-
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.
VRAM - AMD/Nvidia, why does it differ?
- Thread starter MooMoo444
- Start date
Problem, reaction, solution...(applicable in many areas in life, too).
Indeed.
But if nVidia were proactive about it and made 6GB 384 bit bus cards as standard, saying:
"you need this VRAM because in the future when you may or may not adopt 4K and that may or may not exceed 3GB"
I think that would go down like a lead balloon. Especially with the associated cost increase
.
I would be surprised for NVIDIA to use 6GB for Maxwell mid-high range cards, more lilkely 4GB or 4.5GB as they only like to give the minimum bump they can. 1.5GB not enough for 580s, let's give them 512mb more on a 680.
That elusive "big kepler" 512-bit bus GK110 never appeared and instead gave us the 384-bit bus version which means a 3GB 780 and 780Ti.
Even people with a 780/780Ti may be conscious that 3GB could be a limiting factor with sli next year so will get an itch when they see a 4/4.5GB Maxwell card, NVIDA like this.
That elusive "big kepler" 512-bit bus GK110 never appeared and instead gave us the 384-bit bus version which means a 3GB 780 and 780Ti.
Even people with a 780/780Ti may be conscious that 3GB could be a limiting factor with sli next year so will get an itch when they see a 4/4.5GB Maxwell card, NVIDA like this.
Last edited:
Indeed.
But if nVidia were proactive about it and made 6GB 384 bit bus cards as standard, saying:
"you need this VRAM because in the future when you may or may not adopt 4K and that may or may not exceed 3GB"
I think that would go down like a lead balloon. Especially with the associated cost increase
Fair point. The answer to that is to produce both and give people an option though. You can never have too much, but you can have too little.
True. But they won't produce something if they don't think there's a big enough market for it. If they truly believed there was a market for it, they'd be straight in there vacuuming the profit.
Personally I would agree with their assumption of how things are. I think the market for 4K (i.e. VRAM chomping resolutions) is miniscule because quite simply the cards are not up to the job of pumping out acceptable frame rates outside of 3-way and above multi-GPU configs. So a miniscule market becomes non-existent (in market terms).
In the future this may change but we'll be a couple of generations on then so 2/3/4GB will most likely be redundant or close to anyway.
That's all fine and well, but don't start a smear campaign on the opposition, and then recommend a 3gb card for 4K when it doesn't have enough vram, while going to great lengths to tarnish the Hawaii 4gb card.
VRAM speed and Bus width, it all amount to the same thing, GigaFlops per second on the Memory threading speed.
With a 384Bit Bus the 780ti has about the same memory performance as the 290/X with its 1250Mhz and 512Bit Bus, the 290/X running the same 1750Mhz memory speed it will be churning out some 460 Gflop/s vs 325 on the 780ti, that will make a difference at any resolution.
But yes that difference will increase as the res goes up, but thats also because the 290/X has 64 Raster Units vs 48 on the 780TI.
The 290/X is predetermined to have very high performance, its held back at present with low component settings. there is more to be had out of it.
By comparison the 780TI has just about every little bit already squeezed out of it.
The 290/X is just more GPU tied up, anchored down. Can't wait to see it let loose.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Feb 2010
- Posts
- 14,583
I don't know whether to laugh or cry about this comment...because it's so true in a way...
How many 290/X's have you seen running @ 1750Mhz?
Post #26 does not state anywhere that it is aimed at 1440 res people, it just says high res gaming.
That slide is just as bad as nvidia saying 3gb is enough for 4k.
Already been thought this. you need to the thread before replying. the answer is in the thread
Already been thought this. you need to the thread before replying. the answer is in the thread
Makes no sense but ok.
#27
True, but
This is on Reference cards with Reference Coolers and no Memory overvolting.
There 7979 were running 1750, 1850 to 2000Mhz memory when they had decent coolers on them, they had memory overvolting.
AIB 290's should get the same and will clock well.
As for type and cost, AMD use exactly the same VRAM chips.
#35
As i said, Reference cards with reference coolers, the VRAM chips aren't even cooled on the reference GPU's, actually its probably a good job there is no contact between the cooler and the Memory IC's, running as hot as those cards do the cooler would probably heat them up.
Better PCB's with better coolers and unlocked memory volting they will soon be running at 1750Mhz in the same way that any self respecting 7970 owner clocked their memory to that speed or more as soon as they installed it.
But There are Cheapskates, yes. just as you do with 780's and 7970's you make sure you know what your buying.
Lies. That slide was part of a package, I didn't include all the slides but seeing as you mentioned it...
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 May 2007
- Posts
- 10,222
On the vram front could it be that Nvidia feed the chips more voltage at stock which in turn allows higher speeds. This could always be checked to see if indeed Nvidia are using better memory.
Welcome to the world of business.
This kind of thing happens all the time. I don't know why people get offended by it. But if you are stay clear of their products. That's your right. Nobody is forcing you to buy them.
By 'you' I mean in the third person, not you in particular Matt
.Lies. That slide was part of a package, I didn't include all the slides but seeing as you mentioned it...
That mentions resolutions ? meaning more than 1, what are the other 'HD Resolutions' that more memory is needed for ? as i see 2560x1600 on there but thats the slowest growth, The next highest res is 1920x1200 which is my res, and 2gb is enough , slide lies.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 15 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 3,417
Didn't do the 3Gb GTX 580's any harm
Never really had a problem with VRAM use at 1080p though I'd agree that for higher end multi monitor setups or 4k its not enough.
The only time even to date I've had any issues with VRAM at 1920x1080 is the 470s with only 1.28GB and ultra settings in BF4 - even high settings it was just inside their capabilities (about 75MB clear). Ultra settings will just about push past 2GB but so far I've not seen it come close to 3GB.
The only time even to date I've had any issues with VRAM at 1920x1080 is the 470s with only 1.28GB and ultra settings in BF4 - even high settings it was just inside their capabilities (about 75MB clear). Ultra settings will just about push past 2GB but so far I've not seen it come close to 3GB.