Monetary Value of GTX 780 compared to GTX 970

littlepuppy · 9 Jan 2015 at 07:59

The 970 is an upgrade, period, else they should refund the 970 minus reasonable depreciation. No way is a new 970 worth anything like a used 780.. sounds like the business in question is being very fair, I would expect a charge of around 70 quid..

almighty15 · 9 Jan 2015 at 08:56

Most places refund based on current market costs, bare in mind that OCUK was selling 780's for £199.99 not so long ago which is cheaper then the cheapest GTX970. GTX780's prices are also highly inflated.

If you have another GTX780 you'll still have same issue's should that one break and maybe even worse issues then you have now, the GTX970 as it's a new card should come with a fresh 12 months warranty which alone could be worth a small fee.

Gripen90 · 9 Jan 2015 at 10:42

almighty15 said:
Most places refund based on current market costs, bare in mind that OCUK was selling 780's for £199.99 not so long ago which is cheaper then the cheapest GTX970. GTX780's prices are also highly inflated.

If you have another GTX780 you'll still have same issue's should that one break and maybe even worse issues then you have now, the GTX970 as it's a new card should come with a fresh 12 months warranty which alone could be worth a small fee.

That so weird ! in Denmark by consumer law if the item you purchased cannot be replaced to one alike, then you can accept to get another similar specs/performance item but you are in no way obliged to accept it. If the reseller cannot exchangep to an identical item you are entitled by law to get the full refund of what you paid for the item at the time, and that is no matter how much it's worth today - it is always the date of purchase that counts.
So yes technically if I paid 4500Dkk for a GTX 780 1 year ago and I cannot get an identical one, then I can get my 4500Dkk back and buy another card e.g GTX 980. You can say that if you paid 4500Dkk for the GTX 780 and you are then offered a GTX 970 valued to 2800Dkk, then it's a 1700Dkk loss on your behalf, simply put the new card doesn't have the equal value of the original purchased item and that is what counts. Therefore you are not obliged to accept such a return offer, but one can agree to it if they wish so.

Also any replacement you get whether is an identical GTX 780 or a new GTX 970 then you're warranty period by the reseller automatically gets renewed with another 2years ! Meaning if I return a 1½year old 780 and get a new replacement then I have a new 2year warranty period.

If this isn't how it works in the UK, then I am actually happy that we pay a bit more for our hardware

se_vietboi · 9 Jan 2015 at 10:50

Gripen90 said:
That so weird ! in Denmark by consumer law if the item you purchased cannot be replaced to one alike, then you can accept to get another similar specs/performance item but you are in no way obliged to accept it. If the reseller cannot exchangep to an identical item you are entitled by law to get the full refund of what you paid for the item at the time, and that is no matter how much it's worth today - it is always the date of purchase that counts.

Yeah well Denmark laws doesn't apply here.

Gripen90 · 9 Jan 2015 at 10:56

se_vietboi said:
Yeah well Denmark laws doesn't apply here.

No but there is an European consumer law also, from where a lot of the danish law material has been adopted.

SDMilne · 9 Jan 2015 at 11:28

You are entitled to a full refund of any item deemed faulty or not fit for purpose in the UK as well. Also in no way should the faulty 780 have the market value of a used 780 applied to it. It should be treated as having the monetary value it had on the day it was purchased. Overclockers may well have been selling the 780 for £199 recently but I see that today they sell from between £300 and £440.

The 790 is being seen as an upgrade on a technical level, but I believe in legal terms it would not be. To be seen legally as an upgrade it would need to be an item of greater monetary value than the part it is replacing.

almighty15 · 9 Jan 2015 at 11:31

Gripen90 said:
That so weird ! in Denmark by consumer law if the item you purchased cannot be replaced to one alike, then you can accept to get another similar specs/performance item but you are in no way obliged to accept it. If the reseller cannot exchangep to an identical item you are entitled by law to get the full refund of what you paid for the item at the time, and that is no matter how much it's worth today - it is always the date of purchase that counts.
So yes technically if I paid 4500Dkk for a GTX 780 1 year ago and I cannot get an identical one, then I can get my 4500Dkk back and buy another card e.g GTX 980. You can say that if you paid 4500Dkk for the GTX 780 and you are then offered a GTX 970 valued to 2800Dkk, then it's a 1700Dkk loss on your behalf, simply put the new card doesn't have the equal value of the original purchased item and that is what counts. Therefore you are not obliged to accept such a return offer, but one can agree to it if they wish so.

