• 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.

gtx 670 2gb or 4gb

LtMatt said:
Regarding Battlefield 4...

Providing you game at 1080p 2gb should be enough, though you may not have the gpu grunt nor vram required to run x4 AA. For 1440p or higher its looking increasing likely that 2gb will not be sufficient, even with AA disabled. Details might have to be sacrificed at this resolution if these bf4 vram usage benchmarks are accurate.

r39xfAD.jpg
Click to expand...


But in game play the 670 performs similar to 7970, better than a 7950 with x4 MSAA @1080 :)

but as the graph shows neither delivers what most consider acceptable game performance



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
 
Tonester0011 said:
Shame they didn't run the game on 2GB cards to rule out caching
Click to expand...

There is more to extra vram than just caching according to Pcper, more vram=lower frametimes=less stutter.

2Gb 680 vs 4Gb 680:

Both the Titan and the HD 7970 have the best / lowest frame time variance with the GTX 680 2GB coming in last. It is interesting to see the added frame buffer of the 4GB GTX 680 making a noticeable difference in potential stutter.




The GTX 680 4GB frame times are also noticeably tighter and doesn't exhibit nearly as many spikes in frame times as the 2GB models do.



I find it very interesting that the GT 680 4GB cards from EVGA in SLI mode exhibit much less potential stutter than the 2GB cards, in line with the GTX Titans.
Click to expand...

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...4K-Resolutions/Battlefield-3-Single-GP?page=2

It's an article about high res gaming but the principle is the same regarding frametime delivery.

I'm not advocating that a single 4Gb 670 is going to perform better in anything in regards to how it's gpu grunt is affected by differing vram amounts, simply pointing out it's not as simple as a gpu is simply 'caching' it's extra vram-what almost everyone likes to say here.

:)
 
LtMatt said:
I bet AMD are doing everything they can to make sure this happens. If it does its going to hurt Nvidia cards pretty badly. Its going to be interesting to see what the actual vram usage is come release. You can't rule out the possibility of the vram usage coming down, but i think its looking unlikely 2gb will be enough at a res of 1440p or higher.
Click to expand...

The vram usage is kind of irrelevant though give how different game engines use the the onboard video memory, performance fps graphs is where it will really show if the vram is a bottleneck or not.
 
whyscotty said:
But in game play the 670 performs similar to 7970, better than a 7950 with x4 MSAA @1080 :)

but as the graph shows neither delivers what most consider acceptable game performance



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Click to expand...

Check this post. It explains why those benchmark scores you posted should be ignored as they're done on a build of the game that has no game or driver optimizations.

The build that was shown at gamescon worked perfectly on a 2x7970 ghz card yet according to that benchmarking the average fps was only 37. :)

 
Last edited:
tommybhoy said:
There is more to extra vram than just caching according to Pcper, more vram=lower frametimes=less stutter.

2Gb 680 vs 4Gb 680:



http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...4K-Resolutions/Battlefield-3-Single-GP?page=2

It's an article about high res gaming but the principle is the same regarding frametime delivery.

I'm not advocating that a single 4Gb 670 is going to perform better in anything in regards to how it's gpu grunt is affected by differing vram amounts, simply pointing out it's not as simple as a gpu is simply 'caching' it's extra vram-what almost everyone likes to say here.

:)
Click to expand...

Good find :)
 
Also, to note - Matt's graph shows VRAM usage at over 2GB for the 4xAA 1920x1080 so that would mean unplayable for all cards with less than that - yet the 670/680/770 all show none of the drops associated with hitting the wall, they all are (780, Titan exception) unplayable with those settings so turning them down is a must (doing so reduces VRAM usage...)

 
tommybhoy said:
There is more to extra vram than just caching according to Pcper, more vram=lower frametimes=less stutter.

2Gb 680 vs 4Gb 680:



http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...4K-Resolutions/Battlefield-3-Single-GP?page=2

It's an article about high res gaming but the principle is the same regarding frametime delivery.

I'm not advocating that a single 4Gb 670 is going to perform better in anything in regards to how it's gpu grunt is affected by differing vram amounts, simply pointing out it's not as simple as a gpu is simply 'caching' it's extra vram-what almost everyone likes to say here.

:)
Click to expand...

Good find indeed. I was looking for this article the other day but couldn't find it. Fair play to the 4gb 680.
 
LtMatt said:
Check this post. It explains why those benchmark scores you posted should be ignored as they're done on a build of the game that has no game or driver optimizations.

The build that was shown at gamescon worked perfectly on a 2x7970 ghz card yet according to that benchmarking the average fps was only 37. :)

Click to expand...

So doesn't this also effect your graph as its done by the same ppl? :confused:
 
whyscotty said:
So doesn't this also effect your graph as its done by the same ppl? :confused:
Click to expand...

Is vram usage going to decrease when a lot of the map textures are missing though? How can a driver make a video game use less vram? I know performance can be optimized, but as far as i know vram usage is not something a new driver from amd or nvidia can change. I stand to be corrected if im wrong, but i can't see vram usage decreasing that much.
 
LtMatt said:
Is vram usage going to decrease when a lot of the map textures are missing though? How can a driver make a video game use less vram? I know performance can be optimized, but as far as i know vram usage is not something a new driver from amd or nvidia can change. I stand to be corrected if im wrong, but i can't see vram usage decreasing that much.
Click to expand...

I'm clutching at straws :D
 
Stating for a fact that 2GB is going to be enough sounds a bit self deluded - we can say for absolute certain that at some point over the next couple of years it won't be, it's just a case of when. It could begin with BF4, maybe it won't.
 
We'll have plenty of 670 users to test out BF4 when the game finally comes, i'll even buy it to test all the cards i own (a lot...) both at highest settings and at highest playable settings, gives me something to do :D
 
There are tons of people who don't upgrade their GPU for over a year, a lot of people posting about an upgrade still have GTX 460s and so on. But even still, I'd be really surprised if we don't see games offering better options with 3GB within the next year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom