4GB VRAM enough for 1080p?

PapaLazaru · 28 Oct 2016 at 13:09

Is anyone pushing more than this whilst playing BF1, to be precise?

ta

Stelly · 28 Oct 2016 at 13:09

Yes

Stelly

PapaLazaru · 28 Oct 2016 at 13:11

How much past?

Aiming for 120FPS if that makes any difference to VRAM - the whole thing confuses me.

Stelly · 28 Oct 2016 at 13:22

Have a look at this mate:

http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/90/much-vram-need-1080p-1440p-4k-aa-enabled/index.html

Stelly

Nasher · 28 Oct 2016 at 13:27

Depends. It's not just resolution that determines how much VRAM is used. There are currently only a handful of games that will use 3gb or more at 1080 (like Hitman and SoM), but expect that to rise in future.

nashathedog · 28 Oct 2016 at 13:28

PapaLazaru said:
How much past?

Aiming for 120FPS if that makes any difference to VRAM - the whole thing confuses me.

How video memory is used has changed with the current console generation. The consoles have a much larger pool of memory available compared to older gen's and games developers are using it for high resolution textures as a way to visually improve how a game looks for as small an impact as possible on the gpu. Going forward more and more games will exceed the 4gb limit at all resolutions (1080p and beyond) in this way, It's not a big deal though as it tends to be a case of turning the texture setting down one notch to take it below 4gb's and the difference visually is hard to see. I recently read an article that stated the games developers have around 5 gb's available on the consoles.

Aretak · 28 Oct 2016 at 13:35

4GB is fine for now, yes. There are a handful of games which can use more, but you literally won't be able to notice the difference between the top texture setting and the one below it at 1080p, which is all that's needed to bring them back under. 3GB is where you start running into a lot more games that require compromises which do affect visual quality.

PapaLazaru · 28 Oct 2016 at 13:35

I'm still confused so I will re-phrase.

BF1, high/ultra @ 1080p @ 120FPS.

Would you uprade from a 290 @ 4gb to a 390 @ 8gb if it was going to cost you £20 or so to buy and sell.

Aretak · 28 Oct 2016 at 13:38

For £20? Yes, I'd make that trade, assuming it's a similarly-good model (i.e. you're not trading a 290 Vapor-X for a voltage-locked Gigabyte 390 or something).

Seanspeed · 28 Oct 2016 at 13:41

PapaLazaru said:
I'm still confused so I will re-phrase.

BF1, high/ultra @ 1080p @ 120FPS.

Would you uprade from a 290 @ 4gb to a 390 @ 8gb if it was going to cost you £20 or so to buy and sell.

For £20, yea I would.

It's not gonna make a big difference, but it'll let you run better textures here and there and help avoid stuttering in the odd title.

Aretak said:
but you literally won't be able to notice the difference between the top texture setting and the one below it at 1080p

This isn't true at all.

Drollic · 28 Oct 2016 at 13:55

4gb is fine for 1080p.

Seanspeed · 28 Oct 2016 at 14:01

Just for those curious about BF1 in particular, it's quite light on vRAM compared to most other recent graphics-heavy games:

Yaayuh! · 28 Oct 2016 at 14:11

For BF1 @ 1920x1080, yes 4GB is fine.

Aretak · 28 Oct 2016 at 14:11

Seanspeed said:
This isn't true at all.

Yeah, it is. Certainly during gameplay. The only way you're going to tell the difference is by taking still screenshots and comparing them side by side.

bru · 28 Oct 2016 at 14:18

Every bodies eye are different, some notice more than others.

If there is no difference in the settings why do the developers bother putting them in. :rolleyes:

Dave2150 · 28 Oct 2016 at 14:19

Aretak said:
Yeah, it is. Certainly during gameplay. The only way you're going to tell the difference is by taking still screenshots and comparing them side by side.

Best to run 640x480 and low detail in every game then buddy

opethdisciple · 28 Oct 2016 at 14:21

4GB vram is fine in 90% of games at 1080p.

However for 120fps gaming I think your need more than a 390 in the top titles.

I'd imagine a 1070.

Aretak · 28 Oct 2016 at 14:32

bru said:
Every bodies eye are different, some notice more than others.

If there is no difference in the settings why do the developers bother putting them in.

Nobody's saying there isn't a difference. :rolleyes:

But if you want to tell me that you're going to notice the difference between this:

And this:

As you run past it in-game, then I'm saying that I don't believe you.

~>Dg<~ · 28 Oct 2016 at 14:40

its fine.

bru · 28 Oct 2016 at 15:11

Aretak said:
Nobody's saying there isn't a difference.

But if you want to tell me that you're going to notice the difference between this:

And this:

As you run past it in-game, then I'm saying that I don't believe you.

Well myself I cannot tell a difference at all, but I am as blind as a bat.

But if you want to argue that there isn't anyone out there in the entire world that could notice a difference, be my guest.