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

[Davedree]

maybe they dont feel like bending over this time?
they bored of that position!
and lol @ just turn them down

 

[Orangey]

Here is a small little petition that started yesterday afternoon

There's 568 supporters ATM

https://www.change.org/p/nvidia-refund-for-gtx-970

*signs*

 

[snips86x]

haha - read some of the comments on the petition and tempted to sign it too:

"I've signed this petition to jump on the band wagon"

lol

 

[Rangerjr1]

This one is better

 

[humbug]

*signs*

nvidia engineers had misunderstanding with the pr and falsely displayed 64 rop but when you use gpu z the bios report says 64 rop so did the pr team write the bios ??

 

[MasterOC]

Here is a small little petition that started yesterday afternoon

There's 568 supporters ATM

https://www.change.org/p/nvidia-refund-for-gtx-970

Won't see it going anywhere but signed anyway

 

[africanos23]

Won't see it going anywhere but signed anyway

Yeah I know, its like when I was a hooligan at football matches when I was younger.

Just following the crowd


"I bought a SLI of GTX970. I want to break stuff at home since yesterday." <-- From petition LMFAO

 

[Alexrose1uk]

Really, I think Nvidia could do with doing something doing here.
Be it a rebate, free games, or nothing and burn reputation.

It's thier choice, but I do think this sort of thing will hurt them, even if only a little in the long run, this sort of antic does leave a bitter taste in the mouth, and obviously, it upsets enthusiasts, whom are often the people family, friends and associates will ask for recommendations when it comes to computer sales. It also doesn't look good that they've essentially been falsely advertising for several months before they have been caught out, which suggests it may be knowingly. I have to think SOMEONE inside Nvidia may have realised there was an error here and has raised it, but it was ignored.

Essentially though, with things like the ROP loss, they have falsely advertised, and whether it affects performance a lot or not, people have essentially got less card than the specs they chose when buying it and based thier purchase on.

It's clear even from this thread, some people may have made slightly different purchases if the RAM, ROP, Cache etc situation was clear from word go, although some would have been happy with the honest truth.

Not really on.

I wouldn't be surprised if OcUK haven't said anything as they're in discussions with Nvidia/thier suppliers, this news has only hit in the last few days, and if they do get refund requests, they are in an awkward position, the card technically isn't as marketed, and legally you could potentially argue the card has been misold. Not OcUK's fault, but they and other etailers will face some unhappy customers I think.

 

[ubersonic]

Before I do initiate my "14 day satisfaction guarantee" or my "no coil whine guarantee", how likely is it that I'd break the 3.5GB limit with SLI 970's at 1080p and max settings over the next 24 months?

Well if you break 3.5GB on a 970, you will also break 4GB on a 290, so your only real options would be 8GB 290, GTX980, or a Titan.

 

[Fanatic]

Meh, nothing has changed. My cards still run as well as they did when I bought them. If I want I can use DSR and 8xAA to make them fall over. I think I'll just stick to sensible settings for smooth 60FPS at 1440P.

 

[Mei]

ofc some just have no imagination and stick to bending over
either that or their face is ugly

 

[mmj_uk]

10 - 15% refund or free game would make up for it.

And a price drop to reflect the changed specs.

The only reason the GTX970 is so cheap to begin with is because of compromises like this, if you want a fully functional core you have to pay the premium for it (GTX980). The weird thing is, if NVidia had released GTX970 with 3.5GB RAM and slightly smaller bus (if technically possible) at the same price point it would still have been hugely popular even though you were buying less. Most people are just throwing their toys out of the pram because their GTX970 is not as close to GTX980 as they thought it was after having saved well in excess of £200. Taking the whole package into account it's still a better card than anything AMD currently offer.

 

[Final8y]

Well if you break 3.5GB on a 970, you will also break 4GB on a 290, so your only real options would be 8GB 290, GTX980, or a Titan.

Every Vram level will get broken at sometime, its about getting the most that will last the longest at a given price point and the 290 4GB has it over the 970.
And there is no 6 or 8 GB GTX980 so that comes off the your recommened more than 4GB list.

 

[Squink]

The only reason the GTX970 is so cheap to begin with is because of compromises like this

So definitely NOT because it's on an exceptionally mature process?

 

[Alexrose1uk]

Most people are just throwing their toys out of the pram because their GTX970 is not as close to GTX980 as they thought it was after having saved well in excess of £200.

I think it's more because the card is not what people were promised, and it actually doesn't have the specs advertised?

Regardless of performance, the part is not as advertised. People get upset on this point out of principle alone.

There would have been no backlash like this if the stats advertised had been honest.

 

[Mei]

nvidia have HUGE profit margins
any1 who doubts that is s-s-s-s-stupid!

 

[Pelinox]

The only reason the GTX970 is so cheap to begin with is because of compromises like this, if you want a fully functional core you have to pay the premium for it (GTX980). The weird thing is, if NVidia had released GTX970 with 3.5GB RAM and slightly smaller bus (if technically possible) at the same price point it would still have been hugely popular. Most people are just throwing their toys out of the pram because their GTX970 is not as close to GTX980 as they thought it was after having saved well in excess of £200. Taking the whole package into account it's still a better card than anything AMD currently offer.

Why is it a weird thing? I have 2 970s myself, and i am a happy camper. It does, however, give a bitter taste in my mouth.

 

[RanxZy]

IMO the 970 is a 1080p card any way, so it should be fine but know this; Nvidia always launch their cards with just enough of everything "for now".

They want to keep you coming back.

VRAM is obviously reasonably cheap. On the 4gb 670 for example the premium was only £40 or so. But Nvidia do not want your card to last four years, they want it to last until the next time they have a new card that they want you to buy.

AMD are not as shrewd and you usually get a far higher memory bandwidth and a fair chunk of actual memory.

Yeah NVIDIA really have a habit of making sure they always give the enthusiast the imperfect card just so they can upgrade to the next flagship.

The 780Ti was the fastest card from Kepler IMO but it's no coincidence that they shaved off 3GB from the overpriced supercomputer cards and never offered a version with 6GB. Otherwise why buy a 980?

 

[MrMD]

Pretty annoyed with these revelations tbh.

If they were fully upfront about the specs to begin with i wouldnt have a bought a 970.Would have grabbed a 290x,or maybe just waited it out(280x at the time).

Mostly got it for the extra 1gb of vram with an eye on sli for when TW3 hits(i just bought a new case and everything to make that happen) and new 1440p/120hz monitor.

Consideriing contacting the retailer i got it from to see if a refund is possible,but i doubt that would happen tho,especially considering i got mine week after launch.

This gimped memory stuff is quite a big deal to totally forget to mention IMO


Edit: To people concerned about 4gb usage at 1080p,it will happen this year.Even games like titanfall and arma 3 will push towards 3.5gb with the settings cranked up and they arnt particualrly graphicaly demanding really

 

[ubersonic]

Every Vram level will get broken at sometime

I know, but he was specifically tlking about 3.5GB in a specific timeframe

and the 290 4GB has it over the 970

The 290 has 4GB into which is has to hold the Windows GUI (plus whatever web browsers and other GPU utilizing apps you have open) the 970 would store all of that in the shoddy 500mb so it's actually more like 3.7-3.8GB vs 3.5GB in favour of the 290, however the 970 has hardware memory compression so can actually fit more into that 3.5GB than the 290 can fit into it's remaining 3.7-3.8GB.

And there is no 6 or 8 GB GTX980 so that comes off the your recommened more than 4GB list.

If you had been reading what myself and the other guy said, it was a 3.5GB+ list, not a 4GB list.