I was thinking that Nvidia are gearing up for 12K gaming - AFAIK AMD GPUs are currently only capable of it. There's also some chap who has a three 30" surround set up and he was using over 6GB in some games (admittedly with 8xMSAA). Personally I'd have liked another 1GB of VRAM. Some games have come close to hitting the 3GB limit.
That's Nvidia all over though dude. I'm not ragging on them and being pro AMD again, it's just how it is. Remember, up until about a week back I was an avid Nvidia user (and still am !) but they just take the piss with vram. A while back (not at launch by any means) I got a pair of EVGA 295 co ops. A mate of mine bagged them for me from EVGA's outlet in the USA for $90 each with a 90 day warranty. Any way, set them up with three monitors and all was well. Then BF3 comes along and runs like total dog poo. I then found out that it used more vram, even on minimum settings, than the cards had. So that was them pretty much fit for the bin. Imagine how annoyed you'd be paying £550 each for them a mere 18 months prior? And they bloody did it again with Kepler. 2gb. BF4 uses up to 3gb FFS. What's sickening is that the 295s (each one) had about the same guts as a GTX 480, yet, without the vram you're screwed. I'll never take it for granted again. But Nvidia have always given out way less than AMD have.
