- Joined
- Nov 15, 2011
- Location
- SoCal
Why cant Nvidia make a single GPU that has 20GB Video memory and run any game at 120hz at 1600p for the next 5 years. And also priced at a lovely $299.99. WHY I SAID!
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
gtx 680 4gb seriously what is taking so long
- Thread starter CURTO
- Start date
- Joined
- May 29, 2005
$200 After Mail-In Rebate
It also needs to overclock really well and not have a cold bug with liquid nitrogen.
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2011
- Location
- SoCal
Oh definitely....10GHZ core. 1TB bandwidth. 4nm architecture. uses only 10 watts of power. It is also made of titanium capacitors and has lifetime warranty with a replacement program where they send you the new era card for free when it comes out.
Alright ill stop here...
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2011
- Location
- SoCal
Haha...
I also wish the current 580 3gb prices would drop even further.
Im not sure how this is going to work but once the 6-series start rolling through...are the 5-series going to dry out of stock and manufacturing?
I also wish the current 580 3gb prices would drop even further.
Im not sure how this is going to work but once the 6-series start rolling through...are the 5-series going to dry out of stock and manufacturing?
- Joined
- May 10, 2009
It's worth noting that ram density wise the 680 uses the same (expensive!) density chips that the 580 3GB cards do. Asking for a 4GB card means using 512MB/chip ram, and that is far from cheap.
If the GF110 really does have a 512bit memory interface (which is horrendously expensive in and of itself) it can use the same 256MB/chip memory that the 680 is using and have 4GB.
Of course I expect people will demand an 8GB card at that point
If the GF110 really does have a 512bit memory interface (which is horrendously expensive in and of itself) it can use the same 256MB/chip memory that the 680 is using and have 4GB.
Of course I expect people will demand an 8GB card at that point
OP
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2009
- Location
- Wollongong, NSW, Australia
- Thread Starter
- #28
basically the reason why i want 4gb is because ive read up that some games *cough* bf3 actually suck up ~2gb vram on 1080p resos or something like that (basically people whinging that theyre bottlenecked). now for me i gotta support 5760x1200 so im going to need more than 2gb to be safe and hell i want to be a bit future proof because i have a feeling games are gonna start sucking up more vram anyways. so 4gb seems to be a nice number for me, hence the reason why i want to wait for a 4gb.
OP
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2009
- Location
- Wollongong, NSW, Australia
- Thread Starter
- #30
ill see if i can find the link. it was basically a forum full of nvidia boyz talking about their vram useage in bf3 and what not. a number of them were reporting ~2gb vram usage and i dont think any of them had surround
EDIT: heres one site where most of them are reporting ~1.5gb ram usage at 1080p and some up to 2.1gb.
http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/battlefield-3-pc/1430356-vram-usage-ultra.html
now ive got 3.33x as much reso as that so im assuming im gonna need like over 6gb of ram :|
It seems to scale... its weird. THere is a thread where a guy had a 580 1.5GB and 580 3GB. The 1.5GB used ~1.2GB (mine did too). His 3GB took ~1.9GB.
EDIT: On the 7950, It also used ~1.8GB and of course it has 3GB.
My 680 takes 1.8GB at 2560x1440, Ultra.
Thing is, it only chokes on memory around the 1GB mark. Anything over that and its smooth.
EDIT: On the 7950, It also used ~1.8GB and of course it has 3GB.
My 680 takes 1.8GB at 2560x1440, Ultra.
Thing is, it only chokes on memory around the 1GB mark. Anything over that and its smooth.
OP
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2009
- Location
- Wollongong, NSW, Australia
- Thread Starter
- #35
It seems to scale... its weird. THere is a thread where a guy had a 580 1.5GB and 580 3GB. The 1.5GB used ~1.2GB (mine did too). His 3GB took ~1.9GB.
EDIT: On the 7950, It also used ~1.8GB and of course it has 3GB.
My 680 takes 1.8GB at 2560x1440, Ultra.
Thing is, it only chokes on memory around the 1GB mark. Anything over that and its smooth.
wait how the hell to you measure vram usage on an ati card? dont you need cuda? and well yeah, is vram:resolution linear? if so then yeah im gonna need like over 6gb of ram
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2010
- Location
- London, UK
well that little back and forth pretty much answered my question hehe.Just buy a 2gb version and by the time they bring out the 4gb version, by then youll probs have enough money to get another 2gb, SLI, problem solved XD
hehe.Just buy a 2gb version and by the time they bring out the 4gb version, by then youll probs have enough money to get another 2gb, SLI, problem solved XD
OP
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2009
- Location
- Wollongong, NSW, Australia
- Thread Starter
- #37
well that little back and forth pretty much answered my question
nah multi gpus is a no go for me. ive tried it that many times and done it as properly as you could and i still have problems. i just dont like have two cards, makes **** too complicated for me. i just found out sapphire is making a toxic 7970 with 6gb vram
EDIT: ok ive had another look around and it turns out vram usage: resolution and/or aa is NOT linear at all. check out this link
http://widescreengamingforum.com/fo...ity-discussions/17509/gpu-ram-usage-eyefinity
it basically shows that going from a single monitor to 3 screen roughly increases the vram usage by 1gb and by adding aa onto that youre looking at another few hundred mb. every bench he did on anything the vram never went any higher than 2gb; it got close but never higher. so im pretty convinced that while a 2gb 680 would be fine, i might still consider 4gb one just to be safe.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2010
- Location
- London, UK
nah multi gpus is a no go for me. ive tried it that many times and done it as properly as you could and i still have problems. i just dont like have two cards, makes **** too complicated for me. i just found out sapphire is making a toxic 7970 with 6gb vram
EDIT: ok ive had another look around and it turns out vram usage: resolution and/or aa is NOT linear at all. check out this link
http://widescreengamingforum.com/fo...ity-discussions/17509/gpu-ram-usage-eyefinity
it basically shows that going from a single monitor to 3 screen roughly increases the vram usage by 1gb and by adding aa onto that youre looking at another few hundred mb. every bench he did on anything the vram never went any higher than 2gb; it got close but never higher. so im pretty convinced that while a 2gb 680 would be fine, i might still consider 4gb one just to be safe.
i suppose if yours gona be gaming at silly resolutions it might be worth the extra cash, but i dont think it would be worth choosing a 6gb 7970 over a 680. I dont know how much of a trade off the more ram would be. I mean SLI can be a bit complicated. But i think it would be a clever bet if you are gaming at such high resolutions. Tbh im still on a pretty low resolution, which is fine when your on a desk. I find anything above 22" on a normal desk painful on the eyes. So 2gb will be fine for me for quite a while
- Joined
- May 29, 2005
wait how the hell to you measure vram usage on an ati card? dont you need cuda? and well yeah, is vram:resolution linear? if so then yeah im gonna need like over 6gb of ram
It works pretty well to use MSI Afterburner and have the on screen display the memory usage.
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2008
- Location
- East Coast
You cant even find a 680 with 2gb let alone 4gb, unless you get lucky and happen upon a site that got 5 in, and then get your order finished in the 2 mins they are still there. (I am looking for 680 HC and even fewer of those).
