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

kedge · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:38

I suppose nvidia were not being forthright about the memory subsystem when the first reviewers tested the GTX 970. If you knew beforehand would you have purchased the GTX 970?.

ICDP · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:38

Dervious said:
Unfortunately for retailers, I think it is their legal duty to sell products that meet their claimed specifications. It doesn't seem fair, but that's the law.

But surely they rely on the product vendors giving them accurate specifications on said products?

Nvidia misadvertise their GTX970, people get annoyed, OCUK give refunds/replacements. It seems to me that Nvidia are to blame here, yet OCUK are hit with the bill, though this is of course supposition on my part.

Bigbud · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:40

LambChop said:
Gibbo, are you really going to give refunds to people with 970's when they blatantly turn round and say its due to depreciation ?

I paid £299.99 for my G1 on release day, the price today is

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=GX-147-GI

£299.99 :eek:

I'll be rolling in a fat stack (of course I did pay for Saturday delivery and I have to pay to send it back :rolleyes:

~>Dg<~ · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:40

Gibbo said:
How does he know I have not, assumptions are the mother of all beep beeps, we've gone at it from every angle.

youve done pretty well. people who wanted refunds got refunds. we know why. good business for you. people stuck with cards have not though. so you tried it just didnt end as good as it could have done.nvidia could have given us with cards some kind of offer but haven't didnt. i know this isn't your fault.

you cant win everything. thats okay.

rs155 · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:40

So upon waking up after night shift, Are they doing refunds for our 970's now then?

~>Dg<~ · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:42

ICDP said:
But surely they rely on the product vendors giving them accurate specifications on said products?

Nvidia misadvertise their GTX970, people get annoyed, OCUK give refunds/replacements. It seems to me that Nvidia are to blame here, yet OCUK are hit with the bill, though this is of course supposition on my part.

do people not understand business ?

Ocuk wont lose. they will gain from this.you can thank gibbo for his hardwork.

people thinking ocuk are footing the bill are you crazy.

Manook · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:42

ICDP said:
But surely they rely on the product vendors giving them accurate specifications on said products?

Nvidia misadvertise their GTX970, people get annoyed, OCUK give refunds/replacements. It seems to me that Nvidia are to blame here, yet OCUK are hit with the bill, though this is of course supposition on my part.

OCUK will initially foot the bill but if this goes as it should what will happen is that the retailer will just lose the profit made as they will be reimbursed by their distributor at trade prices, who will then be reimbursed by theres so on..... The manufacturer will be reimbursed but this will depend on the contracts signed and the countries laws they are based in.

They will lose the profit but if people like myself are going to upgrade to 980's then they will eventually make more profit as its a sale they would not have made otherwise. Albeit this will probably be wiped out by other losses incurred by this.

Wizzfizz · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:42

Needs a sticky for people asking which brands are being accepted back

cHk4 · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:42

If OcUK allow us to return the MSIs I would happily take credit and buy an EVGA 980, I've always used EVGA but went MSI for some reason this time... I'll be going back to EVGA that's for sure.

Phace · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:43

Der said:
Garbage. Gibbo does not owe you anything. Nvidia is the company that misinformed you. Are there any other retailers out there issuing refunds? Overclockers.co.uk can happily forget this whole thing and technically they will not be incorrect.

Kinda incorrect there, Nvidia misinformed Overclockers who then misinformed customers (ACCIDENTLY & NOT OCUK's FAULT!!).
Sale Of Good Act 1979 states (amongst other things) that an item must be/perform etc as described. Although Nvidia messed up big time, as soon as OCUK used Nvidias product description on the OCUK website there was a break of consumer law.

With that said, I love Overclockers and do not hold them responsible for this mess, its all Nvidia!

Axil · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:44

Hi Gibbo

Is there any update from MSI yet.

I'm curious as I'm bringing my 970GTX 4G in to OcUK tomorrow anyway under RMA as it's got the MSI 'special' screwed Cooling fans issue (i.e the silent cooling isn't as the fans remain spun up after gaming) that it developed before Xmas and after MSI trying (and failing) to fix the issue with BIOS updates they've told me to RMA to retailer.

This means that I'm going to be without the card anyway while it's being tested (though to be honest it'll be a case of fire up the card, try a game and just hear the fans decide not to spin down afterwards leading to having to reboot to shut the things up)

tangey · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:45

Might I suggest that a sticky thread be made covering OCUK's current position, and what manufacturers are covered etc, and close that thread so that only the admin can modify it as things change.

Discussion, conjecture and other stuff can stay here.

oaksmokedbacon · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:45

Although my views might be discarded I'd thought I'd throw my 10cents in the pot being a happy 970 owner.

my MSI 970 works a dream and overclocks like a beast. FC4 1080p with it on pretty much all highest settings and as people say Ubisoft so badly coded... not a problem and good solid 60-80FPS. BF4 on ultra, 80fps on 64player servers. 3d Mark Skydiver benchmark I think was in top 45 last I looked, up against some solid machines. Other benchmarks were also good, but I'm lazy and can't be bothered uploading the screenies for submitting

after reading review after review before spending my £269 on the MSI (great deal just before xmas on OCUK) it was clear that the 970 was designed for 1080p gaming at high settings, and upping the resolutions would probably mean sacrificing detail levels to obtain high fps. It seemed if I felt I wanted to go higher than 1080p my money would go on a 980 as it is bigger, faster and aimed at this market and the price matches this expectation.

I wont disagree Nvidia may have dropped a knife in their own foot, however I see my investment as well spent. As someone said in another thread, the benchmarks don't lie and some people like to build a fuss over an issue that is probably going to affect 1% of all users.

Anyway rant over, probably a week too late but hey better late than never!

rs155 · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:45

Wizzfizz said:
Needs a sticky for people asking which brands are being accepted back

Good question. Witch brands are being accepted?

Gibbo · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:46

LambChop said:
Gibbo, are you really going to give refunds to people with 970's when they blatantly turn round and say its due to depreciation ?

What do you mean? If customer is unhappy with their 970 we are giving customers until end of February to return it.

Mal X · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:46

Gibbo said:
Yeah do a comparison of our 295 X2, 290X, 290, 280X, 285, 280, 980, 970 and 960 prices, were about the cheapest out there and we also have the largest range too.

GPU Kings!

payday today, so it's time for another case, the GPUs can wait... it's nerdy time now

jwilliamson47 · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:46

Phace said:
Kinda incorrect there, Nvidia misinformed Overclockers who then misinformed customers (ACCIDENTLY & NOT OCUK's FAULT!!).
Sale Of Good Act 1979 states (amongst other things) that an item must be/perform etc as described. Although Nvidia messed up big time, as soon as OCUK used Nvidias product description on the OCUK website there was a break of consumer law.

With that said, I love Overclockers and do not hold them responsible for this mess, its all Nvidia!

I agree with this, and it's certainly true. However, OCUK never advertised rops, or l2 cache, so a lot of retailers are trying to get away with it and think any sort of court wouldn't understand the ins and outs of technical information. It was misleading on Nvidia's part and their attitude has been poor. Hence, I will be moving to AMD.

Kipz · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:47

Sorry to bog up this thread even more but things are getting lost lol.

Any word from Asus/Nvida/Other manufacturers other than EVGA/KFA2/Galax/OcUK?

Dervious · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:48

ICDP said:
But surely they rely on the product vendors giving them accurate specifications on said products?

Nvidia misadvertise their GTX970, people get annoyed, OCUK give refunds/replacements. It seems to me that Nvidia are to blame here, yet OCUK are hit with the bill, though this is of course supposition on my part.

I agree.

OCUK (and other retailers) buy products in good faith from their suppliers. The sale of goods act places the ultimate responsibility on the retailer to make sure that the customer is receiving goods that perform as described (as well as being fit for purpose etc).

I think NVIDIA should be helping OCUK, as much as OCUK seem to be helping their customers. Ultimately, OCUK can vote with their money, just like the end user can. If NVIDIA don't supply good products that perform as described, and furthermore leave retailers to clear up their mess, they will ultimately suffer the consequences.

Gibbo · 29 Jan 2015 at 16:48

Manook said:
OCUK will initially foot the bill but if this goes as it should what will happen is that the retailer will just lose the profit made as they will be reimbursed by their distributor at trade prices, who will then be reimbursed by theres so on..... The manufacturer will be reimbursed but this will depend on the contracts signed and the countries laws they are based in.

They will lose the profit but if people like myself are going to upgrade to 980's then they will eventually make more profit as its a sale they would not have made otherwise. Albeit this will probably be wiped out by other losses incurred by this.

Most the manufacturers so far and suppliers are refusing to take returns. So they shall get b-graded and sold at reduce prices. Some will support us, some will not.