PDA

View Full Version : Assassins Creed: Unity DX12 Windows 10 - The way it's meant to be played



RVSage
07-31-2015, 07:11 AM
DX 12 improves FPS marginally, improves draw distance and texture pop-in issue...

:D

http://i.imgur.com/tYcvMwn.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/pudGTG7.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/doyVjd4.jpg


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dx8jiiPb64&feature=youtu.be

PS
Game not optimized for directx 12.. just a minor improvement in draw calls and WDDM 2.0 helps

And sorry about title...It is plain windows 10

Rukeith
07-31-2015, 07:15 AM
Whelp, time to upgrade to Windows 10 lol. I remember the brief time I played unity, it had annoying texture draw distance. Buildings from even a mild distance looked blurry/smudged and low res, does this fix that issue?

Jessigirl2013
07-31-2015, 05:19 PM
Cool ;)

I would love to upgrade to windows 10,
But for some reason windows still hasn't had to dialog box pop up yet :(

What's your personal opinion of it? Is It as good as 7?

RVSage
07-31-2015, 06:05 PM
Cool ;)

I would love to upgrade to windows 10,
But for some reason windows still hasn't had to dialog box pop up yet :(

What's your personal opinion of it? Is It as good as 7?

The performance is the same.. mostly.. It is just that the draw distances have improved(I guess the draw calls api of dx12 is better) Note:ACU is not built for DX12 this is the not best leap possible

The windows 10 WDDM 2.0 or Windows Display Driver Model 2.0 could be another reason... But overall it is just the game feels a bit more stable..My overall experience is the same as before though.. People with lower graphic cards may find more improvement.

Jessigirl2013
07-31-2015, 06:29 PM
The performance is the same.. mostly.. It is just that the draw distances have improved(I guess the draw calls api of dx12 is better) Note:ACU is not built for DX12 this is the not best leap possible

The windows 10 WDDM 2.0 or Windows Display Driver Model 2.0 could be another reason... But overall it is just the game feels a bit more stable..My overall experience is the same as before though.. People with lower graphic cards may find more improvement.


This will probably be the case with me ;)

KmarkoPL
07-31-2015, 07:47 PM
For your information , there is no game at the moment ,witch support in any kind of level the DX12
You just have good frame rate on high settings that's all .

RVSage
07-31-2015, 08:31 PM
For your information , there is no game at the moment ,witch support in any kind of level the DX12
You just have good frame rate on high settings that's all .

Yes no game is optimized for DX12... But all games on windows 10 goes through dx12... (which is dx11 backward compatible.... btw I run on Ultra... I believe the slight improvement is based on dx12 draw call api improvement and windows display driver model version 2.0..

Jessigirl2013
07-31-2015, 09:43 PM
Yes no game is optimized for DX12... But all games on windows 10 goes through dx12... (which is dx11 backward compatible.... btw I run on Ultra... I believe the slight improvement is based on dx12 draw call api improvement and windows display driver model version 2.0..

I agree, most games will have an improvement in performance with DX12;)

Yamatsan
08-01-2015, 05:02 PM
AFAIK Windows 10 has a minor increase in max draw-calls with DX11. That's why you might see a minor difference in performance/LOD/pop-in issues compared to Windows 8.1 or 7.

The game is NOT running on DX12 as you can clearly see in the top left corner of the screen (it states D3D11). If the game would be running on DX12 you would see a major difference not minor (especially in the case of AC:U which is heavily CPU-bound).

Games use a specific API, in this case DX11. It is impossible for a game made with the DX11 API to benefit from the DX12 API. It is however possible to port a game to a newer API (for example DX12).

I guess porting AC:U to DX12 would almost fix all performance/LOD/pop-in issues. What a shame we will probably never see that day...

Also Windows 10 comes with the WDDM 2.0 which results in lower CPU utilization. This can also explain the minor difference in performance/LOD/pop-in issues (especially with a game like AC:U which is heavily CPU-bound).

But hey, every small increase helps! Hooray for the minor increase in max draw-calls on Windows 10 while using the DX11 API. :)

Jessigirl2013
08-01-2015, 07:33 PM
Have you seen the pop in on the Syndicate demo ;)
Yikes!
But they can hide behind the fact that its an alpha demo. ;)
Part of me things they just stuck that on the footage as a safety net.;) in case of bugs
As seen here


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYnW9U7aNUM

The cutscene audio didn't work ;)

But by the looks of the comments on some of the videos, it didn't work. ;)
and UBI unlisting the video from their official channel, just makes it look like they have something to hide!:mad:

Mr_Shade
08-02-2015, 10:24 AM
The above.. is Alpha..

As you have clearly seen.. and stated - so it's not final code... this is the same demo people played at AC Syndicate The Tour - and many thousands of people enjoyed it..

Yes there were technical issues in that stream, which again are due to being Alpha.. or more likely technical issues with the equipment used to stream.

Check the many other Ubisioft channels using the same Alpha code - and you might see a different bug or issue or none- same code - doesn't always react the same..


I can't answer why it was removed - but if it's glitchy and people like your self are assuming the game is going to be buggy [even though it's alpha.. which you seem to ignore] and you jump to Ubisoft is 'hiding something'- can't blame them?

You really do seem to have an agenda.. with this video since I have seen you post it a few times in unrelated threads?



End of the day - plenty of other streams of the same demo - all went well.. alpha code is alpha for a reason..

Jessigirl2013
08-02-2015, 12:03 PM
The above.. is Alpha..

As you have clearly seen.. and stated - so it's not final code... this is the same demo people played at AC Syndicate The Tour - and many thousands of people enjoyed it..

Yes there were technical issues in that stream, which again are due to being Alpha.. or more likely technical issues with the equipment used to stream.

Check the many other Ubisioft channels using the same Alpha code - and you might see a different bug or issue or none- same code - doesn't always react the same..



Considering the game is 3 months away, as myself and other forums members have already pointed out, I was just stating that it seems odd that its still in that state.
I've clearly pointed out when mentioning the video, that it is in fact an alpha and that the majority of the issues will be fixed at launch.



I can't answer why it was removed - but if it's glitchy and people like your self are assuming the game is going to be buggy [even though it's alpha.. which you seem to ignore] and you jump to Ubisoft is 'hiding something'- can't blame them?


This is where I don't think you understand my point. My issue is not with the buggy demo footage <----- Its an alpha, of course its a glitch mess;)
My issue is with the fact that it got unlisted <---- Don't we have a right to see the footage and make our own opinion.


You really do seem to have an agenda.. with this video since I have seen you post it a few times in unrelated threads?




As for "my agenda"<---- I actually found this quite hurtful :(
My point of posting the video on the forums is actually so that people can see it, Due to the fact that it is unlisted.


I wouldn't say I've posted it on unrelated threads on purpose,
When discussion went onto Syndicate and Performance issues, then I posted it ^ like said above because otherwise people wouldn't see it otherwise



End of the day - plenty of other streams of the same demo - all went well.. alpha code is alpha for a reason..
Like I've pointed out above^, I know this and that isn't my issue.


Overall I post on this forum like many others to discuss AC with likeminded people and to express my opinion on upcoming releases.
In no way do I post to intentionally trash AC <---- I love it, Trust me ;)<----- my posts show this ;)
I just want everyone who didn't see that stream to stay informed with AC news ;) They have a right to know ;)

Mr_Shade
08-02-2015, 12:13 PM
Considering the game is 3 months away, as myself and other forums members have already pointed out, I was just stating that it seems odd that its still in that state.
I've clearly pointed out when mentioning the video, that it is in fact an alpha and that the majority of the issues will be fixed at launch.


Simple - It's old code which they used for E3... they create one demo and we have reused it for other things - rather than spend valuable time which they are using to finish the game on making new demos.

The demo is perfectly suited to showing what the game play etc will be like - if you ignore the odd bug and glitch ;)

That code is not the current state of the game.. it's constantly being revised and optimised - and don't forget we have a new demo incoming for Gamescom ;)


Would have thought that was clear - by the fact the demo has not changed for many months and has always been the same Alpha code - but hopefully thats clearer ;)

Jessigirl2013
08-02-2015, 12:30 PM
Simple - It's old code which they used for E3... they create one demo and we have reused it for other things - rather than spend valuable time which they are using to finish the game on making new demos.

The demo is perfectly suited to showing what the game play etc will be like - if you ignore the odd bug and glitch ;)

That code is not the current state of the game.. it's constantly being revised and optimised - and don't forget we have a new demo incoming for Gamescom ;)


Would have thought that was clear - by the fact the demo has not changed for many months and has always been the same Alpha code - but hopefully thats clearer ;)
Ill say again, I agree with all your points about the fact its an alpha ;)


As I said that wasn't my issue ;)
I think we should just end this argument agreeing that we both have made valid points;)

D51-ClaudioACSy
08-02-2015, 12:44 PM
Ill say again, I agree with all your points about the fact its an alpha ;)


As I said that wasn't my issue ;)
I think we should just end this argument agreeing that we both have made valid points;)

I can only advice you to make your proper judgment when the game will be released on October 23rd ;)

Mr_Shade
08-02-2015, 12:50 PM
I can only advice you to make your proper judgment when the game will be released on October 23rd ;)

indeed ;)

Jessigirl2013
08-02-2015, 01:06 PM
indeed ;)

I also agree ;)
I know it will be definitely better than the alpha ;) Like all games ;)

Yamatsan
08-02-2015, 05:12 PM
AFAIK Windows 10 has a minor increase in max draw-calls with DX11. That's why you might see a minor difference in performance/LOD/pop-in issues compared to Windows 8.1 or 7.

The game is NOT running on DX12 as you can clearly see in the top left corner of the screen (it states D3D11). If the game would be running on DX12 you would see a major difference not minor (especially in the case of AC:U which is heavily CPU-bound).

Games use a specific API, in this case DX11. It is impossible for a game made with the DX11 API to benefit from the DX12 API. It is however possible to port a game to a newer API (for example DX12).

I guess porting AC:U to DX12 would almost fix all performance/LOD/pop-in issues. What a shame we will probably never see that day...

But hey, every small increase helps! Hooray for the minor increase in max draw-calls on Windows 10 while using the DX11 API.

Also Windows 10 comes with the WDDM 2.0 which results in lower CPU utilization. This can also explain the minor difference in performance/LOD/pop-in issues (especially with a game like AC:U which is heavily CPU-bound).


DX12 and DX11 sources:
https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/36vey3/will_directx_12_have_an_impact_in_current_directx
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2435993
WDDM 2.0 source:
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/dn932171%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

sheby1911
08-02-2015, 05:44 PM
Windows 10 didn't improve anything to me. I still have pop-ins and MASSIVE LOD issues.

Jessigirl2013
08-02-2015, 06:14 PM
Windows 10 didn't improve anything to me. I still have pop-ins and MASSIVE LOD issues.

Can you post screenshots?

sheby1911
08-05-2015, 02:27 PM
Here you go! Sorry for such a long time of response.
http://i.imgur.com/XG0cUSc.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/Q520unE.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/thcvWse.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/XL7irLw.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/1nqnVKP.jpg

Jessigirl2013
08-05-2015, 09:46 PM
Here you go! Sorry for such a long time of response.
http://i.imgur.com/XG0cUSc.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/Q520unE.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/thcvWse.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/XL7irLw.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/1nqnVKP.jpg

No prob ;)

Yikes!, I get what you mean. ;)

What settings is that on?

sheby1911
08-05-2015, 11:24 PM
All settings max besides shadows are on low (I can see no difference between low and high) and AA = FXAA

I play on GTX 980

Cheers!

RVSage
08-06-2015, 07:30 PM
AFAIK Windows 10 has a minor increase in max draw-calls with DX11. That's why you might see a minor difference in performance/LOD/pop-in issues compared to Windows 8.1 or 7.

The game is NOT running on DX12 as you can clearly see in the top left corner of the screen (it states D3D11). If the game would be running on DX12 you would see a major difference not minor (especially in the case of AC:U which is heavily CPU-bound).

Games use a specific API, in this case DX11. It is impossible for a game made with the DX11 API to benefit from the DX12 API. It is however possible to port a game to a newer API (for example DX12).

