http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...0-roundup.html
even at 2560x1600 there is no diference between the 2gb sapphire model and then 1gb msi card, which both clocked about the same... the sapphire card is clocked only 10mhz lower, but that was enough to always pull ahead of the 2gb sapphire card... so 2gb seems to make no sense at all so far?
Makes perfect sense. Let's see again after 12 months.
Shame they did not test GTA IV, the 2GB card would rock the socks off in that game
I have found that 2GB cards have a much higher minimum frame rate at resolutions equal to or greater than 1920x1200, for example in Crysis you can get a 3fps minimum frame rate boost! (on a 2GB GTX 285), no difference on Maximum Framerate tho.
John
Stop looking at the walls, look out the window
I was under the impression that GTAIV was one of the main games that benefited from 2gb over 1gb, surprised they didn't bench it.
Exactly, I have read somewhere that GTA IV requires 1.6GB of Video RAM for Maximum Details/Draw Distance with highest texture qualityOriginally Posted by acidpython
John
Stop looking at the walls, look out the window
GTA4 is just a horribly coded game.
And in fact, with tessellation and new high-res texture compression methods, I doubt we will see the demand for more than 1Gb any time soon.
DirectX 11 should be very demanding GPU performance wise, though.
Donate to XS forums
would be interesting to see how that changed once you add 1gb or so of texture mods to fallout 3 and increase the ugrid rather than running it at stock settings since its only made to use ~350m as thats around the xbox360 limit i think
more memory on gpus is really needed as games look so much better when there not just a blur of fugly textures although you can get around this by having frequent loads which isnt great
Also DASA correct me if I am wrong, but isnt there an official HD texture pack for Fallout3?
Also Fakefactory's Cinematic mod for Half-Life 2 would benefit from more VRAM as each incarnation of this fantastic mod gets more and more texture lovin!
John
Stop looking at the walls, look out the window
yes that mod was the beginnings of texture mods for fallout3 its good but fairly low quality in comparison to some
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=287764
there is some nice 2048 textures to replace the old 512 ones
good point with the cinematic mod to its a great mod for hl2 which makes a huge difference
its a shame vista stopped gpu memory usage monitors from working it would be handy to know just how much extra games use with these mods and aa\af at high res
where is gta4? where is cinematic mod? where is fallout 3 with hd textures pack?
HD4890 1GB in Crossfire vs. HD4890 2GB in Crossfire.
Using a single HD4890 2GB in Crossfire doesn't give it justice... use 2 of them in 2560x1600 and compare it to 1GB cards...
SweClockers.com
CPU: Phenom II X4 955BE
Clock: 4200MHz 1.4375v
Memory: Dominator GT 2x2GB 1600MHz 6-6-6-20 1.65v
Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair IV Formula
GPU: HD 5770
put some 16x AA and watch what happens.
But can you even see any difference in quality between 16x and 4x at 2560x1600 or even 1920x1200?
Just saying normally you wouldn't use 16x anyway cuz you won't see any difference so there's no reason to use it and then the 2GB is still unneccessary if showed a performance difference, so it doesn't change the point at all. 4x AA is more useful to test IMO.
Last edited by RPGWiZaRD; 10-11-2009 at 08:43 AM.
Intel? Core i5-4670K @ 4.3 GHz | ASRock Extreme6 Z87 | G.Skill Sniper 2x8GB @ DDR4-1866 CL9 | Gigabyte GTX 970 OC Windforce 3x | Super Flower Titanium 1000W | ViewSonic VX2268wm 120Hz LCD | Phanteks PH-TC14PE | Logitech MX-518 | Win 7 x64 Professional | Samsung 850 EVO & 840 Pro SSDs
If all people would share opinions in an objective manner, the world would be a friendlier place
yesBut can you even see any difference in quality between 16x and 4x at 2560x1600 or even 1920x1200?
Seriously?
4x more than enough when you get to 1920x1200 +.
Core i7 920 D0 B-batch (4.1) (Kinda Stable?) | DFI X58 T3eH8 (Fed up with its' issues, may get a new board soon) | Patriot 1600 (9-9-9-24) (for now) | XFX HD 4890 (971/1065) (for now) |
80GB X25-m G2 | WD 640GB | PCP&C 750 | Dell 2408 LCD | NEC 1970GX LCD | Win7 Pro | CoolerMaster ATCS 840 {Modded to reverse-ATX, WC'ing internal}
CPU Loop: MCP655 > HK 3.0 LT > ST 320 (3x Scythe G's) > ST Res >Pump
GPU Loop: MCP655 > MCW-60 > PA160 (1x YL D12SH) > ST Res > BIP 220 (2x YL D12SH) >Pump
I can live with 4x.
When i get Pixar quality edges then it will be enough for me.
Video memory serves a very simple function. It stores texture data, vertex data, a frame buffer, and a number of other things. It isn't something that is going to increase performance unless there wasn't enough memory to fit it all before. So, it isn't fair to look at ROFLBENCH99 which uses 200MB of VRAM and conclude "The 2GB model is pointless as it doesn't perform any better." That comparison compares two things which don't test the variable that actually changes.
Some people here pointed out that GTA4 would be a good game to test since it is known to be able to use over 1GB of VRAM. This is exactly the kind of test which would matter--seeing the increased performance in a scenario where on one card it has to lean on system memory and on the other it does not. It's quite clear which will be faster.
Particle's First Rule of Online Technical Discussion:
As a thread about any computer related subject has its length approach infinity, the likelihood and inevitability of a poorly constructed AMD vs. Intel fight also exponentially increases.
Rule 1A:
Likewise, the frequency of a car pseudoanalogy to explain a technical concept increases with thread length. This will make many people chuckle, as computer people are rarely knowledgeable about vehicular mechanics.
Rule 2:
When confronted with a post that is contrary to what a poster likes, believes, or most often wants to be correct, the poster will pick out only minor details that are largely irrelevant in an attempt to shut out the conflicting idea. The core of the post will be left alone since it isn't easy to contradict what the person is actually saying.
Rule 2A:
When a poster cannot properly refute a post they do not like (as described above), the poster will most likely invent fictitious counter-points and/or begin to attack the other's credibility in feeble ways that are dramatic but irrelevant. Do not underestimate this tactic, as in the online world this will sway many observers. Do not forget: Correctness is decided only by what is said last, the most loudly, or with greatest repetition.
Rule 3:
When it comes to computer news, 70% of Internet rumors are outright fabricated, 20% are inaccurate enough to simply be discarded, and about 10% are based in reality. Grains of salt--become familiar with them.
Remember: When debating online, everyone else is ALWAYS wrong if they do not agree with you!
Random Tip o' the Whatever
You just can't win. If your product offers feature A instead of B, people will moan how A is stupid and it didn't offer B. If your product offers B instead of A, they'll likewise complain and rant about how anyone's retarded cousin could figure out A is what the market wants.
you'll be waiting a while then, as in 2 or 3 years.
GPGPU computing is the major candidate to benefit from large amounts of video memory, but only for professional app's as of now.
you guys are game modders and such and still dont know its a gimmick like every thing else in this industry.
enev if the textures were high enuff to need 2g it woulg give you 2-3 frames xtra woopy doo
_________________
I thought 1gb vs 2gb was common knowledge after the nV GT260 cards, even was a review on it.
Review had GT260>X280 and 4870 512MB&1024MB variants.
i5 3570k | Asus Z77-V Dlx | 16Gb 2400 HyperX Pred | ASUS 6950 2Gb DCuII | X-fi Titanium | Samsung SA350
Corsair AX860i | Hyperx 3k 120Gb,i520 120Gb,320 7200.11,2x2Tb WdB | Corsair H80i | Antec P280 | win7 x64
That soon
All games can be modded to use full system resources so this is pointless,it only applies to those who want to utilize it as you can see they didn't MOD a single game.The point of having more resource's is for more Eyecandy,once you have acceptable performance already.
So this review os useless. Next!
Are we there yet?
What surprises me is that XBit labs usually do quite indepth reviews, the omission of GTA IV is very sloppy and I am sure that if they actually tested the "proper" Crysis @ 1920+ with Very High Details you will see the 2GB card having higher MINIMUM frame rates (albeit both cards producing woefully unplayable frame rates...)
It shocks me they did not chose games which we know use large amounts of VRAM
John
Stop looking at the walls, look out the window
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks