How much Video Ram do your games use @ 2560x1600?

[poohbear]

Hey all, so i'm hoping to get a new 30" IPS @ 2560x1600 and wanna know how much VRAM games use @ that resolution? I currently have a GTX 670 2GB, and most games new don't surpass 1.5gb @ 1080p, so how much of a jump can i expect going to 2560x1600? Is 2GB enough? Can you guys check using GPU-Z (under the "Sensors" tab & "Memory used" tab) while playing your games please?

The one game i'm worried about is BF3 @ ultra settings, it uses 1.5gb-1.8gb on average @ 1080p, so not sure if i can handle that with a GTX 670 2GB.

Thanks!

 

[JAG87]

BF3 actually runs fine with a GTX 670 at 2560x1600, even with MSAA. Last time I looked it was around 1.9GB. With just FXAA/SMAA it was around 1.7GB.

But there are games that are heavier on VRAM than BF3, and will not run well once you turn on MSAA on a single 670.

 

[poohbear]

BF3 actually runs fine with a GTX 670 at 2560x1600, even with MSAA. Last time I looked it was around 1.9GB. With just FXAA/SMAA it was around 1.7GB.

But there are games that are heavier on VRAM than BF3, and will not run well once you turn on MSAA on a single 670.

I see, thanx. U said "won't run well on a SINGLE 670"? But 2 670s in SLI wouldnt change anything that as they still only have 2gb, no?

 

[blackened23]

I play at this resolution and there are no current games that will go past 2GB unless you mod it heavily. EOT.

If you use excessive amounts of anti aliasing via nvidia inspector, specifically SGSSAA will eat up VRAM. I play all kinds of games at that resolution and no games have passed the 2GB barrier except skyrim with an absolute ton of mods and SGSSAA. In that case skyrim would not run, but without SGSSAA it is fine.

Long story short, you won't have any problems unless you 1) mod heavily 2) use SGSSAA via nvidia inspector. Theoretically 8X MSAA can cause you to pass the barrier to but I have not found any games which this applies to. Remember MSAA is the biggest contributor to VRAM depletion, aside from pixel count and game assets. If any game doesn't agree with the VRAM on your card it won't run - again I haven't found a single game like this. If it does apply to a future game, you can use FXAA instead of 8X MSAA / SGSSAA to ease the VRAM requirement.

 

[JAG87]

I see, thanx. U said "won't run well on a SINGLE 670"? But 2 670s in SLI wouldnt change anything that as they still only have 2gb, no?

If you're using up all the memory, it won't make a difference, you'll still get stutters and bad minimum frame rate. But bare in mind, it's really just a handful of games that could use more than 2GB with AA, it's not something you should be concerned about, especially since the future seems oriented towards post-AA anyways, which reduces VRAM usage a lot. So I don't think 2GB VRAM will be much of an issue at 2560x1600 for the near future.

edit: blackened beat me to it

 

[aaksheytalwar]

With consoles going 8gb, don't expect more than a few months life at 1440p with 2gb and another few months at 1080p. Now high end cards are going to be 4+ gb from now on and since consoles with 8gb are coming, 4-6gb VRAM will be the norm in 2013 late/2014. In 2014 you will have trouble even running maxed out at 1080p wi less than 3gb VRAM.

Anyways current games like bf3 will be fine with msaa but a single 670 can't play at 1440p with msaa anyway.

 

[blackened23]

Anyways current games like bf3 will be fine with msaa but a single 670 can't play at 1440p with msaa anyway.

You can make most games run reasonably well with a 670 at 1440p. Granted, extremely demanding games like crysis 3 will require lowering settings a bit, but I understand the OP prefers RTS and RPG games which will be fine.

 

[Stuka87]

I play at this resolution and there are no current games that will go past 2GB unless you mod it heavily. EOT.

If you use excessive amounts of anti aliasing via nvidia inspector, specifically SGSSAA will eat up VRAM. I play all kinds of games at that resolution and no games have passed the 2GB barrier except skyrim with an absolute ton of mods and SGSSAA. In that case skyrim would not run, but without SGSSAA it is fine.

Long story short, you won't have any problems unless you 1) mod heavily 2) use SGSSAA via nvidia inspector. Theoretically 8X MSAA can cause you to pass the barrier to but I have not found any games which this applies to. Remember MSAA is the biggest contributor to VRAM depletion, aside from pixel count and game assets. If any game doesn't agree with the VRAM on your card it won't run - again I haven't found a single game like this. If it does apply to a future game, you can use FXAA instead of 8X MSAA / SGSSAA to ease the VRAM requirement.

