Graphics Nvidia’s GTX970 has a rather serious memory allocation bug

TBH you are taking me a little out of my depth
So i hope someone else with a better understanding than me can correct any mistakes.

From my understanding from Windows Vista onwards drivers got moved into user mode kernel space, it's why Vista was so flaky because vendors were learning how to write user mode drivers versus the old way of kernel mode drivers.

Basically drivers could no longer communicate directly with the hardware without going through the HAL for stability reasons.

 

I'm happy to be corrected, but i think Nvidia has in fact written a caching algorithm for how it handles the last 512MB of slower vRAM, unless i got hold of the wrong end of the stick and misunderstood what caching you were referring to.

Probably in a similar fashion as a CPU has a caching algorithm for how it handles it's caches.

 

Golden Tiger did a previous post which I thought was interesting.

 

I have pretty much decided to pay the extra and get a 980 and hope she does not find out. There is far to much uncertainty as to whether this issue is going to prove a headache for Nvidia. But with the various forums I have looked at and given that most of the posts are technically way past my pay grade the consensus seems to be don't buy a 970.

 

PCPER done some more testing on frame times.
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphics-Cards/Frame-Rating-Looking-GTX-970-Memory-Performance

If his testing has shown that some performance settings are more likely to cause stutter in the sub-25 FPS range, my guess is that in SLI it would show similar results around the sub 50 FPS range.

For SLI i would probably agree that the 970 may not be ideal at extreme settings, but as a single card solution most people won't see any problems (unless you enjoy playing at sub 25 FPS)

 

I think the key word here is most. I know it would bother me, the slightest glitch in a game I would immediately think that it was this issue was to blame and what a fool I was to buy the 970 ETC ETC. So, send her out onto the streets and get the cash for a 980 and hopefully have less stress in the long run.

 

just read on overclockers, evga have agreed returns on there 970's

 

I said "just over 30", sorry I didn't remember the exact average FPS 7 years ago . There is also memory bus limitations and total memory limitations between GTS and GTX.

Whereas the 970 is sold as only have SM clusters disabled. Even with ROP disabled, the ratio should still be proportional.

Anandtech article suggested there is in fact a caching algorithm used.

The article didn't point out where this algorithm sits. As pointed out earlier, this could be optimised in the firmware or even memory controller (best case) or rely on driver optimization for each game (my worst fear).

Thank you for the explanation. It's great to learn something new every day.

So if HAL reports VRAM. Does that mean there's no way to change the amount of VRAM the game sees unless the graphics card are always limited to 3.5GB, thus HAL only senses 3.5GB?


My knowledge resides in hardware architecture design, I've little knowledge in drivers and game optimizations. Hence I'd rather have a solid hardware to begin with.

 

Here is the statement.

HI there

We have EVGA with us today and they are first to provide an update on the GTX970.

If you are completely dissatisfied with your EVGA GTX970 then EVGA will 100% support any return of your product through OCUK.

EVGA do however encourage you to contact them directly before returning your card, as options to step up to GTX980 will be made available but only those in direct contact.

Please contact supportEU@evga.com if you have any concerns with your EVGA GTX970 product.

 

AFAIK the HAL would query the registers of the hardware, so it just reports what the hardware presents to it.

 

http://www.techpowerup.com/209409/p...s-being-returned-over-memory-controversy.html

I do find this rather amusing...

It doesn't matter on the spec. It could be 1 of everything, ROPs, shaders #whatever. The launch reviews had X performance, the cards still have X performance. Information about the way the 970 is technically a little broken aside as if it wasn't brought to light and there would be no issues.

Mountain
Mole hill

As im not in retail or anything like that anymore I can say the following.

Customers are now and have always been idiots. end of.

 

Interesting, I'll give EVGA a buzz, I wonder if I can step up to 980 for around £100.

Worth a try, can't hurt in asking.

 

It'll be £200 won't it - the cost of the difference between the two cards.

 

Absolutely worth a try. Don't ask don't get as they say.

 

Not really sure why anyone cares. The card is dirt cheap yet blows away anything accept the 980 above it which costs £200 more at last check. Are people bored with lack of other GPU News or just hoping for discounts.

If it had 1 rop 1 cuda core and 1mb of memory but delivered the frame rates it does would it make a difference? Outside of some hardcore elite that must have specs at set levels.

People are making crazy assumptions about memory usage in 4k without real benchmarks to back it up. Theres not been a game released yet that has been designed for 4k. Till it happens performance at that resolution varies so much on a game by game and setting by setting scenario that how much memory your gpu has or hasnt is kinda irelivent.

GPU memory is only really needed for High AA settings, Game Devs are not going to start putting 6gb of texture files to the gpu buffer. As the Consoles they are designing around do not have that level of buffer to play with. (PS4 has 4.5gb, Confirmed on ps4 website by infamous second son developer)

 

you appear to have missed the last few days - this isn't some little matter - dying light at 1080p is filling a 970`s ram.

 

If you plan to go 4k and SLI I would drop the 970, as usage more regularly goes into the slower partition at 4k in my experience with it. I wish I had 2 980s to compare side by side.

After this debacle I hear people are planning to sue the makes of Neverending Story.

 

Nvidia have withdrawn the statement it will use drievrs to fix the hardware issues