Which video card - confused...
 

Hello everybody,

I'm getting soon a new computer and it should do CoD fine as I'm looking forward to do a bit of flying again (apart from Photo editing).

CPU, motherboard, RAM should be fine (i7 2600, 2 x 8 GB RAM, 120 GB SSD) but the big question is the video card.

I was reading up a bit on the issue here but many topics are about a year old and not sure about what video card to get.

First I think 2GB cards are better, best 3GB, as game uses up to 2.4GB as was mentioned somewhere.

Then is there any brand to be avoided or are all of them OK?

I'm starting with some choices of cards:
Gainward GTX-560 Ti Phantom 2GB GDDR5, PCI-E 2.0 x16, HDMI
Club 3D GTX-560 Ti CoolStream 2GB GDDR5, PCI-E 2.0 x16
EVGA GTX-560 Ti 2GB DDR5, PCI-E 2.0 x16

Would there be any difference between those or are they basically the same?
How would they handle the game, over London, playable all the time or would there be problems?Next step up priceswise would be:
HIS HD 6950 IceQ X Turbo, 2GB GDDR5, PCI-E 2.1 x16, HDMI
Sapphire HD 6970 2GB, PCI-E x16 2.0, DP, HDMI
MSI HD 6970 Lightning 2GB, PCI-E x16 2.0, DP, HDMI
All still 2 GB cards but a good bit more expensive than above cards - would those do make a real difference to above?

Then I got:
Sapphire HD 7950 3GB, PCI-E x16 3.0, DP, HDMI
Club 3D HD 7950 3GB, PCI-E x16 3.0, DP, HDMI
The cheapest two 3GB cardsI can get. Again would those make a big difference as compared to the other two sets of 2GB?

Last batch is:
Sapphire HD 7970 3GB, PCI-E x16 3.0, DP, HDMI
XFX HD 7970 Black Edition 3GB, PCI-E x16 3.0, DP, HDMI
Gigabyte HD 7950 OC 3GB, PCI-E x16 3.0, DP, HDMI
ZOTAC GTX-580 AMP2! 3GB DDR5
ZOTAC GTX-580 3GB DDR5, PCI-E 2.0 x16
Those cost quite a bit more $$$then the 3GB cards mentioned above. Worth the money or not?

So overall how playable is the game on those 2GB cards, is it worth to take one of the more expensive 2GB cards over the cheaper ones?

Plus are those 3GB really worth getting over the 2GB ones? Among the 3GB ones would the cheaper set do about as well as the more expensive set?

Thanks for any input!
******

I got an ASUS GTX 560Ti 1GB and it rocks, If you can find a 2Gb or 3GB version, go for it you wont regret it.

Or wait for patch, as there is a chance you wont need to upgrade as much. I'm betting my 560Ti 1GB will hammer the game after the patch.

Wait for the performance patch and decide then. If you don't want to wait get a 7970.

i just put one of those in my machine too. works great, all settings maxed out.

I've got a 560ti 1GB and I'm getting 60 FPS 1920x1080 over land can get more but i'm using VSync.
In take of I get art least 45 FPS.
Schadow put to low as I dnt see any difference between high or low at some altitude.
I, had to use a ram drive to reduce stutters and they are actually totaly gone.
The patch that will be here in two weeks be sure wil ofcoarse render al of the tweaking useless and obsolete :)

So seems the GTX 560Ti 2GB would run the game sufficiently?

Well too late now, am getting a HD 7950 3GB, already on the way, couldn't wait for patches, friend is bringing components to Bkk for me, saves me a b it of cash.

Thanks anyway!
+++++

Did you get your gpu yet?

Nice card there mate.. I got the 6950-2gig about 4 months ago and runs this game maxed out except trees on 1920x1200

That card will do you for quite a while

Yeah,I got a feeling the 3GB cards are gonna be a tad acedemic after the patch,we will see,it's always good to buy cards ahead of games technology anyway,enjoy.;)

Thanks for the comments all. Got the rig set-up and working, handles CoD from the CD all right, no probs. Now I will have to register the game and then patch it to newest version, now that's going to be a royal pain in the butt with the slow internet I got here....

Please let me know how that 7970 runs the game. I have a 6850 in about the same computer as you, but my framerates not always to great, about 35 with grass, trees/forests, and shadows off, landscape to medium. Anyone else run the 6850? It's great when I'm over 2km, I get 60 fps then. I've already overclocked too. Thanks.

With the 7950 3GB I get about 60, low over the water or coast, 10-20 planes. No probs at all so far.
Mind you, that's out of the box, no patches at all, didn't go down that road yet due to slow internet...
+++++

Nice! congrats!

Please, if you ever have some free time, post your screen resolution and graphic details settings (grass, shadows etc etc - usually a screenshot of the CoD Video page is the easiest).

And the most important: tell us what is the max VRAM usage you have experienced while playing (the highest we have heard of was 2,4Gb VRAM while flying over London).

~S~

I am using a watercooled Asus HD 7970 @ 1,3 Ghz/1675 MHz Ram and I currently reach up to 2,7 GB of vram usage in some benchmark tracks.

In CoD, you can see, that the bigger memory is an advantage over the 680, and as far as I get the news from luthier right, I do not see any memory reduction in the performance patch, which some of the guys stiyll think.
As far as I remember right, he told us something about multicore cpu usage (thread using) and afterwards something about longer loading times, cause they will load more map details just at the beginning. This will be in general the normal ram, but it perhaps also takes some advantages of the graphics ram ( we dont know).

So, if we will have a decrease of RAM usage? - We don't know!
If we will have an even bigger advantage on performance with more vram? - We don't know!

Normally I am a Nvidia fanboy, but for my current games, I see no advantage or better say some disadvantages with the new nvidia 680!!! Sure, that a 4 GB version of the 680 could be an alternative, it will ne just too expensive and do not solve the problem for higher resolutions.

So, I just can recommend the ATI's this time, if you are driving higher resolutions than 2560 x 2440 or even eyefinity setups.
But if you really can wait and money is no problem, the next kepler will blow ati away so far. But ati will also introduce an answer. But personally I think, that this years crown of graphics cards is already reseved for nvidia,. Just to make it clear: NOT for the 680 (although i was really stunned, that the smaller kepler reaches that class).

Looking forward to your comments.

Res is 1920x1080, graphic details are maxed out I think.
How can I see the usage of the VRAM? Somewhere on that Catalyst Control Center?

Will get the screenies in about two weeks, off to Laos tomorrow for a while...

Just my setup info for resolution: I am running a 24" 120Hz monitor currently, but I hope to switch to 3 x 27" setup (preferrably with a higher resolution, than 1080p on the single monitor.

Safe trip!

~S~