Asenna Steam
kirjaudu sisään
|
kieli
简体中文 (yksinkertaistettu kiina)
繁體中文 (perinteinen kiina)
日本語 (japani)
한국어 (korea)
ไทย (thai)
български (bulgaria)
Čeština (tšekki)
Dansk (tanska)
Deutsch (saksa)
English (englanti)
Español – España (espanja – Espanja)
Español – Latinoamérica (espanja – Lat. Am.)
Ελληνικά (kreikka)
Français (ranska)
Italiano (italia)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesia)
Magyar (unkari)
Nederlands (hollanti)
Norsk (norja)
Polski (puola)
Português (portugali – Portugali)
Português – Brasil (portugali – Brasilia)
Română (romania)
Русский (venäjä)
Svenska (ruotsi)
Türkçe (turkki)
Tiếng Việt (vietnam)
Українська (ukraina)
Ilmoita käännösongelmasta
So you say its good or ♥♥♥♥? I dont get it rly.
Is this guy a PC enthusiast or an average PC gamer? I only ask as he makes a pretty stupid statement. A game itself does not need to have insane mouth watering graphics to use a lot of VRAM.
There are multiple factors. You have texture quality, AA, shadows, and what resolution you are playing at. Max Payne 3 looks about the same graphics quality wise yet at 1080P maxed out it was pushing 2GB of VRAM and at 2560x1600 it was pushing 6GB of VRAM. And this was 3 years ago.
An open world game has to load certain things into VRAM in order to keep it from having texture pop. Add in all the factors, such as 4x AA basically means 4x the resolution and more VRAM useage, and I am noit surprised this game needs 6GB of VRAM at Ultra HD resolutions.
Something positive that article said.
Guru3d.com is a reliable site.
Sleeping Dogs is what all game developers should strive for.. That game looks amazing and runs like a watch without asking for your paycheck in hardware upgrades in return.
Yes, I didnt ment it as an excuse. It can make it a bit frustrating when it stutters, that's a fact.
Those GTX 770 results on page 5 are kinda shocking btw. That's realy odd.
Yes I can read thank you.
Yeah fortunatly that helps a bit.