vRam usage tests (MKII)

Rastalovich

New member
New submission request guidelines:

GameName, Settings, Resolution, Graphic Card Details, vRam used

Please mark your Settings with one of the 5 categories that you think applies:
  • MAXIMUM - Absolutely every slider to the max, AA, AF, MSAQPAD/whatever, PhysX/Havok/whatever - EVERYTHING!
  • VERY HIGH/ULTRA - The biggest of preset, but you've undercut something from the above. By choice or forced.
  • HIGH - The 2nd highest preset
  • MEDIUM - Mid settings
  • LOW - Between the lowest possible and medium

Accepting that this isn't an even spread. The 2 top ones can be considered close in various games. This is taken into account later. (Spread is something like 100/90/75/50/25 - roughly)

DirectX, Hires Textures, MODS.

All these will be considered applied. I know it's a generalisation in some cases, but if there's patches available, we are assuming they're applied.

Excel can do the calculations.

Here's a link to the old thread just incase you're confused as to what the heck's going on:

http://forum.overclo...m-useage-tests/

Major thanks to all who've participated so far. Continuing the theme, there will be gratuitous Likes where applicable.
 
Submissions from MKII onwards:

vRam usage key : <1G 1G<>1.5G 1.5G<>2G 2G<>3G+

.Batman: Arkham City (Unreal Engine 3), Maximum, 1920x1080, (GTX570 1.28G), 1262MB+

.Battlefield 3 (Frostbite 2.0), Very High/Ultra, 1920x1080, (HD7970 3G), 1500MB+

.Battlefield 3 (Frostbite 2.0), Maximum, 1920x1200, (GTX480 1.5G), 1049MB+

.Blades of Time (DagorEngine 3.0), Maximum, 1920x1200, (GTX480 1.5G), 410MB+

.Confrontation (BI Engine), Maximum, 1920x1200, (GTX480 1.5G), 720MB+

.Deus Ex Human Revolution (Unreal Engine 3), Maximum, 1920x1080, (GTX560Ti 1G), 450MB+

.DIRT 3 (EGO Engine 2.0), Maximum, 1920x1080, (HD7970 3G), 1165MB+

.GTA4 (RAGE/Euphoria/Bullet), Maximum, 1920x1080, (HD7970 3G), 1095MB+

.The Elder Scrolls | Skyrim (Creation Engine), Very High/Ultra, 1920x1200, (GTX570x2 1.28G), 1262MB+

.StarCraft 2 (In-House/Havok), Maximum, 1920x1080, (HD7970 3G), 838MB+
 
Example submission:

Blades of Time (DagorEngine 3.0), Maximum, 1920x1200, GTX480 1.5G, 410MB+

bladesoftime_2012_05_09_20_43_45_163.jpg


bladesoftime_2012_05_09_22_47_52_463.jpg
 
This is good stuff Rasta.

Might I suggest some further spreadsheets for the future? People might find graphs for each game useful. Also the rankings in your spreadsheet above might be better off listed by total vRam usage as opposed to a % of a card (I noticed tha shogun 2 is pulling over 1200 mb but listed as 'too easy'). What do you think?

I shall be sure to put in my results once I've built my rig at the beginning of June!
 
Yeah the submissions here will be added to the same spreadsheet and so forth. From that you can generate whatever really.

There's a little rough comparison thing going on that gives the Shogun 2 a "Too Easy" - logic being, although the game demands 1200+ vram, the hd7970 has 3g, so in effect using less than half that's available. Somewhere within the sheet's comparison, it'll be dictating that using less than half the card's memory (for example), is "Too easy". It's a bit more complicated than that cos it also factors in whether at the same time what the settings level is.

The figures can be massaged tho, so if there's a tendancy to agree it can be altered without any trouble.

Actually, I better check that jpg against the lastest sheet cos I did make some changes in levels. The one above is a quick copy/paste from the original thread.

Good point tho.
 
Cool I just got Deus Ex Human Revolution to get shots of this weekend. This game seems to be held back a bit by my dual core CPU.
 
Measured using Asus GPU Monitor. Grand Theft Auto IV, High, View Distance 60, 1920x1080, HD7970 3GB, MAX 2592MB

This is one game I would definitely believe requires vram for the pc.

I can remember way back looking at an earlier engine using a 1g card and I destinctly remember it not allowing the detail increases cos of the 1g. I'd even go as far as saying it had a bar-meter?? or similar, that showed how much was being used.

Very poor imo, makes you wonder how they ported it to so many platforms.
 
This is one game I would definitely believe requires vram for the pc.

I can remember way back looking at an earlier engine using a 1g card and I destinctly remember it not allowing the detail increases cos of the 1g. I'd even go as far as saying it had a bar-meter?? or similar, that showed how much was being used.

Very poor imo, makes you wonder how they ported it to so many platforms.

You are correct! In the graphics settings menu it has a meter that shows you the vram your card has and how much your settings will use. It's quite funny because the meter's only sitting around 900 for my settings, while ASUS Gpu Monitor clearly reports very different numbers. Also, there is a 'very high' option for some stuff like shaders. However, if I select 'very high' the game will run badly. It will play the game in a slowmotion kinda way. I think my hardware is too new for this game or something.

Edit: I updated my previous post. The strange behaviour from GTA IV was due to me adding the -nomemrestrict flag. I did that because without any flags it wouldn't even let me change the graphics settings. However, I've now found a new fix, and it also allows me to run Very High without any strange slow-motion effects. :')

Edit 2: New results!

StarCraft 2, Ultra, 1920x1080, HD7970 3GB, 838MB+

Battlefield 3, Ultra (2xAA), 1920x1080, HD7970 3GB, 1500MB+
 
... viewing distances I seem to recall multiplying the memory required the most. Might be wrong.

StarCraft 2, Ultra, 1920x1080, HD7970 3GB, 838MB+

Battlefield 3, Ultra (2xAA), 1920x1080, HD7970 3GB, 1500MB+

In reference to the OP changes, you mean settings = Very High/Ultra ?
 
Stacraft 2 would be MAXIMUM and BF3 I guess would be Ultra because I haven't maxed out the AA on BF3. Sorry mate, didn't read it entirely well.

Edit: By the way, any games you would like me to run specifically?
 
Hi,

Just one for the moment:

Skyrim, Ultra*, 1920x1200, 2x GTX 570 in SLI, 1,262mb

* My Skyrim is modded so the Ultra setting is futher enhanced with the Bethesda HD Textures as well as numerous 3rd party texture & mesh mods as well as lighting enhancements. Additionally I have an NV profile set to ensure maximum visual quality and AO is enabled in the profile as well. I also run uGrids=9, which means more detail is loaded.

Interestingly, most of my games report 1,262mb used eventually. Skyrim hits this number within moments of loading in an external area - usually a quick 360 will see it peek. Extended play on several of my games starts in the 700mb area then eventually hits 1,262mb after some time. It is basically the PEEK vRam usage over a reasonable play period we're interested in here right?

It is good to see many games making use of what's available to them, this can only improve the gaming experience I'd have thought. While my 570's perform well, I think more titles will benefit from higher levels as time moves on. That said, I've not yet had to turn off a detail due to hitting the vRam wall - if I was at 2560x1600 it might be a different story, though my friends 2x 480's with 1.5gb vRam appear to be coping admirably at that resolution.

Great topic - I second that a downloadable .xls sheet would be useful for viewing the data - that jpg makes my head hurt lol.

Cheers,

Scoob.
 
It is basically the PEEK vRam usage over a reasonable play period we're interested in here right?

That said, I've not yet had to turn off a detail due to hitting the vRam wall - if I was at 2560x1600 it might be a different story, though my friends 2x 480's with 1.5gb vRam appear to be coping admirably at that resolution.

Great topic - I second that a downloadable .xls sheet would be useful for viewing the data - that jpg makes my head hurt lol.

Cheers,

Scoob.

As peek as possible is best. We're pretty much under the assumption that whatever figures we record here can't be nailed down as a ceiling for what a game will ever need, we make the distinction here by keeping the "+" next to each recording. It'd be an ideal situation for a game to be played all-day and as best from beginning to end, but we'll take what we can get. Imo, and I try to show this by the spreadsheet, that whatever results you see anywhere here for a game, you should give it head-room to take more if it needs to. In the same breathe as we may say "most games, plus the OS, only need 1.95G main memory", installing 2G isn't good enough. It doesn't allow for freak occurrences, part of a game you haven't seen yet, future games/epansions and so on.

The sheet shows descriptions of Hard/Very Hard/Easy etc, not so much as the card hasn't got the grunt to process, but more as how well it's coping with the memory - as-best as possible. This isn't an exact science, and can't claim to be. You get freak results with everything. But the more you get, the more you can hope to isolate freak results as what they are. Sometimes a game will 'error' in some way and not give up what's allocated - we can't work around that either. Maybe a freak can be taken as such an example.

Push your mate off his computer and grab some results !
tongue.png


Yeah the xls is far from idea as a jpg. Infact, that's a grab taken from my mac and it's fortunate I could fit it in a 1200 resolution. I really want to pursue that online spreadsheet thing, it looks good and a better alt.
 
Back
Top