GTX 970: 3.3GB?! Whaa?!

[Guest Generallee]

Yall fell for the biggest bait ever known to mankind

[R_Golden]

You deliberately misquoted me, but whatever. Don't really give a fuck.

I thought you were referencing what you said before. I only took a piece so you would know what I was talking about. You did indeed say it would perform bad in real scenarios when the .5gb is hit, no?

[brokencross]

I thought you were referencing what you said before. I only took a piece so you would know what I was talking about. You did indeed say it would perform bad in real scenarios when the .5gb is hit, no?

As if that would be saying the card is an utter pile of shit.

I even specified the scenarios where the full 4GB would be used, and stated it was a great card for 1080p gaming.

[Aphala]

Sources?

 

That's actually impossible, they are 500MB Modules

512*

[R_Golden]

As if that would be saying the card is an utter pile of shit.

I even specified the scenarios where the full 4GB would be used, and stated it was a great card for 1080p gaming.

I never said you didn't, I was just pointing out the contradiction.

[brokencross]

I never said you didn't, I was just pointing out the contradiction.

There's no contradiction. The 970 is a great card, it just happens it performs badly when it uses all the VRAM.

[mwthomas10]

ive got enough money in the bank at the moment to get two of the fastest 970 cards available but this 3.5 vram issue is just putting me off spending the money. I want to go back to playing skyrim modded with shit loads of mods on it and I just don't want to make the same mistake when I brought my 2 670 and ran out of vram.

 

Holding off and see "IF" the 980ti comes out with the increase vram.

DX12 is *IM 99%SURE ON THIS*  going to add vram sharing between sli'd cards, so you would have 7gb full speed vram and 1gb slower, the effect of which can be minimized by nvidia releasing driver updates.

[LarsReviews]

Random 970 panic. Everyone buy 980 and take cover aaahhhh

[CoolaxGaming]

CAN we PLEASE stop this 970 argument shit?

The card DOES drop its performance when the 3.5 gig mark is passed. No I don't own a 970, how do I know?

Well the fucking architecture proves that. Try running your GPU at 1/7 of its stock speeds and see the lovely FPA.

And yes there is FALSE advertising going round, Nvidia still advertises the card as 7gbit per second when the last 500mb does not run at the speed.

Nvidia hoped no one would find out, but we did...

And yes games exceed 3.5gb vram on 1080p. Titanfall.

Running a clean bench won't show these probs, but in a desktop environment, where there is a lot of clutter and games are played in long periods, more vram is used.

And no, there is no driver that maxes out the GB at 3.5, if it was, nvidia would have to officially announce the card was 3.5gb

[Sintezza]

okay im going once again quote a post from my self i made about this a while back.

 

Sintezza

 

Yes its an issue, infact  in hightexture games, even at 1080p there some issues reported.

With shadow of mordor for example.

But also heavy modded skyrim and what not, could be a potentional issue.

 

Of course you can allways turn down some filters and still be fine.

But still for a $350,- card, and the way Nvidia is marketing it as a 1440p beast (future proofing), its just meh...

 

In a nutshell, there are 2 chunks of vram on a GTX970 card.

1 chunk of 3.5GB running over a 224bit bus, and 1 chunk of 512MB running only on 32bit.

As soon as a game exeeds the 3.5GB of vram, it will be basicly continue accesing the other 512MB, so there is basicly still 4GB of effective vram on the card.

The problem with this, is that the 512MB runs ALLOT slower, its basicly terrible slow for Vram standards.

Which basicly makes the 512MB chunk kinda useless.

 

In my opinnion for 1080p the GTX970 is still a very good card.

But Its still a ripoff in my opinnion, no matter how you look at it..