2GB VRAM enough for 1900x1080p?

Hi guys!

With the Collector's Edition gathering dust on my HD for about 12 months, I finally made the decision to transition to COH2 from vCOH during the recent sale adding all of the remaining factions plus bundled with DLC modules. Pretty much a 1v1 and 2v2 automatch preferred player, I'm playing it regularly now and enjoying the learning curve so far.

Although my current PC will play it, unsurprisingly I'm lusting to enjoy it in all its higher detailed glory, and so looking to upgrade my hardware.

I'll be sticking with 1920 x 1080p though, as I find a 24" screen my preferred size for the desktop.

As a conservative budget mid-range buyer, the GPU I am considering is the GTX960. The rest of the kit is nothing especially remarkable, but will be considerably better performing that what I have now. Importantly it meets my budget requirements.

Planned CPU is the i5 6600K on Z170 board with 16GB DDR4 plus a 500GB SSD for the OS and game. Currently running WIN7_64, probably installing the 10 upgrade when I transition.

Hoping someone more techno literate than I experienced with this game's quirks might have an answer for the following question.

Having read the guides and other articles here, being aware that this game is CPU intensive and RAM hungry, to avoid insufficient VRAM swapping to RAM, will 2GB VRAM be sufficient on the GTX960 running 1900x1080 for this game, or performance wise is it worth the extra spend going to 4GB VRAM (i.e not bottlenecking elsewhere)?

I would save the extra for the 970. I know you said conservative budget buyer, but if you're getting 16gb DDR4 and 500gb SSD you can hopefully manage a bit more on the gfx. That'll have by far the biggest impact, so drop back on something else if the budget is totally fixed.

2GB of VRam will only work if you use graphics at medium (textures and image quality) if you put this on high it will go over 2GB,
my 970 gtx used 3.2GB once with options on higher

Hi there! My housemate has a AMD R9 270X 4gb version. He can play Coh2 at medium-high settings with 50-60 fps on 1080p reoslution.

It is a very good card that is around the same price as the GTX 960, yet it outperforms it. It also truely has 4gb or VRam, unlike my own GTX 970 that simply fails hard after 3.5 VRam is in use.

It could be a good alternative to the GTX 960. If you can save the money, get the GTX 970, if not, the R9 270X is also very suited for pretty decent 1080P gaming.

Save for the 970 man, big difference

If u are going 960 go with 4GB, you wont regret

my 970 gtx used 3.2GB once with options on higher

Thanks. Just the kind of qualitative anecdotal confirmation I am after. Was that running in 1920x1080 at the time?

If you can save the money, get the GTX 970, if not, the R9 270X is also very suited for pretty decent 1080P gaming.

That would be an acceptable compromise point for now. The increase in CPU grunt, extra RAM and VRAM should go a long way toward alleviating as best can most of the known issues such as the momentary hesitation/(swapping)stutter, map and object loading time and occupation, compensate for memory leaks etc leaving pretty much the ever ongoing GPU quest for detail level and visuals like AA the bane of contention and compromise.

Over recent years I've found myself an AMD (ATI) GPU buyer generally, although I am unbiased per se. I've owned a stack of NVIDIA cards too over the years. I buy on price/perf ratio these days though, and NVIDIA has usually placed a distant runner up in that mid through mid-high end race for years. Brand familiar ownership pride fanboys and a comfortable cartel like segmented pricing arrangment do none of us any favours.

I looked at the reviews and You Tube comparitives between the R9 270X, R9 380 and GTX960 yesterday which made me aware of the differences in evolutionary phase, performance, power consumption and heat generated. The R9 270X is difficult to source these days having been obsoleted in AMD's segment by the R9 380. I liked the price and perf of the R9 380, but it does run hot relative to the GTX960 at full gaming GO, and its power consumption is arguably absurd in direct comparison. Whilst my PSU (Corsair HX720 modular) can cope with that, I'd like to avoid that kind of power consumption and heat generated if possible as I live in a sub-tropical climate which gets very hot and humid in summer. Although in all honesty, it is still in triaged in contention given its price/perf/availability.

Thank you for your comments and recommendation.

GTX 960 at 50 fps ultra easily in 1080p

I'm with R9 290x at 50 fps 4K Ultra, just saying

Nvidia suck on COH 2 ...

GTX 960 at 50 fps ultra easily in 1080p

I'm with R9 290x at 50 fps 4K Ultra, just saying

Nvidia suck on COH 2 ...

my 970 can't even get the 16x aa without dipping frames

My i5 3570K at 4,5 Ghz isn't the fault here either. Game optimization is just shit. AMD is better with coh2.

That would be an acceptable compromise point for now. The increase in CPU grunt, extra RAM and VRAM should go a long way toward alleviating as best can most of the known issues such as the momentary hesitation/(swapping)stutter, map and object loading time and occupation, compensate for memory leaks etc leaving pretty much the ever ongoing GPU quest for detail level and visuals like AA the bane of contention and compromise.

