Mirror's Edge Catalyst 'Hyper' Settings Made Possible by 8GB VRAM

[3DVagabond]

I wonder where's that guy who said 4gb will be enough for this console generation.

I don't know if you're talking about me, but I'll admit to saying it. Doesn't mean they can't pull some marketing settings to sabotage it though.

 

[96Firebird]

Refusing to run outright or refusing to run with any stability is basically the same in this case. The point is that the game should run perfectly stable, but as a slideshow.

Go ahead, run a game where you run out of VRAM and let me know if you can get any meaningful data from it.

 

[therealnickdanger]

Hyperbole Mode.

Not sure why everyone is worried about this. Several games released in recent memory "require" certain settings until someone figures out a way to run it with a .ini edit or startup command. Doom's Nightmare Graphics Mode "requires" 5GB, but runs just fine on cards with 4GB (or 3.5GB). GTAV wouldn't run on dual core machines, until someone made a fix. I give it a week.

 

[Sweepr]

Nope, instead all we got was "Battlefied 1 is going to run crap on AMD." Okay.

I missed this part, can you please highlight for us?

Of course the real loser here is Fury/Fury X, other 4GB VRAM VGAs probably don't have the horsepower to push Hyper settings anyway.

 

[antihelten]

Go ahead, run a game where you run out of VRAM and let me know if you can get any meaningful data from it.

I can tell if there actually is a VRAM limit (by seeing the framerate tank). A game that simply refusing to run on the other hand could be due to a million and one different reasons, with one of these being the game having an artificial limitation that prevents 4GB GPUs form running.

Anyway I just stumbled across this on Nvidia's site:

I'm using a non-reference 970 (Asus Strix) and I'm getting 70+ on average on Hyper settings.

So apparently the game runs hyper settings just fine with 4GB, and Gamers nexus managed to screw things up somehow. This is exactly why you'll wan't the game to actually run, instead of just assuming that 4GB is an issue when the game doesn't run.

 

[Yakk]

Hyperbole Mode.

Not sure why everyone is worried about this. Several games released in recent memory "require" certain settings until someone figures out a way to run it with a .ini edit or startup command. Doom's Nightmare Graphics Mode "requires" 5GB, but runs just fine on cards with 4GB (or 3.5GB). GTAV wouldn't run on dual core machines, until someone made a fix. I give it a week.

Still, in the meantime some sites may release benchmarks (or may be encouraged to), and the intended marketing damage will be done by the time the bogus looking requirements can be bypassed. Such is the state of PC gaming nowadays...

 

[ShintaiDK]

I missed this part, can you please highlight for us?

Of course the real loser here is Fury/Fury X, other 4GB VRAM VGAs probably don't have the horsepower to push Hyper settings anyway.

+1 :thumbsup:

 

[antihelten]

+1 :thumbsup:

Apparently a 4GB 970 can do 70+ FPS at 1080P with hyper settings. Gamers Nexus must have screwed up their testing somehow.

This game does not appear to have any real VRAM limits (at least not at 4GB), so once whatever issue Gamers Nexus ran into is fixed, Mirror's Edge should run just fine on 4GB cards.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Agreed, though many of us have been getting it since the almost punch-drunk obsession with "can it run Crysis 3" thing. And the Crysis 2 thing before that. (Takes a bunch of pretty charts brand fanboys just love to argue over, screws them up and throws the whole lot in the bin). What are the actual visual differences. "Show me". Everything else is just repeating someone else's "rat race" sales pitch...

All I've seen in the links so far is this:-
http://media.gamersnexus.net/images/media/2016/game-bench/me-catalyst/me-catalyst-bench-course.jpg
http://www.gamegpu.com/images/stori...rrorsEdgeCatalyst_2016_04_22_21_05_07_098.jpg
http://www.gamegpu.com/images/stori...rrorsEdgeCatalyst_2016_04_22_21_09_11_179.jpg
http://www.gamegpu.com/images/stories/Test_GPU/Slider/MEC/1/3.jpg
http://www.gamegpu.com/images/stories/Test_GPU/Slider/MEC/1/6.jpg
http://www.gamegpu.com/images/stories/Test_GPU/Slider/MEC/2/6_1.jpg
http://www.gamegpu.com/images/stories/Test_GPU/Slider/MEC/3/7_1.jpg
http://www.gamegpu.com/images/stories/Test_GPU/Slider/MEC/4/8_3.jpg
http://www.gamegpu.com/images/stories/Test_GPU/Slider/MEC/4/8_4.jpg

Unless I've got sucked into a parallel universe, or am looking at completely the wrong game, what in God's name could justify straining even a 2GB VRAM card at 1080p with those visuals? If you 'need' 8GB VRAM and up to 10GB RAM for a "blur-saturated outdoor equivalent of Portal 1", then your game is catastrophically unoptimised... :thumbsdown:

Edit 2: Seriously, I can't believe people are cheering on the "need" for + $600 GFX cards for this (min vs med vs max / min vs med vs max). What am I supposed to be looking at? Am I really seeing Skyrim + 2K textures get higher fps on an i3-4170 + 750Ti looking like this, than an i7 + GTX 970 does in Mirrors Edge Catalyst looking like this on "Максимальное качество" ("Maximum Quality")?

I can't say it better than you did.

BTW wow that Crysis 3 comparison shot is so pathetic to the point of utter hilarity.

 

[xthetenth]

I'm going to be real mad if Mirror's Edge, a game which both has a gameplay design that wants as fast and fluid a framerate and also has a visual design that lends itself to the sort of asset work that performs quite well chugs compared to something with much more complicated level geometry like SW: Battlefront by the same devs.

But then again, apparently Gaming Evolved is good for a Total War game that actually runs well. A game that looks like Total Warhammer running like Shogun 2 is nuts. Battlefront runs brilliantly. The Gaming Evolved brand is tied to some really good games.

Hopefully either ME runs great once drivers are done or this setting is just a low performing mess slathered on top of a game that performs well and looks good.

 

[IllogicalGlory]

I missed this part, can you please highlight for us?

Of course the real loser here is Fury/Fury X, other 4GB VRAM VGAs probably don't have the horsepower to push Hyper settings anyway.

Well, let's see.

Will future DICE games (Battlefield 1) also benefit/need 8GB+ VRAM VGAs to run at max settings?

This is what we call a "leading question", where the answer is built into the question, the subtext is obvious. The subtext of course being that the Fury X and RX 480 are going to choke in Battlefield 1. It's textbook FUD.

 

[Sweepr]

Well, let's see.This is what we call a "leading question", where the answer is built into the question, the subtext is obvious. The subtext of course being that the Fury X and RX 480 are going to choke in Battlefield 1. It's textbook FUD.

You can include GM204 VGAs from NVIDIA in your generalization, or wait for more Mirror's Edge Catalyst tests (few benchmarks out) before jumping to conclusions if that makes you feel better. Save your personal attacks for someone else, I can't change the results.

 

[96Firebird]

This is what we call a "leading question", where the answer is built into the question, the subtext is obvious. The subtext of course being that the Fury X and RX 480 are going to choke in Battlefield 1. It's textbook FUD.

Sounds like your own insecurities that your 290 won't be able to max BF1. Its ok, you can just drop some settings. Like I said, all graphics cards have their limitations...

 

[mohit9206]

I don't know if you're talking about me, but I'll admit to saying it. Doesn't mean they can't pull some marketing settings to sabotage it though.

No i don't think it was you. In any case its kinda silly to assume one could coast by on a 4gb card throughout this generation because Watch Dogs was just the beginning. More unoptimized games are coming our way lol.

Hyperbole Mode.

Not sure why everyone is worried about this. Several games released in recent memory "require" certain settings until someone figures out a way to run it with a .ini edit or startup command. Doom's Nightmare Graphics Mode "requires" 5GB, but runs just fine on cards with 4GB (or 3.5GB). GTAV wouldn't run on dual core machines, until someone made a fix. I give it a week.

I don't recall GTA V requiring fix to work on dual core. I didn't do anything and it ran fine on my Pentium. Far Cry 4 required fix after which it ran great. Also Rise of Tomb Raider technically shouldn't have worked on my 1gb card as medium settings required 2gb and low settings 1.5gb yet i ran it on medium with just 1gb of vram that too on a Pentium. I hope my 1gb card and Pentium last me a few more years...

 

[therealnickdanger]

I don't recall GTA V requiring fix to work on dual core. I didn't do anything and it ran fine on my Pentium. Far Cry 4 required fix after which it ran great. Also Rise of Tomb Raider technically shouldn't have worked on my 1gb card as medium settings required 2gb and low settings 1.5gb yet i ran it on medium with just 1gb of vram that too on a Pentium. I hope my 1gb card and Pentium last me a few more years...

The official system requirements for GTA5 are a minimum of a quad-core CPU. Most people have not been as fortunate as you, I think. There are a slew of forum posts from its launch day where people couldn't get the game to start or play reliably on dual-core PCs. Some of the communities fixes/mods have greatly improved game performance for dual-core CPUs.

Based upon what you posted, I think we're in agreement that what we are told is a requirement is rarely that. What is often considered black and white is in fact very often gray.

 

[therealnickdanger]

I have to wonder what sort of impact this marketing tactic will have on sales of the game itself. For the unaware masses, hearing or reading something like "Hyper mode requires an 8GB graphics card." can quickly turn into "Don't buy this game if you don't have an 8GB card."

If it's all just a ploy to move more Pascal, then it fails because there are other 8GB GPUs on the market for less money.

If it's truly a legit requirement, then it runs the risk of impacting sales due to dumb consumers.

Either way it I can't see it as a successful marketing strategy for EA or Nvidia.

 

[antihelten]

If it's truly a legit requirement, then it runs the risk of impacting sales due to dumb consumers.

It's not a legit requirement, 4GB cards runs just fine with hyper settings:

970
970
980
980
980

There's even a guy running on a mix of hyper and lower settings on a 2GB card:

770

Some people are apparently experiencing texture pop-in, but that doesn't appear to be a VRAM issue seeing as a guy with a Titan X is also experiencing it.

 

[Headfoot]

No i don't think it was you. In any case its kinda silly to assume one could coast by on a 4gb card throughout this generation because Watch Dogs was just the beginning. More unoptimized games are coming our way lol.

4GB very well may end up being enough ("super mega ultra hyper" settings with no IQ improvement discarded) considering that the PS4 Neo and NX kick off the next generation and those dont seem to be too far out

 

[Bacon1]

Has anyone done any IQ comparisons yet? Or even straight FPS comparisons between the hyper and ultra or ultra/high?

 

[Keysplayr]

If there is no discernable difference between hyper and Ultra settings, obviously you would use whichever had the smaller performance impact.
And...... mirrors edge? Was the first one even popular? I remember playing it two or 3 times (not anywhere near to completion) and was underwhelmed.

 

[crisium]

I played some of the first but didn't finish either. I really liked it but I got frustrated with the human encounters. I'm somewhat interested in this one, but I wonder if I should just try playing the first again instead. Should be able to get a pretty good framerate.

 

[Sonikku]

You guys think 4gb is enough on the 480 for 1080p gaming?

 

[96Firebird]

You guys think 4gb is enough on the 480 for 1080p gaming?

As long as every checkbox doesn't need to be checked, yes.

 

[Thala]

You guys think 4gb is enough on the 480 for 1080p gaming?

I am certain, that this would be sufficient for almost all use-cases.

As long as every checkbox doesn't need to be checked, yes.

Precisely. Potential framerate would limit you before VRAM. Point in case even an GTX1080 cannot sustain 60fps in 1080p! when enabling hyper settings in Mirrors Edge much less any other GPU - and that is already assuming someone plans to play 1080p with GTX1080.

 

[Yakk]

You guys think 4gb is enough on the 480 for 1080p gaming?

Some people will say yes, others a big no.

Depends on your e-peen IMHO.

You can always figure out a way to use more. My guess is AMD will probably keep steady at 4gb for the next few years, while nvidia will try to push new options which will require 8gb for very slight improvements.

That being said, if the 8gb version of the RX480 is indeed only $40 or $50 more... my answer would be... why not?