aberkae
New Member
- Total Posts : 38
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2008/12/16 07:05:54
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/09 01:45:01
(permalink)
8 gig vram currently is recommended if you want to run 4k and only makes sense in sli, 8 gigs vram is future proofing your graphics for this generation of ports, if you are going to get a second card eventually. By this time next year the gtx 980 should sell for roughly half it's price, 4k monitors are also becoming more affordable. But by then 16 nm gpus will be around the corner as well with probably more hefty vram and probably double the gpu horsepower at best for a similar price. Choices choices.
My rig: Core i7 980 @4.3 ghz Gtx 690 Corsair obsidian 800D case ASUS Rampage III extreme ROG Corsair Dominators: 6GB 2GHz, 7-8-7-20, Antec TPQ 1200 psu corsair h50 cooling Crucial c300 256g sata 6gbits/s SSd screen asus vg278h 120hz 3 vision 2.0 monitor
|
Verun
iCX Member
- Total Posts : 288
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/12/19 07:36:25
- Location: Germany, NRW
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/09 01:50:34
(permalink)
You can say the exact same for any given time in the past 20 years.
|
rjohnson11
EVGA Forum Moderator
- Total Posts : 84677
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2004/10/05 12:44:35
- Location: Netherlands
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 86
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/09 01:55:09
(permalink)
I believe both AMD and NVIDIA are aware of the 4K push and AMD has already responded with 8GB high end cards. Difficult to say right now but I would expect NVIDIA will do the same.
|
Tylerslikewhoa
New Member
- Total Posts : 64
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2014/09/27 15:37:42
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 1
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/09 02:49:22
(permalink)
I bet Evga is preparing 8 gb varm cards already and will ship before year end
|
VVhiplash
iCX Member
- Total Posts : 392
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2011/06/15 11:42:22
- Location: U.S.A
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 1
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/09 04:29:27
(permalink)
Tylerslikewhoa
I bet Evga is preparing 8 gb varm cards already and will ship before year end
This is the only reason I decided to hold off on my 970 purchases. I'm waiting for the 8gb versions which are rumored to release sometime this month, or next month. Maybe a 970 Classified will be among them? 
ll Steiger-Dynamics Maven ll Intel i7-5930k 4.2Ghz ll ASRock X99 Extreme6/AC ll Liqmax II 240 ll GeiL Super-Luce 32gb 2666mhz ll (x2)EVGA GTX 980 SC ll Samsung XP941 500gb and 850 Pro 1TB ll EVGA PS 1000W Platinum ll
|
rsxownes
iCX Member
- Total Posts : 293
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2007/05/01 08:27:13
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/09 08:24:20
(permalink)
Do you think they will allow step-ups from the 4GB version of the 980 SC ACX 2.0 cards?
Current RIGCase: Phanteks Enthoo Primo black case CPU: Intel I9-13900K MB: ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z790 HERO RAM: G.SKILL Trident Z5 RGB Series 32GB DDR5 5600 PS: EVGA 80 PLUS Platinum 1000 W SSD: Kingston KC3000 4TB PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe GPU: Nvidia 4090 Heatware: https://heatware.com/eval.php?id=100702 
|
Dakutagawa
New Member
- Total Posts : 87
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2014/07/16 15:16:00
- Location: Nor-Cal
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 1
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/09 11:26:28
(permalink)
I personally don't plan on 3840x2160 gaming for at least a year, likely 2 til the tech gets fleshed out more, "4k" is still in its infancy, and my GTX 970 SC ACX 1.0 4GB card will serve me more than well while "4k" matures. To all those early adopters (those .02% of steam users), 8GB will be made available for you, just wait a month or 2, so really, this is all a non-issue right? I think this thread should be titled "4GB isn't enough for 4k gaming with Ultra textures, but for 99% of steam users its fine"
post edited by Dakutagawa - 2014/11/09 11:29:26
i7-4790k, 4.8GHz @1.28v | ASRock Z87 Extreme 42x8GB Mushkin Blackline DDR3-2133MHz C9 @1.65v1TB Samsung 970 Evo NVME | 2TB WD Caviar BlackEVGA RTX3080 FTW3 Ultra Hybrid
Acer Predator X34 3440x1440@120hzSeasonic Prime TX-850 | Corsair 5000D Airflow
|
Verun
iCX Member
- Total Posts : 288
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/12/19 07:36:25
- Location: Germany, NRW
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/09 14:18:34
(permalink)
Don't understand all this hype about 4K. I won't go that route.
2D surround is better.
|
chrcoluk
Superclocked Member
- Total Posts : 138
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2011/10/27 20:06:17
- Location: UK
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/09 14:55:10
(permalink)
OP is probably right, thats the market, I think thats why the cards are at the price they at, as nvidia will sell a bunch more when 8 gig is released :p
I think 4 gig will be enough to play games fine tho, but 8 gig may well be needed for highest settings.
|
V I D A L
New Member
- Total Posts : 58
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2014/06/23 21:22:47
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/09 19:28:04
(permalink)
Verun
Don't understand all this hype about 4K. I won't go that route.
2D surround is better.
You don't understand because you never saw it. 4k is Amazing. After playing something at 4k, you just can't go back to 1080p. I have a GTX680 and I obviously can't play modern games very well at 4k, but many less demanding games like Dishonored, Outlast etc runs just fine in 4K. But then I recently bought The Evil Within, which I can get 60fps at 1080p, but is unplayable at 4k.... (20fps or something) I will simply not play it... I rather not play than play at 1080p. I have other stuff to play and will save Evil Within for when I got an upgrade (which I am waiting for a GTX980 with 6 or 8 VRAM.) Seriously... after playing at 4k, you can't go back to 1080.
|
Drazhar
FTW Member
- Total Posts : 1464
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2008/12/07 02:14:51
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 4
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/09 19:34:30
(permalink)
|
MADOGRE
SSC Member
- Total Posts : 786
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2007/12/12 16:02:16
- Location: Alabama
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 1
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/09 19:52:10
(permalink)
Check out the R9 290X 8GB card reviews sigh, waste of money...... not sure why people cant understand more ram does not help if the memory bus and GPU does not have the threw put to make use of it.
|
Verun
iCX Member
- Total Posts : 288
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/12/19 07:36:25
- Location: Germany, NRW
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/09 22:24:23
(permalink)
V I D A L
You don't understand because you never saw it. 4k is Amazing. After playing something at 4k, you just can't go back to 1080p.
I have a GTX680 and I obviously can't play modern games very well at 4k, but many less demanding games like Dishonored, Outlast etc runs just fine in 4K. But then I recently bought The Evil Within, which I can get 60fps at 1080p, but is unplayable at 4k.... (20fps or something) I will simply not play it... I rather not play than play at 1080p. I have other stuff to play and will save Evil Within for when I got an upgrade (which I am waiting for a GTX980 with 6 or 8 VRAM.)
Seriously... after playing at 4k, you can't go back to 1080.
I understand that 2160p is a huge step from that old HD resolution that keeps being in the spotlight for a few too many years because the big publishers dominate the marked with stupid console games aimed at max HD and that can't go higher because of silly console limitations. I wasn't talking about 1080p however. HD it so outdated. The PC industry developed far ahead from the possibilities of mere consoles for years now. The PC industry is at 1440p now (for several years) and we're talking about an upgrade to 2160p (4k).  It's still a lot more visual information, but the monitors don't get bigger, so it appears much sharper of course as more stuff is in the same space as before. A problem with higher resolutions though is that fonts get real small in older games and many non AAA ones (and almost all indie). Triple 1440p however frees you of the tunnel-look that first person games offer for one-monitor setups. With 2D surround on a 3x1440p setup, you have a higher resolution in whole than 4k. But it's a discussion that has no goal. Both: 4k and 2D surround setups are viable for high end gaming. Something consoles will not see in the current or next generation. In case of surround - never.
|
_Nite_
Omnipotent Enthusiast
- Total Posts : 14962
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2007/04/18 15:35:04
- Location: Sumner, Washington
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 46
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/10 01:53:59
(permalink)
V I D A L
Verun
Don't understand all this hype about 4K. I won't go that route.
2D surround is better.
You don't understand because you never saw it. 4k is Amazing. After playing something at 4k, you just can't go back to 1080p.
I have a GTX680 and I obviously can't play modern games very well at 4k, but many less demanding games like Dishonored, Outlast etc runs just fine in 4K. But then I recently bought The Evil Within, which I can get 60fps at 1080p, but is unplayable at 4k.... (20fps or something) I will simply not play it... I rather not play than play at 1080p. I have other stuff to play and will save Evil Within for when I got an upgrade (which I am waiting for a GTX980 with 6 or 8 VRAM.)
Seriously... after playing at 4k, you can't go back to 1080.
This is an example of a dumb move by a gamer, you buy a monitor that your setup can't handle, and lose out on playing those demanding games.... I will continue to stay on 1080p for this reason, its still the best balance of performance vs quality. a single GTX 980 won't help you on 4K btw, that resolution will need at least 2 card or tri SLI..... again another example of performance running out before the vram does.
post edited by _Nite_ - 2014/11/10 02:04:27
Gaming Rig: AMD Ryzen 7 2700x @ 4.25Ghz - Asrock B450 Pro 4 - 16GB Crucial Ballistix DDR4 3000 - 240GB SSD (OS), 1TB ADATA SU800 SSD and 2TB ADATA SX8200 Pro M2 NVME (Games) - 8GB RTX 3070 XC3 Ultra - Sound Blaster Audigy 5 RX - EVGA Supernova 750w G2 - Antec 302 - 24" Asus VG248QE
|
aberkae
New Member
- Total Posts : 38
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2008/12/16 07:05:54
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/10 12:03:47
(permalink)
True but shadow of mordor at 4k shows benefit meaning that if you decide to go 4k and eventually add another card the Xtra vram shows potential.
My rig: Core i7 980 @4.3 ghz Gtx 690 Corsair obsidian 800D case ASUS Rampage III extreme ROG Corsair Dominators: 6GB 2GHz, 7-8-7-20, Antec TPQ 1200 psu corsair h50 cooling Crucial c300 256g sata 6gbits/s SSd screen asus vg278h 120hz 3 vision 2.0 monitor
|
lehpron
Regular Guy
- Total Posts : 8858
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2006/05/18 15:22:06
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 191
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/10 13:13:49
(permalink)
MADOGRE
Check out the R9 290X 8GB card reviews sigh, waste of money...... not sure why people cant understand more ram does not help if the memory bus and GPU does not have the threw put to make use of it. It isn't that they can't understand, rather the majority that doesn't have use disregards the demands of others. Too many people are saying "I don't get it" on the coincidence of "I don't use it"; but awareness doesn't automatically mean everyone will act cohesively.  High Vram cards are aimed at multi-GPU users, where combined GPU power does make use of the extra Vram per GPU; but most reviews of higher Vram card don't test or show results of this scenario. It reveals a bias against more Vram by not testing where it is of most benefit. If only testing single-GPU and single-monitor, i.e. what most gamers do, then no freaking duh will the result show little benefit in extra Vram if the game won't push out enough frame rates to justify it. Perhaps higher Vram cards are not aimed at most gamers just because it comes off as a waste to everyone else? It is analogous to a console user claiming a PC is a waste of money to game on because they don't have use for it, and we're all expected to agree with that sentiment.
post edited by lehpron - 2014/11/10 13:21:17
|
Sprinx
iCX Member
- Total Posts : 364
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/03/16 19:05:55
- Location: Tennessee, US
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 2
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/10 14:12:42
(permalink)
Still extremely pleased with my 2 GB GTX 680, gaming at 1080p on my 120 Hz BenQ monitor with Strobelight light boost hack.
Had to use *only* High textures on Shadow of Mordor, but it's still incredible looking and crazy smooth.
I remember people forking over an extra $150-200 or something for 4 GB 680s back in 2012, and I still think that they did not get a good value from that. No game pushed that VRAM limit until just recently, and that $200 could have gone towards a new 970 today.
Not planning on upgrading until next series GPUs come out at the earliest (2015 or 2016). Maybe then 4K (and more VRAM)will make more sense.
ASUS Prime X570-Pro AM4 | AMD Ryzen 7 5800X ZOTAC GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32 GB DDR4 3200 Corsair Crystal 570X | Corsair CX-F CX750F PSU Corsair Hydro Series H100i RGB Platinum CPU AIO
|
V I D A L
New Member
- Total Posts : 58
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2014/06/23 21:22:47
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/10 14:35:40
(permalink)
Verun
V I D A L
You don't understand because you never saw it. 4k is Amazing. After playing something at 4k, you just can't go back to 1080p.
I have a GTX680 and I obviously can't play modern games very well at 4k, but many less demanding games like Dishonored, Outlast etc runs just fine in 4K. But then I recently bought The Evil Within, which I can get 60fps at 1080p, but is unplayable at 4k.... (20fps or something) I will simply not play it... I rather not play than play at 1080p. I have other stuff to play and will save Evil Within for when I got an upgrade (which I am waiting for a GTX980 with 6 or 8 VRAM.)
Seriously... after playing at 4k, you can't go back to 1080.
I understand that 2160p is a huge step from that old HD resolution that keeps being in the spotlight for a few too many years because the big publishers dominate the marked with stupid console games aimed at max HD and that can't go higher because of silly console limitations.
I wasn't talking about 1080p however. HD it so outdated. The PC industry developed far ahead from the possibilities of mere consoles for years now.
The PC industry is at 1440p now (for several years) and we're talking about an upgrade to 2160p (4k).
It's still a lot more visual information, but the monitors don't get bigger, so it appears much sharper of course as more stuff is in the same space as before.
A problem with higher resolutions though is that fonts get real small in older games and many non AAA ones (and almost all indie).
Triple 1440p however frees you of the tunnel-look that first person games offer for one-monitor setups. With 2D surround on a 3x1440p setup, you have a higher resolution in whole than 4k.
But it's a discussion that has no goal. Both: 4k and 2D surround setups are viable for high end gaming. Something consoles will not see in the current or next generation. In case of surround - never.
I get your point, but still.. this resolution matter has nothing to do with consoles or game publishers. It's all about the screen. I tried PC games from 2005, 2006 that runs perfectly at native 4k... Of course, some game engines were never meant to handle that high of resolution and crashes... some very modern games have problems at 4k... but the majority of games I tried, old or new, can run at 4k out of the box. Some others need to run in windowed mode to be at 4k.. then I use a little software called "flawless borderless gaming" or something like that to play games on windowed mode that looks like fullscreen.
|
V I D A L
New Member
- Total Posts : 58
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2014/06/23 21:22:47
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/10 14:49:44
(permalink)
_Nite_
V I D A L
Verun
Don't understand all this hype about 4K. I won't go that route.
2D surround is better.
You don't understand because you never saw it. 4k is Amazing. After playing something at 4k, you just can't go back to 1080p.
I have a GTX680 and I obviously can't play modern games very well at 4k, but many less demanding games like Dishonored, Outlast etc runs just fine in 4K. But then I recently bought The Evil Within, which I can get 60fps at 1080p, but is unplayable at 4k.... (20fps or something) I will simply not play it... I rather not play than play at 1080p. I have other stuff to play and will save Evil Within for when I got an upgrade (which I am waiting for a GTX980 with 6 or 8 VRAM.)
Seriously... after playing at 4k, you can't go back to 1080.
This is an example of a dumb move by a gamer, you buy a monitor that your setup can't handle, and lose out on playing those demanding games....
I will continue to stay on 1080p for this reason, its still the best balance of performance vs quality.
a single GTX 980 won't help you on 4K btw, that resolution will need at least 2 card or tri SLI..... again another example of performance running out before the vram does.
