Is the GTX 965M Memory bus bandwidth sufficient?

According to the specs on Nvidia's page http://www.geforce.com/hardware/notebook-gpus/geforce-gtx-965m/specifications the 965M has only 128-bit memory bus, but it also has 2gb of dedicated Vram.

edit: by sufficient i mean sufficient to not affect framerate if all of the card's memory is in use.

Should i expect the memory bus to be a bottleneck in the GPU's performance or not?? (please refer to the link for further spec details), and why/how??

 

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-965M.134120.0.html


The following was taken from the above link.

The 970m is better than the 965m in "Ultra" settings at 1080p by...

...53% in Witcher 3

...29% in Dirt Rally

...36% in Battlefield Hardline

...41% in Far Cry 4

...55% in Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare

...45% in The Crew


The 965m has 80% of the 970m core count, but it loses by 30%-50% because it is stuck with a 128bit memory bus.

 

Sufficient for what?

You could make a sound enough argument for how the architecture as it is really isn't served by a broader bus - even if you had a desktop board. Before explaining that the internal addressing on the chip basically favors a 128-bit bus towards the type of ram that is actually used (actually, it's not 128 bit either, it's 2x64 - very deliberately designed). While pointing out that most of the driver-optimisation actually relies on commands executing on segments at that size. And that for the current typical uses for graphics cards (read: current and previous apis), it makes very little sense to move towards larger internal addressing space, as well as larger internal units, over simply faster frequency and lower latency for each operation. While you might instead want to create addressing space in graphics card ram that can be written and read via the system bus that has broader bandwidth, and that might benefit from larger transport packets. But that's completely academic, since such a thing would mean an entirely different approach to how graphics cards work.

And that argument would of course rely on the idea that we should keep the current paradigm, or that no practically approachable alternatives exist.

But in practice, what you're going to see is that all the kepler and maxwell cards at the moment essentially don't benefit from a broader internal bus. And in the same way that gddr5 and ddr3 ram really doesn't matter as much as simply higher clocks on the bus-frequency (note: gddr5 runs on double the internal bus-speed to maintain the same throughput as ddr3 ram. The benefit from moving to gddr5 ram is basically that you can put a serial-produced gddr5 ram module on a card, and therefore be able to fit more ram for less money on a graphics card. But performance-wise, the actual boost is negligible, specially if you take into account the fact that it draws more power).

In the same way, the difference in performance from architecture optimisation towards maxwell and possibly the next iteration is much more significant than the hardware customisation of the different variants. For example, the 965m is based on the gk204 chip, but with some smxes disabled. So it ends up in the same range as the gk107 based kepler cards (with the ..*cough* vast 2Mb level2 cache, arguably what makes the most difference in that generation over the last one), with some differences in the feature set, along with better power-efficiency. So you could say that the reason why this board exists is to offer customers an option to take advantage of the better power-efficiency and power-profiles on maxwell, at about the same or slightly higher performance as the gk107 based cards. Which it does offer - you would absolutely pick a cut-down gk204 card over a super-clocked gk107 card - since the former would be easier to maintain without extra cooling, and running into problems when overclocking. If you would at all do that - the standard package is perfectly good without doing anything with it, after all.

So to sum up: if you wanted a card with minimal power-consumption that still has decent enough performance to run previous/current generation games and applications that rely on 3d graphics, then you wouldn't choose a 965, but a smaller maxwell-based card (that also turn up with 2Gb vram, thanks to how it really makes very little sense to differentiate these cards on ram size any more). After all, you're talking about 15-20% better scores over a 30w card (which still put those "throwaway cards" in a performance tier that is over the magic 2600 3dmark11 scores, that gives you comfortable 720p gaming without AA. While to get past that in any significant way, you would need at least triple that score). While if you wanted the best possible performance in a 70-90w envelope (which the 965m will reach on full utilization), then you would want to pick a faster maxwell card with more smxes based on the gk204 chip. And then even underclock it or make use of the dynamic power-profiles when not running the card at peak speed, to get very much the same performance as on a 965m, at about the same power-draw as well..

 

Problem is the "ULTRA" settings. Switch to "high" and you will likely see that gap close because it won't be so bus limited. Or turn off/down AA. I only touch those uber settings if I have a desktop GPU because even the 256-bit bus 980m is somewhat limited due to vRAM speeds.

970m also has 25% more cores than 965m which also contributes to performance gains. 965m isn't a bad card, you just won't be able to run max details in many game, although it should perform great at 1080p at high detail settings if you sacrifice AA.

 

Remniscent of the days of PhysX. Run an AMD card with a nVidia GPU for PhysX. This won't really get you anywhere realistically either. I'd rather the focus be on same card SLI or Crossfire. However if Microsoft can get this to work pretty flawlessly with different OEM video cards, it shows what crap effort is put in at AMD and Nvidia to get SLI and Crossfire working properly when it's their own hardware. Maybe they should ask Microsoft to write their drivers.

 

i guess i should've made my situation more clear.

I have an alienware m17 with the GTX 675m which has gone faulty for the third time, and to cut the story short, Dell is offering me a replacement which has the 965m, which is a take it or leave it offer.

so my concern is, will i be seeing less VRam performance (or any other performance related aspect that is hampered by this 128-bit memory bus) that will bottleneck the card??, or am i going to see performance improvements in all aspects??, and if not in all aspect, then which aspects will i see a drop in?

 

Given the scenario, you should overlook any potential bottleneck in the VRAM department and do your happy dance for getting a card that stomps your old 670m.


...or as the old adage states, "don't look a gift horse in the mouth".

 

i know, i'm very happy, but i still would like to know if there will be bottlenecks for the sake of knowing the limitations of the card given the elements i mentioned.

 

I think HTWingNut and I actually said basically the same thing, he was just much more tactful about it ...like he didn't want to hurt the 965m's feelings.

...or in other words...

...yes, but only relative to other current cards performance. You should just concentrate on the major upgrade side of it.

 

Hahaha. Uh.. well, disregarding how you would get about doubled performance in 3d games overall -- there are theoretical situations with heavy static post-processing (type.. fsaax16, that you won't use anyway) that might, in certain situations, have slightly better performance on the 675m, if you compare it to a similarly clocked 192 or 128 bits internal memory bus.

Seriously, though - no discussion, go for the 965m, and either use it on standard clocks, knowing it will last. Or overclock it till it crackles, and it'll still work until the plastic in the laptop chassis rots. You're being offered a replacement for the heavier Fermi cards, that run hot and need cooling of the kind you don't typically get on a laptop. And it's a card with massively better performance overall as well. Do it now.

edit: oh, and yes, of course - if you compare a gk204 card with 128 bit memory bus to one of the gk204 variants with a 256 bit bus (that typically would be the ones with more smx units), then yes, of course it will benefit those cards. But I assure you - if you don't use post-processing effects on high resolutions (that exacerbate the effect I described earlier), you won't notice any difference whatsoever. There is a good reason why the internal memory bus on the "CUDA" type cards are broader, though. But in practical terms, you won't see the kind of bottlenecks people are talking about.

 

I'm still stuck on this (though in agreement with everyone else). Essentially, Dell will replace your m17xR4 with an Alienware 15 (R2 presumably)? I mean, if you're okay with a screen size reduction, that's fine, but it doesn't make much sense if you want the same screen size.

 

i never said it will be a 15 inch, infact it'll be a 17.3 inch (i.e an M17x)

Old laptop specs as seen on dell site:


New laptop specs as outlined in the e-mail they sent me:

 

Huh? That would be a 17 R3, but the 17 R3 doesn't come with a GTX 965m. You're unable to configure one, and the specifications manual never references the GTX 965m.
No, I smell a potential problem occuring. Either that, or the GTX 965m will be a future option. Either way, this is something to bring up.

 

I would ask them nicely if you can pay the difference between the 965m and the 970m build, maybe even find out how much they would want extra for the 980m.

The performance difference between the 675m and 965m isn't enough to reach today/tomorrow's performance demands for games - 2GB of VRAM isn't enough, see if you can get 4GB-8GB.

Think about it this way, you would likely be looking to upgrade about now or soon after, so the extra cost will be a bargain compared to paying for a completely new laptop. It might be even less than paying for a 970m/980m GPU upgrade.

Good luck

 

^good idea. Would never have occurred to me to be that greedy, but very good suggestion.

Much better cpu, too. Seems like a good deal to me, unless people know something critical about dell refurbs. Might want to ask if it's been a unit that has been lying around since release, perhaps, something like that. So you know you have to repaste, things like that..

 

Can't you put an MXM 980M inside the M17x R4?

 

Ummm the 6700HQ is pathetic. It's BGA and 300 MHz slower than the 3720QM.

 

nipsen, nothing greedy about getting proper compensation.

The 6700HQ is brand new, no dust on that.

 

"Proper compensation". I'll have to remember that one.

 

According to this thread (well, it's about the GTX 970m, but process should be the same), yes. I linked that thread since the m17xR4 in this thread has a 3D panel.

 

nipsen, you do that, and also remember to only apply it to believable circumstances

If you are being inconvenienced due to the vendor failing to provide a promised service, that is costing you valuable time away from your usage of hardware they are supposed to keep running, it is up to the owner to accept offered compensation.

It isn't asking too much for the owner to counter offer, and Dell usually responds positively to those requests. They might not even actually charge for the bump up in GPU, or other component you aren't happy with.

They are asking him to accept performance equal to what he bought years ago, but he should be offered equivalent relative performance today to what he bought then. If he bought top of the line then, he should get top of the line now; not offered a low end build equivalent to years old performance.

There are plenty of circumstances where this isn't appropriate, but in this case, with what he is working with, and a vendor like Dell that is known to accept counter offers, it is appropriate.

It may take escalating to a Manager, or another Department, which they may offer, be honest and hang in there and be polite in your request - and keep asking and explaining nicely, no need to throw a fit, and see what they counter offer.

 

i will try look into the upgrade to the 970m deal, but at the same time i don't want to do something that'll turn the situation 180 degrees and i end up getting a worse deal.

 

abdullah_mag, that's unlikely to happen, the minimum they offered so far will still be on the table. You aren't refusing to accept it, you are asking to upgrade the performance so it is on par with what you bought then - top of the line.

You don't have to say all that, just ask for replacement to 970m level, and you would be happy to pay for upgrade to 980m.

If nothing else it will be good practice for when your new Dell fails several times and they can't fix it, and you are back in the same compensation / replacement conversation. You'll get good at and comfortable with the give and take after a while.

 

the thing is though, i'm not willing to pay a single dime more into this, simply because i haven't the extra money to spend on those things, so as much as i would love to upgrade to a better card, i won't do it if i have to pay the difference.

 

abdullah_mag, if you get the 970m you don't have to pay for the further upgrade to the 980m if you don't want to, at least you know what it would cost.

Please come back and let us know how it works out.

 

Hehe. Yeah... see, it sounds to my ears as if you're selling the idea that Ramadan comes on the same day two years in a row. But you obviously make a good argument - that since he's buying an alienware, and very specifically gets a very expensive product because it's supposed to be the best, etc. Then that's what they should be offering compensation towards.

I guess it just seemed rude to me to decline the first offer, since it was so generous.

 

nipsen, with Dell the first offer isn't the best final offer. It may be with the first person he talks with, but be nice and polite to that person and they will help you move on to the next person authorized to give him a bump up to parity, or a compromise in between offer/request.

 

Yes. You should expect the memory bus to be a bottleneck in the GPU's performance, just like the desktop 960 is bottlenecked by its 128-bit memory bus.

