• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

GTX 970 Memory Drama: Plot Thickens, NVIDIA has to Revise Specs

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
46,277 (7.69/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 8GB G.Skill Sniper X
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
It looks like NVIDIA's first response to the GeForce GTX 970 memory allocation controversy clearly came from engineers who were pulled out of their weekend plans, and hence was too ambiguously technical (even for us). It's only on Monday that NVIDIA PR swung into action, offering a more user-friendly explanation on what the GTX 970 issue is, and how exactly did they carve the GM204 up, when creating the card.

According to an Anandtech report, which cites that easy explanation from NVIDIA, the company was not truthful about specs of GTX 970, at launch. For example, the non-public document NVIDIA gave out to reviewers (which gives them detailed tech-specs), had clearly mentioned ROP count of the GTX 970 to be 64. Reviewers used that count in their reviews. TechPowerUp GPU-Z shows ROP count as reported by the driver, but it has no way of telling just how many of those "enabled" ROPs are "active." The media reviewing the card were hence led to believe that the GTX 970 was carved out by simply disabling three out of sixteen streaming multiprocessors (SMMs), the basic indivisible subunits of the GM204 chip, with no mention of other components like the ROP count, and L2 cache amount being changed from the GTX 980 (a full-fledged implementation of this silicon).



NVIDIA explained to Anandtech that there was a communication-gap between the engineers (the people who designed the GTX 970 ASIC), and the technical marketing team (the people who write the Reviewer's Guide document, and draw the block-diagram). This team was unaware that with "Maxwell," you could segment components previously thought indivisible, or that you could "partial disable" components.

It turns out that in addition to three SMX units being disabled (resulting in 1,664 CUDA cores), NVIDIA reduced the L2 cache (last-level cache) on this chip to 1.75 MB, down from 2 MB, and also disabled a few ROPs. The ROP count is effectively 56, and not 64. The last 8 ROPs aren't "disabled." They're active, but not used, because their connection to the crossbar is too slow (we'll get to that in a bit). The L2 cache is a key component of the "crossbar." Think of the crossbar as a town-square for the GPU, where the various components of the GPU talk to each other by leaving and picking-up data labeled with "from" and "to" addresses. The crossbar routes data between the four Graphics Processing Clusters (GPCs), and the eight memory controllers of 64-bit bus width each (which together make up its 256-bit wide memory interface), and is cushioned by the L2 cache.

The L2 cache itself is segmented, and isn't a monolithic slab of SRAM. Each of the eight memory controllers on the GM204 is ideally tied to its segment of the L2 cache. Also tied to these segments are segments of ROPs. With NVIDIA reducing the L2 cache amount by disabling one such segment. Its component memory controller is instead rerouted to the cache segment of a neighbouring memory controller. Access to the crossbar for that memory controller is hence slower. To make sure there are no issues caused to the interleaving of these memory controllers, adding up to the big memory amount figure that the driver can address, NVIDIA partitioned the 4 GB of memory to two segments. The first is 3.5 GB large, and is made up of memory controllers with access to their own segments of the L2; the second segment is 512 MB in size, and is tied to that memory controller which is rerouted.

The way this partitioning works, is that the 3.5 GB partition can't be read while the 512 MB one is being read. Only to an app that's actively using the entire 4 GB of memory, there will be a drop in performance, because the two segments aren't being read at the same time. The GPU is either addressing the 3.5 GB segment, or the 512 MB one. Hence, there's a drop in performance to be expected, again, for apps that use up the entire 4 GB of memory.

While it's technically correct that the GTX 970 has a 256-bit wide memory interface, and given its 7.00 GHz (GDDR5-effective) memory clock, that translates to 224 GB/s of bandwidth on paper, not all of that memory is uniformly fast. You have 3.5 GB of it having normal access to the crossbar (the town-square of the GPU), and 512 MB of it having slower access. Therefore, the 3.5 GB segment really just has 196 GB/s of memory bandwidth (7.00 GHz x 7 ways to reach the crossbar x 32-bit width per chip), which can be said with certainty. Nor can we say how this segment affects the performance of the memory controller whose crossbar port it's using, if the card is using its full 4 GB. We can't tell how fast the 512 MB second segment really is. But it's impossible for the second segment to make up 28 GB/s (of the 224 GB/s), since NVIDIA itself claims this segment is running slower. Therefore NVIDIA's claims of GTX 970 memory bandwidth being 224 GB/s at reference clocks is inaccurate.

Why NVIDIA chose to reduce cache size and ROP count will remain a mystery. We can't imagine that the people designing the chip will not have sufficiently communicated this to the driver and technical marketing teams. To claim that technical marketing didn't get this the first time around, seems like a hard-sell. We're pretty sure that NVIDIA engineers read reviews, and if they saw "64 ROPs" on a first-page table, they would have reported it up the food-chain at NVIDIA. An explanation about this hardware change should have taken up an entire page in the technical documents the first time around, and NVIDIA could have saved itself a lot of explanation, much of it through the press.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2012
Messages
12,062 (2.77/day)
Location
Gypsyland, UK
System Name HP Omen 17
Processor i7 7700HQ
Memory 16GB 2400Mhz DDR4
Video Card(s) GTX 1060
Storage Samsung SM961 256GB + HGST 1TB
Display(s) 1080p IPS G-SYNC 75Hz
Audio Device(s) Bang & Olufsen
Power Supply 230W
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD+
Software Win 10 Pro
All the benchmarks in all the reviews are still accurate of course, so everything about how it performs in games at various resolutions is still true.

But NVidia has basically lied about hardware specifications. I don't believe for a second this was all one big mistake of somebody not saying to marketing that the card did not in fact have 64 ROPs and 224GB/s bandwidth. By all accounts it's pretty crappy business practice, and they should be punished accordingly.

That being said. I still like my 3.5GB 970 for the price I got it at.
 
Joined
Jan 21, 2008
Messages
237 (0.04/day)
System Name PC2.1
Processor Intel i7 3770k @4.6GHZ
Motherboard MSI Z68A-GD80
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 16GB Corsair XMS 1866MHz
Video Card(s) SLI EVGA 780 Classifieds
Storage Samsung 830 250gb /Samsung EVO 840 120GB
Display(s) 3x Dell 27" IPS screens
Case Thermaltake T81 Urban
Power Supply Cooler Master V1000
Software Windows 8.1 64bit
All the benchmarks in all the reviews are still accurate of course, so everything about how it performs in games at various resolutions is still true.

But NVidia has basically lied about hardware specifications. I don't believe for a second this was all one big mistake of somebody not saying to marketing that the card did not in fact have 64 ROPs and 224GB/s bandwidth. By all accounts it's pretty crappy business practice, and they should be punished accordingly.

That being said. I still like my 3.5GB 970 for the price I got it at.


This is no different than the dual GPU cards, they physically have double the memory but only half is usable. This changes nothing, the card does have 4gb, and as you said all the benchmarks are still the same. I dont agree with them doing this and not telling people but if you got the card based on reviews and benchmarks you got what you paid for.

The truth is once the card gets a to a rez where 4gb would even be worth having the GPU cant handle it and it would make maybe 1-2fps difference at best, its been show time and time again, 256bit bus really can only handle 2gb.
 

64K

Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
6,104 (1.66/day)
Processor i7 7700k
Motherboard MSI Z270 SLI Plus
Cooling CM Hyper 212 EVO
Memory 2 x 8 GB Corsair Vengeance
Video Card(s) MSI RTX 2070 Super
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB and WD Black 4TB
Display(s) Dell 27 inch 1440p 144 Hz
Case Corsair Obsidian 750D Airflow Edition
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply EVGA SuperNova 850 W Gold
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Logitech G105
Software Windows 10
Good points especially this one

We're pretty sure that NVIDIA engineers read reviews, and if they saw "64 ROPs" on a first-page table, they would have reported it up the food-chain at NVIDIA.

Nvidia needs to do something to make this right with people who already bought a GTX 970 before the truth came out. I haven't run into any problems with my 970 but I would like a partial refund. Maybe a $50 Newegg gift card.

If this customer backlash gains traction it could result is a class action lawsuit. I'm certain with a market cap of 11 billion it would attract a top gun law firm to handle it.
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
182 (0.03/day)
System Name xkche
Processor INTEL Core I5 6400
Motherboard Gigabyte H170 Gaming
Cooling Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO
Memory 16GB DDR4 2400Mhz (2133Mhz)
Video Card(s) Sapphire RX480 Nitro+ (4GB)
Storage Crucial MX200 275GB
Display(s) 49" LG TV 49UH6030 4K HDR
Case NZXT 410
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply EVGA 600W
Software Windows 10
because 4GB is more fun that 3.5GB
 

64K

Joined
Mar 13, 2014
Messages
6,104 (1.66/day)
Processor i7 7700k
Motherboard MSI Z270 SLI Plus
Cooling CM Hyper 212 EVO
Memory 2 x 8 GB Corsair Vengeance
Video Card(s) MSI RTX 2070 Super
Storage Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB and WD Black 4TB
Display(s) Dell 27 inch 1440p 144 Hz
Case Corsair Obsidian 750D Airflow Edition
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply EVGA SuperNova 850 W Gold
Mouse Logitech G502
Keyboard Logitech G105
Software Windows 10
Class action lawsuit?

Possibly. Here in the USA we sue each other for anything and everything. It would be far cheaper for Nvidia to issue a partial refund.
 
Joined
Jul 16, 2014
Messages
8,115 (2.29/day)
Location
SE Michigan
System Name Dumbass
Processor AMD Ryzen 7800X3D
Motherboard ASUS TUF gaming B650
Cooling Artic Liquid Freezer 2 - 420mm
Memory G.Skill Sniper 32gb DDR5 6000
Video Card(s) GreenTeam 4070 ti super 16gb
Storage Samsung EVO 500gb & 1Tb, 2tb HDD, 500gb WD Black
Display(s) 1x Nixeus NX_EDG27, 2x Dell S2440L (16:9)
Case Phanteks Enthoo Primo w/8 140mm SP Fans
Audio Device(s) onboard (realtek?) - SPKRS:Logitech Z623 200w 2.1
Power Supply Corsair HX1000i
Mouse Steeseries Esports Wireless
Keyboard Corsair K100
Software windows 10 H
Benchmark Scores https://i.imgur.com/aoz3vWY.jpg?2
Sounds like nvidia might have been planning future sales of "new cards" with a rebrand of this card by unlocking more "stuff" later on. They just got caught doing it, some might call it cheating.
 
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
299 (0.08/day)
System Name gamingPZ
Processor i7-6700k
Motherboard Asrock Z170M Pro4S
Cooling scythe mugen4
Memory 32GB ddr4 2400mhz crucial ballistix sport lt
Video Card(s) gigabyte GTX 1070 ti
Storage ssd - crucial MX500 1TB
Case silverstone sugo sg10
Power Supply Evga G2 650w
Software win10
aa2.png
 
Joined
Oct 29, 2013
Messages
69 (0.02/day)
Location
Switzerland
System Name Double Overseer
Processor i7 3820 / FX-8350
Motherboard Asus P9X79 / MSI 990FXA-GD65
Cooling Air
Memory Kingston 16 GB RAM 1600 / Corsair 8 GB RAM 1866 (2000)
Video Card(s) PCS+ 7950 Crossfire / Club3d 7950 13 Series / Hauppauge 5500
Storage 240 Kingston HyperX 3K / Crucial MX100 256 GB / 1+3 TB Seagate
Display(s) S240HL Acer / S242HL Acer x2
Case 2x Thermaltake Overseer
Audio Device(s) Onkyo TX-SR309 / 5.1 Canton
Power Supply Fractal Design Newton R3 800 / Seasonic SS-660KM Active
Mouse 5 Euro one
Keyboard Logitech K120
Software Windows 7 64-Bit / Windows 10 64-Bit
Benchmark Scores Firestrike 10400 3DMark11 13400 / triple crossfire Firestrike 12500 3DMark11 15600
Like 4 GB is needed for today's games and 3.5 GB is not enough. The most customers won't notice any difference. A dirty feeling about NVIDIA hardware what so ever arrives. Quality is something else.
 
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
2,141 (0.56/day)
Location
Serbia
Processor Ryzen 3600
Motherboard X570 I Aorus Pro
Cooling Deepcool AG400
Memory HyperX Fury 2 x 8GB 3200 CL16
Video Card(s) RX 470 Nitro+ 4GB
Storage SX8200 Pro 512 / NV2 512
Display(s) 24G2U
Case NR200P
Power Supply Ion SFX 650
Mouse G703
Keyboard Keychron V1 (Akko Matcha Green) / Apex m500 (gateron milky yellow)
Software W10
"The way it's meant to be played"
 
Joined
Nov 18, 2010
Messages
7,106 (1.46/day)
Location
Rīga, Latvia
System Name HELLSTAR
Processor AMD RYZEN 9 5950X
Motherboard ASUS Strix X570-E
Cooling 2x 360 + 280 rads. 3x Gentle Typhoons, 3x Phanteks T30, 2x TT T140 . EK-Quantum Momentum Monoblock.
Memory 4x8GB G.SKILL Trident Z RGB F4-4133C19D-16GTZR 14-16-12-30-44
Video Card(s) Sapphire Pulse RX 7900XTX + under waterblock.
Storage Optane 900P[W11] + WD BLACK SN850X 4TB + 750 EVO 500GB + 1TB 980PRO[FEDORA]
Display(s) Philips PHL BDM3270 + Acer XV242Y
Case Lian Li O11 Dynamic EVO
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Fractal Design Newton R3 1000W
Mouse Razer Basilisk
Keyboard Razer BlackWidow V3 - Yellow Switch
Software FEDORA 39 / Windows 11 insider
False ad is an false ad. And it is not as it should be, that's it, it is a lie.

It ain't a question about speed, but common sense. nVidia played faul.

For example AMD got TLB bug on K10, they force fixed it via kernel patch to all, despite it caused BSOD in very few specialized tasks, but yet they played clean.

Intel also plays clean and errata documents are available on Intel site and describes what stepping did correct for each CPU, thus kernels are patched and aware and disable many features, mostly virtualization sub features those are often broken. As all consumer semiconductor makers do with their device data sheet, it's been since 1950ties.

This time it is more than fishy. They actually intended to make such obscure design, they could save more on that one single memory chip, as it really give 2-5% max performance delta as they say. Doing that just for marketing and for the sake of round 4GB number?(noob user actually thinks it is the main criteria, OK yes) And spoofing the ROP count, just why(noob user doesn't know what it is). Gosh this is low... I am actually disappointed having nvidia cards in the past then a bit.

Although... everyone remembers the FX series bloop with broken DX9c shaders, they also acted a bit the same, there was a recall for them?

Well I guess it will bring up more AMD users, as they need dough really bad in order to keep them alive and maintain the competition. As the green camp is getting funny ideas and their marketing team smoking way too green stuff.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
1,802 (0.32/day)
Location
ATL, GA
System Name My Rig
Processor AMD 3950X
Motherboard X570 TUFF GAMING PLUS
Cooling EKWB Custom Loop, Lian Li 011 G1 distroplate/DDC 3.1 combo
Memory 4x16GB Corsair DDR4-3466
Video Card(s) MSI Seahawk 2080 Ti EKWB block
Storage 2TB Auros NVMe Drive
Display(s) Asus P27UQ
Case Lian Li 011-Dynamic XL
Audio Device(s) JBL 30X
Power Supply Seasonic Titanium 1000W
Mouse Razer Lancehead
Keyboard Razer Widow Maker Keyboard
Software Window's 10 Pro
Like 4 GB is needed for today's games and 3.5 GB is not enough. The most customers won't notice any difference. A dirty feeling about NVIDIA hardware what so ever arrives. Quality is something else.

You are correct, it's likely not needed, or required. However it is still a lie, or atleast worst a negligent mistake. The 970 represented the possibility for you to not need to invest 1k+ US to attain a very playable experience at 4k@60 fps without AA and such turned off, at 600 US. So I would assume people who bought two of these were planning on either that resolution or 1440p @120 fps(arguably just as demanding). They saw this as opportunity to achieve that, where the ram is relevant.

Ironically, I downgraded from a pair of Titans to a pair of 980s(side grade? iono). For a simple reason, Shadowplay works at 4k@60FPS. It does not with AMD, and it is not possible using fraps, dxtory, or the like(see my vraps, 4x256gb SSD raid 0(lsi 9266-4i). I can record, and upload 4k video's now that look good.
 
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
4,180 (1.15/day)
Location
Texas
System Name SnowFire / The Reinforcer
Processor i7 10700K 5.1ghz (24/7) / 2x Xeon E52650v2
Motherboard Asus Strix Z490 / Dell Dual Socket (R720)
Cooling RX 360mm + 140mm Custom Loop / Dell Stock
Memory Corsair RGB 16gb DDR4 3000 CL 16 / DDR3 128gb 16 x 8gb
Video Card(s) GTX Titan XP (2025mhz) / Asus GTX 950 (No Power Connector)
Storage Samsung 970 1tb NVME and 2tb HDD x4 RAID 5 / 300gb x8 RAID 5
Display(s) Acer XG270HU, Samsung G7 Odyssey (1440p 240hz)
Case Thermaltake Cube / Dell Poweredge R720 Rack Mount Case
Audio Device(s) Realtec ALC1150 (On board)
Power Supply Rosewill Lightning 1300Watt / Dell Stock 750 / Brick
Mouse Logitech G5
Keyboard Logitech G19S
Software Windows 11 Pro / Windows Server 2016
Possibly. Here in the USA we sue each other for anything and everything. It would be far cheaper for Nvidia to issue a partial refund.
There is a high chance that will happen actually, knowing how things have happened in the past and how anyone is willing to do anything for some publicity and a buck this would not surprise me at all. Its been to long since launch of the cards for this explanation to fly at this point (Being a "whoops there was a miscommunication" line) and they are likely going to feel backlash from it.

Like 4 GB is needed for today's games and 3.5 GB is not enough. The most customers won't notice any difference. A dirty feeling about NVIDIA hardware what so ever arrives. Quality is something else.
3.5gb is plenty for most scenarios however some people bought this card for extreme resolutions and such that the 4gb would be helpful in the future. I know at least 1 person who bought 3 intending a 4K rig on a little bit of a lower budget ($900 for 3 cards versus $1,100 for 2 980's) and this is something that might have changed his mind and caused him to upgrade or look at the alternatives (Actually have not heard from him yet or if he knows about it ill have to ask him at the next LAN party).

While I doubt many people here or anywhere were concerned with the ROP count, the L2 Cache, among other things it is still not right to lie to your customers. Performance has not changed and the numbers seen before still stand, however the 3.5gb is the most concerning part to those running the extreme areas of gaming and still could have effected a small amount of users decisions (I am being conservative with that). Even if just 5% would have changed their minds based on this information that is 5% of the people who purchased the card that feel ripped off in some way (Random number, not an actual figure). I don't find the way they are handling this to be smart nor the way it started out to begin with smart.
 
Joined
Nov 18, 2010
Messages
7,106 (1.46/day)
Location
Rīga, Latvia
System Name HELLSTAR
Processor AMD RYZEN 9 5950X
Motherboard ASUS Strix X570-E
Cooling 2x 360 + 280 rads. 3x Gentle Typhoons, 3x Phanteks T30, 2x TT T140 . EK-Quantum Momentum Monoblock.
Memory 4x8GB G.SKILL Trident Z RGB F4-4133C19D-16GTZR 14-16-12-30-44
Video Card(s) Sapphire Pulse RX 7900XTX + under waterblock.
Storage Optane 900P[W11] + WD BLACK SN850X 4TB + 750 EVO 500GB + 1TB 980PRO[FEDORA]
Display(s) Philips PHL BDM3270 + Acer XV242Y
Case Lian Li O11 Dynamic EVO
Audio Device(s) Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Fractal Design Newton R3 1000W
Mouse Razer Basilisk
Keyboard Razer BlackWidow V3 - Yellow Switch
Software FEDORA 39 / Windows 11 insider
where the ram is relevant.

The problem is with reasonable buyers, who bought the card to be future proof, and thus taking the vram amount into reasoning. And Games tend to eat more VRAM lately... if you play old ones, except Skyrim, then it is OK, but those who bought 970 wont just play CS:GO. It would be shame if after 6months witcher3 and GTA5 will bring this card to their knees and a new card will be needed again... but hey... that was the plan :nutkick:
 
Joined
Jul 28, 2007
Messages
94 (0.02/day)
Location
Portugal
Processor AMD Ryzen 5 3600
Motherboard MSi MPG X570 Gaming Plus
Cooling Noctua NH-D14
Memory G.Skill DDR4-3600 Trident Z CL 16
Video Card(s) MSi GTX 1080 Gaming X 8GB
Storage Crucial P1 500GB M.2 NVMe
Display(s) Acer Predator XB1 IPS 165Hz G-Sync
Case Lian-Li PC-A10B
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty Pro Series
Power Supply Seasonic Focus+ Gold 750W
Mouse Zowie EC1-A
Keyboard G.Skill KM780 MX (MX brown)
It's not super hard to believe that a marketing mistake was made initially when giving infos to reviewers and so on (even if it's reported around the web that those marketing dudes have high knowledge of GPU tech).

What is very hard to believe is that after months passed, and hundreds of reviews and articles, nobody at nVidia noticed the errors on so many reviews up until now. (Which if it was the case, it would prove they just don't give a damn what the reviews say, as long as they give a nice final grade and Pro/Cons appraisal.)

That said, it might mean that they did noticed the info/marketing "mistake" but didn't say anything until now because the card was working as intended anyway, getting mega hype, getting big sales, and pointing out the info mistake would actually be a possible marketing "downgrade", since the card was doing so well and AMD has no new response until Q2. So they just kept quiet, since this was detected only under specific games+settings, reviewers didn't even catch the info issue, and they just decided to shrug their shoulders... hoping that those user reports being made were just something considered by others as inaccurate or just non-relevant to the point of making a fuss about it. A gamble that failed completely.
 
Last edited:

the54thvoid

Intoxicated Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
12,378 (2.37/day)
Location
Glasgow - home of formal profanity
Processor Ryzen 7800X3D
Motherboard MSI MAG Mortar B650 (wifi)
Cooling be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 4
Memory 32GB Kingston Fury
Video Card(s) Gainward RTX4070ti
Storage Seagate FireCuda 530 M.2 1TB / Samsumg 960 Pro M.2 512Gb
Display(s) LG 32" 165Hz 1440p GSYNC
Case Asus Prime AP201
Audio Device(s) On Board
Power Supply be quiet! Pure POwer M12 850w Gold (ATX3.0)
Software W10
Makes me happy I opted out. I was looking at going 4k, still am, and sli 970's looked like a good option.
I'd have bought the cards for the potential 4GB memory. If my experience could have been marred by this, in scenario's where 4k used over 3.5GB, I would be angry.
But, I read reviews and sli 970's seemed weaker than other options. I stayed with my 780ti and sli'd that instead.
This very poor PR for NV. Kind of impossible to defend the lie. Great card but needs to be formally rebranded as 3.5GB.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2011
Messages
336 (0.07/day)
System Name Matar Extreme PC.
Processor Intel Core i9-10900KF @5.2GHZ AVX-1 & Uncore @4.6GHZ @1.285v
Motherboard Gigabyte Z590 UD , With PCIe X1 Card intel killer 1650x card
Cooling CoolerMaster ML240L V2 AIO with MX6
Memory 4x16 64GB DDR4 3600MHZ CL16-19-19-39 G.SKILL Trident Z NEO
Video Card(s) Nvidia ZOTAC RTX 3080 Ti Trinity overclocked +100 core +1000 mem
Storage WD black 512GB Nvme OS + 1TB 970 Nvme Samsung & 4TB WD Blk 256MB cache 7200RPM
Display(s) Lenovo 34" Ultra Wide 3440x1440 144hz 1ms G-Snyc
Case NZXT H510 Black with Cooler Master RGB Fans
Audio Device(s) Internal , EIFER speakers & EasySMX Wireless Gaming Headset
Power Supply Aurora R9 850Watts 80+ Gold, I Modded cables for it.
Mouse Onn RGB Gaming Mouse & Logitech G923 & shifter & E-Break Sim setup.
Keyboard GOFREETECH RGB Gaming Keyboard, & Xbox 1 X Controller
VR HMD Oculus Rift S
Software Windows 10 Home 22H2
Benchmark Scores https://www.youtube.com/user/matttttar/videos
2 GTX 970 OEM was on my shopping list next month mainly the OEM because I love the OEM cooler and look just like the 980 but now that I read all this I will wait for the GTX 970Ti editions 20nm or what ever they will be called.
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2012
Messages
12,062 (2.77/day)
Location
Gypsyland, UK
System Name HP Omen 17
Processor i7 7700HQ
Memory 16GB 2400Mhz DDR4
Video Card(s) GTX 1060
Storage Samsung SM961 256GB + HGST 1TB
Display(s) 1080p IPS G-SYNC 75Hz
Audio Device(s) Bang & Olufsen
Power Supply 230W
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD+
Software Win 10 Pro
Just to let you guys know, retailers and AIB partners (Gigabyte, Asus, MSI) are not accepting returns for this problem at this time. I presume they will be in avid communications with NVidia first before we get a response on where to go from here.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2006
Messages
5,147 (0.78/day)
Location
AZ
System Name Thought I'd be done with this by now
Processor i7 11700k 8/16
Motherboard MSI Z590 Pro Wifi
Cooling Be Quiet Dark Rock Pro 4, 9x aigo AR12
Memory 32GB GSkill TridentZ Neo DDR4-4000 CL18-22-22-42
Video Card(s) MSI Ventus 2x Geforce RTX 3070
Storage 1TB MX300 M.2 OS + Games, + cloud mostly
Display(s) Samsung 40" 4k (TV)
Case Lian Li PC-011 Dynamic EVO Black
Audio Device(s) onboard HD -> Yamaha 5.1
Power Supply EVGA 850 GQ
Mouse Logitech wireless
Keyboard same
VR HMD nah
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores no one cares anymore lols
So they're pretty much saying the 970 as paper spec'ed would have been within a few percentage pts of the 980. Seriously if it's as fast as it is at 56 ROPs and less L2 than we thought, full memory specs and 64 ROPs would seem to further close the 10-12% performance gap between the 2 cards. That puts pressure on the 980 sales and further distances the 970 from the 960 which was already a massive gap to begin with.

False advertising aside, they had to neuter it. Next time though a little heads up will save them a lot of PR crap.
 
Joined
Nov 15, 2005
Messages
1,007 (0.15/day)
Processor 2500K @ 4.5GHz 1.28V
Motherboard ASUS P8P67 Deluxe
Cooling Corsair A70
Memory 8GB (2x4GB) Corsair Vengeance 1600 9-9-9-24 1T
Video Card(s) eVGA GTX 470
Storage Crucial m4 128GB + Seagate RAID 1 (1TB x 2)
Display(s) Dell 22" 1680x1050 nothing special
Case Antec 300
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply PC Power & Cooling 750W
Software Windows 7 64bit Pro
I still call BS on this.... from the front page news yesterday, Nvidia claimed that both the 980 and the 970 suffered slowdowns over 3.5GB of VRAM memory usage. Today they are claiming that this "issue" was created in the way they disabled some of the components to create the 970 line. Something still doesn't add up here.

Edit: After checking the article from yesterday, the table included that showed the effects of running :love:.5GB and >3.5GB were almost identical in the performance hit on both the 980 and the 970. If that is true, then someone is still lying.
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
1,065 (0.32/day)
System Name loon v4.0
Processor i7-11700K
Motherboard asus Z590TUF+wifi
Cooling Custom Loop
Memory ballistix 3600 cl16
Video Card(s) eVga 3060 xc
Storage WD sn570 1tb(nvme) SanDisk ultra 2tb(sata)
Display(s) cheap 1080&4K 60hz
Case Roswell Stryker
Power Supply eVGA supernova 750 G6
Mouse eats cheese
Keyboard warrior!
Benchmark Scores https://www.3dmark.com/spy/21765182 https://www.3dmark.com/pr/1114767
"Why NVIDIA chose to reduce cache size and ROP count will remain a mystery."

idk, it seemed the TR, PCper and esp. anand tech articles made it quite clear. though i do seem to have a talent at solving murder mysteries within the first chapter of the book.

" We can't imagine that the people designing the chip will not have sufficiently communicated this to the driver and technical marketing teams."

do you think they go out and have after work drinks? i'd be surprise if they're in the same building let alone on the same floor. in a perfect world all departments communicate well w/each other. however in the real world it is lacking.

"To claim that technical marketing didn't get this the first time around, seems like a hard-sell. We're pretty sure that NVIDIA engineers read reviews, and if they saw "64 ROPs" on a first-page table, they would have reported it up the food-chain at NVIDIA."

word on the street is the engineers were too busy watching kitty cat videos while eating cheetos.

"An explanation about this hardware change should have taken up an entire page in the technical documents the first time around, and NVIDIA could have saved itself a lot of explanation, much of it through the press."

yeah and i am surprised that technology journalists who have reported for years didn't see the asymmetrical design also. hopefully they will learn from nvidia's mistake as well.


edit: oh yeah HI, i am new :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: xvi
Joined
Dec 23, 2012
Messages
1,704 (0.41/day)
Location
Somewhere Over There!
System Name Gen2
Processor Ryzen R9 5950X
Motherboard Asus ROG Crosshair Viii Hero Wifi
Cooling Lian Li 360 Galahad
Memory G.Skill Trident Z RGB 64gb @ 3600 Mhz CL14-13-13-24 1T @ 1.45V
Video Card(s) Sapphire RX 6900 XT Nitro+
Storage Seagate 520 1TB + Samsung 970 Evo Plus 1TB + lots of HDD's
Display(s) Samsung Odyssey G7
Case Lian Li PC-O11D XL White
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Super Flower Leadex SE Platinum 1000W
Mouse Xenics Titan GX Air Wireless
Keyboard Kemove Snowfox 61
Software Main: Gentoo+Arch + Windows 11
Benchmark Scores Have tried but can't beat the leaders :)
so NVIDIA in trouble? I wonder what the AMD camp are thinking about this.

I mean if nobody found out about this "anomaly", NVIDIA will not say anything. Thats for sure. I mean its been months since 970 was out and they only found out now?

And response was a communication gap between each NVIDIA departments? For sure they lock this parts in purpose. so when they unlocked it, they will call it 970ti. Look at 780 and 780ti. 780 ti was just unlocked 780. am i right?
 
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
700 (0.15/day)
Location
Pensacola, FL, USA, Earth
Any word from the AMD camp over this? I'd be curious if they might try to pull some PR stuff using this. Or if they will just keep their traps shut for the time being. :laugh:
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
13,791 (1.94/day)
This is no different than the dual GPU cards, they physically have double the memory but only half is usable. This changes nothing, the card does have 4gb, and as you said all the benchmarks are still the same. I dont agree with them doing this and not telling people but if you got the card based on reviews and benchmarks you got what you paid for.

The truth is once the card gets a to a rez where 4gb would even be worth having the GPU cant handle it and it would make maybe 1-2fps difference at best, its been show time and time again, 256bit bus really can only handle 2gb.

SLI/Crossfire actually has a legit explanation behind it. When you merge two or more cards, they still have to process the same frames, either alternating or some other method on all of them. But the fact is, you effectively only have as much memory as each individual card has.

In theory, they could merge the memory pool and share it through PCIe, but I think OS doesn't really support that and GPU's aren't on the level where shaders could co-operate between GPU's in a seamless way in a way where you could just easily stack things up together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xvi
Top