• 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.

nVidia seems to have repeated ram fiasco with the 980ti DISPROVEN! Request closing thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not suprised if they have , i did wonder when it was a cut down chip but if so it really should have been stated earlier
 
Marine-RX179 said:
For practical usage having 500MB less vram out of the 6GB usabled by games is probably not so much of an issue, but from marketing the card's vram amount point of view as a business, they are really taking a mick...

Just think of those times you order a large fries from McDs, but the content you received is of the regular fries size...

I definitely remember the many occassions of at the McDs starring at my large fries that's the size of a medium, shaking my fist and thinking to myself "You call this a large fries? Are you kidding me!?"
Click to expand...

More like ordering a large coke and finding it 1/2 full of ice...

Anyway I hope it turns out there isn't a memory problem with these cards. It would put me right off buying one...
 
Phixsator said:
I took a crack at the memory benchmark used to discover the 970 ram issue..To my big surprise yet again, the last 500mb seems gimped..I dont know what to think of this.. This is with my spanking new 980 ti..

169m5n6.png

dcr22b.png

New run has been doneo with gpuz running as well
2mfdrgk.png

EDIT: changed the title to reflect what card this is concerning.
Click to expand...

Send it back.... you've been robbed. Your card will self destruct in the next 5 minutes.
 
Phixsator said:
i have updated the OP with a new run..


please explain why that is? cause if there is any way this is not true i would very much like to confirm that
Click to expand...

I edited my post with a qualifier, but basically if you are running the test on a display that is managed by the DWM then any memory used will need to be swapped, hence the numbers falling through the floor.
 
This is slightly less of a problem than it was on the 970, because it's harder to fill 5.5GB+ of VRAM than it is to fill 3.5GB+ of VRAM.

Having said that, there had to be a reason the Titan X commanded a premium :D
 
Layte claims the test is invalid due to the way my screen is setup.. so until the tests validity has been proven or disproven i think everyone should hold their horses.. no need to throw mud just yet
 
Phixsator said:
Layte claims the test is invalid due to the way my screen is setup.. so until the tests validity has been proven or disproven i think everyone should hold their horses.. no need to throw mud just yet
Click to expand...

I'm going to be honest looking at the numbers and the fact it's 0.5gb again I can see this being true.
 
Surely not twice in a row and no other reviewers bothered to check this to see if it has "ramgate" also.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom