This needs to be posted everywhere.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
GeForce GTX 970s seem to have an issue using all 4GB of VRAM, Nvidia looking into it
- Thread starter Naked Snake
- Start date
- Status
This needs to be posted everywhere.
Naked Snake
Member
A German
Given this and Nvidia having specifically misrepresented the differences between the 980 and 970, I don't think your excuse flies.
So for the hell of it, I opened up a chat with newegg in an attempt to return or exchange my 970. They flat out refused either option saying I was past my return period. I provided links with the issues pertaining to the 970 and still nothing.
Now out of principle, I feel I must continue battling this, heh.
Now out of principle, I feel I must continue battling this, heh.
They did the same to me. gave me some BS link that tried to say that the card still had 4 GB so there was no false advertising. When i responded with a technical explanation they just pushed me off to the manufacturer and said to take it up with them.
Same course of action with me. They said I should speak with NVIDIA. So I am.
holygeesus
Banned
I haven't made any excuses. I would expect a card I am paying a premium for to give me premium performance. The 970 still performs as well as it did when everyone was raving about it at launch - with driver improvements, better if anything. People are overreacting wildly.
If seriously considering returning a 970 for a 980, the way things are going, you are still not likely to be future proofing yourselves for any length of time, if frame buffers are being challenged by games already.
Might as well just keep the 970 and wait for 6/8GB cards.
opticalmace
Member
Since when is PCPer German?
The Omega Man
Member
They must be very aware of the issue and they must have their best people coming with bullet proof excuses and all refusals possible to avoid what it could b a mass return of a cards.
If they let one slip in it will be used as ammunition from others to return theirs as well.
E-tailers are not going to take the loss, it's up to Nvidia to man up
Naked Snake
Member
My bad, the site is called pcgameshardware, I had mistakengly thought they were a german off-shoot of pcper for some reason.
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Geforce-GTX-970-Grafikkarte-259503/Specials/zu-wenig-VRAM-1149056/
SliChillax
Member
Unfortunately as a student I don't have too much time to deal with this but you're definitely right. I will try again in two days maximum.
Of course it does...the GTX 980 has almost 25% more CUDA cores and costs almost 40% more. The difference between the two cards hasn't changed since September when they were released.
The clock is on a piece of the pie as we can obviously tell.
Yes, a card that costs $180 more should perform better. I happen to agree with that.
I still don't agree that it's WORTH $180 more.
Everyone that is destroyed by the fact that the 970 has 500mb less usable memory than advertised should return it and wait for the next round of cards. I seriously do not see the 980 being worth the extra money over even a gimped 970.
That's the grey area for me right there. What are these driver improvements going to consist of? If they start scaling back IQ and effects, they've lost me as a customer. If they can quite honestly prove with each driver release what the improvements are doing through detailed explanation, then I'd be satisfied. Until then, I hope driver testers look at everything.
I got lucky in that both of my 970's I bought from amazon were eligible for a refund until this Saturday so sometime today, UPS will be picking up 2 boxes at my front door.
I'm still not sure what I want to do at this point. I have my gaming laptop that can run most games ok at best but I do have a large library of games I haven't played yet that it should be able to run without any issues as well as a lot of Wii U games I need to play/finish.
As for my desktop graphics, I'm using the on board video for now just to use the computer but I don't know if I want to just buy a 980, slap an EK block on it and call it a day or wait to see if they have a TI version planned or possibly a 6 gig version coming.. also I'm curious to see what the new radeon 390x or whatever it will be brings to the table. I'm not married to nvidia. I just want whatever can dish out the best frame rate in Witcher 3.
Either way, this sucks and the more I think about how much this hurts the future-proof ness of the 970's, the more I wanted to send them back while I still could.
I'm still not sure what I want to do at this point. I have my gaming laptop that can run most games ok at best but I do have a large library of games I haven't played yet that it should be able to run without any issues as well as a lot of Wii U games I need to play/finish.
As for my desktop graphics, I'm using the on board video for now just to use the computer but I don't know if I want to just buy a 980, slap an EK block on it and call it a day or wait to see if they have a TI version planned or possibly a 6 gig version coming.. also I'm curious to see what the new radeon 390x or whatever it will be brings to the table. I'm not married to nvidia. I just want whatever can dish out the best frame rate in Witcher 3.
Either way, this sucks and the more I think about how much this hurts the future-proof ness of the 970's, the more I wanted to send them back while I still could.
SliChillax
Member
I went to the Nvidia website to look for support and their links sent me to my GPU manufacturer which is Gigabyte, then Gigabyte sent me to contact my retailer. Still nothing so far.
Back then, I didn't check the VRAM usage. So I can't tell you. But obviously, a demanding game which goes to the limit will push the weaker card even more so that it's more prone to frametime spikes. This considered, I don't believe the shown difference is significant. Both times, there is stuttering going on. And then SoM is one of these not so perfectly optimized open world games and hardly a great benchmark. It's a bit too easy to shove it all on the VRAM issue - there are so many reasons for stutter.
holygeesus
Banned
I meant the driver revisions we have seen already, ignoring this recent development. Games perform better on the latest drivers, than on those that shipped with the card. Optimization and all that.
The benchmarks I saw at release, made it clear that 4k gaming at high framerates was never going to be possible on this 970. Nothing has changed. Gaming at 1080p, with high texture levels et al, is still where this card shines, and for higher resolutions compromises will have to be made, as the benchmarks said back in the day.
People have gotten too carried away with the almost mythical aura that has surrounded this card since launch, and seem to have forgotten that it *does* have limits, like any piece of technology - limits that aren't suddenly new.
The performance you are getting for your buck, is still staggeringly good, but expecting similar performance to high-end cards is unrealistic, otherwise there would be no market for them. Take a refund and buy a 980, but don't expect it to offer much more future proofing, if games are already choking on 3.5GB. 4 doesn't seem to offer much headroom, when you consider how long some people here are unrealistically expecting these cards to last at high resolutions and settings.
Mengy
wishes it were bannable to say mean things about Marvel
I think you are glossing over the point that people bought these cards (myself included) based on incorrect specs and information. That is the largest reason for the backlash. Had the correct info been known from the beginning I'd wager heavily that the 970 would NOT have sold the way it did. It still might have sold okay, but certainly not like it has. I'm not sure I would have bought one if I'd known it was actually a 3.5GB card with an extra 0.5GB of much slower cache memory. And even though I'm satisfied with the cards performance for now, I'm fairly certain that this issue will rear it's ugly head for me down the road once I start pushing newer games at max graphics. I'm only keeping it because I don't see a better option for me right now, but if I had one, I'd be returning this thing on principle alone. For certain I'll never trust nor early adopt Nvidia tech again, I'll treat them very carefully from now on and only buy fully vetted (ie: older & cheaper with glowing reviews) cards from now on.
There is no argument on Nvidia's side here which makes them look good. They fucked up hard, pure and simple.
People keep saying this, but the inherent performance issue was found out and then a few weeks went by then NVIDIA finally told us why it performed the way consumers reported. There was a problem before NVIDIA admitted, the card wasnt performing as expected.
Of the 3.5+512MB was no issue, nobody would have ever had known.
Also there are games using 3GB VRAM at 1080p playable on the GTX 970, isnt it somewhat possible that towards the end of the year games like Witcher 3, Batman, GTA V could be pushing this 3.5GB 'limit' at 1080p60fps?
And thier Twitter is extremely embarradding right now lol
https://mobile.twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce?p=s
This is possible i guess.
SliChillax
Member
The least they should do is offer a free game.
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
dat pr response
Dumb question, but when you play a game, what happens to the memory that the windows desktop has reserved? Does he game get to use it, then it gets reallocated if you alt-Tab out to windows? Or does it stay allocated to windows? If the desktop always has a few hundred MB reserved for it, couldn't that be put in the 'slow' 512MB part? Windows desktop wouldn't need the speed so there would be no performance penalty
I don't believe much is saved for windows in full screen gaming mode. Windowed gaming it does reserve a few hundred MBs, especially with aero.
ZombieSupaStar
Member
apparently I cant step up my 970 I bought on amazon dec 14th?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00NVODXR4/?tag=neogaf0e-20
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00NVODXR4/?tag=neogaf0e-20
Exactly. I didn't pay the price of a PS4 for a graphic card that was good now but maybe not next year. I'd expect that of the 960 but not the 970. That's why my 560ti is back in my PC and the 970 is headed back to Amazon for a full refund.
It's embarrassing to say the least. They've evidently stepped back from what was already a feeble attempt at saving face by completely ignoring the situation and absolving themselves of any responsibility. Have they even kept their promise of refunding people who want to return a card? Their attitude has been, "if you don't like it don't buy it, but we think you should still like it because we think it's awesome."
Also, why hasn't the big gaming sites picked this up? This deserves some attention, maybe then Nvidia will act more like a company that cares about its consumers.
Objectively Bad Opinion
Member
.
ussjtrunks
Member
Im glad to have purchased the worlds first early access gpu, Im glad to report it runs my games fantastically if the finished product is even better it'll be even more awesome
Fullscreen, Aero is shut down and the desktop goes to the cache.
Borderless Window, it is just a window, so you lose all desktop RAM. Advantage; you can Alt Tab easily and you benefit from desktop vsync. Probably, in that scenario, the driver can cache the desktop in the slow part.
