Should you be compensated for the GTX 970 issues and spec changes?

[garagisti]

@Elixer
Good one! I have been repeating this over threads, if people are happy, very good. Then again, there are those who are resorting to labelling customers who paid for something, for feeling as they do now. I mean seriously.

I have to say that i was expecting Nvidia do better than this, but i guess i should have known.

 

[Silverforce11]

Video proof for the delusional users here thinking its "faux outrage" or a non-problem:

Enjoy your stuttery, frame-dropping game play. Even in ACU & FC4, both NV GameWorks titles, when vram gets pushed beyond 3.5gb, the 970 suffers horribly.
http://www.computerbase.de/2015-01/geforce-gtx-970-vram-speicher-benchmarks/4/

Now multiply that for SLI setups. GG.

 

[utahraptor]

The Nvidia rep that promised to help people get refunds and promised a fixed driver has edited the message to remove any hint of a coming driver and also removed the mention of refunds. Now when he is PMed he responds with this generic message:

"Hello,

Is there a specific game that I can help you with? Unfortunately we made an error in the reviewer guide but the GTX 970 is one of the best GPU's we've ever built.


http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/68595-gtx-970s-memory-explained-tested-2.html


Let me know how I can help."

Also, price cuts from AMD to profit on the scandal: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2877...dd-pressure-to-gtx-970-memory-furor.html?null

 

[Silverforce11]

http://www.techpowerup.com/209409/p...s-being-returned-over-memory-controversy.html

And so it begins.

As I've said previously, if EU launches a class action, they will 100% win. EU laws are pretty damn strict when it comes to false advertisement.

 

[AnandThenMan]

What's unfortunate is the e/retailers are going to eat the costs along with the AIBs. The only way that will change is if Nvidia steps up, which so far they don't seem willing to do.

 

[Silverforce11]

It's looking ugly in EU now..

http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Kommentar-Nvidias-schmutzige-Kartentricks-2529523.html

And the GeForce forum is full of rage. I cannot believe someone at NV made the call to shutdown a legitimate attempt from their staff to help people obtain refunds, back-tracking on posts (seriously, on the internet, you think you can hide what you posted?!?!)... if only they had placed value in "Honesty" and "Decency", owned up, take it like man... but no, they decided to go full stupid denial mode, leaving their loyal users who want refunds or upgrades to 980 in the rain, along with retailers and AIBs who have to cope with the returns.

Oh dear, storm in a teacup is about to go into a can of woopass mode.

 

[AnandThenMan]

Nvidia is going to have to step up and offer some kind of compensation they can't just sit back and hope it all gets better.

 

[Subyman]

Wow, yesterday I thought Nvidia may have a chance to save face by offering refunds and a driver update. I never thought they'd dig their heels in and tell people to "shove it, you got a good card." I've purchased $1000's worth of nvidia cards (I've got $700 in 970's right now) and this is a huge turn off. I'm going to give them a week or so to come up with a decent response and hope they pull through with something. I have no problem jumping ship to AMD. I've owned plenty of them as well.

I have a very hard time believing it was a "marketing problem." That kind of stuff doesn't just happen in an international business with millions in marketing budget. Easier for nvidia to throw marketing under the bus than admit they concocted this disingenuous scheme holistically.

 

[garagisti]

The Nvidia rep that promised to help people get refunds and promised a fixed driver has edited the message to remove any hint of a coming driver and also removed the mention of refunds. Now when he is PMed he responds with this generic message:

"Hello,

Is there a specific game that I can help you with? Unfortunately we made an error in the reviewer guide but the GTX 970 is one of the best GPU's we've ever built.


http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/68595-gtx-970s-memory-explained-tested-2.html


Let me know how I can help."

Also, price cuts from AMD to profit on the scandal: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2877...dd-pressure-to-gtx-970-memory-furor.html?null

I wouldn't exactly use the phrase how you used it. One can't blame AMD (i think you're not) for making most of a slip by their competition.

 

[garagisti]

It's looking ugly in EU now..

http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Kommentar-Nvidias-schmutzige-Kartentricks-2529523.html

And the GeForce forum is full of rage. I cannot believe someone at NV made the call to shutdown a legitimate attempt from their staff to help people obtain refunds, back-tracking on posts (seriously, on the internet, you think you can hide what you posted?!?!)... if only they had placed value in "Honesty" and "Decency", owned up, take it like man... but no, they decided to go full stupid denial mode, leaving their loyal users who want refunds or upgrades to 980 in the rain, along with retailers and AIBs who have to cope with the returns.

Oh dear, storm in a teacup is about to go into a can of woopass mode.

Who do you think can do such a thing? Stopping employees across the globe from helping their customers... do you think their visionary CEO may be aware of this?

 

[AnandThenMan]

I wouldn't exactly use the phrase how you used it. One can't blame AMD (i think you're not) for making most of a slip by their competition.

