Tuesday, October 6th 2020

Crysis 3 Installed On and Run Directly from RTX 3090 24 GB GDDR6X VRAM

Let's skip ahead of any "Can it run Crysis" introductions for this news piece, and instead state it as it is: Crysis 3 can absolutely run when installed directly on a graphics card's memory subsystem. In this case, an RTX 3090 and its gargantuan 24 GB of GDDR6X memory where the playground for such an experiment. Using the "VRAM Drive" application, distributed in an open-source manner via the GitHub platform, one can allocate part of their GPU's VRAM and use it as if it was just another system drive. After doing so, user Strife212 (as per her Twitter handle) then went on to install Crysis 3 on 15 GB of the allocated VRAM. The rest of the card's 9 GB were then available to actually load in graphical assets for the game, and VRAM consumption (of both the installed game and its running assets) barely crossed the 20 GB total VRAM utilization.

As you might expect, graphics memory is one of the fastest memory subsystems on your PC, being even faster (in pure performance terms) than system RAM. Loading up of game levels and asset streaming from VRAM "disk-sequestered" pools to free VRAM pools was obviously much faster than usual, even more than the speeds achieved by today's NVMe drives. Crysis 3 in this configuration was shown to run by as many as 75 FPS in 4K resolution, with the High preset settings. A proof of concept more than anything - but users with a relatively powerful (or memory-capable) graphics card can perhaps look at this exotic solution as a compromise of sorts, should they not have any fast storage options, and provided the game install size is relatively small.
Sources: Strife212 @ Twitter, via Tom's Hardware
Add your own comment

70 Comments on Crysis 3 Installed On and Run Directly from RTX 3090 24 GB GDDR6X VRAM

#2
birdie
The GPU Ram Drive application is ages old and I find it puzzling why people all of a sudden have remembered about it.
Posted on Reply
#3
kony
Wow, 3090 can run Crisis 3 in high resolution, amazing!!!
Posted on Reply
#4
bubbleawsome
Just a small note that Strife is a woman, so not really his vram there.
Posted on Reply
#5
neatfeatguy
bubbleawsomeJust a small note that Strife is a woman, so not really his vram there.
Everyone knows women don't play video games.

On a more serious note here - actually, I don't have one. I'll just move along now.
Posted on Reply
#6
LiveOrDie
who cares ram disk is old news.
Posted on Reply
#7
rutra80
A lot of that VRAM-stored data needs to go to CPU. CPU has worse access to VRAM than to RAM. I'd treat that article with a grain of salt...
Posted on Reply
#8
laszlo
one downside...if you forget and shut down the pc need to install it again and again....
Posted on Reply
#9
Vya Domus
rutra80A lot of that VRAM-stored data needs to go to CPU. CPU has worse access to VRAM than to RAM. I'd treat that article with a grain of salt...
Indeed, it's probably no better than a really fast NVME drive.
Posted on Reply
#10
bug
See? This is why 3090 is kinda cool, despite its sky-high price: it can do things not possible before.
Posted on Reply
#11
rutra80
Vya DomusIndeed, it's probably no better than a really fast NVME drive.
I doubt even that. It might be goodish with single threaded sequential access when there's not much going on PCIe bus, but otherwise I expect it to be much worse than ramdisk placed on motherboard RAM...
Posted on Reply
#12
Raevenlord
News Editor
bubbleawsomeJust a small note that Strife is a woman, so not really his vram there.
Indeed. Thank you, corrected.
Posted on Reply
#13
bug
rutra80A lot of that VRAM-stored data needs to go to CPU. CPU has worse access to VRAM than to RAM. I'd treat that article with a grain of salt...
This is about replacing the SSD<->CPU data path, not the RAM<->CPU data path ;)
Posted on Reply
#14
Caring1
bubbleawsomeJust a small note that Strife is a woman, so not really his vram there.
Rhyming slang?
Trouble & strife = Wife.
Posted on Reply
#15
rutra80
bugThis is about replacing the SSD<->CPU data path, not the RAM<->CPU data path ;)
Yeah, still I would replace that SSD with motherboard-based ramdisk. But surely there would be no wow factor in comparison to "RTX on" ramdisk :p
Posted on Reply
#16
fynxer
I want to run Warzone from VRAM, any GFX card with 512GB memory out there :)
Posted on Reply
#17
bug
rutra80Yeah, still I would replace that SSD with motherboard-based ramdisk. But surely there would be no wow factor in comparison to "RTX on" ramdisk :p
Obviously there are better ways of playing a game other than from VRAM. But it's a neat proof of concept imho. Bonus points for including Crysis in the story ;)
Posted on Reply
#18
bubbleawsome
Caring1Rhyming slang?
Trouble & strife = Wife.
I don't think I get it?
Posted on Reply
#19
Vayra86
bugSee? This is why 3090 is kinda cool, despite its sky-high price: it can do things not possible before.
Yay, it can run software in a completely useless way at reduced performance?
Definitely worth 1500 :D
bugincluding Crysis in the story ;)
That's really all there is to it, I'm still waiting for the eternal 'I installed Doom on my 3090'
Posted on Reply
#20
ZoneDymo
birdieThe GPU Ram Drive application is ages old and I find it puzzling why people all of a sudden have remembered about it.
ermm who says anyone ever forgot?
that is like saying its odd we all of a sudden do Ray Tracing because that is ages old as well, we just never had the hardware to do it in real time.
Its just that we currently have a capable card with a relatively large amount of Vram, the only thing I find odd is that they did not use the (lacking) Crysis Remaster....wait wait no...probably not enough Vram for it
Posted on Reply
#21
ZeppMan217
birdieThe GPU Ram Drive application is ages old and I find it puzzling why people all of a sudden have remembered about it.
24 gigs on a prosumer grade card, and maybe some PR for the upcoming Crysis 1 remaster.
Posted on Reply
#22
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
Why is this even an article? Reading game data from VRAM, which has to be read to system memory before going back to the GPU, is only going to hurt performance. It's fancy that you can do this, but it's really a sub-par solution compared to just using a normal RAM disk. Accessing system memory is going to be far faster than doing twice the number of transfers over PCIe to and from the same device. This isn't a win for latency and it's not a win for bandwidth compared to the alternative.

tl;dr edit: Buy more ram and make a ram disk, it'll be cheaper and faster.
Posted on Reply
#23
VulkanBros
Jesus - that´s a stiff price for a small harddrive....
Posted on Reply
#24
lexluthermiester
AquinusWhy is this even an article?
Because it's very interesting! That's why.
AquinusReading game data from VRAM, which has to be read to system memory before going back to the GPU
Which would happen with ANY storage. VRAM is literally the fastest storage you can buy.
Aquinusis only going to hurt performance.
How? HDD's are much slower and SSD's, even the fastest, are still slow in comparison to VRAM. How is VRAM going to "hurt" performance?
AquinusIt's fancy that you can do this, but it's really a sub-par solution compared to just using a normal RAM disk.
You assume that game assets are not transferred directly to other sections of VRAM through special instruction operations, which would not be difficult. However, you have a point with the ram-disk.
AquinusAccessing system memory is going to be far faster than doing twice the number of transfers over PCIe to and from the same device. This isn't a win for latency and it's not a win for bandwidth compared to the alternative.
While that would be true if the VRAM could not do transfers directly to itself, it can and with this VRAM-disk scheme likely does. This is an experimental thing. It's not being done because it's practical, it's being done for giggles. Lighten up a little bit.
Posted on Reply
#25
modmax
with the same system I installed crysis 1 on the vega 56 (lower memory quantity), I don't see where the miracle is, mostly thanks to the tool written by the programmer that allows you to use the gpu memories as a disk; however in my benchmarks I arrived at 4gb / sr / w, measured with crystal disc mark then I tried the same thing using a disk made with the ram of the cpu (2666mhz ddr4 dual channel) and the result was 10gb r / w then I do not see where the miracle obtained by the user is ... maybe he has a credit ... he devoted himself a lot to the subject until he found a tool that allows you to do this .... in addition to being an exercise in style I do not see the usefulness or difficulty in achieving is pciexpress3.0 vs cpu ram bus; exfat is the fastest filesystem even if by just about 7-10%.
in the third photo you can see how with the aida benchmark the ram of the gpu are slow in the r / w but in the copy being inside the gpu the bus allows it to reach 30 times the speed of the pciexpress 3.0 bus while the cpu still remains in advantage having about 4 times the speed in r / w
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 5th, 2024 08:28 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts