WCCftech: Memory allocation problem with GTX 970 [UPDATE] PCPer: NVidia response

[cmdrdredd]

The fact that I can't replicate anywhere close to 3.6GB of memory usage in Far Cry 4 at 1080p even with 8x MSAA and maxed settings including simulated fur, enhanced god rays, and soft shadows doesn't help the case for "the GTX 970 can't use all 4GB because it isn't a 256bit card".

 

[KaRLiToS]

First time I run this test.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I wonder now, you have 4 GPUs, does the benchmark scale with the number of GPUs in the system? I didn't think about that when I ran it. Gonna post my results with one GPU.

 

[KaRLiToS]

Seems to. I'll do it with one GPU too.

 

[96Firebird]

See what clocks it runs your memory at as well.

 

[KaRLiToS]

1.

2.

3.

 

[railven]

Try shadow of mordor 1920x1080 Ultra textures.
GTX980 uses full 4GB Vram

Or try far cry4 1920x1080 all max + 8xMSAA
GTX980 again uses full 4GB Vram

watch Dogs 1920x1080 all max+ Ultra textures + 8xMSAA
Again GTX980 full 4GB Vram

We test it in same game in same setting and same scene on GTX970 and 980 and gtx970 alloacate onl 3500-3600MB in those games and GTX980 always full 4GB Vram

Figured easiest way to make or break his point is to test one of the scenarios his forum crew tested.

Anyone got a combination of GTX 970+Them games or GTX 980+Them games willing to put this to rest?

 

[cmdrdredd]

Figured easiest way to make or break his point is to test one of the scenarios his forum crew tested.

Anyone got a combination of GTX 970+Them games or GTX 980+Them games willing to put this to rest?

I do and as I said my 970s don't even hit 3.6GB(sits around 3.3GB actually) at 1920x1080 and 8x MSAA even with all the highest settings applied in Far Cry 4. To do that I need to go up to 1440p. When I go up to 4k I can hit 3.7GB and higher until the game locks up my PC because it's starting to go over my 4GB.

 

[Head1985]

We already know watch dogs
GTX970 http://abload.de/img/wd2ebur2.jpg
GTX980 http://abload.de/img/wd2mfjpy.jpg
Same pc, same scene, same drivers

And- after start game (application) WD eat all vram on 980, but only around 3500 on 970.

its from user who have both gtx 970 and 980

he will maybe test more games.

 

[railven]

I do and as I said my 970s don't even hit 3.6GB(sits around 3.3GB actually) at 1920x1080 and 8x MSAA even with all the highest settings applied in Far Cry 4. To do that I need to go up to 1440p. When I go up to 4k I can hit 3.7GB and higher until the game locks up my PC because it's starting to go over my 4GB.

Well, considering he claims that a GTX980 in the same scenario loads up the full 4GBs, we need someone with a GTX 980 that can address it.

Only reason I'm even credence to his claims is I had some wonky memory issues with m GTX 660 TI's even though Toyota chewed me out saying I was wrong. So just interesting to see if any one can full out prove/disprove his claims wrong.

Seems using AIDA64 isn't going to do it, since it isn't a gaming application.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Anecdotal evidence and why does it matter if the 970 uses less vram? If performance doesn't suffer then there is no issue. Besides, people have already demonstrated that you can saturate the 970s memory entirely. You ignore all evidence that doesn't agree with you.

Plus that scene in watch dogs is dynamic. Meaning it is never the exact same twice.

See what clocks it runs your memory at as well.

Capped to 6ghz whether single card or dual card.

 

[railven]

We already know watch dogs
GTX970 http://abload.de/img/wd2ebur2.jpg
GTX980 http://abload.de/img/wd2mfjpy.jpg
Same pc, same scene, same drivers


its from user who have both gtx 970 and 980

he will maybe test more games.

I dunno, them two screen shots don't even look like they're using the same settings. Second screen shot seems to be missing a freak-ton of details.

 

[railven]

Anecdotal evidence and why does it matter if the 970 uses less vram? If performance doesn't suffer then there is no issue. Besides, people have already demonstrated that you can saturate the 970s memory entirely. You ignore all evidence that doesn't agree with you.

Plus that scene in watch dogs is dynamic. Meaning it is never the exact same twice.

/shrug

It would matter to me. I got rid of my GTX 660 Ti's because of the memory issues I was having. I got a GTX 780 which is basically a side grade, performance numbers were on par, and not changing mods I had zero memory issues. But, again, if he's wrong - he'll be proven wrong. I just figured easiest way was to use his scenarios.

 

[cmdrdredd]

I dunno, them two screen shots don't even look like they're using the same settings. Second screen shot seems to be missing a freak-ton of details.

Also notice the 970 is getting higher fps. It is clear they aren't the same.

I am starting to think this supposed issue is artificial.

/shrug



It would matter to me. I got rid of my GTX 660 Ti's because of the memory issues I was having. I got a GTX 780 which is basically a side grade, performance numbers were on par, and not changing mods I had zero memory issues. But, again, if he's wrong - he'll be proven wrong. I just figured easiest way was to use his scenarios.

Was not responding to you directly and calling you out. Sorry if it seemed that way. I was meaning to address the op but didn't quote him.

 

[railven]

Also notice the 970 is getting higher fps. It is clear they aren't the same.

I am starting to think this supposed issue is artificial.

Higher frame rate with lower load, definitely implies to me something is off.

I'd assume even the resolution is different (which would clearly indicate a difference in memory load).

Was not responding to you directly and calling you out. Sorry if it seemed that way. I was meaning to address the op but didn't quote him.

Nah, no worries. I didn't take it like that. But this topic just reminded me of my issues with my 660's and I was called insane haha. Either way, my issue might been a defective card, this issue if real has some people claiming it's real. Who knows.

 

[Head1985]

if you guys dont trust person who have both cards test it for yourself

 

[cmdrdredd]

Higher frame rate with lower load, definitely implies to me something is off.



I'd assume even the resolution is different (which would clearly indicate a difference in memory load).







Nah, no worries. I didn't take it like that. But this topic just reminded me of my issues with my 660's and I was called insane haha. Either way, my issue might been a defective card, this issue if real has some people claiming it's real. Who knows.

Well until people here (who I trust a lot more) start saying they can't load beyond 3.6GB, I am not worried in the least. I mean anyone can test this in about 5 min by running 4k resolution via dsr. The game or scene doesn't matter to determine if a card had a memory problem and wouldn't use the full 4GB.

 

[cmdrdredd]

if you guys dont trust person who have both cards test it for yourself

Yeah cause everyone buys a 980 AND a 970.

 

[railven]

if you guys dont trust person who have both cards test it for yourself

Don't take it personal, just some people prefer better "evidence."

Well until people here (who I trust a lot more) start saying they can't load beyond 3.6GB, I am not worried in the least. I mean anyone can test this in about 5 min by running 4k resolution via dsr. The game or scene doesn't matter to determine if a card had a memory problem and wouldn't use the full 4GB.

Pretty much this. You'd expect more people being vocal if it were a huge issue.

 

[SPBHM]

I think the AIDA memory read and write are basically PCIE limited, copy is also maybe a little?

2500K is PCIE 2.0, 5960X 3.0,

 

[Head1985]

Ok here is far cry4 1920x1080 all max + 8xMSAA
GTX980
http://abload.de/img/farcry4_2015_01_04_172hxoz.jpg
mine own gtx970
http://abload.de/img/farcry4_2015_01_04_18vajys.png

 

[railven]

Ok here is far cry4 1920x1080 all amx + 8xMSAA
GTX980
http://abload.de/img/farcry4_2015_01_04_172hxoz.jpg
mine own gtx970
http://abload.de/img/farcry4_2015_01_04_18vajys.png

No offense, but you need someone to confirm their settings.

Again, these two screen shots are so different judging by the scaling of the OSD text - I'd argue they aren't even in the same resolution. Which baffles me since one loads 4GB with what looks like a lower resolution than the other.

I dunno, at this point with no card in the race I guess I'll just step out. Good luck though!

 

[cmdrdredd]

lol...what exactly are you showing here?

They arent the same...clearly

 

[Head1985]

you guys are hopeless i dont even know why i posting here because you know all better than us who already testet it.
Its same scene with same setting but on gtx980 sun is behind cloud.

Just test it on GTX980 if you dont trust me.. first village 1920x1080 all max +8xMSAA

 

[cmdrdredd]

you guys are hopeless i dont even know why i posting here because you know all better than us who already testet it.
Its same scene with same setting but on gtx980 sun is behind cloud.

Then it isn't the same. The dynamic weather , environment, and AI changes the memory and GPU load. Heck they aren't even standing in the same spot. The buildings are further away in one image.

That's not complicated to understand, or so I thought.