Modder creates a fully working 16GB RTX 3070 using VRAM from a dead AMD GPU

midian182

Posts: 11,693   +177
Staff member
In brief: Nvidia's RTX 3070 was a great graphics card that we loved at the time, but its 8GB of VRAM is becoming an issue as games demand more video memory. Now, a hardware modder has shown what the Ampere card might have looked like had Nvidia been a little more generous, creating a fully working RTX 3070 16GB using parts harvested from dead GPUs.

The project comes from ComputerBase forum member AssassinWarlord, who started with a Gigabyte RTX 3070 Gaming OC and an AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT with a dead GPU.

The RTX 3070 originally used eight 1GB Samsung GDDR6 chips for its standard 8GB configuration, while the Radeon card provided eight 2GB Samsung chips, enough to double the Nvidia card's memory capacity.

This was not a case of simply swapping chips and calling it a day, of course. AssassinWarlord removed the memory from both cards and reballed the chips, a delicate process that involves replacing the tiny solder balls on the underside of each memory package so it can be mounted to a new PCB.

He then used a 3D-printed holder for a GDDR6 stencil and soldered the 16GB worth of modules onto the RTX 3070 PCB. The card initially still appeared as an 8GB model because the memory straps also needed changing so the GPU would select the correct BIOS timing table.

After changing the strap resistors, the RTX 3070 booted and displayed 16GB, but it was not immediately stable. The card suffered black screens and solid-color crashes when switching power states, especially after exiting a benchmark or moving between desktop and load states.

AssassinWarlord eventually traced the issue to the 16GB timing configuration in the BIOS, which appears to exist because Nvidia experimented with 16GB RTX 3070 designs internally but never finished the implementation.

Because modern Nvidia BIOS files cannot be freely modified without breaking security checks, the solution was a workaround rather than a clean BIOS fix.

A registry tweak called DisableDynamicPstate forces the card to remain in its high-performance P0 state, preventing the downclocking behavior. The downside is idle power consumption of around 70W, which is not exactly great, but it does make the 16GB mode stable.

The modder also added a physical switch that lets the card boot in either 8GB or 16GB mode after a full power cycle. This allowed AssassinWarlord to compare both memory configurations on the same card, making the effects of the extra VRAM much easier to see.

The gains were not dramatic in synthetic benchmarks. In some cases, the 8GB mode was slightly faster at stock clocks, likely because the 16GB timing table was never properly finalized.

The bigger improvement was seen in games. In Marvel's Spider-Man 2 running at 4K using the Very High preset, the 8GB mode was stuck in the roughly 20fps range. In 16GB mode, with 13.3GB of VRAM in use, performance jumped to more than 40fps, effectively doubling the frame rate.

This isn't the first time someone has created a 16GB RTX 3070. Modder VIK-On produced a working version years ago, also running into stability issues before finding a clock-locking workaround. But AssassinWarlord's version stands out for turning two broken cards into one far more useful GPU, while also adding a cool 8GB/16GB switch.

Permalink to story:

 
A 3070 would still be a pretty nice card with 16GB so that's cool.
Not surprised he was sitting on a dead 6900 XT. Back when I bought AMD GPUs I saw quite a few of them die rather quickly. At stock speeds, I don't overclock.
 
Watch some YouTube videos of this type of work. Reballing with the proper stencils, and correctly sized solder balls, is not that hard, just don't sneeze. A ten pack of different sized balls in plastic vials is pretty cheap.
 
A 3070 would still be a pretty nice card with 16GB so that's cool.
Not surprised he was sitting on a dead 6900 XT. Back when I bought AMD GPUs I saw quite a few of them die rather quickly. At stock speeds, I don't overclock.
that's BS, amd 6xxx cards hardly die, I've been using mine for 5 years now and going strong with custom OC over factory OC applied.
 
A 3070 would still be a pretty nice card with 16GB so that's cool.
Not surprised he was sitting on a dead 6900 XT. Back when I bought AMD GPUs I saw quite a few of them die rather quickly. At stock speeds, I don't overclock.

No it would not.

3070 don't have the compute to push newer demanding games at high/ultra settings anyway.

3070 does handle most games at medium preset still, which is fine for many and this don't really push the 8GB. It will run most games even on high settings and still don't max out the 8GB, yet the fps might be low because GPU is struggling.

VRAM never saved a weak GPU. 3070 is not exactly weak but I would consider it slightly weak if we talk about running new and demanding AAA games on ultra. No 6 year old / 3 generations old GPU will do that well.

Even a card like 3090 24GB feels pretty slow and loses in most new games to even a 4070 SUPER 12GB and the 4000 series have native FP8 meaning it handles DLSS 4.x way better with less perf hit and also have option for FG + runs at ~200 watts, which is like half of 3090.

It never makes any sense to try and futureproof with VRAM. The GPU will end up as the limiting factor in most cases.

There is tons of examples where Radeon 6800 16GB loses to 3070 8GB in newer games as well. Weak GPU, that buckles with RT elements is the problem here. A GPU issue. RDNA 2 just sucked for RT and in games that force RT elements, this is bad.

Would I rather have 12GB or 16GB? Yes, ofc but if GPU is dated and old, it really makes little difference.

Just because 3070 16GB shows improvements in niche-workloads (that don't even run well on the 16GB version) shows nothing really. You can push most GPUs into VRAM issues, even 5080 16GB if you insist.

A GPU should have a good balance between GPU power, VRAM and features (like upscaling, FG etc). This is how you secure good longevity.
 
Last edited:
A GPU should have a good balance between GPU power, VRAM and features (like upscaling, FG etc). This is how you secure good longevity.
I'm not sure that investing such effort arguing against a subjective qualifier like 'pretty nice card' makes a lot of sense.

However I do think it'd be fair to say that the 5,888 CUDA cores on a 256-bit memory bus design that is the 3070 was never particularly well balanced with a mere 8GB of GDDR6.
 
I'm not sure that investing such effort arguing against a subjective qualifier like 'pretty nice card' makes a lot of sense.

However I do think it'd be fair to say that the 5,888 CUDA cores on a 256-bit memory bus design that is the 3070 was never particularly well balanced with a mere 8GB of GDDR6.

How so?

Even in games released 4 years after 3070, the 8GB VRAM is not really a problem


Here, it even beats Radeon 6800 16GB, in every resolution on max settings, even in native 4KU/UHD it delivered higher minimums than the more expensive 6800 with 16GB.

6700XT had 12GB and was similar priced as 3070, an easy win for the 3070 too.

The 3070 also has option for DLSS 4 on top of all this. It aged better than AMD cards (less RT perf hit, better upscaling support)

Really only a small handful of games will use more than 8GB in 1080p/1440p. Use DLSS and/or Turn settings down a notch, and you are golden. Who really expect to max out new AAA games after 6 years on a mid-end GPU?

There is still not many games that uses more than 8GB on settings a 6 year old GPU like 3070 can realistically run (medium/high settings at 1440p = 8GB is generally plenty) and DLSS 4 adds bigtime to longevity, where DLSS 4 is far better supported and overall far better than FSR 4, which is locked and exclusive to RDNA4 still.

RDNA 2 aged like milk really, in comparison. Completely buckles under RT loads. Many games have forced RT elements (and had for years). Upscaling is default in tons of AAA titles, DLSS wins easily.

VRAM never futureproofed any GPU and it never will. You can find games that punish 12 and 16GB cards too (run of out VRAM). Just because some games can max out 8GB does not mean you can't play them, lower a few settings and you are golden, DLSS support is worth far more than VRAM alone. Radeon 6800 with its 16GB is not going to max out new games either, so what did the 16GB do? Nothing really. Old GPU got old.

You can ramble about VRAM all you want, RDNA 2 showed its age real quick even with 16GB VRAM. GPU arch could not handle RT loads and was lacking good upscaling support. So the people that needed upscaling the most, could not use it. Meanwhile RTX 2000 users has been using DLSS for years and have full DLSS 4 support since day one.

A friend of mine uses his 2080 Ti still, runs perfectly fine in many new AAA games and DLSS 4 added years of life. He will upgrade when RTX 6000 / RDNA5 aka UDNA hits in 2027-2028, his card lasted 10 years. Try that on AMD.

How does RDNA 1 fare today compared to RTX 2000? Awful. Both are 8 years old soon. Even RDNA 2 feels old compared to RTX 3000 series.

AMD FineWine did not apply in the last few generations... Plenty of RAM, yet GPU arch is the problem. Nvidia generally aged better, with less VRAM, thanks to bettter arch.

VRAM < Arch

You can't fix a bad arch, but you can easily fix running of out VRAM.
 
Last edited:
No it would not.

3070 don't have the compute to push newer demanding games at high/ultra settings anyway.

3070 does handle most games at medium preset still, which is fine for many and this don't really push the 8GB. It will run most games even on high settings and still don't max out the 8GB, yet the fps might be low because GPU is struggling.

VRAM never saved a weak GPU. 3070 is not exactly weak but I would consider it slightly weak if we talk about running new and demanding AAA games on ultra. No 6 year old / 3 generations old GPU will do that well.

Even a card like 3090 24GB feels pretty slow and loses in most new games to even a 4070 SUPER 12GB and the 4000 series have native FP8 meaning it handles DLSS 4.x way better with less perf hit and also have option for FG + runs at ~200 watts, which is like half of 3090.

It never makes any sense to try and futureproof with VRAM. The GPU will end up as the limiting factor in most cases.

There is tons of examples where Radeon 6800 16GB loses to 3070 8GB in newer games as well. Weak GPU, that buckles with RT elements is the problem here. A GPU issue. RDNA 2 just sucked for RT and in games that force RT elements, this is bad.

Would I rather have 12GB or 16GB? Yes, ofc but if GPU is dated and old, it really makes little difference.

Just because 3070 16GB shows improvements in niche-workloads (that don't even run well on the 16GB version) shows nothing really. You can push most GPUs into VRAM issues, even 5080 16GB if you insist.

A GPU should have a good balance between GPU power, VRAM and features (like upscaling, FG etc). This is how you secure good longevity.

Do you have a RTX 3070?

I have, and this card is limited in today games because... errhhh... 8 GB OF VRAM.

You can spin like a crazy parrot justifying that is "useless" to put 16 GB in this card, but the reality is that you could PLAY SMOOTHLY many CAPCOM games (with RT engine) IF you have 16 GB and not 8 GB. And this is only one example of many cases.


Yes, it is powerful enough to use "more than 8gb of vram", yesterday and TODAY, with real games. Stop that nonsense talking about it.

And fyi, I have a RTX 4070, too. And do you know WHAT? YES, it's limited TOO because of 12 GB in many games, but in a LESSER WAY than the RTX 3070.
 
Do you have a RTX 3070?

I have, and this card is limited in today games because... errhhh... 8 GB OF VRAM.

You can spin like a crazy parrot justifying that is "useless" to put 16 GB in this card, but the reality is that you could PLAY SMOOTHLY many CAPCOM games (with RT engine) IF you have 16 GB and not 8 GB. And this is only one example of many cases.


Yes, it is powerful enough to use "more than 8gb of vram", yesterday and TODAY, with real games. Stop that nonsense talking about it.

And fyi, I have a RTX 4070, too. And do you know WHAT? YES, it's limited TOO because of 12 GB in many games, but in a LESSER WAY than the RTX 3070.
4070 12GB is not limited, it is a 1080p/1440p card. 4 years old. The card is more GPU limited than VRAM limited.

3070 is not limited by VRAM on settings the card can actually do, 6+ years after release. You expect to run ultra preset at native 1440p......

You speak about RT, on a 6 year old GPU? Just stop.

3070 is not powerful, even if it had 32GB VRAM. GPU is lower mid-end and this card don't need 16GB or even close. Made on a crappy 10nm Samsung node (8nm is a lie), with barely 2 GHz boost clocks on average - GG this card is dated

I laugh when I see people with 5 year old mid-end GPUs thinking they could max all new games if they just had enough VRAM.

Even 6900XT 16GB runs like pure garbage in new demanding games. Did the VRAM help? No. GPU is dated. No good upscaling to help either.

At least you have full DLSS 4 support with a 3070 and this was true since day one DLSS 4 came out.

95% of PC gamers use 1440p or lower. 12GB VRAM is pretty much plenty for almost every single game, even on max settings, but if you expect to run Path Tracing, FG too, you need 16+ GB not only because of the VRAM but because you need vastly more GPU power than any 8 or 12GB offering will give you.

Funny how people today think their GPU and hardware in general, should last 8-10 years if they have enough VRAM. Back in the days, you upgraded every 1-2 years and threw the old card in the trash bin, now people want their dated hardware want it to last a decade. Hahaha.
 
Last edited:
Back