Now I really want to know about the VRAM requirements, since my 970 now only has 3.5GB and 0.5gb of cache 
VRAM requirements weren't stated, but if the requirements were based on hands-on experience, then the minimum has to be something like 1.5GB, because that's the practical maximum on a supposedly 2GB 660. We just don't know how the game responds above that level to a greater or lesser availability of VRAM.Now I really want to know about the VRAM requirements, since my 970 now only has 3.5GB and 0.5gb of cache
That seems a pretty steep requirement speaking of the bare minimum.. Of course if we base upon the official requirements your argument is flawless. However I expected less since Tw2 did not require lots of memory at all. We'll see
This seems to vary from card to card. My other card maxed out at approximately 3560MB vram usage but my other card can go up to around 3,7GB before stutter/frame rate drops start to appear. So I just use the latter as my master card in my SLI setup so I can go above 3,5GB before running into problems.Now I really want to know about the VRAM requirements, since my 970 now only has 3.5GB and 0.5gb of cache
Any idea why this differs from card to card @Guy N'wah ? Some say it's because Hynix memory and some that it's because some cards didn't have the L2 Cache cut. At least so severely.
Also, what do you think about this statement?
https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/803518/geforce-900-series/gtx-970-3-5gb-vram-issue/post/4438120/#4438120
But still. GTX 770 is also a 2GB card. I would think that if TW3 was so VRAM hungry, they would've recommended a card with more VRAM. But oh well, what do I know.
Last edited:
Sounds plausible and a reasonable position for them to take, all considered. Basically, the driver writers didn't take note of the problems that would ensue when the 8th block was used for general VRAM and didn't prevent applications from using it that way. They'll be able to fix that in drivers, and they're going to try to make good for users who really need the full complement of VRAM. (Most games don't, and a driver fix means the worst you're out is you got something short of the bargain you thought you were getting. But some professional applications do, and even a driver fix means they can't use the card for its intended purpose, and their lawyers are likely to use the words consequential damages.)
I doubt it's anything to do with the memory brand. It's more likely to do with the level of damage done to the crossbar.
Do you think there will be some performance results before the game is out?
Im a bit worried that the recommended specs are targeting 30fps :/
Im a bit worried that the recommended specs are targeting 30fps :/
Hello Guys!
I would like to ask you wether a laptop with the following specs. could run the " Wild Hunt" on Ultra:
Intel® Core™ i7
32 GB RAM
NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 980M 8192 MB GDDR5
If somebody interested in the further specification here is the link: http://www.notebooksbilliger.de/notebooks/msi+notebooks/gaming+serie/msi+gt72+2qe32sr351bw
I would like to ask you wether a laptop with the following specs. could run the " Wild Hunt" on Ultra:
Intel® Core™ i7
32 GB RAM
NVIDIA® GeForce® GTX 980M 8192 MB GDDR5
If somebody interested in the further specification here is the link: http://www.notebooksbilliger.de/notebooks/msi+notebooks/gaming+serie/msi+gt72+2qe32sr351bw
Guys since I'm planning on get a 4790k and a 970, how much i have to "care" for the motherboard?? I not planning in the future to make SLI, so i have a doubt if i need a beast motherboard for a high-end system. I was thinking on get the gigabyte motherboard GA-Z97X-Gaming 3, is it gonna be by any mean a bottleneck on the processor or the gpu? thanks
( sorry for the bad english)
( sorry for the bad english)
They're still working on optimization. So the situation will get better, but I still think we're looking at high settings, 1080p, 30 fps on recommended-level PCs. The interview with Adam Badowski that gregski kindly translated:
http://forums.cdprojektred.com/threads/33437-GRYOnline-pl-interview-with-CDPR-studio-lead-Adam-Badowski-translation
says about as much.
As long as 30 means 30, and not drops to 20, 15, 12, or 10 at the moment you really need the controls, I think it should play competently.
The motherboard has no impact on gaming performance whatsoever. You can choose the one you prefer depending on the features you (really) need. Raising the price you have more features, better overclockability, simply better aesthetics sometimes. You'll find many reviews on the net. The only things you need to pay attention to are the chipset (cpu, overclockability) and ports you need or you expect to need in the future.
@magus0916 we still don't know. You have a monster laptop but it's still a laptop.. if you ask me I think you'll not be able to push to ultra.
Last edited:
Any Z97 except cheap ones like the MSI PCMate or ASRock Anniversary should be fine. Motherboards like the
ASRock Z97 Extreme 4 or 6
ASUS Z97 A, Deluxe, or Pro
MSI Z97 G43 or G45
Gigabyte Z97 UD5H
At that level or above, motherboard choice really depends on the bells and whistles you want.
@Guy N'wah
With the information that we have at the moment, what would be your estimation on how my system compares to the test system CDPR used to run the gameplay demo (4690k, GTX 980, 8GB RAM iirc)? Especially in a situation where the game will use over 3GB of VRAM.
With the information that we have at the moment, what would be your estimation on how my system compares to the test system CDPR used to run the gameplay demo (4690k, GTX 980, 8GB RAM iirc)? Especially in a situation where the game will use over 3GB of VRAM.
Last edited:
Impossible to tell how SLI will work, how long will it take to be perfectly implemented, how Nvidia will correct drivers for 970 etc. Bench are your best friends, the only difference/advantage you have is the dual 970 vs. single 980 IMHO
Yeah. I should have added that the presumption in the question was that there would be a working SLI profile for the game. Two 970s should easily dominate a single GTX 980 if there's even a decent scaling involved. My biggest concern though is what happens if the game goes beyond the optimal 3GB VRAM usage when the memory speeds start to drop. The max VRAM usage with my setup is roughly 3.7GB.
Also, the supposed engineer @ geforce forums did say that they are trying to update the GTX 970 drivers so that they would load as much driver related stuff into the last slow partition of the memory to allow games to perform better. That does give me a glimpse of hope that the situation might improve a bit.
Last edited:
Yeah I was referring to this
anyways you know as well that it's too early to say anything: drivers will hopefully manage better than now the 970 issue, SLI profile is unknowns, drivers after release will give better performance, the game itself will surely be optimized better than its current state. I feel and share your anticipation for the game but sadly we have to wait. You with that rig shouldn't be the one to worry though In the meantime my little 560ti runs Civ V just well
lol. True. First world problems I guess..You with that rig shouldn't be the one to worry though
I have the exact same setup and no real expectation to run it anywhere near decent with this current system ... Im getting a new one soon ( I5 4590 - msi 970 gtx gaming 4 g - 16 gig ram - ssd )..(I will do some vids regarding Witcher 3 perfomance) .. Do you guys think I can max the game & do some recording at the same time @ 1080p .. ? should I invest in a better processor (i7)?
Last edited:
i5 4590 shouldn't hold you but I don't know yet if i7 over i5 will be profitable for this specific game and don't know if you'll max the game with good performance. Maybe games will eventually start to utilize hyperthreading (since I don't think you would invest in a better cpu only for a single game) but I think some time is still needed. Maybe a year or possibly more. The rig is very good but you'll have to wait for benchs nonetheless - it's still possible that some of the heavier effects will be taxing even for a 970.
Well I hope to reach very high setting with hairworks & 30-60+ FPS... for the sake of the recordings for my witcher 3 - movie version
.... a 980gtx shouldnt make any big differnce either compared to 970gtx ?
Last edited:
There have been some "issues" with the 970s.Well I hope to reach very high setting with hairworks & 30-60+ FPS... for the sake of the recordings for my witcher 3 - movie version
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8935/geforce-gtx-970-correcting-the-specs-exploring-memory-allocation
It's still a great card for the price but I really can't recommend buying one right now. At least not until we see what Nvidia will do to address these issues.