3GB VRAM vs 8GB Unified RAM on Xbox One/PS4

[SlowSpyder]

So you're saying that even though cards with 6GB of VRAM (Titan) are having issues with this game still that it's just the cards? That we just need cards with more VRAM?

So how much VRAM you think we need for WatchDogs if a 6GB Titan still displays issues? Maybe 8GB? 10GB?

It seems to me that enthusiasts just want games to use up resources, irregardless of it there is a quality improvement. What's the point of a game that not even 6GB of Titan VRam can't handle if the game looks no better than Crysis?

Would you tout minesweeper as the best game ever if it required 10 GB of VRAM and would we all be bragging about being able to run minesweeper? Or would we say the game is incredibly inefficient?

Only the PC Enthusiast market would fathom scenarios in which we applaud Devs for making games less efficient because now we can buy faster hardware to run games lol.........

No, that isn't what I'm saying. I am saying that, like many games, this will be polished with upcoming patches that make playability better. And, I was posing a question (even though my first sentence lacks a question mark and has a period, my bad, I'll fix that), what if (there's that 'what if' again, asking a question) this game does in fact need the vram it does for a good reason? Say this game was made by the best in the business with a huge budget and plenty of time, maybe it could still require close to as much vram as it does because that is just how much vram is needed? It seems like whenever one of these showcase games comes along and it doesn't run as well as some people feel it should on their hardware, despite their complete lack of experience or know-how in regards to building games, they all seem to know the problem is the developers, the porting, etc.

*edit - Just want to add, I have no idea if that is indeed the case, that there is a good reason this game requires at least 3GB of vram for ultra, but a lot of people seem to assume that when their hardware doesn't run a particular title as well as they feel it should.

 

[Gloomy]

lmao are you guys new to PC gaming? Why act surprised over a setting made specifically for few configurations.

Do you act similarly surprised when games come with AA settings? TressFX? PhysX?

Or does it hurt more when some of you were actively campaigning for cards that lacked the requisites to run that setting?

 

[Deders]

Just wondering how many of you have tried the game with the suggested settings?

I'll say it again, It runs fine on my i5 and 780, I'm using Temporal SMAA with everything maxed out. I even have Vsync on but to get triple buffering (and decent framerates) I have to switch from fullscreen to borderless window and back.

It's running quite smoothly. Usually 50+fps, driving ranges from 40-50 with occasional dips to 30.

I'm actually really enjoying the game. One of the first games I can say that about for a long time. (wolfenstein is also good)

We had the same issue when GTA4 came out, which is a similar style game. For the best settings we needed 1.5GB but cards hadn't been released that had 1.5GB at the time. It also wanted at least a tri core when dual core was mainstream.

 

[PC_gamer5150]

Just wondering how many of you have tried the game with the suggested settings?

I'll say it again, It runs fine on my i5 and 780, I'm using Temporal SMAA with everything maxed out. I even have Vsync on but to get triple buffering (and decent framerates) I have to switch from fullscreen to borderless window and back.

It's running quite smoothly. Usually 50+fps, driving ranges from 40-50 with occasional dips to 30.

I'm actually really enjoying the game. One of the first games I can say that about for a long time. (wolfenstein is also good)
.

I am going to use these setting on my 780 as soon as i get my free copy of WD

 

[rpe33]

very few games will use more than 4GB of VRAM for 1080p gaming

 

[UsandThem]

very few games will use more than 4GB of VRAM for 1080p gaming

That answer is so 2014.