2GB VRAM not enough for BF4?

[swchoi89]

Hi guys,

So, if I were to go for GTX 770 SLI (2GB), would it still be ok with the MAXIMUM settings? How big of a difference would it make if I go with 4GB editions?

I am hesitating to go for the 4GB editions because of the price difference.

 

[NINaudio]

What resolution are you aiming for?

 

[n0x1ous]

What resolution are you aiming for?

2GB is fine for 1080p. I played the beta quite a bit @1080p with my setup in sig and VRAM usage was usually 1700-1800 MB - Everything Max - 4x MSAA

Edit: Sorry NINaudio, meant to quote OP

 

[poohbear]

My 670s in SLI are perfectly fine @ 1440p with 2xMSAA. Use an average of 1800~1950mb according to the chatlrt in GPU~Z. 4xMSAA pushes past 2gb (2025~48).

 

[smackababy]

2GB is fine for 1080p. I played the beta quite a bit @1080p with my setup in sig and VRAM usage was usually 1700-1800 MB

Edit: Sorry NINaudio, meant to quote OP

This.

I have 670SLI and have no problems on ultra @ 1080p. I don't actually look at the framerate, but I have no noticeable slowdowns. Everything is smooth.

 

[moonbogg]

Hi guys,

So, if I were to go for GTX 770 SLI (2GB), would it still be ok with the MAXIMUM settings? How big of a difference would it make if I go with 4GB editions?

I am hesitating to go for the 4GB editions because of the price difference.

Get the 4 gig editions and don't look back. 2gb is a mistake right now. Don't do it. You can google some charts on BF4 vram usage. I think the chart will decide for you. You will have a lot of GPU power and you don't want to have it wasted from lack of Vram. Seriously damn it, don't screw yourself. Spend the few extra bucks and have peace of mind.

 

[rtsurfer]

Get the 4 gig editions and don't look back. 2gb is a mistake right now. Don't do it. You can google some charts on BF4 vram usage. I think the chart will decide for you. You will have a lot of GPU power and you don't want to have it wasted from lack of Vram. Seriously damn it, don't screw yourself. Spend the few extra bucks and have peace of mind.

+1

 

[swchoi89]

Get the 4 gig editions and don't look back. 2gb is a mistake right now. Don't do it. You can google some charts on BF4 vram usage. I think the chart will decide for you. You will have a lot of GPU power and you don't want to have it wasted from lack of Vram. Seriously damn it, don't screw yourself. Spend the few extra bucks and have peace of mind.

It's not few extra bucks. I'm talking about $150 extra. If others are saying that there is no noticeable difference with GTX 670 SLI, then I'm sure GTX 770 can deliver the same or better?

MY resolution is 1920 x 1080 with a 120Hz monitor. I'm not expecting to hit 120FPS solid throughout, but more than 60FPS all times under maximized settings.

 

[moonbogg]

It's not few extra bucks. I'm talking about $150 extra. If others are saying that there is no noticeable difference with GTX 670 SLI, then I'm sure GTX 770 can deliver the same or better?

MY resolution is 1920 x 1080 with a 120Hz monitor. I'm not expecting to hit 120FPS solid throughout, but more than 60FPS all times under maximized settings.

I was playing last night and had problems and I suspect it was due to Vram. I'll stop preaching, that's not my job. Good luck.

 

[imaheadcase]

Get the 4 gig editions and don't look back. 2gb is a mistake right now. Don't do it. You can google some charts on BF4 vram usage. I think the chart will decide for you. You will have a lot of GPU power and you don't want to have it wasted from lack of Vram. Seriously damn it, don't screw yourself. Spend the few extra bucks and have peace of mind.

What piece of mind, it just uses what you have, if you don't have it, won't use it. simple as that. I have zero issues with 1.5gigs.

 

[swchoi89]

Still confused with the answers. Seems like a lot of people have the GTX 670 sli (2GB edition). Moon saying he has issues, others are saying they barely notice anything.

 

[seitur]

2GB is not not good enough anymore. Even if you'll be fine with BF4, then next "big game" will make it not enough.

3GB as new minimum and 4GB as standard and 6GB+ for more1440p or higher with full bells and whistles will start to emerge in 2014.

On the other hand paying for premium high-end option like 770 SLI right before console gen changes and not long before 20nm GPUs is not very smart, if you're a person that is not wealthy and 150$ is noticeable amount of money.

 

[Leyawiin]

You will have a lot of GPU power and you don't want to have it wasted from lack of Vram.

Yeah, its time for 3 or 4GB upper range cards to be the new paradigm. I don't regret my GTX 670 2GB and its served me well, but that was then, this is now. Mid-range cards are still fine at 2GB - they cost less for a reason.

 

[moonbogg]

Yeah, its time for 3 or 4GB upper range cards to be the new paradigm. I don't regret my GTX 670 2GB and its served me well, but that was then, this is now. Mid-range cards are still fine at 2GB - they cost less for a reason.

Agreed. I have those cards and they have been great, but just because people can "get by" with 2gb in BF4 doesn't mean spending $800 on two 2gb cards today is a good idea. To the OP, if you want to go multi GPU right now and keep costs sensible, consider AMD options. 280x cards have 3gb of ram, they should be about $300 each and they will kick all sorts of colorful ass in BF4.

 

[Brahmzy]

My 2 2GB 670FTWs are rockin' BF4 @ 1600p. But I will NOT be buying 2GB cards to replace them. If I were buying now, 4GB minimum.

 

[x3sphere]

BF4 recommends 3GB, and it's very likely more games will start demanding that or more to run at max soon. With the new consoles coming out the baseline is being raised, that means higher PC requirements.

I definitely wouldn't get a card with less than 3GB. The 770 4GBs are a poor value in terms of price/performance. I'm going to say the upcoming R9 290 in CF would likely be a much better buy in terms of bang for your buck, although it will cost more (guessing $400-450 for a 290).

Although seeing as the NV cards come with game bundle right now if you can sell the games for around $20 each then 770 4GBs aren't a terrible value.

 

[moonbogg]

BF4 recommends 3GB, and it's very likely more games will start demanding that or more to run at max soon. With the new consoles coming out the baseline is being raised, that means higher PC requirements.

I definitely wouldn't get a card with less than 3GB. The 770 4GBs are a poor value in terms of price/performance. I'm going to say the upcoming R9 290 in CF would likely be a much better buy in terms of bang for your buck, although it will cost more (guessing $400-450 for a 290).

Although seeing as the NV cards come with game bundle right now if you can sell the games for around $20 each then 770 4GBs aren't a terrible value.

Good lord if there ever was one. That would be hella fast.

 

[sm625]

Even if a card were to use more than 2GB that doesnt mean that its actually using all of that. a large portion of the so called used memory might be able to be overwritten at no performance penalty at all. I look forward to seeing actual data showing 4GB yields better performance than 2GB at 1080p. Even now you'd be hard pressed to justify having 2GB vs 1GB! There is no way to justify having 4GB when 2GB only gets you 4% more performance than 1GB! See this page for actual data:

http://us.hardware.info/reviews/430...erence-battlefield-3---1920x1080-+-frametimes

You are definitely better off putting your money into shaders than VRAM.

 

[Makaveli]

If I was buying a gpu right now today I would not pickup a 2GB card.

I agree with everyone else.

And you do make a good point SM625 but if I was planning on keeping this setup for the next 2-3 years 2GB of vram worries me.

 

[x3sphere]

Even if a card were to use more than 2GB that doesnt mean that its actually using all of that. a large portion of the so called used memory might be able to be overwritten at no performance penalty at all. I look forward to seeing actual data showing 4GB yields better performance than 2GB at 1080p. Even now you'd be hard pressed to justify having 2GB vs 1GB! There is no way to justify having 4GB when 2GB only gets you 4% more performance than 1GB! See this page for actual data:

http://us.hardware.info/reviews/430...erence-battlefield-3---1920x1080-+-frametimes

You are definitely better off putting your money into shaders than VRAM.

The thing is, if you don't have enough VRAM some games will stutter or flat out refuse to run.

I know Skyrim with mods can definitely use over 2GB at 1080p.

 

[toyota]

Even if a card were to use more than 2GB that doesnt mean that its actually using all of that. a large portion of the so called used memory might be able to be overwritten at no performance penalty at all. I look forward to seeing actual data showing 4GB yields better performance than 2GB at 1080p. Even now you'd be hard pressed to justify having 2GB vs 1GB! There is no way to justify having 4GB when 2GB only gets you 4% more performance than 1GB! See this page for actual data:

http://us.hardware.info/reviews/430...erence-battlefield-3---1920x1080-+-frametimes

You are definitely better off putting your money into shaders than VRAM.

lol looking at ram usage on a low end card? here is a hint for you, a low end card cant run the settings that will need more vram anyway. the gpu itself becomes a limitation first.

 

[zod96]

I play at 2560x1440 and have a 2GB GTX 770. In BF4 everything set to High, no AA but High post AA and SSAO I get 55-60 fps all the time. 2GB is fine...

 

[x3sphere]

I play at 2560x1440 and have a 2GB GTX 770. In BF4 everything set to High, no AA but High post AA and SSAO I get 55-60 fps all the time. 2GB is fine...

That's nowhere near max settings.

I have to say the 290x seems to dominate at BF4, it's getting 60 FPS average versus 52 on the Titan, at 1920x1200. I'd wait to see what the 290 brings but one 290x might be more than enough for BF4 at 1080p, especially if you can OC it.

http://www.techspot.com/review/734-battlefield-4-benchmarks/page3.html

 

[SimianR]

If you are going to invest in an SLI solution that basically gives you twice the horsepower of a regular card, why limit yourself down the road by grabbing the 2GB cards? To me - it kind of defeats the whole purpose of going SLI in the first place. Bioshock infinite in some cases uses more than 2GB, BF4 uses more than 2GB - next gen console games are going to start hitting the PC over the next 3-6 months and who knows how much VRAM they will be use. Yes you can run BF4 and other titles fine with 2GB - but I could also run BF3 fine on my 1GB Radeon 5870 - the problem being that once it started using all the VRAM I didn't notice a drop in fps but I did notice some hitching/stuttering - it was annoying. Overall fps doesn't always translate into smoothness

 

[runzwithsizorz]

2GB is not not good enough anymore. Even if you'll be fine with BF4, then next "big game" will make it not enough. 3GB as new minimum and 4GB as standard and 6GB+ for more1440p or higher with full bells and whistles will start to emerge in 2014.

I agree. I'm not planning on buying any v card yet. If you can, wait and see what happens price wise after the R290's come out...deals to be had on Nvidia and AMD.