• 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.

** INSANE TITANZ DUAL GPU DEAL: PALIT @ £899 BUT ONLY 9PC AVAILABLE!!

tommybhoy said:
It was nothing unless you make it into something, as for the baiting crap-pot kettle.

Your advice at the time said 4Gb wasn't any more future proof than 3Gb, same as 3Gb/2Gb time before that-including going dual or more, no point going the facetious spin with the confused.
Click to expand...

tommybhoy said:
Why would you, it has enough grunt/vram.



This.

When Nvidia give you 4Gb on their high end parts, it's time to wake up.
Click to expand...

Not getting wrapped up in a petty argument but again, what is the above statement saying? To me, that is baiting all the guys who have bought a 980.
 
The general consensus is that for roughly the same price you can choose between the GTX 980 SLI or GTX Titan Z ( with regards to this deal ). SLI GTX 980 is faster then a GTX Z while the Z has more Ram and is a single slot solution and probably retain its value well.

I could have gone SLI 980s but have decided to go Titan Z. It will be a bit slower but I can live with that. ( I loved the past single slot solutions having owned them - GTX 690 / HD 7990 )

I can see why people get defensive no one likes to spend money on new tech and be told their Vram may limit them in the future for 4K.

This was the same argument when People said 3GB would not be enough and people jumped down their throats. Now those people that jumped down peoples throat pretty much have 4GB cards with some citing Vram as being one of their reasons to upgrade. Im pretty sure 4GB will be fine to be honest but will be going 4K and the Titan Black has been one of the best cards I have owned.

I think is a excellent price for a GTX Titan Z and well done to OCUK for making it so.
 
Gregster said:
Not getting wrapped up in a petty argument but again, what is the above statement saying? To me, that is baiting all the guys who have bought a 980.
Click to expand...

More like-'not getting wrapped up in a petty argument but I'll take it there and make it look like someone else is the cause'.

Easiest way not to argue is don't take it down that route, which you clearly are.

It was clear enough, how the **** you can perceive it as baiting directed at those using 4Gb, only you have the answer, I really don't have a clue how you came to that estimation.
 
tommybhoy said:
It was clear enough, how the **** you can perceive it as baiting directed at those using 4Gb, only you have the answer, I really don't have a clue how you came to that estimation.
Click to expand...

So explain to me and the others who responded what it meant? No need to go off on one and if I have misread what you mean, explain it to me please.
 
Already explained what I didn't say to Ayahuasca, don't have to justify anything with Lamchop for obvious reasons.

It's a pretty simple statement that has been said a quite few times by others since 970 launch, first time Iv'e repeated it, I'm the first person you have called to task about the meaning of it, really?

Could you care to explain what you think I'm saying and why you didn't query the meaning then, with accusations of baiting?
 
Last edited:
The PS4 & XBone can only put 5gb of its unified ram towards games "quoting Naughty Dog" and yet companies like Ubisoft are capping games at 900p and 30fps and yet us PC users have been playing much better looking games at 100fps on 1080p with 3gb VRAM cards so as I pointed out we don't need more than 4gb if games developers pulled their fingers out.

If someone tried to sell you a 5gb card but told you it could only run at 900p @ 30fps you would tell them to jump in a lake. You shouldn't need 4gb+ for up to 1440p and if you do it's not your cards fault red or green.
 
kazuya1337 said:
The PS4 & XBone can only put 5gb of its unified ram towards games "quoting Naughty Dog" and yet companies like Ubisoft are capping games at 900p and 30fps and yet us PC users have been playing much better looking games at 100fps on 1080p with 3gb VRAM cards so as I pointed out we don't need more than 4gb if games developers pulled their fingers out.

If someone tried to sell you a 5gb card but told you it could only run at 900p @ 30fps you would tell them to jump in a lake. You shouldn't need 4gb+ for up to 1440p and if you do it's not your cards fault red or green.
Click to expand...

Some of that 5GB is used as RAM as well as VRAM.

If a game uses 2gb Ram and 3gb vram, that's 5GB total.
 
I'm confused. If Shadow Of Mordor requires 6GB for Ultra textures @ 1080P, then can someone please explain why my 980's run it totally maxed out with ultra textures and smooth all the time without stuttering?
 
KingDazza said:
I'm confused. If Shadow Of Mordor requires 6GB for Ultra textures @ 1080P, then can someone please explain why my 980's run it totally maxed out with ultra textures and smooth all the time without stuttering?
Click to expand...

Nope, I can't explain that.

It definitely uses more than 4GB. I notice some frame rate dips with my 980s @1440p with ultra enabled, that vanish with high (and I can't tell the difference).

Maybe you haven't downloaded the separate texture pack?
 
kola said:
why does Middle Earth need so much vram the textures are crap imo , im no expert I must admit ;/
Click to expand...

Consoles have more resources now so developers can just use it all instead of actually optimizing their games to run nicely with less usage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom