• 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.

4GB VS 8GB

Gabbatek

Gabbatek

Gabbatek

Associate
Joined
28 Feb 2011
Posts
1,689
Location
Norwich
With the way that games are going, how long do you think it will take until 4GB is not enough to play games on max settings


i'm quite tempted to leave mine and upgrade to a 290x but is it worth it?
 
1 year. My understanding though is that unless you play at very high resolutions, compute performance will always be more important.

There was some talk of SLI/Crossfire being able to stack RAM in the future. If that's the case, compute performance becomes even more important.
 
As of today, for most people, I don't think an 8GB is worth bothering with when there are new cards on the horizon. The only justification is if you're @ 4K, or plan to be soon. But for anyone else, by the time you're regularly pulling 4GB+ in gaming, we'll be several generations down the line, and the 290X will be ancient. As mentioned anyway, a single 8GB card is pointless, as there's not enough GPU grunt to utilise all the VRAM, so you need Crossfire to exploit it.
 
Posted this is another thread but it's relevant here. Yes 8GB is worthwhile, it will not give you higher peak FPS but it will give you less drops and stutter VS 4GB. Also allow games like Shadow of Mordor to be fully maxed out @ 1440P with no drops. (Uses over 6GB)

Just read what the man himself has said in relation to the R9 290X 8GB.

Gibbo said:
If your gaming at 1080P then a single card should be more than future proof for years to come even on the poorest console ports which could be using around 6GB of memory:
Click to expand...

Gibbo said:
980 is faster until you exceed its 4GB VRAM limit.
Click to expand...

Gibbo said:
Games are using more than 4GB in current games, even at 1080P, 1440P upto 6GB usage is possible and 4k it is nearly possible to use upto 8GB.

This is today, who know what the case will be in 2-3yrs. :)
Click to expand...
 
It is not that simple though, and you're forgetting that the 290X 8GB as a single card simply does not have the GPU grunt to utilise all that VRAM. You need x2 of them Crossfire for that. If this weren't the case, then sure, 8GB card all day long, but you're kidding yourself if you think simply getting a card with a load of VRAM will cover you... and for years? Come on, let's get real. It's no different to an old GTX 670 4GB... more usable VRAM than a 970, but can it handle modern games as well... errr, no, obviously not.
 
Legend said:
It is not that simple though, and you're forgetting that the 290X 8GB as a single card simply does not have the GPU grunt to utilise all that VRAM. You need x2 of them Crossfire for that. If this weren't the case, then sure, 8GB card all day long, but you're kidding yourself if you think simply getting a card with a load of VRAM will cover you... and for years? Come on, let's get real. It's no different to an old GTX 670 4GB... more usable VRAM than a 970, but can it handle modern games as well... errr, no, obviously not.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand.. We're not talking about GPU grunt, we're talking about current games that use more than 4GB even at 1080P. You do not need 'dual cards' for that like your saying. If you do not have the vram you simply won't be able to enable certain settings as the memory isn't there for it to be allocated to. Also when you do run out of vram, you get drops / stutters. The 290X 8GB gives a smoother experience as it does not have FPS drops, because it does not run out of vram.

Shadow of Mordor / Wolfenstein, give noticeable better experience than GTX 980. The 980 may get higher 'peak' FPS but also has drops / stutters. The 290X 8GB does not have this problem so gives a better experience.

Future games are going to require more vram not less. What do you think is more of a probable handicap, the - 5% FPS performance on the R9 290X 8GB or the 980 running out of vram once it hits 4GB..

Add the fact that the 290X 8GB is £300 VS a £450 GTX 980 4GB, and that 290X 8GB makes a whole lot of sense.

£150 left in your pocket and having extra vram in the tank (Twice as much). Def a worthy purchase at such a cheap price VS the 4GB cards.
 
Last edited:
I think for people using 120hz+ screens they wont really suffer this running out of vram business as much as the people on 60hz because they are going to lower the graphic settings to gain the extra fps.

Basically using the 'compute performance' part of the card more than the memory.
 
I run out of vram on dead rising 3 4k and dragon age inquisition 4k maxed out without any AA. Watch dogs can use it all too. That's 3 totally different engines and devs.

I want 2 8gb cards now.
 
At was res OP?

Realistically, 4Gb should do you fine for the next couple of years @ 2560x1440. There will always be that game which is well ahead of the curve or badly optimised that will require a bit more.

But if you're planning for the future (2 years) and want to play things at Max (inc AA) then to be safe and to cater for these games now and in the future you're looking at:

1920x1080 - 3GB - 1 GPU
2560x1440 - 4-6GB - 2 GPUs
3840×2160 - 8GB - 3 GPUs
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the information in terms that I can just about understand!! Been wondering this exact point for a while now ahead of a GPU upgrade soon. Appreciate the advice.
 
If a game is using more then 4GB at 1080p, its been poorly optimized no doubt about it. These GPU manufactures releasing these cards with all this VRAM is only going to help the developers become lazy when developing these games.

As long as the game works on console, thats all they care about. Let the mugs who play on PC deal with it, even if it means emptying their pockets on new hardware.
 
Gabbatek said:
With the way that games are going, how long do you think it will take until 4GB is not enough to play games on max settings


i'm quite tempted to leave mine and upgrade to a 290x but is it worth it?
Click to expand...

4GB is enough for years and years and years. but....

Don't blame manufacturers when lazy devs don't optimize.

The question should be 'How long till lazy devs use all VRAM in nearly every game' ?
 
and another point to ask, when will crossfire and sli optimise and stack the memory of multi gpu's.

very tempted to pawn off my two 280x's on ebay and get a 290x 8gb and then in a year or two get another one for crossfire
 
All the hype now about 4GB not being enough those same people are going to be falling over themselves to buy a 4GB 390X when they see the performance numbers, 8GB is a luxury nothing more and by the time it becomes worthwhile there'll be far better GPU's available. It's been that way since the late 90s, additional GPU memory has just been a way of milking more money from those who simply must have the best.
 
Depending on the screen resolution, I'd say 4GB will become insufficient rather quickly. Purely because with 8GB of unified memory on the PS4, developers are unlikely to optimise games to use any less than a total of 8GB ram + vram on the PC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom