• 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.
ALXAndy said:
Well they would do they have a hobbled memory bus dude.

I recall saying at launch that the 970 and 980 were an odd release. Mostly because people were expecting them to replace the 780 and 780ti (which they did) but underneath they were no better. I mean yeah, benchmarks and in a straight line they're faster, but the memory bus on the 780 etc was far higher..

So they're not true 4k cards so what are they? 1440p and 1600p are actually very unusual resolutions and in the grand scheme of things hardly ever used, so that means they're a 1080p card?!?!

Very odd IMO. Obviously they're far cheaper to produce than the real Kepler high end cards so they've sort of done a side step performance wise.

I bought my Titans about three days before they both launched and tbh? I'm bloody glad I did. Yeah I lose out on actual brute force core speed but at least they won't fall on their face should I decide to go 4k (and I'll be honest, I'm really starting to lean that way...)
Click to expand...

The 980s are really good cards and I have a lot of fun with mine.:)

What I am trying to say is people now they are looking closely at the 970s should not write them off as defective for things that also effect the 980s.
 
ALXAndy said:
Thanks for that Kaap, very interesting I appreciate it.

I'm now leaning fully toward 4k, like the Tower of Pisa leaning...
Click to expand...

A word of caution though even with the performance dip the 980s still trade blows with the 290Xs @2160p. In performance the 290Xs have a very small edge but it varies from game to game and how many cards are used @2160p.
 
Mei said:
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 :)
Click to expand...

yes that's why i wont get rid of my Panny, it looks utterly beautiful....get yourself if you can ;-

http://www.panasonic.com/uk/consumer/viera-televisions/plasma/tx-p60zt65b.html

it's the last of the reference plasmas.......or the next model down at 65'', it's the best tv in the world.... still is :cool:

but in the future we need :-
1....far better depth of field/ 3D
2....far better motion handling
3....far more processing power.
3....at least 120Hz True
3.....deffo 4K...........no make that 8K :D



.
 
Tonester0011 said:
If i get 4k for my desk it'll be that 27" swift, if they're even making it.
I'm not a single monitor guy, a 32" wouldn't allow me to have a second decent sized screen on my desk :(
Click to expand...

The problem with 27" or 28" monitors @2160p is you have to resize things otherwise they are too small (unless you have very good eyesight). With 32" 2160p you can just leave things the way they are, for example browsing this forum is a doddle with no resizing needed.
 
I really have to do some proper testing as Ubi games are a long shot from being indicative of the issue's severity. I'd be ok with having a slight performance loss when the card accesses the last 0.5gb but if there's massive hitching involved (as in the case of Unity) I'll be gutted.

Wish there was some way to monitor what's actually happening with that 0.5gb chunk of vram as Gpu-Z apparently won't show anything above 3.5gb. I'll try to test Mordor with HD textures (though that might stutter regardless of the card's vram problems as devs suggest 6gb;p) and Crysis 3 with heavier AA. I don't have many games currently installed but maybe these will do.
 
I've already shown unity runs fine on my 970 with 4gb usage.

Wish there was some way to monitor what's actually happening with that 0.5gb chunk of vram as Gpu-Z apparently won't show anything above 3.5gb. I'll try to test Mordor with HD textures (though that might stutter regardless of the card's vram problems as devs suggest 6gb;p) and Crysis 3 with heavier AA. I don't have many games currently installed but maybe these will do.
Click to expand...

Not true, it certainly does.
 
Mal X said:
at last there's something we agree on, but make that a 70'' 4K OLED circa 2016
this should look better than real life :eek::eek:.if OLED survives that is :confused:
Click to expand...

Was taking the **** out of ALX.
Ergh, even the thought of agreeing with something you've said....i can feel the rope tighten :p

Kaapstad said:
The problem with 27" or 28" monitors @2160p is you have to resize things otherwise they are too small (unless you have very good eyesight). With 32" 2160p you can just leave things the way they are, for example browsing this forum is a doddle with no resizing needed.
Click to expand...

How close you sit to your screens would also play a part, i sit fairly close. Also, meh eyesight. a lot younger than you mind ;) :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom