GTX680 4GB Reviews

[blastingcap]

You guys dissing large amounts of VRAM will understand, once you go triple-monitor.

 

[Jaydip]

Not sure what you consider absurd but I showed >2GB of vram usage at 4xMSAA and some mods in Skyrim.

By absurd i mean 8xMSAA or higher.Greater than 2GB vram usage doesn't meant it won't run with < 2GB.It will be slower due to paging though.

 

[Elfear]

By absurd i mean 8xMSAA or higher.Greater than 2GB vram usage doesn't meant it won't run with < 2GB.It will be slower due to paging though.

True but the slowdowns will be painful because of the large dips in fps.

 

[Subyman]

I play at 1080p, no reason for me to worry about more VRam for a while.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Not sure what you consider absurd but I showed >2GB of vram usage at 4xMSAA and some mods in Skyrim. Blackened23 is right that for 90% of gamers 2GB is just fine but more than that isn't stupid if you game at high resolutions with max eye candy.

I can show you over 2GB VRAM usage in 800*600 and no AA with Skyrim mods

Making unoptimized poor mods doesnt mean you should have to bruteforce it with hardware.

 

[ShintaiDK]

You guys dissing large amounts of VRAM will understand, once you go triple-monitor.

No...

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=33408705&postcount=21

 

[Elfear]

I can show you over 2GB VRAM usage in 800*600 and no AA with Skyrim mods

Making unoptimized poor mods doesnt mean you should have to bruteforce it with hardware.

Do you have any other option at this point? The mods look gorgeous and until someone optimizes them that's all we have.

 

[blastingcap]

No...

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=33408705&postcount=21

You will note that they used FXAA in the HardOCP review, not MSAA, and that the GTX580 was at 16x10 res as opposed to 19x12 for the 7970 they tested. Do you even read the reviews you cite as proof?

FXAA is NOT MSAA. I don't really like artificial blurriness. Maybe with time my opinion of FXAA will change, but as of now I prefer MSAA.

It's been shown that triple 1080p with 2x MSAA and 2GB VRAM may be feasible with BF3, but it gets shaky once you go to 4x MSAA.

Further, there is no guarantee that BF3 is going to be the most VRAM-intense title for the next, say, 12 months. There are already high-rez mods of other games that are way more framebuffer-intensive than the stock game.

I don't think that 3GB is a great reason to get the 7970 vs the Gtx680 2GB edition, unless you are planning to keep the card for longer than 24 (maybe even 36) months or are planning to game at higher than 5760x1200 (less, if you want MSAA instead of FXAA). But I also wouldn't dismiss the extra VRAM so readily. The 4GB VRAM edition of the 680 makes this somewhat moot for most gamers, though... the ones who have the need, will buy the 4GB edition. For the vast majority of gamers, they will be fine with 2GB for quite some time, even on a 30" 2560x1600 panel.

Edit: Regarding BF3, 4xMSAA, 2GB VRAM: P.S. Read www.hardocp.com/article/2012/04/25/geforce_gtx_680_3way_sli_radeon_7970_trifire_review/4 about how gtx 680 is severely bottlenecked even at 2x MSAA, when gaming at 5760x1200 on triSLI 680s. Obviously GPU power was not at issue there, but VRAM was certainly affecting things. Even the 7970s suffered though I think it's probably a driver issue with crossfire and not a VRAM limitation.

 

[blackened23]

No...

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=33408705&postcount=21

First of all, I agree with you that 2gb is more than enough for 95% of users. However, you are blatantly ignoring the math - it is DEFINITELY possible to run out of VRAM when you use in excess of FXAA at 5720x1200. I stated that if you run this resolution 4gb can be beneficial, depending on how much you want to tweak your IQ. It means you can use more mods and you can use higher levels of AA. The math is pretty clear on this - anti aliasing is not free, it costs memory.

Again, I agree that 2gb is enough for most everyone. Most people don't run such exotic resolutions so its a non issue for most.

 

[HurleyBird]

No...

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=33408705&postcount=21

Yeah, it's ok for now, but 2GB is not at all future proof for triple monitors. Those of us who were around from the beginning (HD5870) know how quickly things can change from "I have enough VRAM for everything but a few fringe cases" to "Damn, I need to lower my settings again."

I remember when the 2GB 5870 eyefinity6 came out. Apparently it was overkill and only made a difference in 6 monitor eyefinity. But now the original HD5870 is unusable in even three monitor surround. That's going to be the 680/690 a year from now.

 

[guskline]

You will note that they used FXAA in the HardOCP review, not MSAA, and that the GTX580 was at 16x10 res as opposed to 19x12 for the 7970 they tested. Do you even read the reviews you cite as proof?

FXAA is NOT MSAA. I don't really like artificial blurriness. Maybe with time my opinion of FXAA will change, but as of now I prefer MSAA.

It's been shown that triple 1080p with 2x MSAA and 2GB VRAM may be feasible with BF3, but it gets shaky once you go to 4x MSAA.

Further, there is no guarantee that BF3 is going to be the most VRAM-intense title for the next, say, 12 months. There are already high-rez mods of other games that are way more framebuffer-intensive than the stock game.

I don't think that 3GB is a great reason to get the 7970 vs the Gtx680 2GB edition, unless you are planning to keep the card for longer than 24 (maybe even 36) months or are planning to game at higher than 5760x1200 (less, if you want MSAA instead of FXAA). But I also wouldn't dismiss the extra VRAM so readily. The 4GB VRAM edition of the 680 makes this somewhat moot for most gamers, though... the ones who have the need, will buy the 4GB edition. For the vast majority of gamers, they will be fine with 2GB for quite some time, even on a 30" 2560x1600 panel.

Edit: Regarding BF3, 4xMSAA, 2GB VRAM: P.S. Read www.hardocp.com/article/2012/04/25/geforce_gtx_680_3way_sli_radeon_7970_trifire_review/4 about how gtx 680 is severely bottlenecked even at 2x MSAA, when gaming at 5760x1200 on triSLI 680s. Obviously GPU power was not at issue there, but VRAM was certainly affecting things. Even the 7970s suffered though I think it's probably a driver issue with crossfire and not a VRAM limitation.

As you can see from my sig, rig 2 has the 680 with 3 24 inch 1920x1080 monitors. Runs well

 

[blastingcap]

As you can see from my sig, rig 2 has the 680 with 3 24 inch 1920x1080 monitors. Runs well

My OC'd 5850 could run triple monitor TF2 at medium-high and limited to no AA just fine on 1GB VRAM but that doesn't prove anything.

Go ahead and run BF3 and play multiplayer with settings cranked to max and 4x MSAA and report back your experiences if you want. Oh wait, we ALREADY know the answer: it sucks and is probably due to memory bottleneck. See the HardOCP article on this. I linked to it in the very same post you quoted.

If you are okay with FXAA then your 2GB will last longer but I personally don't like FXAA and I am not alone in that. If you plan to upgrade your rig before 2GB becomes an issue for 5760x1080, you might as well just get a 670 then and save $100 to put into your next upgrade.

 

[blackened23]

When you're running this kind of setup, 4gb can help: not to sound like a broken record but AA costs memory. However, 2gb is fine for most people.

The take home message is that super high levels of AA costs VRAM. 95% of users don't care about this level of IQ or 3d surround resolutions, so 2gb is fine.

 

[Subyman]

When you're running this kind of setup, 4gb can help: not to sound like a broken record but AA costs memory. However, 2gb is fine for most people.

The take home message is that super high levels of AA costs VRAM. 95% of users don't care about this level of IQ or 3d surround resolutions, so 2gb is fine.

40fps isn't playable for me anyway, so the difference between 2 and 40 doesn't matter.

 

[Elfear]

40fps isn't playable for me anyway, so the difference between 2 and 40 doesn't matter.

That's what overclocking is for.

 

[awkmonkey]

I run triple 2560x1440 monitors. I can cap the VRAM on 3GB cards without breaking a sweat. There is not a single doubt in my mind that framerates die a horrible death when you cap the VRAM. I'm not even sure if 4gb will be enough. I am the 1%.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

It is 40 vs 20 in this particular situation. In some other situation or in some other future game/situation it may be 60 vs 40 FPS, there 60 would be fine and as you said, you don't like playing at 40 fps, making the choice obvious for you.

But if you wish to upgrade in less than a year, 2GB is okay except for heavy AA at 1600p , as in 4x/8x SsAA + 8x MSAA and also except for Eyefinity (okay in many situations though).