2 or 4 gb of vram for 1080p gaming

[mata-pombos]

Do you guys think its worth na extra 40€ for the 4 gb version of the mid-rage (200$) gaming cards? I dont do mods or anything and i only play at 1080p. Thanks for the help

[TheKDub]

4GB is better, though if you're referring to 960s or such, don't even bother with the 4gb version, the card isn't powerful enough to utilize all the VRAM, not to mention a 970 isn't that much more expensive than a 4gb 960.

 

Now if you planned to do something like 4GB 960 SLI then you'd probably be able to use up the 4GB of VRAM, but at that point you'd be better off going with a single more powerful gpu.

[Grrizz]

These days I wouldn't go less than 4GB even on a modern mid-range card, you might not be able to use all 4GB at reasonable frame rates but you will likely go over 2GB.

[Johannes_Lazor]

I would recommend 3gb, That is the amount of Vram GPU's in that range can handle.

[AlTech]

3Gb or 4GB - Coming from a person using 2GB at 1080p

[Lotus]

Just get the R9 280 or 280x. 3GB is fine. 2GB  is usually fine too, but consdiering the 280 is cheaper and basically as good (and better in some games where the extra 1GB comes into play), it's the option I would choose.

[TheCaptain53]

Do you guys think its worth na extra 40€ for the 4 gb version of the mid-rage (200$) gaming cards? I dont do mods or anything and i only play at 1080p. Thanks for the help

2GB is pushing it for modern gaming. However, in a year or two, 3/4GB of VRAM will be required for 1080p (if people are still using 1080p by then).

[DarkSmith2]

Vram size doesnt matter with windows 10. Atleast with gaming.

 

GTX970 (4GB VRAM, take a close look at MEM: usage)

 

Explanation:

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/dn894184(v=vs.85).aspx

[Johannes_Lazor]

Vram size doesnt matter with windows 10. Atleast with gaming.

 

GTX970 (4GB VRAM, take a close look at MEM: usage)

 

 

Explanation:

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/dn894184(v=vs.85).aspx

"virtual Vram" is like downloading more system RAM, You cant.

[Alurit]

if you find a 280x for the same price as the 960 2gb, (though it uses more power) I'd go for that. 2gb seems to be not enough for some games, especially for console ports that are caching heavily into vram.

[Lotus]

"virtual Vram" is like downloading more system RAM, You cant.

Every GPU has "virtual VRAM" just like every PC has "virtual system ram" in that when the current ram is overflowed, it goes down to the next fastest form of storage. On VRAM that's system ram, and on system ram that's your SSD (or your HDD). This isn't anything new. It's just slower and you get huge frame dips when it happens. The GTX 970 is different though because it has 3.5GB of full speed vram and then another 0.5 GB of slow vram that's basically the same speed as system ram. You get little microstutters due to the display driver trying to address that last little 0.5GB of VRAM when it doesn't have to (or if you're under high usage). It's not a big problem, but some people notice it. This may have been fixed with a driver update though.

[Johannes_Lazor]

Every GPU has "virtual VRAM" just like every PC has "virtual system ram" in that when the current ram is overflowed, it goes down to the next fastest form of storage. On VRAM that's system ram, and on system ram that's your SSD (or your HDD). This isn't anything new. It's just slower and you get huge frame dips when it happens. The GTX 970 is different though because it has 3.5GB of full speed vram and then another 0.5 GB of slow vram that's basically the same speed as system ram. You get little microstutters due to the display driver trying to address that last little 0.5GB of VRAM when it doesn't have to (or if you're under high usage). It's not a big problem, but some people notice it. This may have been fixed with a driver update though.

He said that Vram size wont matter it Win10, The amount of Vram will always be a factor.

[DarkSmith2]

He said that Vram size wont matter it Win10, The amount of Vram will always be a factor.

WDDM 2.0 only needs 10% of the bandwidth we needed before. even ddr3 ram is fast enough to have 0 performance decrease while being used as buffer.

[TheConverter]

I thought we all know that;

 

280X > 960 @ 200$

390  > 970 @ 350$

980TI > Fury X @ 650$

[Johannes_Lazor]

WDDM 2.0 only needs 10% of the bandwidth we needed before. even ddr3 ram is fast enough to have 0 performance decrease while being used as buffer.

It would be the other way around, The Vram is the buffer and RAM is more like storage.

You would still need faster memory for things that happens on screen.

Without making textures smaller in some way,  we wont be able to cut back that much of the bandwidth.

[Lotus]

I thought we all know that;

 

280X > 960 @ 200$

390  > 970 @ 350$

980TI > Fury X @ 650$

That last one is still up in the air. The FuryX hasn't been out long enough and I heard that most of the tests were done on pre-release drivers, one of the drawbacks to trying to release as early as possible. I'm still waiting for Luke to do his thing when they finally get the card and release their performance numbers, not because I think he can overclock more than others, but because it'll be later than the initial performance tests and likely will be run on better drivers.

[TheConverter]

That last one is still up in the air. The FuryX hasn't been out long enough and I heard that most of the tests were done on pre-release drivers, one of the drawbacks to trying to release as early as possible. I'm still waiting for Luke to do his thing when they finally get the card and release their performance numbers, not because I think he can overclock more than others, but because it'll be later than the initial performance tests and likely will be run on better drivers.

 

As you have seen I'm not a brand fanboy.

 

The 280X (or 380?) and the 390 completely smash the 960 and the 970 when it comes to performance for price.

 

 

 

Just as my 980TI Gigabyte card overclocked smashes any Fury X out there and even the Titan X.

 

 

 

The fury has been a let down for all of us, maybe AMD can do something with the 400-series card but I won't get my hopes high.

 

AMD has always ruled in the low+med section and now even in the high section with the 390, but they suck at the enthusiast class.

[mata-pombos]

2GB is pushing it for modern gaming. However, in a year or two, 3/4GB of VRAM will be required for 1080p (if people are still using 1080p by then).

1080p is still going to last a long time since 1440p and mainly 4k are require realy big and expensive monitors wich are not what the average consumer seeks