Discussion in 'Videocards - NVIDIA GeForce' started by alanm, Jan 23, 2015.
See how cheap they go because of this.
Gonna pick up a second one?
we already said if your not happy then return it, coming on here moaning you cant return it is what the problem is so moan/whine on NVidia site about it as there is nothing we can do if we don't have issues.
to be fair about it, if I was unhappy about something I bought i prob's would of ranted a bit to lol but its just human nature i think lol ...
Doubtful. I'd have to get a new PSU as well. My 620watt SeaSonic won't handle 2 of these cards. I really didn't build with SLI in mind.
Would love to see a 3gb 780ti put under the same vram heavy gaming conditions the 970 had been through. I believe it still remains ahead (or equal to) the 4gb 290x even in the most demanding scenarios, incl 4k. This leads me to believe that if the 970 was kept purely as a 3.5gb card (by blocking off all access to the .5gb section with a driver or bios update), its performance would fare better. Again, the point being, why does a 3gb 780ti do so well vs the 4gb 290x? Nothing I've seen to date has shown the higher vram advantage of the 290x over the 780ti. There may be, just havent seen it.
But, if Nvidia completely blocked off all access to the .5gb part, it may create more legal complications as it is no longer the advertised 4gb card. Again, makes one wonder, has the quest for marketability (and legal considerations) made the card as a whole maybe less of a performer than a pure 3.5gb design?
I would venture to guess that the cards value on a used basis has been hit fairly heavily
bro, do you even 3.5gb? haha... Feel for you
hey guys, don't worry I'm still here. Just had meetings the first part of the day but have a bit of time free now.
I've caught up with the thread the best I can and, of course you'd expect me to say this, but the GTX 970 is exactly as designed and it is a great product. The best thing I can say is go and reread the reviews I'm sure many of you who have a 970 read before you bought one. That performance has not changed at all - it's a great gaming GPU.
If you haven't read it already then Hilbert has a great write up right here on what is going on.
hey, why does the 2gb 690 do so well against a 6gb titan even in vram heavy games at 4k? Dying light is a perfect example, the 690 beats titan at 4k. the 970 beats the titan too. I don't really see an issue.
Here's Toms Hardwares take on the matter ... which sums up how i feel about it to.
"I’m not omniscient. I don’t know if Nvidia knew about this and chose to keep it close to its chest, or if the company found out with the rest of us last Friday. But I have no good reason to believe the company is lying. To tell the truth, from a practical standpoint, I’m not sure if it matters.
That’s not to say I think it’s OK to be fed misinformation about GPU specifications. This is a subject I am patently passionate about. I think it’s important for the technical press to have the right information at its disposal when analyzing hardware and deciphering the repercussions of what goes on under the hood. Nvidia needs to work hard to make sure this kind of mistake never happens again.
But from a purely practical standpoint, this doesn’t really change anything for the end user. The GeForce GTX 970 remains one of the best graphics card buys on the market. It performs the same way it did at launch — which is really good. As such, we will continue to recommend it until there is a better-performing option for the price.
We can empathize with buyers who feel betrayed, though. Nvidia definitely has some mind-share to earn back. But to us the price/performance ratio trumps everything else, and that hasn't changed."
move on and enjoy your card is my advise.
I agree. But what I mentioned is for the vocal tiny minority who are claiming issues, and for the benefit of critical tech press who are trying to highlight the issue and the specific conditions that would cause it (extreme settings, etc). If Nvidia had designed it as pure 3.5gb card (no slower .5gb section), these conditions may not have been reproducible. And we may have an example of that in the 3gb 780ti (as well as 2gb cards).
How different it is now that not very long ago we were saying "no don't get the 256MB card, the FX5600 isn't fast enough to make the most of it". VRAM is the new Shader count, where it seems the higher the better!
It could be that the 690 is a dual gpu card and that extra gpu is giving it the extra power to compete against a titan.
Sure it is
Welcome sir, how is it going? Any news from Jen-Hsun Huang or Tom Petersen please? They will explain things to us also? or they will talk about this situation with us?
Cripes, is Dying Light that heavy? Not really looked into benchmarks for it. Good to know at those settings id be rocking a solid 25 fps!
it allocates all available vram. maxing out vram here, maxing it out on 3gb cards too. still, gpu grunt wins.
The trick with that game is to lower the viewing distance, makes the fps skyrocket.
Would be great if this pushes prices down then I can grab a second one as planned :banana:
Is this genuine Next Gen tech or is it along the lines of Unity.
How many Pixel/Vertex's shaders does the 970 have, thats what I want to know! Better be more than 8!
(oh and yes I know its been unified since the G80 )
Sure it is but playing it with high textures on a gtx690 = stuttery mess. Take a look http://www.dsogaming.com/pc-performance-analyses/dying-light-pc-performance-analysis/