I would be fine with the card if all the games run well. But with the shared memory in the actual generation of consoles we may get games that really abuse in Vram usage. If the 4gb starts to be necessary then the things may get more complicated. Also, if you use a GPU based 3d rendering program you'll probably need all the memory you can get. In that case a 970 is not a good choice.
970 = 2 x 270x here in Brazil, too expensive. edit: My processor would be a bottleneck too, wouldn't?
If you use your gpu for work then maybe you should buy a quadro or firepro card, don't f*@# around when it's your livelihood.
Nvidia was cool with that with the 500 series - I don't work with 3D, but I know people who wanted the 590 so badly because it was a monster for 3d rendering. Nvidia destroyed that with the 600 series.
So Dying Light is really strangely optimized. Never reaches 100% of CPU or GPU usage but doesn't always keep the 50fps that I locked on RadeonPro.
Yeah same for me too. According to those numbers my gpu is the bottle neck since it can achieve a 42fps. on all settings ultra. But I nowhere get close to that. 30-35 fps everywhere. http://www.techspot.com/review/956-dying-light-benchmarks/page5.html
That is exactly why I went for the 970, and it still lives up to what Hilbert's review indicated, even more than that. I did not pay attention to it's number of ROP's, I lifted an eye brown when I saw 256bit, 4GB and 224GB/s, but regardless, the card looked good under all tests, even checked a few other sites to be absolutely sure. So conclusion is that NVidia did not lie to me. They disappoint me slightly though by that not all 4GB are running at 224GB/s, on the other hand I'm impressed that 3.9GB can be loaded up on the card itself without that there is any visible issue with it in game. So they took a big step in regards to compression and allocation, which in a way makes up for having a slower 500MB memory partition. As for Jensen's blog, he can't go out now and say sorry, if people can't see that they are pretty blind about what is going on. Just saying, NVidia is going to court what ever they are proud of the card or they are sorry for messing up with the specs, and naturally they can not afford to loose face. They are not loosing a lot of customers either, most of those that whined the most got GTX980's now, and some still got one on their way.
I don't use AO, DoF and motion blur, everything else is high, 1080p, I can get 50fps in almost every place. But when there are a lot of zombies or I'm moving fast it goes down to 30-35. But the CPU and GPU usage seems the same. I can't overclock the memory to test if I get more fps because the system get very unstable.
They could of priced this gpu $100 more USD easily would sell like hotcakes, A card $200 less than a 980 is bound to have some shortcomings. This is why I believe they priced the card so low. 90% the performance $200 less. Think it might of been a design flaw with the vram and the maxwell architechure. They knew they screwed up and got caught. Now this "blog". IMO.
Yeah I don't get it. It would have been way better to literally say nothing. Whoever does their PR is like so bad, they make dumb mistakes like this all the time. You know everyone that hates Nvidia is going to come out of the woodwork and harp on something like that -- then why say it? Why give them the ammunition? Makes no sense.
Is that the Beatles on Abbey road in London in your Avatar? Yes they screwed up Nvidia, Naughty naughty.
Not only is he the founder, he's the reason AMD didn't buy them and overpaid for ATI. They had loans and BS ready to buy nVidia then Kim Jung Un here demanded to be CEO of the universe. AMD told him to **** off and the deal fell through.
I'm not really sure NVidia PR is entirely to blame. He should have had the brains to avoid doing something so stupid.
idd the blasphemy!!! :cussing::flame: Jensen, GeForce, Nvidia = the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit
