Middle Earth Shadow of Mordor - 6GB Vram required (ultra textures)

[RussianSensation]

After what happened with 480/580 1.5GB, 680 2GB and 780Ti 3GB, NV can raise the price by $75-100 and 980 will sell. As far as Nv not being able to sell a 680 mid-range successor for $600 with 8GB, that is absurd. They already raised 680's price by $50. In reality given that 970 is $329, the 980 should really be a $449 card. NV just has baked in an insane profit margin on the 980.

 

[ShintaiDK]

After what happened with 480/580 1.5GB, 680 2GB and 780Ti 3GB, NV can raise the price by $75-100 and 980 will sell. As far as Nv not being able to sell a 680 mid-range successor for $600 with 8GB, that is absurd. They already raised 680's price by $50. In reality given that 970 is $329, the 980 should really be a $449 card. NV just has baked in an insane profit margin on the 680.

And for 449$ it should be 8GB as well, right? Actually even better, they should be forced to sell it for 299$ Damn greedy company!

How dare they charge 50$ more than a GTX680 with double the VRAM, 33% larger die, much better cooler! Not to mention all the performance and power consumption metrics.

 

[RussianSensation]

It's $50 from a card that should have been $349-399 to begin with since GK104 was mid-range and 780/780Ti were the real flagship products. They can charge $1000 if they want. Your point that they wouldn't be able to sell a 980 8GB for $600 has no justification. Hopefully AMD brings some needed competition next year so that GM200 is not $1000. With your logic in 2 years Pascal GP104 goes up $50 to $600, repeat another 2 years and soon mid-range cards would cost $1000?

 

[Erenhardt]

I guess that is bad new for HBM. How does the cost of 1GB of stacked memory compare to GDDR5?
Also, since DDR4 is out, any info if we will see GDDR6?

 

[ShintaiDK]

I guess that is bad new for HBM. How does the cost of 1GB of stacked memory compare to GDDR5?
Also, since DDR4 is out, any info if we will see GDDR6?

It is very bad news for stacked DRAM cost wise(and size wise initially). Pascal for example got 4 stacks of stacked DRAM and support 8 to 16 channels.

If we look at Knights Landing. There is 8 stacks there to reach 16GB. So I wouldnt be surprised if 2016/2017 highend gaming GPUs came with a max of 8GB.

There is no such thing as GDDR6. Stacked DRAM is the "GDDR6".

 

[jpiniero]

A sloppy console port would ship with "medium" quality and that's it, no "high" or "ultra" options for PC.

The fact that its available as a ultra texture downloadable is a sign the devs care, since their original art assets are most likely 4K resolution.

6 GB is probably the PS4/XBox One textures unblemished.

 

[Techhog]

Not laziness per se, but I'm sure developers aren't taking the PC into account when designing the game. That most people's discrete GPU only have 2, maybe 3 GB of memory is of no concern to them.

I consider that lazy porting.

 

[BrightCandle]

They could be uncompressed textures. Wouldn't be the first time we caught a developer using supreme amounts of VRAM for its Ultra texture quality only to find that most of it was a waste as they didn't compress it at all for maximum quality instead of being a little bit more selective.

 

[SlickR12345]

Played Watch Dogs on AMD 295x and it still had performance issues with these minor but frequent stutters. The ram and ultra raw power didn't matter when playing a terrible console port.

I feel like all of these new games are going to be nothing more than terrible console ports that just require ridiculous amount of vram just because they are unoptimized.

I highly doubt this and other similar games that we've been hearing recently are better looking than Crysis 3 or Far Cry 3, yet they require 4 or 6 gb ram now.

 

[EndlessWargasm]

Are there any screen shots comparing the different settings.

My bet is it will be neigh on impossible to tell the difference between ultra and high.

 

[Attic]

Are there any screen shots comparing the different settings.

My bet is it will be neigh on impossible to tell the difference between ultra and high.

Agree.

And if the requirement/suggestion for ultra textures is 6gb it IMO means the dev doesn't really care.

So few gamers have a card fitting that requirement that either the dev is putting that 6gb number out just to draw attention or they just don't care about that setting.


Otherwise the game looks really interesting, possilbly great. There is a war captain system of the orc army that the player has to slueth around and investigate to take down underlings until getting to the captains and such. I may not be explaining it right, but it sounded really really engaging and fun.

Plus Tolkein fantasy world, somewhat fully realized, yea i'll take some of that.

nVidia should bundle this game, or AMD should bundle the game.

 

[Attic]

Here's a video of 4xTitan running the game with ultra textures.

Youtube doesn't deliver all the detail, but can gauge if 6gb VRAM is appropriate for overall game graphical delivery.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrzSBpkxbqw

The game doesn't look ground breaking at all graphically, so why the goundbreaking 6gb VRAM requirement for ultra?

I wonder if TW3 will blitz us with a massive VRAM requirement for ultra detail as well. I doubt it.

 

[desprado]

Here's a video of 4xTitan running the game with ultra textures.

Youtube doesn't deliver all the detail, but can gauge if 6gb VRAM is appropriate for overall game graphical delivery.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrzSBpkxbqw

I wonder if TW3 will blitz us with a massive VRAM requirement for ultra detail as well. I doubt it.

It is running on Single GTX titan because there is no SLI or Crossfire support yet.

 

[frozentundra123456]

It is running on Single GTX titan because there is no SLI or Crossfire support yet.

Looks like Tomb Raider on steroids!

Cant really tell from you tube, but the grpahics dont look exceptional. Speaking of TR though, I though the graphics were exceptional on my 1gb HD7770.

 

[kasakka]

It is running on Single GTX titan because there is no SLI or Crossfire support yet.

Do you know if it's coming? Wouldn't mind getting this but I don't think a single GTX 770 will cut it...

 

[Rezist]

I was really hoping with all the consoles being so similar to PC they would begin making better ports but it's the same old story again. It's like they intentionally want to punish the PC despite getting usually decent sales.

 

[Attic]

Do you know if it's coming? Wouldn't mind getting this but I don't think a single GTX 770 will cut it...

I think a 770 should run this game fine at med/high details. I don't think the game, graphically, is worth a GPU purchase.

 

[Kippa]

It is possible that rather than having huge textures on a few models that they could have smaller textures on large number of models. In both instances they would goble up a lot of video ram.

At a guess looking at the video preview I think the they have lots of unique meshes with lots of small textures on them.

 

[SlowSpyder]

A year ago: "I wish I had a game that pushed my system, these ports of games from these old consoles are so weak!"

Today: "This game takes more resources than my gaming PC has... lazy developers!"

 

[kasakka]

I think a 770 should run this game fine at med/high details. I don't think the game, graphically, is worth a GPU purchase.

Already got two GTX 770s as I got a good deal on the second one. So as you can imagine I'd rather use both whereever I can!

 

[MTDEW]

Take this for what its worth to you, since I cannot post a link to where it came from.
But I can say it was posted along with a screenshot of the games menus I've never seen before showing a setting of +200% (5440x3200) and showing the game is running on an AMD Radeon R9 200 series.
So it seems like some legit info of one persons opinion.

Ultra-Textures are not available yet, so the PC Gamer Vid only uses "High".

I doubt even the ultra-textures will use 6 Gigs on 1080p however - High uses 2.7 Gigs but with downsampling from 2720 x 1700 @ 1920 x 1200. Reason because I didn't try 1080 is because Mordor recognizes my downsampling-resolution as native and will only use percentages of that- so instead of 1080p I'll get some really weired ones like 1927 x 1187 or something like that (and I can't be arsed to fix it right now).

There is however a ingame-supersampling option so you can set the internal rendering to 200 % and will get effectivly 4K-Res while still being in 1080p. If I'd use that coming from 1080p instead of 1700p I'd wager you'd be around 3 Gigs. So the recommendation seems plausible.

So with Ultra-Textures taking somewhat more VRAM and Supersampling enabled, 4 Gigs might be just not enough, making the jump to 6 Gigs logical. - Remember: With Supersampling you're effectively running 4K not 1080p. Coming from there, I'd wager you'll be absolutely fine with 3 Gigs running this game with everything set to ultra, including textures but disabled supersamping.

It also runs very nice. Everything set to ultra except textures and downsampling I get an average framerate of just over 60 with some minor drops to ~50. Setting this to 4K, I still get 45+ with a R9 290X. This is an Nvidia-sponsored game, so Geforce-users will probably be at least slightly higher than this with a similar performing GPU (GTX 780- 780T i, Titan, GTX 970)
I'll test that more in-depth at some point next week, so we'll see.

So much for not optimized.

So don't get your panties in a bunch "wink"

 

[ShintaiDK]

A year ago: "I wish I had a game that pushed my system, these ports of games from these old consoles are so weak!"

Today: "This game takes more resources than my gaming PC has... lazy developers!"

It depends how its done.

I can also make X current game need 50GB VRAM. It doesnt make it look any better tho.

 

[mindbomb]

bf4 with mantle seems to have similar requirements - 2 gigs for medium, 3 for high, 4 for ultra. The recommendations are very helpful. In many r9 285 reviews, many were perplexed as to why bf4 ran so poorly when they benched ultra (requiring 4 gigs of vram) on a 2gb card.

 

[realibrad]

A year ago: "I wish I had a game that pushed my system, these ports of games from these old consoles are so weak!"

Today: "This game takes more resources than my gaming PC has... lazy developers!"

Saying they wish they had something to push their systems, is a short hand way of saying they wanted a more detailed game. Nobody was saying they wanted typical games that looked and felt the same as any other, but used more resources. For that, they could have run bench marking software.

Its like saying I wish I had a challenging game to play, and you cut off my hand to make it harder. All you did was cripple me, instead of making the game more challenging.

 

[alcoholbob]

Even if it says it requires 6GB I bet a 3 or 4GB will run this game faster at 4K than trying to run Crysis 3