Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Gtx580 1.5gb vram VS. 3gb

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
October 19, 2011 2:13:03 AM

Im going to buy all the components for a new desktop this November and im still a bit unsure on the graphic card.

I thought about the gtx580 but then i then i couldnt decide which version to get, the 1,5gb or the 3gb.


My computer will have a i7 2600k with a neat air/water cooler for me to play with overclockings, so there's no risk of the graphic card suffering from bottleneck. My display will be a single 24'' at 1920x1080.

Knowing that i plan on not upgrading my computer for at least 2 year and still be able to confortably run the upcoming games on those years, should i settle for the 1.5gb version or get the 3gb?

I heard that even today, games like metro 2033 love the extra vram, so i expect future games to use it even more. Or will the extra vram only be useful if i were to use a multi screen setting?

Ps. a 1.5gb version of the card, like the msi twin frozr II goes for 480€ here where i live and a 3gb version, like the msi lightning xtreme goes for 560€.

More about : gtx580 5gb vram 3gb

a b U Graphics card
October 19, 2011 2:28:00 AM

Well, GTX 580 is a powerful VGA, u MAY tax the card hard enough to use all the video ram available. U going to use that card for 2 years minimum, and 2 years is relative long run, dont u think that the 3gb would be good?
October 19, 2011 3:42:43 AM

you'll only see the benefit of 3gb at higher resolutions 2560x1600 or more.

back then, the difference between 1gb and 2gb was only $20-30.
i just closed my eyes and get the higher resolution. I was planning on getting another card to SLI.

I was planning to get 3monitors and hoping to get better performance for having higher resolutions. The PROBLEM was i cant find any video gtx 260 2gb to SLI it few months later. $20 was nothing compared to 80€ ($100).

if you dont have plans to SLI/getting 30" monitors, id get the 1.5gb. no real benefit at 1920x1080 resolutions for 3gb.
Related resources
October 21, 2011 3:16:14 AM

From what I understand you will not see the benefit of 3GB of video memory at the resolution of 1920x1080 and would be better off throwing your money at a higher frequency 1.5 GB card than a 3GB card.

I built a PC last weekend and asked myself your same question and went with 1.5GB because I also plan on running at 1920x1080. I read an article (that unfortunately I cannot find right now) that basically stated, from what I remember (article had numbers backing it up), that you wont come close to hitting the 1.5 memory cap running at your resolution. Everything I have read suggests 3GB is for 2560x1600 and multi monitor setups.

If you plan on sticking with your res for a while on a single monitor but eventually plan on dual displaying or upgrading your monitor to a higher res you could always just add another 1.5 card for SLI if you have the right mobo.
October 21, 2011 2:33:32 PM

Thanks for your advices, i made a mistake on the OP, ill be using 2x24'' monitors. One for fullscreen applications like games and whatnot while the other will be for browsing, IM, and exploring windows. Would this setup make a dent on a regular 1.5gb card or the screen used for browsing will hardly make any difference while the other is running a game?
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 21, 2011 2:53:54 PM

No, using a second monitor for non-gaming purposes won't affect things much. If you may add a third monitor for Nvidia Surround then go for the 3gb card(and plan to buy a second.) Otherwise just get the 1.5gb model.
October 21, 2011 9:10:26 PM

I have trouble thinking that you will burden the VRAM given what you plan on using the second monitor for. I found a thread where someone post some stats (near the bottom) of VRAM usage statistics in some modern games. Worth a read.

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/318211-33-evga-superc...
October 22, 2011 2:37:13 AM

Thanks to everyone who answered, you've been very helpful.

Rgresh1, im reading through the link you posted, thanks for the help.
October 22, 2011 5:56:10 AM

Depends if you're wanting to max out AA even.
32xS is a beast as it's 32x samples all the time compared to 32X CSAA that is Coverage Sampling. CSAA does 16x samples when performance is low, and gets up to 32X when there's enough power. However, if a 480 can do CSAA it in DX 10 using TR MSAA at 700 MB, then a 580 would do BFBC2 32xS only with 1.5 GB.

But particle heavy games like GRID reach 1-1.5 GB using 32XCSQAA at high resolutions. Or games like Far Cry 2 which is based on an upgraded CryEngine 2 take 950-980 MB vRAM only at 1600X1200 with no AA. With enough rendering power say 580 Tri-SLi, you can fill up the RAM at a higher resolution using AA. So it depends on whether you play games like Crysis Wars using AA on a high res panel or not.

*Conclusion depends if you want to ever add more monitors, render more samples or simply be future ready (and the latter is not always so)
!