NVIDIA GeForce Community V14
|
|
 Jan 18 2015, 12:55 PM
|
 
Senior Member
615 posts Joined: Jan 2008  
|
Comparing with the previous gens, the GTX 760 was quite similar in terms of performance with the GTX 670.
If GTX 960 can't match the performance of GTX 770, thats quite bad considering the gap between GTX 760 and GTX 970 is quite huge |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2015, 12:59 PM
|
Senior Member
4,522 posts Joined: Apr 2006
|
QUOTE(S4PH @ Jan 18 2015, 12:30 AM) yup tested on shadow of mordor with max textures msi afterburner reports 3.5gb of usage very weird Tested a couple of games yesterday, namely DA:I and Alien Isolation.http://www.dsogaming.com/news/nvidia-gtx-9...ore-than-3-5gb/  As we all know DA:I is a bit of a hit and miss when it comes to PC optimisation, it's not entirely solid but for the most part it runs decent. My 970 top out at 3.7GB (3702mb to be specific) VRAM on 1440p, max settings. Switch it down to 1080p, max settings and it was hovering around 3680MB. However I did get stuttering once the VRAM went about 3.5GB in DA:I, which is what many others on the internet has already reported. I wouldn't say the stuttering is terrible till the point of being unplayable, but it can get annoying. Fortunately DA:I isn't a game where you need twitch reflexes, but if this issue crops up in other games then it'll be quite a bad gaming experience. Alien Isolation on the other hand runs on pretty much any machine and it's example of great optimisation on PC games. Obviously the game isn't stressful enough to use 4GB of VRAM, but what I did was downscale from 4k to 1080p. VRAM usage was around only 3GB. Obviously no stuttering, but I just wanted to try a game where everything is all well and dandy. Will test a few other games later. QUOTE(area61 @ Jan 18 2015, 12:55 PM) Comparing with the previous gens, the GTX 760 was quite similar in terms of performance with the GTX 670. 960 is expected to be near 770 performance. Given Maxwell's track record of OC ability, it's quite a given that the 960 will surpass 770 in performance. It's an assumption of course, but I think at this point it's a safe one.If GTX 960 can't match the performance of GTX 770, thats quite bad considering the gap between GTX 760 and GTX 970 is quite huge This post has been edited by SSJBen: Jan 18 2015, 01:01 PM |
|
|
Jan 18 2015, 02:03 PM
|
Senior Member
588 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Penang | Puchong | Malacca
|
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-960-msrp-200/
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... « This post has been edited by raydenex: Jan 18 2015, 02:09 PM |
|
|
Jan 18 2015, 07:42 PM
|
Senior Member
1,167 posts Joined: Jan 2007 From: ..Tsukuba..
|
QUOTE(SSJBen @ Jan 18 2015, 12:59 PM) Tested a couple of games yesterday, namely DA:I and Alien Isolation. Im sure its driver issues memory management is screwed up for the 970, btw im still lovin my 970 way better than my r9 290 As we all know DA:I is a bit of a hit and miss when it comes to PC optimisation, it's not entirely solid but for the most part it runs decent. My 970 top out at 3.7GB (3702mb to be specific) VRAM on 1440p, max settings. Switch it down to 1080p, max settings and it was hovering around 3680MB. However I did get stuttering once the VRAM went about 3.5GB in DA:I, which is what many others on the internet has already reported. I wouldn't say the stuttering is terrible till the point of being unplayable, but it can get annoying. Fortunately DA:I isn't a game where you need twitch reflexes, but if this issue crops up in other games then it'll be quite a bad gaming experience. Alien Isolation on the other hand runs on pretty much any machine and it's example of great optimisation on PC games. Obviously the game isn't stressful enough to use 4GB of VRAM, but what I did was downscale from 4k to 1080p. VRAM usage was around only 3GB. Obviously no stuttering, but I just wanted to try a game where everything is all well and dandy. Will test a few other games later. 960 is expected to be near 770 performance. Given Maxwell's track record of OC ability, it's quite a given that the 960 will surpass 770 in performance. It's an assumption of course, but I think at this point it's a safe one.  |
|
|
Jan 18 2015, 08:33 PM
|
Senior Member
4,254 posts Joined: Nov 2011
|
QUOTE(SSJBen @ Jan 18 2015, 12:59 PM) Tested a couple of games yesterday, namely DA:I and Alien Isolation. its always weird how some older gen games that looks way better than current, yet eats up less VRAM As we all know DA:I is a bit of a hit and miss when it comes to PC optimisation, it's not entirely solid but for the most part it runs decent. My 970 top out at 3.7GB (3702mb to be specific) VRAM on 1440p, max settings. Switch it down to 1080p, max settings and it was hovering around 3680MB. However I did get stuttering once the VRAM went about 3.5GB in DA:I, which is what many others on the internet has already reported. I wouldn't say the stuttering is terrible till the point of being unplayable, but it can get annoying. Fortunately DA:I isn't a game where you need twitch reflexes, but if this issue crops up in other games then it'll be quite a bad gaming experience. Alien Isolation on the other hand runs on pretty much any machine and it's example of great optimisation on PC games. Obviously the game isn't stressful enough to use 4GB of VRAM, but what I did was downscale from 4k to 1080p. VRAM usage was around only 3GB. Obviously no stuttering, but I just wanted to try a game where everything is all well and dandy. Will test a few other games later. 960 is expected to be near 770 performance. Given Maxwell's track record of OC ability, it's quite a given that the 960 will surpass 770 in performance. It's an assumption of course, but I think at this point it's a safe one.  for exp, Crysis 3. its looks superb and beautiful, and it doesnt even chug under <3GB VRAM cards too |
|
|
Jan 18 2015, 09:43 PM
|
Senior Member
1,943 posts Joined: Apr 2005
|
QUOTE(marfccy @ Jan 18 2015, 08:33 PM) its always weird how some older gen games that looks way better than current, yet eats up less VRAM I actually love newer memory chugging games to be honest.for exp, Crysis 3. its looks superb and beautiful, and it doesnt even chug under <3GB VRAM cards too For example Far Cry 4's texture looked superb and detailed compared to Far Cry 3 with the same engine. And both running about the same speed on the same hardware. This post has been edited by terradrive: Jan 18 2015, 09:44 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 18 2015, 09:50 PM
|
|
Senior Member
4,254 posts Joined: Nov 2011
|
QUOTE(terradrive @ Jan 18 2015, 09:43 PM) I actually love newer memory chugging games to be honest. i like it as well, but its sort of an unnecessary usage of GPU resource imoFor example Far Cry 4's texture looked superb and detailed compared to Far Cry 3 with the same engine. And both running about the same speed on the same hardware. some things we dont notice much during heat of gaming, texture wise, unless its really bad textures or im actively looking for it, its not noticeable to me |
|
|
Jan 18 2015, 10:29 PM
|
Senior Member
1,053 posts Joined: Sep 2009 From: In Your Mind 
|
QUOTE(marfccy @ Jan 18 2015, 09:50 PM) i like it as well, but its sort of an unnecessary usage of GPU resource imo i kinda agree with this. some things we dont notice much during heat of gaming, texture wise, unless its really bad textures or im actively looking for it, its not noticeable to me  |
|
|
Jan 19 2015, 12:38 AM
|
Junior Member
124 posts Joined: Oct 2009
|
Finally...
 Getting a 2nd one tomorrow... 
|
|
|
Jan 19 2015, 12:48 AM
|
|
Senior Member
4,522 posts Joined: Apr 2006
|
QUOTE(S4PH @ Jan 18 2015, 07:42 PM) Im sure its driver issues memory management is screwed up for the 970, btw im still lovin my 970 way better than my r9 290 Perhaps. I never actually noticed this VRAM "bug" back on 344.16, only in 347.09 where this issue is cropping up all over the place. It still sounds like a hoax to be honest. Will need more time to test things out.QUOTE(marfccy @ Jan 18 2015, 09:50 PM) i like it as well, but its sort of an unnecessary usage of GPU resource imo For years developers has been finding ways to compress textures and optimize fillrate for games. Suddenly, devs just say "oh wadaheck" when consoles suddenly have 8GB of RAM. Then suddenly we are getting all these games which needs a gigantic step in VRAM just because, "why not?".some things we dont notice much during heat of gaming, texture wise, unless its really bad textures or im actively looking for it, its not noticeable to me |
|
|
Jan 19 2015, 01:06 AM
|
|
Senior Member
4,254 posts Joined: Nov 2011
|
QUOTE(SSJBen @ Jan 19 2015, 12:48 AM) For years developers has been finding ways to compress textures and optimize fillrate for games. Suddenly, devs just say "oh wadaheck" when consoles suddenly have 8GB of RAM. Then suddenly we are getting all these games which needs a gigantic step in VRAM just because, "why not?". which gave GPU makers ideas of "oh hey, lets make a card that have high VRAM, just cause we can and people will still pay for it. then, we can proceed to release newer cards with slightly abit more VRAM just cause "console demands it"the idea of utilising more VRAM for graphics is good, but lets face it. going high resolution texture pack is not so important as 4K is still in infancy and yet to be widely adopted. so the needs of extremely high VRAM is not required for now not to mention, devs will also go "ahh why the hell need to compress?" and then massive influx of uncompressed textures appearing that made GPUs suffer just cause lack of VRAM despite being rather powerful TLDR version : unless 8GB VRAM GPUs are standards, this is somehow like another scheme to make us upgrade parts too often eventhough the GPU itself is more than capable. the only issue is VRAM throttling perf This post has been edited by marfccy: Jan 19 2015, 01:08 AM |
|
|
Jan 19 2015, 02:44 AM
|
Junior Member
145 posts Joined: Jul 2011
|
Wait, people want a 960?
