Very true but if you are savvy with your setting you can still have a very good looking game on under powered hardware. I know I can hit my VRAM limit with my sig rig but I don't mind sacrificing a bit here and there to get 60FPS min. I take his word for it on that considering the shear amount of leg work he has done in some games fine tuning his settings. I know that I have my issues with him but I do give credit where credit is due. And as I have said before I can run out of VRAM in my sig rig if i get stupid with some settings. Im not saying you can wack everything to max with only 1GB at 1440 and you will be fine but you can make sacrifices at 1080 on 1.5GB and still have a very good looking game. I have to make less sacrafices with 2GB and would probalby not be much of a difference in over all performance of my rig if I had 4GB cards with current games.
^ Thanks Right, imho it all depends how the game uses texture streaming. Of course there is a hard limit, but 97% of the time 1280-2048mb is enough with low AA @ 1080p. Thief with SSAA -low uses ~1500-1520mb and runs ok, but i prefer 60fps so i run without it. Latest patch 1.2 and 1.3 made a big difference compared to vanilla, much better texture streaming. *pics with patch 1.2 These two are with ssaa - off TitanFall can't run max texture, the engine has a weak streaming technique and needs 3gb memory pool no matter what.. COD Ghosts, similar like TitanFall, but I think nvidia and COD devs are working on a fix.. Can't test anymore though, played only free weekend. BF4 can run Ultra textures ok, no aa.. There are occasional hickups, but I think its mostly driver optimization issue here.. 331.87 runs great, 335.23 can have hickups (2-3 stock maps), for example China Rising DLC all maps super smooth with 335.23. The rest runs ok maxed (expect AA) and doesn't cause any vram issues, ie Crysis2, 3, Hitman, TR, MetroLL, FC3, SS3, Batman AO.. Anyhow, I agree with others 4Gb looks more future proof vs 2Gb..
there is no 4 gb for me as i found in the shop its either the gtx 770 2 gb or the R9 280x 3 gb please move to my other thread admin plz lock this thread thanks
They trade blows. Look at benchmarks and see which card does better in the type of games you play. They are targeted at the same segment of the market, and if similarly priced, there isn't a 'better' card. That said, I'd vote 280x for their overclocking headroom. (Get a decent cooler like the HIS or Gigabyte version)
well the recommended system specs of watch dogs only call for 2gb video memory, thats the recommended NOT minimum. Recommended: OS: Windows Vista (SP2), Windows 7 (SP1) or Windows 8 (Please note that we only support 64 bit OSs.) Processor: Eight core - Intel Core i7-3770 @3.5 GHz or AMD FX-8350 X8 @ 4 GHz Memory: 8 GB RAM Graphics: DirectX 11 graphics card with 2 GB Video RAM - Nvidia Geforce GTX 560 ti or AMD Radeon HD 7850 DirectX: Version 11 Hard Drive: 25 GB available space Sound Card: DirectX 9.0c Compatible Sound Card with Latest Drivers Additional Notes: Broadband connection and service required for multiplayer mode. Supported Video Cards at Time of Release: nVidia GeForce GTX460 or better, GT500, GT600, GT700 series; AMD Radeon HD5850 or better, HD6000, HD7000, R7 and R9 series Intel® Iris™ Pro HD 5200
who needs 3 gb ram lol guys who are buying the 2 gb cards look at metro using all 3 gb of my gpu and my system cant beat it on very high 2x AA telestation high the spirit crusher is barley keeping up with this game at very high , its a strong game. http://imgur.com/FSA23iT a 770 gtx would have killed this rig
