Available very soon:
 
http://www.evga.com/articles/00914/EVGA-GeForce-GTX-960-4GB/
 

I, too, would like to know if this is actually 4GB of GDDR5 speed RAM. And also what are people's opinions about 4GB of RAM on a low memory bandwidth card? Is there any benefit to this for 1080p gaming? Or is this strictly for nudging the GTX 960 into 4k eligible territory?

notfordman

gfunk319
Is it really 4GB or is it 3.5GB? 
 
And how does this compare to the 970 or the 980?
 
Its kind of funny, I've been on the fence about updating my 660TI sli to  a 970sli.  I was about to order a set of 970's when I remembered this post and now this comes out.   

Are you relating the 970 controversy to this card?

I think people want to know if that same memory design used on the GTX 970 is used here.

I was hopping that the GTX 960 would also be released with the Blower Style Cooler.

houkom

bcavnaugh
I was hopping that the GTX 960 would also be released with the Blower Style Cooler.

It's been stated before that the "reference blower" that is found on the upper end 700 and 900 cards costs more to produce. If this is going to be a more budget-friendly card, then I can imagine they will never stick that "TITAN COOLER" or w.e. you wanna call it on this card.

True on the Titan Blower, but more at this one.

rjohnson11
This model will have FULL bandwidth across 4GB.

That's a good thing obviously....  but what's that say about the 970?  The 960 has full 4GB, but the 970 doesn't?  What an insult!!!  I actually don't believe it.  I'm still waiting for the truth to drop about my 2 980's.
 
Nvidia really shot themselves in the foot.  It goes alot farther than just the 970.

bsmegreg
I don't know why you guys seem to think this card cannot handle 4k, i'm sure it will be able to but it won't get 60fps (probably around 20-30).  At a 1920x1080 i'm sure this card could slaughter anything for next 3 years, then it will be in the dark area like every other card that is 3 years or older.  Although I do kind of think 4GB may be killing it a little unless you plan on running two games at once, which does happen.  
 
Whoever made the comment that it could probably handle 1440 is stupid...  All you need is 50fps and this card can probably give you 60fps in 1920x1080 which at that point your arrogant to say you need more.  Its not like your eye can see the difference between 50fps and 200fps.  

Please just stop, lol.

Your eye isn't limited to a refresh rate. Why do you think professional gamers don't play on 60hz monitors? They need to see faster than you, because they can see the difference and their brain processes what they see faster than someone that thinks they can't see the difference between 50 and 200 fps.

Hence the 120hz, 144hz, and 240hz monitors.

http://gaming.eizo.com/products/foris_fg2421/

And calling me stupid? Nice. Slight 1440 is possible but 4k is less than logixal on the 128 bit bandwidth. You should just close your browser and not revisit if you want to start name calling.

Now, and addition. 4k could probably get 20-30 fps, but 1440 is just "stupid".. you do realize that 4k is 2160 right... so, 1440 is stupid and 4k can get 20-30 at double the pixels? That makes so much sense. Why didn't I think of that? Totally makes sense.

Again, just stop, lol.

Scarlet-Tech

And calling me stupid? Nice. Slight 1440 is possible but 4k is less than logixal on the 128 bit bandwidth. You should just close your browser and not revisit if you want to start name calling.

Now, and addition. 4k could probably get 20-30 fps, but 1440 is just "stupid".. you do realize that 4k is 2160 right... so, 1440 is stupid and 4k can get 20-30 at double the pixels? That makes so much sense. Why didn't I think of that? Totally makes sense.

Again, just stop, lol.

1440? This card could do both 1440 and 2160. I don't know why your insulting the card for being bad...  Just because it can't get 80fps doesn't mean it can't do it; it just means its more economical for practical use. In theory your eye can see 1000fps but I really don't think you need to buy your kid a $600 graphic card.

bsmegreg


1440? This card could do both 1440 and 2160. I don't know why your insulting the card for being bad...  Just because it can't get 80fps doesn't mean it can't do it; it just means its more economical for practical use. In theory your eye can see 1000fps but I really don't think you need to buy your kid a $600 graphic card.

