NVIDIA Issues Official Statement Regarding GTX970's VRAM Usage

DSOGaming writes: "After the whole controversy surrounding GTX970’s VRAM usage, NVIDIA went ahead and made an official statement regarding this issue. According to the green team, GTX970’s memory is split in two sections; the first section that has a higher priority allocates 3.5GB while the second section allocates 500MB. And while a game can allocate all 4GBs, only 3.5GB are being allocated when a game needs less than that."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
sorceror1711216d ago

Sure, the car holds 20 gallons. The tank holds 15 gallons, and there are five 1-gsllon cans in the trunk. Sure, actually *using* those last five gallons is slow, but there's 20 gallons. What are you complaining about?

SilentNegotiator1216d ago

That's really not a good analogy.

UltraNova1215d ago (Edited 1215d ago )


Ok what you might wanted to say is, a car's tank holds 20 gallons of which 5 is the reserve, the gas meter on the dash is calibrated that way as well so in the end you only use 15 gallons on day to day basis, unless you forget to fill up one day (a not so rare occasion, admittedly) and the next gas station will require burning fuel from that 5 gallon reserve.

OT. I dont see the problem here for those who got an not as if that 500mb of memory is off limits permanently, like the 8th core of an 8-core CPU in order to increase yield...

sorceror1711215d ago

Sure, that 512MB is there. It's just *much* slower to access than the rest of the VRAM. As in, three to eight *times* slower. That's more like having 3.5GB of RAM, plus 512MB of L2 cache or something. Check the numbers - drops from 150GB/sec to 46GB/sec, all the way down to *19* GB/sec.

No one's saying that memory is "off limits permanently". But VRAM is supposed to be immediately accessible to the GPU, and this memory... isn't. So it's memory, but lumping it in with the rest of the VRAM is deceptive at best.

Same as with the gas can in the trunk. Sure, it's fuel, and the car *can* use it... it's just dramatically slower and less convenient to access it.

UltraNova1215d ago

"Check the numbers - drops from 150GB/sec to 46GB/sec, all the way down to *19* GB/sec. "

Well if that's ^^ truly the case (I'm not doubting you)then yeah selling the card as a 4gb VRAM option is misleading.

airshiraz1216d ago

i trust nvidia
they wont cheat us
i have seen 4 gigabytes usage of ram in asassins creed unity .u can see for urself with evga precison and put asasins unity resolution on 4k

FlyingFoxy1216d ago

You trust a company that puts out Titan GPU's that cost a fortune, and are only a little better than a top card from the competitor that's much cheaper?

I have a 970 because they were well priced for the performance, but there's no way i am kissing Nvidia's ass.. they are going to make the same mistake with the new Titan against the 390x.

airshiraz1216d ago

did they lie about titan?i mean they dont lie when i say i trust them.they have so many awful cards and customer must open his eyes before buying a gpu

wannabe gamer1216d ago

lol once again someone talking out their arse that doesnt understand that titan isnt just for gaming. lmao


not a big deal in my books

Maxor1216d ago

I have no idea what the fuss is about. It's not like they gimped the card. The performance is tiered or else there wouldn't be any reason for the 980 GTX to exist!

FlyingFoxy1216d ago

I think it only really affects 4k which pretty much runs crappy on any single card anyway, so anyone with a 970 or 2 is likely to be playing at 1080p or 1440p max.

fullmetal2971215d ago (Edited 1215d ago )

I still don't understand how partitioning t
the memory into 3500mb and 500mb sections helps for better traffic management. Someone care to explain?