another gtx970 question

[Swegly]

Is this true? 

[Whorax]

Can't watch the video because I don't have much time (gotta go take a final soon), but if we're referring to the 3.5GB thing, I don't believe that's fixable with software updates.

 

I could be wrong though, so don't take my word for it.

[Fulgrim]

The 3.5GB is a physical problem. It cannot be fixed with software.

[VioDuskar]

Can't watch the video because I don't have much time (gotta go take a final soon), but if we're referring to the 3.5GB thing, I don't believe that's fixable with software updates.

 

I could be wrong though, so don't take my word for it.

it's a hardware issue that can't be fixed with software, but it can be mitigated by working data flow differently.

[Swegly]

The 3.5GB is a physical problem. It cannot be fixed with software.

Would you recommend return the 970 and get a different card or just keep it. I plan to play at 1440p

[pablopg69]

Would you recommend return the 970 and get a different card or just keep it. I plan to play at 1440p

What games are you going to be playing?

[Swegly]

What games are you going to be playing?

Every single latest FPS or Free roam games or RP games

[Fulgrim]

Would you recommend return the 970 and get a different card or just keep it. I plan to play at 1440p

For 1440p, the GTX 970 will do ok i guess, as long as you toggle some settings down, especially shadows. I'd say for the similar price of a GTX 970, the R9 290x is a more viable option for 1440p, since it has comparable performance, and 4GB of usable vram.

[pablopg69]

Every single latest FPS or Free roam games or RP games

Would you mind playing on high as opposed to ultra ?

Also, some AA is not really necessary, still, would you be willing to let it go?

If yes, to both of these, then keep it.

If not, you might want to get a better card.

[Swegly]

Would you mind playing on high as opposed to ultra ?

Also, some AA is not really necessary, still, would you be willing to let it go?

If yes, to both of these, then keep it.

If not, you might want to get a better card.

Do you mean high on the 970 compared to say a 290x on ultra?

[ADZ_123_!"£]

Would you mind playing on high as opposed to ultra ?

Also, some AA is not really necessary, still, would you be willing to let it go?

If yes, to both of these, then keep it.

If not, you might want to get a better card.

The only card better than the 970 is the 980 and that is a very expensive upgrade to go for.

PS How have you not heard about this 3.5gb vram issue before.

[Swegly]

The only card better than the 970 is the 980 and that is a very expensive upgrade to go for.

PS How have you not heard about this 3.5gb vram issue before.

I heard of it before but now Im rethinking it due to the high price I paid for it since being in sweden. Going to California in a month so i guess ill return it and by a 290x for 150$ less. Btw when is the 300 series released (IF THATS WHAT THEY ARE CALLED!)

[pablopg69]

Do you mean high on the 970 compared to say a 290x on ultra?

Sure. Look at it this way:

The 970 is a newer gpu, therefore is more efficient, more powerful, and all that crap.

The 290x only real advantage is the full 4gb of VRAM usage.

As games get more demanding, and they will if consoles keep dominating the market, especially fps, the 290x will lag behind. So now, is those .5gb worth the extra power consumption, aging chip?

Get a 980 if the budget allows for it. If not, high is really not that bad.

[ADZ_123_!"£]

I heard of it before but now Im rethinking it due to the high price I paid for it since being in sweden. Going to California in a month so i guess ill return it and by a 290x for 150$ less. Btw when is the 300 series released (IF THATS WHAT THEY ARE CALLED!)

Really unless you are going to go for 4k gaming then the 3.5GB of vram won't make a difference to you. 

[pablopg69]

It's not an issue. You're talking as if the engineers at NVIDIA screwed up. The memory usage on the 970 is by design. Buying it and expecting it to perform like a 980 or a Titan is why people complain so much. If used as intended, the 970 works flawlessly.

Source: I have one.

[Swegly]

It's not an issue. You're talking as if the engineers at NVIDIA screwed up. The memory usage on the 970 is by design. Buying it and expecting it to perform like a 980 or a Titan is why people complain so much. If used as intended, the 970 works flawlessly.

Source: I have one.

Ok well I have reached a decision. Use my old gtx650 as a place holder after I return the 970 and get all 430$ back till I go to the US in 1 month and when im there buy a 290x Tri-x for 300$ (here in sweden the 970 was 430-450) or keep the 970. Suggestion?

[colonel_mortis]

Moved to GPUs

[pablopg69]

Ok well I have reached a decision. Use my old gtx650 as a place holder after I return the 970 and get all 430$ back till I go to the US in 1 month and when im there buy a 290x Tri-x for 300$ (here in sweden the 970 was 430-450) or keep the 970. Suggestion?

let us know how it goes.

[michaelk12]

Maybe what they did was make it put the data that isn't QUITE as bandwidth-intensive in the slow .5 portion?

[Swegly]

let us know how it goes.

Put in the gtx650. Even if the .5vram thing didnt bother me enough the prices in sweden are absurd. Im going to california in one month for a couple weeks so maybe I can stock up on crossfire 290xs+ 1440pmonitor then.

[ExcitezR]

yeah it is capped at 3.5GB now this is my afterburner after playing GTA 5 over 3 screens in surround

 

[Blackie Sheen]

Can't watch the video because I don't have much time (gotta go take a final soon), but if we're referring to the 3.5GB thing, I don't believe that's fixable with software updates.

 

I could be wrong though, so don't take my word for it.

well, I  did not watch the video either but I suppose they might be able to limit the amount used by games to 3,5 GB though a firmware update