• 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.
Dying Light has performance issues at higher resolutions and settings. It's going to need a few patches before it's worthwhile.

I've swapped out my 970s for my older R9-290s, @ 4K the performance is miles smoother on all games I play.
 
Gregster, Final8ty - Both of you have posted some really good stuff in your times that I have noticed so don't risk a holiday by bickering.

If you can't agree then agree to disagree and leave it at that.

No one on this forum has an obligation to reply to anyone. The only people doing that are yourselves. Don't take the bait.

Lets keep the forum a constructive place with intelligent and passionate discussion without the bickering.

I see bickering I stop reading which is a shame because there might be some useful or insightful thoughts but it gets lost and ignored.
 
Trustdesa said:
Same here, playing at 1080p no issue at all, I am generally VERY picky about this things however (Despite Nvidia lied) there are no better cards for the money, the 290x is a power hungry card and heats like a BBQ, if the 300 was around then different story.

IMHO
Click to expand...

yea after a lot of thinking lately i'm deffo pleased i've kept mine, the 290x isn't any better at 1080p.

if Dying Light runs perfectly then so should FC4...........plus, DL has more detail and textures too.... it's always a good idea to buy a game after it's been out 3 weeks, because it's either already fixed or still getting rubbish postings here... unfortunately i got FC4 on release day !!!!!

the 300X will be a brand new card, so in theory it should be better and faster, lets wait and see.

the 970 SLI eats Dying Light for breakfast..... but i tell you what i really hate in the last 3 brand new games i've brought...... the bloody white dust particles in the air..... like Cotton.........NO NO NO NO. where the hell did they get that from.
 
Last edited:
i have the asus strix gtx 970 but wish i had got the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 HOF. My asus strix has coil whine and it ****es me off.

which is the better card for cooling and speed?
 
Bonjour said:
It's still way too early to make a call on DX12.
Click to expand...

+100000

Why are people taking something so long before any kind of official release as gospel?

For nvidia owners, I'll be happy for them if true, but really, it's just waaaaaaaay to early to base any decision off of something like that star swarm bench.

Return your cards if you want. Don't hang on those results
 
I dont see a problem tbh people who wants to send them back do it the card is the same card when bought and people raving about it, toms hardware guide has made the best reference so far

"You’re a muscle-car buff and you decide to test drive the new 2015 Dodge Charger Hellcat. The car is advertised as a supercharged 8-cylinder, 6.2 Liter Hemi engine with 24 valves that produces 707 horsepower at 6,000 RPM. It’s one of the most powerful cars you can buy for the dollar, achieving 0-60 MPH in under three seconds and a quarter-mile in under 12 seconds. You take it for a test drive, you fall in love with the car, and you buy it. In the months to follow, you remain quite pleased with your purchase and the performance the car provides.

It later comes out that Dodge made a mistake on its marketing materials: the engine has 16 valves, not 24. It still produces 707 horsepower at 6,000 RPM though, and it still offers the same amazing road performance that it did the day you bought it. It’s still one of the fastest cars you could purchase for the dollar. But you can no longer say you own a 24-valve V8."

But from a purely practical standpoint, this doesn’t really change anything for the end user. The GeForce GTX 970 remains one of the best graphics card buys on the market. It performs the same way it did at launch — which is really good. As such, we will continue to recommend it until there is a better-performing option for the price.

We can empathize with buyers who feel betrayed, though. Nvidia definitely has some mind-share to earn back. But to us the price/performance ratio trumps everything else, and that is no different today than it has been since the GeForce GTX 970 was released.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-960,4038-4.html

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2015/01/22/nvidia-geforce-gtx-960-review-feat-asus/6

regardless of memory Pr crap its still faster in near all games than a 290x at 1080p as above.
 
Last edited:
More like you fell in love with it as you thought it was... but somehow you didn't quite manage to test it properly.

One day, you take your new car to a track... you can finally use every last bit of that horsepower.

As you get over 640bhp in active use, an extra cylinder fires up at a rate that doesn't match the others... causing the engine to stutter, cough and hiccup at a rate you weren't able to test until you found a scenario that really used the card.

Your purchase and enjoyment is spoiled because it does not perform as advertised & you find out the manufacturer lied (mis-communicated) about the specifications. You want it to do what it says on the tin... but the manufacturer sticks their fingers up at you telling you that you should have tested it better before purchase...
 
eyetrip said:
+100000

Why are people taking something so long before any kind of official release as gospel?

For nvidia owners, I'll be happy for them if true, but really, it's just waaaaaaaay to early to base any decision off of something like that star swarm bench.

Return your cards if you want. Don't hang on those results
Click to expand...

I think you're confused. It's well known that the first cards to utilise new APIs are the most efficient at it.

:p

Dave2150 said:
NVIDIA won't be able to convince game designers to lower the level of detail in their games, because their 3.5GB 970 struggles.
Click to expand...

I'm hoping that in some titles that Nvidia are associated with that the games can dial in the correct auto settings for the hardware so between a 970 and 980 you would have slightly lower drawing distance etc on the 970.

It's going to be interesting for to see any benchmarks of cards after this exposure. If they are not highlighting anything during testing, it might raise curiosity as to why. With some people feeling cheated from these reviews, it's a possibility but IMO, I wonder why everybody started going crazy on news of a deficiency but in the days and weeks previous to that, their recommendations are for the 970 to everyone?.

TBH, I might have returned mine but if not one game I played was effected, I can't see why I would. Who cares about depreciation in the PC market?. It's a fast moving circuit so I don't see the reduction of a few £ being a factor. Being fed lies, fair enough and this is why I don't see a problem for anyone sending theirs back. I'm just curious with the hero to zero thing due to someone's findings while all their games ran their games excellently to the point that owners would happily suggest the same card one day and then say the next that it's no good :confused:.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom