Resident Evil 7: Biohazard PC Performance Review

VRAM Usage

Resident Evil 7: Biohazard PC Performance Review

VRAM Usage

To say the least, Resident Evil 7 consumes a lot more VRAM than the game actually needs, with the game being playable on 2GB GPUs at up to 1080p High settings without any major issues. Notice that the game can use almost 6GB of VRAM when using the same settings on our GTX 1080, which means that the game is not using VRAM with optimal efficiency. 

It is clear that Resident Evil 7 is designed to load as much data as possible to VRAM, which allows the game to quickly access data when needed. That being said the game can easily run with lower amounts of VRAM. 

We recommend that players that have GPUs with 4GB or less VRAM stay away from Very-High settings, as this is where we started to see performance issues with the game. This is where we see VRAM become a limiting factor, though gamers will still have a great visual experience when the game is played at High or even Medium settings. 

 

Resident Evil 7: Biohazard PC Performance Review

 

  

«Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next»

Most Recent Comments

25-01-2017, 15:05:35

Dicehunter
Really impressive seeing the Fury X performs so well.Quote

25-01-2017, 15:39:57

AngryGoldfish
What polar opposite results you found compared to Guru3D's performance review. Something must have been out of whack with their system or drivers as the Fury X performed really poorly and erratically.

It's fantastic to see the Fury line still hold strong in these big titles. After a couple of poor performance numbers over the last four months, I'm glad to see the Fury line pick things up again and remain competitive.Quote

25-01-2017, 16:22:28

WYP
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryGoldfish View Post
What polar opposite results you found compared to Guru3D's performance review. Something must have been out of whack with their system or drivers as the Fury X performed really poorly and erratically.

It's fantastic to see the Fury line still hold strong in these big titles. After a couple of poor performance numbers over the last four months, I'm glad to see the Fury line pick things up again and remain competitive.
The big difference is that they used Max settings, which is insanely VRAM intensive and I found to cause a lot of framerate instability on even the GTX 1080.

In my testing, I opted for what I called "high" settings in the review, which provided these results. I wouldn't recommend higher as it caused a lot of issues, especially on the old NV driver.Quote

25-01-2017, 16:27:01

AngryGoldfish
Quote:
Originally Posted by WYP View Post
The big difference is that they used Max settings, which is insanely VRAM intensive and I found to cause a lot of framerate instability on even the GTX 1080.

In my testing, I opted for what I called "high" settings in the review, which provided these results. I wouldn't recommend higher as it caused a lot of issues, especially on the old NV driver.
That makes sense. Sometimes I think developers include 'insane' settings just because they can, not because they need to or should.Quote

01-02-2017, 10:12:39

BigDaddyKong
Most developers will tell you games are designed to be played on high. Very high, it extreme settings are there to be used for screen shots, and showing things off. Not for game play.Quote
Reply
x

Register for the OC3D Newsletter

Subscribing to the OC3D newsletter will keep you up-to-date on the latest technology reviews, competitions and goings-on at Overclock3D. We won't share your email address with ANYONE, and we will only email you with updates on site news, reviews, and competitions and you can unsubscribe easily at any time.

Simply enter your name and email address into the box below and be sure to click on the links in the confirmation emails that will arrive in your e-mail shortly after to complete the registration.

If you run into any problems, just drop us a message on the forums.