970 memory allocation issue revisited

Discussion in 'Videocards - NVIDIA GeForce' started by alanm, Jan 23, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. stevevnicks

    stevevnicks Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,440
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    Don't need one
    not at all the GTX 970 is working exactly as it was designed to work, I have sli setup with 3 x 1080p monitors and works grate cant see why people are moaning I only picked up on this so called issue today and Nvidia have already said its not a bug, its just probs the reason why this so called Vram issue has been elevated is probs only due to this unknown bit of software that people have been using its not an official peace of NVidia hardware testing program I know that much and has started these new fear threads .. I wondered what the fuss was about as my cards seem to play games just fine.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2015
  2. neo5555

    neo5555 Active Member

    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    2 x 6950's in CF
  3. Pill Monster

    Pill Monster Banned

    Messages:
    25,214
    Likes Received:
    9
    GPU:
    7950 Vapor-X 1100/1500
    You got DWM enabled and some VRAM is being reserved by Windows..

    That's why the results from this app are mostly inconclusive.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2015
  4. ---TK---

    ---TK--- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    22,109
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    2x 980Ti Gaming 1430/7296
    I'm not going to buy an amd cpu out of spite. Only way is if they are faster than intel. Gpu wise I like the way nvidia is going with oc, temperature, tdp, physx and cuda based h264 video encoding. I always buy the full gpus anyways.
     

  5. neo5555

    neo5555 Active Member

    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    2 x 6950's in CF
    Whats DWN ?
     
  6. rm082e

    rm082e Master Guru

    Messages:
    713
    Likes Received:
    251
    GPU:
    3080 - QHD@165hz
    Asked that earlier before I googled: see here.
     
  7. neo5555

    neo5555 Active Member

    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    2 x 6950's in CF
    Cool.. Thx.

    Disabled the service and ran the test again..

    No difference at all...

    ***EDIT*** All good.. Tried again after reboot. Getting correct result now. :)
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2015
  8. FrAnTiC

    FrAnTiC Member

    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Asus STRIX GTX1070 OC
    Just had a chat to live support
    Nvidia support: "This is a known issue and we are investigating into it"
    Me: "I saw on a website that this was done intentionally, how valid was this quote"
    Support: "I am sorry, but we can't discuss this as it is being investigated. Once our engineers have found a fix we will post it in our forums and everywhere"


    This is from NVIDIA forum .Looks like they don't know whats going on.
    And the other thing that bothers me is that if it was intentional why are they investigating the issue when there should be none.
     
  9. goranm

    goranm Member

    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gigabyte GTX 970 G1
    Because they are thinking of the least painful (cheapest) way to fix this. ;)
     
  10. alanm

    alanm Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,343
    Likes Received:
    3,449
    GPU:
    Asus 2080 Dual OC
    Because it was mentioned by different people with different levels of info?
     

  11. Pill Monster

    Pill Monster Banned

    Messages:
    25,214
    Likes Received:
    9
    GPU:
    7950 Vapor-X 1100/1500
    Well what choice do they have when this "issue" is being spammed across every major hardware site on the net by (the same) people?
    The last thread on this forum which is now closed, has had over 42,000 views. This is only one forum.

    My guess is they can't find the issue because there really isn't one to begin with... None of the claims related to this have been verifiable or conclusive.

    What is the point of contention here anyway? Seems the goalpost has moved a few times over that one......

    Hopefully we will all get some closure one way or the other.....
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2015
  12. VultureX

    VultureX Banned

    Messages:
    2,577
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI GTX970 SLI
  13. alanm

    alanm Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,343
    Likes Received:
    3,449
    GPU:
    Asus 2080 Dual OC
    I dont think theres any point in doing Nais (or vulturex) tests anymore. They all pretty much show the same thing on the 970. Only variation is whether DWM or headless mode has been used.
     
  14. FrAnTiC

    FrAnTiC Member

    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Asus STRIX GTX1070 OC
    I thought that if it was intentional the engineers would have known it already and there wouldn't be anything to investigate in first place.
     
  15. flexy

    flexy Member Guru

    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    Riva 128
    Do you REALLY think we had this discussion if there was only a 1%-3% performance hit?

    AFAIK, users investigated this and looked closer what's going on because they had MASSIVE peformance drops when a certain VREM usage was reached, not "1%-3%"
     

  16. IcE

    IcE Don Snow Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,696
    Likes Received:
    78
    GPU:
    3070Ti FE
    What GPU doesn't have a massive performance drop when it runs out of VRAM? Seriously? It's difficult to even max 3GB on my 780, I seriously don't see how this would ever be a serious issue to anyone outside of principle.
     
  17. flexy

    flexy Member Guru

    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    Riva 128

    How exactly is this official statement "news"?

    We know this already. Yes the GTX970 only has normal 4GB "on paper", if an app or game uses the last chunks it uses another method and gets slow. WE KNOW THAT ALREADY. So the NV statement just confirms what we found out.
     
  18. fry178

    fry178 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,879
    Likes Received:
    321
    GPU:
    Aorus 2080S WB
    i cant find anything on nvidias website or product box that says 4GB vram @256bit, or "useable" 4gb for "every" app.

    its 4gb vram, which the card physically has,
    says its coming with a memory bus width of 256bit, which it is.

    anyone that has a car, please check advertised mpg with what you actually get driving.
    is it the same or better? NO?
    sued the company yet?!


    nvidia acknowledging that there is/might be an issue, and knowing about before the product was shipped, is NOT the same.

    thinking that amd is not doing what everyone else (on this planet) is doing (that sells a service/product), keep living in lala-land...


    that said, i think there might be an issue. does it matter to gamers? probably not (at least within expected fps range).

    AND, as soon as i finished my building my quad (rotor), i will get an oced 970....
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2015
  19. flexy

    flexy Member Guru

    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    Riva 128
    The "difference" here the 970 "runs out of VRAM" when it hits 3GB-ish although it's a advertized as 4GB. Obviously it has nothing to do with "running out of Vram" since the 980 has the same amount of Vram and doesn't have the problem. So "it runs out of Vram" because of its internal architecture, it simply CAN NOT ACCESS the entire 4GB properly which is the entire point of this discussion. Why and how it does this 'internally' is [for me] entirely irrelevant.
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2015
  20. Thuban

    Thuban New Member

    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 980
    if this hardware failure is true, that's why the GTX 960 has exactly 1.024 shader cores (instead of maybe 1.280) and only 2gb vram to avoid this hardware failure :p
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page