Support NeoGAF

[WarpathDC]

Played this last night. It's not optimized as its definitely not a looker and is a resource hog. Not a great ad for UE4.

 

[Ryoohki360]

4k need 3gig without msaa, if you use msaa or txaa you're done for. Unless use Smaa or fxaa.

I mean i game at 1440p and even grid 2 at 8xmsaa doesn't use all the vram. Will have to wait for grid 3 witch will use 4k Textures.

The better the engine scale with memory the best it is, otherwise it's just dead memory. It's when it chug that it sucks

 

[Ryoohki360]

Btw the ue4 wasn't optimized for console until 4.1 so.. That explain it

 

[Obeso]

As soon as the PS4 was announced with 8GB GDDR5 it should have been clear as day to anyone that 4GB would be the minimum to get you comfortably through this generation. 3GB cards should hold on for a while yet, but that's the absolute minimum VRAM capacity that even a midrange user should be aiming for.

People are still recommending stuff like a 2GB GTX 770 every day in the PC thread and it's never sat well with me.

Same applies to a 780 Ti. I'd you're buying it for the long term then 6GB option is the only one you should be considering. If you change your card every 12 months then that is a different matter.

And that is why a console is usually a better option in the beginning of a generation. Will wait another year before update my PC. Video cards will likely come with much more memory.

 

[Ryoohki360]

Someone can test AC4, it use 4k texture as per nvidia, with SMAA, MSAA and TXAA at 1080p? I doubt that PS4 will use 4k textures for a forsable future as it use more RAM..

 

[Respawn]

Fuck. Thats pretty hardcore.

Indeed.

 

[That Wont Fit In There]

How will does the ps4 version run it?

Horribly. Horrible frame drops and takes longer than you'd think to load the game each time you want to play.

 

[BriareosGAF]

The hardware fragmentation that is inherent in the PC space, means that developers cannot rely on the user's GPU having sufficient GPGPU capability. So, they don't take advantage of GPGPU so often and the burden is placed on the CPU for calculations such as the interaction of particles and other complex physics simulation.

It's not really the hardware so much as the driver stack. UAV serialization is the biggest problem with GPGPU in the PC space, although it can be avoided in some cases with auxiliary libraries that hint to the driver underneath the stack, and/or some other tricky techniques.

The bigger issue is render target memory. Right now a variety of techniques are being utilized/explored on console because they have essentially unbounded render target memory. Things like cached shadow backing stores allow us to avoid regenerating shadowmaps every frame, but they require large amounts of render target memory to be effective. These have the double benefit on PC of reducing draw call counts per frame, but are least likely to be leverage-able there.

And then there are forward looking techniques like OIT to volume render targets, of course.

 

[Faith]

Thank god I went with a 4GB 770.

Indeed.

Nobody wanted to listen that the VRAM usage will go up really high this gen. Thankfully I listened to myself and not to advises of others.

 

[Aizu_Itsuko]

That's not how it works. That 8gb is not VRAM, it's really 5GB of everything ram since 3 is used for OS. You can't lump it all together and say, ha they have so much VRAM, cause they don't. They have to use a lot of that ram the same way a PC uses its ram to load and run shit.

I know how it works.

Those 8GB of memory (OS footprint aside) can be split based on whatever the specific game needs. That means that many games will easily exceed 2GB of VRAM usage during this console generation, even though there will be games that will not. We are in a thread where a game already needs more than 3GB and requirements are going to go higher, not lower. 2GB of VRAM is not going to cut it this gen, even if it seemed like a lot not long ago.

 

[riflen]

It's not really the hardware so much as the driver stack. UAV serialization is the biggest problem with GPGPU in the PC space, although it can be avoided in some cases with auxiliary libraries that hint to the driver underneath the stack, and/or some other tricky techniques.

The bigger issue is render target memory. Right now a variety of techniques are being utilized/explored on console because they have essentially unbounded render target memory. Things like cached shadow backing stores allow us to avoid regenerating shadowmaps every frame, but they require large amounts of render target memory to be effective. These have the double benefit on PC of reducing draw call counts per frame, but are least likely to be leverage-able there.

And then there are forward looking techniques like OIT to volume render targets, of course.

This is interesting. Thanks. It's such a shame that the flexible nature of the PC, while being a great benefit in some ways, is also the reason for its limitation as a games platform in others.

 

[Prophet Steve]

Btw the ue4 wasn't optimized for console until 4.1 so.. That explain it

Uh, no, that is not true and I am not sure how it is relevant to how much VRAM is uses on the PC anyway. It got full support in 4.1, doesn't mean it was not optimized beforehand, in fact, I am not sure whether there are any performance changes for consoles in the new update.

Indeed.

Nobody wanted to listen that the VRAM usage will go up really high this gen. Thankfully I listened to myself and not to advises of others.

This is no prove at all that games suddenly are going to require a lot more VRAM.

We got proof that tells nothing, because we don't know what the game does when you do use less VRAM like that, and besides that it is with one game that seems badly optimized anyway.

Then that same game also runs like crap on the PS4.

Now, I would like Nvidia to have put more VRAM in their graphics cards, because I have my doubts 2GB and maybe even 3GB will hold up for very long, but it isn't all doom and gloom just yet.

Also, if you base that argument on how much VRAM the PS4 has, it is laughable. You have 8GB of VRAM there, 2/3GB of that is used for the OS, and then you probably have about 2/3 GB that is used as normal RAM, so you end up with the same amount anyway.

 

[Draft]

It was developed with 8 GB of GDDR5 in mind; I'm surprised it even runs on most PCs!

 

[Z3M0G]

Any screenshots floating around of the PS4 version?

 

[Faith]

It was developed with 8 GB of GDDR5 in mind; I'm surprised it even runs on most PCs!

PCs have DDR3 RAM for the stuff that doesn't require such high bandwidths.

 

[artist]

I've never hidden the fact that I sit in team green for all manner of reasons (stability, S3D, gsync, faster driver support, less hitching and previously Nvidia Inspector but RadeonPro looks to have surpassed it now) but they're currently dropping the ball in terms of VRAM. At every important pricepoint AMD seem to give you an extra 1GB of VRAM and if you're buying a card to last you 2+ years (which I firmly believe encompasses most gamers) then that's going to make a huge difference.

The GTX 770 has the horsepower to see through this console generation yet it barely has another year or two's life in it because 95% of cards are sold with a piddling 2GB GDDR5.

Currently?

Nvidia have been consistently dropping the ball on VRAM for a long time, I see the G8x was already brought up in this thread.

 

[b0bbyJ03]

I love the overreactions in here. 2GB of VRAM should be more than fine for the rest of the console generation if you want to game at 1080p. will there be games that use more than that? sure, just look at this game and even Titanfall when it uses Insane textures. The question is; will there be a visible difference between insane/ultra textures (which are either uncompressed or use very little compression) and the very high setting textures? I think that is the more important question. I can tell you that in Titanfall it is not distinguishable and I did a comparison in this game and i couldn't tell the difference either.

I think the problem is that a lot of PC gamer's egos cannot handle the fact that their settings are not at the highest option, regardless of whether it makes any difference or not. Every single game that comes out this gen will be playable on your 2 GB cards so stop worrying. By the time we start seeing "next gen", like past ps4 xb1, games you will have had your cards for at least 3 years.

 

[jacksepticeye]

Judging by how the game looks I'd put it down to terrible optimisation. Doesn't look nearly good enough for the resources it hogs

 

[Faith]

Judging by how the game looks I'd put it down to terrible optimisation. Doesn't look nearly good enough for the resources it hogs

It probably a PS4 port. I think they aren't using the DDR3 ram of the PC at all?

 

[therealminime]

Yeah it runs extremely poorly on my pretty good PC. I can max out Crysis 3 at 1440 and have higher framerate then Daylight with some settings turned down. It doesn't look all the great either. I presume a lot of it is due to it being a super early UE4 game.

 

[VibratingDonkey]

Why do 780's only have 3GB when 760's and 770's have versions with 4GB? Always found that odd and also stupid.

Speaking of sufficient RAM; I knew it was going to be expensive, but actually seeing that price listed next to a graphics card, you feel like you're taking crazy pills.
https://www.komplett.se/search?q=295x2
Roughly $2100.

 

[Dario ff]

A friend of mine was playing this yesterday just fine with a 1 GB card, although not sure at what settings, but at 1080p. He was able to push the settings to the max, but he'd just get low FPS instead. Not the kind of unplayable FPS when you run out of VRAM tho. Sounds like it's doing a cache with the available VRAM, and probably an automatic UE4 thing.

 

[b0bbyJ03]

Why would devs want to simulate looking at a game through a pair of bad/cheap corrective glasses?

this really comes down to adding imperfections to the picture. A lot of what we consider "reality" comes from these imperfections. Its like lens flare or bloom, its adds absolutely nothing to the gameplay, matter of fact it makes it harder to see, yet it tricks your brain into thinking "this looks real" because you associate it with what you've been watching on TV your whole life.

 

[Crimsonclaw111]

How so people recommending the GTX760/770 are doing that based on numbers we do know. The main point is that if you get a GTX770 4GB you might as well get a GTX780 for a bit more and it will destroy the 770 in the vast majority of situations even in the future. The GTX760 does not have the computational power to justify 4GB RAM, based on the numbers we do have. PC-GAF tries to give you best value for your money. If you want to waste money for very specific scenario's, be my guest.

780s are damn expensive. I bought my 770 4GB open box and used for $250, you can find deals out there.

 

[SpyGuy239]

I've never hidden the fact that I sit in team green for all manner of reasons (stability, S3D, gsync, faster driver support, less hitching and previously Nvidia Inspector but RadeonPro looks to have surpassed it now) but they're currently dropping the ball in terms of VRAM. At every important pricepoint AMD seem to give you an extra 1GB of VRAM and if you're buying a card to last you 2+ years (which I firmly believe encompasses most gamers) then that's going to make a huge difference.

The GTX 770 has the horsepower to see through this console generation yet it barely has another year or two's life in it because 95% of cards are sold with a piddling 2GB GDDR5.

no arguments with the 4gb but I replaced my 770 with a 780 during the price drop last September and there is no 6gb option available. What then, are you saying I should have stuck with my 770 4gb instead of going for the 780 3gb, and that the 770 would have lasted me longer than the 780?

There must be something we are all missing here.

 

[Exploding8]

Wait, so is a 4gb 770 better long term than a 3gb 780? 0.o

 

[TheD]

The UE4 Elemental demo only uses about 1.5 GB and the UE4 Cave demo uses about 700MB (and Daylight does not look better than them), so it is safe to say that we are looking at some kind of caching.

 

[ColonelSkills]

no arguments with the 4gb but I replaced my 770 with a 780 during the price drop last September and there is no 6gb option available. What then, are you saying I should have stuck with my 770 4gb instead of going for the 780 3gb, and that the 770 would have lasted me longer than the 780?

There must be something we are all missing here.

There's a 6 GB option now, of course, but unfortunately it's only recently.

And I don't think you're hurting yet. This is likely caching, and until proven otherwise I wouldn't be thinking you downgraded or anything. In a vast majority of cases, the 780 will serve you extremely well for the foreseeable future.

 

[riflen]

It probably a PS4 port. I think they aren't using the DDR3 ram of the PC at all?

In the OP, the guy states that it uses up to 3GB of system memory.

Why do 780's only have 3GB when 760's and 770's have versions with 4GB? Always found that odd and also stupid.

It's related to bus width. The GK110 GPU of the 780/780Ti/Titan/Titan Black/Titan Z has a 384-bit bus. This means the choices for VRAM are 1.5, 3, 6, 12, 24 GB and so on.

The GK104 in the 760 and 770 has a 256-bit bus, so the choices are 1, 2, 4, 8, 16GB.
6GB in June 2013 when the 780 was released, was probably too expensive for nvidia to make their $500 target. The memory decision was probably also influenced by them wanting to make the Titan their premium product.

 

[chickdigger802]

Still feel bad for people that got a card recently and got this instead of watch dogs... but to be fair I'm predicting some fun surprises in the benchmarks for that as well.

 

[Waaghals]

Why do 780's only have 3GB when 760's and 770's have versions with 4GB? Always found that odd and also stupid.

Speaking of sufficient RAM; I knew it was going to be expensive, but actually seeing that price listed next to a graphics card, you feel like you're taking crazy pills.
https://www.komplett.se/search?q=295x2
Roughly $2100.

Those are all dual GPU cards (i.e. 2x 4GB).
Furthermore, you won't actually need 8GB to match the new consoles. They can only use about 5GB of their total pool.

 

[solarus]

Welp. I knew i should have paid a bit more for my gtx 670 and got something bigger than 2gb vram, i dont want to upgrade for a while :/

 

[Erasus]

It probably a PS4 port. I think they aren't using the DDR3 ram of the PC at all?

So, the entire game is loaded into the VRAM of the GPU, not having the framebuffer be in VRAM and the rest (game logic, etc) be in DDR2/3 RAM? That sounds dumb, and impossible.

 

[solarus]

Arkham knight is going to melt cards left, right and centre.

 

[Crimsonclaw111]

Arkham knight is going to melt cards left, right and centre.

Did the first Arkham game?

 

[SapientWolf]

So the 3GB 780 Ti is beating the 6GB Titan at 1080p here.

http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/daylight-test-gpu.html

Does the game hitch or something? Does anyone sprechen Sie Deutsch?

 

[Faith]

780Ti better than 780 SLI, lol? And 780Ti SLI equal to 780Ti?

What's that? CPU bottleneck?

 

[Objectively Bad Opinion]

780Ti better than 780 SLI, lol? And 780Ti SLI equal to 780Ti?

What's that? CPU bottleneck?

No multi-GPU support. Notice the 295X2 is the same as the 290X also. Same for the other multi-GPU cards.

 

[Felix Lighter]

The UE4 Elemental demo only uses about 1.5 GB and the UE4 Cave demo uses about 700MB (and Daylight does not look better than them), so it is safe to say that we are looking at some kind of caching.

As in, it simply uses as much ram as is available for caching but doesn't actually require the memory necessarily? I'm sorry if I missed it in the thread but are people experiencing the telltale plummet in performance due to running out of VRAM memory?

Looking at the graph a few posts up, you'd expect the min framerate of 2 GB cards to be single digits if it was running out of VRAM that it needed.

 

[chickdigger802]

Arkham knight is going to melt cards left, right and centre.

arkham knight is (heavily modified) unreal 3 though. It probably should run fine on most rigs with physx off.

 

[Objectively Bad Opinion]

As in, it simply uses as much ram as is available for caching but doesn't actually require the memory necessarily? I'm sorry if I missed it in the thread but are people experiencing the telltale plummet in performance due to running out of VRAM memory?

Looking at the graph a few posts up, you'd expect the min framerate of 2 GB cards to be single digits if it was running out of VRAM that it needed.

It's probably an average of minima, not the lowest point.

Then again, reviewers never clarify, so...

 

[SapientWolf]

It's probably an average of minima, not the lowest point.

Then again, reviewers never clarify, so...

It's min and average. You don't average minimums.

 

[SighFight]

So the 3GB 780 Ti is beating the 6GB Titan at 1080p here.

http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/daylight-test-gpu.html

Does the game hitch or something? Does anyone sprechen Sie Deutsch?

So 770 2 gig vs 280 3 gigs is pretty much a tie. Allocating more memory does not equal more performance per say.

Edit: And its a russian site so german won't help much.

 

[KKRT00]

So the 3GB 780 Ti is beating the 6GB Titan at 1080p here.

http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/daylight-test-gpu.html

Does the game hitch or something? Does anyone sprechen Sie Deutsch?

And we are done. They are just caching in available VRAM like Battlefield 3 and 4.

 

[BennyBlanco]

my 2 gig 670 am cry

 

[Durante]

So as I thought, UE4 is just intelligently caching.

780Ti better than 780 SLI, lol? And 780Ti SLI equal to 780Ti?

What's that? CPU bottleneck?

No, that's why you don't build multi-GPU setups

 

[Objectively Bad Opinion]

It's min and average. You don't average minimums.

I know, just saying it's impossible to know a lot of the time what a reviewer's methodology is.

 

[s_mirage]

780Ti better than 780 SLI, lol? And 780Ti SLI equal to 780Ti?

What's that? CPU bottleneck?

It's not taking advantage of SLI at all at the moment. That's the issue.

 

[AndyBNV]

It's not taking advantage of SLI at all at the moment. That's the issue.

There is an SLI profile available via GeForce Experience. GameGPU needs to check the checkboxes, check for updates, and then re-do their tests

 

[th4tguy]

Seems like an Unreal Engine 4 thing. Both the realistic rendering and cave demos take up ~2.5GB VRAM, meanwhile the Elemental demo hits 3+GB VRAM.

Which is funny because that is the scaled back elemental demo that was used to demonstrate the tech on PS4.