To all the people who said 2GB VRAM for 1080p was enough

[Senzelian]

290X? I guess you're saying the 280X.

 

It's also pretty much midtier at 200€. Literally the only leg-up it has over the competition is TDP and HDMI 2.0. And while having a lower TDP is always better, I don't honestly believe that a midrange desktop PC buyer is most concerned about TDP. The performance difference for the same price is too much, and everything at this price range will still run with a cheap 500 W PSU.

 

nVidia throttles the Titan only because there's no competition for the fastest single-GPU right now. Performance comes first to their flagship, and nVidia always wants to claim the "fastest GPU" title at any cost. Right now that can also bundle it with better TDP because the competition hasn't launched a new card in ages, but back when they did have competition, they weren't thinking of TDP at all.

A midrange desktop PC buyer shouldn't be concerned about TDP, as it already should be as low as possible. He should be able to expect to get a high performance card at the lowest possible TDP. NVidia delivers exactly that.

And it's not only that, NVidia delivers always new innovations when it comes to their software. ShadowPlay is only one example.

AMD has right now nothing apart from a good p0rice to performance ratio. And that is because the cards are already old af. I bet that the 390X won't be much better than the 290X IF they also want to go the same route as NVidia and keep the TDP low. If they don't care about it, then it can easily outperform the TitanX.

[Nup]

Like you said in your title, 2GB was enough for 1080p. Today's titles will push that. Hence why so many people recommend the 280 over the 2GB 960!

[Nup]

-snip-

AMD does offer recordings with their Gpus

[Senzelian]

AMD does offer recordings with their Gpus

I know, but afaik not in the same way as NVidia does. I heard that ShadowPlay works much better.

I haven't used a AMD card for years now.

[Nup]

I know, but afaik not in the same way as NVidia does. I heard that ShadowPlay works much better.

I haven't used a AMD card for years now.

Admittedly I haven't tried it bit just thought I'd let you know. In case you didn't shadow play is very smooth, for sure.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Weren't there already a few games that used more than 2GB at 1080p even before GTA 5 came out? 

[Lawliet93]

I had that same problem back when I was choosing  between the gtx 760 and the R9 280. I went with the 280 from gigabyte and right after I installed Assassins creed 4 i observed a Vram usage of around 2,3 GB. There is really no excuse for sub 3GB cards these days (texture compression technology can only do so much).

[Aphala]

I remember the times when a 512MB HDD was plenty.

12GB will be entry level at some point

So you are at least 40 - 50? lol

[minibois]

So you are at least 40 - 50? lol

I meant more like 60GB or so

But the first HDD that was over 512MB was in 1980. (but it was the size of a fridge)

The first time there was a 'consumer' HDD with over 512MB was in 1990. Not that crazy

 

I used Windows 93 a bit too, while I was born in '97 myself. 

[dragoon20005]

I meant more like 60GB or so

But the first HDD that was over 512MB was in 1980. (but it was the size of a fridge)

The first time there was a 'consumer' HDD with over 512MB was in 1990. Not that crazy

 

I used Windows 93 a bit too, while I was born in '97 myself. 

Win 93?

 

did you mean 3.1?

 

Win 95a then Win 95b

 

then Win 98 and SE

 

 

 

anyway for 1080P Ultra settings

 

3GB VRAM is now the minmum

[prostum]

I have a gtx 770 windfoce 2GB . What if a go more than 2GB, what will happen??

[dragoon20005]

I have a gtx 770 windfoce 2GB . What if a go more than 2GB, what will happen??

your game will stutter and you get fps drops to 0

[prostum]

How much free vram should i leave free on gta 5 to get smooth gameplay?

[dragoon20005]

How much free vram should i leave free on gta 5 to get smooth gameplay?

it should depend on the res you set

 

at 1080P Med it should be under the 2GB limit

[minibois]

-snip-

I knew it was released in '93 and I saw the Windows '95 and '98 logos so much, I did not think the 1993 version of Windows would be called differently

[dragoon20005]

I knew it was released in '93 and I saw the Windows '95 and '98 logos so much, I did not think the 1993 version of Windows would be called differently

Win 3.1 is a hybrid of MS-DOS and Windows

 

upon boot you get the classic MS DOS then you need to input a command to go to the GUI mode

 

Win 95 became fully GUI based but not with upgrades later

 

my first rig was a 386 and Win 3.1

 

then Pentium with Win 95a and b, then Win 98 SE

 

then Win XP

 

Vista and Win 7

 

and now Win 8 and 8.1

 

I skipped ME coz it was crap same goes for Win 8

[zappian]

Nvidia fanboys who kept saying the 960 was better

 

I recommended the 280 at the time.

Glad you enjoyed the card.

[Aphala]

I meant more like 60GB or so

But the first HDD that was over 512MB was in 1980. (but it was the size of a fridge)

The first time there was a 'consumer' HDD with over 512MB was in 1990. Not that crazy

 

I used Windows 93 a bit too, while I was born in '97 myself. 

Ahh lol 512mb 1K+ consumer drives! My first one was 20gig I think way back for a Windows 95 pc (prebuilt because I was a scrub). born in 93 good times, can't wait for 10tb SSD's to be a regular thing!

[minibois]

Ahh lol 512mb 1K+ consumer drives! My first one was 20gig I think way back for a Windows 95 pc (prebuilt because I was a scrub). born in 93 good times, can't wait for 10tb SSD's to be a regular thing!

Small correction, it was 13,6 GB.

An OG Seagate Barracuda drive:

[TheMcSame]

Times change. Hell, sometime in the future 1TB of VRAM might be on entry level card... Okay, extreme example but you get my point. As time goes one VRAM requirements change.

[Pandora]

You were wrong.

With my R9 280, everything high in GTA V, I keep using 2.3-2.5GB of VRAM on 1080p.

When I recently asked on this forum if I should get the 960 or 280, some people kept saying 2GB is enough for 1080p. It's not.

Really glad the majority of you guys recommended me the 280, don't regret it a single bit!

i always say save your pennys and get the 280x. very stable and a power house. 2 gigs isnt really enough for gaming anymore.

[Zulkkis]

A midrange desktop PC buyer shouldn't be concerned about TDP, as it already should be as low as possible. He should be able to expect to get a high performance card at the lowest possible TDP. NVidia delivers exactly that.

And it's not only that, NVidia delivers always new innovations when it comes to their software. ShadowPlay is only one example.

AMD has right now nothing apart from a good p0rice to performance ratio. And that is because the cards are already old af. I bet that the 390X won't be much better than the 290X IF they also want to go the same route as NVidia and keep the TDP low. If they don't care about it, then it can easily outperform the TitanX.

 

Maybe the perf / TDP is higher, but the GTX 960 is slower than 280 or 280X. I don't know anyone who has a system with a PSU able to add two PCI-E power connectors to a card that couldn't fit a 280X into their system. With the GTX 750 Ti I can sort of agree, since it can run through the bus alone.

 

The TDP limitations come in heat and power consumption, but like said, any 500 W PSU can handle a 280X and a higher-end intel CPU perfectly fine. The users who are more concerned about perf / watt are server clusters, miners and such who run a load 24 / 7. For an average user, the power bill differences are negligible. The other factor is noise, but it's not like either of the cards is particularly noisy.

 

Shadowplay is pretty much damn equal to AMD Game DVR. The implementations and the performance hit in both are pretty much the same.

 

What the GTX 960 has is HDMI 2.0, that's about it. DSR is largely useless for a midrange card like this, and even if you'd use it, there are other software that already does this oversampling.

 

Price to performance is the most important thing, if the performance differences are small and not 30% or so but instead at like 5%, then I can see people picking up the more efficient, quieter card at the same price.

[Aphala]

Small correction, it was 13,6 GB.

An OG Seagate Barracuda drive:

Ahh Seagate! What happened to you... That design tho....

[Aphala]

Times change. Hell, sometime in the future 1TB of VRAM might be on entry level card... Okay, extreme example but you get my point. As time goes one VRAM requirements change.

 

Nah by that point we will be using far more effiecient and powerful methods and it may not be RAM at that point let alone VRAM, the future is pretty unclear

[minibois]

Ahh Seagate! What happened to you... That design tho....

They are still decent, but WD master race /jk

I do miss the Barracuda from the Barracuda drives Gave Seagate the edgy-ness

And boy oh boy, I wonder where ULTRA ATA went