[Regor245]

I know this is dumb but..

I think this is the way how it works.

Ok Example:

I have 256mb of Vram and 2GB of ram, but about 1.7 GB is usable

QUOTE

256 x 1700 x 1700 = 739840000

Vram x Ram x Ram

(i thought it was Vram x Resolution x Resolution... but it's not)

When i've tried that value, It fixes my popping textures problem.

Currently using "256 x 1024 x 1024 = 268435456" - game runs better and less Ram usage.

There is no texture popping when i was using patch 1.0.4.0, but when i've upgraded to 1.0.7.0. it started..
___________
I've tried this value

QUOTE

256 x 640 x 640 = 104857600

Game becomes worse. Textures Popping so bad.


Quote from Rockstar Toronto

QUOTE

Basically -memrestrict is telling the game how much video memory your system has available.  At startup we query the OS for this value but as some of you may have noticed the number can vary even though you are obviously not changing your video card everytime you play the game. Once the game exceeds the amount of video memory available, the Os finds it from somewhere else (system memory) and eventually this causes fragmentation and the game throws up an RESC10 error because the OS can't find anymore free memory.  The tricky part is that every OS behaves differently, and thats before you factor in other .dll's and drivers that also make requests from this memory pool which will be different from user to user. Using -memrestrict explicitly tells the game how much video memory to use.  The math is to take the desired meg number and multiply it by 1024 twice.  So if we wanted to declare 600 megs of VRAM: 600 x 1024 x 1024 = 629145600 you would enter the commandline "-memrestrict -629145600" Lowering this number increases stability of the game by capping the video memory, but there will come a point where there isn't enough memory to draw everything required by the game which is when you see "popping".

___________

EDIT:

Just ignore this thread/post. But i think i'm doing it right.

feel free to post if i'm wrong.

This post has been edited by Regor245 on Monday, Mar 12 2012, 11:31

[mkey82]

If you have 1000MB VRAM you're supposed to use 1000x1024x1024x0.8, something like that.

[Exxon]

QUOTE (mkey82 @ Monday, Mar 12 2012, 19:08)

If you have 1000MB VRAM you're supposed to use 1000x1024x1024x0.8, something like that.

May I ask, where is that 0.8 for?

[Regor245]

Thanks, i get it now. except the "0.8" thingy

[mkey82]

Well, I expected that question

Basically, it's an arbitrary value because, in a general case, you'll want to "limit" the available amount of memory to a value lower then the actually available. This should only serve as a starting value, you will always want to test with lower/higher numbers. On one end you should get more popup and more stable performance, on the other more details and lag caused by loading textures. The trick is to hit a sweet spot in the middle.

This post has been edited by mkey82 on Tuesday, Mar 13 2012, 06:41

[Regor245]

Ok thanks again, I'll try it later.

This post has been edited by Regor245 on Tuesday, Mar 13 2012, 13:05

[cornflakes4u]

QUOTE (Regor245 @ Tuesday, Mar 13 2012, 13:55)

Ok thanks again, I'll try it later.

Why do you multiply it by 256? It's 1024 and it's not related to how much RAM or VRAM you have.

You multiply it by 1024 (1MB) twice because the memrestrict value is in bytes.

Edit: Nice ninja-edit.

[Regor245]

QUOTE (cornflakes4u @ Tuesday, Mar 13 2012, 21:12)

QUOTE (Regor245 @ Tuesday, Mar 13 2012, 13:55) Ok thanks again, I'll try it later. Why do you multiply it by 256? It's 1024 and it's not related to how much RAM or VRAM you have. You multiply it by 1024 (1MB) twice because the memrestrict value is in bytes. Edit: Nice ninja-edit.

LOL ! yes i saw you we're reading this topic when i decided to edit it, because i did it wrong.

anyways, i thought 1024 is 1GB/1024mb

I think i got it now.


i've tried 256 x 1024 x 1024 x 0.85 = 228170137.6... works fine i guess.



just give me an example value if it's wrong again.