You're jumping to conclusions. Firstly, I didn't buy a monitor... I bought a 65" curved UHD 3D TV... Not meant exclusively for PC, but for everything, specially movies. Secondly, 1080p games on this TV, looks far better than 1080p on my old 40" TV... That is because modern 4k smart TVs comes with smart filters that "guess" the missing pixels in a 1080p image to make it 4k.. not a simple upscale, but an actually filter pretty much like SNES emulators does to make old pixelate graphics smooth. There is no way to explain, you needed to see. In short, a PS3 game has far less aliasing on this 65" TV than it had on my 40" FullHD. We all would assume the opposite. So I can still play games at 1080p just fine... not to mention any resolution between 1080 and 4k... but after seeing in 4k, my demanding for quality was increased. Besides, there is no telling right now how demanding 4k will be in the next couple of years when developers start to build games with that resolution in mind and properly optimizing for that. I was surprised to see how well a single GTX680 2GB handle 4k res with everything maxed out in past gen games... I tried Batman Arkham Origins, Sniper Elite V2, Mafia 2, Bioshock Infinite, Alice Madness Returns and many others.. they all run great. Only the most demanding and newer games can't be handled at 4k right now... After seeing what a single GTX680 can do, I think a single GTX980 will do just fine for now... I can always get another one later, or by the time I need a better one, there will be a 990 or something better. btw, at 4k you don't need AA at all. Can't say if is the filter from the TV or actually the pixel density of the 4k resolution, but the fact is that in all games I tried, it looked absolutely perfect with AA off. Turning AA on only made the game slower but it didn't change a bit how the game looks. It could be the TV filter though.. who knows. In any case, you won't need a lot of AA anyway.
post edited by V I D A L - 2014/11/10 17:18:09
|
Verun
iCX Member
- Total Posts : 288
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/12/19 07:36:25
- Location: Germany, NRW
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/10 22:39:37
(permalink)
The step from a huge 65" TV at only HD to a smaller 27" monitor that has 1440p is incredible too because of the vastly higher DPI. You also don't need AA on such a 1440p monitor. It's not a 4k exclusive :)
Agree with the rest. I guess I'll just be the guinea pig and try two 980's. And if they suck, I'll get a Titan II later in 2015.
|
Macto1990
New Member
- Total Posts : 14
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2014/09/27 01:14:24
- Location: Germany
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/14 12:58:59
(permalink)
Sprinx
Still extremely pleased with my 2 GB GTX 680, gaming at 1080p on my 120 Hz BenQ monitor with Strobelight light boost hack.
Had to use *only* High textures on Shadow of Mordor, but it's still incredible looking and crazy smooth.
I remember people forking over an extra $150-200 or something for 4 GB 680s back in 2012, and I still think that they did not get a good value from that. No game pushed that VRAM limit until just recently, and that $200 could have gone towards a new 970 today.
Not planning on upgrading until next series GPUs come out at the earliest (2015 or 2016). Maybe then 4K (and more VRAM)will make more sense.
As an example: Assassin's Creed Unity (1080p) with my ZOTAC GTX 670 AMP! (wich is slightly faster than a stock GTX 680 with the same 2GB VRAM):   And I am far out of VRAM ;-)
Intel Core I7- 5930k || EVGA X99 FTW || ZOTAC GTX 670 AMP! || G.Skill Ripjaws 4 2666MHz 4x4Gb
|
TChittenden II
Superclocked Member
- Total Posts : 166
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2005/12/29 20:22:00
- Location: San Antonio, USA
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 1
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/17 12:19:58
(permalink)
VVhiplash
Tylerslikewhoa
I bet Evga is preparing 8 gb varm cards already and will ship before year end
This is the only reason I decided to hold off on my 970 purchases. I'm waiting for the 8gb versions which are rumored to release sometime this month, or next month. Maybe a 970 Classified will be among them?
If they release these before the end of the year I will definitely be taking advantage of the Step Up program. :D
==My System== Case: Corsair CC800DW CPU: Intel Core I7-3930k @ 3.8GHz Motherboard: EVGA X79 FTW Graphics Card: 2 x EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 in SLI Memory: Corsair Dominator 16GB (4x4GB) DDR3 1866 9-10-9-27 Boot Drive: Samsung 850 Pro 250GB SSD Games Drive: 2 x 450GB SATAIII 10k RPM Velociraptor in RAID 0 Power Supply: CORSAIR Professional Series RM-1000
|
CiroConsentino
New Member
- Total Posts : 36
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2012/01/31 12:02:15
- Location: Brazil
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/18 05:27:41
(permalink)
I'm still playing at 1920x1080 and I'm not going 4K resolution for at least 2 more years. 4GB of VRAM is enough for my gaming needs. Besides, 4K monitors are extremely expensive here in Brazil.
I won't even get a 2560x1600 res monitor. FullHD resolution is enough for my 23" monitor.
A 27" monitor is another story though. FullHD is not enough...
|
_Nite_
Omnipotent Enthusiast
- Total Posts : 14962
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2007/04/18 15:35:04
- Location: Sumner, Washington
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 46
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/20 02:13:39
(permalink)
CiroConsentino
I'm still playing at 1920x1080 and I'm not going 4K resolution for at least 2 more years. 4GB of VRAM is enough for my gaming needs. Besides, 4K monitors are extremely expensive here in Brazil.
I won't even get a 2560x1600 res monitor. FullHD resolution is enough for my 23" monitor.
A 27" monitor is another story though. FullHD is not enough...
I feel the same way, like I was saying earlier, standard 1080p HD is the best compromise on performance / vram usage. no offense to anyone here but whoever runs a 3 monitor surround / 1440p monitor / 4K monitor is just asking for trouble on performance / vram usage.
post edited by _Nite_ - 2014/11/20 02:15:50
Gaming Rig: AMD Ryzen 7 2700x @ 4.25Ghz - Asrock B450 Pro 4 - 16GB Crucial Ballistix DDR4 3000 - 240GB SSD (OS), 1TB ADATA SU800 SSD and 2TB ADATA SX8200 Pro M2 NVME (Games) - 8GB RTX 3070 XC3 Ultra - Sound Blaster Audigy 5 RX - EVGA Supernova 750w G2 - Antec 302 - 24" Asus VG248QE
|
etacarinae
New Member
- Total Posts : 83
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/12/31 00:28:09
- Location: Australia
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 0
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/20 08:01:57
(permalink)
I need >4GB of VRAM because I'm a heavy tab user in Chrome. I'll use in excess of 100 tabs at any given time as it's just easier for me to manage my research.
If I want to launch a VRAM exhaustive game, then I'll have to shut down my Chrome session and it's a nuisance to do so. If I don't, then the particular game will just exhaust the GPU's VRAM and end up crashing both Chrome & the game.
This is why I'm often bemused at comments here purporting that we don't need any more than 4GB of VRAM. Does no one here have a multi-mon setup and run both their browser and games at the same time? This isn't just applicable to games but multitasking too.
Intel i7 3960X @ 4.5GHz | Corsair Dominator Platinum 2133Mhz C9 64GB | Rampage IV Extreme | NEC PA271W EVGA Titan X SC | Corsair Force GT Raid 0 [2*240GB] [OS Drive] | WD Velicioraptor 1TB [Games Drive] | Hitachi Deskstar 7K4000 Raid 6 [8*4TB] [Media Array] | PAN-UJ-235A BD Slot Load | PAN-UJ-875A DVD Slot Load Corsair AX1200i | Corsair H100i | Lian-Li PC-V2120X | LSI 9271-8i | Steelseries Rival | DK8000SII [Browns]
|
Sprinx
iCX Member
- Total Posts : 364
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2009/03/16 19:05:55
- Location: Tennessee, US
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 2
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/20 08:33:05
(permalink)
etacarinae
I need >4GB of VRAM because I'm a heavy tab user in Chrome. I'll use in excess of 100 tabs at any given time as it's just easier for me to manage my research.
If I want to launch a VRAM exhaustive game, then I'll have to shut down my Chrome session and it's a nuisance to do so. If I don't, then the particular game will just exhaust the GPU's VRAM and end up crashing both Chrome & the game.
This is why I'm often bemused at comments here purporting that we don't need any more than 4GB of VRAM. Does no one here have a multi-mon setup and run both their browser and games at the same time? This isn't just applicable to games but multitasking too.
