• 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.
Hmm I am playing Falcon 4.0 Allied Force with Geo Mod pack and ultra high res ground textures. I peak around 3.8~3.9GB Vram and don't take any nose dips.
 
I ran that bench on my GTX 980 (yes 980) and mine also dips at around 3.4GB.

Gaming though I have not had a single issue, the cards have been running perfectly when all 4GB of VRAM is used, and the cards have spent the majority of their time at 3.5 to 4GB of VRAM usage (about 3 months I've had these).

Playing Shadow of Mordor at 1080p with ultra textures is silky smooth and has no frame rate drops at all, that game with ultra textures permanently sticks to 3.8GB to 4GB of VRAM and I have put around 35hrs into it with the 980's.

Watch Dogs also runs fine with 3.5 to 4GB of VRAM used, as well as many other VRAM demanding games I have ran in the last few months.

Considering my gaming performance with 4GB of VRAM used has been flawless, I am completely ignoring this benchmark result.

Edit - Just though I would add that before I ran the bench Windows 8.1 was using around 450MB of VRAM.

GTX%20980_zpscoeilgmc.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've tried ESO, Civ5 on a mega super epic huge map, SOM and Unity, the highest vram use i've had was 3534mb.
The odd thing is a ran ESO at 4k with no AA and it used 3534mb, turned on 8xAA and it went down a nip to 3516mb, shouldn't it go up?
 
J.D said:
I'm confused. You say that above then you plus one this comment below.
Click to expand...

Nothing to be confused about

The performance of the 980s drops far more than it should if everything was working right when the resolution increases so I yes I think there is something very wrong with the hardware design of the 9 series cards.

Having said that I don't think that this homemade benchmark is working correctly as it is reporting that the cards are losing the ability to use their full memory. This is something that does not happen on my 980s, Titans or any of the other NVidia cards I own all of which have never had any problems accessing all the VRAM they came with.
 
Bonjour said:
Starting to go viral:

http://youtu.be/ZQE6p5r1tYE

Apparently in-game the glitches in the 2nd half of the vid were just stutters / freezes while playing. Shadowplay recorded the glitches. Apparently..

Seems odd to me tbh.
Click to expand...

I don't think people should be using FC4 to demonstrate a problem with graphics cards as it is not very good at the best of times. I actually bought the game to see how bad it ran rather than the other way round.:D:)
 
You have a 970? :)

I agree, no one should be using any Ubisoft game to get a realistic benchmark, as they're so badly ported games.
 
Last edited:
I wonder how this is all going to unfold... my second 970 is on order. I won't be cancelling it yet, as I want to see how this plays out. If these cards aren't using all the RAM though, either that needs to be fixed or they give you a card that does, or you get a refund.
 
From the 'reddit' thread...

"I called Nvidia today, and after a 15:36 minute long call the support agent I was speaking to confirmed that they /ARE/ aware of the issue, apparently it's a Driver/Firmware issue too, and they're working on something to fix it."
 
Legend, your posts in this thread are pretty cringworthy. you keep banging on about class action lawsuits and this costing nvidia millions and WE HAVE RIGHTS WE WANT OUR 4GB NOW!.

remember when we all took our iPhones and galaxys back because the operating systms used 40% of the available storage? No? that's because nobody did. What makes you think you have any more 'rights' now?

Don't get me wrong, i'm with you as far as hoping they can fix it, because yeah i really want that last 400mb or so, but if they dont then, well, you don't have much of a case against them.
 
james.miller said:
Legend, your posts in this thread are pretty cringworthy. you keep banging on about class action lawsuits and this costing nvidia millions and WE HAVE RIGHTS WE WANT OUR 4GB NOW!.

remember when we all took our iPhones and galaxys back because the operating systms used 40% of the available storage? No? that's because nobody did. What makes you think you have any more 'rights' now?

Don't get me wrong, i'm with you as far as hoping they can fix it, because yeah i really want that last 400mb or so, but if they dont then, well, you don't have much of a case against them.
Click to expand...

I am starting to think this is all getting blown out of proportion.

If I am using one or two cards I don't think I could find much that can use more than 3.5gb on a regular basis.

I also think anyone who thinks they have got a case against NVidia have got no chance. The reason I say this is I don't think NVidia have made any claims which are untrue. The 970 does have 4gb of VRAM and it does have a 256bit bus, the problem seems to be how the card uses these, something that NVidia have made no claims or promises about.
 
james.miller said:
Don't get me wrong, i'm with you as far as hoping they can fix it, because yeah i really want that last 400mb or so, but if they dont then, well, you don't have much of a case against them.
Click to expand...
You are bang wrong with that statement. I hope they can fix it too, but if it's hardware and unfixable, I don't think you're aware how serious this is. A 12.5% (or more) reduction in memory that you paid for? Are you seriously saying no-one has a case? Come on. Your iPhone example is absurd and has no similarity to this whatsoever.

I'll sell you an 8GB card then. I'll stick some 8GB RAM chips on there, but you can't use them. You want your money back? Sorry, the RAM is on there, you don't have a case, goodbye. Ridiculous. The fact the card has 4GB is irrelevant if you can't use 4GB.

All this aside, I have a sneaking suspicion this will be fixable with firmware, so hopefully there will be a happy ending.
 
Legend said:
From the 'reddit' thread...

"I called Nvidia today, and after a 15:36 minute long call the support agent I was speaking to confirmed that they /ARE/ aware of the issue, apparently it's a Driver/Firmware issue too, and they're working on something to fix it."
Click to expand...


That's sounds totally plausible. After a bajillion cards sold... Oops. It reads like lip service though.
 
james.miller said:
Legend, your posts in this thread are pretty cringworthy. you keep banging on about class action lawsuits and this costing nvidia millions and WE HAVE RIGHTS WE WANT OUR 4GB NOW!.
Click to expand...
I'm not banging on about lawsuits, or suggesting such a drastic course of action (I actually think that would be mad), I merely made the point that it wouldn't be surprising, if this turns out to be an unfixable issue (not that I think it will)... and such an action would cost Nvidia millions. I am not demanding anything, but I am VERY MUCH of the view, and not alone in this, that you should get what you pay for. Maybe you're OK with getting less though, which is your prerogative of course.
 
I just realised something...

If the 970's memory problem was due to some reason of how it was cut down from the 980...what about the new 960? I mean if they were cut down using the same method, would they also potentially have the problem of memory bandwidth taking a dive, when memory usage exeed 87.5% of the total capacity (1.75GB)?
 
ye that was mentioned earlier in the thread, kaap can test for us! :)
in happier news jimmy has released a new video!! <3
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom