Split second today i got Titanfall to hit 3609mb vram usage on my 970,right before it crashed the game with a error.I have tried to get this card to use more then 3500mb and be usable and games either crash,lock up or stutter then crash.
The Titanfall crash happened when a map was loading,it wasn't even mid-game when i crashed.
Seems this card is hard locked to 3536mb or so,anything higher and the card simply crashes whatever game is open.How others are getting 3800mb is beyond me,certain cards just more prone to the issue?
By any chance, do you have a disabled or limited page file?Split second today i got Titanfall to hit 3609mb vram usage on my 970,right before it crashed the game with a error.I have tried to get this card to use more then 3500mb and be usable and games either crash,lock up or stutter then crash.
The Titanfall crash happened when a map was loading,it wasn't even mid-game when i crashed.
Seems this card is hard locked to 3536mb or so,anything higher and the card simply crashes whatever game is open.How others are getting 3800mb is beyond me,certain cards just more prone to the issue?
He just made life easier for those seeking success in the courtroom
Wrong.
By any chance, do you have a disabled or limited page file?
just sayingMyself, as well as others here who have the 970, have experienced 3800MB+ VRAM usage without any stuttering or issues.
Very, very interesting...Played a couple matches with it enabled,vram usage actually peaks at 3613mb now and during a load of map it loaded damn near 3800mb.Takes a while but it still crashes to desktop.Playable but hitching and stutter took place.Constant disk access as well.
Without it enabled,i cap pretty much 3.5gb then crash quickly.Drop settings from Insane to Very High and pretty much could play till my ass turns to jello without missing a beat.
Typically not needing to use a pagefile,i rarely see even 5gb usage out of my 8gb.
just saying
I have yet to see the full 4100mb used in any 970 shots anywhere peeps or review sites.
say 3800mb of real game + 300mb$$$ .
Very, very interesting...
I wonder if a gtx 980 does constant disk access above 3.5 GB...
There should be no reason for constant disk access unless you're running out of SYSTEM ram. I have never, in all my years of PC gaming seen excessive amount of page file usage by saturating your VRAM.
Yeah, I know right? But I've seen multiple reports of people with GTX 970 complaining about their paging file going crazy just as they go past 3.5 GB of ram.There should be no reason for constant disk access unless you're running out of SYSTEM ram. I have never, in all my years of PC gaming seen excessive amount of page file usage by saturating your VRAM.
Yeah, I know right? But I've seen multiple reports of people with GTX 970 complaining about their paging file going crazy just as they go past 3.5 GB of ram.
Has anyone tried Shadows of Mordor with this game? it supposedly woul use more than 4gb of VRAM. Im curious how much of the GTX 970's 4gb it can use for those claiming the card never goes beyond 3.5gb. My GTX 970 with latest drivers & games never uses more than3.2gb @ 1440p with max settings, let alone 3.5gb. Farcry4 is the only game i have that uses the most VRAM but again it doesnt pass 3.2gb.
Can anyone test with shadows of mordor?
Has anyone tried Shadows of Mordor with this game? it supposedly woul use more than 4gb of VRAM. Im curious how much of the GTX 970's 4gb it can use for those claiming the card never goes beyond 3.5gb. My GTX 970 with latest drivers & games never uses more than3.2gb @ 1440p with max settings, let alone 3.5gb. Farcry4 is the only game i have that uses the most VRAM but again it doesnt pass 3.2gb.
Can anyone test with shadows of mordor?
I think where you are getting but please explain your argument?
Tried with max setting at 1080p. It hovers around 3.5GB but never over it. I'm going to assume the driver is preventing the GPU from using that last 0.5GB. On my 290x, I was able to us ALL of the 4GB.
I doubt that's what's happening. It makes no sense. They may be getting hitching (caused by the "unique" memory architecture of the 970) that may appear to look like things are being paged in and out of the drive, but I highly highly doubt that's what's actually going on.
It does explain why skipsneeky2 was crashing without a page file. Crashes are exactly what you expect to happen when you run out of ram without having virtual memory. It doesn't make sense conventionally, but the symptoms are there.
In most modern operating systems, including Windows, application programs and many system processes always reference memory using virtual memory addresses which are automatically translated to real (RAM) addresses by the hardware. Only core parts of the operating system kernel bypass this address translation and use real memory addresses directly. The virtual memory management component of the operating system maintains the tables used by the hardware to provide the mapping of virtual addresses into real addresses. A small amount of RAM is used by those parts of the operating system that can not be paged out (for example, the virtual memory manager) and is thus not available for assignment to virtual memory.
Pardon me, I should have said "running out of virtual memory". Did you read his symptoms?You have virtual memory without a pagefile. The issue he has is unrelated to that. Unless he also ran out of physical memory. Where he would have crashed anyway.
Pardon me, I should have said "running out of virtual memory". Did you read his symptoms?
His game crashed very quickly after hitting 3.5 GB of vram.
Upon enabling his page file, he no longer crashed, but saw that his page file was being thrashed (constant HDD access). And typically, he said doesn't need more than 5 GB of ram, so it shouldn't be related to that.
There's something very odd there. I know what the conventional wisdom is, and I know what the page file is supposed to be for. But something else is happening there, and it's just plain weird.
Frankly, I don't know what's going on exactly - but perhaps Nvidia has some sort of weird paging algorithm that results in heavy paging once beyond 3.5 GB of vram usage? And the stutter is caused by paging to an HDD? For those who have their page file on an SSD, maybe less stuttering?
So I dunno. Anyone care to test? I returned my GTX 970, but now I'm curious on a theoretical level what is going on there. Test going beyond 3.5GB with a page file, without a page file, page file on ssd/hdd, on ramdisk..?
You're right, it really has nothing to do with the topic at hand, I was pondering the implications of nvidia's software implementation of the soft "3.5GB" usage typically seen. I just find supremely it odd considering the multiple incidents I've seen about pagefile usage skyrocketing after 3.5GB of vram is used. This is off-topic for this thread, so I'll check it here.He would have had to run out of system memory too then. If its a 32bit application it can only use 4GB under a 64bit OS.
But it has nothing to do with the 3.5GB as such. The card still got 4GB nomatter how people try and spin it. The only question is the speed of the last 512MB.
Some games may depend on a pagefile, I know a few that will crash without a pagefile. Nomatter what else you got in hardware. A pagefile simply gives the ability to page out memory. But it has nothing to do with virtual memory, besides being part of it if used. Since virtual memory is the entire memory pool, nomatter what it consist of.