Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Zotac 970 / plain jane.. did I buy a good non-refernce card?

Tags:
  • Gtx
  • Zotac
  • Gigabyte
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 23, 2014 9:01:33 AM

Hello all! Quick question, I have heard very little about Zotac's cards and while trying to fine a GTX 970 that wasn't sold out I found the plane jane Zotac 970 and decided to grab it due to my inability to be patient and wait out for the gigabyte version that I wanted. Have any of you had experience with Zotac cards, customer service etc?

More about : zotac 970 plain jane buy good refernce card

September 24, 2014 11:06:04 AM

I also pulled a trigger on a smallish Zotac GTX 970. It is only 210mm in length. I like its minimalistic design it is not kitchy.

I read good and fair things about Zotac on Reddit. Here. I hope it will be performing also like that. Looking forward for experience to share and hear from others. Hope some Zotac community will be established online. I believe people trust more reputable brands but I will give Zotac a chance. I also saw on their website that they offer 5 years warranty for their GTX 970 after registering online. That is great and it is one of the reasons I decided for it. Such a long warranty is not offered even by the "best" brands.

best, d.
m
0
l

Best solution

September 24, 2014 12:13:08 PM

I got the Gigabyte but if that had sold out, I probably would have done the same thing. Zotac should be absolutely fine, they have been around for quiet some time 7 odd years I think, and though they charge a little less you should have no problems. They do some good non-reference designs and it should overclock as well. I think all the GTX 970's are in and around the same ball park, but if you pay a bit more you get a better overclock as standard other than that the coolers are different. I think they have 3 different versions of the GTX 970. Don't worry, it's good and will more than do the job.
Share
September 24, 2014 5:43:43 PM

Thanks guys in appreciate the responses and hope to hear some good news on the OC side of the card. Just got mine in the mail while i was on lunch so going to unload the old hoover 6870 lol and hook up the 970 and see how she runs! Good luck to both of you!
m
0
l
September 24, 2014 9:50:05 PM

Got the same one, was, on reputable online stores here, quite a bit cheaper. Doesn't look cheap, runs really cool and silent. Firestorm tool comes with a couple presets for quick clock speed settings.
I got confused that firestorm on the DVD was 1.0.44.0 and on their site 2.0.5. Wrote their support, got an answer within 24h that the DVD version is the new version for the GTX9xx series.

So far, very happy.

Edit: forgot to say: the benchmark results got better after the cooler/paste settled in. In standard mode it is capped at 80 degrees celsius, fine for games, runs constantly at 60 when I play borderlands 2.
When you want to get better results in benchmarks, up the temp cap. Don't do it early though, give it a bit time. And the first time it reaches higher temps it will give off a faint metallic smell, don't be overly alarmed ;) 
m
2
l
September 24, 2014 11:29:09 PM

That are some good news. Keep posting what are your observations with gameplay and if there is any coil whine present. I also discovered that coil whine is not a problem of a single brand but if you serch the web you can discover all brands have it (MSI, Asus, Gigabyte, eVGA...). Plenty of videos on youtube about that problem. It usualy happen because of the high frame rate in the game menus or durring gameplay. Setting Adaptive Vsync inside Nvidia settings maight help. Also download Precission tools from eVGA website and set Frame Rate Limiter to 120 or something. It might help very much. We will see, I still do not have a card in my hands. Best, d.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 9:13:55 AM

no coil whine in mine but i have no idea what im doing in this whole OC thing... ive done valley benchmark after only raising the +100MHz and got a terrible 2197 score, furmark was 3033. From what ive been seeing i should be seeing a valley score of 3000 and furmark around 4000. have any of you ran benchmarks with your zotac? forgot to say my temps in furmark were 80c at highest and valley did not go above 70c.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 9:45:37 AM

Seems Nvidia cards are load throttled when running furmark, for example. I'm also getting the same marks as you. Watch your core clock when running furmark, and you'll see it doesn't go above 830-840, base clock should be 1076. It never reaches that.

Read: http://www.geeks3d.com/20101109/nvidia-geforce-gtx-580-...

I'm pretty sure this is still in place.

Edit: also no coil whine on mine.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 9:54:53 AM

ahh i see Mandarb, well just did a valley benchmark 3186 score and 76fps avg.. still not seeing that 4000 mark like some other benchmarks from other websites.. how do i post a pic? ohh yea 1620MHz clock? lol
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 11:29:44 AM

Just ran a valley benchmark myself.

API: DX11
Quality: Ultra
Stereo 3D: Disabled
Monitors: Single
AA: Off
Fullscreen: Yes
Resolution: 1920x1080

Score: 3809
Average FPS: 91

Seems pretty ok when I compare it with the marks from this review for the GTX980. Also considering their test system was using a current gen i5 when I'm using a stock clock i7-2600k, and my memory is DDR1333 CL9.

No idea what your system is. But did you run a 15min furmark burn in benchmark? My card got considerably faster after the cooler/paste settled in.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 11:39:36 AM

Mandarb said:
Just ran a valley benchmark myself.

API: DX11
Quality: Ultra
Stereo 3D: Disabled
Monitors: Single
AA: Off
Fullscreen: Yes
Resolution: 1920x1080

Score: 3809
Average FPS: 91

Seems pretty ok when I compare it with the marks from this review for the GTX980. Also considering their test system was using a current gen i5 when I'm using a stock clock i7-2600k, and my memory is DDR1333 CL9.

No idea what your system is. But did you run a 15min furmark burn in benchmark? My card got considerably faster after the cooler/paste settled in.


no haven't ran the burn in yet, but i have a FX 6300 (stock) and running the 970 through a pci 2.0 slot? doubt the 2.0 would hinder it that much.. my driver is the latest certified and not the beta. how long do you think it would take for the paste to set in? roughly 1 day old and only has about 3 hours of gaming time on it and thats at maybe 30/40% because ive been running arma 3 and i know thats CPU game rather than a high GPU game. i dont know but im kinda upset that im seeing these low scores, but im also very impatient and a beginner when it comes to computers.

API: DX11
Quality: Ultra
Stereo 3D: Disabled
Monitors: Single
AA: Off
Fullscreen: Yes
Resolution: 1920x1080

Score: 3186
Average FPS: 76
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 11:40:22 AM

Love me some Zotac !
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 11:43:09 AM

Zotac doesn't have the name recognition or reputation of Asus, EVGA, Gigabyte etc., but I've heard few negative things about their products. All indications I've ever seen are that they are as good as any other.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 11:44:05 AM

They are excellent IMO. Great customer service and nice warranties. Same company that makes sapphire for AMD.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 11:57:00 AM

Dinner_Theif_313 said:


no haven't ran the burn in yet, but i have a FX 6300 (stock) and running the 970 through a pci 2.0 slot? doubt the 2.0 would hinder it that much.. my driver is the latest certified and not the beta. how long do you think it would take for the paste to set in? roughly 1 day old and only has about 3 hours of gaming time on it and thats at maybe 30/40% because ive been running arma 3 and i know thats CPU game rather than a high GPU game. i dont know but im kinda upset that im seeing these low scores, but im also very impatient and a beginner when it comes to computers.

API: DX11
Quality: Ultra
Stereo 3D: Disabled
Monitors: Single
AA: Off
Fullscreen: Yes
Resolution: 1920x1080

Score: 3186
Average FPS: 76


Well, it didn't really settle when gaming, I was only playing Borderlands 2, and it never really rises above 60 degree celsius.

Get Furmark: http://www.ozone3d.net/benchmarks/fur/

Don't have Firestorm running so your card runs with stock settings, select "Burn-in benchmark 1920x1080 15min".

Let it run its 15min course, the card should throttle itself to stay at 80 degrees celsius (that's the standard bios temp preset). My first run the card delivered only some 25fps average, second run it went up to 50 (didn't let it run through, though). It's safe since you can't kill your card with it, but I'd stay around your PC nonetheless. Better safe than sorry. Keep an eye on the temp, it's shown during the benchmark.

Edit: nevermind, saw that you already have furmark when reading through earlier posts. Just do the 15min burn in benchmark. Your scores should go up. Also, what's your other components?

And don't worry, I run PCIe 2.0 x16, same as you. Before investing in a new card I did some research and it's not a bottleneck, at most it costs you 2 fps according to some tests.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 12:12:18 PM

Mandarb said:
Dinner_Theif_313 said:


no haven't ran the burn in yet, but i have a FX 6300 (stock) and running the 970 through a pci 2.0 slot? doubt the 2.0 would hinder it that much.. my driver is the latest certified and not the beta. how long do you think it would take for the paste to set in? roughly 1 day old and only has about 3 hours of gaming time on it and thats at maybe 30/40% because ive been running arma 3 and i know thats CPU game rather than a high GPU game. i dont know but im kinda upset that im seeing these low scores, but im also very impatient and a beginner when it comes to computers.

API: DX11
Quality: Ultra
Stereo 3D: Disabled
Monitors: Single
AA: Off
Fullscreen: Yes
Resolution: 1920x1080

Score: 3186
Average FPS: 76


Well, it didn't really settle when gaming, I was only playing Borderlands 2, and it never really rises above 60 degree celsius.

Get Furmark: http://www.ozone3d.net/benchmarks/fur/

Don't have Firestorm running so your card runs with stock settings, select "Burn-in benchmark 1920x1080 15min".

Let it run its 15min course, the card should throttle itself to stay at 80 degrees celsius (that's the standard bios temp preset). My first run the card delivered only some 25fps average, second run it went up to 50 (didn't let it run through, though). It's safe since you can't kill your card with it, but I'd stay around your PC nonetheless. Better safe than sorry. Keep an eye on the temp, it's shown during the benchmark.

Edit: nevermind, saw that you already have furmark when reading through earlier posts. Just do the 15min burn in benchmark. Your scores should go up. Also, what's your other components?

And don't worry, I run PCIe 2.0 x16, same as you. Before investing in a new card I did some research and it's not a bottleneck, at most it costs you 2 fps according to some tests.




Asrock 970 extreme3
FX 6300 (stock clock)
coolnix 700w PSU
samsung 840 250GB SSD

The only time my temp has ever gone above 70c was on the furmark test, valley and any other time ive ran it hard its never gone above 70c. you think there is a limiter im not seeing? also im running MSI afterburner and not the firestorm.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 12:32:12 PM

Yes, when you check all settings, also in afterburner, you will see that the target temperature preset is locked to 79 degree.
m
0
l
September 25, 2014 12:43:46 PM

Mandarb said:
Yes, when you check all settings, also in afterburner, you will see that the target temperature preset is locked to 79 degree.


yes i have seen that but i have raised my volt/power so the limit is now 89/91c but still have not seen it go above 70c. am i hitting a BIOS cap that takes priority over my MSI afterburner? sorry for all the questions and i greatly appreciate your responses!
m
0
l
September 26, 2014 12:32:36 AM

What I just posted on the other thread:

"I just gave it a quick try. I could up the base clock (1076MHz) with afterburner by 200MHz and memory clock by 100MHz without issues. Seems afterburner ups the boostfrequency coupled with the base clock as there's no separate setting for it.

The unigine valley result was 2400 in extreme HD:
http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/TherconJair/UnigineV...

CPU clock was stock i7-2600k, no overclocking save the card.

Clock speed hovered mostly at around 1380MHz, temperature with automatic fan control never exceeded 84 degrees celsius.

I tried to go a bit further, but the card didn't like it. Whenever core clock spiked past "1400 and something"MHz the card locked up and the drivers reset.

It seems their bundled firestorm program has built in safeties, boost clock never exceeded 1215MHz while trying to overclock with that."

I told afterburner to prioritise power draw over temperature for these tries. Didn't try it the other way around, though.

EDIT: I'm a fool, firestorm just needs to run as admin, it doesn't give these rights itself like afterburner does. According to it, upping clock by 200MHz pushes boost to 1415. With these settings, card went up to 1427. If it stayed for longer there it became a bit unstable. Seems for mine 1400MHz is the limit.
m
0
l
September 26, 2014 8:53:38 AM

Mandarb said:
What I just posted on the other thread:

"I just gave it a quick try. I could up the base clock (1076MHz) with afterburner by 200MHz and memory clock by 100MHz without issues. Seems afterburner ups the boostfrequency coupled with the base clock as there's no separate setting for it.

The unigine valley result was 2400 in extreme HD:
http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/TherconJair/UnigineV...

CPU clock was stock i7-2600k, no overclocking save the card.

Clock speed hovered mostly at around 1380MHz, temperature with automatic fan control never exceeded 84 degrees celsius.

I tried to go a bit further, but the card didn't like it. Whenever core clock spiked past "1400 and something"MHz the card locked up and the drivers reset.

It seems their bundled firestorm program has built in safeties, boost clock never exceeded 1215MHz while trying to overclock with that."

I told afterburner to prioritise power draw over temperature for these tries. Didn't try it the other way around, though.

EDIT: I'm a fool, firestorm just needs to run as admin, it doesn't give these rights itself like afterburner does. According to it, upping clock by 200MHz pushes boost to 1415. With these settings, card went up to 1427. If it stayed for longer there it became a bit unstable. Seems for mine 1400MHz is the limit.



still not seeing anything even close to what you guys are and i have no idea why.... i wish i could upload a pic so i can show you that im running 1640MHz overclock on valley and still only seeing 2190 on extreme HD test...why am i only getting 2190??? while everyone else is seeing at least 3000 on extreme HD???



m
0
l
September 26, 2014 9:34:23 AM

2190 is around what I get on extreme HD too with stock clock/presets. When I overclock 220Hz, just before the driver starts resetting, then my best run was 2455.
m
0
l
September 26, 2014 9:53:19 AM

Dinner do you have your V-sync disabled? Adaptive v-sync disabled in nVidia settings and on these tweaking utility that Zotac provides? You received 1640Mhz on Core? That is crazy overclock :) .
m
0
l
September 26, 2014 9:57:25 AM

He's looking at the clock displayed in the unigine mark. I have two monitors and have the clock tool displayed there. When that reads out 1350MHz the in-test one shows 1700MHz. Wrong multiplier or software, no idea, but it's not correct. ;) 
m
0
l
September 26, 2014 4:35:56 PM

Mandarb said:
He's looking at the clock displayed in the unigine mark. I have two monitors and have the clock tool displayed there. When that reads out 1350MHz the in-test one shows 1700MHz. Wrong multiplier or software, no idea, but it's not correct. ;) 


you're right because when i OC only by 200-220MHz theres no way I'm getting a 1640Mhz total OC. i have the screenshot but no idea how to upload it..but atleast someone is seeing my results also. i've been looking for a while now and everyone else is seeing higher scores then us, with mild-high OC's... I dont know what i should do now. the only reason i bought this card was because it would compete with a 780, im almost thinking of dishing out the extra cash to get a 780ti because im looking for that kind of performace and this isn't cutting it. i mean its a good card but i think i want be to be able to run anything on ultra. what do you guys think? 780ti or a 980? i mean i want to atleast score a 4000-5000 on valley and run pretty much any game on ultra with no problems. so maybe 980 sli or 780ti sli?
m
0
l
September 26, 2014 10:58:38 PM

If you have the space in your case and the PSU to support it, get a second Zotac GTX970 and run them SLI. Pretty much the same price as a single GTX980, and most likely a 60 to 80% performance increase over it. Stay on the new GTX9xx line, better energy efficiency, HDMI 2.0 if you want to do 4K gaming, and DX12 support.

Also, the 220MHz performance increase isn't bad. Over at Extremetech I believe they got a Zotac AMP! Edition to +240Hz. The people with even higher rates have most likely water cooling, for example the guy at overclockers posted afterburner graphs and the temp graph showed a max temp of 38 degrees. That can't be done on air. And he's looking at Bios hacks so he can drive the card even higher.

And I currently run everything I own at 60fps at ultra and FullHD. Sure, when I throw 4 cluster grenades that split into 9 subgrenades into an area with barrels and enemies it drops shortly into the 40ties (no overclocking).
m
0
l
September 27, 2014 12:59:42 AM

Hiya, I guess drivers are still not optimized for 970/980. Please see some score for Geforce GTX 980. It scores only 2737 on Extreme.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wO8pN1B9tUc

Another Valley on extreme with 970, score 2214
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Wzeej-E-Mw

Another 970 on extreme, (@ 1501 boost and 7780mhz mem): score 2538
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36742228&pos...

So I guess it is more or less same result for everybody. Maybe you will need some time to wait that some good release of drivers comes in. I would not bother. Card is made for gaming and I guess all of those are running super smooth :) .

best, d.
m
0
l
!