• 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.
nothing new said but im posting bcos it talks about homeworld remastered :)
which ive been waiting on! i loved that game, but the multiplayer was bit boring

 
“We posted stats. We didn’t properly explain the memory architecture. We messed up. We never intended to deceive anyone but our best intentions be damned you all got information that you thought you could trust and made decisions based on that.

We screwed up.

But, with that said, you feel different. You feel deceived and maybe you even feel like you don’t have any options. You do.

If you don’t want the card now, knowing what you know, you should return it. Get a refund or an exchange. You should do what will give you the best gaming experience possible and if you need help to get that done let me know.”
Click to expand...


http://gamingtheater.net/2015/01/nvidia-false-advertisement-we-messed-up/
 
Marine-RX179 said:
Yea I do recall seeing people mentioning having stuttering issue even way before those whole 3.5GB+512MB memory thing surfaced, but some Nvidia "users" helpfully reassuring them it's just result of poor drivers of late, or Ubisoft games bring POS...
Click to expand...
This has sorta been my line of thinking since i got my card.

Got one in 1st/2nd week,noticed with quite a few games i played i was having problems which i just attributed to 'driver issues'.Now im not so sure.

Everygame i had problems with are games that push upto and past the 3.5gb mark.(although thats not something i considered relevant till now)

Of the 3 games i had the most issues with Titanfall/Arma3/FC4

Titanfall seems to run flawlessly finally after the December driver update.

Arma3 crashes a lot still(Nvidia driver crashes,not generic arma crashes)

FC4 i just gave up on :/

These are the only games i really played that actually push vram since i got the 970.Most the games i been waiting for got delayed to this year :(
 
Gibbo said:
First off, NVIDIA neither Etailors advertised ROPS. NVIDIA advertised bandwidth which is exactly what the card can deliver. The card is not miss-advertised.

Just to clear it up, if the card had more ROPs, it would not offer any more performance, so people need to drop the ROPs, it was never advertised as such and even if it had more it would not perform any faster or better.

The only issue is the way the memory is addressed, it has 4GB of RAM, it can use 4GB of RAM, it is how it is used, for all we know this could be fixable, but we don't know, we, me, you and everyone else is not NVIDIA, this could just be a driver/game issue.

If you think the 970 is not for you and you don't want to spend more than £300 then check out the 290X they do offer similar performance or very close too and we do have some good deals on them from £250. :)
Click to expand...

Although OcUK are one of the better Companies out there, I don't relay like what has been said in the above post.

I posted something along the lines of this a little earlier in this Thread but i guess it got lost and I wasn't that sure if I should post it again as I feel a little bad about doing so. So, please be kind.

What I'm going to say below is open to interpretation, so please read it as is and make your own minds up.


The Card does have 4G VRAM, that is true and we are being told that it has not been miss-represented. But, NVIDIA (along with all the etailers I've checked) out there list the following Spec for that 4G of VRAM:

NVIDIA's Site : http://www.geforce.co.uk/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-970/specifications

GTX 970 Memory Specs:
7.0 Gbps Memory Clock
4 GB Standard Memory Config
GDDR5 Memory Interface
256-bit Memory Interface Width
224 Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec)


From a random GTX970 on OcUK: http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-010-GX

- Memory Clock: 7010MHz
- Memory Size: 4096MB GDDR5
- Memory Bus: 256-bit


Remember that anything that is advertised for Sale has to truly represent the product on Sale at that given point of time and in a simplistic way - meaning, not saying one thing but meaning another and anyone could follow the description.

So, as a layman.

The NVIDIA Spec is telling me a couple things.

1) The GTX970 has a Standard Memory Config of 4G - note the word standard (which also appears under the GTX980 Memory Specs).

2) The GTX970 has a 256 bit wide Memory Subsystem across the total of 4G.

It doesn't tell me that it has a non-standard Memory configuration as has been released by NVIDIA after the user community found out and admitted to on this very forum by a representative of NVIDIA.

If the true Specs of the Memory Subsystem where posted. It should be in simplistic terms. For Example:

1) The GTX970 has a Non-Standard Memory Config of 4G. - good, I can understand that.

2) The GTX970 has a 224 bit wide Memory Subsystem across 3.5G and 32 Bit wide subsystem on the remaining 512mb. - Good, I can understand that to (but to cover butts I'd add that accessing this memory on it's own may slow the GPU.

What we, shouldn't need to know is how the GM204 processor implementation within the GTX970 operates at all levels.

So, a little Dr Googling comes up with several Web Sites that list the do's and don't's while describing a Product for Sale.

I'll refer to this one :

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/29

and quote this:

False trade description.

(1)A false trade description is a trade description which is false to a material degree.

(2)A trade description which, though not false, is misleading, that is to say, likely to be taken for such an indication of any of the matters specified in section 2 of this Act as would be false to a material degree, shall be deemed to be a false trade description.

(3)Anything which, though not a trade description, is likely to be taken for an indication of any of those matters and, as such an indication, would be false to a material degree, shall be deemed to be a false trade description.

(4)A false indication, or anything likely to be taken as an indication which would be false, that any goods comply with a standard specified or recognised by any person or implied by the approval of any person shall be deemed to be a false trade description, if there is no such person or no standard so specified, recognised or implied

Point 2 may well apply here for anyone who would want to investigate further if between OcUK/NVIDIA do nothing.
 
Gibbo said:
It is no different than what I am experiencing with Bentley right now, Hi I want to spend money with you, can I get this option on my car, how about this and how about that. They can't give me answers because they don't know as they are waiting for some big boss in HQ or some team to provide them the answer. So now they just be honest and say dunno, or they make crap up and make more more mad. :D

I am sure a solution will be found tomorrow. :)
Click to expand...

Fix That For You, Honest mistake ;)
 
africanos23 said:
Just to add to my previous post and the "scaremonger" allegations.

I'm a 4K user and the issue is a lot easier to spot for me as I hit the 3.5GB in most if not all games
Click to expand...

This guy is mega pro NV and this did surprise me as i have never seen him say a bad word about NV, while constantly slating AMD in thread after thread.
GoldenTiger said:
Well ****, I totally misread that graph set before :eek: :mad:. Guess my 4k monitor wasn't at fault after all... which sucks, because I already sent it back for a refund and had gotten a killer deal on it originally.



Maxwell 2.0 chips are basically the 2600K of GPU's :p. In general I agree though.
Click to expand...



GoldenTiger said:
Did a little testing of my own using afterburner's frametime readings and other monitoring tools... it's not FCAT but it's very accurate regardless. Here's what I got...

PHaofek.png
So yeah, using SLI GTX 970's to drive high-res high-settings will result in massive, massive frametime issues, even if the framerate over a given second remains reasonable. It is basically an unplayable mess at that point when using 3.7-4.0gb of VRAM. If you can stay around/below 3.5gb of actual usage, which it does its best to do, frametimes are consistent and tight as you would expect. The framerate averaged around 38, meaning in a perfect world the frametimes would be right around 26.3ms for each frame.

As an interesting aside, when finding my settings to test with I noticed it would literally, over the course of several seconds, try to work its way back down to below 3.5gb of usage if it went over, until I set things high enough that it couldn't and would just stick at 3.7-3.8gb+ the whole time. Otherwise it would fight and keep pingponging from ~3.4gb directly to ~3.7gb and back repeatedly before finally settling at ~3.4gb. That's probably the drivers at work, there.
Click to expand...

GoldenTiger said:
I couldn't say, honestly, but my cpu usage isn't more than ~70% average on the cores during gameplay typically so presumably there's plenty of headroom on that front.

Just to elaborate a little (copying another forum post I wrote) even with a similar framerate, frametimes get completely torpedo'd once you pass the 3.5gb threshold. For example that graph was ~38fps, but if you get below the 3.5gb mark outright with your settings a ~50fps gameplay has consistent frametimes with little variance, bouncing between ~15-25ms of render time as you'd expect, sometimes a little more or less.

The ~38fps though passing the 3.5gb vram mark, however, ends up having times constantly going between ~35ms to 150ms of time to render each frame, with many spikes over 200ms.
Click to expand...


http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1849838&page=18
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom