Official Nvidia GTX 970 Discussion Thread

[zappian]

That does not justify the silly bickering and blatant name-calling you did prior. In fact, you made an entire thread flaming at everybody being "NVidia apologists". You may have calmed down now, but the actions you have made in the meantime has tarnished your reputation in this forum. Most people, upon seeing your username, will only remember you as a "crybaby" or "AMD shill", depending on their own view of the matter.

 

Im okay with that.

 

I have said since the beggining i wanted an apology and started doing right by their costumers.

 

I wont apologize for calling nvidia out when they scammed their customers.

 

Thats no who I am.

 

What i did was justifiable at the time.

 

I showed people what had happened.

I dont really care what you think about me if did i woundlt make controversial threads all the time

would I.

[Victorious Secret]

That does not justify the silly bickering and blatant name-calling you did prior. In fact, you made an entire thread flaming at everybody being "NVidia apologists". You may have calmed down now, but the actions you have made in the meantime has tarnished your reputation in this forum. Most people, upon seeing your username, will only remember you as a "crybaby" or "AMD shill", depending on their own view of the matter.

 

I'll just consider him the embodiment of teenage angst and justice warrior superiority. He could've debated logically and I'd be happy to  discuss things, but when you repeatedly go straw man then resort to calling ANYONE who disagrees a "yes man" or "Nvidia apologist", come on. You're not even leaving room for rational thinking so sorry if I don't have the patience and instead call you out as the spoiled child you are. 

He'll grow up one day and gain some maturity, look back on his "2 legit 2 quit" attitude and realize how poor it was. I say that because almost every single person here had that phase but its not an excuse to lose your handle when people are trying to be logical with you. 

[Zulkkis]

Because they BUILT the cards -- they BUILT the chips and the PCBs. They knew EXACTLY how it worked. How come they didn't say something? 

 

nVidia did all the design and marketing that caused this in the first place. Board partners usually throw in some better voltage control (or worse if you go cheap), attach their own cooler and a fancy sticker and that's about it. Ultimately it doesn't matter to the consumer though, and nVidia has already assumed some responsbility by offering to help consumers to get refunds. I could understand if there was one or two board partners who changed the design to a cheaper one having this issue (like some dick moves done before where new batches of cards get their power delivery and other features gimped after the first batch and reviews are out), then I would tell people to be mad at the specific board partners.

 

you have to be shitting me. you have been one of the biggest posters in this going off at every one and demanding heads on a plate and with one "im sorry" all is forgiven. wow

 

 

see below

 

 

this^^^ omg 1000 times this. you all RIP THE SHIT out of "console peasants" about fps and how 30 is shit and 60 is the min and now your all suddenly ok with 30-40 when its at 4k to prove a point...hypocrites

 

 

you have to bring up 4k and dual 970s as thats the only real way to push the vram to 4gb

 

Firstly, the difference between a 980 and 970 prior to this information was that they were equal in everything but texture fillrate and core count. Nothing that's really a bottleneck for SLI configurations. The 970 was supposed to be "90% of a 980" and was marketed as such.

 

Secondly, you don't have to have a 4K monitor to push a game to 4K. You've got supersampling which nVidia now natively supports with DSR. Some games do actually run fine with 4K since they aren't very demanding to begin with.

 

Thirdly, the game might not be computationally taxing compared to the VRAM usage. Example: Skyrim with mods.

 

Lastly, not everyone demands 60 fps or 120 fps from every one of their games. Not everyone is wiggling their e-peen in front of console users, either. 30 FPS is playable for some games, the thing is that certain developers and other parties have stated that 30 fps might be actually superior to 60 fps beacuse it is more cinematic or some bullcrap like that, which isn't true. Games always feel better to play at higher framerates, however a racing game might need that 60 fps a lot more than your turn-based strategy game. Meanwhile that turn-based strategy game with pre-rendered animations looks hella lot prettier at 4K, and you might get a better combat view at higher resolutions and are willing to play at lower framerates to achieve that.

 

I have a 120Hz display (actually 144 Hz) but some games I rather play in crisp 1440p @ 60Hz rather than at 1080p with higher refresh rates, and vice versa.

 

But ultimately it is false advertisement. They've chosen to take a direction where the least amount of people possible will demand to swap the cards. 970 is still the best single card for 1080p at its price range. I don't doubt that at all. But suddenly losing practically 1/8th of the VRAM as it'll end up causing godlike strutter when used does kind of suck.

 

And just in general, no you cannot expect every developer to specifically code for this. If that was actually a great way of doing things, people would actually use this as a cost-cutting measure far more regularly. A game having less performance because the developer wasn't bothered to implement a new memory profile for a very specific card doesn't really take the blame towards a developer.

 

In general the badly coded games argument doesn't hold much air. Even if a card is great but the games don't run well on it, blaming the game's code won't make it run any better for the user. Games with bad performance might still be awesome otherwise, and rather than moving the mountain (yelling at developer to fix the game they might not be even able to because of publisher contracts) they want to go around it (buying the best card possible for the situation that fits their budget).

[zappian]

I'll just consider him the embodiment of teenage angst and justice warrior superiority. He could've debated logically and I'd be happy to  discuss things, but when you repeatedly go straw man then resort to calling ANYONE who disagrees a "yes man" or "Nvidia apologist", come on. You're not even leaving room for rational thinking so sorry if I don't have the patience and instead call you out as the spoiled child you are. 

He'll grow up one day and gain some maturity, look back on his "2 legit 2 quit" attitude and realize how poor it was. I say that because almost every single person here had that phase but its not an excuse to lose your handle when people are trying to be logical with you. 

 

Yes im quite unrational when i prove my arguments and gave ample proof that nvidia had faked their specs.

 

I did research and shared it.

 

I wont support a morally bankrupt company and if you do thats your own prerogative.

 

Maybe when NVIDIA does something worse , something that really affects you you will learn,

 

Until then you will keep defending them.

[Suika]

I did research

Obviously you haven't since you can't back up any of the claims I refuted. You hold absolutely zero footing in the argument.

[Majestic]

Yes im quite unrational when i prove my arguments and gave ample proof that nvidia had faked their specs.

 

I did research and shared it.

 

I wont support a morally bankrupt company and if you do thats your own prerogative.

 

Maybe when NVIDIA does something worse , something that really affects you you will learn,

 

Until then you will keep defending them.

 

Thank god we have your wisdom, how would we ever survive.

 

Narcissistic muppet...

[Victorious Secret]

Yes im quite unrational when i prove my arguments and gave ample proof that nvidia had faked their specs.

 

I did research and shared it.

 

I wont support a morally bankrupt company and if you do thats your own prerogative.

 

Maybe when NVIDIA does something worse , something that really affects you you will learn,

 

Until then you will keep defending them.

 

It must be nice to be so young that you only see the world in black and white, instead of the infinite shades of grey it actually is. Enjoy your naive existence, I hope when you finally grow up its because of something mundane and harmless and nothing extremely serious.

[zappian]

Obviously you haven't since you can't back up any of the claims I refuted. You hold absolutely zero footing in the argument.

 

You havent watched the pc per video probably so.

 

Or read the article to the end.

 

It speaks by itself.

[Majestic]

You havent watched the pc per video probably so.

 

You do your research, only derrive the incorrect conclusions or blow it out of proportion. And because you derrive them yourself, you cannnot comprehend you're wrong. For;

 

 

If you’re incompetent, you can’t know you’re incompetent. […] the skills you need to produce a right answer are exactly the skills you need to recognize what a right answer is.

—David Dunning^[7]

[zappian]

You do your research, only derrive the incorrect conclusions or blow it out of proportion. And because you derrive them yourself, you cannnot comprehend you're wrong. For;

 

Depends what conclusion did you extract from the pc per article.

 

Just to see if we are on the same page.

[Majestic]

Depends what conclusion did you extract from the pc per article.

 

Just to see if we are on the same page.

 

You believe nvidia scammed people. You believe that the 3.5GB main buffer is actually hurting the 970's performance. Etc. etc.

Calling everyone "yes men", "fanboys" and "apologists" the second they disagree with you.

 

I don't think nvidia scammed people per se, and i dont believe the 3.5GB will hurt the 970 much. 

The card is worth it's money even with this new information, so it's not really a big scam.

 

I only really object to what nvidia did with the advertisement. But since they did sell the card at a reasonable price i'm going to let them get away with it.

Had they sold it for 400 euro's or more, i'd have totally boycotted their company.

[zappian]

You believe nvidia scammed people. You believe that the 3.5GB main buffer is actually hurting the 970's performance. Etc. etc.

Calling everyone "yes men", "fanboys" and "apologists" the second they disagree with you.

 

It is after the 3.5 GB VRAM , this has been tested and proved.

 

http://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/2tu86z/discussion_i_benchmarked_gtx_970s_in_sli_at_1440p/

 

Dont worry i have been called much worse by calling out nvidia.

 

Do you have any empirical proof to refute this , or are you going to ignore the tests.

 

The numerous firtst person reports on these forums and guru 3D.

 

And how do you think people discovered the issue in the first place?

 

They were playing games at high resolutions and experience immense stutter.

Thats what brought this issue up.

[Majestic]

It's not the 3.5GB buffer that is causing the issues. It's the driver/OS/Application not handling it properly. A 780TI doesn't start stuttering when it reaches 3GB because it isn't unbalanced memory. 

 

As soon as the drivers/OS and applications communicate properly about the speed of that last portion and don't put large textures in it, it won't effect performance at all. So the 3.5GB isn't the issue, the 512MB is. Which should be totally fixable with drivers/firmware or OS updates. 

 

See what I mean about being inept? You haven't the foggiest how stuff works and just regurgitate everything you read.

 

Funny fact; this is totally explained in the pcper.com video which you advocate constantly as empirical proof of your argument.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

Im okay with that.

 

I have said since the beggining i wanted an apology and started doing right by their costumers.

 

I wont apologize for calling nvidia out when they scammed their customers.

 

Thats no who I am.

 

What i did was justifiable at the time.

 

I showed people what had happened.

I dont really care what you think about me if did i woundlt make controversial threads all the time

would I.

 

What you did was NEVER justifiable, end of. You can call out a company under rational terms, but you did no such thing. You skimmed through the sources you shove in other people's face, and call anybody who question it a fanboy or apologist. That is a remarkably childish route to take, and as people (and myself) has pointed out, throwing around half-truths and ad-hominem attacks shows that you do not have any legitimate counterarguments to make, and therefore you have no leg to stand on. Up to now, you have been dragging your feet in an illusion of a black-and-white world, when there are an infinite number of shades of grey.

[Dude]

Even though I am disappointed in Nvidia for lying; they still make better cards than AMD do (for the most part) and even though this is a catastrophic fuck up, I would still happily swap in my R9 290 for GTX 980 any day of the week.

[zappian]

It's not the 3.5GB buffer that is causing the issues. It's the driver/OS/Application not handling it properly. A 780TI doesn't start stuttering when it reaches 3GB because it isn't unbalanced memory. 

 

As soon as the drivers/OS and applications communicate properly about the speed of that last portion and don't put large textures in it, it won't effect performance at all. So the 3.5GB isn't the issue, the 512MB is. Which should be totally fixable with drivers/firmware or OS updates. 

 

See what I mean about being inept? You haven't the foggiest how stuff works and just regurgitate everything you read.

 

Funny fact; this is totally explained in the pcper.com video which you advocate constantly as empirical proof of your argument.

Wrong the 970 has nerfed l2 cache and less SMS on the memory.

 

There are 500 MB of VRAM that are noticeably slower.

 

What did you think the nai benchmark was trying to prove.

 

Its not something that can be solved by drivers of firmware that easily.

 

The memory arquitecure is cutdown from the 980.

[Victorious Secret]

My collection so far:

 

 

-shitposted memes-

 

LTT doesn't encourage shitposting of memes, so cut it out or have a mod do it for you. 

If you want to shitpost, I recommend www.reddit.com/r/shitpost or www.reddit.com/r/circlejerk 

[Majestic]

Wrong the 970 has nerfed l2 cache and less SMS on the memory.

 

There are 500 MB of VRAM that are noticeably slower.

 

What did you think the nai benchmark was trying to prove.

 

Its not something that can be solved by drivers of firmware that easily.

 

The memory arquitecure is cutdown from the 980.

 

Yes and it also has less SMM's, who cares. Newsflash; it's not a 980. I know it has 500mb of slower memory, it's what you quoted and I tried to explain to you what the caveat of that was and why some people report poor performance beyond 3.5GB. It's not nerfed either, it's binned. Why the hell do you think the 970 is cheaper than previous generations. It's why they say they're proud of the damn thing.

 

What the Nai benchmark only demonstrates is exactly that. It does not reflect gaming performance so long games don't use that portion of the memory thinking it is high-bandwidth memory. Which pcper.com explains in the video. Clearly you haven't watched it yourself or are too technically incapable of comprehending. In which case, I suggest you leave those matters to people who are.

 

Christ you are dense.

[79wjd]

Wrong the 970 has nerfed l2 cache and less SMS on the memory.

 

There are 500 MB of VRAM that are noticeably slower.

 

What did you think the nai benchmark was trying to prove.

 

Its not something that can be solved by drivers of firmware that easily.

 

The memory arquitecure is cutdown from the 980.

The issue is that most games don't need 4gb of VRAM, and a lot of the ones that are using that much are just loading excess crap that DX thinks might be needed in the future. So by closing off that .5gb sector they would avoid potentially important information from being stored in that memory. Thus that information would just be put into the 3.5gb when it's actually needed. And since DX prediction algorithm with the intention of increasing performance has a negligible benefit it's really not an issue. 

 

And as 4gb of VRAM won't be needed at sub-4k resolutions (where the card truly belongs) or at low-medium settings at 4k (where it still produces somewhat playable results), it really doesn't make any difference in terms of performance. 

[Shahnewaz]

LTT doesn't encourage shitposting of memes, so cut it out or have a mod do it for you. 

If you want to shitpost, I recommend www.reddit.com/r/shitpost or www.reddit.com/r/circlejerk 

Mods don't take out other criclejerks, idiots shitposting and bickering in this forum, but will take out my glorious collection?

How crooked.

[zappian]

Yes and it also has less SMM's, who cares. Newsflash; it's not a 980. I know it has 500mb of slower memory, it's what you quoted and I tried to explain to you what the caveat of that was and why some people report poor performance beyond 3.5GB.

 

What the Nai benchmark only demonstrates is exactly that. It does not reflect gaming performance so long games don't use that portion of the memory thinking it is high-bandwidth memory.

 

Christ you are dense.

 

Really mature name calling as well.

 

I have proven it affects gaming performance,

 

http://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/2tu86z/discussion_i_benchmarked_gtx_970s_in_sli_at_1440p/

 

I think you are suffering from three things.

 

-Buyers remorse.

-Stocholhom syndrome.

-Need to justify your purchase.

 

You are so biased it hurts me physically.

[Majestic]

 

I have proven it affects gaming performance,

 

http://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/2tu86z/discussion_i_benchmarked_gtx_970s_in_sli_at_1440p/

 

And I explained why.

 

It's not the 3.5GB buffer that is causing the issues. It's the driver/OS/Application not handling it properly. A 780TI doesn't start stuttering when it reaches 3GB because it isn't unbalanced memory. 

 

As soon as the drivers/OS and applications communicate properly about the speed of that last portion and don't put large textures in it, it won't effect performance at all. So the 3.5GB isn't the issue, the 512MB is. Which should be totally fixable with drivers/firmware or OS updates. 

 

See what I mean about being inept? You haven't the foggiest how stuff works and just regurgitate everything you read.

 

Funny fact; this is totally explained in the pcper.com video which you advocate constantly as empirical proof of your argument.

 

 

My collection so far:

 

Not funny in the slightest, please leave.

[Shahnewaz]

Not funny in the slightest, please leave.

Those weren't posted for you, so please ignore.

[zappian]

 

 

 

And I explained why.

 

 

Not funny in the slightest, please leave.

 

 

Still nvidia wont be able to fix the nerfed memory arquitecture.

 

Unless you can download more l2 cache and SMs.

 

Fact of the matter is this problem affects gaming performance.

You might be able to reduce slightly the problem at best.

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

Really mature name calling as well.

 

I have proven it affects gaming performance,

 

http://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/comments/2tu86z/discussion_i_benchmarked_gtx_970s_in_sli_at_1440p/

 

I think you are suffering from three things.

 

-Buyers remorse.

-Stocholhom syndrome.

-Need to justify your purchase.

 

You are so biased it hurts me physically.

 

You accuse him of name-calling; when you were calling people worse names from the very beginning. Don't hold double-standards; practice what you preach.