New GeForce Bundle: Witcher 3 and Batman: Arkham Knight

Subject: Graphics Cards | May 5, 2015 - 12:46 PM |
Tagged: The Witcher 3, nvidia, GTX 980, GTX 970, gtx, geforce, batman arkham knight

NVIDIA has announced a new game bundle for GeForce graphics cards starting now, and it’s a doozy: Purchase a qualifying GTX card and receive download codes for both Witcher 3: Wild Hunt and Batman: Arkham Knight!

batman-witcher-glp-header.png

Needless to say, both of these titles have been highly anticipated, and neither have been released just yet with Witcher 3: Wild Hunt due to be released on May 19, and Batman: Arkham Knight arriving on June 23. So which cards qualify? Amazon has a page specifically created for this new offer here, and depending on which card you select you’ll be eligible for either both upcoming games, or just Witcher 3. NVIDIA has this chart on their promotion page for reference:

eligible_cards.png

So GeForce GTX 980 and GTX 970 cards will qualify for both games, and GTX 960 cards and the mobile GPUs qualify for Witcher 3 alone. Regardless of which game or card you may choose these PC versions of the new games will feature graphics that can’t be matched by consoles, and NVIDIA points out the advantages in their post:

"Both Batman and The Witcher raise the bar for graphical fidelity, rendering two very different open worlds with a level of detail we could only dream of last decade. And on PC, each is bolstered by NVIDIA GameWorks effects that increase fidelity, realism, and immersion. But to use those effects in conjunction with the many other available options, whilst retaining a high frame rate, it’s entirely possible that you’ll need an upgrade."

NVIDIA also posted this Witcher 3: Wild Hunt behind-the-scenes video:

In addition to the GameWorks effects present in Witcher 3, NVIDIA worked with developer Rocksteady on Batman: Arkham Knight “to create new visual effects exclusively for the game’s PC release.” The post elaborates:

"This is in addition to integrating the latest and greatest versions of our GPU-accelerated PhysX Destruction, PhysX Clothing and PhysX Turbulence technologies, which work in tandem to create immersive effects that react realistically to external forces. In previous Batman: Arkham games, these technologies created immersive fog and ice effects, realistic destructible scenery, and game-enhancing cloth effects that added to the atmosphere and spectacle. Expect to see similar effects in Arkham Knight, along with new features and effects that we'll be talking about in depth as we approach Arkham Knight’s June 23rd release."

batman-arkham-knight-screenshot-1.jpg

Of note, mobile GPUs included in the promotion will only receive download codes if the seller of the notebook is participating in the "Two Times The Adventure" offer, so be sure to check that out when looking for a gaming laptop that qualifies!

The promotion is going on now and is available “for a limited time or while supplies last”.

Source: NVIDIA

Podcast #338 - More USB 3.1 Devices, Broadwell NUC, another 840 Evo fix and more!

Subject: General Tech | February 26, 2015 - 02:07 PM |
Tagged: pcper, podcast, video, usb 3.1, Broadwell, Intel, nuc, Samsung, 840 evo, asus, Strix Tactic Pro, GTX 970, directx12, dx12

PC Perspective Podcast #338 - 02/26/2015

Join us this week as we discuss more USB 3.1 Devices, Broadwell NUC, another 840 Evo fix and more!

You can subscribe to us through iTunes and you can still access it directly through the RSS page HERE.

The URL for the podcast is: http://pcper.com/podcast - Share with your friends!

  • iTunes - Subscribe to the podcast directly through the iTunes Store
  • RSS - Subscribe through your regular RSS reader
  • MP3 - Direct download link to the MP3 file

Hosts: Ryan Shrout, Jeremy Hellstrom, Allyn Malventano, and Sebastian Peak

Program length: 1:46:04

  1. EVGA Contest Winner!
  2. Week in Review:
  3. News item of interest:
  4. Question: Alex from Sydney
    1. Just a quick question regarding DirectX 12. I’m planning to buy a new graphics card soon but I want a DirectX 12 card for all the fancy new features so I’m considering either the GTX 970 or 980, the question I have is are these real DirectX 12 cards? Since DirectX 12 development is still ongoing how can these cards be fully DirectX 12 complaint?
  5. Hardware/Software Picks of the Week:
    1. Ryan: Prime95
    2. Jeremy: Not SSL anyways; old become new is much more pleasant
    3. Allyn: Lenovo Superfish removal tool (once their site is back online, that is)
  6. Closing/outro

Subscribe to the PC Perspective YouTube Channel for more videos, reviews and podcasts!!

NVIDIA Faces Class Action Lawsuit for the GeForce GTX 970

Subject: Graphics Cards | February 23, 2015 - 04:12 PM |
Tagged: nvidia, geforce, GTX 970

So apparently NVIDIA and a single AIB partner, Gigabyte, are facing a class action lawsuit because of the GeForce GTX 970 4GB controversy. I am not sure why they singled out Gigabyte, but I guess that is the way things go in the legal world. Unlucky for them, and seemingly lucky for the rest.

nvidia-970-architecture.jpg

For those who are unaware, the controversy is based on NVIDIA claiming that the GeForce GTX 970 has 4GB of RAM, 64 ROPs, and 2048 KB of L2 Cache. In actuality, it has 56 ROPs and 1792KB of L2 Cache. The main talking point is that the RAM is segmented into two partitions, one that is 3.5GB and another that is 0.5GB. All 4GB are present on the card though, and accessible (unlike the disable L2 Cache and ROPs). Then again, I cannot see an instance in that class action lawsuit's exhibits which claim an incorrect number of ROPs or amount of L2 Cache.

Again, the benchmarks that you saw when the GeForce GTX 970 launched are still valid. Since the issue came up, Ryan has also tried various configurations of games in single- and multi-GPU systems to find conditions that would make the issue appear.

Source: Court Filing

Amazon, Newegg and others offering partial refunds on GTX 970 purchases

Subject: Graphics Cards | February 19, 2015 - 01:51 PM |
Tagged: nvidia, memory issue, GTX 970, geforce

It looks like some online retailers are offering up either partial refunds or full refunds (with return) for those users that complain about the implications of the GeForce GTX 970 memory issue. On January 25th NVIDIA came clean about the true memory architecture of the GTX 970 which included changes to specifications around L2 cache and ROP count in addition to the division of the 4GB of memory into two distinct memory pools. Some users have complained about performance issues in heavy memory-depedent gaming scenarios even though my own testing has been less than conclusive

GM204_arch.jpg

Initially there was a demand for a recall or some kind of compensation from NVIDIA regarding the issue but that has fallen flat. What appears to be working (for some people) is going to the retailer directly. A thread on reddit.com's Hardware sub-reddit shows quite a few users were able to convince Amazon to issue 20-30% price refunds for their trouble. Even Newegg has been spotted offering either a full refund with return after the typical return window or a 20% credit through gift cards. 

gtx970refund.jpg

To be fair, some users are seeing their requests denied:

"After going back and forth for the past hour I manage to escalated my partial refund to a supervisor who promptly declined it."

"Are you serious? NewEgg told me to go complain to the vendor."

So, while we can debate the necessity or vadidity of these types of full or partial refunds from a moral ground, the truth is that this is happening. I'm very curious to hear what NVIDIA's internal thinking is on this matter and if it will impact relationships between NVIDIA, it's add-in card partners and the online retailers themselves. Who ends up paying the final costs is still up in the air I would bet.

Our discussion on the original GTX 970 Issue - Subscribe to our YouTube Channel for more!

What do you think? Is this just some buyers taking advantage of the situation for their own gain? Warranted requests from gamers that were taken advantage of? Leave me your thoughts in the comments!

Further reading on this issue:

Source: Reddit.com

Podcast #335 - Mobile G-Sync, GTX 970 SLI, a Broadwell Brix and more!

Subject: General Tech | February 5, 2015 - 02:05 PM |
Tagged: podcast, video, g-sync, GTX 970, gigabyte, brix s, broadwell-u, Intel, nuc, arm, Cortex-A72, mediatek, amd, Godavari, Raspberry Pi, windows 10

PC Perspective Podcast #335 - 02/05/2015

Join us this week as we discuss Mobile G-Sync, GTX 970 SLI, a Broadwell Brix and more!

You can subscribe to us through iTunes and you can still access it directly through the RSS page HERE.

The URL for the podcast is: http://pcper.com/podcast - Share with your friends!

  • iTunes - Subscribe to the podcast directly through the iTunes Store
  • RSS - Subscribe through your regular RSS reader
  • MP3 - Direct download link to the MP3 file

Hosts: Ryan Shrout, Jeremy Hellstrom, Josh Walrath, and Allyn Malventano

Subscribe to the PC Perspective YouTube Channel for more videos, reviews and podcasts!!

 

Author:
Manufacturer: NVIDIA

Battlefield 4 Results

At the end of my first Frame Rating evaluation of the GTX 970 after the discovery of the memory architecture issue, I proposed the idea that SLI testing would need to be done to come to a more concrete conclusion on the entire debate. It seems that our readers and the community at large agreed with us in this instance, repeatedly asking for those results in the comments of the story. After spending the better part of a full day running and re-running SLI results on a pair of GeForce GTX 970 and GTX 980 cards, we have the answers you're looking for.

Today's story is going to be short on details and long on data, so if you want the full back story on what is going on why we are taking a specific look at the GTX 970 in this capacity, read here:

Okay, are we good now? Let's dive into the first set of results in Battlefield 4.

Battlefield 4 Results

Just as I did with the first GTX 970 performance testing article, I tested Battlefield 4 at 3840x2160 (4K) and utilized the game's ability to linearly scale resolution to help me increase GPU memory allocation. In the game settings you can change that scaling option by a percentage: I went from 110% to 150% in 10% increments, increasing the load on the GPU with each step.

bf4settings.jpg

Memory allocation between the two SLI configurations was similar, but not as perfectly aligned with each other as we saw with our single GPU testing.

bf4mem.png

In a couple of cases, at 120% and 130% scaling, the GTX 970 cards in SLI are actually each using more memory than the GTX 980 cards. That difference is only ~100MB but that delta was not present at all in the single GPU testing.

Continue reading our look at Frame Rating comparisons between GTX 970 and GTX 980 cards in SLI!

Podcast #334 - GTX 970 Memory Issues, Samsung 840 Evo Slowdown, GTX 960 and more!

Subject: General Tech | January 29, 2015 - 02:43 PM |
Tagged: windows 10, wetbench, video, Samsung, Primochill, podcast, nvidia, microsoft, GTX 970, gtx 960, DirectX 12, 840 evo

PC Perspective Podcast #334 - 01/29/2015

Join us this week as we discuss GTX 970 Memory Issues, Samsung 840 Evo Slowdown, GTX 960 and more!

You can subscribe to us through iTunes and you can still access it directly through the RSS page HERE.

The URL for the podcast is: http://pcper.com/podcast - Share with your friends!

  • iTunes - Subscribe to the podcast directly through the iTunes Store
  • RSS - Subscribe through your regular RSS reader
  • MP3 - Direct download link to the MP3 file

Hosts: Ryan Shrout, Jeremy Hellstrom, Josh Walrath, and Allyn Malventano

Subscribe to the PC Perspective YouTube Channel for more videos, reviews and podcasts!!

 

Author:
Manufacturer: NVIDIA

A Summary Thus Far

UPDATE 2/2/15: We have another story up that compares the GTX 980 and GTX 970 in SLI as well.

It has certainly been an interesting week for NVIDIA. It started with the release of the new GeForce GTX 960, a $199 graphics card that brought the latest iteration of Maxwell's architecture to a lower price point, competing with the Radeon R9 280 and R9 285 products. But then the proverbial stuff hit the fan with a memory issue on the GeForce GTX 970, the best selling graphics card of the second half of 2014. NVIDIA responded to the online community on Saturday morning but that was quickly followed up with a more detailed expose on the GTX 970 memory hierarchy, which included a couple of important revisions to the specifications of the GTX 970 as well.

At the heart of all this technical debate is a performance question: does the GTX 970 suffer from lower performance because of of the 3.5GB/0.5GB memory partitioning configuration? Many forum members and PC enthusiasts have been debating this for weeks with many coming away with an emphatic yes.

GM204_arch.jpg

The newly discovered memory system of the GeForce GTX 970

Yesterday I spent the majority of my day trying to figure out a way to validate or invalidate these types of performance claims. As it turns out, finding specific game scenarios that will consistently hit targeted memory usage levels isn't as easy as it might first sound and simple things like the order of start up can vary that as well (and settings change orders). Using Battlefield 4 and Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare though, I think I have presented a couple of examples that demonstrate the issue at hand.

Performance testing is a complicated story. Lots of users have attempted to measure performance on their own setup, looking for combinations of game settings that sit below the 3.5GB threshold and those that cross above it, into the slower 500MB portion. The issue for many of these tests is that they lack access to both a GTX 970 and a GTX 980 to really compare performance degradation between cards. That's the real comparison to make - the GTX 980 does not separate its 4GB into different memory pools. If it has performance drops in the same way as the GTX 970 then we can wager the memory architecture of the GTX 970 is not to blame. If the two cards perform differently enough, beyond the expected performance delta between two cards running at different clock speeds and with different CUDA core counts, then we have to question the decisions that NVIDIA made.

IMG_9792.JPG

There has also been concern over the frame rate consistency of the GTX 970. Our readers are already aware of how deceptive an average frame rate alone can be, and why looking at frame times and frame time consistency is so much more important to guaranteeing a good user experience. Our Frame Rating method of GPU testing has been in place since early 2013 and it tests exactly that - looking for consistent frame times that result in a smooth animation and improved gaming experience.

reddit.jpg

Users at reddit.com have been doing a lot of subjective testing

We will be applying Frame Rating to our testing today of the GTX 970 and its memory issues - does the division of memory pools introduce additional stutter into game play? Let's take a look at a couple of examples.

Continue reading our look at GTX 970 Performance Testing using Frame Rating!

NVIDIA Plans Driver Update for GTX 970 Memory Issue, Help with Returns

Subject: Graphics Cards | January 28, 2015 - 10:21 AM |
Tagged: nvidia, memory issue, maxwell, GTX 970, GM204, geforce

UPDATE 1/29/15: This forum post has since been edited and basically removed, with statements made on Twitter that no driver changes are planned that will specifically target the performance of the GeForce GTX 970.

The story around the GeForce GTX 970 and its confusing and shifting memory architecture continues to update. On a post in the official GeForce.com forums (on page 160 of 184!), moderator and NVIDIA employee PeterS claims that the company is working on a driver to help improve performance concerns and will also be willing to "help out" for users that honestly want to return the product they already purchased. Here is the quote:

Hey,

First, I want you to know that I'm not just a mod, I work for NVIDIA in Santa Clara.

I totally get why so many people are upset. We messed up some of the stats on the reviewer kit and we didn't properly explain the memory architecture. I realize a lot of you guys rely on product reviews to make purchase decisions and we let you down.

It sucks because we're really proud of this thing. The GTX970 is an amazing card and I genuinely believe it's the best card for the money that you can buy. We're working on a driver update that will tune what's allocated where in memory to further improve performance.

Having said that, I understand that this whole experience might have turned you off to the card. If you don't want the card anymore you should return it and get a refund or exchange. If you have any problems getting that done, let me know and I'll do my best to help.

