Unlimited video memory setting?

[Sansidar]

I bought this game, but ended up refunding it because for some reason the graphics looked horrible even with all the settings turned up. Recently some guy mentioned that apparently theres a silent downgrading thing going on with the game. If you don't have the "Unlimited video memory" box ticked, then the game with downgrad if it thinks you can't run it with those settings, but this seems to not work very well.

So, my question is how much video memory should my GPU need to run the game without downgrades on let's say mostly ultra settings? My card has 6 gigs of vram, it's a a 1060 and I don't expect it to be able to run the game at max settings, but I do expect it to be able to make the game not look like a PS2 game. Even the campaign map looked horrible. Everything was blurry and pixelated.

[dulany67]

6 gig 1060 should be able to handle unlimited video memory in this game. It's been a while but I don't remember the game using more than 6 gigs. I have an 8 gig rx580 and I use it. Our cards are very comparable.

Now why it was looking like crap before... there may be something else going on.

[Bladiumdragon]

Originally posted by dulany67:

6 gig 1060 should be able to handle unlimited video memory in this game. It's been a while but I don't remember the game using more than 6 gigs. I have an 8 gig rx580 and I use it. Our cards are very comparable.

Now why it was looking like crap before... there may be something else going on.

THere's a specific graphic setting that causes that. I only revently discovered it because of Queen Bess' nets looking weird. I forget which option that is. That being said, if it stays really low, the game could be detecting the in-built graphics card instead of the main one, but since the main is being used there's no performance drop.

[Sansidar]

Originally posted by Bladiumdragon:

Originally posted by dulany67:

6 gig 1060 should be able to handle unlimited video memory in this game. It's been a while but I don't remember the game using more than 6 gigs. I have an 8 gig rx580 and I use it. Our cards are very comparable.

Now why it was looking like crap before... there may be something else going on.

THere's a specific graphic setting that causes that. I only revently discovered it because of Queen Bess' nets looking weird. I forget which option that is. That being said, if it stays really low, the game could be detecting the in-built graphics card instead of the main one, but since the main is being used there's no performance drop.

The game shows my 1060 and its 6 gigs of vram at the top of the graphics settings panel ingame so it seems to be able to detect it?

[Bladiumdragon]

Originally posted by Sansidar:

Originally posted by Bladiumdragon:

THere's a specific graphic setting that causes that. I only revently discovered it because of Queen Bess' nets looking weird. I forget which option that is. That being said, if it stays really low, the game could be detecting the in-built graphics card instead of the main one, but since the main is being used there's no performance drop.

The game shows my 1060 and its 6 gigs of vram at the top of the graphics settings panel ingame so it seems to be able to detect it?

Can you share a screenshot of the image? And what about the rest of your computer? How much RAM do you have and what's your processor?

[Sansidar]

Originally posted by Bladiumdragon:

Originally posted by Sansidar:

The game shows my 1060 and its 6 gigs of vram at the top of the graphics settings panel ingame so it seems to be able to detect it?

Can you share a screenshot of the image? And what about the rest of your computer? How much RAM do you have and what's your processor?

Running it on an i5 4670k and 8 gb ram. Can't give you a picture of the ingame graphics because I'm not at home currently.

[Bladiumdragon]

Originally posted by Sansidar:

Originally posted by Bladiumdragon:

Can you share a screenshot of the image? And what about the rest of your computer? How much RAM do you have and what's your processor?

Running it on an i5 4670k and 8 gb ram. Can't give you a picture of the ingame graphics because I'm not at home currently.

Aaaaah. That's the problem. While your processor is fine, you have too little RAM. That's why your graphics are downgraded. You need 16GB RAM at least.. Recommended on the store page is for medium graphics.

Your graphics card is fine and has ample memory, but the computer needs plenty of space to store and process information that the GPU doesn't take care of.

[Sansidar]

Originally posted by ;1643167006268630817:

Originally posted by Sansidar:

Running it on an i5 4670k and 8 gb ram. Can't give you a picture of the ingame graphics because I'm not at home currently.

Aaaaah. That's the problem. While your processor is fine, you have too little RAM. That's why your graphics are downgraded. You need 16GB RAM at least.. Recommended on the store page is for medium graphics.

Your graphics card is fine and has ample memory, but the computer needs plenty of space to store and process information that the GPU doesn't take care of.

This game should not require 16 ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ gigs of ram for anything above medium... If that's the case then the devs have been slacking hard on the optimization. Is the supposed to look like a PS2 game on medium?

[Bladiumdragon]

Originally posted by Sansidar:

Originally posted by ;1643167006268630817:

Aaaaah. That's the problem. While your processor is fine, you have too little RAM. That's why your graphics are downgraded. You need 16GB RAM at least.. Recommended on the store page is for medium graphics.

Your graphics card is fine and has ample memory, but the computer needs plenty of space to store and process information that the GPU doesn't take care of.

This game should not require 16 ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ gigs of ram for anything above medium... If that's the case then the devs have been slacking hard on the optimization. Is the supposed to look like a PS2 game on medium?

Why shouldn't it require 16 gigs? It's processing a lot of info and detail all at the same time at higher levels. (also, it's well known that this game is poorly optimized compared to the first TW:WH).

As for your other question: Yes. It looks terribadbad at medium. The standard of RAM you need nowadays is 16GB, honestly. They're not 'that' expensive, for two sticks of 8 at least.

[SgtScum]

I'm running a 4670k @4.4 and a 1080ti plus 16 gigs @2133 and this game murders the frames at 4k if there are skaven and/or lizardmen in large stacks. Guess the much more complex models and animations they use really tax even a high end system. Runs a dream at 1080/1440 though with everything maxed out and also fine at 4k as long as there are no skaven or lizardmen.

[Kaelus Von Sestiaf]

I have 8 gigs and have solid FPS on high settings, you do not need 16 gigs of ram.
what this game needs is a solid CPU and a half decent GPU or a GPU with lots of vram, that's it.
OP has another problem if the game looks bad, 'cause it's a gorgeous game.

[Bladiumdragon]

Originally posted by Kaelus Von Sestiaf:

I have 8 gigs and have solid FPS on high settings, you do not need 16 gigs of ram.
what this game needs is a solid CPU and a half decent GPU or a GPU with lots of vram, that's it.
OP has another problem if the game looks bad, 'cause it's a gorgeous game.

I played this game with 8 Gigs and it gave me the same problem. His CPU is more than enough considering its cores and frequency speed. And yes. You do need more than 8 if you consider that the Windows 10 os reserves 2GB of RAM to function, and then there are the other programs in the background to make everything function.

[archmag]

Originally posted by Kaelus Von Sestiaf:

OP has another problem if the game looks bad, 'cause it's a gorgeous game.

This is all subjective. I play it on min graphical settings and I think the game is beautiful.

In battle:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1660058338

On global map:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1735749911

Someone else with the same settings will say it's trash.

Maybe game looks great at his PC, but he still thinks it's bad because he is accustomed to different quality.

[Spectral]

Originally posted by Bladiumdragon:

Originally posted by Sansidar:

Running it on an i5 4670k and 8 gb ram. Can't give you a picture of the ingame graphics because I'm not at home currently.

Aaaaah. That's the problem. While your processor is fine, you have too little RAM. That's why your graphics are downgraded. You need 16GB RAM at least.. Recommended on the store page is for medium graphics.

Your graphics card is fine and has ample memory, but the computer needs plenty of space to store and process information that the GPU doesn't take care of.

The RAM has nothing to do with it. Lack of RAM would effect performance not visual fidelity

[archmag]

Originally posted by spectral2k:

The RAM has nothing to do with it. Lack of RAM would effect performance not visual fidelity

If Unlimited video memory setting is ON then RAM will be used for graphics too instead of only video card memory. Only in that case it can influence visuals in case there is still not enough memory. Using it will significantly lower the performance, so this option should be used only in cases like mine, I have 1GB video card and 16GB RAM, I use this option because 1GB video memory is not enough to play the game even at minimum settings, but with this option on the game works fine.

Video card with 8GB should be enough to deal with graphics seeing as recommended amount on store page is 4GB, so Unlimited video memory option is not useful unless you have a ton of RAM and want to try laboratory with some extreme parameters.

[SgtScum]

Actually unlimited video memory uses up all available vram then it looks first to system ram then a hdd cache. So if you have a gpu with lots of vram then it will enhance quality at no or little cost to performance as long as you don't go over and spill into system ram.