Kind of backs up the my theory (and others!) that GPU limitations will almost always kick in before VRAM limitations.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
680 2gig v 680 4 gig
- Thread starter neilo67
- Start date
Kind of backs up the my theory (and others!) that GPU limitations will almost always kick in before VRAM limitations.
2GB is loads i run @ 7680x1440.. never go above 2.5gb, even in BF3 it runs at a steady 1.9gb on high settings.. so at 1080p 2GB 
If you want future proof just get a 7970, muCH better than the GTX 680 4Gb, and much cheaper... My 7970's kick arse over the GTX 680's in BF3.. just the Amd drivers SUCK..
If you want future proof just get a 7970, muCH better than the GTX 680 4Gb, and much cheaper... My 7970's kick arse over the GTX 680's in BF3.. just the Amd drivers SUCK..
Last edited:
No he's chosen poorly. At 5760x1080 in BF3 with everything max and max AA HardOCP just managed to get the 2GB vram limit to affect performance *slightly*
Quite when only 2GB will cause a material difference in framerate to a 4GB card at 1080p who knows, but it won't soon.
2GB is fine for now and it will be for a good while yet.
Game producers are not going to make games need more than 2GB for a a while because if they do they will be alienating all gamers other than those who own the top two AMD cards and those few specialist Nvidia owners who bought into the must have more Vram trap.
This of course is just my personal opinion.
Game producers are not going to make games need more than 2GB for a a while because if they do they will be alienating all gamers other than those who own the top two AMD cards and those few specialist Nvidia owners who bought into the must have more Vram trap.
This of course is just my personal opinion.
2GB is loads i run @ 7680x1440.. never go above 2.5gb, even in BF3 it runs at a steady 1.9gb on high settings.. so at 1080p 2GB
If you want future proof just get a 7970, muCH better than the GTX 680 4Gb, and much cheaper... My 7970's kick arse over the GTX 680's in BF3.. just the Amd drivers SUCK..
Ofcourse it doesn't use more then 1.9GB VRAM, you only have 2GB.
My GTX 480 doesn't exceed 14xx mb.
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 2,877
- Location
- -
I'm happy with my choice
Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it I guess.
Hopefully you'll need it at some point to make the £80 worthwhile!
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,522
Ofcourse it doesn't use more then 1.9GB VRAM, you only have 2GB.
read his sig - he has 7970 crossfire (3GB cards), otherwise how does it use 2.5gb on 3 screens?
He was right IMO. There's always new mods coming out for games like Skyrim and such and people will always want to install them. Just because it's ok now doesn't mean a mod in 4-5 months will be ok for him. Better safe than kicking yourself.
You are right, I misread it. Thing is, I bet that when I get my GTX680 4GB I will use more than 2GB @ 2560x1440 Ultra settings
Perhaps. Only ever seen one game go over 2gb vram when i had 2 3gb 580s and that was serious sam 3.
Where did I say 120 hz requires more Vram? All I said was in my opinion hes chosen well and with a 120hz monitor would have smoother gaming experience with all settings maxed out. Sorry if my opinion causes you to "lol" .
Sorry,reviews are all well and good.BF3 to name one can't be played maxed out with a 2gig card on a 1920x1080 never mind larger resolutions,I've tried. Now I've got a 4 gig card I can,as I said IMHO I think he's chosen well from my experience of both cards.
Hmmm that 1st statement does not correspond with your 2nd statement. Not that it matters as you kind of back tracked.
I see your point,vram has no effect on frequency just a smoother experience.My bad wording. "Poppycock" not heard that in a long time.
Sounds like you're trying to justify your purchase and convince yourself tbh.
The reviews prove there is zero frame rate difference.
Hmmmm
Well it plays maxed on my 2GB GTX680 (+100/+400) at 1080p AND uses less than 2GB at 3620x1920 Ultra settings with 2xAA so.....
For reference I run 3620x1920 (Portrait Surround) and I CAN make my 680 run out of memory but it requires settings that arn't playable on a single card.
