Forza Horizon 6 GPU Benchmark: 8GB vs. 16GB VRAM

[LordVile95]

Maybe read and watch this article, which explains and demonstrates it in games like *Pragmata*, where the FPS may still look fine, but the game automatically leaves data out to make it work. Wake. up. It is not even just about FPS anymore. Games nowadays adjust automatically without you being able to do anything about it, to make it smooth for people with only 8 GB cards. You are ignoring the issue just because the FPS are "fine."

And in the forum post, the author—one of the guys in the video—also says:



Timestamp of the video where he shows how details get reduced and LOD is aggressively adjusted:

Article: https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Prag...8-GiByte-VRAM-Gate-RTX-3070-RTX-5060-1525770/

On settings that the cards can’t actually run, on specific games that handle it this way, anyway you’re really not getting the point are you. Also you can reply rather than post and hope I don’t notice it

 

[bloomsun]

Whatever you think.. ok. You are not getting the point that VRAM is not sufficient and it doesnt matter how ever you spin it. "Also you can reply rather than post and hope I don’t notice it" Huh? Also, whatever. What do I care if you notice something, I dont even know what, or not.

 

[LordVile95]

Whatever you think.. ok. You are not getting the point that VRAM is not sufficient and it doesnt matter how ever you spin it. "Also you can reply rather than post and hope I don’t notice it" Huh? Also, whatever. What do I care if you notice something, I dont even know what, or not.

How is it not? You can see with the 9060XT that 8GB is fine u less you’re really going to notice that it’s running at 101FPS rather than 105. The issue with the 5060Ti is that it has a x8 interface not that it has 8GB of VRAM.

 

[todestriebu]

How is it not? You can see with the 9060XT that 8GB is fine u less you’re really going to notice that it’s running at 101FPS rather than 105. The issue with the 5060Ti is that it has a x8 interface not that it has 8GB of VRAM.

The issue with the 5060Ti 8GB is 8GB VRAM *AND* x8 interface. And consider it's PCIe 5.0 x8, it will be even worse in a, say, AM4 board with only PCIe 4.0 or even 3.0 speed. 5060Ti 16GB is mostly fine in a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface.
See: https://www.techspot.com/review/3004-nvidia-rtx-5060-ti-pcie-benchmark/
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5060-ti-pci-express-x8-scaling/31.html

9060XT 8GB did fare a lot worse in 1080p Extreme and Extreme+RT, only to lesser extent than 5060Ti.
Is it really bad? It's a lot more debatable than 5060Ti, but it does make the title of this article a little bit misleading / biased imo, because it is supposed to bash 8GB variants of GPUs, not only 5060Ti 8GB (which does deserve such criticism).
9060XT isn't getting away unscathed either in the graphs in the big test, just not in 1080p high+RT preset and not to the extent of 5060Ti, and I can kinda see some other people will jump in and say "Steve/Tim, you AMD shill!!!!!" if 9060XT is included.

 

[LordVile95]

The issue with the 5060Ti 8GB is 8GB VRAM *AND* x8 interface. And consider it's PCIe 5.0 x8, it will be even worse in a, say, AM4 board with only PCIe 4.0 or even 3.0 speed. 5060Ti 16GB is mostly fine in a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface.
See: https://www.techspot.com/review/3004-nvidia-rtx-5060-ti-pcie-benchmark/
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5060-ti-pci-express-x8-scaling/31.html

9060XT 8GB did fare a lot worse in 1080p Extreme and Extreme+RT, only to lesser extent than 5060Ti.

Becaure extreme settings use 4K textures which are pointless on 1080p and 1440p resolutions. It’s also not where toh want performance to be on a racing game on the 16GB cards either so you’d be turning settings down regardless. It’s similar to the last time they did this when they’re said the 16GB had 500% more performance or something ridiculous becaure the 8GB card had 5FPS but the 16GB card got 25. Neither were playable so an inch is as good as a mile

Is it really bad? It's a lot more debatable than 5060Ti, but it does make the title of this article a little bit misleading / biased imo, because it is supposed to bash 8GB variants of GPUs, not only 5060Ti 8GB (which does deserve such criticism).
9060XT isn't getting away unscathed either in the graphs in the big test, just not in 1080p high+RT preset and not to the extent of 5060Ti, and I can kinda see some other people will jump in and say "Steve/Tim, you AMD shill!!!!!" if 9060XT is included.

They have an agenda to push and it’s bad form especially when they’re producing bespoke benchmarks to get the result they want rather than a repreeentrive one

 

[bloomsun]

I just fed the whole site into AI and asked it who is correct and who is wrong. You know what? Im not completely correct either, but the assessment is clear if one is willing to learn:

Whats funny? Even AI tells you, that you are wrong:

They have an agenda to push and it’s bad form especially when they’re producing bespoke benchmarks to get the result they want rather than a repreeentrive one

"LordVile95 — Right about the PCIe interface, wrong about almost everything else
What he gets right:
The RTX 5060 Ti 8GB has a PCIe 5.0 x8 interface. On older motherboards (PCIe 3.0 or 4.0), that card runs at reduced bandwidth. When the GPU spills into system RAM, that narrower bus absolutely hurts performance more than a full x16 card would. The RX 9060 XT 8GB, with its full x16 interface, does not face this additional penalty.

Where he is wrong:
"It is the x8 interface, not the 8 GB." This is false. The article documents VRAM usage well above 8 GB. If the working set is 10–12 GB, an 8 GB card is physically incapable of holding it all, regardless of PCIe speed. A faster highway does not help if the warehouse is too small.

"They designed tests to jack up VRAM usage." Testing a game at its maximum preset is standard hardware journalism. The article also tested without ray tracing and still found 16–46 % gaps. Those are not "bespoke" or artificial scenarios; they are the game's own quality presets.

"8 GB cards are fine." At 1080p/1440p High settings, they are usable, but "fine" ignores the quiet visual compromises bloomsun mentioned. The article also notes that the High preset forces downgrades to both textures and geometry, which is visually obvious."

"todestriebu — The most technically accurate commenter"
"bloomsun — Right about the big picture, but overstating the universal crisis"
"gamerk2 — Logically backwards"
"Nintenboy01 — Factually correct"

"todestriebu has the most balanced and technically correct view. bloomsun is right about the industry trend and the invisible quality loss. LordVile95 correctly identifies the PCIe handicap but incorrectly uses it to dismiss the entire VRAM problem."

 

[LordVile95]

I just fed the whole site into AI and asked it who is correct and who is wrong. You know what? Im not completely correct either, but the assessment is clear if one is willing to learn:

Whats funny? Even AI tells you, that you are wrong:



"LordVile95 — Right about the PCIe interface, wrong about almost everything else
What he gets right:
The RTX 5060 Ti 8GB has a PCIe 5.0 x8 interface. On older motherboards (PCIe 3.0 or 4.0), that card runs at reduced bandwidth. When the GPU spills into system RAM, that narrower bus absolutely hurts performance more than a full x16 card would. The RX 9060 XT 8GB, with its full x16 interface, does not face this additional penalty.

Where he is wrong:
"It is the x8 interface, not the 8 GB." This is false. The article documents VRAM usage well above 8 GB. If the working set is 10–12 GB, an 8 GB card is physically incapable of holding it all, regardless of PCIe speed. A faster highway does not help if the warehouse is too small.

"They designed tests to jack up VRAM usage." Testing a game at its maximum preset is standard hardware journalism. The article also tested without ray tracing and still found 16–46 % gaps. Those are not "bespoke" or artificial scenarios; they are the game's own quality presets.

"8 GB cards are fine." At 1080p/1440p High settings, they are usable, but "fine" ignores the quiet visual compromises bloomsun mentioned. The article also notes that the High preset forces downgrades to both textures and geometry, which is visually obvious."

"todestriebu — The most technically accurate commenter"
"bloomsun — Right about the big picture, but overstating the universal crisis"
"gamerk2 — Logically backwards"
"Nintenboy01 — Factually correct"

"todestriebu has the most balanced and technically correct view. bloomsun is right about the industry trend and the invisible quality loss. LordVile95 correctly identifies the PCIe handicap but incorrectly uses it to dismiss the entire VRAM problem."

Oh look AI is wrong again surprise surprise. It also didn’t even read it correctly.

 

[bloomsun]

At this point Im asking myself what it actually takes for you to accept the facts...

 

[LordVile95]

At this point Im asking myself what it actually takes for you to accept the facts...

Accept what facts bud? There’s literally benchmarks showing you’re wrong and you’re resorting to AI now. What’s next are you going to start putting glue on pizza to make the toppings stay in place because AI said to?

You’re also completely ignoring the point that they’re using DLSS, which they never use in a standard run, to make the difference seem larger than it actually is. And AI doesn’t seem to recognise that although you would typically test cards with maxed settings in this case you’d test to what’s actually playable as you’re testing similar models of cards. For example if you’re comparing a 9070 to a 5090 you would test at 4K maxed out because even if the 9070 can’t get playable generates the 5090 can. With the 5060Ti you’re not going to be playing it maxed out as the frame rate is too low so it doesn’t matter when the difference is because again an inch is as good as a mile. Does it really matter that the 16GB model gets 1.5x the FPS at 4K with RT? No because it only gets 25FPS. Which is why they’re using DLSS to effectively lie.

 

[todestriebu]

Becaure extreme settings use 4K textures which are pointless on 1080p and 1440p resolutions. It’s also not where toh want performance to be on a racing game on the 16GB cards either so you’d be turning settings down regardless.

No, not on this game. There are obvious visual improvements between high and extreme presets. And some of them are obvious due to texture upgrades.
I can't put image files here?? oh well...

When I was on a RTX3070 and stuck on a 1080p monitor I would accept high presets but always tried to go past high presets. It was very doable in Forza Horizon 5, but in Forza Motorsport 8 I wasn't able to get high quality texture work even with everything else at lowest settings possible, so I'm stuck with either "okay framerates but bad texture" or "good texture but 10-ish fps". FM8 doesn't have a higher-than-high texture setting.

Oh, and 9060XT 8GB is gonna suck on a PCIe 3.0 slot. It should suck less than 5060Ti 8GB, but it's gonna suck.

It’s similar to the last time they did this when they’re said the 16GB had 500% more performance or something ridiculous becaure the 8GB card had 5FPS but the 16GB card got 25. Neither were playable so an inch is as good as a mile

In a imaginary but totally feasible scenario where the frame rates are doubled (10 vs 50) we now have one side that is playable but the other is not.

They have an agenda to push and it’s bad form especially when they’re producing bespoke benchmarks to get the result they want rather than a repreeentrive one

Now look, they are running a business. They need views for the business to survive. Their agenda is anything against any ordinary gamer, so why you heff to be mad?

 

[LordVile95]

No, not on this game. There are obvious visual improvements between high and extreme presets. And some of them are obvious due to texture upgrades.
I can't put image files here?? oh well...

There’s really not

When I was on a RTX3070 and stuck on a 1080p monitor I would accept high presets but always tried to go past high presets. It was very doable in Forza Horizon 5, but in Forza Motorsport 8 I wasn't able to get high quality texture work even with everything else at lowest settings possible, so I'm stuck with either "okay framerates but bad texture" or "good texture but 10-ish fps". FM8 doesn't have a higher-than-high texture setting.

Oh, and 9060XT 8GB is gonna suck on a PCIe 3.0 slot. It should suck less than 5060Ti 8GB, but it's gonna suck.

What platform that supports W11 and has a CPU that meets the minimum spec doesn’t have at least PCIE 4?

In an imaginary but totally feasible scenario where the frame rates are doubled (10 vs 50) we now have one side that is playable but the other is not.

Which doesn’t exist here so why bring it up.

Now look, they are running a business. They need views for the business to survive. Their agenda is anything against any ordinary gamer, so why you heff to be mad?

The agenda is pushing people to more expensive hardware by falsely claiming a product is bad when in reality it’s not which harms consumers. They’re giving bad product advice to push an agenda.

 

[Lew Zealand]

There’s really not

What platform that supports W11 and has a CPU that meets the minimum spec doesn’t have at least PCIE 4?

B360, Z370, Z390
B350, X370, B450, X470
and their lower-tier H and whatever equivalents.

Coffee Lake and Zen/+/2 boards, so: Loads of them.

But his assertion that 8GB GPUs on PCIe 3.0 are gonna suck are of course quite exaggerated.

 

[LordVile95]

B360, Z370, Z390
B350, X370, B450, X470
and their lower-tier H and whatever equivalents.

Coffee Lake and Zen/+/2 boards, so: Loads of them.

But his assertion that 8GB GPUs on PCIe 3.0 are gonna suck are of course quite exaggerated.

So low end processors that will be a limit themselves and near decade old boards. For some reason I don’t think if you’re running that you’ll be upgrading to a £300-400 GPU at this point. However the 9060XT 8GB does drop to around £250 every so often and that’s a solid deal at a £150+ discount from the 16GB

 

[todestriebu]

There’s really not

I swear on FH6 there is. I just can't post the screenshots here.
But to quote the optimization guide here (https://www.techspot.com/article/3127-forza-horizon-6-optimization/):
"Despite the name, we don't think the High texture mode actually looks especially high quality"
Extreme is the 4K texture here. Ultra is pretty good. High is potato compared to Ultra.
And visual quality is a subjective thing. If high is good enough, more power to them. But Ultra is subjectively much better than High in FH6. It is still better than medium in FM8, but only borderline acceptable in my eyes.

What platform that supports W11 and has a CPU that meets the minimum spec doesn’t have at least PCIE 4?

My 5800X3D on a B450 board says hi.

Which doesn’t exist here so why bring it up.

If my 3070 had, say, 10GB VRAM it would have held up a lot longer. If I was on a B550/X570 board instead of a B450 board it might or might not have gotten away in FM8.
You are right that the results in this article and the big test would have justified against 5060Ti 8GB but not the 9060XT 8GB. But consider it screwed up 5060Ti 8GB it is also close to screw up the 9060XT 8GB. Not in FH6, but in near future / maybe some other recent games.

So low end processors that will be a limit themselves and near decade old boards. For some reason I don’t think if you’re running that you’ll be upgrading to a £300-400 GPU at this point. However the 9060XT 8GB does drop to around £250 every so often and that’s a solid deal at a £150+ discount from the 16GB

My 5800X3D on a B450 board says hi again. It was a drop-in upgrade, and not exactly low end.
And for some time I was looking for anything higher than 3070 and had more than 8GB, because my 3070 and its 8GB VRAM failed me at FM8 at 1080p high texture where no other settings including resolution scaling and DLSS ultra performance could have saved the situation at the time.

The agenda is pushing people to more expensive hardware by falsely claiming a product is bad when in reality it’s not which harms consumers. They’re giving bad product advice to push an agenda.

You did successfully make me doubt they are being too selective in how they present the results, but telling people a) you are this close to a playable 1080p maxxed out experience which is visually much better than 1080p high b) you are gonna get screwed by 8GB VRAM even in 1080p isn't bad advice. Meanwhile telling people "8GB VRAM is good enough" is a bad advice unless esports only / very limited budget / 1080p low-medium is acceptable / longetivity is not considered.

 

[LordVile95]

I swear on FH6 there is. I just can't post the screenshots here.
But to quote the optimization guide here (https://www.techspot.com/article/3127-forza-horizon-6-optimization/):
"Despite the name, we don't think the High texture mode actually looks especially high quality"
Extreme is the 4K texture here. Ultra is pretty good. High is potato compared to Ultra.
And visual quality is a subjective thing. If high is good enough, more power to them. But Ultra is subjectively much better than High in FH6. It is still better than medium in FM8, but only borderline acceptable in my eyes.

And if you’re not playing at 4K you don’t get the benefit of the 4K texture. Play the game at 1080 or 1440p and the difference isn’t there.

My 5800X3D on a B450 board says hi.

And you’re pairing a top of the line, for its day, CPU with a budget GPU?

If my 3070 had, say, 10GB VRAM it would have held up a lot longer. If I was on a B550/X570 board instead of a B450 board it might or might not have gotten away in FM8.

Not really it’s just not fast enough to run high settings.

You are right that the results in this article and the big test would have justified against 5060Ti 8GB but not the 9060XT 8GB. But consider it screwed up 5060Ti 8GB it is also close to screw up the 9060XT 8GB. Not in FH6, but in near future / maybe some other recent games.

The 5060Ti 8GB is a bad card but that’s mainly down to cheaping out on the bandwidth more than anything. The 9060XT is significantly cheaper as a 8GB model and is the best budget card there currently is for the price. You also can’t judge off of the future, maybe it will maybe it won’t but it’s more likely that at the settings the silicon performs well at the VRAM buffer isn’t going to be a major limitation.

