Is 2GB of VRAM enough?

[Vitalius]

i still dont understand crossfire and SLI fully... When you hook up two 2GB cards why do you only get 2GB, why not 4GB??? where does 1 card's memory go? is it just not used? if so why is it not used? sorry for being off-topic but man i want this cleared up in my head

each card get an allocated 2GB, 4GB isn't shared between the 2 GPU's

To further elaborate: Each GPU has to work on the same frames. This means the two sets of 2GB VRAM are copies of each other, basically.

Think of it like RAID 1, but different. The total storage is halved because of how the system works.

[bcredeur97]

To further elaborate: Each GPU has to work on the same frames. This means the two sets of 2GB VRAM are copies of each other, basically.

Think of it like RAID 1, but different. The total storage is halved because of how the system works.

THANK YOU!

[bcredeur97]

I wish someone would make a future-proof super-card with like PCI-e gen 4, an insane GPU chip, and like 30GB of VRAM. something that gets like 1000FPS in crysis 3. and then they should sell it for like $6000 USD

[Tr3vor]

Memory on consoles is more complicated, for there is hUMA, unified memory etc.

There is no longer vram and ram. Ps4 has 8gb of gddr5 and so the apu can use it however it needs (but there will be limits for system and limits for games etc.).

If game needs textures, apu is loading textures into ram. If apu needs to hold some temporary file, it just writes to ram and reads later.

Very complex and don't worry, it will make programming easier for the consoles but its not magic, just technology, and ram sharing will be separated on pc like usually.

 

I know there is not "VRAM" and "system RAM", but there are files for the game, and there are files for the video, its just the ratio system files vs video files. 

 

I've had games use around 4GB, BF3 being one of them on a 64 player server, besides that most games I've seen use 2-3GB, and that's gonna get bigger as AI gets better and whatnot.

[Vitalius]

I know there is not "VRAM" and "system RAM", but there are files for the game, and there are files for the video, its just the ratio system files vs video files. 

 

I've had games use around 4GB, BF3 being one of them on a 64 player server, besides that most games I've seen use 2-3GB, and that's gonna get bigger as AI gets better and whatnot.

Here are some hard numbers regarding RAM usage by the PS4:

 

The demo of Killzone: Shadow Fall shown during PlayStation 4's announcement only used 4GB of memory – not the full 8GB GDDR5 RAM available to developers in the final hardware, Guerrilla has revealed.

According to the studio, 3072MB (3GB) of PS4's 8GB were dedicated to video resources powering the demo, with 1,536MB used for system resources. A further 128MB were shared between the two.

 

Of the 3GB reserved for video memory, 1,321 MB were used by non-streaming textures.

According to Guerrilla, the demo featured 8200 physics objects, 500 particle systems and real-time reflections - which include "a lot of Guerrilla secret sauce".

 

Guerrilla's decision to stick with 4GB suggest that the developer may not have been aware of Sony's decision to include 8GB in final retail hardware – something Just Add Water CEO Stewart Gilray told VideoGamer.com had been kept secret from third-party developers until the console's announcement.

"We were told [PS4] was 4GB originally," Gilray told us, "and we first knew it had 8GBs when Mark said at the event's stage, 'And it has 8GB of memory.' We'd had kits at that point for a good while."

So. Of the 4.5GB total RAM usage, 3GB were for the Game side of things and 1.5GB was for the OS side of things. 

Of the 3GB, 1.3GB were for the game's mechanics/physics/particles/effects/etc while 1.7GB were for the Visual (what VRAM is used specifically for) side of things. 

 

And it still looked that awesome.

Well, this should be fun to watch unfold. Obviously, it is a demo, but at the same time, that leaves a huge amount of headroom for improvements. And admittedly (to me), the Killzone demo was particularly awesome imo.

It had quite a draw distance already. So much so that I would say that it would be better to up the quality of textures and AA rather than the draw distance at that point.

Dang, it is even more awesome than I suspected.

[Tr3vor]

Here are some hard numbers regarding RAM usage by the PS4:

 

So. Of the 4.5GB total RAM usage, 3GB were for the Game side of things and 1.5GB was for the OS side of things. 

Of the 3GB, 1.3GB were for the game's mechanics/physics/particles/effects/etc while 1.7GB were for the Visual (what VRAM is used specifically for) side of things. 

 

And it still looked that awesome.

Well, this should be fun to watch unfold. Obviously, it is a demo, but at the same time, that leaves a huge amount of headroom for improvements. And admittedly (to me), the Killzone demo was particularly awesome imo.

It had quite a draw distance already. So much so that I would say that it would be better to up the quality of textures and AA rather than the draw distance at that point.

Dang, it is even more awesome than I suspected.

 

I doubt they'll be doing much AA with those systems, the GPUs are only equivelant to GTX 660s or so, it will probably be used for textures.

[Cs342]

So if I am only planning on gaming at 1080p, how long will a GTX 770 last compared to something like a 7970?

[Vitalius]

I doubt they'll be doing much AA with those systems, the GPUs are only equivelant to GTX 660s or so, it will probably be used for textures.

Well, in regards to that, Anandtech mentions that the specs of the APU in the PS4 is 1.84TFLOPS with 1152 GPU cores. 

While the GPU cores puts it roughly (forgive that it is Wikipedia) between a 7850 and a 7870 and the TFLOPS put it in the same area.

This puts it roughly equivalent to a GTX 660 Ti which is not the same GPU as the GTX 660. Still, I think AA could be handled by it, if optimized.

Interestingly, in the PS3 generation, Call of Duty 4 Modern Warfare was rendered at 1024x600 (600p) and upscaled/anti-aliased for HD TV's. Which is just terrible (it did have 0.5GB of RAM but still). 

I would expect some form of AA, or at least true 1080p at this point for consoles. Preferably 60FPS. More than likely at this rate at least.

But regardless, I believe console games having so much RAM at their disposal will help PC gaming a lot. I expect 16GB of RAM to be the new "sweet spot" for games 2-3 years from now.

 

So if I am only planning on gaming at 1080p, how long will a GTX 770 last compared to something like a 7970?

It depends on your settings and FPS requirement. Ignoring those, probably until you decide to upgrade (i.e. the time interval does not matter).

[Cs342]

Well, in regards to that, Anandtech mentions that the specs of the APU in the PS4 is 1.84TFLOPS with 1152 GPU cores. 

While the GPU cores puts it roughly (forgive that it is Wikipedia) between a 7850 and a 7870 and the TFLOPS put it in the same area.

This puts it roughly equivalent to a GTX 660 Ti which is not the same GPU as the GTX 660. Still, I think AA could be handled by it, if optimized.

Interestingly, in the PS3 generation, Call of Duty 4 Modern Warfare was rendered at 1024x600 (600p) and upscaled/anti-aliased for HD TV's. Which is just terrible (it did have 0.5GB of RAM but still). 

I would expect some form of AA, or at least true 1080p at this point for consoles. Preferably 60FPS. More than likely at this rate at least.

But regardless, I believe console games having so much RAM at their disposal will help PC gaming a lot. I expect 16GB of RAM to be the new "sweet spot" for games 2-3 years from now.

 

It depends on your settings and FPS requirement. Ignoring those, probably until you decide to upgrade (i.e. the time interval does not matter).

So having 3GB of RAM is not going to be a huge advantage over 2GB?

[Vitalius]

So having 3GB of RAM is not going to be a huge advantage over 2GB?

In regards to a video card? That depends on your settings and resolution.

3GB of VRAM is preferred. Especially for the future. 

[Tr3vor]

Well, in regards to that, Anandtech mentions that the specs of the APU in the PS4 is 1.84TFLOPS with 1152 GPU cores. 

While the GPU cores puts it roughly (forgive that it is Wikipedia) between a 7850 and a 7870 and the TFLOPS put it in the same area.

This puts it roughly equivalent to a GTX 660 Ti which is not the same GPU as the GTX 660. Still, I think AA could be handled by it, if optimized.

Interestingly, in the PS3 generation, Call of Duty 4 Modern Warfare was rendered at 1024x600 (600p) and upscaled/anti-aliased for HD TV's. Which is just terrible (it did have 0.5GB of RAM but still). 

I would expect some form of AA, or at least true 1080p at this point for consoles. Preferably 60FPS. More than likely at this rate at least.

But regardless, I believe console games having so much RAM at their disposal will help PC gaming a lot. I expect 16GB of RAM to be the new "sweet spot" for games 2-3 years from now.

 

It depends on your settings and FPS requirement. Ignoring those, probably until you decide to upgrade (i.e. the time interval does not matter).

 

The 660 has a TFLOP rating of 1.88, that's more than the PS4 APU. I'd say the PS4 APU is about the power of a 7850. The XB1 is more along the lines of a 7790.

 

I wouldn't turn on AA on a card like that, I'd turn the settings up first bigtime, also, if games aren't running in real 1080p, I'll be highly disappointed. the frame rate will depend on the game for sure.

[Cs342]

In regards to a video card? That depends on your settings and resolution.

3GB of VRAM is preferred. Especially for the future. 

I was under the impression that the 770 is faster than the 7970

[Tr3vor]

I was under the impression that the 770 is faster than the 7970

 

Its back and forth. When you overclock a 7970 its ahead by a small bit.

[Vitalius]

Its back and forth. When you overclock a 7970 its ahead by a small bit.

This.

[Tr3vor]

To me the question would be decided by your upgrade cycle.

 

Of course more Vram will come into play later, but its so early on that a 770 2gb will work for another few years (2-3 maybe), if you upgrade then you'll be fine. If you're looking for a long term card (maybe 4 years or so) then go with the 7970.

 

There are people still rocking 580s with 1.5gb of vram they're doing OK, I wouldn't worry about it too much, just get the card that appeals more to you.

[Cs342]

To me the question would be decided by your upgrade cycle.

 

Of course more Vram will come into play later, but its so early on that a 770 2gb will work for another few years (2-3 maybe), if you upgrade then you'll be fine. If you're looking for a long term card (maybe 4 years or so) then go with the 7970.

 

There are people still rocking 580s with 1.5gb of vram they're doing OK, I wouldn't worry about it too much, just get the card that appeals more to you.

I'll probably keep it for around 2 years, would it last me that long?

[Vitalius]

I'll probably keep it for around 2 years, would it last me that long?

Of course more Vram will come into play later, but its so early on that a 770 2gb will work for another few years (2-3 maybe)..

I do not know. You tell us.

[Keystone Nyan Cat]

Again, today.

 

And you would run at -almost- filled vram most of the time. Now consoles have 4-5GB RAM for games, what do you think they will use it for? Textures.

 

What if the amount of games with 2k+ textures raises quickly in next few months? Will you tell everybody to return 2GB cards because they can't run anything at playable framerates because of vram bottleneck?

That memory is shared with the system memory...

[Vitalius]

That memory is shared with the system memory...

We had a semi-length discussion about that. Go back and read it if you can. Or it might not have been this thread, in which case, my bad.

Summary:

• Consoles have 8GB RAM in total.
• Both only use 2.5GB-3.5GB of it for everything else (OS, downloads, etc) aside from games.
• About 4.5-5.5GB of RAM go to the games.
• Of the game dedicated RAM, about 1.3 (assuming up to 2.0) GB can/will be used for game processes (physics, particle effects, etc etc) while the rest is for VRAM, meaning consoles can be using up to about 4GB of RAM as VRAM. 

We do not have any numbers on XB1 RAM usage for a game, so all that is regarding the PS4 specifically.

4GB of potential VRAM usage by a console is ... a lot.

[Keystone Nyan Cat]

We had a semi-length discussion about that. Go back and read it if you can. Or it might not have been this thread, in which case, my bad.

Summary:

• Consoles have 8GB RAM in total.
• Both only use 2.5GB-3.5GB of it for everything else (OS, downloads, etc) aside from games.
• About 4.5-5.5GB of RAM go to the games.
• Of the game dedicated RAM, about 1.3 (assuming up to 2.0) GB can/will be used for game processes (physics, particle effects, etc etc) while the rest is for VRAM, meaning consoles can be using up to about 4GB of RAM as VRAM. 

We do not have any numbers on XB1 RAM usage for a game, so all that is regarding the PS4 specifically.

4GB of potential VRAM usage by a console is ... a lot.

Isn't memory used by the game and memory needed for graphics different? I mean, in a traditional PC game the engine will use both VRAM and system RAM. Thats why I think the memory allocated for graphics may be much lower. Anyways, we both may be wrong as this will depend on the developer and the engine they choose   So I guess we just have to sit back and watch until we get more official information. Thanks for the information though and for replying to me, much apprecicated ;)

[Vitalius]

Isn't memory used by the game and memory needed for graphics different? I mean, in a traditional PC game the engine will use both VRAM and system RAM. Thats why I think the memory allocated for graphics may be much lower. Anyways, we both may be wrong as this will depend on the developer and the engine they choose   So I guess we just have to sit back and watch until we get more official information. Thanks for the information though and for replying to me, much apprecicated ;)

You are welcome.

We have the exact official specs for the PS4 from Anandtech:

 

CPU Cores/Threads: 8/8

CPU Frequency:  1.6GHz with 2.3GHz boost clock

CPU µArch:   AMD Jaguar

Shared L2 Cache:  2 x 2MB

GPU Cores:   1152

Peak Shader Throughput:  1.84 TFLOPS

System Memory:  8GB 5500MHz GDDR5

System Memory Bus:  256-bits

System Memory Bandwidth:    176.0 GB/s

Manufacturing Process:    28nm  

That is GDDR5 RAM. 8GB of it. The kind of RAM that our gaming GPUs use. It is used as both System RAM and VRAM since the PS4 uses an APU (which VRAM and System RAM are the same thing to an APU).

We have the RAM usage numbers for a demo of Killzone: Shadow Fall from www.videogamer.com (among other sources such as Twitter feeds of developers):

 

 

The demo of Killzone: Shadow Fall shown during PlayStation 4's announcement only used 4GB of memory – not the full 8GB GDDR5 RAM available to developers in the final hardware, Guerrilla has revealed.

According to the studio, 3072MB (3GB) of PS4's 8GB were dedicated to video resources powering the demo, with 1,536MB used for system resources. A further 128MB were shared between the two.

Of the 3GB reserved for video memory, 1,321 MB were used by non-streaming textures.

According to Guerrilla, the demo featured 8200 physics objects, 500 particle systems and real-time reflections - which include "a lot of Guerrilla secret sauce".

Guerrilla's decision to stick with 4GB suggest that the developer may not have been aware of Sony's decision to include 8GB in final retail hardware – something Just Add Water CEO  Stewart Gilray told VideoGamer.com had been kept secret from third-party developers until the console's announcement.

"We were told [PS4] was 4GB originally," Gilray told us, "and we first knew it had 8GBs when Mark said at the event's stage, 'And it has 8GB of memory.' We'd had kits at that point for a good while."

Source: Guerrilla Games

So yeah. We have official information. I mean, not all developers will do it like Guerrila Games does it, but they will be within 1GB of that, I am sure. And while it may be a demo, that is a VERY interactive and detailed demo to only use that much RAM.

I want to point out that the demo has FXAA enabled with no multi-sampling: