How much VRAM will we need next year or two?

[Horrux]

1GB VRAM cards have been around for nearly 3 years. Or maybe more? I just bought two GTX 570s for SLI, which is performing very nicely, but the cards are just 1280mb, and I fear that future games will require more VRAM than this in order to run maxed. I hear F1 2010 runs 1.5Gb at ultra, and Shogun II, which I have, runs well above 1.2Gb at highest settings.

This seems to be a trend and I worry that in the future, games will use more VRAM than I have. But how much and when? Someone posted somewhere that even Skyrim will have a RECOMMENDED VRAM requirement of only 512 Mb, which I find somewhat hard to believe, given that Oblivion's requirements to run maxed back when it came out were simply impossible to match with then-available technology. I remember it took some years before it was possible to run that one maxed with decent framerates, same as Crysis.

 

[cadaveca]

Depends on the resolution you run.

 

[micropage7]

it depends on the game itself, most run fine with 1 gig memory. but if you are hardcore gamer or play it to the max resolution or setting take 2 gig
i guess on the next years 1 gig would run fine but not for high end game
but anyway you could double it by using crossfire or sli

 

[xBruce88x]

yea games are just now approaching the need for 1GB of VRAM with uber settings. for multi monitor goodness or high res with high AA and AF, then 2GB may be needed soon... esp. if microsoft and sony release new consoles that make full use of DX11 quality graphics. meaning all the new console ports would too. right now all these cards with the high vram (1.5gb instead of 768, 2gb instead of 1, etc) seem to be a marketing gimmick (except the really high end gpus). 2gb ram on my 9600gt probably wouldn't improve its performance. 2gb on newer cards on the other hand is a different story since they'll be able to process more and make full use of the 2gb. until we see games REQUIRE 1GB of vram i wouldn't worry too much about 2gb for vram unless you want tri monitors at high res with max AA and AF

basically it comes down to what res you're going to game at and how many monitors.

 

[wickerman]

I think generally speaking most people will run out of gpu computing power before they really run out of vram. There are probably a few games that are an exception, but I think its fair to say you'll get good life out of those.

Game developers do like to push the envelope sometimes with certain features or settings, but on the whole they have to design their games to run well on the largest number of systems possible. You're not gunna get too many people to buy your game if your $50 game requires a $500 graphics card. So you might come across some cases where you have to go from ultra down to high graphics, or tweak some particularly memory intensive settings, but I don't think you'll really have to sacrifice much of your gaming experience at least over the next 2 years.

 

[twicksisted]

but anyway you could double it by using crossfire or sli

crossfire does not double the graphics card vram.

Anyways the amount of vram needed depends on the resolution youre gaming at and also the games requirements. If you consider that the majority of games are made for Xbox/ps3 then you start to realise that 1 gig is pretty much fine at the moment.

I'm sure the requirements will change but for that to happen they will have to release a next gen games console with higher specs so that games developers can push the technological envelope further.

 

[Horrux]

To clarify, I am a high end gamer. I run SLI GTX 570s so as to max out my games and get great framerates.

I know that CURRENT games are fine with 1280mb, although it seems GTA IV, Shogun 2 and F1 2010 make use of more VRAM at their higher quality settings.

Moreover, the rule of "most" games is not one I am willing to go by. Console ports annoy the high end pc gamer, who always looks for more out of his games. I certainly am annoyed at pure console ports. I much prefer pure PC games, and those do take advantage of higher end PC hardware.

Moreover, I am talking here about FUTURE games. I know about the current ones, I have about 200 of them.

 

[cadaveca]

1280 MB isn't enough for tri-monitor gaming.

Seem even the GTX580 is having some vram limit issues running 3 monitors.


So agian, it depends on resolution.

 

[Mussels]

VRAM 'upgrades' are going to be slow moving.


32 bit OS's cant use them, console ports are still really common so they'll be restrained in those titles, and since the majority of people cant use it if it existed, why would card makers even start making the cards?


personally i dont see 2GB cards being 'needed' for a while for 99% of users (eyefinity etc aside), with 4GB cards only having value in SLI/crossfire situations (since the VRAM isnt additive)

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

yea it entirely depends on the game for many of the games i play most actually benefit from 2gb frame buffer at 1920x1200 but a large majority of popular titles do not.

 

[newtekie1]

Future games? Yeah, there will be some for sure where 1.25GB will likely cause some problems with absolute max settings. However, it isn't likely that lowering the few settings to get below that limit will have any noticeable affect on image quality.

 

[Horrux]

Yeah I think 1.25Gb looks to be sufficient until the next generation consoles show up. And yet, there are bound to be some _PC_ games developers that will want to again push the envelope... I'm disappointed that so little is known about future games and their capabilities.

 

[douglatins]

Single monitoring at 1920 or 2560 i believe over 1gb will be plenty for a long time

 

[twicksisted]

I'm disappointed that so little is known about future games and their capabilities.

Sorry, im not flaming you here but i found this part a little funny... like anything, little is known as it is the "future"... nothing is ever known except speculation and heresay

 

[Horrux]

Sorry, im not flaming you here but i found this part a little funny... like anything, little is known as it is the "future"... nothing is ever known except speculation and heresay

Yes, but I would think, like, some developers might talk about what future technologies they might be implementing, or video card manufacturers, and the future of game development.

It's a huge industry, they must have some idea where they are headed. After all, AMD, Intel & nVidia put out roadmaps...

 

[twicksisted]

Yes, but I would think, like, some developers might talk about what future technologies they might be implementing, or video card manufacturers, and the future of game development.

It's a huge industry, they must have some idea where they are headed. After all, AMD, Intel & nVidia put out roadmaps...

Very true... though you can bet your money that they develop games for profit and that isnt in the PC gaming sector right now... so any future apps will have to make do with the current console hardware... untill a new console with updated specs comes out... the requirements for games will pretty much be the same

 

[voidshatter]

see this

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18284509

 

[antuk15]

ANYONE buying a GPU NOW needs to get one with 2Gb.

For the best part of 6 months I've been telling people that 1Gb isn't enough.

 

[twicksisted]

when i was upgrading a friends pc recently, they went with a radeon HD6950 2gb model... but looking at all the reviews there was little to no increase in FPS and actually some games suffered.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

well 5850 xfire at 1000-1050 core is roughly about 6950 performance or better, and going from 1gb to 2gb on 6970s that are stock right now frame rate massively improved and in more then a few titles the extra ram made a very large difference problem is right now its a minor change only a few games really need the extra ram not enough to actually matter. but that will change once more developers switch over to PC as the lead platform as the new consoles are in the works because its easier to scale something down then it is to scale it up.

 

[erocker]

For the best part of 6 months I've been telling people that 1Gb isn't enough.

Can you explain why?

 

[cadaveca]

Can you explain why?

I've been saying the same, but have been running 2560x1600 for almost 5 years now. Add in AA, and you quickly run outta VRAM.

Now we got eyefinity, again 1GB not enough, been running that for near 2 years now(Sept 2009).

 

[erocker]

You're running a high resolution. What about for 1080p users? I mean, I use 1gb cards at 1920x1200 and have no ill effects. I do realize that 1gb is at the cusp of perhaps not being enough due to using a couple 768mb cards recently. So, I'm thinking 1.5 - 2gb would be a good standard.

 

[cadaveca]

Totally agree. Just putting it in perspective.

With the next generation of console quickly approaching, I do beleive that 1GB will soon be "not enough", but util those titles come, for sure 1GB is more than enough for 1080p users, in most cases. Even tack on 4xAA, and you're fine, but 8xAA with 1GB VRAM seems to be problematic for quite a few apps out there.

 

[crazyeyesreaper]

and sadly its not the 8xAA that tends to always bog the performance down, as many of todays gpus are more then capable of pushing it in terms of power. but were in the transitional stage where it starts to matter