• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

The VRAM Debate

How much VRAM is necessary at 1920x1080?

  • 1 GB

    Votes: 31 43.1%

  • 1.25 GB

    Votes: 7 9.7%

  • 1.5 GB

    Votes: 17 23.6%

  • 2 GB

    Votes: 15 20.8%

  • 2.5 GB or more

    Votes: 2 2.8%
  • Total voters
    72
MavericK

MavericK

Zero Cool
2FA
Joined
Sep 2, 2004
Messages
33,063
I see a lot of VRAM limitation discussion around these days...more so than ever before it seems. I'd like to make a thread where a collection of knowledge and information about VRAM limitations, backed with solid evidence, can be shared. As a bonus, I have included a poll where you can share your feelings on VRAM amounts at a standard resolution (1920x1080)

So, here are some starter questions:

1) What VRAM usage are you seeing (and at what resolution/settings)?

2) If possible, is there any empirical framerate data for identical 1 GB vs 2 GB cards (or 1.5 GB vs 3 GB)?

3) What kind of an FPS loss is there when VRAM "runs out"?
 
I will start it off by posting this BF3 performance review, where it appears at 1920x1080 even with full AA and AO there is no VRAM limitation even at 1.25 GB or so.

Battlefield3-Final-GPUs-1920-4xMSAA-FXAA-v2.png
 
From my experience... I'm still using 1gb 5870's at 5760x1080 and it's obvious when you run out of VRAM. Easiest way is to just set very high levels of AA at that res and watch FPS drop into the single digits. Another possible sign is constant stuttering. It's not so much "you lose X fps"... it's way more black and white (it's either fine or unplayable). When you don't run out of VRAM there should be no noticeable FPS difference.
 
Yeah, at higher multi-monitor resolutions like that I can see running out as being a problem. Part of the reason I created the poll at 1920x1080 is because I keep hearing that 1 GB may not be enough at that resolution, though I have not seen a lot of evidence supporting this.

I welcome discussion about multi-monitor setups as well, though. Thank you for posting.
 
The VRAM is not the expensive upgrade, no reason to get less than 2GB imho.
 
At 1080p resolution it depends on what the user wants. You only NEED 1GB but depending on what one is doing or even looking into future games it'll be silly not to consider buying a card with at least 1.5GB for 1080p. Look at battlefield 3 for example. It doesn't NEED that much vram but if you have it, it will use it. You can get higher settings and more fps by having it.

Also a user could be in love with high resolution texture packs and game overhaul mods. That would tax vram even more and is a great reason to spend the $20-$50 extra to have the extra vram.


I never buy based on what will squeeze me by today. I always buy more than I need today and hopefully enough for the days ahead.
 
How much VRAM is NECESSARY.

The "necessary" part is very subjective.

My 5870 can use 1GB at 1920x1080 or it can use 1GB at 5760x1080.

Depends how much AA I am willing to use & to a lesser extent, texture size. Also this is very game dependent in how efficiently it can (pre)load & flush textures in real-time from it's texture cache.

And as stated earlier, when you run out of VRAM it's easy to see, you usually end up in the single digit frame rates. I call it the "Brick Wall" cause everything comes screaming to a near halt when you hit it.
 
This is a silly question because it 100% depends on the game, the settings you run, and your expectations.

In most games 1GB VRam is plenty, especially if you are willing to dial down a setting or two. My cards only have 1GB VRam per GPU and I get hitching in BF3 using Ultra settings due to obviously running out of VRam. I don't consider it a problem though because once I go down to High settings the game is silky smooth and runs great, and that is with 4x Edge-Detect AA.

I have 2x 4850 512mb cards in my secondary rig and even those cards are more than capable of playing any modern game at a reasonable FPS as long as I dial down the more VRam intensive options and compromise a bit on the AA.

Some people obsessively need to run every graphical option at the highest setting or they feel like something is wrong. Others are more than content running games on medium or even low settings. Some feel like high levels of AA are necessary, others hate AA and don't use it at all. That is where expectations come into play.
 
Ambiguous poll is ambiguous. I actually voted 1GB, because unless you play Dragon Age 2, that is all that seems to be necessary, for now. I don't think that one game should force everyone to buy 2GB cards at 1080p.
 
For 1080 at high AA, I would say 1.25 would be fine. Any more than that is really catering to the multi monitor crowd.
 
this is a moving target so it an almost useless to say how much is enough. heck remember about 6-9 months ago when plenty of people were still claiming 768mb was enough even for 1920x1080. a year before that and people were arguing over 512mb being enough. as of today, 1.50gb will certainly cut it for any single gpu setup and even 1.25gb is fine but who knows 6 months from now. yes even 1gb is fine for all but 2 or 3 games but many people crank AA or run mods and that changes your needs.
 
MavericK96 said:
How so? Doubling the RAM on a 570 or 580 is almost a $100 increase.
Click to expand...

that's just another choice on the whole "nvidia vs radeon" debate that will go on forever.

Personally I got a 2GB radeon card for only 30 dollars more than it's 1GB counterpart. It's pretty well known that if you want price vs performance you will be going AMD radeon.

I switched from nvidia to AMD just 3 weeks ago and I'm quite happy. I will give my money to whoever offers me the best experience for the least cash.
 
MavericK96 said:
3) What kind of an FPS loss is there when VRAM "runs out"?
Click to expand...

Massive FPS drop. Talking down into the <10FPS range. You will know when it happens.

1GB is plenty for games that have been released up to this point in time (no idea about BF3) @ 1920x1080. With triple monitor setups it is insufficient if you want higher levels of AA in some titles.
 
samuelmorris said:
Ambiguous poll is ambiguous. I actually voted 1GB, because unless you play Dragon Age 2, that is all that seems to be necessary, for now. I don't think that one game should force everyone to buy 2GB cards at 1080p.
Click to expand...

Well of course it depends on the game, but I'm just saying, "in general..."

Like you said, one game shouldn't skew the result unless that's the only game you ever play...
 
cannondale06 said:
this is a moving target so it an almost useless to say how much is enough. heck remember about 6-9 months ago when plenty of people were still claiming 768mb was enough even for 1920x1080. a year before that and people were arguing over 512mb being enough.
Click to expand...

I had a 1 GB setup for the last 3 years or so and never ran into any VRAM issues at 1920x1080/1200, even with 4x MSAA. I'd say for single-monitor gaming the "target" moves fairly slowly. But I do agree, it is a moving target, like anything else in technology.
 
MavericK96 said:
I had a 1 GB setup for the last 3 years or so and never ran into any VRAM issues at 1920x1080/1200, even with 4x MSAA. I'd say for single-monitor gaming the "target" moves fairly slowly. But I do agree, it is a moving target, like anything else in technology.
Click to expand...
yes but you already had 1gb during the time that 512mb and 768mb were debated about. as of TODAY and going forward, 1gb is not enough for some games if you have a card that can crank the settings.
 
True...I guess that begs the question, do you think 1.5 or 2 GB will be enough for the next 3 years, or do you expect to see exponential VRAM requirements?
 
If you're playing games at high-end, nothing will do 'for the next 3 years' - technology is too changeable, if your expectations don't change, then your hardware must change with the times, i.e. far more often than 3 years.
 
-Sn1PeR- said:
Massive FPS drop. Talking down into the <10FPS range. You will know when it happens.

1GB is plenty for games that have been released up to this point in time (no idea about BF3) @ 1920x1080. With triple monitor setups it is insufficient if you want higher levels of AA in some titles.
Click to expand...
not always true unless you are really running out of vram. sometimes a game will just hitch or stutter and there can even be a chance of artifacting of some sort but the framerate may not change much. this is why a benchmark may not always show all potential issues.
 
This is actually what normally happens when you run out video memory, it's just that BF3 bucks the trend by dynamically adjusting detail.
 
MavericK96 said:
True...I guess that begs the question, do you think 1.5 or 2 GB will be enough for the next 3 years, or do you expect to see exponential VRAM requirements?
Click to expand...
I guess every person just has to decide for themselves. sometimes that does not work out. I am sure many gtx460 768mb have already had to upgrade sooner than if they would have gone with 1gb models. for me I knew 1gb would not even be enough for GTA 4 and a couple other games at settings I wanted to run so I waited for a good deal on a gtx570 instead of a gtx560 ti. of course the gtx570 is faster in general too so its not always an apples to apples comparison when choosing a new card.
 
samuelmorris said:
If you're playing games at high-end, nothing will do 'for the next 3 years' - technology is too changeable, if your expectations don't change, then your hardware must change with the times, i.e. far more often than 3 years.
Click to expand...

Actually, until Metro 2033 or so, my 3-year-old setup ran everything at max detail just fine. It was SLI, true, but it's still a valid setup.

cannondale06 said:
I guess every person just has to decide for themselves. sometimes that does not work out. I am sure many gtx460 768mb have already had to upgrade sooner than if they would have gone with 1gb models. for me I knew 1gb would not even be enough for GTA 4 and a couple other games at settings I wanted to run so I waited for a good deal on a gtx570 instead of a gtx560 ti. of course the gtx570 is faster in general too so its not always an apples to apples comparison when choosing a new card.
Click to expand...

So you chose the 1.25 GB 570 rather than a 2 GB 560 Ti? The 570 is definitely faster, yes, but if you were afraid of running into VRAM limitations why didn't you go with the 2 GB card?
 
samuelmorris said:
This is actually what normally happens when you run out video memory, it's just that BF3 bucks the trend by dynamically adjusting detail.
Click to expand...
I kept getting hitching in Clear Sky when I had my gtx260 even though the framerate was fine. when I started monitoring vram usage, it showed my vram was maxed every time I was hitching. I lowered one setting and never got that hitch again because I was using 20-25mb less vram.
 
MavericK96 said:
Actually, until Metro 2033 or so, my 3-year-old setup ran everything at max detail just fine. It was SLI, true, but it's still a valid setup.



So you chose the 1.25 GB 570 rather than a 2 GB 560 Ti? The 570 is definitely faster, yes, but if you were afraid of running into VRAM limitations why didn't you go with the 2 GB card?
Click to expand...
because the 2gb gtx560ti was more than the gtx570 and would be slower. at the level of gpu, 1.25gb is enough for now at the settings it can actually handle. I knew the gtx570 would perform better in every game over the gtx560ti. worse case scenario is that I might have to reduce AA. 1.25gb may indeed be an issue next year but I can always upgrade to a faster card at that time. thats why I always try and get the best deal so if I do NEED to upgrade then I will not lose as much money.
 
cannondale06 said:
because the 2gb gtx560ti was more than the gtx570 and would be slower. at the level of gpu, 1.25gb is enough for now at the settings it can actually handle. I knew the gtx570 would perform better in every game over the gtx560ti. worse case scenario is that I might have to reduce AA. 1.25gb may indeed be an issue next year but I can always upgrade to a faster card at that time. thats why I always try and get the best deal so if I do NEED to upgrade then I will not lose as much money.
Click to expand...

Smart move. With 8x AA in WoW I use only 1.2gb VRAM. I have 2gb with xfire 6870's.
 
samuelmorris said:
This is actually what normally happens when you run out video memory, it's just that BF3 bucks the trend by dynamically adjusting detail.
Click to expand...

Is there a review that says they dynamically adjust the detail when the vram gets low? Would like more info on this.
 
didn't read all the replies, but I have 1.5 gb and game at the same res. at max settings it never loads more than 700mb (usually averages around 500mb). So I say 1gb is plenty for now.
 
SticKx911 said:
didn't read all the replies, but I have 1.5 gb and game at the same res. at max settings it never loads more than 700mb (usually averages around 500mb). So I say 1gb is plenty for now.
Click to expand...

exacly, DICE is not retarded to kill 1gb video cards for 1080p.
 
SticKx911 said:
didn't read all the replies, but I have 1.5 gb and game at the same res. at max settings it never loads more than 700mb (usually averages around 500mb). So I say 1gb is plenty for now.
Click to expand...
for what game? if you mean in general then you are not playing modern games. I can find plenty of games to use well over 700mb. heck I could use over 700mb at playable settings in some games with my old gtx260.
 
Let's all please realize AA uses a lot of VRAM. So how much VRAM you need will depend on how much AA you want.
 
cannondale06 said:
I guess every person just has to decide for themselves. sometimes that does not work out.
Click to expand...



I'm going to guess that at least one site will do an in depth performance review of BF3, probably with the help of DICE, that covers lots of stuff including VRAM.
 
I agree that it mostly depends on the game, at 1080p vanilla GTA IV can use almost 1.5gb and with mods Morrowind can use over 2gb. It seems to me like at 1080p 1gb is fine for most games though you might have to turn down a few settings, 1.5gb is plenty for max settings in all but a few games, and 2gb gives a little bit of wiggle room for higher resolutions, future games, and mods.

I voted for 1.5gb since it's the minimum that I would get but I would prefer 2gb.
 
1GB VRam Minimum, 1.5GB VRam Recommended.

Most games I play I usually see sit around 800MB VRam maxed out but there are a few that creep into 1.2-1.3GB territory (Metro 2033, Crysis, etc).
 
at that resolution 1GB is more then enough, if you want a little headroom then maybe 1.25GB.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top