Sorry, but you are wrong. There are games without mods that will use over 2GB of RAM if its there (Bioshock Infinate being one of them). And 2GB nVidia cards do get jerks when they have to flush out memory and load new textures in. Most noticeable when moving between areas. Cards with 3GB+ don't see this.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Well, if I turn MSAA and everything on in Crysis at 2560x1440 I can hit the wall and get a slideshow lol.

For the record I have shown screenshots of Bioshock infinite eating up 2GB but I'll be honest, I think it was pooling textures unnecessarily and wasting it. So in truth it wasn't really in use.

With consoles going 8gb, don't expect more than a few months life at 1440p with 2gb and another few months at 1080p. Now high end cards are going to be 4+ gb from now on and since consoles with 8gb are coming, 4-6gb VRAM will be the norm in 2013 late/2014. In 2014 you will have trouble even running maxed out at 1080p wi less than 3gb VRAM.

Anyways current games like bf3 will be fine with msaa but a single 670 can't play at 1440p with msaa anyway.

Remember that the 8GB is shared by everything. The OS takes some, the open apps and programs takes some, the game running in memory takes some, and the rest can be called upon by the GPU. How much of the 8GB will really be left just for the GPU? I'm thinking they will reserve a good chunk for the OS and the loaded apps and games and network. Then you have probably 2GB left over anyway.

 

[cmdrdredd]

double post

 

[blackened23]

Sorry, but you are wrong. There are games without mods that will use over 2GB of RAM if its there (Bioshock Infinate being one of them). And 2GB nVidia cards do get jerks when they have to flush out memory and load new textures in. Most noticeable when moving between areas. Cards with 3GB+ don't see this.

No offense but I'm afraid you're actually the one who is wrong.

That's your theory regarding Bioshock Infinite. It's not true. That very topic has been discussed ad nausea around here so I won't bother again, but I will state that the hitches in Bioshock Infinite are resolution independent. The game is using DX11-UE3 and many, many DX11-UE3 games have this same hitching behaviour, and it isn't related to VRAM. There's just something strange about UE3 and DX11, a lot of games hitch regardless of GPU - but UE3 with DX9 does not hitch. I get the same hitching at 1080p at 1680*1050, it is resolution independent. The game is just using an old, wonky engine - the same thing happens in Batman: AC with DX11 and is also resolution independent (when you pan the camera quickly with the mouse, it will always hitch...[referring to batman: AC here])

The other thing to keep in mind is this: games don't run when they run out of VRAM. You'll be staring a desktop and get a TDR or crash. It isn't a case of VRAM pooling, the game just refuses to run if you exceed the proper amount - i've seen this many times in surround resolutions with AA set too high. I've tested surround quite a bit and you can actually exceed 2GB of VRAM with super high MSAA levels. I've done it, i've tried it, and games won't run if you do so - in which case you revert to FXAA. VRAM pooling doesn't happen if you go beyond the limit. The game crashing and staring at the desktop, this is what happens. But this is not the case at 1440p.

 

[poohbear]

thanks all. Ok ill stick with my GTX 670 until Nvidia or AMD release their refresh, then jump on a 3gb-4gb card when they come out later this year. I'll avoid the MSAA, but my understanding is you don't need AA at 2560x1600, is that correct? @ such a high resolution the jaggies are hardly noticeable, no? I always remember when AA first came out it was meant for low resolutions, not the high ones.

 

[cmdrdredd]

thanks all. Ok ill stick with my GTX 670 until Nvidia or AMD release their refresh, then jump on a 3gb-4gb card when they come out later this year. I'll avoid the MSAA, but my understanding is you don't need AA at 2560x1600, is that correct? @ such a high resolution the jaggies are hardly noticeable, no? I always remember when AA first came out it was meant for low resolutions, not the high ones.

It depends on the game. Where you can afford to use AA go ahead and use it. Not everything is perfectly smooth, even at 2560x1440/1600. Some games benefit from AA quite a bit.

 

[bystander36]

Just realize you don't need more than 4x MSAA, or you don't need SSAA.

Btw, why do people recommend SGSSAA in Nvidia Inspector. It far inferior to 2x2 or 3x3 SSAA under the standard "AA setting", rather than SGSSAA in transparencies. Unless it is game dependent, but the games I've tried, SGSSAA is no where near as good SSAA under the normal "Antialias setting" within Nvidia inspector.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Just realize you don't need more than 4x MSAA, or you don't need SSAA.

Btw, why do people recommend SGSSAA in Nvidia Inspector. It far inferior to 2x2 or 3x3 SSAA under the standard "AA setting", rather than SGSSAA in transparencies. Unless it is game dependent, but the games I've tried, SGSSAA is no where near as good SSAA under the normal "Antialias setting" within Nvidia inspector.

It's more compatible and runs faster.

 

[bystander36]

It's more compatible and runs faster.

Well, it does nothing in many games, such as Dragon Age: Origins. It behaves like normal transparencies. Maybe a little better in some cases, but it is not the same as SSAA.

 

[blackened23]

Just realize you don't need more than 4x MSAA, or you don't need SSAA.

Btw, why do people recommend SGSSAA in Nvidia Inspector. It far inferior to 2x2 or 3x3 SSAA under the standard "AA setting", rather than SGSSAA in transparencies. Unless it is game dependent, but the games I've tried, SGSSAA is no where near as good SSAA under the normal "Antialias setting" within Nvidia inspector.

You're confused. SGSSAA is SSAA. It isn't transparency supersampling. Transparency is less quality, but SGSSAA isn't transparency supersampling, it's a different setting entirely and isn't accessible in nvidia control panel. There are different methods of SSAA, which are (sparse grid) SGSSAA, OGSSAA or RGSSAA. Transparency SS is a completely different setting which isn't as good as SGSSAA.

 

[blackened23]

Well, it does nothing in many games, such as Dragon Age: Origins. It behaves like normal transparencies. Maybe a little better in some cases, but it is not the same as SSAA.

SGSSAA works in any game that has native MSAA. You're confusing Transparency SS with SGSSAA. They are different things.

 

[bystander36]

You're confused. SGSSAA is SSAA. It isn't transparency supersampling. Transparency is less quality, but SGSSAA isn't transparency supersampling, it's a different setting entirely and isn't accessible in nvidia control panel. There are different methods of SSAA, which are (sparse grid) SGSSAA, OGSSAA or RGSSAA. Transparency SS is a completely different setting which isn't as good as SGSSAA.

SGSSAA is only available in Nvidia Inspector under "Antialiasing - Transparency". It is not available under "Antialiasing - Setting". Under "Antialiasing - Setting" there is 2x1, 1x2, 2x2, 3x3, and 4x4 Supersampling. There is no SGSSAA option.

Are you saying my Nvidia Inspector is different than yours?

Edit: I did find an article that explained how to use SGSSAA. Sounds like a ton of work. You have to find some bit, and you mix regulars MSAA with SGSSAA in transparencies. I'm guessing it never worked for me due to not setting the proper AA bit. I think I'll stick with normal SSAA for now. I only use it in two games anyways and that would take hours per game to figure out.

 

[blackened23]

SGSSAA is only available in Nvidia Inspector under "Antialiasing - Transparency". It is not available under "Antialiasing - Setting". Under "Antialiasing - Setting" there is 2x1, 1x2, 2x2, 3x3, and 4x4 Supersampling. There is no SGSSAA option.

Are you saying my Nvidia Inspector is different than yours?

Edit: I did find an article that explained how to use SGSSAA. Sounds like a ton of work. You have to find some bit, and you mix regulars MSAA with SGSSAA in transparencies. I'm guessing it never worked for me due to not setting the proper AA bit. I think I'll stick with normal SSAA for now. I only use it in two games anyways and that would take hours per game to figure out.

Normal SSAA. Huh? The SSAA that you're using is actually SGSSAA. So you either apply SGSSAA to only transparencies or the full scene. SSAA is SGSSAA and applies to the full scene.

There is SGSSAA, OGSSAA, and RGSSAA. There is no "normal" SSAA. Nearly every SSAA implementation by both nvidia and ATI is SGSSAA, and if you ever choose SSAA within nvidia inspector that is what what you're getting. What you configure is whether you apply to only transparencies or the full scene. Nvidia control panel ONLY allows you to do transparencies, you need a 3rd party program (eg inspector) to apply SGSSAA to the full scene.

 

[exar333]

Well, if I turn MSAA and everything on in Crysis at 2560x1440 I can hit the wall and get a slideshow lol.

For the record I have shown screenshots of Bioshock infinite eating up 2GB but I'll be honest, I think it was pooling textures unnecessarily and wasting it. So in truth it wasn't really in use.



Remember that the 8GB is shared by everything. The OS takes some, the open apps and programs takes some, the game running in memory takes some, and the rest can be called upon by the GPU. How much of the 8GB will really be left just for the GPU? I'm thinking they will reserve a good chunk for the OS and the loaded apps and games and network. Then you have probably 2GB left over anyway.

This. Best case would likely be 50/50 usage between CPU/OS and GPU. That is probably a stretch. Most games will likely be tailored to use 1-3GB for the GPU, similar to the PC.

Hopefully they do give more RAM to the CPUs to improve AI and other CPU-related functions, not handled by the GPU.

 

[bystander36]

Normal SSAA. Huh? The SSAA that you're using is actually SGSSAA. So you either apply SGSSAA to only transparencies or the full scene. SSAA is SGSSAA and applies to the full scene.

There is SGSSAA, OGSSAA, and RGSSAA. There is no "normal" SSAA. Nearly every SSAA implementation by both nvidia and ATI is SGSSAA, and if you ever choose SSAA within nvidia inspector that is what what you're getting. What you configure is whether you apply to only transparencies or the full scene. Nvidia control panel ONLY allows you to do transparencies, you need a 3rd party program (eg inspector) to apply SGSSAA to the full scene.

RGSSAA (Regular Grid, but not Rotated Grid) and OGSSAA (Ordered Grid) are the normal SSAA. SGSSAA is a slightly modified version. At least according to the searches I've found. It's also quite confusing, considering the only place to apply that "SGSSAA" option is under transparencies.

http://www.dahlsys.com/misc/antialias/

Sparse Grid Super-sampling Anti-aliasing

Similar to SSAA This type of AA is the first in a series of AA types that represent a compromise designed to trade image quality for performance.
The sampling pattern of plain SSAA is called Regular Grid or Ordered Grid. It can be pictured as a grid that has higher resolution than the pixel grid. Where SSAA samples in each square in that grid, SGSSAA samples in only some of the squares.

You might be interested in actually using SGSSAA, so you could follow these undocumented directions: http://www.overclock.net/t/1250100/nvidia-sparse-grid-supersampling

Note: The reason I asked about this, is your continued use to call it SGSSAA has caused me to search for the option and I never found it anywhere but in transparencies, and it didn't work right (I didn't do all that is in that link though). Now I know you were just meaning to call it by its full name, though you were mistaken on what the full name is, as SGSSAA is compromise version, similar to CSAA and MSAA.

 

[JAG87]

RGSSAA (Regular Grid, but not Rotated Grid) and OGSSAA (Ordered Grid) are the normal SSAA. SGSSAA is a slightly modified version. At least according to the searches I've found. It's also quite confusing, considering the only place to apply that "SGSSAA" option is under transparencies.

I'll try to clear this up for you.

NVCP SSAA is OGSSAA. Which is good but not great, because it's not very effective on almost vertical or horizontal edges.

AMD CCC SSAA is RGSSAA. It is the best quality you can get, but the performance hit is massive.

SGSSAA is in between. It gives quality that's in between OGSSAA and RGSSAA, but with better performance. This is the algorithm that NV and AMD use for TRSSAA, because it's more efficient than OGSSAA and RGSSAA.

Full scene SGSSAA is not an exposed option with either vendor. What ended up happening at one point is that there was a bug in the NV driver that applied SGSSAA to the whole scene instead of just transparency when you selected TRSSAA. People discovered this, and they wanted the option to keep it, but NV would not add it to the control panel because it's untested and not really supported. However, they released a utility that essentially replaces the TRSSAA settings into full scene SGSSAA settings. Here it is:

http://nvidia.custhelp.com/ci/fatta...9VRWlTb0hvbA==/filename/GeForce_SSAA_Tool.exe

So basically with this, you can enable 2x or 4x full scene SGSSAA (without messing around with bits) for basically any game that you select TRSSAA for. Remember that even with this hack/bug, full scene SGSSAA is triggered just like TRSSAA, that is by the level of MSAA you select. Without MSAA, neither TRSSAA nor SGSSAA will be triggered.

Hopefully I didn't confuse the hell out of you.

Bye

 

[bystander36]

That is weird, because the articles I've found say SSAA, RGSSAA and OGSSAA are different names for the same thing, and it is SGSSAA that is the compromise.

I've also used the normal Aliasing-mode SSAA option in Nvidia Inspector, and end up with the same results my AMD setup gets with SSAA enabled.

Anyways, the confusion was he was calling SSAA, SGSSAA. Which is not right, even if we went by the names you gave.

Anyways, cool tool. I might mess with it in other games. Though DA Origins is working good right now.

Edit: You might check under AA mode, in Nvidia inspector and use 3x3 [supersampling D3D only]. It works well in some games at least. I'll experiment with the tool you gave if I run into a game that doesn't work with.

 

[JAG87]

RGSSAA is rotated grid, and OGSSAA is ordered grid. Two completely different things. NV is stuck on good old OGSSAA, and I dont think they will ever improve it or do anything at all, they literally consider full-scene SSAA to be an out-dated remedy.

So SGSSAA is a bit of a bastardized SSAA that trades performance for quality vs. RGSSAA, but offers better performance. But it can actually result in the worst quality between all three because it tends to blur the most.

But anyways, the future is not any of these. Besides high PPI displays which is the true solution, the best quality to performance trade-off is a hybrid of multi sampling AA, morphological AA, and temporal SSAA. And the only algorithm that addresses all of them so far is SMAA.

SMAA 4x produces image quality can actually be better than SGSSAA, and performance is way better.