970 memory allocation issue revisited

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

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

    SuperAverage Master Guru

    Messages:
    247
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    Gigabyte xtreme 1080
    If someone would just write a program that reserves the first, say, .3GB vRAM, then run on settings of a game that show, without that program running, 3.5GB of vRAM usage, and compare performance, we'd probably see if there were an issue.

    The game would be forced to either use 3.2GB of vRAM and swap the remaining .3GB to system memory, or use .3GB of supposedly slower vRAM (without using the entire 4GB) and comparison could be made.
     
  2. cowie

    cowie Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    13,276
    Likes Received:
    352
    GPU:
    GTX
    no I just don't want to screw up the meat got to leave a little on the bone:nerd:
     
  3. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,809
    Likes Received:
    3,367
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    We have community made of people interested in HW/IT/Technologies.
    Their forums are just anyone who has graphics card or had it in past and joined.

    That being said I don't like many responses in this thread which had zero value for investigation. Were not based on any kind of logic. Or were attempts for derailment of this thread and to force closure.

    But I am very pleased to see how many of our members managed to evade trolls.
    How some went to create their own practical test methods/scenarios.
    And that we managed to keep quite calm in average.
     
  4. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    22,036
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    The same people that have been pushing this BS here, are pushing it along over there. From what I can gather reading all the crap they're posting everywhere, their goal really has nothing to do with the GTX970 memory segregation or a resolution to whatever issue they claim exists. It's purely to cause as much damage to NVidia as possible.

    When this is all said and done, I'm concerned either we'll see a big market swing towards AMD and/or higher GPU prices to cover additional R&D costs to avoid another card like the 970. In the end, consumers are likely to suffer as much or more than NVidia over this....and for no reason.

    There is no problem.

    With 8 memory chips, you'd have 32bit x 8 connections to 8 x 512MB chips. (For those bad at math, 32x8=256 and 8 x 512MB = 4096MB or 4GB) NVidia has segregated 1 memory chip from the pool. If they used 1GB x 4 with 4 x 64bit connections, it would have the massive impact that you people keep claiming. Since they were smart enough NOT to do that, the real-world performance impact is negligible when games are run at settings that the GPU is actually capable of.
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2015

  5. Twiddles

    Twiddles Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,155
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    MSI 2080 2190-7550
    I've been talking to my colleagues about this and there isn't an instant and exact method for measuring this. It would simply cost too much time to create something else that could produce reliable numbers. I might try something else later this day with loading massive 3D models and looking at performance numbers there.
     
  6. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,809
    Likes Received:
    3,367
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    Well 970 is cheaper to make than 780 was. And 980 is cheaper to make than 780Ti was.
    If nVidia has to reduce damages they can do it by lowering price.
    They can price them somewhere between 280x and 290x as 970/980 have transistor count in between.
    If nVidia feels like it they can put AMD graphics business on hold till AMD releases 380(x)/390(x).

    It says a lot about how good 970/980s are. And on other hand tells that nVidia is making huge profits on them. SO I would not be worried, their prices were never base on R&D.
    As nVidia stated before: Making premium products for premium prices.
    They will always base prices based on performance.
     
  7. SuperAverage

    SuperAverage Master Guru

    Messages:
    247
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    Gigabyte xtreme 1080
    Been running some more stuff this morning to basically debunk my own video as evidence of a 3.5GB issue.

    I'm not sure yet, but there appears to be some evidence that the glitches I recorded in shadowplay were during some rather high spikes in frametimes.

    While the frametime spikes do happen at above 3.5GB use, there is no proof that the frametime spikes occur BECAUSE of some issue with vRAM usage above 3.5GB.

    One of the issues I'm having getting good data for those more knowledgeable than I in interpreting the results, is that using the same settings in the same scenes yields different vRAM usage every time, which makes no sense to me. I'm trying to level usage out at between 3.7 and 3.8GB, so that more than the supposed 3.5GB limit, but less than the entire pool is used.

    I'm convinced at this point that the glitches on the video I made have absolutely nothing to do with the magic 3.5GB limit, because while the glitches can occur on hitches, they do not always, and vice-versa. That isn't to say they are not connected on some level, but I do not think one causes the other, necessarily, without some other influence as well.

    The reason I suggested that a small chunk of memory in the first 3.5GB, of fixed size, be reserved while another programs, such as as game, recorded to use exactly(ish) 3.5GB of vRAM at playable, is to compare behavior when part of that 3.5GB is required to use a portion of the segregated half a gig, to compare performance.

    I know it's been done to some degree already, but without a set, standard initial reservation, the results are too all-over the place, and cases can be made for either point of view with the same damn data pool, because it isn't standardized and is "open to interpretation."
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2015
  8. WoenK

    WoenK Active Member

    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Vega 64
    OMG!
    Just used process explorer and found out that even my HD7850 does not use the whole memory, not matter how much I fill her and how much goes into dynamic RAM, it does not use about 125 MB of the 1 GB. It seems every card has the problem

    :D

    joke aside, it is the only program I have found that even shows at least some of the programs using the VRAM in a bit more detailed manner.
    Fiddled with some programs and could never fill it to exactly 1024 MB without ever using dynamic RAM. It seems that even with nothing running some stuff is allways in the dynamic one.

    most funny thing I noticed was that some Nvidia programs were using some VRAM...really had forgotten to deinstall it after testing a 680.

    But buttomline....I do not trust any tests unless they can prove that they could make the game ask just for a specific VRAM and not use any dynamic AND do not have anything else using VRAM at all.
    I do not believe that is even possible the moment you have an OS running, there are allways some parts of memory reserved,no matter which kind and that even has to be like that, because it could not run otherwise. There will allways be some overhead.
     
  9. Essenthy

    Essenthy Master Guru

    Messages:
    415
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    GTX 980Ti 6GB
    @SuperAverage :

    you should always restart your game when swapping settings, espcially AA, vram dosnt get dumped properly unless the engine or the game switch to another chapter or something like that ( like in AC unity )

    when testing i noticed this behaviour for watch dogs and AC unity and FC4, now am not sure if this is specific to Ubisoft games or how the GTX 970 handle fast settings swapping memory wise

    anyways one of the worst thing Nvidia did was marketing the card as a 4k capable upfront, yes well you can get to 4k on old games and by lowering some settings for the newest, but most peoples got it wrong and are cracking 8x msaa at 4k wich is ridiculous and regardless of the amount of Vram you have ther's no way you'll get good results
     
  10. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    22,036
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    "Math doesn't lie"...and the math says this "issue" is non-existant as it's been described by all the shills trying to damage NVidia for their own profits.

    Does an issue exist? Yes. NVidia wasn't open and honest about the memory configuration. That's the only issue that exists from what I can see and verify. Aside from that, there is a single memory chip that we don't have access to at "full bandwidth" but at the bandwidth it does have, it's not a massive hindrance to performance. In fact, it's barely noticeable in "real-world" scenarios.

    On a side note, this is the first generation of graphics cards where people have gotten upset because games don't use every available byte of memory. In the past, it's always been the other way around. If games used the full available memory, people got upset. Can't see any explanation as to why that would change given the negative performance impact of completely filling VRAM....

    @WoenK - So, basically, what you're saying is that you don't believe we will never get a solid answer using publicly available software because of how DirectX/CUDA/OpenGL/OpenCL all work. Am I understanding that correctly?
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2015

  11. stevevnicks

    stevevnicks Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,440
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    Don't need one
    im still all a bit taken by this issue, what I don't understand is how come back in September NONE of the reviewers who tested the 970 came across this 3.5gig issue ? every web site raved with nothing but good things to saying including guru3d.
    didn't guru even do some 4k testing later or was that another site cant remember
    so why is this an issue now? and not back then ?
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2015
  12. SuperAverage

    SuperAverage Master Guru

    Messages:
    247
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    Gigabyte xtreme 1080
    Yeah, I've been restarting the game. Getting different vRAM usage results with the same settings in the same places.

    I do have two, in SLI, never expected 8xmsaa at 4k.

    Some review sites think that dipping below the monitors refresh rate is ok, I can't stand it, I always set my settings to never, ever go below 60fps (and since I use vsynch, never higher, either.)

    The only reason I got involved at all is because I don't like buying something that is not as described. The specs listed on an item are a large part of why I buy something. I expect to get exactly what was described.

    It's a matter of principle, I guess.
     
  13. Extraordinary

    Extraordinary Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    19,562
    Likes Received:
    1,630
    GPU:
    ROG Strix 1080 OC
    I can remember one member here asking why he couldn't get his 970 to use all 4GB vRAM before all this happened
     
  14. stevevnicks

    stevevnicks Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,440
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    Don't need one
    funny thing was.. I was going to get 2 gtx980's lol but I was taking advise from the 3d guru review among others and opted the 970 was a no brainer so didn't get the 980's got the 970's based on the reviews lol

    so was that a big mistake on my behalf not getting the 980's?

    and what makes me laff more is the fact I had 7 months of issues with my 2 r9 290x's that were exchanged for the 970's which too now have an issue LOL FECK MY LUCK lol


    why do I even bother lol I try to make the best choice from the reviews just to find out the cards I have now have an issue ...

    all I can do at this point is laff :/
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2015
  15. trandoanhung199

    trandoanhung199 Member

    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Asus EN8500GT
    Because it's a non-issue for 99.99% of users that have the 970?

    And then there's the vocal bunch that probably doesn't even own a 970, just register on a bunch of websites and regurgitate the same stuff over and over and over hoping to deter people to not buy 970s.

    I really do think they're pro-AMD. Sucks for them, the majority of people will still buy the 970 because it's still the best card for pretty much everyone outside of the extremely rich and the very poor.

    We'll see in the next quarterly report from NVIDIA.

    It's funny that I see many people saying they're holding off on purchasing a 970, and not that they'll switch to AMD. Speaks volumes on AMD-ware right now :banana:
     

  16. SuperAverage

    SuperAverage Master Guru

    Messages:
    247
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    Gigabyte xtreme 1080
    Probably because the issue, if it is one, is so well implemented that it's difficult to notice. For instance, any game that uses more than 3.5GB of vRAM isn't expected to run well at 4k on a single second-best GPU anyway, so if something ran like crap, it's a simple and fast conclusion to say "well, it's a single GPU at 4k on a demanding game, of course it doesn't run well", with no perceived reason to look into the matter any further, probably assumed to be entirely GPU bottleneck.

    However, with more people getting 970's for SLI setups, there is now at least the processing potential to use more than 3.5GB of ram with these games, removing, in part at least, the question of GPU bottlenecks.
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2015
  17. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    22,036
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    There was no issue to point out back in September, as no issue actually exists. It was fabricated by shills trying to cause damage to NVidia.
     
  18. SuperAverage

    SuperAverage Master Guru

    Messages:
    247
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    Gigabyte xtreme 1080
    Yeah, it was noted, but on a pretty small level.
     
  19. stevevnicks

    stevevnicks Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,440
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    Don't need one
    yea that's what I thought fella ?

    I just hope it turns out to be billy-bull-sh** because to return back to the shop and say "hello im back again :) these cards to have issues and i need to have these replaced" lol I think he would just tell me to feck off after the R9 290x mess around lol
     
  20. BladeRunner

    BladeRunner Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,945
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    Asus 1080Ti STRIX
    Because its not an issue... I run 970SLI, no issues whatsoever and I have upgraded from 780s - the difference is phenomenal, mind blown.

    All the muppets who are screaming "we must beat the Japanese at their own game" etc when it comes Nia "benchmark" etc are a waste of time and are most likely extreme die-hard fanATics from the 9800Pro era..puhlease
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page