Definitely tempted but will definitely wait for a 3rd party cooled design. Also wondering if a fully unlocked GM200 980 TI 2 is round the corner! The original cooler is OK, that's it. The only benefit is that it exhausts some (not all) of the heat out of the case. Custom coolers are much better at cooling and/or quieter. As long as your case has good airflow, they are a lot better.
Hehe grats to all the owners and the ones placing an order, certainly those are kick ass cards! If I'd have built my rig half a year later I'd jump on the train too with SLI. And full cover waterblocks of course Have fun with your new toys boys!
This has been done many times before. You need to understand how memory allocation works. Just because a game shows use of over 6GB on a TitanX does not mean it will suffer any loss of performance on cards with less VRAM.
yeah i just tested SOM and it never used more than 5.5gb vram @ 1440 highest settings only@ 4k the game used 6.3gb vram
According to people who have been testing on ocuk with titan x when using over 6gb although not needed games run smoother when using more memory. Kaapstad is the man to ask as he has done lots of testing.
http://nl.guru3d.com/vRamBandWidthTest-guru3d.zip Run the benchmark here To run it use the bat but first right click and edit. Options are vRamBandwidthTest.exe [BlockSizeMB] [MaxAllocationMB] So we change the bat line from Code: vRamBandwidthTest.exe 64 3072 to Code: vRamBandwidthTest.exe 64 6144 Block size stay at w/e Max allocation would be 6144
I don't understand how that is possible because there is no 6GB version to compare with. You can't generalise, every game using different resolutions and graphics settings will behave differently. For example, a 970 can use 4GB of RAM and not see any slowdowns in some games. The point is that just because you see VRAM use at over 6GB does not mean that 6GB is actually being used at that time. It also does not mean that a graphics card with less RAM will perform any differently if it has the same processor. There may be a difference but it is not guaranteed.
This. I did use way to much time trying to reproduce the stuttering issues that some GTX970 users faced when hitting the 3.5GB wall, I never faced the issue, neither did my frame times show the crazy jumps others had. Conclusion must be that it depends a lot on the rest of the system, like system memory speed/timings and so on.
Just seen this in the techpowerup review: "NVIDIA seems to have learned from the GTX 970 ROP-count and memory-configuration drama. The chip is wired to 6 GB of GDDR5 memory across its 384-bit interface and can address all of it at a consistent bandwidth. "
Thanks for confirmation, was wondering the same. Nice to see nvidia didn't gimp on ROP count and bandwidth that goes with it.