Is the GTX 1070 memory bandwidth enough?

[Lord Flashheart]

Hi

PC Spec: i7-3770k @ 4.4 Ghz 16 GB DDR3 1600Mhz memory, GTX 970, GTX 670 for (CUDA/PHYSX)

I am looking at maybe updating my gtx 970 to a gtx 1070.
I have a 1080p 144hz gsync monitor
My preference is for high frame rates rather than very high resolutions.


It has 8GB of memory which will definitely be enough.

For some games, it will be great, others possibly overkill. That is fine as I want headroom for good frame rates and demanding upcoming games.

For some games, I will want to seriously up the AA options, using the nivida control panel & nvidia inspector.
My understanding of AA is it helps provide the illusion of higher resolution.
I think it needs a lot of graphics memory bandwidth.

The GTX 1070 it seems has 256GB/s onboard memory bandwidth GDDR5.
Is that enough for maximum AA options such as 32xS through nvidia inspector.

My understanding of how Anti Aliasing is limited so are looking for useful info especially concerning GPU memory bandwidth.

AMD cards have GPU bandwidth higher but like games with physx/flex so its nvidia only for me.

Thanks

[Chompman]

For 1080p the 1070 is plenty even at 144hz.

[CursedPanther]

Unless the game in question is odd enough to not provide an AA solution of its own, you're better off not overriding it with the NVIDIA Control Panel. Just set to whatever the highest level the game can offer.

[Lord Flashheart]

Originally posted by CursedPanther:

Unless the game in question is odd enough to not provide an AA solution of its own, you're better off not overriding it with the NVIDIA Control Panel. Just set to whatever the highest level the game can offer.

A lot of games have limited AA options, which is why I want increase it, assuming no graphical glitches.

[Mittens]

Originally posted by ianm_ozzy:

Hi
My understanding of AA is it helps provide the illusion of higher resolution.

No, antialiasing is there to remedy the staircasing of polygon edges, so they appear smooth :)

[Andrius227]

Instead of AA, just use DSR.

[Sticky Honeybuns]

Originally posted by drunknmunkey:

Originally posted by ianm_ozzy:

Hi
My understanding of AA is it helps provide the illusion of higher resolution.

No, antialiasing is there to remedy the staircasing of polygon edges, so they appear smooth :)

As this guy said.

There really is never a reason to max AA though. Turn on max AA and then go to a mid leavel AA in a game that has lots of AA options. Maybe you can but I cat tell a difference. There is a big difference in x0, x2, up to x8, but after that I have to focus really hard to see the difference. In my opinion it's not worth the performance hit. Even at 1080p with a 1070, some games will go to a crawl because of high AA.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Also you don't really even need to use NVIDIA Inspector to do that.
Such as making the AA look better in GTAV for example.
You can simply do that on per-game basis right within NVIDIA Control Panel.
Via options such as:
- Anti-Aliasing Mode: Enhance
- Anti-Aliasing Transparency: Multi-Sample (or #x Super-Sample)

[DarkStarClassic]

Originally posted by ianm_ozzy:

Hi

PC Spec: i7-3770k @ 4.4 Ghz 16 GB DDR3 1600Mhz memory, GTX 970, GTX 670 for (CUDA/PHYSX)

I am looking at maybe updating my gtx 970 to a gtx 1070.
I have a 1080p 144hz gsync monitor
My preference is for high frame rates rather than very high resolutions.


It has 8GB of memory which will definitely be enough.

For some games, it will be great, others possibly overkill. That is fine as I want headroom for good frame rates and demanding upcoming games.

For some games, I will want to seriously up the AA options, using the nivida control panel & nvidia inspector.
My understanding of AA is it helps provide the illusion of higher resolution.
I think it needs a lot of graphics memory bandwidth.

The GTX 1070 it seems has 256GB/s onboard memory bandwidth GDDR5.
Is that enough for maximum AA options such as 32xS through nvidia inspector.

My understanding of how Anti Aliasing is limited so are looking for useful info especially concerning GPU memory bandwidth.

AMD cards have GPU bandwidth higher but like games with physx/flex so its nvidia only for me.

Thanks

For 1080p yes it's enough.

[Lord Flashheart]

Originally posted by Andrius227:

Instead of AA, just use DSR.

DSR looks better but it is very inefficient. It tanks the frame rates.

[Lord Flashheart]

Originally posted by Bad-Motha:

Also you don't really even need to use NVIDIA Inspector to do that.
Such as making the AA look better in GTAV for example.
You can simply do that on per-game basis right within NVIDIA Control Panel.
Via options such as:
- Anti-Aliasing Mode: Enhance
- Anti-Aliasing Transparency: Multi-Sample (or #x Super-Sample)

Thanks
I already know about those options. Nvidia inspector has more options, some of which are not in the control panel.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Originally posted by ianm_ozzy:

Originally posted by Andrius227:

Instead of AA, just use DSR.

DSR looks better but it is very inefficient. It tanks the frame rates.

No it doesn't, it's 1|1 performance.
If it tanks the FPS, well then your GPU and/or system is generally not good enough for that Resolution. Obviously you can not always expect to have a game setup for Ultra everything @ 1080p; and then enable DSR and not expect to perhaps lower a few visual settings slightly to compensate. FYI, 1440p is DSR=1.78X

Honestly if you can't run a majority of games @ 1440p/144Hz on a single 1070, you are seriously doing something wrong.

Increasing AA and SuperSampling in most games would usually impact performance more then just upscaling to maybe 1440p via DSR.

Also depending on the original clarity (pixel-pitch) of your current screen, you will need to play around with and adjust "DSR Smoothness" to have any applied DSR Resolution appear more accurately. The default smoothness of approx 33% is way too high and will usually make DSR appear "blurry"

[Washell]

Originally posted by Sticky Honeybuns:

There really is never a reason to max AA though. Turn on max AA and then go to a mid leavel AA in a game that has lots of AA options. Maybe you can but I cat tell a difference. There is a big difference in x0, x2, up to x8, but after that I have to focus really hard to see the difference.

That depends on the physical size of the screen. On a 60" screen you would be able to tell the difference between x8 and x16. But you're correct that on the average screen in the user's home, you won't be able to tell the difference.

[Sticky Honeybuns]

Originally posted by Washell:

Originally posted by Sticky Honeybuns:

There really is never a reason to max AA though. Turn on max AA and then go to a mid leavel AA in a game that has lots of AA options. Maybe you can but I cat tell a difference. There is a big difference in x0, x2, up to x8, but after that I have to focus really hard to see the difference.

That depends on the physical size of the screen. On a 60" screen you would be able to tell the difference between x8 and x16. But you're correct that on the average screen in the user's home, you won't be able to tell the difference.

Yes, what you are saying is true. This thread has now sparked my interest in screen size vs detectable difference.

I have two main gaming rigs, one on my 34" 3440x1440 ultra wide and one in my dedicated home theater room with a dlp projector on a 135" 1.1 gain elite screen (this is also my HTC vive VR room as well). I will compare AA settings on my 135" to see what level I can detect. Obviously detection level will differ depending on an individuals vision.

[Bad 💀 Motha]

Differences in AA settings can still be quite noticeable even on a laptop screen; if you can't see those differences on smaller screens, well we can't help that.

[Hare+Guu!]

Is the GTX 1070 memory bandwidth enough?

For 4k? Nope.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-8gb-pascal-performance,4585-5.html

It only manages to tie with fury x which only has 4gb but vastly superior ram speed.

For 1080p? It doesn't matter. As long as it has at least 200gb/s.