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:
    1,441
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    Don't need one
    nice :) luckly I can live with this ram issue as I don't have any issues if and when I do I will alter my setting as needed.

    you cant fix something that is not broken .. how ever if the card was faulty I would return for none faulty one .. thing is Nvidia have aready said no it not broken its working as designed .. so I don't have no problem to worry about here. how it access its ram is how they designed it to, I was happy back when I bought the gtx970 and am still now, so all in all im still very happy lol
     
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2015
  2. chimchim

    chimchim Banned

    Messages:
    53
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    nothing
    Glad I didn't buy a 970. Resale value on those things must have plummeted :eek:
     
  3. stevevnicks

    stevevnicks Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,441
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    Don't need one
    why would anyone buy a new gtx970 just to sell it ???
     
  4. Rich_Guy

    Rich_Guy Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,390
    Likes Received:
    507
    GPU:
    MSI 2070S X-Trio
    Spotted that yesterday on HardOCP :D
     

  5. rl66

    rl66 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,292
    Likes Received:
    167
    GPU:
    quadro K6000+Tesla M2090
    it is not the same ram (gddr5 vs ddr3 or ddr4) and it is not the same duty...
    this timing doesn't mean anything for a GPU.

    it's like comparing a motorbike with a truck: both are made to use road, but with one you will be faster, and with one you can handle a lot...
     
  6. rl66

    rl66 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,292
    Likes Received:
    167
    GPU:
    quadro K6000+Tesla M2090
    to buy an AMD R9 290X lol

    ((it could smell like trolling...))
     
  7. Bansaku

    Bansaku Member Guru

    Messages:
    155
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    Gigabyte RX Vega 64
    I recently put together a new system with an ASUS Strix 970 4GB and was surprised that for AAA graphics intensive games like SoM, DA:I, and Tomb Raider at maxed settings yielded a measly 5fps average faster than a single HD7950 3GB. Reducing AA from 4x to 2x, and eventually FXAA, I noticed the gap start to widen, though not by as much as I would have suspected. No issues playing Skyrim or CoD: AW at maxed out settings as the 970 easily outperformed a single HD7950 by a wider margin (that was to be expected). But really, it's all moot when you are playing 1920x1200 maxed settings and achieving greater than 90FPS, regardless of GFX.

    Anyway, my point is booerns nVidia! That last 500mb and 208bit (effective) really does hurt performance. I noticed it right away before all of this was brought to light.
     
  8. leszy

    leszy Master Guru

    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    13
    GPU:
    Sapphire V64 LC
    http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Gefor...504639&token=F15627D89F47C4C96D59434C0DCA8AE1

    If you mean to play older games, there shouldn't be any problem. But don't count on something better than medium settings in Witcher 3, Star Citizen or other incoming high demanding games. Generally mainstream games shouldn't have to much problems, because they will have dedicated support in drivers, worse with games outside of main stream and all beta/test versions.
     
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2015
  9. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,510
    Likes Received:
    962
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    Really????

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  10. fisher6

    fisher6 Active Member

    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 970 GTX 4GB
    Nvidia not giving out the real specs (for whatever reason) is bad, no questions asked. However, the impact this "issue" has on performance is being blown out of proportion. I game @1440 on my qnix(@110Hz) and have no issues at all with fps or stuttering. I also think one shouldn't expect smooth 4K gaming with a GTX 970, I dunno about SLI.
     

  11. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,510
    Likes Received:
    962
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    Thank you. On the SLI front even the 980's in SLI start to struggle at 4K the 256bit memory bus is too narrow.
     
  12. mR Yellow

    mR Yellow Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,935
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Sapphire R9 Fury
    The 380x can't come soon enough. Always nice to have more variety to choose from.
    It might even drive 980 prices lower.
     
  13. eclap

    eclap Banned

    Messages:
    31,497
    Likes Received:
    3
    GPU:
    Palit GR 1080 2000/11000
    5fps increase against a single 7950? What are you smoking?
     
  14. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,510
    Likes Received:
    962
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    Yeah so according to him my 670's in SLI are 80% faster than a single 970.:3eyes:
     
  15. ---TK---

    ---TK--- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    22,112
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    2x 980Ti Gaming 1430/7296
    I`m not surprised by anything posted anymore, going to install the gsync drivers now brb
     

  16. thinktwice

    thinktwice Member

    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Club 3D HD 7950
    nvidias acting like this is not old. some of you may allredy remember the false marketing nvidia made back then when the 9600-9800 gt was released. Everyone thought that the 9000 series were better gpus, in fact the 9800gt was nothing else then rebranded 8800.... this memory issue looks like the same story to me but way more ugglier then in the past....
     
  17. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,263
    Likes Received:
    747
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    I switched from an HD7950 to a GTX970. The GTX970 flat out bitch slaps the 7950 is every conceivable way. The 2 cards don't even come close to being compared.
     
  18. ---TK---

    ---TK--- Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    22,112
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    2x 980Ti Gaming 1430/7296
    amd rebrands too, take off the red glasses
     
  19. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,263
    Likes Received:
    747
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    Yep. HD6770 = HD5770.... There was absolutely no changes made except the name and bios. Exact same thing NVidia did with the 8800GT and 9800GT. 9600GT used a G94 GPU, so not sure what the issue was there as it was not a rebrand in any way. The G94 was a G92 derivative..... The 9600GT just suffered from random black screens that never got fixed (seems kind of like what AMD has been going through since the HD7K series launched....lol)
     
  20. keromyaou

    keromyaou Member Guru

    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    EVGA Titan SC x2
    At this moment there are no gpus which can run all the games comfortably on 4K display. Those who already bought expensive 4K displays should be special people with deep pocket. Since 4K is very demanding, you should get the best gpus as far as possible such as 290X crossfire or gtx980/Titan SLI. Even then running games on 4K display is very tough. When I bought two Titan for SLI, I only had one 1440p display in my mind. The pixel amount of 4K is 2.25 times as much as that of 1440p. To me I only start considering 4K displays only after the performance of high-end gpus reaches at least twice as powerful as that of Titan/gtx980. In my opinion, for using 4K display adequately we need at least Pascal-generation high-end gpus. Under this circumstance I don't know why those who manage to get gtx970 class gpus need to jump on the 4K band wagon along with these special people. The performance of gtx970 is lower than that of unlocked overvoltaged vanilla Titan. You cannot expect even two gtx970 can run games on a 4K display comfortably as much as two unlocked Titans can't do it. At this moment 1080p or 1440p displays are mainstream and a sweet spot. Gtx 970 is doing a fine job at these resolutions and very cost-effective. I think that Nvidia did a big bargain with gtx970.
    As a side note, I understand that some special games require absurdly huge amount of VRAM even at 1080p/1440p reaching to 4GB limit without much improvement of graphical quality. Even then if you reduce AA settings, you can run games without taxing VRAM. If you want to buy relatively future-proof gpus in this sense, then you need to buy something with at least 6-8GM VRAM. To me, buying gtx980 4GB does not make much sense because of VRAM size. I would wait for gtx980 8GB at least or something newer. Buying gtx970 8GB (probably two segments of 7+1GB) does not make any sense to me either since if you want to maximize the usage of 4-8GB VRAM you had better get something as powerful as you can get.
    Those who bought gtx970 4GB version should have decided to get this gpu thinking that (1) they want to run games at 1080p or 1440p, and (2) just in case when some new games require a lot of VRAM they are willing to reduce AA settings a bit. Although the fact that Nvidia was not clear about the VRAM configuration of gtx970 is problematic, the performance of gtx970 is nonetheless very good for its intended purpose as far as I see.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page