4GB GTX 960s incoming

I assume these will be like the 970s and have 512MB as slow speed caching VRAM? I wonder what they will be priced at. If over $220 then it really isn't a good deal compared to AMD's offerings.
 
Flogger23m said:
I assume these will be like the 970s and have 512MB as slow speed caching VRAM? I wonder what they will be priced at. If over $220 then it really isn't a good deal compared to AMD's offerings.
Click to expand...

I don't think they'll do that again; but we'll have to wait until they're released to find out one way or the other.
 
Good news but probably should have been 4GB from the start since the 700 series was 2GB and the 900 is the upgrade.
 
Flogger23m said:
I assume these will be like the 970s and have 512MB as slow speed caching VRAM? I wonder what they will be priced at. If over $220 then it really isn't a good deal compared to AMD's offerings.
Click to expand...

Arnt the 960 2gbs $199? Id imagine the 4gb would be a $50 increase
 
Flogger23m said:
I assume these will be like the 970s and have 512MB as slow speed caching VRAM? I wonder what they will be priced at. If over $220 then it really isn't a good deal compared to AMD's offerings.
Click to expand...
Why would you assume such a thing when the card is not even cut down?
 
Flogger23m said:
I assume these will be like the 970s and have 512MB as slow speed caching VRAM? I wonder what they will be priced at. If over $220 then it really isn't a good deal compared to AMD's offerings.
Click to expand...

Incorrect! The whole problem with the 970's memory configuration is due to how resources were disabled going from the 980 to the 970; part of the memory bus was running at very slow speed.

These 4GB 960 cards are the same full chip as the 2GB ones, with a full 128-bit memory bus. They're just using larger memory chips.

4GB wasn't some magic number - if the 980 had been 8GB and the 970 listed the same, we'd all be making jokes about 7GB of memory instead of 3.5GB.

Really, just read some of the articles about the 970's memory issue. It's pretty clear the problem was a result of the hack-job NVIDIA did to cut a 980 into a 970, and not some magical 3.5GB barrier.
 
Still can't buy the damn things, and it's been a week.

I fucking hate paper launches. Usually not something Nvidia does these days.
 
defaultluser said:
Still can't buy the damn things, and it's been a week.

I fucking hate paper launches. Usually not something Nvidia does these days.
Click to expand...
These are just cards with more vram released by some of the card makers and not some official Nvidia release...
 
deruberhanyok said:
Incorrect! The whole problem with the 970's memory configuration is due to how resources were disabled going from the 980 to the 970; part of the memory bus was running at very slow speed.

These 4GB 960 cards are the same full chip as the 2GB ones, with a full 128-bit memory bus. They're just using larger memory chips.

4GB wasn't some magic number - if the 980 had been 8GB and the 970 listed the same, we'd all be making jokes about 7GB of memory instead of 3.5GB.

Really, just read some of the articles about the 970's memory issue. It's pretty clear the problem was a result of the hack-job NVIDIA did to cut a 980 into a 970, and not some magical 3.5GB barrier.
Click to expand...

Nobody reads anymore, they just whine and complain like ignorant experts.
 
misterbobby said:
These are just cards with more vram released by some of the card makers and not some official Nvidia release...
Click to expand...

Still sucks. I'll keep whining, but I'll stop blaming Nvidia :)

Fucking soft launch OEMS!

Perhaps if they continue to delay, we'll see these in stores the same time Nvidia announces the ALL NEW GTX 960 Ti (which is looking at about August at this rate ).
 
Will 4gb even make a difference on a 128-bit memory bus? I would imagine turning up AA settings or resolution to fill 4gb would create a stutter show with that cards fillrate, it barely beats a 660ti for Gabes sake.

Also SLI 960 is about equal to a 970, why pay more for 2 premium priced gpus when one can do the job better for less.
 
deruberhanyok said:
These 4GB 960 cards are the same full chip as the 2GB ones, with a full 128-bit memory bus. They're just using larger memory chips.
Click to expand...

Are there are higher density GDDR5 modules now.? Otherwise it'll likely be double the chips in clamshell mode.

Ticker305 said:
Will 4gb even make a difference on a 128-bit memory bus? I would imagine turning up AA settings or resolution to fill 4gb would create a stutter show with that cards fillrate, it barely beats a 660ti for Gabes sake.
Click to expand...

Size and actual performance requirements (bandwidth) for data stored in VRAM do not necessarily correlate. The most notable example would be textures, they require massive size relative to actual performance. There are many games already where texture settings differ for 2GB and the 4GB variant of the same chip even at 1080p resolutions.

2GB cards in the actual performance class of the GTX 960 (also r9 285) are basically unbalanced compared to the consoles. They are significantly faster than even the GPU within the PS4 but have have much less accessible memory than both before having to access slower storage. As such if you want universal parity (at the very least) with "console graphics" these cards actually may not be able to do so (with already many examples) as they are not universally more capable.

In general, starting with the r9 285, the current new mid range releases have been terrible compared to the past. At least we can say the GTX 960 is relatively better than the r9 285 was release but that is a battle of the worst. GTX 960 is actually a rather poor release compared to Nvidia's own previous examples as well.
 
Wow, EVGA isn't going to make a stock-clock single-fan shorty 960 4GB card. They generally have all the mix'n'match options. Dual-fan for typical ~100w 128-bit card. And 760 cards could be had for $199 last year. the 960 is only 8% faster ... $250? No way.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I'm thinking that since the minimal 960 cards are down to $190 after rebate, the new starting price on these 4GB things will be like $220-230, with top-end 4GB cards near $250. That will leave room for a $270-280 960 Ti.

I'm expecting the same split memory space as the original 660 and 660 Ti, with 3GB in the main memory space, and 1GB secondary space. It's definitely going to be 192-bit, but since they're making the 4GB GTX 960 an official thing, they'll have to match the memory capacity with the next card up.
 
according to this article, these cards will not suffer from the same VRAM issues as the GTX 970...whether or not that is actually true remains to be seen.

To give its customers more choice, EVGA has just rolled-out three brand-new GTX 960 models that pack 4GB of fast GDDR5 under-the-hood -- and no, this card doesn't suffer from the same sort of design caveat that the 970 does, so all 4GB is available, and all at the same speed.
Click to expand...

the mid-level card retails at $250 from EVGA:

EVGA GTX 960 Prices

i'm guessing that since the 2 lower-tier 2GB versions both retail for $209.99, and the lowest tier one also has a $10 mail-in rebate, they'll probably do the same for the 4GB versions....$249.99 + $10 MIR for the 04G-P4-3963-KR with the 1127MHz Base Clock, and just flat-out $249.99 with no MIR for the 04G-P4-3966-KR 1279MHz Base Clock version. the highest tier card (04G-P4-3968-KR w/1304MHz Base Clock) will likely be around $269.99 - $279.99, given the price jump to to $239.99 on the highest tier of the 2GB versions from the other two.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top