It's already mainstream - we have consoles and tvs that do it and we have gpus that do it, we also have phones that record it
I've been gaming at 4K since 2016
-
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.
NVIDIA ‘Ampere’ 8nm Graphics Cards
- Thread starter LoadsaMoney
- Start date
It's already mainstream - we have consoles and tvs that do it and we have gpus that do it, we also have phones that record it
I've been gaming at 4K since 2016
So why are people needing the new gen 3080ti’s or a ps5? Because gpus have been struggling to provide a consistent high level experience. Yes I can run 4K on my 980ti but I have to make a lot of adjustments for it to be playable.
Also as it’s been pointed out numerous times. Steam hardware survey still has 1080p as the most used res. 4K is by no means mainstream. Yet.
Err, think your loosing grip on reality here. I haven't edited my posts, so go ahead and quote my post where I stated "14-15gb available for vram". You don't find it, as I didn't say it.
I said "On another note, are you aware of specs of current gen consoles? They have 8GB of shared memory, that can be used for both graphics and system. As consoles are so well optimised, the system/OS doesn't use that much, and the majority can be dedicated to the GPU as VRAM. The next gen of consoles have 16GB of shared memory..."
You plucked 14-15gb out of nowhere, while I simply said the majority can be dedicated to VRAM. 6 out of 10 is a majority.... 9 out of 10 is also a majority, though a better description would be 'vast' majority. Your "15gb" number would mean the new consoles could use 93.75% of their shared memory as VRAM. Please don't try and insinuate that I suggested this. Anyways I'll stop now since it feels like I'm a school teacher
My main point is that console total memory is doubling. Consoles can use the majority of their shared 16GB of memory as VRAM - so VRAM allocation in AAA takes will very likely explode over the next year, rendering 8GB cards obsolete.
This 100%. In my experience, those 60+ develop a mindset where they refuse to acknowledge that their eyesight and hearing have decreased. Some refuse to get adequate corrective glasses, or hearing aides... Ages makes the majority stubborn and delusional.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 5,165
- Location
- South Wales
If 4K is so easy to run as some seem to make out, how come the demanding games still have lows of 30/40FPS?
By the time it becomes mainstream we might be able to do 100+FPS in those games, then people will rave about 8K and say 4K looks crap etc etc, cycle repeats
4K is mainstream mate, has been for a few years now. Steam hardware survey includes the sweat shop LAN cafe's in China and other asian countries, where hundreds are crammed into tiny spares, all on the same ancient hardware. There was a report where steam hardware survey was counting many of these machines more than once, making their data untrustworthy.
Anyhow, are you aware that the next gen of consoles are here soon, and that they are native 4K? Console gaming is much bigger than PC gaming overall - this will further stamp 4K's dominance over the faces of disbelievers.
Also, the 980ti is a very old card, so it's no wonder it struggles with 4K.
Sorry but 4K is not mainstream for gaming at all. Yes we now have PS4 pros and Xbox series x and yes many can actually play at 4K but how many actually do? You basing your assumption based on forums like this which do not reflect the mainstream at all.
If you can show me some data to back it up I’ll eat my words but I don’t think you can.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2018
- Posts
- 0
@tyler_jrb please point me to a technical briefing that states the xsx will reserve 6gb for the OS.
This.. 4k is still being rolled out on different media platforms. The pro and x got a taste of 4k. The next consoles will have it from the start so it will start to kick off as most now have a 4k tv. The majority of PC gamers are on still on1080/1440 high refresh rate I would imagine. I'm not not sure how anyone could say 4k has been mainstream for years. The content is only catching up now.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 5,165
- Location
- South Wales
Consoles doing 4K means nothing, PS3 and 360 were full HD weren't they? How many games ran at 1080p again..?
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 20,679
- Location
- The KOP
No ps3 and xbox ran around 720p and 900p they was never listed as being anything like that.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 5,165
- Location
- South Wales
Either way they are usually restricted in some way, resolution or frame rate
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 20,679
- Location
- The KOP
That is true, consoles will always have to make that balance with performance or visual because of how consoles are. They are a small form factor that gives off a lot of heat something must give way.
What they do though is still excellent, the PS4 Pro running last of us 2 has blown me away just how good that game looks on a 4k TV sure its not native but that is the clever work these consoles cam do and next gen will be the same.
Yep the Ps5 and new Xbox will change what resolution gamers play at. With them being 4K and 4K TVs being the minimum you can now buy, the mainstream will adopt 4K. Like it or not consoles are the mainstream not pcs.
Bearing in mind we are still at least a year or 2 away from PS5’s being the dominant console.
Bearing in mind we are still at least a year or 2 away from PS5’s being the dominant console.
From memory the XSX reserves no more than 3GB for the OS. The "slow" VRAM you are referring to runs at 336GB/s. This is equivalent to the bandwidth of a 2060. While it is slower than the main pool of memory it is not entirely useless, which is what you seem to be implying.
I’m not staying it’s entirely useless. But that is 40% difference in memory speed. There will be a difference if it’s being actively used, which means it likely won’t be used other than for OS/CPU other stuff such as audio etc or preload/keeping necessary info in the faster pool of memory.
They can delve into the cpu optimal ram but it’s 40% slower, which is a fairly big difference especially if say running both actively at the same time for vram.
Obviously the ps5 is slightly different in this way having all memory available of all the same speed all be it slightly slower. But that won’t so much matter as gpu spec wise it is a fair bit lesser than the XSX for example.
A lot of articles state it as cpu and gpu optimal memory.
I perhaps shouldn’t have worded it that way, my bad. But having 10gb fast and 6gb slow is there for a reason.
Sure it can delve into the 6gb which will likely be used for os and other stuff anyway. But actively running them both together will give performance differences.
Last edited:
I think you've done your maths wrong. The 6GB is 40% slower, or you could say that the 10GB pool is 66% faster.
((560-336)/560)*100 = 40%
((560-336)/336)*100 = 66.6%
((560-336)/336)*100 = 66.6%
Different developers will use it for different things. If they need to store models and textures in the 6GB pool because they have run out of space on the 10GB side, then they will.
I was halfway through a ninja edit after realising my mistake, but didn’t quite get there in time
. Been on nights so I’ll have to use that as my excuse now .That was my meaning, for preload and other such data textures etc. But as active vram there will still be a difference between the two. especially considering how much CU’s the gpu has inside the XSX, requires a lot of bandwidth at full grunt.
My guess is they wanted to use more perhaps 20GB total, at least the way the board is laid out suggest that. Using a mix of 1gb and 2gb chips instead of 2gb on all. But maybe decided not too on a cost basis compared to say the ps5.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Jun 2018
- Posts
- 2,827
Well said. I said something similar like that way back. They don't like to read that though. So you will get responses like that. So have your container ready for those strawmen they will pluck out of then air.Err, think your loosing grip on reality here. I haven't edited my posts, so go ahead and quote my post where I stated "14-15gb available for vram". You don't find it, as I didn't say it.
I said "On another note, are you aware of specs of current gen consoles? They have 8GB of shared memory, that can be used for both graphics and system. As consoles are so well optimised, the system/OS doesn't use that much, and the majority can be dedicated to the GPU as VRAM. The next gen of consoles have 16GB of shared memory..."
You plucked 14-15gb out of nowhere, while I simply said the majority can be dedicated to VRAM. 6 out of 10 is a majority.... 9 out of 10 is also a majority, though a better description would be 'vast' majority. Your "15gb" number would mean the new consoles could use 93.75% of their shared memory as VRAM. Please don't try and insinuate that I suggested this. Anyways I'll stop now since it feels like I'm a school teacher
My main point is that console total memory is doubling. Consoles can use the majority of their shared 16GB of memory as VRAM - so VRAM allocation in AAA takes will very likely explode over the next year, rendering 8GB cards obsolete.