM isn’t enough. But I kinda wish they actually did all those testing with DLSS performance mode instead of just quality/balanced while the tests clearly show the scenario are VRAM limited. Especially you can swap the DLSS DLL to use the transformer model instead of CNN In DLSS supported games.

I actaully just got the same laptop(legion 5) as the video but with a 5060 instead. So after spending hours tinkering and doing tests/benchmarks on the new laptop these are basically what I found:

  • no point getting a 5070 over 5060 due to the VRAM

  • you need to know the expectation and limitation of the 8GB VRAM

  • need to fine tune the settings while monitoring the VRAM usage can’t just use preset modes on games

  • use DLSS performance mode instead quality/balanced helps quite a lot

  • Swap the DLSS DLL for transformer model instead of CNN. People claim transformer mode performance mode is almost as good as the CNN quality mode

17

u/conquer69 2d ago

Rendering at 720p instead of 960p doesn't free too much vram.

-1

u/teffhk 2d ago edited 2d ago

But if rendering at 960p made you reached the VRAM limit and slow down your game a lot, rendering at 720p instead in DLSS performance mode definitely helps without losing too much quality. I tested it in Hellblade 2 and MH:Wilds it actually helps.

-6

u/Desperate-Coffee-996 2d ago

This is the dead end. We should get some of these AI compressing-decompressing technology like yesterday. As much as we can hate upscalers, frame generation, other AI stuff, this is getting out of hands, soon 16Gb cards and laptops will be in trouble and for what? For playing upscaled 720p-1080p, 200Gb+ games that looks like PS4-early PS5 games? Unfortunately, I think Nvidia and AMD will try to hold it back as long as possible...

4

u/surf_greatriver_v4 2d ago

we already have vram compression in GPUs, don't we?

0

u/Desperate-Coffee-996 2d ago

I mean that one with AI that supposed to like reduce VRAM usage up to 90%

0

u/scielliht987 2d ago

It's a hopeless ideal, software devs will always find ways to use more RAM.

-3

u/surf_greatriver_v4 2d ago

...AI that supposed to...

Ah ok, so it doesn't really work

2

u/Desperate-Coffee-996 2d ago

I don't know, just saw some article about it and thought this is probably the only real solution instead of keep stacking up VRAM and launching prices to the space as games slowly going over 12Gb+ even at 1080p. Tho judging by downvotes, apparently not everyone is happy about reducing VRAM usage...

2

u/scielliht987 2d ago edited 2d ago

Also, ASTC texture compression exists, which is better than DXT. But we never got it on desktop for some reason, except for some Intel iGPUs.

Neural texture compression is an obvious next step, and because it's an asset processing step, you can check that the output is correct, so no AI worries.

It should get about JPG levels of compression. So I wonder why we didn't get JPG-style block compression in hardware...

*Oh, and that sampler feedback stuff. That should theoretically make texture streaming more accurate.

2

u/CatsAndCapybaras 2d ago

The point of AI compression is that it can be lossy, but look lossless. The output in the best case will not be perfect, so you can't check it against a ground truth.

3

u/scielliht987 2d ago

You could do a reasonable check, like how video codecs measure quality.

1

u/conquer69 2d ago

Because the solution isn't to reduce vram usage, it's for nvidia to provide more vram at reasonable prices. You can get a decent 8gb laptop for $800 but if you want 12gb, you need to pay $1200 extra. Fuck that.

1

u/Desperate-Coffee-996 2d ago

As someone said in reply above, devs will always find the way to use more memory. So if they're pushing 12gb limits at 1080p with upscalers now, give them time and 16, then 24 will not be enough, and we're still talking about 1080p. So more vram and reasonable prices are not an option, same as going back to huge expensive monstrosities that requires stands, individual cooling, new 1000w power supply etc. And for laptops this is going to be even worse.

1

u/conquer69 2d ago

More vram is definitely an option. Only 8gb is less than what the 5 year old consoles have available. An extra 8gb of vram doesn't cost $1500 either.

devs will always find the way to use more memory

I don't see how devs freezing their tech improvements due to low vram is a good thing for anyone but nvidia. Even they struggle with this because their RTX features use more vram.

1

u/Desperate-Coffee-996 2d ago

An extra 8gb of vram doesn't cost $1500 either.

No, but 16gb costs like twice of 8gb GPU, and this is already out of range of typical mass level of $200-400 GPUs. And of course, both AMD and Nvidia did that on purpose to reduce GPU usage like RTX 4060 and 5060 and force people to buy 4060 Ti and 5060 Ti or better. This is why I said give them time and they will force us to buy 24Gb GPU for $1000.

-4

u/Emperor_Idreaus 2d ago

« Laughs in 3080 Ti 16GB W/ DLSSFG FSR3 mod alternative »

5

u/NeroClaudius199907 2d ago

How much did you get the 3080ti for? Because 5080 has 16gb as well. The problem isnt high end but low-mid range

-20

u/kyleleblanc 2d ago

This is why Apple Silicon with its unified system memory is actually leaps and bounds ahead of PC gaming here.

Go ahead, downvote me, I don’t care.

7

u/Desperate-Coffee-996 2d ago

Consoles with their unified memory and compressing methods were ahead of PC games for years, but this is consoles, you can't sell a new one for $700+ every 1-2 years just because 8+16 isn't suddenly enough within one generation even for upscaled 720p and performance mode.

1

u/EndlessZone123 2d ago

Consoles using gddr ram crippling effective cpu performance and forcing a lot of optimizaions is not really comparable.

0

u/Henrarzz 2d ago edited 2d ago

CPU performance in consoles is limited by cache being 1/3rd of their desktop parts, not unified memory

-13

u/kyleleblanc 2d ago

True.

I chose Apple Silicon because they’re doing it in the desktop / laptop market.

The fact you can’t get unified system memory in x86 land in 2025 is downright criminal.

8

u/jhenryscott 2d ago

You literally can. Strix Halo

-6

u/kyleleblanc 2d ago

Yeah, fair point but it should be the default standard across the entire industry at this point and sadly it likely never will be.

5

u/jhenryscott 2d ago

It has a use case, and one that is probably gonna to see a much wider adoption over the next 5-10 years. But a parts and systems based approach where we have a product stacks for different parts of the machine is going to remain the most popular approach because of its individual customization. Some people need 256GB of RAM and no Graphics of any kind (data servers) they will never buy APUs, even if cheaper, enterprise clients don’t want to buy things they don’t need. And gamers (mostly) want to upgrade with the rapidly accelerating pace of core/architecture improvements. Even the m4 ultra will look like a toy next to a 192GB GDDR7X GPU that is only 1-3 years away.

Flexibility of application will continue to be the norm while SoC systems will see an increase in market share they’ll never be able to compete with customized systems.

Doing everything really well is not as valuable as doing one thing perfectly and at scale.

1

u/dovahshy15 2d ago

There's the Framework Desktop though.

-2

u/kyleleblanc 2d ago

Fair point but it should be the standard, not a one off.

4

u/xmrlazyx 2d ago

It's not the standard because it's expensive. And unfortunately people who buy x86 systems won't pay the Apple premium for unified memory. Look at Core Ultra 200V (Lunar Lake). Got so much backlash cause they switched to unified memory and it's such a great platform.

1

u/jrr123456 2d ago

The standard should be dedicated memory, it's always superior.

1

u/jrr123456 2d ago

AMD Ryzen AI Max+395 has 128GB of unified LPDDR5X.

1

u/kyleleblanc 2d ago

I know but it’s not the norm sadly.

5

u/jrr123456 2d ago

It is the norm

All AMD APUs and intel CPUs have unified memory.

But to get high end performance you need a dedicated GPU with dedicated memory.

You can't get high end performance from a unified chip that shares memory, the die size would be too large and it would be limited by the memory.

A fast GPU needs GDDR, but GDDR has higher latency than DDR, which negatively impacts CPU performance.

5

u/Rudradev715 2d ago

Game support is dogshit in MacOS,

Only 4 or 5 year old games are coming to it.

Otherwise apple silicon is way ahead

With AMD strix Halo at least it's changing.

1

u/CatsAndCapybaras 2d ago

Yes, unified memory is super fast and apple silicon is pretty good, but you pay for that in other ways. I really value choice. I want to be able to run the software I like and have the option to spec my machine the way I want. I also value upgradeability. Mac is a good option but it's not for everyone.

1

u/Dreamerlax 2d ago

Sure but not many games are on Mac OS unfortunately.

1

u/jrr123456 2d ago

Unified memory holds back the performance, dedicated memory is always better, having the CPU and GPU compete for resources increases latency and lowers effective bandwidth.