• 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.

fury and 4gb limiting?

so you can get a good frame rate on a 1080 monitor with the crimson software upscaling to 1440?

i tried before and it seemed pretty bad. maybe my i5 6400 being the bottleneck?

It works great for me, I run every game upscaled to 1440p on my 1080p monitor. Just been playing Doom like it and it spends most it's time at around 70 or 80 odd and never below 60, That's all maxed. I don't like running games lower than 60 and if a game needs tweaking to stay up above that it doesn't need much of one. I don't bother overclocking the gpu either its a Fury Tri-x that comes out the box at 1040/500.
 
Yes it will be a problem even at 1080P in some games. Now that NVIDIA's mid range cards have 6GB of VRAM and NVIDIA's high end cards have 8GB VRAM, developers will be implementing larger textures, so the Fury cards will be unable to play at max settings.

Nonsense.
At 1080p I would be amazed if you could notice the difference, I'd be further surprised if everyone starts throwing massive textures into games when so many people are still using 970s and other "4gb" cards.
 
OP, When I was using a 1080 screen I never came across any problems with 4gb VRAM. Most on this forum were recommending a 3.5gb card for 1080p until last month.
 
Yes it will be a problem even at 1080P in some games. Now that NVIDIA's mid range cards have 6GB of VRAM and NVIDIA's high end cards have 8GB VRAM, developers will be implementing larger textures, so the Fury cards will be unable to play at max settings.

Nonsense.
At 1080p I would be amazed if you could notice the difference, I'd be further surprised if everyone starts throwing massive textures into games when so many people are still using 970s and other "4gb" cards.

It doesn't matter if anybody can't notice the difference, he's 100% spot on, others have gave examples of current titles, here's another one:

The highly dev optimised:cool: Doom cannot be run on nightmare??? setting@1080p on anything running 4Gb the 97/80's/290X's/RX480's, aren't running out of grunt by a long shot in this title, 2/390X 8Gb's will be nailing Doom and highly clocked versions(1.2GHz+) snapping not far short at a stock 980Ti's heels.

Times have changed-it's textures now, as dave said, 4Gb going forwards has had it, now as more Vulkan/DX12 titles uptake will increase, devs will be pushing textures more as those api's are vram hungry.

:)
 
Not a reference blower though. All the dual fan models for under £390 look okay. Mind you this is only 10 or 20 quid more https://www.overclockers.co.uk/inno...ddr5-pci-express-graphics-card-gx-066-in.html I don't think it'll matter that much the cards all seem to clock in similar ballparks, Actually getting a Zotac with a 5 year warranty is also a good option as you get an extra 2 years peace of mind. https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-c...orce-gtx-1070?ckSuppliers=685&sSort=3&ckTab=0

I think I'd choose from these personally https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-c...-gtx-1070?ckSuppliers=685-219&sSort=3&ckTab=0
I seem to like the Inno3d 1070 iChill.

Is it a popular one that people on here go for?

1070's are all running there or there about as nasha said, if you like the look of the card then go for it, but looking at your sig- 7970 looks like you are a keeper, so if your budget can go further the 1070 Amp is peace of mind....

...£20 more gets you THE undisputed King of the 1070's that is the Amp Extreme-The only 1070 with higher power limits than the rest, mines tops out the gpu oc cap limit it has custom led lightning and smashes everything@1080p

It's long though(32ish cm?) but as it's built like a Sherman tank, you oc, and if Pascal bios editors land(not a guarantee), this card will keep on giving imo, and afaik, zero coil whine reported from the users here that have them.


But if your not into oc'ing as 1070's are fast enough already, the Inno3d 1070 iChill will serve you well-but, imo, don't be tempted to go for the air boss as that 4th fan isn't needed@stock.

Anyway, good luck whatever you get and let us know how you get on.:)
 
Last edited:
Will the Amp Extreme be able to drive an ultra wide 4k monitor 3440x1440?

It'll be fine, I'm constantly researching 21:9 as it is my next monitor move too and while there will be games that will require adjustments to be made to the settings it'll be nothing that detracts from the overall experience,

There's plenty of video's on the tube showing the 1070 @ ultrawide

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=GTX1070+@+3440x1440
 
It doesn't matter if anybody can't notice the difference, he's 100% spot on, others have gave examples of current titles, here's another one:

The highly dev optimised:cool: Doom cannot be run on nightmare??? setting@1080p on anything running 4Gb the 97/80's/290X's/RX480's, aren't running out of grunt by a long shot in this title, 2/390X 8Gb's will be nailing Doom and highly clocked versions(1.2GHz+) snapping not far short at a stock 980Ti's heels.

Times have changed-it's textures now, as dave said, 4Gb going forwards has had it, now as more Vulkan/DX12 titles uptake will increase, devs will be pushing textures more as those api's are vram hungry.

:)

Doom's a bad example, i can run it at nightmare settings at 4K without an issue on the Pro Duo, you just need to put a command in the launcher shortcut to unlock the settings. Works on Vulkan like a peach at 4K with highest possible settings and of course at 1080P too.

For Nasha, Forza works fine at max settings at 4K as well so that must be related to your 8GB of system memory.
 
There are people that are saying 3GB for the smaller 1060 is no not enough for 1080P when it will run out of grunt before VRAm, those same people are saying the much more powerful FuryX at 4K doesn't have a VRAm problem with 4Gb.


Any talk bout memory compression is entirely moot since nvidia also have delta color compression and by most accounts a superior technology, although the biggest benefit of the compression is not vram space saving but bandwidth improvements which is why Nvidia cards get away with a far smaller bus size.
 
Doom's a bad example, i can run it at nightmare settings at 4K without an issue on the Pro Duo, you just need to put a command in the launcher shortcut to unlock the settings. Works on Vulkan like a peach at 4K with highest possible settings and of course at 1080P too.

For Nasha, Forza works fine at max settings at 4K as well so that must be related to your 8GB of system memory.

I'd presumed that the dynamic render quality setting was a vram user but it seems I was wrong.

Mind you it may simply be a bug not allowing it with dsr, plus it seems you need a 4k monitor & 16 gb's of systen ram which I haven't got.
Fury X + 16 GB machines unable to select “Ultra”
Machines equipped with an AMD Fury X that also have 16 GB of system memory will be unable to select “Ultra” dynamic render quality with 4K resolution. To work around this issue:
1) Ensure the system display resolution is set to 4K (3840 x 2160 – requires 4k monitor / display adapter)
2) Launch the game and go to fullscreen model (Alt-Enter)
3) Go to Options->Video
4) Set “Dynamic Render Quality” to “Ultra”
5) Set “Force Resolution” to “Off”

https://www.vg247.com/2016/05/06/forza-6-apex-beta-known-issues-and-workarounds/
 
Last edited:
There are people that are saying 3GB for the smaller 1060 is no not enough for 1080P when it will run out of grunt before VRAm, those same people are saying the much more powerful FuryX at 4K doesn't have a VRAm problem with 4Gb.

This an example of being behind the times in your thinking and trying to make it a brand wars topic, In recent years we've started to get games where the ram usage is being increased by texture files rather than performance hogging settings like AA which was the usual way in which ram was used up previously.

As an example I can run Rise of the Tomb Raider with every setting maxed and get a 60/70/80 fps experience that is perfectly playable. However having the textures on very high causes it to stutter quite badly while not affecting the overall fps, Turning just the textures down from very high to high removes the stutter completely while having no effect on the performance.

Currently there's not many games like this but it's a trend that is likely to continue seeing the number of such games increasing.

Ignoring the data does not make it wrong. It is happening but removing the problem as I did by turning the textures from very high to high in Rise of the Tomb Raider has virtually no impact on the visuals or the experience so it isn't really a problem.

Any talk bout memory compression is entirely moot
Agreed.
 
Last edited:
People keep referring to it as a "Problem" though

It really isnt a "Problem" if there isnt a work around like AMDMatt stated then you just drop the textures down a notch, if you can tell the difference in anything other than staring at stills for ten minutes then your gaming wrong
 
Guaranteed that you'll have sold it on before 5yrs because it stinks due to drivers. Just say'in

I agree. I will have bought a 4k screen by then and will probably want the latest graphics card to accompany it. But I need something now and this fits the bill.
 
It works great for me, I run every game upscaled to 1440p on my 1080p monitor. Just been playing Doom like it and it spends most it's time at around 70 or 80 odd and never below 60, That's all maxed. I don't like running games lower than 60 and if a game needs tweaking to stay up above that it doesn't need much of one. I don't bother overclocking the gpu either its a Fury Tri-x that comes out the box at 1040/500.

Hmm I'm only getting a ultra wide 1200p option and no 1440p etc
 
Hmm I'm only getting a ultra wide 1200p option and no 1440p etc

I didn't know you was talking ultrawide, I'm running 16:9 2560x1440 on a 1920x1080 monitor, I thought ultrawide only came at 2560x1080 or 3440x1440, Plus I didn't think dsr was available for ultrawide.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom