Do you really get performance drops from a lack of Vram?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Steel_Nugget

Steel_Nugget

Honorable
Dec 5, 2013
785
0
11,060
So I heard a while ago that once you play a game that needs more Vram then you're GPU can provide you will get huge performance hits/spikes, and I listened to that info. But now I decided to look at benchmarks and different cards and see how much of that was true.
The first GPU I looked at was a GTX 590. This card has 1.5 GB of Vram (Usable) but has the power to out perform a GTX 770 or R9 280x (Or GPUs with similar performance). But that would go to a waste if the Vram usage thing was true since games like BF4 @ 1080p use 2Gb of Vram. Well I looked at videos, and the GTX 590 ran fine on BF4 even though BF4 uses more Vram than the card can give. So that it self raised suspicion for me.

I then recently (Today) went to look at more reviews of a GPU with different amount's of Vram against it's self, and again was shocked to see (In this case a GTX 770) a GTX 770 2GB perform only slightly worse then the 4GB model in games when it went over 2GB of Vram.

So does Vram really have a affect on performance (When you run out) or does it actually not matter as much as people claim?

If you read this, and answer thanks ahead of time.

Link to charts showing games at 5760x1080p using more then 2GB of Vram:http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=718118

Page that shows GTX 770 2Gb vs GTX 770 4GB at 5760x1080p:http://alienbabeltech.com/main/gtx-770-4gb-vs-2gb-tested/3/ Go to the middle of the page, and look at the side by side of 5760x1080p
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
DM Gold

DM Gold

Distinguished
Jul 17, 2014
93
0
18,760
well if your going to be gaming on 1080P then 2 GB of VRAM is great but if you start going over 1080P then you will start needing more VRAM but if will not slow you down that much. for right now 2GB of VRAM is perfect for gaming
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Steel_Nugget

Steel_Nugget

Honorable
Dec 5, 2013
785
0
11,060
What some people say is that if you go over the amount of Vram on your GPU you will get around 10 FPS from what you were at. So I think that was exaggerated a bit.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
anbello262

anbello262

Distinguished
Sep 27, 2013
1,179
3
19,915
Personally, I have the exact same doubt as you. I comment mainly to follow this thread and get an answer, but I also wanted to know. When you fill the availbale Vram, does the game's performance just cap there, or do you ACTUALLY get a big performance hit?
If you are playing at 45 fps and cap the ram there, do you stay at 40-45 fps, or do you actually have big spikes into the 10-20 fps range? Or maybe less, like the 30 fps range?

What is the exact effect of using up all availabke ram (with a potent GPU and CPU)?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Steel_Nugget

Steel_Nugget

Honorable
Dec 5, 2013
785
0
11,060
Yeah, thats what I hear all the time, but if you look at my link, Metro 2033 at 5760x1080p uses about 2.5GB of Ram. If the Vram wall limit thing is true the 2GB model would be unplayable while the 4Gb would still be up there. But what actually happened is the 2GB model was slower by 2-3 FPS.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Steel_Nugget

Steel_Nugget

Honorable
Dec 5, 2013
785
0
11,060
I saw a guy on Youtube with SLI GTX 570 with 1.25 GB of Vram. He said that on BF4 Ultra 1080p he would get good framerates 60-90. So since the game uses about 2GB of Vram I'd say that Vram is overrated.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Steel_Nugget

Steel_Nugget

Honorable
Dec 5, 2013
785
0
11,060
I have a HD 7970 and have it at 1200mhz core 1600mhz mem and it can max every game execpt Metro LL, and Farc Cry 3. Basically I'd recommend the R9 280x even if it had 2GB of Vram.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Steel_Nugget

Steel_Nugget

Honorable
Dec 5, 2013
785
0
11,060
I think I'll spend money to solve this. I'm going to pick up two GTX 570s off Ebay, and I'll see the results. Shouldn't be a big deal, since I can then use one as a Physx GPU, and sell the second to my friend with a HD 7770.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
anbello262

anbello262

Distinguished
Sep 27, 2013
1,179
3
19,915
Actually, the 280x is the one with 3gb, and the 770 only has 2, but I like the 770 more (for aesthetic reasons, and because I've always liked nvidia)...

If you are really gonna try that, then let us all know, I'm really curious and could really use that info!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Steel_Nugget

Steel_Nugget

Honorable
Dec 5, 2013
785
0
11,060
I know the R9 280x has 3GB. I said as if it did have 2GB I would still recommend it. I thought I was the only person who bought video cards based on aestheric reasons lol. Anyways the performance difference between the two is minimal, and I agree with liking Nvidia more for there software, and such and having better looking GPUs.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Steel_Nugget

Steel_Nugget

Honorable
Dec 5, 2013
785
0
11,060
I got two but one arrived damaged. So I oced the one that worked, and got pretty good result (To me) considering it only has 1.28GB of Vram. Also I apologize for the shaking camera, and for recording with a potato. I can make another clip later if needed, and fix that, just ask. Also no sound since I use a head set. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9mvKhIRZiU&feature=youtu.be If you want me to test another game ask, I might own it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
J

Jay Lavistria

Honorable
Aug 2, 2013
704
0
11,060
I think 3GB is best for 1080p.
Some games actually DO eat up more than 2GB on 1080p.
Either games with ridiculously high quality textures and alot of them in one field of view, like Skyrim + HD textures.
Or games that are not optimized for minimal performance load like Call of Duty Ghosts.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Steel_Nugget

Steel_Nugget

Honorable
Dec 5, 2013
785
0
11,060
BF4 uses 2GB of Vram on my HD 7950, so it was over the GTX 570s 1280mb Vram. If you want me to see how it does with texture mods in Skyrim tell me which ones to download I own the game.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom