Discussion in 'Games, Gaming & Game-demos' started by Stone Gargoyle, Nov 12, 2013.
All those nvidia early adopters oh boy.
I believe it's just marketing BS..It's how they gonna make people buy 8GB cards..
Time to sell my 970s...not >.<
Interested to see shots comparison between textures now.
Maybe it will be adressed in a later patch, like the 6GB failure with WatchDogs (?)
So 3GB Vram for now, but later on they will release optional texture pack that will require 6GB Vram . If only game will look fine on medium texture settings (2 GB Vram card), than it's not a big deal for me. In essence, this is how PC gamming should look like, different settings, for different setups. Crysis 1 looks good even now, because it was also done with future setups in mind .
Is this one of those, 'if you have more vram the game will use more vram' type things rather than a requirement.
I would be interested to see if the ultra setting can be selected with a 4gb card and how much video ram it actually uses on a 4 a 6 gb card.
A 6gb card using more than 4gb vram isn't necessarily an indication that the ultra setting actually needs more than 4 for the reason above.
My guess is the Ultra textures are intended for people playing at 4K so the resolution is taken into account for the VRAM usage. Obviously, at 1920x1080, the game would need much less VRAM so it may well be possible to run the game with Ultra textures at those resolutions. If not out of the box then I'm sure someone will find a hack or workaround to be able to do it.
I haven't checked myself but re-read the description, the requirements are assuming you are playing at 1080P from what I've read.
EDIT: Yeah it does say 1080p
The bit that worries me is in the image it says ASSUMING a 1080p rendering resolution, apparently 6 is needed, which sounds like wtf to mean.
Didn't we use to call that a memory leak?
Didn't realise that.
Well that's bloody stupid because, let's face it, why would you own a card with 6 GB of VRAM (which is only a Titan/Titan Black at the moment) if you're only playing at 1080p? That is a silly waste of VRAM, or rather it was.
I mean, what the highest rez 'complete' texture pack you can get for skyrim and how much vram does that use?
^There a several 6GB 780's as well.
Haha, since ID Tech 5 it has become an industry 'feature'.
I played Wolfenstein today, used about 3250mb vram...vs 2600 or so on my 780.
Same performance, ( 60 frames ) same visuals...
Kind of ironic that games like Wolfenstein: TNO (which requires a 50 GB install) use 3 GB of VRAM when their texture quality is so poor. To be honest, I've really not been that impressed with idTech 5 so far; RAGE was a great game with some lovely art direction but its textures ranged from average to downright terrible and that was a game that used 20 GB of hard drive space as well.
Wonder how it will be for Evil Within, the X360 and PS3 versions are 7 GB so the game is perhaps 3 - 5 GB and then the PS4, XBO and PC versions are 50 GB so at least 35 - 40 GB "Megatexture" data?
(4GB VRAM recommended, as per their system requirements 2GB should work but might not be fully stable.)
Guys relax..It's just promotion for the 8GB version of GTX980/970.I bet the differences will be zero or minimal, just watch Titanfall comparisons between very high(Requires 2GB) and insane(Requires 3GB) textures.Ridiculous..
Hmm, good points, but I doo think that Wolf all up is actually a much larger game (gameplay/levels wise) as a whole compared to RAGE. Also, RAGE was made by ID, so perhaps they know how to get better final product size, similar to what Crytek and Epic can do with their own engines compared to the majority of thirdparty teams.
Don't forget that there are no repeating textures with Id 5. Though, I cant say its made things any better because of it.
Yeah I guess that can be true as well. Same thing but uncompressed.