• 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.
the reviews of the card still stand - its a damn fast card for the money! for 1080p and 1440p the memory potential hiccup likely wont be seen at all.
 
also - as was asked a few pages back:

'If this was a "miscommunication" between marketing and engineering how does the fact that GPU-z reports 64 ROPS for this card, did marketing write the BIOS for the cards '

that's your refund right there - gpu-z reports 64 ROP`s and last night NVidia said it didn't have them.

BUT , does the card still game well or are the owns now actively looking for stuttering which might not exist for them?
 
Are you lot forgetting that we are finding it really difficult to see these performance issues in more than a few games? Literally, the game that keeps getting mentioned, SoM, is known to use 6gb of vram at the settings people are using to try and demonstrate the issue on a 970! It also brings a 980 to its knees. I've repeatedly asked for videos of this game breaking stutter in other games but very few people have been willing to even try. Kudos to those that have/are doing so.

I personally can't make anything stutter like that, not even games like ac:u unless i CLEARLY go over 4gb usage or run out of gpu grunt.

This whole thing has been blown way out of proportion with people concentrating on the rop count being wrong, rather than the actually hit on performance people are seeing. 1800+ posts and how many people have have shown evidence of the stuttering?

1? was there even 1?
 
Last edited:
littlepuppy said:
Another argument, for mis selling, I would say the resale value of 970's has dropped by 20 -25 percent as a result of this **** up, which as time goes by will get more noticeable as games use more memory. It's a clear case of mis selling, if someone were to legally challenge this nvidia would clearly lose.

Why? The specifications were materially different to the manufacturers stated ones.. and whoever thinks it matters if it's on the box or not you are wrong you cannot seriously expect all the low level specs of the gpu to be on the box, that's why you use the manufacturer website..

Nvidia need to learn a lesson in honesty here, people should return their cards just to shaft them, no doubt it may be different in the us, but in the eu the consumer protection laws are very strong and nvidia are shafted.
Click to expand...

No, you'd have a very hard time making a case anywhere. There are no standards to measure GPU performance by, and no amount of number of shaders, clocks, amount of memory or anything like that is ever a hard line definition of a level of performance that will result in. Just try explaining to a judge what the problem is when benchmarks by reviewers are always all over the place anyway ... you're not going to be able to build a case.

You might be able to make a case in a small claims court in case the retailer wouldn't want to refund you, but even then it is not worth the hassle or anyone's time or money. You'd still have to show that the card isn't working well though, and good luck with that.

I fully agree that nVidia should've been more open about what the hardware is built like, but that has all to do with managing expectations and not so much with the actual level of performance. Prove beyond a doubt that there is a serious performance problem, only then you might have a legal case.

(I'm not a lawyer, just have at least half a brain and I'm in strong favour of full honesty at all times).
 
Sony had to recently give refunds to those who wanted them for mis-selling based on advertising for the PS-Vita

also , GPU-Z reports 64 ROP`s and last night NVidia rep said it didn't have 64 rops.
 
Has anyone actually asked for a refund on this? Are there any 970 owners out there who feel lied to by Nvidia?
 
GPU-Z is an independant piece of software. we already know it reports the gpu vram usage wrong (afterburner doesnt) on the 970 so why should we trust what it says about rops? regardeless of that, nvidia have nothing to do with that software.
 
Giving the consumer mis information and selling products on that mis information is ****** , so Sony are forced to pay back money to consumers for this on there vita **** up , developers for h1z1 had to give money back as they sold on misinformation , so just because this is a GPU we shouldn't be entittled to a potential refund or or pennies back ? Who regulates these sorts of things if anybody?
 
The Running Man said:
The problem is that the card could be faster in some situations with that extra 500mb of ram blocked off completely. .
Click to expand...

That I guess is the problem that NV need to fix with a driver and then all will be fine again....., it seems the managing of 3 pools of ram is the main issue not the slower 500mb on the card as this is still faster than system ram as stated many times before.
 
eyetrip said:
Am going to contact cs today and see what they say.

Have a pretty good idea :/
Click to expand...

let us know what they say, I brought a 970 in November and only just seen this thread!

when I play games at the highest ress it stutters and then the fps drops. when I lower down the screen ress its then fine
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom