• 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's having performance issues using 4GB Vram - Nvidia investigating

Status
Not open for further replies.
TheRealDeal said:
Yea before this came to light all gtx970 thought they had 4gb of full speed ram and going over that would effect performance. Now it's the case that going over 3.5gb is an option but not ideal.

Anyone defending Nvidia in this is not just a fanboi but daft as well.
Click to expand...

I do not think anyone would defend nvidia saying they are right in this, i think more so that a lot of people would never had noticed the possible performance issue but now they feel they got an inferior card from what it was last week.

I get the misinformed part, and i get the principle of feeling like they bought a lesser card but for Many people its a none issue as the card performs the same as it did before they heard the news.

If the card was sold as a 3.5gb card in the first place it would have saved face for nvidia but the damage is done now, would most of the people who own a 970 still have bought one if it said 3.5gb and 56 rops, I believe they would.
 
Rangerjr1 said:
You can clearly see that the 7970s are faster lol, it was a driver restriction obviously, and not a lack of card horsepower. Drivers is a completely different topic though, i proved what i was trying to prove, which is that the 7970 definitely is faster than a 680.

And i dont give a **** what Nvidia says lol, they LIE about their cards specs man.

Besides, even titans have a hard time beating 7970s in quadfire:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1360884/...e-valley-benchmark-1-0/4100_100#post_20010088
Click to expand...

why are you linking forum posts ? its not a genuine and respected review? also its still 7 MONTHS after the release?? come back when you actually have something worthwhile not 3rd rate forum posts about benchmarks run at weird and random settings
 
Harlequin said:
why are you linking forum posts ? its not a genuine and respected review? also its still 7 MONTHS after the release?? come back when you actually have something worthwhile not 3rd rate forum posts about benchmarks run at weird and random settings
Click to expand...

Why dont you come back with a 680 and I`ll curb stomp you with a 7970 and that can be the end of it?
 
thesmokingman said:
Why dont you come back with a 680 and I`ll curb stomp you with a 7970 and that can be the end of it?
Click to expand...

I`ve already linked GTX 680 review that show it was faster than all the rest - the other poster is `laughing` at how NVidia`s flagship from 2012 , isn't its flagship but a mid range card (although in march 2012 NVidia had nothing else faster on the market - and nothing till feb 2013 single GPU in the form of titan
 
Harlequin said:
why are you linking forum posts ? its not a genuine and respected review? also its still 7 MONTHS after the release?? come back when you actually have something worthwhile not 3rd rate forum posts about benchmarks run at weird and random settings
Click to expand...

d005c746de.jpg

Find a 680 that compares, I will let you compare it to an LN2 score because im nice.
 
Harlequin said:
I`ve already linked GTX 680 review that show it was faster than all the rest - the other poster is `laughing` at how NVidia`s flagship from 2012 , isn't its flagship but a mid range card (although in march 2012 NVidia had nothing else faster on the market - and nothing till feb 2013 single GPU in the form of titan
Click to expand...

7970 was faster...
 
Harlequin said:
I`ve already linked GTX 680 review that show it was faster than all the rest - the other poster is `laughing` at how NVidia`s flagship from 2012 , isn't its flagship but a mid range card (although in march 2012 NVidia had nothing else faster on the market - and nothing till feb 2013 single GPU in the form of titan
Click to expand...

The 7970 was always a faster card than the 680, its just amd limited the actual performance of it, so all those early amd users were sold a gimped card for 6 months, hmmmm ;)

Or Ranger just likes amd too much to be objective about them.
 
Harlequin said:
pointless linking anything in 2015 - from a card released in 2012........

the GTX 680 , when released was the fastest single gpu available , and the high end of NVidia`s model lineup

prove to me otherwise , from march of 2012 or gtfo
Click to expand...

The 7970 was released before the 680 god dammit lol
 
The Running Man said:
We know that now but at the time no one knew about the impact of the smm.


What's really interesting is how the reviewers have failed so badly and literally lapped up what nvidia said despite it being impossible. But not querying it.

for example if in kepler you couldn't disable an smm without disabling the rop entirely and the cache? I only have a non technical understanding of this but what do the reviewers think was cut back on the 970 to still provide a 256bit mem interface and 56 rops and 2mb cache?
Click to expand...

It has been 'known' a while http://techreport.com/blog/27143/here-another-reason-the-geforce-gtx-970-is-slower-than-the-gtx-980.

About the SMM/cache/ROP, you have it wrong. What was different to kepler was the ability to keep a memory controller active despite the disabling of its associated ROP+cache NOT as you are saying the disabling an SMM (or SMX in keplers case) taking out ROP's.

I almost get the feeling you would find a way to complain if you had a GTX 980 and you ever found out what it's architectural bottlenecks are that limits it's capabilities.
 
Ian Evey said:
The 7970 was always a faster card than the 680, its just amd limited the actual performance of it, so all those early amd users were sold a gimped card for 6 months, hmmmm ;)

Or Ranger just likes amd too much to be objective about them.
Click to expand...

They hadn't finished the driver re-write going VLIW to GCN. You're right though, the 7970 was always faster, especially clock for clock. Only a nitwit would argue otherwise... not pointed at you good sir. And who still uses anandtech reviews as a point of reference haha?
 
thesmokingman said:
They hadn't finished the driver re-write going VLIW to GCN. You're right though, the 7970 was always faster, especially clock for clock. Only a nitwit would argue otherwise... not pointed at you good sir. And who still uses anandtech reviews as a point of reference haha?
Click to expand...

Informed and knowledgeable people obviously :o
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom