970 memory allocation issue revisited (Part 2)

If you google around, you'll see that there have been stuttering issues with the 970s, especially 970 SLI months before the vram issue was officially found out. The reviewers just want to get the reviews out and that's that. They've got a lot of benching to do, so it's quite possible that they wouldn't pay much attention to some stuttering that'd happen in a few cases maybe.
When I got the second 970 a few months ago, I thought the occasional stuttering was because of bad SLI support, and had no idea it was because of VRAM.

 

Ive said this before to many people, I have seen upwards of 3.9GB too and had zero stutters or dramatic framedrops people are talking about.

It's even more impressive that even though the 970's are made this way that they still perform extremely close to a 980 and even beat a stock 980 when overclocked.

I understand people are angry that we didn't know about this before hand, and Nvidia should do something to say sorry for us 970 owners who paid for something we didn't get. But we still got an amazing card there is no question about that.

 

could be down to bad coding if plays bad with some games?

 

I just want to prove that i don't have issues, so people can't call me a fanboy

 

Ok.

Log file, Ram, Vram, PF, Frame time
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6iEHBJdGBREdXI4a2EzbjF4MEU/view?usp=sharing

 

then try what computerbase posted?

Well I saw that video and it had some really nasty slowdowns

 

I wouldn't waste my time trying to prove myself to someone on the internet. It's pointless.

 

BF4 ~3900MB VRAM, no stuttering at all :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLRxeYO976w

 

^^Yikes @ that framerate, think sli is in your future.

 

Dont you guys see this yet ?

http://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/2uco43/boris_vorontsov_from_enbseries_has_a_theory_on/

 

hmmm sounds alot like that old turbocache tech nvidia used to use

 

2520x1575 with 180% resolution scale = 4536x2835 which is 55% higher than 4K and that's with Ultra 4xMSAA, I'd say he's good to go.

 

BF4 doesn't count. It's not a poorly optimized console port. /sarcasm :deflate:

 

Hehe, i just used really high settings in order to force the card to use more than 3.5GB VRAM

 

I would not say you or anyone are wasting time fella .. if anything your showing us/those that your setup runs at 4gig fine, or Memorian is showing his system is ok at 4gig, I find this info very handy at the least, because I don't have those games to test and at least it restores faith lol

 

Thanks for the video Memorian.

However i'm not entirely sure that its a valid test. Fps and frametimes are already low due to the demanding res & scale used.

I think it would be interesting to see a game that is running on 60+fps with Vram usage in the region of 3600-4000mb, to see if that introduces stutters or the odd high frametime.
Not a test which is already a stutterfest due to running out of gpu horsepower.

 

Unrealistic scenario most of the time, games that run at 60fps won't use that much vram.

 

Clearly you don't understand very basic manners. No I don't understand German, why the hell would I? Learn some manners, then speak.

 

Yeah maybe, but I think that its those such (modern) VRAM heavy games where people are reporting the stuttering problem, eg Shadow of Mordor, Dying Light.

The most VRAM intensive game I have is Watchdogs. It uses 3400-3500mb of VRAM at DSR 1523p and SMAA, fps is 60ish fps and above mostly.

I can increased the DSR to raise the VRAM usage, but then fps nose dives and frequent stutters occur as I run out of gpu power. So its a meaningless test to me, is it the gpu or is it the slower 0.5gb of VRAM causing the slow fps ?

 

I have yet to succeed forcing my cards to use more than 3580MB VRAM. Tried FC4 and Lords of the Fallen so far.