• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

[kitguru] Return rate of GeForce GTX 970 after memory scandal is below 5%

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I know I am past my return window plus I got a great deal on my GTX 970 when Amazon decided to give me a $70 credit since I ordered mine just before the announcement of the free game.

So I am figuring I am still good plus I fully expect that Nvidia will be sued and I will get a few dollars or some game down the line.

I do think that Nvidia knew about this much sooner than it came out so I am unhappy about the lies.
 
Last edited:
Leyawiin said:
I don't think a 5% return rate is out of line for any retail product of any kind. If you haunt hardware forums you're going to get a skewed view of how much concern there is about the misleading specs.
Click to expand...

Actually 5% will cost you a lot of net profit. It's not a statistically insignificant number.
 
guskline said:
I received my FULL refund from Newegg today for my GTX 970.

I sent it back because at the time of purchase, I did not receive the card that was advertised.
Click to expand...

Can u elaborate how u didnt recieve what was advertised? U DID recieve a card with 4gb. the 500mb people are fretting about is still much faster than system RAM.
 
ocre said:
So maybe you want to share your 970 experience here or just act like you know so much about it. I actually have first hand experiences to share and if you don't own a 970, its not meant for you anyway.
Click to expand...

Every "professional" review of the 970 in the past (EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.) didn't mention the issue either because it's not something obvious. In fact, avg. FPS "may look ok".

For the casual user, the performance of the 970 even in those extreme situations seems "ok".

So your personal experiences about the performance of the 970 doesn't change the fact that the 970 has those frame-time, stutter and system-memory access problems...and the reviews which *in the past* all didn't catch those problems don't change that fact either.

I do NOT say that the 970 is a weak, under-performing card (because it's not), it might well do "great" for 95% of all current gaming scenarios. But there is also no reason for me to make the card look better and to ignore those things and not to be concerned. I am not buying a video card every two months and I don't want the card running into problems a short time after I got it. Current games (dying light, 1920x) are ALREADY using 3.2GB out of the box. How does this look in 5 months? What shelf-life does this card have and is it really worth €320-€370 which is the going price here? In my opinion not.
 
garagisti said:
If you and some others think 970 was a non issue, well then I ask you lot this simple question. How many bridges do you "own" by now? If I had to guess I'd say you must have bought a few, no?
Click to expand...

I own %95 of the bridges..going by the stats. Fact is stats back up it was a non-issue. Most people who own cards know it.

Even the guys here at anand attested to it, maybe %1 of the games out would even care if it was 4gigs. Even then it would not be a huge performance hit to even care about. Even down the road it is a non-issue.
 
Last edited:
imaheadcase said:
I own %95 of the bridges..going by the stats. Fact is stats back up it was a non-issue. Most people who own cards know it.

Even the guys here at anand attested to it, maybe %1 of the games out would even care if it was 4gigs. Even then it would not be a huge performance hit to even care about. Even down the road it is a non-issue.
Click to expand...
I must say that i like how sportingly you answered to sarcasm. Cheers! Some more 😛

By all means do share what games you're working on, and what they are going to be like... given you're boldly making a claim that it is going to be a non-issue.

The trouble is there were a lot of people on the forums who were making noises. How many people do you think are aware of the issue outside of the forums? I'd be surprised if more than 10 out of 100 owners knew about the issue outside of the forums. They may be experiencing some issues, but some will think it is their screen (this happened to some very experienced users), or driver (the same as before, a lot of experienced users thought it is software) or whatever, but not many would link it to card. It is not a problem for Nvidia, but it is a real problem for a lot of buyers. Well, certainly for more than you would imagine.

Also, one must remember that 5% is merely what is reported, and doesn't include those who were out of return period and are not being allowed to return their cards.
 
poohbear said:
Can u elaborate how u didnt recieve what was advertised? U DID recieve a card with 4gb. the 500mb people are fretting about is still much faster than system RAM.
Click to expand...

Be glad to. On 1/4/15, the day I bought it, Nvidia listed the card on it's website as having 64 ROPs and 4G Vram. Now it acknowledges 56ROPs and 3.5G Vram directly connected with corresponding full speed L2 Cache while the eighth .5G Vram chip bypasses the L2 cache by using the 7th Vram chip's connectors to access the ram controller. They "now" claim it doesn't matter because their software algorithms adjust for this etc, etc. Had it been advertised as 4 G "effective" Vram they may have had an argument with me. I would have had a reason to question what "effective" ram meant.

I'm WELL aware of its performance; it was strong card. Just wasn't the 4G vram I expected or relied upon.

Based upon the facts at the time I purchased it, it was not what was advertised. (How do you explain the ROP snafu? And, had that been accurately stated upon release, I believe it would have tipped off reviewers!)🙂
 
Last edited:
5% of all 970s have been returned since this problem started? That seems really damaging if true.
 
Leyawiin said:
How many higher end discrete graphics cards are returned in general? That would settle the question.
Click to expand...

I highly doubt 5% of the total amount of high end graphics cards sold after 4 months have been returned all at once over a 1-2 week period of time. That means there was a large spike of returns after the news hit.
 
flexy said:
Every "professional" review of the 970 in the past (EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.) didn't mention the issue either because it's not something obvious. In fact, avg. FPS "may look ok".

For the casual user, the performance of the 970 even in those extreme situations seems "ok".

So your personal experiences about the performance of the 970 doesn't change the fact that the 970 has those frame-time, stutter and system-memory access problems...and the reviews which *in the past* all didn't catch those problems don't change that fact either.

I do NOT say that the 970 is a weak, under-performing card (because it's not), it might well do "great" for 95% of all current gaming scenarios. But there is also no reason for me to make the card look better and to ignore those things and not to be concerned. I am not buying a video card every two months and I don't want the card running into problems a short time after I got it. Current games (dying light, 1920x) are ALREADY using 3.2GB out of the box. How does this look in 5 months? What shelf-life does this card have and is it really worth €320-€370 which is the going price here? In my opinion not.
Click to expand...

You seem to have a problem with me sharing my experience and now your actually saying, "just because you notice a problem, it doesn't mean its not there"

I am blown away!!!!!!!!

Once again I am telling you, my post is intended towards people with a 970 and those who might find it useful. I find your efforts to put it down interesting. Are you really suggesting everyone go through the hassle of a return and refund, be without a card for however long, just to end up with a side grade for a problem you insist is there even if there is not a much better experience even with a 980?

Cause, all I wanted to do is share my experience and findings to those that don't really want to go without a GPU or go thru the hassle in limbo.

So you're saying everyone send your cards back because there is an invisible problem that cant tell is there, oh and get a 290x which has stutter and frame time issues at the same high settings as the 970 does.

Sure, I think people with gtx 970s might find my post much more educating. And I never told anyone not to return their cards. I actually tell them, do what they like. that this is what i did and what i found out first hand. surely you have an issue with that.

I say to anyone, do what you want. Especially don't do what others may be trying to pressure you into.
 
Video shows the same thing as several others I've seen. The driver tries really hard to keep memory usage below 3.5GB, when usage goes above then frame times become erratic. The memory limiting is Nvidia knowing full well the card has a hardware issue that the driver is trying to minimize.
 
AnandThenMan said:
Video shows the same thing as several others I've seen. The driver tries really hard to keep memory usage below 3.5GB, when usage goes above then frame times become erratic. The memory limiting is Nvidia knowing full well the card has a hardware issue that the driver is trying to minimize.
Click to expand...


That's why I returned over $1000 in 970s (3x970). This card will be like an older sli/cf setup in the future. You're dependent on Nvidia making the tweaks to your games to keep memory usage <3.5gb to ensure peak operation. Seeing how they abandoned my 780ti in newer titles doesn't give me a ton of faith in their practices.
 
Pneumothorax said:
That's why I returned over $1000 in 970s (3x970). This card will be like an older sli/cf setup in the future. You're dependent on Nvidia making the tweaks to your games to keep memory usage <3.5gb to ensure peak operation. Seeing how they abandoned my 780ti in newer titles doesn't give me a ton of faith in their practices.
Click to expand...
By the way, how're your replacements working out so far?
 
Pneumothorax said:
That's why I returned over $1000 in 970s (3x970). This card will be like an older sli/cf setup in the future. You're dependent on Nvidia making the tweaks to your games to keep memory usage <3.5gb to ensure peak operation. Seeing how they abandoned my 780ti in newer titles doesn't give me a ton of faith in their practices.
Click to expand...

Have you considered the fact that they may not have "abandoned" the kepler cards at all, and the architecture of the time, just isn't doing well with current games? It is well known that Keplar did poorly with compute, and games which used a fair bit of compute, they did not do well with, like Metro 2033.

Nvidia has never abandoned older cards in the past, and it seems more likely the poor performance is simply due to a change of programming techniques, that is exposing the weaknesses of the architecture. Sort of like how tessellation was hammering the AMD 5000 series.
 
bystander36 said:
Have you considered the fact that they may not have "abandoned" the kepler cards at all, and the architecture of the time, just isn't doing well with current games? It is well known that Keplar did poorly with compute, and games which used a fair bit of compute, they did not do well with, like Metro 2033.

Nvidia has never abandoned older cards in the past, and it seems more likely the poor performance is simply due to a change of programming techniques, that is exposing the weaknesses of the architecture. Sort of like how tessellation was hammering the AMD 5000 series.
Click to expand...

You might be right but I doubt it, because there's an additional trend to driver support for Kepler and that's their SLI support has gone downhill too. I'm now having to go through the control panel and adjust settings to get proper scaling/GPU utilization where as I never had to do more than enable SLI before... Certainly sounds more like abandonment then a paradigm shift of programing technique.
 
I was quite happy playing games on my 970 a few weeks ago, now I am meant to be all upset and return it despite the fact it still plays games exactly the same way it did? Nothing has changed in my 970 experience. Really the *outrage* by a few people who post repeatedly and have no intention of ever buying and an nvdia card is just a lot of hot air.

That said I am surprised if the return rate really was 5% as that is huge, I doubt most 970 users even know this issue exists?
 
Dribble said:
I was quite happy playing games on my 970 a few weeks ago, now I am meant to be all upset and return it despite the fact it still plays games exactly the same way it did? Nothing has changed in my 970 experience. Really the *outrage* by a few people who post repeatedly and have no intention of ever buying and an nvdia card is just a lot of hot air.

That said I am surprised if the return rate really was 5% as that is huge, I doubt most 970 users even know this issue exists?
Click to expand...

I'm in retail and trust me, most people don't love your company so much that they are willing to let you bald face lie to them in order to get them to buy something. There are even more people who won't come back to you and complain. They'll just never come back period. nVidia is not helping themselves out by ignoring this issue.
 
3DVagabond said:
I'm in retail and trust me, most people don't love your company so much that they are willing to let you bald face lie to them in order to get them to buy something. There are even more people who won't come back to you and complain. They'll just never come back period. nVidia is not helping themselves out by ignoring this issue.
Click to expand...

Most people don't care what you sold them if it works as they expect. Having used the card they only come back and complain if that's not the case. The 970 works as people expect - they bought the card expecting it to perform like it did in the reviews which is does. We have to be told there's a problem with our cards, because other wise we'd never know as they work fine.
 
Erenhardt said:
I don't know if this is placebo effect, but 670 seems smoother at times than 970 with high textures, nevermind the ultra.
Click to expand...

In SOM, 970 absolutely stutters with ultra textures even at 1080P and the driver does everything to not allow the card to exceed 3.5GB in the game:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6k55epUBCE

Dribble said:
We have to be told there's a problem with our cards, because other wise we'd never know as they work fine.
Click to expand...

That's not what happened. Actual gamers picked up real world stutters and FPS drops on a single 970 and 970 SLI in real world games and only then reviewers found out. Since reviewers cannot do extensive testing like real world gamers, just because most reviewers online didn't see problems, doesn't mean they didn't exist in some games/settings. Ryan on AT did mention that he did notice anomalies but didn't think much of them.

I know some people are trying to say that when 970 runs into VRAM bottleneck, 980 and 290X are just as unplayable but it's simply not true.

54/56 average is a lot better than 45 fps minimums. Considering 290X often sells for $300 or less, the only thing saving 970's fall from grace is that there are too few examples yet of games like SoM. If more games start being like SoM, then 970 is toast compared to 290X/980. Also, while the performance of the 970 is excellent in 99% of gaming situations, the fact that NV false advertised (whether it's intentional or not) but is doing absolutely nothing about it is unacceptable. Do you think car companies that underrate their engines by 5-10 hp or MPG by 1-2 mpg just get away with it? Not happening.

GTX-970-MEMORY-4.jpg
 
Last edited:
Dribble said:
I was quite happy playing games on my 970 a few weeks ago, now I am meant to be all upset and return it
Click to expand...

No. Actually you should be extremely happy to realize you paid money for "fantasy specs" and fake 4GB memory where only 3.5 are actually available...and "64 ROPs" which magically turned into 56, amongst other things.

You should also be very happy that the stutter and frame-time problems of the 970 are actually already showing in today's games...which sure is an indication that your beautiful card has a looooong and beautiful future ahead of it...a card that sure will last you at least the next five years. Because we all know that 4GB is entirely "far-fetched" and no game ever will use 4GB of video memory in the next 5, 10 or 15 years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top