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

[PayneUK]

Yep, I just asked them what they're doing or planning on doing.

I didn't tell them I was sending them back although I might and see what happens

I would suspect that if you did send them in you'll get them back fairly quickly, possibly followed by them asking you for money for testing and p&p.

Would be very interested to hear what does happen though, goodluck.

 

[Harlequin]

Will be interesting to see what PCper have to say in the article they are doing this evening. Hopefully it will alleviate some of the more genuine fears that people have. Of course it will do nothing to appease those who just want to argue and **** off Nvidia.



http://www.pcper.com/

you mean how AMD did the same over FCAT and still the fangirls went into rabid mode??

 

[Kaapstad]

I guess you could pretend these are successor to the 690 in a way?

Though would be funny if Nvidia actually release a card with two 960 GPUs on a single PCB

Funny you should mention that

To try these 960s out I will be using the PC that normally houses my GTX 690s.

 

[almighty15]

I would suspect that if you did send them in you'll get them back fairly quickly, possibly followed by them asking you for money for testing and p&p.

Would be very interested to hear what does happen though, goodluck.

Not if I send them back as not as advertised.

I could try to say I bought 2x cards that were advertised as 4Gb VRAM at 224Gb/s but I was given 2x cards that have 3.5Gb of VRAM at 224Gb/s and 0.5Gb of VRAM at much lower.

Would be interesting though

 

[Mei]

yes they look good, but i wouldn't trade in my Panny plasma for one yet.........i'd wait another two years.

i think the 4K LED might die a death, because i like the look of the new front mounted Laser projector tv.......... if it becomes popular that is, who knows...........shrug !

i dont think the res is as important as the panel tech yeh, deeper blacks and the rest of it is way more important, maybe after they milk us with the 144hz ips we might get something better

 

[Ian Evey]

Quoting is a pain on a phone, James.
I've only done a tiny bit of '4k' gaming on my TV. A single 970 on low/medium copes fine, if 60hz is okay lol.

You should use an Apple iphone like i do, its a breeze to quote

 

[PayneUK]

Not if I send them back as not as advertised.

I could try to say I bought 2x cards that were advertised as 4Gb VRAM at 224Gb/s but I was given 2x cards that have 3.5Gb of VRAM at 224Gb/s and 0.5Gb of VRAM at much lower.

Would be interesting though

Indeed, I touched on that in my question but the response I got to that was that the card comes with 4GB of VRAM, and they are not responsible for how NVidia choose to utilize it on the card.

They would be opening up a can of worms if they did accept an RMA on that though, which I don't believe they would until more from NVidia comes through.

 

[Kipz]

I think the main issue I have here is the blatant questionable selling practices and false advertising by NVidia. The card is effectively 3.5Gb and while that doesn't really affect me too much (even though I have been having trouble in games with what I thought were memory leaks although now I am not too sure). Uk selling regulations protects buyers against products that are not fit for purpose. If the purpose is to play games that require 4Gb of VRM (Shadow of Mordor) then you should be protected and entitled to a refund.

Hopefully once we get a little more information about the matter OcUK will release their statement about it too. As far as I'm concerned, I really advocate voting with your wallet and I do not wish to support how NVidia have handled this. That R9 290x is looking awfully tempting right about now.

 

[Kaapstad]

Not if I send them back as not as advertised.

I could try to say I bought 2x cards that were advertised as 4Gb VRAM at 224Gb/s but I was given 2x cards that have 3.5Gb of VRAM at 224Gb/s and 0.5Gb of VRAM at much lower.

Would be interesting though

I think you are over reacting but if you need it here is a hardware fix guaranteed to work.

Spoiler

Sapphire Announces Radeon R9 290X 8GB Tri-X with Higher Clocks

Following the successful introduction of the industry's first 8GB R9 290X graphics card with its Vapor-X model, SAPPHIRE Technology has just announced another 8GB card sporting the highly acclaimed SAPPHIRE exclusive Tri-X triple fan cooler, enhanced clocks and dual BIOS, making the large frame buffer option available at a slightly lower cost.

The SAPPHIRE R9 290X Tri-X 8GB features the latest GCN (graphics core next) architecture from AMD with 2816 stream processing units and an enhanced engine clock of up to 1020Mhz. It is equipped with 8GB of the latest high performance GDDR5 memory on a 512-bit interface and now clocked at 1375 MHz (5.5GHz effective) delivering higher bandwidth than earlier models. Built on a SAPPHIRE original pcb, the layout incorporates a 6-phase power design delivering up to 240 watts (40 watts per phase) for maximum performance. Two 8-pin power connectors ensure adequate system power is available (up to 375 Watts total including PCI-Express power).


The SAPPHIRE Tri-X cooler used on the R9 290 series was the industry's first cooler to use a central 10mm heatpipe in addition to four subsidiary heatpipes ensuring even heat distribution throughout the heatsink assembly., The three fans have dust repelling bearings now each with dual ball races. They are equipped with aerofoil section blades to deliver highly efficient airflow at low noise levels, and the fan cowling is designed to control the routing of the airflow for maximum cooling efficiency.

With support for Ultra HD (4K displays) and AMD Eyefinity multi-screen technology, the SAPPHIRE R9 290 series maximises the visual experience for work or play with superior image quality and high resolution displays. Testing has shown the increased frame buffer of the R9 290X 8GB model brings performance benefits in high resolution photo and video editing, as well as providing for the large texture maps beginning to be used in some video games, especially where extreme mods are used.

The R9 290X uses the PCI-Express 3.0 interface and supports multiple cards in AMD CrossFire natively without the need for bridge cables. In addition to superior cooling and performance, SAPPHIRE has also implemented DUAL BIOS on the Tri-X models, with an LED illuminated button switch, ensuring that the cards boot and deliver maximum performance in systems with both UEFI and legacy BIOS implementations.

The SAPPHIRE R9 290 series is equipped with AMD TrueAudio technology which brings a heightened level of audio immersion, surrounding gamers with realistic audio environments whether it is through stereo headsets or speakers. A dedicated audio processor in the GPU enables the SAPPHIRE R9 290 series to deliver a richer and deeply immersive soundscape, including true to life echoes, convolution reverbs and incredibly realistic surround sound environments.

SAPPHIRE 8GB R9 290X Vapor-X and Tri-X models are in production now and will be available from SAPPHIRE's usual etail and retail partners.

http://www.techpowerup.com/209296/sapphire-announces-radeon-r9-290x-8gb-tri-x-with-higher-clocks.html

Seriously I would hang onto the 970s if I was you.

 

[Kipz]

Indeed, I touched on that in my question but the response I got to that was that the card comes with 4GB of VRAM, and they are not responsible for how NVidia choose to utilize it on the card.

They would be opening up a can of worms if they did accept an RMA on that though, which I don't believe they would until more from NVidia comes through.

I think the 4Gb VRAM at 224Gb/s will be the deciding factor because it certainly is not that.

 

[Harlequin]

heres a question - has anyone actually tested the R290X under the same display conditions to see its performance drop?

COD:AW @4K with FSAA and without FSAA for example?

 

[Mei]

Indeed, I touched on that in my question but the response I got to that was that the card comes with 4GB of VRAM, and they are not responsible for how NVidia choose to utilize it on the card.

They would be opening up a can of worms if they did accept an RMA on that though, which I don't believe they would until more from NVidia comes through.

so if you believe you have been mis-sold you are meant to go directly to nvidia? how are you meant to do that
your legal contract is with them not nvidia anyway so

 

[almighty15]

I think you are over reacting but if you need it here is a hardware fix guaranteed to work.

Spoiler

http://www.techpowerup.com/209296/sapphire-announces-radeon-r9-290x-8gb-tri-x-with-higher-clocks.html

Seriously I would hang onto the 970s if I was you.

I would love to keep the 970's but if they're killing performance at 4k because of this memory thing then I don't want them.

If they were choking due to lack of horse power then fair enough, no complaints from me, but I didn't drop over £600 on a pair of 970's with water blocks just to be robbed of performance at 4k because of a hardware limitation that Nvidia neglected to tell anyone about.

 

[ALXAndy]

heres a question - has anyone actually tested the R290X under the same display conditions to see its performance drop?

COD:AW @4K with FSAA and without FSAA for example?

Nothing from the AMD side yet but here's what happens in Mordor...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQE6p5r1tYE

Not sure if you saw that as it was posted quite a few pages back. TBH? all we need now are more tests like that one. I would love to see some one write an app that can shove data to and fro the memory bus at set intervals to see just exactly what happens when you run into the secondary chunk. Going by that video though? it ain't very nice.

 

[McGraw]

Is this starting to affect anyone? I mean......psychologically?

I mean.....I sat down to play BF4 last night and just as I was booting my machine, just before I did, I looked at it.......you know.......the "you ok bro?" look.

I swear to god, the PC looks more stupid than it was the night before.

FLOL!

I daren't tell mine I know it's dirty little secret. It would break its heart.

 

[humbug]

heres a question - has anyone actually tested the R290X under the same display conditions to see its performance drop?

COD:AW @4K with FSAA and without FSAA for example?

I have One 290, i have never run it at 4K, but even at 1080P maxed out it uses 4GB of Buffer, it does not slow down.

 

[ALXAndy]

I have One 290, i have never run it at 4K, but even at 1080P maxed out it uses 4GB of Buffer, it does not slow down.

Yeah I can confirm that. I had a 290 in my main rig for testing when I bought it and it was great for AW, maxed out.

Cut scenes were a bit choppy but I don't relate that to the gaming experience.

Must say I was actually very impressed with the 290. Yeah it was hot, but shove it in a cooling duct and it behaved itself quite well.

 

[bru]

Not if I send them back as not as advertised.

I could try to say I bought 2x cards that were advertised as 4Gb VRAM at 224Gb/s but I was given 2x cards that have 3.5Gb of VRAM at 224Gb/s and 0.5Gb of VRAM at much lower.

Would be interesting though

I will say the same to you as I said to whoever it was earlier, in fact quoting it might be easier.

But you are taking the 224GB/s figure as an absolute, that all memory access is at that rate. if that is the case then the base clock is an absolute as well and if when working flat out it drops below that then it is faulty, hence the furmark reference.

Or of course, much more realistically the 224GB/s figure is up to 224GB/s, in which case Nvidia have stated nothing wrong in the specifications, because the card does have 4GB ram and can access up to 224GB/s.

The earlier furmark reference is that when running furmark cards can throttle below their stated base clock speed, so by your reckoning they are all faulty.

 

[Ian Evey]

I think the main issue I have here is the blatant questionable selling practices and false advertising by NVidia. The card is effectively 3.5Gb and while that doesn't really affect me too much (even though I have been having trouble in games with what I thought were memory leaks although now I am not too sure). Uk selling regulations protects buyers against products that are not fit for purpose. If the purpose is to play games that require 4Gb of VRM (Shadow of Mordor) then you should be protected and entitled to a refund.

Hopefully once we get a little more information about the matter OcUK will release their statement about it too. As far as I'm concerned, I really advocate voting with your wallet and I do not wish to support how NVidia have handled this. That R9 290x is looking awfully tempting right about now.

I know, get a 295x2 that has 8gb of memory, you will love that!

 

[Kaapstad]

heres a question - has anyone actually tested the R290X under the same display conditions to see its performance drop?

COD:AW @4K with FSAA and without FSAA for example?

I use 980s and 290Xs

I can not say about the 970 but the 980s do have a serious performance dip @4K.

@1080p the 980s are in front of the 290Xs but @2160p in multi GPU setups the 290Xs are slightly faster.