Would it not go to RAM? Mind you, I understand it will be bad either way.
-
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.
Nvidia announces RTX 2060, more powerful than GTX 1070 Ti at $350
- Thread starter Scania
- Start date
Would it not go to RAM? Mind you, I understand it will be bad either way.
The only ones which can use system ram are Vega using HBCC or professional cards.
Last edited:
Cheers!
This video is actually just reinforcing the point I've been making all along - fixing the VRAM issue was incredibly easy, all he had to do was change textures to high, and the game looked great (around 09:30 he even talks about this saying it hasn't really lost anything on the visuals front) and didn't exhaust VRAM.
06:29 is interesting, look at the way the textures 'pop in' on the roof of the petrol station, and VRAM usage pretty much at max (~6080MB). Would be interesting to see if the same happens on cards with more VRAM.
Still its at 1080p and it cant use Ultra textures with DXR. Doesn't bode well for the future, many other games also hit 5gb~ usage at 1080p as SOTTR.
Personally I wouldn't be happy with turning down the textures now or in 6 months after spending that much on a card. Many people keep GPUs for 2-3 years.
Good video. Really highlights that VRAM usage is just not an issue. The high values reported mostly reflect caching rather than actual usage.
It is also clear that the GPU will run out of horse power long before it runs out of VRAM.
An interesting aspect was the 2060 was using around 0.5GB less VRAM than the 1060 due to better compression. Even comparing Pascal to Vega It was clear that nvidia have more advanced compression technologies. So it would be interesting to compare say a 580 to the 2060, there might be another 0.6GB used on AMD so now you are comparing an 8gb AMD card to an effective 7GB NVidia card that is faster.
Nope, it won't. It will start using disk storage, unless you have VM turned off in which case it will crash with an out of memory error.
But like I said the engine will automatically lower detail to fit it in to memory, rather than use virtual memory (which is why you see varying memory usage with supposedly the same settings). What your actually seeing is the vram limited 2060 with lowered detail vs another card with more vram holding a higher detail.
Last edited:
https://www.techspot.com/article/1785-nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-vram-enough/
Suggests it's not currently a problem, and they suggest it won't be a problem for a couple of years either.
I'm not convinced. As someone in the market for a new GPU, I don't want to run the risk of crippling myself in a year or two. Done that before with a 770...
Suggests it's not currently a problem, and they suggest it won't be a problem for a couple of years either.
I'm not convinced. As someone in the market for a new GPU, I don't want to run the risk of crippling myself in a year or two. Done that before with a 770...
This is just nonsense. Disk storage is only used when the driver cannot store the data in system memory. This is entirely transparent to the developer, just like any program will always sue the system memory first.
In these comparisons all cards have the same detail settings.
Rival cards at the same price point can't use Ultra textures with DXR either though; they might have more VRAM, but not be able to perform at raytracing.
People worry about spending money and having to turn down textures but for me that is far less of an evil than buying a card and it just not having the raw firepower to push frames without resorting to more impactful tweaks like lowering resolution and suchlike. Furthermore more grunt is always of benefit (at least until you get beyond monitor refresh rate at max settings) because it means higher framerate all of the time, extra VRAM only comes into play in certain situations and is wasted at other times.
It is provably not a problem because even when pushing 4K high details there is no evidence of running out of VRAM with the 2060 performing close to the 2070 as expected, moreover, at these setting the game is barely playable anyway.
That m,eans you will run out of basic GPU power well before 6GB becomes a limit.
No it's not, a GPU will NOT use system ram unless there is something to handle that (like HBCC). That isn't how the architecture works. You can't just have one set of ram start dumping it's contents in to another set of ram.
You might have set the same detail settings, but it doesn't mean it's what your actually seeing. If they started locking off options (as they did in Doom 2016 if you had less than 5gb) people would cry. So they can be sneaky about it.
Last edited:
Doesn't make sense that a modern GPU can't overflow to system ram when the GeForce 6200 TurboCache from 2006 did exactly this so they could say it "had" 256mb when it was a 32mb card. Same with the Radeon Xpress X300 from that era.
Of course modern GPUs will use system ram, nasher is just speaking nonsense. You can easily test it in games if you use over the VRAM limit, the system ram usage increases. You can also see form the performance drop, although it liekly makes the game unplayable the drop is only aorund 30-40% typically with some micro-stutter. If the GPU had to fetch data from the hard disk then the performance would drop like a stone and there would be noticeable pauses beyond micro-stutter.
The drivers don't need any special HBCC hardware or anything.
For starters, to even use the darj disk would require first the data in vram gets dumped into system ram, and then gets saved to disk. It can't be saved directly to disk from VRAM. The OS has no way of doing that.
The VRAM debate is a tedious one. Generally if a game requires more than the 6GB, it will require more horsepower. You would need to turn down settings to get a decent framerate and this in turn lowers the VRAM. It isn't rocket science people!
You clearly don't know how this stuff works :/
The virtual memory exists to act as an overflow. You can't pass things between vram and system ram without something in between to manage it. Yes performance will tank completely once it starts using virtual memory (and system memory is also a lot slower), which is why things will scale back to avoid it.
Last edited: