3008 [2.74] vs [FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death
3008 [2.74] currently leads with 16,499 concurrent players against 7,551, a 2.2× advantage. On all-time peak the record belongs to 3008 [2.74] at 19,588 concurrent players, versus 10,397. Momentum favours 3008 [2.74]: +10.9% week over week versus -12.6% for [FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death. Lifetime, 3008 [2.74] has more visits (3.3B vs 326M). Full side-by-side history for 3008 [2.74] and [FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death is charted above.
3008 [2.74]
16,499
playing now
18,581 24h peak · 3.3B visits
VS
[⏰FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death
7,551
playing now
10,142 24h peak · 326M visits
Player count history
3008 [2.74][FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death
Head to head
| Metric | 3008 [2.74] | [FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Playing now | 16,499 | 7,551 | 8,948 (2.2×) |
| 24h peak | 18,581 | 10,142 | 8,439 (1.8×) |
| 24h average | 15,776 | 6,827 | 8,949 (2.3×) |
| 7-day peak | 19,588 | 10,142 | 9,446 (1.9×) |
| 7-day average | 14,763 | 6,593 | 8,170 (2.2×) |
| 30-day peak | 19,588 | 10,142 | 9,446 (1.9×) |
| All-time peak | 19,588 | 10,397 | 9,191 (1.9×) |
| 24h change | ▲ 9.4% | ▲ 15.7% | — |
| 7d change | ▲ 10.9% | ▼ 12.6% | — |
| Total visits | 3.3B | 326M | 3B (10.1×) |
| Visits (24h) | 1M | 512.7K | 529.9K (2.0×) |
| Visits (7d) | 7.1M | 3.8M | 3.3M (1.9×) |
| Favorites | 5.8M | 639.5K | 5.1M (9.0×) |
| Rating | 91.7% | 87.3% | — |
| Global rank (players) | #103 | #244 | of 7,866 |
| Trending score | 28.8 | 13.6 | — |
| Created | Jan 20, 2019 | Mar 8, 2025 | — |
| Genre | Survival | Survival | — |
Other comparisons
Both games are sampled on the same schedule and plotted on a shared time axis, so the comparison is like for like. Peaks, averages and growth come from RoVitals's own recorded history — 12 days for 3008 [2.74], 12 for [FASHIONABLY LATE] Die of Death.