970 memory allocation issue revisited

Please anyone:

* Does this issue also apply WHEN DWM IS DISABLED?
* Does this issue apply under Linux, DOS, memory test on bootable DVD...ie. independently from Windows?
* Under what condition does the performance drop after 3.5G NOT occur?
* Has the memory allocation problem/slowdown a REAL impact in games, eg. in games that use more than 3.5 Vrem, eg. by using DSR, downsampling etc.

It's amazing that even reading lots in various threads there is no clear, concise answer to find to the above questions.

Gracias

 

some people are claiming that its a false statement lol so all I can say is my system is playing games fine I don't have no issues with the way my cards run, wait and see for official Nvidia statement but Im still happy with how my setup runs so if there is a a so called fix in the post to make it run faster then whooper if not what difference will I notice lol none as its running grate as it is .. so probs why im not kicking up a fuss to something I have never had an issue with or noticed to be honest. handy that other people do though because if its not giving all its got and more can be tapped from it then I will see it as an bonus ... and nice one to the hardcore testers for finding this problem if it is indeed a real world problem.

time to order a pizza and play with kali Linux laters

 

It's a segmentation problem, CUDA must use single segment.

 

The results seem inconsistent. Some people are playing games like Dragon Age and Watchdogs with 4K mem usage and no problem. Some folks are looking at Shadow of Mordor, Farcry 4, and AC: Unity and reporting problems when above 3.5.

Best thing each of us can do is boot up a game, turn on down sampling, crank the AA until the memory usage is through the roof and see what happens. The repeat that test in several other games. I'll be doing exactly that tonight when I get home.

 

Well i've been following this news as many others have to , and should ive of purchased two 970s ( i have the upgrade bug) which at the last minute decided not to , i think that i would of felt totally missed lead in thinking that one was getting a full 4g of fast ddr5 vram
and that 4g vram would stand me in good for running at higher rez, then to find out that i only got 3.5g of vram would have left a bad taste in my mouth . This is not a smart move by Nvidia and i suppose is going to impact badly on 970 sales until this mess is sorted out .

 

Performance drop would be SIGNIFICANT if this was a case, ant it's not! CUDA is a "problem" They must fix CUDA driver to be able to work with 2 segments!

 

I made a test, used a game to fill the first 2,8GB and than used the test to force it to fill up to 4GB.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1535502/gtx-970s-can-only-use-3-5gb-of-4gb-vram-issue/450#post_23453318

 

^^^^ Dude.. can u please rezise your image !?!?!

 

Resized.

 

the only reason why Watch dogs run OK ( by ok i mean around 28~ fps ) at 4k is if you use High textures or low, wich at 4k dosnt reach 3500mb even when overmoded with reflections/bloom all over the place

you can totally forget about it with ultra texture at 4k, the game tank at around 12-10~fps, at first i though it was because of Watch dogs weird ass ultra texture loading methode, so i tried to go over 3500mb with high textures, and of course as soon as reacher 3528mb the game started to tank fps around 20~ and lower

 

Thank you

 

This is pure speculation nothing more. Where is your supporting evidence other than hyperbole and rhetoric from people jumping on the bandwagon. Rhetoric like I've never seen before, it's quite crazy.

Has there been any reliable source to back up the claims of a performance penalty due to gimped hardware? I mean what GPU wouldn't tank when the gfx settings are pushed up so high you're using nearly 4GB VRAM, is that even doable on a single GPU in double digit fps?

The only games even really mentioned seem to be Skyrim and maybe Shadow of Mordor. In nearly every thread I have seen, Skyrim is the only game mentioned, and it's always the same...."Skyrim won't use over 3.5GB and it stutters which means all 4GB isn't accessible so Nvidia shafted us".

Skyrim stutters because it's Gamebryo, and everyone knows Gamebryo runs like a pig. Not quite indisputable evidence of missing VRAM....

.

 

So nvidia has advertised different product. Such a shame. Its great card but knowing that only 3gb in my case can be used is different story and i should not buy it. I would say to nvidia. I want my money back.

 

Whatever you're "testing" here, we know already that the LOWER chunks like in your picture are not a problem. I do not exactly know how the test works, but according to your image the higher chunks from 3GB-4GB are not even tested. And this is the problematic chunk we're talking about, the section from 3GB-4GB.

 

Okay I have a very specific question for you: Under the conditions you are describing, what is the frame rate just before you hit 3528mb of RAM usage?

 

Says who? The shills?

All these unfounded accusations with little or no supporting evidence are what makes the entire affair very dubious imho, as others have also pointed out....

 

That's really weak. If i were good, wealthy lawyer, no doubt i would sue them...it's false specifications.

 

Game was used to fill the memory to app. 2,8GB, than a test was run to fill the rest. You can see that total memory usage was almost exactly 4GB. Test was loaded after the game. You can see that it was performing around 155GB/s. SO if CUDA can't be "programed" to work with more than ONE memory segment (partition) it would drop after about 3,5GB/s. This test with game+CUDA test was used to test the last portion of memory segment from 2800-4096MB to check if it is a real 3.5+0.5GB or just 3,5GB +0GB and that GTX 970 can't use more than 3,5GB and that the rest is just a system RAM. As you can see it is not the case. GTX 970 may have a different memory allocation approach, but it is capable of using FULL 4GB at full speed, just not with CUDA applications. This is something that they can fix with driver update.

 

It's over

https://forums.geforce.com/default/...tx-970-3-5gb-vram-issue/post/4432672/#4432672

 

I have actually taken time and recorded a video where i showcase Shadow of Mordor at 2k maxed out on a GTX 970.

There is no issues when you play over 3.5GB of VRAM.
I feel like people don't even try things out for themselves, just complain because everyone else is doing so. I honestly can't find issues in SoM nor in Far Cry 4 when going 3.8-4GB.

Read the description.
http://youtu.be/ctZ8o27UbUk