Ultra settings will now require a video card with 2GB of VRAM

VictorBrav0

A six core AMD cpu and a GTX 760 has been working really well for me in ESO with Ultra settings. Getting roughly 60 fps outside, 40 fps in towns, and roughly 30 fps in PvP with the occasional 20 fps dip here and there. Still very playable. I always thought 2 GB was necessary for this day and age.

Ethona

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hey guys, wanted to pop in and provide some clarification on this note. We've added a ton of new NPCs for the Justice System, which are using up more VRAM. The 2GB of VRAM was more of a recommendation than a hard requirement (we'll edit the wording in the patch notes to reflect this) - you are still free to choose Ultra if you have less than 2GB. That said, if you experience any hitching, you can try lowering the draw distance which should help.

Thanks for clearing this up!

gresiac

I have nvidia gf 580gtx how much vram does it have ?

UrQuan

gresiac wrote: »

I have nvidia gf 580gtx how much vram does it have ?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=nvidia+gf+580gtx

Grunim

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hey guys, wanted to pop in and provide some clarification on this note. We've added a ton of new NPCs for the Justice System, which are using up more VRAM. The 2GB of VRAM was more of a recommendation than a hard requirement (we'll edit the wording in the patch notes to reflect this) - you are still free to choose Ultra if you have less than 2GB. That said, if you experience any hitching, you can try lowering the draw distance which should help.

Thanks Gina, I'll continue with my GTX 560ti which has 1GB VRAM for now. Though I'll use your recommendation for a 2GB VCard to talk my husband into upgrading this card sooner rather than later. I bought this card for Skyrim so it's only fitting I suppose.

driosketch

Have a GTX570 with 1280MB of ram now, but I've been looking for an excuse to upgrade anyways.

Stroggnonimus

Interesting that on the BOX of ESO, it says 2gb vram are recommended. So if a box made a year ago already said that, whats the problem now ?

LuxLunae

Anybody tried playing this game in heavy battles with a 980?

Semfim

Can anyone tell me why with my system (laptop with GeForce 765M 2GB RAM, i7 4700 MQ and 8GB system RAM), I get a recommendation from the nvidia experience thing to drop my settings from high at 1920x1080 res? They say I should be at view distance 25, no shadows, no water reflection, all else on high.

Is there a way I can get more out of the system, like dropping resolution?

Any tips would be nice. (And sorry for highjacking the thread)

Sallington

Semfim wrote: »

Can anyone tell me why with my system (laptop with GeForce 765M 2GB RAM, i7 4700 MQ and 8GB system RAM), I get a recommendation from the nvidia experience thing to drop my settings from high at 1920x1080 res? They say I should be at view distance 25, no shadows, no water reflection, all else on high.

Is there a way I can get more out of the system, like dropping resolution?

Any tips would be nice. (And sorry for highjacking the thread)

Laptop GPUs are generally not powerful enough to handle most modern games near max settings.

Here's some benchmarks for your laptop's GPU. You can compare those numbers to other GPUs out there.

tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-780m-770m-765m,3732-2.html

But yes, if you dropped your resolution that would give you more wiggle room with other settings.

RazielSR

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hey guys, wanted to pop in and provide some clarification on this note. We've added a ton of new NPCs for the Justice System, which are using up more VRAM. The 2GB of VRAM was more of a recommendation than a hard requirement (we'll edit the wording in the patch notes to reflect this) - you are still free to choose Ultra if you have less than 2GB. That said, if you experience any hitching, you can try lowering the draw distance which should help.

GINA,

Could you please do the same with textures and other things? I mean, as you may know there is people with high end pc's etc...The same analogy you are using for this 2gb "requirement" could be done by adding more quality textures and draw distance (letting you adjust the amount of fog) and you could "recommend" 4gb of vram.

If other people want to play just like the game is it now, no problem, they could just not increase the draw distance and continue using the same textures as now.

Deal?

Tarikko

How awesome will this game be with the high res textures pack...

Give us Skyrim sky as a start... The sky right now is so bland and dull...

You know you can just head to the nexus.. The mods are already there. I'm sure the authors would love to share them with zos!

Observant

Stroggnonimus wrote: »

Interesting that on the BOX of ESO, it says 2gb vram are recommended. So if a box made a year ago already said that, whats the problem now ?

Well, the wording was quite confusing. They said the requirement was 2GB, not the recommendation. In the literal sense, that means you would no longer be able to run at Ultra unless you have 2GB+ VRAM. For the thousands upon thousands of players that have played on Ultra with a 1GB card(which is more than sufficient) for the last 10 months, that wouldn't be fair, as there's no reasoning behind it.

You do have a slight amount of empathy to see what we could be angry about, yes?

ZOS_GinaBruno

Observant wrote: »

Stroggnonimus wrote: »

Interesting that on the BOX of ESO, it says 2gb vram are recommended. So if a box made a year ago already said that, whats the problem now ?

Well, the wording was quite confusing. They said the requirement was 2GB, not the recommendation. In the literal sense, that means you would no longer be able to run at Ultra unless you have 2GB+ VRAM. For the thousands upon thousands of players that have played on Ultra with a 1GB card(which is more than sufficient) for the last 10 months, that wouldn't be fair, as there's no reasoning behind it.

You do have a slight amount of empathy to see what we could be angry about, yes?

Yes, absolutely. There was just some miscommunication on our end.

Auldjohn

I have an integral AMD Radeon HD 7650M video chip with 2 GB dedicated VRAM. OS is Windows 8.1, 8 GB RAM. During Closed Beta I could run ESO in Ultra Mode with at least 30 FPS.

Since about Update 3 or 4 my video settings have had to be greatly reduced. I now need to run a custom Medium Mode to achieve 18-30 FPS in solo areas. I also had to change quality from Quality to Balanced. At less than Medium Mode graphics are so degraded that immersion is affected very negatively.

Will Update 6 be further tweaked to improve graphics quality with Mobile GPUs?

Humanistic

Observant wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Miscellaneous
General

• Ultra settings will now require a video card with 2GB of VRAM.

I have a GTX 560 Ti WINDFORCE 3X, and I've ran at ultra settings everyday since beta with zero issues. Why are you doing this to me?

If I feel the game isn't playing up to par, I'll tone the graphics down myself. Don't do it for me.

I really hope this gets nerfed before rolling to the live server, half the reason I stick around and pay $15 to beta test is merely because the graphics are beautiful.

TESO Community, how do you feel about this? Justified? and if so, why?

Cheers,
Observant.

UPDATE
This is only a recommendation, they are not going to hard-code a minimum VRAM requirement for Ultra settings. Thanks Gina for clearing that up!

Stop worrying about it, the ONLY difference is the shadow resolution was increased - that's why they are saying you need the extra VRAM if you want to have "Ultra" shadow settings. Nothing else is different.

Jaxsun

Observant wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Miscellaneous
General

• Ultra settings will now require a video card with 2GB of VRAM.

I have a GTX 560 Ti WINDFORCE 3X, and I've ran at ultra settings everyday since beta with zero issues. Why are you doing this to me?

If I feel the game isn't playing up to par, I'll tone the graphics down myself. Don't do it for me.

I really hope this gets nerfed before rolling to the live server, half the reason I stick around and pay $15 to beta test is merely because the graphics are beautiful.

TESO Community, how do you feel about this? Justified? and if so, why?

Cheers,
Observant.

UPDATE
This is only a recommendation, they are not going to hard-code a minimum VRAM requirement for Ultra settings. Thanks Gina for clearing that up!

They're doing it so they can say, look we told you to have a minimum of 2gb of ram to run ultra. You didn't listen that's why you have 1 fps in cyrodiil...

Grunim

Humanistic wrote: »

Observant wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Miscellaneous
General

• Ultra settings will now require a video card with 2GB of VRAM.

I have a GTX 560 Ti WINDFORCE 3X, and I've ran at ultra settings everyday since beta with zero issues. Why are you doing this to me?

If I feel the game isn't playing up to par, I'll tone the graphics down myself. Don't do it for me.

I really hope this gets nerfed before rolling to the live server, half the reason I stick around and pay $15 to beta test is merely because the graphics are beautiful.

TESO Community, how do you feel about this? Justified? and if so, why?

Cheers,
Observant.

UPDATE
This is only a recommendation, they are not going to hard-code a minimum VRAM requirement for Ultra settings. Thanks Gina for clearing that up!

Stop worrying about it, the ONLY difference is the shadow resolution was increased - that's why they are saying you need the extra VRAM if you want to have "Ultra" shadow settings. Nothing else is different.

Yeah I still seem to be doing fine with my 560Ti on PTS, which is a good thing because I want my next card to have at least 4GB of RAM and I want prices on new cards to drop some more first before I take the plunge and upgrade.

jelliedsoup

i guess for those who can afford it and are willing to for it will get a good show. Won't be me.

sean.plackerb14_ESO

Ethona wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

Brandalf wrote: »

Sallington wrote: »

Kilandros wrote: »

Because ZOS is operating under the misguided and generally incorrect assumption that performance issues aren't on their end but are caused by players running the game on a higher-than-optimal graphics setting.

Imagine them scratching their heads and throwing their hands up in disbelief when--shockingly--performance is still regarded as poor in Cyrodiil and elsewhere.

I get 14FPS in sieges and high 20s-low 30s in crowded cities on my GTX 970.

Maybe they need to make Ultra require an 8GB GPU? Since it's obviously a VRAM issue...

.....why do I get better performance with my HD 7850 1GB than you do with your 970....something here isn't right.

I just went out and bought an i7-4790k last night because I was tired of my Fx-6300 holding me back.

In a giant fight in Cyrodil last night, my FPS never dipped below 30. In crowded towns it was between 45-60.

I'm never going AMD again. It just doesn't have the umph to handle CPU intensive games like this.

This a thousand times! I haven't ever looked back to AMD after my early 2000 run with them. AMD does not match what Intel does for gaming. Reading over benchmarks will show you how even a I3 man handles AMD. Always buy Intel CPUs and Nvidia GFX.

Looking at gaming benchmarks is what made me decide to go with Intel over AMD for my CPU. From what I understand Intel CPU's perform better in games overall because they have higher performance per core or thread, and most games don't make heavy or efficient use of multi threading. At least for now.