• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

970's having performance issues using 4GB Vram - Nvidia investigating

Status
Not open for further replies.
So has this "issue" been confirmed as hardware related or not?

I read a long explanation on a tech site and seems to be that this is based in hardware due to sectioning of the memory... so an inherent design fault. Nvidia say its not a fault and others say it is because they marketed it as a full 4GB usable not 3.5GB and .5GB of not quite so usable memory??

So have we any clear answer yet from the powers that be? that is a year's time there will be zero performance hit if a game uses the full 4gb ?

We were sold a card on the facts as advertised... 4GB of ram.. there was no mention of speed or performance issues if you used more than 3.5GB of that ram. I would imagine many people would have reconsidered their purchase had this been known/advertised. Many would have been happy to buy the 970 still due to price, but many bought the 970 assuming it was a 980 with less processing units and nothing else.

From a personal point of view i got the 970 instead of the 980 due to price and weighing up the performance difference/cost. If i had known of this potential performance hit i would not have bought the 970... i detest having something that has known faults, be it laptops... phones or in this case a gfx card. I would have bunged an extra £200 and got a 980 instead.

I notice also no official statement from OCUK yet...
 
Last edited:
ICEx21 said:
Is my GTX970 better than my R290?
No. My 290 didn't stutter in the games I played where as both my 970s in single and sli mode do.
Click to expand...

As said, if you are having an issue on a 970 and not a 290 then it has nothing to do with this memory config (not saying you don't have a problem, it appears you do, just saying it's unrelated to the topic).


ICEx21 said:
Is my GTX970 better than anything else I could have got for the money?
No as I could have got another 290 or a 980 which wouldn't have these problems
Click to expand...

Please tell me where I can get £250 GTX980's from? /drool
 
Gregster said:
Nice to see a common sense post and I would feel the same way if I had a 970.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I'm holding on to my current 970, but I cancelled the £600 (£400ish after selling my current card) SLI I was planning on getting as a result of this, and will rather wait for AMDs offerings, which might be better, or at the very least bring the price of the 970s down.
 
Aurhinius said:
and as a result it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.

I would say this applies in this case?
Click to expand...

Exactly that. I would not have purchased the 970 if all this was known information from the start.
 
Gregster said:
Nice to see a common sense post and I would feel the same way if I had a 970.
Click to expand...

that's two of you including myself then maybe more. but there are also those that are not happy and rightly so. regarless of how you, me or anyone else feels , NVidia told some porky pies and have been caught out. regardless if people are using all there 4GB vRAM without issues , the fact remains it was not sold as spec'd .
 
To be honest I don't see this as being much different to the intel issue not so long ago.

The problem isn't that the cards are faulty in any way but that the information that was available to allow people to make an informed purchase decision was infact incorrect and arguably had some factual information misrepresented.

If it was me I wouldn't return the card but I believe in defending the right to do so if you wish.
 
ubersonic said:
Stuff
Click to expand...

I like that you cared enough about a topic enough to post that you don’t care about it and to tell people who do care about it why they shouldn’t care about a issue you care enough to not care about. ;)


For some people this has less to do with the possible performance impact as it does to do with the fact that this trend of ‘miss communication’ between corporations and consumers is getting beyond what we are willing to accept.

In the past few years we are seeing more and more companies develop poor software, mislead with bad advertising and generally treat their customers with contempt.

That is what I care about, I am not attacking NVidia because they are NVidia, I'm just trying to make them take responsibility for their actions in one of the few ways I have available.
 
Last edited:
if you break it down with the correct info many more might of gone for 290s.

the funny thing is a 970 gtx is still faster even with the misinformation .


should nvidia be spanked ? = yes or somekind of rebate refund or game/s for buyers.

do i see this happening ? im airing on no but i know of shops starting to pull 970 gtxs already because of this in usa and fair of lawsuits. so maybe just maybe.
 
Jaguar has just spent £500,000 with the company i work for because they made 1 little descriptive error, they are not waiting to get found out and taken to court for millions, all the descriptive work is being done again from scratch for the sum aforementioned.
 
ubersonic said:
Is my GTX970 better than my R290? Yes.
Is my GTX970 better than the GTX780it replaced? Yes.
Is my GTX970 better than anything else I could have got for the money? Yes.
Is my GTX970 giving the same performance today as last week? Yes.
Did I buy my GTX970 based on performance reviews that are still valid? Yes.
Will my enjoyment of the card ever be crippled by this rubbish? No.
Do I care about any of this memorygate crap? No.
Click to expand...
It's not really sure about a product's relative performance comparing to other products, but the issue lies with whether or not the product in question that are being sold matches the spec and features of what it originally advertised at/claim to be with.

Forget about Nvidia and AMD for a sec here...let pretend this issue is with an Intel CPU- a CPU thats clearly stated 4.00GHz in the spec, and people bought that CPU, only later to discover that not only it is actually a 3.80GHz CPU with masked reading saying it's 4.00GHz in cpu-z, and the CPU performance will throttle and drop down to 3.50GHz when CPU usage usage hit above 87.5%...surely there will be uproar, and people will demand Intel to "do something" to address the situation, rather than just putting up with Intel telling them "it's part of the design feature" or " it's unforuntate that they has been miscommunications within the company".

I noticed lots of people be debate from law angle, or what's acceptable and what's not acceptable...however, I am more interested in what Nvidia's is going to do about it, if any. Surely there must be "something" that Nvidia can do to help remedy the situation, beside just change the spec to the correct ones for the cards that are still on the shelf. Just give people a free game (non Ubisoft ideally) or a Shield joypad, or discount code/vouncher for buying the Sheild Tablet as a gesture/compensation or something may be?

Refund for the 970 is may be out of question for Nvidia, but may be they would work out something, like giving 970 owners the option to trade-in their 970 and add money to exchange for a 980 (similar to the EVGA step-up program) if they are truly worried about the performance drop issue?
 
Last edited:
The Running Man said:
What do you want me to read again. You know the only answer to my last question will state that the card is crippled.
Click to expand...

How about my reply to MasterOC claiming 500mb is VIRTUALLY UNUSABLE.

Notice how i didn't mention it being slower? Now read back further and notice how I've never denied it being slower. Then understand that my ac:u video is just an example of the kind of vram usage that is supposed to 'cripple' my card thanks to the VIRTUALLY UNUSABLE ram that i am, in fact, using. It's an example because I've not found anything that does cripple it without going over 4gb yet, and believe me I've tried and I've asked other people to show evidence and upload some videos.

2000 posts in and still nothing.

I mean really, what else do you think i should try to explain?
 
~>Dg<~ said:
if you break it down with the correct info many more might of gone for 290s.

the funny thing is a 970 gtx is still faster even with the misinformation .


should nvidia be spanked ? = yes or somekind of rebate refund or game/s for buyers.

do i see this happening ? im airing on no but i know of shops starting to pull 970 gtxs already because of this in usa and fair of lawsuits. so maybe just maybe.
Click to expand...

those buying for SLI configs may very well have gone for the 290's ... that's what I was originally leaning towards myself.
 
If the consumer was not deceived by Nvidia in the first place they could have made a decision to buy a 970 or not based on the memory config and might have even went with the 980.

That was taken out their hands by Nvidia's deceit, so I'm not surprised some people are upset with the new 970 specs months after release and of course performance issues.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom