Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Upgrading my GPU for extra Vram

Tags:
  • GPUs
  • Games
  • Monitors
  • Graphics
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 28, 2014 6:17:46 AM

hi,

i own a gtx 770 2gb and a 1080p monitor.

the problem is that i think my vram wont be enough for future games like AC Unity and Batman Arkham Knight since more and more games require more than 2gb vram such as: wolfenstein: the new order,titanfall. i fear i wont be able to use my 770's maximum power without some extra vram and i'm used to play games at 1080p high-ultra with some aa: smaa,txaa,msaa.

i made a few calls and i think i can sell my 770 and buy the new gtx 970 (which has 4gb vram and cuda 6's unified memory support). this will cost me 272$, dont be shocked about the price, i live in Israel so even a ps4 costs 680$ here.

so my question is should i upgrade my gpu? is it really worth all the trouble?

p.s.

i must say im sorry to open a new thread on the subject over and over again but this problem really bothers me since i only bought my first real PC for gaming a year ago.

More about : upgrading gpu extra vram

September 28, 2014 6:23:50 AM

Yes it is a valuable upgrade if you are wanting to make sure you have future compatibility, the 970 is a excellent choice of a card over the 770 due to it's 30% increase in power and increase in power efficiency :) 
m
0
l
September 28, 2014 7:44:24 AM

well according to tomshardware's review the 970 is only about 23% faster than the 770 so i'm mainly thinking about upgrading because of the vram issue..

the question is, will upcoming games strat using more vram at 1080p since its already happening in some games
m
0
l
Related resources
September 28, 2014 7:53:19 AM

eli150 said:
well according to tomshardware's review the 970 is only about 23% faster than the 770 so i'm mainly thinking about upgrading because of the vram issue..

the question is, will upcoming games strat using more vram at 1080p since its already happening in some games


Y es newer games will start to take advantage of VRAM :) 
m
0
l
September 28, 2014 7:59:37 AM

Yeah, that's the funny thing with this situation. Really at 1080p with a 770, you'll never need 4GB. However, 2GB falls short. I mean, to justify your means it'd be cheaper to sell your 2GB 770 to fund a 4GB 770. Though to feel like it was really worth the effort, I'd go with the obvious and drop a little on a GTX 970.

There's no such thing as future proof. But you'd be proven for the future, here. With a progressive 4GB vram you'd be in nice standing for a relatively cheap, ultimately strong SLI combo later on.
m
0
l
September 28, 2014 2:15:20 PM

i'v read about a rumor that 970 and 980 are going to get custom 8gb vram versions - if i choose to upgrade should i wait for these versions or i can be sure i would not need more than 4gb vram at 1080p?
m
0
l
September 28, 2014 2:19:54 PM

For 1080 you'll never need more than 4GB(less) for a singular monitor set-up. In fact, most cards run out of steam before they use a full 3GB or 4GB video ram. A GTX 770 comes close, so it's not an utter waste when running only one for a single monitor.
m
0
l
September 28, 2014 3:03:23 PM

ok just checked and even dead rising 3 is using more than 3gb vram at 1080p. people told me a year ago that i should buy my 770 with 2gb vram because its more than enough for 1080p and now i regret not buying the 4gb version. i want to be sure this time it will be good enough for the next 2-3 years(not max settings but enough vram for 1080p).
m
0
l
September 29, 2014 1:12:48 PM

Even if the rumor about the 8gb versions of 970 and 980 is true, is there a chance we will need more than 4GB ram to run games at 1080p max settings?
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
September 30, 2014 2:27:22 AM

I find shadow of mordor complete crap that 6 gb ram is req. Unless supersampling or high msa or aa is allowed which basically transforms a 2k title and outputs it baq at 4k at 1080p such ram usage is highly impossible or unless its a lazy port or the draw distance is immensly low
m
0
l
September 30, 2014 2:44:20 AM

Those crappy ports are the biggest problem of n pc gaming buddy. And more and more of them pop up: dead rising, watch dogs and now shadow of mordor.. I guess its best to wait for gpus with 6+ vram
m
0
l

Best solution

September 30, 2014 3:01:19 AM

eli150 said:
Those crappy ports are the biggest problem of n pc gaming buddy. And more and more of them pop up:D ead rising, watch dogs and now shadow of mordor.. I guess its best to wait for gpus with 6+ vram


If you want to wait that's fine, especially considering that it seems most companies are trying to utilise the high Vram out of consoles. However, bear in mind that when the 4gb version of the gtx 770 came out, it was nearly double the price (some areas it was cheaper, some it was way over double). Considering the strength of the gtx 970, I highly doubt that there will be any difference between the 4gb and 8gb versions of the card, and the 4gb gtx 970 is leagues above the console gpu, but it is up to you, although I really don't think it is worth spending potentially hundreds extra on something that you may not even need.

Also, I'm pretty sure that by the time that 6-8gb becomes standard for PC, the GPUs will reflect this.
Share
September 30, 2014 3:05:45 AM

Do you think the 970 wont be able to use atleast 5-6 vram?
m
0
l
September 30, 2014 3:08:11 AM

It's not that, it's that I don't think it will NEED that extra Vram. I mean look at Crysis 3, it could use Vram above 2gb, but it didn't really help FPS, it was the quality of the GPU itself that affected performance.
m
0
l
September 30, 2014 3:20:14 AM

Crysis 3 is not a good example because you cant expect other companies to take care of pc gamers like crytek and ea. Bf4 works great on my 770 with 2gb vram everything is on ultra 1080p 2x msaa. The problem is most companies dont optimize games for pc. Its becoming clear that the most anticipated games are going to ask for more vram like ac unity, batman ak, gta v
m
0
l
September 30, 2014 4:56:42 AM

I doubt GTA 5 will need any large amount of Vram lol, probably an amazing cpu and extra ram though (regular, not Vram). If a game is unoptimised for PC, you could have a 1000gb of Vram and it wouldn't make a difference beyond a few FPS. If Vram was going to affect performance in a meaningful way, it would be on a game optimised for that much Vram, and at that point it would be rather easy to run with a decent card anyway, Vram notwithstanding.
m
0
l
September 30, 2014 6:53:11 AM

The problem is not fps, its stutters that will make the game unplayable because of lack in vram
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
September 30, 2014 8:18:38 AM

Ignore stupid requirements and wait and see benchmarks.

People are running Shadow of mordor on overclockers.co.uk on 4gb GTX 980 running ultra and the HD texture pack and still getting over 70fps avg and smooth gameplay.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18627...
m
0
l
September 30, 2014 8:35:48 AM

Ok but still i rather wait and see how this all vram bullshit plays out before i buy the wrong gpu version again. Thanks for your help guys.
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
September 30, 2014 9:12:08 AM

eli150 said:
Ok but still i rather wait and see how this all vram bullshit plays out before i buy the wrong gpu version again. Thanks for your help guys.


Are you having any issues with your 770 then?
m
0
l
September 30, 2014 12:38:17 PM

yes. my card is fast enough to deliver high fps on ultra settings but i cant play on ultra without stutters because i dont have enough vram.
not talking just about watch dogs but also titanfall, wolfenstein the new order,dead rising 3 and soon shadow of mordor.

2gb vram is not enough for 1080p and i think that soon 4gb wont enough either - if it was, i would buy a 970 4gb tomorrow
m
0
l
September 30, 2014 12:49:56 PM

eli150 said:
yes. my card is fast enough to deliver high fps on ultra settings but i cant play on ultra without stutters because i dont have enough vram.
not talking just about watch dogs but also titanfall, wolfenstein the new order,dead rising 3 and soon shadow of mordor.


People are playing shadow of mordor on maxed settings with a 7970 ghz, but then, that does have 3gb Vram, so I guess it's possible that the lack of Vram is causing stuttering. As I said before, I highly doubt you will need more than 4gb Vram, but if you want to get the 8gb Vram, that is up to you, although as with everything, it will carry a heavy price premium.
m
0
l
September 30, 2014 5:21:38 PM

what do you think will be the price difference? why are you so sure 8gb vram wont be used at 1080p? is it because the gpus are not fast enough? please explain if you can. i just dont want to pay 480$+ for the 4gb version and then regret it.
m
0
l
September 30, 2014 5:24:16 PM

Fitzitz said:
eli150 said:
yes. my card is fast enough to deliver high fps on ultra settings but i cant play on ultra without stutters because i dont have enough vram.
not talking just about watch dogs but also titanfall, wolfenstein the new order,dead rising 3 and soon shadow of mordor.


People are playing shadow of mordor on maxed settings with a 7970 ghz, but then, that does have 3gb Vram, so I guess it's possible that the lack of Vram is causing stuttering. As I said before, I highly doubt you will need more than 4gb Vram, but if you want to get the 8gb Vram, that is up to you, although as with everything, it will carry a heavy price premium.



what do you think will be the price difference? why are you so sure 8gb vram wont be used at 1080p? is it because the gpus are not fast enough? please explain if you can. i just dont want to pay 480$+ for the 4gb version and then regret it.
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 3:54:08 AM

eli150 said:
Fitzitz said:
eli150 said:
yes. my card is fast enough to deliver high fps on ultra settings but i cant play on ultra without stutters because i dont have enough vram.
not talking just about watch dogs but also titanfall, wolfenstein the new order,dead rising 3 and soon shadow of mordor.


People are playing shadow of mordor on maxed settings with a 7970 ghz, but then, that does have 3gb Vram, so I guess it's possible that the lack of Vram is causing stuttering. As I said before, I highly doubt you will need more than 4gb Vram, but if you want to get the 8gb Vram, that is up to you, although as with everything, it will carry a heavy price premium.



what do you think will be the price difference? why are you so sure 8gb vram wont be used at 1080p? is it because the gpus are not fast enough? please explain if you can. i just dont want to pay 480$+ for the 4gb version and then regret it.


In the UK, the 4gb 770s were somewhere around the price of a 780-780ti depending on where you bought them, and I think that was the case in America too. I would guess that the 8gb models would be slightly less or as expensive as a 980. Also, the reason I don't think you will need more than 4gb Vram on a single 1080p is that very few games actually need that Vram (in fact, I can't think of any that even come close to needing 3 lol). In fact, I'm pretty sure that the only game which has ever benefited from a large amount of Vram is a heavily modded skyrim, and when it needs that much Vram, there are a thousand other issues anyway.

Now I'm not saying that it is impossible that a company makes a game that uses over 4gb of vram, but this would mean either a) It is a badly optimised game, and no amount of Vram in the world will help you. Or b)That it is setting a new standard, and the strength of the gpu required to run it would likely be the thing that holds it back anyway, so 8gb Vram might give you an extra 5-10fps at max.

Let's say that there is an option c) A game comes out that runs well on a card, but gets 20-30fps more from Vram (which seems near impossible to me, but I can't tell the future, so some genius may be able to do this). In that case, if you really wanted the game that badly, and those FPS would raise it from 30-60, not 60-90, then you can always sell your 970, by which point you would likely have some extra cash saved anyway, and buy the 8gb model, which would have dropped down in price a lot closer to the 4gb model anyway.

Edit: Your main concern seems to be with the fact that Vram makes a huge difference, which it rarely does. As I ended with though, you can always sell your 4gb model and get the 8gb model (at which point, the price gap shouldn't be so huge)
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 5:22:20 AM

Fitzitz said:
eli150 said:
Fitzitz said:
eli150 said:
yes. my card is fast enough to deliver high fps on ultra settings but i cant play on ultra without stutters because i dont have enough vram.
not talking just about watch dogs but also titanfall, wolfenstein the new order,dead rising 3 and soon shadow of mordor.


People are playing shadow of mordor on maxed settings with a 7970 ghz, but then, that does have 3gb Vram, so I guess it's possible that the lack of Vram is causing stuttering. As I said before, I highly doubt you will need more than 4gb Vram, but if you want to get the 8gb Vram, that is up to you, although as with everything, it will carry a heavy price premium.



what do you think will be the price difference? why are you so sure 8gb vram wont be used at 1080p? is it because the gpus are not fast enough? please explain if you can. i just dont want to pay 480$+ for the 4gb version and then regret it.


In the UK, the 4gb 770s were somewhere around the price of a 780-780ti depending on where you bought them, and I think that was the case in America too. I would guess that the 8gb models would be slightly less or as expensive as a 980. Also, the reason I don't think you will need more than 4gb Vram on a single 1080p is that very few games actually need that Vram (in fact, I can't think of any that even come close to needing 3 lol). In fact, I'm pretty sure that the only game which has ever benefited from a large amount of Vram is a heavily modded skyrim, and when it needs that much Vram, there are a thousand other issues anyway.

Now I'm not saying that it is impossible that a company makes a game that uses over 4gb of vram, but this would mean either a) It is a badly optimised game, and no amount of Vram in the world will help you. Or b)That it is setting a new standard, and the strength of the gpu required to run it would likely be the thing that holds it back anyway, so 8gb Vram might give you an extra 5-10fps at max.

Let's say that there is an option c) A game comes out that runs well on a card, but gets 20-30fps more from Vram (which seems near impossible to me, but I can't tell the future, so some genius may be able to do this). In that case, if you really wanted the game that badly, and those FPS would raise it from 30-60, not 60-90, then you can always sell your 970, by which point you would likely have some extra cash saved anyway, and buy the 8gb model, which would have dropped down in price a lot closer to the 4gb model anyway.

Edit: Your main concern seems to be with the fact that Vram makes a huge difference, which it rarely does. As I ended with though, you can always sell your 4gb model and get the 8gb model (at which point, the price gap shouldn't be so huge)


the truth is i dont want to upgrade, i want to stay with my 770 for the next year or two but it bothers me that its vram is holding it back at 1080p(2GB). Also, higher resolutions dont concern me because a display with higher resolution than 1080p costs too much and i only play with one display. Do you think upgrading to a 970 is worth all the trouble of selling my 770 and then paying 270$+? will i see a big difference between these two gpus at 1080p?

thanks for your help.
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
October 1, 2014 5:24:25 AM

It depends entirely if the games you play actually have an issue with your current card.

Im using a 2gb Gtx 680 on a 1440p screen and for the games I play its fine, but im not playing the most graphically demanding stuff to be honest.
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 5:33:46 AM

yes i do play the most demanding games which my 770 is fast enough to run at max settings but in some cases its vram is holding it back. That's why i fear about upcoming games(like AC Unity and Batman AK) requiring larger amounts of Vram to run properly.
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
October 1, 2014 5:36:07 AM

You could do one thing.
Download MSI afterburner(Google it).
It also installs a utility named RivaTuner Statistics Server(RTSS). Let it do that.
It'll now allow you to view all stats such as GPU usage, Memory usage, GPU/Mem clock speed, framerate, GPU temperature, fan speed, etc in the game itself, so you can monitor in real time.
After running both MSI Afterburner and RTSS, go in Options in MSI afterburner and select monitoring.
Select all the metrics you want to view, check "show in On Screen Display" and you can see how much VRAM you're actually using.
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 5:48:46 AM

cst1992 said:
You could do one thing.
Download MSI afterburner(Google it).
It also installs a utility named RivaTuner Statistics Server(RTSS). Let it do that.
It'll now allow you to view all stats such as GPU usage, Memory usage, GPU/Mem clock speed, framerate, GPU temperature, fan speed, etc in the game itself, so you can monitor in real time.
After running both MSI Afterburner and RTSS, go in Options in MSI afterburner and select monitoring.
Select all the metrics you want to view, check "show in On Screen Display" and you can see how much VRAM you're actually using.


thanks, ill give it a try. do you think a 970 is worth the upgrade from a 770(2gb)?
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
October 1, 2014 5:55:34 AM

The thing is that the new consoles have upped the game a bit, especially with the PS4 8 gb shared memory with a combination of sloppy ported console games to PC. 2 GB cards were getting a bit out dated at the end but with these new game titles we've seen recently things seem to have speed up drastically.
High end cards can now utilize much more than just 2 gb vram at 1080 and will if you let them. I still don't believe that you need to max out AA/MSAA to get good eye candy. In most parts it's barely even noticeable but it will eat away your video memory in a heart beat.
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 6:11:19 AM

Mahisse said:
The thing is that the new consoles have upped the game a bit, especially with the PS4 8 gb shared memory with a combination of sloppy ported console games to PC. 2 GB cards were getting a bit out dated at the end but with these new game titles we've seen recently things seem to have speed up drastically.
High end cards can now utilize much more than just 2 gb vram at 1080 and will if you let them. I still don't believe that you need to max out AA/MSAA to get good eye candy. In most parts it's barely even noticeable but it will eat away your video memory in a heart beat.


do you recommend keeping my 770 2gb or upgrade it to 970?
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 6:31:05 AM

Sell your 770 and upgrade to 970, it seems worth it to me
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 6:36:28 AM

Why? Will i see a difference in fps? Or are you saying it because of the 4gb vram?
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 6:38:41 AM

just for people that whant to no what this card will do in this game.

i7 2600k at 4.2ghz, left the card at his stock speeds.

settings in game

resolution 2715x1527
any thing else ultra.

recorded with fraps.
first chapter

2014-10-01 12:04:44 - ShadowOfMordor
Frames: 13894 - Time: 240734ms - Avg: 57.715
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
October 1, 2014 6:41:07 AM

eli150 said:
Mahisse said:
The thing is that the new consoles have upped the game a bit, especially with the PS4 8 gb shared memory with a combination of sloppy ported console games to PC. 2 GB cards were getting a bit out dated at the end but with these new game titles we've seen recently things seem to have speed up drastically.
High end cards can now utilize much more than just 2 gb vram at 1080 and will if you let them. I still don't believe that you need to max out AA/MSAA to get good eye candy. In most parts it's barely even noticeable but it will eat away your video memory in a heart beat.


do you recommend keeping my 770 2gb or upgrade it to 970?


The question is subjective. If you feel like the games you are playing are stuttering and you don't want to go on a comprimize with certain graphics settings to remove the stuttering, then the short answer is yes. A 970 4 gb should be somewhat "future proof" for the next couple of years but there's no guarante, hence no such thing as future proof..

Honestly you should be able to squeeze a year or two out of that card in my opinion without game breaking compromizes on the graphics at 1080 but if you want the most money out of that card you should probably sell it now or... or when the card is out of stock for people who want to go SLI.. but then again. .who would go SLI with a 2 gb card :) 
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 7:01:47 AM

mastergup said:
just for people that whant to no what this card will do in this game.

i7 2600k at 4.2ghz, left the card at his stock speeds.

settings in game

resolution 2715x1527
any thing else ultra.

recorded with fraps.
first chapter

2014-10-01 12:04:44 - ShadowOfMordor
Frames: 13894 - Time: 240734ms - Avg: 57.715


how much vram did your card use on ultra? if it doesnt need 6gb for ultra, do you think i can go to high settings with 2gb vram?
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 7:10:28 AM

Mahisse said:
eli150 said:
Mahisse said:
The thing is that the new consoles have upped the game a bit, especially with the PS4 8 gb shared memory with a combination of sloppy ported console games to PC. 2 GB cards were getting a bit out dated at the end but with these new game titles we've seen recently things seem to have speed up drastically.
High end cards can now utilize much more than just 2 gb vram at 1080 and will if you let them. I still don't believe that you need to max out AA/MSAA to get good eye candy. In most parts it's barely even noticeable but it will eat away your video memory in a heart beat.


do you recommend keeping my 770 2gb or upgrade it to 970?


The question is subjective. If you feel like the games you are playing are stuttering and you don't want to go on a comprimize with certain graphics settings to remove the stuttering, then the short answer is yes. A 970 4 gb should be somewhat "future proof" for the next couple of years but there's no guarante, hence no such thing as future proof..

Honestly you should be able to squeeze a year or two out of that card in my opinion without game breaking compromizes on the graphics at 1080 but if you want the most money out of that card you should probably sell it now or... or when the card is out of stock for people who want to go SLI.. but then again. .who would go SLI with a 2 gb card :) 


that depends on how much will i have to compromise on the graphic settings. i can play with no aa,lower shadow setting and in some games the texture level doesn't make much difference but if ill have to lower resolution or other settings just because of lack of vram then maybe i should upgrade now and be done with it for next 2-3 years. is it possible for a 970 to use more than 4gb vram on 1080p display?
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
October 1, 2014 7:19:38 AM

Just a side note (I know there will be people who will disagree) but ultra settings are overrated, if you can max out high graphics settings that is alsmost just as good.
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 7:35:14 AM

Mahisse said:
Just a side note (I know there will be people who will disagree) but ultra settings are overrated, if you can max out high graphics settings that is alsmost just as good.


depends on the game. in some games its a noticeable difference and in some games high is really almost just as good.
my problem is not playing on high settings with no aa, that ok. my problem is playing on 1080p mid-low because of lack in vram.
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 7:53:52 AM

in this game i tried 2 settings ultra and high, also to resolutions set in game 1x 2715x1527 and the other resolution was 1 step below 1820x ... dont now any more.
The vram used did not change much what ever setting i tried of the 2.

max vram used is 3618mb
AVG Vram used was 2045mb


m
0
l
a b C Monitor
October 1, 2014 8:01:26 AM

Its worth bearing in mind that "used vram" doesnt mean it needs that amount. Many games will just cache unneeded things in vram if it is available.
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 8:05:51 AM

True but it gives him a idea i think he can play it at high settings with no problem.
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 8:26:38 AM

RobCrezz said:
Its worth bearing in mind that "used vram" doesnt mean it needs that amount. Many games will just cache unneeded things in vram if it is available.


i know that but more and more new and upcoming games require more vram like the evil whithin

http://www.pcgamer.com/the-evil-within-system-requireme...
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 9:10:49 AM

eli150 said:
RobCrezz said:
Its worth bearing in mind that "used vram" doesnt mean it needs that amount. Many games will just cache unneeded things in vram if it is available.


i know that but more and more new and upcoming games require more vram like the evil whithin

http://www.pcgamer.com/the-evil-within-system-requireme...


So I did some digging into the 6gb Vram Textures for Shadow Of Mordor, and it turns out that it was an estimate for 4k Downscaling (Can't remember the exact term, but the gist of it was that it is supposed to give 4k level graphics at 1080p/1440p). It turns out that people have been running it fine with a gtx 970/980. At maxed settings with a 970, including "6gb Vram Textures", at 45-50fps, 60fps constant if they reduce shadows. With 980 it stayed around 55-60 fps with all ultra, no reductions. Of course this will vary slightly from person to person, but the supposed "6gb Vram" graphics only took up 3.5gb, and this was at 1440p.
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 9:13:13 AM

eli150 said:
Mahisse said:
Just a side note (I know there will be people who will disagree) but ultra settings are overrated, if you can max out high graphics settings that is alsmost just as good.


depends on the game. in some games its a noticeable difference and in some games high is really almost just as good.
my problem is not playing on high settings with no aa, that ok. my problem is playing on 1080p mid-low because of lack in vram.


Unless your card has 1gb of Vram or less, it would not be the Vram that means you can't play at high settings
m
0
l
a b C Monitor
October 1, 2014 9:57:37 AM

Apparently you need to install a special HD pack to get the Ultra texture. Without the pack Ultra and High a close to the same. I've been reading a bit and it turns out that they actually showed some love for the PC in this games by adding this HD pack for high-end PCs only. With the HD pack the VRAM usage goes signficantly up but without it you can play the game with a 2GB card on ultra, assuming that your card is fast enough.

980 benchmark with HD pack: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGEe-SX0VSI

So it seems like the 6GB thingy is overrated

I'm not really impressed by the graphics though :D 
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 12:03:50 PM

I,m playing the game with high res pack on the gtx 970, if you want i run for quit a long time with fraps on, i will do this tomorrow, and i will post it here.
m
0
l
October 1, 2014 12:54:50 PM

thanks guys, you helped a lot. i think i'm going to wait for the 8gb version of the 970 and pay the extra 100$. next gen consoles gpus have access to 8gb ram(5-7 usable probably) and some console games cant run on 1080p so i think it will be safe to go with the 8gb version of the 970(whenever it comes out).
m
0
l
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!