GTX 970 VRAM

[x Relentless Xx]

I want to upgrade my graphics card to either a 970 or a 980, but this 3.5GB vram issue is putting me off the 970, ive seen what it does when it tries to tap into that 512MB of vram and its not pretty. I cant make a decision.

[Gofspar]

I want to upgrade my graphics card to either a 970 or a 980, but this 3.5GB vram issue is putting me off the 970, ive seen what it does when it tries to tap into that 512MB of vram and its not pretty. I cant make a decision.

Gigabyte jerry rigged a fix so it uses it for caching, mine can use 3.8gb.

[Senzelian]

I want to upgrade my graphics card to either a 970 or a 980, but this 3.5GB vram issue is putting me off the 970, ive seen what it does when it tries to tap into that 512MB of vram and its not pretty. I cant make a decision.

See it like that: The GTX 780 had 3GB of VRAM and I've never seen anyone complaining that that wouldn't be enough. So, the GTX 970 has now even 500MB more. I don't think that this will effect anyone that is playing at 1080p or 1440p without modding a game heavily.

[Enderman]

ive seen what it does when it tries to tap into that 512MB of vram and its not pretty.

first of all, are you running 4k? if you are then you should get a 980

if not, a 970 will NOT use over 3.5GB of vram at 1080p or 1440p

 

second, the slower memory is actually STILL THERE so its actually better than if you did not have that half gig of vram

you can think of it as having 3.5GB vram plus some

the 780ti had only 3GB and performed fine, but of course when you start needing more than 3GB you will get frame drops which is what happens when you use over 3.5GB on the 970

[x Relentless Xx]

first of all, are you running 4k? if you are then you should get a 980

if not, a 970 will NOT use over 3.5GB of vram at 1080p or 1440p

second, the slower memory is actually STILL THERE so its actually better than if you did not have that half gig of vram

you can think of it as having 3.5GB vram plus some

the 780ti had only 3GB and performed fine, but of course when you start needing more than 3GB you will get frame drops which is what happens when you use over 3.5GB on the 970

I game on 1080p @144Hz, ive seen the 970 try and use that extra 512 at 1080p though in demanding games like Dying Light and Assassins Creed Unity

[Bonesy]

I still think it's an amazing card; especially considering it would have been a 3GB card with previous architectures. Also, your bottleneck will be performance before it will be VRAM in most cases. Here is a video that might give you some more feedback/thoughts:

 

[Enderman]

I game on 1080p @144Hz, ive seen the 970 try and use that extra 512 at 1080p though in demanding games like Dying Light and Assassins Creed Unity

yeah well imagine if it was a 780ti with only 3GB, you would be getting stuttering much sooner

 

plus if youre already using over 3.5GB, then you probably could easily use more than 4, in which case you should buy something other than a 970 or 980

[x Relentless Xx]

@Bonesy ive already seen that video, but thanks

[blackadder]

For 1080p its great, overclocks like a beast. My friend has a 980sc and i dont think it was worth it, he does play at 1440. My g1 gets really close to his 980 because he doesnt over clock. I would still wait for amd 300 stuff, just for the price drop if nothing else. Or grab a 290x when they go on sale.

[x Relentless Xx]

-snip-

please leave if youre going to be beligerant

[x Relentless Xx]

For 1080p its great, overclocks like a beast. My friend has a 980sc and i dont think it was worth it, he does play at 1440. My g1 gets really close to his 980 because he doesnt over clock. I would still wait for amd 300 stuff, just for the price drop if nothing else. Or grab a 290x when they go on sale.

Yea im going to try and get 1500Mhz out of it

[Fate]

You're likely not going to use over 3.5GB vram with one card (assuming you want to play at >60fps), so unless you plan to go SLI at 1440p or higher, a 970 is perfectly fine imo.

[x Relentless Xx]

You're likely not going to use over 3.5GB vram with one card (assuming you want to play at >60fps), so unless you plan to go SLI at 1440p or higher, a 970 is perfectly fine imo.

yea im still leaning towards the 970

[blackadder]

Yea im going to try and get 1500Mhz out of it

its up to chance but, alot of people can get 1500 on core. The 900 card are full direct x 12 too. I think youll be fine. I dont have the two games that give people problems so i have yet to have that bad experience.

[x Relentless Xx]

yeah well imagine if it was a 780ti with only 3GB, you would be getting stuttering much sooner

plus if youre already using over 3.5GB, then you probably could easily use more than 4, in which case you should buy something other than a 970 or 980

yes but thats irrelevant because the 780s vram doesnt bottleneck itself. The 970 has 512mb of significantly slower vram that when it has to tap into that extra 512mb, it severely bottlenecks the card, the 780 has 3Gb of vram at full speed, thats why the 780 doesnt do that. So that statement is irrelevant.

[Shahnewaz]

Why not an R9 290X? It looks the perfect alternative.

[blackadder]

Why not an R9 290X? It looks the perfect alternative.

i feel the same way. There is a member review on the fourms that is really good please give it a read.

[Enderman]

yes but thats irrelevant because the 780s vram doesnt bottleneck itself. The 970 has 512mb of significantly slower vram that when it has to tap into that extra 512mb, it severely bottlenecks the card, the 780 has 3Gb of vram at full speed, thats why the 780 doesnt do that. So that statement is irrelevant.

I dont think you understand how vram works...

 

what happens with the 970 at over 3.5GB is THE SAME as what happens with a 780/780ti at 3GB

the GPU needs a place to put the frames, and if it doesnt have a place for them (in the case of the 780/ti) you get massive frame drops

the the case of the 970, it does have the vram, but its slower, so you still get massive frame drops

 

ITS THE SAME PROBLEM

basically you "run out of" vram at 3.5GB

[Razzaa]

yes but thats irrelevant because the 780s vram doesnt bottleneck itself. The 970 has 512mb of significantly slower vram that when it has to tap into that extra 512mb, it severely bottlenecks the card, the 780 has 3Gb of vram at full speed, thats why the 780 doesnt do that. So that statement is irrelevant.

Some people get bad performance after 3.5gb. I do not. I have many videos playing new AAA games over 3.5gb vram usage. I also monitor frame times and see no issues. For 1080p it isnt even worth discussing the so called vram issues.

[blackadder]

I dont think you understand how vram works...

what happens with the 970 at over 3.5GB is THE SAME as what happens with a 780/780ti at 3GB

the GPU needs a place to put the frames, and if it doesnt have a place for them (in the case of the 780/ti) you get massive frame drops

the the case of the 970, it does have the vram, but its slower, so you still get massive frame drops

ITS THE SAME PROBLEM

basically you "run out of" vram at 3.5GB

still faster than system memory,mostly bbecause we dont have to go through the pci bus.

[Shahnewaz]

still faster than system memory,mostly bbecause we dont have to go through the pci bus.

Which is of no use since you can't access both partitions simultaneously. So the GPU ends up using more system memory and that's the reason behind huge pagefile size increases when running games.

Also all the games will see the GPU having 3.5GB VRAM, not 4GB.

Dissapointing. Outrageous. :angry:

[Enderman]

still faster than system memory,mostly bbecause we dont have to go through the pci bus.

yes, which is why having a slow 3.5GB of vram is better than not having the 512MB at all

[blackadder]

Which is of no use since you can't access both partitions simultaneously. So the GPU ends up using more system memory and that's the reason behind huge pagefile size increases when running games.

Also all the games will see the GPU having 3.5GB VRAM, not 4GB.

i have games that show up as 4gb

[ExcitezR]

i use the 970 over 3 1080 screens and have no issue with the Vram

[SteveGrabowski]

The 980 should be a little more future proof because of the full 4GB of VRAM running full speed, but do you find that worth $200+ more?