is 2gb not enough?

[Silent_Scone]

What does Having system memory and a decent SSD do??? If you run out of VRAM that won't do anything at all

 

[robertchalmers1]

Nope, SLI reports the actual VRAM used and unlike AMD, doesn't need halving.

Clocks were stock SLI Titans (837Mhz) and CPU 3930K at 4.625Ghz.

does this mean that if you have 2 x 2gb cards in sli you then have 4gb vram while if you use 2 cards in crossfire then you only get the vram from one card in use

 

[robertchalmers1]

This thread got more replies in 1 hour even though its the same old asked 100x Q and some peeps asking for help are lucky to get a reply in some threads lol.

OP could have used Search.

if you read my original post I said that on closer reading, as in I used search and came to the conclusion that 2gb may well not be enough today, or the very near future and that is why I asked in the forums.

 

[Silent_Scone]

does this mean that if you have 2 x 2gb cards in sli you then have 4gb vram while if you use 2 cards in crossfire then you only get the vram from one card in use

Nope. Crossfire is alternate frame rendering like SLI which doesn't stack VRAM. Stacking VRAM would take a massive hit on performance, which is why even with Mantle having synchronous crossfire and having the ability to stack VRAM, experts are still saying alternate frame rendering is still preferable.

 

[arc@css]

does this mean that if you have 2 x 2gb cards in sli you then have 4gb vram while if you use 2 cards in crossfire then you only get the vram from one card in use

No, you would only have 2gb. This applies to both companies; 2 + 2 = 2; 4 + 4 = 4, and so on.

 

[robertchalmers1]

Thnx I thought that was the way it worked but clearly didnt understand the way it was written. The bit I dont get is why nvidia have the higher end cards with only 2gb vram. I quite fancied going with nvidia sas ive not owned a proper nvidia gaming card before and the 770 does seem to do very well in a lot of reviews even outdoing the 280x.

 

[~>Dg<~]

at 1080 there are a handful of games that use over 2gb skyrim,bf4 can , titanfall definitely does.

so yes 2gb is okay for 90 percent of games still but it will be pushed this year with bigger games.

 

[robertchalmers1]

The way im looking at it is, im building this pc as opposed to getting the xbox one. So choosing my card carefully. Im hoping to get something that say 6 months down the line I wont need to replace.

perfect example my son got a gaming pc for his xmas couple years back and I put in a 7970 and even now that plays most games fine and more than likely will for next 12-18 months. I was looking to do the same for me.

I cant afford to shell out 400+ in one go however I could easily buy a 770/280x this week then another in a fortnights time if its the right devision. I also plan on adding 2 cards possibly close together as its a water cooled pc and want everything built from the off so I dont needa mess about draining it etc in couple of months time

 

[Gregster]

at 1080 there are a handful of games that use over 2gb skyrim,bf4 can , titanfall definitely does.

so yes 2gb is okay for 90 percent of games still but it will be pushed this year with bigger games.

This is just wrong.

BF4 doesn't use over 2GB at 1080P

Skyrim can if you add tons of mods.

Titanfall I can't comment on, as no one with a 2GB card that I know of has played it fully maxed.

@ Robert. Why not grab a 290 now and then when you have enough cash, add a second. From my understanding, you have less chance of them black screening under water, so could be worth considering.

 

[Yaayuh!]

at 1080 there are a handful of games that use over 2gb skyrim,bf4 can , titanfall definitely does.

so yes 2gb is okay for 90 percent of games still but it will be pushed this year with bigger games.

I've put in many hours of BF4 @ 1080p @ ultra with my GTX690, never had any VRAM problems.

Apart from that, i an't really give anymore input on this. I only play BF4 and BL2 really

 

[nicnik]

mid-high range pc. just buy 3gb and be done with it. not point gimping yourself.

 

[Silent_Scone]

And BF4 is pretty intensive too. Thing is though it will buffer the current frame and however many frames ahead, so with a titan although it says you're USING say over 3gb at 1440p you're actually not, with caching it's using as much as the game thinks it needs to and works with what's available. BF4 has some massive maps, so if it's buffering a further 10 frames for example, it's going to cache a lot of VRAM along with any other info the GPU needs. If you have 3gb VRAM, it won't cache as much.

At least that is the most obvious explanation. Which is why all these VRAM readouts prove nothing.

 

[OLDPHART]

1 is not rly enough
2 is fine for 1920x1080
3 is fine for 2560x1440

eyefinity fits in there somewhere but not sure where

l would change the above to-
1-2 is fine for 1920x1080
2-3 is fine for 2560x1440

It all depends what GPU's your using regarding the amount of Vram and how much grunt[horsepower] they have Single GPU's are getting faster+more Vram.

As game's are slowly going beyond 2GB, using SLI 4GB 670's and at the moment its not worth upgrading.

 

[Diagro]

And BF4 is pretty intensive too. Thing is though it will buffer the current frame and however many frames ahead, so with a titan although it says you're USING say over 3gb at 1440p you're actually not, with caching it's using as much as the game thinks it needs to and works with what's available. BF4 has some massive maps, so if it's buffering a further 10 frames for example, it's going to cache a lot of VRAM along with any other info the GPU needs. If you have 3gb VRAM, it won't cache as much.

At least that is the most obvious explanation. Which is why all these VRAM readouts prove nothing.

Thats most likely the reason why my VRAM useage shows 3.95Gb in single player 95% of the time.

 

[Gregster]

Thats most likely the reason why my VRAM useage shows 3.95Gb in single player 95% of the time.

So that would be 1975mb used then

 

[robertchalmers1]

So choices ive narr8wed it down to are a 2gb gtx 770 or a 3gb 280x, although ive noticed ocuk 280x are vastly overpriced compared to there competitors is there any reason for that or are ocuk just cashing in due to the mining craze that seems to be going on at the moment

 

[Rusty0611]

Greg and I used 1GB different amounts of VRAM on a 3GB 780 and 6GB Titan. Same settings, same server. And I was doing better (obviously) so more dead bodies to cache .

 

[Darujhistan]

This time next year 2Gb will be no where near enough for 1080p

It's not enough now.

 

[Darujhistan]

Im trying to do some research for my next purchase and it looks like 2gb vram is no longer really enough. The cards I were looking at was the gtx 770 which mainly comes with 2gb vram and the occasional, highly priced 4gb ram. On closer reading it appears that the 770s dont have enough grunt to make use of the 4gb anyways.

Basically if the general consensus is 2gb is no longer enough why did nvidia release mid-high end cards with onky 2gb ram?

im trying to wisely choose my card that will hopefully last as long as possible but stuck now as what to do

any help or advice in the right direction really appreciatec

Don't buy a new card with 2GB of VRAM, that's my advice. Especially with a look to the future.

You'll regret it if you do.

 

[Darujhistan]

The answer is simple.

If you play games with **** poor IQ settings then 2Gb will be fine.

If you play games with IQ settings turned on then 2Gb is not enough.

Although why anyone would build a gaming PC and not have the IQ settings turned on is beyond me, may as well buy a PS4.

Bingo!