I guess porting AC:U to DX12 would almost fix all performance/LOD/pop-in issues. What a shame we will probably never see that day...

But hey, every small increase helps! Hooray for the minor increase in max draw-calls on Windows 10 while using the DX11 API.

Also Windows 10 comes with the WDDM 2.0 which results in lower CPU utilization. This can also explain the minor difference in performance/LOD/pop-in issues (especially with a game like AC:U which is heavily CPU-bound).


DX12 and DX11 sources:
https://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/36vey3/will_directx_12_have_an_impact_in_current_directx
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2435993
WDDM 2.0 source:
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/dn932171%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

Exactly my point ..

Jessigirl2013
08-06-2015, 08:30 PM
All settings max besides shadows are on low (I can see no difference between low and high) and AA = FXAA

I play on GTX 980

Cheers!

Cool.
980 - I'm jelly, Just curious what FPS your getting?

sheby1911
08-07-2015, 02:38 PM
I'm getting average 45fps on these settings, but on overclocked i get 50 and more. 2560x1440 resolution.

Jessigirl2013
08-08-2015, 06:57 PM
I'm getting average 45fps on these settings, but on overclocked i get 50 and more. 2560x1440 resolution.

Nice ;)
Is the FPS on the low side compared to other games, due to the poor optimisation?:rolleyes:

dargor5
08-09-2015, 10:38 PM
Cool.
980 - I'm jelly, Just curious what FPS your getting?

I too play with 980. Have everything maxed out (but shadows, on high) plus SweetFX, V sync from the nvidia ctrl panel. 54-60 fps

Ouky1991
08-09-2015, 10:59 PM
AC Unity seems much better on windows 10. I've been testing only for about an hour, but in the most broblematic places game runs smoother for me. Low texture streaming persist though. But finaly since its release i can play at 1080p without stutter and with both cores activated (i had to dedicate one core to physx on my GTX 690 before, to play without stutter). It looks like Windows 10 enables VRAM stacking in ACU although the game doesn't run on DX12 - I've noticed after today's testing my VRAM usage got to 3200MB while GTX 690 has only 2MB per core. In Win 7 it was always something like 1988MB so it must stack. It may be just bug in EVGA Precision x that i'm using but ACU runs really much better. Can anybody clarify VRAM stacking on Win 10 dx11?

Jessigirl2013
08-10-2015, 11:57 AM
AC Unity seems much better on windows 10. I've been testing only for about an hour, but in the most broblematic places game runs smoother for me. Low texture streaming persist though. But finaly since its release i can play at 1080p without stutter and with both cores activated (i had to dedicate one core to physx on my GTX 690 before, to play without stutter). It looks like Windows 10 enables VRAM stacking in ACU although the game doesn't run on DX12 - I've noticed after today's testing my VRAM usage got to 3200MB while GTX 690 has only 2MB per core. In Win 7 it was always something like 1988MB so it must stack. It may be just bug in EVGA Precision x that i'm using but ACU runs really much better. Can anybody clarify VRAM stacking on Win 10 dx11?

I don't get why UBI have stopped patching it as its still not fixed.:mad:

Sounds good, shame a 980 is out of my price range. ;)
What do you think about the 960 2gb or 960 4gb, would there be a noticeable difference considering the difference in price?:confused:

Ouky1991
08-10-2015, 01:34 PM
I don't get why UBI have stopped patching it as its still not fixed.:mad:

Sounds good, shame a 980 is out of my price range. ;)
What do you think about the 960 2gb or 960 4gb, would there be a noticeable difference considering the difference in price?:confused:

I'm not sure whether you were replying on my post or "dargor5" but I wouldn't recommend any GPU with 2GB especially for ACU. Go for GTX 960 4GB and you should get stable 30fps according to this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y4YF1kUFFM

Also what makes it run much smoother is 1/2 refresh rate adaptive vsync turned on in nvidia control panel. Rather than fps jumping between 30-40 with this you will get stable 30 without stuttering.

Ouky1991
08-10-2015, 07:08 PM
After additional testing on Win 10 i can confirm VRAM IS STACKING. If you have two 2gb cards in SLI, game will use 4gb at once (instead of 2gb in windows 7/8) so if you are considering win 10, go for it. Thanks to that i can now play 1080p and ultra textures,when on Win 7 I had to use 900p and high textures only (now the game uses all 4gb on my old gtx 690).

So far only downside is that ACU is crashing from time to time (twice in about 6 game sessions) and some minor cloud texture stuttering which went away after changing some random settings.

YazX_
08-11-2015, 09:27 PM
After additional testing on Win 10 i can confirm VRAM IS STACKING. If you have two 2gb cards in SLI, game will use 4gb at once (instead of 2gb in windows 7/8) so if you are considering win 10, go for it. Thanks to that i can now play 1080p and ultra textures,when on Win 7 I had to use 900p and high textures only (now the game uses all 4gb on my old gtx 690).

So far only downside is that ACU is crashing from time to time (twice in about 6 game sessions) and some minor cloud texture stuttering which went away after changing some random settings.

Sorry to break the news for you, VRAM doesnt stack, DX12 gives low level APIs access which can allow devs to address VRAM on each card independently instead of leaving it to drivers to mirror VRAM, if devs didnt do any work in that regard then it will behave same way and will not stack.

now there are no games support DX12, when you run any DX11 game on windows 10 it will use DX11 DLLs (APIs) which is packed with DX12, people notice improvements in windows 10 not because they are using DX12 rather than windows 10 has better kernel and WDDM 2.0 which gives better performance in general and maybe better drivers optimization for windows 10.

now for your case specifically, i dont know what was wrong with your windows 7, 4GB is split between 2 GPUs, meaning you have 2GB per GPU and data is mirrored, so basically your 690 is like having 680 SLI with 2GB mirrored VRAM. seeing its 4GB utilized mean that 2GB on each GPU is addressed which is again mirrored that result in 4GB in total.

Ouky1991
08-11-2015, 10:46 PM
Sorry to break the news for you, VRAM doesnt stack, DX12 gives low level APIs access which can allow devs to address VRAM on each card independently instead of leaving it to drivers to mirror VRAM, if devs didnt do any work in that regard then it will behave same way and will not stack.

now there are no games support DX12, when you run any DX11 game on windows 10 it will use DX11 DLLs (APIs) which is packed with DX12, people notice improvements in windows 10 not because they are using DX12 rather than windows 10 has better kernel and WDDM 2.0 which gives better performance in general and maybe better drivers optimization for windows 10.

now for your case specifically, i dont know what was wrong with your windows 7, 4GB is split between 2 GPUs, meaning you have 2GB per GPU and data is mirrored, so basically your 690 is like having 680 SLI with 2GB mirrored VRAM. seeing its 4GB utilized mean that 2GB on each GPU is addressed which is again mirrored that result in 4GB in total.

Thanks for responce. I understand that with gtx 690 or 680x2 sli card uses only 2GB. So if some game requires for example at least 3GB VRAM, 2GB even in sli in not enough right? Anyway using EVGA precision X in win 7 I could see 2GB VRAM used when playing ACU on both cores and couldn't use ultra textures without major stutter. Now I see 4GB on both of them but then again, it might be bug. i don't think there was something wrong with my Win 7 before, are you saying that I should have seen 4BG used in that program in Win 7 and now it just works as it was suppoesed to? One way or another Assassin's Creed Unity works better on Win 10.

YazX_
08-11-2015, 11:11 PM
Thanks for responce. I understand that with gtx 690 or 680x2 sli card uses only 2GB. So if some game requires for example at least 3GB VRAM, 2GB even in sli in not enough right? Anyway using EVGA precision X in win 7 I could see 2GB VRAM used when playing ACU on both cores and couldn't use ultra textures without major stutter. Now I see 4GB on both of them but then again, it might be bug. i don't think there was something wrong with my Win 7 before, are you saying that I should have seen 4BG used in that program in Win 7 and now it just works as it was suppoesed to? One way or another Assassin's Creed Unity works better on Win 10.

when a game requires more than 2GB or more than the available VRAM, then system RAM will be used and will be swapping between RAM and VRAM , however, Getting data from RAM is too much slower than getting it from VRAM thanks to the narrow PCIEx bus bandwidth, thus you see stuttering unless if the textures streaming in game engine is done brilliantly that it would get data way before you reach the the desired scene to render, but that is very hard to accomplish without doing some scarifies and i dont think i have seen any game engine does that, most of game engines lower textures quality or give you the option to do that to fit into VRAM.

yes i'm saying you should've seen 4GB vram utilization in windows 7, i had the same issue when i was on windows 7 with GTX 770 SLI 2GB each, memory utilization was 1.3GB on each card, then when i installed windows 8.1, memory on two cards have been fully utilized, i have never knew what was wrong but seems to me something to do with windows 7 and drivers.

and yes i agree most of games should work better on windows 10, and DX12 optimized games should give great boost in performance, i think DX12 exclusive titles will appear very soon unlike DX10 and DX11 where it took around 4-5 years to start using them since MS is pushing windows 10 and DX12 too hard, in addition to massive gains in performance which is always good for game developers as their games will run decently on lower end hardware as well.

Ouky1991
08-12-2015, 09:58 AM
when a game requires more than 2GB or more than the available VRAM, then system RAM will be used and will be swapping between RAM and VRAM , however, Getting data from RAM is too much slower than getting it from VRAM thanks to the narrow PCIEx bus bandwidth, thus you see stuttering unless if the textures streaming in game engine is done brilliantly that it would get data way before you reach the the desired scene to render, but that is very hard to accomplish without doing some scarifies and i dont think i have seen any game engine does that, most of game engines lower textures quality or give you the option to do that to fit into VRAM.

yes i'm saying you should've seen 4GB vram utilization in windows 7, i had the same issue when i was on windows 7 with GTX 770 SLI 2GB each, memory utilization was 1.3GB on each card, then when i installed windows 8.1, memory on two cards have been fully utilized, i have never knew what was wrong but seems to me something to do with windows 7 and drivers.

and yes i agree most of games should work better on windows 10, and DX12 optimized games should give great boost in performance, i think DX12 exclusive titles will appear very soon unlike DX10 and DX11 where it took around 4-5 years to start using them since MS is pushing windows 10 and DX12 too hard, in addition to massive gains in performance which is always good for game developers as their games will run decently on lower end hardware as well.


Wow, are there any articles out there ivestigating that Win 7 issue? I've never heard about that. If that was the problem, I'd like to know more about it but I didn't find anything on the internet. Anyway thanks for detailed explanatoin.

YazX_
08-12-2015, 10:31 AM
Wow, are there any articles out there ivestigating that Win 7 issue? I've never heard about that. If that was the problem, I'd like to know more about it but I didn't find anything on the internet. Anyway thanks for detailed explanatoin.

Technically speaking there are none, and to be honest its still vague to me on why that happened, maybe some conflicting process, drivers, windows kernel,.... there are too many things to think of and cannot narrow it down to one thing, and when compared to other games, they seem to work perfectly fine. games are very complex softwares and the problem is each game works differently since each game engine is coded differently so its impossible to unify one behavior for all games. however, glad your problem got sorted out with windows 10, enjoy :)

Jessigirl2013
08-12-2015, 09:30 PM
I'm not sure whether you were replying on my post or "dargor5" but I wouldn't recommend any GPU with 2GB especially for ACU. Go for GTX 960 4GB and you should get stable 30fps according to this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y4YF1kUFFM

Also what makes it run much smoother is 1/2 refresh rate adaptive vsync turned on in nvidia control panel. Rather than fps jumping between 30-40 with this you will get stable 30 without stuttering.
Thanks for the help ;)
I'll just save up for a 970:rolleyes:

YazX_
08-12-2015, 10:34 PM
Thanks for the help ;)
I'll just save up for a 970:rolleyes:

if you want my advise, dont get GTX 970, it has two different configs for memory, 3.5GB works at full bandwidth speed and 500 MB works at 1/7th of speed, technically speaking the card cannot address more than 3.5GB unless if its required and it will cause slowness and alot of people encountered stuttering because of that, me personally have GTX 970 and i bought before the news went out, Nvidia lied about GTX 970 specs and it was discovered by users then Nvidia came out and admitted it.

