Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › AMD/ATI › V ram maddness
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

V ram maddness - Page 14

post #131 of 207
I agree that it is in the realm of "mid-range PC"
HOWEVER, it is NOT a mid-range GAMING PC.......

It's basically (2) Jaguar quad core units running at 1.6GHz..... If that is mid range, then my 1090T is still high end, cause I have A LOT more computational power than that!!

And then there is the GPU, which is essentially a 7850 running at a wimpy 800MHz!!!.... that could be debated as mid range I suppose, but last I checked, my 280x is midrange now....
PS4 uses 1152 shaders at 800MHz..... my 280x uses 2048 shaders @ 1070MHz (stock)..... I know scaling is not 100% in all cases, but simple math tells you I have over 100% more graphical power....
I say that because in addition to pixel/texel fill rates being higher.... I also have over 330GB/s memory bandwidth VS the PS4 176GB/sec.... and don't even get me started on the puny 68GB/s the xbox one has biggrin.gif


Now if value is a thing..... let's put it like this.... You could get the same deal, and better performance by slapping an i3, a 270x, a basic mobo, a 1TB HD, and a 500W PSU all in a decent case for the same amount.... then run Linux or Steam OS (if the damn thing ever gets here!!) thumb.gif


***BREATH*****


Sorry, damn console bidness gets me in a tiff
I have to tell EVERYONE that comes over that my PC is twice as powerful as a PS4, and they are like "na man....." tongue.gif
Then I throw in the part about how old all the hardware in it is, hahaha
Edited by Agent Smith1984 - 10/17/14 at 10:46am
Daddy's Gamer
(15 items)
 
Son's Gamer
(13 items)
 
PROJECT WIFEY
(11 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-9590 @ 5GHz Asus 990FX Sabertooth Rev 2.0 MSI Gaming 390X G. Skill Trident X 4x4GB  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 EVO 250GB Seagate Barracuda 1TB SATA 3  LEPA 240AC Windows 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG 55UB8500 55" 4K 3D TV Logitech MK350 Rosewill HIVE 850 NZXT S340 
MouseMouse PadOther
Logitech G700s Aukey Smooth 36" Gaming Pad Logitech Driving Force GT  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom X6 1065T @ 4GHz - 1.45v MSI 970 Gaming XFX DD 7870 Black Edition @ 1200/1500 G. Skill Trident-X 8GB  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
ADATA SP550 240GB SSD Lite On 24x DVD  Corsair H80i Windows 10 
MonitorPowerCase
46" 1080P LED TV Raidmax RX850 Apevia X-Dreamer 3 Pink 
  hide details  
Reply
Daddy's Gamer
(15 items)
 
Son's Gamer
(13 items)
 
PROJECT WIFEY
(11 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-9590 @ 5GHz Asus 990FX Sabertooth Rev 2.0 MSI Gaming 390X G. Skill Trident X 4x4GB  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 EVO 250GB Seagate Barracuda 1TB SATA 3  LEPA 240AC Windows 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG 55UB8500 55" 4K 3D TV Logitech MK350 Rosewill HIVE 850 NZXT S340 
MouseMouse PadOther
Logitech G700s Aukey Smooth 36" Gaming Pad Logitech Driving Force GT  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom X6 1065T @ 4GHz - 1.45v MSI 970 Gaming XFX DD 7870 Black Edition @ 1200/1500 G. Skill Trident-X 8GB  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
ADATA SP550 240GB SSD Lite On 24x DVD  Corsair H80i Windows 10 
MonitorPowerCase
46" 1080P LED TV Raidmax RX850 Apevia X-Dreamer 3 Pink 
  hide details  
Reply
post #132 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent Smith1984 View Post

I agree that it is in the realm of "mid-range PC"
HOWEVER, it is NOT a mid-range GAMING PC.......

It's basically (2) Jaguar quad core units running at 1.6GHz..... If that is mid range, then my 1090T is still high end, cause I have A LOT more computational power than that!!

And then there is the GPU, which is essentially a 7850 running at a wimpy 800MHz!!!.... that could be debated as mid range I suppose, but last I checked, my 280x is midrange now....
PS4 uses 1152 shaders at 800MHz..... my 280x uses 2048 shaders @ 1070MHz (stock)..... I know scaling is not 100% in all cases, but simple math tells you I have over 100% more graphical power....
I say that because in addition to pixel/texel fill rates being higher.... I also have over 330GB/s memory bandwidth VS the PS4 176GB/sec.... and don't even get me started on the puny 68GB/s the xbox one has biggrin.gif


Now if value is a thing..... let's put it like this.... You could get the same deal, and better performance by slapping an i3, a 270x, a basic mobo, a 1TB HD, and a 500W PSU all in a decent case for the same amount.... then run Linux or Steam OS (if the damn thing ever gets here!!) thumb.gif


***BREATH*****


Sorry, damn console bidness gets me in a tiff
I have to tell EVERYONE that comes over that my PC is twice as powerful as a PS4, and they are like "na man....." tongue.gif
Then I throw in the part about how old all the hardware in it is, hahaha


Ah man, I'm usually the one that goes on about how you can build a Gaming PC with similar specs and performance for around the same price, or even better for a little more.

EuroGamer's superb £450 Next Gen Gaming PC.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-the-next-gen-digital-foundry-pc
post #133 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by TopicClocker View Post

Ah man, I'm usually the one that goes on about how you can build a Gaming PC with similar specs and performance for around the same price, or even better for a little more.

EuroGamer's superb £450 Next Gen Gaming PC.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-the-next-gen-digital-foundry-pc

Awesome stuff in that article....

I like how they actually achieved 1080p60 instead of matching the PS4.....
AND look at that image quality in the video..... obviously the consoles both dumb down the settings some, because the clarity, and textures on the PC look way better!

Good read!! Makes me feel so much better about my old "dinosaur"
Daddy's Gamer
(15 items)
 
Son's Gamer
(13 items)
 
PROJECT WIFEY
(11 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-9590 @ 5GHz Asus 990FX Sabertooth Rev 2.0 MSI Gaming 390X G. Skill Trident X 4x4GB  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 EVO 250GB Seagate Barracuda 1TB SATA 3  LEPA 240AC Windows 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG 55UB8500 55" 4K 3D TV Logitech MK350 Rosewill HIVE 850 NZXT S340 
MouseMouse PadOther
Logitech G700s Aukey Smooth 36" Gaming Pad Logitech Driving Force GT  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom X6 1065T @ 4GHz - 1.45v MSI 970 Gaming XFX DD 7870 Black Edition @ 1200/1500 G. Skill Trident-X 8GB  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
ADATA SP550 240GB SSD Lite On 24x DVD  Corsair H80i Windows 10 
MonitorPowerCase
46" 1080P LED TV Raidmax RX850 Apevia X-Dreamer 3 Pink 
  hide details  
Reply
Daddy's Gamer
(15 items)
 
Son's Gamer
(13 items)
 
PROJECT WIFEY
(11 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-9590 @ 5GHz Asus 990FX Sabertooth Rev 2.0 MSI Gaming 390X G. Skill Trident X 4x4GB  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 EVO 250GB Seagate Barracuda 1TB SATA 3  LEPA 240AC Windows 10 x64 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG 55UB8500 55" 4K 3D TV Logitech MK350 Rosewill HIVE 850 NZXT S340 
MouseMouse PadOther
Logitech G700s Aukey Smooth 36" Gaming Pad Logitech Driving Force GT  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom X6 1065T @ 4GHz - 1.45v MSI 970 Gaming XFX DD 7870 Black Edition @ 1200/1500 G. Skill Trident-X 8GB  
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
ADATA SP550 240GB SSD Lite On 24x DVD  Corsair H80i Windows 10 
MonitorPowerCase
46" 1080P LED TV Raidmax RX850 Apevia X-Dreamer 3 Pink 
  hide details  
Reply
post #134 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by levontraut View Post

I have a single 770 with 4 gig Vram

I have not seen a game that comes close to 2 gig yet.. I have seen benchmarks hit 3gig Vram but nothing more

I really dont see what the issue is.

if there are games out there that truly hit 4+ gig Vram please let me know so I can test it out. Also what OS type do you have? 32 bit or 64 bit? windows7 home premium?


These all hit over 2gb vram for me. Win 7 Pro 64bit 1360x768p everything's maxed msaa x8 and all. 7970/8350

BF4
Bioshock
Civ V
COD Ghost
Dead Rising 3
Middle Earth
Sniper Elite 3
Thief
Watchdogs
Wolfenstein


And I'm sure there are more that i have never played i have seen Crysis 3 in the 2200mb before but never print screened it and i cant play enough even though i got it free with my 7970 to care.
post #135 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2003M36sp View Post

These all hit over 2gb vram for me. Win 7 Pro 64bit 1360x768p everything's maxed msaa x8 and all. 7970/8350

BF4
Bioshock
Civ V
COD Ghost
Dead Rising 3
Middle Earth
Sniper Elite 3
Thief
Watchdogs
Wolfenstein


And I'm sure there are more that i have never played i have seen Crysis 3 in the 2200mb before but never print screened it and i cant play enough even though i got it free with my 7970 to care.
at that resolution the gpu doesnt the fully used


*** signature....
Edited by PontiacGTX - 10/17/14 at 4:37pm
post #136 of 207
quote name="PontiacGTX" url="/t/1518318/v-ram-maddness/130#post_23016963"]
at that resolution the gpu doesnt the fully used


*** signature....[/quote]


Can only assume what that means "at that resolution the gpu doesnt the fully used" Maybe "at that resolution the gpu doesnt get fully used."

Since I max everything aa, msaa, ultra settings it pushes it to the gpu to be the bottleneck as you can see most are around 99% even at 720p. Since my HDTV native is 720p it's just going to have more cpu usage but doing the same in 1080p or higher res would only result in more vram usage and less cpu usage. We need lots of Vram to ultra games.
post #137 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2003M36sp 
Can only assume what that means "at that resolution the gpu doesnt the fully used" Maybe "at that resolution the gpu doesnt get fully used."

Since I max everything aa, msaa, ultra settings it pushes it to the gpu to be the bottleneck as you can see most are around 99% even at 720p. Since my HDTV native is 720p it's just going to have more cpu usage but doing the same in 1080p or higher res would only result in more vram usage and less cpu usage. We need lots of Vram to ultra games.
i mean clock speed not % usage


And it`s not a gpu bottleneck there isnt a thing like that.it`s a gpu limitation
Edited by PontiacGTX - 10/19/14 at 10:43am
post #138 of 207
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent Smith1984 View Post

I agree that it is in the realm of "mid-range PC"
HOWEVER, it is NOT a mid-range GAMING PC.......

It's basically (2) Jaguar quad core units running at 1.6GHz..... If that is mid range, then my 1090T is still high end, cause I have A LOT more computational power than that!!

And then there is the GPU, which is essentially a 7850 running at a wimpy 800MHz!!!.... that could be debated as mid range I suppose, but last I checked, my 280x is midrange now....
PS4 uses 1152 shaders at 800MHz..... my 280x uses 2048 shaders @ 1070MHz (stock)..... I know scaling is not 100% in all cases, but simple math tells you I have over 100% more graphical power....
I say that because in addition to pixel/texel fill rates being higher.... I also have over 330GB/s memory bandwidth VS the PS4 176GB/sec.... and don't even get me started on the puny 68GB/s the xbox one has biggrin.gif


Now if value is a thing..... let's put it like this.... You could get the same deal, and better performance by slapping an i3, a 270x, a basic mobo, a 1TB HD, and a 500W PSU all in a decent case for the same amount.... then run Linux or Steam OS (if the damn thing ever gets here!!) thumb.gif


***BREATH*****


Sorry, damn console bidness gets me in a tiff
I have to tell EVERYONE that comes over that my PC is twice as powerful as a PS4, and they are like "na man....." tongue.gif
Then I throw in the part about how old all the hardware in it is, hahaha

comparing pc to ps4 specs like that doesnt quite work due to the optimization a ps4 has its pribally alot more powerful than its pc equivalent.
How ever all im saying is graphics cards are about 500 quid for high end like the 980 yet im not seeing double the difference in graphics cpsidering the theoreticle power it has compared to a console.....however considering the fact that most console games run at 30 fps..I reckon a 980 and a 290x vould run most games at that fps at 4k....its the 60fps stuff which gets hard....tbh I would rather have 4k than 60fps....lol but pc gaming...no compromise.
post #139 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbylongshore View Post

comparing pc to ps4 specs like that doesnt quite work due to the optimization a ps4 has its pribally alot more powerful than its pc equivalent.
How ever all im saying is graphics cards are about 500 quid for high end like the 980 yet im not seeing double the difference in graphics cpsidering the theoreticle power it has compared to a console.....however considering the fact that most console games run at 30 fps..I reckon a 980 and a 290x vould run most games at that fps at 4k....its the 60fps stuff which gets hard....tbh I would rather have 4k than 60fps....lol but pc gaming...no compromise.

At the moment that's not really the case.
Currently, with multiplatform games it's possible to compare the PS4 and Xbox One to PC hardware, similar hardware in PCs against the PS4 are able to deliver similar and or even better performance and visuals.


There's alot more to read in the original articles, they're excellent reads!
Quote:
Does The Evil Within manage to rise above its performance issues and live up to its potential? Well, yes, it's a solid and interesting game. Of the two console builds, PS4 gets the nod - the higher resolution is welcome and the game simulation is more closely linked to the renderer, meaning less stutter than the Xbox One version. However, while improved over the Microsoft console, the PS4 game still feels highly under-optimised. Indeed, as things stand, with the possible exception of Thief, The Evil Within probably has more performance issues than any other title we've tested on the new wave of consoles - and that's a real shame, as there's a remarkably good game here let down by its surrounding technology.

That being the case, those looking for something closer to the best possible experience should really opt for the PC version, provided you have the requisite hardware to at least match and exceed PS4 performance - a modern Core i3 processor matched with something like a Radeon R9 270 or a GeForce GTX 660 should get you to 1080p30 with a consistent performance level.

Quote:
Sleeping Dogs: Definitive Edition - the Digital Foundry verdict

On balance, United Front Games succeeds in creating the ultimate edition of its open-world crime drama, giving PS4 and Xbox One owners the most eye-catching console release so far. The only snag is that, in aspiring to the PC's top-end visual standard, the struggling 20-30fps performance is a high price to pay for this luxury. And with visible tearing creeping in too, the current-gen console experience doesn't feel quite as definitive as we'd hoped.

Compared to PC, the only visible console-side sacrifices are the lower-grade ambient occlusion - appearing faintly more intrusive on Xbox One - and a more prominent depth of field effect. But between the Sony and Microsoft releases, PS4's main advantage is undeniably on the performance front; Xbox One hitting the bottom end of the 20-30fps band during our tests, while segments of play unfold at 25fps at its worst on PS4.


The end result is that only the new PC version lives up to its Definitive Edition moniker. But are its extra touches worth the extra money for owners of the original PC release? While the broadened draw distances are a major plus, we'd argue many other tweaks are simply too subtle to justify another expense. Edits to character model designs, upped object density and new city atmospherics are welcome. But it's fair to say, for most developers, much of this falls into the territory of a courtesy, free post-release patch.

Quote:
Alien: Isolation - the Digital Foundry verdict

Creative Assembly wanted parity between PS4 and Xbox One and on the basis of image quality, detail and effects work it has managed it, but while native 1080p sharpness may please Xbox One owners, it has come at a cost, because while the Xbox One version delivers the core Alien experience mostly intact, overall immersion is compromised by frequent drops in fluidity. Performance is obviously the deciding factor here and it's clear PS4 has a distinct advantage. As such the PS4 game gets our recommendation for console owners, even though we're left with the nagging feeling that 60fps should have been possible on Sony's hardware based on the game's PC showing.
Quote:
In the final analysis, the PC game is the definitive version of Alien: Isolation. While the level of graphical quality is only marginally improved over PS4 and Xbox One, the game is easy to run across a wide range of configurations, so 1080p at 60fps is achievable on older GPUs without having to dramatically lower graphical presets, while the low system requirements of the game easily open up running at 1440p at high frame-rates.

Quote:
At the time of writing, the console releases also have unexpected aces up their sleeves. To the Xbox One and PS4's credit, each offer post-processing anti-aliasing that's not available on PC, plus a working motion blur effect - though we suspect that this option is likely to be fixed in due course on PC. To an extent, such extras make up for the lack of an ultra texture quality equivalent, adding a lick of polish to the game's overall presentation.

It's undeniably a PC victory in theory though, provided you have powerhouse hardware to support its max settings - allowing for a taxing super-sampling option to solve its aliasing issues. However, the PS4 remains the best bang-for-buck version out right now. While broadly a match for Xbox One, its full 1080p resolution, higher shadow quality and increased foliage density barely put a dent in its v-synced 30fps performance. The Xbox One release is a solid 30fps too in matching frame-rate tests but the added visual treats on Sony's platform make this an easy one to call between the two.

Optimization is real, but it doesn't necessarily mean it can make hardware alot more powerful.
post #140 of 207
Quote:
Originally Posted by TopicClocker View Post

At the moment that's not really the case.
Currently, with multiplatform games it's possible to compare the PS4 and Xbox One to PC hardware, similar hardware in PCs against the PS4 are able to deliver similar and or even better performance and visuals.
There's alot more to read in the original articles, they're excellent reads!





Optimization is real, but it doesn't necessarily mean it can make hardware alot more powerful.
I'd settle for a higher minimum frame rate which I assume the consoles deliver quite well in regard to their gpu components.
The Machine
(14 items)
 
Nexus 7 2013
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10 6800K Asus F2A85-V MSI 6870 Hawx, VTX3D 5770, AMD HD6950(RIP), Sap... G.skill Ripjaws PC12800 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 7200.5 1TB NEC 3540 Dvd-Rom Windows 7 x32 Ultimate Samsung P2350 23" 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic s12-600w CoolerMaster Centurion 5 Logitech G600 Auzen X-Fi Raider 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Quad Krait 300 at 1.5Ghz Qualcomm APQ8064-1AA SOC Adreno 320 at 400mhz 2GB DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
32GB Internal NAND Android 5.0 7" 1920X1200 103% sRGB & 572 cd/m2 LTPS IPS Microsoft Wedge Mobile Keyboard 
PowerAudio
3950mAh/15.01mAh Battery Stereo Speakers 
  hide details  
Reply
The Machine
(14 items)
 
Nexus 7 2013
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10 6800K Asus F2A85-V MSI 6870 Hawx, VTX3D 5770, AMD HD6950(RIP), Sap... G.skill Ripjaws PC12800 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 7200.5 1TB NEC 3540 Dvd-Rom Windows 7 x32 Ultimate Samsung P2350 23" 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic s12-600w CoolerMaster Centurion 5 Logitech G600 Auzen X-Fi Raider 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Quad Krait 300 at 1.5Ghz Qualcomm APQ8064-1AA SOC Adreno 320 at 400mhz 2GB DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
32GB Internal NAND Android 5.0 7" 1920X1200 103% sRGB & 572 cd/m2 LTPS IPS Microsoft Wedge Mobile Keyboard 
PowerAudio
3950mAh/15.01mAh Battery Stereo Speakers 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD/ATI
Overclock.net › Forums › Graphics Cards › AMD/ATI › V ram maddness