So I'm looking forward to upgrading to a GTX 680 from my 470, but I'm wondering if I should be waiting for the 4GB cards to come out?

Is 2GB really enough for Skyrim if you start packing on the 2048x2048 texture mods?

Thanks.

Ah I wish I could do that too... ( Well I have GTX 560 Ti and I can run Ultra with HD and ENB ) , I bet it won't work like that in the next TES game hehe..

Edit: I suggest waiting for the 4GB

I'm waiting for the 4gb cards to upgrade my 560, figured if I'm spending the money I want all I can get.

The 2GB version should be enough, unless playing games at higher than 1920x1080 resolution.

whats that 4gb gonna run, cost wise?

no doubt the 4gb card will be nicer, but i decided i'm not waiting and laid down for the 2gb model. hopefully will get my hands on it in a couple of days and we'll see how it goes.

2 GB is plenty for Skyrim and I plan to upgrade from my 2GB 6970 to the 2GB 680(because I hate AMD drivers) which will cost me around 5 bills. If VRAM is important to you overall or you have a game on the horizon in mind that 4GB would help with in particular then maybe waiting is worth it.

I got the 1GB 5870 card when they came out two and a half years ago. Now I'm unable to use high-resolution texture patches as I run headlong into the VRAM limit. I will not be making the mistake of buying a 2GB card. 4GB for me (especially since I intend to run two GTX 680s in SLI eventually).

Steve my VRAM max usage on everything Ultra(shadows High but @ 4096 range of 8000) and the HD texture pack is under 1 GB. Even with texture mods including Static Mesh Imps, WATER, Super ENB I am still not close to 2GB...aside that I think we will see a lot more 3 GB etc. before a serious and good 4GB card so you may be waiting quite a while. I play a vanilla Skyrim but I have a mod test version installed to see what my rig can do and have yet to crash it adding texture mods.

The 680 is the first single-GPU card that Nvidia has offered that will support 3 monitors for surround gaming. If you plan to use it for this, the extra VRAM would be useful. However, 2GB is sufficient for three 1920x1080 displays. If you plan to use it with three 2560x1600 displays, I'm sure the 2GB would still be able to do this, but the 4GB would probably be more preferable.

Panoramic Single Screen or no go for me....can't handle those breaks between displays.

Eh, after a while you get used to it. I used to feel the same way, but now that I have my 3 screens there is no way that I would ever go back to a single screen on my personal desktop.
Do you wear glasses? I find it is much like getting used to that. After a while you stop noticing the glasses frames and just see passed them. With the triple screens, after about a week or two regular use you just dont even really notice the bezels any more.

Nope no glasses I have near perfect vision. I guess I can see that happening after a while kind of like getting used to widescreen when DVDs came out.

As a glasses wearer you do get used to the frames after a while. It becomes like DOF lol, the bit outside your frames is blurred and you forget it's there. I may go for a 3 monitor setup.

I just ordered my GTX 570 which has 1.28gb VRAM. I think it'll be enough for now. In a year or 2 if I get a 3 monitor setup, that's when I'll probs get a 680 2GB. We'll see what game are like in those years, see if 4GB is really needed.

4gb so you could put in lots of hd mods..

Yeah generally 2gb is enough for most things, I'm going to be ordering three new monitors at the same time as the 4gb card as well as being an avid arma player so the VRAM is valuable to me. Grass for miles 0.o. I just don't see getting the 2gb one personally, it's already $500, I'd rather drop the extra $100-150 for the 4gb one when it releases, already spending that much may as well go all out.

Yes ARMA would be one of those exceptions where VRAM is like gold. Great game very underrated.

Personal experience, is that the official HD pack, Ugrids 7, ultra, and AA/AF puts me over 1.5 gigs Vram. So take that for what you will.

Also, that is without any mods.

Im running the 2k hd, water, flora, and like 35 other mods. x4ssaa, x16 AF, ugrids 7, i am only playing it at 1280x720(tvs native) and i sit at about 985 of my 1gb vram. 6870

4GB VRAM?!?, you anit gonna see that version last long. So get it while you can!

with my gpu hd7950, i always encounter lagggggggggggggggggggggggggggg ^^

1280x1024 resolution on 1x 23 inch screen. All hi res textures 2048+ from , Beth HiRes DLC, 2K HD, SRO, etc, loads of other texture mods, ENB, uGrids=7, 4xMSSA, 16x AF, performance SOA, sets me up to 1.6GB vram average, peaking at 1.9GB, even 2GB. This is on a 560 Ti 2GB model, not even at full HD (1920x1080).

So if you plan on using lots of hi res mods, injectors like ENB, ultra ultra graphics, increased view distance etc, on a HD 1080p and higher resolution screen (or use multiple monitors), you will hit 2GB+ easily. Ive seen reports of users approaching 3GB at very high screen resolutions with all eye candy tweaks. If you you use 1080p + resolutions and only hi res textures the 2GB will be enough. If you plan on using every available eye candy tweak there is, you will need 4GB.

I have a 680 2 GB, running battlefield on Ultra with 4x MSAA, I peak at around 1700 MB VRAM usage. I think you'll be fine unless you're planning on playing at higher resolutions than 1920*1080. I haven't measured my VRAM usage in Skyrim, but I'll doubt it'ss be any higher that BF3, even with texture packs.

I run the high-res texture pack just fine and I'm on a GTX460 1GB(?)


Edit - Ahhh, you know what, I use FXAA instead of any AA setting.

Screen resolution matters. If you run higher resolution (2500x1600), or multiple monitors, then you run the risk of going over 2GB a bit faster.

The price different matters. 450 euros for 2GB, or 600 euros for 4GB. I would keep the 150 euros, and use them to purchase my next videocard a bit earlier. On average, over the years, that will probably give you better performance for you money. However, if the 4GB version is only 25 or 50 euros extra, then I'd say "why not ?". And buy the 4GB version.

The thing you should realize is, no matter what videocard you buy, you can always thrown more mods at it than it can handle. Even with a 4GB card, at some point the vram will be full and you'll have to make decisions which mods you think are more important. If not for the vram (textures) then at some point it might be speed. The question boils down to, is the 2GB worth the money ?
Example, a little over a year ago, I bought a gtx580 to replace my gtx260. I was mainly playing Rift at the time. The framerates would double (or less), but it didn't give me a more fluent feel in the game. I could now run 4xSSAA in stead of 4xFXAA. Which made everything prettier. But I'd arrive at the same framerates (around 30 fps in cities). Was it worth it to buy the gtx580 just so I could use a different AA modus ? I thought not. The gtx580 was loud at idle, which irritated me a lot. So I sent it back. Not worth it.

Now I have a gtx680. I'm very happy with it. Even with my E8500 cpu, it runs Skyrim beautifully. I kept enabling more eyecandy, and the gtx680 could do it, without losing much frames. I am now at the point that both E8500 and gtx680 run at 100%. So my E8500 is not holding back my GPU in Skyrim. (It might in other games). 60 fps most of the time in Skyrim. 30-40 fps at the most demanding places (whiterun stairs, markath, etc). (In 3 weeks I will buy my new Ivy Bridge Intel processor. Then my gtx680 will surely not be bottlenecked by the CPU in any game).

My gtx680 uses 1.5-1.6 GB vram.
I use a 1920x1200 monitor.
8xMSAA with 4xSSAA Transparency AA.
All settings at Ultra.
Very High SSAO (Ambient Occlusion) enabled via the nvidia driver. I love SSAO now. Don't ever wanna play without it anymore.
Bethesda high-res texture pack.
Bunch of mods, but not the large texture packs (Bethesda texturepack does a fine job).
SkyUI, Lush and Glorious grass, Flora overhaul, Water enhancement, Static Mesh Improvements, Deadly Dragons, Better Snow, Quality Roads.

I see 1.5-1.6 GB used. But that does not necessarily mean my vram is almost at the limit. I suspect that when Skyrim will approach 2GB, then the game will start to clear up memory more aggressively. E.g. when you leave a cell, it stays in memory. So when you go back, loading times are minimal. If your free vram gets low Skyrim might start clearing old cells from memory slightly more aggressive. I don't know for sure, ofc. But I think I can enable a lot more mods, and texture packs, before the 2GB will become a limit. I bought the 2GB gtx680, because it was the only one for sale. But if given the choice, I'd probably still buy the 2GB version. I expect the 4GB cards to come with a small overclock, but cost 100 euros extra. Not worth the money for me, imho.