Usefulness of 512MB vram with X1900

[MistaPi]

I can imagine it fast can become useful with FP HDR+AA or generally at very high res with 4/6xAA, but other than that, when games begins to require more than 256MB for highest detail level, do you think X1900 will be able to run those at high res (1280x960/1024 or higher)?

 

[Ailuros]

IMHO when 512MB will make a significant difference in games, they'll be way more capable GPUs than today available.

 

[MistaPi]

Yes I think so too, but for someone that doesn’t buy a new gfx card every half-year or every year, would be something to seriously consider for future proofing? (Let's say there also was a 256MB X1900XT on the marked).

 

[Ailuros]

If you intend to keep it for say 2 years then obviously a 512MB GPU would be a wiser decision.

 

[MistaPi]

Its not that obvious for me Im afraid. To be clear, and sorry if I am nagging, but you don’t think that those games wont demand to much at full detail levels for say 1280x1024 with atleast some AA and AF that 512MB vram wont matter much anyway. That is you have to go to a lower setting that doesn’t demand that much memory.

 

[_xxx_]

As always, more == better

Really, 512 MB already benefits a few games visibly. Next year, you'll see it making a big difference.

 

[Blazkowicz]

Unreal 3 style games should use a lot of texture data. look at Doom3, with its mutiple layers of low res textures.. Unreal 3 demos look so great firstly because these multiple layers (including normal maps and other things) are getting hi/very hi res.
512MB makes sense, it will be useful for textures; with sufficient memory, upping the textures in a game doesn't hurt much and it's a huge part of image quality.

sure, a X1900XT will be slower than a hid-range "X2800" but should be still superior to midrange cards and vastly superior to the low end. (right now an "old" X800pro is better than a X1600pro)

 

[ANova]

Well FEAR stutters horribly on my 256MB X850 XT with texture settings on high, so there seems to already be a game or two that can make use of 512 MB.

 

[karlotta]

i max out in Q4 and hit over 400mb in BF2. 512mb is the only option IMO.

 

[KimB]

Well FEAR stutters horribly on my 256MB X850 XT with texture settings on high, so there seems to already be a game or two that can make use of 512 MB.

I'm not sure that's representative of all 256MB boards, though. No problems with texture settings on high for my 7800GT SLI setup (and bear in mind that this means only 8x PCIe for each card). I think that PCIe boards do better in general with offloading textures to system RAM.

 

[MasterBaiter]

I think to some degree this is a chicken/egg thing. Game developers will only enhance their graphics as cards can support those features. If we want mega-textures, we will need mega-amounts of memory. There is also a rise of large screen monitors out there with a native resolution above 1600x1200 (I'm running @ 1920x1200 native) This will eat memory usage as well. Most of the time I cannot turn on AA as it usually kills my performance. I'm running a 7800GTX 256 currently. For me, my next purchase of a 512mb card is pretty much a given. I'm just waiting to see what Nvidia puts out in the next couple of months , and that will determine if I go ATI or Nvidia.

 

[KimB]

Fortunately, it's really easy to have a quality option to turn down texture resolution. So in this situation, there's no problem with game devs thinking a bit ahead as far as video memory is concerned.

 

[AlNom]

Fortunately, it's really easy to have a quality option to turn down texture resolution. So in this situation, there's no problem with game devs thinking a bit ahead as far as video memory is concerned.

I suppose the only thing is moving over to DVDs just for storing the ridiculously high res images.

 

[Kaotik]

IMHO when 512MB will make a significant difference in games, they'll be way more capable GPUs than today available.

Actually we have such games already I believe, I remember seeing several benches of X800XL 512MB where it was beating X850XT 256MB, and about on par with 7800GTX 256MB

 

[neliz]

There are a few games where 512 really helps (BF2, and FEAR) where it is a bonus (D3/Q4) and it generally helps when you apply loads of AA/AF.
If you compare 256 and 512 cards you see that 512 cards take a lot less % penalty for applying those image enhancers, not at low res, but at higher resolutions (1600x1200 and upwards) since THAT is where you'd buy a 1900 for.

do you think X1900 will be able to run those at high res (1280x960/1024 or higher)?

That's the previous generations' property!

 

[Ken2012]

I'm not sure that's representative of all 256MB boards, though. No problems with texture settings on high for my 7800GT SLI setup (and bear in mind that this means only 8x PCIe for each card). I think that PCIe boards do better in general with offloading textures to system RAM.

Hmm, personally my (256MB) 7800GTX SLI setup still gets the stutters when I put Quake 4 up to 'Ultra Quality'.

My question: Could SLI/Crossfire solutions some day be UMA? Each GPU dipping into each other's (RAM) pools? Presumably one of the reasons for the current (NUMA-like, in regards to the video sub-system and not including the system memory aperture) a lack of bandwidth in the SLI bridge/Crossfire DVI connection? Thanks.

 

[neliz]

Hmm, personally my (256MB) 7800GTX SLI setup still gets the stutters when I put Quake 4 up to 'Ultra Quality'.

That's what you get for not following the rules boy.
Texture swapping is what will bring any card stuttering in D3 and Q4 at "ultra quality" (I think the box or manual clearly states that 512mb graphics memory is required)

 

[Ken2012]

That's what you get for not following the rules boy.
Texture swapping is what will bring any card stuttering in D3 and Q4 at "ultra quality" (I think the box or manual clearly states that 512mb graphics memory is required)

I know that man. Although, worth mentioning that contrary to very popular belief amongst the gaming crowd, ultra qualitied Doom 3 has always run 100% fine for me with a 256MB solution* (even my old AGP 6800GT), whereas Quake 4 certainly eats video memory for breakfast.

*@1280*1024, 2xFSAA.

 

[neliz]

I know that man. Although, worth mentioning that contrary to very popular belief amongst the gaming crowd, ultra qualitied Doom 3 has always run 100% fine for me with a 256MB solution* (even my old AGP 6800GT), whereas Quake 4 certainly eats video memory for breakfast.

*@1280*1024, 4xFSAA.

I'm just confused at this topic.. 1900's 512mb graphics memory and asking if it is enough to run 1280/1024 with some aa/af.

Ati's x800 series has much more problem in demanding environments it seems.

 

[archie4oz]

The more the better... After using OS that's been virtualizing VRAM resources for the past 3.5 years (OS X) and another one upcoming (Vista), I'll take all the VRAM I can get my hands on. 512MB? Hell I'll take a 1GB if I can...