The whole 4gig vs 2gig Vram issue needs to be put to rest.

H

hdgamer

Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
816
Basically if more Vram and bigger bus = better performance and more future proof, wouldn't the 7970 win in almost every game, even in triple monitor setups?

All the tests I've seen so far proves that anything beyond 2 gig Vram doesn't make a single bit of difference. Can someone please show me actual graphs, or evidence of this? Has anyone ever returned at GTX680 for a 7970 because the Vram was limiting them?
 
VRAM has never really been a factor its about how well the card can utilize the extra ram and this thread needs to be closed.
 
hdgamer said:
Basically if more Vram and bigger bus = better performance and more future proof, wouldn't the 7970 win in almost every game, even in triple monitor setups?

All the tests I've seen so far proves that anything beyond 2 gig Vram doesn't make a single bit of difference. Can someone please show me actual graphs, or evidence of this? Has anyone ever returned at GTX680 for a 7970 because the Vram was limiting them?
Click to expand...

Poor argument as you're comparing different cards where other factors come into play. Compared a 2GB and a 4GB version of a 680 (or 670). You'll find that there are cases where the extra VRAM matters. If you're at 2560x1440/1600 w/AA, you may need the VRAM for some games. Skyrim mods run you over 2GB of VRAM on one monitor. As for Eyefinity/Surround users, VRAM becomes a major issue.

Hell, I'm still good on 1GB for my lower-end needs, but just because YOU don't push 2GB+ doesn't mean others don't. Also, let's not forget future proofing as some people want to keep their cards for awhile.
 
It depends on the RESOLUTION and amount of ANTI ALIASING you use!

4gb is definitely helpful for surround..
 
It'll never be put two rest for two reasons, one good, one not:

The good reason is because it does depend. Amount of RAM for GPUs, and CPUs, is the kind of thing that so long as you have enough more doesn't help at all, but if you don't have enough everything slows way down. However "enough" varies depending on the game and settings. Higher resolutions take more RAM, of course, and some kinds of AA take more or a lot more. Also more textures take more. So there's no one standard for what is needed, and it continues to grow as time goes on. Time was that 4MB was all games would use back in the Voodoo days, now hard to find a game that will run with less than 256MB and they'll usually use more.

The other reason is because of fanboys/people who need to justify their purchase. No matter what you have, some people are going to claim it isn't enough if they have something more. So even if regular GTXs had 256GB of RAM, if there were 512GB versions some people would buy them and would claim they were necessary for X, Y and Z reasons. Even if all the evidence is against some people, they won't let it go.


Now as it stands presently, there isn't a lot that will make use of more than 2GB. You have to generally look at some special cases, like very high resolutions or the like before you can get games to actually make use of more. In time, more things will probably start to try and use more since cards are available with it. Games can hoover up a lot of RAM with high rez textures, if they are allowed to.
 
VEGA runs 5760x1200.

As mentioned, 4gb can be helpful at that resolution (or for surround in general) but is nearly worthless for single screen.
 
xoleras said:
VEGA runs 5760x1200.

As mentioned, 4gb can be helpful at that resolution (or for surround in general) but is nearly worthless for single screen.
Click to expand...

Actually he runs 5400x1920 (10.36MP) and in that video he was running 4320x2304 (9.95MP), where 5760x1200 is only 6.91 MP.

That being said, you can hit the limit on lower resolutions as long as you have enough eye-candy on. If you like to max out your settings and you have multiple GPU's (2 things that usually go together), you will likely run into a VRAM Wall with 2GB Video Cards.
 
VRAM is more black and white...

It's not going to give you a performance increase across the board, but when you run out of it, you REALLY feel it. It's very obvious at surround resolutions.

wouldn't the 7970 win in almost every game, even in triple monitor setups?
Click to expand...
The 7970 does perform relatively better in triple monitor benches vs. single monitor ones.
 
Very simple. If you want to keep the card for a year or less get a 2GB version. If you want to keep it for 2 -3 years get the 4 GB version. I have 2 cards - a HD 4850 512MB and a HD 4850 1 GB bought in 2009 running in different PCs. The HD 4850 512 MB is struggling because most games easily cross 512 MB RAM even with medium - high texture settings. The HD 4850 1GB card is much better and provides atleast better texture quality settings to be used in majority of games because its able to accomodate those larger textures.
With the next generation consoles launching in late 2013 the 2 GB VRAM amount is going to face similar shortages in 2014 especially if you want to use high levels of MSAA. From past experience I have learnt its always better to err in the side of caution.
 
Just curious...are any cards made to be able to add vram? If not is this because any card would be antiquated by the time it needs more vram or is this just so you have to buy another card? Why wouldn't this be a great feature?

I certainly have no need of a 4gig card now, but if I decide to co tripple monitor next year it would be sweet to just add some more vram considering I already have SLI 680's...but would I buy 2 more 680's with 4gigs apiece...unlikely...so I dont upgrade and nobody makes any money.
 
Although a novel and innovative concept, video cards do not posses extra slots to add VRAM. They are simply not designed to be able to accommodate. It would be cool to see manufacturers enable a motherboard type design to videocards to accept new gpu's, ram etc. etc..

I think a simplified cooler system ala, what we see with CPU's where something could just be latched on would be interesting as well.
 
Interestingly the option to add RAM for graphics cards existed when EDO DRAM was used in the 1990s. You could get a card with provision for 4MB EDO DRAM. you could install 2 MB EDO DRAM initially. later when needed you could add 2MB EDO DRAM
 
/Sarcasm mode.

Damn. I knew 3Gb of VRAM was not useful to play Skyrim at 7680X1600 with high-res texture packs + countless PQ mods and AA

Thank you OP. I'm selling everything and buying some old GTX 580 with 1.5Gb of VRAM right now

/End of sarcasm. :)
 
Crixus said:
Although a novel and innovative concept, video cards do not posses extra slots to add VRAM. They are simply not designed to be able to accommodate. It would be cool to see manufacturers enable a motherboard type design to videocards to accept new gpu's, ram etc. etc..

I think a simplified cooler system ala, what we see with CPU's where something could just be latched on would be interesting as well.
Click to expand...

Oh god. We might see some weak GPU's stuck on big boards just so the consumer can expand the RAM and think they're making their GPU faster.
 
Intel_Hydralisk said:
Oh god. We might see some weak GPU's stuck on big boards just so the consumer can expand the RAM and think they're making their GPU faster.
Click to expand...

Why do you have 8 gigs of ram in your box!? Because you CHOOSE to! Its called choice/options its a nice thing! :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top