Calm down dear...lol
I live in a world expecting to be lied to, so don't take it so personally when it happens.
Uhm...
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.
Calm down dear...lol
I live in a world expecting to be lied to, so don't take it so personally when it happens.
It depends on the card and the game, Example, I've just had delivered yesterday a 1440 res monitor, BenQ BL2710PT in fact, and I'm using a Galax GTX 970 exoc with it. Now, I don't have any new games, but I've currently been spending the day trying out various older games, Crysis, crysis2 and crysis 3 and COH tales of valor. Also gave heaven and valley benchies a go. Now, all I've had to do in Crysis 3 to get average 55-60fps in game is turn down shaders to high from very high, thats one setting. This is obviously dependant on the game level being played and whats on the screen at the time. It can drop to around the low 40s, but only once have I seen below that figure. I can't see any visual difference, but the fps increases sufficiently to give a lot smoother gameplay which also negates the input lag of the screen which is noticeable but not obtrusive.
My point being that I think a lot of people here are assuming that having to turn down a setting or two is the end of the world, it isn't. If you're a hard core gamer then this would probably be an issue, but for a lot of people, like me, its not. If I buy a few games in the future and encounter Vram issues that cannot be remedied by reducing one or two settings, then I will replace the 970 and get an AMD replacement, I certainly will not be giving Nvidia any more of my hard earned dosh (the issue I have with them is misrepresentation of a product that "THEY" supplied and giving absolutely NO explanation, apology, or anything related to this debacle, thats what I'm a bit peeved with.
And good on Ocuk and Gibbo, et al wrt their customers, absolutely top notch.
Have Nvidia commented anymore?
Is bold your new thing?
Those pesky carp though, we have a trout problem down here. As for you not being a fanboy, LOL! You're not in the usual sense, but you do get very proud of whatever vendor happens to be in your machine, your posting style changes. It's a wonderful thing to watch, i'm sure i'm not the only one to notice.
Lmao @ Boom. Whatever you use, you claim it as the best and then rip everyone else. It is laughable in truth and makes for amusing reading.
Why are people talking about the cost of running a 290x over a 970? It has never been about the cost of the additional power consumption, ever. That's an excuse dreamed up by people to dismiss the power consumption argument.
Its about heat output and not running temperature, either, heat output. Doesn't (shouldn't) matter to most people, however for some, because of space issues etc., it makes the difference between choosing card A or card B.
Lower power consumption is something everybody should want. Not because it costs less in juice to run, but because less consumed means more room for something bigger and something faster. Ie, if nvidia hadn't have achieved the efficiency improvements with Maxwell, how much further do you think they could have pushed Kepler?