-
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.
Graphics card ram
- Thread starter princejim
- Start date
Do you not mean 3GB v 6GB ?
I assume you are referring to Gb instead of Mb?
It's dependant on the resolution you are playing at. More GPU RAM means you're less likely to run out or run into any issues such as stuttering or needing to reduce the quality of the game.
What resolution are you playing at and what cards were you looking at?
It's dependant on the resolution you are playing at. More GPU RAM means you're less likely to run out or run into any issues such as stuttering or needing to reduce the quality of the game.
What resolution are you playing at and what cards were you looking at?
Using my 3Gb 780 ti @ 5760x1080 (desktop spanned over three monitors) the 3Gb isn't enough for maximum settings in games like Battlefield 1 & 4 as the large resolution uses more VRAM than the card has, if I drop the resolution down to 1920x1080, effectively one monitor, I can pretty much max out whatever I throw at it.
That's the difference between 3 and 6Gb VRAM for me anyway.
For this reason I'm getting an 8Gb 1070 soon, if my 780ti had say 6Gb I very much doubt I'd need to upgrade it, shame, bar the limited VRAM it's a terrific card still.
That's the difference between 3 and 6Gb VRAM for me anyway.
For this reason I'm getting an 8Gb 1070 soon, if my 780ti had say 6Gb I very much doubt I'd need to upgrade it, shame, bar the limited VRAM it's a terrific card still.
If by MB you mean GB, depends the card
If you are referring to GTX1060 3GB and GTX1060 6GB is not only the VRAM difference but the GPU is smaller on the 1060 3GB. Aka is not the same GPU.
If you are referring in general terms, it depends the GPU also.
A 6GB Titan (Kepler) is much weaker card than a RX480 4GB or a Fury which 4GB HBM.
And on the latter it depends the type of VRAM. GDDR, GDDRX, HBM etc.
Be more specific what you have in mind to assist you.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 12,881
- Location
- Surrey
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Jan 2013
- Posts
- 22,313
- Location
- Rollergirl
TLDR: You should be going for 6GB.
It's like the difference between a standard definition TV and a HD TV. Both of them are going to be capable of showing EastEnders, but one will look better than the other.
With 3GB you could be forced into medium settings, but with 6GB you have the capacity for higher settings.
It's like the difference between a standard definition TV and a HD TV. Both of them are going to be capable of showing EastEnders, but one will look better than the other.
With 3GB you could be forced into medium settings, but with 6GB you have the capacity for higher settings.
Having owned a 780ti previously I'm not sure it could push 6.2 million pixels around the screen to a satisfactory degree, that's 3/4 of 4K and my 1060 (an improvement on the 780ti) wouldn't come close to it unless I chose lower quality settings.
I think it's worth bearing in mind the card performance when you look at memory amounts. A 1060 at 3 or 6gb is a low end card really and whilst you can give it 6gb it may not have the power to max that vram. It's like putting an expensive set of tyres on a Ford Fiesta. It can't really maximise their potential.
I hear what your saying, but, I find in the main it's textures that push it over the limit of VRAM but otherwise it seems just fine, BF4 for example, I can sustain 60 fps easily so long as textures are set to low - everything else bar AA on ultra - as soon as I increase texture quality the fps tanks and the card is over it's 3Gb, BF1 and Battlefront are the same more or less.
I certainly have the perception - rightly or wrongly - that it's the VRAM or lack of that's holding it back...
I find using MSI Afterburner very useful for checking how much VRAM is being used and to measure how increasing graphics settings affects VRAM usage. Having said that I only have to do this because I have a 3GB card (780ti) and some newer games are stretching this at 1440p at higher settings, if I had twice the VRAM I wouldn't have to bother. I am aware that with lower end cards they don't always have the processing power to make full use of large amounts of VRAM so depending on what card you are looking at it might be worth looking at benchmarks for both models to confirm that the extra memory makes a difference.
With the 1060, the 6GB is the obvious choice because the 3GB is essentially a different (lower performing) card.
The RX480 is a much more interesting test case for the advantages of extra VRAM. The 8GB card shows slightly better 0.1% low figures, though only by a significant margin in a few games. The 8GB card is also better able to cope with textures and MSAA cranked up, though the 4GB is sufficient for most current games on Ultra. So essentially there is very little difference right now. With the few games that struggle with 4GB, performance can be improved drastically by dropping MSAA or textures down a notch. It'll be interesting to look again toward the end of 2017 to see if that's still the case, or if more games demonstrate difficulties with 4GB VRAM. At present, difficulties can largely be chalked up to bad optimisation (AC: Syndicate, Mirror's Edge).
Texture packs will make use of the extra RAM, so buying an 8GB based on today's benchmarks isn't totally wasted. I'd also be curious to see what happens to benchmarks if MSAA is dialled up one step at a time. At what point does the 4GB start to struggle? And how much higher can the 8GB go?
The RX480 is a much more interesting test case for the advantages of extra VRAM. The 8GB card shows slightly better 0.1% low figures, though only by a significant margin in a few games. The 8GB card is also better able to cope with textures and MSAA cranked up, though the 4GB is sufficient for most current games on Ultra. So essentially there is very little difference right now. With the few games that struggle with 4GB, performance can be improved drastically by dropping MSAA or textures down a notch. It'll be interesting to look again toward the end of 2017 to see if that's still the case, or if more games demonstrate difficulties with 4GB VRAM. At present, difficulties can largely be chalked up to bad optimisation (AC: Syndicate, Mirror's Edge).
Texture packs will make use of the extra RAM, so buying an 8GB based on today's benchmarks isn't totally wasted. I'd also be curious to see what happens to benchmarks if MSAA is dialled up one step at a time. At what point does the 4GB start to struggle? And how much higher can the 8GB go?
Last edited: