Would i ever see 3.5GB 4GB vram limit on GTX970 at 1080

[opethdisciple]

Just to put this in to perspective.

I game at 1200p.

I've played most of the AAA titles recently.

Of the top of my head:

SOM: Max settings. Textures where set to the second highest. As to go any higher you needed 6Gb of Vram as the game stated. Even with the HD pack, the game would have been playable, but you did get the odd stutter.

Ryse: All max, smooth.

Dying Light: Maxed. I have left the fov at default. I think I’m getting over 60fps as my monitor is tearing which only happens when I go above 60.

For the life of the card, which will be two years for me, this 3.5Gb vram issue, will not be an issue, during this time.

It's categorically not an issue. Or not an issue I've seen yet and I've played most of the AAA titles to date.

 

[opethdisciple]

Hello friends.

We're all well aware of the 970 VRAM issue but I feel there has been a lot of scaremongering with very few people (or websites) posting actual numbers and data.

Here is an article from Digital Foundry stress testing the 970 with many games at many resolutions and settings:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-revisited

This Article from PrinceNelson in another thread seems to sum it up.

 

[PrinceNelson]

Check the Eurogamer article that has just been posted. It has actual videos showing FPS and frame-times compared to the 980 over mny games at many resolutions and settings. To sum it up, the 970 has ZERO problems at 1080p and performs exactly the same as the 980 when it comes to frame-times, even when exceeding 3.5

When the card can spills into the .5 pool of memory 'the driver intelligently allocates resources, only shunting low priority data into the slower area of RAM.'

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-revisited