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

Mal X · 2 Feb 2015 at 14:44

setter said:
Is 8gb on the 970/980 not a bit of a stretch due to the low memory bus?

they dont want any of their cards getting too close to the Titan Z in performance, or you'll buy the cheaper card ..........BUT DUE TO THIS ....you'll buy the 380X instead...............DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURR.

it's so flipping obvious that you'll buy an AMD card this year, it'll come in loads of different variations, so it looks like Nvidia are screwed

who can say no to an 8GB MSI Lightning 380X :eek:

Bonjour · 2 Feb 2015 at 14:47

Swagger187 said:
Well, after a lot of deliberation I have decided to change my step up with EVGA from a 970 FTW+ to a 980 reference. The cooler is lush and not I have downside to a mid tower I would like to heat to get exhausted out the back

Ker-ching

Bailey · 2 Feb 2015 at 14:51

Strudders said:
Very very happy, my new Inno3d 980 "ichill, Hercules blah blah blah
Ultra boss silly name" is amazing and when I get a new monitor later this year will be set up for life...

So yeah, cheers Guy's n girl's

Thanks very much

setter · 2 Feb 2015 at 14:52

Mal X said:
they dont want any of their cards getting too close to the Titan Z in performance, or you'll buy the cheaper card ..........BUT DUE TO THIS ....you'll buy the 380X instead...............DUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURR.

it's so flipping obvious that you'll buy an AMD card this year, it'll come in loads of different variations, so it looks like Nvidia are screwed

who can say no to an 8GB MSI Lightning 380X

I personally wont be buying an AMD card, not that I've got anything against them. As ill be buying a gsync monitor an AMD card will be totally pointless for me.

naujoks · 2 Feb 2015 at 14:57

I'm actually someone who has the setup which should create all the difficulties:
2 GTX 970 in SLI, connected to the Philips 40" 4K monitor.

I can report the following frame rates from playing these games:

Far Cry 4 - 4k, everything on ultra, 2x AA: between 30 and 60 FPS. No stuttering (but other artefacts, which I blame on the game but not on the card, as Far Cry is the only game where I see them.

Dying Light - 4k, everything on high, AA off, as AA on produces horrible texture flickering (again, that's the game, not the card). Between 30 and 50 FPS, but some stuttering when you turn around quickly. It's very playable though.

Dragon Age Inquisition - 4k, everything on high, 2x AA, between 30 and 60 FPS. No stuttering, except when you turn around quickly. Very playable.

I was considering getting a second GTX 780 to the one I used to have, then got the two 970s. Only when I had ordered them did I read about the "bug" and got worried. However, these two ASUS cards are silent in desktop mode and use a lot less power. I didn't bother trying everything out with the two GTX 780. I doubt I would have got better results from them.

In case you're wondering: I'm keeping these two cards as I'm very happy with them.

mxoagentjohnson · 2 Feb 2015 at 14:57

Its nice to know the card i purchased was advertised wrong, the only reason i got the ****ing thing is because companys cant optimize their games and demand 4gb of bloody VRAM even for 1920x1080.

Seriously cheesed off, payed about 300 for a advertised falsly card.

setter said:
I personally wont be buying an AMD card, not that I've got anything against them. As ill be buying a gsync monitor an AMD card will be totally pointless for me.

And at this rate you wont even need to buy a GSync monitor as its not proven you might not even need the module atall/

Gibbo said:
Still refusing at present!
To you the customer it does not matter, OcUK has decided to cover cost for the brands which don't step up and support us.

I purchased mine last year, but i might consider returning it after this current news *(if that isnt too much of a hassle for you or you are doing that). Mines a gigabyte, i only game at 1920x1080 but i want to upgrade to 4K and i wouldnt give a **** covering the cost to upgrade to a 980 if that means it actually has 4gb of VRAM!

easyrider · 2 Feb 2015 at 15:03

I'm now thinking an AMD card and a new 1440p freesync monitor in March...

Legend · 2 Feb 2015 at 15:05

I'm still not 100% sure, despite the 211 pages in this thread, whether if I got ANOTHER 970 Reference to accompany the one I already have, if I would suddenly start to encounter stuttering and problems in games, when with a single card everything seems to run fine? I'm at 1440p, with a view to going ultra wide later this year. Really unsure what to do tbh.

setter · 2 Feb 2015 at 15:07

It hasn't been proven yet either that you don't need the module on desktop monitors. Certain laptops yes. And as I already have two NVIDIA cards and don't play the games that are affected by the vram issue on 970's, gsync is the logical choice. That and my current monitor is ancient.

james.miller · 2 Feb 2015 at 15:09

Legend said:
I'm still not 100% sure, despite the 211 pages in this thread, whether if I got ANOTHER 970 Reference to accompany the one I already have, if I would suddenly start to encounter stuttering and problems in games, when with a single card everything seems to run fine? I'm at 1440p, with a view to going ultra wide later this year. Really unsure what to do tbh.

you've changed your tune lol

Everything we've seen says you probably will have issues in SLi. I dont know if i would sli in your shoes, unless i knew i could move it on for little/no loss if things went south.

RavenXXX2 · 2 Feb 2015 at 15:14

easyrider said:
I'm now thinking an AMD card and a new 1440p freesync monitor in March...

Sounds like a plan. Question is 8 GB or 4.

Legend · 2 Feb 2015 at 15:17

james.miller said:
you've changed your tune lol

Everything we've seen says you probably will have issues in SLi. I dont know if i would sli in your shoes, unless i knew i could move it on for little/no loss if things went south.

Well, 211 pages is enough to confuse anyone ha!

Yes, it would appear that I might have issues, which is a concern, and most annoying as I'd always had my mind set on a 970 SLI upgrade path. Plus more food for thought when I factor in the fact I COULD get full value back on the one I have and opt for a 290X Crossfire set-up at less cost, which I ASSUME would better and more problem free than 970 SLI?

grimm · 2 Feb 2015 at 15:24

naujoks said:
I'm actually someone who has the setup which should create all the difficulties:
2 GTX 970 in SLI, connected to the Philips 40" 4K monitor.

I can report the following frame rates from playing these games:

Far Cry 4 - 4k, everything on ultra, 2x AA: between 30 and 60 FPS. No stuttering (but other artefacts, which I blame on the game but not on the card, as Far Cry is the only game where I see them.

Dying Light - 4k, everything on high, AA off, as AA on produces horrible texture flickering (again, that's the game, not the card). Between 30 and 50 FPS, but some stuttering when you turn around quickly. It's very playable though.

Dragon Age Inquisition - 4k, everything on high, 2x AA, between 30 and 60 FPS. No stuttering, except when you turn around quickly. Very playable.

I was considering getting a second GTX 780 to the one I used to have, then got the two 970s. Only when I had ordered them did I read about the "bug" and got worried. However, these two ASUS cards are silent in desktop mode and use a lot less power. I didn't bother trying everything out with the two GTX 780. I doubt I would have got better results from them.

In case you're wondering: I'm keeping these two cards as I'm very happy with them.

I wouldn't accept any stuttering at all with that setup unless I was sure it was caused by the game and not the card(s).

andybird123 · 2 Feb 2015 at 15:34

grimm said:
I wouldn't accept any stuttering at all with that setup unless I was sure it was caused by the game and not the card(s).

the games mentioned are all rife with problems on other cards including 6gb and 8gb ones, so I'm going to go out on a limb and say it is the game(s) and not just straight up the cards

easyrider · 2 Feb 2015 at 15:37

Just watched a video in Far cry 4 970GTX at 2160 V the 980 and the stutter on the 970 was dreadful

humbug · 2 Feb 2015 at 15:42

setter said:
It hasn't been proven yet either that you don't need the module on desktop monitors. Certain laptops yes. And as I already have two NVIDIA cards and don't play the games that are affected by the vram issue on 970's, gsync is the logical choice. That and my current monitor is ancient.

What i find interesting is why one of Asus's own guys set out to prove the G-Sync Module can be bypassed on a screen that has the Free-Sync style scaler.

I'm not so sure Screen Vendors are entirely happy with Nvidia charging them fee's for the privilege of having to add in a $150 chunk of hardware.

Adaptive-Sync is coming, it does the same thing with no cost to them.

fs123 · 2 Feb 2015 at 15:43

easyrider said:
Just watched a video in Far cry 4 970GTX at 2160 V the 980 and the stutter on the 970 was dreadful

a link?

RavenXXX2 · 2 Feb 2015 at 15:44

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgObJcJhKoc

970 does not look smooth at all compared to the 980, even though it's low FPS you can see the micro stutters on the 970.

setter · 2 Feb 2015 at 15:46

humbug said:
What i find interesting is why one of Asus's own guys set out to prove the G-sync Module can be bypassed on a screen that has the Free-Sync style scaler.

I'm not so sure Screen Vendors are entirely happy with Nvidia charging them fee's for the privilege of having to add in a $150 chunk of hardware.

Adaptive-Sync is coming, it does the same thing with no cost to them.

Personally ill wait until there is proper confirmation of this. Too much rumour and speculation at present tbh.

ED209 · 2 Feb 2015 at 15:48

RavenXXX2 said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgObJcJhKoc

970 does not look smooth at all compared to the 980, even though it's low FPS you can see the micro stutters on the 970.

just watched it and you can see the 970 stuttering