I think you are confused on how things work. Opening tabs in Chrome affects your system memory RAM, and affects VRAM virtually not at all. I just tested this myself. I opened almost every link in EVGA's web site (scavenger hunt style, you know what I mean). VRAM usage was at about 308 MB.  When I closed all tabs, it went back down to 272 MB, a quite negligible difference of 29 MB. However, system RAM was utilized by an additional 1.7 GB when the tabs were open. See attached pictures for evidence of this.  It sounds like you have some software issues somewhere. Try using a different browser temporarily to see if this fixes your crashing.
post edited by Sprinx - 2014/11/20 08:52:01
Attached Image(s) 
ASUS Prime X570-Pro AM4 | AMD Ryzen 7 5800X ZOTAC GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32 GB DDR4 3200 Corsair Crystal 570X | Corsair CX-F CX750F PSU Corsair Hydro Series H100i RGB Platinum CPU AIO
|
Vlada011
Omnipotent Enthusiast
- Total Posts : 10126
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2012/03/25 00:14:05
- Location: Belgrade-Serbia
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 11
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/20 09:03:07
(permalink)
melonsplitter
Tylerslikewhoa
If you buy a gtx 970 or 980 now you will be kicking yourself due to ram issuses. It's already started with Shadows of mordor. 4 gb will only last you another 6 months 1 year tops. 6 and 8 gb cards are the norm within the next 6 months
(Deleted by Mod)
 Stop to argue. But really sound funny... What NVIDIA will free beast from GTX980 8GB with full 256bit and young Maxwell go in battle in R9-390X with HBM 3D stacked RAM and 20nm. That's suicide for GTX980. NVIDIA think on another things... About BIOS and boost for GM200, memory quantity, how many models, how they stay against R9-390X and how much time need for GM210 if Radeon win. But if NVIDIA have information that Radeon will not launch graphic before May/June it's very possible to immediately after New Year launch GTX980 8GB. But not if AMD prepared their premium beast for end of February- March. NVIDIA know that better than we. If you remember there are live offer for 780 6GB for 500$ for people who want SLI and think that 4GB is not enough. Or full GK110 - Titan Black or nice offer Titan Z with cheaper price.
post edited by XrayMan - 2014/11/20 19:17:01
|
rjohnson11
EVGA Forum Moderator
- Total Posts : 84677
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2004/10/05 12:44:35
- Location: Netherlands
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 86
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/20 09:10:50
(permalink)
One thing is for sure. Game developers will need access to larger amounts of vram for greater graphics details. I expect we'll see more video cards with higher levels of vram sooner than later.
|
Vlada011
Omnipotent Enthusiast
- Total Posts : 10126
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2012/03/25 00:14:05
- Location: Belgrade-Serbia
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 11
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/20 09:32:55
(permalink)
Yes you are right, but what stop NVIDIA to launch immediately GTX780Ti 6GB and on Spring 2015 to present GM204 (GTX970/GTX980) as mid range and GM200 as high end with 8GB? Plan to people cross from 3 to 4GB and than it's again not enough and to cross on GM200 and again later to finally buy GM210 with 12 GB for 1500$.
How many people could play here with GTX780Ti 6GB Classified SLI faster and better than GTX980, more video memory, 384bit compare to 256bit. NVIDIA is not even smart to see than more people will buy GTX980 if they launch immediately only 8GB.
Same would be with 780Ti, how many people didn't pay only because 3GB.
|
rjohnson11
EVGA Forum Moderator
- Total Posts : 84677
- Reward points : 0
- Joined: 2004/10/05 12:44:35
- Location: Netherlands
- Status: offline
- Ribbons : 86
Re: 4 gb of ram isn't enough
2014/11/20 09:47:53
(permalink)
Vlada011
Yes you are right, but what stop NVIDIA to launch immediately GTX780Ti 6GB and on Spring 2015 to present GM204 (GTX970/GTX980) as mid range and GM200 as high end with 8GB? Plan to people cross from 3 to 4GB and than it's again not enough and to cross on GM200 and again later to finally buy GM210 with 12 GB for 1500$.
How many people could play here with GTX780Ti 6GB Classified SLI faster and better than GTX980, more video memory, 384bit compare to 256bit. NVIDIA is not even smart to see than more people will buy GTX980 if they launch immediately only 8GB.
Same would be with 780Ti, how many people didn't pay only because 3GB.
I can't speak for NVIDIA nor EVGA but I'm sure that NVIDIA knows that more vram will be needed especially if 4K becomes popular.
|