2gb Nvidia cards pretty rare?

[mfenn]

I am not confused, but I think you are.

If a 32bit apps is not compiled with /largeaddressaware, then it can't use more than 2 gb of memory, which is known as the soft cap. 32 bit application can exceed 4Gb of memory usage even with /largeaddressaware due to the 32 bit limitation. The 4gb limitation is aka the hard cap. No 32bit apps can use 4 gb in a 32bit OS because the OS must reserve some for kernel, 3gb at max. A 32bit app that is compiled with /largeaddressaware can fully use 4gb under 64bit OS.

64 bit OS can run 32 bit apps, but not the other way around. It will be better to write apps that run on both 32/64bit OS as the market is a max of 32/64bit OS. So instead of creating 64 bit apps, which does not run on 32 bit OS, it is better to write them in 32 bit. The problem is, 32 bit apps don't utilize more than 4gb, which is the key to the problem. Hypothetically speaking, If apps are engineered correctly, it can run as 1 32 bit thread on 32 bit OS and as multiple 32 bit threads while in 64 bit OS.

First you cannot just make up terms such as "2 gb soft cap" and "4 gb hard cap" and expect knowledgeable people to have any idea of WTF you are talking about. If you mean the 2GB/2GB user/kernel split, just say so! Seriously, Google search for "2 gb soft cap" and see if you get ANY sort of relevant result. I was able to infer your meaning, but that doesn't mean others will. If you search for "2GB/2GB user/kernel split", then you will get plenty of relevant results. A bit of advice, if you want to play with the big boys, at least be able to competently use the terminology.

Regarding /largeaddressaware, and increasing the user/kernel split to 3GB. Those are both hacks and you (should) know it. What's the point of having a single binary that behaves differently under 32-bit and 64-bit OSes? You would be better off just shipped 32-bit and 64-bit binaries and having your stub loader detect the bitness of the system and then exec the appropriate binary.

Using the /3GB switch to changes the user and kernel address partitions is even worse. The 32-bit kernel was designed to have 2GB of address space and you're playing with fire when you change that.

You keep using the word thread. It doesn't mean what you think it means. Threads of a given process share the same memory address space. PERIOD. That's the whole point of using them, you know. Threads are all about having multiple CPUs executing on the same data. Frankly, I'm not sure where you got the idea that running multiple threads gives you more addressable space.

One additional thing, when software is properly designed for portability, it is not difficult to create both 32 and 64 bit binaries from the same source code. Look at the majority of FOSS software. I can grab the source and build it either 32-bit or 64-bit if I want to.

 

[SHAQ]

More than 1GB IS necessary if you play modded games with higher res textures and AA. I run out of memory on Fallout 3 with just a 1024 res terrain pack and higher res armors and items with
2X AA and 1920 res. The GTX 480 is supposed to have 1.5GB and I am looking forward to that mostly for the extra memory.

 

[toyota]

More than 1GB IS necessary if you play modded games with higher res textures and AA. I run out of memory on Fallout 3 with just a 1024 res terrain pack and higher res armors and items with
2X AA and 1920 res. The GTX 480 is supposed to have 1.5GB and I am looking forward to that mostly for the extra memory.

again though, besides GTA 4 no game goes over 896mb of vram at playable settings for a gtx275. I used some high res texture mods on Fallout 3 and even at 1920 I didnt even hit much over 700mb even with 8x AA. the gtx480 will be a much faster card that will probably easily allow 16x AA in all games and also be able to handle most any game at 2560 even with plenty of AA.

 

[x3sphere]

Now if your resolution is at 2560 X 1600, then you more or less need 2Gb of VRAM. This resolution may be a result of multi display or a single XHD display. Both is not too far from the norm, assuming you will keep your card for more than 1 year.

FYI: I have no problems running most games today at 2560x1600 with 4XSSAA on my 5970, meaning my internal resolution is four times that. So the VRAM ceiling is far from being hit. GTA IV is the only game that eclipses the 1GB mark without mods and whatnot, yet I can still run it fine fully maxed out. Perhaps the faster GDDR5 memory helps. Anyways, just proving that the need of having 2GB even at high resolutions is a myth right now.

 

[Seero]

FYI: I have no problems running most games today at 2560x1600 with 4XSSAA on my 5970, meaning my internal resolution is four times that. So the VRAM ceiling is far from being hit. GTA IV is the only game that eclipses the 1GB mark without mods and whatnot, yet I can still run it fine fully maxed out. Perhaps the faster GDDR5 memory helps. Anyways, just proving that the need of having 2GB even at high resolutions is a myth right now.

5970 is a 2gb VRAM card right? so a GTX 275 may not be able to run those games with the same resolution you are getting at maximum speed right? With your 5970, which is a 2 gb VRAM card, everything runs fine, while have a lot of room to spare. I would do buy 5870 2gb if i am to buy a new card today. The 1gb version may do the job, but may not have enough VRAM to max things out in future games. Don't you agree? Or are you saying that 2gb is overkill and no games will never use so much VRAM in the future? Or are you saying that the GPU will actually bottleneck when a game requires that amount of VRAM?

While I am not saying 2gb is required, but 896Mb on GTX275 can be a bottleneck. Pick batman for example, with physX set the high, it uses about 300Mb of VRAM just for physX, leaving only 600Mb for other things. Shuttering starts when physX + graphics are heavy. Those who have played the game knows what I am talking about. This still happens with a GTX285 1gb.

At 1680x1050, 16xAA, max everything including physx: over 800mb VRAM usage. At 16QxAA, over 1GB.

As you can see 1Gb is at the water mark for today's game, 2Gb is more future proof. It isn't a myth. As of now, you have GTA4 and Batman AA. What will we have this year? Games that use less? or more? Yes, reducing eye candy will fix it, but that means you are really not maxing out the card.

In other words, if you get a 2gb card, you can probably max out any games within 1 year without worrying about VRAM bottleneck. If you get a 1gb card, you will not be able to max out some games that had been released.

The dicussion is yours.

 

[SHAQ]

again though, besides GTA 4 no game goes over 896mb of vram at playable settings for a gtx275. I used some high res texture mods on Fallout 3 and even at 1920 I didnt even hit much over 700mb even with 8x AA. the gtx480 will be a much faster card that will probably easily allow 16x AA in all games and also be able to handle most any game at 2560 even with plenty of AA.

Get the new EVGA precision and go to fallout3nexus.com and get a bunch of texture packs. As soon as it fills up about 850mb of vram the game ctd's. That is with ultra settings in FO3 even without AA. I do have over 4gb in my textures and meshes directories though. lol Even Doom with the Doomsday source mod and texture packs I will run out of RAM if I don't compress the textures. So if someone only plays games without mods then 1GB of vram is enough. Otherwise at least 1.5GB is necessary. The next big graphical leap will occur when cards have enough vram to utilize higher res textures.