• 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.

Vram shocker@1080p-Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor

tommybhoy

tommybhoy

tommybhoy

Soldato
Joined
30 Mar 2010
Posts
13,432
Location
Under The Stairs!
Nothing confirmed/denied from the dev but apparently there is an optional high res pack that requires 6Gb or greater vram@1080p for max textures::eek:

VUGmq64.png


Happy Nvidia 6Gb/8Gb 290X owners if it's actually needed.

Loads of vram discussion going on here:

http://steamcommunity.com/app/241930/discussions/

PCGamer has a Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor video: max settings at 2560x1440-Titan SLi but idk if that has the texture pack installed.


Looks like a AC/Batman hybrid affair, does look good and the console version is getting rave reviews.
 
I seriously doubt the textures are high resolution enough to justify using that much VRAM - perhaps some kind of pre-caching going on like in Titanfall.

If they are true high res textures then it's about time games had better textures because textures don't require much raw power to run so no reason why they shouldn't just be an optional extra for people with significant amounts of VRAM to run.
 
I think you download the ultra texture pack separately, so it might be correct.

As PC gamers, we should be embracing optional extra graphical things like texture packs that really push the system.

Ok there's only 10,000 odd people who can probably use these (if true) but within a year more people will have 8GB cards.
 
VincentHanna said:
As PC gamers, we should be embracing optional extra graphical things like texture packs that really push the system.

Ok there's only 10,000 odd people who can probably use these (if true) but within a year more people will have 8GB cards.
Click to expand...

The only thing I don't like is the select few that deny you will ever need more than 3GB at 1080p, even when we're talking about SLI setups. That's just setting people up for a nice bottleneck imo when the several console ports with little vram optimisation come along.

4GB cards are readily available for little more than the 3GB ones so it shouldn't be a problem.
 
So ultra only differs from high if running 4K.
This is going to effect such a small market it really is pretty irrelevant.
Nothing more than a setting just to get the game some more press.
 
RanxZy said:
The only thing I don't like is the select few that deny you will ever need more than 3GB at 1080p, even when we're talking about SLI setups. That's just setting people up for a nice bottleneck imo when the several console ports with little vram optimisation come along.

4GB cards are readily available for little more than the 3GB ones so it shouldn't be a problem.
Click to expand...

Weren't people here saying you'll never need more than 2GB VRAM about 6 months ago?
 
I've been telling people for nearly 12 months now that as soon as the new consoles settle down the VRAM requirements for PC will go through the roof.

I got laughed at....
 
teppic said:
Weren't people here saying you'll never need more than 2GB VRAM about 6 months ago?
Click to expand...
Pretty sure people were still saying that less than a month ago :p

To think back on the 770 release (when 680 rebranding to 770), I commented that Nvidia should really be released with 4GB instead of 2GB considering they priced it higher than the 7970, and that the latter had 1GB more vram despite released 1 year before it, and people were lining up to jump in to defend and justify Nvidia's decision to charge more and give less insisting more vram is not needed and won't make a difference :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom