Several R9 285's pictured (VideoCardz)

[AtenRa]

For people that need more than 2GB there are more Graphics cards to choose from. This is not a top of the line High End graphics card to replace R9 290. This will replace 280 at lower cost and lower TDP. im sure some models will also have 4GB as well for those that need it.

 

[blackened23]

I've had many disagreements with you but that's the perfect summary. It isn't a high end card. Low end maybe mid range card, just like the GTX 760. The 760 is fine for 1080p, I imagine 285 is an intended competitor to the 760 (price wise). If someone wants 4GB,....they should get 4GB and shut up. Though like I said, the intended audience isn't playing everything on ultra. If you want ultra you get a more expensive card that has more VRAM anyway. Alternative choices out there. That's all there is to it really.

 

[3DVagabond]

I've had many disagreements with you but that's the perfect summary. It isn't a high end card. Low end maybe mid range card, just like the GTX 760. The 760 is fine for 1080p, I imagine 285 is an intended competitor to the 760. If someone wants 4GB,....they should get 4GB and shut up. Though like I said, the intended audience isn't playing everything on ultra. If you want ultra you get a more expensive card that has more VRAM anyway. Alternative choices out there. That's all there is to it really.

Hmmm? People are just discussing their opinions and why they think the way they do. It just doesn't seem logical that it would have less VRAM than the 280 did.

 

[blackened23]

Difference being 285 was designed specifically as a low/mid range SKU, while the 280...being a rebadge was originally a high end SKU. So there's no flexibility to change the VRAM amount for lower price tiers unless they go with 1.5GB, which they probably don't want to do.

If you feel a lower GPU needs 4GB, we'll agree to disagree, but I know for a fact that there's tons of people gaming just fine on 2GB to this day, and even 1.5GB 580s to this day. For the 1 game that's an issue at 1080p, and yes, most of these 200$ price teir cards will be used for 1080p - anyway in the event of an issue you lower 1 dial and go about your gaming business. IMO. And if you really want 4GB there's that option (I assume?) There's no regression. Buy what you want to buy depending on your resolution. My suspicion is , if people want to game on ultra with 4X SSAA or 4k they wouldn't get a 285. But if they do they can certainly get 4GB, since all rumors indicate 2 and 4GB versions.

I could see the 4GB argument for a high end SKU. For something potentially higher than 290. But this? Nah. IMO.

 

[Silverforce11]

@blackened23
The difference is you are assuming its a 760 class performance. Whereas what we have to go on, same specs as Tahiti in shaders and improved GCN, with the R285 name, we are expecting greater than R280X class, so thats beyond even the GTX770 class.

Definitely 4GB vram would give it longevity. I just don't think that kind of performance with that low a vram combo is good in late 2014.

The discussion as to why its 2gb, 3dVaga raised a good point. If R285 will be 2GB and R285X will be 4GB, would be a good product differentiation strategy.

 

[SPBHM]

Difference being 285 was designed specifically as a low/mid range SKU, while the 280...being a rebadge was originally a high end SKU. So there's no flexibility to change the VRAM amount for lower price tiers unless they go with 1.5GB, which they probably don't want to do.

the same GPU as the 280s was sold with 256bit/2GB memory bus (Tahiti le from the 7870 Joker card or whatever it was),
they could very easily have done the same to the 280/280x I think

they would only go down to 1.5GB if they wanted to keep the 384bit memory bus intact (not the case with the 285) and didn't want to use memory channels with different memory sizes like Nvidia did with the 660 Ti.

2GB was fine, but now it's to late for a new card, with this level of performance (probably around r9 280) and just 2GB, if you care about the card's longevity.
unless the price is very attractive.

 

[96Firebird]

For people that need more than 2GB there are more Graphics cards to choose from. This is not a top of the line High End graphics card to replace R9 290. This will replace 280 at lower cost and lower TDP. im sure some models will also have 4GB as well for those that need it.

:thumbsup:

 

[toyota]

How much benefit is there from ultra?
http://www.maximumpc.com/graphics_analysis_wolfenstein_new_order_2014
http://www.digitalstormonline.com/u...er-graphics-comparison-ultra-to-low-idnum267/
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Wolfe...enstein-The-New-Order-Test-Benchmark-1121737/

I mean I can make something need 500GB VRAM, it doesnt mean its good or needed still.

2GB is fine, also for future games. And its obvious since you have to pick some extreme cases, usually where the textures are in raw format to get over 2GB usage. But that doesnt mean its needed or worth the extra cost at all.

so now you change your argument to say that Ultra does not look much better in one of the games mentioned? and how the hell are the games I mentioned only "extreme cases"? they are real games that are popular and available right now. again the POINT is that 2gb will limit the settings you can run on that card from day 1 and that is a FACT. its asinine to say its fine for future games when its not even fine now for all games.

again its hilarious that people complained that 2gb might not be enough for 680 and now we actually have games that do need more than 2gb and all of sudden 2gb is just fine for that level of card? lol typical inconsistent nonsense for these forums.

 

[ShintaiDK]

so now you change your argument to say that Ultra does not look much better in one of the games mentioned? and how the hell are the games I mentioned only "extreme cases"? they are real games that are popular and available right now. again the POINT is that 2gb will limit the settings you can run on that card from day 1 and that is a FACT. its asinine to say its fine for future games when its not even fine now for all games.

again its hilarious that people complained that 2gb might not be enough for 680 and now we actually have games that do need more than 2gb and all of sudden 2gb is just fine for that level of card? lol typical inconsistent nonsense for these forums.

Can we agree that these games all play fine with 2GB with very high IQ settings in 2560*1600? Or do you refuse that?

Just dumping raw textures as an ultra setting while expanding the install space requirement isnt ultra. Just as the raw audio in Titanfall that took 30GB or something was an utter joke. So is most ultra settings. Specially in the games you list.

You only focus on the number, 2 vs 3 or 4. Not what it actually changes. try check what it actually changes. Then tell me if you still think you need more than 2GB.

I also assume you got a 6GB GTX780, else what to do with that obsolete trash? Some stuff wont work with 3GB! 6GB is a _need_ to have, right?

 

[toyota]

Can we agree that these games all play fine with 2GB with very high IQ settings in 2560*1600? Or do you refuse that?

Just dumping raw textures as an ultra setting while expanding the install space requirement isnt ultra. Just as the raw audio in Titanfall that took 30GB or something was an utter joke. So is most ultra settings. Specially in the games you list.

Again I will make it simple. these cards have the power to run some games at settings that will need more than 2gb. that is basically what I have been saying since the beginning. if someone wants to buy a card where the vram is going to limit them in some games even from day 1 then that is their choice I guess.

 

[blackened23]

There you go. It's their choice based on what they play and their resolution. Nobody holds a gun to your head and forces a 2GB purchase. FFS, if you want 4GB, get 4GB. Apparently 4GB versions will be available just like the 760 and 770.. Tons of people are gaming just fine at 2GB and for the 1 crap game that needs possibly more, they lower 1 setting. Big deal. But you said it. Their choice. If they happen to want 4GB they will buy 4GB. Nobody is forcing your hand to do a purchase of a 2GB card.

 

[toyota]

its NOT just 1 game. AGAIN all the hell I am saying is that 2gb will limit settings that gpu could otherwise run in some games now and of course in some upcoming games. BS and nonsensical excuses will not change that simple fact. some of you are just laughably inconsistent based on other vram discussions.

 

[Enigmoid]

its NOT just 1 game. AGAIN all the hell I am saying is that 2gb will limit settings that gpu could otherwise run in some games now and of course in some upcoming games. BS and nonsensical excuses will not change that simple fact. some of you are just laughably inconsistent based on other vram discussions.

So its three problematic games (Watch dogs, wolfensetin, daylight)?

 

[toyota]

So its three problematic games (Watch dogs, wolfensetin, daylight)?

I saw issues with Thief too if using high SSAA. so that is 4 games that I know of but there could certainly be some others.

 

[jpiniero]

The thing is most of the titles you mention also have 360/PS3 versions or were using engines that were really designed for the earlier gen. It's once you see the second wave of titles where it gets designed around the new consoles where the graphic level tends to jump quite a bit; and since both have 6-7 GB of memory available it's not hard to think that they are going to budget more than 2 GB for what a PC video card would use.

 

[Enigmoid]

High SSAA? What is the fps at 1080p high settings to begin with?

(What about gaming at non-stupid amounts of AA).

 

[RussianSensation]

Just as I predicted -- AMD's AIBs will start clearing R9 280/280X cards shortly and during this small window of time before that inventory runs out, those cards will be a better value than the 285.

R9 280X is $240 on Newegg. Even if 285 is $200, the 280X with 2048 SPs and 3GB of VRAM is going to be better.

So its three problematic games (Watch dogs, wolfensetin, daylight)?

Toyota is actually spot on. When 680 2GB vs. 7970/Ghz 3GB were discussed 2.5 years ago, many feared that 2GB will become a bottleneck in the next 2-3 years. 670/680 2GB cards lasted for 2.5 years without much of a compromise, aside from the games Toyota mentioned and modded GTA IV or Skyrim games, etc. However, to buy a 2GB card now for $200-250 with plans on keeping it for 2-3 years is just too risky imo because we in the PS5/XB1 and next gen GPUs transition period (imminent launches of 880 and 300 series in the next 12 months). First, GM204 will move the mainstream to 4GB of VRAM. With cards like 280/280X having 3GB, it's just a matter of time before more games take advantage of more than 2GB of VRAM. Also, the games we've played in the last 2 years have been 90% PS360 console ports for the most part. We should see a substantial jump in graphical quality and with it increased demands on VRAM as developers start making games for PS5/XB1 consoles. Games like Watch Dogs are just the start of that new wave.

Every new console generation brings a large influx of demanding titles on the PC. We can't expect the PC gaming landscape to stay stagnant from now until end of 2016/middle of 2017. And honestly with 280X selling for $240 on major sites like Newegg, the 285 2GB is not a good option unless AMD prices it at $189 or something.

 

[3DVagabond]

its NOT just 1 game. AGAIN all the hell I am saying is that 2gb will limit settings that gpu could otherwise run in some games now and of course in some upcoming games. BS and nonsensical excuses will not change that simple fact. some of you are just laughably inconsistent based on other vram discussions.

Wow! Who are you and what have you done with Toyota? You are being so calm. I would have thought by now you would have been over the top. Good going, though.

Listen, you can see that people want to take what you say and try and simply dismiss it because they can't actually counter it. "It's only one game." "If you want to use those ridiculous textures." Or, whatever. Fill in the _________.

You've made your point. Best I can recommend is to bookmark this and when nVidia releases 4gig GM204 (Because obviously nVidia sees the benefit of 4 gig) you will be far more likely to get people certain to agree.

Now, on the flip side. There is something to be said for a card (likely) made from the Pro version of the 3rd chip down in the eventual hierarchy to only have 2 gig. This chip is after all really the Pitcairn replacement (and maybe not even the full chip) with the real Tahiti and Hawaii replacements to come yet. This card will likely end up the R370 when the next gen does come in full. How expensive do we really want the BoP to be for a card that is this far down the pecking order. There is possibly 5 sku's to come yet in higher performance brackets.