Initially shocked to see the 1%low difference is really big in some scenes. So I am happy to know that upgrading my 16gb to 32gb might actually improve the stutters :) thanks for this
pretty small difference anyway, because the game has shitty optimization no matter what hardware you have and need to be fixed. Games like RDR2 eat this game alive in optimization and technical quality
@@cjagria rdr2 is a 2018 game🤣🤣🤣🤣. Right now games are really demanding but in this case hogwarts is a joke. Still 32gb is a better choice for future games
*On the 10GB 3080, to see the 0.1% and 1% lows come up so far from 16GB of system ram to 32GB of system ram is impressive. I assume this is because of the page file size being larger with more ram.*
I built my current PC two years ago and basically every pc tech channel was saying 32gb+ was overkill and that no game would ever require more than 16gb..
Yeah it's more about stability than anything else... 16gb is enough for now but games will become more and more demanding so upgrading to 32gb at some point will be necessary... especially how cheap it is for 2 16gb ddr ram. If you can sell the one you currently have to some1 else you can upgrade it for like 50$
Learn to use ISLC. It's free, from the makers of DDU and clears standby memory that MS fills up and that cripples gaming on newer titles. The problem is not the gaming using more than 16 GB of RAM, it's that Windows sucks at memory management and you are using virtual memory.
Uhm, what video are you watching? He's using dedicated RAM from his GPU as well as installed motherboard RAM. Where do you see anything that shows him using virtual memory?
@@VoiceULove In 16GB, the RAM is pretty much at maximum usage, so then it will start to use virtual memory after that for whatever amount it needs as long as virtual memory is allocated. This uses disk drives and is very slow by comparison. If you can somehow disable virtual memory or you have no more space left allocated to be able to become virtual memory, maybe you will even instead have a crash of the game when it fails to dumping stuff from memory.
@@kakashisensei7387 Well even NVME M.2 drives are very slow compared to RAM so "slower" yes, and probably still considerably so, but I don't have a fast SSD like that so I can't verify whether it's as noticeable as I would expect. Everything of course runs drastically slower on mechanical drives but still also on 2nd gen SSDs (not talking specifically about Hogwarts Legacy here).
It's all Ultra, 4k and RayTracing on without any form of DLSS or FSR. Like, no one would play it like that. You would at least enable DLSS or frame generation.
Yes the game actually is very enjoyable with 4k ultra dlss off ultra settings rt max but frame generation on with reflex set to boost mode and Nvidia dlaa anti aliasing which gives you the best image quality and playable latency at about 80 to 90 fps.
@@averywebb1179 During the intense fighting seans it can be problematic especially under the hardest difficulty but you can always play it on story mode difficulty if latency doesn't bother you.
@@aberkae have you tried... lowering your expectations? 45-50 fps for native ultra RT is still REALLY good. This isn't 1080p we're talking about anymore.
@@RayzaNC This is actually a problem with unreal engine 4 and happens on many games (happened to me with metro and cyberpunk for example) i dont know if its fixable.. at least UE5 solved it so future games won't have the problem
@@Kalimar94 i did, no difference in ram really. the most i have used was 10.5, that seems to be the peak. in the forest for example the average is 5.5 i feel like this game is very weird, i changed my 3070 to a 4070ti and everything was butter smooth. no more stutters basically 60fps at all times. awesome. then i go into hogsmead and its worse than with a 3070. 10fps max. gpu usage suddenly at 100% with...100watt consumption???? i think it just has too many rough edges atm. like my ram usage is super fine but for others it seems impossible.
I'm not exactly an expert in this kind of thingy but can Hogwarts Legacy run on my HP victus 15...AMD ryzen 5 5600H with Radeon Graphics 3.30 GHz..12gb of ram..would be nice if someone reply to me. My graphic cards is GTX 1650
I'm not sure which software you are using but these numbers are not accurate. These numbers represent the total amount used by your system, not what the game is currently using. If you are using MSI afterburner you need to add RAM process usage to get the accurate depiction of what this game is using.
@@bitcoincryptoglitch4404 so.. i got a 3070ti 8gb vram and 16gb of memory ram. with a update to 32gb and setting the game on ultra (except textures on high) the game shouldn't have shutter. right?
I play on RX 6750 XT 12 GB, game used up to 10.1 GB of VRAM (in Hogsmeade, at least that's the most i've noticed). The game probably didn't need that much to run smoothly tho. IMO the biggest problem was RAM util at 14.6GB (out of 16 GB) on my setup, so basically maxed out. I also tried allocating different sizes of paging files (virtual ram) but it didn't make any noticeable difference. My guess is that 16GB of RAM is problem in this game. As you could see in the video, frame times are much more stable, and lows are higher with 32 GB. Edit: Ofc, 1080p, ultra settings, without raytracing.
@@js100serch I tried the game again and definitely noticed an improvement in terms of performance. If you can, try activating XMP from BIOS. I will also upgrade to 32GB to see if the performance improves even further. I think with a few patches, the game could become quite performant at some point.
A bit of an unfair comparison. You forgot to turn off RTX on the 4090 after watching the video again. Test on the 3080 was without RTX and for the 4090 was with RTX ON
I got a pretty old pc upgrading later this year finally but as of now I got a 1080 and 16 gb of ram the game is playable and still fun but it will stutter at times and averages 40 fps. Main problem is textured take a second to load when in a new area
WTF? Some gamedev finally managed to create a piece of cr... that actually use even MORE than 16 GB of RAM? Laughabale. But, for this sh..., getting 24 is more advisable, skimping a little vs 32. But if you game other games too and don't want to close other apps like browsers etc. then you better get 32 gb ram. But, for this one game 32 gb is waste of money, same as waste of money is price of this game. Overpriced.
these comparisons are useless, DLSS should be on. Regardless Redo this, but turn on DLSS. Go to Nvidia Control > Upscale your entire monitor display, go in game set new display, then DLSS on, have it so when you do turn on DLSS, it will render at 100% . Done. 130+
The performance is all over the place and utilization not so much. The frame generation and dlss set to quality makes it playable but the utilization is still lacking due to poor coding.
That’s exactly how I play 3440x1440 DLDSR to 5120x2160 with DLSSQ and FG looks really good 😁 I get 99% GPU usage on the 4090 OC 3Ghz+. Then turn off the fps counter and enjoy the visuals
Initially shocked to see the 1%low difference is really big in some scenes. So I am happy to know that upgrading my 16gb to 32gb might actually improve the stutters :) thanks for this
dont look frames...look at stability
True. No frame drops almost on 32 gb
pretty small difference anyway, because the game has shitty optimization no matter what hardware you have and need to be fixed. Games like RDR2 eat this game alive in optimization and technical quality
The lows are worth looking at too, for those more intense moments of the game.
I Look only for prices € 😀
@@cjagria rdr2 is a 2018 game🤣🤣🤣🤣. Right now games are really demanding but in this case hogwarts is a joke. Still 32gb is a better choice for future games
*On the 10GB 3080, to see the 0.1% and 1% lows come up so far from 16GB of system ram to 32GB of system ram is impressive. I assume this is because of the page file size being larger with more ram.*
I remember when my 16gb of mem was more than enough.
I remember when 32mb ram was enough and 16mb was standard✌👉
@@LaserDiK Lol I'm that old too. I miss my Tandy.
"640K ought to be enough for anybody"
- Bill Gates
And it should still be. There's absolutely no reason for this game to be so demanding.
I built my current PC two years ago and basically every pc tech channel was saying 32gb+ was overkill and that no game would ever require more than 16gb..
Glad to know I don’t need 32gb ram. I mean it runs great on my system now at 4k ultra with 16gb ram.
Yeah it's more about stability than anything else... 16gb is enough for now but games will become more and more demanding so upgrading to 32gb at some point will be necessary... especially how cheap it is for 2 16gb ddr ram. If you can sell the one you currently have to some1 else you can upgrade it for like 50$
Learn to use ISLC. It's free, from the makers of DDU and clears standby memory that MS fills up and that cripples gaming on newer titles. The problem is not the gaming using more than 16 GB of RAM, it's that Windows sucks at memory management and you are using virtual memory.
Does it help reduce stutters in this game?
Uhm, what video are you watching? He's using dedicated RAM from his GPU as well as installed motherboard RAM. Where do you see anything that shows him using virtual memory?
@@VoiceULove In 16GB, the RAM is pretty much at maximum usage, so then it will start to use virtual memory after that for whatever amount it needs as long as virtual memory is allocated. This uses disk drives and is very slow by comparison. If you can somehow disable virtual memory or you have no more space left allocated to be able to become virtual memory, maybe you will even instead have a crash of the game when it fails to dumping stuff from memory.
@@Endelite well my stutters stopped after creating 16 gigs of virtual memory . Is it still slow if you make the virtual ram on an nvme m.2 SSD?
