Makes little difference what on the spec sheets as the boxes advertise the same way. Example
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=g...=isch&q=gtx+295+retail+&imgrc=YJD3jmqnJqTaHM:
-
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.
970 3.5GB 'Ramgate' - NVIDIA ordered to pay $30 to each owner
- Thread starter Dave2150
- Start date
Makes little difference what on the spec sheets as the boxes advertise the same way. Example
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=g...=isch&q=gtx+295+retail+&imgrc=YJD3jmqnJqTaHM:
Associate
- Joined
- 23 Mar 2013
- Posts
- 245
I'm going to say something useless to the discussion but... *maths. 
Soldato
The reviews always state you get 2+2/3+3 etc Blud, it's not the same as stating 4Gb instead of Nv should have fessed up instead of omitting the fact it's got 3.5Gb TurboNutter/500Mb SnailPace and missing rops.
Just so that guy doesn't jump down my throat-my 970 was a cracker-next one stayed intact and was brilliant.
Last edited:
Soldato
you can use all the ram on a dual gpu card when not in crossfire or sli, right? say, two seperate instances rendering different objects on each gpu?
A "communication error" between their marketing and tech departments. Oh look a flying pig
I really don't understand how anyone can argue against it having 4GB of ram, especially as the normal argument is, it has 3.5 GB or normal ram and 500MB of slower ram. Guess what 3.5GB + 500MB = 4GB.
Ok argue about the memory bandwidth, the bus width, The ROP count, The level 2 cache, being an NVidia card, not liking the colour green, but it does have 4GB's of ram.
Ok argue about the memory bandwidth, the bus width, The ROP count, The level 2 cache, being an NVidia card, not liking the colour green, but it does have 4GB's of ram.
In normal use the full 4GB can be used
Soldato
I really don't understand how anyone can argue against it having 4GB of ram, especially as the normal argument is, it has 3.5 GB or normal ram and 500MB of slower ram. Guess what 3.5GB + 500MB = 4GB.
Ok argue about the memory bandwidth, the bus width, The ROP count, The level 2 cache, being an NVidia card, not liking the colour green, but it does have 4GB's of ram.
It's not the numbers, it's the visual result when the cards enter that dreaded 0.5GB zone. A slideshow is a slideshow regardless of semantics.
Soldato
I really don't understand how anyone can argue against it having 4GB of ram, especially as the normal argument is, it has 3.5 GB or normal ram and 500MB of slower ram. Guess what 3.5GB + 500MB = 4GB.
Ok argue about the memory bandwidth, the bus width, The ROP count, The level 2 cache, being an NVidia card, not liking the colour green, but it does have 4GB's of ram.
I wasn't getting the use of the full 4Gb at one point bru, they capped it after the **** storm.
When I went 970 after the dirty scandal
, I found out that mine would sit just over 3.7Gb usage no matter what, but then a fair few months later it did start to use the whole 4Gb, whatever workaround they used in the driver idk, but they did get there eventually.Now before I'm told 'bs mines always used the 4Gb', gregsters 970 review exhibits the same as mines did-his never went over ~3.73Gb@1440p either, so it's not as if my setup was an isolated case, if yours didn't great but that could also explain why some didn't get anything untoward and that's why they are so vocal about it too.
And I suppose that's what Nv get in the end, (never mind what the red team think of them) the perception of some of their own customers are now seeing them as lying *******s.
This is a slap to the gaming media community as well as Nvidia. They have a particular role in calling out anti consumer behaviour, which is rife in PC hardware, particularly in the CPU and GPU spaces. The media has failed to do that, and in most cases sides to far with the vendors.
I wasn't getting the use of the full 4Gb at one point bru, they capped it after the **** storm.
When I went 970 after the dirty scandal
Now before I'm told 'bs mines always used the 4Gb', gregsters 970 review exhibits the same as mines did-his never went over ~3.73Gb@1440p either, so it's not as if my setup was an isolated case, if yours didn't great but that could also explain why some didn't get anything untoward and that's why they are so vocal about it too.
And I suppose that's what Nv get in the end, (never mind what the red team think of them) the perception of some of their own customers are now seeing them as lying *******s.
Probably BS as i was told as it worked fine from the start and there was no driver etc that fixed anything
lolI should probably move along because apparently never was an issue. Means nVidia did no wrong. Don't claim $30 dollars and don't pass go.
gotta admit 970 was and still is a great card. shame about how it started off as it tainted it. Even more a shame nvidia cut corners with the card. might be why they sold it as cheap as they did.
Soldato
R7slayer stop making stuff up, it's pathetic. The card is compromised, nobody said it was without fault. Nobody said nVidia are perfect. Nobody said there wasn't a driver that fixed everything, i said i can't remember there being one. Seems nobody else can either.
I told you I was here if you wanted to debate amicably, like an adult. Thats clearly a no, then.
Trying to give us 4gb of ram instead of 3.5 wasn't cutting corners, it was an attempt to give the card more resources. In retrospect they shoulndnt have bothered and instead gone for a simpler 3.5gb card but we all know those specs would have put the card at a disadvantage next to the 290x. Probably why nVidia thought they had to try. Most of this I've mentioned in a previous post though, and you ignored that so..
Tommybhoy, why did 3.7gb become a thing anyway? The issue was passing 3.5gb and it turning in to a slide show, not 3.7. if youre at 3.7gb usage then you are at least already using the 500mb partition for caching, if not actively accessing it.
Nobody said they had 4gb use in every game, so why would you think somebody's going to jump down your throat? I don't get 4gb usage in every game now.
I told you I was here if you wanted to debate amicably, like an adult. Thats clearly a no, then.
Trying to give us 4gb of ram instead of 3.5 wasn't cutting corners, it was an attempt to give the card more resources. In retrospect they shoulndnt have bothered and instead gone for a simpler 3.5gb card but we all know those specs would have put the card at a disadvantage next to the 290x. Probably why nVidia thought they had to try. Most of this I've mentioned in a previous post though, and you ignored that so..
Tommybhoy, why did 3.7gb become a thing anyway? The issue was passing 3.5gb and it turning in to a slide show, not 3.7. if youre at 3.7gb usage then you are at least already using the 500mb partition for caching, if not actively accessing it.
Nobody said they had 4gb use in every game, so why would you think somebody's going to jump down your throat? I don't get 4gb usage in every game now.
Last edited:
Permabanned
This isn't the only way for the memory limit of a card to be exceeded and I've been saying that since year dot as you put it, The difference is I got laughed at for saying I was selling my 780 Classified as it did not have enough ram a few years back, The reason it didn't was because I used a lot of textures mods and today games are starting to do the same and use high quality texture files that use a lot more memory,
Memory usage is not tied to just performance hogging settings such as AA, Nowadays there's quire a few games that use the memory up through the size of the texture files and the number of games is going up all the time.
I own a games that I can run beyond 60 fps that stutter like a pig because the 4gb's of memory on my card has been exceeded and more games are being added to the list all the time.
Permabanned
Soldato
Absolutely nashathedog, I agree even HL2 cinematic mod will tear up 4gb of ram. If heavy modding is your thing then neither 3.5 or 4gb is likely to be enough mow.
Soldato
I never said it was a slideshow if you could read what I said objectively I think it would be easier to interpret, but I'll try and simplify what I said one last time:
Bru said there's always been 4Gb, in a direct response to that comment I said what I saw was that it never always had 4Gb available.
In known vram hungry games it was [email protected] for the game/up to 225mb for driver/os for quite some time, then all of a sudden the remaining slow ram was made available in the same vram hungry titles, the card started using all of it's available ram=you never got the whole 4Gb to use for some time.
Bru said there's always been 4Gb, in a direct response to that comment I said what I saw was that it never always had 4Gb available.
In known vram hungry games it was [email protected] for the game/up to 225mb for driver/os for quite some time, then all of a sudden the remaining slow ram was made available in the same vram hungry titles, the card started using all of it's available ram=you never got the whole 4Gb to use for some time.