Nvidia GameWorks - Game Over for You

[razor1]

Which doesn't change the fact that Nvidia flat-out lied about the specs of the card (ROPs and L2 cache) for over four months. They didn't come clean until it was conclusively proven by gamers that there was something seriously wrong with the memory on the 970.

And if I remember correctly, the 970 has to have per-game driver tweaks in order to keep frequently accessed data out of the slow 0.5GB portion of memory. Once the 970 no longer becomes relevant to Nvidia, they'll stop devoting programmers to it and performance could easily tank. The 970 might just become Nvidia's next Kepler.

And this is why there are multiple class action lawsuits against nV. Hell why would one say its been forgotten about when its in court right now? Because they want to show only one side of the argument and try to convince people that nV is untouchable when they do something wrong, and skew their argument in such a way that is beneficial to their side even though there are many people that have bought the product and are looking for nV to pay for their devious acts?

I wasn't talking about the driver tweaks I was talking about specifically what JustReason stated.

 

[Creig]

I wasn't talking about the driver tweaks I was talking about specifically what JustReason stated.

Yes, but you said:

Reviews were done with the 3.5 gb +.5 gb issue anyways the cards performance isn't going to change because the problem is now known.....

And I disagree. Performance could very easily change for the worse once Nvidia stops its per-game memory tweaks for the 970. The 980, which doesn't have gimped memory, won't suffer from this issue despite being so closely related to the 970. It's going to be a 970 specific issue.

 

[razor1]

Yes, but you said:

And I disagree. Performance could very easily change for the worse once Nvidia stops its per-game memory tweaks for the 970. The 980, which doesn't have gimped memory, won't suffer from this issue despite being so closely related to the 970. It's going to be a 970 specific issue.

How so? Can you tell me the difference vram partition usage, based on different games and what memory will need swapping based on what is going on?

Fiji with its 4 gb vram is using a similiar type of driver optimization as with the 970 when Fiji goes over its 4gb limit.

Most engines already have "persistent" world (what UE4 calls it) type optimizations built in for just this thing, but in the case of the 970 the engine reads it as a 4gb card, and if the driver now tells the engine its only a 3.5 gb card things will work just fine. Its fairly a simple fix on the driver side to tell the software how much memory to allocate, its not a huge burden.

 

[Creig]

How so? Can you tell me the difference vram partition usage, based on different games and what memory will need swapping based on what is going on?

Fiji with its 4 gb vram is using a similiar type of driver optimization as with the 970 when Fiji goes over its 4gb limit.

Most engines already have "persistent" world (what UE4 calls it) type optimizations built in for just this thing, but in the case of the 970 the engine reads it as a 4gb card, and if the driver now tells the engine its only a 3.5 gb card things will work just fine. Its fairly a simple fix on the driver side to tell the software how much memory to allocate, its not a huge burden.

So what you're saying is that in the future, the 970 will go from being a 4GB card to being a 3.5GB card once Nvidia stops supporting it. Sure, I can see that. But you don't think that will affect performance at all?

 

[razor1]

So what you're saying is that in the future, the 970 will go from being a 4GB card to being a 3.5GB card once Nvidia stops supporting it. Sure, I can see that. But you don't think that will affect performance at all?

it will affect performance, that's why I signed up for the lawsuit , but not immediately, it will have more affect than a 4gb card too.

 

[ChosenUno]

Well IMO once 3.5GB becomes a limiting factor the card is already obsolete due to performance. The 980 won't fare much better as there's very little separating the two cards.

 

[Semantics]

How so? Can you tell me the difference vram partition usage, based on different games and what memory will need swapping based on what is going on?

Fiji with its 4 gb vram is using a similiar type of driver optimization as with the 970 when Fiji goes over its 4gb limit.

Most engines already have "persistent" world (what UE4 calls it) type optimizations built in for just this thing, but in the case of the 970 the engine reads it as a 4gb card, and if the driver now tells the engine its only a 3.5 gb card things will work just fine. Its fairly a simple fix on the driver side to tell the software how much memory to allocate, its not a huge burden.

Ideally it would just store your desktop in that .5GB and the game would get the faster 3.5GB

 

[razor1]

Ideally it would just store your desktop in that .5GB and the game would get the faster 3.5GB

Yeah that is definite possible, I've seen windows 10 use up to 350mb of vram, so its not that much of a loss if they use that 500mb for that.

 

[JustReason]

There are two problems with this statement, again you didn't do your research and posting about something you don't know about. There are multiple class action lawsuits in different stated against nV for the 3.5 gb screwup, so they aren't forgotten about.

Reviews were done with the 3.5 gb +.5 gb issue anyways the cards performance isn't going to change because the problem is now known.....

And yes I did sign the up for the class action lawsuit for the gtx 970.

Ok I have a question for you... Is English your primary language?

If not then that goes a long way to explain why you always misrepresent my posts.

Like when you said

posting about something you don't know about. There are multiple class action lawsuits in different stated against nV for the 3.5 gb screwup

Here is what I said

Now maybe not enough time has passed, but I am very disappointed that nothing has come of it.

Now I said MAYBE NOT ENOUGH TIME HAS PASSED hence why nothing has come of it yet. Doesn't change the lack of outcry by reviewers. Now maybe you thought I meant nothing is happening when I meant no OUTCOME hence nothing come of it yet.

And sorry but the yellow part makes no sense at all against my post.

 

[JustReason]

Well IMO once 3.5GB becomes a limiting factor the card is already obsolete due to performance. The 980 won't fare much better as there's very little separating the two cards.

Most reasonable people will agree that the performance impact to any given individual is likely 0. It only ever appeared in extreme cases to begin with.

But again the issue isn't performance it is FALSE ADVERTISING aka: LIES.

 

[KazeoHin]

Ok I have a question for you... Is English your primary language?

If not then that goes a long way to explain why you always misrepresent my posts.

Like when you said

Here is what I said
Now I said MAYBE NOT ENOUGH TIME HAS PASSED hence why nothing has come of it yet. Doesn't change the lack of outcry by reviewers. Now maybe you thought I meant nothing is happening when I meant no OUTCOME hence nothing come of it yet.

And sorry but the yellow part makes no sense at all against my post.

I think the yellow part makes a lot of sense.. in context.

The 3.5+0.5 issue never really bothered me. The card has X performance, it reviewed with X performance, everyone purchasing the card expected X performance and got X performance. That X performance doesn't suddenly change to Y performance just because someone finds an issue. The card still performs just as well, if not BETTER than what it did on launch-day reviews. So where is the actual reduction of value?

 

[JustReason]

I think the yellow part makes a lot of sense.. in context.

The 3.5+0.5 issue never really bothered me. The card has X performance, it reviewed with X performance, everyone purchasing the card expected X performance and got X performance. That X performance doesn't suddenly change to Y performance just because someone finds an issue. The card still performs just as well, if not BETTER than what it did on launch-day reviews. So where is the actual reduction of value?

I meant in relation to what I said. I said that it would have 0 = ZERO impact on performance for nearly everyone today.

 

[Semantics]

Most reasonable people will agree that the performance impact to any given individual is likely 0. It only ever appeared in extreme cases to begin with.

But again the issue isn't performance it is FALSE ADVERTISING aka: LIES.

Eh just like AMD has 8 core cpus, problems of a self defining industry.

 

[ChosenUno]

Most reasonable people will agree that the performance impact to any given individual is likely 0. It only ever appeared in extreme cases to begin with.

But again the issue isn't performance it is FALSE ADVERTISING aka: LIES.

So you'd argue there should be class action lawsuits against AMD for false claims made on the Fury X as well?

I mean, Overclocker's Dream...

 

[razor1]

Ok I have a question for you... Is English your primary language?

If not then that goes a long way to explain why you always misrepresent my posts.

Like when you said

Here is what I said
Now I said MAYBE NOT ENOUGH TIME HAS PASSED hence why nothing has come of it yet. Doesn't change the lack of outcry by reviewers. Now maybe you thought I meant nothing is happening when I meant no OUTCOME hence nothing come of it yet.

And sorry but the yellow part makes no sense at all against my post.

It isn't about outcome for everyone but intent. I flat out refuse to have Intel anything for as long as I can mange it. I didn't care for their immoral behavior and so choose to not support them at all. It is my choice. I don't condemn those that do and I do advise the use of their processors for those that don't care or need their processing power. But to turn a blind eye to such actions is a disservice to the community as a whole.

The Nvidia 3.5Gb Vram issue was never completely about performance. That was how it was found out. But in real world use, initially 10% of the user base may have had performance issues. With driver updates we may see 0%. The ISSUE was the lies. Now maybe not enough time has passed, but I am very disappointed that nothing has come of it. Automobile manufacturers get fines quite yearly for such things. Had AMD done it we would never hear the end of it. But because it was Nvidia it apparently can be excused and forgotten.

So you see performance isn't the only metric. Sometimes it is the intent or the skewing of the truth that most have a problem with.

where in this post did you have that comment that you quoted yourself?

I just searched for this

Now maybe not enough time has passed, but I am very disappointed that nothing has come of it.

And there were no matches. now


Edit giving you the benefit of the doubt but have tried different portions of you quote and can't find them either.

 

[n=1]

It isn't about outcome for everyone but intent. I flat out refuse to have Intel anything for as long as I can mange it. I didn't care for their immoral behavior and so choose to not support them at all. It is my choice. I don't condemn those that do and I do advise the use of their processors for those that don't care or need their processing power. But to turn a blind eye to such actions is a disservice to the community as a whole.

The Nvidia 3.5Gb Vram issue was never completely about performance. That was how it was found out. But in real world use, initially 10% of the user base may have had performance issues. With driver updates we may see 0%. The ISSUE was the lies. Now maybe not enough time has passed, but I am very disappointed that nothing has come of it. Automobile manufacturers get fines quite yearly for such things. Had AMD done it we would never hear the end of it. But because it was Nvidia it apparently can be excused and forgotten.

So you see performance isn't the only metric. Sometimes it is the intent or the skewing of the truth that most have a problem with.

It's there.

 

[JustReason]

It's there.

I am just shaking my head here. lol

 

[razor1]

It's there.

weird wonder why the search didn't pull it up.