This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. GTX 970 only uses 3.5 - 3.6 GB of its 4 GB VRAM.

User Info: Loshadt

Loshadt
4 years ago#1
http://www.reddit.com/r/pcgaming/comments/2s2968/gtx970_memoryvram_allocation_bug/
http://www.overclock.net/t/1535502/gtx-970s-can-only-use-3-5gb-of-4gb-vram-issue#post_23397421

So it seems to me that my 970s refuse to utilize above ~3600 MBs of VRAM unless they absolutely need it, but I've no idea why. Nvidia didn't gimp the memory bus in any overly obvious way from the full GM204 chip therefore the 970s should have no issue using the same VRAM amount as the 980s. I don't like what I see, it's like the situation with the GTX 660 that had 2 GBs but could only effectively use up 1.5 without reducing its bandwidth to a third, so it tried to avoid exceeding 1.5. The difference is that was predictable due to the GK106's 192-bit memory bus, there's nothing about the 970's explicit specifications that indicates the same situation should apply.

A similar shortcoming was noticed sometime back regarding the 970's ROPs and how the cutting-down of 3 of GM204's 16 SMM units affected the effective pixel fillrate of the 970s despite retaining the full 64 ROPs. It's possible that Maxwell is more tightly-connected to shader clusters and severing them affects a lot about how the chip behaves, but that doesn't really make sense. If this is an issue, it's almost certainly software-related. I'm not happy regardless of the reason and I'll try more games later. Anecdotally, I have noticed recent demanding games peaking at about 3500-3600 MBs and can't actually recall anything going beyond that. I didn't pay attention to it or change any conditions to test it.


Hopefully it's a software issue, either way I'm pretty pissed I payed $340 for a card that doesn't even operate as advertised.
Scientifically proven.

User Info: ATARIJAWA

ATARIJAWA
4 years ago#2
Some people are injustice collectors and are incapable of not nitpicking everything apart. Such is life.
Gamefaqs game rating system : 10 = Best Game Ever. 8-9. Crushing dissapointment. Below 8 :Total Garbage. This is getting ridiculous. people agreeing so far 117

User Info: snesmaster40

snesmaster40
4 years ago#3
*hugs AMD card*
Are we not men?

User Info: Nicodimus

Nicodimus
4 years ago#4
The vast majority of games don't even break 2000 MBs at 1440p, which most people don't even use yet. If you're at 1080p, this is a non-issue for 99% of games.
My photography: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nicodimus22/sets

User Info: Loshadt

Loshadt
4 years ago#5
Nicodimus posted...
The vast majority of games don't even break 2000 MBs at 1440p, which most people don't even use yet. If you're at 1080p, this is a non-issue for 99% of games.


I think you're missing the point by a pretty wide margin.
Scientifically proven.

User Info: Combo Master

Combo Master
4 years ago#6
pretty pissed over this?? I wish i had as perfect life as you if this is what upsets u..
Combo Master

User Info: ATARIJAWA

ATARIJAWA
4 years ago#7
They rounded up. Its pretty common in the pc industry. They wouldnt sell a 3.6 gb card. Not worth caring about.
Gamefaqs game rating system : 10 = Best Game Ever. 8-9. Crushing dissapointment. Below 8 :Total Garbage. This is getting ridiculous. people agreeing so far 117

User Info: Snickleseed

Snickleseed
4 years ago#8
Combo Master posted...
pretty pissed over this?? I wish i had as perfect life as you if this is what upsets u..
i7 3770 | 16GB G.Skill | Samsung 850 EVO 250GB | 2TB Seagate | MSI Twin Frozr GTX770 |

User Info: Nicodimus

Nicodimus
4 years ago#9
Loshadt posted...
Nicodimus posted...
The vast majority of games don't even break 2000 MBs at 1440p, which most people don't even use yet. If you're at 1080p, this is a non-issue for 99% of games.


I think you're missing the point by a pretty wide margin.


That some neckbeard playing Skyrim with 418 mods on his 4K monitor is going to run out of VRAM? How will the world ever keep turning?
My photography: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nicodimus22/sets

User Info: Loshadt

Loshadt
4 years ago#10
ATARIJAWA posted...
They rounded up. Its pretty common in the pc industry. They wouldnt sell a 3.6 gb card. Not worth caring about.


Well, it is worth caring about because if you actually read any of the information it actually HAS 4096 MB of VRAM, it just has major issues accessing it.

Combo Master posted...
pretty pissed over this?? I wish i had as perfect life as you if this is what upsets u..


Yeah, I know it's really petty to be upset over paying $340 for something that doesn't work as advertised.

Nicodimus posted...
That some neckbeard playing Skyrim with 418 mods on his 4K monitor is going to run out of VRAM? How will the world ever keep turning?


Jesus Christ I'd give anything for a person here who can pass a 4th grade literacy test. Let me break it down using nice small words. GTX 970 has 4GB VRAM, it only allocates up to 3.6 GB most of the time.
Scientifically proven.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. GTX 970 only uses 3.5 - 3.6 GB of its 4 GB VRAM.
  • Topic Archived