Load of crap. Kepler cards are not getting worse. Maxwell cards are just getting better as the engineers learn to optimise for the new architecture. All optimisation for kepler has been done.

it's a good card yes but Nvidia have gimped previous gen card's for the latest drivers so people will but Maxwell, I've got a a 780 Ti and on paper that should completely demolish the 970 but it's only 5%-10% better at best on average in game's.

Sounds like conspiracy theories to me

Nvidia has been causing issues for older gen cards (aka not 900 series) as my 780 has lost its edge due to driver updates.

Not that simple sadly as newer games have issues with older drivers as well unless you want to reinstall each time you play a different game.

it really depends what games, what res / settings are used? for instance my heavily modded skyrim would use 2.4GB to 3GB of the GPU memory, BF4 was over 2GB (I think BF3 was pretty close if not over 2GB) - hence my upgrade from a 2GB card to a 4GB card, the difference was very noticeable in skyrim (virtually eradicated the occasional frame rate slow downs) I game at 1080p, usually with all eye candy turned on and often tweaked nvidia settings

At the risk of repeating myself, VRAM usage =/= VRAM performance benefit. It's easiest to check this using pretty much any review of the same GPU with multiple VRAM configurations. This 960 2GB/4GB review was the first one that came up in a quick search:


So, there you have it. The 4GB 960 is using over 3GB of VRAM, and running extremely well. They're testing Shadow of Mordor, which the above user (admittedly, a user who does not know how to configure SLI'd Titan Xes to run GTAV at 1080P) claims is extremely VRAM-heavy in its usage. And this would seem to back that up - over 3GB of usage at 1440P. So let's see how that tanks the 2GB card:


Yup, and the graph backed that up. Despite over 3GB VRAM usage on the 4GB card, the 2GB card turned in basically-identical performance.

In other words, you're welcome to monitor your VRAM usage during games, but don't assume it is in any way impacting performance - at least, not without isolating it as a bottleneck (which is fairly easy, but would take more than an hour at least).

The person above claims 12GB isn't enough.

With the 980Ti my VRAM usage is 5200-5500mb at 4k.
That's with fairly sensible graphic settings.

Less than 5GB VRAM used in GTA 5 at 4K.



http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/05/04/grand_theft_auto_v_multigpu_performance_review_part_2/3

Thanks for the tip, no bottleneck here.

I'm not interested in trying to convince people they are wrong, I'll leave that to you and Romeo and your "vast knowledge".

Enjoy your games :smiley:

2 grands worth of GPU's struggling with GTA 5 at 1080? Don't max out the advanced settings as it bottlenecks the CPU. It's certainly not a VRAM limitation.
And if Shadow of Mordor runs high textures even when ultra is enabled, then, what were they thinking...

No, they don't. You may think they do, but they don't. I have Titan X in SLI and it barely copes with GTA V on Ultra at 1080p, meaning everything maxed. Shadows of Mordor will say ultra but it's just running the "high" textures as I believe someone already explained to you. You CANNOT run Ultra textures with less than 6GB of VRAM.

:smile:

I see the problem. I guess you're one of those people who thinks that Minimum Specs are unimpeachable. That's OK. I won't charge for tuition today.

For GTAV, as rev6 points out, it doesn't necessarily affect game performance if you change the settings so that the "required VRAM" number is higher than the amount of VRAM in your system. It's a case of you reading two words in the options and leaping to a conclusion which is sadly not backed up by real-world testing in this case. I always recommend real-world testing.

For Shadow of Mordor, you have made a most interesting claim about receiving a message if you try to run the Ultra Texture pack with less than 6GB of VRAM. I certainly haven't seen this message, and neither have these people who have been running the Ultra textures at 1080P without a performance hit. Do you have a screenshot of this message you could share with us, please?

Of course, maybe the requirement is for running with Ultra textures at 4K (feel free to add a comment about why this should be obvious here).

And no, my dissertation did not teach me how to read - another mistake on your part. I learned to read when I was a baby. Try it - it's amazingly useful.

But before you do... any chance of that link, please?

Shadow of Mordor works fine here with 3GB VRAM and Ultra textures... So does GTA 5 :smile:

For GTA V it's simple, load it up, look at the bit that says "required vram".

For Shadow of Mordor, try and run it with less than 6 GB with Ultra downloaded textures. It tells you that you can't.

I'm sure your dissertation taught you how to read :wink:

The 390 isn't worse than the 780. It trades blows with the 970.

If you feel like you need more then I guess it comes down to personal preference so do what you feel is best.

But you'd upgrade to a 390 (much worse than a 780 (more video texture is good, hotter and louder is bad)) or a 970 which is just slightly better? Plus you are talking to the guy who upgrades phones every few months to stay up to date :wink: I miss being able to play games at 60fps on at least medium which is impossible on The Witcher 3 for instance..

Upgrading from a 670 to a 780 wouldn't be an upgrade I'd make the jump for tbh. But that's just me.

I think it would make more sense to go maxwell of one of the R9 300 series

Definitely worth it, 670 is pretty tired now whereas he next card to properly beat this one (GTX 980) is still £400

So question is, is the OC edition for £190 worth it? I'm seriously wondering whether I should upgrade from my 670 to this but I'm not sure..

Agreed

Got mine today. Installed card, drivers. Runs fine.

To answer some things above---

The 970 is about 10% faster than the 780

There are games that use more than 3gb of VRAM at 1080p

The 780 with a fx8350 will draw around 500w without any overclocks so a good rated 600-650w psu is a must.

Driver performance hasn't been nerfed by Nvidia but newer games will favour newer gpu architecture so some have gone full tinfoil hat.

Nvidia has been causing issues for older gen cards (aka not 900 series) as my 780 has lost its edge due to driver updates.

3 things does this card use less power than a r9 380 ? and is its performance about the same ? and is the OC version worth the extra tenner ? cheers

Do you have a link to back this up? I've been following all the benchmarks I can find and have only found cases where VRAM quantity was the bottleneck in cases where SLI was used - and even then, never at 1080P. Please back up what you have been saying, if that is not too much trouble - where did you learn about this?

(By the way, my dissertation was on 3D rasterisation - I am literally qualified to discuss this. Sadly, not too many people posting on forums are. For example, saying games "require" more than 3GB when no PC game out today requires 3GB to run.)

The OC version is still in stock for £10

OC Version

Beta, they require it yes. Sadly most people think they know what they are talking about.

If only it was 4GB.

So on average would this card outperform a 970 or r9 380 ? and is it going to support DX12 ?

​The performance is the same I was talking about the comparison with Maxwell and how drivers and fixes are almost a ghost story for me with my 780 ti, games that came out around the release if this card will perform well but when comparing the latest benchmarks with my card and this card to a 970 you can tell what Nvidia have done and its been obvious for a long time.

Expired (sold out)

it's a good card yes but Nvidia have gimped previous gen card's for the latest drivers so people will but Maxwell, I've got a a 780 Ti and on paper that should completely demolish the 970 but it's only 5%-10% better at best on average in game's.

This card is about equal to the 970 which I do own. Anyway, going over 3GB VRAM usage would likely mean your card is being pushed to its limits anyway so people shouldn't be bothered by "only" 3GB.

I think 3GB VRAM is enough for 1920x1080 :smiley:

Are those games actually losing performance due to insufficient VRAM? Remember, it's perfectly more for programs to copy more data into VRAM than they actually use. Just because a game is showing 3.8GB VRAM usage doesn't automatically mean that there is even the smallest performance benefit from having more than 3GB.

Of course, it's easy enough to run some CPU/GPU tests and isolate the VRAM amount as the bottleneck. Sadly, most people just see VRAM usage and assume that the usage is the same as the beneficial amount.

Not here. All well under 3GB.

Rainbow Six Siege at 1080p takes around 2.9 GB VRAM if you max the settings

GTA V, Shadow of Mordor, Dying Light all at 1080p to name a few.

Saying that, great card and unless you are using DSR for VR or must play in 4k then this will still run most things at ultra. I just gave mine to my dad, my Titan X in SLI isn't stupendously better to be honest :disappointed:

Which games and at what resolution?

wow, that is a good price!

I assume this card is discontinued?

Went for the non OC version, there isnt that much difference in clock speeds looking at them. Got free delivery too :smile:

Wow my first deal to get hot and it goes to 500 degrees! Glad some people found the deal useful :smiley:

3GB VRAM is used up completely now to play some games at max settings that doesn't even include graphics mods so in the future it won't be a lot that's why the new cards have 4GB.

OC version worth £10 more?

No, the 780 will leave the 960 standing. 4GB is only needed for very high resolutions...where 1 card isn't enough.

Purchased - thanks for peoples advice earlier.

Having owned both the 780 and 970 I would still stump up the extra for the latter.

I was about to get this for my build for £169.99 from CCL Gigabyte NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 Windforce 4GB Card , I take it this is better as its 4GB and not 3GB RAM

The OC version is available for £10 more

Your text here

Because of the VRAM? Poor choice.

780 everytime, 4gb on a 770 is only worth it if you were to SLI two cards.

I wouldn't buy it let's put it that way but you can do as you wish

Would this work out a better buy for about £10 less? I'm not sure which one to go for.
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-208-MS&groupid=701&catid=1914&subcat=1750

dont feed him.

3GB of VRAM not a good deal

Links? :smiley:

Can't decide if I should jump on this or go all out for an R9 380....

Gaming Edition? Not for me then, anyone knows good deals on 4GB GTX 790 designed for Microsoft Excel?

Thanks OP! Heat added! Bought it. TCB at 1%
Just need Power supply and CPU now and my build is done!

Yep - looks like warranty with OcUK though, that's not necessarily a bad thing, at least it'll be UK for warranty (I hate having to pay for European RMA postage).

This is sealed new stock then?

You can pick up a second hand gtx 970 for around the same price.

BTW: Anyone notice that Overclockers hardly put up any negative (and low rated) reviews ?

I'm using my 780 on 2560x1440 with no problems, you might not be able to max settings at this res but it's on sale for £170, it's a great card for that price.

295x2 will (ish)

This is a decent deal but bear in mind that this is a 1080p card. There is a reason why they are starting to fall in price... People are moving on up to QHD and UHD (1440p and 2160p respectively) due to the cheapness of korean monitors and need more VRAM and oomph to get acceptable fps. Also newer games are needing more and more texture cache.

Note that SLI does not pool VRAM, so 2 cards is still a 3 gig card.

On another note - apparently the Hynix VRAM version aren't as good as the Samsung ones. Source: OCN official GTX owners club

I have one of them. Bf4 on max without resolution scale upped about 80fps and 61-62 degrees. I was thinking to put another one. Do you think it's a good idea?

A GTX780 will play anything at decent settings, you just wont be doing 4K res with it.

from what ive seen paying an extra 70 for another 3gb isnt worth it for the couple extra fps you may get. Ive gathered this from the benchmark videos i have seen, but have a look at some for yourself to see aswell.

If that's the case - maybe I should get a cheaper card than a 980ti and wait a year or so. The 6 gig version of this card comes in at about half the price of 980ti.

So, would the 6 gig version be a benefit at all for 1440p, or anything at all, over the 3 gig; or is 3 gig the sweetspot for the performance this card offers?

It's standard practice for nVidia to tweak drivers for the latest games with little thought about what older stuff they break.

heres the thing, even a 980ti cant play 4k games maxed out at 60fps man.

yeah 780 or 780 SLI will not cut it at 4K for latest and future titles IMO

Looks like their website cant handle the demand, unable to load anything on their site at the moment.

Better off getting a 980ti

Yeah, I have a 4k monitor - would the 6 gig card come anywhere close to cutting the mustard, or should I just save up towards a £500 odd card?

any discount codes for overclockers guys?

Unless you're running at higher resolutions then the increase in VRAM makes a much bigger difference. If you're running at resolutions greater than 1440p then you will see a benefit from more VRAM. If not, the bottle neck is on raw performance not memory.

Website was down for maintenance but back up now.

Anyone know if the 6 gig version is a good deal @ £240? Thanks.

Is this worth £180, with 970s popping up for £220 from time-to-time? Genuine question?

Overclockers have R9 270X for £89 also

FUU 780 or 780 ti i dont know!!!

Sucks down 250w of power so you would need a decent PSU to go with it.

*sigh* website time-out.

Your titan bulldozes ahead regardless. :stuck_out_tongue:

My Asus GTX670 needs all the help it can get.

If that were the case there would be benchmarks of older games getting worse all over the pc sites.

If they are doing that then someone would be initiating a class action lawsuit.

Maybe they should pump a few more quid into their web servers then...

I've not seen any performance drops with my titan. In fact games like witcher 3 and gta v have had their performance increase with new drivers.

Latest drivers are giving me worse performance on the same games that should not have changed it at all, have to revert all the way back to 353.38 to get some actual gpu usage (as low as 30% in Tera for example in the latest, however going back to the earlier driver and full 99% usage with no slideshow frames).

Don't know why people are arguing there has been no crippling, they clearly have been dropping fixes for the previous series.

Yep I am still awaiting confirmation - fingers crossed.

edit: it's been shipped!

I did a little research and turns out this card is very good under load when it comes to noise levels (and also when not under load). I just inherited a new computer so I have picked this up to give it a little GFX boost.

Heat added

Wow. Great price for a very decent card still.

Amazing deal. Thanks

Perfect timing if you are wanting to reach the recommended specs for Fallout 4:

http://bethesda.net/#en/events/game/prepare-for-the-future-fallout-4-important-release-info/2015/10/08/35