Graphic Problem
- Thread starter Airey
- Start date
timtofly
One Day
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 9,445
Any card that has current drivers, will work. Some of the newer, higher end cards introduce their own issues. It is not the map size that causes problems. It is how HD looking you need your terrain and units to display. Do you play zoomed in or zoomed out? If you play zoomed out, then you need a higher end card to address all the detail that is on the screen.
timtofly
One Day
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 9,445
Out of your list: R9 270X
What about a GTX 760? or GTX 480?
If you want to stay with AMD, then a R9 270 or HD 7870, but they are rated slightly lower than the two nvidea cards respectively.
If running the settings at high, does not play well, you can always lower them. You can always save the game, change the setting, and reload if you are having issues late game. I am not saying you need expensive memory. It was more along the lines of needing 4 GB of cheap GPU RAMM or staying with 2 GB of higher priced GPU RAMM. There is another thread about the topic. If you are going to use a couple of 40" monitors, then you are going to need more RAMM. If you are going with a 22" monitor then 2GB will be faster for you.
The issue with high end cards is coding and how to use the extra power, not that they are bad cards. Driver issues also. If you are going to play at lower settings why spend extra money, unless you have future needs for such cards?
What about a GTX 760? or GTX 480?
If you want to stay with AMD, then a R9 270 or HD 7870, but they are rated slightly lower than the two nvidea cards respectively.
If running the settings at high, does not play well, you can always lower them. You can always save the game, change the setting, and reload if you are having issues late game. I am not saying you need expensive memory. It was more along the lines of needing 4 GB of cheap GPU RAMM or staying with 2 GB of higher priced GPU RAMM. There is another thread about the topic. If you are going to use a couple of 40" monitors, then you are going to need more RAMM. If you are going with a 22" monitor then 2GB will be faster for you.
The issue with high end cards is coding and how to use the extra power, not that they are bad cards. Driver issues also. If you are going to play at lower settings why spend extra money, unless you have future needs for such cards?
timtofly
One Day
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 9,445
The only reason to get a 4Gb, is if you are going to run a resolution of 3840×2160 which uses a buffer of 3850MB. A 2Gb will do 2560x1600 with a 2060MB buffer.
Both types will support up to 4 monitors. From the testing done on the Gigabyte cards, the 4Gb card does not give that much better performance over the 2Gb. It runs quieter and cooler than the 2Gb card though. I do not know much about the Asus, but they are an innovative company and probably work just fine.
They main reason to get a 4 GB card would be a future monitor that will take advantage of the higher buffer rate.
Both types will support up to 4 monitors. From the testing done on the Gigabyte cards, the 4Gb card does not give that much better performance over the 2Gb. It runs quieter and cooler than the 2Gb card though. I do not know much about the Asus, but they are an innovative company and probably work just fine.
They main reason to get a 4 GB card would be a future monitor that will take advantage of the higher buffer rate.