Hahaha.. you are some kind of special. Where did I insult the card? Point it out. I said it could probably do 1440 in sli without issue. You said "whoever (whomever) said it could probably do 1440 is stupid." Here, you can't seem to keep your stories straight, this is what YOU said after I said it could do 1440.

I think I misunderstood your previous post, so I am going to edit mine. When I say it can probably do 1440p, I mean at high or close to max settings. If you honestly think at 4k you are going to set this card to max settings... well, just no, it isn't going to happen. If you think that scaling to 4k and them turning the settings to low just to get a playable framerates is ok.. No.

Why would ANYONE spend the absolute minimum on a GPU while absolute max on the monitor, and them turn the settings down to the lowest possible settings? A playable frame rate is the target.

My statement, "can probably do 1440p" is referring to decent quality and good fps. I didn't say anything about max fps or any of the garbage you spout off as calling an insult to this card. If you think you can play at 4k and not get at least degraded settings for a playable frame rate, feel free.

I think 1440 will be able to have decent if not max settings in some games with these in sli. I doubt one drives it well with the 128 bit interface and high settings. Time will tell, of course.

chosin
article does say a better 4K experience  . would be my assumption, it would first have to run for it to be better. 128bit bus and full memory is kind of weird. 

The 128 bit bus is the only thing that I think would be the limit. It seems that it would cause some issues. We shall see when the review models hit the desk of the reviewers, then the consumer gets them as well.

zildjian75

rjohnson11
This model will have FULL bandwidth across 4GB.

That's a good thing obviously....  but what's that say about the 970?  The 960 has full 4GB, but the 970 doesn't?  What an insult!!!  I actually don't believe it.  I'm still waiting for the truth to drop about my 2 980's.
 
Nvidia really shot themselves in the foot.  It goes alot farther than just the 970.

  IC someone is still beating that dead horse still.

Grey_Beard
And what happens when the card hits 4GB threshold on the memory?  Will you return it for a full refund?  Why is it that now everything can run 4K or you think it can?

Too bad you can't hit the 4GB threshold on the GTX 970 and if you did your card would become extremely unstable. But I would assume you can on this card at least. Maybe there trying to compensate for their 80% usability of the GTX 970. I don't understand why your poking holes at the 970 refunds; a lot of people don't seem to take it seriously. Maybe you should try an expierment of your own where you try to get your 970 to pass 3512mb of vram and see what happens. I did twice and had a hard reboot both times after only seconds of passing the threshold. This suggests to me that my card is unfit for 4k gaming which limits me in the future when I bought the card expecting it to perform.

 
Is there any word on pricing of the 4GB model as of yet? I'm kind of tempted to wait with purchasing a GPU if the price of these is right and these are available before GTA V release. Excited to see if I could get two of these baby's for SLI. 

bsmegreg

Grey_Beard
And what happens when the card hits 4GB threshold on the memory?  Will you return it for a full refund?  Why is it that now everything can run 4K or you think it can?

Too bad you can't hit the 4GB threshold on the GTX 970 and if you did your card would become extremely unstable. But I would assume you can on this card at least. Maybe there trying to compensate for their 80% usability of the GTX 970. I don't understand why your poking holes at the 970 refunds; a lot of people don't seem to take it seriously. Maybe you should try an expierment of your own where you try to get your 970 to pass 3512mb of vram and see what happens. I did twice and had a hard reboot both times after only seconds of passing the threshold. This suggests to me that my card is unfit for 4k gaming which limits me in the future when I bought the card expecting it to perform.

Why would I try that? I do not care to create a problem just to create a problem. I will get into 4K gaming with a card designed for 4K gaming. The 970 is not that card, nor is the 960 or even the 980. Why do we always need to push it to the limits? Why is it when we do and something happens its a big deal? Is it not the owner's fault for pushing the card? When you push it to the limits are you not expecting something bad or a problem to occur which is why it is done? I do not own nor want to own a 4K monitor or monitors, as I like multiple monitor set ups, at this point in time. There is little out there in gaming designed for this resolution, heck it will take years until broadcasting begins to even think about their investment to get to this resolution. I do not get a rush from being on Pluto first.

Funny that you put it that way, then maybe NVIDA Should Install 5 GB of Memory and State 4 GB of Usable Memory.
This way users will get their full 4 GB of memory and NIVDIA Gets their "BUFFER ZOMG"