@@kakashisensei7387 Well even NVME M.2 drives are very slow compared to RAM so "slower" yes, and probably still considerably so, but I don't have a fast SSD like that so I can't verify whether it's as noticeable as I would expect.
Everything of course runs drastically slower on mechanical drives but still also on 2nd gen SSDs (not talking specifically about Hogwarts Legacy here).
16G RMA is not enough for this game！
lows are good, but... under 60fps on a 4090?
It's all Ultra, 4k and RayTracing on without any form of DLSS or FSR. Like, no one would play it like that. You would at least enable DLSS or frame generation.
Yes the game actually is very enjoyable with 4k ultra dlss off ultra settings rt max but frame generation on with reflex set to boost mode and Nvidia dlaa anti aliasing which gives you the best image quality and playable latency at about 80 to 90 fps.
Are you really complaining about native 4k ray tracing at 45 to 50 fps?
@@averywebb1179 During the intense fighting seans it can be problematic especially under the hardest difficulty but you can always play it on story mode difficulty if latency doesn't bother you.
@@aberkae have you tried... lowering your expectations? 45-50 fps for native ultra RT is still REALLY good. This isn't 1080p we're talking about anymore.
they need to fix the reflection in the water so it doesn't disappear when you look up and down
That's just a problem with SSR, they need to optimise it properly so ray tracing is actually usable
@@RayzaNC This is actually a problem with unreal engine 4 and happens on many games (happened to me with metro and cyberpunk for example) i dont know if its fixable.. at least UE5 solved it so future games won't have the problem
DO you guys think its worthy buying another 32gb(2x16) 6000MHz cl36/38/..* ? I have i5 13600KF and 4090 But waiting for i9 14th gen.
Depends on what u do
What a memory hog!
there must have been an update because my game is running with 4.5 to 8.5 gb
are u playing at 4k ultra?
@@Kalimar94 im playing at 4k but not ultra, i changed a couple of settings, i also have dlss quality. 4k does not really need that much more ram
@@ImAnOcean 4k ultra textures are huge try turn everything ultra u will get more than 20gb usage
@@Kalimar94 i did, no difference in ram really. the most i have used was 10.5, that seems to be the peak. in the forest for example the average is 5.5
i feel like this game is very weird, i changed my 3070 to a 4070ti and everything was butter smooth. no more stutters basically 60fps at all times. awesome.
then i go into hogsmead and its worse than with a 3070.
10fps max. gpu usage suddenly at 100% with...100watt consumption???? i think it just has too many rough edges atm. like my ram usage is super fine but for others it seems impossible.
3440x1440 upscaled with DLDSR to 5120x2160 with DLSSQ and FG makes for a really nice visual experience
I just don't understand why i can't get anywhere near this fps on my 3080
What cpu is in your system?
could be many things. drivers, thermals, motherboard, cpu, maybe time to reapply thermal paste and thermal pads?
I'm not exactly an expert in this kind of thingy but can Hogwarts Legacy run on my HP victus 15...AMD ryzen 5 5600H with Radeon Graphics 3.30 GHz..12gb of ram..would be nice if someone reply to me. My graphic cards is GTX 1650
1080p should be fine at medium
i have 16gb of ram but my textures take forever to load in. 3070
And suddenly games need 32gbs ram to run when i could do it just fine with 8gbs. What a scam.
Thanks, Have 32 but I have support for up to 64gb and ram is dirt cheap now.
I'm not sure which software you are using but these numbers are not accurate.
These numbers represent the total amount used by your system, not what the game is currently using.
If you are using MSI afterburner you need to add RAM process usage to get the accurate depiction of what this game is using.
16GB vs 32GB 🐏
how much Vram consumes at 1080p?
5GB on low and 7.2gb on Ultra
@@bitcoincryptoglitch4404 so.. i got a 3070ti 8gb vram and 16gb of memory ram. with a update to 32gb and setting the game on ultra (except textures on high) the game shouldn't have shutter. right?
@@lucianobaldacchino9039 still stutter but less maybe
I play with 3070ti and 16gb ram and the game run pretty well
I play on RX 6750 XT 12 GB, game used up to 10.1 GB of VRAM (in Hogsmeade, at least that's the most i've noticed). The game probably didn't need that much to run smoothly tho. IMO the biggest problem was RAM util at 14.6GB (out of 16 GB) on my setup, so basically maxed out. I also tried allocating different sizes of paging files (virtual ram) but it didn't make any noticeable difference. My guess is that 16GB of RAM is problem in this game. As you could see in the video, frame times are much more stable, and lows are higher with 32 GB.
Edit: Ofc, 1080p, ultra settings, without raytracing.
@@lucianobaldacchino9039 yes i upgraded to 32 and textures load a lot quicker.
You’ll get a few more fps if you OC the 4090 to 3000-3100 MHz
and even more if you OC to 7000 MH. Thanks, Cap.
If you also have a high end CPU to feed it or it'd be bottleneck.
You are lucky if you can stable oc up to 3100hmz...
Does this game really need 32Gb of ram or is it just badly optimized?.
The performance is an absolute joke. There's no reason for a game like this to require such hardware.
@@MNMNT_OG Mmm I see... I asked this on another video like this and they told me the same.
@@js100serch I tried the game again and definitely noticed an improvement in terms of performance. If you can, try activating XMP from BIOS. I will also upgrade to 32GB to see if the performance improves even further. I think with a few patches, the game could become quite performant at some point.
It’s bad optimization, no game should ever need 32GB of ram.
why no 4090 1440p?
Makes 0 difference 16GB vs 32GB.
HELLO, good video! 🔥🔥🔥
A bit of an unfair comparison.
You forgot to turn off RTX on the 4090 after watching the video again.
Test on the 3080 was without RTX and for the 4090 was with RTX ON
the video is about ram utilisation. It's not 3080vs4090
@@Kalimar94 still, unfair comparison. Settings weren't equal.
Also 16gb vs 32gb there is no major difference.
@@Thesilentwolf7610 Sure if you ignore 1% lows and just stare blankly at average fps, there is no difference between 16gb vs 32gb.
@@Thesilentwolf7610 There is major difference in stability (frame times more consisten on 32GB, less peaks), which helps to eliminate stutters
So I can play with Rtx 3080 Ryzen 5600x and 16 gb ddr 4 on wqhd ? I won’t upgrade and because of this ram I didn’t buy the game
Your Ram is fine mate, but at some stage in the next year or so it would be worth upgrading to 32gb
16gb might still stutter, I heard even 32 will stutter for some people.
@@mfenix88 I don't think so
I got a pretty old pc upgrading later this year finally but as of now I got a 1080 and 16 gb of ram the game is playable and still fun but it will stutter at times and averages 40 fps. Main problem is textured take a second to load when in a new area
In this game right now is not enough…
WTF? Some gamedev finally managed to create a piece of cr... that actually use even MORE than 16 GB of RAM? Laughabale. But, for this sh..., getting 24 is more advisable, skimping a little vs 32. But if you game other games too and don't want to close other apps like browsers etc. then you better get 32 gb ram. But, for this one game 32 gb is waste of money, same as waste of money is price of this game. Overpriced.
nice
👍👍👍
Just download more RAM.
I am glad I hava 32G 7200M cl32 RAM and 4080.
32gb seems like not enough these days, its hitting 20gb plus system ram and other things you may have open in the background will cap that.
This game optimization is bullshit!
Trash optimization.
I have:
i7 11th gen
16gb Ram
RTX 3070
How do you guys think my HL performance it's gonna be?
youtube 3070 how.....
You can't play this game at 4K, but 1080p will be fine.
4090 can't hit 60fps, makes me feel better that my lowly 3080 ti can't hit 60fps at 4 ultra
2080 мало памяти, из за нее фризит
Rx 7900xtx
Everybody has 32 Gig - so there is no problem !
Great game - great visuals ! We wanna see more like this.
rich boi take
16GB enough with DDR5.
But 16 GB DDR4 not enough. DDR4 you need 32 for this.
Everybody lol. Maybe if you're rich. I barely know anyone which has more than 16GB RAM because it's absolute overkill for most games.
these comparisons are useless, DLSS should be on. Regardless Redo this, but turn on DLSS. Go to Nvidia Control > Upscale your entire monitor display, go in game set new display, then DLSS on, have it so when you do turn on DLSS, it will render at 100% . Done. 130+
?
The performance is all over the place and utilization not so much. The frame generation and dlss set to quality makes it playable but the utilization is still lacking due to poor coding.
That’s exactly how I play 3440x1440 DLDSR to 5120x2160 with DLSSQ and FG looks really good 😁 I get 99% GPU usage on the 4090 OC 3Ghz+. Then turn off the fps counter and enjoy the visuals