--Peter

This makes things a bit more interesting - based on my conversations with NVIDIA about the GTX 970 since this news broke, it was stated that the operating system had a much stronger role in the allocation of memory from a game's request than the driver. Based on the above statement though, NVIDIA seems to think it can at least improve on the current level of performance and tune things to help alleviate any potential bottlenecks that might exist simply in software.

IMG_9794.JPG

As far as the return goes, PeterS at least offers to help this one forum user but I would assume the gesture would be available for anyone that has the same level of concern for the product. Again, as I stated in my detailed breakdown of the GTX 970 memory issue on Monday, I don't believe that users need to go that route - the GeForce GTX 970 is still a fantastic performing card in nearly all cases except (maybe) a tiny fraction where that last 500MB of frame buffer might come into play. I am working on another short piece going up today that details my experiences with the GTX 970 running up on those boundaries.

Part 1: NVIDIA Responds to GTX 970 3.5GB Memory Issue
Part 2: NVIDIA Discloses Full Memory Structure and Limitations of GTX 970

NVIDIA is trying to be proactive now, that much we can say. It seems that the company understands its mistake - not in the memory pooling decision but in the lack of clarity it offered to reviewers and consumers upon the product's launch.

Author:
Manufacturer: NVIDIA

A few secrets about GTX 970

UPDATE 1/28/15 @ 10:25am ET: NVIDIA has posted in its official GeForce.com forums that they are working on a driver update to help alleviate memory performance issues in the GTX 970 and that they will "help out" those users looking to get a refund or exchange.

Yes, that last 0.5GB of memory on your GeForce GTX 970 does run slower than the first 3.5GB. More interesting than that fact is the reason why it does, and why the result is better than you might have otherwise expected. Last night we got a chance to talk with NVIDIA’s Senior VP of GPU Engineering, Jonah Alben on this specific concern and got a detailed explanation to why gamers are seeing what they are seeing along with new disclosures on the architecture of the GM204 version of Maxwell.

alben.jpg

NVIDIA's Jonah Alben, SVP of GPU Engineering

For those looking for a little background, you should read over my story from this weekend that looks at NVIDIA's first response to the claims that the GeForce GTX 970 cards currently selling were only properly utilizing 3.5GB of the 4GB frame buffer. While it definitely helped answer some questions it raised plenty more which is whey we requested a talk with Alben, even on a Sunday.

Let’s start with a new diagram drawn by Alben specifically for this discussion.

GM204_arch.jpg

GTX 970 Memory System

Believe it or not, every issue discussed in any forum about the GTX 970 memory issue is going to be explained by this diagram. Along the top you will see 13 enabled SMMs, each with 128 CUDA cores for the total of 1664 as expected. (Three grayed out SMMs represent those disabled from a full GM204 / GTX 980.) The most important part here is the memory system though, connected to the SMMs through a crossbar interface. That interface has 8 total ports to connect to collections of L2 cache and memory controllers, all of which are utilized in a GTX 980. With a GTX 970 though, only 7 of those ports are enabled, taking one of the combination L2 cache / ROP units along with it. However, the 32-bit memory controller segment remains.

You should take two things away from that simple description. First, despite initial reviews and information from NVIDIA, the GTX 970 actually has fewer ROPs and less L2 cache than the GTX 980. NVIDIA says this was an error in the reviewer’s guide and a misunderstanding between the engineering team and the technical PR team on how the architecture itself functioned. That means the GTX 970 has 56 ROPs and 1792 KB of L2 cache compared to 64 ROPs and 2048 KB of L2 cache for the GTX 980. Before people complain about the ROP count difference as a performance bottleneck, keep in mind that the 13 SMMs in the GTX 970 can only output 52 pixels/clock and the seven segments of 8 ROPs each (56 total) can handle 56 pixels/clock. The SMMs are the bottleneck, not the ROPs.

Continue reading our explanation and summary about the NVIDIA GTX 970 3.5GB Memory Issue!!