Well, I usually play with 4x FSAA on, and that significantly increases the amount of video RAM used. Most of the time, it's 16x CSAA with TR SSAA. TR SSAA increases it *a lot*, much more than just simple 2560x1600.
My condolences for you gaming at that rez with only 512MB.. I feel ya!
Yeah, thank God my 8800GTX has just enough (768MB) for most games released within the last 18 months! Using Rivatuner's monitoring, it's passed 700MB with 3-4 games but the memory usage kept on dropping after peaking somewhere so close to 768MB. It seems that the texture buffers were being "re-cached" or something like that, and I could notice some hitching in the game as confirmed with the graphs.
It is a big factor of stability in some certain resolutions with some level of AA. Some cards will simply refuse to let you play a game at a high rez+high AA. Some games just crash due to poor texture management at a limited buffer, or due to poor drivers. I'd just rather have more than enough memory and not worry about it.
Sometimes, if our hardware does not advance for a while, the software development also stays stagnant. More often than not, software development usually follows hardware development. If Nvidia and ATI went ahead and marketed 1GB flavors of the 9800GTX, 3870/4870 right from the beginning, many of us would have already bought it, and more game developers would be encouraged to use higher-rez textures. We've been stuck at 512MB for like 2 years and then the "half-step" to 768MB for another 1.5 years. Remember Doom 3 released in 2004 "requiring" 512MB for Ultra quality graphics? That was 4 damn years ago!! Seriously guys, do you really want hardware tech to be that stagnant, unlike the past when we went from 16MB to 128MB (8x the amount) within 2 years between 2000 and 2002?
Bookmarks