NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti Smiles for the Camera

[net2007]

totally gonna upgrade my obsolete gtx 970. thank god i waited... getting tired with 3,5gb + 0.5gb vram.
and this card gonna answer my prayer..... thanks nvidia

Proof? Do you even play on 4k?

 

[Casecutter]

The original maybe, now its just the same damn cooler every time.
Very generic and repetative

At least this time they figured they would sell enough they could tool a cover to add "Ti" on this one. With Titan they just re-use the old Titan, figuring crinkle paint would gussy it up enough.

At then on TitanX this cooler appears to be pushed to the limit, it caused throttling, and similar in dbA as the quiet mode for the reference 290X. The Ti having the 6Gb should do better heat wise as from W1zzard's thermals it seem the heat off the memory saturated the PCB and to some extent the places stress on the GPU itself.

 

[HumanSmoke]

You can add the latest poster boy, GTA V to the list. Here's a little vid showing vRAM usage at 4K

 

[radrok]

You can add the latest poster boy, GTA V to the list. Here's a little vid showing vRAM usage at 4K

Last time I used afterburner with a Radeon card it gave me the sum of the two cards video memory when running a CFX configuration, I wouldn't be surprised if this was the same case.

 

[net2007]

Last time I used afterburner with a Radeon card it gave me the sum of the two cards video memory when running a CFX configuration, I wouldn't be surprised if this was the same case.

are you serious? Is that with the DX 12? This is something I'm most looking forward to seeing besides the other interesting technologies associated with dx12. I really want to knoway about vram stacking because this could open up the door for so much potential. As of right now you wouldn't even really have to buy a 980 ti in order to play 4K at 60 frames a second. You could get away with buying 3 970s. There's definitely some interesting possibilities there

 

[xenocide]

Witcher 3 uses under 2GB of vRAM even on 4K. I assume other devs are just not doing a good job coding and being very liberal with their vRAM allocation. I'll also add that vRAM has never been a legitimate bottleneck--just because you max out the vRAM on your card doesn't mean any performance is actually lost.

 

[net2007]

Witcher 3 uses under 2GB of vRAM even on 4K. I assume other devs are just not doing a good job coding and being very liberal with their vRAM allocation. I'll also add that vRAM has never been a legitimate bottleneck--just because you max out the vRAM on your card doesn't mean any performance is actually lost.

There is performance lost when you use up all the Vram. Crysis 2 for example, shooting the water resulted in 1 fps

 

[xorbe]

12 gb is not to much considering gamea in 4k are exceeding 6 gb. In my opinion the 980 ti should come with 8 gb.

And you propose that be done how with a 384-bit bus?

 

[net2007]

And you propose that be done how with a 384-bit bus?

I don't propose anything. I'm just saying 6 is not enough but it will have to make due I guess.

 

[xenocide]

There is performance lost when you use up all the Vram. Crysis 2 for example, shooting the water resulted in 1 fps

Crysis 2 also tesselated an entire ocean under the visable game world. Not exactly the pinnacle of great design choices. That's one where I'll assume the problem was on the developer end. Also, why would shooting water be affected directly by filled vRAM? That sounds more like it has to do with the way the game handled water than with filled vRAM.

 

[rodneyhchef]

Since this is going to be a cut-down TITAN X - will it have the same memory allocation controversy as the GTX 970 I wonder?

I'd be interested in one of these if the price is right, needs to be cheaper than 2x970s though.

 

[64K]

Witcher 3 uses under 2GB of vRAM even on 4K. I assume other devs are just not doing a good job coding and being very liberal with their vRAM allocation. I'll also add that vRAM has never been a legitimate bottleneck--just because you max out the vRAM on your card doesn't mean any performance is actually lost.

More VRAM does nothing for performance unless the game actually needs it and you don't have it then the engine starts using system RAM which is slower so performance takes a hit.

 

[net2007]

More VRAM does nothing for performance unless the game actually needs it and you don't have it then the engine starts using system RAM which is slower so performance takes a hit.

that's the thing though, games are getting more demanding especially in higher resolution

 

[64K]

that's the thing though, games are getting more demanding especially in higher resolution

Agreed.

 

[newtekie1]

You can add the latest poster boy, GTA V to the list. Here's a little vid showing vRAM usage at 4K

It is really hard to see because his video is so blurry and poorly recorded, seriously he has afterburner installed why isn't he just using that to capture video, but anyway, he has MSAA on. I'm guessing 8x MSAA. Turning MSAA on when running at 4K is stupid and will use stupid amounts of vRAM.

 

[net2007]

Far cry 4 In 4k uses 6gb easy. not to mention shadow of Mordor

 

[xenocide]

Far cry 4 In 4k uses 6gb easy. not to mention shadow of Mordor

And Witcher 3 uses less than 2GB in 4K. It seems more likely that these companies were being very negligent when it came to resource allocation than anything. I mean shit, CoD: AW uses as much vRAM as it has access to, not because it's demanding but because the devs didn't care to optimize it. As resolution goes up developers will just have to be more careful with how they allocate resources.

EDIT: Even the consoles are limited to like 5GB-6GB of RAM, so I imagine not many games will use drastically more than 6GB. 6GB is plenty these days.

 

[net2007]

If this windows 10 tech preview wasn't messing up I would post screens right now of vram usage. I haven't even had a chance to look.

 

[xorbe]

And Witcher 3 uses less than 2GB in 4K. It seems more likely that these companies were being very negligent when it came to resource allocation than anything. I mean shit, CoD: AW uses as much vRAM as it has access to, not because it's demanding but because the devs didn't care to optimize it. As resolution goes up developers will just have to be more careful with how they allocate resources.

EDIT: Even the consoles are limited to like 5GB-6GB of RAM, so I imagine not many games will use drastically more than 6GB. 6GB is plenty these days.

Vram is technically wasted if not put to use caching things. So, good on CoD:AW for aggressive caching if the vram is there. It's not inefficient, it's opportunistic.