Over recent years I've found myself an AMD (ATI) GPU buyer generally, although I am unbiased per se. I've owned a stack of NVIDIA cards too over the years. I buy on price/perf ratio these days though, and NVIDIA has usually placed a distant runner up in that mid through mid-high end race for years. Brand familiar ownership pride fanboys and a comfortable cartel like segmented pricing arrangment do none of us any favours.

I looked at the reviews and You Tube comparitives between the R9 270X, R9 380 and GTX960 yesterday which made me aware of the differences in evolutionary phase, performance, power consumption and heat generated. The R9 270X is difficult to source these days having been obsoleted in AMD's segment by the R9 380. I liked the price and perf of the R9 380, but it does run hot relative to the GTX960 at full gaming GO, and its power consumption is arguably absurd in direct comparison. Whilst my PSU (Corsair HX720 modular) can cope with that, I'd like to avoid that kind of power consumption and heat generated if possible as I live in a sub-tropical climate which gets very hot and humid in summer. Although in all honesty, it is still in triaged in contention given its price/perf/availability.

Thank you for your comments and recommendation.

No problem and I totally agree with you. To add to my previous post, the GTX 970 basically has 3,5 GB of VRam, as soon as you hit it, it starts utilizing the left over 500 mb VRam which is about 5.5 times slower, which will result in unbearable stuttering. Now for 1080P gaming the card is fine, but on some occasions it does reach that peak sadly.

Regarding your tropical problem haha, the GTX 970 does run cooler, but there is an alternative here as well. If you get one of the cheaper cards, say the GTX 960 or the R9 270X 4gb or the R9 380, you can spend the money that you saved by not buying the GTX 970 on a better cooling device for your graphics cards. I think this is more of a win win situation, since you get a better card than you have now and you get a better cooling device for your GPU, which will result in better performance and cooler hardware.

Something to think about!

Thanks. Just the kind of qualitative anecdotal confirmation I am after. Was that running in 1920x1080 at the time?

yes

To those of your reciting the GTX970 mantra. With sincere respect, I am hearing you and do appreciate your reply and the suggestion, acknowledging your perspective. But it's just not going to happen for me at this time.

In AU, the price of all things IT is just absurd, and the recovering US economy and strengthening USD does us no favours either in a world where trade revolves around it. NVIDIA's GTX970 is > AUD$500 here, around 45% more expensive than a 4GB GTX960. Spending an additional $150 to $200 on just a GPU just isn't an option I care to exercise. Although over the years I have more frequently than I would prefer to recall, the days of me spending $500 or more on just a GPU are long gone. Read why in the final paragraph at the foot of this post.

As it is, my current primary PC performs in excess of requirement for everything I require of it except this game. So performing a hardware upgrade now is pretty much a grudge buy justifiable in terms of WHF only by the '3 year PC techno life' rule. Those of you married will comprehend the importance of Wife Happiness Factor. Either I spend on an upgrade on the previously spec. items RAM, CPU, MOBO, SSD which is still a modest one by any standard, or not at all. A core upgrade to anything less is just irrational with modest savings for a huge perf hit. I have already chosen the sweet spots. I can always replace my GPU later with the key now being minismisation of the 100% depreciative loss GPUs represent when they are obsoleted.

Although both AMD and NVIDIA both do their utmost to deny it to the end user by implementation of deliberate obsoletion and segmentation marketing program which today they have perfected to a fine art, nothing is surer regarding GPUs than faster becomes cheaper rapidly, even though the cycle runs at an inconsistent pace. Of recent it has slowed as has CPU development which heralds a significant leap at some time not too future distant.

At this time, my only realistic chance of obtaining a GTX970 or better at the pricing they are pitched these days is as a hand me down. I have a long time good friend who is an obsessive gamer who usually buys the latest hottest GPU on the block in its incipient release phase price regardless. So I'll possibly wait for him to change over and if it's not too late in the card's techno life cycle, move up to whatever he is casting off. Or make an offer as incentive for him to upgrade now if he hasn't got the biggest fastest latest brute GPU already. Otherwise, I'd just rather allocate that money elsewhere on things a lot better value than a GPU daughterboard in a savvy marketed glam oversized box targeted at its testosterone fueled demographic. Just like Subway does with its subs, the GPU manufacturers know exactly their primary target demographic they can extort max demand pricing from.