This post has been edited by Regor245 on Wednesday, Mar 14 2012, 10:00

[mkey82]

Like I said, the best option is to test, increments something like this

200000000
230000000
250000000
280000000
310000000

[fenderjaguar]

Have you guys ever even looked at how much VRAM is actually being used? This (1.0.7.0) is with a 1GB card, -norestrictions and everything maxed out including very high shadows. The game claimed it was going to use 1.2GB of VRAM and ended using around 800MB in reality:

http://i42.tinypic.com/280jmdd.png

And for anyone who thinks using nearly all the VRAM is bad, it's not. "-availablevidmem 3.0" results in using nearly all the VRAM (and more system memory) being used by GTA 4, a bit like Crysis 2, Witcher 2 and Battlefield 3 do, without any configs. None of these games stutter or hitch when they do this.

[Brainsick]

I assume the "-availablevidmem 3.0" command has to be used in conjunction with "norestrictions" right?

[fenderjaguar]

QUOTE (Brainsick @ Saturday, Mar 17 2012, 00:31)

I assume the "-availablevidmem 3.0" command has to be used in conjunction with "norestrictions" right?

I used both, but I don't think it necessarily has to matter. If you use the "-availablevidmem 3.0" command, then in the graphics options, you'll see 3GB listed, instead of how much hard VRAM you really do have.

"norestrictions" was just a way of unlocking ALL the highest settings on a 1GB card (and observing how much memory actually got used, instead of believing that the game really did 'know' how much it was going to use). But for me, "-availablevidmem 3.0" was more a way of making the game use more of the memory that you had (board memory and video card memory), even if I was using lower settings. For example, in real gaming I don't put any of the settings on 'very high' like I did for that graph, I put them all on 'high'. I turn night shadows off. And I have the draw distances at 40. And at these settings it used about 800, whereas without "-availablevidmem 3.0" command, it would use around 600MB with the same settings. Unused VRAM, up to about 950MB on a 1GB card, is wasted VRAM imo.

Also, process explorer never reported any usage of this so called "GPU system memory". I believe that these games differenciate between VRAM and board RAM, but the VRAM never overspilled into the board memory. The used mother board memory maybe some kind of other purpose, but I know that even if loading from the board memory to the VRAM, it must be faster than loading from the hard drive to the VRAM? So why people are so scared of using lots of it?

Hell, I've never even seen any game using more than 9xxMB on the VRAM and 2GB on the board RAM. These 32 bit games are large address aware, right? That means it still has 1GB to spare....

[Brainsick]

Well, in my case I do need to use "norestrictions" since my gpu has 1.5GB VRAM and anything above "availablevidmem 2.2" locks the settings for me, but thanks for the info, I'll give it a try, maybe I can reduce some of the stuttering I have. (even if fraps reports constant 60 fps).

[mkey82]

Well, where fenderjaguar fails miserably is at realizing not every system acts the same when forcing settings.

[fenderjaguar]

QUOTE (mkey82 @ Saturday, Mar 17 2012, 08:54)

Well, where fenderjaguar fails miserably is at realizing not every system acts the same when forcing settings.

I never said "every system acts the same when forcing settings".

There is no need calling me "miserable failure".

[Brainsick]

haha, well I do appreciate the advice, however it made no noticeably difference for me unfortunately.

[fenderjaguar]

QUOTE (Brainsick @ Saturday, Mar 17 2012, 11:40)

haha, well I do appreciate the advice, however it made no noticeably difference for me unfortunately.

So it is the higher graphics settings are locked out, that is your problem?

[Brainsick]

It went something like this:

"availablevidmem 2.2" -> "norestrictions" was not needed, but stuttering was still present.

"availablevidmem 2.5" -> had to use norestrictions but stuttering persisted.

"availablevidmem 3.0" -> used norestrictions, but for some reason it showed only 300mb or so of total vram available in the graphics menu; I think the game cannot use that much vram.

[Brainsick]

My stuttering is not the result of badly utilized video ram apparently, it seems more like a frame buffer issue, if I play with vsync on + fraps, in specific parts of the city it'll go up to 61 frames and the game will stutter, it seems like it can't cap the framerate properly and this generates stuttering. Pretty weird.

[luceberg]

I use the commandline -reservedapp 0, which in my case prevents stuttering. Worth a try maybe...