You'd think 970 is overkill for you at 1080p, but console parts ain't gonna be so kind to your machine. I play on 1080p almost exclusively and even Tomb Raider struggles to stay over 60fps at all times(obviously it's higher than 60 most of the time, but framerates dropping below 40 is distracting). |
|
|
Jan 19 2015, 07:27 AM
|
All Stars
14,673 posts Joined: Sep 2010
|
QUOTE(jamilselamat @ Jan 19 2015, 02:44 AM) Wait, people want a 960? Parts or ports? You'd think 970 is overkill for you at 1080p, but console parts ain't gonna be so kind to your machine. I play on 1080p almost exclusively and even Tomb Raider struggles to stay over 60fps at all times(obviously it's higher than 60 most of the time, but framerates dropping below 40 is distracting).  |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 19 2015, 09:07 AM
|
|
Junior Member
145 posts Joined: Jul 2011
|
QUOTE(chocobo7779 @ Jan 19 2015, 07:27 AM) Parts or ports? Typos. |
|
|
Jan 19 2015, 09:55 AM
|
Senior Member
718 posts Joined: Mar 2010 From: Puchong Extreme
|
I thought only multi monitor setup use a lot of VRAM? First time heard VRAM throttling
|
|
|
Jan 19 2015, 05:06 PM
|
Senior Member
5,043 posts Joined: Aug 2013 From: Putrajaya
|
Could this be the Titan-X?
  Source: http://www.techpowerup.com/209008/first-pc...-x-surface.html Expect a big price tag for it. This post has been edited by Minecrafter: Jan 19 2015, 05:07 PM |
|
|
Jan 19 2015, 05:18 PM
|
Junior Member
450 posts Joined: Mar 2007
|
waiting the GTX 960, but a liitle bit disappointed bout the spec and price. @@
|
|
|
Jan 19 2015, 10:01 PM
|
|
Senior Member
4,254 posts Joined: Nov 2011
|
QUOTE(amxpayne67 @ Jan 19 2015, 09:55 AM) I thought only multi monitor setup use a lot of VRAM? First time heard VRAM throttling its due to massive spam of uncompressed textures by devs, which causes the VRAM to be overloaded and strugglingnot so long ago, even 2GB is more than enough for 1440p but with the introduction of 8GB VRAM in PS4, devs are now taking opportunity to utilise more VRAM so despite GPU having more than enough power to deal with the game, you get frame drops due to lack of VRAM |
|
|
Jan 20 2015, 06:39 PM
|
|
Senior Member
4,522 posts Joined: Apr 2006
|
VRAM throttling is one issue. The whole other issue is voltage throttling, pretty much due to Nvidia's "Boost" technology. Seriously hate it. Going through the trouble to disable it through BIOS mods is possible, but most users wouldn't even dare try (despite it being quite safe if you research before doing anything).
|
|
|
Jan 21 2015, 09:05 AM
|
|
Senior Member
1,943 posts Joined: Apr 2005
|
QUOTE(marfccy @ Jan 19 2015, 10:01 PM) its due to massive spam of uncompressed textures by devs, which causes the VRAM to be overloaded and struggling If you have lower VRAM size then just set your settings for lower sized texture in the game settings, that's all...not so long ago, even 2GB is more than enough for 1440p but with the introduction of 8GB VRAM in PS4, devs are now taking opportunity to utilise more VRAM so despite GPU having more than enough power to deal with the game, you get frame drops due to lack of VRAM But we are in 2015 already. AMD or Nvidia should push 8GB VRAM for their top of the line cards now, since VRAM isn't that expensive anymore.  GTX 960 is a dud by Nvidia, it's 2015 yet the performance is like a GTX 760... Performance increase from OC is not much though compared to GTX 780 or GTX 970. And interesting to see the lousy overclocker R9 290 (as everybody been saying) had performance increase as good as 780/970. Mid range gamers are still screwed for years with lousy performance lol. Most berbaloi GPU still over RM1k  This post has been edited by terradrive: Jan 21 2015, 09:12 AM |
|
Topic ClosedOptions
|
| Change to: |  0.0282sec
 0.29
 6 queries
 GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 26th November 2025 - 06:59 PM |
Quote