• 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 compression on the GTX 9 series, it is not very good.

I don't think I remember reading it was intended to compress all of what is in VRAM kaap - it uses dynamic compression when moving data around in order to minimise traffic over the bus, it isn't a magic bullet to improve VRAM utilisation itself

That's what i thought it did, just looking at benchmarks show the 980/970 isn't as crippled by the 256bit bus as it what have been - upping the res still hurts mind, just not as much :cool:
 
I doubt anyone's decision to buy a 9 series card is based on memory compression.

I think everyone knows by now 4gb isn't enough for 4k in most new titles.


For a single card even @4K 4gb is actually overkill because even if you can use all that memory by pushing up the settings the fps will be so awful as to not want to do it most of the time.

Also interestingly @4K in the benches I have seen for single cards the 980s are the best performers, this also applies to 2 way setups. It is only when you get to 3 and 4 card setups the 290Xs start getting the upper hand.

I spent about 60 hours last week gaming on a single 980 @4K as this was the only setup that could run what I was using.

Horses for courses as they say.
 
What I don't quite understand is why they didn't make a high end part with a 512-bit bus? They said compression techniques allowed them to get it to 256 without compromise.... So why not up it to 512 too and get super epic performance?

And what game was it you gamed at 4k?

He already said, Crysis 3. Unless I missed something.
 
What I don't quite understand is why they didn't make a high end part with a 512-bit bus? They said compression techniques allowed them to get it to 256 without compromise.... So why not up it to 512 too and get super epic performance?

Because doing that isn't free and costs quite a bit per card. If they're trying to hit a certain price-point then sacrifices have to be made (plus it's all about producing a 'balanced' architecture)
 
What I don't quite understand is why they didn't make a high end part with a 512-bit bus? They said compression techniques allowed them to get it to 256 without compromise.... So why not up it to 512 too and get super epic performance?

The 9 series will ultimately be their mid range cards and are not really targeted @4K. One of the problems from what I have been told with using a larger bus (apart from the extra cost) is it generates more heat and uses more power. These two things go totally against what the 9 series are all about, low TDP and efficiency.

The other reasons for it is for 99% of users it would be a waste of money as it really only benefits very high resolutions like 4K, the old 6 series 256bit cards were fine up to 1600p as well and would not have benefitted from a bigger bus at their normal working resolution.
 
Plenty of us playing at 4k using dsr. It's not unreasonable to expect 4k to become mainstream quicker as a result.
 
Back
Top Bottom