TES Skyrim 0.279

[sheson]

Phinix
Regarding nvidia limit of vram size. As expected, there is no activity at nvidia forums, except incompetent fanboys and cortana lovers. Any issues with ENBoost are ignored from this moment.

Can't fault you for trying but the incompetence and ignorance of some people is pretty pathetic.

So the "recommendation" is if you use windows 8/10 get an AMD card to not have the limiation? Then again who in their right mind would use windows 8 or 10 anyways?

[benhat]

well... i use window 10, but i am not right in the mind anyway you got that right
also i want to play dx12 games when they hit the shelf (i think that is about the only reason i updated, what can you do....)

[wysiwyg]

I saw the posts on the nvidia forums and even I was annoyed. I hate asking question only to get argument against ever answering it.

I have a Titan-X with 12GB of video memory and 32GB of system memory running Windows 7 64 bit and my Skyrim also runs fine. As expected, the video memory only shows about 4GB maximum being used according to diagnostics; Evga on screen display of video memory use.

When I reinstalled Skyrim I intentionally chose the highest quality settings for Vividian ENB, the largest textures, and even Dynamic LODs at the highest setting just to see how it would run. I use the frame rate limited to 58 fps but @ 2560x1600 often get only 40 fps with lots of snow or rain while moving outside in demanding locations like outside of Windhelm. Skyrim won't even run at these settings without your software.

Previously I had a GTX 690 with only 2GB of video memory and Skyrim ran well with your memory management additions. I wish I could send you this card to test with since it had Windows XP drivers although they weren't supported officially.

Thanks for everything Boris!

[Looky]

benhat

Sorry, I couldn't reply to your PM since I registered recently (even though I've been lurking this forum for 2 years now )
About 4gb limit on DX9 and my contact as I said they could do only so much since there are only handful of people working on those modded drivers. According to them it is possible to exceed the limit but this process would create major bugs and maybe it would take tons of hours to fix them. If there had been NVIDIA tech guys or more people that are experienced in this kind of profession, imo it might have happened. Not that I know anything about driver related things but yeah...

[ENBSeries]

sheson
This limit is not depends from OS version from what i saw in users reports, so can't recommend to go for AMD (Jafin have 4Gb limit on AMD if i remember).

We just need to find several users who have and don't have limitation with same videocard model and make comparisons of drivers, registry, don't know what else. May be some old driver forced that limit. Or on the contrary, old driver unlocked 4gb limit for all others. In the VRamSizeTest topic only few reports, most are in various topic of the forum from random players as amount of available memory detected by mod itself (calculation code is the same for mod and VRamSizeTest application). I can't make comparison tests for many dx9 games to show performance loss when limit exist, because such test require videocard with more than 4 gb of memory and fast enough to run in very high resolutions and antialiasing. May be i differ from others, but thought that when someone purchase very powerful videocard, he/she expect to play not only future games but also maxed everything for older and favorite and here 4Gb may not be enough, because lot of video memory required for render targets with antialiasing of any games with progressive graphics. Speaking about really good game engines which use their own memory management for d3d resources - even more important to have bigger amount of video memory for no performance loss and no stuttering. I really want now to make scandal from this limitation same as it was with gf970 3.5gb, because these both are equal and 3.5gb explanation by NVidia is lie.

[pinto10]

Boris

If you need some users, I am happy to help out. let me know what info you need. I currently have the 4gb limit with my Nvidia 970 on windows 10 and this limit is causing my fallout and skyrim to crash whereas it was't a problem before.

[ENBSeries]

pinto10
I don't know how to answer, really. Hard to find players with equal videocards, OS, with/without limit. They will not bother with comparisons of files, registry, etc. Making images of the OS drive and reinstalling OS to check everything on clear setup is the simplest way to find out. You see, these all are hard enough for the most users, while for driver developers it's very simple. I guess prooving that performance is lower with this limit for many games at highest resolutions/antialiasing/dsr and then sent such data to popular game portals will do better a job.

[SA547]

EDIT: I ask because I am thinking of changing vendor...maybe AMD could save me some grief lately?

Seriously, every AMD product I have tried (with the exception of the XTX1900 I bought for Oblivion which I actually loved) has been a huge disappointment. Noisy, buggy drivers, overly hot, and unreliable.

With AMD it's basically the same situation, it depends on the vendor and specific version you get. Sticking with Asus and Sapphire will get you a good card. At the moment, it looks like, depending on what performance bracket you want, AMD is kinda the way to go. This will likely change again in 6 months, but right now it really seems that way. I'd avoid the R9 390 cards since they're power hungry, hot and fast versions of the 290's (performance should be up around the GTX 980 though). However, the R9 380 cards seem to be really quite good (comparable but probably a little faster than 970), as well as the Fury line-up. The Fury cards are actually really impressive.

If I were to buy a new card right now (which I'm not) my first choice would be a Fury X (if there was room in my case for the AIO liquid cooler; vendor doesn't matter too much here) or the Sapphire Fury Tri-X. If I wasn't going for the ultra high end, I'd get the R9 380X. 6 months ago I would've done 980 or 970, probably from ASUS.

Nvidia does have better overall support, as benhat mentions, but as far as hardware goes, AMD has it right now. Each to their own though. If you're sick of what you have and want to try something else, jump to the other side and hope it's better. It's likely you'll find some fix for whatever problem you have, but you'll have other problems. Do your research, make your purchase and hope it doesn't die.

I'm happy with Powercolor, especially as far as their HD7750 is concerned (I play at 1280x800 and get up to 40FPS in this way, and snap excellent screenies).

Been using the Cat 15.7 drivers for Win7/64 and so far no stability problems. As for Geforce, I was personally bewildered by the frequency of driver updates nVidia has to make.

EDIT: Oh and AMD CPU's are crap... but we all know that.

My Athlon II X2 260's still solid even after three years. Am considering an upgrade, but I'm not wanting an Intel, after suffering through hand-me-down Pentium 4s before I made my first build.

[kranazoli]

Hey,

May I ask what is this value does?

FixLag=true
FixLag=false

Thanks!

Ps:

Found this:

"Added FixLag parameter to enblocal.ini (require restart) which reduce annoying delays mostly in windowed mode, you know it's kinda frames skipping issue when videocard is very busy even at high frame rates. Feature is experimental hack found by me, made for NVidia card, seems it not work for AMD. If it useful, i'll make separate set of wrappers with only it enabled. Let's dance boys"

If that's the all info, okay, I found it.
Ask it, because I have an GTX 980 VGA card, an it sounds promising.

Does it works?

[ENBSeries]

That parameter decrease frame rate, but makes one type of annoying stuttering invisible. It's hard to explain or display on video, it's how ugly you feel the game acting, kinda time misaligment between input and result on the screen with small travel back in time.