either get GTX 980 or AMD 390/390x

dargor5
08-13-2015, 12:19 AM
if you want my advise, dont get GTX 970, it has two different configs for memory, 3.5GB works at full bandwidth speed and 500 MB works at 1/7th of speed, technically speaking the card cannot address more than 3.5GB unless if its required and it will cause slowness and alot of people encountered stuttering because of that, me personally have GTX 970 and i bought before the news went out, Nvidia lied about GTX 970 specs and it was discovered by users then Nvidia came out and admitted it.

either get GTX 980 or AMD 390/390x

I second that.

Jessigirl2013
08-14-2015, 05:25 PM
Looks like I need to save up twice as long for a 980:rolleyes:

Thanks for the heads up guys.

Ouky1991
08-19-2015, 10:56 PM
when a game requires more than 2GB or more than the available VRAM, then system RAM will be used and will be swapping between RAM and VRAM , however, Getting data from RAM is too much slower than getting it from VRAM thanks to the narrow PCIEx bus bandwidth, thus you see stuttering unless if the textures streaming in game engine is done brilliantly that it would get data way before you reach the the desired scene to render, but that is very hard to accomplish without doing some scarifies and i dont think i have seen any game engine does that, most of game engines lower textures quality or give you the option to do that to fit into VRAM.

Today I noticed max VRAM usage 4103 MB, how is that possible? Shouldn't it be 4096 tops when using 2GB SLI? Or is it actually VRAM and RAM working together as you said above?

YazX_
08-20-2015, 12:10 AM
Today I noticed max VRAM usage 4103 MB, how is that possible? Shouldn't it be 4096 tops when using 2GB SLI? Or is it actually VRAM and RAM working together as you said above?

ok here is the thing with dual GPU cards, the OSD application see it as 4GB and display accordingly because its actually 4GB card, but internally those 4GB are distributed it on 2 GPUs, each GPU has its own dedicated 2GB, so its actually using 4GB but the data inside those 4GB is 2GB mirrored. for SLI its a bit different since they are multiple cards not one card with dual GPUs, so OSD application show each card separately with VRAM usage.

now for showing 4103, its only 7 MB difference , so either its a software display error or the card has few extra MBs because its not exact 1024 MB per 1GB, with manufacturing RAM/VRAM sometimes you lose some MBs and other times you gain MBs, but in most cases you lose some MBs.

Ouky1991
08-20-2015, 02:30 PM
ok here is the thing with dual GPU cards, the OSD application see it as 4GB and display accordingly because its actually 4GB card, but internally those 4GB are distributed it on 2 GPUs, each GPU has its own dedicated 2GB, so its actually using 4GB but the data inside those 4GB is 2GB mirrored. for SLI its a bit different since they are multiple cards not one card with dual GPUs, so OSD application show each card separately with VRAM usage.

now for showing 4103, its only 7 MB difference , so either its a software display error or the card has few extra MBs because its not exact 1024 MB per 1GB, with manufacturing RAM/VRAM sometimes you lose some MBs and other times you gain MBs, but in most cases you lose some MBs.

Alright, thanks again for explaining. I will try to use different setting to get even more vram usage to be sure whether it's just an error. Is it unsafe for the card to use its max VRAM (in same way as too much temperature can lower card's life span)? Or should I rather use a bit lower settings?

YazX_
08-20-2015, 02:51 PM
Alright, thanks again for explaining. I will try to use different setting to get even more vram usage to be sure whether it's just an error. Is it unsafe for the card to use its max VRAM (in same way as too much temperature can lower card's life span)? Or should I rather use a bit lower settings?

nah its perfectly fine to utilize full VRAM, it wouldn't shorten the lifespan of VRAM nor your video card.

Jessigirl2013
08-20-2015, 04:25 PM
nah its perfectly fine to utilize full VRAM, it wouldn't shorten the lifespan of VRAM nor your video card.

Yeah, Surely if it was unsafe manufactures wouldn't allow it to use it.;)

strigoi1958
08-20-2015, 07:55 PM
only thing I noticed were the animation seems slightly quicker when jumping from object to object...