The embarassing part is that they keep repeating it's a fantastic card. It's so fantastic they've withheld its real specs and memory architecture until some guy made a vram benchmark.
i swear it's like some people refuse to try to understand what the fuck people have been talking about over thousands of posts here. i've talked at length about the 970 being held back @ 3.5GiB unless forced over by increasing textures to an unplayable level. about the stuttering and tearing that happens when it closely approaches/crosses the 3.5GiB mark and starts shedding memory to stay under the mark. other sites and persons have done frametime tests, memory tests and hardware analysis all to show that the 970 has a number of issues that were not disclosed on release, mislabelled on the spec sheet and undiscovered until recently.
more infuriating than the actual issues though is some people's insistence that either there's no issue or that the issues should be accepted because there's a more expensive card out there.
dgrdsv
Member
a) There are different ways of using the VRAM.
b) If we're talking about using the VRAM like say SoM uses it then having a 0.5 GB of twice as fast memory is preferable to not having them because SoM simply caches resources in VRAM, it doesn't need all of them for each frame. Loading these resources from system RAM will be slower and will lead to heavier fps drops.
c) If we're talking about a situation where a game needs more than 3.5 GBs of data from VRAM each frame (ish) then it doesn't matter if you have 3.5 GBs of VRAM or 3.5+0.5 (or, which is highly likely in this scenario, full 4GBs) - the game will be near unplayable.
So what you're asking for makes zero sense whatsoever. Having these 0.5 GBs available is better than not having them at all in all imaginable cases.
Also you shouldn't forget that the OS is consuming the VRAM as well nowadays. Depending on your desktop resolution even 0.5 GBs may not be enough for that. And storing the DWM in this slow memory pool of 970 is the first thing that comes to mind when one's thinking about what to do with it.
Not really. The desktop remains in the VRAM although the usage is reduced somewhat. Still the OS does use VRAM even when an app is fullscreen. Aero isn't even there in 8+ but on 7 not all games result in Aero being shut down either. Most of DX10+ games are running alongside Aero / DWM.
Anyone from Scan.co.uk tried to get a refund from them?
This is the best use of this GIF ever!
This is the best use of this GIF ever!
I think you're being hyperbolic. But, if it makes you feel better, then you made the right decision
yes, it's a not an issue it is the way the card was designed.
protomouse
Member
Yes.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
"It's not a bug. It's a feature."
Never mind that it puts the lie to claims Nvidia made other than "4GB".
I think you're being hyperbolic. But, if it makes you feel better, then you made the right decision
I know I did, thanks for understanding my viewpoint.
But seriously, people call console purchases "investments", because of amortizing their cost across a multi-year lifespan. That's how I see this, especially since the cost are equal. It might be cheap to some, but I don't want to buy a new card every year or every two years. If I were to do that, I would have paid less for a step-up in performance strictly looking at today's graphic requirements, with the expectation of doing it again in two years.
That's what makes me so mad about this news. I made an informed decision on an investment which I believe is not inconsequential, but I did so on false or incomplete information provided by the manufacturer.
KillaKalz347
Banned
In what games? Ryse showed AMD cards consistently beating their new gen Nvidia counterparts, as well as in Shadow of Mordor. The 290X was even neck and neck with the 980 in several game works titles.
I know I did, thanks for understanding my viewpoint.
But seriously, people call console purchases "investments", because of amortizing their cost across a multi-year lifespan. That's how I see this, especially since the cost are equal. It might be cheap to some, but I don't want to buy a new card every year or every two years. If I were to do that, I would have paid less for a step-up in performance strictly looking at today's graphic requirements, with the expectation of doing it again in two years.
That's what makes me so mad about this news. I made an informed decision on an investment which I believe is not inconsequential, but I did so on false or incomplete information provided by the manufacturer.
A 97o will always be more powerful than a ps4. It's never going to be less powerful.
Pc graphics settings will just continue to get higher and further from the ps4.
Ground Zeroes. Shadow of Mordor was interesting since it was a Nvidia partner game and performed competitively if not outright better on AMD.
I bought the 970 as my first graphics card (a huge upgrade from whatever the graphics card is on the late 2009 Macbook my dad gave me, lol) because of all the great reviews it got (like getting one was a great bang for your buck) and to somwhat future-proof it. I like it so far and admit I'm a little disappointed I can't make full use of all 4 gigs without dropping performance. Even if I'd known about this 3.5 gig issue, I'd still get the 970 anyway.
Guess I'll stick to it.
Guess I'll stick to it.
Probably old but Amazon has this message on the 970 page:
"Item Under Review
While this item is available from other marketplace sellers on this page, it is not currently offered by Amazon.com because customers have told us there may be something wrong with our inventory of the item, the way we are shipping it, or the way it's described here. (Thanks for the tip!)
We're working to fix the problem as quickly as possible."
"Item Under Review
While this item is available from other marketplace sellers on this page, it is not currently offered by Amazon.com because customers have told us there may be something wrong with our inventory of the item, the way we are shipping it, or the way it's described here. (Thanks for the tip!)
We're working to fix the problem as quickly as possible."
Doesn't ubersampling run like ass on all configs?
It happens often when too many people complain about an item to CS. They will probably updates the information part and put it back on sale.
Just wondering when Nvidia will speak up about this. I doubt manufacturers and retailers are really happy receiving angry emails and calls.
TheChewyWaffles
Member
If I could return my 970 (bought it in October) and pay to upgrade to a 980 I would in a second.
Feel the same way (November). Nvidia needs to just step up and stop trying to cover their tracks.
- Status