Official Nvidia GTX 970 Discussion Thread

[Tacitus]

Given your performance needs, power requirements and budget, you just returned the best solution available so your option is to wait. Two 290Xs will do just as good a job as 970s, if you buy a new PSU to go with them.

 

It's not returned, nor is it really the best solution as I could not justify the cost of another 970. At my resolution 290x CF > 970 SLI by ~4% across a variety of games, I doubt a pair of 290s is drastically worse.

 

I'm also somewhat unconvinced of my need for a new PSU. In most cases I've seen, a pair of 290s being hammered by something like valley draw 660-680W from the wall (thus the system is being fed even less). So I know they'll be fine at least.

 

But I do appreciate the input. It's just hard to argue with the value of a pair of 290s right now.

 

I would also add I have a fairly basic setup. 1 SSD, i5 4670k at stock clocks, 3 case fans, 8gb ram and a CD drive. Not that taxing.

[McMurderMonkey]

Kinda glad I didn't get one for Christmas. May look into one later down the line, when prices drop.

[bogus]

 

You talking about DX12 = Mantle or DX11+Mantle = DX12? Richard Huddy never claimed this though, you're the guy who has to prove this not me and Microsoft did deny the BS you are spewing.

"It’s our job to create great APIs and we have worked closely with our hardware and software partners to prove the significant performance wins of Direct3D 12."

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/directx/archive/2014/03/20/directx-12.aspx

I'm talking about Microsoft asking to use Mantle, wich was what Richard Huddy claimed, several times.

I don't have to prove shit - you are the one claiming what no offcial party claims: that Richard Huddy, and others, are lying.

So if you claim this, then it's you who should prove he is wrong... wich you haven't so far, neither you will.

 

 

An API being low-level/cutting CPU overhead aren't features, something in the form of tesellations is a feature or a special rendering technique whatever bs. 

You're ignorant if you claim Mantle is the first low-level API, D3D has been low-level on the PC for like 15 years;

Windows supports DirectX 8.0, which enhances the multimedia capabilities of your computer. DirectX provides access to the capabilities of your display and audio cards, which enables programs to provide realistic three-dimensional (3-D) graphics and immersive music and audio effects. DirectX is a set of low-level Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) that provides Windows programs with high-performance hardware-accelerated multimedia support.

https://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en-us/what_is_directx.mspx?mfr=true

And their consoles always had low-level API's.

 

Nope I don't claim Mantle is the first low level API, I don't know where the fuck you got that information LOL - DX8.0 LOOOOL? If you want a really low level API check Glide API.

Here, food for thought: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7371/understanding-amds-mantle-a-lowlevel-graphics-api-for-gcn

 

 

Why did AMD refuse to comment on Anandtech's rumour that Mantle is plain copy of the Xbox's one API? 

 

What’s not being said, but what becomes increasingly hinted at as we read through AMD’s material, is not just that Mantle is a low level API, but rather Mantle is the low level API. As in it’s either a direct copy or a very close derivative of the Xbox One’s low level graphics API. All of the pieces are there; AMD will tell you from the start that Mantle is designed to leverage the optimization work done for games on the next generation consoles, and furthermore Mantle can even use the Direct3D High Level Shader Language (HLSL), the high level shader language Xbox One shaders will be coded against in the first place.

 

Let’s be very clear here: AMD will not discuss the matter let alone confirm it, so this is speculation on our part. But it’s speculation that we believe is well grounded. Based on what we know thus far, we believe Mantle is the Xbox One’s low level API brought to the PC.

Pretty sure AMD would have said it without any hassle that they built it from the ground up by themselves.

Maybe because they are bound to a contract not to mention they developed a API for Xbox One? Maybe because Microsoft choose to go with DX11.2?

And again you, like many other, live in the wonderland where companys copy shit from eachother without any legal issues, and still manage to develop a solution 2 years previously the ones who are originally developing it, and still got almost 100 Devs supporting it - RIGHT! LOOOOL

Now if you will try to move your little brain cranks you will figure this out: "Oh shit, if they can't comment some shit because they can be compromised - YET THEY FUCKING COMMENT ND CLAIM THAT MICROSOFT ASKED TO BRING MANTLE TO DX12 - THEN THEY MUST BE SURE THEY CAN CLAIM THIS SHIT WITHOUT ANY LEGAL ISSUES"

Do you even think before owning yourself with your logic?!

 

 

Yeah they've asked for the source code which AMD didn't want to give them, see above why.

Anandtech's rumour makes a lot more sense than your DX11+Mantle = DX12 theory based on shit.

Nope - they denied the access cause Mantle was in beta. Here you go, learn the facts:

 

"I know that Intel have approached us for access to the Mantle interfaces, et cetera," Huddy said. " And right now, we've said, give us a month or two, this is a closed beta, and we'll go into the 1.0 [public release] phase sometime this year, which is less than five months if you count forward from June. They have asked for access, and we will give it to them when we open this up, and we'll give it to anyone who wants to participate in this."

Yeah the difference is that Anandtech, like you said, it's a rumour - what I'm saying is what AMD said... so yeah... you need to stop owning yourself...

The rest of your post was ignored cause it doesn't address anything I said. You are just try harding and lost in your own arguments, when all you have to do is prove Richard Huddy is lying.

[mr moose]

I honestly don't believe a full refund is warranted as that price difference would be a restocking fee, which imo is completely fair. Just because Nvidia lied/miscommunicated/whatever doesn't mean Newegg is the one to blame/punish -- lets be honest, the likelihood that Newegg knew anything about any of this is non-existent. 

 

Yeah, I'm just a miser for technical accuracy.  Laws and stuff.

[jaggysnake57]

I'm not here to link you to google, bud. This is dumb, you're still fucking using "why aren't you hating on AMD and Intel then, HUH?!" as some sort of reasoning for why it's okay for nvidia to do this. I'm done with you, this much twisting of reason is wayy too much for me. I'm going to call it like I see it, this is pure fanboyism not being able to deal with others criticizing a company and wanting instead that other companies are criticized.

its not fanboy i go where the performance is...and i did google hence the reason im asking for proof.  both amd intel et el use simlar tactic to advertise thier products. yet they seam to be having an easy time of it

 

the fact is your argument is not valid and is opinion, hence you looking for an out.

[Goussy]

It just sucks that people that bought the 970 have to deal with less then what they were expecting.

[Pomfinator]

It just sucks that people that bought the 970 have to deal with less then what they were expecting.

They got a 970 in performance, no one bought this card by looking at the ROP and cache count. The 970 is the same card with the same performance, nothing has changed except for some numbers on a spreadsheet. If they want to return it they can, Nvidia has to honor it. But do it because you're unsatisfied with Nvidia not with the card.

[bcredeur97]

we must remmeber people that 3.5GB is still more than 3GB that the 780TI had for example.

 

This is still a good card, it still got a memory upgrade over the past generation.

 

Its a shame that Nvidia lied about it but I dont see any reason to panic over this.

[Goussy]

They got a 970 in performance, no one bought this card by looking at the ROP and cache count. The 970 is the same card with the same performance, nothing has changed except for some numbers on a spreadsheet. If they want to return it they can, Nvidia has to honor it. But do it because you're unsatisfied with Nvidia not with the card.

im not mad at anyone it just sucks if someone bought a 970 and they were expecting there to be 4gb of cram at the same speed.

[othertomperson]

It's not returned, nor is it really the best solution as I could not justify the cost of another 970. At my resolution 290x CF > 970 SLI by ~4% across a variety of games, I doubt a pair of 290s is drastically worse.

 

I'm also somewhat unconvinced of my need for a new PSU. In most cases I've seen, a pair of 290s being hammered by something like valley draw 660-680W from the wall (thus the system is being fed even less). So I know they'll be fine at least.

 

But I do appreciate the input. It's just hard to argue with the value of a pair of 290s right now.

 

I would also add I have a fairly basic setup. 1 SSD, i5 4670k at stock clocks, 3 case fans, 8gb ram and a CD drive. Not that taxing.

 

It depends on what games you're playing but at most resolution the 970 SLI does slightly better. There's bugger all in it though. If 970 SLI is too expensive then 290X CF will be too, since actually in the UK the 970 is still potentially cheaper, and 290 CF will be worse than either of them. Whether the price difference offsets the performance decrease, you're the only one who can make that decision.

 

And as for the PSU, you're giving yourself 70 Watts headroom without taking account of any overclocking you'd want to be doing, your CPU (and its overclock which let's face it you should be doing with an unlocked CPU anyway) or anything else in your system. 70 Watts breathing space is not enough for me to recommend this at all.

 

Ultimately what it comes down to is this: is it cheaper to buy another 970, or to buy two 290s and a PSU?

[tnlich]

I never discussed it's performance, I only discussed them lying, a fault yeah right, Nvidia that big company do you really think no one will ever notice ??? a couple of enthusiasts pointed this out, don't you think engineers would have noticed ??? keep in mind those engineers test the card and the also design it, Nvidia said they made the card like this and the OP included the quote, I'm just pissed about them lying.

 

 

Someone give Ces a tranquilizer please. Read my post man.. I said Ok to you then Asked the questions. I GET WHAT YOUR SAYING CES!!!!!!!!!! Honest :lol:

[tnlich]

I don't think the benchmarks show that the card was stuttering (when it hits 3.5gb) upon release. 

 

 

Like I said in a earlier post it did it on a Rare and almost never occasion. So wander why everyone is so angry. Everyone lies now a days. Its basically what the country is running and trading off of now . LOL

[SeanBond]

It only happens in a few games; Shadow of Mordor being one that was tested by Jay to show the stuttering issue, but that was with the texture pack installed as well so that could be something to take into account? *shrug*

 

The worry is how it'll be performing in future titles, which is valid to an extent.

I did see that, but im not convinced it's because of the .5gb issue so much as the game says it's required to have 6gb. I can't even launch it with 3gb with ultra textures.

[mr moose]

Like I said in a earlier post it did it on a Rare and almost never occasion. So wander why everyone is so angry. Everyone lies now a days. Its basically what the country is running and trading off of now . LOL

 

this in a nutshell, Do people really think that of the 100's of reviews out their for this GPU that all the reviewers lied and said it was good if it was stuttering?  Just because an FPS graph doesn't show stuttering doesn't mean there was an unexpected stuttering, and even if there was the reviewer would have said.  Like ALL cards, stuttering occurs when the cards performance limit is hit,  Clearly in the reviews this was before vram speed issues became a limiting factor.

[Tacitus]

It depends on what games you're playing but at most resolution the 970 SLI does slightly better. There's bugger all in it though. If 970 SLI is too expensive then 290X CF will be too, since actually in the UK the 970 is still potentially cheaper, and 290 CF will be worse than either of them. Whether the price difference offsets the performance decrease, you're the only one who can make that decision.

 

And as for the PSU, you're giving yourself 70 Watts headroom without taking account of any overclocking you'd want to be doing, your CPU (and its overclock which let's face it you should be doing with an unlocked CPU anyway) or anything else in your system. 70 Watts breathing space is not enough for me to recommend this at all.

 

Ultimately what it comes down to is this: is it cheaper to buy another 970, or to buy two 290s and a PSU?

 

680 Watts from the wall on a 750W PSU doesn't mean 70W headroom. It means the system is using a fair bit less than 680W (probably closer to 600), so there is, I believe, ample headroom. Plus my CPU is actually at stock clocks, I cheaped out and didn't get an aftermarket cooler, and now I can't be arsed with it

 

But for the most part I agree; 290x CF vs 970 SLI is very close, with 290 CF lagging behind a bit. But I think it has a certain value the others do not. Guess I'll make my mind up over the next few days.

[Razzaa]

This was the response from NCIX. Having 3.5gb improves performance apparently lol 

 

 

Hi,

Thank you for contacting us regarding your concern, at this time nvidia's official stance is to contact your respective manufacturer for the video card and was announced here:

http://forums.ncix.com/forums/?mode=showthread&forum=215&threadid=2697769&pagenumber=3&product_id=102011&forumid=215&pcbuilderid=0&overclockid=0&subpage=2

If you do wish to return a card to us it will be treated as a satisfaction return with a 15% restocking fee deduction and has to be within our 15 day refund period from when you received the product as the memory allocation misinterpretation is not considered a defect.
You would have to defer to the manufacturer's warranty process for ANY units over 30 days based on the date on when you've received the video card.

The reason behind the memory allocation is also explained here officially from nvidia which apparently increases perfomance of the video card and only certain games that are not optimized well that go over the 3.5gb memory usage will experience graphical slow downs.
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/NVIDIA-Discloses-Full-Memory-Structure-and-Limitations-GTX-970

Please contact:

ASUS
Send a ticket: http://www.service.asus.com/#!rma-request/cope
Call/Chat: http://www.service.asus.com/#!b2c3/cpm1

EVGA
http://www.evga.com/about/contactus/
Phone: 1-888-881-3842
E-mail: support[AT]evga.com

Gigabyte
http://www.gigabyte.com/support-downloads/support-downloads.aspx
Send a ticket: http://www.gigabyte.com/support-downloads/technical-support.aspx

MSI (Canada)
http://ca.msi.com/about/contact-us/
Email: CAsupport@msi.coom
Phone: 1-626-271-1004 Option 1

Zotac (Canada)
Email: support.us[AT]zotac.com
All other regions: http://www.zotac.com/support/contact-support.html?show=global

Let us know if you have further questions or concerns. 

 

 

[Guest Kloaked]

I did see that, but im not convinced it's because of the .5gb issue so much as the game says it's required to have 6gb. I can't it even launch it with 3gb with ultra textures.

Yeah that's interesting.

[Misanthrope]

yeah but its not 8 seperate parts. its like saying i have a car with 8 cylinders that gives me 300bhp total. then finding that 1 of the cylinders was gimped by the manufacture and performs worse than the others. the car runs fine and how it was intended, still gives 300bhp, and performs like al the reviews said it would. but the engine is different to how you thought it would be. is that wrong?

also you would have to prove that 1 part being less has changed the experience from how it was advertised. thats the key thing here, even with the vram issue its still the same card that the reviewers benchamrked. it is as advertised. it still works as intended

No. It would be like claiming it can reach a top speed of 200km but going past 140 would make the car overheat, have torque issues, etc. Most people will not be driving at that speed, but some might want to and should be able to if they paid for that, no if then or buts.

The issue here is that this being defended cause people like Nvidia, not because there is any logic from a pro consumer stand point to do so. You should get what you fucking paid for, not what someone says it's good enough anyway.

[mr moose]

No. It would be like claiming it can reach a top speed of 200km but going past 140 would make the car overheat, have torque issues, etc. Most people will not be driving at that speed, but some might want to and should be able to if they paid for that, no if then or buts.

The issue here is that this being defended cause people like Nvidia, not because there is any logic from a pro consumer stand point to do so. You should get what you fucking paid for, not what someone says it's good enough anyway.

 

can people please quit with the analogies.  None of them work.  It only confuses people and they start arguing a completely irrelevant point.

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

Like I said in a earlier post it did it on a Rare and almost never occasion. So wander why everyone is so angry. Everyone lies now a days. Its basically what the country is running and trading off of now . LOL

 

Haha I guess because not many people still play rage and probably just blamed the game.

It had some weird texture loading issues on amd cards. I haven't seen the benchmarks for rage btw, where did you find it?

 

edit: Misread rare for rage haha. One thing I realized is that many people who are not enthusiast are also buying 970s.

Yes, there are others out who wants a gaming pc and many of them were recommended 970s. So they may have been

the many angry people we are seeing.

 

But we cannot deny that the 970 is not without problems. Like you said it did on a "Rare and almost never occasion" which means

it still did. 

 

poor 970... getting all the blame from nvidia's mistake :B

[Kinda Bottlenecked]

nope. sorry but people know the issues and how the ram is laid out, the card still has 4gb.  there is no false advertising going on right now. FACT

 

yeah maybe it is unethical but its not just nvidia doing it where is the hate for AMD?  or intel....i think that there does need to be more transparency but people are picking the wrong fight with the 970...

 

True... It is a fact that the card has 4GB. If we take the card and strip it down, we would see all vram modules present. 

But one would assume that he/she has 4GB of vram available. Not to say that that 0.5GB is not available. It would just cause 

a little stuttering and that's all to it.

 

Like you said "maybe it is unethical". I wasn't happy that both AMD and Nvidia advertised their highest end card with having enormous

amounts of vram when it only has half of that. This is unfortunately very unethical from both parties. But the biggest difference here

is that the 970 is only a single core card, where the card rightfully has access to 4GB of vram. No one expected the last 0.5GB to be slow.

 

The gpu market is very important. Especially to us, enthusiasts, if we let nvidia off the hook for making such a blunder and not acknowledging

such a problem exists. Nvidia and AMD would probably think it is okay to do it again.

 

I'm sure you wouldn't want this to happen again. I know i wouldn't. But sadly we have to create flak for nvidia. Especially when they've

said it was "designed this way". Does that not sound sickening to you? After so many people were upset that it was technically a "3.5GB"

card nvidia said that it was "designed this way". Imagine how some loyal customers must have felt when the nvidia said there is "nothing

wrong with the card" and "it was designed this way for a reason". Many people reading this would probably interpret it as nvidia designing

the card to stutter when reaching more than 3.5GB. I get that nvidia is upset that many people are now choosing 290Xs over 970 but really,

they have to expect this especially when they are not admitting the card is not without flaws.      

[Lewellyn]

can people please quit with the analogies.  None of them work.  It only confuses people and they start arguing a completely irrelevant point.

 

Hypocrite.

 

 

Busted.

[Victorious Secret]

Hypocrite.

 

analogy.png

 

Busted.

 

@NumLock21 posted that analogy to mock everyone, hence why @mr moose liked it. Or can you not tell when someone is being blatantly snarky when it comes to this topic? 

Stop being such a white knight. We've explained this so many times. We actually agree with your premise that Nvidia lied and shouldn't get away with it. What we didn't agree with is the constant flood of posts about it. What does that solve? Nothing. Stop trying to make it a thing.

 

You already know what actions to take to actually cause change, go engage in them instead of circle jerking this forum and getting butthurt whenever someone disagrees with you or calls you out, and then engage in subversive, derogatory and demeaning statements about them simply because they had the gall to tell you to calm down. 

[DeViLzzz]

Nvidia gone and done it again with them locking down laptop gpus through drivers.  Nvidia is the new Ubisoft.  Nvidia keeps on digging.

[Lewellyn]

@NumLock21 posted that analogy to mock everyone, hence why @mr moose liked it. Or can you not tell when someone is being blatantly snarky when it comes to this topic? 

Stop being such a white knight. We've explained this so many times. We actually agree with your premise that Nvidia lied and shouldn't get away with it. What we didn't agree with is the constant flood of posts about it. What does that solve? Nothing. Stop trying to make it a thing.

 

You already know what actions to take to actually cause change, go engage in them instead of circle jerking this forum and getting butthurt whenever someone disagrees with you or calls you out, and then engage in subversive, derogatory and demeaning statements about them simply because they had the gall to tell you to calm down. 

 

Oh, could you not tell from my obvious sarcasm that I was cracking a joke about being busted, because I have even stated before that I also prefer people don't speak in analogies?

 

No, sorry. The forum is open and labeling people "butthurt" and telling them to "GTFO" is not conducive for a proper discussion.

 

 

go engage in them instead of circle jerking this forum and getting butthurt whenever someone disagrees with you or calls you out, and then engage in subversive, derogatory and demeaning statements about them simply because they had the gall to tell you to calm down. 

 

white knight (edited in definition of white knight for irony lols) : someone or something that rescues or saves another person or thing from a bad situation

 

This is some meta irony...