For those of suggesting I spend up to a GTX970. Why won't I spend that kind of money on graphics any more? Been there done that, bear the deep scars of the fiscal regret. Been PC gaming since '92. Just one of many examples, anyone here want to buy a pair (X2) of Canopus 3dfx Voodoo II 12MB cards with SLI connectors in original boxes since long ago surplus to requirement? Just one of so many too rapidly obsolescent but HOT HOT HOT at the time cards I've owned over the years sitting stored in the roof space. Now I'd rather just have my $1800 back I spent on that pair (in about '97 dollars if I recall accurately) with interest. And it is just one of so many including the very first and revolutionary NVIDIA 2D/3D OpenGL API chipset which went on to become the RIVA128 and then the GeFORCE as it has been marketed ever since. Been there since 16 bit ISA was the standard graphics bus to be superseded by VESA, PCI, AGP, then PCIe to where we are at now with PCIe X3.n, through 3dfx's Glide, Microsoft's Direct3D, and eveolution of the OpenGL APIs to name but a few significant milestones. Owned the lot when they were HOT back then. $$$$$ OUCH! Just trying to give perspective from where I'm sitting to those of you with helpful intention pushing for the 970, and advise that whilst I do understand why, present my reason why not.

All that said, I do appreciate the suggestions and help generously offered by each and every one of you who responded.

Game optimization is just shit. AMD is better with coh2.

My research concurs with both the above statements.

Different raison détre and ethos predominated with development of COH2 than that of COH, self evident.

Even so, committed to the change and learning curve I am enjoying COH2 now for all its warts, but see many of the same IMBA issues that plagued COH, and many of the same ploys (ToV) used in the release of new content to incite maximum potential audience penetration. Unnecessarily IMV. Wasn't necessary in the days of Command and Conquer (original) + add-ons, or Total Annihilation + add ons to make them outstanding successes ans sell extraodinarily well. Why it is necessary to now?

on a better cooling device for your graphics cards.

Minds that think alike. In summer, heat and humidity present a serious problem to hardware where I live if one's kit is situated within an air conditioned envionment. Although I didn't mention it previous, part of the upgrade $$$ had already been triaged to include a liquid cooling kit for the CPU. Not an important factor for many perhaps, but it is for me. Not only more stable temps, but saves significantly on the cumulative fan ambient noise levels when the CPU is ramped up, and more efficiently dissipates the heat to atmosphere (room temp already sweltering in summer from device heat dissipation).

I'm fortunate in that I have a dedicated PC room. Not an unused bedroom, but purpose built in the centre of the house adjacent the family room, bedrooms and HT room. However as yet it is not air conditioned as the design of the home being open plan, to effectively air condition that area requires a fully ducted system which is both expensive and compromised by the fact that we can't get other than residential single phase power outside our capital cities without an extended wait time/queue. <sigh>. However that IS on the agenda for this financial year, and one of the areas I'd rather spend my money than contributing to either AMDs or NVIDIA's coffers any more than I must.

Minds that think alike. In summer, heat and humidity present a serious problem to hardware where I live if one's kit is situated within an air conditioned envionment. Although I didn't mention it previous, part of the upgrade $$$ had already been triaged to include a liquid cooling kit for the CPU. Not an important factor for many perhaps, but it is for me. Not only more stable temps, but saves significantly on the cumulative fan ambient noise levels when the CPU is ramped up, and more efficiently dissipates the heat to atmosphere (room temp already sweltering in summer from device heat dissipation).

I'm fortunate in that I have a dedicated PC room. Not an unused bedroom, but purpose built in the centre of the house adjacent the family room, bedrooms and HT room. However as yet it is not air conditioned as the design of the home being open plan, to effectively air condition that area requires a fully ducted system which is both expensive and compromised by the fact that we can't get other than residential single phase power outside our capital cities without an extended wait time/queue. <sigh>. However that IS on the agenda for this financial year, and one of the areas I'd rather spend my money than contributing to either AMDs or NVIDIA's coffers any more than I must.

I see, quite understandabld indeed. The best of luck to your quest of a cooler environment and smooth gaming!

...the upgrade $$$ had already been triaged to include a liquid cooling kit for the CPU...

Keep in mind, those basic liquid coolers in the 50-100 range are often louder and less efficient than decent air coolers.

Instead of going for i5 overclocking, have you considered i7 / Xeon? The HT will pay off in the long run (and right now already with certain titles), as well as lowering your overall heat signature. You also mentioned a later GPU upgrade, so at least your CPU won't bottleneck then.

just my 2 cents.

Hi. And thanks. Yes,already a consideration. Quality (reliability) & noise level will be one of the LCS purchase criteria.

Looked at Xeon too as a cheaper bang for the buck upgrade. But for the few games I would play, the Skylake i5 simply is a better compromise for the next three years, and runs cool with low TPC. i7 is completely redundant for my needs. There are the other benefits of a Z170 chipped mobo too.

P.S. Love your avatar. What's his/her name?

dont get a gtx 960
get the r9 380 nitro, its just better. yes, it consumes more power, but a) the oced nvidia designs cosume much more than the standart model aswell and b)its not that much

and dont get liquid cooler aswell, a good aircooler is quieter, cheaper and increases airflow

edit: are you planning to oc?

my 970 can't even get the 16x aa without dipping frames

My i5 3570K at 4,5 Ghz isn't the fault here either. Game optimization is just shit. AMD is better with coh2.

Never run 16x AA you need a magnifying glass to see the difference over 4x, 2x is enough for RTS games anyway