The GTX 980M also has memory issues...

[Guest Kloaked]

Well, then... discuss the tech and not whether or not people are making stuff up.

Have you ever been in a group conversation where that one guy won't shut up about his stories, and you know for a fact he's bullshitting?

[stconquest]

Have you ever been in a group conversation where that one guy won't shut up about his stories, and you know for a fact he's bullshitting?

 

Yeah, I left.

 

:lol:

[Sauron]

Yup I just googled it, that seems super overkill though for a laptop?

 

It's used in the t80 titan from msi, which has two, meaning THEORETICALLY the laptop has enough power to actually use a bit more than 4gb. Probably not 8gb, but because of the way the vram bus works they have to double the capacity if they want to increase it at all.

[jaggysnake57]

LTT needs a purge. A big one. We cater too much to the shitposters by pretending we are shitposters and thus allowing the shitposters to think they are in safe waters. 

at the same time some of the none shitposters are acting like children so what do you do?  oh that is NOT aimed at you

 

Right now yes, only Dying Light and soon The Witcher 3, but next year every single new game will be like that.

dying light runs like shit any how go outside look at the sun and watch the fps drop

 

Im just gonna say Nvidia is shit. You know, SOME people still shop by specs, even rops and cahce. They dont look at benchmarks. Non-techies

unless im mistaken but the 970s closest rival is the r9 290x very similar in performance and in price but the 970 has lower power consumption and generally lower heat...so how are people shopping by spec?

 

Next thing we know, the Titan II will only be able to use 8GB of its total 12GB.....

Wow Nvidia

Keep it up!

where abouts in the midlands you from?

 

I am no fanboy:)

 

I got 970's, But I am pissed off, And I hope Nvidia will release somekind of update to fix this issue, 

have you seen any performance issues?

[mr moose]

Well, then... discuss the tech and not whether or not people are making stuff up. 

 

Until people stop with making shit up there is nothing to read and much less to talk about.

[BiG StroOnZ]

Until people stop with making shit up there is nothing to read and much less to talk about.

 

Not only that but people are so absorbed into this whole NVIDIA fiasco that nobody is even paying attention to some of the other stories that are more interesting or more important. 

[That Norwegian Guy]

dying light runs like shit any how go outside look at the sun and watch the fps drop

 

Once you balance the CPU cores manually, it runs fine.

[Guest Kloaked]

Not only that but people are so absorbed into this whole NVIDIA fiasco that nobody is even paying attention to some of the other stories that are more interesting or more important.

By more important and more interesting, and going by your avatar, you're referring to illuminati confirmed stories right?

[kpreg]

y u do this nvidia

[stconquest]

Until people stop with making shit up there is nothing to read and much less to talk about.

 

Let them have fun, what is the harm?  Most of us are just waiting to see what happens.

[DeViLzzz]

Grats Nvidia on becoming even more scummy.

[BiG StroOnZ]

By more important and more interesting, and going by your avatar, you're referring to illuminati confirmed stories right?

 

Well, what most people don't realize is that the symbol for the Illuminati is the Owl. My Avatar is the Eye of Providence. But yes, precisely that! 

[jaggysnake57]

Once you balance the CPU cores manually, it runs fine.

errrr how did you do that got any links?

[miljaker]

The issue isn't if the ram is enough to run anything you throw at the "1080p" screen. The issue is Nvida thinks it's ok to give false information or not give enough information.

 

Linus gave a good example on the WAN show. You buy a box of 7 luxury cookies. But when you open the box you see that one of the cookies is only 1/4th of the size of the others. 6 full sized cookies is still plenty for you but you still didn't get what you expected. That's shitty and shouldn't happen.

 

I'm planning on upgrading to 970 sli soon because it's still a great deal and that slow 0.5gig isn't really needed for me. But that doesn't change the fact Nvidia lied and withheld critical information.

[Admiral Naismith]

I doubt it would be as big of an issue as others are saying.