Also any replacement you get whether is an identical GTX 780 or a new GTX 970 then you're warranty period by the reseller automatically gets renewed with another 2years ! Meaning if I return a 1½year old 780 and get a new replacement then I have a new 2year warranty period.

If this isn't how it works in the UK, then I am actually happy that we pay a bit more for our hardware

If your GTX780 broke after 12 months then the seller can charge you for a replacement if the warranty period is only 12 months.

In fact after 12 months a seller doesn't have to legally handle any warranty returns after a 12 month period. They have the right to hand that responsibility to the buyer after that 12 month period.

You can not refuse a card of equal performance as technology changes so drastically which is why it's done on performance.

In the UK a buyer can only get a full refund if

1. The item can't be replaced with an identical item
2. There are no suitable replacements

A GTX970 is more then a suitable replacement for a GTX780 so he has no grounds to refuse it as a replacement as in every way it superior to a GTX780.

What can be argued is if they charge to move to a GTX970, but depending on if they upgrade to a third party custom card they then have the right to charge depending on the GTX780.

And warranties also carry over too, if you have a graphics card with 2 years of warranty and it breaks after 18 months the replacement card still only has 6 months worth of warranty and does not reset the clock back to 2 years.

almighty15 · 9 Jan 2015 at 11:33

SDMilne said:
You are entitled to a full refund of any item deemed faulty or not fit for purpose in the UK as well. Also in no way should the faulty 780 have the market value of a used 780 applied to it. It should be treated as having the monetary value it had on the day it was purchased. Overclockers may well have been selling the 780 for £199 recently but I see that today they sell from between £300 and £440.

The 790 is being seen as an upgrade, but I believe in legal terms it would not. To be seen legally as an upgrade it would need to be an item of greater monetary value than the part it is replacing.

You can only get a full refund if they can't replace with an identical product or do not have a suitable replacement.

There's more then enough suitable replacements available for a GTX780.

almighty15 · 9 Jan 2015 at 11:38

SDMilne said:
I've now asked them about getting a 970 as the replacement

An important sentence people are over looking.

The OP has asked about a GTX970 as a replacement, the seller hasn't offered it.

That changes how things work as the seller will now have to shift his replacement GTX780 as B-grade or a refurb which means they'll get a cut down price for the card, which won't cover the cost of a GTX970.

That's like me getting a GTX780 back from repair, selling it on eBay and then buying a GTX970.

There's a cost involved making that move and it's unfair for the OP to expect the seller to cover that cost.

Nickjf20 · 9 Jan 2015 at 11:42

They are only obliged to give you another 780 or a refund

If you ask for a 970, don't complain if they want payment for the switch

If they had come straight out asking for payment in exchange for a 970, that would be a different matter

SDMilne · 9 Jan 2015 at 11:51

They haven't actually said there will be a charge. They have said any possible charge will be based upon the price of a 780 vs the price of a 970 either on July's 780 price or today's. Either way that equates to little or no charge.

As an example, say you go into a clothes shop and buy a jacket for £100. Two weeks later you wear it for the first time and find it had a tear in it. You take it back and decide that you'd like to replace it with a £130 jacket. That would be fine as long as you pay £30. Say you see a jacket that is technically better because of the label on it that costs £90? You'd get that as the replacement item without fuss and they would also put £10 in your hand. The same principle should apply here.

almighty15 · 9 Jan 2015 at 11:55

If they swap your replacement GTX780 for a GTX970 they will not be able to sell that GTX780 for enough money ( As it'll have to be sold as a refurb or B-grade ) to cover the price of a new GTX970.

If you don't have to pay I'll surprised but there's loads of GTX780's still on sale so you'll easily get a GTX780 back.

And it's unfair and quite amusing that you expect them to cover the costs.

Speaking of which, which brand and model GTX780 do you have?

And you didn't wear the jacket but you've run that GTX780 for nigh on 6 months so that comparison is stupid.

SDMilne · 9 Jan 2015 at 12:01

It's not stupid at all. In both cases neither item is of satisfactory quality or deemed fit for purpose. It doesn't matter that one is a computer part and one is a piece of clothing. They are consumer goods governed by the same laws. And, the comparison I made to replacing the jacket would apply to all sectors of retail as well. Computer parts aren't there own separate section with their own rules.

iB CoMpL3XiTy · 9 Jan 2015 at 12:21

SDMilne said:
It's not stupid at all. In both cases neither item is of satisfactory quality or deemed fit for purpose. It doesn't matter that one is a computer part and one is a piece of clothing. They are consumer goods governed by the same laws. And, the comparison I made to replacing the jacket would apply to all sectors of retail as well. Computer parts aren't there own separate section with their own rules.

Your clothing analogy doesn't work because you've actually got ~6 months use out of your GTX780, you've had some money's worth out of it.

I very much doubt a retailer would take back a 6 mouth old jacket because it had a tear in it.

They could offer you a partial refund or they may replace your card with another GTX780.
A GTX970 may cost them more, it's not your right to turn down a direct replacement in favour of a superior product at no extra cost to you

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/engla...aulty_goods_-_if_you_want_your_money_back.htm

SDMilne · 9 Jan 2015 at 12:34

It would not be seen within law as a superior product. To be seen as such it would need to have a higher monetary value. It does not possess this. They are duty bound to replace it with something of equal or failing that greater monetary value. I daresay many businesses would jump at the chance to give out a replacement item of lower monetary value.

Nines11 · 9 Jan 2015 at 12:36

TBH people are missing the point here.....

The 780 is broken, they send it back to the shop the shop sends it back to the vendor who will probs send them a 970 to sell anyway, so the shop never loses out.

The OP has asked for a 970 which is what he would get 8/10 sending it back to a vendor as they dont make 780s anymore.

EVERY time ive RMAed a card direct ive got the next model up as a replacement, never once got the same card back, mind you ive never had a card break in the first year either, i dont over clock and thats probably why.

almighty15 · 9 Jan 2015 at 12:37

SDMilne said:
It would not be seen within law as a superior product. To be seen as such it would need to have a higher monetary value. It does not possess this. They are duty bound to replace it with something of equal or failing that greater monetary value.

That's wrong, it has to be superior in terms of specification and performance.

But it's ****ing irrelevant anyway, YOU'VE asked to make the swap.

se_vietboi · 9 Jan 2015 at 12:39

SDMilne said:
You are entitled to a full refund of any item deemed faulty or not fit for purpose in the UK as well. Also in no way should the faulty 780 have the market value of a used 780 applied to it. It should be treated as having the monetary value it had on the day it was purchased. Overclockers may well have been selling the 780 for £199 recently but I see that today they sell from between £300 and £440.

The 790 is being seen as an upgrade on a technical level, but I believe in legal terms it would not be. To be seen legally as an upgrade it would need to be an item of greater monetary value than the part it is replacing.

Not in my case. Bought a 5870 from OCuk close to £350, RMA a year later, got a refund of near £250.

se_vietboi · 9 Jan 2015 at 12:43

SDMilne said:
It would not be seen within law as a superior product. To be seen as such it would need to have a higher monetary value. It does not possess this. They are duty bound to replace it with something of equal or failing that greater monetary value. I daresay many businesses would jump at the chance to give out a replacement item of lower monetary value.

Yeah and what if something of equal value now is slower than what you had? Or what if it was triple the performance? The former doesn't seem fair to the buyer and the latter doesn't seem fair to the seller. It needs to be equal in performance. Not monetary value.

littlepuppy · 9 Jan 2015 at 12:50

Buyer wants to have his cake and eat it.. this is just the type of customer I'm sure most retailers would be happy to do without.