970 memory allocation issue revisited

Exactly, and that's why I'm saying discounted upgrade. It's just an option and an idea. Many people who opt for the refund option may then decide to not stay loyal to the brand and switch over to AMD. There's no equivalent full 4GB card at that price segment offered by Nvidia. I'm certainly not looking for a handout, as I love my GTX970. I'm just putting something on the table that could result in a dissatisfied customer remaining loyal to the brand. I think this really hurts SLI owners and the prospective 970 SLI buyers the most tbh.

 

Your comment is a bit shortsighted

Might be 10% now, and 50% in games upcoming in 1-2 years.
It's not about not having 4GB, its about wrong alocation and massive drop in performance@3.5GB level. And the games will eat more, believe me.

Not everybody changes the card every 6 months.

Cheers!

 

Agree. And in the end of the day, is way better for nVIDIA to keep the costumer than loose it for AMD. Multiply this for "who-knows-how-many" unhappy costumers (GTX 970 sold a lot more than 100 000 already, I am sure), and we start to grasp the magnitude of the sums in question.
From NVIDIA's perspective, is a lot better to loose $100 in each GTX 980 than loose all $329 of the GTX 970s and the costumers!
Just saying

// EDIT
I am one of the GTX 970 SLi "wannabes". I'm not interested in refunds.

 

Yes, because future games will need more VRAM than current benches :nerd:

 

And if frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their ass on the ground every time they jumped.

We don't live in a world of IF here. All the benches I've seen any issue encountered on the 970 shows up proportionately on the 980.

 

yeah, that's why we see 2gb gtx 690 beating a 6gb titan in vram hungry games, right?

 

what are you going on about ? the gtx970 has 4 gig ram this has be talked about pls move on

this ram bs is moot (or mute even) these future games you/people talk of don't even exist so you wont know how they run on any GFX

 

Well I guess they all look the same if you ignore frametimes and the 970s stubborn persistence to stick to 3.5GB as much as possible. It's difficult to tell what future and more demanding games will expose in the difference between the 970 and 980. That's what everyone is worried about.

 

Pure speculation.

No data available yet that indicates it will be so. Quite on the contrary. GTX 970 seams to be working as intended; it uses all 4GB when needs without performance degradation. More data needed to confirm this, of course.

 

Precisely. I don't have a tree with golden leaves or a magic basket full of money that they never end. I think and read carefully before buying something so I hate when I feel a sense of being fooled.

 

The average frametime is unplayable to begin with your point is moot.

 

I would of updated these puppies in 2 years anyway.

oh that is if I have the cash spare if not, guess what I will do ? turn down the settings a little like I have always done with every gfx card I've owned.

 

The last test of mine about this issue, users are ignorant, so don't have any reason to research more (my old post here with first test i made):
Wrote another test to check how that slow 0.5 gb memory works and again it's the same thing which driver do for a long time, that memory is stored in RAM instead of VRAM, that's why it slow. Basically, this is standart behavior for the most videocards on the market (vram is physical vram + a bit ram). What it means on practice compared to another videocards? GTX 970 have 3.5 Gb of VRAM. What i see in articles with explanation from NVidia is half-lie and of course casual people are incompenent and better to not listen to them. I don't think it's something horrible to loose 0.5 gb, but it's bad that NVidia hide such information (my own videocard with 2 gb or vram have access to 2.5 gb and nobody annonced it as 2.0 fast and 0.5 slow).

PS: i'm working as pro 3d developer more than 15 years in game industry and you freaks here trying to troll me.

 

and can you think of the benefit? they have insured people will choose the top of the line cards for generations.

 

Apples and oranges
GTX 970 and 980 should have the exact same memory specs using the same GM204 chip. Just different shader/SM counts, as advertised by NVidia.

 

nice PC spec you have there fella ... just like to add why don't I have this issue then ?

 

While I can agree with that in part. They most likely did that to make the performance difference between the 970 and 980 larger. Think of the performance difference of the 670 and 680. If you set the 670 base and boost clock to reference 680 and bumped the memory to 6200Mhz effective and you have 680 performance.

 

another argument that annoys me is people keep saying the gtx970 wont be able to play future games, its not future proof ?? umm nothing is future proof ..

do you think all the gtx680 owners are still playing new games maxed settings etc?

do some of these people think they got a gtx970 and will be able to play any game at max setting for ever or something?

 

I'm not worried at all.

in the very near future, say the next 6-12 months, the 980 will get spanked silly by new 20nm cards anyway so yeah, it really doesn't matter.

 

I can tell you for certain I can't max out games now so yeah the "future proofing" argument is a moot point IMO.