Please note: the vRAM isn't the bottleneck, but the actual, slow memory bandwidth. The card's core is too strong for such a pitiful memory bandwidth. nVidrosoft is simply cutting too many corners with the cards. They have exactly three well-balanced cards in their current lineup: the 750Ti, the 980 and the 980Ti. And the 980 is overpriced.

For mobile, the 970M is the best balanced card.

 

There is another thing i should mention.

I'm not dealing with dell directly, i'm dealing with a certified third party who is "the middle man" and they handle a lot of the hassle especially if i'm out of warranty (and i was).

So i'll give this third party a call tomorrow and see if it's wise to email the guy at dell and ask him for that upgrade.

 

abdullah_mag, that guy should be experienced enough to get you that modest request up to the 970m.

 

Idk how much of a price gap is between the 965m and the 970m to gauge if such a request is plausible, any info on that?

 

abdullah_mag, I wouldn't worry about the cost, you are asking for parity in replacement. You had a top of the line laptop, and they are offering you the bottom of the line now. Requesting the top of the line may be too much, but meeting in the middle at the 970m is reasonable.

Just let him know of your honest concerns about the 965m performance, and you aren't comfortable accepting that, and that you would like a 970m as compensation that meets your comfort zone as a replacement.

It's that simple.

 

Ok will do, fingers crossed

 

It's not that simple. A 965m has twice the performance of the 675m and same amount of vRAM. Hopefully they will offer a reasonable upgrade cost, and I would upgrade to a 970m for $100-$150 more, although I wouldn't expect miracles after dealing with OEM's for decades. Reason is not in their nature.

2GB vRAM is sufficient for the performance of the card. It's borderline but sufficient.

 

If you stay positive and make sure to let them know you are not happy with the first offer, and ask them to go back to Dell to bump up to the 970m, and ask to speak to Dell directly if they are not helpful.

The intermediary may make this easier, or more difficult, stay calm and stay connected through the process and be as positive and polite as you can, until you get what you want.

Good luck

 

This is the email that i prepared in response to the specs, i will send it in a few hours after i confer with the dell subsidiary.

Email:
The specs are nice but i have some concerns about elements that i believe are a downgrade, and i also have a request.

Concerns:
1. The display does not support 3d, therefore the refresh rate will be only 60hz versus the 120hz that i had and the display will not support 3d functionality.

2. The storage size is 1tb less and it doesn't include an SSD cache drive which i also had.

3. The new spec has a DVD drive instead of a blu ray drive, which is simply a downgrade.

4. The processor clock speed with turbo boost is 0.1 ghz less than what i had.

5. The new graphics card's (the 965m) memory speed is 2500, has only a 128-bit memory bus and 80gb/s memory bandwidth, as opposed to the 1500mhz memory speed, 256-bit memory bus and 96gb/s memory bandwidth that the old card had (the 675m), which means that the new graphics card will have worse VRam (video ram) performance and that will most definitely be a bottleneck.

Request:
I can overlook all the sacrifices mentioned above if only the graphics card was better, if you would kindly be willing to upgrade the swap machine's specs from the Nvidia GTX 965m to the Nvidia GTX 970m that would be fantastic.

The 965m is an option on the alienware m15, while all the new alienwares m17 r3 offer the options of either the 970m or the 980m.
So if you would kindly grant me this request i would deeply appreciate it.


Tell me what you think and what i can add to strengthen my argument to increase chances of success.

 

abdullah_mag, outstanding, you got the idea, list all the things not met by their offer, and trade out what doesn't matter for the 1 or two that do.

Let's hope it goes over to the right desk at Dell the first time.

That letter is so well done, I think you would have done this yourself even before any of the suggestions here, but I am glad we could help.

Good luck

 

Thanks for the support fellas, even if this doesn't work i'm still happy you pushed me to prepare a counter offer as i wouldn't have done so on my own accord

But hey, all around it's still quite a boost in performance so it won't be so bad in any case.

 

One thing to consider about the bus size is that Maxwell gets more out of any given amount of bandwidth than Kepler and Fermi. The 2MB cache reduces the need to go to memory in the first place, and the new color compression techniques they added mean less bandwidth is used for any given operation.

I'm not saying Maxwell 128bit is better than Kepler 192bit for example, but Maxwell 128bit > Kepler 128bit. GCN did a similar thing for AMD when they moved from VLIW4.

 

But the point is, will that be sufficient for the the card to make use of ALL its memory without bottlenecking on it should the need arise??

 

You're misunderstanding. Whether a card can fill enough of its vRAM or not is very very rarely the issue. The issue is when data needs to be shuffled in and out of vRAM too fast for the memory bandwidth to handle, and the core lags waiting for the memory. This is NOT something that can simply be fixed with a larger vRAM buffer either... the game likely is designed to use X amount of vRAM anyway, so more won't help.

The problem with this card is that the core is stronger than its bandwidth can keep up with in many cases. It is not a problem the 970M has. And it would have been better as a 192-bit memory bus card, but nVidrosoft in their great wisdom, wanted to cut corners because they have no semblance of a decent lineup of cards. It's also not a problem the 960M has, because it has a lot less cores. Even though it does very well when overclocked like crazy, it still is at a basic level weaker. Maybe you could make a 960M MATCH a 965M, but then that's closer to the limits of the 960M and also not how it was intended. I couldn't expect perfect performance out of such a low-end GPU, all things considered. But the 965M is another story.

 

One thing i noticed, the new m17 r3 has 2 fans but shared heatsinks by the cpu and gpu.

Is that necessarily a problem?

 

2 things to point out. You're not getting a DVD drive from the outline you provided. You're getting a software called "Cyberlink PowerDVD". And the 17 R3 only has 1 SATA III slot, so the max HDD size you'll get is 1 TB because Alienware doesn't provide 2 TB HDDs for the laptop. Though you should be able to get a 128 GB M.2 SSD in place of the SSD cache you had.
I know it seems like I'm nitpicking, but they're somewhat important to note.

 

There are many threads here at NBR that have good examples of working a replacement laptop deal with Dell, unfortunately they are spread out all over the forums, but there is 1 thread dedicated to Dell Alienware replacement laptops:

*** Official Alienware Notebook System Replacement Thread ***
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...re-notebook-system-replacement-thread.781015/

You might read that and search around the forums for other examples of getting replacement laptops from Dell for ideas on how to approach them to get what you need to feel you were given a fair deal in trade for your laptop.

 

Oh dear, are both the CPU and GPU BGA on the 17 r3??

Will that affect performance??

 

There are no non-BGA mobile CPUs anymore, so every single mobile chip is a TDP-limited BGA cheeseturd.

It will not affect performance unless you want to do CPU-intensive tasks. I would still far quicker suggest a P770DM, P775DM or P870DM instead of anything in Alienware's terrible lineup.

 

well i play MMORPGs and MMOs a lot, and many of those are CPU bound, will that affect me?

 

Since you care about single-thread clockspeed mostly, yes. Yes it will. I would suggest the same laptops I listed, and getting the overclockable CPUs (i5 or i7 should both be fine for MMOs) and just making sure your cooling is great and overclocking them.

BUUUT of course, your budget is going to be an issue. But if you were considering an AW17 R3, you should be able to buy at least a basic machine out of what I listed.

 

I'm not sure you read the whole thread, but i'm not looking for a purchase, i am looking at a replacement laptop offered by dell, so i will not spend a dime.

 

I didn't read the thread, I just popped in to list the vRAM issues, and responded to things after that. If you do get a return from them however, maybe selling and getting one of those machines sometime soon might be something on your list of things to do. For some inexplicable reason, AW17 R3s are in demand now.

So are Razer Blades.

I don't understand people

Good luck with your exchange though!