-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Jen-Hsun On GeForce GTX 970
- Thread starter Gregster
- Start date
Dont be ignorant, there's still 4gb there, its different in the way its accessed, thats all.
Would you say it's superior?
I've never thought that to be honest, why ?
It's a bit like selling a car as a four door vehicle, except when you buy the car you realise that one of the four doors is only half the size of the others, wrapped in bard wire and coated with dog faeces.
"Oh sorry, our marketing team didn't communicate very well with our technical team. But don't worry, You still get four doors."
Of course there's 4GB - that's not in question. My point was that up to phrasing would allow for the reduced speed access to the 500MB chunk at the end without having to field silly claims about lying etc.
If it was as siple as that, there wouldn't be an issue, the 970 non unified vram allocation-it's like Hussein Bolt doing a Triathlon different-fast-sllllllllllllllooooooooooooowwwwwwwww-fast-sllllllllllllllooooooooooooowwwwwwwww.
Dont be ignorant.
Or it is like buying a 5 door car where the 5 door is for the boot.
Or buying a Hard drive that has a rated read/write speed yet on the outside f the patter you don't get anywhere near that.
Or a car that has a rated 0-60 time that is impossible once there is a second person in the car.
There is 4gB of memory that is all fully accessible in the 970, just that 12% of it is not as fast as 88% of the rest, and it is still faster than pulling data from system ram. So yes, there is the bonus of an extra 512Mb of memory that can still be extremely useful and makes the cards faster than if that memory was missing or locked out.
If it was as siple as that, there wouldn't be an issue, the 970 non unified vram allocation-it's like Hussein Bolt doing a Triathlon different-fast-sllllllllllllllooooooooooooowwwwwwwww-fast-sllllllllllllllooooooooooooowwwwwwwww.
Dont be ignorant.
Terrible analogy. Lambchop is right, no matter how you see it. It has 4GB and 0.5GB runs at a slower rate. It is still the same great card it was prior to this news.
The "up to" phrasing is very confusing though because it is wrong. It isn't up to 4gb, it is 4GN, always, without any constraint on the amount. Up to would indicate there are some circumstances where 4GB isn't accessible, that is never the case.
What might be better would be to change the bandwidth numbers, so multiply the max BW by 0.88 and add 0.12* the bandwidth of the last 12%.
But even that would be misleading because unless a game is accessing that last 12% then the actual bandwidth in the peak bandwidth.
The only real fair ware to judge the card is to look at its real world performance, both with < 3.5Gb and > 3.5Gb. That is exactly how most people purchased the card, they liked the performance they saw.
What is under the hood is largely irrelevant form a consumer perspective. Its like the whole 256bit vs 512bit memory - what matters is performance not internal design decisions. Does anyone care what the circuit diagram for one of the shades look like, what the design of each transition is? The exact capacitance of one of the power supply capacitors? No, you care about performance in the real world.
It runs so slow nvidia are actively telling games not to access it so yeah in reality you bought an 4GB card but only really get to use 3.5gb of it.
It's definitely not the same great card when owners of 970s are affected by the dodgy vram implementation.
It's definitely not the same great card when owners of 970s are affected by the dodgy vram implementation.
Talking about the 290X should I launch a law suit against AMD and Asus as 2 of my cards have Elpida and 2 have Hynix meaning the performance is different. The performance hit between the two types of VRAM is far greater than anything that 970 owners experience.
Rubbish lol
If we use your example it would be more like selling a 4 door vehicle where one of the doors opens very slightly slower than the others.
Did you not notice that before you bought it ?
If it was as siple as that, there wouldn't be an issue, the 970 non unified vram allocation-it's like Hussein Bolt doing a Triathlon different-fast-sllllllllllllllooooooooooooowwwwwwwww-fast-sllllllllllllllooooooooooooowwwwwwwww.
Dont be ignorant.
Thats not what we were talking about the previous guy said 'upto 4gb memory' - there is 4gb memory there. It really is that simple. Now if you want to talk about hos fast sloow or whatever that is, thats a different debate to what I replied to orginally.
No it was not
The boxes are identical and it does not mention which type of memory is being used.
As all 4 cards were bought together and are the same model it would be fair to expect the same memory.
If AIB partners are allowed to use different memory it should state what type is in use on the box so the buyer can make an informed choice.
Anyone up for a class action, come on guys who wants to sue AMD !!!
Hang on wait AMD are broke forget it lol.
This is actually a very good point. AMDMatt even stated the difference can be 1000 points in 3DFirestrike and that is both at the same clocks. That is quite a big difference to me.
It doesn't detract from nVidia being wrong but it does show that the differences between AMD cards are a lottery and it shouldn't be that way. It should clearly state what memory is used for each card and not left in the lap of the God's which you get.
Last edited:
a Big difference? its 1%?
Sorry, it should have been 1000 points. I will edit my post to save confusion.