• 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.
mulpsmebeauty said:
While you're probably being facetious, the market demanded 4gb cards.
Click to expand...

Indeed, because in current times 4gb is necessary and not just there as a selling point.

How Nvidia ever thought they'd get away with it with 4k around is beyond words. Maybe in their world they expected people to buy Titans for 4k?

If I had bought a single 970 I wouldn't really care. First up, one is not enough for 4k so you'd be a bit silly even trying it. But two does sound more than enough for 4k, yet 3.5gb isn't enough.

I said at launch it was a very strange release. It offered nothing but VRAM over the 780 and 780ti.

If I had one and played up to 1440p I wouldn't care if I'm honest. At the end of the day they're more than enough for those resolutions. Yeah sure you may have to turn the settings down a bit but at £280 or so they're not exactly terribly expensive are they? My 7970 cost me £439 at launch and that was the absolute cheapest I saw them for. Some were £500 or more.

It's a mid ranged card that people are expecting ultra high end out of.
 
PCPER will be running an uopdate shortly - they have had a phone interview with NV with tech answers (reading between the lines - its a known issue with Maxwell)
 
ALXAndy said:
I said at launch it was a very strange release. It offered nothing but VRAM over the 780 and 780ti.
Click to expand...

970 die is something like 20% smaller than a 780ti. Are you telling us you cant see why nvidia would want to replace the 780/ti with a smaller, cheaper to produce die?

It's a mid ranged card that people are expecting ultra high end out of.
Click to expand...

:o
 
ALXAndy said:
If I had one and played up to 1440p I wouldn't care if I'm honest. At the end of the day they're more than enough for those resolutions. Yeah sure you may have to turn the settings down a bit but at £280 or so they're not exactly terribly expensive are they? My 7970 cost me £439 at launch and that was the absolute cheapest I saw them for. Some were £500 or more.

It's a mid ranged card that people are expecting ultra high end out of.
Click to expand...
But the thing is one of the incentive behind the 900 lines is that it was introduced along with the DSR feature, meaning potentially there would be users wish to run 4K DSR on their 2560 res monitor with a pair of GTX970...
 
james.miller said:
970 die is something like 20% smaller than a 780ti. Are you telling us you cant see why nvidia would want to replace the 780/ti with a smaller, cheaper to produce die?
Click to expand...

I didn't say that though did I? I said they were pointless to buy. Of course they were far from pointless to make, look how many have been selling !

stooeh said:
It isn't really, unless you consider 40fps more than enough or turning down settings :p
Click to expand...

Well they're not high end cards are they? at £280 or so each they're most certainly mid range cards. High end cards are £500 or more.
 
ALXAndy said:
How Nvidia ever thought they'd get away with it with 4k around is beyond words. Maybe in their world they expected people to buy Titans for 4k?
Click to expand...

It's just building in obsolescence. If the 970 and 980 came with 6gb built in, the people who aren't early adopters wouldn't have to upgrade as often. Standard business practice when you operate from a position where people will buy your product no matter how average it is, whilst singing your praises from every forum.
 
mulpsmebeauty said:
It's just building in obsolescence. If the 970 and 980 came with 6gb built in, the people who aren't early adopters wouldn't have to upgrade as often. Standard business practice when you operate from a position where people will buy your product no matter how average it is, whilst singing your praises from every forum.
Click to expand...

They've definitely got that power, yes. They've always had it sadly.
 
ALXAndy said:
I didn't say that though did I? I said they were pointless to buy. Of course they were far from pointless to make, look how many have been selling !
Click to expand...

No you didnt.

Well they're not high end cards are they? at £280 or so each they're most certainly mid range cards. High end cards are £500 or more.
Click to expand...

So your 7970 wasn't high end, then? Anyway, price does not dictate performance. Next you'll be claiming ocuk reference 980's arent high end cards but a Poseidon Platinum is :o

Tonester0011 said:
Turn down settings, lower vram requirements = winner.
A single 970 is ample for 4k, if you're not delusional and think you must crank all settings to 11!!!
Click to expand...

Dont agree with this, i find it fine at 2560x1080 but i cant hold 60fps at 4k in just about anything lol.
 
Last edited:
james.miller said:
price does not dictate performance. Next you'll be claiming ocuk reference 980's arent high end cards but a Poseidon Platinum is :o
Click to expand...

The 980 is a mid range card too. When does TitanX, 980ti launch again?

It's a fact that the 970 and 980 are the mid range Maxwells as the high end ones are coming. The low end ones are 750ti and so on.

Yeah there are lots of tarty cards out there for £500 or more but they still have that same mid ranged Maxwell core on it, crap memory bandwidth and all.

It's like saying the 670 and 680 were high end Keplers when they weren't, those were the 780, 780ti and Titan.
 
Daft viewpoint, sorry.

TitanX will replace the 980 as nvidia's top end card. Top end, ALXAndy. That does not mean the 980 is mid range card and it will of course, based in its performance, still be a high end card.
 
almighty15 said:
And there is the chink in your comment, everyone play games at different settings so 1:1 comparison can never be done based on personal gaming preferences.

I play at 2560x1440 and 4k with everything maxed out ( Hence the reason for buying a pair of 970's ) and I can get performance to choke when the memory goes over 3.5Gb, even on games that from a ALU load point of view aren't that demanding.
Click to expand...

BF4 @ 4K, maxed out, 3.7GB VRAM...50-60fps with no frame rate collapses whatsoever.

Crysis 3 @4k, mixture of High-Very High settings, 2xMSAA 3.5GB VRAM...40-50fps with no frame rate collapses whatsoever.

FC4 @4k, Ultra settings 2xTXAA, 3.8GB VRAM...40-50fps with no frame rate collapses whatsoever.


..do see what I'm getting at?
 
Harlequin said:
PCPER will be running an uopdate shortly - they have had a phone interview with NV with tech answers (reading between the lines - its a known issue with Maxwell)
Click to expand...

i dont see how they can even call themselves a review site if they are willing to just accept benchmarks like that made up by the company and add a comment agreeing with them,
anyone impartial would not do that without running their own tests first

and if they did run their tests before commenting, where are they?

so really, screw them! lol they are more worried about losing their freebies than misleading people
 
Cooper said:
BF4 @ 4K, maxed out, 3.7GB VRAM...50-60fps with no frame rate collapses whatsoever.

Crysis 3 @4k, mixture of High-Very High settings, 2xMSAA 3.5GB VRAM...40-50fps with no frame rate collapses whatsoever.

FC4 @4k, Ultra settings 2xTXAA, 3.8GB VRAM...40-50fps with no frame rate collapses whatsoever.


..do see what I'm getting at?
Click to expand...
If I reading what it is you are trying to imply correctly...

"If I am not having any problem my 970s, then neither should you with yours. You shouldn't complain about an issue your 970s are having and making a fuss because my 970s are working perfectly fine"?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom