Middle Earth: Shadow of Mordor GeForce GTX 970 VRAM stress test

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Jan 28, 2015.

  1. CK the Greek

    CK the Greek Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,278
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    GB 2060S,Gsync,3DV2
    You use in a weird way the power of words...

    First if you buy a car that is advertized to have 300HP you take it ONLY for 0-60?? You don't care about IF its 300HP comes REAL 300HP ? (and not 250 + 50 nitro if needed) If you can't see the difference between buying with clear terms and without, well you are one of these easy targets ( a duck dropped in the ocean) for "sharks" of ****ty companies (mostly "international" ones with plenty offshores..). Keep making them smile for future profit..

    WAKE UP PEOPLE. THIS NEXT GENERATION OF GREEN TEAM'S GPUs ARE ONLY THE BEGINING IF YOU LET IT PASS LIKE NOTHING HAPPENED.

    Get the point..? WAKE UP.
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2015
  2. Agent-A01

    Agent-A01 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,362
    Likes Received:
    898
    GPU:
    1080Ti H20
    Check any of the reviews of 4k.. Shadow of mordor with VRAM maxed the 970 has sub 30fps, the 980 isnt playable either so what then?
     
  3. ScoobyDooby

    ScoobyDooby Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,096
    Likes Received:
    65
    GPU:
    1080Ti & Acer X34
    I wonder how long people are going to drag this $hit out?

    Okay, Nvidia deserves a smack on the hand for not being entirely forthcoming about this "issue"

    And though I agree they should be held accountable so that they realize they can't pull stuff like this with impunity, but at the same time all I have been reading all sorts of nonsense, most of it from red-team fanboys who are chomping at the bit to keep this complain-train going.
     
  4. CK the Greek

    CK the Greek Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,278
    Likes Received:
    11
    GPU:
    GB 2060S,Gsync,3DV2
    @ Hilbert

    About that gtx970 never being "advertized" for 4K. In any newer Nvidia's video you will hear the 9xx cards give the best performance for 4k gaming..
    (for example like this one http://youtu.be/W1LQZI7c7Ng?t=8m41s 'till the end of video,though it's the only time I've heard those days that dx12 will be fully supported from gtx980...)

    it's not directly advertised and you can't -legally- blame anyone, however it's one of the smart marketing methods indirectly passing to a target group your primal objective. And most of the times Nvidia doesn't separate (at least has NOT till now) 980 from 970.



    as long as we read foolish posts, even from gtx970 owners.
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2015

  5. ivymike10mt

    ivymike10mt Master Guru

    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    12
    GPU:
    GTX 1080Ti SLI
    ...
    Are u sure u do that test corect..? SoM have some bugs on PhysX on...
    Also it might be some bad SLI optimization?
    And how it look when your set game under 3.5 GB utilization?
     
  6. 4KOLED

    4KOLED Member

    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    SLI GTX 970 EVGA FTW
    when gpu is using 3.5 GB it's ok i have 45-35 fps, but when it starts using 3.6 GB i drop at 20-25 fps and then 17 fps at 3.9 GB.
    Above 3.5 GB memory usage, GPU are around 99% usage, but when uses 3.6 vram gpu usage drops around 45% usage
     
  7. CPC_RedDawn

    CPC_RedDawn Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,792
    Likes Received:
    267
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX1080Ti AMP
    Then something is wrong on your end.

    I have zero stuttering in this game and I too use the same settings as you but I force DSR to render to 1440p and display 1080p. It stays locked at 60fps and never moves.

    No micro stutter, no jittering, it is 100% vysnced to 60fps. And no I don't have a gsync monitor either.
     
  8. 4KOLED

    4KOLED Member

    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    SLI GTX 970 EVGA FTW
    You tried in 4K ?
     
  9. Denial

    Denial Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,658
    Likes Received:
    1,880
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080Ti
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/8931/nvidia-publishes-statement-on-geforce-gtx-970-memory-allocation

    They also get 45 fps above 3.5GB of ram.

    http://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/cont...ce_gtx_970_4gb_strix_oc_video_card_review.png

    I'm sure at 1440p @ Max that's above 3.5 as well considering how ****ty that game uses memory.

    If you said it was stuttering, maybe I'd agree - but I think something else is happening in your case. Like every case I've ever seen where bandwidth isn't enough or you run out of memory it almost always leads to stuttering and not steady performance loss.
     
  10. JoeyR

    JoeyR Member

    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    4
    GPU:
    2x eVGA GTX 980Ti's
    I find it odd that a reviewer such as Guru3d has a hard time replicating the performance issues many are having(myself included). You guys are one, if not the most legit review site for hardware & my personal favorite.

    I got my 2x 970's on December 5th, and man did they tear through games!
    It wasn't until Christmas my better half bought me Shadow Of Mordor(if you haven't played it you should!) That I noticed some strange behavior(I figured it was poor driver optimization) Hitching/Stuttering on Ultra setting at a measly 1920x1080. I set afterburner to have GPU VRAM utilization & GPU usage in the OSD, and fired everything back up. Looking back, it always seemed to sit right about 3.5GB VRAM usage and sometimes peak around 3.8-3.9.

    I knew I should have listened to myself, thinking back to my GTX 570 SLI setup and how when the cards ran out of VRAM, games became a stutterfest. Sad to think myself & now so many others brushed this off this entire time thinking it was either driver related or another component. I know there are some of you that aren't very upset right now, and I'll agree it really is a great card still, but how about with future games on the horizon? Sorry to tell you, the world is moving forward, and games will only become more demanding overtime. With a few games currently out that can already utilize the 4Gb potential of the cards.........sorry correction "3.5", it's only a matter of time before more games hit the market.

    Yes like Hilbert pointed out in his article, we can opt to just lower some AA settings or Texture Quality settings. BUT! that 512MB of VRAM we were cheated out of could have made the difference in having to do so. It's just sickening to see how all this came to be. In staid of the old days(I think back to the Geforce FX series & Radeon 9700/9800 series) where Nvidia would use driver "hacks" to reduce image quality to return better performance(still failed to outpace the 9800 XT). Nope this time by, we actually dished out our hard earned cash for hardware that is "non-fixable".

    Sorry for the rant. Just one super bummed multiple GTX 970 owner, that feels a little cheated.
     

  11. GoldenTiger

    GoldenTiger Banned

    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0


    Did a little testing of my own using afterburner's frametime readings and other monitoring tools... it's not FCAT but it's very accurate regardless. Here's what I got...

    (full-size link: http://i.imgur.com/PHaofek.png )
    [​IMG]

    So yeah, using SLI GTX 970's to drive high-res high-settings will result in massive, massive frametime issues, even if the framerate over a given second remains reasonable. It is basically an unplayable mess at that point when using 3.7-4.0gb of VRAM. If you can stay around/below 3.5gb of actual usage, which it does its best to do, frametimes are consistent and tight as you would expect. The framerate averaged around 38, meaning in a perfect world the frametimes would be right around 26.3ms for each frame.

    As an interesting aside, when finding my settings to test with I noticed it would literally, over the course of several seconds, try to work its way back down to below 3.5gb of usage if it went over, until I set things high enough that it couldn't and would just stick at 3.7-3.8gb+ the whole time. Otherwise it would fight and keep pingponging from ~3.4gb directly to ~3.7gb and back repeatedly before finally settling at ~3.4gb. That's probably the drivers at work, there.
     
  12. Denial

    Denial Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,658
    Likes Received:
    1,880
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080Ti
    Interesting -- I'd like to see the same test ran under 980's though, obviously I doubt you have two laying around but yeah.
     
  13. 4KOLED

    4KOLED Member

    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    SLI GTX 970 EVGA FTW
    I just tried 150% scale (~1660p) it doesnt use more than 3.5 GB, gpu usage is not droping like it does in 4K and of course it's more playable and fps are higher.
     
  14. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,555
    Likes Received:
    987
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    How did you do that when you have already sold your 970's???????? Hard to keep your lies strait?
     
  15. GoldenTiger

    GoldenTiger Banned

    Messages:
    116
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nope, I don't :p.

    Just to elaborate a little (copying another forum post I wrote) even with a similar framerate, frametimes get completely torpedo'd once you pass the 3.5gb threshold. For example that graph was ~38fps, but if you get below the 3.5gb mark outright with your settings a ~50fps gameplay has consistent frametimes with little variance, bouncing between ~15-25ms of render time as you'd expect, sometimes a little more or less.

    The ~38fps though passing the 3.5gb vram mark, however, ends up having times constantly going between ~35ms to 150ms of time to render each frame, with many spikes over 200ms. Crazy stuff. :(
     

  16. omnimodis78

    omnimodis78 Active Member

    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FTW
    The more I read about this, the more convoluted the arguments become. Again I state that I really like my 970. If I were given a choice to give it back and get a full refund, I would not do so, I'd keep it. But all this hate, is it coming from a real, quantifiable place or is it just that we're pissed at NVIDIA for how they (did not) communicate this clearly from the beginning? Someone neutral, please chime in.
     
  17. Loophole35

    Loophole35 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,555
    Likes Received:
    987
    GPU:
    EVGA 1080ti SC
    Okay so you still have them. Kinda feel sorry for the guy your selling them to. If I were to buy them I would not want you to continue to use them after a deal was agreed upon, but oh well.
     
  18. hallryu

    hallryu Don Altobello

    Messages:
    11,386
    Likes Received:
    14
    GPU:
    2x HD7970
    Time to get back on topic guys.
     
  19. Licaon

    Licaon Member Guru

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gigabyte GTX660Ti-OC
    Neither the original report, nor the nVidia update nor this test ever mentioned this as a DirectX only thing, hence my question and the link you removed.

    And yes, while a minority, OpenGL users (Linux/OSX) have use even of Windows only tests like this since we can buy the same card off the shelf, knowingly or not of issues that might arise later on our OS platform of choice.

    Also given the performance supremacy that nVidia still holds on Linux (at least) with their closed source driver, future purchases are going to be nVidia anyway.
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2015
  20. Mineria

    Mineria Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,859
    Likes Received:
    25
    GPU:
    Asus Strix GTX 1080
    Hilbert, it could be interesting to see this test performed on a 4GB GTX770.
    If you got any of those floating around could you give it a shot if it isn't to much hassle?
     

Share This Page