As the guy said above me, its the sketchy advertising that bothers me.

[tnlich]

Question is how many more lies have they slipped and told in the past? That 1 is what is going to brake the camels back.

[FreeDiver]

It's an old joke...

I used to tell old jokes, until I took an arrow to the knee...

[Luke]

Hmm that's too bad. I have a question though, Is the problem that the last 500MB of VRAM is so slow to the point where it pretty much does nothing for performance or is there some sort of performance degradation when the card stars utilizing the slow 500MB of VRAM?

[othertomperson]

Question is how many more lies have they slipped and told in the past? That 1 is what is going to brake the camels back.

 

3.5+0.5 is still 4. Calling this lying would be like complaining that AMD lied about the R9 290X reference card's boost clock because it could never reach it because it thermal throttled so hard.

 

 

Hmm that's too bad. I have a question though, Is the problem that the last 500MB of VRAM is so slow to the point where it pretty much does nothing for performance or is there some sort of performance degradation when the card stars utilizing the slow 500MB of VRAM?

 

The card loses about 3% performance when you start using more than 3.5GB vram.

[Godlygamer23]

The issue isn't if the ram is enough to run anything you throw at the "1080p" screen. The issue is Nvida thinks it's ok to give false information or not give enough information.

Linus gave a good example on the WAN show. You buy a box of 7 luxury cookies. But when you open the box you see that one of the cookies is only 1/4th of the size of the others. 6 full sized cookies is still plenty for you but you still didn't get what you expected. That's shitty and shouldn't happen.

I'm planning on upgrading to 970 sli soon because it's still a great deal and that slow 0.5gig isn't really needed for me. But that doesn't change the fact Nvidia lied and withheld critical information.

And the card should perform better as the original specs called for 64ROPS, not 56.

[meritmaster]

Quit with the "keep on digging" related shit, it's fucking annoying and got old a long time ago.

You're insulting. If you don't like the subject matter, or this thread, then don't join in on the conversation! Does it hurt you that much? You're getting "fucking annoying". If people find this a big deal, and you don't, then mind your own business you troll. Grow up. 

The thread wasn't put up to so you can try to derail it. 

[Majestic]

No no no, have you people learned nothing these past few days? Ill just copy the same shit i've been saying on more of these outlets.

 

This is the problem when this stuff becomes public. More people join the fray that don't know how this stuff works. What you're seeing is windows desktop already using a good chunk of memory. Meaning that cannot be allocated properly by that programm and will start to use system memory. If you're going to test this, you need to run it in headless mode or atleast make sure the 980M isn't the active unit or caching a desktop. What a suprise the speed is exactly that of the PCI-E 3.0 busspeed. 16GB/s.

Just to explain, you'll see the same thing happening if you run this on a GTX980 or R9-290X.

EDIT: The amount that is pooled from system memory depends on your desktop resolution and amount of utilities opened that use vram. Looks like this laptop already uses 384MB. So my guess is a 1440p screen. Or 1080p with a few chrometabs open.;

 

In short; they ran the test with teh 980M as active display driver. Meaning Windows already uses up 384MB (in this case).

Same shit happens if you run the test on a 980. Go ahead, try it!

This is also why @Faa and myself are telling people that you already use up some portion of your VRAM and that you can never throw 4GB at a game.

 

Pretty frustrating that these clueless pillocks join the clickbait bandwagon instead of waiting for verification. Integrity is non-existant for these news outlets. (by which i mean tech-newssites)

[sylarspock]

not this again...

[RazeG3SG1]

RIP to 3K resolution gaming laptops

[gunsman]

And the card should perform better as the original specs called for 64ROPS, not 56.

 

 

from PCper, ROP count has minimal to no impact 

 

keep in mind that the 13 SMMs in the GTX 970 can only output 52 pixels/clock and the seven segments of 8 ROPs each (56 total) can handle 56 pixels/clock. The SMMs are the bottleneck, not the ROPs.