Sorry but if you are buying a USD 550+ GPU in 2015 then you better pack more than 4 GB VRAM.
Sure, there will be options like we had 7970Ghz 3GB and 6GB or 290X 4GB and 8GB. To imply that a $550 card
absolutely needs 8GB of VRAM is absurd. Not everyone is a 1440P or 4K gamer.
My guess is the R9 390 is going to be fighting Titan X with similar perf and there is no way 4 GB is enough for such a powerful GPU.
Why is 4GB not enough for 1080P-1440P? According to you then 99.9% of all GPUs today are worthless now?
Even at 1440p a game like Dying Light
Did you see that review? R9 295X2 suffers from a driver issue in that old review. 980 4GB has no such problems. From the review:
"As you can see, with all the video cards operating at the highest settings the game allows, GeForce GTX TITAN X blows the doors off of everything in this game. AMD Radeon R9 295X2 cannot keep up even with the single-GPU GeForce GTX 980. Keep in mind both have 4GB of VRAM available, so if this was about VRAM bottlenecking, both would have the same trouble, yet GTX 980 is clearly significantly faster than AMD R9 295X2."
I think the reviewer made a mistake here. Again, 980 has smooth performance but CF suffers badly. If 4GB was the culprit, 980 would have bombed too, but it doesn't.
This looks more like a CF/game driver issue for R9 295X2 than a VRAM bottleneck given how smooth 980's fps delivery is.
or GTA V (with MSAA 4x) easily exceeds 4 GB VRAM at the highest settings.
Again, I think the review is making a mistake here talking about VRAM. R9 295X2 has higher minimums than the Titan X. How in the world is he concluding that 4GB of VRAM is the bottleneck? Besides R9 295X2's smoothness factor improves at 4K vs. 1440P in this game, which sounds like a driver/game issue.
Also, MSAA in GTA V is one of the worst decisions:
1) The performance hit is nearly 50%.
By the time we get to 4K, the performance hit from 4xMSAA is so great, everything is unplayable. Thus, I don't agree with your insinuations that R9 390X/Titan X are some uber powerful cards -- they are for 1440P and below -- but for 4K, they won't be fast enough. If someone is buying 2 or more of those, 6-8GB starts to make a lot more sense, but if you are only in the market for 1 of those cards, the GPU is too slow imo to need 6-8GB. Maybe future games will prove me wrong but so far I haven't seen any game where this is the case. Right now I recommend the Titan X over 980 SLI not because of the extra VRAM, but because when SLI doesn't work, Titan X OC is 50% faster than 980 OC. That's a huge advantage that's hard to ignore. However, looking at pure GPU pixel shading power, the Titan X is way too weak for 4K on its own.
Notice how the Titan X is at 28 fps but R9 295X2 is at 36 fps and 980 SLI is at 37 fps? If VRAM was a bottleneck, those dual cards would never manage higher FPS than the Titan X. I myself made a mistake thinking GTA V actually needs > 4GB of VRAM but I looks like I was wrong. The game just dynamically varies the VRAM but it doesn't require it.
2) With so many shimmering textures in GTA V, MSAA doesn't solve any of those issues. It's a terrible method for this game to be honest as it has questionable IQ and insane performance hit.
What is the point of such a powerful GPU if you cannot run at MSAA 4x or SSAA 4x depending on the game at 1440p.
30-40% faster than a 980 isn't that powerful in the context of how inefficient MSAA works in modern games/engines. Also, it's WAY not enough to even talk about SSAA at 1440P. If we were talking about a card 2-2.5X faster than a 980, I'd agree. Again, what about all those gamers on 1080P and 1200P? Why would they want to spend extra for 8GB option? Sounds like a waste.
btw imo AMD's R9 380 and R9 380X will ship with 4 GB HBM and be perfect in the USD 300 - USD 500 segment. So people who want a 1440p card with 4 GB should pick these. For the rest who want to go above USD 500, AMD will have 8 GB R9 390 and R9 390X at USD 600 - USD 800 price range.
I think AMD needs R9 390/390X 4GB versions since they'll make a lot more sense for gamers at 1440P and below than the more expensive and rather wasteful 8GB versions. That's why I questioned the whole 8GB is required or a fail idea from the start. 6-8GB for 4K when discussing dual 390Xs? Fine. 8GB for 1080P-1440P? Overkill for now. You haven't provided good examples to prove how > 4GB helps at 1440P and below in any modern title. I am anxious to see Batman AK, Project CARS and the Witcher 3. All those 3 games should give us more data points to work with. The next Deus Ex, Star Citizen, Mad Max and Just Cause 3 might push the VRAM requirements further but those games are ways out.
)
Facebook
Twitter