Official Nvidia GTX 970 Discussion Thread

[Najuno]

A friend of mine runs exactly this scenario. He has 2 Gigabyte G1 GTX970 in stock settings running. He has no VRAM stuttering at all. He plays Star Citizen, Elite Dangerous, Dead Space3 and Arma III most of the time.

Kind of strange that some people seems to struggle and others are fine. But that might as well depends also a bit on the rest of the system I guess.

[KamiKatze]

970s are bad for high resolutions.

 

You're really  getting on my nerves lateley. You are everywhere and you splatter your hearsay all over everyone's thread.

 

970s are still great for higher resolutions. I am getting around 2 GB VRAM in heavily modded skyrim. Just as an example, i know the 970 is slightly damaged and i am very pissed about it but it's still a good card.

[zappian]

You're really  getting on my nerves lateley. You are everywhere and you splatter your hearsay all over everyone's thread.

 

970s are still great for higher resolutions. I am getting around 2 GB VRAM in heavily modded skyrim. Just as an example, i know the 970 is slightly damaged and i am very pissed about it but it's still a good card.

 

970 are bad for 4k.

 

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014/11/19/nvidia_geforce_gtx_970_sli_4k_nv_surround_review

 

Not my fault the truth annoys you.

 

I did proper research in the matter and you can see the 290x cfx is a better option.

 

If you have some kind of proof that 970s are better than a pair of 290x at 4k go ahead.

 

If you want to disagree with me bring proof to the table , otherwise its useless.

 

I say that they are bad at 4k since the pair of 290x is quite superior and cheaper.

 

They are still excellent 1080p and 1440p cards.

 

[Butterfish]

970 are bad for 4k.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014/11/19/nvidia_geforce_gtx_970_sli_4k_nv_surround_review

Not my fault the truth annoys you.

I did proper research in the matter and you can see the 290x cfx is a better option.

If you have some kind of proof that 970s are better than a pair of 290x at 4k go ahead.

If you want to disagree with me bring proof to the table , otherwise its useless.

1440p is also considered high res and my 970 works great for exactly that.

[zappian]

1440p is also considered high res and my 970 works great for exactly that.

 

Im talking about 4k and higher .

[sgloux3470]

dying light. I'm reaching 3530mb with my 970 at 1440p

 

That's fine.

 

Dying Light will max out all available VRAM, but it won't exceed it.

 

The poor performance in Dying Light is just how the game runs right now.

 

Lots of modern games will use AVAILABLE VRAM, but that does not mean that they REQUIRE it.

 

Nvidia has set the 970 in drivers to only use 3.5 GB of VRAM, so as long as you don't see 3.6+ you're fine.  (Which is kind of evidence that they knew about it a long time ago...)

[othertomperson]

970 are bad for 4k.

 

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014/11/19/nvidia_geforce_gtx_970_sli_4k_nv_surround_review

 

Not my fault the truth annoys you.

 

Actually a lot of the people you are shouting your bullshit over are actually using 970s at 4K as their daily drivers. Whatever research you think you've done it cannot compare to actually using this constantly. You'd do well to listen to the experiences of people who actually game at this because you are just wrong, and you're not just wrong you are shouting your bullshit from the rooftops, going out of your way to derail every thread you come across that so much as mentions 970s just to scream misinformation and that is getting fucking irritating as all hell.

 

Two 290Xs are also a really good solution, but you are painting it as 290Xs being the ONLY solution, and 970s being incapable. You literally just said that they are "bad for 4K" which isn't true.

 

On topic, the answer to OP's question is "unlikely". The 970's vram is good for 4K, which would be equivalent to 4-way surround.

[zappian]

Actually a lot of the people you are shouting your bullshit over are actually using 970s at 4K as their daily drivers. Whatever research you think you've done it cannot compare to actually using this constantly. You'd do well to listen to the experiences of people who actually game at this because you are just wrong, and you're not just wrong you are shouting your bullshit from the rooftops, going out of your way to derail every thread you come across that so much as mentions 970s just to scream misinformation and that is getting fucking irritating as all hell.

 

On topic, the answer to OP's question is "unlikely". The 970's vram is good for 4K, which would be equivalent to 4-way surround.

 

Again if you can prove me otherwise go right ahead.

 

Unless you can its just a bunch of ad hominems directed at me.

 

The cheaper pair of 290x usually gets better results at higher resolution.

 

Anyways i dont want to get into another argument over this , im out.

[Lewellyn]

You're really  getting on my nerves lateley. You are everywhere and you splatter your hearsay all over everyone's thread.

 

970s are still great for higher resolutions. I am getting around 2 GB VRAM in heavily modded skyrim. Just as an example, i know the 970 is slightly damaged and i am very pissed about it but it's still a good card.

 

You realize that skyrim doesn't really require a lot of VRAM in the first place and that it has a horrible load distance for details + textures right?

[Justhavocman]

You're really  getting on my nerves lateley. You are everywhere and you splatter your hearsay all over everyone's thread.

 

970s are still great for higher resolutions. I am getting around 2 GB VRAM in heavily modded skyrim. Just as an example, i know the 970 is slightly damaged and i am very pissed about it but it's still a good card.

It's common knowledge that 970's are bad for 4k , linus said so , everyone is saying so , the benchmarks show so. It's a 300$ card for crying out loud. Don't expect it to run 4k @60fps.

[Lewellyn]

It's common knowledge that 970's are bad for 4k , linus said so , everyone is saying so , the benchmarks show so. It's a 300$ card for crying out loud. Don't expect it to run 4k @60fps.

 

Usual response: 

 

"Oh but you can play at 25-30 fps just fine..."

[othertomperson]

 

Again if you can prove me otherwise go right ahead.

 

Unless you can its just a bunch of ad hominems directed at me.

 

The cheaper pair of 290x usually gets better results at higher resolution.

 

Anyways i dont want to get into another argument over this , im out.

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXTtmK81VwY

 

 

You're also lying about the 290X being cheaper than the 970.

 

 

It's common knowledge that 970's are bad for 4k , linus said so , everyone is saying so , the benchmarks show so. It's a 300$ card for crying out loud. Don't expect it to run 4k @60fps.

 

One gets ~30fps at 4K, two of them get ~60. Performance between the 780, 970, 290X and 980 varies by not very much at all, and I have never experienced the 970's vram to be an issue. The benchmarks between it being released and everyone going ape shit about this never revealed an issue either.

Usual response: 

 

"Oh but you can play at 25-30 fps just fine..."

 

In case you'd never heard of it.

[zappian]

Us prices please:
 

Cheapest 970:

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

 

Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 970 4GB Video Card  ($319.99 @ Newegg) 

Total: $319.99

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-02-02 12:38 EST-0500

 

Cheapest 290x:

 

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

 

Video Card: Diamond Radeon R9 290X 4GB Video Card  ($299.99 @ Amazon) 

Total: $299.99

Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Generated by PCPartPicker 2015-02-02 12:38 EST-0500

 

Get some benchmarks of sli 970 wining against 290x cfx.

All the publications show the contratry.

Btw what do you think @Fate ?

[Lewellyn]

One gets ~30fps at 4K, two of them get ~60. Performance between the 780, 970, 290X and 980 varies by not very much at all, and I have never experienced the 970's vram to be an issue. The benchmarks between it being released and everyone going ape shit about this never revealed an issue either.

 

[JustCallMeVlad]

Title kinda says it all, Im thinking of RMAing my 970s because of the VRAM issue but I'm not 100% sure its worth it with my setup.  Ive hit 90% Vram usage before ( According to MSI afterburner) not really sure if the stuttering was from the GPU or the games I'm running. 

What do you think? 

 

 

Before anyone says it. 4GB 290X's will not help. You need 8GB cards 

[KamiKatze]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXTtmK81VwY

You're also lying about the 290X being cheaper than the 970.

One gets ~30fps at 4K, two of them get ~60. Performance between the 780, 970, 290X and 980 varies by not very much at all, and I have never experienced the 970's vram to be an issue. The benchmarks between it being released and everyone going ape shit about this never revealed an issue either.

In case you'd never heard of it.

You are my new hero. You gave a good and pregant answer to that BS talk.

[Lewellyn]

Before anyone says it. 4GB 290X's will not help. You need 8GB cards 

 

4GB + 4GB dual gpu cards don't count do they?

[JustCallMeVlad]

4GB + 4GB dual gpu cards don't count do they?

 

 

No. You need these

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202129&cm_re=8GB_290X-_-14-202-129-_-Product

[Whorax]

well 90% VRAM usage is about 3.6-3.7GB so youre in the "not safe" zone. If the stuttering is unbearable you might want to take advantage of Nvidias offer and return the cards.you could also try turning down the quality a bit and see if that helps

That's easier said than done. NewEgg rep essentially told me no way in hell because they have benchmarks of the 970 and 980 that say the issue isn't an actual issue. I'll be doing a live chat again today to see if I can get a more understanding/willing rep.

[othertomperson]

 

Us prices please:

 

Why the hell should I care what they are priced in one foreign country? I don't live in the US. That in no way affects my purchasing decision.

 

Before anyone says it. 4GB 290X's will not help. You need 8GB cards 

 

Maybe sometime in the future, perhaps. Right now the 970s's 4GB is absolutely fine except for a couple of terrible ports (including AC:U) so the standard 290X would be absolutely fine for this too. Which is good, because the 8GB version still costs about £400, which is stupid. 

 

qLkizAW2.png

 

There is no link associated with that picture. There is no testing methodology, no reference to quality beyond "high", there is no reference to how much AA they are using. All we know is that they are testing what is notorious for being one of the most demanding games in existence at 4K and having it cripple basically every dual GPU solution that you could possibly test it on. If you are claiming this is representative, then your point should be that 290Xs are bad at 4K because if they could be expected to throw out a maximum of 40 fps they wouldn't be doing much better than 970s.

 

As it is, 970s and 290Xs both perform pretty damned decently the majority of the time.

[Nikolithebear]

No. You need these

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814202129&cm_re=8GB_290X-_-14-202-129-_-Product

I'll look into it but I do run an Nvidia Shield so AMD is'nt really in the question unfortuantly...  The card I'm think of replacing it with is 980 SLI.  

[JustCallMeVlad]

I'll look into it but I do run an Nvidia Shield so AMD is'nt really in the question unfortuantly...  The card I'm think of replacing it with is 980 SLI.  

 

 

Not going to help. Keep the 970's and turn down the settings 

[Justhavocman]

Before anyone says it. 4GB 290X's will not help. You need 8GB cards 

 

4GB>3,5GB 

You are my new hero. You gave a good and pregant answer to that BS talk.

He was just proven wrong ._. i mean i don't even...

[JustCallMeVlad]

4GB>3,5GB 

He was just proven wrong ._. i mean i don't even...

 

 

Yeah because that whole 500 more mb is going to make such a difference 

[Justhavocman]

Yeah because that whole 500 more mb is going to make such a difference 

Half a gig is still half a gig . If you're gonna argue about the 20£ difference between the 290x and the 970 then i'm gonna argue about the 500MB difference. It's only fair if you think about it.