Okay, I'm out of the loop. What's the shitstorm about GTX 970s?

[Tafel_Kafel]

Hi guys, I'm planning to get a Asus GTX 970. But there's been some shit on the internet like "blah blah buy the r9 290 4gb instead blah gtx 970 something something vram"

I don't get it. Will that affect gaming performance anyway? Should I really get a 4GB R9 290? What's wrong with buying a 970?

I could use google but it's kinda confusing.

[WinNut]

Basically what happens is that after filling up 3.5GB of vRAM the bandwith tanks for the last .5 GB.

[EarthboundHero]

What resolution are you playing at?

[Raudi_]

Basiclly, Specs about the 970 were wrong since the launch, and the VRAM tanks at the last .5GB.

[Tafel_Kafel]

What resolution are you playing at?

I'm be playing at 1080p, 144hz probably.

[Tafel_Kafel]

Basically what happens is that after filling up 3.5GB of vRAM the bandwith tanks for the last .5 GB.

 

Basiclly, Specs about the 970 were wrong since the launch, and the VRAM tanks at the last .5GB.

Will I really use all the 4GB in gaming anyway?

[Guest Kloaked]

I'm be playing at 1080p, 144hz probably.

 

Then get a 980 or a Radeon equivalent.

[EarthboundHero]

I'm be playing at 1080p, 144hz probably.

Then don't worry. Pretty much the VRAM losses performance when it uses the last half gig. It's only a problem at 4K. 

[Scouten]

I'm be playing at 1080p, 144hz probably.

you will be fine my 780s seldom hit 3GB at 1440

[SeanBond]

Hi guys, I'm planning to get a Asus GTX 970. But there's been some shit on the internet like "blah blah buy the r9 290 4gb instead blah gtx 970 something something vram"

I don't get it. Will that affect gaming performance anyway? Should I really get a 4GB R9 290? What's wrong with buying a 970?

I could use google but it's kinda confusing.

low bandwidth for 5.gb of memory. Most people will never even reach that much vram usage anyway. So the big fuss is just a bunch of morons.

[Tafel_Kafel]

Then get a 980 or a Radeon equivalent.

RIP budget. BTW, Nvidia has better drivers and cool features, so I'm going with a 970 I guess, I won't lose much.

[Padunkadunk]

Lol tons of threads out there on the 970 shitstorm...

 

...starts his own thread to ask what's going on with the 970 shitstorm.

[Guest Kloaked]

RIP budget. BTW, Nvidia has better drivers and cool features, so I'm going with a 970 I guess, I won't lose much.

 

The driver and features debate is something that's now as a preference since both have equal problems today.

[Tafel_Kafel]

Lol tons of threads out there on the 970 shitstorm...

 

...starts his own thread to ask what's going on with the 970 shitstorm.

eyup, sounds like it.

[79wjd]

low bandwidth for 5.gb of memory. Most people will never even reach that much vram usage anyway. So the big fuss is just a bunch of morons.

Well to clarify on this a bit.... Anyone who's complaining about the cards performance is a moron. Anyone who's complaining about Nvidia isn't. 

Lol tons of threads out there on the 970 shitstorm...

 

...starts his own thread to ask what's going on with the 970 shitstorm.

Who the hell wants to read through a 60 page thread of shit. 

[niofalpha]

An issue with Ram effecting people at 4K... Blah Blah Blah, people butt hurt, acting like there card is instantly whorbad.

 

It REALLLLLYYY Doesn't matter...

[Sauron]

There are two big complaints about the gtx 970:

 

1)---NVIDIA straight up lied.

 

Nvidia lied about the specs of the gtx 970. They said it had more ROPs than it actually has. They also "omitted" to say that 0.5 out of those 4gb were partitioned separately and you'd get stuttering when accessing them. That doesn't change benchmark results, but at high resolutions you may get noticeable stuttering even if it's not reflected in the framerate. Definitely not a huge issue, but people don't like to support lies with their money.

 

2)---The price.

 

Currently you can get an R9 290x for 100$ less than a 970. Theoretically thanks to the new architecture and cheap memory interface nvidia should be able to pay less for their gpus and therefore sell them at a very competitive price. However AMD sells their stuff for 100$ lower, which means that either AMD is selling at a loss, or nvidia is claiming exaggerate margins. It also means that the price/performance value of the 970 sank into the ground a few months after release. It was the obvious choice when it was priced like an R9 290, now the gap is too high for the higher efficiency to justify.

 

Will these two things affect your experience? Probably not. But you could get significantly better value out of amd for much less, if you care to spare some money to buy some other nice upgrade.

[79wjd]

There are two big complaints about the gtx 970:

 

1)---NVIDIA straight up lied.

 

Nvidia lied about the specs of the gtx 970. They said it had more ROPs than it actually has. They also "omitted" to say that 0.5 out of those 4gb were partitioned separately and you'd get stuttering when accessing them. That doesn't change benchmark results, but at high resolutions you may get noticeable stuttering even if it's not reflected in the framerate. Definitely not a huge issue, but people don't like to support lies with their money.

 

2)---The price.

 

Currently you can get an R9 290x for 100$ less than a 970. Theoretically thanks to the new architecture and cheap memory interface nvidia should be able to pay less for their gpus and therefore sell them at a very competitive price. However AMD sells their stuff for 100$ lower, which means that either AMD is selling at a loss, or nvidia is claiming exaggerate margins. It also means that the price/performance value of the 970 sank into the ground a few months after release. It was the obvious choice when it was priced like an R9 290, now the gap is too high for the higher efficiency to justify.

1) Just like I would expect the 4gb of VRAM to be fully functional, I would also expect the Reference R9 290 to be able to run at 100% -- which we both know it can't. So, expectations are not always a reality. And I'm not conviced Nvidia lied about the ROPs, I do believe there was just miscommunication between the engineers and public relations team. 

 

2) Efficiency is a big reason to consider 970s and has nothing to do with whats going on, and is something that's always been the case with Nvidia vs. AMD. So price is something else entirely different. 

[I/O]

Then don't worry. Pretty much the VRAM losses performance when it uses the last half gig. It's only a problem at 4K. 

For now but in the future games will need to access all 4GB of Vram @ 1080P.

[EarthboundHero]

For now but in the future games will need to access all 4GB of Vram @ 1080P.

It'll be fine. That's far off and by then you should upgrade your card anyways.

[79wjd]

For now but in the future games will need to access all 4GB of Vram @ 1080P.

By the time thats the case the 970/290 will be crap anyway. 

[I/O]

It'll be fine. That's far off and by then you should upgrade your card anyways.

Or so one would hope. I rather not run the risk of being forced into an early and expensive upgrade.

[I/O]

By the time thats the case the 970/290 will be crap anyway. 

It could happen on any upcoming game like GTA V or TW3.

[EarthboundHero]

Or so one would hope. I rather not run the risk of being forced into an early and expensive upgrade.

nVidia is realizing new drivers soon. Anyone wanting a 970 should wait and see if that resolves the issue, otherwise go with something else.

[79wjd]

It could happen on any upcoming game like GTA V or TW3.

Yeah, and a single R9 380x will also be able to drive Eyefinity surround 8k @ utlra @ 288fps.