HardOCP looking into the 970 3.5GB issue?

Status
Not open for further replies.
chenw said:
TBH, from his graphs, 980 isn't fairing much better. from his settings 970 was stuttering at 3.5gb mark, and 980 was barely under the 4gb mark, anymore than that 980 isn't much better off.
Click to expand...

980 has much fewer and smaller frametime spikes while using its whole RAM and a more consistent GPU usage. 970 is all over the place with frametimes and GPU, and has an erratic RAM usage. It is a big difference. And look at how the 970 is "fighting" against the >3.5 GB usage while 980 has no problem using it all. 4 GB as advertised indeed.
 
Last edited:
Btw if anybody is actually seriously thinking of joining the red team, AMD may have a deal for you:

I was curious and got a response from Roy about it:

"Hi <insert name here>*, thank you for your email, we really care about the community and appreciate hearing from you. Thank you.

We believe that Radeon R9 series represents a fantastic GPU for you, GCN supports Mantle, DX11, DX12 and is ready for VR courtesy of its ACE (Asynchronous Compute Engine). The series larger memory bus also makes them ideal for 4K. And of course today we have world class drivers, the Omega 14.2 version has been downloaded over 10M times.

Sounds like a sales pitch? Maybe but I game myself (BF4, FC4 and Total War) and I love my 290X's.

The good news is that our partner XFX is willing to help you if wish to join &#8216;Team Red&#8217;, we certainly would love to have you. To find out how they can help; Please send your reply direct to Mark Regimbal on cc above and he will give you details.

Very best regards
Roy

PS this is really me, not an admin. I had no idea this would be so popular and I do have my regular job to do so please be patient with us and with our friends at XFX whilst they meet demand. J


roy taylor Description: Description: Description: red
Corporate Vice President | Alliances
7171 Southwest Parkway, Austin, TX 78735 USA
Twitter: AMD_Roy <phone number omitted because forum rules>*
Description: Description: Description: image004 facebook | amd.com"

*manually deleted and put that in :p

Anyway, meh, was hoping for a Sapphire promotion rather than XFX.
Click to expand...

This is on top of the price cuts on the 290X, which can be had for $299.99 now.
 
n=1 said:
Btw if anybody is actually seriously thinking of joining the red team, AMD may have a deal for you:



This is on top of the price cuts on the 290X, which can be had for $299.99 now.
Click to expand...

Any news if Gigabyte is accepting return or exchanges? I haven't seen shit.

I bought my 970's in september, so I honestly think im SOL.
 
DASHlT said:
Any news if Gigabyte is accepting return or exchanges? I haven't seen shit.

I bought my 970's in september, so I honestly think im SOL.
Click to expand...

Currently not as the cards are a-ok per Nvidia's instructions. Some retailers are accepting returns, though. Where did you buy yours from?
 
Meeho said:
Currently not as the cards are a-ok per Nvidia's instructions. Some retailers are accepting returns, though. Where did you buy yours from?
Click to expand...

Newegg. Already tried that route. Been way to long.....gave me the nvidia bullshit.
 
DASHlT said:
Newegg. Already tried that route. Been way to long.....gave me the nvidia bullshit.
Click to expand...

https://forums.geforce.com/default/...tx-970-3-5gb-vram-issue/post/4442431/#4442431
Don't despair people. I contacted Newegg.ca for a rma yesterday and I got a No it's past 30 days window. Then I contacted them via live chat and it was still no its past 30 day.

I didn't give up, I explained to them that at no time the memory if the card run at 256bit and that on their website they STILL advertise that it does. I was told they would come back to me in 3 to 7 days. and tonight I received my RMA number and prepaid UPS waybill for a refund with 0 restocking fee.
Click to expand...

That is the only positive report I've seen regarding Newegg. Others were refused.
 
Jesus that is a great deal on a 290X...
I think I am all in for getting that over the 290 at this point.
AMD marketing is sure on this, although they were a tad slow in my opinion.
Suck about NewEgg guys. They always seem to pull that crap, the bus speed advertised was most certainly false.
 
Amazon has been great regarding returns as far as I could see.


We all knew this was coming :)

Hitler Reacts To The GTX 970 Being 3.5GB + .5GB
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNGi06cq_pQ



Something to consider when choosing your next brand:
Gibbo said:
Hi there


I now have a final update on all brands:

YES BRANDS! (Supporting OcUK)

OcUK Brand: We support these ourselves as customer is king.
KFA2 (Formerly Galax): Supporting OcUK to keep our cost minimal.
Inno3D: Supporting OcUK to keep our cost minimal.
EVGA: Supporting OcUK to keep our cost minimal and offering step up for customers contacting them directly.
Asus: No decision but their support in past has being legendary so we are confident they will have our backs.
Zotac: Looking into it but want to support but need final decision to come form big boss, looking good though!


