AA requires massive amounts of ram. if you are going to xfire this puppy, you will be cranking up the AA requireing more memory. Paritucualrily 8x-16xAA at 4K
Am I the only gamer who thinks AA looks awfully fuzzy & unappealing? I never use it in any game. ...1080p btw.
A Heavily modded (+enb+ Ugrids 7/9) Skyrim exceeds 4 GB Vidmem here in 4K in some scenes. (I havn't much succes with SKSE and the mempatch in getting it under 4GB)
Heavy modded games need VRAM i welcomed my 4gb card with Skyrim using 4k textures. Mempatch is best happend for Skyrim sinds longtime. No CTD or any long loadingtimes.
At 1080p, no AA looks awful MSAA and SSAA look great, but any post processed AA looks blurry And btw more than 2x AA in 4K is utterly useless
Oh O, the big bad word. By the time you use 6/7GB of VRam there will be faster cards with more vRAM available. Not to mention this card will be slower than them. No doubt this is for ePeen,, the price I expect for this will be in the upper GTX 780Ti, especially with the price hikes the R9's are having. And right now, with some 4K monitors being castrated to 30hz, methink 4K is still not ready for prime time, and only 0.01% will use it for gaming
That truely depends on the size of the screen. A 21.5" screen at 1080 has a very dense ppi. You really don't need AA at that screen size.
Well on my 24inch monitors (very close to 21inch) the jaggies are still quite there, you'd have to sit very far away not to notice If you don't, well good for you as games will run a whole lot better But AA is there for a reason. Not many people play on smaller than 21inch, and 1080p has been the standard for a while 21.5inch 1080p: 102 ppi 24inch 1080p: 91 ppi 27inch 1440p: 108 ppi 30inch 4k: 146 ppi
When we come to the point where 8GB VRAM is needed, imagine the horsepower that will be required. Certainly this card won't have it. As being said above, it's a marketing stand and nothing more.
I have yet to see the need for more than 2xAA at 1440p. This probably will remain true at UHD resolution.
"Remember people, crossfiring doesn't actually double your VRAM. In theory, it does, but during gameplay both GPUs share almost entirely the same data, with some minor differences here and there. I would sincerely love to be proven wrong about this." I'm starting to suspect there may be more to this 8GB VRAM than may be obvious right now. The comment above made me think, and what he's saying is certainly true of AFR (alternate frame rendering) but doesn't apply to SFR (split frame rendering). In fact, with SFR, absolutely none of the data in the first graphics card's buffer need be duplicated in the second card's buffer at all. In this way, SFR might allow the combination of two graphics card's memory addresses into one large unified memory space of 16GB, using virtual memory addressing. Three graphics cards would be able to combine their memory into an even larger virtual address space of 24GB, etc. Methinks AMD has something pretty big up their sleeve, and those who just bought or are buying nVidia 970/980 cards might be a little bit sorry when we find out just what it is.
Even if you have 12gb videocard skyrim will get it on it´s knee´s like an arrow Skyrim is not made for 4k textures and enb it's all a hacked way(boris "ENB"Voronsov) to make it posible, but it will never be smooth ride with skyrim. It will how ever looks great for a DX9 because of awesome mods and ENB. Better hope next installment Elder Scroll VI will need more use of new tech in DX12? Or next years The Witcher 3 DX11?
I don`t think you quite understand how AFR and SFR work. With AFR, which is the most common form of multi-GPU rendering, you`re absolutely correct. But with SFR, this is not the case. With alternate frame rendering, you must render an entire screen sized frame within the VRAM of each card. As soon as card 1 is finished, it proceeds to flush its memory and start rendering the frame after card 2, and card 2 finishes its rendering of an entire screen size frame, etc. With split frame rendering, each card is rendering part of the frame, eg. with 2 cards, card 1 might rendering the top half of a frame, and card 2 might render the bottom half of the frame. In other words, you do not need to duplicate the contents of card 1 with card 2. Since card 2 can have entirely different data from card 1, it in effect means you can add the video memory together to create a virtual address space that is twice as large as the video memory of one card, duplicated. In the case of 3 video cards, each card could render one third of the screen frame, etc.
Split frame render isn't even an option anymore in the NVCP it gave a tremendous performance decrease vs AFR.
