Results 1 to 19 of 19
  1. #1
    Dedicated Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    1,399
    Rep Power
    54

    Nvidia 970 not as advertised?

    Anyone else seen this?

    http://www.pcgamer.com/why-nvidias-g...han-35gb-vram/

    From what I've been reading, GTX 970s have 3.5 GB of VRAM separated from 0.5 GB of VRAM, with the latter being accessed at a much reduced rate, resulting in performance hits in games that use more than 3.5GB.

    To add to that, it appears that the amount of ROPs and L2 cache on the 970 are lower than originally suggested, based on a 'misunderstanding'.

    I purchased a 970 myself a few months ago. Not particularly happy about this, as I wonder how it will affect upcoming games that require 4GB for higher settings.


  2. #2
    PSU Technical Advisor
    Varsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    W-s-M
    PSN ID
    UK-Varsh
    Age
    33
    Posts
    6,379
    Rep Power
    91
    Items User name style
    I Was very close to purchasing a couple 970's instead of a couple 980's and glad that I went for the latter because of what I use them for (I needed the CUDA cores) but it is a shame what has happened here. I think it's a bit unfair to point the finger at Nvidia saying that they deliberately mislead everyone as in terms of business law they can be fined an extortionate amount worldwide through false advertisement lawsuits, no company, even Microsoft, is that stupid, there must have been something during the manufacturing process that had slipped past the checks.

    I would imagine either a driver that throttles the card to 3.5GB or something else, I would hate to imagine them recalling all cards as that would be a serious dent in their coffers.

  3. #3
    Dedicated Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    1,399
    Rep Power
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Varsh View Post
    I would imagine either a driver that throttles the card to 3.5GB or something else, I would hate to imagine them recalling all cards as that would be a serious dent in their coffers.
    Unfortunately it's said to be architectural - the 4GB is split into a 3.5 and 0.5 pools. Overclockers seem to be offering refunds, but then there isn't much of an alternative in that price range anyway.

    Edit: This was posted by an Nvidia rep over at Overclockers:

    Hi Guys,

    I’m Rick, a Product Manager for NVIDIA based here in the UK. Although I read the Overclockers forums a lot and work with the guys here, this is my first post.

    I want to just start by saying sorry, we messed up.
    We posted the wrong GTX 970 spec and we did not fully explain the memory architecture, and I get why you guys are so annoyed.

    However, I feel the GTX 970 is still an amazing card and one we are really proud of and I believe it is still the best card you can buy for the money.

    If you’ve got any specific questions I’ll do my best to answer them.

    Thanks
    Rick
    Last edited by Valefor; 4 Weeks Ago at 17:57.

  4. #4
    Sonata Dusk
    Nerevar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Equestria
    Age
    22
    Posts
    16,017
    Rep Power
    140
    Between this and Nvidia's $#@! for making g-sync proprietary (and as a result much more expensive) I think I'm moving over to AMD's cards from this point on. The GPU is often the most expensive component in a gaming PC and I'm not going to give up several hundred dollars to a company that acts like this.
    Last edited by Nerevar; 4 Weeks Ago at 17:59.

  5. #5
    Dedicated Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    1,399
    Rep Power
    54
    For anyone who has bought a 970 from Overclockers - they are offering a full refund on all 970s until the end of February.

  6. #6
    PSU Technical Advisor
    Varsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    W-s-M
    PSN ID
    UK-Varsh
    Age
    33
    Posts
    6,379
    Rep Power
    91
    Items User name style
    I've read most of that topic on the 970's on OcUK now and that's a real shame that this has happened. Glad I've gone with the 980's as so far I haven't come across any problems although I am now keeping an eye open.

  7. #7
    Dedicated Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    1,399
    Rep Power
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Varsh View Post
    I've read most of that topic on the 970's on OcUK now and that's a real shame that this has happened. Glad I've gone with the 980's as so far I haven't come across any problems although I am now keeping an eye open.
    Yea I think you've dodged a bullet by going for the 980 instead.

    I think I will return my 970 for a refund, and either go for a 980 or wait to see what the AMD 300 series will bring. Considering I want to play Star Citizen, I am not confident in keeping my 970 knowing that once it hits 3.5GB of VRAM usage it's going to start taking performance hits.

  8. #8
    Administrator
    Fijiandoce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Pacific Isles of Doceness
    PSN ID
    Fijiandoce
    Posts
    4,769
    Rep Power
    95
    I just bought a 970. IMO, not too arsed about the 3.5GB VRAM.

    I can't hit 2GB with my 660, so not going to worry about maxing the 970 any time soon. Does mean i can't live with the card for as long as expected though, but c'est la vie
    Sig courtesy of the_jim


  9. #9
    PSU Technical Advisor
    Varsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    W-s-M
    PSN ID
    UK-Varsh
    Age
    33
    Posts
    6,379
    Rep Power
    91
    Items User name style
    Quote Originally Posted by Valefor View Post
    Yea I think you've dodged a bullet by going for the 980 instead.

    I think I will return my 970 for a refund, and either go for a 980 or wait to see what the AMD 300 series will bring. Considering I want to play Star Citizen, I am not confident in keeping my 970 knowing that once it hits 3.5GB of VRAM usage it's going to start taking performance hits.
    With dual 980's I'm able to get roughly ~20FPS at 4k on Star Citizen which I was quite surprised about. Obviously there's zero optimisation on that game at the moment with zero LODs which means that the only thing that works in the options screen is the screen resolution, but despite that I think the next Nvidia series will be the one that will own Star Citizen. At 1440p though I Can get a steady 60FPS using only 2.7GB VRAM. I'd imagine the 970 should be fine at 1080p but I wouldn't want to say for certain as it's still in early development.

    It just looks beautiful at 4k so if you want to have downscaling then I guess wait a bit or bite the bullet like I did in the end.


  10. Likes Valefor likes this post
  11. #10
    Administrator
    Fijiandoce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Pacific Isles of Doceness
    PSN ID
    Fijiandoce
    Posts
    4,769
    Rep Power
    95
    I don't get the furore tbh. People were praising the card as being a performance beast. This happens and suddenly the card is next to useless? I don't get the logic, majority of people making a hubbub would have switched off it long before it hit issues
    Sig courtesy of the_jim


  12. #11
    PSU Technical Advisor
    Varsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    W-s-M
    PSN ID
    UK-Varsh
    Age
    33
    Posts
    6,379
    Rep Power
    91
    Items User name style
    The card is a beast, but what it is praised about is that it has taken the 780Ti and reduced its TPU and power in half. I was thinking about getting two 780Ti's initially but the VRAM wouldn't have been enough plus I Would've needed a 1000W PSU instead of the 750W I'm using at the moment - a HUGE difference! They added more cores too to boot and of course the extra 1GB VRAM. The next series is the one where the real power will come from assuming that AMD get their act together because Nvidia are clearly sitting on their arses just like Intel are.

  13. #12
    Dedicated Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    1,399
    Rep Power
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Fijiandoce View Post
    I don't get the furore tbh. People were praising the card as being a performance beast. This happens and suddenly the card is next to useless? I don't get the logic, majority of people making a hubbub would have switched off it long before it hit issues
    It's more the fact that its longevity has been reduced, and for people like myself that buy GPUs on a 2-3 year cycle that's not good news. There are games now that are nearly hitting 4GB, such as Dying Light that has just come out - some are reporting 3.5GB VRAM usage at 1080p. And that's now, what about in a year's time? And since 3.5GB is when the performance will significantly drop on the 970, that's not good for its future prospects.

    Then of course there is Shadow of Mordor, that required 4GB just for high settings (not ultra). A lot of this is because of the poor optimisation due to them being console ports, but this laziness seems to be common these days.

    If people were made aware of the 970's VRAM limitations, I'm sure it would have factored into many people's purchasing decision.

  14. #13
    PSU Technical Advisor
    Varsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    W-s-M
    PSN ID
    UK-Varsh
    Age
    33
    Posts
    6,379
    Rep Power
    91
    Items User name style
    Oh that reminds me, I never did get round to testing Mordor Ultra @ 4k did I? Let me give that a whirl now and see how it runs.

    Edit: Well after a good little run I was getting a steady 60FPS at 4k on ultra settings using between 3.7 and 3.9GB VRAM. Only when the game was loading the map for the first time did it max out at 4GB VRAM but once loaded it dropped below.

  15. #14
    Power Member
    mynd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Down Under
    Age
    42
    Posts
    17,153
    Rep Power
    166
    Items User name style
    Quote Originally Posted by Valefor View Post
    It's more the fact that its longevity has been reduced, and for people like myself that buy GPUs on a 2-3 year cycle that's not good news. There are games now that are nearly hitting 4GB, such as Dying Light that has just come out - some are reporting 3.5GB VRAM usage at 1080p. And that's now, what about in a year's time? And since 3.5GB is when the performance will significantly drop on the 970, that's not good for its future prospects.

    Then of course there is Shadow of Mordor, that required 4GB just for high settings (not ultra). A lot of this is because of the poor optimisation due to them being console ports, but this laziness seems to be common these days.

    If people were made aware of the 970's VRAM limitations, I'm sure it would have factored into many people's purchasing decision.
    It has 4gb of memory, that's all you need to know, and it works just fine, better than fine.
    Dont let the idiots who dont understand anything ruin what you purchase.

  16. #15
    Sonata Dusk
    Nerevar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Equestria
    Age
    22
    Posts
    16,017
    Rep Power
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by Fijiandoce View Post
    I don't get the furore tbh. People were praising the card as being a performance beast. This happens and suddenly the card is next to useless? I don't get the logic, majority of people making a hubbub would have switched off it long before it hit issues
    I haven't seen that. I've seen people upset because of Nvidia's scummy business choices lately.

  17. #16
    Administrator
    Fijiandoce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Pacific Isles of Doceness
    PSN ID
    Fijiandoce
    Posts
    4,769
    Rep Power
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by Nerevar View Post
    I haven't seen that. I've seen people upset because of Nvidia's scummy business choices lately.
    Admittedly, i've only seen it from scrolling down to the comments under the articles (biggest mistake i guess )

    But, I doubt it was done with malice. Engineers wouldn't have done anything to physically gimp the card. And the higher-ups probably expected really tight restrictions on what they could do. This set-up fell in line with the requirements and the company pushed it forward to marketing who are the biggest bunch of baboons this side of the milky way.
    Sig courtesy of the_jim


  18. #17
    Master Guru
    Bigdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Age
    34
    Posts
    6,770
    Rep Power
    76
    Items Baby ChocoboPlayStationUser name style
    Quote Originally Posted by Fijiandoce View Post
    I don't get the furore tbh. People were praising the card as being a performance beast. This happens and suddenly the card is next to useless? I don't get the logic, majority of people making a hubbub would have switched off it long before it hit issues

    It's probably more of a spontaneous thing for people that bought a 970, since they've used it for awhile and no it, they can get a refund and get the better card, with the thought in mind "if the 970 is this awesome, just think on what the 980 is like." It's an excuse to get their money back even though they like the GPU, but to get a better one. Basically a refund for a last minute decision.
    PSN ID: Intense_Peanut

  19. #18

  20. #19
    PSU Technical Advisor
    Varsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    W-s-M
    PSN ID
    UK-Varsh
    Age
    33
    Posts
    6,379
    Rep Power
    91
    Items User name style
    Looking at that article, despite the aforementioned use of only 3.5GB on the 970, it seems that there's no general performance issue at all when going over 3.5GB much like the 980.

    From what I'm understanding from that article is that applications are reporting only 3.5GB on the 970 yet it runs fine at over 3.5GB during certain scenarios. If that's the case then it's an overreaction on the consumer part exacerbated by the fact that the VRAM is reported to the end user incorrectly due to Nvidia's different hardware configuration.

    Having said that everything is still quite vague right now.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
vBCredits II Deluxe v2.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2010-2015 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.