Would be extremely incompetent of AMD if they didn't try and capitalize. Can you imagine if the tables were reversed? Not only would Nvidia milk it for all it's worth but the various hardware sites would be cruisifiying AMD, instead they are saying nothing to see here still great card move along. I actually find this much more distasteful than what Nvidia is doing, because with NV I have come to expect it, they are looking out for their own interests. Review sites should not be looking out for Nvidia's interests but that is exactly what they are doing.

 

[Grooveriding]

This has been a good barometer of measuring the value of the various review sites and how they've handled this story. PCPER I wrote off long ago as being uselessly biased and any data they put out goes right to the trash bin, but there have been a few others that have massaged this story nvidia's way as well.

 

[utahraptor]

I think Anandtech and Tom's hardware are kind of opposite takes so I guess their owner comes off as neutral.

 

[UaVaj]

4GB mean 4GB - click for the full article. few quotes below.


"The performance hit exhibited when the GTX 970 taps that 512MB segment doesn’t appear to be significant, especially when you consider that in common scenarios you’d already need to force games down to unplayable frame rates before you crossed the 3.5GB memory threshold, as PC Perspective's testing found."

"It’s those disillusioned buyers that AMD hopes to sway to Team Red—and a Radeon R9 290x for under $300 is a very tempting offer indeed."





How many of you are running more than 970 x3? and/or beyond 2560x1440p? to be truly be affected by this spec change?

 

[garagisti]

It's looking ugly in EU now..

http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Kommentar-Nvidias-schmutzige-Kartentricks-2529523.html

And the GeForce forum is full of rage. I cannot believe someone at NV made the call to shutdown a legitimate attempt from their staff to help people obtain refunds, back-tracking on posts (seriously, on the internet, you think you can hide what you posted?!?!)... if only they had placed value in "Honesty" and "Decency", owned up, take it like man... but no, they decided to go full stupid denial mode, leaving their loyal users who want refunds or upgrades to 980 in the rain, along with retailers and AIBs who have to cope with the returns.

Oh dear, storm in a teacup is about to go into a can of woopass mode.

Good find!

I'm sure though that some will suggest that Euro lot get their knickers in a twist unnecessarily, i mean why protect consumers?

 

[garagisti]

4GB mean 4GB - click for the full article. few quotes below.


"The performance hit exhibited when the GTX 970 taps that 512MB segment doesn’t appear to be significant, especially when you consider that in common scenarios you’d already need to force games down to unplayable frame rates before you crossed the 3.5GB memory threshold, as PC Perspective's testing found."

"It’s those disillusioned buyers that AMD hopes to sway to Team Red—and a Radeon R9 290x for under $300 is a very tempting offer indeed."





How many of you are running more than 970 x3? and/or beyond 2560x1440p? to be truly be affected by this spec change?

It is rather, may i say, disrespectful to all buyers of the cards in question when you suggest that they either:
a) play the games right, like apple told buyers of iphone 4 that they weren't holding it right.
b) aren't affected by it, as it happens at higher res. I mean you buy higher res screen.

 

[UaVaj]

It is rather, may i say, disrespectful to all buyers of the cards in question when you suggest that they either:
a) play the games right, like apple told buyers of iphone 4 that they weren't holding it right.
b) aren't affected by it, as it happens at higher res. I mean you buy higher res screen.

please do not take it the wrong way. it is NOT dis respect. it is clarification of the relationship between GPU, VRAM and ROP.

in order for the spec change to affect you. you must have enough GPU pushing enough VRAM pushing enough pixels (ROP).



if all you got is a single 970 pushing 1920x1080p. your limiting factor is clearly not VRAM nor ROP. even 970 x2 pushing 1920x1080p or 2560x1440p is not at that limit yet.

 

[Elixer]

Whoops, what I had here first was already posted... mods, feel free to delete this non-post.

 

[garagisti]

please do not take it the wrong way. it is NOT dis respect. it is clarification of the relationship between GPU, VRAM and ROP.

in order for the spec change to affect you. you must have enough GPU pushing enough VRAM pushing enough pixels (ROP).



if all you got is a single 970 pushing 1920x1080p. your limiting factor is clearly not VRAM nor ROP. even 970 x2 pushing 1920x1080p or 2560x1440p is not at that limit yet.

Well, don't take my word for it, instead read some tests done by a user called golden tiger at hardforums. He has a bit of a reputation at xtremesystems for his preferences in gpus, where he once was (don't think he's there anymore). He's not exactly chuffed at his sli setup made of 2 970s. I'd not say that he doesn't know how to get most out of his system. Think he's running 1440p or 1600p, but certainly not 4k. He suggests that in sli, the problem is more pronounced.

Apologies, but this thread is full of disdain for buyers who paid good money for something, and it's hard not to read between the lines. One more thing to remember is that newer monitors are coming to market, and a lot of people will be upgrading and a fair bit of them will be 1440p or higher than that. Then what? Tough luck for being had?

 

[Subyman]

4GB mean 4GB - click for the full article. few quotes below.


"The performance hit exhibited when the GTX 970 taps that 512MB segment doesn’t appear to be significant, especially when you consider that in common scenarios you’d already need to force games down to unplayable frame rates before you crossed the 3.5GB memory threshold, as PC Perspective's testing found."

"It’s those disillusioned buyers that AMD hopes to sway to Team Red—and a Radeon R9 290x for under $300 is a very tempting offer indeed."





How many of you are running more than 970 x3? and/or beyond 2560x1440p? to be truly be affected by this spec change?

I don't think that matters at all. The simple fact that I was misled by the specs is what bothers me. They've instilled doubt in their specs. Last thing we need are the companies lying about specs regardless of performance.

 

[deanx0r]

While I am happy with the performance of my GTX970 G1 Gaming, there are other issues that left a unsatisfying ownership experience. I don't think I would return my card for a refund as it is too much of a hassle.

This was no misunderstanding with the marketing team, they knew exactly what they were doing, and now that it backfired, I am looking closely on how NVIDIA will right this wrong.

The Nvidia rep that promised to help people get refunds and promised a fixed driver has edited the message to remove any hint of a coming driver and also removed the mention of refunds. Now when he is PMed he responds with this generic message:

 

[SolMiester]

Have to say I'm quite disappointed and surprised by nvidia's inaction and silence on this matter.
Four days and nothing, a quick check on their web site is deafening in the news absence. The product page still incorrectly lists the specifications?!.
Do I think this was a lie?, or not a misunderstand from the marketing dept or a conspiracy?, certainly not, and I laugh at the youngsters for thinking such. To think such huge global company would take such an action with a high change of discovery is ludicrous and fantastical thinking. Shareholder backlash would be intolerable.
Would I change my recommendation/, no, the product performance is still the same, nothing has changed and while AMD might have great hardware, NV still have the best software.
I have however, changed my mind on compensation. Some kind of voucher for a game perhaps, or a full refund of the product for false advertizing, honest mistake or not,.

 

[UaVaj]

Apologies, but this thread is full of disdain for buyers who paid good money for something, and it's hard not to read between the lines. One more thing to remember is that newer monitors are coming to market, and a lot of people will be upgrading and a fair bit of them will be 1440p or higher than that. Then what? Tough luck for being had?

vram is one of the most misunderstood aspect of a video card.

to add insult to injury. vram is what most folks use as a benchmark in their buying decision.

no wonder there are so many pissed off 970 owners.

lastly these owners are entitled to be upset. they did not get what they pay for.

even if that vram is a placebo. (moar vram definitely sells - nvidia definitely knew about this - and choose to not disclose )




you do bring up an excellent point. when they buy that new monitor with a larger resolution, they will need that extra vram. totally true.

however, this is ONLY true if they have also BUY another 970 to help push that extra vram in which the new monitor with a higher resolution demands.

now you see where is going now?

they will need to get to: 970 x3 and/or resolution beyond 1440p to "possibly" be affected by this spec change.




point is. most of these upset 970 owners are clearly not running this type of setup. hence not affected by this spec change.







btw. do run 290x x4 and 3k resolution. only game with ALL the eye candy. have yet to max out 4gb of vram. as in 4gb of utilized vram. NOT as in 4GB of allocated vram.

simply cannot imagine anyone with a single 970 running out of 3.5GB of vram. which impossible in a practical "playable and enjoyable" gaming scenario.

 

[Elixer]

While not exactly the same deal, Nvidia did do this 'segmented' memory in the past as well...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6159/the-geforce-gtx-660-ti-review/2

The best case scenario is always going to be that the entire 192bit bus is in use by interleaving a memory operation across all 3 controllers, giving the card 144GB/sec of memory bandwidth (192bit * 6GHz / 8). But that can only be done at up to 1.5GB of memory; the final 512MB of memory is attached to a single memory controller. This invokes the worst case scenario, where only 1 64-bit memory controller is in use and thereby reducing memory bandwidth to a much more modest 48GB/sec

Now, you see that, back then, they admitted what they did and were up front about it to the reviewers, but this time around, they chose instead to lie about the specs & capability of the 970.

So, for the 660, they were truthful, and *gasp*, there wasn't any complaints.
For the 970, they lied, and there are complaints, as well there should be.

 

[jackstar7]

Well, don't take my word for it, instead read some tests done by a user called golden tiger at hardforums. He has a bit of a reputation at xtremesystems for his preferences in gpus, where he once was (don't think he's there anymore). He's not exactly chuffed at his sli setup made of 2 970s. I'd not say that he doesn't know how to get most out of his system. Think he's running 1440p or 1600p, but certainly not 4k. He suggests that in sli, the problem is more pronounced.

I followed his story and he even returned a 4K monitor because he believed the fault was in the monitor, not in his GPUs in SLI. Now he knows the truth and has turned his passion against that which he was championing just days ago.