Is 8GB going to be the new standard graphics memory next year?

Hulk said:
Yes because of two reasons:


  1. 2160P (I refuse to call it 4K, why don't we start calling 1920 x 1080 2K?)
  2. Lazy console ports.
Click to expand...

I don't think its right to call it 2160p either. You know what works peferectly state the whole resolution as is. No bullshit, no letters, no short hands, no funny WUXGA that no one understands. And if a non standard monitor size comes out no one is confused or tricked.

3840x2160
2560x1440
1920x1080

Done everyone knows exactly what it is and no one has to remember anything other than exactly what it is.
 
Sharpclaws said:
I hope not, i still have a 1gb card which i hope is fine for 1680x1050 for years to come.
Click to expand...

Unlikely, this is already bare minimum for anything but the lowest details at the moment, before soon even lowest details might start struggling.
 
rudy said:
I don't think its right to call it 2160p either. You know what works peferectly state the whole resolution as is. No bullshit, no letters, no short hands, no funny WUXGA that no one understands. And if a non standard monitor size comes out no one is confused or tricked.

3840x2160
2560x1440
1920x1080

Done everyone knows exactly what it is and no one has to remember anything other than exactly what it is.
Click to expand...

I always have, or at least 99% of the time, done exactly this. I don't know why the acronyms and non-sensical terminology became common :(.
 
rudy said:
I don't think its right to call it 2160p either. You know what works peferectly state the whole resolution as is. No bullshit, no letters, no short hands, no funny WUXGA that no one understands. And if a non standard monitor size comes out no one is confused or tricked.

3840x2160
2560x1440
1920x1080

Done everyone knows exactly what it is and no one has to remember anything other than exactly what it is.
Click to expand...

shia.gif


Couldnt agree more. I dont know when or why we went to all the acronyms for resolutions. Every time I see WQHD I think theyre talking about a radio station. Just say what it is. I realize its a little more typing but its so much more clear.
 
rudy said:
I don't think its right to call it 2160p either. You know what works peferectly state the whole resolution as is. No bullshit, no letters, no short hands, no funny WUXGA that no one understands. And if a non standard monitor size comes out no one is confused or tricked.

3840x2160
2560x1440
1920x1080

Done everyone knows exactly what it is and no one has to remember anything other than exactly what it is.
Click to expand...

It's a lot to type, especially on mobile.
 
KazeoHin said:
It's a lot to type, especially on mobile.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. I can type about 45 to 50wpm with my SwiftKey setup, and it autosuggests numbers I type like a resolution with any frequency, for example. All I do is start typing 2... 5.... And I get suggestions to tap for 2560x1440 or 2560x1600, etc. It's just laziness and ignorance, really, as to why people abbreviate these numbers in random ways, in my opinion. Besides, surely you can't be trying to say a small number is a lot to type on a real keyboard, I hope! It's nothing on mobile, let alone a physical keyboard.
 
I feel 8GB standard graphics cards would be great as long as pricing seems reasonable. It'd be a a nice upgrade from my dinky 768MB card and really make me want to jump for it.
 
I think they are skipping 6gb part and going straight toward 8gb for high end. Then setting 8gb the common vram.
 
Hulk said:
2160P (I refuse to call it 4K, why don't we start calling 1920 x 1080 2K?)
Click to expand...

Reasons for this are not entirely logical: 1080p got into popular use since there were TWO, repeat TWO, and not one, HDTV standards and displays: 1080 and 720. Calling one of them 2K would be leaving option of 1K or K for the other. When there were two types of HDTVs in shops, the 1080 vs 720 was much better differentiating factor. With 4K there is no such problem even though technically 4K= 4096x2160 which is digital cinema standard and used in high-end monitors. 4K is short acronym and easy to remember.

Regarding the 8GB VRAM note this is nontechnical problem but market dependent. It starts with the price of VRAM, what might be the potential market size at a given price point of a card and ends with competition advantage of launching new product. For a company, 8GB decision might be a very bad one e.g. if the product will be seen as too expensive and in times of so-so economy even small price differences matter.

Does anybody know what might be the price difference 8GB vs 6GB?
 
Uncompressed "ultra" textures are easy for developers to throw in but generally only show a difference to the regular "high" textures at 4K resolution and even then on a still image. In motion that difference disappears and you're just left with lower FPS and high VRAM use.

I'm sure there will be plenty of 8 GB cards out but like the case was with previous gen 4 GB card, that extra RAM was largely useless for the generation of games that runs on the hardware.

2-4 GB will most likely be the usual range for a long while unless 1440p+ displays suddenly become the norm (instead of 1080p). That's still going to require a lot more GPU horsepower and 8 GB will only become a good idea when running at 4K with MSAA etc.
 
Unless I had a very small budget or prepared to play at max 720p, I wouldnt buy a 2 gig card today. The vram requirements has shot up in the past 12 months, and its only going one way.
 
I wouldn't buy a 2 GB card but I wouldn't wait for an 8 GB card, either.
 
kasakka said:
Uncompressed "ultra" textures are easy for developers to throw in but generally only show a difference to the regular "high" textures at 4K resolution and even then on a still image. In motion that difference disappears and you're just left with lower FPS and high VRAM use.

I'm sure there will be plenty of 8 GB cards out but like the case was with previous gen 4 GB card, that extra RAM was largely useless for the generation of games that runs on the hardware.

2-4 GB will most likely be the usual range for a long while unless 1440p+ displays suddenly become the norm (instead of 1080p). That's still going to require a lot more GPU horsepower and 8 GB will only become a good idea when running at 4K with MSAA etc.
Click to expand...

I think 1440p displays will become the norm in the next 0-12 months, you can get them for less than $200 now on eBay! A lot of noobs don't know though that you need top of the line cards to actually be able to play games with smooth frames on 1440 monitors lol.
 
Hulk said:
I think 1440p displays will become the norm in the next 0-12 months, you can get them for less than $200 now on eBay! A lot of noobs don't know though that you need top of the line cards to actually be able to play games with smooth frames on 1440 monitors lol.
Click to expand...
I think 4k will be more common than 1440 in the next 18-24 months.
 
misterbobby said:
I think 4k will be more common than 1440 in the next 18-24 months.
Click to expand...

I dont simply because of the huge load it puts on GPU's and the money youll have to invest in them. 1440 can still be played reasonably well with a $300 video card on pretty much all titles so I think that will make 1440 displays a lot more popular than a 4K. Like I mentioned earlier, on a 28" screen there isnt going to be much of a difference between 4K and 1440. Youll have to get up around 40+ inches for all the extra pixels to make a difference at least enough to justify a $1000 in video cards. I think 4K will continue to be a niche resolution for those that can shit money.
 
Standard only if you're using 2-4 cards.
Single card users are fine with 3-6GB. You'll need to turn the settings down well before you max out 6GB.
 
MacLeod said:
I dont simply because of the huge load it puts on GPU's and the money youll have to invest in them. 1440 can still be played reasonably well with a $300 video card on pretty much all titles so I think that will make 1440 displays a lot more popular than a 4K. Like I mentioned earlier, on a 28" screen there isnt going to be much of a difference between 4K and 1440. Youll have to get up around 40+ inches for all the extra pixels to make a difference at least enough to justify a $1000 in video cards. I think 4K will continue to be a niche resolution for those that can shit money.
Click to expand...
But many people only look at the price of the monitor and they are getting cheap fast. Plus many people do more than game so its nice to have the extra resolution for other things. I guess check back in 2 years and we will see. ;)
 
misterbobby said:
But many people only look at the price of the monitor and they are getting cheap fast. Plus many people do more than game so its nice to have the extra resolution for other things. I guess check back in 2 years and we will see. ;)
Click to expand...

This. 4k will be the new 1080p in a couple of years. Also, I still boggle that people can't comprehend 4k res benefits on 28" screens, they are plenty big at normal viewing distance, heck it was obvious even on a 24" and I don't have amazing eyesight. It's like taking off or on a pair of glasses, with how big of a clarity boost it is for gaming. For desktop use on 28 to 32 inches it is extremely useful.
 
I don't know why people are so butt-blasted over it being called 4K.

It's easier and catchier to say than "2160p."

It's not even trying to be misleading. 4K makes the common pleb think of something that's 4x the resolution of 1080p. Which is exactly what 4K is.
 
2014 console games were in development before Sony increased ram in PS4 to 8 gigs of unified memory. I'm afraid we will see soon games where we need 6GB VRAM due to that
 
Hulk said:
I think 1440p displays will become the norm in the next 0-12 months, you can get them for less than $200 now on eBay! A lot of noobs don't know though that you need top of the line cards to actually be able to play games with smooth frames on 1440 monitors lol.
Click to expand...

you know whats ridiculous (to me anyway), is that 1440p HASN'T already been the gaming standard for almost FIVE years already.

I went 1440p in January 2010, yes, 2010, with the Dell 27" u2711. Replaced it this year with the flat screen 34" LG.

Jesus, 1440p was available (with a damn good pic and response time that was fine for gaming) in 2-0-1-0. I can't believe 1080p monitors are even for sale on anything other than 2nd hand e-bay.

Please let 1080p finally die and usher in fast response / big 4K displays. Who wouldn't love gaming on a 32" 4k @ 120hz.

But yeah, I think reasonably priced 1440p will win out over 4k as the accepted gaming standard for a good long while. Shooter guys still generally prefer the 120/144hz of panels like the Asus PG278Q over the awesome pic / density of a 4K or the amazing field of view of 34" 21:9.

2015 should be finally interesting for monitor purchasing!
 
4K is going to be the future standard. Then I see a reason to hae 6-8gb being standard for video cards.

But right now only unoptimized games need more then 4gb at 1080p. Even the new DAI only needs a 4gb card for 4k.

I agree 1080p needs to die soon.
 
Why would 1080 need to die soon though? Its all some people want or need and does not stop anybody from getting 4k screens.
 
misterbobby said:
Why would 1080 need to die soon though? Its all some people want or need and does not stop anybody from getting 4k screens.
Click to expand...

To keep the industry moving along. You can now get 4k monitors for around $350. Give it 4-5 years and 1080p will be the new 720p. No one wants 720p now.
 
DASHlT said:
To keep the industry moving along. You can now get 4k monitors for around $350. Give it 4-5 years and 1080p will be the new 720p. No one wants 720p now.
Click to expand...
Well there were never any mainstream 720 monitors as only a few little 15-18 inch models with 1366x768 were ever made. Now 1280x1024 was pretty common years ago but being 5:4 killed that off. 1920x1080 monitors are 16:9 which is going to be the standard for any foreseeable future. They also come in sizes many people consider adequate such as 22-27 inch. There is nothing wrong with 1080 for the average person and see no reason for it to die anytime soon.

And until Windows can handle text and other stuff properly at 4k and 5k like Apple comps do then we cant be blinding people with resolution they cant even easily use. I can assume that will be addressed in Windows 10 though.
 
4K will supplant 1080. 1440 will go away. 4k will take over because they will make a gazillion TV's using it.
 
misterbobby said:
Well there were never any mainstream 720 monitors as only a few little 15-18 inch models with 1366x768 were ever made. Now 1280x1024 was pretty common years ago but being 5:4 killed that off. 1920x1080 monitors are 16:9 which is going to be the standard for any foreseeable future. They also come in sizes many people consider adequate such as 22-27 inch. There is nothing wrong with 1080 for the average person and see no reason for it to die anytime soon.

And until Windows can handle text and other stuff properly at 4k and 5k like Apple comps do then we cant be blinding people with resolution they cant even easily use. I can assume that will be addressed in Windows 10 though.
Click to expand...

By the time 4k becomes mainstream Windows will have fixed the issue.

With Intel, Samsung, Apple pushing for 4k to become the standard it will happen even if you think it shouldn't.

Companies don't wait and get left behind in the Tech business. It happened with MSFT when mobile devices took off, and we all know how that ended up.
 
Flopper said:
it should been fixed with win 8 IMO.
Click to expand...

True, but 4k isn't a big deal right now, its a very very small % of people who use it.

That will change in 4-5 years.

Besides windows 10 (i mean windows 8 redone and fixed) will be out soon, so they will be ready for when 4k goes mainstream.
 
misterbobby said:
Why would 1080 need to die soon though? Its all some people want or need and does not stop anybody from getting 4k screens.
Click to expand...

Good point. Perhaps I was a little harsh just wishing 1080p to be killed already. I took some shit in another thread when I made a comment like "does anyone on this forum even game at 1080p anymore?!?!" A few peeps railed me, reminding me that not everyone has $$$ coming out there ass for 1440p + monitors and graphics cards.

So yeah, I guess live and let live. 1080p I suppose is fine for certain office environments as well as the very very very limited gamer who maybe only plays something like Guild Wars 2 once in a while.

My main resentment against 1080p has simply been industry stagnation in the monitor department, until mid 2014. 2014 FINALLY saw some good stuff. 4K @ 60hz w/o needing any tricks. Amazing looking 34" 21:9 that are breathtaking in some games. And 144hz w/ g-sync 1440p panels for the head-shot BF4 crowd. I was hoping for this kind of stuff a bit quicker, and I guess I partly blamed people still actually using 1080p for anything other than office work/web browsing.

I think 2015 is going to be The Year of The Monitor. Finally.
 
DASHlT said:
That will change in 4-5 years.
Click to expand...

Might be longer. My GTX 970 still has trouble maintaining 60 frame rates at 1080 in some games. The push for 4K is rather dumb anyways; aside from a few hardware geeks and display manufactures no one cares. ;)

I'll go to 1440P when $250-300 GPUs can get 60 frame rates with most games. Otherwise I'll take the frame rates over pixels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top