My 5800X3D on a B450 board says hi again. It was a drop-in upgrade, and not exactly low end.
And for some time I was looking for anything higher than 3070 and had more than 8GB, because my 3070 and its 8GB VRAM failed me at FM8 at 1080p high texture where no other settings including resolution scaling and DLSS ultra performance could have saved the situation at the time.

The 8GB 3070 performs fine at 1080p high on forza. You can run 1440p ultra and get over 60FPS. The drama is if you try and run RT over medium. Have a link

You did successfully make me doubt they are being too selective in how they present the results, but telling people a) you are this close to a playable 1080p maxxed out experience which is visually much better than 1080p high b) you are gonna get screwed by 8GB VRAM even in 1080p isn't bad advice. Meanwhile telling people "8GB VRAM is good enough" is a bad advice unless esports only / very limited budget / 1080p low-medium is acceptable / longetivity is not considered.

I think you’re not thinking critically. The maxed out experience at 4K is not the same at 1080 becaure again 4K textures do nothing if you’re not playing at 4K which is what hogs the VRAM. You can have pretty much everything else maxed and it will look identical. The 8GB cards run it at 1440p high with RT just fine and that’s without DLSS with lows over 60 trailing the 16GB cards by maybe 5FPs and match the 16GB cards without RT.

Also pixel peeping on stills isn’t the same as what’s noticeable in game. The XSX version is worse graphically than my PC but it’s still perfectly playable and looks nice.

 

[todestriebu]

And if you’re not playing at 4K you don’t get the benefit of the 4K texture. Play the game at 1080 or 1440p and the difference isn’t there.

My first thought is HAHAHA NO, but because this is a subjective thing I know I'm not going to convince everyone out there.
There are enough differences that while I can barely accept the compromise of using high texture I would much prefer to have at least ultra texture even in 1080p in FH6. This time it is too noticable for me.
* To be clear and probably disqualify me from further commenting, I have taken screenshots in 1080p in FH6, but while I'm still on the same 5800X3D and B450 board. I'm currently on a 4K OLED with a GPU that can comfortably do native 4K extreme preset. That 3070 was stuck there before I could move place and get past 24" 1080p.

The 8GB 3070 performs fine at 1080p high on forza. You can run 1440p ultra and get over 60FPS. The drama is if you try and run RT over medium. Have a link

Perhaps there are later optimizations or the video didn't touch any of the tracks / scenes I had trouble with.
in FM8 most of the time I could do 90fps at 1080p high with that 3070, but there were enough tracks / scenes that hammers the VRAM and drops to <15fps.
And again, this is something that the 3070 could have gotten away with 10GB VRAM / potentially with PCIe4.0. This pretty much scared me away from anything with 8GB VRAM even if I couldn't get away from the 24" 1080p.

I think you’re not thinking critically. The maxed out experience at 4K is not the same at 1080 becaure again 4K textures do nothing if you’re not playing at 4K which is what hogs the VRAM. You can have pretty much everything else maxed and it will look identical. The 8GB cards run it at 1440p high with RT just fine and that’s without DLSS with lows over 60 trailing the 16GB cards by maybe 5FPs and match the 16GB cards without RT.

I will concede a little bit more:
9060XT 8GB does look good at the price in your place. And FH6 is just not a good example to prove that because 9060XT 8GB did okay. But I probably will get into the same situation in FM8 with that 9060XT 8GB.

There are examples that the situation is stuck between a potato texture and a good texture that is too heavy for 8GB VRAM and ruins frame rate (FM8 is/was? one) and 1080p ultra is much better than 1080p high (subjectively FH6 is one), and while it didn't quite screw up 8GB cards this time in FH6 my opinion that unless reasons 8GB is compromised and bad stands.

 

[LordVile95]

My first thought is HAHAHA NO, but because this is a subjective thing I know I'm not going to convince everyone out there.
There are enough differences that while I can barely accept the compromise of using high texture I would much prefer to have at least ultra texture even in 1080p in FH6. This time it is too noticable for me.
* To be clear and probably disqualify me from further commenting, I have taken screenshots in 1080p in FH6, but while I'm still on the same 5800X3D and B450 board. I'm currently on a 4K OLED with a GPU that can comfortably do native 4K extreme preset. That 3070 was stuck there before I could move place and get past 24" 1080p.

But you wouldn’t be playing at 4K with these cards

Perhaps there are later optimizations or the video didn't touch any of the tracks / scenes I had trouble with.
in FM8 most of the time I could do 90fps at 1080p high with that 3070, but there were enough tracks / scenes that hammers the VRAM and drops to <15fps.
And again, this is something that the 3070 could have gotten away with 10GB VRAM / potentially with PCIe4.0. This pretty much scared me away from anything with 8GB VRAM even if I couldn't get away from the 24" 1080p.

Did you have RT on as that’s the only thing that takes the 3070 down to 15FPS at 1080p

I will concede a little bit more:
9060XT 8GB does look good at the price in your place. And FH6 is just not a good example to prove that because 9060XT 8GB did okay. But I probably will get into the same situation in FM8 with that 9060XT 8GB.

9060XT does fine in FM8

There are examples that the situation is stuck between a potato texture and a good texture that is too heavy for 8GB VRAM and ruins frame rate (FM8 is/was? one) and 1080p ultra is much better than 1080p high (subjectively FH6 is one), and while it didn't quite screw up 8GB cards this time in FH6 my opinion that unless reasons 8GB is compromised and bad stands.

There’s really not. The only time you’re getting that is when games use dynamic textures or target specific frame rates.

In games the cards can run well the 8GB VRAM buffer doesn’t really create an issue and this article pretending that it does by using a poorly designed card rather than one with suitable bandwidth is disingenuous at best

 

[todestriebu]

Did you have RT on as that’s the only thing that takes the 3070 down to 15FPS at 1080p

I have said somewhere else that I have tried with all settings low except textures. I can confirm high texture is the only thing needed in FM8 to take my 3070 down to ~15fps in certain scenes / tracks.

In games the cards can run well the 8GB VRAM buffer doesn’t really create an issue and this article pretending that it does by using a poorly designed card rather than one with suitable bandwidth is disingenuous at best

Probably yes, but pretending 8GB VRAM is fine is also disingenuous at best.

 

[LordVile95]

I have said somewhere else that I have tried with all settings low except textures. I can confirm high texture is the only thing needed in FM8 to take my 3070 down to ~15fps in certain scenes / tracks.

Then there’s clearly something else wrong as others with weaker CPUs are getting better with the same card.

Probably yes, but pretending 8GB VRAM is fine is also disingenuous at best.

Not really. 8GB cards are 1080p cards at this point and at 1080p at settings the silicon can actually run they’re the same as the 16GB models of the card itself isn’t poorly designed

 

[todestriebu]

Then there’s clearly something else wrong as others with weaker CPUs are getting better with the same card.

Perhaps, but consider I have gone as far as trying a fresh clean Windows 10 install along with other things outside of the game, FM8 was the one that prompted me to get more than 8GB VRAM back in late 2023. I couldn't even think of an excuse for the issue, but with this discussion I could blame the PCIe3.0 slot for not being 4.0.
I'm very sure the main issue at that time is running out of VRAM. All the videos I had checked at the time claiming (insert 8GB card here) can run FM8 at 1080p high fine didn't touch the tracks I had issue.

Not really. 8GB cards are 1080p cards at this point

"1080p medium / budget cards".

at 1080p at settings the silicon can actually run they’re the same as the 16GB models of the card itself isn’t poorly designed

I will repeat myself with a slightly different wording this time: the settings I could run FM8 with that 3070 with 8GB VRAＭ and a hypothetical 3070 with 10GB VRAM is definitely not the same (1080p ~90fps high with very obvious medium texture VS 1080p high ~90fps with no pain).
I don't know what will happen on a 5060Ti/9060XT on that PCIe3.0 slot. If they can actually manage 8GB VRAM better, good for them. Otherwise if PCIe5.0x8 is not counted as "adequate bandwidth" and is counted as "poorly designed" then PCIe 5.0 x16 falls into the same category because PCIe3.0 exists.

 

[PierreJG]

As much as I dislike Microsoft or anything to do with them, MS and Playground Games know how to optimize games. I have a Windows partition mainly for some games and work programs. Forza is well optimized. I have an R5 5500 with an RX6600XT. I play the games in 1080p high but with lower textures because of my VRAM limitation. I also enabled ray tracing on Medium and enabled FSR. I get most 60fps locked, and it sometimes drops to around 53fps. If I unlock 70-80+, the frame drop can be clearly felt. There is just one place that tanks my pc and that is going over the bridge with the open sea on the side. That dropped to 25-30fps