How long till 1GB of vram is not enough?

[Aquinus]

readings tend to duplicate in crossfire. so halve that.

Touché. Turning off crossfire shows this in AIDA, but Afterburner is still a bit finicky when it comes to reporting though.

 

[m1dg3t]

If you're on 1080p and/or 64bit OS you really should have minimum 1.5GB Vram.

1GB is really pushing it with some titles these days. My $0.02 anyways

 

[eidairaman1]

If you're on 1080p and/or 64bit OS you really should have minimum 1.5GB Vram.

1GB is really pushing it with some titles these days. My $0.02 anyways

still resolution dependent honestly. Coding still meshes better with 1024,2048,4096, 8192 MB of Ram than with 1536, 3072, etc etc.

 

[Calin Banc]

If you're using Afterburner to judge that, that isn't purely GPU dedicated memory.

What else can it be? I have a 6970 2GB, it doesn't needs to use the RAM. Besides, when I've loaded a saved game, the counter went to ~ 1,3GB and started to rise. Until ~ 1,4-1,5 GB, the game was a little bit "stuttery", after that, all good.

In SS 3, after an alt+tab, the game would run at 20-30FPS for a second until the memory usage was up to it's "normal" levels - sometimes waaay beyond 1GB mark - even 1,7-1,8GB at times.

560ti/6950/6850/6870, all 1GB variants will seriously damage the performance of the GPUs în multi-GPU configurations.

 

[Mussels]

What else can it be? I have a 6970 2GB, it doesn't needs to use the RAM. Besides, when I've loaded a saved game, the counter went to ~ 1,3GB and started to rise. Until ~ 1,4-1,5 GB, the game was a little bit "stuttery", after that, all good.

In SS 3, after an alt+tab, the game would run at 20-30FPS for a second until the memory usage was up to it's "normal" levels - sometimes waaay beyond 1GB mark - even 1,7-1,8GB at times.

560ti/6950/6850/6870, all 1GB variants will seriously damage the performance of the GPUs în multi-GPU configurations.

system ram.

also, my 5870 1GB crossfire is doing just fine with 1GB.

 

[Calin Banc]

What DX is showing represents the memory for both your cards combined, although as we know, in games it's equivalent to 1GB. It shows the ~ the same amount for my 6970 2GB.

Why a game would use system RAM instead of much faster, much better vRAM?

In the pic. with the graphs, it shows, for example, how the vRAM limits the 560ti/6870 setup in BF 3. 6950 2GB has better minimum FPS than SLI/CF 560ti/6870. Of course you'll gain performance from adding a second card, but it will be limited and may experience stutter, lag, big drops or variations in FPS etc. I'd say that it depends how much that limit of 1GB is passed, e couple of hundred MB or more - 3-500MB.

http://translate.google.com/transla...4650-prestandaanalys-battlefield-3/4#pagehead

 

[Solaris17]

when you get a monitor with res higher than 1080p.



AA kicks up the FPS massively, so you can always run with 0x or 2xFSAA and get away with 1GB for a bit longer. those people going over 1GB these days are either running multi monitor, higher than 1080p, or massive amounts of AA.

or all of the above, i guess.

but its a mixed salad. I agree that we have already passed the threshold of 1GB like some others have said. running no AA etc is nice but not realistic. with no AA to make games look good you would need to run a high rez and even not upping the settings is unrealistic since the quality decline after the mobile market took off. games look shitty out of the box or have less and less graphics tuning options so to make the game look the way you want you almost have to crank them. Take skyrim for example too. skyrim is a fantastic game. some of skyrims better attributes are CPU coded. but like skyrim their are games out their that have poorly coded GPU segments. and to compinsate you almost have to have a better card just to over come the clumsyness. I think 1GB vram was good a few years ago when a game ran well on it and it looked how you wanted it to. but to buy a game now and play it looking how you want it to look you need to crank it. and todays games take alot more then 1GB. If you want to play it out of the box and have the same experience as the guy running a dell XPS then 1GB rigs are fine. its when you want to be a PC gamer when you run into problems. anyone can play league of legends no matter what shit i could probably run it on a Vtech. but i dont think anyone on TPU is of the mind to play a game like someone on a netbook running GMA3100 HD or some shit. With that in mind if your of the TPU mind 1GB was dead awhile back. multi monitor or ultra wide rez or not.

 

[m1dg3t]

I think For 16 x 10 resolution and under you can still rock 1Gb vRAM, especially if using a top tier core, without much hassle for majority of games. You may get the odd circumstance where you encounter poor coding as mentioned previously but I think it's liveable at that level

 

[Calin Banc]

At 16x10 you may encounter some problems here in there, but it should be ok - as long as you don't go multi-GPU. Thankfully, "next-gen" mainstream cards are 2GB, so we're set.