2 GB vs 4 GB thread is pretty much..

But that needs 6GB :wanker:

 

The views of programmer/system admin and author of BF4 Frame Time Analyzer:

Of course that wont preclude the odd game or so from appearing that insists on a certain obscene amount of vram for it to function at certain settings.

 

I been saying the same thing, multiple times. But you got some slack jawed yokels saying that a 670 can utilize 4gb of vram. I affectianely termed the phrase "The Netherlands connection" for the group of people.

 

He seems to forget that all 3d models have textures and that it is way more efficient to store these in the local video ram than to retrieve these from the system RAM and pass them to the video card for processing each time.
Most of the vRAM is texture memory. In those parts you can't even store anything else, because it's optimized solely for textures. If you're a CUDA programmer and want to make use of all the vRAM you have to store your data as if it were a texture.

This guy is talking about the final frame only. In the early days of video cards they only store the final frame (which is just an uncompressed picture the size of your screen resolution). Of course that doesn't take 6GB to store. But this isn't the 90's anymore. Using the video ram as opposed to system RAM has many advantages that he just plainly ignores.

@TK: jealous much at my 670's running watch dogs smoothly using 3.8GB of vRAM?

 

Actually, just played again and the setting didn't stick, as soon as it did my usage shot up to my 4GB cap. OOPS!

Anyway.
ULTRAAAAAAA: http://puu.sh/bUw3p/dea7e385b1.jpg

HIGH: http://puu.sh/bUw53/f5c84d223e.jpg

...I can only see a minor difference because it's up close on a model.

 

VultureX is a self confessed computer games programmer, I'm sure he knows better than someone with verifiable credentials.

 

Honestly you've reassured me to just stick with what I have and get a 2nd rather than waste time getting the 8GB models then they come out :cheers:

Because of the consoles and their unified architecture, I've had trouble trying to predict what to expect a few years down the road since I upgrade very infrequently.

Ah. Not as big an improvement as I thought. Only difference I notice is slightly more detail on the face mainly and the same for the bones on its back.

 

Seeing as I usually buy the x80 models, Am not jealous at all. In fact my former cards 680`s were faster than your 670`s.

 

Yes he programs games in ue3 or ue4 but he cannot get firestrike to run on his rig. True story.

 

Yeah there's no noticeable difference for me ingame (as in actually playing and not trying to see the differences on a pause screen) tbh, textures for everything else look the same.

 

I guess the question that must come up, is why certain graphically stunning games can make do with far less vram (metro LL, less than 1gb vram usage and certainly not a game from "the 90s") than other vram sucking games that still look like crap (ie watchdogs). Gratuitously filling up vram with textures does not seem to be the only prerequisite for graphically appealing games. I have far more respect for game devs that achieve far more with far less and still manage to wow their critics. Cramming gigabytes of textures into vram is not the sole path to getting incredible looking games. Also what part of these textures are 'immediate' vs 'can be cached', ie, when you pass through scenes/textures that are not likely to be immediately repeated or prioritized, does it continue to hog up the vram as cache or can it go into system ram? I have a feeling there is a fine line in the balancing involved and which probably is easier for the dev to just commit to vram and not spend valuable time trying to maintain a more efficient balance.

 

I agree with that. Unfortunately developers, like he posted, don't care that much about these things so you end up with games like Watch Dogs. But in these cases it actually pays off to have a video card with a little more vRAM, just to cope with the inefficiencies of the engine.
So in that regard a video card with a little more memory doesn't have to be a waste. And Watch Dogs is not the only game where that matters.

If you want to use your memory you can use it. I found a guy on some forum that went from a 690 with 2GB to dual 680 with 4GB to eventually dual titans, because he had vRAM limitations in Skyrim, which crashed the game. ****'s hilarious, he used so many texture mods that he ended up using 5.7GB of vRAM.

 

metro ll average view distance around 10 -20m
watch dogs average view distance around 100 -200m.
mostly those without the equipment to run wd in the first place are those that bash it most.
average age of this forum imo 16

 

^
Draw distance doesn't affect texture memory much, its all in gpu & cpu power since it has to draw more polygons in the distance.


And WD stutters only because of character LOD texture transitions not because of low vram, that's why even 6GB TitanBlack has it. Ie driving around with a car and passing by all those pedestrians.

Nvidia & Game devs fixed most of it, but still until they fix this double texture character loading it will always stutter @ ultra - its loading high and ultra mipmaps at the same time, instead of just ultra mipmaps and textures.

Its Dunia engine texture implementation fault (its how engine was build back then), it worked ok for FarCry2,3 but its not really suitable for open world game like WD with many AI, I would blame only game developers for being lazy ass devs and not lack of vram.. They took the short road and combined 3 engines into one, its much easier to do this then all from scratch, now we end-users suffered from their laziness.

Even Maldo master of texture manipulation said it.

 

Same here in the previous 2gb vs 4gb thread. Those people are just delusional.

 

I just wanted to make note, that my argument is not in forgetting of Geometry, 3D Mapping, Etc. Not at all.

I even added this amusing illustration to emphasize what exactly is mandatory (size wise) at 1920x1080



I just want people to know that what these companies are putting in the VRAM is a secondary storage of assets (obviously not prioritized because users complaints of memory hitching and fps tanking for split seconds.)

The green illustrates the Texture I/O supposed to be going to RAM, Disk to RAM, the Green I/O is pulled by Yellow. If it is properly managed.

These guys have set it up to where everything is RED/ORANGE, and it extends pass the VRAM Memory Table (since it's virtual it can do that) and goes straight into Systems RAM, because on the PS4, they load EVERYTHING into RAM/VRAM as soon as they can because they aren't running from disc or HDD.

This what you get:
2GB of VRAM:
6GB of VRAM:

 

nah, just trolls and people keep falling for it

 

I concur. BTW am I the only one that sees the artifacts in both screen shots.

 

That too.

I agree that there is a very tiny bit of difference between high and ultra.

I see tiny white dots on the character's cape and the flowers he is holding. I don't know if that is the artifacts you are talking about.

 

Dots at the cape. And what's that strange grey thing with light grey borders on the top right side of the screen? :3eyes:

Tbh, not impressing at all, if I imagine seeing this as "ultra" settings on the pc.