NO BRANDS! (Refusing to support or make a decision this week)

- Gigabyte: Will not accept returns, but have not come to a final decision. As such OcUK shall still take them back and cover all the cost ourselves.
- MSI: Want to still think about it and decide next week. OcUK is fed up of waiting and as such will take back cards now and we shall cover the cost ourselves.
- Palit: Refuse to take returns, so OcUK shall cover the cost ourselves. -> Palit informed they are now accepting returns




I am really hopeful the NO brands come to their senses and at the very least support OcUK and really should support all their resellers globally. If they change their minds we will let you our customers know!

In short OcUK will now accept returns on all brands should you be unhappy with your purchase, the window for returning a 970 is between now and end of February.
Click to expand...

EDIT: Palit now accepts returns.
 
Last edited:
chenw said:
TBH, from his graphs, 980 isn't fairing much better. from his settings 970 was stuttering at 3.5gb mark, and 980 was barely under the 4gb mark, anymore than that 980 isn't much better off.
Click to expand...

The big difference is that the 970 reports it has 4GB vram and the game tries to use it causing the performance issues.
The 980 also reports 4GB vram but can cope without performance problems.

If the 970 reported it had 3.5GB vram it would lessen the problem.
But NVidia wont do that.
 
Nenu said:
The big difference is that the 970 reports it has 4GB vram and the game tries to use it causing the performance issues.
The 980 also reports 4GB vram but can cope without performance problems.

If the 970 reported it had 3.5GB vram it would lessen the problem.
But NVidia wont do that.
Click to expand...

This!


SHOCKING interview with Nvidia engineer about the 970 fiasco --> A MUST SEE! :D
UXzfLyC.png
 
Last edited:
Meeho said:
980 has much fewer and smaller frametime spikes while using its whole RAM and a more consistent GPU usage. 970 is all over the place with frametimes and GPU, and has an erratic RAM usage. It is a big difference. And look at how the 970 is "fighting" against the >3.5 GB usage while 980 has no problem using it all. 4 GB as advertised indeed.
Click to expand...

Indeed 980 is smoother than 970 when it comes to usage of RAM at 3.5GB to 4GB.

But I was referring to the fact that the game was already using the full 4GB on 980, which, given the VRAM usage on the 970, means almost all of that are actual usage. Meaning that 4GB is already barely cutting it.

The biggest conclusion I can draw from the frametimes is not that 970 can only hold 3.5GB in its VRAM before slowing down, but rather the fact that it was able to do that easily is an indication that 4GB may not last as long as we expected it.

Given the circumstances, I really don't feel 980's are going to last that much longer than 970. If 970 is already choking when it has half a gig of VRAM less than 980, it is little good news with the 980
 
chenw said:
Indeed 980 is smoother than 970 when it comes to usage of RAM at 3.5GB to 4GB.

But I was referring to the fact that the game was already using the full 4GB on 980, which, given the VRAM usage on the 970, means almost all of that are actual usage. Meaning that 4GB is already barely cutting it.

The biggest conclusion I can draw from the frametimes is not that 970 can only hold 3.5GB in its VRAM before slowing down, but rather the fact that it was able to do that easily is an indication that 4GB may not last as long as we expected it.

Given the circumstances, I really don't feel 980's are going to last that much longer than 970. If 970 is already choking when it has half a gig of VRAM less than 980, it is little good news with the 980
Click to expand...
We know this, some games can max out 4GB.
This is why the game is being used for this test.

Of course settings matter, its easy with some games to max the ram but the framerate isnt playable.
There are a few that can push the limit while remaining playable, and then there is SLI which can easily max 4GB with high settings and remain playable.
 
chenw said:
Indeed 980 is smoother than 970 when it comes to usage of RAM at 3.5GB to 4GB.

But I was referring to the fact that the game was already using the full 4GB on 980, which, given the VRAM usage on the 970, means almost all of that are actual usage. Meaning that 4GB is already barely cutting it.

The biggest conclusion I can draw from the frametimes is not that 970 can only hold 3.5GB in its VRAM before slowing down, but rather the fact that it was able to do that easily is an indication that 4GB may not last as long as we expected it.

Given the circumstances, I really don't feel 980's are going to last that much longer than 970. If 970 is already choking when it has half a gig of VRAM less than 980, it is little good news with the 980
Click to expand...

While it is true that even 4 GB is on the low side, the problem with 970 is the following, as Nenu mentioned:

1) the game uses max of the "real" (fast) memory and it is enough for stutter-free gameplay - this is 4 GB for 980 and 3.5 GB for 970 - both play fine

2a) the game uses max available memory even if it doesn't absolutely need >3.5 GB - this is 4 GB for both cards - 980 is fine, 970 stutters
2b) same as 2a but the game really needs 4 GB - 980 is fine, 970 stutters

3) the game needs >4 GB - both cards stutter, you need to lower the game settings

So, if you want stutter-free gameplay on the 970 it has to act like a 3.5 GB card and the game must be set up to only really require <3.5 GB. If game settings require 3.5-4 GB for fluid playback or the game uses 3.5-4 GB as if it were all the same speed without really needing it, you cannot get stutter-free play with the 970 even though it is still sold as a true 4 GB card without any issues whatsoever.
 
Last edited:
got it, so the main issue isn't in the 3.5GB, but in the last 0.5GB that we could very well actually do without in some cases?
 
If NVidia dont reduce the reported available ram, game devs will have to avoid making use of the last 0.5GB, or at least stop using it in the standard way.
So I dont suppose it will matter in the long run.
Games out now (needing 4GB) that dont get updated will continue to suffer.

The end result will be that it does effectively become a 3.5GB card because thats how it will be utilised.
Chances are there will be some use for the end 0.5GB, for Aero and similar processes so they can remain in memory.
This is assuming the memory is fast enough for those as well :D

chenw said:
got it, so the main issue isn't in the 3.5GB, but in the last 0.5GB that we could very well actually do without in some cases?
Click to expand...

Yep
 
chenw said:
got it, so the main issue isn't in the 3.5GB, but in the last 0.5GB that we could very well actually do without in some cases?
Click to expand...

In essence, yes. Some of the 970's problems would be solved if it would not try to use the last 0.5 GB. That would at least help with games and settings that could live with <3.5 GB memory. They are reportedly doing some driver per game optimizations and use some heuristics mumbo-jumbo for not specifically addressed cases, trying to move less needed stuff to the last 0.5 GB, but in the end it is just a hack to try to hide its limitations, and wouldn't help with true >3.5 GB usage needs.

But they won't limit it to the faster 3.5 GB because that would mean they would have to admit it is really a 3.5 GB card (and even those 3.5 with lower bandwidth than advertised) and not the advertised 4 GB full bandwidth one.

EDIT: Or as stated in the post above :)
 
What would be the performance of a 970 that was of the original spec? Would it be better than the current 970, and closer to a 980?

This is important because review sites would weigh the cost of both cards. It would define/guide the masses to the better value and press the sellers of the cards to not raise prices and gouge, but actually drive prices to go under MSRP.

This entire situation is important. It also affects the integrity of the tech reviewing websites. How can you have a tech site review a product, throw technical mumbo-jumbo at you (giving you, the reader, the impression that they know shit), and then it comes out that they don't even know wtf they are talking about.

Some random on the internet encountered this 3.5GB situation. Why not one of these technical review websites? With their grand knowledge? GPU-Z didn't even see it. WTF is that? They just read the drivers? It doesn't scan the hardware?

The whole thing, one big sham. Lies.

Nvidia gave promotional information about the GTX970, that later came out it was wrong. Nvidia should go back and produce the card to original spec.

Why should they take advantage of the honest intentions of a customer.

You have some douche-bags on the internet saying "You would never have noticed it". Fuck that. The customer has faith in the manufacturer that he or she is getting what was marketed to them. As a company Nvidia, in essence, cut corners on the product and gave the customer less.

All 970s should be accepted for refund, and customers of 970s should be given a free 980.

OR Nvidia can produce a 970 that meets the original spec, and do a free exchange. That's it.

These are the two options. No free game shit.
 
Nenu said:
Exactly that of the 970 reviews where games dont need more than 3.5GB vram.
Click to expand...

I would need the actual hardware to validate. Hypothesis and theories, don't mean much. They disabled parts of the hardware, which wasn't known originally. Can you disable parts of a 980 to make it mimic a 970?

Nvidia trying to explain itself now... "crossbar" this.... "ROP" that. It's insulting. It's like a octopus squirting ink to escape.

No one should allow them to get away. Nvidia's engineers work in a slave camp? No internet access? They don't read? They can't send an email?

This is ridiculous. You had this Nvidia mod come out "I'm not just the CEO of the hair club for men, I'm also a client", talking about how they are going to fix this with a driver; and then someone else comes out and says no driver is planned.

Essentially this Nvidia mod is made to look like he/she spoke out of line. Couldn't an Nvidia engineer have spoken 'out of line' to correct this?

I wonder how much they are going to spend to hire a PR firm to fix this.
 
oopspowsurprise said:
I would need the actual hardware to validate. Hypothesis and theories, don't mean much. They disabled parts of the hardware, which wasn't known originally. Can you disable parts of a 980 to make it mimic a 970?
Click to expand...

Not 100%. Only Nvidia has access to an advertised version of the 970. The closest comparison you'll get is something like this.
 
Meeho said:
1jfNZ0J.png


DJpK8ky.png


UNGhrzp.png
Click to expand...

I posted these to the GeForce forums and surprise surprise they got deleted

Debating whether I should keep posting until I get banned

EDIT: Fuck it, gonna do the right thing.
 
Last edited:
Deleted?! LOL! Don't push it, it is not worth it. Tweet them if you use Twitter :) No need to reference the source.
 
oopspowsurprise said:
I would need the actual hardware to validate. Hypothesis and theories, don't mean much. They disabled parts of the hardware, which wasn't known originally. Can you disable parts of a 980 to make it mimic a 970?
Click to expand...

You are right, there would be a small difference because the first 3.5GB of memory should be running 16.6% faster.
Thats the net effect on performance if not exceeding 3.5GB.
Forgot about that.

970 owners can check how much difference overclocking the ram makes to see how much effect that would have.
 
chenw said:
got it, so the main issue isn't in the 3.5GB, but in the last 0.5GB that we could very well actually do without in some cases?
Click to expand...

Right. And the card is effectively 224-bit. Just fix the specs, and provide a way to disable the rogue 0.5GB, but that will never happen.
 
DASHlT said:
Any news if Gigabyte is accepting return or exchanges? I haven't seen shit.

I bought my 970's in september, so I honestly think im SOL.
Click to expand...

From what I've seen, sadly no. Gigabyte just gave them the official party line. But I do remember seeing one owner saying it's not entirely final, as Gigabyte was "waiting to hear back from nVidia", so who knows. Don't get your hopes up though.
 
anyone have any luck with returns from Amazon?...of all the companies out there I think Amazon has the best chance by far, regardless of how many months have elapsed since you bought the card
 
I've seen multiple reports of Amazon taking returns and issuing refunds.
 
Meeho said:
I've seen multiple reports of Amazon taking returns and issuing refunds.
Click to expand...

now I'm tempted since I bought my Gigabyte 970 from Amazon back in November...but I want something to replace it with and I don't see a card with the price/performance of the originally spec'd 970
 
@ 3.5gb the 970 is still one of the best bangs for the buck. Even if customers knew it was only 3.5gb I bet most still would have purchased it.

This whole thing is blowing up more than it should be IMHO. Nvidia should offer a trade up program to upset 970 customers. For an additional $229 (msrp difference) we will exchange your 970 for a 980. If you aren't willing to pay the difference it just proves you would have bought the 970 anyways,.
 
polonyc2 said:
now I'm tempted since I bought my Gigabyte 970 from Amazon back in November...but I want something to replace it with and I don't see a card with the price/performance of the originally spec'd 970
Click to expand...

290X if you don't mind the heat. Or wait till the 300 series come out.
 
Kardonxt said:
This whole thing is blowing up more than it should be IMHO. Nvidia should offer a trade up program to upset 970 customers. For an additional $229 (msrp difference) we will exchange your 970 for a 980. If you aren't willing to pay the difference it just proves you would have bought the 970 anyways,.
Click to expand...

that makes no sense...the whole point was that most people didn't feel the 980 was worth the additional $230...why would I want a trade-up now?...if I wanted it I would have gotten it then...trade in my 970 for a 980 with no extra cost and then it's even :D
 
lukart said:
Right now 290's are a steal. For this price who goes for 970 its a 101% nvidia Fanboy. I mean, 290x obviously has more muscle than 970, full 4Gb :D better 4K game play.... any reason left for buying the 970?
Click to expand...

HDMI 2.0, unless AMD started placing that on a card recently (the 285 maybe?). Nvidia still has that, but I haven't kept up with the 4:4:4 chroma stuff so who knows if having HDMI 2.0 is even a use.
 
Meeho said:
https://twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce/ went quiet. I guess that terrible damage control backfired.

https://twitter.com/Justin_Hilburn/status/559923551956766720 :)
Click to expand...

I'd actually rather they keep tweeting. Nothing more amusing than self-destruction really. Plus their PR department does a really good job of shitting on themselves.

rinaldo00 said:
DAYMN, oc.uk is REALLY coming through!
Click to expand...

Not surprised. Consumer protection laws are ridiculously good in the EU. If someone were to take nVidia to court in the EU, nVidia would be totally fucked. nVidia knows they're in the wrong here.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top