GearNuke: "Check out a comparison of Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor between the low quality on PC to the Ultra quality, which also confirms the hefty 6 GB VRAM requirement."
i dont think the ultra textures are out yet
They are out. They can be downloaded from Steam as DLC.
its like 9 gb big ...
its 3.7 gb download
there is no difference at all... very strange..
There are alot of differences. Well, not many enough to warrant the need of an 6GBvram though.
what is the difference? I don't see anything...
@Crazysapertonight Then you obviously don't have a sharp eye as others. I'm not trying to defend the game or anything, but there are noticeable differences.
@Crazysapertonight The clothing is more sharp, and the rock textures are also sharper and have a better texture. I'm not going to list all the differences.
what resolution is your monitor? If you are looking at it with a normal every day monitor..
POOOOR optimization ! GArbage port is garbage
This is the difference between low and ultra, not high and ultra. Although there are many differences (probably a lot more obvious still while playing, screenshots rarely do those things justice), I don't think I'll break the bank voor a 6gb GPU just yet.
> not high and ultra This what i am talking about. In skyrim with mods texrures can be much better, but they don't require so much vram
if you had a big 4k monitor im sure it would make a big difference.
I don't see anything that would call for 6gb of vram..
Wait, I'm sure the Ultra textures look blurrier than High? Have these been mis-labeled?
This is interesting from a console perspective. The PS4 and Xbox One have 8 GB of ram which would lead you to believe they can start shipping games that have these kinds of textures but maybe the media and storage devices on the consoles cannot accommodate these file sizes. I think John Carmack mentioned this at one of his QuakeCON speeches.
I believe they're referring to Vram.
There's no difference between system ram and vram on the consoles. It's just ram. The massive texture files still need to be delivered to the user. This cannot happen via a DVD. Maybe 2 or 3?
consoles wont have 6 gigs of vram free, a game with those sorts of textures will most likely be using a bunch of ram for the cpu as well.
That 8gb is shared on consoles so it has to do a lot more than just the graphics, after the os takes it's chunk games only have about 5gb max on the ps4 and that still isn't all dedicated to graphics as the game needs a good amount for the other processes that make up a game.
The consoles have 8Gb of shared ram, say for example 2gb for os, 3gb system and 3gb for video.
So basically If someone like me wants run this game on Ultra Settings what graphics card need? Gtx 970 is not enough??
There is currently no 970 with 6gb vram. i don't think there is a 980 with 6gb ram, there are some 780's 780ti's and Titans out there who can run it, if I'm not mistaken.
There are rumours of a 8 GB 970 / 80 version after initial release, but not much else.
Yes I know that, but I don't want to buy old manufacturing graphics card witch are more expensive And less powerful ( read for gaming) or maybe It's good idea to wait for let say gtx980 ti 8gb...
You can snag a 780 with 6gb vram. Sli and beat the Titan for sheer performance.
A 680 is enough. But you need to have enough VRAM on the GPU. I have a 780 which would run this game easy, but it only has 3gb of VRAM, making so I can't run it on ultra. If I recall correctly the 970/980 only have 4gb VRAM. VERY few cards have 6gb. 780 has a version with it, TITAN Black/Z. While I'm not familiar with AMD, there is the 7990 and the 295X2. 80% of all cards are 2-4gb. Not 6gb, and this is just poor optimizing or a glaring flaw in their engine.
yup same boat as you, I have the Ti version that runs everything like butter but this game apparently needs more...anyways. I'll hold off purchase until hey decide to stop this hardware upgrade push.
I have 2 overclocked gtx 670's in SLI with a gtx 570 for phys X with everything set to ultra apart from the texture(which is set to high), the games chuggs along at around 40 - 60 fps, with ultra textures thats drops to around 30fps. However, i dont see this as a particularly demanding game graphics wise, i just see a poorly optimised console port with tons of problems. The forums over at Steam are heaving with requests for help trying to run this game properly, there's not even an official SLI profile for it yet, the game was made with nvidia cards in mind. Poor in my opinion, should have got it for PS4 instead.
It's plenty bienio. You don't need 6gb vram for this game. Look at the link below to see it runs like a dream maxxed out on a 970 and many cards below 970 specs. The vram requirement was a lie. http://www.neogaf.com/forum...
The 73fps on a 970 was corrected to be only running on high settings not ultra.
Ummm ok. Still doesn't change the fact that it runs smooth as silk on a 970 and below on ultra textures. All sorts of people on that thread with benchmarks with them enabled on 3gb-4gb cards getting really high framerates maxxed out.
wait for 1080ti,titan2,390x . this game is not the big deal that the internet hype wants you to believe.If you are not tired for another assasins creed mordor edition then get it.Monolith is a good dev its a good game but it borrows so much stuff from batman and ac which i find annoying plus 40 gig plus install for an easily 360 game ;-p
6Gb for this? Bad optimized engine of course! 2Gb is enough to do a very taste textures for 4k resolution. Hardware sale is the point!
Yeah that is just a poor use of resources.
My thoughts exactly. 4gb of vram hasn't been used frequently yet, and they're talking about 6gb. That's just too much so soon.
2GB of Vram isn't isn't enough for 4k silly :P 1080p sure, 4k no way
Well crap, all I have is 4.
You're fine. It doesn't require 6gb vram for ultra textures. http://www.neogaf.com/forum... Runs like a dream even on cards with 3gb vram maxxed out.
no it doesent constant dips all over the place difference between high and ultra not that great for performance/ to eye candy ratio heheehe
The differences between low and high (all my xfire 6990s could do at an average fpa of 28) is quite obvious when you play the game. The draw distance on low is horrible. Reminds me of an n64 game. Definitely glad I decided to upgrade and look forward to scrapping my 4 GPU setup. Don't think I'll wait for the 980ti though. 60 FPS on high will do just fine.
You have 4 GPUs (AMD6990) and are only averaging 28 fps? I'm curious as to what resolution are you playing on?
4 Gpus don't always scale well in games. I also think the 6990 is no longer fully supported by amd, so drivers will be touch and go with quad crossx. There shouldn't be a problem anyways but it's something to think about. (Amd usually lacks in the Driver department unfortunately, this was a main reason I stopped going back to it). I remember i had a 5870 and others had a 480 GTX and everyone was laughing at ppl that bought it for 200$ more, but a year later the 480 GTX was generally nearly doubling the 5870 in some games because drivers continued to update while my 5870 never got the support it deserved. Anyways, I would try updating the drivers if still supported and see if it helps!
I have 2 6990s which are each 2x 2GB or 4x 2 GB. I had to shut off xfire as I got even worse results with it on. Playing at 1080p. I grabbed the 14.9 driver that launched yesterday. Was hoping it was released for this game but it doesn't appear so as the notes don't mention it. I'm throwing a strix gtx 970 in my new rig so I should be good to after that. Hate the lack of multi-gpu support In these new games.
I understand. That's actually one the reasons I didn't go with AMD because of driver support. I have 2GB GTX 680 SLI and I'm averaging 35-60 fps on high at 1440p. So far the game is pretty good as the combat reminds me of the Arkham games a bit.
Honestly what game has ever required more than 3 GB of Vram realistically? This is dumb..
I wonder if someone will release an optimized version of these ultra textures? Kind of like what modders did with the official high-res texture pack for skyrim.
Ill know in 45min as I'm 5 min from best buy. I've had a titan and 4k for over a year and a half so I'm looking forward to putting through its paces. I've found no need for aa and usually other settings can be dropped with little notice. And I stare and analyze like a crazy person. Example asx16 is not needed either in any game I've compared. Resolution does make a difference I have found.
That's BS. My 770 should be able to run something that looks like that on Ultra with high res textures. :/ Hoping mods fix that issue.
Well no activation code in case and others have same issue on steam forms. Can' play it...
I have a 770 2gb, i7 950 3,07 GHz with 6 gb ram and I can run the game with almost all options set to high (textures included). I do get some stutter sometimes but for the most part I get 70-80 fps which is way more than I thought I would. In my experience, the whole "you need 6 gb vram" is not true.
I near future mods will fix this i doubt Ultra will need more then 3gb vram, devs should be ashamed.
lol even on Ultra jaggies can be found, and this is the PS4 version: http://i0.wp.com/gearnuke.c... Please don't kill me but the PS4 version looks soo much smoother. :D
That ss sure looks better than the video on PS Store. I'll skip this game even on PC after the last few AAA PC release screw ups. Too much b.s. going around about it like there is some kind of agenda.
6gb vram? Are they out of their minds?!
There's barely a difference between high and ultra settings in practically all games anyway, what difference does it make.. same with doom 3 back in 2004, you just take a large fps hit for hardly any difference in quality. In any case i just bought a GTX 970, great card and clocker, beats 780 ti and on par with 980 when OCed.. but if it's still not enough to run future gen engines at 60fps+ and 1080p i will upgrade it in 6 months or so.
you should have waited at least 4 months until the real cards come out imho
What if the devs mean having RAM + VRAM >= 6GB for ultra? That makes more sense I guess. The people who have played it have said the assets do not look as though they require 6GB VRAM
probably how they ported the game from consoles. i hear that watch dogs was very reliant on vram aswell.
has anyone tried running ultra on a 2 or 4 gb card?
Yes, stutters like crazy because it's constantly loading textures in and out of VRAM.
There are differences, some clear, some not so clear. My problem is the 6GB requirement for such minor differences.
That's uh...not as big of a difference as I was expecting.
Luckily the game is good because that 9gb ultra texture file was crap. I'm sure a Mod will do better
I call bull on the 6gb of vram, I have a 770 4gb runs between 45-115fps on ultra with the HD texture pack installed, only time I get a slow down or freeze is when it loads game for first time. Even in the larger concentrations of uruks they game still runs smooth. Ive already put 10 hours of play time in so I would of noticed peformance decreases by now.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.