What's with the GTX 970's 3.5 GB of VRAM problem?

stipess

Reputable
Jun 26, 2015
15
0
4,520
I found out about that ever since I wanted to buy GTX 970. Apparently, "typical" nVidia has managed to make a glitch in the production of GTX 970, which resulted in some sort of excess 512 MB of VAM? I don't know what happened, nor if that's true, but I want to buy GTX 970 because I want to play every game on 1080p and ultra graphics at 60+ FPS. I can't stand playing any game if it's 30 FPS or below, it's just not fun to play.

In my last question, people have been saying stuff about this 3.5 GB of VRAM thing, but not in much details, so I wanted to know if it's safe to buy it considering my gaming wants
 

sz0ty0l4

Distinguished
Hello. The GTX 970 has 4 Gb vram, however the last 512mb is a lot slower. for 1080p gaming the gtx 970 is the best GPU to buy and it will definitely get you to ultra settings 60 fps.
 

stipess

Reputable
Jun 26, 2015
15
0
4,520


I have Intel i5 3570 3,4 GHz quad core, 8 GB of RAM, windows 8.1
And a power supply of 500 watts, but I will upgrade to 700 soon.

Will it bottleneck? Will I receive less performance because of my other specs?
 

stipess

Reputable
Jun 26, 2015
15
0
4,520


What do you mean 90% of the time? What about that other 10%?
 

kellemdros

Reputable
Jul 13, 2014
117
0
4,710
He means that you processor wil bottleneck in a couple of stupidly CPU conssuming games, but those are usually due to poor coding so... XD
 

sz0ty0l4

Distinguished
There are games that are heavily cpu intensive. the cpu intensitivy may come from the number of NPCs in the draw distance, or heavy physx simulations running on the cpu, or both. Talking about well optimised modern games, games like these can use up to 12 threads, sharing the load between them.

In a game like that any i5 may bottleneck in certain situations. it may not be a continual bottleneck while playing, but more like in certain situations. you go through fast in an area where are 1000 npcs and your gpu usage will drop, because the cpu can't handle the load.

example for a game like that: assassins creed unity

but it can happen in other open world high density games aswell in certain situations, but not frequently. examples: far cry 4, gta 5
 

BiggerBluer

Distinguished
Jun 8, 2015
106
0
18,680
I would say the 4690k would not bottleneck the 970. Everyone wants an i7 4790k but the next best option (within the core series) is the i5 4690k. From what I hear you can easily oc it to 4.2 Ghz. In the end it's your choice.
 

Muezick

Reputable
Dec 25, 2014
50
0
4,630
I'm having an interesting pickle of a time with these cards. You can read the whole story over at the EVGA forums here: http://forums.evga.com/35GB-of-vram-on-GTX-970-SSC-I-cant-believe-Im-writing-this-m2362881.aspx


To summarize. I'm only running one GTX 970 at a time, I don't have the resources to SLI them currently, but I could if I was really invested in it (I'd need a new PSU and an SLI bridge)

I bought a 970 back in February and it ran AMAZING. No issues at all. And absolutely zero evidence of any "3.5gb" problem. Though at the time, the only game I had that was pushing it over 3.5gb of vram was my heavily modded Skyrim. The point is, the card has performed in games flawlessly for what it is.

Fast forward to last month. I buy another identical make and model GTX 970 (The EVGA SSC Version) for my girlfriend's computer that we're slowly building.

Fast forward to last weekend. My Older 970 ssc has it's DVI port burn out. So I'm about to RMA it. I put my girlfriends 970 into my computer, since we're still buying her parts for her new computer, she can't use the 970, so no problem. The other 970 is packed up in a box, waiting to be carted off to the UPS store.

I load up Batman Arkham Knight, which my older 970 chewed through no problem, and what do I find? Stuttering when the card goes over 3.5gb of vram. ;_;

Now my Original GTX 970 handled Batman Arkham Knight just fine. There were points where the frame RATE would drop considerably, during times of heavy movement, such as gliding or bat mobile or fighting lots of enemies at once, but Batman AK is one of the worst PC ports in recent history. STILL, I was getting a solid 50-60 fps on foot, and 35-45 in the bat mobile when the game wasn't shitting itself. Provided the makers of that game can fix those areas, it'll be a beautifully mastered game. There was no frame stutter or frame dropping

Now my newer 970 doesn't perform as well as my older 970. When it goes above 3.5gb of vram usage, there is stuttering, unfortunately, it's very very intermittent. Sometimes it's so bad, you can't even play the game, but others, it's extremely subtle, so much to the point you can't even see it.

I decided to load up Assassin's Creed Unity, since that's another newer game that uses tons of vram, and while the game was only running at about 30 fps, it was a steady 30 fps, and it was using over 3.5 gb of vram, there was much less stutter. Unfortunately, I am afraid the only way I can really test these cards for this "Stuttering" issue is to SLI them together, because in my personal findings, I'm finding that these cards run out of raw horse power long before they cap out their vram. I decided to push a lot of my other games in DSR to higher resolutions than my monitor can provide. What I found time and again was that the GPU of the card physically couldn't handle the higher resolutions, and the vram usually hovered around 2.5 or 3. Dragon Age Inquisition, DSR to 4k, ULTRA MAX settings....only 3 gigs of vram, only 20 fps, dipping to 15fps during movement. Found similar results in other games.


What does this mean? It means that if you plan on running only one GTX 970 at 1080 and 60Hz, then the chance of you encountering "3.5gate" is extremely low. In order to get acceptable frame rates (40+, ideally, a solid 60) in newer games, you'll have to adjust the settings such that the game itself wont even be using over 3.5gb of vram. And if you get lucky (Like I did with my first GTX 970) when it does go over 3.5gb of vram, you won't see stuttering at all any way.



One interesting note. My Newer GTX 970 has Elpida Memory Modules, and is running a newer BIOS version. My older GTX 970, which gets slightly better performance and has never ever exhibited any frame stuttering, uses Samsung Ram and has an older BIOS. Another user on the EVGA forums confirmed that in the past, those of his graphics cards he got with Samsung ram modules always ran better.


For reference, My system is:
CPU: i5 2500k OC to 3.9Ghz
Motherboard: p8p67-m Pro (rev 3.0)
Ram: Corsair Dominator DDR3, 2x4gb (1600Mhz)
GPU: 1x EVGA GTX 970 SSC (1493 Core Clock, and 7000 memory Clock) (I can OC the older 970 to 1590~ and 7500, the gains are amazing)
 
^this. As an owner to 660SLI i can imagine what kind of problem once the memory usage exceed 3.5GB with 970. But as a single card it will not matter much. Same with 660. The card have 2GB but before you can fill that much memory (back then there is no vram hungry games like ACU or SoM) you will have hard time maintaining 60FPS.
 


Very similar system to my rig except I have a 2600k and matching Zotac cards and have yet to see any issue with the Ram gate thing.
 

Muezick

Reputable
Dec 25, 2014
50
0
4,630



What brand are your memory modules?
 


I have never checked but these are my cards :- http://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/b3053/zotac-gtx-970.html
 

Muezick

Reputable
Dec 25, 2014
50
0
4,630


You can check with GPU-z.

Here's my good GTX 970, it uses Samsung memory Modules.

Jm1iIE5.gif


I am only curious because my bad GTX 970 uses Elpida memory modules, and a few other people have posted that other graphics cards with Elpida memory Modules have also had sub par performance. So i was just curious which you had.

 

Muezick

Reputable
Dec 25, 2014
50
0
4,630


Interesting. Well I'm RMAing the 970 with elpida. At leaSt when I open the next 970 they send me back, if it says hynix I don't necessarily have to flip shit.

Thanks for the info