NVIDIA GTX 970 Design FLAW Lead to 3.5GB max vRAM usage

[LeGenD123]

I just don't believe you because you've lost credibility in my eyes. Thank you.

This is trolling FYI.

 

[Baghi]

Serious post, not trolling. After all the talk and debates across multiple forums anyone who still defends NVIDIA is delusional.

 

[nafu]

Not again Guys...... :giveup:

 

[Baghi]

Not again Guys...... :giveup:

:hah:

Here's the thing: a GTX 970 can push close to GTX 980 fps in games, even after exceeding 3.5GB pool, BUT the game play doesn't remain as good as on the GTX 980. What reviewers are doing now is showing absolute numbers, same was the case with AMD's HD 7970 Crossfire - numbers were impressive but the gameplay wasn't as satisfying as GeForce counterparts. After pcper/Ryan brough frametime issue and AMD addressed them, went bridgeless solution for multi-GPUs etc., now AMD's Crossfire is on a role!

I'm still however, reading further about the issue and struggling to find "clear" explanation on GTX 970 SLI FCAT results. This is coming from someone who just doesn't dig around GeForce forums like some LeGenD on this forum, but also explores other heavily crowded forums as well.

 

[Voodoo]

i feel for the ppl who bought this . hell i was about to
@Voodoo

don't care ... 1080p

 

[Link]

don't care ... 1080p

900p here :laugh1: ordered one already! don't care either!

 

[Baghi]

That's the spirit! Always be happy and live with the moto "whatever I've is the best".

 

[nafu]

only then you will satisfied with what you got. Hence u ll be in peace.

 

[nafu]

NVIDIA CEO talking now on GTX 970 DRAMA

 

[Hammadkamal]

The latest Nvidia driver fixed the issue so we should get over the drama and move on. The new drivers now can make the 970 cross the 3.5GB mark with ease and with no stuttering at all. Looks like they fixed it secretly to avoid any future lawsuits.

 

[AtiLover]

347.52 improvers

 

[nafu]

347.52 improvers

after 3.3GB memory tends to slowed down. still utilization is not fuller according to this benchmark results

 

[Voodoo]

i don't think this can be improved through drivers .... it is purely hardware issue

 

[nafu]

yup. its a design flaw. software cannot do any remedy on it. that is why AMD 4GB means 4GB

 

[wankelboy]

Nvidia gimped us lol
@LeGenD123 @Baghi
@Owi Khan
@nafu @Voodoo

watch this

https://youtu.be/Zb8WQ7atNkY

 

[nafu]

Nvidia gimped us lol
@LeGenD123 @Baghi
@Owi Khan
@nafu @Voodoo

watch this

https://youtu.be/Zb8WQ7atNkY

lol that is amazing. durng video just cant stop laughing like he. and yeah NVIDIA gimped people. because "it meant to be Gimped"

and there is another video made on hitler. that was nother worthy and little funny too

 

[Khan2014]

I have gtx 970. played all games on ultra at 1080. No problemos 60plus fps errywhere. Yeah when I buy a 30 inch 4k monitor in 2 years ill get 16gb cards.

 

[nafu]

I have gtx 970. played all games on ultra at 1080. No problemos 60plus fps errywhere. Yeah when I buy a 30 inch 4k monitor in 2 years ill get 16gb cards.

While Gaming, you can't notice any such issues. but Vram extensive games that consumes more than 3GB that might bother you. but that type of games are very less. SOM is one that eats up more vram. and COD AW as well. high FPS drops will bother.

 

[lucas jensen]

Hmmm Amazing

 

[Shary Bhallu TC]

While Gaming, you can't notice any such issues. but Vram extensive games that consumes more than 3GB that might bother you. but that type of games are very less. SOM is one that eats up more vram. and COD AW as well. high FPS drops will bother.

I don't think there is any graphically intensive game that goes above 3.7 or so GB at 1080p. 4K is a different story. Considering I maxed out Shadow Of Mordor with an i3 2100 and 4 GB RAM, the small level stutters I experienced must be due to system RAM rather than low VRAM. =/

I've also played Dying Light at maxed out settings and have experienced no stuttering at all despite reports that the game could reach around 4 GB VRAM on 1080p.