• 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.

680 GTX 4 GIG?

Neo-Geo said:
Your wrong,once you start modding games with high res texture packs like Skyrim,GTA4,Dragons Age,Crysis etc, it eats up the ram quite easily,the more memory the better.
Click to expand...

Oh great, so now 2 Gb Vram isnt enough for 1080p, we need a 4 gb minimum to be able to play games without any lagspikes.

I'll keep that in mind while my PC carries on tearing every game apart with lousy dual 1 Gb GTX 560 tis.
 
OCPete said:
I don't think you'll get more fps moving from SLi 480's to a 680 in BF3 @ 1200p. You may get better minimums but average and max frame rates will be lower.
Click to expand...

I guess you are talking about only one 680 then? Since OP mentioned that he would be getting two 680's.
 
If you're worried about VRAM usage in the future get a 4gb 680 as you're primary and a 2gb one as the slave so you can utilise the 4gb of VRAM.

This way if you want to go Surround and/or 3d in the near or far future you can almost be guaranteed to have enough. VRAM
 
chipachap said:
If you're worried about VRAM usage in the future get a 4gb 680 as you're primary and a 2gb one as the slave so you can utilise the 4gb of VRAM.

This way if you want to go Surround and/or 3d in the near or far future you can almost be guaranteed to have enough. VRAM
Click to expand...

lol@you, Primary/slave.. Theyre not IDE DVD drives lol.

As OptimaLnrg says, A 4GB card & a 2GB card will only give 2gb usable.
 
That's what they were referred to when I was looking up Crossfire.

I'm sure I've seen people saying they use a 2gb 6950 and a 1gb one but it gives them 2gb. I've seen several people say on various forums it can only use the memory of the top/primary card so the 2nd card amount is disregardible.

I haven't read any articled or reviews stating this it just seems to be the consensus so cite me if I'm wrong.
 
When will people start realising that you're more likely to be limited by raw performance rather than memory when using the highest settings at the highest resolutions with texture packs etc. When did 2GB Vram become obsolete...
 
chipachap said:
That's what they were referred to when I was looking up Crossfire.

I'm sure I've seen people saying they use a 2gb 6950 and a 1gb one but it gives them 2gb. I've seen several people say on various forums it can only use the memory of the top/primary card so the 2nd card amount is disregardible.

I haven't read any articled or reviews stating this it just seems to be the consensus so cite me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

When crossfiring or SLI-ing, each card needs to keep it's own copy of all the textures, etc so that card can render it's frames. This means the cards can only use as much memory as the "smallest" card has - a while back I crossfired a 4870 1GB with a 4870 512MB and my PC ended up seeing 2 x 4870 512MB's. You can run cards at different overclock levels with crossfire (not sure about SLI on that score) but memory size must be the same.
 
Helios1234 said:
When will people start realising that you're more likely to be limited by raw performance rather than memory when using the highest settings at the highest resolutions with texture packs etc. When did 2GB Vram become obsolete...
Click to expand...

It didn't.

But I remember a year ago when Bit-tech reviewed the 6950 and clearly said that AMD were stupid for putting so much vram on it and should have released it as a 1gb card. "2gb is stupid."

PC gaming is always based upon its last game. Battlefield 3 saw the end of 1gb cards as they simply do not have enough vram. 1.5gb from all of the tests done around here seems to be right around enough, so we could then declare that 2gb is more than enough. And it is. Right now.

However, times change quickly. As DX11 is used more and more it has become apparent that other sacrifices need to be made.

Both Crysis 2 and BF3 are terribly linear. If you try to wander off course with BF3 it shoves you back to the play area. However, Fallout 3 for example uses some trickery and offers enormous landscapes. As does Skyrim.

Crysis 2 was linear, but was a bit more clever about it. It simply put walls and buildings in the way. However, when ran with ultra settings and heavy textures both games really need a lot of vram.

So what is going to happen now that we have games that look like that? well, if any one releases a game that isn't as pretty it will be criticised. Even Skyrim's graphics have their shortcomings and they were all pointed out.

So let's say that DICE decide to release Bad Company 3 (as an example name only) and decide to make the levels as big as the ones in Bad Company 2.

It is going to need more vram.

It only takes one game to come along and render a card useless. Last October BF3 was a clear example to that. Now? people have realised that it needs a lot of vram and thus, are seeing it as a factor when buying cards.

2gb IMO on a £400+ card is not enough. Not when a single game could come along and render that £400+ card useless.

So yes, not every one will see it as important. Fair enough. Some people are more worried about having a card they can say is faster. Fair enough.

But, as I found out with my two EVGA 295 co op cards, vram is absolutely crucial. BF3 turned them both into very expensive paperweights.
 
Your EVGA 295s still wouldn't have been good enough for BF3 if they had 20 Gb vram on them, its not only about GPU power, they simply didn't have the tech required to run that game!

You post so much vile that its unbelievable that anyone can possibly believe you.

Andy that is.
 
Neo-Geo said:
Start adding some of the HD mods and HD flora that is used in Skyrim and watch your vram be eaten up,its a well known fact and is over many a forum exceot maybe here at Ocuk,not just with skyrim but anygame that uses high memory mods.

Not only that try running all what i have said with very high Super Sampling,Anistropic filtering and Ambient Occlusion using Nvidia inspector even on 2x580s and watch your pc crawl!

The more memory/Vram the better its been proven especially when using high levels of super sampling and HD mods.
Click to expand...

Don't be ridiculous, I run Skyrim at 2560x1440 with over a hundred mods, and these are well known on this forum so stop spreading misinformation.

It's obvious that once you start using SS games will be using much more VRAM because effective resolution increases gradually but there aren't many people running games using SS not knowing about the VRAM limitations.

With all that said, Skyrim uses a highly outdated engine that is not known for optimisation and good memory management which is why it's not the best example of VRAM limited games.

Fact is, Skyrim with a few mods won't hit the VRAM limit at 1920x1080.
 
chipachap said:
That's what they were referred to when I was looking up Crossfire.

I'm sure I've seen people saying they use a 2gb 6950 and a 1gb one but it gives them 2gb. I've seen several people say on various forums it can only use the memory of the top/primary card so the 2nd card amount is disregardible.

I haven't read any articled or reviews stating this it just seems to be the consensus so cite me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

You're wrong, I know where you pulled your "consensus" from but I won't say it as the word is banned around here.


BTW, I'd love to see some info on graphics cards limited by VRAM that would otherwise run BF3 without any issues at VRAM limited settings.

From what I've seen, you wouldn't get playable framerates in said scenarios, regardless of VRAM limitations.
 
Last edited:
I'm running skyrim with the nexus HD 2K texture pack, 1920x1200, 4x MSAA, 16x AF.

I played a new game for a little over a week and there was not the slightest bit of lag, slowdown or bad FPS on just 1 Gb vram!

So maybe you can tell why and how much I have the rubbish 'you need 2 Gb vram at 1080p, oh no, now you need 4 fb!'.

There's not a single game in existance that will yet struggle to run on SLI GTX 570s all the way up to 1440p, even BF3 is fine with that.
 
Mr Krugga said:
Don't be ridiculous, I run Skyrim at 2560x1440 with over a hundred mods, and these are well known on this forum so stop spreading misinformation.

It's obvious that once you start using SS games will be using much more VRAM because effective resolution increases gradually but there aren't many people running games using SS not knowing about the VRAM limitations.

With all that said, Skyrim uses a highly outdated engine that is not known for optimisation and good memory management which is why it's not the best example of VRAM limited games.

Fact is, Skyrim with a few mods won't hit the VRAM limit at 1920x1080.
Click to expand...

bhavv said:
I'm running skyrim with the nexus HD 2K texture pack, 1920x1200, 4x MSAA, 16x AF.

I played a new game for a little over a week and there was not the slightest bit of lag, slowdown or bad FPS on just 1 Gb vram!

So maybe you can tell why and how much I have the rubbish 'you need 2 Gb vram at 1080p, oh no, now you need 4 fb!'.

There's not a single game in existance that will yet struggle to run on SLI GTX 570s all the way up to 1440p, even BF3 is fine with that.
Click to expand...
How is it misinformation?Its true that the more super sampling that you use the more ram that you use its a fact,just because you choose to ignore this fact dont mean it isnt true.

Bump up your super sampling and watch your cards crawl,just because YOU guys dont use much SS,it dont mean that other people dont want to use it either,Ambient Occlusion is another killer on the fps on very high quality,the fact of the matter is the more vram the better,it all boils down to what you play at the end of the day.
 
Last edited:
1.5GB is the average VRAM useage for BF3 ultra 1080p with all the BS added in too.

I reckon you can easily get that down to 1 gb without sacrficing too much

Silly VRAM sizes (currently 2.5gb+) are just for multi monitors/1600p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom