Black Ops III: 12 GB RAM and GTX 980 Ti Not Enough

[Pill Monster]

I don't have GTA V so I can't speak for experience but, if my memory serves me correctly, that game uses extra VRAM for caching so it could very well be just like TW3 in that respect, so I wouldn't go making any assumptions to that end.

I've played TW3 maxed out without Hairworks. In fact I didn't find Hairworks to impact performance by all that much, I feel that it's just a slow engine for what it is doing. I don't have GTA V so I can't talking about it but, there was a discussion several months ago about how it appeared that GTA V was caching stuff in VRAM if it was available and wasn't reflective of how much memory is being actively used at any given time.

Yeah prior to W10 memory could be allocated even if not in use, beginning with W10 (I think it's 10, u can look it up) any VRAM not actively in use with data residing in it must be given up so other apps can use it, = Memory Reclaim.
More of a Windows Memory/Driver Management problem than application afaik..

Affects games DX 11< onward.

 

[Deleted member 67555]

Oh I agree on that. We should also be careful not to jump on the bandwagon too quickly, but in the case of CoD, where there's smoke, there's fire. Even more so, because CoD is one of the (Many) reasons PC games have *not* seen themselves improve vastly over the past console generation. We have just had one of the longest periods of standstill, and todays' console grunt is hardly anything to write home about.

CoD is the reason why PC games haven't what?
Oh no LOL...
I'd say that several game studios are far behind what CoD does.
CoD has some of the best mechanics hands down.
It is a visually good game..yes it could be better.
Online play needs improvement but it is in the top 5 best....for what you're able to do.

No...Most studios need to catch up to CoD...
I don't have BlOps 3 yet but did play the Beta and I can say with certainty that the biggest problem people have with the game is not being able to play in an almost 3D environment.
They don't like it and struggle but its still good.

 

[Fx]

just memory leak no need to worry it will be fine

The game might have a memory leak, but it isn't the primary culprit. I have my settings set as high as possible at 1080p. I have a EVGA 980ti FTW card and 12GB of memory.

The game crashes as soon as the campaign begins.

No...Most studios need to catch up to CoD...
I don't have BlOps 3 yet but did play the Beta and I can say with certainty that the biggest problem people have with the game is not being able to play in an almost 3D environment.
They don't like it and struggle but its still good.

That isn't my problem with the latest games in the series. For me, the problem with Ghost was that they made normal mode feel like it was pseudo hardcore; you ended up dying too fast. Secondly, they took out CTF mode which is what I play 98% of the time.

For Advanced Warfighter, I simply didn't like all of the air boosting.

My favorite games in the whole series is MW2, MW3 and BO2.

Unfortunately, people cry and whine for change, and consequently the devs gave us change. I really never wanted change except for maybe new maps and enhanced graphics. The realistic 3D environment does make the game feel different and is harder, but I am fine with that.

 

[NC37]

BWAHHAHAHA!!

"Games won't go over 4GB in 1080," people said...."a 970 is all you'd need," they said..."the 3.5GB limit is a non issue," they said...."8GB VRAM is overkill for 1080," they said...

Who's laughing now!! Oh right, me! HA HA HA!

Man how many times I told people...memory pool size does not = resolution. There is no set limit. Games never settle on limits for long. I've seen this for years and people still profess that,"you'll never need more than..." this amount or that amount.

Sure the game is likely badly coded and buggy right now but still, give it time. Limits are meant to be broken. Game complexity increases. Even 8GB will be surpassed. Heck they're already looking past 16GB for next year. Even if it's high end cards...if they make it, devs will try to take advantage of it. Specially since PC gaming is often times not very optimized and can be sloppy.

 

[Vayra86]

CoD is the reason why PC games haven't what?
Oh no LOL...
I'd say that several game studios are far behind what CoD does.
CoD has some of the best mechanics hands down.
It is a visually good game..yes it could be better.
Online play needs improvement but it is in the top 5 best....for what you're able to do.

No...Most studios need to catch up to CoD...
I don't have BlOps 3 yet but did play the Beta and I can say with certainty that the biggest problem people have with the game is not being able to play in an almost 3D environment.
They don't like it and struggle but its still good.

Gun mechanics? CoD didn't invent those at all or set any kind of standard in that regard besides the use of iron sights for aiming, and that was already many, many versions of the game ago. If you really want to talk about mechanics, let's look at UT'99 and you will see how archaic the whole shooter formula really is. It is a type of games that has seen almost zero changes in over ten years. What CoD does, better be good because if it isn't in this day and age, the developer is a complete failure. Shooters are as old as PC's and CoD as a shooter hasn't brought anything new to the table, ever, at all. CoD:AW is also just riding the bandwagon of the return to arena-styled shooters, a returning trend that refers strongly to the upcoming UT4.

 

[Frick]

But in all honesty, while Crysis is still super demanding, it looked spectacular at time and is in a way still a benchmark for visual fidelity. Mostly because it's SO old but looks like it was released a year or two ago...

AND you could run it on quite weak systems if you lowered the settings, and it still looked good. I played the multiplayer beta on an Athlon 3000+ and a x1950 pro with most settings on High (1280x1024).

 

[RejZoR]

I had the same setup back then and while it looked pretty good even at lower settings, once you check it at highest setting, there is hard to go back.

I usually crank up settings all the way up and then remove non-essential settings that hardly affect visuals, but give good performance. Though, these days, I just crank up everything to max with any game and never look back.

 

[Slizzo]

So installed the game on Monday, played a round of Zombies with some friends and did notice some framerate issues. Went back to playing Fallout 4...

 

[Prima.Vera]

Too much hate on this thread. To be honest, this latest COD has THE BEST graphics in the market right now. Is only natural that the older cards are having issues playing this, because of EVOLUTION. The game is using all available RAM and VRAM, not because of bad coding, but actually because of good coding. Yes is caching all available memory because this is what it was coded to do. And is good. I had big stutter on my 780Ti card with 3GB of VRAM on 1080p, but I fixed that only be disabling the textures from Ultra to High. Now it runs like butter with all other details maximised. With averaging 70FPS across everywhere, I still think is a good game especially considering the graphics. And no other bugs noticed so far.

Peace.

 

[Uplink10]

I haven't played it so I can't comment about the graphics but the story is very bad. I mean seriously do they just sit around and try to make the most unbelievable and impossible game they can think of?

I'd put this game into psychological sci-fi category because the story fits it. It felt like a bad sci-fi movie with all the mind scenes and the combat looked more Crysis armour-mode like - going out with armour mode and shooting everything and everyone up.

Good thing I watched a game movie and didn't buy the game and I find it hard to believe that Black Ops 3 is selling like hot cakes. Does no one appreciate the story anymore? It is all flash, no photo for me.

 

[Prima.Vera]

Yeah, story is pretty bad and unbelievable, and technical facts are ridiculously stupid...

 

[ManofGod]

The PC Whiny Master Race Strikes again! Just upgrade your ram already since it is so cheap. It you do not do so, then it is your own fault when you cannot play something on Ultra smoothly. I cannot understand why anyone uses less than 16GB of ram and claims to be a PC Master Race expert.

 

[Prima.Vera]

Stuttering is not because of system RAM, but mostly because of Video RAM on GPUs...

 

[Her3tic]

Currently my PC is set like this:
VGA : GTX 680 MSI Twin Frozer III
CPU : Core i7 3770k
Ram: 8gig
Windows 10 - Latest Direct X and VGA drivers are installed.

After playing like 10 minutes, Memory usage reach 800mb and goes up like 1400 mb on Cod. The problem is that task manager shows system using up to 2200mb near COD. and im not sure why.
Is it the games problem that causes this, or something else is wrong.

Graphic setting High on Texture quality and texture filtering and mesh quality. Dynamic shadows on , Subsurface on, Rest Medium.

 

[johnspack]

Get a 980ti, only thing that will run this. My 970 will run circles around your 680, but I'd need a 2nd one to run this game.
Turn your settings down is all you can do. I'll wait for an affordable pascal card before I get this game.

 

[xXDS_K1ll3rXx]

This is NOT true at all! I have got 16 GB RAM, an intel i7-4790k and a gtx 970. I have played the game for about 300 h on steam and i have NEVER had any lag or framedrop. The game takes about 50-60% CPU, 5-7 GB RAM and 2.5-3.3 GB vram on 1080p and max settings. I never had less than 60 FPS. Maybye the 980ti isn' t good enough beacause it was used for bitcoin mining or something like that. And alsow it has got 6 GB vram. Or maybye just some cod hater wrote this. NOT TRUE AT ALL!!

 

[rtwjunkie]

Maybye the 980ti isn' t good enough beacause it was used for bitcoin mining or something like that.

So let me get this straight, without knowing that the site owner W1zzard does all the GPU testing (and his testing methods are respected around the world), you assume that this respected man was bitcoin mining on his 980Ti, and THAT might be why it wasn't good enough?

Hold on....

Wow, talk about reaching.

 

[Estaric]

This is NOT true at all! I have got 16 GB RAM, an intel i7-4790k and a gtx 970. I have played the game for about 300 h on steam and i have NEVER had any lag or framedrop. The game takes about 50-60% CPU, 5-7 GB RAM and 2.5-3.3 GB vram on 1080p and max settings. I never had less than 60 FPS. Maybye the 980ti isn' t good enough beacause it was used for bitcoin mining or something like that. And alsow it has got 6 GB vram. Or maybye just some cod hater wrote this. NOT TRUE AT ALL!!

Well there is also things called updates that increase performance. At the time this was posted this was the case it may very well have been patched.

 

[Octopuss]

Guys don't feed the necrotroll.