970 memory allocation issue revisited

It's a bait and switch more or less. 4GB... with 3.5GB functioning properly. It's pretty blatant false advertisement. Legally in Canada and the EU they can't get away with this, which is why the store I bought it from offered a refund or exchange with no argument. They know if I were to dispute the charge with my credit card company they would refund me and I'd end up with a free GTX 970.

 

Doesn't matter what your view is on the 970. Nvidia made a mess of the whole thing and many peeps aren't happy with how it was handled.

Anyone returning their GTX970 and wanting a great deal on a Radeon with a full 4GB please let us know. @NVIDIAGeForce @stoakley

https://twitter.com/amd_roy/status/560462075193880576

 

yea we understand a lot of people are not happy .. it does not mean every owner has the same issue about the ram as those who do and are quite happy with the 970 me being at least one of them lol

 

Well it's not is it? The card still has 4GB on it regardless of how it functions. Legally in most countries I think they can, and will.

I don't see why anyone would use that as a means of getting a refund when it is the ROP count and L2 cache which obviously are incorrect.

 

Oh, thank you. I was afraid my card was malfunctioning...

 

These guys knew what they were getting at the point of purchase, you didn't, that's all I'm getting at. I don't know why you are going all defensive.

I already said I feel sorry for you SLI people.

 

I just had to make sure
But yea you are right, former ATI now AMD is not better either.
I do remember one major technical screw up from Nvidia though, AMD fan-boys reminds us of it all the time, the infamous driver incident...

The "lying" part is discussable, we can assume just as much, the truth is only known at Nvidia.
From a healthy marketing view I doubt that they intentional added higher numbers on the specs, since that is a risky thing to do and illegal at the same time.
Any idea how much what such a stunt would cost Nvidia if it was proven at international courts?
So they would never allow this to happen in the first place, what happened afterwards seems a bit shady to some, but again, we can't prove it, only speculate.

 

Why would any GTX 970 owner want a R9 290X (the only one that would be relevant) instead?
Besides that, again proof that AMD has no less shame than Nvidia, darn, I wish they had some more competitors in that segment.

 

I cant help it if im happy with my purchase still ?? why you worrying for me? when im not ?? don't make sense to me .....but if it make you happy im fine by that to im happy not worrying and your happy worrying for me, strange world we live in today but at least a happy one I guess ...

 

In Canada and EU it would end in a grey zone.
Since the card has 4GB of working memory, even if that includes that 500MB of them act slower.
The advertisement is still correct, with exception of 2 numbers that came out wrong to the reviewers.
So legally Nvidia would win, you need much more solid evidence to dance with their lawyers.
That Nvidia has issued manufacturers/shops to refund with no argument is only to show some good will, since they surely want those who are unhappy to go for their products again next time.
I bet they could say f u and get away with it without legal problems.

 

Has this been confirmed anywhere ? I must have missed it if it has.
I did see that post by the nVidia employee (Peter) on the Geforce forums saying he would help if he could. But lets be honest it really means jack, what is he going to do if 50,000 people from 174 different Countries all pm him asking for help.
Just PR that's all.

 

I'm aware that it has 56 ROPs enabled. It's only actually capable of using 52 of those 56 active ROPs though at any one time though. Basically, you'll always have 4 ROPs doing nothing.

It's easier to dyno a few engines and give people a rough estimate of engine power output than it is to put multiple models with multiple options on a chassis dyno.

It's amazing the short memory people have.

"back in the day" NVidia knowingly and willfully falsified TDP data for G86m and G84m, which resulted in millions of laptops suffering from GPU failures. To this day, NVidia still denies any wrong-doing.

Because either you're too young, or simply don't pay much attention to the news.

Nowhere in that post does it even remotely mention a "free trade". In fact, one of Roy's responses is that they don't want the NVidia card.

What IS said in that post, is that if you're unhappy about the GTX970 and want to switch to AMD, they are offering great deals on Radeon cards.

NVidia has no say at all in what retailers do. If retailers choose to give refunds, it's on them. If retailers refuse to give refunds, it's on them and local laws. NVidia has no authority. Same goes with manufacturers really. NVidia can't force them to give refunds, unless NVidia is covering all of the losses.

 

Has mr.Ben disappeared?

 

Several pages ago.

 

After a lot of reading in this forums I feel like I need to add my bit to this.(maybe little longer)

I'm not preferring one brand over other, just buying the best for what I have at the time of upgrade.
After my purchase of GF780 I was really outraged as I was unable to properly play 90% of games(mostly drivers issues)for 3 months; that’s the past.
Now as I see this, the old feelings came back as this is probably even worse than many of ppl here imagine. Either way they are HC fun boys or just working for NV.

1. NVidia lied. They lied to:
Manufacturers - damage to brand name and possible troubles for RMA cards.(even in the future)

Reviewers - loss of credibility - most of them gave 970 Top Pick
I personally have recommended this card to 2 of my friends based on the reviews and their needs $$$, so now I have to tell them it is not really a future proof card as it looked like.

Customers and Owners - just read the post of some of the owners.(and many more do not know about it)

2.Future fixes by driver is not really a fix. Every company is counting money and imagine you would need extra resources and teams to develop drivers for every game + SLI profiles.
Most probably they will be doing per game fixes for half a year and then they will just drop it or disable 512 mb of VRAM.

3. Drivers development is not easy these days and adding another equation to developers is like adding 2 times possibilities of issues anywhere. More and more games, especially with higher resolution are using more VRAM and it will not be easy to handle specialty of 970.

I do not really know how HH feels about it(his real opinion) as future reviews are at stake(he needs to be neutral). Article with testing of one game at 3.6 GB usage is not really a testing. Some of the guys say it gets worse with more VRAM use. As stated before, every game needs to be tested properly by 1 card and SLI cards. SLI might have the most issues.

And last thing from another bar.
Posts like these:

These are really insulting. A lot of people are coming to these forums for advice and reading. They can find it without posting garbage, but that’s for moderators to handle.

 

@ Sykosis, if you read properly you would see I did edit the comment. I should've deleted the incorrect part.

 

FYI 'mr 2 posts' was a duplicate account started by a previously banned member for the sole intent of trolling and has now been re-banned.

 

Anyone that has any degree of loyalty to these companies is naive.... These companies have no loyalty to their customers. They exist simply to make a profit.

Just because we're not all screaming for the death of NVidia, doesn't mean that some of us approve of what happened. Some of us just accept the fact that mistakes DO happen in any company, regardless of size. Granted, NVidia has intentionally done things like this in the past. We have no proof at all that this particular incident was intentional to any degree. Until someone can prove (beyond any reasonable doubt) that it was in fact intentional, I will continue to use my card with no regrets. On the day that it's proven to be intentional, I'll deal with it however I see fit (within the confines of the law).

 

A "free trade" would be a great deal, which is why the edit didn't change how I read the post. Deleting the incorrect part would be a good idea, to prevent future confusion (in case anyone ever sees that page again).

I wish AMD were in the position to offer such a deal as a free trade. Can't say I wouldn't take them up on it. I won't do the refund/return thing, but I'd take a trade since power draw is meaningless to me. I'm still happy with my card overall, but it's going to be difficult to sell later on and that part I'm not happy with.

 

How did reviewers loose credibility? You mean all of them lost credibility because they reviewed the card as was? Did they skew results? Did they lie? WTF are you on about?

About "lack" of vram, go tell that to the 780ti users who are now all crying in their bedrooms because they only have 3gb vram. Jesus.