No it doesn't. Here's a benchmark I found showing it running much quicker.

If you really wanted a 2gb 960 then buy this and contact Amazon to give you a £20 refund.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-listing/B00SJ8FZZ0/ref=dp_olp_used?ie=UTF8&condition=used&m=A2OAJ7377F756P

Will this fit in a compact PC? Anyone have the dimensions

Single fan so quite short , 2slots wide should fit most itx cases with 2 slot wide capability.. some cases can only fit single wide cards.. nvidia etc. might bring out a single slot gtx950 soon?

Plenty of recent review showing that 2GB in this GTX 960 and the 2GB version of the R9-380 are near to reaching their limits:

Taken from:
http://www.computerbase.de/2015-12/2gb-4gb-gtx-960-r9-380-vram-test/2/#diagramm-geforce-gtx-960-fps-mordors-shadow-1920-1080
Google Translate.
In other words: there is no automatic 128-bit bus means 2GB is enough. Provided we are not talking 4GB DDR3 vs 2GB GDDR5, more memory is usually useful. Even the 8GB in the R9-390 / R9-390X or the 12GB in the Titan X can make a performance difference in some games.

Just email Amazon support or live chat and ask them- I did it yesterday and they took off 20 quid immediately.

No worries about the 128 bus...4gb are the new minimum.

I don't really know what a 128 bit bus is so you are most probably right with whatever you said above.

What I do know is that this is a 1080p card and no games running at 1080p will use over 2GB and hence 4GB is a waste.

After I just linked to FPS benchmark results showing the 2GB version of this card running Shadow of Mordor at around 10 FPS less?
Okay.

GTAV does use over 2gb for starters :smiley:

The sum of my knowledge is not just that review.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-nvidia-geforce-gtx-960-2gb-vs-4gb-review

This review/benchmark I read says that the GTX 960 2GB runs faster that the 4GB at 1080p. Check different sources make up your own mind.

No it doesn't. Here's a benchmark I found showing it running much quicker.

Well, that is from October 2015. The Computerbase one is more recent and this one
http://www.techspot.com/review/1114-vram-comparison-test/page5.html
from January 2016 also shows some games performing way worse with 2GB like Rainbow Six Siege:

and Assassin's Creed Syndicate

No guarantee but it seems the recent trend is for games becoming more VRAM constrained. No wonder, the current consoles have 8GB and can use ~4GB or so for graphics. And they are only trying for under 900P, so a PC gamer running 1080P will be better served by more than 2GB. Especially since PC gaming means being able to use mods.

No, it does not say that. It says that the MSI GTX 960 has higher clocks than the Gigabyte GTX 960. That is why their 2GB card performed about 1-2% faster than their (slower-clocked) 4GB card in games where VRAM quantity wasn't a factor, and about 25% slower in games where it was. (The 128-bit bus applies to all 960 models, by the way.)

I'm usually the first to point out the mistakes of people who claim more VRAM is always better (usually as they wrongly point to VRAM usage rather than isolating VRAM quantity as a limited factor), but we've brushed against the limits of 2GB a few times over the past year or so, and I certainly wouldn't buy or recommend a 2GB card today unless it was something like a ~£100 950 (i.e. not looking for great gaming performance, just something about 50% faster than the latest consoles to stick in an old machine or buy on the cheap).

Read different sources properly to make up your own mind.

So it says what I said then that the 2GB version is faster than the 4GB version. :sunglasses:

Not bad but still 2GB is 2Gb....remember you have a 30 day returns (plus 12 month warranty if faulty) so if you see a cheap 4GB card pop up then you can return this one.

If you average all of the results, then, no.

If you add all of the results, then, no.

If you get two cards with the same clocks but different VRAM quantities, then, no.

And given that this Zotac 2GB card in the deal has significantly lower clocks than either the MSI or the Gigabyte cards in your link, then, no.

But you get points for trying! :man:

Sorry to bump but just wanted to thank you for that tip. Found a Gigabyte 960 4GB card on Warehouse Deals and got them to drop the price, except they seem to have knocked off £30 instead of £20, dropping it to £123.90. Not that I'm complaining!

dropped by a penny, now £139.98!

Another source 2GB vs 4GB

We clocked each video card to the reference clock speed of 1127 MHz base / 1178 MHz boost / 7 GHz memory. We will be running apples-to-apples settings across all five games.









http://www.hardocp.com/article/2015/08/04/msi_geforce_gtx_960_gaming_4g_video_card_review/10

Nice deal, but I'm holding out for a couple of months when, in all likelihood, a new generation of Nvidia cards will slash the costs of getting a 960 with 4GB or a 970 with 4GB.

Bought 6 months ago a 4Gb one in amazon for this price. Paying this price nowadays for a 2Gb is a terrible terrible deal. Cold.

Photoshopped.

If you really want the 4Gb version, it's only another £20 from ebuyer HERE.

Sorry I missed something - what's the deal with this Amazon price dropping £20 (or more)?

Don't get a 2 GB card in 2016. Minimum specs for some games (Gears of War, Quantum Break) are already hitting 2 GB VRAM. You'll need to upgrade quite soon just to play new releases.

​arn't all graphs just made up though?

Unless your desperate why would you buy a 2gb card now when the next gen are around the corner? Just wait 2 or 3 months and pick this up for £100 when the next gen come out or buy a 4gb faster card for similar cash...

bought the 4gb version cheaper than this from ebay 20% off last week, already got it installed.

Will it go down to less than £100? I think they'll sell up all the 2GB stock and stop making them before it gets that cheap. Worth getting if you are gaming at around 1080p and not intending to jump on the 4k/VR bandwagon in the next year or so.

All this massive price drop speculation is probably a bit dangerous. There has been no driver from AMD to force a stock drop, so if NVIDIA launch first, they will have been in perfect position to reduce old stock and ramp up new stock.

Don't count on NVIDIA dropping prices on old cards too much. They may just stop making them.

Pah! Well...



...so ner!

Although this looks really cool, people are confusing this card you are linking with the card in the sales description. Twice someone has asked "will this fit in my case" directly after you linked that image.

Maybe it'd be a good idea to stop linking that image?

The actual size of the card 17.4 Cm, very small.

Sadly I'd have to agree.

Just measured the card in that picture. Measured 17.2 cm. Good representation if you ask me.

One of the best comments I have read. Thanks for the grin!

According to techspot

'As expected the GTX 960 and R9 380 simply aren’t powerful enough to warrant anything bigger than a 2GB memory buffer'

unless you go SLI/CF of course

The R380 is a superior card and a bit cheaper imho

The only problem is that the 380 doesn't work very well with older/lower end CPUs.

If you have an i5 2500k or higher, you will be fine, anything lower, you are at risk of the CPU/GPU forming a bottleneck.

And let's not forget the power consumption difference is 70 watts, which would negate the slight cost difference after a year of gaming (maybe 2) of gaming.

The 380/960 are low-mid range cards, so I don't believe there's going to be a major diff as these are gpu limited not cpu limited, I mean if you have a 8350 and oc it slightly, then it should pritty match any i5/i7 cpu in 1080p
Check out these graphs, pritty handy, although they dont have a 380 or a 960, they do have a 280 and a gtx 770, which you can compare a bit.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Systems/Quad-Core-Gaming-Hardware-Roundup/BioShock-Infinite-and-Civilization-Beyond-Earth

Sorry for coming in late to this party.. where is the Amazon offer to refund £20 (or £30 in your case)?

The 8350 doesn't match any i5 or i7, really.

But that's not the issue at hand here, AMD suffers heavily from a low /mid end CPU.

https://youtu.be/9nlMJ7Ysdzk?t=341

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NUD--UIMes

And multiple others, if you want or need more evidence.

Back onto the 8350... I don't know where you got this idea, the 8350 matching the i5/i7, but it really doesn't. The i3 trades blows with the 8350 in terms of games.

Not a bad price for a decent card. Just brought the 4GB version

4 months later - still the same price. GTX 960's still holding their prices pretty much. 4GB versions approx £40 more too.

Only because the 1060 released so overpriced in comparison and people are idiots - a 4gb 470 would be a far better buy. Now got a 480 nitro+ 8gb so I don't really care...

You got pwned